North Charleston cop charged with murder after video surfaces of him shooting man in the back

a reply to: Siddharta

He won't get murder, to hard to actually get in this circumstance. First and third are out of the question and second would be rather hard to nail.

a reply to: Spider879

Thing is, if there hadn't been a video of this murder, MANY people here would be stating, "Scott stole the cop's taser and was a threat to other people! The cop had the right to shoot him!" They would be buying the cop's story 100%, just like they did in the Travon Martin, Michael Brown, and every other case of a black man being killed by a cop (or wanna be cop) case.

So, smearing the victim doesn't surprise me one bit. While I haven't read THIS thread, I've seen a few instances where people have asked, "why was Scott running?" As if the REASON he was running makes ANY difference at all. It's like they're looking for every reason they can to justify the murder.

I never thought I'd see the day when we would be watching cold blooded murders and trying to justify them... It's freaking SICK! That's why I'm staying away from this topic here.

And I see the same crap I've been talking about on this page. People are SICK! I'm out.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Thing is, if there hadn't been a video of this murder, MANY people here would be stating, "Scott stole the cop's taser and was a threat to other people! The cop had the right to shoot him!" They would be buying the cop's story 100%

This is just so true, and I think the biggest point of this whole ordeal. It really should be the driving point of this all.
This just shows that a person, and in this case a police officer, is in fact willing to do this when they think no one is looking.

Without the video, this would have just been another statistic and one less 'thug' off the street.

Soooo...elephant in the room....does it make people reflect differently on Ferguson/Mike Brown?

Different thread, simply a rhetorical question.

a reply to: kosmicjack

I think the Mike Brown shooting has evidence that Brown went for the cop's gun.
With the Mike Brown case, we were told that witnesses saw Mike Brown shot in the back... no evidence backs that story, but to the contrary.
One thing this case does is give black people some ammunition in their argument that the police can't be trusted. The video would back that up.... not just the shooter, but the black cop that did nothing when the shooter planted the taser.

Sorry for answering the rhetorical question.... but there are connections between the two events. Cops and race.

a reply to: kosmicjack

I doubt it, even with the picture of Wilsons face after the 'beating'.

I am sure it might have changed the minds of those on the fence but not the ones that knew he was guilty from day one.

This will forever be an isolated incident.

a reply to: alienjuggalo

After giving this one some time. i'm ready to weigh in.

What kind of GD ^%&$en piece of #### murdering asshat, white trash ( I'm
white BTW ) bigot nut case, maniacs are the police dept's hiring now days?
The whole dept. should be laid waste just for hiring this souless wonder.

Lynch him, so we can all move on.

Back shooters come in one color.

YELLOW!

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: kosmicjack

I think the Mike Brown shooting has evidence that Brown went for the cop's gun.
With the Mike Brown case, we were told that witnesses saw Mike Brown shot in the back... no evidence backs that story, but to the contrary.
One thing this case does is give black people some ammunition in their argument that the police can't be trusted. The video would back that up.... not just the shooter, but the black cop that did nothing when the shooter planted the taser.

Sorry for answering the rhetorical question.... but there are connections between the two events. Cops and race.

I disagree. I think there's proof he attacked the cop. I don't think there's any proof he went for the gun specifically.


After all the evidence on mike brown was out . Here's what I think the logical conclustion is.


So darren Wilson sees M. Brown and Co. and thinks they look suspicious. He stops to check them out, prob thinking about searching them cause they look ghetto...

Well ole mike brown it turns out, IS NOT a good person!! After the incident in the gas station. He just knows that's why the cop stopped so he's acting squirlliy.

Darren Wilson pulled up right next Brown. Prob because he wasn't 100% sure he was gonna search the kids. He had no idea about the gas station , but he picks up on brown acting guilty.


Brown thinks the cop knows about the store. At this point however brown had given no one his identification. So if he can get away he might be scott free...

Wilson can tell the kids about to run and reaches out the window to subdue Brown and figure out what he is acting shifty about.


Brown, with Wilson grabbing his shir, decides he's gonna Punch the cop till he lets him go and then break out running. So he stops Wilson from opening the door and begins pummeling a nearly defence less wilson (since he was still seated in the car with the door closed/cracked.).


Wilson, getting pummeled and unable to mount a defence (rightfully) pulls his gun and fires a couple shots. Hitting Brown in the hand....


Brown gets shocked by the gun shots and realizes wilson has let go. He turns and runs.


Wilson (scared, angry, shocked and flooded with adrenaline), climbs out of the car firing. Hitting Brown in the back of the arm, shattering his bone.


Brown having been shot twice, turns around to surrender looking down at his bloody hands.....


Nothing as sexy as a vast conspiracy by the police to kill black men....nor a vast
Conspiracy to by blacks to kill cops...


Just a crazy situation that escalated. With Wilson breaking the letter of the law ( by shooting at a fleeing suspect) but being in an extreme circumstance when he did.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

The problem with your statement is that the guy was shot in the back. I think this cop would have gone down one way or another, sooner or later.

There is no way one can claim self defense when the "perpetrator" has 4 or 5 shots taken from behind. There is only one way to write that one up, from a prosecutor's standpoint.

Might as well claim that he stole the cop's gun and shot himself in the back in an act of suicide. Not going to fly.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

The problem with your statement is that the guy was shot in the back. I think this cop would have gone down one way or another, sooner or later.

There is no way one can claim self defense when the "perpetrator" has 4 or 5 shots taken from behind. There is only one way to write that one up, from a prosecutor's standpoint.

Might as well claim that he stole the cop's gun and shot himself in the back in an act of suicide. Not going to fly.

I disagree TOTALLY!!


There are countless videos of police harming citizens, that anyone would agree the cop was wrong, yet the cop wasn't charged.

a reply to: Entreri06

Show me one where the victim/perpetrator was shot in the back multiple times. None from in front.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Entreri06

Show me one where the victim/perpetrator was shot in the back multiple times. None from in front.

I'm sure video less accounts have happened.


However, I'm refering to police officers striking already subdued citizens. Which tho not as final, of course. In the same catagory of police breaking the law and facing no reprecussions.


A recent video has a 110lb woman hand cuffed in the back of a squad car. She leans on her side and kicks the cop in the shin when she realizes she can't talk her way out of a trip to jail. The 250lb cop punches her like a man shattering her orbital socket.

Should she have been charged with resisting or striking an officer? Absolutely!

Should the cop have retaliated against an already subdued citizen? Of course not! There is no way that was or should be considered legal. However the cop wasn't even reprimanded. It was considered a clean arrest.....

I'm bad at posting links to videos ( actually never tried it lol) but I'm gonna give it a shot.

a reply to: Entreri06

youtu.be...

Damn hoped it would embed...

Video of cop breaking handcuffed womans orbital bone.

Guess who wasn't charged or reprimanded?

a reply to: Entreri06

The officer does have the right to use force, forcefully detain he legs cause of the kick. Not knock her out. Holy Jesus.

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Entreri06

Show me one where the victim/perpetrator was shot in the back multiple times. None from in front.

I'm sure video less accounts have happened.


However, I'm refering to police officers striking already subdued citizens. Which tho not as final, of course. In the same catagory of police breaking the law and facing no reprecussions.

We were talking about the current OP. You stated that if not for the video the cop would have got off scot free, and I said something along the lines of I doubt it, since the victim/perp was shot in the back. Forensics would have told the story as to whether the cop should have been afraid (of a man running away from him). You replied and made the remark something along the lines of it happens all the time. I know what you are saying, but regarding the OP when you reply with:

I disagree TOTALLY!!

It's pretty clear.


I wont say that it couldnt happen, but I am extremely skeptical that it would happen often.

originally posted by: bbracken677

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Entreri06

Show me one where the victim/perpetrator was shot in the back multiple times. None from in front.

I'm sure video less accounts have happened.


However, I'm refering to police officers striking already subdued citizens. Which tho not as final, of course. In the same catagory of police breaking the law and facing no reprecussions.

We were talking about the current OP. You stated that if not for the video the cop would have got off scot free, and I said something along the lines of I doubt it, since the victim/perp was shot in the back. Forensics would have told the story as to whether the cop should have been afraid (of a man running away from him). You replied and made the remark something along the lines of it happens all the time. I know what you are saying, but regarding the OP when you reply with:

I disagree TOTALLY!!

It's pretty clear.


I wont say that it couldnt happen, but I am extremely skeptical that it would happen often.

I don't think police commiting the cold blooded murder from the OP happens often.
However it's worse IMHO when they do such things, considering they are paid, trained and armed to protect against it.

Now I do think cops make the wrong decisions leading to the deaths of innocents then cover it up quite a bit. But I think police unnessacerily and unlawfully manhandle citizens ALL the time !!!

originally posted by: bbracken677

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Entreri06

Show me one where the victim/perpetrator was shot in the back multiple times. None from in front.

I'm sure video less accounts have happened.


However, I'm refering to police officers striking already subdued citizens. Which tho not as final, of course. In the same catagory of police breaking the law and facing no reprecussions.

We were talking about the current OP. You stated that if not for the video the cop would have got off scot free, and I said something along the lines of I doubt it, since the victim/perp was shot in the back. Forensics would have told the story as to whether the cop should have been afraid (of a man running away from him). You replied and made the remark something along the lines of it happens all the time. I know what you are saying, but regarding the OP when you reply with:

I disagree TOTALLY!!

It's pretty clear.


I wont say that it couldnt happen, but I am extremely skeptical that it would happen often.

Oh, please watch that video. I think it'll give you a whole new approximation of what cops can get away with. Compare that with cases with no video.....

a reply to: bbracken677

All he would of had to say was that he had the taser, hence the plant.

You think he would not have gotten cleared if he went the " I was protecting my fellow officers from a man with a taser" route?

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: bbracken677

All he would of had to say was that he had the taser. hence the plant.

You think he would not have gotten cleared if he went the " I was protecting my fellow officers from a man with a taser" route?

Like the kid who "shot himself in the head, while handcuffed, in the back of a squad car, after being searched.....

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: bbracken677

All he would of had to say was that he had the taser. hence the plant.

You think he would not have gotten cleared if he went the " I was protecting my fellow officers from a man with a taser" route?

Like the kid who "shot himself in the head, while handcuffed, in the back of a squad car, after being searched.....

Oooh that was such a miscarriage of justice , a high price for smoking ganja for the kid, and the cops walked.