Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

He attacked him.how much more evidence of threat do you need?

 usernamesareannoying wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
But he obviously wasn't a threat, he was scared and running away.

says the guy watching it from his safe comfy home. Did the cop know it was obvious that he was scared and running away? What was he supposed to do, let him go? It's easy to judge after the fact.

Been there. Done that.
One does not shoot an individual fleeing. There was significant time gap and distance for the officer to see both hands were clear and breaking contact. Since Charleston has not been declared a combat zone one does not shoot an individual in the back while running away. Even in a combat zone if the individual was a threat and started running away one does not shoot the individual in the back while the individual hands are "clear" of weapons. The Officer did a 5/2 Stryker kill

Why shoot the individual who was fleeing when the officer in question has the individual driver license.

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
He attacked him.how much more evidence of threat do you need?

Resisting arrest is not attacking a police officer. Since an already fired tazer on the ground is not an imminent threat, Especially if the victim was fleeing without it. Any assumptions about 'may be armed' are not legal as that would allow police to summarily execute anyone they want due to an 'unknown unknown'.

The eye witness who saw everything said Walker never attacked the officer, never was struggling or even had control of the tazer to fire it. There were two eye witnesses, one at the entrance to the alley and the one with the camera who saw things before film started rolling. Neither saw Walker ever attack or be the aggressor towards Slager. There is zero evidence of Walker ever taking, controlling or firing the tazer. The only 'evidence' of the 'attack' is Slager's word.

Again... You basically come back to "Police can execute anyone they deem as 'bad' by assuming they are violent and secretly armed. Anyone who resists or runs is doing so to better murder the officer, even though there is no evidence of that."

Guess you guys are right, he should have just let him get away.

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
Guess you guys are right, he should have just let him get away.

As opposed to shooting him in the back and planting evidence?

...probably.

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
Guess you guys are right, he should have just let him get away.

Yeah, when compared to what the cop did...yes, he should have let a guy get away whose crime was a busted taillight. Yes.

And when that happens and said criminal goes and kills a family the next day you'll be the same person crying why didn't the police stop him when they had the chance. Give me a break.

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
And when that happens and said criminal goes and kills a family the next day you'll be the same person crying why didn't the police stop him when they had the chance. Give me a break.

The victim was not a suspect in any charge of a violent crime, had not committed a violent crime, and did not appear to have the intent of going and committing a violent crime after his running away.

Plus that's a pretty pathetic appeal to emotion.

What if the next day he saved a family of 4.5 from a house fire. Now they're dead because that cop shot him. Equally as absurd given the histories.

Plus, and I can't fething believe I need to say this, you don't execute someone on a ridiculous hypothetical that never fething happened and has no indication of doing so.

It is against the rules of this site to call what you are doing what it is.

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
And when that happens and said criminal goes and kills a family the next day you'll be the same person crying why didn't the police stop him when they had the chance. Give me a break.

If we kill everyone, like, literally everyone, then there will be no more families murdered.

Why has that not been thought of before?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ooh, no, better still. What if the guy was going to have a family? And his children could have had families of their own!

That cop just prevented potentially hundreds of people from being born. He's, like, the most powerful contraceptive known to man.

Wait.....we're suppose to have emotions? What if emotions are all burned out over a time? The Officer cannot even claim that either by being in the Coast Guard. I can't call it a fun kill 5/2 style but to me it was a Rage Kill.

Yeah, should have just let him go.
Let me go find my rose colored glasses.

I guess I just think that a guy that puts his life on the line for crap pay and no thanks deserves a bit better treatment than this thread is giving him.

You guys win. Resume your cop bashing.

Or get a rope as I think someone said.

Even the hilariously blue wall guys at /r/protectandserve say this was a bad shoot/manslaughter/possibly murder.

You're hilarious. 10/10.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Even the hilariously blue wall guys at /r/protectandserve say this was a bad shoot/manslaughter/possibly murder.

You're hilarious. 10/10.

One of these days I'm going to make up the official DakkaDakka Neo-Authoritarianism League badges.

I mean, Kan even agreed that the officer was guilty.

I like how this guy wants a killer to get better treatment than a guy who hasn't paid child support. It's bizarre really.

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
And when that happens and said criminal goes and kills a family the next day you'll be the same person crying why didn't the police stop him when they had the chance. Give me a break.

If your only options are "shucks, he got away" and "shucks, I'll kill him and lie about everything" then letting him get away is the best option.

Of course the real world option is to realize that a fleeing subject is not an acute threat so you let him flee and utilize the resources at your disposal to search the area for him, use the footage from the dash cam to print a picture, use the car that is physically in your possession to search for clues as to who he is (maybe that weird plate on each end will tell you) and where he could be located.

If at any point he actually doesn't pull a Sir Robin anymore and becomes a threat, then you deal with the threat that exists at that point.

At least the old idiot pay-to-play cop from Oklahoma had the decency to say "sorry" after accidentally killing a man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 usernamesareannoying wrote:

I guess I just think that a guy that puts his life on the line for crap pay and no thanks deserves a bit better treatment than this thread is giving him.

Well, considering that he didn't get killed by getting shot in the back and that they already said the death penalty is off the table I would say that he is already getting better treatment than what he gave to the guy he killed.

You guys win. Resume your cop bashing.

There is a minor difference between "cop bashing" and pointing proven liar is a piece of scum, badge or no badge.

We know for a fact that he is a liar and that he falsified his report and the crime scene.

Or get a rope as I think someone said.

Well, if the cop wouldn't have acted like that is what he was thinking this thread wouldn't exist.

 d-usa wrote:

Of course the real world option is to realize that a fleeing subject is not an acute threat so you let him flee and utilize the resources at your disposal to search the area for him, use the footage from the dash cam to print a picture, use the car that is physically in your possession to search for clues as to who he is (maybe that weird plate on each end will tell you) and where he could be located.

That sounds like.... detective work.

So just a quick summary of our Oklahoma guy (because having two bad cop threads seems spammy):

- 72 year old reserve sheriff deputy participates in an undercover gun buy
- while the suspect is being arrested the deputy decides that using his tazer would be a great idea despite the other cops being in control of the guy
- pulls out his gun instead and shoots the guy that is in the process of being arrested, says "oops"
- as bad guy was dying he talked about being unable to breathe because he was shot, other deputy tells him "feth your breath" and later states he didn't hear the gun shoot right next to his head and didn't know anyone was shot.
- 72 year old reserve deputy is a long time friend to the sheriff
- he donated money and cars to the sheriff department
- he served as the campaign manager for the sheriff's reelection campaign and was his biggest donor
- he takes the sheriff on vacations to Vegas
- sheriff insists that he is a good guy and that there is nothing wrong with him participating in dangerous undercover operations and that there was no pay-to-play going on there

From experience when the blood is up and what not. A weapon going off beside my head not going register till after the fact. Its like firing a cannon off. Its not really loud when your on the piece but its damn loud when your in front of the piece and less loud when your not near the muzzle. Also if ones use to range firing the discharge is not going to register to you being your use to the round going "down range". You will though turn a quick head when a discharge sounds "off" then what your use to.

Edit

State going to get the crap sued out of them for sure

Guy's probably got some manslaughter charges headed his way too. Probably wan't on purpose, but it's like a car crash. You may not have meant to do it, but it's still your fault.

I wished he pulled the Tazer though. Can you imagine how funny that would be

My real question is if they are holding him and he did use a tazzer wouldn't they get hit too?

OgreChubbs wrote:
My real question is if they are holding him and he did use a tazzer wouldn't they get hit too?

YES

EDIT

NO they would not have as this video shows the charge does not jump

And this is why you don't have 72 year old cops.

I think the cops in NY are relived from in the field duty after they reach like 35 or something. I know my cousin just retired from being a NY state trooper, and he's in his 30's. I'll have to ask him.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
And this is why you don't have 72 year old cops.

I think the cops in NY are relived from in the field duty after they reach like 35 or something. I know my cousin just retired from being a NY state trooper, and he's in his 30's. I'll have to ask him.

This wasn't a sworn officer, it was someone who was a 'volunteer'. Though the perception is that the guy was paying via donations and trips to play at cop.

That's even worse.

 curran12 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
And this is why you don't have 72 year old cops.

I think the cops in NY are relived from in the field duty after they reach like 35 or something. I know my cousin just retired from being a NY state trooper, and he's in his 30's. I'll have to ask him.

This wasn't a sworn officer, it was someone who was a 'volunteer'. Though the perception is that the guy was paying via donations and trips to play at cop.

Are you sure he wasn't sworn? A lot of departments have part-time reserve deputies and officers that are still sworn officers, even if they aren't full-time.

Well, a reserve deputy is a real cop. They do get the training, they are armed, and they can perform the role of part time police. My dad does it, he's in his 50's and retired from working for the BOP and works as a director of emergency management for the county. He does a few regular shifts when they really need him, but for the most part he does what most reserve deputies do: pull shifts at events with large crowds (county fairs, festivals, races, etc).

Most reserve programs do a good job supplementing the regular deputies during events where there are a lot of crowds and you need extra help with crowd control, or looking for drunks, or staff DUI checkpoints.

I don't think the problem is with having volunteer reserve deputies, a small problem is the presence of a volunteer at a high risk gun buy (which he participated in frequently) with the bigger problem being the presence of an apparent "pay-to-play" long time friend and former campaign manager of the sheriff who is 72 years old and who couldn't tell a tazer from a gun.

What, did he mean to give the guy a shave and a haricut?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
What, did he mean to give the guy a shave and a haricut?

Autocorrect is almost as deadly as reaching for the wrong weapon