RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Ex-South Carolina cop Michael Slager gets 20 years for Walter Scott ki - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Ex-South Carolina cop Michael Slager gets 20 years for Walter Scott ki Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,977
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 07 December 2017 - 06:34 PM

Ex-South Carolina cop Michael Slager gets 20 years for Walter Scott killing
Updated 4:10 PM ET, Thu December 7, 2017


Charleston, South Carolina (CNN)Michael Slager, the former South Carolina police officer who shot and killed Walter Scott, was sentenced Thursday to 20 years in federal prison, a decision the Scott family said gave it a "sense of justice."
"This is an historic day for civil rights, in particular for officer-involved shootings," said Chris Stewart, one of the Scott family's attorneys, at a press conference following the sentencing.
US District Court Judge David Norton made his decision after hearing emotional statements from members of both families. Norton earlier Thursday had said the "appropriate underlying offense" for Slager, who is white, was second-degree murder.

Scott's family has repeatedly expressed forgiveness to Slager, who said that he was thankful for that. But the victim's relatives were glad to see the officer held accountable.
"We are hurt," said Anthony Scott, Walter's brother, "and we do have some type of passion for the Slager family, in that they have to suffer as well. And we do forgive Michael Slager for what he did. But yes, we did want justice for my brother, and we feel that we have gotten a sense of justice."

Slager pleaded guilty in May to violation of civil rights by acting under the color of law in Scott's April 2015 killing. Slager's 2016 state murder trial ended in a mistrial.
At the time of the shooting, Scott was only the latest black man to be killed in a series of controversial officer-involved shootings that prompted "Black Lives Matter" protests and vigils.


Federal prosecutors sought a life sentence, arguing Slater, then a North Charleston police officer, had committed second-degree murder and also should be punished for obstructing justice by providing the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division with false statements.
Slager, 36, shot Scott five times in the back "for running away, simply for having a broken taillight," Jared Fishman of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division told the court in his closing statement this week.
It's "time to call it what it was -- a murder," Fishman said, specifying second-degree murder.
But defense attorney Andy Savage argued that while Slager's actions were criminal, they did not amount to murder. The appropriate offense was voluntary manslaughter, Slager's attorneys said.

A probation officer had recommended Slager be sentenced to 10 to 13 years in prison.

<snip>

Link
I'm a little shocked at the severity and length of the sentence. I believe this is federal time.

But this is what accountability looks like, and that's a good thing.

This post has been edited by Ladybird: 07 December 2017 - 06:36 PM

0

#2 User is offline   ThePatriot 

  • Warpaint
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 26,568
  • Joined: 17-August 03

Posted 07 December 2017 - 06:42 PM

It's always good when justice is served.
0

#3 User is offline   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,387
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 07 December 2017 - 06:53 PM

IF this is the case I'm thinking of, I recall seeing the original video. (Guy stepping out of his car in broad view at a convenience store?)

I agree, Justice is served.

Weed out the bad apples. I'm PERFECTLY okay with that.
0

#4 User is offline   SARGE 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 9,643
  • Joined: 26-June 03

Posted 07 December 2017 - 06:56 PM

View PostThePatriot, on 07 December 2017 - 06:42 PM, said:

It's always good when justice is served.


Yes, it is.
0

#5 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,977
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 07 December 2017 - 07:02 PM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 07 December 2017 - 06:53 PM, said:

IF this is the case I'm thinking of, I recall seeing the original video. (Guy stepping out of his car in broad view at a convenience store?)

I agree, Justice is served.

Weed out the bad apples. I'm PERFECTLY okay with that.

Yes, probably.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/07/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott.jpeg

Still, it may not have been so severe if he hadn't lied.
0

#6 User is offline   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 24,737
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 07 December 2017 - 07:23 PM

View PostLadybird, on 07 December 2017 - 07:02 PM, said:

Yes, probably.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/07/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott.jpeg

Still, it may not have been so severe if he hadn't lied.

It doesn't matter because he had no lawful or legitimate reason to shoot the man.

Period.

It was straight up murder.

This post has been edited by Rock N' Roll Right Winger: 07 December 2017 - 07:24 PM

0

#7 User is offline   Howsithangin 

  • I'm dethpicable
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 25,005
  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 07 December 2017 - 08:32 PM

Agree with others on this one. Justice served, for a change.

Zero justification for the shooting.
0

#8 User is offline   Buckwheat Jones 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 6,904
  • Joined: 08-May 03

Posted 07 December 2017 - 08:40 PM

View PostLadybird, on 07 December 2017 - 07:02 PM, said:

Yes, probably.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/07/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott.jpeg

Still, it may not have been so severe if he hadn't lied.

Oh, it’s THAT guy. I wouldn’t have cried if they gave him the needle. What a poor excuse for a human being.
0

#9 User is online   Moderator T 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 35,812
  • Joined: 02-October 03

Posted 07 December 2017 - 11:38 PM

I'm surprised he didn't try to plea earlier, there was no way he was going to get away with this murder.
0

#10 User is offline   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 10,250
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 08 December 2017 - 03:42 AM

View PostRock N, on 07 December 2017 - 07:23 PM, said:

It doesn't matter because he had no lawful or legitimate reason to shoot the man.

Period.

It was straight up murder.

:yeahthat:

We agree on something!

I was disgusted the first time I saw that and am glad that he is being punished.
0

#11 User is offline   LongKnife 

  • Don't start none, won't be none.
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 2,920
  • Joined: 10-November 04

Posted 08 December 2017 - 08:37 AM

He's in for a fun time in the big house.
0

#12 User is offline   Taggart Transcontinental 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 23,778
  • Joined: 22-October 03

Posted 08 December 2017 - 09:21 AM

Funny how there are no "controversial black shootings by police" any more.. Guess cops stopped shooting people. Or maybe our DOJ isn't the politicized insane asylum it was under Obama.

As far as this guy goes. He screwed up, he should go down.

This is the one he dropped the taser, if I recall correctly?

Friggin stupid.
0

#13 User is offline   oki 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,510
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 08 December 2017 - 09:43 AM

View PostTaggart Transcontinental, on 08 December 2017 - 09:21 AM, said:

Funny how there are no "controversial black shootings by police" any more.. Guess cops stopped shooting people. Or maybe our DOJ isn't the politicized insane asylum it was under Obama.

As far as this guy goes. He screwed up, he should go down.

This is the one he dropped the taser, if I recall correctly?

Friggin stupid.



Last I heard you can only shoot a fleeing suspect if they are a proven threat or an eminent one. If I remember correctly this guy had warrants over failing to pay child support. As much as I detest deadbeat dads, I don't believe that qualifies him as a threat(sarcasm).
Trigger happy cop.

Oki
0

#14 User is offline   Tea Party Hooligan 

  • I kick puppies
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 16,629
  • Joined: 27-May 03

Posted 08 December 2017 - 11:02 AM

Quote

"for running away, simply for having a broken taillight,"


I don't remember why he ran in the first placeve. If it was a busted taillight, then there was no reason to run. White, black, purple, pink; it doesn't matter, you could be shot for running from police (as I've been told by all the LEO supporters, you don't run from the po-po). Do I think the cop got a proper sentence? Yes. Do I think that skin color had anything to do with it? Nope.
0

#15 User is offline   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,387
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 08 December 2017 - 03:45 PM

View Postoki, on 08 December 2017 - 09:43 AM, said:

Last I heard you can only shoot a fleeing suspect if they are a proven threat or an eminent one. If I remember correctly this guy had warrants over failing to pay child support. As much as I detest deadbeat dads, I don't believe that qualifies him as a threat(sarcasm).
Trigger happy cop.

Oki


Yeah, more or less.

Historically, in most jurisdictions that were descended from English Common Law, the standard for deadly force was "Fleeing Felon"; reasonable belief that the fleeing person HAD committed a felony.

That changed with Tennessee v. Garner in 1985. Now the standard is "the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

Personally, I think that with Garner the pendulum swung TOO far the other direction. Still, though, even WITHOUT Garner this was still a "Bad" shoot.
0

#16 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,778
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 09 December 2017 - 06:36 PM

Good. Have a nice 20-year "vacay".

Drain the police swamp of bad apples, very good idea. Every speeding ticket (a half dozen in 30+ years) I've got, except one where the sheriff was very reasonable, have left me feeling that unless I do exactly as told and answer exactly as expected and don't question a damn thing, they might resort to violence. So my personal anecdotal experience is that cops as an organization still do have some ways to go. Of course, I've never been involved in a crime, so I don't know how people there get treated. Maybe better than civil infractions....?

I'm a mild mannered white guy so I don't think police are IN GENERAL racist, given the treatment I've been subject to. I don't really buy that angle at all. I'm much more willing to believe that IN GENERAL they have control issues.

This post has been edited by zurg: 09 December 2017 - 06:37 PM

0

#17 User is offline   Diamond369 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 9,499
  • Joined: 03-May 04

Posted 10 December 2017 - 09:24 AM

Personally, I think he should have received more, but 20 years is good enough.
0

#18 User is offline   oki 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,510
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 12 December 2017 - 02:03 PM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 08 December 2017 - 03:45 PM, said:

Yeah, more or less.

Historically, in most jurisdictions that were descended from English Common Law, the standard for deadly force was "Fleeing Felon"; reasonable belief that the fleeing person HAD committed a felony.

That changed with Tennessee v. Garner in 1985. Now the standard is "the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

Personally, I think that with Garner the pendulum swung TOO far the other direction. Still, though, even WITHOUT Garner this was still a "Bad" shoot.



Officers need discretion. Sadly some don't understand that discretion requires good sense, in short doesn't mean you can shoot anyone running away.
There has to be reasonable proof that the person is an imminent threat. I always took reasonable proof as something in which the average person would see as proof. IE someone just robbed a store with a gun, the person running away is a match to the description. The person running away has a violent history, the person running away is wanted for threats, the person running away just committed a violent crime etc etc etc.

%99.9 of officers know all this and serve their communities honorably and exceptionally. Awful not only for the victim, but also all the cops who are never thanked and never highlighted for their selfless deeds.

Oki
0

#19 User is offline   oki 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,510
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 12 December 2017 - 02:14 PM

View PostDiamond369, on 10 December 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

Personally, I think he should have received more, but 20 years is good enough.



Let's see an ex cop who went to prison for shooting a black man? If he even survives, those 20 might as well be life.
This guys life is going to be a absolute living hell.


Oki
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users