Police Abuse

Did the Cop Who Shot Walter Scott in the Back Try to Doctor the Scene?

Video seems to show the officer picking up an object and dropping it near the body.



A closer look at the video that shows North Charleston, South Carolina, police officer Michael Slager shooting motorist Walter Scott in the back suggests why Slager's superiors were so quick to charge him with murder after viewing the footage. Not only was Scott running away from Slager when the patrolman fired eight rounds at him, but it does not look like Scott ever had control of the officer's Taser in a way that posed a significant threat. In fact, as Nick Gillespie mentioned earlier this morning, it looks like Slager may have doctored the scene by picking up the Taser and dropping it near Scott after shooting him.

After Slager stopped Scott for driving with a broken brake light on Saturday morning, Scott ran away, apparently because he had an outstanding warrant for failure to pay child support. According to police reports, Slager pursued Scott and caught up with him in a lot next to a muffler shop, where the officer drew his Taser and fired. The New York Times describes what happened next:

The video begins in the vacant lot, apparently moments after Officer Slager fired his Taser. Wires, which carry the electrical current from the stun gun, appear to be extending from Mr. Scott's body as the two men tussle and Mr. Scott turns to run.

Something—it is not clear whether it is the stun gun—is either tossed or knocked to the ground behind the two men, and Officer Slager draws his gun, the video shows. When the officer fires, Mr. Scott appears to be 15 to 20 feet away and fleeing. He falls after the last of eight shots.

The officer then runs back toward where the initial scuffle occurred and picks something up off the ground. Moments later, he drops an object near Mr. Scott's body, the video shows.

Reuters' description is similar:

At no point in the video, which does not show the initial contact between the men, does Scott appear to be armed.

Slager is seen placing the victim in handcuffs as he lies on the ground, and then the officer walks back to a spot near where he opened fire.

The video then shows him appearing to pick something up, return to Scott, and then drop it next to him on the ground.

"Shots fired and the subject is down," Slager reported over his radio. "He took my Taser."

NEXT: Ferguson Residents Come Out to Vote, Diversify City Council

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. An earlier description I believe stated that the shooter looked in the direction of the video-taker. I haven’t seen the footage. Does this happen? And if so, is it before or after he dropped the taser next to the body?

    1. I watched once. I didn’t notice one way or another. I was just surprised that the person doing the recording wasn’t gunned down too, as he had an object in hand and was watching the cops (while swearing in a terrified/horrified manner)

      1. Okay I just watched it. It kind of looks like he does just after the final shot, when he glances back at the stun gun on the ground behind him. And yes, the person recording the video didn’t appear to be coy about it. He’s fortunate.

        I can’t make out the shooter dropping the stun gun next to the body after he goes to retrieve it from where it was tossed. People taking video need to learn that steady and at a distant is usually better than shaky and moving closer, for multiple reasons. (At least it wasn’t vertical video.)

        1. I’m trying to imagine holding anything steady while watching another human being’s life snuffed out.

          1. I did a little livestreaming in my protesting days. Keeping an eye on everything, trying to follow all the action while still keeping the feed smooth so’s not to make viewers at home seasick… And if the cops pull anything funny, the livestreamer’s the one that’ll get your arse out of a jam with the video evidence. So. Did you remember to turn on the audio?

            I’d rather run grill and saute stations solo, at the same time. Videography is fucking difficult.

          2. But he was holding it steady until he went on the move. The shooting was pretty clear. The aftermath wasn’t. Kudos to him for getting what he did, of course.

  2. I have the sense that the Jeremy Dear case here in Albuquerque probably had a very similar sequence–Mary Hawks had a firearm and may or may not have turned on Dear after fleeing. We have to take Dear’s word for what occurred because he didn’t bother turning on his lapel cam. This shooting demonstrates why we have reason to be suspicious and to demand footage.

    1. ^Hawkes

      Damnit, swype. Read my mind.

  3. Video killed the homicide star.

    1. You were fleeing as a felon in a city park, when I met you.
      I tased you out, I shot you up
      And turned you around, slapped the handcuffs on and called my crew.

      Now five minutes later on I’ve dropped the taser at your feet.
      Abuse cover up has been so easy for you.
      But don’t forget it’s me who put you where you are now,
      And I can put you back there too.

      Don’t, don’t you obey me?
      You know I can’t believe it
      When I hear that you won’t obey me.
      Don’t, don’t you obey me?
      You know I don’t believe you
      When you say that you don’t heed me.
      It’s much to late to find
      When you think you’ve changed your mind.
      You’d better change it back or we will both be sorry.
      Don’t you obey me, baby?
      Don’t you obey me, oh?
      Don’t you obey me, baby?
      Don’t you obey me, oh?

      I was fleeing as a felon in a city park,
      That much is true.
      But even then I knew I’d seen murder in your face
      Either with or without you.

      The five minutes we have had have been such violent times,
      I still won’t obey you.
      But now I think it’s time I get a lawyer on my own.
      I guess it’s just what I must do.

  4. Looked to me like he was simply retrieving the taser, unfortunately for him it makes him look guilty.

    1. It was the ‘shooting a fleeing citizen in the back’ that made him look guilty to me. Moving evidence around just cemented the impression.

      1. I should have been clearer in my comment, “Moving the taser, even if just to retrieve it, unfortunately makes him look guilty.

        I never said any of the other evidence didn’t make him look guilty but I was willing to wait to see if there was more to the story, but apparently there wasn’t.

    2. Unfortunately for him he shot a 50 year old in the back at a distance.

      1. The fool, it’s 45 year old season

    3. being guilty often, and amazingly, makes one look guilty.

    4. “Shots fired and the subject is down,” Slager reported over his radio. “He took my Taser.”

      If there were any doubt whatsoever, the department would have put him on administrative leave until the furor blew over or they fired him over something much more innocuous. Instead he’s charged with murder.

  5. So:

    If you move towards a cop, you’re at risk of being shot because you’re attacking.
    If you move away from a cop, you’re at risk of being shot because you could pose a deadly threat to others.
    If you don’t move, you’re at risk of being shot if the officer “perceives” (or lies and says, same difference) that you’re “reaching for your waistband”.

    A strange game. The only winning move is not to play stay as far away from police officers as possible.

    1. Cops don’t kill people. Cops with guns do. (Or with chokeholds, beatings etc)

    2. No, the best move when confronted by a LEO is just what the protestors have been telling us: Hands Up “I surrender” Don’t Shoot. And then pray to your god that the LEO is not some power-crazed maniac who will shoot you anyway. Better to let your lawyer try to sort it out than have your family picking six pall bearers. Running from the cops or getting confrontational is a death wish.

      1. Like most sane people, I find the police far more frightening than comforting. Your comment made me think of the college kid who was shot by the cop after saying “What are you going to do? Shoot me?” Does anyone know whatever became of that?

      2. Hands up, say loudly and clearly. I. AM NOT. RESISTING.

        1. Liar ! Blam, blam, blam, blam, blam, blam, blam, and blam !

          1. Pretty much.

    3. If you attempt to grab a cops stun gun, you’re gonna get shot. Even if you fail to gain control of the stun gun and end up fleeing, you’ll still get shot in the back.

      That’s not to excuse the cop shooting him in the back whatsoever, and ferrchrissakes it wasn’t like the deceased was exactly fleet of foot and he should be charged and convicted (though I think a second degree murder charge or aggravated manslaughter is the proper charge). But you make a move at any weapon on a cop’s person, you merit a Darwin award.

      1. If you attempt to grab a cops stun gun, you’re gonna get shot.\

        And who said that he did that? Was it the guy who murdered him?

        1. The video. All you need do is watch it.

          1. The video begins after the officer fires his TASER at the murder victim. So what is your point?

            1. Sudden is a precog, Sug. Don’t belittle his glorious power.

            2. It’s unclear from the video that the officer fired the taser (though it is clear a taser was fired given that the wire is evident at 0:19). But the wire that is visible appears to descending from the officer’s chest level towards the ground after the taser is thrown to the ground, which would indicate either malfunctioning equipment (unlikely) or the taser was wrestled with and knocked out of his hand thereby severing the wire from being attached to the taser. The trajectory at which the taser hits the ground is inconsistent with him discarding the weapon and appears it was at the least knocked out of his hand by the deceased. And the deceased’s ability to run away is inconsistent with having just been tased. Again, none of this is to claim that the officer was justified in shooting a fleeing man in the back eight times, simply to state: DONT PICK FIGHTS WITH ARMED MEN OR YOU’RE GONNA DIE!

              1. What makes you think he “picked a fight?” Cops taze people every day when nobody has “picked a fight.”

                1. Well I don’t think he initially picked a fight. In fact, he initially fled and the officer tracked him down (which is why this confrontation which started with a traffic stop occurred on a grassy area with no cars in the immediate vicinity). But it’s clear from the video that he knocks the cop’s taser out of his hand (again, trajectory of the taser visible at 0:18 and 0:19 is fairly clear).

                  We don’t have any video evidence of the events leading up to the taser being drawn. I’m not sure the use of the taser was ever warranted, nor am I sure it was unwarranted. But in either event, you don’t make an attempt to grab a weapon (whether gun or taser) from a cop or you will get shot. Obligatory caveat that I still believe the cop shooting a fleeing suspect in the back if fucking murder.

                  1. Easy to say that but if you feel like your life is threatened, instinctually, your probably going to try and defend yourself, not submit.

                  2. sudden, everything you have said in this thread is completely and utterly full of shit.

              2. So if you run away from the fight you’ll be just fine? If that’s the case it looks like we need to disarm the police.

    4. My GSD and I walk the neighborhood and very often we encounter cops. Every time we do, I tell her, “Those guys want to shoot you and will find any reason they can to do so.” Every time. Hopefully, she understands.

  6. “Shots fired and the subject is down,” Slager reported over his radio. “He took my Taser.”

    This was probably true, but not accurate. After Slager attempted to tase Scott, the Taser slipped out of his greasy piggy hand, at which point, a firearm was discharged to execute this fleeing deadbeat dad for not only failing to his child support/pussy tax, but for disrespecting AUTHORITAH.

  7. Is nobody going to state the obvious- there is NO WAY he’s going to pay the child support now. Maybe, just maybe, issuing warrants for not paying child support is a practice that should stop?

    I mean, the kid will never have a father now. Also, any arrest made for failure to pay is most likely going to negatively impact the father’s earning potential anyway, being counterproductive to the issue.

    This disgusts me all around.

    1. Child support law isn’t about supporting children, it’s about punishing Fatherhood.

    2. Oh Spencer, you poor, deluded, hetero, cis-lord oppressor, don’t you know that fathers are unnecessary?

    3. Taxpayers will take over the payments.

    4. I’m on board with your second paragraph. But how exactly do you deal with people who fail to comply with a court order? One of the biggest problems in the child support arena is these guys don’t even have bank accounts so you can’t even garnish wages directly.

      1. Sounds like a civil matter to me.

      2. Probably not with the drug war tactic of amping up punishment from confiscation and disposal to arrest and summary execution.

      3. First question I must ask is, was the court order reasonable?

        I’ve seen all sorts of people court-ordered to shit miracles and bleed cash. I’ve seen a court order a person to take a week’s vacation from work every month to visit children taken out of state.

      4. People fail to pay judgments all the time because they don’t have the money. Child support is hardly a unique case. We don’t go issuing arrest warrants for people who don’t pay their rent or credit card bills. Instead, the court issues an ordering garnishing wages and seizing bank accounts or other property. There’s absolutely no reason to throw people in jail for owing money.

        1. well, unless they owe ME money. then put them behind bars until they can pay me… oh, wait… how does that work again?

          1. Precisely. Putting someone in jail as a way to get them to pay money they don’t have is about the dumbest strategy possible. It basically ensures the person will never pay back the money because they will 1) not be able to work while in jail, and 2) will likely lose their job for not showing up and/or getting a record, and 3) will have a hard time getting another job for having a record and getting fired from the previous job. The whole thing makes me wonder whether the state is actually trying to get fathers to pay child support, or whether they are just trying to look tough and to trap more people in the criminal justice system to justify their own jobs and budgets.

            1. this was all figured out a long time ago on an island far far away when the brits got rid of debtors prisons. only our courts could resurrect a practice as failed, corrupt amd mean spirited as imprisoning the poor for being poor.

        2. I always thought that debtors prisons were illegal in America so how did the courts get around this issue when it comes to child support and the IRS for that matter.

  8. What is the thing that gets thrown down when the victim begins to flea? Is that the Taser? Was the taser still attached and when he ran he pulled it out of the officers hand? We we ever know? How about the balls on the guy that filmed it, after seeing the officer just kill someone like that I don’t know if I would have stuck around.

    1. How about the balls on the guy that filmed it, after seeing the officer just kill someone like that I don’t know if I would have stuck around.

      I was thinking the same thing. In his position I definitely would have been afraid for my own life, simply as a witness. Just like I would if I saw the Mob murder someone. But I repeat myself.

      1. He deserves a medal. Probably a price on his head now though, expect a routine traffic stop to go badly in his future.

        1. Assuming they even know who it is. I would be sending such evidence though a burn email.

  9. Looks like slam dunk, beyond a reasonable doubt proof of a completely unjustified homicide. But I thought the same thing about the Garner killing. A civilian would be done, but too many juries seem to think the cops should be allowed to do absolutely anything.

    This guy had better get convicted, or the country might explode.

    1. I’m guessing the cop will get probation for involuntary manslaughter and he’ll lose his job/bennies. Oh, he might spend a night in jail too.

      1. They’ll claim it would be cruel and dangerous to put cop in jail for such a minor offense,real criminals would be likely to seek revenge.

        I imagine the cop is stunned about Being charged.

        1. It’s a shock ! Our hero did everything right, shot the guy in the back, made sure he was dead so can’t tell his side of the story, planted the taser AND called it in immediately so you have a good excuse for being so scared you just had to shoot a guy Dead, he followed his training to the letter ! His only mistake was not seeing and killing the guy filming, that iPhone looked just like a shotgun from here.

          1. If he only hit 5 of 8 at 20 feet, maybe the officer instantly evaluated his chance of hitting the camera guy as being about nil with the remaining bullets in the magazine?

    2. This guy had better get convicted, or the country might explode.


    3. The cynic in me says there’s no way he gets convicted.

      Indicted, probably…convicted, probably not. Juries just don’t like convicting cops for things they do on duty. If juries let cops walk after things like the Kelly Thomas murder, and don’t even indict after the Eric Garner killing, I suspect they’ll look for any reason not to convict him. “He shouldn’t have been running from police” seems one they’ll latch onto quickly.

      Hopefully my inner cynic is wrong, but I doubt it.

      1. I admit I thought that the Staten Island cop would be convicted for sure, and as you say he ended up not even getting indicted, so I suspect you’re probably right. It’s tragic that we’ve given cops a virtual licence to kill.

      2. If it goes to trial there will be lots of cops in uniform staring down the jury. Some might even go so far as to slide their thumb across their neck. It won’t be a hung jury, it will be aquittal.

        1. Acquittal is out of the question. If a picture is worth a thousand words, a video is worth about 25 to life. Otherwise, there’ll be hell to pay around there like nobody has EVER seen since the Civil War era.

  10. Of course this is already being contextualized as white-on-black violence, which is helpful to approximately nobody except racialists on both sides of the issue. We could hold this up as an example of the abusive culture characterizing the practice of policing domestic soldiering, as an example of why insisting on video to corroborate police reports is necessary, or we can stage another pointless exercise in promoting racial disunity. Guess which is likelier to happen.

    1. Exactly. and thanks. I have to say that the people who use these sorts of events to further their divisive, self serving “racialist agenda” as you say, are moral scum.

      1. Critiquing an institutional structure like modern law enforcement requires nuance and deliberation, whereas alleging racial animus requires neither–not even particularly compelling evidence, because often enough the allegation is all the evidence racialists want or need. There are few true villains like the officer in this episode, but many like Dear who skirt criminality on technical excuses. It’s tough to demonstrate how an institutional arrangement results in evil outcomes. Incentives are slippery things to prove. Racial narratives are easier.

    2. Race and police brutality and misconduct are, for the foreseeable future at least, going to be closely linked issues. I agree with you the hyperfocus on it is counterproductive – at the same time, one can’t ignore its relevance. There’s a reason why the black community gets more outraged about police misconduct and brutality in their communities – and it’s not because the media invented a narrative in the 21st century. In my experience, in cases of police misconduct, white people generally react one of two ways: 1) (Less common in clearcut egregious cases) They assume the victim had it coming, and take anything as evidence of such – such as Garner disrespecting the cop, this guy running a way, the boy and guy in Cleveland holding toy guns, etc. 2) More commonly in clearcut cases, they, like any sane person, are shocked and dismayed at the event. However, there’s a strong tendency to just assume that this is an outlier event due to a “bad apple” police officer. An understanding of the larger systemic flaws in American policing is not common. The reason for these reactions is that most white people generally have reasonably positive interactions with police, maybe have friends and families on the force, and view them as the selfless protectors of law and order.

      1. Indeed. There’s what you understand theoretically, and then there’s perceptions. I pointed out once that to argue on the one hand (correctly) that the justice system is bullshit, a den of corruption and thieves, and then on the other assume that being arrested and/or having a record proves a flawed personal character, is not altogether consistent.

        I was called a black crime apologist, which was a neat trick since I never mentioned race.

        Perception is the filter by which we perceive reality. In theory this works quite well, but then so does communism. All men are idealists and view the world through rose-tinted glasses, the left-hand lens being called Experience and the right Bias, both such being so wound up in who we are that the whole is called Ego. Ordinary pink spectacles they are to others, but to our own selves perception is a validation and summation of our existence. Thus will a man choose perception over reality if the latter disagrees with the former. To an intellectual, this is irony – to a bastard, this is opportunity.

      2. Race and police brutality and misconduct are, for the foreseeable future at least, going to be closely linked issues.

        While I agree with that observation and largely agree with the way the public responds across racial lines, there are explanatory reasons behind that. Look, I hate to be the one that sounds like an unapologetic racist, but I think it’s equal measure of folly to fail to examine the attitudes and behaviors of the victims of police brutality. Urban black culture is remarkably dysfunctional and the interactions with police are often an instigating factor in many of these instances. That’s not to excuse any particular shooting by police, and certainly not this one. Yes, it’s clear from the video that the deceased attempted to grab the stun gun before dropping it and fleeing. His fleeing was hardly rapid and so the cop should have pursued on foot rather than discharging his weapon, though it is entirely possible that in the heat of the moment that the cop believed the deceased actually did have the stun gun and didn’t see it drop by his person (which would be somewhat corroborated by his examining the area around the deceased before going back to retreive the stun gun.

        1. But it is monumentally stupid to try wrestling possession of a weapon away from a cop. Michael Brown did it and he’s dead. This guy did it and he’s dead. At some point the black community at large needs some goddamned introspection. Should this officer be discharged? Obviously. Should he be charged with a crime? I believe so. But none of that exonerates the idiocy of the dead.

          1. Trayvon wasn’t all that bright either.

          2. I’m talking about a broader history that predates modern “urban black culture” and extends far beyond the shooting deaths that get the most attention. In the big picture, those are still relatively rare. It’s the much more common everyday abuses that have gone on for decades and centuries, in addition to deaths, beatings, etc. that have resulted in the black community being far more skeptical of law enforcement than the white community. I don’t disagree that it’s not smart to run from police or try to take a weapon – I’m saying that’s missing the broader point here.

            1. Duly noted and I think you have a good read on it which is partly why I pointed out my agreement with most of the thesis you put forward. I think those legacy effects of institutional racism are one of the reasons that blacks today can often act bellicose with cops but I think it equally dumb to pretend a Mexican cop in South Los Angeles in 2015 is functionally the same with a Tuscaloosa cop in 1972. Sort of a “he started it” argument that children use.

        2. “Yes, it’s clear from the video that the deceased attempted to grab the stun gun before dropping it and fleeing”

          No it is not ‘clear’ this occurred, as none of what you describe was in the video.

          1. It’s not clear because you’re not using your clairvoyance superpower. Ask Sudden for advice because his clairvoyance superpower is “clearly” working.

    3. This is not the case by and large in the black community – most black people see and experience negative interactions with police far more often and as such are more aware of systemic issues with the way police operate in their communities.

      To sum it up, I do agree with you in that I wish there could be a coordinated push against all the flaws of modern American policing, and I wish that race was not often the primary factor discussed in those cases. However, that day is not going to come when black people, or even left-wing activists in general, make as much noise when these incidents happen to white people – if it comes, it’s going to come when white people care as much about those incidents as black people do when it happens to them.

      1. Not just black people, but poor people. Cops are bullies who know that people who can’t afford an attorney have no way to fight back.

        1. Again, my comment wasn’t meant to imply that this is only an issue in the black community, or that all white groups get treated equally by police. I’m just explaining why there’s disproportionate anger over police conduct between racial groups, and a result, why race plays a significant factor in the debate (yes, the media often does exploit that, but they certainly are not responsible for its existence and prominence in the first place).

      2. Agreed. I don’t discount the influence of racism, but the culture of zero accountability and zero oversight exacerbates rather than causes racial tension. A bigoted florist is called out by the twitter mob, investigated by the feds, and ultimately convicted of a crime. An equally bigoted cop enjoys the cover of law and has at his disposal much greater latitude over his victims. The problem with focusing on the racial aspect is that it produces no realistic or effective policies to mitigate racist conduct, if it even exists in the first place (the Darrel Wilson case, for example). Instead, it derails what should be the main focus?requiring wearable cameras, for instance. Reforming drug and forfeiture laws. Reducing the breadth or scope of interface blacks have with cops.

        It’s a bit like the global warming debate?radicalizing and politicizing the warmist side, and demonizing skeptics, has created a climate (har) utterly unconducive to debating the subject rationally. Warmists should be alarmed and ashamed at having been preempted by progressive politicians. Instead, they’re happy for the patronage. Which tells you something about their priorities.

        1. I agree with virtually everything you’ve said. I was just explaining why it’s such a prominent factor in these cases, and that the roots of that explanation go back a lot further than media coverage in the last 5 years. And if the narrative is going to change, it’s going to require change from all groups, not just black people or left-wing activists. Because aside from libertarians, those groups are virtually the ones that care at all (in a politically or socially significant manner) in the first place.

          1. Yep. And you’re right, sadly, it’s not likely to change the tenor of the debate until more whites begin turning on cops for their trespasses. Given how drastically the ethnically-populated urban schools differ vs. majority-white suburban schools, it’s probably going to take awhile longer.

    4. It’s not white on black.

      It’s blue on everyone else.

  11. Is it too soon or too late for “Ivanhoe” references?

    1. It’s constantly too soon and too late for any references to the works of Sir Walter Scott.

  12. because he had an outstanding warrant for failure to pay child support.

    Thanks to the police, the child will NEVER get financial support from his father ever again. Now the taxpayers get to pay it.

    1. “Bitch set me up!” –father, probably.

      …too soon?

  13. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is what- I do…… ?????? http://www.jobsfish.com

  14. Fwiw, appears to be murder – straight up

  15. IMO…absolutely he was getting ready to doctor the scene. And I think this is a point that a lot of people are missing and a fact that, if proved at trial, will have a determining factor in sentencing. The officer was wrong for shooting (obviously) – this is a mistake of the head. It is a momentary reaction, bad judgement, poor decision, etc…for which the officer will be incarcerated for greater than 20 years (again, IMO). However, concocting a narrative and doctoring physical evidence to fit the officer’s version of events is a mistake of the heart – a look into what kind of person he actually is. That is the disgusting part to me.

    1. However, concocting a narrative and doctoring physical evidence to fit the officer’s version of events is a mistake of the heart – a look into what kind of person he actually is. That is the disgusting part to me.

      Agreed and echoed somewhat downthread. Though I think it’s not entirely inconceivable that he believed that deceased had the taser on his person. The video starts with the two men clearly wrestling over the taser, at which point it is knocked from the cop’s hand. The cop could have legitimately believed that the deceased managed to gain control of the pistol and that was why he made the shoot as opposed to chasing the man down (as stated below, that would explain why after successfully pursuing the man on foot from the scene of the traffic stop and showing his capability of catching up with him why he would choose not to pursue on foot this time). Chalk that up to bad judgement/heat of the moment/etc. His efforts at doctoring the scene seem hastily done after he realized the deceased only knocked the taser to the ground back where the original conflict occurred. But he proceeds to plant and drop the weapon by the corpse without his partner noticing. That would corroborate what he thought actually happened and his story, but doctoring a crime scene to conform to what you originally thought is vile.

      1. But I’ll echo the same sentiment I do everytime we get something like this, and it’s not to excuse excessive force but rather to educate idiots on how to interact with armed men (whether cop or criminal): don’t run from heavily armed people who can quickly call back up and definitely don’t fight them for their weapon. You will die. That’s not racism it’s fucking realism.

  16. Another awesome example of cop first aid in action. Cuff him and watch him die. (Not that any amount of first-aid would have helped after pumping 4 or 5 rounds into his back)

  17. South Carolina is one of the states (NC, VA, GA, TN are the others, all clustered together) that ban collectively bargaining for police officers. The cop just got fired, and if they mean business, there’s no “administrative leave,” no arbitration, none of that.

    1. i would be very interested to compare the firing rates of union/nonunion police forces.

  18. “Shots fired and the subject is down,” Slager reported over his radio. “He took my Taser.”

    That’s an obvious lie, based the video.

    Which makes it perfectly clear that, yes, he was doctoring the scene. He had to, once he lied.

    1. That’s an obvious lie, based the video.

      Not exactly. It is entirely possible that he actually believed the suspect had the taser at the time he made the call. He clearly struggled with the deceased over the taser at the start of the video, and the trajectory that the taser falls it is consistent with it being knocked from his hand. It is hardly inconceivable that he believed the fleeing man to be in possession of the taser. Moreover, that would explain his not pursuing the deceased on foot (which he clearly would be physically capable of doing since he had pursued the deceased on foot after he fled the traffic stop resulting in the location of the murder being in a grassy park area instead of by a car). You’ll also note he made the call at around 0:29, prior to even inspecting the body. He proceeds to approach the body, cuffs him, and then scans the surrounding grounds as though he believed the taser could be there.

      Of course it turns into another matter when he notes the taser back by where the original skirmish occurred and clearly makes a hurried effort to retrieve and plant it by the deceased, even going so far as to drop it close enough to the deceased for his partner to notice before picking it up again. In many ways, that’s the most disturbing part of the video.

      1. im sure the cop already has a lawyer, so you can calm down with the advocacy.

  19. This pig is soooo not going to enjoy the joint, especially when those big black iron pumpers get hold of him.

      1. OMG! That’s hilarious. Yeah, bro, we talkin’ pig stickahs heah…

  20. Hey, I’m just shocked he got charged.

  21. At least the officer went home safe at the end of the shift. That’s what’s important here.

  22. Is it okay for white people to be outraged by situations like this, but not about Brown? I have this innate reflex that makes me want to judge each case on its merits, but I understand that’s just my white privilege talking.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.