Friday, 8 December 2017

Michael Slager-Walter Scott case: Slager gets 20 years in prison for murdering Scott

quote [ CHARLESTON, S.C. (WCIV) - In an historic civil rights case, a federal judge Thursday sentenced ex-North Charleston, South Carolina, police officer Michael Slager to 20 years in prison for shooting and killing unarmed black man Walter Scott in 2015. ]

Down the railway track
[SFW] [crime & punishment] [+8 Good]
[by ScoobySnacks@12:03amGMT]


Mythtyn said @ 12:12am GMT on 8th Dec
Why is it a historical civil rights case? It should just read, murderer found guilty.
conception said @ 12:21am GMT on 8th Dec
Historic in that sometimes it's not ok for the police to kill black men?
Hugh E. said @ 1:03am GMT on 8th Dec
It is a civil rights case because when it was a case of a murderer killing a man, the murderer was not found guilty. So it became a federal civil rights case. It is historic because justice was served in a case involving a police officer.
Mythtyn said[1] @ 1:31am GMT on 8th Dec
Thats where I guess i'm confused. He was convicted, was he not?

Edit: From the article i get the impression he killed a man in cold blood. Lied about it. Truth came out, was tried and convicted. Did i miss something? (aside from skin color)
backSLIDER said @ 2:09am GMT on 8th Dec
Usually it doesn't go how it should. In this case if a random stranger hadn't used his cell phone camera to record what happened it is unlikely the cop would have even been fired. And some cases just a few years ago just like this one have seen the cop do no jail time.
Mythtyn said[2] @ 2:17am GMT on 8th Dec
I fully understand that. Theres many cases that would not be won if not for video footage and in this case a person of authority would have been believed and gotten away with murder if not for that video. But in this case, he was and it did go how it should. I wouldn't call this a historic civil rights case. Bastard murderer convicted in court, yes.
rylex said @ 2:27am GMT on 8th Dec
Technically he plead guilty to a lesser charge.

It's kind of bullshit because the cop isnt admitting wrong doing for murder but for impinging upon someone's human rights. Still a step in the right direction
Mythtyn said[1] @ 2:31am GMT on 8th Dec
THANK YOU!! I was unaware he pled to a lower charge and as I said earlier, no knowledge of the case and wasn't about to research it. The article makes it sound like he was convicted for murder. Yeah thats BS, he should have been convicted of murder.
kylemcbitch said @ 1:21am GMT on 8th Dec
That's right folks, you too can get justice so long as there happens to be video recording of an event you can compare to the police's version of events.

Can anyone tell me why anyone except cops oppose bodycams again?
robotroadkill said @ 3:31am GMT on 8th Dec [Score:1 Funny]
I look fat in the footage!
norok said @ 1:08pm GMT on 8th Dec [Score:1 Underrated]
I don't think anyone opposes them but studies have shown they do not significantly change police behavior and possibly increase the rate of fatality in encounters.

It's really the training. The whole drawing your weapon and pointing at someone to get them to comply is a horrible policy that escalates; rather than de-escalates.

This guy in particular though, based on the footage, was hell bent on not letting the guy get away by any means necessary. Again, training cops to make the arrest above all other considerations at work.
foobar said @ 4:23pm GMT on 8th Dec [Score:2]
Training isn't the issue. There will always be lapses in proper protocol, no matter how thorough the training. The issue is that the police do not face consequences for those lapses.
raphael_the_turtle said @ 6:36pm GMT on 8th Dec
How about bodycams, training, and consequences? No need to make it an either/or situation, I'm sure there's plenty of things that can be fixed in our law enforcement's make up.
kylemcbitch said[1] @ 8:47pm GMT on 8th Dec
The increase in fatality is certainly a point to consider, and I would be interested in something more in depth as to why that is. However, from the standpoint that they do not change police behavior... that's fine with me.

I am not looking to change police behavior (at least not with cameras) but to ensure that A) no one has to question a hero cop's actions ever again, and B) that shitty cops who lie, over-react, or otherwise breach public trust be held accountable.

As for how we train police, I don't disagree, but I have to point out that in a country with liberal access to guns there isn't really much of a choice from a personal safety to the responding officer perspective.

Edit: And for what it's worth, I am sorry Norok. It's pretty clear you are not a troll. I was wrong.
kylemcbitch said @ 8:56pm GMT on 8th Dec

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.

Posts of Import
4 More Years!
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things
AskSE: What do you look like?

Karma Rankings