Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd like to add a thought to all of this. This one incident does not make this cop a crooked or bad cop unless it's shown that he killed Scott with malice and forethought or has a history of doing things like this.
Cops like everyone else make mistakes, get all jacked up on adrenaline and do something that they'd otherwise never do but that in and of itself does not make them a bad person. As for the lying on the report, not surprising and can be explained a couple of ways one of which is the adrenaline rush I referenced earlier which can create confusion or "fog of war". The other is pure self preservation after realizing you really "F"d up. Something many if not most people will do after royally messing up.
Did he shoot and kill the guy without reason? Looks that way and he'll now pay the penalty for it. We still have no idea WHY he did what he did which is important when it comes to charging/sentencing.
seriously, not a bad cop? fog of war? He killed a guy who ran like a turtle. 99% of cops would have let Scott go and gone to the DA and asked for a warrant for evading arrest, gone back with backup and arrested him. And by the way, Scott was too far from the cop to use his taser on him if he actually had it (which I see no evidence of). Oh, and before I have to hear the 'but he had a warrant for failure to pay support' again- that is a misdemeanor, not a felony so Scott was not a 'fleeing felon'.
If SLED is involved in the investigation of this, all of your questions will be answered - they are an outstanding organization.
Police later said that Scott was hit with the Taser at least once, because part of it was still attached to him when other officers arrived on the scene. But city officials said that Scott was clearly too far away to use a Taser if he did have it.
Given those facts, it is difficult to construct a scenario where the shooting was justified.
Since when do we assume the police always make charges that are correct? Certainly not the numerous anti-cop posts on this forum. People can't have it both ways based on when it suits them.
We have yet to hear from defendant, the other officers on the scene, and any other evidence that might exist during the period between those two videos. Until that happens, it's still too early to say clearly anything.
Since when do we assume the police always make charges that are correct? Certainly not the numerous anti-cop posts on this forum. People can't have it both ways based on when it suits them.
We have yet to hear from defendant, the other officers on the scene, and any other evidence that might exist during the period between those two videos. Until that happens, it's still too early to say clearly anything.
I have no idea what that word salad means, you might want to rephrase it if you want a response.
Since when do we assume the police always make charges that are correct? Certainly not the numerous anti-cop posts on this forum. People can't have it both ways based on when it suits them.
We have yet to hear from defendant, the other officers on the scene, and any other evidence that might exist during the period between those two videos. Until that happens, it's still too early to say clearly anything.
Sorry, but that video is pretty clear. Maybe the cop can somehow convince everybody that police should actually be allowed to gun fleeing people down or that he thought the fleeing man was on his way to the store to purchase a gun, and then he was going to come back and shoot him.
seriously, not a bad cop? fog of war? He killed a guy who ran like a turtle. 99% of cops would have let Scott go and gone to the DA and asked for a warrant for evading arrest, gone back with backup and arrested him. And by the way, Scott was too far from the cop to use his taser on him if he actually had it (which I see no evidence of). Oh, and before I have to hear the 'but he had a warrant for failure to pay support' again- that is a misdemeanor, not a felony so Scott was not a 'fleeing felon'.
If SLED is involved in the investigation of this, all of your questions will be answered - they are an outstanding organization.
I stand by my assertion that he's not a bad cop UNTIL proven otherwise by something other than just this shooting. Something happened to this cop to make him think shooting was ok. Now if evidence comes out that he's a "cowboy" or has had multiple incidents in his past then ok, I'll agree with you but until that time it was a bad decision for unknown reasons.
Because he is a deadbeat Dad. Anyone who would not spend a dime towards his 4 kids in 3 years is a deadbeat. He wasn't man living up to his responsibilities.
How many times have you said this in the last 72 hours? Tell the truth, would you hire a guy like Scott? I mean... what do you think his credit rating was? Would he have been a good fit with the other upstanding people at your firm? Of course not. So... given that mindset among a large portion of the job creators, where are black men supposed to obtain gainful employment to support their responsibilities? Banging black men up for back child support is very lucrative for most states because it is a near certainty that a black man will be unemployed or underemployed due to the general dislike of black men by white people. There is a joke: "What is the difference between a hooker and a lawyer?" A hooker stops screwing you if you die. Scott is dead. I think he has paid for his crimes. At a certain point your continued harangue about Scott's failures as a man and a human being went beyond reasonable and now they just look ridiculous, self-righteous and... sanctimonious...
The audio that was released doesn't sound good at all. Seems pretty light-hearted about the shooting and got an "adrenaline rush" from it. That's pretty sad.
If you want to believe it somebody on this thread claims to know his employer. Not sure what the work is but whatever the case Scott was driving a nice shiny Mercedes Benz. Even if it was "used" he certainly felt inclined to present an air of status that he didn't have rather than support his kids. If he had not been gunned down in this high-profile incident, would you really be defending somebody like this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leisesturm
How many times have you said this in the last 72 hours? Tell the truth, would you hire a guy like Scott? I mean... what do you think his credit rating was? Would he have been a good fit with the other upstanding people at your firm? Of course not. So... given that mindset among a large portion of the job creators, where are black men supposed to obtain gainful employment to support their responsibilities? Banging black men up for back child support is very lucrative for most states because it is a near certainty that a black man will be unemployed or underemployed due to the general dislike of black men by white people. There is a joke: "What is the difference between a hooker and a lawyer?" A hooker stops screwing you if you die. Scott is dead. I think he has paid for his crimes. At a certain point your continued harangue about Scott's failures as a man and a human being went beyond reasonable and now they just look ridiculous, self-righteous and... sanctimonious...
If you want to believe it somebody on this thread claims to know his employer. Not sure what the work is but whatever the case Scott was driving a nice shiny Mercedes Benz. Even if it was "used" he certainly felt inclined to present an air of status that he didn't have rather than support his kids. If he had not been gunned down in this high-profile incident, would you really be defending somebody like this?
If you want to believe it somebody on this thread claims to know his employer. Not sure what the work is but whatever the case Scott was driving a nice shiny Mercedes Benz. Even if it was "used" he certainly felt inclined to present an air of status that he didn't have rather than support his kids. If he had not been gunned down in this high-profile incident, would you really be defending somebody like this?
Really?
Looks to be a 1990s E300/320 (at least 20-yo) model.
Worth $1000-$3000 depending on condition.
KBB for private party Good condition on a 1995 E320 is $1800.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
