Police Officer Charged with Murder for Shooting Man in Back

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/07/officer-michael-slager-shoots-man-in-back-video_n_7021134.html **WARNING** Graphic Video

He was pulled over for a broken tail light but the situation escalated when Walter Scott fled because of an outstanding warrant for his arrest, which was for unpaid child support. He did not have a violent history.

Apparently the officer felt threatened as Walter Scott made an attempt to obtain his taser, according to his attorney.

The video does seem to contradict the story of a threatening situation, however.

@PcGamingRig: IMO, skin colour doesn't matter, in my eyes they both could've been purple but he shot another (unarmed) human being, he belongs in jail!

Just me or are there just to many trigger happy people in the police corps?

Giving a man a loaded gun can really make him feel powerful.

@gamerguru100:

How on earth do people like that become police officers? Do they really need to tell you not to shoot unarmed people in the back?

@toast_burner: If he has the skills you get in easilly, you don't want to know how many soldier (doesn't matter what country) are mentally ill and joined the army just to shoot people...

This cop deserves to go to jail for homicide. He cost a man his life.

Are you from the States? Intelligence and sense are not paramount when it comes to filling the ranks. Becoming a cop is not difficult......unfortunately.

I know most of you are just kids, but the truth is this. . .

In most countries and even in this country until very recently - if you run/ran from a cop, he tells you to stop and you dont . . you got shot in the back and it was perfectly legal.

It's still legal all over the world.

Telling police they can't shoot someone who refuses to stop is a completely new concept.

Looks pretty open and shut to me...but I do have a question...if the suspect did go for the cop's taser (and frankly it looks like that's exactly what happened) would it still be lawful* for the officer to shoot the suspect in the back after he failed and was running away?

Anyways in the video the reporter seems to question if it's a taser at all, but honestly that's exactly what it looks like. You can even see the yellow nose cone and the squib lines coming off of it.

*I don't think it's ethical, I am just asking in regards to the law. I really don't think the cop should have shot this man at least with the information I have seen so far. It does appear the suspect went for the cop's taser but the danger the cop appeared to be in did not seem that serious.

@Born_Lucky: No, if you are told to stop making a gesture deemed threatening and you don't then you risk getting shot...if you run you get chased, not shot. This isn't the Wild West.

What if you try and take the cop's taser and then run?

@Renevent42: Then you either get shot during the altercation or if that doesn't happen for as long as you're a threat then there's no reason for a cop to shoot you when you're not. Unless in the US a man with his back turned to you while you have both a taser and a gun is a threat.

I actually don't disagree with you from an ethical standpoint, I guess I am more interested in how the law works in this case. From what I saw from the video the suspect didn't appear to be a huge threat that warranted being shot, but maybe the fact he did try and disarm the cop in the legal sense he became a deadly threat.

@Renevent42: I see...so your question is whether it is acceptable by law to shoot someone who presented a threat even if he/she doesn't at the time they get shot. It's an interesting question, but I'm afraid I don't really know for my own country, let alone the States =)

Had he come towards him then I can to a degree understand the whole lethal force thing, provided he actually would be or had something on him that would be a dangerous threat to the officer.

A man running away is hardly a threat, infact quite the opposite. And that this was over a broken breaklight, the Cop could've just walked back to the car, note down the license plate and mail the fine to the man along with a court order for running away from the police.

shooting is easier than chasing.. maybe it was hot that day and the cop was feeling sluggish from a big lunch

Honestly I don't think the disconcerting parts with these kinds of stories is that they happen.. But the fact that many of these stories surface in which the officer has had a history of this kind of stuff in which the precinct condoned or covered it up.. The most sickening one in recent memory is the Steubenville High School rape case in which evidence surfaced that it had people as high up as DA's and judges condoning or covering up the entire incident..

Courts will make their decision. If he's guilty, he'll get his sentence.

I didn't watch the video, but if the guy really just tried to run away there was no reason to shoot him. Not even a reason to chase him, really. Just wait for him to show up later. Once you run, if they don't catch you immediately, they just start looking and track you down later.

I'm not going to watch the video, but as for the unarmed part we have to remember that in the heat of the moment the officer doesn't know for sure whether the other person is armed or not.

Did he shoot the guy when he was running away or when the guy tried to grab his taser? Grabbing a cop's taser does put the cop's life at risk, since he could tase the cop and then take his gun.

@RickySandstorum: He shot him about 6 seconds after the guy started running and was quite a distance away from the policeman.

the video released showed the cop dropping the taser on the man's body. He planted the 'evidence'

The first part of the video shows the end of what appears to be them fighting over the taser and it being knocked out of the cops hands. Kinda hard to tell but it's right after the camera man runs up and there's like 1 second showing it before the victim ran off and was shot.

You are correct though that after the shooting it doesn't seem like the cop saw the cameraman and appears to try to plant the taser closer to the victim, but then picks it up again. My guess is the cop knew immediately the shooting was excessive, tried to plant the taser closer to make it seem like the victim had possession of the taser instead of just fighting over it, noticed the cameraman, and picked it up again.

*edit*

And actually, as a side comment, it's a little disappointing to see how most of the articles/videos on the subject don't even mention that stuff. I think this, at least in my opinion, is pretty clearly excessive force and even show the cop attempting to cover it up...or at minimum he knew he had to do something to make it appear he was in more danger.

There's no reason not to mention how it also appear there was some kind of scuffle prior to the victim running off.

If anyone is curious to what I am talking about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPUTTtN1NQA

Put it on 720P and slow it down to .25 speed...at around 10 seconds in when the camera finally pans up horizontally you can see the end of what appears to be a minor struggle and the cop having the taser slapped out of his hands...you can even see the taser go flying down into the dirt behind the officer.

Compared to...? This is a ridiculous stereo-type of a comment. There are different standards all over the U.S., to make one blanket statement like this is ignorant.

This was a ridiculous shooting that should have never happened. Sadly this cop acted as though he was a pro at this type of thing, no hesitation whatsoever in every action, and calm as could be after shooting the guy. Disturbing video.

Probably thought he'd get paid vacation like all the rest. I imagine city personal, chief of police, mayor, the DA, they probably don't want their names drug through the mud for protecting the guy, they don't want to be the next Ferguson, not in a city where nearly half the population is black.

Hope he gets the death penalty.

this guy is fucked. it's obvious he gunned the guy down and i would bet the farm that he will be made an example of.

now technically for all you guys saying you can't shoot a guy in the back nothing could be further from the truth.

a legal argument can always be made that a runner is running to a better tactical position, running to get a weapon or getting some distance and time for the purpose of pulling out a gun and engaging you.

i doubt that those arguments will be made in this case but they do exist.

Just because he's been charged doesn't mean he won't be exonerated. Wait and see, I guess.

I don't know about mentally ill, necessarily, but I personally know two who did just that (and another who contemplated joining the police force so he could be crooked with a lower chance of repercussions). There are definitely people out there to be concerned about.

The reason is it's irrelevant. A prior scuffle does not negate the use of excessive force once the danger has abated.

This is often very difficult for juries to grasp. It trips up all kinds of cases, and I'm rather glad that it isn't being made a focal point when it very clearly, according to the evidence we currently have, is completely irrelevant to the crime being discussed.

What a shameful thing to happen. Usually defend police against the mobs but this case is clearly first degree murder. What a coward.

He could get the death penalty.

To anyone arguing that the officer had a right to use his gun, why not just use a Taser, or at least attempt to chase after the man and tackle him down? Oh that's right, nobody has time for dat!

@BattleSpectre:

(Not trying to make light of the situation but your post reminded me of Sweet Brown =P)

@korvus: Gamespot really needs a thumbs up/and or a like comment system.

@BattleSpectre: That would be nice, but again, Sweet Brown will give you the answer =P I'd think that would be very low on the dev's priority list...I'd be happy if my damn form didn't time out if it takes me more than 5 seconds to type a message.

@korvus: Haha, indeed.

I hope this tragedy is used as a much needed catalyst to force the use of body cams.

In defense of the U.S' police corps, that seems to be the case everywhere not just in the U.S. The multitude of the security forces, be it police or military, are people in search for a living, a purpose or both and do not know how to acquire either by merit alone. Depending on how corrupt the political system and its security apparatus are, security forces may also attract a disproportionate number of degenerates and retrogrades looking for power and influence with the protection of the regime on their side.

This appears to be the case except for the most peaceable and fiscally liberal societies where making a living may not be as pressing of a matter as it usually is elsewhere. Nevertheless, the U.S does seem to have a disproportionate number of trigger-happy officers. It is astounding how many people die of police brutality there and how forbearing America's polity seems to be of it.

@mattbbpl: IMO if you feel the need to shoot another person for any reason at all, you're mentally ill (defensive measures not counted in)

(Image removed...this is an actual dead person in the image so it might be considered shocking imagery, so instead I'll just leave the link and people will click at their own risk. Sorry about that wis3boy -Korvus)

http://static1.gamespot.com/uploads/original/148/1489900/2843869-9908185395-DTYSX.gif

just adding this in case anyone doubts it

@wis3boi: Sorry for the edit, but I think you understand the reason =)

coolio

I have a hard time finding any probable reason to why that use of force was necessary.

@Stevo_the_gamer: it never is my friend, it never is...

Deadly force is never necessary?

@Stevo_the_gamer: not against civilians