I remember Freddie Grey. I remember the black officers who participated in that event. I remember the pure BS of "hands up don't shoot", the "white hispanic" George Zimmerman, the "fake news" surrounding BOs beer summit, etc., etc. One person hung this jury. One. Not every white person in the south as you infer. And while I held my nose and voted for Trump, I did so because I abhor abortion on demand, the excessive taxes I pay, the lack of jobs across the country, the pathetic foreign policy decisions made by BO and HRC, etc., etc. So based on your comments within the article aimed at a group of people you don't know, I can easily make the case you're a racist bigot.
Two letters: O. J. The OJ trial was the first time I had heard the term, "jury nullification." The black community had no problem with the concept or outcome of such an act then. While I personally thought Slager was guilty from the video, everyone should learn a lesson of being careful what you ask for.
The SIB needs to pay for the increasing cost overruns, they are responsible for delaying the release of the money for 526.
How about best Photographer?
You are wrong Tupper. The jury foreman went on national TV and said so. That was a lie made up by the media. Watch it for yourself: https://youtu.be/w41dAULfT6Y?t=1m38s
An officer shooting a fleeing suspect, is not, by itself, a crime. The circumstances leading up to that shooting determine if that shooting is justified or not, and unfortunately a large part of that evidence is not on the video. I would have expected an attorney to know that. Might I suggest you read the case of Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S.
If the officer was deemed unjustified by the jury, then so be it. This is not the first case to be declared a mistrial nor will it be the last. Simply because a case was not deemed clear cut enough to reach a unanimous verdict by all jurors while you feel a single piece of evidence should have been enough to convict, is not enough to condemn the entire legal system.
"By shooting Scott, he was doing what he was trained to do as a police officer. Ponder that for a moment." Okay, an officer has the right to defend himself. Your statement ignores the fact that an officer has a duty to defend the public as well. Mr. Scott was willing to engage an officer, potentially using the officers own taser in an attempt to escape. Now, what else would this man have been willing to do had he encountered another person while attempting to flee?
"why were so many gunshots necessary to stop the threat? Would it not have been possible to disable or incapacitate a retreating assailant without the use of lethal force? By any measure, eight shots seems excessive unless the shooter was trying to kill the victim." The officer DID try to incapacitate the victim, twice. Both attempts failed. Why were 8 shots fired? Because the suspect continues to run. Notice that the last shot is fired when the suspect stops and falls. That is called firing to remove the threat. Officers are not trained to fire one shot and then wait to see the result of that shot before firing another. He did not empty his magazine as the Glock .45 carries 10 rounds, not 8.
"There have been two recent cases, also caught on video, where unarmed black males have been shot by police when sitting in a car or remaining stationary with their hands up" Your point here is pure conjecture. Had he been shot in his car it would be on the dash cam video and determining guilt would likely be less difficult. Had the officer shot Mr. Scott while lying on the ground it would be less difficult. However, Mr. Scott DID run and he was shot WHILE running. That is the case being discussed and what he may or may not have felt at the time he chose to run is indeterminable.
Teammom, have you ever lived with white people? Have you ever partied with white people? Studied with any? gone to our weddings or funerals or baptisms? How well do you really know us?
From high school on, I shared classrooms & friendships with Black people. My Black roommate introduced me to the mysteries & delights of the afternoon soap operas. She also introduced me to the delights of an all-Black dorm-room party, where I was the only white person in the room.
My friends & I have shared each others' joys & sorrows, counted each others' babies toes & fingers, & buried each others' children.
I've taught US History, all of it, to both Black and white HS students. I didn't any of edit it, or glorify any of it. I taught them why they should be proud of our country and our state. I also taught them both sides of Reconstruction - how everyone in the defeated states was taken advantage of and helped. (My mama was a historian and a writer. She taught me well.)
Yes, it's time to move on. It's time to quit grousing about a past we cannot change. It's time to, instead, learn from that past and build our future together.
Going back and forth about the past, is not going to help move us forward. Of course all people have prejudices and racial division exist in other parts of the country.
However, in the South there seems to be this romanticized idealism attached to a past that was so wrought with suffering and pain for half of it's citizens. I don't understand, I won't comply with that narrative.,.
In order to move forward, it's imperative that we all let go of what's gone, and work together towards a better tomorrow.
Given no sequestering, I would at least give a thought to possible juror tampering or the possibility a juror lied during selection. As I understand it, it was a lone dissenter.
In every other aspect of life we are told to grieve and move on. Why can't we just do that?
If the south fought the war to keep slaves why did new Jersey and Delaware not not ratify the the 13th amendment until 1903? The union army was segeragated. The army of northern Virginia was not. The Confederacy paid pensions to it black soldiers. The union didn't didnt do squat for their black soldiers. The war was over taxes. The federals imposed tariffs to force the south to sell cotton to the textile mills in the north instead of England. England payed much more for cotton. This is also why England supported the Confederacy during the war. These are facts. They tried to rewrite history to hide the truth. Look up Mr H K Edgerton, a black man who's black ancestor fought for the south with honor and he is proud to honor him. I'm tired of people bringing up the war like it has anything to do with racism. I had family on both sides. very few soldiers who fought for the south owned slaves and fought to defend their homes from a barbaric union army that today would be breaking the Geneva convention
Yes, lets drag up 150 year old history to prove a point. The south was not unique in its feelings of white superiority. When Lincoln announced he was fighting the war to end slavery, New York rioted; hanging and burning blacks alive.
"Its not a 'Southern Thing'."
Racism does exist everywhere. However only one portion of the country decided to commit treason and go to war against the United States because they wanted to keep owning and raping and murdering black people with impunity. And many of the descendants of those people still can't get over losing that war, and are working to see it fought again.
But yeah, Yankees are racist too! So Southerners are absolved!
Don't pay any attention to any of those Excuses Atty. Green. These are the same voices that would have continued to perpetuate slavery if the government hadn't stepped in. In their opinion, this country is THEIRS and THEIRS Alone, despite the fact that their ancestors stole it from the American Indians. Their arguments and justifications are not stronger than the ones proposed to kill American Indians, enslave Africans, or Annihilate Jews... I'm sure that they have issues with the Nuremberg Convictions too.
Dwayne, it's really sad how far you have to reach to make your case.
re: point 2. We now know for sure that Scott was unarmed. Did Slager know that for sure during the altercation with Scott? No, he did not.
The fact that you say "Regardless of what happened prior..." is ridiculous. What happened prior is extremely important. The fact that Scott fought with Slager and attempted to take his weapon is extremely important. It gives Slager a valid reason to be fearful of what Scott might do once he got away from the struggle.
The saddest part is you saying that Scott was running out of fear of himself being shot due to 2 recent cases of black men sitting in cars. That's just silly. Scott ran because he felt he was above the law. Let's apply your logic to Slager. He could have been in fear due to all the cases where people flip out violently on police officers during routine/misdemeanor stops because they are hiding from a more serious crime. That has happened way more than two times. It didn't make sense for Scott to run for a broken taillight, and Slager had no other information about why he would run. I think it's appropriate for police officers to assume the worst in scenarios like that. Just because Scott was running away does not mean the situation was "de-escalating." Scott could just have easily been looking for a better position to take shots at Slager like behind the tree he was running to. Yes, we know now he was not armed, but Slager DID NOT KNOW THAT! All he knew is that Scott was combative, attempted to take his weapon, and ran for a reason not related to why he was stopped.
Just like the other race-baiters, you have to make this issue about race when it is not. If Scott were white, and Slager were black, I'd still be on the side of law enforcement given everything else played out the same way. The only difference is you would not be writing this opinion piece if race were reversed in this situation.
The foreman, who was black, went on national TV and stated that the jury unanimously decided that there was NO MALICE on Slager's part. They just could not agree on the conviction of manslaughter. That fact right there destroys your silly argument.
Those lines exist everywhere, not just Charleston, or South Carolina. Its not a 'Southern Thing'. I have seen far more racism in the Northern United States than I have here in Charleston. Need proof? I can say 'Hi' to a black person here and they smile and say 'Hi' back, and without them assuming I am speaking to them only because I want to sell them something.
Racism is also a two way street. Whites can be racist, no doubt. So can blacks. When a black person looks upon a white person whom they do not know, and for no other reason assumes they are racist because of their white skin, then that black person is a racist. Imagination may have something to do with it in all cases as we should judge each person individually, yet we imagine all are the same based upon social grouping or skin colors.
Cid95 - Thanks. I transposed that statement to be two weeks prior to the shooting, not after the shooting. Thank you for pointing out my error.
I'm sure that if this POS had his way he would be wearing a white hood and and an old bed sheet.
His courthouse antics aren't going to get any higher court to overturn his conviction and save him from the death house after massacring nine people and confessing it on tape. That argument might fly in Massachusetts, not South Carolina.
While I agree from the evidence I've seen, Officer Slager is, at the very least, guilty of manslaughter, neither I nor Mr. Green are jurors in the case and his broad generalization about the criminal justice system are just that, a broad generalization.
Mistrials are actually not unusual in cases like this regardless of the color of the officer or the victim, and so before we start condemning the whole system because it didn't go our way, take a breath. Officer Slager was not found not guilty, there will be a retrial, and more than likely he will be convicted. I wonder if that occurs whether Mr. Green will return to write an OP that the criminal justice system worked the way if was suppose to.
This is the system we have and if Mr. Green would like to suggest another, I'm sure we would all like to hear it.
Trumps focusing "Greatly, YUUUgely, Greatly" on our nation. Good for him.
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2017,
Charleston City Paper