I don't think he will be convicted of murder.
It will be hard to prove malice aforethought in this instance, unless Slager knew Scott personally, and had a beef with him. If this interaction began as a legal traffic stop, and there is no prior history of interaction between the deceased and the defendant, then the only possible conviction should be on manslaughter.
The defense team will argue that Slager suffered some sort of mental breakdown (brought on by job related stress) and snapped during the course of a minor struggle with Scott. They will concede that Slager did shoot Scott in the back, and that it was not appropriate for Slager to have pursued him or to have discharged his weapon. They will also argue that there was no premeditation to murder Scott, and that Slager's employer shares in his culpability because of inadequate training and supervision. The fact that the City has already entered into a multi million dollar settlement with the Scott family is proof of that fact, from the defense standpoint.
If Slager is convicted, it will be for manslaughter.
He will likely get the minimum 2 year sentence and be out in less than a year and a half, with credit for time already served in the county lock up.
I love the idea of a cat cafe!
I wonder if they will be serving exotic food pairings?
Persian fricassee and tabby fingers with a mango chutney salsa, perhaps....
(This could spell trouble for Peking Gourmet...)
Let me break it down in the simplest terms for y'all:
In a socialist society, you have maximum benefits because almost everything is provided for you. Most of the things that are provided for you are chosen by others, who decide what is in good enough, or just plain old "enough" in general (i.e. a one room apartment vs. a three bedroom apartment). If you don't think what they are providing is "enough", well then, tough shit.....
In a capitalist society, you have minimum benefits (nothing is provided to you) but maximum freedom to choose what things you may have, provided that you can earn enough capital to provide these things for yourself. The amount of capital you have available will depend largely on your own intellect and industriousness. If you are a lazy dumb ass, you won't have much and will probably prefer socialism. If you are a clever workaholic, you will probably be able to afford the type of lifestyle you prefer, and will likely prefer the limitless freedom of capitalism.
US society is currently oriented towards crony capitalism, where the worst parts of socialism and capitalism are married together. "Freedom" is heavily weighted in the direction of moneyed interests who use their capital to influence those in power, and to make things "more fair" to those same moneyed interests who have bought influence, and less fair to those who cannot afford the price of access. By controlling the levers of power with money and influence, the crony capitalists dictate socialist policies which benefit their bottom lines. You can't fight City Hall about Comcast's cable rates because Comcast "owns" City Hall through franchise fees (Imposed by the City) and donations to those who make the policies affecting their industry.
As the United States is rapidly approaching the critical mass where the number of lazy dumb asses outnumbers the total number of clever industrious people, we will likely see society rush headlong into full blown socialism, and which point, society will turn on the crony capitalists, before ultimately holding government representatives accountable for the loss or reduction of benefits when the welfare state predictably collapses under it's own weight. It generally doesn't end well for anyone, at that point. Check Greece for a glimpse of our society in the not so distant future....
I can appreciate Jon Stewart's emotional appeal, but his statement about banishing the names of Confederate military and political leaders from local landmarks was not very well thought out.
If Jon Stewart were in charge, he would have us eliminate the following names from our local roads and monuments:
Aiken, Legare, Simmons, Herriot, Manigault, Pinckney, Smith, Calhoun, Spann, Chalmers, Singleton, Cooper, Lowndes, Sumter, Russell, Elliot, Chisolm, Ravenel, Limehouse, Dill, Rembert, Pitt, Laurens, Middleton, Horlbeck, Jennings and Greene, just to name a few.
These are all surnames of former slave owners. These are also the surnames of thousands of black families living here in the Lowcountry who can directly trace their ancestry and surnames back to a time when their ancestors were owned by white folks.
You can't erase historical wounds by banishing names or words. Even if you could, I don't think it would be a good idea. The old saying, "Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it", rings true here.
We must remember history, and we must remember it in context.
Sharonda Singleton was a teacher at my child's school. This massacre has touched our family through that connection. I cannot fathom how Ms. Singleton's son Chris has the strength of character to deal with this tragedy, but I'm glad he does, and I know his mother is proud of him for meeting evil and hate with goodness and love.
And I know this: I'm proud of the way our community has handled this unthinkable act of racially motivated violence. Instead of rioting in the streets (I'm looking at you Baltimore and Ferguson), we have come together as a community to try help those who are grieving.
The useless meat sack of a human being who committed this hate crime had hoped his despicable actions would divide blacks and whites and thus foment a race war.
Instead, he brought us all together.
I hope they put a TV in his jail cell so he can watch thousands of peaceful black and white Charlestonians join hands across the Ravenel bridge tomorrow.
God, I love this town!
(And to Jon Stewart: "Stay in New York!")
"Also, y'all, I'm aware that there are assholes everywhere."
That is true. There are also damn fools everywhere who say they want both freedom of speech and freedom from being offended by the speech of others. Those two things cannot coexist.
To protect freedom of speech you must protect speech you DISAGREE with. If you won't protect the CP's right to publish an image you find suggestive or offensive, then why should any of us protect your right to make asinine comments over the CP's cover?
You sound like another leftist lemming, spouting the same old nonsensical rhetoric.
I'll bet you think man is destroying the environment, too. I wonder if anyone considered how much fossil fuel will be wasted in ferrying copies of CP to their offices in protest, and then on to the landfill for disposal?
You might very well start your little protest of the City Paper, but you will be adding to the destruction of planet Earth in the process. How can you live with yourself? You are a terrible human being.
Go away! (Oh wait, you are already gone)
All Comments »
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2016,
Charleston City Paper