This Piggy Wiggy Got Caught

LazarusOblongLazarusOblong 896 Posts
edited April 2015 in Strut Central
And there's a video, so Michael Scott's murderer may even be convicted.

Of course Scott ran from a cop, so the Brian/Rock/etc. axis here may still defend the cop. I figure the odds on a murder conviction at less than 20%. It's South Carolina, white cop, black guy who committed the black-guy-crime of having a bad tail light while being black.
«13

  Comments


  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    go kill yourself

  • DuderonomyDuderonomy Haut de la Garenne 7,565 Posts

  • JectWonJectWon (@_@) 1,654 Posts
    This pig's mom should have swallowed him and saved us the burden of his existence.



    This piece of shit isn't necessarily indicative of the Charleston police force. The Mount Pleasant (suburban soccer mom HOA haven right next to Charleston) cops are pretty horrendous...they defend their printed circuit of gated communities viciously.

  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts
    imagine if this video didn't exist.

    now think about every other police shooting under "murky circumstances"

  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,873 Posts
    That guy that shot that video has balls of steel. I can't believe he stayed around so long. I'm glad we're in an era when everyone can record police like this. And as much as I commend the guy. As soon as the cop noticed him, he should have really been thinking about his safety. But then he got the cop placing the stun gun next to the victim. Balls of steel...

    We've seen videos where you see someone get murdered by police and a bunch of people always try to justify it. If anyone tries to justify this you know they are fucked.

  • parallaxparallax no-style-having mf'er 1,266 Posts
    That pig needs to rot in jail for the rest of his life.




  • Bon VivantBon Vivant The Eye of the Storm 2,018 Posts
    PatrickCrazy said:
    go kill yourself

    Hit too close to home?

  • ReynaldoReynaldo 6,054 Posts
    He should have had a gun. Too bad white liberals stigmatize open carry when they aren't the ones in the crosshairs.

  • Bon VivantBon Vivant The Eye of the Storm 2,018 Posts
    Reynaldo said:
    He should have had a gun. Too bad white liberals stigmatize open carry when they aren't the ones in the crosshairs.

    Open carry would have prevented him being shot in the back?

  • batmonbatmon 27,574 Posts
    I bet dude still skates.

    Video hasnt meant shit.

    %0 faith that "justice" will be served.

  • skelskel You can't cheat karma 5,028 Posts
    Bon Vivant said:
    PatrickCrazy said:
    go kill yourself

    Hit too close to home?

    You can't mean...no, surely not...Brian is not a mild mannered financials analyst but....a cop?

    ::eek::

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    Bon Vivant said:
    PatrickCrazy said:
    go kill yourself

    Hit too close to home?
    You can try it out too.

    I've never said anything close to supporting anything like this but I guess if you don't fall in line with the Soulstrut hive mind people don't like it. Seems like your boy (and yourself) could not resist talking shit which is kinda sad given the subject matter.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,518 Posts
    Apparently even his union has abandoned him.
    SC is a right to work state, it could be this officer shunned the union and is now getting payback.

    Still, expect his lawyers to delay trail for 2 years. Defame Scott and paint him as a dangerous criminal. Get a change of venue. Convince at least one juror that Slager was afraid that Scott was an imminent danger to others. (Which is all he needs to get off.)

  • jleejlee 1,539 Posts
    LaserWolf said:
    Apparently even his union has abandoned him.
    SC is a right to work state, it could be this officer shunned the union and is now getting payback.

    Still, expect his lawyers to delay trail for 2 years. Defame Scott and paint him as a dangerous criminal. Get a change of venue. Convince at least one juror that Slager was afraid that Scott was an imminent danger to others. (Which is all he needs to get off.)

    ^^^
    this

    Sorry, until there is a conviction, this is just yet another sad episode that fortunately was video taped so that we could have a more reliable conversation on what [em]actually[/em] happened.

    My only (sad) consolation with this ordeal is that the cell phone camera/video is potentially going to be the change agent that inevitably (years from now) gets better interaction between law enforcement and communities. Not a strong desire for outreach, or retraining....just a realization that now you're more likely to get caught.


  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    Prosecute & hopefully execute....dude is a murderer.

    b/w

    Running from the police never has a happy ending

  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,873 Posts
    LaserWolf said:
    Apparently even his union has abandoned him.
    SC is a right to work state, it could be this officer shunned the union and is now getting payback.

    Still, expect his lawyers to delay trail for 2 years. Defame Scott and paint him as a dangerous criminal. Get a change of venue. Convince at least one juror that Slager was afraid that Scott was an imminent danger to others. (Which is all he needs to get off.)

    His first lawyer abandoned too as soon as he saw the video. Good to see a defense lawyer not give a shit about the money and just walk away.

  • DuderonomyDuderonomy Haut de la Garenne 7,565 Posts
    Reynaldo said:
    He should have had a gun. Too bad white liberals stigmatize open carry when they aren't the ones in the crosshairs.

    Surely carrying a gun only bolsters the cop's self-defence argument...



    ...or are you saying that the best way for a black man to deal with institutionalised racism within the police force is to have a shoot-out everytime you get stopped by a cop?

    That sounds like a fucking great idea.


  • Big_StacksBig_Stacks "I don't worry about hittin' power, cause I don't give 'em nuttin' to hit." 4,670 Posts
    batmon said:
    I bet dude still skates.

    Video hasnt meant shit.

    %0 faith that "justice" will be served.

    Sums up my sentiments exactly. There is a reason why I no longer live down South. Dixie is still in effect, and they can have it! Color me an uppity Yankee.

    Peace,

    Big Stacks from Kakalak

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,518 Posts
    Hey Big Stacks,

    This is not a Southern Problem. Staten Island, Brooklyn, Cleveland, Portland Or...

    Not defending the South here.
    Just saying it's important to remember this is a systemic nation wide problem.

    Dan

  • ReynaldoReynaldo 6,054 Posts
    Duderonomy said:
    Reynaldo said:
    He should have had a gun. Too bad white liberals stigmatize open carry when they aren't the ones in the crosshairs.

    Surely carrying a gun only bolsters the cop's self-defence argument...



    ...or are you saying that the best way for a black man to deal with institutionalised racism within the police force is to have a shoot-out everytime you get stopped by a cop?

    That sounds like a fucking great idea.

    Institutionalised racism? Haha. I think the more appropriate phrase would be: "an apparent open season for cops on any black man resisting arrest in any way whatsoever." In such cases, yes, possible death is preferable to probable death. Until cops are retrained, what practical force other than bullet evasion could possibly slow the rate of executions of unarmed black men? Black men should be encouraged to take the same [em]hand on gun, finger on trigger[/em] approach that cops take with them. Or we could all simply work for structural change over the course of decades while the body count rises. I'm sure either approach would effect you equally. Not everyone is so lucky. Schitt is beyond beyond.

  • batmonbatmon 27,574 Posts
    Timebomb

  • ketanketan Warmly booming riffs 2,881 Posts


    (i haven't actually heard the tape. any good?)

  • Rockadelic said:
    Prosecute & hopefully execute....dude is a murderer.

    b/w

    Running from the police never has a happy ending

    He was being tortured and he took a chance and ran.

    Maybe pulling over in the first place was his wrong move. But I'm not into blaming the victim.

    Years ago I posted that America has a police problem and you strongly disagreed. Is that still your position?

  • tech12ztech12z 56 Posts
    "But we don't know what happened before the tape started rolling!" in 3… 2...

  • DuderonomyDuderonomy Haut de la Garenne 7,565 Posts
    Reynaldo said:
    I'm sure either approach would effect you equally. Not everyone is so lucky.

    Not living in America - a choice on my part. Didn't realise this would be considered lucky!


    Really the changes to law enforcement should happen now instead of an arms race.

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    DOR said:
    LaserWolf said:
    Apparently even his union has abandoned him.
    SC is a right to work state, it could be this officer shunned the union and is now getting payback.

    Still, expect his lawyers to delay trail for 2 years. Defame Scott and paint him as a dangerous criminal. Get a change of venue. Convince at least one juror that Slager was afraid that Scott was an imminent danger to others. (Which is all he needs to get off.)

    His first lawyer abandoned too as soon as he saw the video. Good to see a defense lawyer not give a shit about the money and just walk away.
    Yeah, I also think it's great that he completely sold out his client not only by publicly announcing why he was no longer representing him but scheduling interviews, press releases, and website announcements when a simple "no comment" would have been okay. No possible way this doesn't influence a jury's opinion.

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    lol @ euroman seriously responding to reynaldo

  • Fred_GarvinFred_Garvin The land of wind and ghosts 337 Posts
    PatrickCrazy said:
    DOR said:
    LaserWolf said:
    Apparently even his union has abandoned him.
    SC is a right to work state, it could be this officer shunned the union and is now getting payback.

    Still, expect his lawyers to delay trail for 2 years. Defame Scott and paint him as a dangerous criminal. Get a change of venue. Convince at least one juror that Slager was afraid that Scott was an imminent danger to others. (Which is all he needs to get off.)

    His first lawyer abandoned too as soon as he saw the video. Good to see a defense lawyer not give a shit about the money and just walk away.
    Yeah, I also think it's great that he completely sold out his client not only by publicly announcing why he was no longer representing him but scheduling interviews, press releases, and website announcements when a simple "no comment" would have been okay. No possible way this doesn't influence a jury's opinion.
    The only (potentially influential) thing he actually said (that I can find) was that he walked away from the case after seeing the video. Considering that any potential jurors will have seen the same video, would his statement be powerful enough to influence their opinion beyond the conclusions they draw after seeing the evidence? What do you think the odds are that by the time it actually goes to trial, jury members will even recall what he had to say about it?

    How does this contrast with other ways in which a jury might be influenced... such as publicly painting the victim as a violent, dangerous thug (thus making their death acceptable) in the run-up to the trial, like we've seen happen nearly every time a case like this becomes a major story?

    Given historical context (i.e. the typical outcome of cases like this), it's hard to imagine why we should think it's likely that a jury might be unfairly swayed in the direction of ruling against a police officer, even one who very clearly committed the crime he's being charged with.

  • BrianBrian 7,618 Posts
    Fred_Garvin said:
    PatrickCrazy said:
    DOR said:
    LaserWolf said:
    Apparently even his union has abandoned him.
    SC is a right to work state, it could be this officer shunned the union and is now getting payback.

    Still, expect his lawyers to delay trail for 2 years. Defame Scott and paint him as a dangerous criminal. Get a change of venue. Convince at least one juror that Slager was afraid that Scott was an imminent danger to others. (Which is all he needs to get off.)

    His first lawyer abandoned too as soon as he saw the video. Good to see a defense lawyer not give a shit about the money and just walk away.
    Yeah, I also think it's great that he completely sold out his client not only by publicly announcing why he was no longer representing him but scheduling interviews, press releases, and website announcements when a simple "no comment" would have been okay. No possible way this doesn't influence a jury's opinion.
    The only (potentially influential) thing he actually said (that I can find) was that he walked away from the case after seeing the video. Considering that any potential jurors will have seen the same video, would his statement be powerful enough to influence their opinion beyond the conclusions they draw after seeing the evidence? What do you think the odds are that by the time it actually goes to trial, jury members will even recall what he had to say about it?

    How does this contrast with other ways in which a jury might be influenced... such as publicly painting the victim as a violent, dangerous thug (thus making their death acceptable) in the run-up to the trial, like we've seen happen nearly every time a case like this becomes a major story?

    Given historical context (i.e. the typical outcome of cases like this), it's hard to imagine why we should think it's likely that a jury might be unfairly swayed in the direction of ruling against a police officer, even one who very clearly committed the crime he's being charged with.

    First off, there's very little historical context on cases like this as there have been very few cases where something like this has been caught on video. Considering the concern over historical police homicides, do you think it would be best that avoiding any potential jury bias would kinda be good? I don't see how speculating what someone is going to remember over what time period is going to be fruitful, for all we know the entire jury will each have photographic memories. An attorney is going to have privileged information that a jury will not have access to and given that information along with the video, almost anyone will have their opinion changed in some fashion upon knowing that dude dumped him after seeing the video.

    On DOR's absurd point that this guy is somehow a good guy for dumping a client publicly like this, dude basically violated attorney-client privilege by saying that he dumped him after watching the video. It's one thing to dump a client after they lied to you and refuse to comment, it's another thing to stage a press campaign and give interviews. In fact dude is thinking long term greed; up front petty cash vs reputation hit/loss of business for defending dude.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,518 Posts
    In England there are strict rules about commenting on pending trials.
    The media, lawyers, witnesses are all limited in what they can say.

    In the States we have freedom of speech.
Sign In or Register to comment.