White Police Officer Charged With Murder Of Black Man

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
There's a chance--probably slim, I know--that the monies made from the video could be ear-marked for a charitable fund, right? Maybe for the victim's family, even?

I think it's your boundless, sunny-side up optimism what I like best about you. :Sun:

Are you standing in for Zoombie?

I felt sleazy when I was tempted to sell photos I had surreptitiously taken of Taylor Lautner, when he was watching his sister play volleyball at the same tournament as my daughter. (Hey, I took them for the girls, not me!) Apparently, they could have been worth thousands at the time.��

It's one thing to snap a pic of a third-rate "celebrity" like Taylor Lautner. No harm, no foul.

It's quite another to capture the moment of a man's death and profit from it. That goes far beyond "sleazy" and straight to an reprehensible and inhuman act. Scumbag ghouls like Max Markson are beneath contempt in how they try to make a dirty dollar off of Walter Scott's killing.

Mr. Feidin Santana can play the fool when it comes to the cease-and-desist orders against the NY Times and other media outlets, but I'm not playing the fool along with him. He's just another opportunist who went from innocent bystander to greedy creep in zero to sixty seconds flat.
 

Xelebes

Delerium ex Ennui
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
14,205
Reaction score
884
Location
Edmonton, Canada
Hm, TV stations make money off of videos of death all the time (though they may censor it for broadcasting guidelines.) What's the difference from them purchasing the video from Associated Press or Reuters and the like and Associated Press/Reuters demanding payment for it and this one-time cameraman?
 

ShaunHorton

AW's resident Velociraptor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2014
Messages
3,576
Reaction score
581
Location
Washington State
Website
shaunhorton.blogspot.com
Is it really viable to claim ownership of something that's already been spread all across the internet?

And wanting to license it to the news organizations is one thing. Storm chasers do that with Tornado's and such all the time. Planning to charge them to use the video in the trial, though? THAT is complete douchebaggery.
 

Xelebes

Delerium ex Ennui
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
14,205
Reaction score
884
Location
Edmonton, Canada
Is it really viable to claim ownership of something that's already been spread all across the internet?

And wanting to license it to the news organizations is one thing. Storm chasers do that with Tornado's and such all the time. Planning to charge them to use the video in the trial, though? THAT is complete douchebaggery.

The licensing for a trial may be a tall order.
 

Vince524

Are you gonna finish that bacon?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
15,903
Reaction score
4,652
Location
In a house
Website
vincentmorrone.com
I would think the DA wouldn't have to pay for it. It's evidence.

As far as the news... We've all seen it at this point, so screw him. It's not like we need to see the poor man gunned down over and over again.
 

eoficon

Harbinger
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
136
Reaction score
19
Location
the last place you thought to look
If celebrities can sell pictures of their kids or their weddings or whatever for millions this footage, of far more value, should be worth something to the person who took it. The media always pays for footage from sources, so I don't really see the problem. 1000000 to 1 the idea to profit from the video was not his. But the news outlets have already been profiting plenty from free use of it.
 
Last edited:

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
Yeah, I'd charge something. I'd donate most of it (85-90%?) to the family or a charity of their choice, though! But there's no reason the news shouldn't pay something reasonable for it like it was normal photojournalism, imho.
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
As far as the news... We've all seen it at this point, so screw him. It's not like we need to see the poor man gunned down over and over again.

Beg to differ. We DO need to the poor man gunned down over and over again. We need to see if over and over again until every last citizen living in blissful ignorance has it hammered into their thick skulls the reality is many Black Americans are more fearful of crossing the cops than they would ever be of an Islamic State terrorist.

There’s something that seems silly about addressing a tweet from a young reporter covering the murder of Walter Scott, when his killer was trained to be one by the state, his right to be one sanctioned by systems. His murderous pursuit was but a ritual, and the religion in question? White supremacy. Blue gods. White shields. White gods. Blue shields. Whatever.

But that tweet from Deanna Pan, posted after speaking to neighbors of officer Michael Slager, though not nearly as guilty as the hands that took an unarmed man’s life, that tweet spoke volumes. She hoped his dogs were okay. She hoped his dogs were okay. She hoped his dogs were okay.


It made me think of a Common lyric: “Why White folks focus on dogs and yoga/While people from the Low End trying to ball and get over?” While we’re out here trying to survive, other people have the luxury of thinking about dogs. Thinking about dogs after a Black man was hunted and chased like one.

I understand that Pan’s comment was made whilst interviewing neighbors of the accused murderer. But I’m astounded by the professional space she was able to put between herself and a man who she likely watched fleeing for his life, before being further victimized by being handcuffed and having a Taser planted at his side—yet she was unable to do so when it came to the dogs.

But it’s deeper than misplaced sympathy. It’s the pugnacious persistence of White supremacy and the inability of so many of our White countrymen to be consistently outraged at the extrajudicial murders of Black people. It’s the fact that this shooting will be treated as an outlier but some, and even as justified by others. It’s a nation of people who can hope the dogs are okay, but are less concerned with the children of a Black man cut down for no reason. A nation of people who demand calm when an officer is observed murdering an unarmed citizen, but give a pass to raucous college students who take to the streets with violence to celebrate a tournament win. A nation of people who feel safer because police officers can kill Black people with impunity.

It is my sincere hope that the murder of Walter Scott (and that we can even call it a murder without making a deliberate decision to refute the state’s interpretation of his death) challenges the endless dismissals and defenses of high-profile police killings that we’ve heard over and over again. That those who failed to be moved or shaken by the Ferguson DOJ report will now understand why “justified” killings bring throngs of outraged citizens into the street. The unchecked violence of American police cannot continue, and the communities who are victimized by it cannot be the only ones troubled by it. Time will tell if Scott’s public murder will affect a sea change, or if it will remain easier to sympathize with dogs than with Black people.
Perhaps a video loop of Scott running for his life and failing to played would wake up some sleepers. Live...Die...Repeat...

Probably not because people do tend to cling to their precious illusions. Michael Slager was the hammer and Walter Scott was the nail. People can live in a bubble where they say "I can't believe it" but they can never say again "I didn't know."
 

Vince524

Are you gonna finish that bacon?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
15,903
Reaction score
4,652
Location
In a house
Website
vincentmorrone.com
Beg to differ. We DO need to the poor man gunned down over and over again. We need to see if over and over again until every last citizen living in blissful ignorance has it hammered into their thick skulls the reality is many Black Americans are more fearful of crossing the cops than they would ever be of an Islamic State terrorist.


Perhaps a video loop of Scott running for his life and failing to played would wake up some sleepers. Live...Die...Repeat...

Probably not because people do tend to cling to their precious illusions. Michael Slager was the hammer and Walter Scott was the nail. People can live in a bubble where they say "I can't believe it" but they can never say again "I didn't know."


We don't need to constantly see a barbaric murder to know that they happen. Slager deserves to go to prison for what he did and forgotten about.

Huh?
Running for his life?
I thought he was running to escape arrest. Are you saying he would still have been killed if he had allowed himself to be arrested?

He ran from the car to avoid being arrested. We really don't know if he was running to escape arrest or a beating or being killed.

It may be true that had he not run, he might still be alive, but that in no way, shape of form excuses or even mitigates what Slager did.

This was not a cop who had a split second to make a life or death choice and only people who have time to calmly contemplate the choice while there's no danger to themselves see it as the wrong choice.

This was cold blooded murder.
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
Huh?
Running for his life?
I thought he was running to escape arrest. Are you saying he would still have been killed if he had allowed himself to be arrested?

Let's put it this way...

If a cop is willing to blow away an unarmed man because his tail light was out and then phony up the crime scene to make it look like he had just cause to kill the suspect, then after the fact express not one word of concern, regret or remorse, then yeah, it isn't beyond the possibly no matter what Walter Scott did he wasn't going to walk away from his confrontation with Michael Slager.

He was going to die.
 

blacbird

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
36,987
Reaction score
6,158
Location
The right earlobe of North America
Let's put it this way...

If a cop is willing to blow away an unarmed man because his tail light was out and then phony up the crime scene to make it look like he had just cause to kill the suspect, then after the fact express not one word of concern, regret or remorse, then yeah, it isn't beyond the possibly no matter what Walter Scott did he wasn't going to walk away from his confrontation with Michael Slager.

He was going to die.

We don't often disagree on things, Timer, but I really do think you're overstating your case on this one. I really really don't think Slager stopped a guy with a broken taillight in order to kill him and stage the scene, even with a racial motive involved.

What Slager did do, which is blatantly evident on the video, is bad enough to get him put away for a very long time, and I certainly hope that happens. So . . . .

Let's put it this way: You've opined that Slager will walk. I think that highly unlikely. If, at any point in the legal process, that should be a result, there will be a nationwide conflagration, and I really really don't think even benighted local authorities in South Carolina would stomach that. The local authorities, both other police and the judiciary, neither of whom have a hell of a lot of record on such issues to be proud of, put Slager in jail, under serious charges, quicker than a cat chases a mouse, as soon as that video became public.

Would they have done that without the video? Almost certainly not. But that piece of damning evidence is incontrovertible, and the second video that emerged only confirmed what was seen on the first one.

This is a test of the system. Unless you think it's totally rigged, and hark back to the days of To Kill a Mockingbird. Does all manner of misjustice, racially motivated and otherwise, still occur? Of course it does. But I don't think that happens in this case. They got more on Slager than they had on Aaron Hernandez. And simply to save their hides, the SC judiciary is extraordinarily unlikely to look the other way to protect a bad murderous cop. Even his fellow officers haven't shown any signs of doing that. I suspect they are happy he's gone; he damn sure made all their jobs a lot more difficult.

caw
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
We don't often disagree on things, Timer, but I really do think you're overstating your case on this one. I really really don't think Slager stopped a guy with a broken taillight in order to kill him and stage the scene, even with a racial motive involved.

What Slager did do, which is blatantly evident on the video, is bad enough to get him put away for a very long time, and I certainly hope that happens. So . . . .

Let's put it this way: You've opined that Slager will walk. I think that highly unlikely. If, at any point in the legal process, that should be a result, there will be a nationwide conflagration, and I really really don't think even benighted local authorities in South Carolina would stomach that. The local authorities, both other police and the judiciary, neither of whom have a hell of a lot of record on such issues to be proud of, put Slager in jail, under serious charges, quicker than a cat chases a mouse, as soon as that video became public.

Would they have done that without the video? Almost certainly not. But that piece of damning evidence is incontrovertible, and the second video that emerged only confirmed what was seen on the first one.

This is a test of the system. Unless you think it's totally rigged, and hark back to the days of To Kill a Mockingbird. Does all manner of misjustice, racially motivated and otherwise, still occur? Of course it does. But I don't think that happens in this case. They got more on Slager than they had on Aaron Hernandez. And simply to save their hides, the SC judiciary is extraordinarily unlikely to look the other way to protect a bad murderous cop. Even his fellow officers haven't shown any signs of doing that. I suspect they are happy he's gone; he damn sure made all their jobs a lot more difficult.

caw

I only have two responses.

Aaron Hernandez was a punk and a thug and most likely a murderer long before he finally went into the slammer. Michael Slager is a cop and White cops are RARELY punished for killing Black suspects as the Washington Post revealed at length and in depth last Sunday.

According to the website Killed By Police there were 91 people killed in January, 85 in February and 115 killed in March. Some beyond question. Others? Highly questionable.

"A test of the system?" What test? The system is not broken. It was made to work this way. I used to believe in the system, but I have no reason to anymore. Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Oscar Grant, Sean Bell, Amadou Diallo and many many more convinced me not to indulge in the comfort of the illusion of colorblind "justice."

I won't be disappointed if I'm proven wrong, but we will have to wait before we see.
 
Last edited:

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
You've opined that Slager will walk. I think that highly unlikely. If, at any point in the legal process, that should be a result, there will be a nationwide conflagration, and I really really don't think even benighted local authorities in South Carolina would stomach that. The local authorities, both other police and the judiciary, neither of whom have a hell of a lot of record on such issues to be proud of, put Slager in jail, under serious charges, quicker than a cat chases a mouse, as soon as that video became public.

Would they have done that without the video? Almost certainly not.

Almost?

Let's lose the "almost," blacbird. We know if there were no video Slager would have gotten away with it.

Almost?

He shot a man in the back and laughed about it. He tried to stage the crime scene and laughed about it. He murdered a man in cold blood and laughed about it.

Almost? I'm afraid there we definitely disagree.

blacbird said:
But that piece of damning evidence is incontrovertible, and the second video that emerged only confirmed what was seen on the first one.

There was video of Eric Garner being placed in an illegal chokehold by Daniel Pantaleo. There was video of Oscar Grant being shot by Johannes Mehserle. There was video of Rodney King being beaten by the LAPD.

Video may be damning and it may be incontrovertible, but it isn't certainty of a conviction.
 

robjvargas

Rob J. Vargas
Banned
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
6,543
Reaction score
511
Michael Slager is a cop and White cops are RARELY punished for killing Black suspects as the Washington Post revealed at length and in depth last Sunday.
Just a quick aside to opine that I normally don't want murderer's names remembered. I'd rather make the victims the rallying cry.

HOWEVER...

We've had far too many of those this year, and there's not even a hint that the system has got the message.

So... I'm game for not trying the same thing and expecting a different result.

IN MY OPINION, Michael Slager is a murderer and his name needs to be plastered in 15-foot font in front of every police station in the country. Why? Because Nighttimer is right, IMO:

The system is not broken. It was made to work this way. I used to believe in the system, but I have no reason to anymore. Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Oscar Grant, Sean Bell, Amadou Diallo and many many more convinced me not to indulge in the comfort of the illusion of colorblind "justice."

Time and again and again and...

The people we're putting in as guardians of our system, and in whom we *must* place a high degree of trust if the system is to work, are proving unworthy of that guardianship. Not all of them, for certain. I won't even argue that it's most of them. It *is* a minority.

But between the perpetrators, and those who allow the perpetrators to use the "thin, blue line" as a shield against taking responsibility for their actions, we have a major crisis that hasn't just erupted, it's a cancer that's been malignant for a long time.

I get that officers face tough decisions. They do, after all, need to rely on each other in potentially deadly situations. On the other hand, are those same officers expecting me to believe that they trust a killer of the innocent more than the populace?

I don't buy that. I don't see how I ever will.
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
bump

When former police officer Michael Slager, who is accused of murdering an unarmed black man, took the stand in his own defense at his state murder trial this morning, he swore that the unarmed man was a threat and that he kept shooting him until the threat was over.

On the stand today, Slager told his defense attorney Andy Savage he repeatedly instructed Scott to get on the ground. Slager said he did not curse, did not use a racial epithet and did not do anything to indicate he was angry.

Slager said at one point Scott had control of the Taser and he was in fear. Slager told Savage that he warned Scott ahead of time before firing his Taser and firearm. Slager said Scott was a threat and that he kept shooting him until the threat was over.


When asked by the prosecution if Scott did anything to escalate the situation other than run, Slager said "No." When asked if Scott had done anything threatening other than trying to get away, Slager said, "No, not at that time."


Slager said he later told his supervisors that Scott took the Taser and came at him with it.


While he remembers some things about the encounter, "I don't remember everything that happened," Slager said. "I don't remember Walter Scott's arm around my neck. I don't remember the ground fight," he added. "I don't remember dropping the Taser."


"I fired my firearm until the threat was stopped," Slager said. He also told the prosecutor that he used "self-defense" that day.


"In this situation, with everything leading up to the shooting, I was tired," Slager said. "I ran the 200 yards, I was on a fight on the ground, Mr. Scott was coming after me with the Taser twice. My mind was like spaghetti."
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
I feel for the officer. He must have been terrified.

Except, there's actual video of the officer shooting Walter Scott in the back as he desperately tried to run away. What an unlucky break for the police officer. But given our post truth world, maybe that won't make any difference.

Meanwhile, violence continues, as always.
 

Twick

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
3,291
Reaction score
715
Location
Canada
"Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?"

After all, if he says he "doesn't remember" what the video shows, surely the video must be mistaken.