Total Posts:82|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Walter Scott Police Shooting

Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,027
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 8:43:26 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/7/2015 10:11:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Crazy: https://www.youtube.com...

It's a damn shame. We need to find a means of educating these cops to properly handle situations like this. I read that before the shooting, Walter Scott, had knocked something out of the hands of the cop. Even if that was the case, this does not, in any way, warrant the cop unloading 8 rounds into his back. I hope the cop does go down for murder, because that's what happened here - there is no way the cop can successfully argue self-defense with the video evidence against him.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
Daffypuck
Posts: 29
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 10:21:56 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I get so tired of this us vs them narrative crap. How about this, if the guy had not broken the law, he would still be alive. Granted, no excuses for the cops actions, but quit this bu*ls+it "protect my fellow black brother" crap. That is so divisive. By that statement, you are dividing America into us and them, white and black. It should be protect all of us as a nation, as one people.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 10:37:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Question that needs to be answered:
If police believe that a man is dangerous, can they use deadly force to stop him fleeing?

If they just said, "oh, well, we'll just let him go and put out an APB", and that man then commits other crimes, is the police force liable? It seems lose-lose, to be honest.

Obviously, this is predicated on the issue of accuracy of said judgment, but a man who flees from arrest from a traffic stop is hardly acting rational.
My work here is, finally, done.
slo1
Posts: 4,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 10:41:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 10:21:56 AM, Daffypuck wrote:
I get so tired of this us vs them narrative crap. How about this, if the guy had not broken the law, he would still be alive. Granted, no excuses for the cops actions, but quit this bu*ls+it "protect my fellow black brother" crap. That is so divisive. By that statement, you are dividing America into us and them, white and black. It should be protect all of us as a nation, as one people.

Yes, that dirty rotten criminal how dare he drive without doing a full walk around his vehicle to ensure the tail lights are working. Shoot him in the back as punishment.

How about you stop being so divisive and look at the writing on the wall, police departments across the country are infiltrated with employees who should no be police. I can't help it if those individual cops are more likely to abuse their position against black people. We need to be divisive Us versus the Police until the leadership finds ways to identify and eliminate cops like this from their work force.

Stop trying to bury your head in the sand with your fingers in your ears as there is clearly a systemic problem here that you want to defend rather than eradicate.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 10:42:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Did the cop plant evidence?
The NY Times makes it sound like he picked up the tazer, which was discarded, and put it next to the body.
My work here is, finally, done.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 12:28:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 10:21:56 AM, Daffypuck wrote:
I get so tired of this us vs them narrative crap. How about this, if the guy had not broken the law, he would still be alive. Granted, no excuses for the cops actions, but quit this bu*ls+it "protect my fellow black brother" crap. That is so divisive. By that statement, you are dividing America into us and them, white and black. It should be protect all of us as a nation, as one people.

Right. Cops murdering civlians isn't the thing that's divisive. It's the people who are making hay of this thats divisive. Right. lol
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 12:37:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 10:42:48 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Did the cop plant evidence?
The NY Times makes it sound like he picked up the tazer, which was discarded, and put it next to the body.

yep
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 12:44:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 8:43:26 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 4/7/2015 10:11:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Crazy: https://www.youtube.com...

It's a damn shame. We need to find a means of educating these cops to properly handle situations like this. I read that before the shooting, Walter Scott, had knocked something out of the hands of the cop. Even if that was the case, this does not, in any way, warrant the cop unloading 8 rounds into his back. I hope the cop does go down for murder, because that's what happened here - there is no way the cop can successfully argue self-defense with the video evidence against him.

lol. I don't think lack of education was the reason for his crime.

And yes, prior to the shooting, the officer pointed a taser gun at him which he swatted away.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 12:45:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 10:42:48 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Did the cop plant evidence?
The NY Times makes it sound like he picked up the tazer, which was discarded, and put it next to the body.

You can actually see it on video: https://www.youtube.com...
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 12:51:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I don't understand why people think it's okay to act like a retard when around cops. It's obviously not worthy of the death penalty, but jesus christ.
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,027
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 1:24:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 12:44:59 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/8/2015 8:43:26 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 4/7/2015 10:11:47 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Crazy: https://www.youtube.com...

It's a damn shame. We need to find a means of educating these cops to properly handle situations like this. I read that before the shooting, Walter Scott, had knocked something out of the hands of the cop. Even if that was the case, this does not, in any way, warrant the cop unloading 8 rounds into his back. I hope the cop does go down for murder, because that's what happened here - there is no way the cop can successfully argue self-defense with the video evidence against him.

lol. I don't think lack of education was the reason for his crime.

I wasn't saying he's too stupid or something. By saying that we need to educate these guys to better handle situations like this I meant in terms of experience. The more experience they have the better educated they are in handling situations in the field. Perhaps it's a poor choice of wording on my part, lol, I think the point I'm trying to convey is clear though. I wasn't aware that it was a taser, but getting something slapped out of his hand and then unloading on the guy when he's running *away* from the cop is a great example of a lack of education on the cops part in terms of experience. Either he's not experienced enough at keeping his mind clear in times of heightened stress, he's not experienced enough at keeping in line with proper police protocol, he's not experienced enough at immobilizing a fleeing target with non-fatal means. All of which falls under education, or things that he could have potentially been better educated on.

I just can't envision them teaching cops over at the academy to unload their guns on a fleeing target who poses no immediate threat. In this case, the fact that the victim was running away implies no immediate threat. If the victim had punched the cop in the face after slapping the taser away then that's a different story, but he just slapped it away and then ran off in the opposite direction. They've got to have some sort of alternative procedure for such scenarios, and if they don't then it's a failure of proper education.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 1:48:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Anyone know how many bullets actually hit Scott?

I'm not sure if I support the murder charge, but it might qualify as felony murder. The planting of the tazer shows evidence of guilty conscience to me, like maybe he was saying, "I better give him a weapon, since I said self defense".

Assume he was armed, and he was running away, and the officer believed he posed a threat to others, would the shooting be justified? I think this is an important issue that needs to be discussed.
My work here is, finally, done.
Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 1:52:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 10:37:19 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Question that needs to be answered:
If police believe that a man is dangerous, can they use deadly force to stop him fleeing?

If they just said, "oh, well, we'll just let him go and put out an APB", and that man then commits other crimes, is the police force liable? It seems lose-lose, to be honest.

Obviously, this is predicated on the issue of accuracy of said judgment, but a man who flees from arrest from a traffic stop is hardly acting rational.
Here's most of your answer: [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...]

Yes, but only if the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the suspected felon from escaping and if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspected felon may seriously injure or kill others.

The rest of your answer is here: [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...]

The officer's decision to use lethal force should be considered under the Fourth Amendment's "Objective Reasonableness" standard in the sense that the decision should be assessed from any reasonable officer's point of view at the scene. In other words, the accuracy of the judgement to use lethal force is less important than the reason for deciding to use lethal force.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 2:07:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 1:52:15 PM, Enji wrote:
At 4/8/2015 10:37:19 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Question that needs to be answered:
If police believe that a man is dangerous, can they use deadly force to stop him fleeing?

If they just said, "oh, well, we'll just let him go and put out an APB", and that man then commits other crimes, is the police force liable? It seems lose-lose, to be honest.

Obviously, this is predicated on the issue of accuracy of said judgment, but a man who flees from arrest from a traffic stop is hardly acting rational.
Here's most of your answer: [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...]

Yes, but only if the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the suspected felon from escaping and if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspected felon may seriously injure or kill others.

Assume the officer in this case thought danger was imminent. Would the shooting be justified in your opinion? The fact that he said self-defense and not defense of others makes this a hypothetical and academic question.
Would the shooting be justified (i.e. necessary) or would an APB suffice? If the latter, at what point should stand offs and chases not occur?

The rest of your answer is here: [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...]

The officer's decision to use lethal force should be considered under the Fourth Amendment's "Objective Reasonableness" standard in the sense that the decision should be assessed from any reasonable officer's point of view at the scene. In other words, the accuracy of the judgement to use lethal force is less important than the reason for deciding to use lethal force.

What I mean was the accuracy of the validity of the reason, not the accuracy of the situation per se.
In my hypothetical, the man posed a threat and police did not use deadly force and the man hurt others, is the police force liable?

Thank you for the answer, but I knew it. I just want people to consider it, since the reaction often is "he was unarmed" or "he was running away", which are both potentially irrelevant.
Do you think that the cop's judgment is affected after he attacked (after tackling the suspect) ? Would a reasonable officer factor in rage and emotions?
My work here is, finally, done.
slo1
Posts: 4,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 2:07:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 1:48:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Anyone know how many bullets actually hit Scott?

I'm not sure if I support the murder charge, but it might qualify as felony murder. The planting of the tazer shows evidence of guilty conscience to me, like maybe he was saying, "I better give him a weapon, since I said self defense".


Assume he was armed, and he was running away, and the officer believed he posed a threat to others, would the shooting be justified? I think this is an important issue that needs to be discussed.

He was not armed. May have been running because had warrant for his arrest for child support. OR during the traffic stop he was worried for his life because of the behaviors of the policeman.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 2:14:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 2:07:59 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 4/8/2015 1:48:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Anyone know how many bullets actually hit Scott?

I'm not sure if I support the murder charge, but it might qualify as felony murder. The planting of the tazer shows evidence of guilty conscience to me, like maybe he was saying, "I better give him a weapon, since I said self defense".


Assume he was armed, and he was running away, and the officer believed he posed a threat to others, would the shooting be justified? I think this is an important issue that needs to be discussed.

He was not armed. May have been running because had warrant for his arrest for child support. OR during the traffic stop he was worried for his life because of the behaviors of the policeman.

That doesn't answer my question.
Do you think the officer knows why he ran?
Is it unreasonable to assume that someone who runs poses a threat to others?
My work here is, finally, done.
slo1
Posts: 4,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 2:20:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 2:14:43 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/8/2015 2:07:59 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 4/8/2015 1:48:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Anyone know how many bullets actually hit Scott?

I'm not sure if I support the murder charge, but it might qualify as felony murder. The planting of the tazer shows evidence of guilty conscience to me, like maybe he was saying, "I better give him a weapon, since I said self defense".


Assume he was armed, and he was running away, and the officer believed he posed a threat to others, would the shooting be justified? I think this is an important issue that needs to be discussed.

He was not armed. May have been running because had warrant for his arrest for child support. OR during the traffic stop he was worried for his life because of the behaviors of the policeman.

That doesn't answer my question.
Do you think the officer knows why he ran?
Is it unreasonable to assume that someone who runs poses a threat to others?

Yes it is unreasonable unless one has some type of evidence the individual is a potential harm to others such as seeing a weapon. Swatting away a taser is not enough to suspect he is danger to society at large.

Secondly, case law clearly states that when a police officer uses deadly force they have to announce if at all possible. This guy did not say a peep and clearly had plenty of time to yell before pulling the trigger.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 2:23:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 2:20:24 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 4/8/2015 2:14:43 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/8/2015 2:07:59 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 4/8/2015 1:48:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Anyone know how many bullets actually hit Scott?

I'm not sure if I support the murder charge, but it might qualify as felony murder. The planting of the tazer shows evidence of guilty conscience to me, like maybe he was saying, "I better give him a weapon, since I said self defense".


Assume he was armed, and he was running away, and the officer believed he posed a threat to others, would the shooting be justified? I think this is an important issue that needs to be discussed.

He was not armed. May have been running because had warrant for his arrest for child support. OR during the traffic stop he was worried for his life because of the behaviors of the policeman.

That doesn't answer my question.
Do you think the officer knows why he ran?
Is it unreasonable to assume that someone who runs poses a threat to others?

Yes it is unreasonable unless one has some type of evidence the individual is a potential harm to others such as seeing a weapon. Swatting away a taser is not enough to suspect he is danger to society at large.
Is your stance that not having a weapon is categorically unreasonable to believe one poses a threat to oneself or others? Or, just generally that is the case?

Secondly, case law clearly states that when a police officer uses deadly force they have to announce if at all possible. This guy did not say a peep and clearly had plenty of time to yell before pulling the trigger.
Not relevant to my question, but good to know.
I'm not defending the cop, just trying to have a conversation about police policy.
My work here is, finally, done.
slo1
Posts: 4,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 2:40:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 2:23:54 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/8/2015 2:20:24 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 4/8/2015 2:14:43 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/8/2015 2:07:59 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 4/8/2015 1:48:00 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Anyone know how many bullets actually hit Scott?

I'm not sure if I support the murder charge, but it might qualify as felony murder. The planting of the tazer shows evidence of guilty conscience to me, like maybe he was saying, "I better give him a weapon, since I said self defense".


Assume he was armed, and he was running away, and the officer believed he posed a threat to others, would the shooting be justified? I think this is an important issue that needs to be discussed.

He was not armed. May have been running because had warrant for his arrest for child support. OR during the traffic stop he was worried for his life because of the behaviors of the policeman.

That doesn't answer my question.
Do you think the officer knows why he ran?
Is it unreasonable to assume that someone who runs poses a threat to others?

Yes it is unreasonable unless one has some type of evidence the individual is a potential harm to others such as seeing a weapon. Swatting away a taser is not enough to suspect he is danger to society at large.
Is your stance that not having a weapon is categorically unreasonable to believe one poses a threat to oneself or others? Or, just generally that is the case?

No, it could be reasonable to assume an every day object which is used as a weapon could be construed as a danger warranting deadly force. IE: using a car with intent to hurt or swinging a 5 iron with an intent to hurt. The point is that there has to be a standard of reasonableness to assume the perp is a danger or concrete evidence. It is not simply because the police officer "felt" threatened.

Secondly, case law clearly states that when a police officer uses deadly force they have to announce if at all possible. This guy did not say a peep and clearly had plenty of time to yell before pulling the trigger.
Not relevant to my question, but good to know.
I'm not defending the cop, just trying to have a conversation about police policy.
Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 3:05:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 2:07:40 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 4/8/2015 1:52:15 PM, Enji wrote:

Yes, but only if the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the suspected felon from escaping and if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspected felon may seriously injure or kill others.
Assume the officer in this case thought danger was imminent. Would the shooting be justified in your opinion? The fact that he said self-defense and not defense of others makes this a hypothetical and academic question.
Would the shooting be justified (i.e. necessary) or would an APB suffice? If the latter, at what point should stand offs and chases not occur?
A quibble here: necessary in the Court's ruling refers to whether or not the subject could have been stopped through non-deadly means. In this case, the officer attempted to use the stun-gun first and proceeded to use deadly force after the stun-gun failed. This, I think, indicates that the officer did reasonably assess whether deadly force would be necessary to stop Walker.

The more contentious question is whether the officer reasonably believed that Walker posed a threat to himself or others. If the officer reasonably determined that Walker was a danger to others (or to the officer himself) then the shooting was justified. However, if not then the officer should have resorted to other means. You ask at what point should chases and stand offs not occur. These aren't applications of deadly force, so they should be allowed to occur. The point where stand offs and chases turn into applications of deadly force (the officer firing his gun) should be judged the same as other applications of deadly force.

The rest of your answer is here: [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...]

The officer's decision to use lethal force should be considered under the Fourth Amendment's "Objective Reasonableness" standard in the sense that the decision should be assessed from any reasonable officer's point of view at the scene. In other words, the accuracy of the judgement to use lethal force is less important than the reason for deciding to use lethal force.
What I mean was the accuracy of the validity of the reason, not the accuracy of the situation per se.
In my hypothetical, the man posed a threat and police did not use deadly force and the man hurt others, is the police force liable?
I don't know of any case where police were held liable for failing to apprehend a criminal, and I think that would be an absurd precedent to set.

Do you think that the cop's judgment is affected after he attacked (after tackling the suspect) ? Would a reasonable officer factor in rage and emotions?
I realise that police officers are human beings and have emotions, but I'm not particularly convinced they should be given extra leeway for rage or other emotions. Cops should be trained to be and expected to be level-headed -- particularly because of instances where they may need to use deadly force. I think it's best to assess officers' actions based on the judgement of Graham vs. Connor, taking into account that "[they] are often forced to make split-second judgements - in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving - about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation," but not considering either the officer's emotional state or their motivation for applying force (i.e. good intentions do not make an action reasonable or right).
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 3:06:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
"Mr. Scott ran away, "

That is an unreasonable reaction to being stopped for a busted tail light.
That is the cause for the shooting, not the tail light.

The cop was wrong.
He did something stupid, as a result of the dead man doing something stupid.
The cop is in a world of crap, nothing will change that.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,138
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 5:39:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Not surprising at all. The only thing different about this case is that the entire interaction was fortunately caught on camera, so this particular abusive policeman will not be allowed to continue shooting unarmed civilians.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 6:54:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 6:10:29 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/8/2015 7:57:17 AM, Wylted wrote:
Typical cop

Yeah, because the average cop would murder someone like that.

Yep, I can show you literally hundreds of videos of unjustified shootings.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 6:58:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 10:21:56 AM, Daffypuck wrote:
I get so tired of this us vs them narrative crap. How about this, if the guy had not broken the law, he would still be alive. Granted, no excuses for the cops actions, but quit this bu*ls+it "protect my fellow black brother" crap. That is so divisive. By that statement, you are dividing America into us and them, white and black. It should be protect all of us as a nation, as one people.

It's impossible to not break the law. We live in a police state thanks to statists. http://www.wsj.com...

So tell me again how we are supposed to avoid breaking the law, when legal scholars agree we commit 3 felonies a day?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 7:00:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 10:37:19 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Question that needs to be answered:
If police believe that a man is dangerous, can they use deadly force to stop him fleeing?

If they just said, "oh, well, we'll just let him go and put out an APB", and that man then commits other crimes, is the police force liable? It seems lose-lose, to be honest.

Obviously, this is predicated on the issue of accuracy of said judgment, but a man who flees from arrest from a traffic stop is hardly acting rational.

Why wouldn't he flee? At least by running, he gave himself a chance to survive the confrontation. If he just laid there and got shot, he is a goner.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2015 7:01:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/8/2015 10:42:48 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Did the cop plant evidence?
The NY Times makes it sound like he picked up the tazer, which was discarded, and put it next to the body.

He did, the other cop actually reported him for doing so, which is shocking usually they cover for each other.