Michael Slager, an officer with the North Charleston Police Department, has been charged with murder after a highly disturbing video surfaced that shows him shooting an unarmed man who was running away. He could face the death penalty for the alleged crime.
The shooting followed a traffic stop for the ubiquitous reason of having a brake light out on his Mercedes-Benz. We have previously discussed the problem of pretextual stops where traffic violations are used to conduct searches or question drivers. For a prior column, click here.
The video below shows Walter Scott, 50, breaking away from the officer. Something clearly falls to the ground and the officer fires eight shots at the man as he runs away.
Police reports include a statement from Slager that “Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser.”
The video appears to contradict some of what Slager reported. He did report using the taser without effect. The video appears to show wires from the stun gun extending from Scott’s body as the two men struggle. However, Scott then breaks away and is shot roughly 20 feet away from the officer in a hail of bullets.
Under Tennessee v. Garner, a fleeing suspect can be shot under limited circumstances. Deadly force may be used only when “necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others.” Justice White wrote:
A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead…however…Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.
The question is likely to be whether the struggle and failed use of the taser created a sufficient basis for Slager to believe that he had probable cause that Scott was posed a serious threat to him or others. Slager could claim that, the fact that Scott allegedly attacked him and tried to take his taser, was enough to satisfy that Garner standard. This is the ultimate jury decision and the image of shooting a fleeing suspect in the back will obviously present a considerable challenge for the defense.
Source: CNN
One question I have is , why is there no mention of the 2nd hero who showed up at the scene and didn’t report Slager dropping the Taser next to the Mr. Scott?
Similar to the NYPD’s “Broken Windows Theory” – enforcing small crimes prevents bigger crimes – most milder forms of police corruption is never reported, never investigated and would never make headlines.
For example: Police harassing citizens for years or decades. These statistics don’t exist and internal affairs departments generally aren’t interested in these milder abuses (which are also a federal crime). Most IA departments only police the most violent and visible police corruption.
It is a federal crime for any police officer to stalk or harass any citizen, even citizens with previous records – there are virtually no watchdogs to enforce these federal “color of law” statutes. Even most federal authorities aren’t interested in these smaller “broken windows” or milder crimes perpetrated by some (not all) officers.
From the video it appears that there was another cop at the opposite end of the park, covering the fleeing man’s potential exit. This cop walks into the picture as Slager finishes placing handcuffs on the dead man. My first question is why Slager felt a need to gun this unarmed man down when his exit was covered…it’s a pretty small area and Slager should have seen the other cop directly opposite him, in his line of sight. Secondly, this other cop was close enough to witness the murder and the placement of the taser near the body. What was his official account of the occurrence? If it backed up Slager’s version to cover up the facts then shouldn’t he be fired and facing charges of collusion? My third question…and this goes for all of these shootings of unarmed people by an over zealous American police force…why is their first instinct always to shoot to kill? Nobody is going anywhere, nor can they effectively continue to put up a substantial struggle, if you blow out a kneecap.
The suspect was fleeing in a threatening manner causing the officer to fear for his life hence the use of deadly force. (Did you think the officer was actually going to RUN after the suspect? Gimme a break!)
Michael Haz, there is a distinct difference between criminals shooting police officers and on-duty police officers using deadly force. The first is criminal activity which is condemned and vigorously prosecuted without controversy. The second is too often an act by the state which is defended by powerful forces within local government forces and raises issues of officer training, supervision, discipline, abuses of power and criminal action to cover-up which goes uninvestigated and unprosecuted.
These “shoot first, think later” cops probably watch too many cop shows, where 90% of all arrests involve a major shootfest. In the real world, most of the time the threat is far less imminent. Neither failure to pay child support nor a broken tail light are capital offenses.
wrxdave has it exactly right.
He could have easily decided not to shoot, he obviously possessed a working radio to call for other officers to pursue the man who was overweight, 50, and in a strange neighborhood without his car. They knew his identity and where he lived. The officer could have simply pursued and tackled him, engaged him with baton or pepper spray
There was NO reason to shoot this man. He wasn’t a clear and present danger to the policeman or anyone else.
While I generally support the police and have great sympathy for the difficulty of their job. I have several close friends who are retired police and highway patrol and they have some amazing stories………This guy needs to be tried for murder.
First word out of cop’s mouth, ‘Dershowitz’.
Professor Turley: May I suggest that you post a similar topic whenever a law enforcement officer is killed by a civilian? Balance, and all. That side of the story is seldom covered here.
As to Officer Michael Slager, the video shows him shooting a man in the back multiple times as the man was running away for him. If that is the full story, it looks like he committed murder and should be held accountable in a court of law.
What about the tampering with evidence? Did the cop go back to pick up the taser and place it next to the body? No jury could possibly view this as anything but murder. The man posed no harm to the cop running away, Garner or not.
There also needs to be a public debate on abusive use of Tasers which can also cause permanent harm or even death. The fact they are advertised as non-lethal has been a license to taser anyone for anything.
A burnt out brake light bulb leads to discovery of a dead beat dad driving a Benz.
Slager could have aimed for guys legs. Scott’s kids will get a windfall payout that dead beat daddy only dreamed of. As for the cop, he isn’t going to like prison chow. Sad ending.
Garner standard = license to kill.
He could have easily decided not to shoot, he obviously possessed a working radio to call for other officers to pursue the man who was overweight, 50, and in a strange neighborhood without his car. They knew his identity and where he lived. The officer could have simply pursued and tackled him, engaged him with baton or pepper spray, in fact he probably could have talked to him like a reasonable human being before employing his taser in the first place and effected the arrest without force – I am assuming he did none of those things. I am assuming that he used a high handed confrontational approach and what he got in return was a confrontation, that his response to this “lack of respect” was to tase the subject, which works 95% of the time in teaching the subject to respect the officer. When it did not seem to work, and like most biological organisms, the man fled from the source of intense pain he was experiencing, the officer decided that he was tired, had enough, had pretext, and shot him.
That’s just what it appears to be on the surface
Mr. Slager is being thrown to the wolves in an effort to show Americans that police are judged by the same standards as all citizens.
The case will drag on and eventually, Slager will be convicted of a lesser charge or acquitted, but Americans will have been placated.
Slager was stupid enough to shoot somebody in a time of heightened public scrutiny. A year earlier, a year later and he would have skated.
I do predict that Mr. Scott’s children will benefit financially from his death, I am sure that plaintiffs attorneys were knocking on doors shortly after the news broke.
Last week a man was released from 30 years on death row without any substantial evidence at all. Here we have pretty solid evidence of intentional homicide for a jury to decide.
Police officers are also professionally trained in using firearms, use of force, legal scenarios and should be more restrained than the average defendant. The officer paused and could have chosen to shoot him in the leg instead with his professional training. That will impact the jury verdict as well.
Apparently this police department, the city attorney and city legislature were also dragging their feet in adopting police body cameras so those governing bodies could also bear some culpability.
Looks like murder to me….
NBC News reported that there was an outstanding warrant for Mr. Scott for failure to pay child support, which was the basis for attempting place Mr. Scott under arrest after the traffic stop.
I predict an upswing in back child support payments in North Charleston,, although Mr. Scott’s child(ren) likely won’t benefit from that trend.
The defense will start off with and order of accumulated traumatic experiences. After the audience has digested this course it will be followed by a plate full of recent traumatic moments which prepare the palate for the explanation that the victim acted in a manner so as to disorientate the already traumatized officer into believing that the victim was running to his hiding place where he had earlier hidden a weapon. But, honestly, ladies and gentlemen, at this time in the officer’s head he was simply so traumatized he was a victim himself.
So, ya see people, the police officer is just as much a victim as his um, victim. The retrieving of the object, the alleged taser, which could have been a gun, and the placing of it by the victims body, well my client can’t remember doing any of that. He was clearly in shock over what had just transpired.
Placing this officer in jail will not bring back the other participant in this tragic occurrence.