I'm surprised this hasn't been posted already

[Gulo Blue]

I honestly don't know. I wasn't there and I doubt that any source (liberal, mainstream or conservative media) gives an complete, fair or accurate portrayal. But I'm not trying to tear down or discredit an entire movement by pigeon holing it all into misdirected or false outrage. What I do know is certain narratives have been proven false or at least unsubstantiated but continued to be or are still a big part of the story and are the genesis of significant false outrage. Athletes, celebrities and congressman donning hoodies, athletes taking the field with their hands up, musicians doing the same thing at awards show recently, etc, etc. I think the riots in Ferguson and a good amount of the protests in general were motivate by "hands up, don't shoot".

To some degree, I suspect we're thinking similar things and wording it differently. I think the fact that people are ready to run with these narratives says something about the state of things. It says something about how things are and something about how our media portrays things to be.

 

[Michchamp]

agreed.

now imagine if there was no video account of this murder ....

It would be another Ferguson story.

The Atlantic has this article about how support for the officer here hasn't materialized like it did in prior shootings... but for the video. from the victim's father:

Some have posited that without video footage, Scott's death would not have entered the national consciousness. His father, Walter Sr., said as much during an interview with Today. "It would have never come to light. They would have swept it under the rug, like they did with many others." The Huffington Post wrote an article on Wednesday titled "Here's A News Report We'd Be Reading If Walter Scott's Killing Wasn't On Video" to highlight the difference in coverage.
​

that HuffPo article quoted isn't fantasy either; that's what the PD was saying here prior to the video being released.

 

[Michchamp]

To some degree, I suspect we're thinking similar things and wording it differently. I think the fact that people are ready to run with these narratives says something about the state of things. It says something about how things are and something about how our media portrays things to be.

from this other article in the Atlantic:

South Carolina requires police departments to track all traffic stops that don't end in a citation or an arrest, which produces a useful if incomplete picture of how many stops might be essentially pretextual. Of more than 22,000 stops in 2014 in North Charleston, 16,730 involved African Americans?almost 76 percent of stops, much higher than the city's black population. Most of those, some 10,600, involved black men, like Scott.
​

the article also has a graphic showing the number of police killings in England & Wales, Australia, Germany, and the US in 2011. if those countries had police like we do, you could expect to see 300 Germans killed (instead of 6), 82 Australians killed (instead of 6)... etc.

 

[Gulo Blue]

from this other article in the Atlantic:

South Carolina requires police departments to track all traffic stops that don't end in a citation or an arrest, which produces a useful if incomplete picture of how many stops might be essentially pretextual. Of more than 22,000 stops in 2014 in North Charleston, 16,730 involved African Americans—almost 76 percent of stops, much higher than the city's black population. Most of those, some 10,600, involved black men, like Scott.
​

the article also has a graphic showing the number of police killings in England & Wales, Australia, Germany, and the US in 2011. if those countries had police like we do, you could expect to see 300 Germans killed (instead of 6), 82 Australians killed (instead of 6)... etc.

That's the kind of bias that I think drives the reaction. If 10,000 people are pulled over for BS reason, that's 10,000 people ready to protest when the media reports something as a potentially racially influenced shooting. The big reactions have as much to do with traffic stops as shootings.

 

[Gulo Blue]

the article also has a graphic showing the number of police killings in England & Wales, Australia, Germany, and the US in 2011. if those countries had police like we do, you could expect to see 300 Germans killed (instead of 6), 82 Australians killed (instead of 6)... etc.

Those are some significant data points.

 

[Spartanmack]

To some degree, I suspect we're thinking similar things and wording it differently. I think the fact that people are ready to run with these narratives says something about the state of things. It says something about how things are and something about how our media portrays things to be.

Probably true but I would add that running w/ those narratives does a disservice to the legitimate movement. as far as these narrative persisting well after they've been disproved, case in point, look at mc's post right after yours. He says without the video, the South Carolina case "would have been another Ferguson". Despite all the evidence, forensics, testimony, investigations, etc that concluded officer Wilson was justified and that "hands up, don't shoot" was bs, he's still using it as an example of racist cops killing black kids.

And for the record, I completely disagree that the outcome would be significantly different without the video. As I said earlier, his lies wouldn't stand up 5 shots in the back not from close range, no physical evidence the cop was assaulted, physical evidence that the suspect had been tased, making it impossible for the suspect to use the officer's taser against him, eyewitness testimony, etc, etc.

 

[zyxt9]

Change IS happening, and that is great. People need to recognize it will take some time (perhaps 1-5 years), and they need to maintain their persistance in monitoring actual situations where police are being abusive and not following the law. However, everyone also needs to recognize that for every one of these situations, how many are police acting appropriately and within the law? The reality is that percentage wise, these cases are less than 1% of all police situations, from traffic stops to felonies.

That is NOT to defend these situations or say something stupid like we don't need cops to have body cams. We definitely need that. However, it is irresponsible to create a level of claims that the police are doing wrong or illegal activity to a level that borderlines on removal of police in general. Obviously we as a society are not at a level where we are unwilling or not able to partake in criminal or otherwise unlawful practices. If we were, then we woukd not need a police force. That would be an awesome time and place to live. Unfortunately we are not there yet.

 

[zyxt9]

from this other article in the Atlantic:

South Carolina requires police departments to track all traffic stops that don't end in a citation or an arrest, which produces a useful if incomplete picture of how many stops might be essentially pretextual. Of more than 22,000 stops in 2014 in North Charleston, 16,730 involved African Americans?almost 76 percent of stops, much higher than the city's black population. Most of those, some 10,600, involved black men, like Scott.
​

the article also has a graphic showing the number of police killings in England & Wales, Australia, Germany, and the US in 2011. if those countries had police like we do, you could expect to see 300 Germans killed (instead of 6), 82 Australians killed (instead of 6)... etc.

Of thise thousands, how many resulted in the person being shot and killed unlawfully (obviously I'm referring to the known potential for cops to be shit at first, as represented by the number of officers who have been shot at, even killed, when making such stops).

Just pointing out the low percentage. Again, the cams are needed...and officers should not be in charge of when they begin and end filming. Just reminding everyone that the bad cops and their illegal actions are not the norm.

 

[zyxt9]

from this other article in the Atlantic:

South Carolina requires police departments to track all traffic stops that don't end in a citation or an arrest, which produces a useful if incomplete picture of how many stops might be essentially pretextual. Of more than 22,000 stops in 2014 in North Charleston, 16,730 involved African Americans?almost 76 percent of stops, much higher than the city's black population. Most of those, some 10,600, involved black men, like Scott.
​

the article also has a graphic showing the number of police killings in England & Wales, Australia, Germany, and the US in 2011. if those countries had police like we do, you could expect to see 300 Germans killed (instead of 6), 82 Australians killed (instead of 6)... etc.

Probably true but I would add that running w/ those narratives does a disservice to the legitimate movement. as far as these narrative persisting well after they've been disproved, case in point, look at mc's post right after yours. He says without the video, the South Carolina case "would have been another Ferguson". Despite all the evidence, forensics, testimony, investigations, etc that concluded officer Wilson was justified and that "hands up, don't shoot" was bs, he's still using it as an example of racist cops killing black kids.

And for the record, I completely disagree that the outcome would be significantly different without the video. As I said earlier, his lies wouldn't stand up 5 shots in the back not from close range, no physical evidence the cop was assaulted, physical evidence that the suspect had been tased, making it impossible for the suspect to use the officer's taser against him, eyewitness testimony, etc, etc.

While potentially true, I suspect that through the years PDs have managed to coerce or even cover up autopsy results in order to not have these things come to light. I am glad that was not able to happen in this case, as we all are. Still, the evidence shows the cop tried to cover it up. Had he managed to do so in previous situations? He seemed to not really hesitate with his cover up attempt, showing a degree of pre-meditation IMO.

The more checks and balances, including cameras, the better. I'm all for increased surveillance of cops.

 

[Michchamp]

Probably true but I would add that running w/ those narratives does a disservice to the legitimate movement. as far as these narrative persisting well after they've been disproved, case in point, look at mc's post right after yours. He says without the video, the South Carolina case "would have been another Ferguson". Despite all the evidence, forensics, testimony, investigations, etc that concluded officer Wilson was justified and that "hands up, don't shoot" was bs, he's still using it as an example of racist cops killing black kids.

What evidence? the physical evidence shows what it shows, but doesn't provide a narrative. the testimony supporting Wilson's account apparently came from Wilson himself, and Witness #40 at the grand jury, who lied under oath.

And for the record, I completely disagree that the outcome would be significantly different without the video. As I said earlier, his lies wouldn't stand up 5 shots in the back not from close range, no physical evidence the cop was assaulted, physical evidence that the suspect had been tased, making it impossible for the suspect to use the officer's taser against him, eyewitness testimony, etc, etc.

Do you disagree based on any evidence?

The initial reports stated that Scott had tried to grab the officer's taser & all the responding officers administered first aid, but the video shows them shoot him in the back from distance, plant the taser nearby him & completely ignore him... no first aid, no CPR.

It would have to take one particularly brave coroner to push the results of his autopsy over the testimony of at least 2 or 3 cops (not sure how many were all there to witness the incident).

How many times has physical evidence alone actually made a difference when there's no video?? The articles I've been reading over the last year indicate it's very few, as evidence by the fact that when a police officer is actually indicted for murder or manslaughter, it's a newsworth event nationwide.

Not sure why you want to fight the battles over Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin over again... this whole position of yours is amusing: "Okay I admit this one (1) particular police shooting was bad, but black people still have no basis to complain about the way police treat them, and you liberals were wrong about those other cases. WRONG I tells ya."

 

[Michchamp]

While potentially true, I suspect that through the years PDs have managed to coerce or even cover up autopsy results in order to not have these things come to light. I am glad that was not able to happen in this case, as we all are. Still, the evidence shows the cop tried to cover it up. Had he managed to do so in previous situations? He seemed to not really hesitate with his cover up attempt, showing a degree of pre-meditation IMO.

The more checks and balances, including cameras, the better. I'm all for increased surveillance of cops.

Wow. You know, I agree completely with you.

hey, Spartanhack/racist: when you make even zyxt appear to be the voice of reason, it's time to rethink your position on an issue...

 

[Spartanmack]

While potentially true, I suspect that through the years PDs have managed to coerce or even cover up autopsy results in order to not have these things come to light. I am glad that was not able to happen in this case, as we all are. Still, the evidence shows the cop tried to cover it up. Had he managed to do so in previous situations? He seemed to not really hesitate with his cover up attempt, showing a degree of pre-meditation IMO.

The more checks and balances, including cameras, the better. I'm all for increased surveillance of cops.

That's possible, but the forensic evidence was pretty powerful in Brown/Wilson case which disproved the testimony of Brown's friend. There would have to be a pretty complicated conspiracy to cover this up. Even if that guy wasn't so fast w/ his cell phone camera, he was still an eye witness to contradict the officer's accounting of the events. Plus, there most certainly would have been a wrongful death suit and an independent forensic exam commissioned by the plaintiffs to show the suspect was shot in the back while attempting to flee which would have corroborated the eyewitness testimony. Even if he had the taser, no way the cop can justify 5 shots in the back of a fleeing suspect. The case may not be as air tight and would probably cost more/take longer to prosecute, but I think an acquittal would be a very low probability outcome even without the video.

 

[zyxt9]

Historically the police have been given added weight to their testimony while eyewitnesses, especially minorities, have been cross-examined to the point juries side with the coos in question.

I'm with you on the Brown case and I have stated my support of the police, but we also need to balance that support with caution and renewed skeptisism due to the number of videos demonstrating cops doing illegal actions against others. Again, the number of bad cops seems low, otherwise we would see hundreds of these videos every day. These accounts are gaining frequency thanks to the number of independent cameras recording their actions. PDs need to start demonstrating proper action videos to show cases where they acted correctly, but more importantly just stop supporting bad cops.

 

[Spartanmack]

What evidence? the physical evidence shows what it shows, but doesn't provide a narrative. the testimony supporting Wilson's account apparently came from Wilson himself, and Witness #40 at the grand jury, who lied under oath.

The physical evidence that shows brown was not shot in the back like Brown's friend said, was not shot while kneeling or surrendering like brown's friend said, that he went for Wilson's gun, that he assaulted Wilson. It may not provide a narrative but I didn't say it did. I said it disproved a narrative and it does. Virtually everything brown's companion said about the incident was shown to be a lie but hey, if you ignore all the evidence, then you can say a racist cop killed a black kid, der, derr, derrr

Do you disagree based on any evidence?

The initial reports stated that Scott had tried to grab the officer's taser & all the responding officers administered first aid, but the video shows them shoot him in the back from distance, plant the taser nearby him & completely ignore him... no first aid, no CPR.

It would have to take one particularly brave coroner to push the results of his autopsy over the testimony of at least 2 or 3 cops (not sure how many were all there to witness the incident).

How many times has physical evidence alone actually made a difference when there's no video?? The articles I've been reading over the last year indicate it's very few, as evidence by the fact that when a police officer is actually indicted for murder or manslaughter, it's a newsworth event nationwide.

Not sure why you want to fight the battles over Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin over again... this whole position of yours is amusing: "Okay I admit this one (1) particular police shooting was bad, but black people still have no basis to complain about the way police treat them, and you liberals were wrong about those other cases. WRONG I tells ya."

This is just dumb. Every word of it is stupid. Yes I disagree based exclusively on evidence and I've already delineated the arguments twice.but here you go again... The evidence I'm talking about is obvious. The forensic investigation will show he was shot in the back from a distance, it will show that the offending officer was not assaulted and that the suspect was tased. The video shows he tried to plant the taser but like Brown's star witness, his story would have crumbled under any reasonable examination even without the video.

Are you saying medical examiners are living in fear of the police? Let me LOL at that because that's hilarious. Maybe the cops would have paid a visit to the witness late at night and "silenced" him - LOL again. You're as paranoid as you are stupid. As an ambulance chaser you should know there will certainly be a wrongful death suit that will involve an independent autopsy (unless maybe their lawyer is even dumber than you). And he was not shot by "them", he was shot by "him". I haven't seen anything that shows any cops claimed to witness the shooting or any struggle. Nice fabrication there. So you're stupid, paranoid and a liar.

And that's not my argument at all, you've completely missed the point. Also, I'm not looking fight the trayvon or mike brown battles. I'm merely using them as examples of some of the phony outrage we've seen recently. And I'm also not going to let you say ridiculous thing like this incident would have been "another Ferguson". You're wrong about ferguson, you've been proved wrong about ferguson so when you beat the Ferguson drum to make a point, I'm going to call you out for it.

 

[Michchamp]

for the record, this article also supports the theory that but for video, there would've been no indictment. this would've been swept under the rug.

 

[Michchamp]

you are wrong, as per usual.

 

[Spartanmack]

for the record, this article also supports the theory that but for video, there would've been no indictment. this would've been swept under the rug.

Oh, well if it's in an article published on The Intercept then it must be true - if not for the video, the killer cop gets away with it. You win the internets again! take your victory lap! Thanks for the laugh. Fucking moron.

 

[Michchamp]

Oh, well if it's in an article published on The Intercept then it must be true - if not for the video, the killer cop gets away with it. You win the internets again! take your victory lap! Thanks for the laugh. Fucking moron.

yes, the Intercept has less credibility than your own personal take on the subject...

There's also this article that weighs against you: thousands of fatal police shootings since 2005, only 54 officers prosecuted, most acquitted, in some cases even after shooting suspects in the back.

Maybe if you call me enough names, you'll win. Did you learn name calling in business school, or earlier?

 

[Spartanmack]

yes, the Intercept has less credibility than your own personal take on the subject...

There's also this article that weighs against you: thousands of fatal police shootings since 2005, only 54 officers prosecuted, most acquitted, in some cases even after shooting suspects in the back.

Maybe if you call me enough names, you'll win. Did you learn name calling in business school, or earlier?

Did you read the article? it cites the initial police report prepared by the offending officer and statement's from the officer's personal lawyer. it says nothing about the department having concluded an investigation and what the findings of that investigation were. The eyewitness had not yet come forward with the video or an accounting of the incident when the cop's lawyer made those statements and no independent investigation from the victims family had been completed. Thankfully, the video came out when it did, saving a lot of time and effort but if you think the conclusions drawn in this article about the cop probably getting away with it based on his report and statements from his lawyer are valid when the incident was just a couple of days old, you're just being foolish. As per usual.

And I learned name calling from you. I'm just responding in kind. I assumed it was a legal strategy taught at 2nd and 3rd tier law schools...

 

[Michchamp]

I wouldn't know... I went to a Tier 1 school.