Author Topic: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges  (Read 19584 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KiwiCanadian

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #120 on: December 06, 2014, 06:17:51 PM »
Well my daughter just sent me a the original photo of the one that I posted above,
You just cant trust your friends on the internet these days.
Certainly got to read between the lines and take it with a grain of salt.

 

Offline Johnnie F.

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #121 on: December 06, 2014, 07:42:49 PM »
Hi Johnnie and you've obviously feel strongly.

Actually, when I was traveling the USA several times from coast to coast in the 70s and early 80s, I met only friendly and helpful cops, especially in the South. Well, in Gainesville, Fla, one old cop told me to see the judge at traffic court, when a local farmer's pickup had entered the highway right in front of me without looking for traffic and had me run into his side, denting his door. At court then I met a friendly young black judge, who patiently listened to my side of the story and then told me he wanted to dismiss the case. But I wasn't beaten or shot at.

Now the USA seem very different to me. I think the aftermath of 9/11 and the Iraq war changed my view. Before, almost all of the American guys at my age were condemning the Vietnam war and Watergate etc. But that seems to have been forgotten over the years. I don't think it's only me who got old and cranky!

The poor performance of the economy changed America!
Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline KiwiCanadian

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #122 on: December 06, 2014, 07:53:55 PM »
Got to agree with you J F.

I was in LA in the late summer of 1974, we went to see a house built of Bottles on the edge of the Watts district in LA on a Sunday Morning.
We got lost on the way back and every one was looking at us, its an uncomfortable feeling, 2 white guys in s Jacked up 4x4, while all the local population were in their Sunday best ready for church. We stopped and asked for directions, and they where very helpfull. The guy said we don't see that kind of vehicle here that's why you are being looked at. When he found we were from Canada, he was really helpfull.

How life has changed
 

Offline Johnnie F.

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #123 on: December 20, 2014, 10:45:43 AM »
Whether one believes or not, the American justice system has reached a verdict. A group of regular people listened to and saw the evidence presented and reached a conclusion to the best of their ability.

I respect their conclusion.


Should their conclusion still be respected?

St. Louis Grand Jury Heard Witnesses Who Lied, Prosecutor Says

Some witnesses were clearly lying when they spoke to a grand jury about the August police killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., according to St. Louis County prosecuting attorney Robert McCulloch. In an interview about the case Friday, the prosecutor says he won't seek perjury charges.

Nearly a month after he announced the grand jury's decision not to indict Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, McCulloch told St. Louis radio station KTRS 550 AM that he hasn't spoken publicly about the Michael Brown case because "I didn't want to fire things up."

In the interview, KTRS host McGraw Milhaven also asked McCulloch to explain why he made the announcement on the night of Nov. 24, the Monday before Thanksgiving.

"There was no good time to announce this," McCulloch answered.

As you'll recall, McCulloch also arranged for hundreds of pages of grand jury documents to be released about the case, bringing an unusual chance for close analysis of the evidence the panel considered.

Here are some excerpts from the interview:

Lying Under Oath And Perjury

"It's a legitimate issue. But in the situation — again, because of the manner in which we did it — we're not going to file perjury charges against anyone. There were people who came in and yes, absolutely lied under oath. Some lied to the FBI — even though they're not under oath, that's another potential offense, a federal offense.

"But I thought it was much more important to present the entire picture and say listen, this is what this witness says he saw — even though there was a building between where the witness says he was and where the events occurred, so they couldn't have seen that. Or the physical evidence didn't support what the witness was saying. And it went both directions. ...

"I thought it was much more important that the grand jury hear everything, what people have to say — and they're in a perfect position to assess the credibility, which is what juries do."

On Releasing The Findings After Dark

"There was no good time to announce this. Whatever was going to happen was going to happen. We knew that very early on. But I did work very closely with law enforcement. ... I decided early on that I would release it as soon as practicable after the grand jury made a decision. ...

"What occurred afterward was unfortunate; there are a variety of reasons that that may have occurred. Some people were bent on destruction, regardless of when this was going to be released. I thought it was more important to get the information out as quickly as possible. I think waiting longer would have aggravated things."

NPR

St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch Breaks Silence


If that can be proven, they'll have to declare the decision of that grand jury for invalid and let another one sit through the whole trial again. I think that the DA McCullough came out with that at all and now - so long after dark -, because his own career has been threatened on the basis of him allowing witnesses to lie to the grand jury.   :-[
Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline thaiga

Re: US cops kill 2nd Ferguson black teen
« Reply #124 on: December 24, 2014, 06:26:45 PM »
WASHINGTON - Police said Wednesday they shot dead an African American teenager in a town near Ferguson, Missouri, where the police shooting of an unarmed black teen led to weeks of protests across the United States.

Media reports cited a St. Louis County police statement saying that the shooting took place at a gas station at 11:15 pm Tuesday in the town of Berkeley.

Police said an officer opened fire on the teen who was carrying a handgun, hitting him several times and killing him. 

Bangkokpost

US police shoot dead black teenager near Ferguson
Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist should have his head examined.
 

Offline Johnnie F.

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #125 on: January 06, 2015, 08:28:05 PM »
Ferguson grand juror sues, seeking right to speak about his reactions to the evidence

Missouri law generally forbids grand jurors from discussing the evidence that they heard, their own votes, or what the state argued, and this is a part of a longstanding tradition of grand jury secrecy. But one of the Ferguson/Darren Wilson/Michael Brown grand jurors is suing, seeking a court decision that he may indeed speak about the evidence and his reactions to it. Here are some excerpts from the just-filed Complaint in here (Grand Juror Doe v. McCulloch (E.D. Mo. Jan. 5, 2015)):

    19. From Plaintiff’s perspective, the presentation of evidence to the grand jury investigating Wilson differed markedly and in significant ways from how evidence was presented in the hundreds of matters presented to the grand jury earlier in its term.

    20. From Plaintiff’s perspective, the State’s counsel to the grand jury investigating Wilson differed markedly and in significant ways from the State’s counsel to the grand jury in the hundreds of matters presented to the grand jury earlier in its term.

    21. From Plaintiff’s perspective, the investigation of Wilson had a stronger focus on the victim than in other cases presented to the grand jury.

    22. From Plaintiff’s perspective, the presentation of the law to which the grand jurors were to apply the facts was made in a muddled and untimely manner compared to the presentation of the law in other cases presented to the grand jury….

    32. From Plaintiff’s perspective, Defendant’s [i.e., the prosecutor's] statement characterizes the views of the grand jurors collectively toward the evidence, witnesses, and the law, in a manner that does not comport with Plaintiff’s own opinions.

    33. From Plaintiff’s perspective, although the release of a large number of records provides an appearance of transparency, with heavy redactions and the absence of context, those records do not fully portray the proceedings before the grand jury.

    34. Plaintiff would like to speak about the experience of being a grand juror, including expressing Plaintiff’s opinions about the evidence and the investigation, and believes Plaintiff’s experience could contribute to the current public dialogue concerning race relations. In Plaintiff’s view, the current information available about the grand jurors’ views is not entirely accurate — especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges. Moreover, the public characterization of the grand jurors’ view of witnesses and evidence does not accord with Plaintiff’s own. Plaintiff also wishes to express opinions about: whether the release of records has truly provided transparency; Plaintiff’s impression that evidence was presented differently than in other cases, with the insinuation that Brown, not Wilson, was the wrongdoer; and questions about whether the grand jury was clearly counseled on the law.

The grand juror has a strong, though not ironclad, First Amendment case. Butterworth v. Smith (1990) held unconstitutional a permanent ban on a witness’s disclosing his grand jury testimony, and the Court’s rationale may also apply to grand jurors and not just witnesses, where — as here — much of the testimony had already been disclosed by the prosecutor. From Butterworth:

    Here Florida seeks to punish the publication of information relating to alleged governmental misconduct — speech which has traditionally been recognized as lying at the core of the First Amendment. To justify such punishment, Florida relies on the interests in preserving grand jury secrecy acknowledged by the Court in Douglas Oil Co. of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 U.S. 211 (1979). But we do not believe those interests warrant a permanent ban on the disclosure by a witness of his own testimony once a grand jury has been discharged. Some of these interests are not served at all by the Florida ban on disclosure, and those that are served are not sufficient to sustain the statute.

    When an investigation ends, there is no longer a need to keep information from the targeted individual in order to prevent his escape — that individual presumably will have been exonerated, on the one hand, or arrested or otherwise informed of the charges against him, on the other. There is also no longer a need to prevent the importuning of grand jurors since their deliberations will be over. Similarly, the concern that some witnesses will be deterred from presenting testimony due to fears of retribution is, we think, not advanced by this prohibition; any witness is free not to divulge his own testimony, and that part of the Florida statute which prohibits the witness from disclosing the testimony of another witness remains enforceable under the ruling of the Court of Appeals.

    Florida’s interest in preventing the subornation of grand jury witnesses who will later testify at trial is served by the prohibition in question to this extent: if the accused is of a mind to suborn potential witnesses against him, he will have an additional opportunity to learn of the existence of such a witness if that witness chooses to make his grand jury testimony public. But with present day criminal procedure generally requiring the disclosure of witnesses on the part of the State, the names of these witnesses will be available to the accused sometime before trial in any event. Florida provides substantial criminal penalties for both perjury and tampering with witnesses, and its courts have subpoena and contempt powers available to bring recalcitrant witnesses to the stand. We think the additional effect of the ban here in question is marginal at best and insufficient to outweigh the First Amendment interest in speech involved.

    Florida undoubtedly retains a substantial interest in seeing that “persons who are accused but exonerated by the grand jury will not be held up to public ridicule.” And the ban in question does serve that interest to some extent, although it would have the opposite effect if applied to a witness who was himself a target of the grand jury probe and desired to publicize this testimony by way of exonerating himself. But even in those situations where the disclosure by the witness of his own testimony could have the effect of revealing the names of persons who had been targeted by the grand jury but exonerated, our decisions establish that absent exceptional circumstances, reputational interests alone cannot justify the proscription of truthful speech.

Likewise, once the grand jury proceeding in the Darren Wilson case is over, and the evidence has been largely released, I think the usual government interests in grand jury secrecy are likely not sufficient to justify a flat ban on grand juror speech. The matter might be different if the ban was limited to disclosure of what other grand jurors said. But the plaintiff’s lawyer told me — in response to an e-mail from me — that the plaintiff seeks only to disclose his or her own thoughts and reactions to the evidence, not the other grand jurors’ reactions.

The prosecution has some counterarguments available:

First, Butterworth stressed that the Florida law banning statements by grand jury witnesses was relatively unusual among states; to the extent the Missouri law is more common, that might affect the analysis.

Second, and relatedly, recent Supreme Court decisions (such as the animal cruelty video case and the Stolen Valor Act case) have taken the view that traditionally accepted speech restrictions may well be constitutional even where more novel restrictions are not — to the extent that Missouri law tracks a tradition of grand jury secrecy, that might cut in its favor (though note that the Court has indeed often sharply narrowed even traditionally accepted restrictions, such as traditional restrictions on libel law and obscenity law).

Third, one factor in Butterworth is that the law limited a grand jury witness’s ability to convey “information he acquired on his own” (i.e., things he knew before he went into the grand jury room and that he then testified about). Here, the law limits grand jurors’ ability to convey information they acquired as a result of the grand jury process; Justice Scalia’s solo concurrence in Butterworth suggests that he, at least, might view this as important.

Washington Post
Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline Roger

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #126 on: January 14, 2015, 06:52:16 PM »
Relevant to this thread - surprisingly, there is a major developed Country with a worse record of violence generally and police violence, than the USA. Hard to believe but Brazil has terrible problems.
Jotted this down quickly for interest (rightly I hope!) - 50,000 murders every year including 100 Police Officers in Rio alone and 6 yes SIX people are killed by the Police .......... EVERY DAY !!!
Major problems in the massive slum areas in major cities called 'Favellas').
OMG
 

Offline Al

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #127 on: February 25, 2015, 02:29:24 PM »
This issue is now completely and totally finished.

The Justice Department said Tuesday its independent investigation found "insufficient evidence" to charge George Zimmerman with federal civil rights violations in the shooting death of Florida teen Trayvon Martin.

Attorney General Eric Holder said the evidence did not meet the "high standard for a federal hate crime prosecution," but the decision should not end efforts to explore racial tensions in the justice system. The decision closes the federal investigation.

"This young man's premature death necessitates that we continue the dialogue and be unafraid of confronting the issues and tensions his passing brought to the surface," Holder said in a statement. "We, as a nation, must take concrete steps to ensure that such incidents do not occur in the future."

Zimmerman shot Trayvon, 17, on Feb. 26, 2012, as the teen walked back to a relative's home after purchasing snacks at a convenience store in Sanford, Fla.

Federal authorities opened an investigation into the teen's death shortly after the 2012 fatal shooting. They halted the inquiry to allow the local prosecution to proceed and resumed their investigation in July 2013. On July 13, 2013, a Florida jury found Zimmerman not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter, sparking protests in several cities.

The federal investigation resumed after Zimmerman's acquittal in state court. Federal investigators reviewed the evidence generated by Florida's investigation and prosecution and independently conducted 75 witness interviews and reviewed other encounters Zimmerman had with law enforcement in Florida, the Justice Department said. Federal authorities also retained an independent biomechanical expert who assessed Zimmerman's descriptions of his struggle with Trayvon and the shooting.

The investigation reviewed events from the moment of their first encounter through the fatal shooting to determine whether Zimmerman approached Trayvon in a "threatening manner" or used force against him because of his race, the Justice Department said.

"Our decision not to pursue federal charges does not condone the shooting that resulted in the death of Trayvon Martin and is based solely on the high legal standard applicable to these cases," said acting Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta of the Civil Rights Division.

Prosecutors from the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, officials from the FBI and the Justice Department's Community Relations Service met Tuesday with Travyon's family and their representatives to inform them of the findings of the investigation and the decision, the Justice Department said in a written statement.

Trayvon Martin's family, in a statement released Tuesday afternoon, said it was "disappointed'' by the decision.

"We remain poised to do everything in our power to help eradicate senseless violence in our communities, because we don't want any other parent to experience the un-explainable loss we have endured,'' the statement said referring to work with a foundation named for Trayvon.

"We will never, ever forget what happened to our son, Trayvon, and will honor his memory by working tirelessly to make the world a better place."

Daryl Parks, an attorney for Trayvon Martin's family, said an injustice still exists though neither system could hold Zimmerman accountable.

In the weeks after Trayvon's death, much of the nation was consumed with a racially charged narrative about a unarmed black teen killed while walking home with a bag of Skittles and iced tea. In addition to race, the case focused new attention on the definition of self defense.

George Zimmerman's brother, Robert Zimmerman told USA TODAY his sibling did not act based on any racial notions the night of the shooting but shot in self-defense.

Don West, Zimmerman's attorney, said he relayed the news to his client shortly after being informed by the Justice Department.

"Certainly, there is great relief that the case is closed,'' West said. "This was a tragedy for the Martin family and tragedy for George. For a long time, he (Zimmerman) had a target on his back.
 

Offline Johnnie F.

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #128 on: February 26, 2015, 11:00:52 AM »
This issue is now completely and totally finished.

The Justice Department said Tuesday its independent investigation found "insufficient evidence" to charge George Zimmerman with federal civil rights violations in the shooting death of Florida teen Trayvon Martin.

Attorney General Eric Holder said the evidence did not meet the "high standard for a federal hate crime prosecution," but the decision should not end efforts to explore racial tensions in the justice system. The decision closes the federal investigation.


Looks like the "high standards" were set by time: "The conclusion of the investigation came as Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. neared the end of his tenure. The shooting was one of several racially fraught cases that Mr. Holder said the department would finish investigating before he stepped down." (NYT)
Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline thaiga

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #129 on: March 04, 2015, 04:59:26 PM »
Officials: US Report Finds Racial Bias in Ferguson Police

 A Justice Department investigation found sweeping patterns of racial bias within the Ferguson, Missouri, police department, with officers routinely discriminating against blacks by using excessive force, issuing petty citations and making baseless traffic stops, according to law enforcement officials familiar with its findings.

The report, which Ferguson city officials said would be released Wednesday, marks the culmination of a months-long investigation into a police department that federal officials have described as troubled and that commanded national attention after one of its officers shot and killed an unarmed black man, 18-year-old Michael Brown, last summer.

FULL STORY: abcnews.go
Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist should have his head examined.
 

Offline Johnnie F.

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #130 on: March 06, 2015, 07:24:16 AM »
The Los Angeles Times reports, that Michael Brown's family plans to sue the city of Ferguson and ex-cop Darren Wilson for a compensation for unlawful killing.

I think they got very high chances to win that, now after that report.
Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline Al

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #131 on: March 07, 2015, 05:32:11 AM »
To be honest, this is a part of the American judicial system that I have never completely understood. One can be tried in a criminal court and found not guilty (innocent). Then the aggrieved party can turn around and sue in a civil court.

Although there was no criminal trial, in that both the grand jury and the federal government determined that there was not sufficient grounds to pursue, I would think it would be a tough case.

But then again, to prevail in a civil suit requires a lower bar of evidence than a criminal case. And there will be a jury. I suppose the challenge for the attorneys for the former policeman will be to try to separate his actions from that report.

It will be an interesting case to follow.
 

Offline Johnnie F.

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #132 on: March 07, 2015, 09:14:58 AM »
"Not guilty" and "innocent" are two very different findings: "Innocent" means "proven innocent", while "not guilty" just means "presumed Innocent", could still be guilty, evidence hasn't been enough to use the power of state against an individual. That barrier is set very high to limit abuse. The civil suit for compensation is between two persons or parties. The courts are not bound by that barrier limiting the power of state. They have to decide between the interests of two individuals or parties. And it is about "money only", no exercising power like taking a life or putting one in a cage.
Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline Johnnie F.

Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline Al

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #134 on: March 08, 2015, 09:52:42 AM »
More . . .

When a person is killed, it’s not uncommon for the victim’s family to seek financial relief in civil court by filing a wrongful death lawsuit against those they believe responsible for the victim’s death.

The family of Michael Brown announced that it will file a wrongful death lawsuit against Officer Darren Wilson, as well as the city of Ferguson. The news comes one day after Wilson learned that he will not face civil rights charges in the shooting death of Brown this past summer.

Brown’s family attorney Anthony Gray stated:

“We are officially formulating a civil case that we anticipate will be filed very shortly on behalf of the family. We plan to demonstrate in a court of law that Wilson’s choice to use deadly force was unreasonable and unnecessary.”
The family of Ronald Goldman took similar action against O.J. Simpson in 1995,  despite the former NFL running back’s acquittal of charges in a criminal court for killing Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson.

Goldman’s family was subsequently awarded more than $33.5 million, though he has yet to receive the vast majority of that sum:

As Wilson and the city prepare their defense against the lawsuit, they will undoubtedly ask for Brown’s juvenile criminal records to be unsealed.

While criminal acts committed as a juvenile remain sealed under Missouri law, they can be released after the person’s death since privacy protections afforded by the statute no longer apply. The information gathered from those records may be relevant to Wilson’s defense.

However, no one in the public knows for certain what is in such records and if they would be relevant to the civil suit.

A grand jury report discovered that Brown moved toward Wilson before he was fatally shot, and not killed while standing still with his hands up.

The Brown family’s civil suit will likely take years to adjudicate.

 

Offline Johnnie F.

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #135 on: March 11, 2015, 07:05:44 AM »
No end in sight: According to the New York Times another unarmed black man was shot by white cops in Georgia yesterday.
Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline thaiga

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #136 on: March 12, 2015, 02:05:18 PM »
The guy was naked, so they knew he was unarmed

                                  Naked, Unarmed Black Man Fatally Shot by White Police Officer in Georgia

Naked, Unarmed Black Man Fatally Shot by White Police Officer in Georgia
Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist should have his head examined.
 

Offline thaiga

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #137 on: March 13, 2015, 01:29:52 PM »
Ferguson police shot during protest

Two US police officers have been shot in Ferguson, a Missouri town hit by riots over the killing of an unarmed black teenager last year.

One officer was shot in the face and one in the shoulder, St Louis County police chief Jon Belmar said.

bbc.com

Ferguson: Two police officers shot during protest
Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist should have his head examined.
 

Offline Johnnie F.

Re: Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty on all charges
« Reply #138 on: April 08, 2015, 09:16:11 AM »
Video Shows Officer Michael Slager Shooting Unarmed Black Man In The Back In South Carolina

A white South Carolina police officer was arrested and charged with murder Tuesday after video showed him fatally shooting a fleeing, unarmed black man in the back.

North Charleston Police Officer Michael T. Slager, 33, can be seen shooting 50-year-old Walter Scott after a confrontation on Saturday, according to The Post and Courier. Slager chases Scott and shoots at him eight times in the video recorded by a passerby and obtained by The New York Times.

Scott died there, though it wasn't clear if he died immediately.

The graphic video raises questions about Slager's original assertion that he used his gun because he felt endangered.

The confrontation started when Slager had reportedly pulled over Scott because of a broken taillight. It escalated into a foot chase as Scott allegedly fled because there were family court-issued warrants for his arrest. Slager pursued Scott into a grassy lot and claimed that he fired his Taser to subdue him.

Moments later, Slager reported on his radio, “Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser,” according to the Times.

Earlier this week, an attorney for Slager said the cop felt threatened after Scott tried to overpower him and take his Taser. Today that attorney told The Post and Courier that he's "no longer involved" in the case.

But first images in the video are of Slager shooting at Scott as he runs away from him. It also appears that Slager drops the Taser near Scott after he was gunned down, according to The New York Times.

Police reports also say that responding officers performed CPR and delivered medical aid to Scott, but the video shows Scott face down in handcuffs for several minutes after the shooting. Another officer shows up and appears to give Scott aid, but never performs CPR.

Scott had been arrested about 10 times in the past, mostly for failing to pay child support or show up for hearings, according to the paper.

"He has four children, he doesn’t have some type of big violent past or arrest record. He had a job, he was engaged," a lawyer for Scott's family told the Times. "He had back child support and didn’t want to go to jail for back child support."

The shooting in North Charleston comes on the heels of several high-profile cases of police officers using deadly force against unarmed black men in Ferguson, Missouri, Cleveland and New York. This is one of the few times the offending officer has been charged with murder.

"What if there was no video? What if there was no witness? Where would we be without that video," Justin Bamburg said at a presser with the family on Tuesday night. Bamburg represents South Carolina's House District 90.

Family attorney L. Chris Stewart called the witness who recorded the video a "hero," saying that video evidence disproved initial reports that Scott reached for the Slager's Taser. Stewart added that the witness is working with investigators and may eventually come forward.

Stewart also said that they will file a civil lawsuit. The family urged the public to fight for justice legally instead of through violence.

"We can't get my brother back," Scott's brother Anthony said. "I don't think all police officers are bad cops, but there are some bad ones out there."

"I had two brothers, now I have one," he said tearing up. He recalled his brother as an outgoing man who served in the Coast Guard and was a fan of the Dallas Cowboys.

Huffington Post

Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline Baby Farts

  • posting on moderation row
  • Korat forum specialist
  • *
  • Posts: 3351
  • Thanked: 179 times
  • Karma: 0
  • Seeek!
White SC officer chraged with murder for shooting black man.
« Reply #139 on: April 08, 2015, 04:43:12 PM »
A South Carolina police officer was arrested and charged with murder Tuesday in the weekend shooting death of a motorist after a traffic stop over a faulty brake light.

City Patrolman Michael Thomas Slager, who is white, was taken into custody after law enforcement officials saw a video of him shooting 50-year-old Walter Scott, who is black, in the back as he ran away. Slager, 33, a five-year veteran of the North Charleston force, was denied bond at a brief first appearance hearing Tuesday. If convicted, he faces 30 years to life in prison.

North Charleston Mayor Keith Summey announced the charges at a hastily called news conference in which he said City Patrolman Michael Thomas Slager made "a bad decision."

"When you're wrong, you're wrong," Summey said. "When you make a bad decision, don't care if you're behind the shield or a citizen on the street, you have to live with that decision."

The video, which was obtained by The Post and Courier of Charleston from a source who asked to remain anonymous, shows the confrontation between the two on Saturday after Scott ran away from a traffic stop. Authorities say Scott, of Charleston, was shot after the officer already hit him with a stun gun.

A video of the shooting released to news media outlets shows the officer firing eight shots at Scott's back as Scott is running away. Scott falls on the eighth shot, fired after a brief pause. The video then shows the officer slowly walking toward him, and ordering him to put his hands behind his back.

When Scott doesn't move, Slager pulls his arms back and cuffs his hands. Then he walks briskly back to where he fired the shots, picks up an object, and returns the 30 feet or so back to Scott before dropping the object by Scott's feet.

Attorney David Aylor said after the video surfaced Tuesday that he was no longer representing Slager. Aylor had released a statement Monday saying the officer felt threatened and that the motorist was trying to grab the officer's stun gun.

"This is a terrible tragedy that has impacted our community," Aylor told the Post and Courier.

Attorney L. Chris Stewart, who came to North Charleston a day after the shooting to represent the family, said the video forced authorities to act quickly and decisively, and he called the person who made the video a hero.

"What happened today doesn't happen all the time," Stewart told a news conference. What if there was no video?" Scott's mother stood nearby, saying, "Thank you, Lord" and "Hallelujah." Stewart said the family plans to file a lawsuit against the police department. Justice Department spokeswoman Dena Iverson said the Federal Bureau of Investigation will also investigate the shooting.

Scott's brother Anthony said Tuesday night that because of the video, "we have received the truth" and "through the process, justice has been served."

According to The Post and Courier, Scott was wanted for arrest on a Family Court warrant and had a history of arrests related to contempt of court charges for failing to pay child support. Stewart said Scott had four children, was engaged and had been honorably discharged from the U.S. Coast Guard. There were no violent offenses on his record, the attorney said.

At the earlier news conference with the mayor, North Charleston Police Chief Eddie Driggers appeared close to tears.

"I have been around this police department a long time and all the officers on this force, the men and women, are like my children," he told reporters. "So you tell me how a father would react seeing his child do something? I'll let you answer that yourself."

The shooting occurred as heightened scrutiny is being placed on police officer shootings, particularly those that involve white officers and unarmed black suspects. A grand jury declined to indict Ferguson, Missouri, officer Darren Wilson in the fatal shooting of Michael Brown last August, leading to nationwide protests.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/04/08/white-sc-officer-charged-with-murder-for-shooting-black-man/

South Carolina Cop Shoots Unarmed Black Man, Walter Scott, In The Back *Unedited Footage*
 

Offline Johnnie F.

Disabled man in a wheelchair shot by cops (GRAPHIC VIDEO!)
« Reply #140 on: September 28, 2015, 09:00:19 AM »
A graphic cell phone video purportedly shows police in Wilmington, Delaware, fatally shooting a 28-year-old disabled man in a wheelchair, whom police say was in possession of a handgun -- a claim the man's family disputes. Whether or not he had a weapon is unclear from the video.

The Wilmington Police Department said that at 3 p.m. Wednesday their officers were dispatched to a parking lot to respond to a 911 call because a man was reportedly suffering from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, and was still armed. The man was later identified by police as Jeremy McDole.

Full article: Huffington Post



Raw: Delaware Cops Shoot and Kill Man in Wheelchair!


A cops-assisted suicide? Or a swatting victim?
Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline Johnnie F.

George Zimmerman to auction gun he used to kill Trayvon Martin
« Reply #141 on: May 12, 2016, 05:18:11 PM »
Former neighbourhood watch volunteer who was acquitted of murdering unarmed teenager touts firearm as a ‘piece of American history’

George Zimmerman has listed the gun with which he killed Trayvon Martin in 2012 for auction, touting it as “your opportunity to own a piece of American history”.

The former neighbourhood watch volunteer was acquitted two years ago in the death of the young unarmed African American, but the case sparked protests and a national debate about race relations.
#BlackLivesMatter: the birth of a new civil rights movement
Read more

Zimmerman listed “the firearm that was used to defend my life and end the brutal attack from Trayvon Martin” on GunBroker.com on Thursday, with bidding scheduled to begin at 11am EDT on Thursday.

He wrote in the item description that it had recently been returned to him by the Department of Justice and was fully functional.

“Many have expressed interest in owning and displaying the firearm including the Smithsonian museum in Washington D.C. This is a piece of American history. It has been featured in several publications and in current university text books. Offers to purchase the firearm have been received; however, the offers were to use the gun in a fashion I did not feel comfortable with.”

The listing was illustrated by photos of the weapon taken during Zimmerman’s trial.

The gun, a Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm, was billed as a “collectible firearm” and had a starting price of US$5,000.

According to an interview with a local Fox affiliate, excerpts of which were shared on Twitter, Zimmerman said it was “time to move past the firearm, and if I sell it and it sells, I move past it”.

The Guardian

I don't want to know what some might  dream of doing with that gun!
Fun is the one thing that money can't buy
 

Offline Baby Farts

  • posting on moderation row
  • Korat forum specialist
  • *
  • Posts: 3351
  • Thanked: 179 times
  • Karma: 0
  • Seeek!
Re: Disabled man in a wheelchair shot by cops (GRAPHIC VIDEO!)
« Reply #142 on: May 13, 2016, 09:33:37 AM »
A graphic cell phone video purportedly shows police in Wilmington, Delaware, fatally shooting a 28-year-old disabled man in a wheelchair, whom police say was in possession of a handgun -- a claim the man's family disputes. Whether or not he had a weapon is unclear from the video.

The Wilmington Police Department said that at 3 p.m. Wednesday their officers were dispatched to a parking lot to respond to a 911 call because a man was reportedly suffering from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, and was still armed. The man was later identified by police as Jeremy McDole.

Full article: Huffington Post

It looks like this guy wanted to die.  He'd already shot himself.  Then he refuses to drop the .38 revolver and raise his hands.  Then he reaches for something which prompts the police to shoot. People should know by now that when the police order you to drop your gun and raise your hands, you do it.  I don't think any of these police officers were at fault.



Raw: Delaware Cops Shoot and Kill Man in Wheelchair!

A cops-assisted suicide? Or a swatting victim?
 

 



Thailand
Statistics