As far as I am aware, use of lethal force is only justified in certain circumstances. You don't blow someone away in order to effect an arrest - do you?
It's a bit like theft isn't ok. If someone stole something, the police would come around and arrest that person. They wouldn't turn up and summarily execute them.
I agree. He should've been shot in the legs instead, not the back.
This is the first of the Race Panic incidents in the US that is truly credible. It is notable that it is also the only one that resulted in charges before rather than after the broadsheet press piled in.
Footage on the BBC is edited. The full footage is even worse - showing the officer planting evidence and also revealing the initial report to be a pack of lies.
Pretty bad stuff.
I'd like to see the full footage.
We've had a recent spate of these shootings and when the full facts emerge th police have been vindicated.
This is the first of the Race Panic incidents in the US that is truly credible. It is notable that it is also the only one that resulted in charges before rather than after the broadsheet press piled in.
The worst thing is that it is only credible because (read: the white guy is only being prosecuted because) it was filmed.
Had this not been filmed, the police department's original report would have stood. Scott's name would be tarnished and he would be to blame.
You'd have the local community up in arms and the TSR "White genocide" gang going loopy.
This is the first of the Race Panic incidents in the US that is truly credible. It is notable that it is also the only one that resulted in charges before rather than after the broadsheet press piled in.
The worst thing is that it is only credible because (read: the white guy is only being prosecuted because) it was filmed.
Had this not been filmed, the police department's original report would have stood. Scott's name would be tarnished and he would be to blame.
You'd have the local community up in arms and the TSR "White genocide" gang going loopy.
Without the evidence it wouldn't be credible and people arguing for prosecution probably would be motivated by racial animus rather than logic. I'm not sure if that is what you are saying though.
Without the evidence it wouldn't be credible and people arguing for prosecution probably would be motivated by racial animus rather than logic. I'm not sure if that is what you are saying though.
I'm not sure.
Even without video you'd have had the witness - i.e. the person who made the video in the first place. I guess it would be their word against the officer.
I still doubt it would result in the officer being prosecuted though.
I mean look at some of the posts on this thread - some people here just can't believe that the black guy could be without blame and the officer in the wrong.
For someone who complain about antisemitism in Europe you don;t half jump to the "it's always the black thugs fault" side in these shootings
Even when there is actual video evidence.
Not at all.
Merely highlighting the 'poor innocent black teenager gunned down by the police' stories recently result in 'black gang member with criminal past attempted to injure or kill police officer.'
We've had a recent spate of these shootings and when the full facts emerge th police have been vindicated.
I'm not sure what facts could possibly emerge that would exonerate a police officer who clearly fired eight times at an unarmed suspect that was running directly away from him. He was in a residential district and the bullets that missed could easily have injured or killed people in the houses around. He then reportedly just handcuffed the body, without immediately checking the victim's health, and proceeded to plant the taser on the body.