Posted on Apr 7, 2015
Police officer charged with murder in South Carolina after shooting unarmed man in the back. What do you think of cases like this?
66.6K
727
326
24
23
1
As if the act of murder wasn't bad enough, the end of the video shows him handcuffing the victim... who may have been still alive, and walking away. Watching how care free he was about the whole thing, including walking away at the end, leads me to believe that this isn't the kind of thing a good cop just did on a bad day. I imagine that this police officer has victimized people to various degrees throughout his entire career. How his peers on the force have not done anything about it is a little worrisome. Law enforcement do so much good in this country, it's so unfortunate to see this be how they are perceived by so many.
More on the story: http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/07/us/south-carolina-officer-charged-murder/index.html
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXO3Ix_GIyI
More on the story: http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/07/us/south-carolina-officer-charged-murder/index.html
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXO3Ix_GIyI
Police
Murder
Law Enforcement
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 111
53
53
0
I entered law enforcement after the service and still am after more than 16 years. I dont know the whole story here, but to me this looks like a bad shoot. The law changed more than 25 years ago that you cant shoot a fleeing felon unless you can show they are a danger to the community, ie already committed murder.
This is not something that happens often. Yes there are bad cops here and there, yes we are human and make mistakes, but it is not the spirit or way of LE as a system. All this call for reform because a few people think things are bad is ridiculous. Most agencies train hard and often, including shoot dont shoot scenarios. Half those calling for reform are criminals. Its not some huge conspiracy to kill people. But this one does look bad and he is being prosecuted.
I have personally arrested 4 cops and a CID agent in my career. When we do the wrong thing we should be held accountable, but lets not act like the 100s of thousands of LEOs in the country, that are doing it right everyday are all corrupt because of a few bad apples here and there. Are all soldiers wrong because a few kill innocents during combat? Do a few stock brokers embezzling money make them all criminals in need of more oversight? Most complaints on LE are bogus, but some are sustained and dealt with. But don't paint us all with a broad stroke and say we are out of control because of a few bad actors, that is the same thing racists do.
This is not something that happens often. Yes there are bad cops here and there, yes we are human and make mistakes, but it is not the spirit or way of LE as a system. All this call for reform because a few people think things are bad is ridiculous. Most agencies train hard and often, including shoot dont shoot scenarios. Half those calling for reform are criminals. Its not some huge conspiracy to kill people. But this one does look bad and he is being prosecuted.
I have personally arrested 4 cops and a CID agent in my career. When we do the wrong thing we should be held accountable, but lets not act like the 100s of thousands of LEOs in the country, that are doing it right everyday are all corrupt because of a few bad apples here and there. Are all soldiers wrong because a few kill innocents during combat? Do a few stock brokers embezzling money make them all criminals in need of more oversight? Most complaints on LE are bogus, but some are sustained and dealt with. But don't paint us all with a broad stroke and say we are out of control because of a few bad actors, that is the same thing racists do.
(53)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
I can't imagine the difficulty of being a police officer the same way I can't imagine the optempo that combat arms Soldiers who are out front in the thick of the fight. With that being said, I suspect these types of jobs require a lot of training concentrating on making "good" decisions in a split second. The perception from the video is pretty bad, but I'd be interested to know the whole story.
(3)
(0)
SSG Lloyd Becker BSBA-HCM, MBA
I have viewed this video multiple times and it comes down to this point and this point is also happening here. Ferguson, rather before Ferguson, Albequerque PD has multiple uncalled for shootings by police and that last one, they shot a retarded person. The shooting, in Pasco, WA, three officers unloaded 8 rounds in a man holding a rock. Spokane County Deputy, prior military, threatened people with bodily harm, in an interview.
Police departments are getting Bearcats and all those things are for is threats and intimidation; not to protect the public. The 1033 federal program that allows police departments to get these things are doing nothing more than militarizing the police.
Why do they have them? They are super expensive to maintain. How much does it cost for a mine-resistant tire? I would not want the maintenance headache that comes with these things.
Generally, SSG Clayton has a point. The soldier is guilty of a few innocents killed in combat. While it is admirable that he has arrested 4 cops and a CID agent, cops in general, get a free pass. I tend to ask this question. When the balloon goes up, who in reality is my enemy? In Viet Nam, it was simple; everyone is your enemy. You never know when a child comes into your position wearing a satchel charge. Everyday, I am slowly losing my trust of the police. But, at least that Deputy was being truthful of what he said. I can keep going, but I think there will be a turning point, where the communities will start policing the police.
Police departments are getting Bearcats and all those things are for is threats and intimidation; not to protect the public. The 1033 federal program that allows police departments to get these things are doing nothing more than militarizing the police.
Why do they have them? They are super expensive to maintain. How much does it cost for a mine-resistant tire? I would not want the maintenance headache that comes with these things.
Generally, SSG Clayton has a point. The soldier is guilty of a few innocents killed in combat. While it is admirable that he has arrested 4 cops and a CID agent, cops in general, get a free pass. I tend to ask this question. When the balloon goes up, who in reality is my enemy? In Viet Nam, it was simple; everyone is your enemy. You never know when a child comes into your position wearing a satchel charge. Everyday, I am slowly losing my trust of the police. But, at least that Deputy was being truthful of what he said. I can keep going, but I think there will be a turning point, where the communities will start policing the police.
(2)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
There are far more good officers than bad officers but not everyone in uniform is a hero and, like most humans, good officers can often get tainted and compromised with department politics and city politics or supporting the questionable actions of a buddy. It is a tough job that not everyone can do. Like the military, hours of crap and boredom and more paperwork than the recruiter told you about, highlighted by moments of intense excitement and instant decisions.
The analogy of the stock broker is a bad choice and the entire financial industry is in need of more oversight. Furthermore, the stock broker cannot take away my liberty.
Law Enforcement Officers (LEO) should be held to a higher standard and rightfully so but it seldom seems to occur. Not only are the few bad apples guilty, but so is each and every LEO that remains silent about the actions of the bad apples and does not actively drive the bad apples out of the profession. I believe the legal term for far too many police officers is accessory after the fact. In most cases, LEOs give each other a free pass.
The video goes on to show the officer picking up his Taser and placing it next to his victim so the crime scene could justify the shooting. I believe the officer also radioed in within the first few moments after the shooting (say 6 sec) that his victim had taken possession of the officers Taser to create evidence that the shooting was justified which would be recorded by dispatch.
The "criminal" was wanted on a warrant for failure to pay child support. Witnesses said he ran away to avoid being Tasered by the officer, which is why the Taser was on the ground after the shooting. The dead beat dad is now just a dead dad and won't ever be able to support his child.
The analogy of the stock broker is a bad choice and the entire financial industry is in need of more oversight. Furthermore, the stock broker cannot take away my liberty.
Law Enforcement Officers (LEO) should be held to a higher standard and rightfully so but it seldom seems to occur. Not only are the few bad apples guilty, but so is each and every LEO that remains silent about the actions of the bad apples and does not actively drive the bad apples out of the profession. I believe the legal term for far too many police officers is accessory after the fact. In most cases, LEOs give each other a free pass.
The video goes on to show the officer picking up his Taser and placing it next to his victim so the crime scene could justify the shooting. I believe the officer also radioed in within the first few moments after the shooting (say 6 sec) that his victim had taken possession of the officers Taser to create evidence that the shooting was justified which would be recorded by dispatch.
The "criminal" was wanted on a warrant for failure to pay child support. Witnesses said he ran away to avoid being Tasered by the officer, which is why the Taser was on the ground after the shooting. The dead beat dad is now just a dead dad and won't ever be able to support his child.
(2)
(0)
CDR Michael Goldschmidt
What "the rule is" shouldn't even be an issue. What's right should be the ultimate measure.
(1)
(0)
34
33
1
This is clearly a murder (as evidenced from the video)!
The man (alleged criminal) had broken contact and was running AWAY from the Officer and did not look as if he posed a threat any longer....call for backup/tackle him or whatever, no need to shoot the man in the back.
In this case the Police Officer is charged for murder, good call.
The man (alleged criminal) had broken contact and was running AWAY from the Officer and did not look as if he posed a threat any longer....call for backup/tackle him or whatever, no need to shoot the man in the back.
In this case the Police Officer is charged for murder, good call.
(34)
(1)
SSG Buddy Kemper
The fact that within 24 hours he is fired and charged is rather damning too MSG Brad Sand I've been involved with a couple Use of Deadly force situations and have seen brother officers go thru those situations thru the years. I'm on the side of the cops 99.99999% of the time....but just a busted tail lite AND the guy trying to run away is too much. Makes me very sad this morning brother.
(3)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
SSG Buddy Kemper
I too am with Law Enforcement is these matters, and I think Law Enforcement is on the side of victim on this one BUT I am not ready to convict this officer with what I have seen...there is normally a lot more than the 46 seconds of video I saw? When I learned that even the video was three time longer, it made me wonder, why are we not seeing it all?
I too am with Law Enforcement is these matters, and I think Law Enforcement is on the side of victim on this one BUT I am not ready to convict this officer with what I have seen...there is normally a lot more than the 46 seconds of video I saw? When I learned that even the video was three time longer, it made me wonder, why are we not seeing it all?
(2)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
2LT (Join to see)
In this case, the officer had been suspended and I believe charged, or had charges pending, before the video had come to light...so the answer APPEARS justice was being sought before the video, and the video just helps law enforcement. I HOPE even without the video, justice was coming for this man.
Actually there are times to shoot someone who has turned...an armed terror suspect turning and heading toward a elementary school, I'm dropping him/her. When they ask me why I (only) shot him/her eight times, my answer would be "I ran out of bullets." The times you would shoot someone who has turned their back are very limited BUT there are times when it is necessary, and I think in those cases you would pull the trigger too.
In this case, the officer had been suspended and I believe charged, or had charges pending, before the video had come to light...so the answer APPEARS justice was being sought before the video, and the video just helps law enforcement. I HOPE even without the video, justice was coming for this man.
Actually there are times to shoot someone who has turned...an armed terror suspect turning and heading toward a elementary school, I'm dropping him/her. When they ask me why I (only) shot him/her eight times, my answer would be "I ran out of bullets." The times you would shoot someone who has turned their back are very limited BUT there are times when it is necessary, and I think in those cases you would pull the trigger too.
(2)
(0)
SSG Buddy Kemper
MSG Brad Sand I'm with you on that. Let the justice system play out. It looks like hell on the video, but I don't know everything and have been wrong a lot. Gonna be interesting to see how Al Sharpton responds....don't ya think? On a liter note....yesterday on my way back from bank i was pulled over in my POV by a new deputy...FROM MY OWN DEPARTMENT!!!! Hahhahahaah!!!! Had a brake lite out. When he walked up I showed him both hands and said, "I'm a deputy, I'm unarmed....and I'm on YOUR side!!!" He about fell over! ps. Gonna get brake lite fixed after work today. Blessings to you all. I hate this situation in South Carolina for all who are involved.
(1)
(0)
19
19
0
Oh Looky. Here's another officer whose life was in danger...
Look, I understand the need to convince people that not all cops are bad, but in this instance, this cop absolutely was. So Go Ahead and vote me down SMSgt Vote down, because I have an opinion that differs from you.
The video CLEARLY shows what happened. I mean, sure he tried to run after being pulled over. Looks like they were having a conversation when he chose to run again. I didn't see him reach for anything. I hear the officer may have dropped a gun next to his feet, I can't see clearly to reach that conclusion either. But what I can see is that this officer fired 8 shots to the back of a fleeing 50 year old.
That is Over-Kill! Absolutely.
He sure didn't look frightened for his life... He calmly aimed at and shot 8 times. Not that this young 33 year old buck couldn't take down this 50 year old. His own attorney dropped him after this video came out. He didn't get arrested and thrown in jail until after the video came out. What that tells me, is that he was lying or telling half truths until this video was seen.
What happened to like shooting the knee cap out or something to that effect? Why are these bad apples just shooting to kill?? He had no prior Aggravated Assault charges or anything. I will never understand these situations.
Look, I understand the need to convince people that not all cops are bad, but in this instance, this cop absolutely was. So Go Ahead and vote me down SMSgt Vote down, because I have an opinion that differs from you.
The video CLEARLY shows what happened. I mean, sure he tried to run after being pulled over. Looks like they were having a conversation when he chose to run again. I didn't see him reach for anything. I hear the officer may have dropped a gun next to his feet, I can't see clearly to reach that conclusion either. But what I can see is that this officer fired 8 shots to the back of a fleeing 50 year old.
That is Over-Kill! Absolutely.
He sure didn't look frightened for his life... He calmly aimed at and shot 8 times. Not that this young 33 year old buck couldn't take down this 50 year old. His own attorney dropped him after this video came out. He didn't get arrested and thrown in jail until after the video came out. What that tells me, is that he was lying or telling half truths until this video was seen.
What happened to like shooting the knee cap out or something to that effect? Why are these bad apples just shooting to kill?? He had no prior Aggravated Assault charges or anything. I will never understand these situations.
(19)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
MAJ, while I agree that it is often cheaper and easier to deal with the aftermath of a dead suspect than a wounded subject, I disagree with your civil authority financial liability theory even if you heard it directly from a bunch of cynical political attorneys. LEOs are not instructed to "shoot to kill" to save taxpayers' money.
With various levels of humor, some LEOs will "confess" that it is better to kill the suspect rather than allow him to survive so he can never testify against the officer or have a jury feel sympathy for the long term disabilities caused by the shooting. However, LEOs are not instructed to "shoot to kill" to eliminate witnesses either.
Modern LE training teaches that when an LEO employs lethal force the intent should be to stop the suspect's threatening behavior as quickly as possible. The torso (center of mass) presents the body's largest target and it contains large blood vessels and vital areas. The movement of the torso is slower and more predictable than that of extremities. Extremities are much smaller targets, contain much smaller blood vessels, and move unpredictably very rapidly. Bigger targets are easier to hit. Disrupting large blood vessels and/or vital areas makes it easier to incapacitate and stop the threat faster.
LEO firearms training does not teach to kill or wound. The training focuses on improving the LEOs ability to determine when lethal force is necessary (shoot/don't shoot) and ability to stop the threat, eliminate the threat, neutralize the threat or whatever threat terminology the LEA has in their policy. While employing lethal force may indeed result in death, the LEO is not taught to kill suspects to save money.
Is that what is taught to the Army's Military Police these days? "The budget is tight guys. Be sure to "shoot to kill" so we don't have to expend extra funds treating injured subjects". I suppose the Army will save extra money payroll because MP's may shoot Soldiers as frequently as other suspects. No sir, I doubt MPs are taught "shoot to kill" to protect the budget and LEOs are not taught shoot to kill to save taxpayers' money.
However, if you can produce any current LE academy curriculum, state LE standard, "civil authority" documentation, or white paper that supports your shoot to kill to avoid financial liability theory I will gladly vote up your post and unhappily shift my view of the US justice system to match the new information you provide me. Show me your comments are on target and I will adjust fire to match your reliable new found intel on the subject.
With various levels of humor, some LEOs will "confess" that it is better to kill the suspect rather than allow him to survive so he can never testify against the officer or have a jury feel sympathy for the long term disabilities caused by the shooting. However, LEOs are not instructed to "shoot to kill" to eliminate witnesses either.
Modern LE training teaches that when an LEO employs lethal force the intent should be to stop the suspect's threatening behavior as quickly as possible. The torso (center of mass) presents the body's largest target and it contains large blood vessels and vital areas. The movement of the torso is slower and more predictable than that of extremities. Extremities are much smaller targets, contain much smaller blood vessels, and move unpredictably very rapidly. Bigger targets are easier to hit. Disrupting large blood vessels and/or vital areas makes it easier to incapacitate and stop the threat faster.
LEO firearms training does not teach to kill or wound. The training focuses on improving the LEOs ability to determine when lethal force is necessary (shoot/don't shoot) and ability to stop the threat, eliminate the threat, neutralize the threat or whatever threat terminology the LEA has in their policy. While employing lethal force may indeed result in death, the LEO is not taught to kill suspects to save money.
Is that what is taught to the Army's Military Police these days? "The budget is tight guys. Be sure to "shoot to kill" so we don't have to expend extra funds treating injured subjects". I suppose the Army will save extra money payroll because MP's may shoot Soldiers as frequently as other suspects. No sir, I doubt MPs are taught "shoot to kill" to protect the budget and LEOs are not taught shoot to kill to save taxpayers' money.
However, if you can produce any current LE academy curriculum, state LE standard, "civil authority" documentation, or white paper that supports your shoot to kill to avoid financial liability theory I will gladly vote up your post and unhappily shift my view of the US justice system to match the new information you provide me. Show me your comments are on target and I will adjust fire to match your reliable new found intel on the subject.
(1)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
Veronica fulgham-Blais.... So this weekend I had a guy walk out right in front of my patrol car, say, "fuck you" and extend his middle finger in my direction for the entire time he crossed the road... I exited the car and asked if that was for me. He responded, "I didn't like what you cops did in South Carolina" crazy... He was arrested as he did thing right by a crowded beach.... Disorderly conduct and used a fake name... These are the idiots that are popping up all around
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Oh Mylanta CPO (Join to see) like you have anything to do with SC. Stoopid. Ahhhh!!! That was like jury duty yesterday. "It's a conspiracy!!!" Give me a f*ing break. That stuff kills me. Really does
(1)
(0)
CDR Michael Goldschmidt
CPO (Join to see) - So now free speech is a crime? You arrested this guy for giving you the finger? You're serious?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google