- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Slager case declared mistrial
Posted on 12/5/16 at 3:39 pm to MrCarton
Posted on 12/5/16 at 3:39 pm to MrCarton
quote:
If one of my soldiers did what Slager did to an Afghan, I know what I would do. defending life limb and eyesight is the sacred right of everyone. What Slager did was murder and it shows he has no respect for life at all.
You have to wonder about the motivations of anyone who says anything else.
0
Posted on 12/5/16 at 3:51 pm to MLSter
quote:
But no, lets call the cop a racist killer and turn this dead beat dad into an idol. Lets burn some businesses and riot while we are at it.
Well, you are out.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 3:56 pm to MLSter
Didn't I read last week that the hold outs were ones that wanted manslaughter and not murder?
Posted on 12/5/16 at 3:57 pm to MLSter
quote:
They get into one more altercation(start of video) where the dead guy is wrestling on the ground with slager and trying to get away. As both begin to rise Slagers Tazer is ripped form his hands. Slager immediately fears for his life and reaches for his gun and fires at a suspect.
That is not what the video shows. Scott is running away.
You can't shoot people who are running away unless someone's life is in imminent danger.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 3:58 pm to Pax Regis
quote:
I'm sure you are correct but super hot to trot wanna be jurors who are smart know the right answers. Just like the people who want to just go back to work know the "wrong" answers.
Reason I know this is because I was one of those jurors in a cop case. They asked the same ol sh*t "Could you convict a cop? Have any members of your direct family in law enforcement?" etc etc.
Literally the whole jury pool was released from duty
Felt bad for the attorneys and the judge b/c they wasted a whole day with zero to show for it.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 3:59 pm to WhiskeyPapa
LoL slow your roll. We are in agreement here. My point was the hypocrisy of the lefts argument...no guilty verdict = she should be treated as innocent in the court of public opinion (yes, I know she didn't get charged therefore she has never been found guilty).
The spirit of that argument gets thrown on its head regarding these type of BLM incidents.
The spirit of that argument gets thrown on its head regarding these type of BLM incidents.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 4:39 pm to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
Are the Police WRITTEN GUIDELINES on Deadly Force ever produced at these trials?
The "Written Guidelines" are court decisions:
1) Graham v Connor - the main one governing use of force
2) Tenn v Garner - limited so not used as often as justification
Surely the jury was explained these rulings by the prosecutor.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 4:52 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
that is the thing, there is enough of america that believe cops can do no wrong.
There's also an alarming amount of people who believe everything a police officer does is wrong. Too many people in both groups.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 4:54 pm to theenemy
Doubt they had the ruling explained per se. Most likely the standards those cases provided for evaluation of particular instances.
I'm thinking the issue here may be the jury instructions and the confusion they created between murder and voluntary manslaughter. I'm not a S.C. lawyer though.
I'm thinking the issue here may be the jury instructions and the confusion they created between murder and voluntary manslaughter. I'm not a S.C. lawyer though.
This post was edited on 12/5/16 at 8:33 pm
Posted on 12/5/16 at 4:56 pm to WhiskeyPapa
quote:
If Slager gets the process he is due based on his actions, he will be convicted of murder.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
Yeah,
Due process would be a jury of his peers.
Not some internet guy proclaiming him guilty based on cherry-picked evidence. It includes a presumption of innocence.
Due process would be a jury of his peers.
Not some internet guy proclaiming him guilty based on cherry-picked evidence. It includes a presumption of innocence.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:04 pm to Five0
I would be really surprised if the Prosecutor did not explain those two rulings in either opening statements or with an "expert" witness.
If not he screwed up.
If not he screwed up.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
Slow, would me posting in these threads be a reason to exclude me from the potential jury pool for a retrial of this case? Not that I would ever do anything to intentionally exclude myself from a jury.
This post was edited on 12/5/16 at 6:51 pm
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:19 pm to WhiskeyPapa
quote:Man, I wish I could have seen all of the evidence presented at the trial like you obviously did. I'm jealous because I can't say either way without seeing the evidence.
If Slager gets the process he is due based on his actions, he will be convicted of murder.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:21 pm to theenemy
quote:
I would be really surprised if the Prosecutor did not explain those two rulings in either opening statements or with an "expert" witness.
If not he screwed up.
The judge would advise the jury on the law.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:22 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
and people wonder why BLM exists.
No we don't. Soros, Obama, Clinton, MSM, and an alphabet soup of other leftist organizations.
Not saying jury was right, haven't been following it.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:29 pm to Five0
quote:
The judge would advise the jury on the law.
No, in my experience the judge would not bring up past precedents. He would leave that up to the prosecution. He would only explain what the law which was violated states.
If the prosecutor was worth a shite, he should have explained the precedents set and how the defendant failed to meet those standards.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:30 pm to Pax Regis
This is one of their instances where I feel all sides that are fighting for justice lose.
The police, who go about their jobs the right way, lose because an example of an unjustified shooting without the appropriate justice lingers. While those going their job get lumped in with it.
Those that are seeking justice don't get it.
The only ones that may win are the irrational and crooked ones on either side that use crises and tragic circumstances for their own crooked gains.
The police, who go about their jobs the right way, lose because an example of an unjustified shooting without the appropriate justice lingers. While those going their job get lumped in with it.
Those that are seeking justice don't get it.
The only ones that may win are the irrational and crooked ones on either side that use crises and tragic circumstances for their own crooked gains.
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:46 pm to theenemy
Okay.
LINK
question of law
n. an issue arising in a lawsuit or criminal prosecution which only relates to determination of what the law is, how it is applied to the facts in the case, and other purely legal points in contention. All "questions of law" arising before, during and sometimes after a trial are to be determined solely by the judge and not by the jury. "Questions of law" are differentiated from "questions of fact," which are decided by the jury and only by the judge if there is no jury.
;-)
LINK
question of law
n. an issue arising in a lawsuit or criminal prosecution which only relates to determination of what the law is, how it is applied to the facts in the case, and other purely legal points in contention. All "questions of law" arising before, during and sometimes after a trial are to be determined solely by the judge and not by the jury. "Questions of law" are differentiated from "questions of fact," which are decided by the jury and only by the judge if there is no jury.
;-)
This post was edited on 12/5/16 at 6:08 pm
Posted on 12/5/16 at 5:50 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
I get it that his "Adrenaline was pumping". But this was murder. I love cops, but there is no way to defend this.
I agree with this and I do want to hold out a little from casting full judgment of opinion to see what the jury heard....what reasonably caused the deadlock; but the other part which is concerning to me was the appearance that he tried to plant the gun as evidence. It is one thing to get in a judgment call mess and act out in the heat of the moment BUT the gun plant was calculated. We shall see though...
This post was edited on 12/5/16 at 6:04 pm
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News