Cop who shot black man in back 8 times walks free
- Thread starter stinkynuts
- Start date
700 murders in Chicagostill say the BLM movement has no basis for existence.
300 murders in Baltimore
63 murders in Dodge City
Question: How many of the victims are black?
Question: How many of the murderers are black?
Question: When O.J. Simpson walked, how many blacks were outraged?
Walks free is blatantly false. There was a mistrial and presumably the State of South Carolina will seek a retrial. This was not an acquittal the defendant is not a free man anymore than he was the day before the trial began.Cop who shot black man in back 8 times walks free
Further seeing how the jury polled, and having seen the prosecutions case in chief, it may well be that his defense counsel convince him to take a plea agreement if one is offered.
From what I read technically the judge has not yet declared a mistrial and on Monday the jury will continue to deliberate. It seems to me the holdout juror has a mindset that he/she will not find guilty regardless of the circumstances and perhaps had that opinion right from the start of the trial.
faceplantWow since when did YouTube become the authoritative source for truth.
Take a walk around downtown Toronto the people who have their asses hanging out showing their brown streak underwear garners your respect.
Holy Irrelevance, Batman!!700 murders in Chicago
300 murders in Baltimore
63 murders in Dodge City
Question: How many of the victims are black?
Question: How many of the murderers are black?
Question: When O.J. Simpson walked, how many blacks were outraged?
What does black on black crime have to do with this? When people rally for HIV/AIDS prevention, do you sit around asking..."What about Cancer?" There are organizations and movements dealing with different things. BLM is not for that. It's for this. It is about paid public servants abusing trust and power. Enough of the diversionary tactics.
And what is this White obsession with OJ? The one that got away? You expect black people as a collective to be outraged at OJ walking? Maybe they're too busy being outraged at the many thousands of 'white OJs' walking.
We have you here trivialising this with "What about OJ?" This is the reason why systemic racism will never end.
Skyrider strikes again, he is a arch nemisis of logic and reason.Holy Irrelevance, Batman!!
What does black on black crime have to do with this? When people rally for HIV/AIDS prevention, do you sit around asking..."What about Cancer?" There are organizations and movements dealing with different things. BLM is not for that. It's for this. It is about paid public servants abusing trust and power. Enough of the diversionary tactics.
And what is this White obsession with OJ? The one that got away? You expect black people as a collective to be outraged at OJ walking? Maybe they're too busy being outraged at the many thousands of 'white OJs' walking.
We have you here trivialising this with "What about OJ?" This is the reason why systemic racism will never end.
Again, here are the facts. We should be focusing on the larger problem. Yes? No?Skyrider strikes again, he is a arch nemisis of logic and reason.
Chicago 700 murders
Baltimore 300 murders
Toronto 63 murders
http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/chicago-75-murdered-are-black-71-murderers-are-black
A mistrial was (properly) called. One juror caused this. He will be tried again.
I doubt that he will dodge the bullet this time
I doubt that he will dodge the bullet this time
What does that have to do with ANYTHING? BLM is focused on fair treatment of blacks at the hands of white police. Why would blacks be outraged about OJ walking? It was probably the first time a black man got away with killing a white woman, while whites have been walking from killing blacks forever!! In a twisted way, OJ trial represented progress for black people. The fact that you do not understand that shows you have never taken the time to think about what it is like to be black in America.700 murders in Chicago
300 murders in Baltimore
63 murders in Dodge City
Question: How many of the victims are black?
Question: How many of the murderers are black?
Question: When O.J. Simpson walked, how many blacks were outraged?
stinkynuts is not one for facts
The cop shot AT a black man 8 times
He only hit him in the back 3 times
So your subject line is just a tad biased
Not even getting into the fact there was a physical altercation BEFORE Scott attempted to flee
The cop shot AT a black man 8 times
He only hit him in the back 3 times
So your subject line is just a tad biased
Not even getting into the fact there was a physical altercation BEFORE Scott attempted to flee
Well he hit him 5 times. Altercation does not change ANYTHING. Cops can only shoot in self defense or to protect members of the public from an imminent threat. If he was wearing a suicide bomb and running then sure, kill the guy. This shoot did not meet the test. Then there is the false reports and planting of evidence.....stinkynuts is not one for facts
The cop shot AT a black man 8 times
He only hit him in the back 3 times
So your subject line is just a tad biased
Not even getting into the fact there was a physical altercation BEFORE Scott attempted to flee
They should, bunch of classless, tasteless fools- both white and black. Idiots. -edited for irony.So your saying cops can just shoot people for the way they dress?
Lol
You saggin', you faggin'. Jump to 4:00
Last edited:
I'm no law expert. But I never understood why the justice system continues to have a jury. Maybe 100s of years ago it served a purpose, but I still don't think it's the right thing to do.
Why would a serious case with people's live on stake (people already killed or possibly facing long term prison sentences) have the outcome decided among 12 people? First, 12 jurors is a lot of people. So to get every one of them agreeing on something is going to be tough right from the get go. Second, some of these people might be total morons or biased. Asking morons to decide the fate of a case is arguably just as moronic. If there must be a jury process, maybe cut it down to 4 or 5 people. Just to show how silly it is, why 12? Why not make it 24 people?
Wouldn't the correct process be lawyers pitch their cases to the judge and let him/her decide? The judge is likely smarter than any juror, knows the laws better than the jurors, and a good judge can cut through all the lawyer BS and sucking up to jurors and just get to the facts.
Why would a serious case with people's live on stake (people already killed or possibly facing long term prison sentences) have the outcome decided among 12 people? First, 12 jurors is a lot of people. So to get every one of them agreeing on something is going to be tough right from the get go. Second, some of these people might be total morons or biased. Asking morons to decide the fate of a case is arguably just as moronic. If there must be a jury process, maybe cut it down to 4 or 5 people. Just to show how silly it is, why 12? Why not make it 24 people?
Wouldn't the correct process be lawyers pitch their cases to the judge and let him/her decide? The judge is likely smarter than any juror, knows the laws better than the jurors, and a good judge can cut through all the lawyer BS and sucking up to jurors and just get to the facts.
Federal charges are pending next year, so he is facing two sets of charges in 2017. At some point he will be in jail for a long time
This has nothing to do with the topic at hand, genius.Again, here are the facts. We should be focusing on the larger problem. Yes? No?
Chicago 700 murders
Baltimore 300 murders
Toronto 63 murders
http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/chicago-75-murdered-are-black-71-murderers-are-black
If you wanna discuss black-on-black crime then start a separate thread
