PALMETTO STATE’S NATIONAL IMAGE ONCE AGAIN IN TATTERS …
|| By FITSNEWS || South Carolina has had its share of black eyes on the national stage, but this one is really going to leave a mark …
The fatal shooting of Walter Scott – a 50-year-old, unarmed black man – by white police officer Michael Slager has made international news, putting North Charleston (and the Palmetto State) on the map in the worst possible way.
And while Slager has been charged with murder in the case, it’s abundantly clear that never would have happened had an amateur video of the incident not surfaced. In other words, the state gets “no points” on the “no justice, no peace” scorecard.
The video – obtained by The (Charleston, S.C.) Post and Courier – features an iconic screen capture (above) of Scott fleeing from Slager moments before he is gunned down.
Talk about a viral internet moment waiting to happen … errr, already happening.
FITS showed the video of the shooting to three different law enforcement officers – two of whom were white and one of whom was black. Each agreed Slager’s actions constituted a “bad shot,” which is police terminology for the unnecessary use of force.
“Cops are allowed to shoot ‘fleeing felons’ under very limited circumstances,” one of the white officers told us. “From what I gather, assuming the facts are accurate, it’s a bad shot.”
Of course the specifics of the incident are only one part of the story … the real story, as far as we’re concerned, were efforts by North Charleston police to paint a vastly different picture of the incident than the one depicted in the video. According to them, Scott was gunned down by Slager because he posed a legitimate threat to the officer’s safety.
That clearly was not the case … which is probably why Slager’s lawyer, Charleston, S.C. attorney David Aylor, dropped him like a hot potato after the video surfaced.
South Carolina politicians – sensitive of the state’s national image – moved quickly to condemn the shooting.
“After watching the video, the senseless shooting and taking of Walter Scott’s life was absolutely unnecessary and avoidable,” U.S. Senator Tim Scott wrote on his Facebook page. “My heart aches for the family and our North Charleston community.”
“I will be watching this case closely,” Scott added.
In a post on his Facebook page, U.S. Rep. Mark Sanford referred to the incident as an “unfathomable and unconscionable killing” – one which “should be met with real consequence and a thorough review.”
S.C. governor Nikki Haley wasn’t as strident as Scott or Sanford, but she agreed Slager’s conduct was “not acceptable.”
“We have many good law enforcement officers in the field,” Haley said in a statement. “What happened in this case is not acceptable in South Carolina, nor is it reflective of our values or of the way most of our law enforcement officials act. This is a sad time for everyone in South Carolina, and I urge everyone to work together to help our community heal.”
Haley did not address the issue on her ever-cheery Facebook page, choosing instead to focus her attention on the ongoing battle in North Charleston between aircraft manufacturer Boeing and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM).
Even Haley’s fellow “Republican” women criticized her lack of focus.
“Tim Scott has written a post on it and Mark Sanford, too,” GOP columnist Taylor Brown said. “But Nikki remains silent – except for one statement. That’s unacceptable for the ‘leader’ of our state.”
(Pic: Via)
***
87 comments
Yeah, welcome to South Carolina where when a cop does something criminally stupid he gets charged for it and faces the long arm of the law like he should, where nobody riots “…cause, well, just cause…” and where the vast majority of us can accept that “shit happens” and that there are consequences for your actions.
So far, I have to say I applaud the reaction of the police, family, community, and politicians.
Once again, the South Carolina Republicans and Tea Party Members must take full responsibility for Governor Haley.and all her stupid shit. You elected her you must take the blame.
And while there is adequate material to lay blame at the feet of our goobernor for, what does that have to do with this?
Seriously. I am in full agreement. snickering’s comment was absurdly off point.
We’re at Fitsnews, why does that surprise us….
No fan of the Nikster – but she didn’t pull the trigger. But that North Charleston has been allowed to turn into a crap hole over the past 15 years – that’s the saddest part.
Just to move this along to its logical conclusion
You %%%^# POS. You know @@#$!^ well this is OBAMA’S FAULT. Admit what you are.
lol, perfect!
“From what I gather, assuming the facts are accurate, it’s a bad shot.”
lol…I suppose Captain Obvious couldn’t just watch the video and let it rest on its merits…he had to throw in “assuming the facts are accurate”…and people wonder double talkers(which seem to populate much of government) are despised.
Yep, I agree. Also, “bad shot”…really…a innocent man, a father of 4, is dead..killed in cold blood…and this punk describes it “bad shot”
That frame right there is the essence of the fate common folks face these days. On the one side is POWER to do anything, the cold will to do it, the legal means to justify it and the mutually beneficial professional consensus to cover it up or bury it when required. On the other side is a COMMON man driven by circumstances, frustrated by the days events, simply wanting to be left alone on an Easter weekend, wanting to make a stance, making a futile attempt to display some self-worth….and running away in fear for his existence. BAM, BAM…8 times…you know who won. I am sure he gave a false police report too. Wonder that he said in the incident report. Disgraceful and an abomination to God’s creation, this cop, to say the least. When we forget our Christian values as a society…we start shooting our neighbors in cold blood.
“And while Slager has been charged with murder in the case, it’s abundantly clear that never would have happened had an amateur video of the incident not surfaced. ”
So the autopsy results showing eight shots taken in the back and trajectory analysis of increasing distance by the victim (showing that he was running away) wouldn’t have had anything to do with a possible indictment? Not saying the video doesn’t mean anything (it certainly expedites the process), but do you really think the cop would have gotten away with a “necessary force” defense considering those factors?
“but do you really think the cop would have gotten away with a “necessary force” defense considering those factors?
More than likely.
How so? Seems to me that it’s based on the myth that cops are always taken for their word. Like I said, that’s nothing more than a media and grievance-industry driven myth.
A myth? Really? Just read any other story on this site related to alleged misconduct by law enforcement. The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
So you propose eliminating the judicial process and go straight from allegation to conviction? Uncle Joe Stalin would be proud.
“So you propose eliminating the judicial process and go straight from allegation to conviction? ”
Where did she propose that?
Where did I say that, exactly?
“evidence to the contrary is overwhelming”. Skipping trial is next “logical” step.
Don’t get into facts like that, it spoils the headlines…
The event was tragic and the legal process (all of it) needs to be completed. But somehow, some way Haley has culpability and Sic Willie will not stop until he finds it (or makes it up).
There was a case in Sumter a few years ago where a suspect was killed by police. It was the case that led Sumter Coroner Harvin Bullock to declare that an autopsy is a medical record, covered under HIPAA and refuse to provide it to the media. Media sued and ultimately lost in the SC supreme court. Last I heard, the legislature is considering a law to allow autopsy results to be made public in these kinds of cases.
It’s taken me a while to get to your point. But, when the family gained access to the autopsy, they made it public and it showed that Sumter Police or Sheriff’s Dept shot the suspect in the back, at least twice that I recall, and killed him.
As far as I know, and I might have missed it, there was never any discussion of whether the case met the 1985 SCOTUS criteria for shooting a fleeing felon and the case, other than the autopsy part of it, just disappeared off the radar.
Yes. I think a cop can get away with murdering people.
Under some circumstances shooting a fleeing felon in the back is not only the right thing to do, it is also completely legal. The bank robber who just shot up the bank and still has the gun for instance.
That’s why I referred to the 1985 SCOTUS decision that I learned about this morning. I wish I remembered the name and could cite it.
This N. Charleston case doesn’t seem to meet any kind of criteria
except for trigger happy.
It may very well have applied in the Sumter case. I just don’t recall seeing anything about it at the time.
But, it was clear that the Coroner wanted to help his buddies in LE and try to prevent the public from finding out that a young man had been shot in the back by them.
Tennessee v, Garner 471 US 1 The officer has to believe the fleeing suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.
“but do you really think the cop would have gotten away with a ‘necessary force’ defense considering those factors?”
I fully expect that Slager will not only be exonerated of all the charges, but elected as a Right-Thinkin’, Gun-totin’, Liburty (sic) Real Amerikin to the state Legislature.
A white police officer. Shooting a non-white citizen.
Dead.
In Dixie.
Same ole’ same ole’.
It’s Dixie.
You don’t have a problem here; you’ve got the Bull Connor of the 21st Century, who’s gonna help Real Amerikins take their country back from Fast and Furious, Lois Lerner, Ayn Rand Paul’s regulated toilets, and Benghazi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Slager could’ve thrown a noose around his neck and strung ’em up from the highest tree in that park and he’ll still walk out of jail a free man.
Again, it’s Dixie.
The prosecutors should pursue the death penalty for this guy. This looks premeditated.
He took his time pulling out his gun, lining the man’s back up as he was running away…and then pumping half the mag into him.
After getting the cuffs on him he never checked his wounds, applied CPR, etc. He only checked for a pulse a couple of minutes after….
I think you could reasonably make the case it was premeditated.
If you shoot, the procedure is to shoot, cuff, then secure the scene and finally render aid – he did just that. Not defending the dumb ass, just keeping the debate honest
When did he “render aid”?
Watch the video till the end – the second officer can be seen in gloves attempting to render aid – he didn’t nor should he have, there was another officer there to handle that.
I’m confused on the “render aid” part, I didn’t see the other officer do anything but put on gloves and lightly touch the man…no CPR, no wound bandaging, etc.
He was dead when he was cuffed, watch the body after Scott puts the cuffs on him. What the officer with the gloves on was supposedly doing was checking for a pulse. Giving CPR to a body with 6-8 9mm rounds in it just pushes the blood out faster.
lol…ok…so I guess your argument is that it was too late to render aid?
Fair enough. I just didn’t see any urgency on anyone’s part in my mind, but it’s a subjective issue I suppose.
If I’m on a jury, I’m the Queen of Hearts, but differing opinions is what make the world go round.
The sequence of steps following a shooting goes something like this: secure the suspect, secure the scene, report, then check the suspect and render aid.
You don’t want the shooter rendering aid if at all possible for obvious reasons.
The thing is that several outlets have reported that LE initially, pre-video, said that CPR had been performed at the scene.
You never do CPR on a gunshot victim – all you’re doing is pumping blood out of the system. Talking heads think that CPR sounds better than “rendered first aid” which is what a policeman is qualified to do. Mr. Scott was dead before he was cuffed.
past tense: premeditated · past participle: premeditated
think out or plan (an action, especially a crime) BEFOREHAND:
“premeditated murder”
So the cop planned to shoot him, at what point, at the pull over for the tail light? When he went on shift? The night before? His behaviour, while callous, is by the book, sadly. It disgust me to see a dead person cuffed, to no end. But that does not equal pre-planning this scene.
You are going too far the other way. I am not convinced of premeditation, but premeditation does not have to be as far in advance as you make it out. There may be a case to be made. Clearly your statement his behavior is “by the book” is dead wrong.
The question is why did he shoot. When he pulled the gun, he clearly was not in fear for his life. So why did he shoot? One suggestion made by another person is he was angry. That is plausible. In that case if he was so angry he could not control himself, that is not premeditation. Its still a crime but not premeditated murder. If on the other hand said to himself, I am going to kill that SOB. That is premeditation. That may well be a jury question.
“But that does not equal pre-planning this scene.”
I see a lot of pre-planning as he lined up his shots at the back of the slow moving target.
“at what point, at the pull over for the tail light? When he went on shift? The night before?”
Yes, well that’s the question isn’t it? He took his time in putting some rounds into his back, so it’s all a matter of the subjective notion of what constitutes “pre-planning”.
Why would you do CPR on a lifeless body with five slugs in him?
Nah, probably not. You and Colonel have a point. Then again though, I didn’t choose the job and its duties.
If I made a commitment to do the job description, I would.
Guilty intent is shown by planting the taser next to the body, allowing the victim to die rather than give first aid (so he won’t be able to tell his side of the story), and falsification of records after the incident. This is called “res gestae” and is strong evidence of guilt.
Bull, he picked up his taser to secure it and tossed it down near the body- near the end of the clip you see him pick it up and holster it with another officer watching.
To prove premeditation, you’d have to prove that he was out to get Mr. Scott for some reason and had planned the actions – never happen.
Have you seen the report yet the officer filed after the incident but before the video was released?
Have not seen the actual report, just a synopsis – got a link?
No, but that’s my point….we don’t know the issues surrounding “res gestae” brought up by Bubbanator, but there’s some suggestion that the cop may have falsified his report.
We should probably wait until that is/is not confirmed before judging how much further the cop went in covering up his crime.
Remember when Dan Johnson told everyone the SC Trooper shooting was a “good shoot”?(prior to the video)
Supposedly the report says that Mr. Slager attacked Mr. Scott and they struggled over the taser. That doesn’t make sense because the taser was on the ground at Scott’s feet some distance off the road. What I can’t figure out is, if there wasn’t some sort of struggle, is how they got so far from the cars. The shooting appears to have taken place on a ‘side road” between Craig Road and Rivers Street.
Again – even is Scott whipped his ass and ran away you don’t shoot the fleeing suspect in the back. He can’t out run the radio.
The radio call Scott sent in says “…he grabbed my Taser…” clear as a bell.
“Again – even is Scott whipped his ass and ran away you don’t shoot the fleeing suspect in the back.”
lol…very true.
Thing is, when I watch the video, I can’t but subjectively perceive that the cop almost looks relaxed as he’s lining up his back and subsequently pumping rounds into him.
The way that 50 year old is running, he looks like an old military dog with two bad knees(I’m poking you here, lol) who has no chance of going toe to toe successfully with a man almost 20 years his junior.
It almost looks like our do-gooder in blue was annoyed rather than afraid.
Here’s the latest, looks like there was cover up going on…we don’t know how many were involved yet:
“Santana said he changed his mind after reading the version of events as recounted by the police, which didn’t match what he had seen. He said he provided the video to the dead man’s family because he didn’t believe anything would happen to Slager if he didn’t come forward.”
http://news.yahoo.com/protest-planned-white-sc-officer-charged-murder-092432016.html
Before you get your panties in a twist, there is the “presumption of innocence”. Police Admin initially went with what they had – Slager’s report. As for a cover up – Slager dropped the Taser near Scott while another officer was on the scene and picked it up and holstered it in full view of the other officer. Don’t think you’ll find a “cover up”, just a liar.
Slager’s report would have never withstood scrutiny (he shot Mr Scott in the back after all) but initially, all they had to go with was Slager’s report. I pondered yesterday how they got so far away from the cars. The Dash cam will show what happened initially. Mr. Santana didn’t start filming (or for that matter even notice) the scuffle until officer Slager fired his Taser. He says that is what attracted his attention.
Nothing can justify Slager’s actions once he drops the Taser (the beginning of the video)
“Before you get your panties in a twist, there is the “presumption of innocence”.”
Thank you for looking out for my panties.
That you would operate under a “presumption of innocence” under the context of a cop murdering someone by shooting them in the back as they are fleeing…is well, what’s the word….oh yea, preposterous.
Yep, that’s a good word.
Btw, I merely quoted the witness, and he’s a little more informed than you in his opinions because not only was he there, but obviously he read the police report.
But you’re operating from the armchair – when the shooting went down, Police Admin only had Slager’s report to go from.
The event happened at 0930 on Saturday the 4th. From Saturday the 4th until Tuesday the 7th, all they had to go by was Slager’s story and the dash cam video (which will likely show Scott and Slager scuffling). Mr. Santana’s video surfaced Tuesday and Tuesday evening Officer Slager was Mr. Slager and in jail.
“But you’re operating from the armchair – when the shooting went down, Police Admin only had Slager’s report to go from.”
Not only are you too, “operating from the armchair”, your information is incomplete and at times inaccurate:
The black cop standing next to the murderer/cop was there, yet the PD in their statement according the Daily Mail said:
“His department said the officers then performed CPR and delivered first aid to the victim”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3031898/Cop-shot-unarmed-Walter-Scott-investigated-using-excessive-force-black-man-two-years-ago.html#ixzz3Wor5DGQ1
So there you go, one more officer implicated in a potential cover up.
Now, where do you read that Scott ever was “armed with a Taser”?
“until there was incontrovertible proof – you presume innocence.”
Completely a preposterous statement in context of the video. Totally ridiculous. Go watch the video again if you need “incontrovertible proof”.
Slager’s radio report (on the released radio tape) (and allegedly in his written report) says “…he grabbed my Taser…” – to my mind, unless he “…grabbed my loaded shotgun…” he didn’t deserve to be shot in the back. I have heard it argued that if he had the Taser, it was a good shoot – I disagree, the level of damage he could inflict with the Taser doesn’t rise to the level of “deadly force”. Dash cam may change the story slightly – we’ll see.
I have not seen any official written reports from Slager (or the other officer) – have you? I’m operating off of supposedly “in the know” news reports – once again, presuming innocence.
All of that said, unless Mr Scott had Slager’s shotgun (a hypothetical) and was firing it as he fled, he did not deserve to be shot in the back – or the front.
“Slager’s radio report (on the released radio tape) (and allegedly in his written report) says “…he grabbed my Taser…”
#1 I attribute no duty for “presumption of innocence” for the officer based on the video.
#2 There is a difference between “being armed” with a Taser and “grabbing” it, even if one was going to believe anything said by a cop that slowly shot a fleeing perp in the back without even a verbal warning.
“I have not seen any official written reports from Slager (or the other officer) – have you?”
We’ve already covered this ground, because I pointed out to you earlier you were making inappropriate suppositions.
“I’m operating off of supposedly “in the know” news reports”
I’ve listed every link, for every statement by media and the witnesses. Have you?
Indeed, you must be old-school. Toal still uses the term “res gestae” to label an excited utterance or present sense impression. I don’t hear that term very often.
Charleston Thug Life has blown up stills from the video, they clearly show the officer picking up the taser and re-holstering it. http://charlestonthuglife.net/2015/04/new-developments-2/
The guys life is over for sure. He is going to prison for sure. He may not survive in prison, he is an ex-cop. But I don’t think this is a death penalty case. I doubt there is sufficient proof of premeditation. Looks more like heat of the moment anger (not fear) to me.
Some degree of racism may have been involved. I have no problem believing a racist white officer would react differently to a black guy defying him than to a white guy. No proof of that of course.
To me the most likely scenario. Cop stops black guy for tail light. Tells him to get out of the car. Victim is afraid he will be arrested, and become belligerent. Cop pulls out taser and threatens to taser him if he does not cooperate. Victim either slaps the taser out of his hand or grabs the taser and runs. Cop is angry at being defied, angry at being caught off guard, pulls out his gun yells for the guy to stop and shoots.
I think a number of slightly racists gun rights advocates that occasionally post on this site would have done the exact same thing.
You don’t have to be a racist to be on a power trip.
I didn’t say you did. I said it was possible racism was involved, and I said there was no proof.
Regarding my last sentence, I have seen a number of gun rights advocates on this site fantasize about what they would do if they had been in a restaurant when it was robbed by a “black thug”. Their words not mine.
Defending yourself from being robbed is in now way comparable to what happened in that video. Guy got pulled over for a tailight being broken. He had a warrant out for not paying child support. He tried to run. Cop looked like he just decided the chase wasn’t worth it and gunned the guy down as he ran. Maybe racism was involved, but I think your inclination that he was on a power trip is correct.
You can be a black thug and also be on a power trip.
Premeditated? Are you saying the cop left his house that morning with the intent to kill this guy? Are you saying that the cop planned on killing him at the time of the busted tail light? Gee whiz Jackie. You oppose Criminal Domestic Violence arrests in a case with recorded evidence of murder threats, and the laws that enable consequences for it, but this was premeditated. Sorry, it ‘looks’ premeditated. How exactly does it ‘look’ premeditated?
Did you see the interview with the guy who filmed this? He said there was a lot more that happened between the two before he started filming, like both of them on the ground. Bad shoot, but what we saw is just the end result, hopefully the dash cam will show more leading up to the shooting.
SC Rep Sanford, to his credit, has expressed his displeasure in this matter, but not SC Rep Gowdy, who never has anything to say about goings on in his state and who seems to think his only reason for being in Washington is to torpedo another Clinton presidency. WTF? Hey FITS, start yelling to get this turd flushed!
I am interested in the conversation between the two cops. The audio can be enhanced – and it will be.
Black Cop – “What the f— did you do, man!”
White Cop – “He was trying to kill me with my taser”
Black Cop – “You have your taser right there in your hand”
White Cop – Throws it down “I do not.”
Black Cop – “Man, you’re gonna get us fired.”
White Cop – “Is he dead? Good!!! Let’s make up a story.”
Black Cop – “I ain’t lying to save your ass.”
White Cop – Thumbing his weapon – “Oh yes you will. Else it will be your ass lookin’ just like his, get it! I”m hungry.”
Ring Lardner lives!
“South Carolina politicians – sensitive of the state’s national image…” Really? You couldn’t tell it by the way they behave.
http://charlestonthuglife.net/2015/04/new-developments-2/
Comment at the NYT:
Katie
Bellevue, WA 16 hours ago
I’d like to offer a suggestion on how to get around having police officers even bother stopping drivers for infractions like broken tail lights and having such a simple situation turn into the scene of a murder of an innocent person, as is becoming all-too-common:
No more pulling drivers over for simple infractions of this nature. Instead, use the license plate to identify the vehicle owner and issue a warning to the vehicle owner by mail or service, giving them 30 days to replace the tail light (or whatever needs to be remedied) and to provide proof of having done so. If the vehicle owner has not provided proof within the 30 day time frame, then a ticket is issued and the driver is fined and the vehicles license plate cannot be renewed until the fine is paid and proof of the replaced tail light is provided. Problem solved, no violence/death required.
1176Recommend
A lot of times though these stops are pretextual, which is not in violation of constitutional rights (Whren v. US). In my opinion, these stops are still useful and important for discovering other more serious crimes.
Broken taillight, cracked windshield, etc. type police stops are pretexts which allow officers to harass and run checks on drivers. Lazy cops doing their part towards revenue enhancement without the danger of taking on ‘real’ criminals.
Will Charleston’s ranking take a hit?
Charleston named No. 1 U.S. tourist destination for fourth year; No. 2 in world
http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20141020/PC05/141029970
There is a VAST difference between Charleston and North Charleston.
Vast would be an understatement. But I’ll tell you for sure – had the guy been hanging around the Battery – he’d have been arrested for just being there. Rules are rules.
“FITS showed the video of the shooting to three different law enforcement officers – two of whom were white and one of whom was black. Each agreed Slager’s actions constituted a “bad shot,” which is police terminology for the unnecessary use of force.”
Does that mean that excessive use of force is so common that they have slang to describe it?
Come on Down and Set Awhile – it’s a Great Day in South Carolina. Here you can enjoy our wonderful beaches, rounds of golf along sandy shores, explore back-water estuaries by canoe and kayak, beat your wife senseless, shoot unarmed men of color, drive drunk all day if you want, explore the wonders of the North cities of North Charleston and North Columbia, enjoying the fee-only erotic adventures they offer. The sun is shining, the sky is blue, so come on down, set awhile, and enjoy the Old South, the way it used to be.
Da law supposed t’ serve an’ proteck! Dat yung feller werent protekted! No excuse fer shootin’ an uramed man in da back. Hell, not even in th’ front!
Nikki Haley steps up to the podium to address the shooting:
“it’s a GREAT day in South Carolina … err …”
When you start taking into account the totality of all the abuse by police officers in the state of South Carolina, the corrupt legislatures, the fake image of Nikki Haley, it all in one lump sum shows just how totally fucked up everything is in SC.
.
Someone should break it all down into a synopsis for the typical average everyday Joe to understand. No doubt, South Carolina’s government is occupied by a band of crooks and criminals. Government employees are in most all matters are scared of losing their jobs if they turn whistle blower. But a 5 million dollar reward might get some of them producing hard evidence to take some of the little circles (like Leatherman and his cronies) down.
Lets see…this bullet sponge had already been arrested a dozen times for non payment of child support, and he’s driving a Mercedes while the working stiffs are paying EBT, Section 8, WIC and medical care for his baby mamas offspring…good riddance.
“South Carolina politicians – sensitive of the state’s national image – moved quickly to condemn the shooting.”
Tim Scott, agreed.
But Miss Nikki and Miss Lindsey?
You serious?
Per WJCL, Miss Nikki waited until 9:39 p.m. on the night Shoot ‘Em Up Slager got busted to offer on the story …
One. Whole. Paragraph.
And Miss Nikki’s belch started out with a blanket defense of all police officers in the state.
“We have many good law enforcement officers in the field. What happened in this case is not acceptable in South Carolina, nor is it reflective of our values or of the way most of our law enforcement officials act, and I assure all South Carolinians that the criminal judicial process will proceed fully. This is a sad time for everyone in South Carolina, and I urge everyone to work together to help our community heal.”
#####
As for Miss Lindsey …
Complete. Silence.
Until 8:30 a.m. the next day.
With one Twitter post at 8:30 a.m.
https://twitter.com/GrahamBlog/status/585827052894478336
Lindsey Graham
@GrahamBlog
Our thoughts & prayers go out to the family of Walter Scott. The horrific video is very difficult to watch & deeply troubling on many fronts
8:30 AM – 8 Apr 2015
And a second at 9:10 a.m., which referred to his three-graph statement – itself a near mimic of Miss Nikki’s one-grapher save the fact that Miss Lindsey put the late-Mr. Scott up top and the Obey Our Police at the end.
https://twitter.com/GrahamBlog/status/585837105718263808
Lindsey Graham
@GrahamBlog
Statement on the shooting of Walter Scott.
#WalterScott
9:10 AM – 8 Apr 2015
#####
Interesting, also, that Fits omitted Miss Lindsey from the above story. Wonder why? After all, it’s not like Miss Lindsey holds a statewide elected office or anything, right?
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/walter-scott-shooting/walter-scott-shooting-councilman-says-support-hard-working-officer-n337916
Walter Scott Shooting: Councilman Says Support ‘Hard-Working’ Officer
By Alastair Jamieson
NBCNews.com
April 9, 2015
A senior councilman in the South Carolina city where Walter Scott was shot dead told NBC News on Wednesday that the city should support the “hard-working officer” charged with murder.
Bobby Jameson, who is also a cabinet member and mayor pro tem, also criticized protests outside City Hall.
“The NAACP and those people make it look like, to the rest of the black community, that you are doing something by screaming ‘Justice, Justice, Justice,'” he said. “Well, a man’s already been charged with murder. What more justice do you want?”
“Let’s have the facts come out,” he added. “That demonstration out here has nothing to do with the city of North Charleston. It has to do with the show that they want to put on to the black community across the nation.” …
Jameson said that the city should support the officer “as best we can until all the facts about this case are out because, one, he’s a hard-working officer and, two, he’s an employee of this city.”
Even the Post & Courier published the political react from ole’ Real Amerikin Bobby Jameson…
http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150409/PC16/150409326
North Charleston officials ‘wholeheartedly disagree’ with Councilman Bobby Jameson ‘those people’ comment
By Brenda Rindge
@brindge
The Charleston Post & Courier
Apr 9 2015 1:14 pm
North Charleston officials are distancing themselves from critical comments the Mayor Pro Tem reportedly made about protests in the city.
According to an NBC News story published Wednesday, Councilman Bobby Jameson criticized protests outside City Hall in connection with the shooting death of Walter Scott, a black man, by a white North Charleston police officer.
…
In response to Jameson’s comments, the City of North Charleston tweeted on Wednesday, “The City & @MayorSummey wholeheartedly disagree w/comments of Councilman Jameson. His views are not reflective of our beliefs. #walterscott.”
Jameson and city officials did not immediately return calls for comment Thursday.