Alan Wilson Punts On Zachary Hammond Shooting

“justus”

If his name was De’Runnya Hammond instead of Zachary Hammond, charges would have been filed against the police officer by now.

To The Colonel, Here is some education about legal entrapment and its significance. “A person is ‘entrapped’ when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case…”

“- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.”
True…the offer came from Tori Morton, not Zachary Hammond.

“- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.”
This is debatable based on the texts with the guilty person being Tori Morton.

“- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.”
There is no evidence that Zachary Hammond actually knew what was happening. The messages were sent by Tori Morton.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, since no crime was committed BEFORE the SHOOTING happened, there was no entrapment, only a dubious search and seizure after SHOOTING someone who was trying to leave the scene. You should be more concerned about police SHOOTING you when you had not committed a crime. This is a textbook case of SHOOT FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER. This will always be wrong.

Anyone that has followed this story closely knows that Roof had a history of drug use and running from the cops. His mother was aware of his drug use and running from the cops. She did warn him that only bad could come from this but did little to stop his behavior. Morton was from a known drug family. Given that Roof was a user, that there was cocaine found on him, the texts were sent from his phone, and that he associated with Morton it is difficult to believe that he was not aware of what was happening. Add to that the fact that he was driving the car and there had to be some explanation for why they were meeting someone at Hardees. The cocaine that they were there too sell was found on his person. Whether or not Tiller’s life was in danger is debatable. What is not debatable is that if Hammond had not tried to flee he would still be alive. He was a victim of his own reckless lifestyle and poor decisions.

The FBI and the Federal Attorney General need to investigate this case.
Allen Wilson’s office is just another extension of the corrupt government that seems to pervade South Carolina. Wilson, like his dad, is just another one of the clan.

Alan Wilson can be credited
with making the South Carolina state government an accessory to the
murder of Zachary Hammond. Moral right and wrong has no regard for legal technicalities or for politically expedient official
decisions. It depends only on what the truth is.

Look
at the dashcam video showing the shooting of Zachary Hammond. There you
see a murder being done by a police officer. A murder under color of
law is still a murder. A murder that has gone officially unrecognized as
such is a murder, nonetheless.

I say it again: watch the dashcam video, which
the SC State Law Enforcement Division kept FOUO for three months. Hear
Lt. Mark Tiller scream an obscene death-threat at Zachary Hammond, and
watch as he carries it out in accompaniment with the threat’s final two
words.

Mark Tiller shouted at Zachary Hammond: “I’m going to shoot your f***ing a**!”

That’s “f***ing” (pow), “a**” (pow). And Zachary was dead.

The
threat, although it is very clear on the dashcam video’s audio track,
went completely unacknowledged by Solicitor Chrissy Adams. Why? Oh,
probably because it gives insight into Lt. Tiller’s frame of mind and
points to the true reason he killed an unarmed 19-year-old driver.

The
truth is (watch the video) that Zachary Hammond did nothing with the
intention of hurting Mark Tiller. Certain people have claimed to the
contrary. They are lying.

The truth is (watch the
video) that Mark Tiller was never in any mortal danger as the result of
the movement of Hammond’s car. Several persons have alleged otherwise.
They are lying.

The government of the State of South
Carolina had a chance to make things right. Instead, it became fully
complicit in the murder of Zachary Hammond on 1 December 2015, when SC
Attorney General Alan Wilson refused to review the case against Seneca
police lieutenant Mark Tiller. The executive authority of that state has
become, corporately, an accessory after the fact to whatever crime
Tiller committed by shooting Hammond.

This degree of
political corruption isn’t unheard of. The world saw too much of it in
the 20th century in countries under Communist rule. But now the disease
of police state tyranny has come to South Carolina. What once afflicted
East Europe, Russia, and Ukraine is loose in America.

Wilson’s
argument that “second-guessing” a local prosecutor would “set a
dangerous precedent” is vapid nonsense. It was mere political noise
aimed at the mentally mediocre majority. Although it is true that a
person cannot be (and should not be) TRIED TWICE for the same offense,
there is nothing wrong with a state attorney general prosecuting a case
that was declined by a local solicitor.

“There can
be but one prosecutor,” said Wilson. Oh? Even if that’s correct, there
only NEEDED to be one prosecutor. Chrissy Adams truantly decided not to
be that one. And then Wilson followed suit. There never was any hazard
of there being more than one prosecutor. As it is, the number of
prosecutors is zero, still awaiting a first.

Checking
the decisions made by lower authorities is what higher authorities are
supposed to do. It is the primary reason for the higher authority’s
existence. Just as, in the judicial branch, higher courts review
decisions made by lower ones, so likewise are higher officials in the
executive branch supposed to serve as watchdogs for malfeasance and
mistakes made by the occupants of lesser offices.

When
a higher authority willfully neglects his proper function and defines
its exercise as “dangerous,” he’s become a serious problem and a
collaborator in mischief. Whereas it is certainly true that authority
might initiate mischief with an abusive exercise of power, it is also
possible for someone in authority to join in mischief started by someone
else—and do so tacitly, by refusing to do what comes his way ex
officio, by turning a blind eye.

That is what Alan Wilson did, in the case of the shooting of Zachary Hammond.

I
don’t suggest that Wilson has never done anything right. I’m sure he
has. But his refusal to re-open and review the case against Mark Tiller
was the wrong decision. Maybe Wilson had recently scraped the bottom of
his barrel of political courage.