Saturday, December 03, 2016

Cannot in good conscience consider a guilty verdict? UPDATED.

If you haven't seen the video of the Slager case then you're probably living under a rock.  Long short?  Black male motorist pulled over, had some type of minor infractions with the law, took off running...and Slager shot him in the back numerous times.

To add insult to injury (and I'm amazed that no one is talking about this) another officer arrived (a black guy) and appeared at best to tamper with the crime scene at worst to plant evidence (this part is fuzzy as hell...I've heard it both ways....kinda curious what the dept does with him, but like I said no one is talking about that dude).

Ordinarily I'd kick back, relax and watch how this all plays out but one of the jurors said something that made me freeze in my tracks.  Check this out from NBC News.
A lone juror said Friday he can't convict a white former police officer who fatally shot a black man in South Carolina, and the jury said they want to continue deliberating.
The juror in a letter to the court said "I cannot in good conscience consider a guilty verdict" against Michael Slager, a former patrolman who pulled over Walter Scott in North Charleston, and ended up shooting him as a bystander recorded the incident on video.
The jury foreperson said in a separate note to the court that it was only one juror who was "having issues," Circuit Judge Clifton Newman said. The juror opposed to conviction said in the letter, "I cannot and will not change my mind," Newman said.
The crazy thing?  I'm not sure cause I'm not a lawyer but after the juror made that statement even if they come back with some type of guilty verdict this trial is tainted and the conviction will be easily over turned.

I thought that state and local govts could handle these kind of cases. I think I was wrong.

UPDATE.  The juror that I quoted above said quite a bit more than the news media initially told us.  Quite honestly I thought that somehow a KKK member made it onto the jury but the juror is questioning the choices laid out before him.  I'm thinking but not sure that they probably pressed for murder and this juror is thinking this is more an involuntary manslaughter case.  The only reason why I give this a bit of "hope" is because they're talking about what wasn't seen on the tape.  Supposedly Scott grabbed at the officers taser.  What the truth is I don't know.  I wasn't there.

No comments :

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.