Geraldo Rivera Has A Very Sick Outlook Regarding The Walter Scott Murder

[kpete]

"I'm extremely glad that they released the dash cam video because it gives context to the event. However horrific and tragic and outrageous the shooting in the back is, it shows that it started as a righteous traffic stop," Rivera said on "Fox and Friends."

Rivera said that Scott "was acting very hinky, very edgy" and that he allegedly struggled with Slager after the officer used his stun gun.

"So, up until that point the cop, with his adrenaline pumping, now he's been in a physical tussle, now the perpetrator has reached for the taser, allegedly. Now it gives you the context of his blood boiling," Rivera said. "He has done everything professional and now ... this civilian has dared to physically have this altercation with the officer."

"Put that in the officer's head now. I think it saves him from the murder rap," Rivera said.

So Slager deserves a medal or something?

VIDEO & MORE:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/geraldo-dashcam-no-murder-charge


sorry about the rather stark error,
corrected,
kp

[kelliekat44]

1. OFFS!! And Geraldo know all this because he saw some video the rest of us didn't??? nt

[geek tragedy]

2. I hate to defend Geraldo, but he was arguing manslaughter instead of murder

I disagree--that cop was ice cold as he got into firing range stance and gunned down his victim.

But I can see where Geraldo was going with that.

[stevenleser]

7. I would like to hear DU attorneys opine on diff bt 1st degree murder and 2nd degree and manslaughter

He's definitely guilty of one of these, I am just not sure which one. IIRC 1st degree requires some sort of prior planning or thought. I am not sure this qualifies. This also does not seem like manslaughter to me. It seems like 2nd degree murder. But I want to hear what folks like msanthrope and jberryhill say.

[geek tragedy]

9. state of mind would have to be developed at trial.

not sure what South Carolina saws about the difference between the three. the statute doesn't give much guidance.

[stevenleser]

10. Yes, I made the mistake of looking up the statute. I am even more confused now...

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c003.php

[Ms. Toad]

12. Voluntary manslaughter

is heat of passion murder - a murder, except that it was carried out in the heat of passion.

Between first and second degree - the "willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing" factor for 1st degree gives them the discretion to charge most murders as first degree, even though first degree is supposed to be reserved for the worst of the worst.

[Ms. Toad]

11. Voluntary manslaughter or, at the most, second degreee murder.

First degree murder includes "willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing." Premeditation doesn't necessarily require extended planning, but especially in a case like this where there was apparently some provocation (that is in the gap between the two tapes I've seen - the tussle for the taser), I doubt first degree murder would hold up. (There are also other aggravating factors not applicable here which make murder first degree - such as weapons of mass destruction)

Second degree murder is any other kind of murder.

Voluntary manslaughter is the same as murder, except it is missing a element of malice aforethought: acting with (a) an intent to kill or (b) a wanton disregard for human life.

The lack of malice aforethought, when it looks as if there is an intent to kill or a wanton disregard for human life, can arise out of a sudden quarrel or heat of passion where (1) as a result of being provoked (2) you act under the influence of intense emotion obscuring your reasoning and judgement (no time to cool down), and (3) the provocation would be sufficient to similarly provoke an average reasonable person.

Anyone other than a cop - second degree murder. A cop - they'll be more likely to go for voluntary manslaughter.

[msanthrope]

14. Murder, special circumstances 3 and 11. Death penalty.

Murder in SC, requires malice. The cop had plenty of time to form malice between failing to subdue the suspect with a taser, drawing his gun, and shooting all those shots.

And in fact, the number of shots, and the planting of the taser, and the complete indifference to Scott, and no attempts to resuscitate? That's not the actions of a man acting without malice, which is required for manslaughter. The motive for shooting Scott? I would guess that the asshole didn't want to face yet another excessive force inquiry about the use of his taser.


http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c003.php

[stevenleser]

16. Wow, good to know. So we're likely to see this guy executed. I'm not for DP, so my preference

would be to see him get life without possibility of parole.

[msanthrope]

17. No--I think the prosecutors won't go for the DP. But I would. Then see what he pleads to. nt

[jberryhill]

28. 11?

Prosecution:

Aggravating: 3, 11 (I'll give you that provisionally)

Defense:

Mitigating: 1, 2, and 8

[msanthrope]

35. 11---cop had prior investigation for use of his Taser, (which has been reopened)

The use of the taser on Scott was a possible assault, so while I think it is a stretch, and may not survive motions, I would investigate if he referenced the prior investigation and feared a similar investigation into his use of force here. That gives you the murder of a potential witness--Scott. Yeah--it's a stretch.

As for mitigating---

1, he's got, unless the reopened taser investigation goes against him. 2, That's going to be a stretch for him to prove--that a mental and emotional disturbance jibes with his cool and collected planting of evidence and statement given. 8? Tennessee v. Garner should take care of that. Running away is not provocation.

[jberryhill]

37. I got the man for the job

[jberryhill]

25. You're not going to like this

Depends on the state. Each state applies its own labels to crimes defined by their various elements.

Some of these discussions degenerate into pointless arguments like "why are they calling it 'sexual assault' instead of 'rape'" when the state in question actually doesn't even have a crime called 'rape'. The modern trend is to have a spectrum of things defined as different categories of 'sexual assault'.

Most lawyers are familiar with the statutes, and how those statutes are interpreted, in their own state (and typically in their area of practice).

So this is pretty general, and I'll take a look at the SC statutes after that.

Relevant concepts like "forethought" can be interpreted to be along the lines of spur-of-the-moment forethought of a few seconds or less. IN BROAD GENERALITY, the relevant line it is usually somewhere between such formulations as "heat of passion" and "cool, collected plan". The person who walks into the adulterous romp and kills someone is the typical "heat of passion" killing. The person who walks in, walks out, and guns down the spouse's lover the next day, is the typical "cool, collected plan" killing. Anything between is up for grabs.

The guy with the camera said on MSNBC that just before he started the video, the two of them were on the ground, indicating some kind of struggle. In an ideal world, witnesses wouldn't have cameras and microphones shoved in their face for off-the-cuff Q&A. But, that's not our world.

There are at least three other witnesses. If you watch the dashcam video, the driver of the green car north on Craig street probably saw something, as did the two guys across Craig street who head over to the fence shortly after Slager and Scott take off.

So, all kinds of things might emerge from the additional witness testimony, but as far as anything we can see in the videos, there is a gap in what we can see from the time they exit left from the dashcam video, to the time they are standing up in the cellphone video.

What happened in that gap may, or may not, be relevant to Slager's state of mind.

From the dashcam, we can hear him yelling "Taser! Taser! Taser!" at some point while running. That suggests he was (a) intending to use the taser, or (b) working on an alibi while yelling at Scott and reporting on his radio all at the same time.

From the cellphone, we can hear that the Taser was deployed, from the clicking sound of the taser firing, and from the cartridge trailing behind Scott as he runs.

So, was Scott thinking of using his gun in the run up to the moment of however the Taser was deployed? A strong argument could be made that up to that time, he was thinking of using the Taser.

That leaves the moments from the Taser leaving his hand, to deciding to reach for his gun. Or maybe he threw down the spent Taser in order to reach for the gun. Or maybe the Taser was knocked out of his hand.

1. The argument for "cool head" is that, okay, the Taser was on the ground, and the guy was running away. Slager takes a steady stance, aims, fires, and hits 5 out of 8 shots.

2. The argument for "heat of passion" is that the witness says they were struggling, so in that line, Slager is still pumping with adrenaline from the chase, the takedown and whatever may have transpired there, and is still in the "heat of passion" at the time he gets up and fires.

The problem with #1 is that we don't have a good idea of what transpired in that gap, absent further information. The problem with #2 is that Slager does not appear to have been injured in a fight, or at least not from anything that has been released thus far. We haven't even seen the actual police reports themselves at this point, including any statements that may have been taken from the three potential witnesses if they have been found and questioned. I would imagine someone is looking for the person(s) in the green car that went north on Craig.

All of that goes into the blender, and a jury decides whether he was acting in the "heat of passion" or not.

Now that's all kind of the generic "1st or 2nd degree" kind of thing. No state has "generic laws".

So, with that in mind, we turn to the actual South Carolina species of Homicide. Incidentally "Homicide" is not a crime. "Homicide" is the killing of one person by another person. Whether it was a crime, depends on the pachinko slot into which the facts line of up with the following criminal species of homicide in South Carolina:

SECTION 16-3-10. "Murder" defined.


SECTION 16-3-50. Manslaughter.

SECTION 16-3-60. Involuntary manslaughter; "criminal negligence" defined.

SECTION 16-3-85. Homicide by child abuse; definitions; penalty; sentencing.

Then there are some other separately-included crimes. For example, if you poison someone to death, you win a special prize.

But what SC appears to do is, instead of defining a number of categories of "Murder", they simply have one crime called "Murder" and then a shitload of factors that determine what your range of punishments might be for different factors that might aggravate or mitigate the punishment for the murder.

It is a certainty that it won't be "2nd Degree Murder" because there is no second degree murder in SC. It's a pointless question.

And that is a perfect illustration of why lawyers generally take a deep breath before wading into silly definitional distinctions between types of offenses that might or might not be relevant to an offense that took place in one particular state, when the distinction attempted to be made does not even apply to the state in question.

So, all that said, the question of "first or second degree" is categorically irrelevant in relation to South Carolina law.

[stevenleser]

27. Excellent stuff. I think between you and msanthrope I have a pretty good view of this now.

Which is precisely why I wanted you guys to comment.

[msanthrope]

36. jberryhill did what I should have---noted that you don't have degrees of murder in SC--you show

malice, or you don't. Simplifies things, in a lot of ways.

[undeterred]

3. Scott Walker has not been murdered

but he's killing our state government in Wisconsin.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

4. I dont feel guilty that i got a little happy when I read the OP

[jberryhill]

33. You left out "tragically"

As in:

Scott Walker has tragically not been murdered.

[Marr]

5. I thought the video showed the cop planting the taser next to the victim.

How does that line up with Geraldo's characterization of the cop as being emotionally out of control? If you're clear headed enough to plant evidence, surely you're clear headed enough not to murder people.

[Politicalboi]

32. Gerry can say that because

It didn't happen to him or his family. They don't talk much about the framing of the poor victim. That alone should get the cop the DP.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

6. Jesus, whose vault did he pull THAT opinion out of?

[Johonny]

8. Why is Geraldo Rivera still a thing?

We are set to open Al Capone's glove compartment.

[herding cats]

13. Best as I can figure out there's about a 2:00 gap from when Scott took off to when he was shot.

We can still hear Slager for about another 45-50 seconds of that time on the dash video, which gives us a pretty god idea of what took place during that time.

It's that 1:10 - 1:15 time frame makes it clear he had a reason to kill someone who wasn't armed and was trying to get away?

I'd love to hear Geraldo's take on the lie they told about performing CPR on Scott to make the killing seem less, well, like murder.

[msanthrope]

15. You don't need motive to prove murder. nt

[herding cats]

19. Excellent point.

I almost let myself fall victim to a common distraction tactic. I appreciate the reminder!

[gordianot]

21. Odd what transpires in gaps. Guess life is coming down to instant replay.

[herding cats]

24. It's as if we're expected to walk about recording our daily activities to prove our harmlessness

That one missing moment could be all it takes to give someone a reason to defend our murderer if we don't.

[Jenny Red Eye]

18. "very hinky, very edgy" is a very specific compound term used within the justice system

that gives law enforcement officers license to immediately shoot someone in the back. My parents always warned me not to be hinky OR edgy. They also said if I am hinky AND edgy, I'm screwed.

[gordianot]

20. The people on Fox and Friends are just peerless.

Any friend of Fox and Friends should never be required to sit on any jury they too are without peers. Walter Scott was judged on Fox and Friends by those without peers. Might I add I am not a friend of Fox and Friends they are un-ballanced.

[WillowTree]

22. And Geraldo Rivera's opinion about ANYTHING is worth quoting.......why??

[arcane1]

23. The fear of arrest and getting shot with a taser both get the "adrenaline pumping"

But the victim's actions can't be viewed from the same context, Geraldo?

[merrily]

30. For Geraldo, adrenaline pumping on the part of the victim would prove aggression,

also on the part of the victim. Lose lose.

[tabasco]

26. He and his Fox "News" associates are beneath contempt. n/t

[merrily]

29. The man who thought wearing a hoodie was justification to shoot a teen dead.

Yeah, after massive pushback, including supporters all over the world wearing hoodies, Rivera said he son called him out on it and he apologized. But, IMO, this shows how little he meant that apology.

[Politicalboi]

31. A "third" brake light is NOT a

"Righteous traffic stop," I think it had more to do with a Mercedes Benz being driven by a black man.

The cop could have not chased the man, call a tow truck, confiscate and search his car, and take his passenger home. He had the guys license, so he knew who he was. You just go back later and pick him up or not.

[Scurrilous]

34. And the weapon drop Geraldo?

More adrenaline pumpin' and other righteous stuff?