I did enjoy the way the lawyer did so while not explicitly acknowledging the release of the video as the reason, to protect attorney-client privilege.
I canât specifically state what is the reason why or what isnât the reason why Iâm no longer his lawyer. All I can say is that the same day of the discovery of the video that was disclosed publicly, I withdrew as counsel immediately. Whatever factors people want to take from that and conclusions they want to make, they have the right to do that. But I canât confirm from an attorney-client standpoint what the reason is.
I donât think thatâs necessarily planting a Taser. It may just be the answer to the question of, âwhat do you do with a Taser thatâs been discharged and lying on the grass with cords running across twenty or thirty feet of open ground, when you need to move from where it was discharged to the dying body of the man you just murdered, in whom the barbs are embedded.â
The right answer answer is probably to leave everything where it is, itâs now a crime scene, but part of his training was probably to keep control of his weapons, so he had a conflict to resolve and it took him a while to work it out.
Obstruction of justice?
We are all felonies. If we havenât committed a serious crime a crime can easily be fabricated. We can be killed without reason or cause. We are defenseless prey. We must come to the hard conclusion that we live in a police state. This is not hyperbole. There is little difference between the US and Putinâs Russia other than the US is more subtle and sophisticated. If you wonder why one group is targeted and not another itâs because it serves the interests of the powerful.
While what this officer did was despicable, judging how he acted while his adrenaline was flowing is stupid. There is a reason people seek adrenaline rushes, for the euphoric feeling. While his laugh is completely inappropriate, he shouldnât be crucified for it and it is a complete distraction from the events that lead up to the shooting.
Did you miss where after he dropped it next to the man he murdered, he went on to pick it back up and put it in his belt? That action kinda invalidates your scenario.
Iâm sick and tired of stories like this. Of course the police officer got an adrenaline rush; he bravely stood down an urban person who was threateningly running towards him in the other direction! The cop had no choice but to shoot that thug in the back, because, and I canât stress this enough, the assailantâs front was facing the other way!
There was another officer on the scene at the time he decided to move it, so the scene could be secured without moving it. Not only that, but a Taser must be reloaded with a new cartridge for each use, so it was not a device capable of causing further harm. Lastly, Taser cables are only 15ft long.
Why not give a statement right away (Other than the obvious)? If i shot an intruder in my home, I would be on my way to the PD within minutes.
What happens when a lawyer abandons his client? Does the state appoint another one? Youâd think for this policeman, perhaps the lawyers job is to arrange a good plea bargain.
unless you mistake your gun for your taser.
I agree itâs a distraction, b/c thereâs nothing to take from the exchange described. There was laughing apparentlyâŚthere is also nervous laughter. It doesnât confirm intent or anything else, as the headline implies.
However I think the âdonât worry just relax, you wonât have to deal with this for a few daysâŚâ portion is disturbing.
A taser with a discharged cartridge will still operate in âstun driveâ mode, until its battery is exhausted; but will not have any ranged capability. (see page 19).
Of course, itâs not clear who exactly is stupid enough to steal a (uniquely serialized, they all are) taser from a murder scene, with at least one cop standing around and watching, so it barely matters how useful the thing is or isnât. There was no need to move it or anything else until the forensics people did their thing.
No, I donât think so. @tekna2007 beat me to the question, but after watching the video, it could be that he wants to plant the taser on Mr. Scott, but it doesnât look so clear to me, although Iâm not a cop and have never planted evidence.
Slate has this to say about it:
The headline of this post originally stated that the video appears to show the officer planting a Taser on the victim. Itâs unclear whether heâs planting it or if he dropped it and picked it up afterward. The headline has been changed to account for this uncertainty. This is a developing story, and weâll continue to update it to reflect the latest.
Someone mentioned to me that Slager stated Scott was trying to assault him or take the taser from him in the report he filled out about the incident, but thatâs not something Iâve heard from a reputable source yet.
No doubt, Judge the officer and his superiors for their actions, not because he was being human.
For criminal cases, everyone has the right to representation. His lawyer dropping him like a radioactive tuber isnât exactly a good sign for the quality of his case; but if he doesnât make other arrangements he will be provided a public defender(which will probably encourage him to make other arrangements).
I suspect that police forces are quite familiar, at least on a practical level, with how circumstances and physiology affect human responses to questioning.
Advising a subject to take a few unofficial notes as quickly as they feel ready; and then giving them 48-ish hours to cool down and prepare is pretty sensible, if you want them to come off as well as possible.
If you are attempting to extract data you believe they have, or produce testimony that is either incriminating or easy to dismiss as internally contradictory and of low credibility; youâd of course do something else entirelyâŚ
