Shooting witness: Cop had control of the situation

This was a very powerful interview:

The bystander who recorded a South Carolina officer fatally shooting an unarmed black man eight times said the cop had control of the situation before he pulled out his gun.

In an exclusive interview with NBC News, the witness, Feidin Santana, said he could hear North Charleston Police Officer Michael Slager deploying his Taser on Walter Scott when he pulled out his camera phone. He said the two were on the ground before he started filming.

“I remember the police had control of the situation,” Santana said during the interview (above). “You can hear the sound of a Taser… I believe [Scott] was just trying to get away from the Taser.”

Slager was arrested Tuesday and charged with murder after the shooting, which occurred during a traffic stop on Saturday. Slager was charged only after the video was released, and the footage pulled the officer’s own account of the incident into question.

Audio of Slager’s call to dispatch was released today, and there are clear discrepanciesbetween that audio and Santana’s footage. Slager said he felt threatened because Scott allegedly reached for his Taser. Video evidences shows Slager dropping an object near Scott’s body after the shooting.

Santana has reportedly said he waited to release the footage to see how Slager would report his actions.

3 thoughts on “Shooting witness: Cop had control of the situation

  1. God “journalists” drive me crazy sometimes. The “two were on the ground”. What two? The officer and Scott were on the ground? If that was the case, that makes it sound like Scott might have been struggling with the cop and might have gone for the tazer and/or gun at some point. Yet no follow up questions to the intervieweee or clarification provided.
    I always feel stupider and angrier anytime I have to see or read something from the MSM. The worst part is now almost everything is video clips with zero depth, and just to see that you have to wait for pages to load and sit thru ads, and then you get almost zero factual content for your troubles.

  2. The MSM keep booting the question around as to what would have happened had the video not surfaced. The answer is staring them in the face. Look at the non-report by the second officer. But even more telling is the fact shared with Ferguson that the shooter was not required to file an incident report. That screams cover up in progress. The video immediately flipped the cover up into ass covering mode and then they threw only the shooting cop overboard.

  3. This is a repost of my screed on the Michael Brown killing intended to raise the rhetorical question of what the body cam video would have shown in Ferguson provided that corrupt police department didn’t have the opportunity to erase it.

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/us/ferguson-missouri-town-under-siege-after-police-shooting.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=b-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=4

    I am horrified by the mess the media and frankly the blogosphere have made of the evidence in the Michael Brown shooting. Maybe the only true words out of prosecutor McCulloch’s mouth were that the evidence tells the story. Then in a sleight of hand worthy of Karl Rove he claims the evidence supports the Officer’s story and counts on the media to get mired in the “contradictions” among the witnesses. NEWS FLASH: The evidence supports and reconciles almost all of the witnesses while damning the story that the PD took a month to try shoehorn into the physical evidence.

    Let’s take this from the top following the trail of bullet casings. There was only one shot fired from inside the squad car. That bullet went into the door and would have DNA from the deceased on it. The blood and some tissue from the young man’s graze wound to the thumb are found on the inside of the door and the armrest. The evidence strongly suggests that Brown defensively pushed down on the barrel just before discharge. That’s shot 1 and it put the young man to flight. The bullet casing fell on the road immediately under the driver’s side door.

    The casing from shot 2 is found way over by the curb and directly in line with eventual shots 3,4,5,and 6 because Wilson ran up the right hand side of the street. Shot 2 was fired at Brown in flight. They try to put this inside the car to create a struggle for the gun because a shot down the street is difficult to justify. Remember a variety of the witnesses claim one or more shots from the rear at the young man running away. Wilson denies it. The evidence supports the witnesses.

    Now let’s turn to the chase. Brown was wearing flip-flops. He ran out of them. This is a rough tar road. As a consequence the officer catches up about 160 feet from the squad. At the spot that Brown turns to surrender he is on the left hand side of the street with Wilson all the way over on the right and maybe even up on the boulevard. Brown turns, his hands go up and at the same time the officer fires shots 3,4,5, and 6 at a distance of about 30 feet. Brown was hit twice. We know that Wilson was stationary as these shots were fired because the casings land in a tight cluster on the boulevard. We know Brown is standing still because the blood pools at his feet. These are the facts testified to by the white contractor witnesses who have been shown on social media waving their hands in the air and screaming he had his hands up just after the shots. Why would they spontaneously and instantaneously lie? The evidence supports the witnesses again and contradicts the officer.

    The audio recording contains a three second pause. Wilson advances to the center of the street with his gun leveled on the young man. As he approaches Brown is aware that he was shot at in the squad, once while running and again when he tried to surrender. He has been hit twice. He has no shoes on, so flight is not a good option if he fears execution. At ten feet he charges. Wilson fires six shots retreating about ten feet as Brown comes forward almost twenty and falls dead from the head shots. On this the Officer’s testimony converges with some of the witnesses. The evidence supports a final charge. But after the preceding four shots the right of self defense belonged to the deceased.

    The evidence demanded a trial. The witnesses supported the evidence and the cop’s story completely elides shots 3,4,5, and 6 because those facts are consistent with attempted murder.

Comments are closed.