Why Don’t They Just Crucify Officer Michael Slager And Have Done With It?
Attacker and Victim
Baltimore burns—but South Carolina slumbers. For two weeks now, the prosecution/ persecution of white North Charleston PD Officer Michael Slager for the killing of black deadbeat dad Walter Scott has vanished from the Main Stream Media. But the stories are opposing sides of the same coin: sacrifice white cops—encourage black lawlessness.
We at VDARE.com have several questions about the Slager/ Scott case, which the MSM has conspicuously failed to ask:
- Why is Slager still being held without bail?
- Where is the police union?
- Why is Slager being charged with “Murder One”? (the colloquial term for First Degree murder).
- Why an indictment, without getting a true bill from a grand jury?
- Why bother with a grand jury anyway, now that prosecutors have already indicted Slager?
- What about the video analysis at Last Refuge/Conservative Treehouse? (It appears to show Scott had shot Officer Slager with his own Taser).
- What about the argument, first made on VDARE.com on April 12, that Scott was technically no longer a fleeing suspect, but a prisoner violently escaping custody—and thus could legally be shot?
The story so far:
Everyone was in a hurry to be on the record condemning white Officer Michael Slager, and placating black potential rioters and their masters, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Leftist billionaire George Soros and the Main Stream Media.
Then they all went silent.
(One exception: a white female SJW from Cincinnati named Meg Stentz [Email her] who openly hates white Southerners and just recently began teaching black kids in North Charleston whom she has apparently been seeking to incite to riot. [When racial violence no longer shocks, Cincinnati.com, April 26, 2015] Remember, this is an MSM story.)
North Charleston Police Chief Eddie Driggers [Email him] immediately ordered 150 additional body cams for his officers. Body cams are actually very good for good cops, and anti-police activists demand them, yet in practice they do not matter, because anti-police activists and the friends and relatives of black thugs simply ignore any evidence that contradicts their narrative. In the context of the Walter Scott case, however, Chief Driggers’ action seemed like an admission of guilt, both for the Scott shooting and for not previously obtaining the bodycams.
The North Charleston Police Department, which once gave Officer Slager a commendation for his skilled use of the Taser, is now reopening old cases in what looks like an attempt to retroactively re-write Slager’s employment history to match up with the MSM depiction of a racist monster cop.
Likewise, a black man whom Slager tased in 2013, suddenly sees a ghetto lottery beckon and is launching a civil rights lawsuit.
Feidin Santana, the black Hispanic bystander who filmed the video which the MSM then butchered and who claimed he was merely interested in “justice,” has now reportedly decided to pull the video, seeking to make million off of it.
But Santana’s greed could inadvertently help Slager. After George Holliday shot a partial video in 1991 of LAPD officers beating Rodney King and gave it to KTLA, someone in the station’s news department doctored it, cutting out the beginning, in which King charged at the officers—one of the reasons they then beat him with. (King had repeatedly violently resisted arrest.) That doctored video was then shown by KTLA and virtually every other TV station in the country at the beginning of every day’s newscast for what seemed like an entire year, poisoning America against the cops. Due to Santana’s greed, that seems unlikely to happen this time.
Still, “reporters” like USA Today’s Yamiche Alcindor repeating the lie that Officer Slager shot Walter Scott eight times in the back may serve as an adequate substitute for the doctored video:
In North Charleston, a graphic video depicts an officer firing eight times into a fleeing suspect’s back…
[Egregious conduct, video evidence used to charge police [original title: Officers Rarely Charged] by Yamiche Alcindor, USA Today, April 18, 2015.]
Actually, Officer Slager fired his weapon eight times, hitting Scott three times in the back, once in the buttocks, and once in the ear.
- Why is Slager still being held without bail?
A denial of bail is typically triggered by one of two scenarios:
- The legitimate fear that a defendant freed on bail will commit further crimes, e.g., killing witness; and
- That the defendant is a flight risk, e.g., an illegal alien, though in the latter circumstance, defendants are routinely bailed or bonded out.
No-one claims either apply in Michael Slager’s case. Thus there is no legitimate basis for denying him bail—yet I can find no-one who has raised the issue, let alone raised holy heck.
There are two possibilities
- A technicality based on the judge he was brought before, who said he didn’t have the authority to set bail for murder. (Then why was he the judge, and why haven’t they found another judge with more authority??):
— Christina Elmore (@celmorePC) April 8, 2015
- Personal feelings—also based on the judge he was brought before:
Cop Who Murdered Walter Scott Just Stood Before An African American Judge To Ask For Bail, CounterCurrentsNews, April 8, 2015.
- Where is the police union?
As soon as the Santana video was shown, attorney David Aylor, [Email| Twitter] whom fellow lawyer-blogger Scott H. Greenfield correctly called “the other shooter” because of the damage he did to Slager, dropped him as a client. Multiple MSM reports asserted that Aylor had been hired by Slager’s “union” to defend him, and named at least three different organizations as said union, but, as far as I have been able to determine, Slager never had a real union to begin with. (I called Aylor’s office, but got no answer.)
A labor union acts as members’ collective bargaining agent with their employer. But the groups cited in various MSM reports as Slager’s “union”—the South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Association, Southern States Police Benevolent Association (SSPBA), and South Carolina Police Benevolent Association, are not collective bargaining agents. When I spoke with the SSPBA’s Tim Reichert and Charlie Cordell—respectively the organization’s chief PR rep and lawyer—they denied that it was a union, with Reichert emphasizing that the SSPBA is not a group that tells officers to go on strike.
The SSPBA does, however, offer legal services to officers charged with crimes while in uniform. Indeed, while I was on hold waiting to speak with Charlie Cordell, the telephone system played a self-commercial, in which a speaker emphasized that the group had no limits on spending for a policeman’s defense costs.
But not for Slager. Cordell would only direct me to the non-response he had given to MSNBC:
“When officers are accused of crimes stemming from their law enforcement duties, police unions often provide financial and other support. An email from msnbc to a spokesman for the Southern States Police Benevolent Association (SSPBA) was forwarded to Charles Cordell, a lawyer for the group, who responded: “Neither, the Southern States PBA, nor the South Carolina PBA are involved in this case.”
“Asked to confirm that neither group was offering financial support for Slager, Cordell repeated his previous statement. Cordell did not immediately respond to a phone message seeking clarification.”
[Who’s paying for Michael Slager’s heavy-hitting defense lawyer? by Zachary Roth, MSNBC, April 10, 2015.]
The other group cited as Slager’s “union,” the South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Association, is run by Col. Mike Oliver, president, and Ryan Alphin, executive director. Col. Oliver is the commander of the South Carolina Highway Patrol.
SCLEOA has enthusiastically supported the prosecution of Slager:
The South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers’ Association (SCLEOA) confirmed that Slager had been a member of the organization, which provides legal representation to its affiliates.
But a spokesman told the Guardian that Slager would not be provided any assistance as his case “does not meet the SCLEOA criteria of a meritorious defense case”.
In a statement SCLEOA said: “It is sad for us when a police officer makes what appears to be a very bad decision that resulted in unnecessary death. Working with the community and elected officials we can overcome this tragedy. The swift decision to charge the officer demonstrates that law enforcement will not tolerate the tarnishing of the badge and oaths we all take so seriously.”
[Michael Slager fired from South Carolina police force after killing of Walter Scott, The Guardian, April 8, 2015.]
It seems to me to be an egregious conflict of interest for management to be in charge of the organization representing labor. That might explain why the organization would make such a prejudicial statement against one of its members, as well as violating an implicit or explicit contractual agreement to represent all members charged with crimes allegedly committed while in uniform.
What’s the point of being a member of a labor organization that one can’t count on?
I left two telephone messages for, and sent an e-mail to, SCLEOA’s Ryan Alphin, but received no response.
White South Carolina policemen have to find better forms of representation!
- Why Murder One?
Yet another aspect of the prosecution of Michael Slager that has enjoyed MSM acclaim has been his being charged with “first-degree murder.” (Definition: Any intentional murder that is willful and premeditated with malice aforethought.).
(In fact, South Carolina’s statute on homicide doesn’t contain the words “First Degree Murder”, but just says “Murder” with aggravating and mitigating circumstances. [Title 16 – Crimes and Offenses, Ch. 3, Offenses Against the Person, ARTICLE 1: Homicide]. Still, numerous MSM sources are using that term).
An argument can possibly be made for charging Slager with manslaughter (Definition: “unlawful killing of another without malice, express or implied”) or involuntary manslaughter, which would require a showing of “criminal negligence.” But no argument supports a Murder One charge.
Indeed, a stronger argument can be made for no charge, as a retired lawman did in a letter to VDARE.com, because Scott was not simply fleeing, but technically escaping from custody.
Which raises two questions:
- Is this correct as a matter of law?
- If it is legally correct, given how politicized the issue is, will any officer of the court (defense counsel, prosecutor, or judge) have the integrity and the courage to say so?
I wouldn’t hold my breath. Consider that the MSM e.g., CNN [We’re not seeing more police shootings, just more news coverage, By Eliott C. McLaughlin, April 21, 2015]) have imposed a narrative that matches the doctored video in which we see Officer Slager shoot a running Walter Scott, with no previous depiction of Scott fighting him, and possibly seizing his Taser and shooting him with it. That all has been sent down the memory hole, and Slager is being depicted as a liar for reporting that Scott fought with him, even though Scott clearly did, on at least two occasions.
I first called the office of Slager’s current attorney, Andy Savage, to ask whether he had seen the frame-by-frame analysis by The Last Refuge/Conservative Treehouse. Savage directed his investigator, Steve Russell, to respond. Russell emailed me,
“We appreciate your interest in the case and taking to the time to contact our office. I would like to speak with you and find out more about your information….”
I emailed Russell that before we spoke, he ought to look at the LR/CT analysis. He wrote back,
“I am familiar with the work product by The Conservative Treehouse. Again, we appreciate your interest in the case. I am not at liberty to discuss the case, answer any questions or comment on the video….”
Early this week, I called Andy Savage again, and gave his secretary two questions to pass along to her boss: “Why no bail?” and “Why Murder One?”
As of press time today, I had not received a response.
This is what I loathe about lawyers. They refuse to let their clients talk—in order to save the perfect case for trial. But in big public cases like these, that strategy doesn’t work. Their clients are left to twist in the wind for six months, and, by the time the trial comes around, the guy’s life is ruined anyway.
I also repeatedly contacted Ninth Judicial Circuit Solicitor (the equivalent of a district attorney or prosecuting attorney) Scarlett A. Wilson. I spoke with her office’s press representative, Naomi Nation, and gave her the questions at the beginning of this article.
Nation responded to two questions. She said that Slager has not been indicted—he was arrested on a “warrant.” And as for the warrant preceding the (Grand Jury) indictment, Nation said, “That’s how we do things here.”
On Tuesday, when I had not heard back from Nation or Solicitor Wilson, I called again. Nation said she could not answer my questions, but would pass along two I asked her then: “Why no bail?” and “Why Murder One?” No reply at press time.
However, Nation has told me that the next grand jury will be empaneled next week, on May 4—but that “there’s no guarantee” when Slager’s case will come up, and indeed that it’s highly unlikely that it will come up on the 4th. It “could be a July Grand jury.”
Thus Slager could sit in jail for three months, before even getting the option of getting bailed or bonded out.
While the authorities ignore Slager’s due process rights, they are concerned about some appearances. Thus, South Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Jean Hoefer Toal made sure to appoint a black judge to preside over the case, Judge Clifton Newman.
If Americans variously surrender and pile on in cases like these, the Left’s goal of federalizing local police will be effectively accomplished at the local level, without the need for active intervention by Obama or the DOJ (not that they won’t intervene, anyway).
Oh, and Slager’s wife was reportedly eight months pregnant when the incident occurred. I asked attorney Savage’s office if the baby had been born yet, while its father is in jail. As of press time—no reply.
Why don’t they just crucify Michael Slager and have done with it?
Nicholas Stix [email him] is a New York City-based journalist and researcher, much of whose work focuses on the nexus of race, crime, and education. He spent much of the 1990s teaching college in New York and New Jersey. His work has appeared in Chronicles, The New York Post, Weekly Standard, Daily News, New York Newsday, American Renaissance, Academic Questions, Ideas on Liberty and many other publications. Stix was the project director and principal author of the NPI report, The State of White America-2007. He blogs at Nicholas Stix, Uncensored.