• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Prosecution of 2nd Officer in Walter Scott Shooting Is Sought

JANFU

Land by the Gulf Stream
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
59,034
Reaction score
38,583
Location
Best Coast Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/13/u...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

In a two-sentence report filed after the shooting, Officer Habersham wrote that he had “attempted to render aid to the victim by applying pressure to the gunshot wounds” and by helping to coordinate the emergency response.

But critics of Officer Habersham questioned his account and said video evidence indicated that he had done little to assist Mr. Scott. They also suggest that Officer Habersham omitted significant information from his report — for instance, that Mr. Slager dropped an item, possibly his Taser stun gun, near Mr. Scott after the shooting. Officer Habersham could not be reached for comment on Sunday.
A 2 sentence report on a shooting?
 
I had been wondering.

The casualness of it all...
...it was striking

A 2 sentence report on a Police killing speaks volumes, and all negative towards the Department, the leadership of the Police, the city and the State.
It speaks to routine.
 
Is falsifying a police report illegal? Undoubtedly it is against regulation and a fireable offense. I think it should be illegal but I didn't know it was.
 
Is falsifying a police report illegal? Undoubtedly it is against regulation and a fireable offense. I think it should be illegal but I didn't know it was.

An official document that is and can used as evidence, I would hazard a guess yes it would be.
Though I am sure we have more knowledge people on the Board that can answer that directly.
 
From the NY Times article:

Officials here have not ruled out that other officers, including Officer Habersham, could be disciplined, but the municipal authorities are not leading the criminal inquiry into the shooting. Instead, the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division is investigating.

On Sunday afternoon, though, Mr. Summey, the mayor, supported some of Officer Habersham’s account.

“I haven’t seen all of the videos yet, but I know that the one officer that arrived secondly did try to prevent the bleeding,” Mr. Summey said. “If it was fast enough, I don’t know, but he was directing the ambulance in. I know that part; what he saw, I don’t know.”

Also of note is that America's most notorious race-hustler spoke at Mr. Scott's funeral. But of course.
 
From the NY Times article:

Officials here have not ruled out that other officers, including Officer Habersham, could be disciplined, but the municipal authorities are not leading the criminal inquiry into the shooting. Instead, the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division is investigating.

On Sunday afternoon, though, Mr. Summey, the mayor, supported some of Officer Habersham’s account.

“I haven’t seen all of the videos yet, but I know that the one officer that arrived secondly did try to prevent the bleeding,” Mr. Summey said. “If it was fast enough, I don’t know, but he was directing the ambulance in. I know that part; what he saw, I don’t know.”





Also of note is that America's most notorious race-hustler spoke at Mr. Scott's funeral. But of course.

Well he is everywhere but that does not change a thing. He was also at the NY shooting where the family sent the POS on his way. How does that change the killing.
How does a killing merit a 2 line report? Would you find that acceptable?

The facts will speak for themselves.
1 point- before the Chief of Police went live on TV do you think he did or did not see this 2 line report on a deadly shooting?
 
Neither you nor I know what departmental policy is and whether Habersham was advised by his superiors to say as little as possible until expert counsel had been brought in by his department. We don't know whether he subsequently has written a lengthier report or who has interviewed him or anything else. I am unwilling to rush to judgment without more facts. How about you?
 
I think everybody needs to wait for more facts to come in and not rush to judgment about Habersham.
 
Funny thing is that at least three other officers reported that they observed him administering first aid and at least one reported to assist him in doing so. Not to mention video that shows officers administering first aid. People need to stick to the facts and quit making things up.

Dollars to doughnuts that the Officer charged with murder had submitted quite the report
2nd Officer – 2 lines – care to speak to that?
Next- I am well aware that you think that if he had not run, he would still be alive today.

Lawyers say second officer in Walter Scott shooting Clarence Habersham should be arrested | Daily Mail Online

A group of black attorneys have called for the second officer connected to the fatal shooting of South Carolina father Walter Scott to be arrested.
National Bar Association officials said that Officer Clarence Habersham, 37, who was the second policeman to arrive at the dead man's body after shooter Michael Slager, should be fired and prosecuted for filing a false report.
 
What is the department policy on rendering first aid to suspects? And what is the state law on the same?

A cop may have other duties and responsibilities that come before that...those regarding risks to themselves and the public. And preserving the crime scene. I dont know but I'm not assuming they have any legal obligation...altho I believe there is a moral one if there's no danger to others.
 
Neither you nor I know what departmental policy is and whether Habersham was advised by his superiors to say as little as possible until expert counsel had been brought in by his department. We don't know whether he subsequently has written a lengthier report or who has interviewed him or anything else. I am unwilling to rush to judgment without more facts. How about you?

Regardless of whether it's department policy or not, it's sickening that not all of the facts are documented for a police shooting the same day it happened. It's nothing short of appalling. If it's policy then who ever made the policy should be fired and it should be changed. If his superiors told him to omit facts from the report then they should all go to jail. If he did it himself then he should go to jail. Anything else only shows that our current system is a joke.
 
Regardless of whether it's department policy or not, it's sickening that not all of the facts are documented for a police shooting the same day it happened. It's nothing short of appalling. If it's policy then who ever made the policy should be fired and it should be changed. If his superiors told him to omit facts from the report then they should all go to jail. If he did it himself then he should go to jail. Anything else only shows that our current system is a joke.
What facts do you think were omitted
 
What facts do you think were omitted

I was responding to a hypothetical scenerio if you see the post that I was responding to. Where the officer was told to write as little as possible.

There's no way all of his experience of the situation was converyed in two setences. How many times was the guy shot? What position was he in on the ground? Did he talk to the other officer? Did the officer say that the guy was running at him or running away?

I've seen police reports. Generally they are laid out:

Upon arriving at the scene ... details of what was there and what he saw....

I took these actions in this order for this reason...

I also noticed this while responding. I investigated this. As a result I found this.

etc etc...


To think that this guy only wrote down two sentences is laughable. Two sentences isn't enough to even cover the condition of the suspect upon arrival. Was he breathing, how was he positioned, how many times was he shot, was he unconscious, do you have a physical description of the guy, did you check his ID and get a name for the guy, what did the other police officer say?

Pure insanity that anyone could possibly think two sentences are ok for a police report like this.
 
The second officer can only report what he knows

You have very low standards for Police Officers when finding a 2 sentence report on an Officer involved killing acceptable.
 
If I had to defend this man I would put police chiefs and police union on trial. They are the ones who have manipulated that environment.
 
Neither you nor I know what departmental policy is and whether Habersham was advised by his superiors to say as little as possible until expert counsel had been brought in by his department. We don't know whether he subsequently has written a lengthier report or who has interviewed him or anything else. I am unwilling to rush to judgment without more facts. How about you?

Not rushing, it is becoming apparent that this Police force has serious issues within the force.
A 2 sentence report on a killing.
 
What facts do you think were omitted

Why would you be interested. Your opinion on Officer involved killings has become clear as day. If only the suspect did not run he would be alive. if only the suspect paid child support he would still be alive.
Justice for some appears to be how you look at these killings.
 
Is falsifying a police report illegal? Undoubtedly it is against regulation and a fireable offense. I think it should be illegal but I didn't know it was.

Falsifying a police report...illegal...?...no.

Aiding and abetting a criminal act, towit, covering up a murder/manslaughter, yes! Presumable this is how the Charleston PD sees this situation since Officer Habersham didn't include the fact that Officer Slager purposely dropped his taser gun next to Mr. Scott's body after shooting him. This whether Officer Slager believed Mr. Scott was dead or dying. Makes no difference. It was more than falsifying a police report. It was covering up an illegal act.

Falsifying the police report would have been like reporting that the shooting took place at 3:30pm when it really happened at 3pm and it becomes known that the reported time was done to give a police officer cover. What Officer Habersham did was purposely omit crucial information from his report. Why would he do that is the question people should ask.
 
Last edited:
You have very low standards for Police Officers when finding a 2 sentence report on an Officer involved killing acceptable.
The second officer wasn't involved in a killing. He arrived on scene after the fact and related his actions at the scene
 
Why would you be interested. Your opinion on Officer involved killings has become clear as day. If only the suspect did not run he would be alive. if only the suspect paid child support he would still be alive.
Justice for some appears to be how you look at these killings.
Is it your opinion that if Scott had stayed in his car as instructed that Slager would have shot him anyway?
 
Is it your opinion that if Scott had stayed in his car as instructed that Slager would have shot him anyway?

Play your games, you have stated in other threads basically what I posted.
Clearly for you it is Justice for some. And **** the rest.
 
Back
Top Bottom