Mistrial Verdict in Walter Scott Killing by Police Sparks Anger, Outrage
‘A Legal Lynching’
Black Community and Supporters of Justice Outraged After Former Police Officer Who Shot and Killed Walter Scott Handed Mistrial Verdict by South Carolina Jury – Despite Video Evidence
After hours of deliberation, shocking video of the incident recorded by a bystander, and testimony that at times was contradictory from the former police officer’s charged with the murder who fired the fatal shots, a South Carolina jury deadlocked. Eleven were ready to convict, but one juror, identified only as a 50 year-old male, who has been quoted as saying he “cannot in good conscience consider a guilty verdict.”Â
For Black Americans the declared mistrial is yet in another of a long line of missteps by the American justice system which disenfranchises them. It reinforces the principle that Black people’s daily encounters with police more often than not end in harassment, violence or death: Their lives don’t seem to matter, even when they’re being taken in front of millions of viewers.
The Walter Scott mistrial should disabuse us of the notion that proof of wrongdoing is itself enough to convict a police officer for murder.
— Clint Smith (@ClintSmithIII) December 5, 2016
It was a routine traffic stop in April of 2015 which quickly spiraled out of control. The white, North Charleston, SC police officer, 33-year old Michael Slager, had pulled 50-year old Walter Scott, a Black father of four, over for a broken ‘third brake light’ on the Mercedes Benz he was driving. The interaction between the two men escalated after Scott got out of his car and fled. Then in the version initially supplied to the public and media by North Charleston authorities, it was stated that Slager gave chase on foot, a physical altercation broke out, and Slager used lethal force to defend himself.
Re: Walter Scott. When DA sounds like the defense, can’t really be surprised by a mistrial. This is incredible.https://t.co/ZWHnM1jAnQ pic.twitter.com/DeRIoNrGSX
— Ta-Nehisi Coates (@tanehisicoates) December 5, 2016
However, within three days an eyewitness came forward. A piece published by The Post & Courier newspaper on April 12, 2015, described what happened next:Â
“On foot, Slager followed Scott down Craig Road, past a window-tinting shop and a lot behind a pawnshop. To their right was a chain-link fence with barbed wire. At an opening in the fence, Scott turned right, and so did Slager. At least one witness saw the pursuit.
Feidin Santana was on the alley-like road that paralleled the vacant lot. He took that route every day he went to work at a nearby barbershop. When he saw the pursuit, he decided to follow them. He heard the zapping sound of the Taser. He would later tell reporters that Scott seemed to be trying to get away from the Taser.
He pressed record on his cellphone. He twisted it sideways, and then steadied it as Michael Slager, a few yards away, pulled his Glock 21 from his holster.â€
Santana, who initially was too frightened to release the video eventually went to a local media outlet which then broadcast it, and posted it online causing it to go viral.
Cellphone video taken by a bystander shows Walter Scott being shot in the back five times https://t.co/SO5juZkbn5 pic.twitter.com/4fs7i5m1d4
— The Boston Globe (@BostonGlobe) December 5, 2016
The evidence revealed on Santana’s cellphone video was crystal clear: It graphically showed that Slager opened fire on Scott at a distance, striking him repeatedly in the back. Scott was unarmed and contrary to Slager’s statements given to investigators afterwards, Scott did not have possession of the officer’s Taser. In fact, Slager appeared to toss the device on the ground next to Scott moments after shooting him.
Within hours of the video’s release, Slager was fired, arrested and charged with murder.
One prominent member of the Black North Charleston, South Carolina community where the Scott killing took place, speaking confidentially to NCRM, referred to the mistrial as yet another miscarriage of justice, “a legal lynching.â€Â
He pointed out the December 3, Editorial Board of The New York Times editorial in the paper’s Sunday Review section to further illustrate his point.
The Times‘ board, writing about a supplement to the study, “Lynching in America,†released by the Equal Justice Initiative, had stated:
“The time when African-Americans were publicly hanged, burned and dismembered for insisting on their rights or for merely talking back to whites is nearer in history than many Americans understand. The horror of these crimes still weighs heavily on black communities in the South, where lynching memories are often vivid. The anguish is made worse by the realization that some of the killers are still alive and may never be prosecuted.â€Â Â
“This is no different.†he told NCRM. “The mentality that fostered the environment in American society which allowed for the Black community to be terrorized by lynching back then continues today by allowing for the police to be able to shoot black men with impunity.â€Â
Why do people run from police? Because no matter how much brutality, even if captured on video, there is no accountability. RIP Walter Scott
— Lisa Bloom (@LisaBloom) December 5, 2016
While he acknowledged that although the jurors, eleven white and one Black, were considering both murder and manslaughter charges against Slager, the problem was that one juror. Even though his eleven other peers decided that the actions were unlawful, the holdout obviously didn’t view Slager’s actions as criminal.
People will believe Hillary runs a child sex ring out of a pizza place, but not VIDEO of an unarmed Black man shot in the back #walterscott
— Brian Gluckman (@bgluckman) December 7, 2016
“That is the attitude – right there, it’s in front of him and he still does not see the crime – it’s because it’s just another Black criminal and a cop trying to do his job. There’s no real change. This is the same mindset that there’s always been. What about next time? Maybe it will be two or three jurors.â€
Prosecutors have stated that they will retry the case, an announcement that has been met with skepticism in the Black community in North Charleston and elsewhere.
Lecia Brooks, director of outreach for the Southern Poverty Law Center responded, telling NCRM:
“This is a case where an unarmed black man pulled over for a faulty brake light was fatally shot while running away. It is obvious to anyone who sees the video that Walter Scott posed no threat to the officer involved. We don’t believe that justice has yet been done and we are glad that the state of South Carolina isn’t giving up.â€
In statement released Monday, South Carolina’s Republican Governor Nikki Haley expressed her faith in the system and applauded the prosecutor’s decision.Â
“It is my understanding that there will be, as quickly as possible, a new trial where the Scott family and all of South Carolina will hopefully receive the closure that a verdict brings,” Haley wrote. “Justice is not always immediate, but we must all have faith that it will be served – I certainly do. I urge South Carolinians – in Charleston and across our state – to continue along the path we have walked these last two years: a path of grace, faith, love and understanding. That is who we are, and who I know we will continue to be.”
Walter Scott’s mom reacts to Slager mistrial: “It’s not over! Y’all hear me? It’s not over ’til God say it’s over!” https://t.co/J54RiABFFl pic.twitter.com/QDivSHM22Y
— CBS News (@CBSNews) December 5, 2016
Â
Brody Levesque is the Chief Political Correspondent for The New Civil Rights Movement.
You may contact Brody at Brody.Levesque@thenewcivilrightsmovement.comÂ
Image: Screenshot via ABC News/TwitterÂ
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.
Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”
“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”
In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”
He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”
“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”
“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”
“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”
The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.
“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”
Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”
Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.
Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) July 6, 2026
President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.
“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”
The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”
Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”
TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”
Critics blasted Trump.
“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.
One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”
Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”
The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”
Image via Reuters
President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.
According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.
Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”
“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”
Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”
Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.
Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.
The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.
“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.
The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.
“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”
Image via Reuters
Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation
Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs
One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won
Inside the Group Helping MAGA Voters Walk Away — And What Finally Pushed Them
