« "The Effects of Aging on Recidivism Among Federal Offenders" | Main | Latest data from National Crime Victimization Survey adds a bit of uncertainty to 2016 crime story »
December 7, 2017
Judge "convicts" Michael Slager of murdering Walter Scott and gives him 20 years in federal prison
As noted in this prior post, in federal court there was this week a homicide mini-trial as part of the sentencing of former South Carolina police officer Michael Slager pleaded guilty to a federal civil rights offense as a result of his lethal shooting of Walter Scott. This lengthy local article, headlined "Former officer Michael Slager sentenced to 20 years in prison for shooting of Walter Scott, reports on the results of the judicial inquisition and ultimate sentencing decision. Here are a few particulars:
Two and a half years after millions saw a cellphone video of Michael Slager gunning down Walter Scott, the 20-year prison sentence he was handed Thursday will be etched into history as one of the most significant for an American police officer involved in a fatal shooting.
Findings by a federal judge aligned with accusations that observers nationwide had aired against the former North Charleston officer since the footage emerged in April 2015: He committed murder when he shot at Scott eight times as the black motorist ran away. He also later misled investigators and lied during court testimony, the judge determined.
The judge rejected the 36-year-old's claim that Scott's own actions at least initially warranted the gunfire. The decision ended a courtroom battle that has played out since scrutiny befell North Charleston amid a national conversation about police killings. But Slager's penalty on a federal charge of violating Scott’s civil rights may extend that legal fight through appeals. It was more than twice what Slager’s defense team had hoped for, and it came as a surprise to many on both sides of the dispute....
U.S. District Judge David Norton had acknowledged two families who cried in his downtown Charleston courtroom and described how their lives had been torn apart by the shooting. Neither, he said, would be satisfied with Slager’s punishment. "Judging by (Slager’s) history and characteristics, he has lived a spotless life," he said. "Regardless, this is a tragedy that shouldn’t have happened."...
Slager pleaded guilty in May to the federal civil rights violation for using excessive force. But it was the judge’s responsibility to decide the underlying offense: second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter.
Norton largely dismissed Slager’s manslaughter argument that the officer had been provoked by Scott’s resistance, calling the motorist’s actions “wrongful” but not deserving of Slager’s reaction. Instead, the officer acted with malice by repeatedly shooting the unarmed and fleeing Scott, the judge said.
In reaching the murder finding, Norton rejected a pre-sentencing report’s recommendation that Slager should serve between 10 and 13 years behind bars. The judge reduced the penalty from the maximum lifetime term for reasons that had little to do with the shooting: for the way federal and state prosecutors collaborated on his prosecution and the risk of abuse Slager will face in prison because he’s a former police officer.
The sentencing relied on several legal determinations based on Norton’s view of the facts, and in delivering the penalty, he mentioned that he had consulted his wife, a forensic pathologist, in reviewing Scott’s autopsy. Defense attorneys took exception to those comments and the result, but the judge said their complaints would have to be addressed by an appeals court.
Slager will likely get credit for the more than yearlong stint he has already spent in jail. In the federal justice system, there is no parole.
Prior related posts:
- After his guilty plea to a civil rights offense, what federal guideline range and ultimate sentence will Michael Slager face for killing Walter Scott?
- Latest trial of Michael Slager for killing Walter Scott taking place during his federal sentencing for civil rights offense
December 7, 2017 at 07:12 PM | Permalink
Comments
All police protection should be withdrawn from all judges. Judges homes should be listed, and any call from these should ignored. There is no police duty to individuals, so said the Supreme Court. The cars registered to all judges should be stopped for going 4 mph over the speed limit.
Posted by: David Behar | Dec 7, 2017 9:05:40 PM
As to the Judge's comments "The sentencing relied on several legal determinations based on Norton’s view of the facts, and in delivering the penalty, he mentioned that he had consulted his wife, a forensic pathologist, in reviewing Scott’s autopsy. Defense attorneys took exception to those comments and the result, but the judge said their complaints would have to be addressed by an appeals court." At sentencing, the Judge can look at any information per 18 USC 3661, also US v Watts, 519 U.S. 148 (1997), Witte v. U.S., 515 U.S. 389 (1995), and 1B1.4 of the Guidelines.
Posted by: atomicfrog | Dec 8, 2017 8:30:34 AM
While the video coupled with his dishonesty about the events makes pretty clear for my math that Slager is a liar and a killer, and I can only hope that it makes another cop think with his brain and not his trigger finger, this is more than troubling. There's nothing in sec. 3661 to permit the judge to consult with his wife as an expert witness, which in essence denied to Slager due process in an opportunity to confront her.
Far from "any information," per Atomicfrog, sec. 3661 references the court's accepting information regarding "the background, character and conduct" of the defendant, and I cannot see what a forensic pathologist can add on these bases, in that there was, I'd presume, testimony at trial from an ME about the wounds sustained by Scott.
Posted by: miketrials | Dec 8, 2017 10:57:18 AM
My problem is they gave him life on a civil rights charge! The charge should have been first degree murder with special circumstances. This is just another illegal sentence where the state convict's on one charge but issues the sentence on crimes they could not conviction on or never even bothered to charge them with.
Posted by: Rodsmith3510 | Dec 8, 2017 5:09:37 PM
I did not know that there was no parole system in federal court. Good.
Posted by: Liberty Second | Dec 8, 2017 9:30:19 PM
20 years is a little light.
Posted by: federalist | Dec 9, 2017 8:48:20 AM