Former North Charleston police officer Michael Slager, left, is escorted from the courthouse during his murder trial at the Charleston County court in Charleston, S.C., Thursday, Dec. 1, 2016. The case of the former South Carolina police officer charged with murder in the shooting death of Walter Scott, an unarmed black motorist is now before the jury. (AP Photo/Chuck Burton)

CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) — Jurors deliberating in the murder trial of a white ex-patrolman charged with murder for shooting a black motorist asked Thursday for transcripts of key testimony and wondered about the difference between passion and fear.

Michael Slager is charged in the death of 50-year-old Walter Scott, who was shot five times in the back in April 2015 as he fled a traffic stop after his 1990 Mercedes was pulled for a broken taillight. A bystander’s cellphone video of the shooting shocked the nation.

A jury of one black and 11 whites had deliberated more than nine hours over two days in the case of the 35-year-old Slager by the end of the day Thursday. Deliberations resume Friday.

At one point Thursday, Judge Clifton Newman called attorneys to the courtroom saying jurors wanted transcripts Slager’s trial testimony as well as that of Angela Peterson, the lead South Carolina Law Enforcement Division agent who investigated the shooting. Attorneys did not object to the request.

The jury also had a question for the judge: the legal difference between fear and passion. The issue was being researched overnight and Newman said that the jurors would get an answer Friday.

The jury can consider a lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter which in South Carolina is the taking of another life in the heat of passion when provoked.

Slager testified that he feared for his life when he said Scott wrestled with him, got control of his Taser and pointed it at him.

Although jurors were still deliberating, Slager’s attorneys filed a motion asking that if he is convicted, sentencing be delayed until a probation report is compiled. Generally in South Carolina, those convicted of crimes are sentenced immediately after the verdict.

Jurors heard testimony from 55 witnesses during the monthlong trial.

To convict Slager of murder, the jury would have to be convinced he had malice toward Scott. A murder conviction would carry a penalty of 30 years to life. Manslaughter carries a sentence of two to 30 years imprisonment.

Like BlackAmericaWeb.com on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter.

Also On Black America Web:

4 thoughts on “Jurors In Walter Scott Shooting Trial Ask For Transcripts And Definitions

  1. Just saying on said:

    Well, at least we know, there are 11 decent people on the jury who are willing to convict Slager. The lone wolf holding out is the hater. Had the nerve to say “in good conscience, he couldn’t….” If he voted to convict, how could he ever look his KKK buddies in the face at their next meeting?

  2. To serve on jury duty, you can’t have any criminal convictions AND you have be willing to give freely of your time to perform a civic duty that may impact your personal life. That reduces the pool of one group of candidates to the tune of about 1 to 11. I know that haters hate facts, but they are what they are.
    -Holla’

  3. specialt757 on said:

    The fact that this wasn’t a slam dunk to the jurors is problematic in itself. Yes this is a fake “fair trial” giving the illusion they care that this white ex-cop killed a black motorist. Had it not been made public Slager would have never been an “ex” cop and he definitely wouldn’t be on fake trial for murder. I guess our eyes were lying to us and we didn’t see him shoot him in the back five times in cold blood.

  4. Damn the jury of whose peers exactly: One African American and 11 white folks? Are you kidding me? What was the prosecution thinking? Oh I know lets pretend we care that this killer is getting a “fair trial” Is there anyone who believes in the “law” Lets not forgot these are man made laws and they are set to keep us down. I feel sorry for that one African American juror. No matter what happens – if he is the only one finding the cop guilty of murder he has hell to pay with the other 11 and if he goes with the 11 and find this cop not culpable he will need to move out of town. That is wrong in so many ways. What the hell

Add Your Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

×