SC

Officer Involved Shooting In Lexington County

|| By FITSNEWS || There was an officer-involved shooting in Lexington County, S.C. early Tuesday morning – just outside the town limits of Irmo, S.C. A Lexington County sheriff’s deputy shot a “suicidal man” on White Falls Road, according to a law enforcement source.  The man was reportedly in surgery…

|| By FITSNEWS || There was an officer-involved shooting in Lexington County, S.C. early Tuesday morning – just outside the town limits of Irmo, S.C.

A Lexington County sheriff’s deputy shot a “suicidal man” on White Falls Road, according to a law enforcement source.  The man was reportedly in surgery – although we don’t have any word yet regarding his condition.

“It was a nut job who got shot by a deputy,” our source said.

The S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) is investigating the incident – which one local television station is reporting involved “a Florida man visiting his brother.”

Sources close to the investigation tell FITS the officer involved in the shooting – and the man who was shot – are both white.

According to WLTX TV 19 (CBS – Columbia, S.C.), this is the fifteenth officer involved shooting in South Carolina this year.  The most controversial?  The shooting of 50-year-old unarmed black man Walter Scott by 33-year-old white police officer Michael Slager in North Charleston, S.C. on April 4.

That case prompted international attention after Slager’s account of the incident was thoroughly debunked by an amateur video showing him shooting Scott eight times in the back.

UPDATE: The individual shot by the Lexington deputy has been identified as 59-year-old Kimber Key.  According to deputies, he was wielding a knife at the time of the shooting, and sustained gunshot wounds to the upper torso.

***

Related posts

SC

South Carolina Mayor Dead Following Car Crash

Will Folks
SC

Palmetto Past & Present: How Columbia Became the Confederacy’s Currency Capital

Mark Powell
SC

Catherine Templeton: Stopping The Weaponization Of South Carolina’s Judicial System

FITSForum

16 comments

hello April 21, 2015 at 7:59 am

White Lives Matter! Come on back Jesse and Al!

Reply
TroubleBaby April 21, 2015 at 8:24 am

lol…I always find it interesting when there’s a random source claiming the victim was “nut job” that had interactions with police. I always wait for the video now.

Remind me of Dan Johnson and it’s a “good shoot” type behavior. It seems to be never ending.

Reply
Perfect Little Angels April 21, 2015 at 8:51 am

Cops always have a reason to shoot people and their pets. Even if they no-knock raided the wrong house.

Reply
YallCalmDown April 21, 2015 at 9:07 am

Yup. Same shit, different day.

Reply
Elfego April 21, 2015 at 8:28 am

So it goes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply
Rocky April 21, 2015 at 9:34 am

And the trend continues. Cop in SC shoots someone every 8-9 days. Not saying they aren’t justified, but that level of shooting suggests there is something very wrong with the society in this state.

Reply
Daniel Boome April 21, 2015 at 10:09 am

“Slager’s account of the incident was thoroughly debunked by an amateur video”
Umm, no it wasn’t. You can’t keep saying this. We don’t even know Slager’s “account” of the incident yet, so how exactly can his “account” of the incident be “debunked”. Slager’s incident report has NOT, I repeat, has NOT been released. I know it seems like a small detail but you keep repeating this lie over and over again.

Reply
TroubleBaby April 21, 2015 at 10:56 am

“Slager’s incident report has NOT, I repeat, has NOT been released.”

That may be the case, publicly, but remember that the witness/taker of the video said that the reason he decided to go public with the video is that the report did not match what he recorded.

If I recall correctly, he saw the report via the brother of the victim.

Reply
Daniel Boome April 21, 2015 at 11:51 am

Feidin Santana Statement (From His Attorney):

“As I was walking to work, I saw a scuffle ensue between two men (who have since been identified as Officer Michael Slager and Walter Scott) in a grassy, open area. After observing the two men struggle on the ground and hearing the sound of a Taser gun, I began filming the altercation with my cell phone. The video shows Officer Slager draw his gun and fire eight shots at Mr. Scott as Mr. Scott attempted to run in the opposite direction. When I later learned that Mr. Scott died from the gunshot wounds inflicted by Officer Slager, I mustered up the courage to show the recording of the incident to Mr. Scott’s family. While I initially thought about erasing the video, fearing that my life would be in danger if I came forward, I soon realized I needed to take a stand against such brutality. I realized the importance of serving as a voice for Mr. Scott and the many others who no longer have one.”

Nothing about an incident report or any version coming from Slager is mentioned. The timeline is suspicious, as well:

Saturday April 4th – Shooting occurs at approximately 9:30am

Sunday April 5th – Santana shares the video with the Scott Family.

Monday April 6th – Officer Slager arrested in the office of his attorney. The interesting part about this is that Santana has still not been interviewed by SLED at this point.

Tuesday April 7th – SLED releases the Official Arrest Warrant along with Public release of the video via New York Times.

Wednesday April 8th – Witness Santana begins doing video interviews. – Dash Camera video is released showing uneventful traffic stop until Walter Scott flees vehicle.

Reply
TroubleBaby April 21, 2015 at 12:49 pm

“Nothing about an incident report or any version coming from Slager is mentioned.”

This has been was was reported by two outlets I’m aware of(one linked(AP), the other was the Guardian)”

“Santana said he later saw a police report about the shooting and knew that he had to come forward because the officer’s account of what led to the shooting didn’t match what he recorded. Santana said he showed the video to a friend after reading the report, and his friend agreed that he needed to come forward.”

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/latest-police-shooting-unidentified-passenger-car-30198771

Reply
Daniel Boome April 21, 2015 at 12:57 pm

That doesn’t sound a bit contrived? He saw “a police report”, not “the” police report. Also, “he showed the video to a friend after reading the report”. There’s no mention of the family or any sort of interaction with the family. I would seriously doubt any member of the family saw any type of incident report. Doing so would in fact make it “public”. It really doesn’t matter in an ongoing investigation. If you release it or any details of it to anyone (family or not), it thereby becomes “public” because you can’t control the dissemination of that information.

TroubleBaby April 21, 2015 at 1:14 pm

“That doesn’t sound a bit contrived?”

I say this in all honesty, no.

“There’s no mention of the family or any sort of interaction with the family.”

I remember reading (probably in the Guardian) it was the brother of the victim. I suppose I could look for the write up if it matters that much to you.

“I would seriously doubt any member of the family saw any type of incident report. Doing so would in fact make it “public”.”

Well, that tells me two things:

#1 You don’t know if the victims family had access to the video or not.

#2 Ergo, by your own definition of public, it’s possible the report was made public-you just don’t know. (and I don’t either)

Daniel Boome April 21, 2015 at 1:32 pm

That’s really my point, because the truth is that there is no way it has been released (to anybody) and we don’t know about it. That would be even more unbelievable if it were in fact true that the officer lied. The Scott family attorneys would have made sure that at least that part was released to the media. So, at the very least, we can safely say that there was no lie in the report and that it was not fabricated.

TroubleBaby April 21, 2015 at 1:49 pm

“That’s really my point, because the truth is that there is no way it has been released (to anybody) and we don’t know about it.”

But you said you don’t know:

“I would seriously doubt any member of the family saw any type of incident report. Doing so would in fact make it “public”.”

So I’m not sure how you could deduce anything further.

Daniel Boome April 21, 2015 at 2:06 pm

Let me re-phrase the first part: There is no way that we could be unaware of the report’s release, if in fact it has been released. If it has been released, we would absolutely know about it. The only thing we can say right now is that we “don’t know”, which really just means that it hasn’t. Like I said, we can say that because if it has been released, there is no way we would not have seen it by now.

TroubleBaby April 21, 2015 at 2:14 pm

“The only thing we can say right now is that we “don’t know”, which really just means that it hasn’t. Like I said, we can say that because if it has been released, there is no way we would not have seen it by now.”

I’m going to respectfully disagree with you. You’ve been respectful and articulate, I just disagree with your summation.

That being said, we will definitely find out at some point in time in the future if a falsified report has been made or not at some point in the future.

Leave a Comment