Ferguson v2.0

[consortium11]

The last thread didn't go particularly well but here's to hoping that this one can go better.

There's two major points of discussion from the two major items to come out of this, although the two are certainly related.

1) The Grand Jury made their decision not to indict Darren Wilson for the death of Michael Brown. This strikes me as being primarily a legal and evidential question; I believe all the evidence the Grand Jury saw is being (or at this point may have been) released and so it's probably best to read through that before commenting in depth; one of the issues with discussing the Trayvon Martin case was that people hadn't read (or understood) what the evidence was.

2) Sadly but unsurprisingly one of the responses to the Grand Jury's decision was a wave of looting and arson in Ferguson with shops and businesses seemingly unrelated to the case being broken into, goods being stolen and then being set on fire.

[gaggedLouise]

It's looking bleak. The last thing one wants to hear about now is "Thanksgiving riots" over these frayed affairs, but clearly a lot of tempers and minds are on edge.

[Cassandra LeMay]

One source for the court documents and hearing protocols I have found so far is here: http://apps.stlpublicradio.org/ferguson-project/evidence.html

Some documents take forever to load, but I suppose that's no surprise, given the large public interest this case has generated.

[Cycle]

2) Sadly but unsurprisingly the response to the Grand Jury's decision was a wave of looting and arson in Ferguson with shops and businesses seemingly unrelated to the case being broken into, goods being stolen and then being set on fire.

I would be careful implying that looting and arson were the only response to the Grand Jury's decision.  They are not.

[Ebb]

The last thread didn't go particularly well but here's to hoping that this one can go better.

There's two major points of discussion from the two major items to come out of this, although the two are certainly related.

1) The Grand Jury made their decision not to indict Darren Wilson for the death of Michael Brown. This strikes me as being primarily a legal and evidential question; I believe all the evidence the Grand Jury saw is being (or at this point may have been) released and so it's probably best to read through that before commenting in depth; one of the issues with discussing the Trayvon Martin case was that people hadn't read (or understood) what the evidence was.

Without having read more than just bits and pieces of the original testimony, I'll say that I found Vox's take on the events compelling:

http://www.vox.com/2014/11/25/7281165/darren-wilsons-story-side

2) Sadly but unsurprisingly the response to the Grand Jury's decision was a wave of looting and arson in Ferguson with shops and businesses seemingly unrelated to the case being broken into, goods being stolen and then being set on fire.

I'd amend this to say that a wave of looting and arson in Ferguson was one response to the decision. The number of looters and arsonists was far lower than the number of peaceful protesters, both in Ferguson and in many other American cities.

[Kythia]

Daily Mash

[consortium11]

I'd amend this to say that a wave of looting and arson in Ferguson was one response to the decision. The number of looters and arsonists was far lower than the number of peaceful protesters, both in Ferguson and in many other American cities.

I would be careful implying that looting and arson were the only response to the Grand Jury's decision.  They are not.

Noted and changed.

[Cherri Tart]

It's hard to understand what's going on here if you're an outsider looking in. it's hard to come to grips with the raw anger that is being displayed at the moment. it's hard to understand the injustice people feel. Just to throw out a few of the big names that mirror the Michael Brown shooting in recent history; Rodney King,Trayvon Martin and Oscar Grant. Those are the ones many of us are familiar with, but trust me, that is just the tip of the ice berg - whether Wilson deserved to be freed of charges is not the point. the point is, yet another black kid was gunned down by a white cop who was then exonerated. for some of you, this is simply a news story. For others, this is reality. At some point, people start feeling helpless to create peaceful change, wondering, how many of our sons must die? why does no one care? at that point, all they have left is to strike out with violence.

no, it's not going to change anything, but neither are peaceful protests, that has become obvious, at least to many of us. sure, it's self destructive. sure it, at best, doesn't change anything and, at worst, makes things worse, but when you start treating people like they don't matter, what do they have left? honestly, this reaction doesn't surprise me at all, and there is a part of me that yearns to be out there burning shit to the ground as well...

[Scribbles]

I stumbled across this while reading up on the case and am honestly in a bit of shock but is there any truth to the information below?



If so, America really needs to start asking itself why the police feel the need to resort so often to their guns rather than tazers, rubber bullets, pepper spray, etc...

[Shjade]

It seems shocking, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's accurate. I've always had the impression police in the rest of the world basically treat guns as a last resort measure rather than an introductory FREEZE, ASSHOLE tool.

But then, what would I know, I don't live outside the U.S.

[Scribbles]

I've always had the impression police in the rest of the world basically treat guns as a last resort measure rather than an introductory FREEZE, ASSHOLE tool.

Haha, you almost made me choke on my tea with that!

Silliness aside, I know of countries where gun laws are highly restrictive as far as police are concerned and they still feel free to fire off their pistols like gatling guns when given the chance.

Perhaps you need to start looking from the perspective of your local officers and asking yourself why they might feel the need to resort so often to lethal force, there might be a legitimate concern compared to other countries...

[Beguile's Mistress]

 You might want to look up the statistics on the number of guns in the hands of the citizens and how often they are used against other citizens and the police.  I think that if the criminal actors limited themselves to the use of tazers, rubber bullets, pepper spray, etc. the police wouldn't feel the need to use fire arms.  Also, the number of citizens/crimes in relation to the number of police is also a factor.

[Inkidu]

I stumbled across this while reading up on the case and am honestly in a bit of shock but is there any truth to the information below?



If so, America really needs to start asking itself why the police feel the need to resort so often to their guns rather than tazers, rubber bullets, pepper spray, etc...

A.) You can just discount Japan from these things. They're typically specifically stuffed into these comparisons to make other nations look bad, but Japan is an incredibly homogeneous society with strong reverence for norms and mores. It's not so much gun control as gun-less complicity. In general the Japanese don't need armed police because violent crime in Japan has historically been low.

B.) America can fit all three of those nations in Texas alone and has many more population centers per capita (ie. We've equaled the major cities of most nations before hitting the Appalachians). So number of people, number of police. I can't tell from the info whether or not that number is so high because there are more police officers being shot because there are more police officers to shoot.

C.) Most importantly though:

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/causes.html

That is a list of all the law enforcement deaths over the past decade.

In 2014 alone the number of deaths from being shot is 548. The only other one that comes close is car crashes.

Don't get me wrong. I love the number of non-lethal options, but look, approximately 100 more officers were killed by people with guns.

[Knightshadow]

I would like to ask if there are so many police shootings of perpetrators, what were the perpetrators doing to cause this reaction from police?  Were they violently resisting? Were they running away? Were they brandishing their own weapons?  My assumption is that more often the case is an alleged criminal is in the commission of a violent crime wherein the police feel the need to protect life and property.  I would be curious to see statistics on number of perpetrators shot in the back, possibly fleeing.

But the looting?  Violent responses (fires, throwing objects, pushing cars, breaking windows) seem understandable.  But looting?  They are so mad at the decision so they need to rob a Dollar Store and start their Christmas shopping early?  This, I cannot understand.

[Cycle]

This is fascinating.  Look at the number of protests that are taking place around the world...



(To be clear.  This is a map of protests, not riots.)

[Scribbles]

I thought it was obvious but in case anyone is getting defensive, I'd like to point out that I am trying to draw some perspective towards the reasons why lethal force might be used rather than imply the police are somehow in the wrong.

Cycle,

I'm not sure I agree with that map, it seems to have omitted quite a few protests around the world...

Beguile's Mistress,

I have a pretty good idea of what I'd find if I looked up such statistics...

Inkidu,

I could probably lump the entirety of Europe together and go back twenty years and the comparison would still be against the US. The UK had a higher rate of violence per capita than the US at one point and its police shootings were still lower, although if you knew the UK you'd know I'm totally cheating! :P

That said, my post is answered more by your point C than A and B.

[Inkidu]

Well, I felt C was the most important anyway, so I'm glad.

[Apple of Eris]

I'm going to post two videos here, one discussing reasons for the outrage by John Oliver which he talks about the racial issues in that town and across large parts of America in general and the militarization of the US police force: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A

I'd also like to point out as per this daily show clip, there is no actual data kept on how many americans are killed by police. The number of deaths is only an 'estimate'.
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/v4l2pe/a-shot-in-the-dark

[Knightshadow]

I'm going to post two videos here, one discussing reasons for the outrage by John Oliver which he talks about the racial issues in that town and across large parts of America in general and the militarization of the US police force: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A

I'd also like to point out as per this daily show clip, there is no actual data kept on how many americans are killed by police. The number of deaths is only an 'estimate'.
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/v4l2pe/a-shot-in-the-dark

How illuminating and hilarious! Thank you for sharing.  Love that John Oliver!

[Cycle]

Cycle,

I'm not sure I agree with that map, it seems to have omitted quite a few protests around the world...

Really?  What other countries have protests concerning the Ferguson Grand Jury decision?

[Scribbles]

Really?  What other countries have protests concerning the Ferguson Grand Jury decision?

Oh, I didn't realize they related to this trial specifically, I'm shocked Japan would participate in such at all...

I'm going to post two videos here, one discussing reasons for the outrage by John Oliver which he talks about the racial issues in that town and across large parts of America in general and the militarization of the US police force: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A

Hahaha, that was hilarious!

Is racism really such an issue in America? I find that surprising.

[Cycle]

Oh, I didn't realize they rated to this trial specifically, I'm shocked Japan would participate in such at all...

Yeah, it looks like someone made a GoogleMap of the protest rally locations listed on this site:  http://fergusonresponse.tumblr.com/

Oslo's in on the action too!

[Slywyn]

Hahaha, that was hilarious, is racism really such an issue in America? I find that surprising.

Yes, yes it is.

[la dame en noir]

Can I just say that I'm very happy that other parts of the world actually care about what happens to the common folk and even my people. For the longest time I thought the world hated black people...this is beautiful to me.

[Shjade]

Hahaha, that was hilarious, is racism really such an issue in America? I find that surprising.

Yeah, it's...yeah. It's less hilarious when you're here. Unless, of course, you're one of the people who, for some reason, finds the situation funny rather than appalling. x.x

(Note: that's a hypothetical "you," not suggesting you, personally, would be such a person.)

[Zakharra]

 Whether the people in Ferguson have legitimate reason to be angry or not, there is no reasonable excuse to do rioting, vandalism, looting and burning of businesses. I do not mind peaceful or even loud protests, but once the violence starts, especially when there is burning and looting and vandalism going on, what sympathy I have to the protestors starts to drop. Fast.  The people of Ferguson can protest, but they shouldn't be burning, looting or vandalizing anything. It makes them look like morons, especially when its small businesses that are mostly hit.

[Lustful Bride]

I salute the brave National Guard troopers going in. Hopefully they maintain order and this can all be put to rest without any bloodshed.

Protesters will go home, the people causing violence and looting will move off from fear of the feds and order will be re established.

It saddens me to see that the way of non violent protests seems to be dying these days.

My prayers are with the people who have lost their livelyhoods and had their property damaged by all this. I hope that they have not lost too much and that they can rebuild. Though I know that in these harsh economic times, the loss of a business pretty much means they should start preparing for unemployment and food stamps.  :'(

Edit: My persona opinion on this matter is that there is no real right answer. There was going to be riots regardless of what was said and this tragic event has become politicized and polarized.

[Scribbles]

Yeah, it's...yeah. It's less hilarious when you're here.

*sigh* John Oliver is hilarious, not racism, edited my post to make that more clear.

[Cycle]

Whether the people in Ferguson have legitimate reason to be angry or not, there is no reasonable excuse to do rioting, vandalism, looting and burning of businesses. I do not mind peaceful or even loud protests, but once the violence starts, especially when there is burning and looting and vandalism going on, what sympathy I have to the protestors starts to drop. Fast.  The people of Ferguson can protest, but they shouldn't be burning, looting or vandalizing anything. It makes them look like morons, especially when its small businesses that are mostly hit.

I think there is a distinction between rioters and protestors.  Some of the Ferguson protestors rioted.  But not all of the Ferguson protestors rioted. 

Moreover, I suspect some of the rioters were not protestors at all--some were probably just opportunists.

It seems that the majority of the protestors called for non-violent action immediately in response to the announcement, did not riot, and are condemning the rioter for their actions.  It is too bad that the rioters are diluting the protestors' message.

[Knightshadow]

Perfect distinction, Cycle.  Opportunists are being blamed for the looting.  Some protestors are looting.  Regardless, if you are looting, burning, pillaging, causing bodily harm, you are a criminal and should be dealt with accordingly.

On a delicate matter, if the population is 2/3 black yet the police and government demographic is heavily white, why don't some of the residents run for office or join the police force?  Is there evidence of systemic discrimination in hiring?  Certainly the political process at the local level may be accessible--and winnable--for the constituency.  Again, I only ask out of ignorance. I am not familiar with the region's politics or public sector hiring practices.

[Shjade]

*sigh* John Oliver is hilarious, not racism, edited my post to make that more clear.

No, I got what you meant. But think of it from the perspective of the dude DUDE DUUUUUUDE guys in the video clip he uses.

"Is our town really that fucked up?"

On the one hand it's still funny. On the other it's... :|

[Beguile's Mistress]

It's sad that not only are there people committing arson, burglary and theft with threats of bodily harm and assault added to it but there are others influencing and encouraging them to do so.  For many it really has nothing to do with a young black man being killed.  As someone above said they are opportunists out for what they can get for themselves.

[Ephiral]

Worth noting: I'm not sure about the current round, but in round 1, the overwhelming majority of the protesters were not just against the looters,but actively protected and in at least one case saved businesses under attack while the police were doing nothing. The rioting will not diminish my respect for the protesters, nor do I think non-violent protest is becoming a thing of the past, because the protesters and the rioters are distinct categories, and protesters will often not just condemn but actively work against rioting.

[Cherri Tart]

Can I just say that I'm very happy that other parts of the world actually care about what happens to the common folk and even my people. For the longest time I thought the world hated black people...this is beautiful to me.

i'm heartened that a positive message came out of all this tragedy. for the record, there are many who don't care what color your are - actions and deeds create beauty, not skin color. you are beautiful and you matter. *hugs*

[Anesa]

This pastor had a stern message for Ferguson. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B092acMImJE

Personally, I don't have much empathy for Michael Brown. When I seen the video if the deceased being a thug & robbing that store, I lost empathy. I hate that his life was taken, I hate that the police officer will probably have to go into witness protection, but the rioting gives him no honor.  But no matter how much of a criminal he was, a mother lost her son. I have empathy for her. Many business owners and their employees lost their livelihoods in Ferguson during the looting and rioting. I have empathy for them. A lot of the people that live everyday in Ferguson have been vilified because of the ignorant and destructive actions of a few (that are usually agitators coming in from St. Louis and other places). I have empathy for them. But it's not fair to call for empathy for one side and not extend it to the other.

I'm almost positive that Darren Wilson did not wake up that morning intending to kill anyone. And no one can understand the fear he must have felt in those moments unless you've been there. He took a life. Whether he regrets his actions or not, that's a heavy thing to carry forever. He's lost his career. I have empathy for him. I have empathy for his family. I'm sure he has a mother that has had to watch her son go through this.

It's a bad deal all around.

[la dame en noir]

HA!

This is disgusting. Do you realize that this boy just graduated highschool and was on his way to college? He stole a pack of cigars...oh fucking well. I stole skittles when I was fucking 10 year old because I wanted skittles. Not only that, you guys label him as a thug...why? Because of the color of his skin? the fact that he was born in a poorer neighborhood or because of how he dresses?

And all that bullshit of him with money and "thuggish" poses...guess what fools...thats not him and it was proven that it was someone else. Its called fucking racist propaganda. I'm so over this.

[Ephiral]

I'm almost positive that Darren Wilson did not wake up that morning intending to kill anyone. And no one can understand the fear he must have felt in those moments unless you've been there. He took a life. Whether he regrets his actions or not, that's a heavy thing to carry forever. He's lost his career. I have empathy for him. I have empathy for his family. I'm sure he has a mother that has had to watch her son go through this.

Considering how his testimony blatantly and wildly contradicts the known evidence in at least one major regard immediately preceding the shooting... I have strong suspicions that he wasn't as scared as he claims. Even if we take his rather nonsensical and conflicting statement at face value... I can certainly understand where at least some of his decision-making came from.

[Apple of Eris]

I haven't read the entire transcript yet, just bits and pieces, but the tweets by Lisa Bloom are very on point. Why didn't the prosecutor question Wilson about the multitude of inconsistencies in his statement?  Just to sum up a couple questions that SHOULD have been asked in cross examination, but were NOT:

"How did Mike Brown punch you on the right side of your face with his right hand if you were in the driver's seat of your car?"
"If you, as previously testified, did not believe the victim was armed, why were you so focused on the hand near his waist band?"
"How does Brown taking one step constitute charging?"
"If the victim punched you full force in the face twice as alleged, why does your hospital record show no bruises, cuts, or lacerations when you went in for your check?"

She also goes on in her tweets to compare the prosecutions botching of this with the prosecutions poor job in the Trayvon Martin case where again the victim was dehumanized and the prosecution failed to ask any tough questions. As a former lawyer myself I also find myself wondering if the prosecution was incompetent or just unwilling to pursue this faithfully.

And after reading sections of the transcript myself I feel sick to my stomach. I want to start burning things. Especially when I see sections where the officer refers to Brown as "It". As in "...it looked like a demon coming towards me." Then a few sentences later mentions that Brown's hands were in the air.
Honesty, I am completely appalled at this. I don't know if these investigations need to be taken out of the jurisdictions of local prosecutors who are often dependent on the local police or what the solution is, but this, this has to stop.

And here's an interesting article about white riots. http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/11/white-people-rioting-for-no-reason.html Yet I don't recall the outrage about these, the calling them thugs, condemning 'white culture', that [censored] Ted Nugent pontificating publicly about white people and abortion. Where was the outrage from Sean Hannity, Ann COulter, Bill O'Reilly, and Guiliani at these events? Oh right... white people rioting so it's not that bad.

Anyway, I'm out of this convo before I really do break something.

[Skynet]

Whether the people in Ferguson have legitimate reason to be angry or not, there is no reasonable excuse to do rioting, vandalism, looting and burning of businesses. I do not mind peaceful or even loud protests, but once the violence starts, especially when there is burning and looting and vandalism going on, what sympathy I have to the protestors starts to drop. Fast.  The people of Ferguson can protest, but they shouldn't be burning, looting or vandalizing anything. It makes them look like morons, especially when its small businesses that are mostly hit.

This might have been addressed already, but the majority of looters were from out of town taking advantage of the unrest.  A lot of local protesters (both past and current) actively protected local shops from them.

For example, an August video.

So in a lot of cases the looters aren't destroying their own towns, they're just using Ferguson as a focal point knowing that the locals will take the brunt of the blame.

[TaintedAndDelish]

I haven't read the entire transcript yet, just bits and pieces, but the tweets by Lisa Bloom are very on point. Why didn't the prosecutor question Wilson about the multitude of inconsistencies in his statement?  Just to sum up a couple questions that SHOULD have been asked in cross examination, but were NOT:

"How did Mike Brown punch you on the right side of your face with his right hand if you were in the driver's seat of your car?"
"If you, as previously testified, did not believe the victim was armed, why were you so focused on the hand near his waist band?"
"How does Brown taking one step constitute charging?"
"If the victim punched you full force in the face twice as alleged, why does your hospital record show no bruises, cuts, or lacerations when you went in for your check?"

She also goes on in her tweets to compare the prosecutions botching of this with the prosecutions poor job in the Trayvon Martin case where again the victim was dehumanized and the prosecution failed to ask any tough questions. As a former lawyer myself I also find myself wondering if the prosecution was incompetent or just unwilling to pursue this faithfully.

And after reading sections of the transcript myself I feel sick to my stomach. I want to start burning things. Especially when I see sections where the officer refers to Brown as "It". As in "...it looked like a demon coming towards me." Then a few sentences later mentions that Brown's hands were in the air.
Honesty, I am completely appalled at this. I don't know if these investigations need to be taken out of the jurisdictions of local prosecutors who are often dependent on the local police or what the solution is, but this, this has to stop.

And here's an interesting article about white riots. http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/11/white-people-rioting-for-no-reason.html Yet I don't recall the outrage about these, the calling them thugs, condemning 'white culture', that [censored] Ted Nugent pontificating publicly about white people and abortion. Where was the outrage from Sean Hannity, Ann COulter, Bill O'Reilly, and Guiliani at these events? Oh right... white people rioting so it's not that bad.

Anyway, I'm out of this convo before I really do break something.

IANAL, but is it possible that he got hit on the right side of his face if he was looking strait forward at Brown? ( Ie. left handed punch grazing right side of face? )

As for bruises, they do have photos of that:


Unfortunately, there are two narratives going around, and its kind of hard to tell which story is correct. If I am not mistaken, the main reason why he did not get indicted was that the allegations against him were inconsistent and there was really not enough credible evidence to work with.  I am a bit curious about why the cop was not cross examined at the indictment, though.

If its true that this guy really did attack the cop in his car and then try to grab his gun, then he was tempting fate and got burned. I'm not really sure what else the cop was supposed to do in that case. Personally, I think it would have been better if he had just shot him in the legs or shoulder to debilitate him?

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

Such a dark time for my country and a true look into the systemic racism and corruption that still runs rampant. My heart goes out to Mike Brown's family and the people of Ferguson.

[Cassandra LeMay]

If its true that this guy really did attack the cop in his car and then try to grab his gun, then he was tempting fate and got burned. I'm not really sure what else the cop was supposed to do in that case. Personally, I think it would have been better if he had just shot him in the legs or shoulder to debilitate him?

I am neither a cop nor a weapons expert, but I see two problems with "shoot  to wound".

The first ist that a leg or shoulder is a small target and not that easily hit, especially on a moving target. We are talking about situations here where the adrenaline is pumping, heart rates are up, breathing is fast, stress levels are high. That doesn't make for the most precise shots. So if a cop really believes his own life is in danger (rightly or wrongly, but really believes it), telling him to aim for a leg could well lead to several misses or just grazing hits and than an assailant could be upon him. Sadly the torso of a human being makes a much easier target.

The second problem I see is that cops should be taught to use a firearm only as a last resort. If you tell them it's okay to "shoot to wound" they might get their guns out even more than they already do, lowering the threshold for when it is okay to use a firearm. I am not so sure that would be a good idea.

[Caehlim]

I am neither a cop nor a weapons expert, but I see two problems with "shoot  to wound"

The first ist that a leg or shoulder is a small target and not that easily hit, especially on a moving target. We are talking about situations here where the adrenaline is pumping, heart rates are up, breathing is fast, stress levels are high. That doesn't make for the most precise shots. So if a cop really believes his own life is in danger (rightly or wrongly, but really believes it), telling him to aim for a leg could well lead to several misses or just grazing hits and than an assailant could be upon him. Sadly the torso of a human being makes a much easier target..

The FBI agrees.

"Rather, shootings are characterized by their sudden, unexpected occurrence; by rapid and unpredictable movement of both officer and adversary; by limited and partial target opportunities; by poor light and  unforeseen obstacles; and by the life or death stress of sudden, close, personal violence. Training is quite properly oriented towards "center of mass" shooting. That is to say, the officer is trained to shoot at the center of whatever is presented for a target. Proper shot placement is a hit in the center of that part of the adversary which is presented, regardless of anatomy or angle."

Source: Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness, FIREARMS TRAINING UNIT. FBI ACADEMY. QUANTICO.

The second problem I see is that cops should be taught to use a firearm only as a last resort. If you tell them it's okay to "shoot to wound" they might get their guns out even more than they already do, lowering the threshold for when it is okay to use a firearm. I am not so sure that would be a good idea.

I agree. Less lethal armaments (tasers, capsicin spray, etc) are the appropriate choice for a situation not requiring lethal force. A firearm should only be used if the situation justifies the use of immediate lethal force, in which case fancy trick-shooting would not be a realistic or appropriate option.

[Ephiral]

IANAL, but is it possible that he got hit on the right side of his face if he was looking strait forward at Brown? ( Ie. left handed punch grazing right side of face? )

Not what was claimed, though - Wilson specifically said that his left hand was full for most of the alleged attack.

If its true that this guy really did attack the cop in his car and then try to grab his gun, then he was tempting fate and got burned. I'm not really sure what else the cop was supposed to do in that case. Personally, I think it would have been better if he had just shot him in the legs or shoulder to debilitate him?

There is at least one serious problem with Wilson's narrative, which brings the rest of it into severe question: According to Wilson, Brown died 10-20 feet from the car. Why was he found 150 feet away?

[Slywyn]

There have been many inconsistencies and conflicts of interest over the course of this whole thing. It's just terrible.

[Lustful Bride]

We should also remember, that despite all of this, deep down inside. People are just people, no matter what the media or big groups say.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide

[Florence]

And here's an interesting article about white riots. http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/11/white-people-rioting-for-no-reason.html Yet I don't recall the outrage about these, the calling them thugs, condemning 'white culture', that [censored] Ted Nugent pontificating publicly about white people and abortion. Where was the outrage from Sean Hannity, Ann COulter, Bill O'Reilly, and Guiliani at these events? Oh right... white people rioting so it's not that bad.

Anyway, I'm out of this convo before I really do break something.

Its just like how during disasters... ya know, you see a white person carrying stuff out of a flooded store, and they're 'finding supplies'; you see a black person carrying stuff out of a flooded store and they're 'looting'.

But as for this whole issue... I'm just going to echo what I've heard said before by other people, because at this point, I find it hard to argue against it; cops need body cameras. Yes, there's a matter of cost, but when you consider all the incidents where cops are accused of abusing their authority, of killing unarmed kids, of racial prejudice, etc. It would just be so much easier if we could just check video footage, see what happened, be done with it.

As it is, we'll NEVER know with 100% certainty if Darren Wilson acted responsibly, or if he really was out of line. If he was a good cop just doing his job, video evidence would exonerate him. If he was a racist who shot a black kid for being 'scary', video evidence would condemn him. Either way, the only people harmed would be corrupt cops and people trying to frame good cops. From what I've heard, not only would the benefit be proof of what DID happen, but it would also prevent things from happening in the first place. Its been shown that the simple presence of a camera improves the behavior of civilians and police alike.

I've heard people raise the issue of privacy concerns, but... as someone who is very heavily in favor of personal privacy... I feel like, if I'm talking to a police officer, I'm already in a situation where there's not really a huge expectation of privacy. I'm already speaking to a representative of a law enforcement agency, I don't really feel any loss of personal privacy at that point that would even come close to outweighing the positive effects.

[Apple of Eris]

Read this article on CNN. I think it does a very excellent job of summarizing the real problems in discussing race. Whites and minorities often see the discussion of race differently where generally speaking whites talk about overt racism, while minorities often discuss racial bias which oftentimes whites dismiss, despite numerous studies showing that racial bias is real and very damaging to minorities.

Here's the article: http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/us/ferguson-racism-or-racial-bias/index.html?hpt=hp_t4

[Inkidu]

Read this article on CNN. I think it does a very excellent job of summarizing the real problems in discussing race. Whites and minorities often see the discussion of race differently where generally speaking whites talk about overt racism, while minorities often discuss racial bias which oftentimes whites dismiss, despite numerous studies showing that racial bias is real and very damaging to minorities.

Here's the article: http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/us/ferguson-racism-or-racial-bias/index.html?hpt=hp_t4

I think the best thing this article points out is that minorities and majorities are racially biased. The unfortunate situation of this is that it leads to an eye-for-an-eye-makes-the-whole-world-blind kind of situation. :|

[Tairis]

I agree. Less lethal armaments (tasers, capsicin spray, etc) are the appropriate choice for a situation not requiring lethal force. A firearm should only be used if the situation justifies the use of immediate lethal force, in which case fancy trick-shooting would not be a realistic or appropriate option.

The problem with 'less than lethal' armaments is that they are also 'less than reliable'. If we had a perfect solution, ala the 'stun setting' phaser of Star Trek fame, I guarantee you it would be in use.

Tasers suffer from both their single shot nature and the fact that to deliver their jolt both prongs must connect with the target. All you need is from one barb to hit a button, belt, cell phone case, etc and the taser has literally no effect.

Pepper spray hurts like a bitch, but is highly dependent on the victims pain threshold. People that are not prepared or relatively calm? Works wonders. People that have naturally high pain tolerances or are already on an adrenaline high? Not so much. It still hurts, but it's not disabling. The other fun fact that people always forget is that pepper spray is just that: a spray. Ever sprayed a bug and gotten that weird taste or sticky feeling when some of it gets on you? Not fun.

People also always go with the 'well he was unarmed' argument whenever something like this happens. Do you have an idea how bizarrely durable AND fragile human beings are? We can be hit by cars and thrown 40 feet... and walk away. But we can also take a SINGLE punch and die. Until you've been hit by someone that is trying to physically harm you (not sparring or play fighting or accidents) you have no idea what your tolerance is nor in that moment do you know at what point that other person is going to stop.

If a man that size is punching me in the face and I'm already in an inferior position (Like Wilson was in this case, unable to retreat or gain leverage)? Yea, I'm going to shoot him and very likely kill him. And just like this cop I'm sure I'll be crucified as a murderer (if the guy attacking me is black, of course, if he's white no one will care).

Here's what I don't get about this entire issue. We have two very clear facts that are completely indisputable:

1) Brown stole items from a shop
2) Brown physically assaulted a police officer that was in his car

How is this man being portrayed as a victim? There is no scenario that can be explained that makes Brown innocent. He physically attacked a law enforcement officer after committing a crime. Why does it matter how many times he was shot or where he was found? I don't give a damn how much he loved animals or whatever. He did something illegal and stupid, followed it up with something ELSE illegal and stupid. An as someone said above 'oh I stole skittles as a kid'... keyword: kid. This guy wasn't 10. He was an 18 year old man. Young, but still a man.

The lesson here isn't 'evil white cops just want to shoot black guys'. It's 'hey, maybe you shouldn't STEAL crap and then physically ASSAULT law enforcement officer if you don't want to get shot'. If you want to expose racism, profiling, or anything else there are far better examples in the world than this case. Instead it seems like the same story as always: black guy gets shot by a white guy, suddenly he's Pope Francis and clearly the white guy just wanted kill him because he was black.

[Sethala]

I agree. Less lethal armaments (tasers, capsicin spray, etc) are the appropriate choice for a situation not requiring lethal force. A firearm should only be used if the situation justifies the use of immediate lethal force, in which case fancy trick-shooting would not be a realistic or appropriate option.

The cynical side of me says "Right, and as soon as we get the guys assaulting cops to use tasers and pepper spray, we'll get the police to resort to less-violent methods too."

The fact is, there are far too many people that do walk around with a firearm and are willing and able to pull it out and shoot someone rather than stop and ask questions.  A cop is likely going to talk to, detain, or arrest dozens, probably hundreds of people in his career.  All it takes is one of those people pulling a gun and getting a lucky shot off to bring the cop from "defender of the peace" to "worm food".

I think that, as long as the american public has such easy access to firearms (seriously, we have more guns per citizen than most third-world countries), the cops are going to err on the side of caution, and in this case "caution" can often mean "shoot first, check for weapons later".

Granted, there are certainly corrupt cops that are willing to fire on someone they know isn't a threat if they just don't like that person.  I completely agree that "cop cams" should be standard issue, as well as highly visible so both the cop and the people he's talking to know they're being watched and recorded.

[Slywyn]

1) Brown stole items from a shop
2) Brown physically assaulted a police officer that was in his car

Both of your 'facts' have been shown to either be untrue(Brown was never in the store he allegedly stole from, for example) or highly misconstrued(Brown would have had to have punched awkwardly -around- Wilson's head to hit his right cheek).

So... yeah. It's not as cut and dry as people are pretending it is.

[Iniquitous]

Both of your 'facts' have been shown to either be untrue(Brown was never in the store he allegedly stole from, for example) or highly misconstrued(Brown would have had to have punched awkwardly -around- Wilson's head to hit his right cheek).

So... yeah. It's not as cut and dry as people are pretending it is.

Incorrect. The friend with Brown did confirm that he was with Brown when they robbed the store ( link )

The fact of this matter is the "witness reports" of Brown being shot in the back with his hands up has been proven false. (Autopsy shows there were no entrance wounds on his back) Brown had a gunshot wound on his hand with residue from the gun that could only have gotten there if his hand was close to the muzzle of the gun when it went off (this supports the police officer's report that Brown went for his gun). People did report seeing Brown at the window of the car and that it looked like there was a struggle going on. They also reported that he turned away from the car, started to walk off then turned around, lowered his head with his hand at/under his waistband and charged the police officer (this supports the police officer's report as well).

1. If a cop asks you to do something, you do it. You are not going to win if you try to argue/fight with a cop.
2. If you attack a cop, you are asking for it. Wilson reacted as he has been trained to - someone attacked him then charged him. The trajectory of the bullets support how Wilson described the scene.
3. Brown had marijuana in his system at the time of his death.

Simply put, Brown is not the victim so many want him to be. He played with fire and he got burned. Whether people want to admit it or not, the physical evidence supports Wilson. ( Link )

Brown is not the victim here. This is not a white vs black issue.

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

Relevant...

GENEVA, Switzerland (UPDATED) – A UN watchdog on Friday, November 28 slammed police shootings of blacks in the United States, days after a decision not to prosecute a white officer who shot and killed an unarmed black teen sparked nationwide protests..

With tensions still running high after the November 24 decision by a Missouri grand jury not to charge a white policeman who shot dead 18-year-old Michael Brown on August 9, the UN Committee Against Torture published conclusions from its review earlier this month of the US record.

Brown's parents had been present at the hearing on November 12 and 13 in Geneva to discuss their son's case with the committee members.

"The committee is concerned about numerous reports of police brutality and excessive use of force by law enforcement officials, in particular against persons belonging to certain racial and ethnic groups," the 10-member committee said in its report.

It also lamented "racial profiling by police and immigration offices and growing militarization of policing activities."

Alessio Bruni, one of the top investigators on the committee, told reporters in Geneva the members had voiced "deep concern at the frequent and recurring police shootings in fatal pursuit of unarmed black individuals."

The committee, which periodically reviews the records of the 156 countries that have ratified the Convention Against Torture, lamented that the large delegation of high-level US officials who came to Geneva to defend the US record had provided little data on police brutality and investigations into such abuses.

It urged Washington to ensure that all cases of police brutality and excessive use of force are "investigated promptly, effectively and impartially", that perpetrators be brought to justice and that victims receive effective remedies.

"We have certain concerns about whether investigations are ... thoroughly completed and whether punishment of law-enforcement when they have crossed the line are effectively put in place," said another of the panel's top investigators, Jens Modvig.

[Rex Pacis]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWUkBxmFUvU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVJzspyeen8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCVPMZmQB2U&list=UU1yBKRuGpC1tSM73A0ZjYjQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e57CSImJ-c

Just leaving this here cause this issue is starting to drain my psyche. I'll try to keep it short.

I can't say for sure that Darren Wilson is guilty of anything but I can say for sure if he really cared about justice and believed he did nothing wrong the least he could have done was stand trial. That is literally the only thing he had to do and I believe a lot of this violence and unrest could have been calmed some.  A man accused of murder will never stand trial because of a tainted Grand Jury process with a prosecutor who seemed to have no intention of indicting Darren Wilson ever...you know the one job he had. God forbid that doesn't irk some people with a history of being oppressed.

Why does it matter where Brown was found, Tairis? I think it's very important because that alleged "assault" on Darren Wilson took place in his car not 8-10, 30, or 150 feet from his car. Somebody must have chose to flee. No? So Wilson..."fearing" for his life chose to give chase after Brown assaulted him. Does that sound like police procedure? I thought he had called for backup. I don't think Brown was innocent of anything...if he did not go to jail for assault then he should have at least have had to answer for the robbery. Not be six feet under right now. However the issue is not what Michael Brown did it's about what Darren Wilson ended up doing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yfbbt6DvHg

A few more things....

Like it says in the one video above. Supposedly, according to the chief of freaking police, at first Darren Wilson had no idea about the robbery and was approaching Mike Brown and his friend for jaywalking. Suddenly when testimony time comes he is blocking their escape with his car and is noticing cigars in Mike Brown's hands taken in a robbery he was supposed to know nothing about.

So it is proven that either Darren Wilson or the police themselves changed the story around to their benefit and that doesn't grind anybody's gears? Or maybe make you think that I don't know maybe the police are lying? They left him lying the street for four hours and took no pictures of the scene. Does that sound like good police work to anyone? I had heard the store owner didn't even report a robbery but that didn't stop them from releasing the video to show Brown's thuggish behavior. Who was pressing charges over a handful of cigars? You can watch the fourth video above to see exactly what that meant to the case. ((Hint: Nothing!))

So many more questions to bring up but I'm tired and more tired of typing them.

Brown never did himself any favors(unless he did try to surrender but whatevs...) but to think that Wilson is innocent of any wrong doing just because Brown was a "thug" and cause the Grand Jury chose to NOT charge him with anything is a little silly. He will never be innocent in some people's eyes because he never had to face the charges brought against him cause a PROSECUTOR couldn't prove to a jury that killing an unarmed person was wrong. Probably didn't help when your case to said jury was to let them hear every testimony and piece of evidence. Sure sounds like someone did his homework against Wilson like he was supposed to...

[Florence]

3. Brown had marijuana in his system at the time of his death.

Every time this point has been raised in discussions of this subject, my reaction has been the same: ... so?

Shit if having pot in your system warranted execution, I wouldn't be here typing this right now.

Granted, I have the good sense not to interact with the fuzz while high, but still.

Also, on the topic of the robbery; as Rex Pacis said, the police themselves publicly stated that Wilson had no knowledge of the robbery at the time of the shooting. If that's so, it sort of makes the entire thing irrelevant when discussing whether or not Wilson was justified in the shooting. If I ran outside with a knife and stabbed some guy in the street only to later find out he was a serial killer, it wouldn't change the fact that I just randomly stabbed a guy in the street. He could have been a nice guy who runs a soup kitchen and donates all his spare change to charities for all I knew.

Based on what I've heard, at least, it sounds like as far as Wilson knew, Brown was just some black kid walking in the middle of the street when they first encountered each other. You can debate what happened after that point well enough, but unless Wilson was made aware of them, the events prior aren't really relevant towards whether or not the shooting was justified.

You could argue that it goes to character, but all that tells me is he was kind of a punk, and probably deserved to go to jail. It's not sufficient to paint a picture of a kid who deserved to be gunned down in the street.

To be clear I'm not saying lock Darren Wilson up and throw away the key. I'll be the first to admit that I don't really know what happened. I just think one thing that is clear is that past events the shooter wasn't aware of don't really have much weight in debating the shooting itself.

I definitely agree that, for me at least, its the lack of an indictment, more than the lack of a conviction, that bothers me. I know they've emphasized that the people deciding that were the only ones with access to ALL the information; but it just seems to me there was at least enough to go on to bring it to trial. If he was innocent, awesome, let a jury find him innocent.

I know there would have been an outcry either way, with people claiming the grand jury bowed to pressure if things went differently; but at least if he stood trial we could have some sense that there had at least been an effort to make sure justice was served.

[consortium11]

Why does it matter where Brown was found, Tairis? I think it's very important because that alleged "assault" on Darren Wilson took place in his car not 8-10, 30, or 150 feet from his car. Somebody must have chose to flee. No? So Wilson..."fearing" for his life chose to give chase after Brown assaulted him. Does that sound like police procedure? I thought he had called for backup. I don't think Brown was innocent of anything...if he did not go to jail for assault then he should have at least have had to answer for the robbery. Not be six feet under right now. However the issue is not what Michael Brown did it's about what Darren Wilson ended up doing.

I think posts like this are why I mentioned in the OP about reading the evidence and testimony.

No-one denies that Wilson pursues Brown after the exchange in the car (where Brown seemingly punched Wilson twice, went for his gun and was shot twice in return, once in the thumb/hand). As the story goes Wilson ran after a fleeing Brown and told him to stop and get on the ground. Brown stopped... but turned and charged Wilson. Wilson fired a number of shots, told him to stop again and then, when he didn't, fired several more, the last of which hit Brown in the head and killed him. The physical and witness testimony pretty much all supports this and at the very least doesn't oppose it.

Does it sound like police procedure to pursue a fleeing subject who's just assaulted a police officer? Yes. One can of course think that, especially with the benefit of hindsight, it would have been better for Wilson to call for backup and try to track Brown's movements without engaging him but that's a judgement call, not a matter of procedure.

[Rex Pacis]

This might sound dumb but which evidence in particular was I supposed to look at, sir? Considering that the prosecutor rather then do his job and build a case against Darren Wilson chose to present the jury, with most likely no legal backgrounds, all the "evidence" they had collected. If the transcripts really are thousands of pages long like I heard why would I read through it only to find what I've already heard. Some people say he was surrendering, Wilson and some other witnesses(only five out of sixty testimonies i think) say he was charging, Brown can say nothing. I think someone here already talked about the unreliability of eyewitnesses so there's that.

You wanna talk about the autopsy well I already provided a short video on that.

My conclusion is based off the actions and words of Darren Wilson and the Ferguson police. They changed their story when it came time for the grand jury, they didn't bother to correct that bullshit story about orbital socket fractures, they released a tape about a crime that had nothing to do with the incident, the town prosecutor played the role of defense attorney...these people worked real hard to make sure Brown was portrayed as a criminal even though as far Darren Wilson knew before the incident all he was was a disorderly jaywalker who he shot and killed. According to Dorian Johnson Wilson grabbed Brown first after having reversed his car back to them. So who really started the aggression is still up in the air.

Don't forget that when the tape was released Wilson supposedly had no idea about the robbery yet it is the basis of his defense all of a sudden. Because if he shot and killed a jaywalker who disrespected him then that might be an actual crime.

You seem to imply that I'm misinformed but the truth is neither of us is actually fully informed. However the things I said in my last two paragraphs are actual facts so maybe you can see why I don't believe a word Wilson says. And considering how racially charged this issue is the fact that nine out of the twelve jurors were white is just the icing on the bullshit cake. There's no Indian,  Asian, or Hispanic people living in Ferguson?

One last thing I'm fairly certain Wilson at least says he called for backup...he just chose not to wait for it. He was terrified for his life however so the obvious choice must be to go after the staggering man you shot twice and are afraid might kill you. So that aint 20/20 hindsight that's just..WTF? Chase a criminal into his turf alone is definitely a solid plan of action lol.

The thing I'm not getting is why people think just because he was not indicted that means he was innocent of any wrong doing. It just means he is NOT going to trial. A trial that would have sorted through the fact and fiction to give us a better picture of what really happened. Couldn't have that now could we? God forbid he was actually proven innocent during the trial.

[Caehlim]

I can't really comment on any of the other issues here, not knowing many of the facts, but here's one I can answer.

And considering how racially charged this issue is the fact that nine out of the twelve jurors were white is just the icing on the bullshit cake. There's no Indian,  Asian, or Hispanic people living in Ferguson?

According to the 2010 census, 1.2% of the population of Ferguson identifies as Hispanic, 0.5% Asian and 0.4% other races. So when selecting a group of 12 people, you still wouldn't see any Hispanic, Asian or Indian jurors if they were statistically representative. However the population is 67.4% African American, which does not appear to be represented within the jury pool. Only 29.3% of the population is considered White.

[Oniya]

However the population is 67.4% African American, which does not appear to be represented within the jury pool. Only 29.3% of the population is considered White.

There's also the difficulty of getting people to serve jury duty.  Here in the States, jurors are selected at random from a pool usually comprised of registered voters.  Jurors also have the ability to plead 'hardship' if taking the time off for jury duty would endanger family members (for reasons of care-taking, loss of income, and such).  Jurors are paid a small compensation, and employers are not allowed to prevent someone from serving on a jury, but the compensation doesn't come anywhere near a day's wages.  As a result, a juror who is living paycheck-to-paycheck, or is the sole caretaker of children or elders is likely to plead for (and get) a hardship waiver.  If a lot of the African American population falls into that socioeconomic bracket, then that can impact the jury demographics.

[Caehlim]

There's also the difficulty of getting people to serve jury duty.  Here in the States, jurors are selected at random from a pool usually comprised of registered voters.  Jurors also have the ability to plead 'hardship' if taking the time off for jury duty would endanger family members (for reasons of care-taking, loss of income, and such).  Jurors are paid a small compensation, and employers are not allowed to prevent someone from serving on a jury, but the compensation doesn't come anywhere near a day's wages.  As a result, a juror who is living paycheck-to-paycheck, or is the sole caretaker of children or elders is likely to plead for (and get) a hardship waiver.  If a lot of the African American population falls into that socioeconomic bracket, then that can impact the jury demographics.

Well according to the American Community Survey for 2010-2012 the poverty rate is three times higher for African Americans living within Ferguson, so this certainly does seem quite possible.

[Beguile's Mistress]

In addition, grand jury participation is usually a more time consuming commitment than the one-day-one-trial commitment most counties expect for jurors empaneled for a courtroom system.

[DiscoveringEzra]

http://nypost.com/2014/11/27/balloon-atics-target-thanksgiving-day-parade

Im sorry, but that rubbed me the wrong way


The limitation of riots, moral questions aside, is that they cannot win and their participants know it. Hence, rioting is not revolutionary but reactionary because it invites defeat. It involves an emotional catharsis, but it must be followed by a sense of futility.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

[Knightshadow]

Even Martin Luther King, Jr. saw the uselessness of anarchy. Peaceful demonstrations, gaining the means to political office in order to effect change. This is what it means to responsibly and peacefully change the world for the better.  Anarchy invites violence.  Kids at the Macy's parade are innocent.  Should their safety be jeopardized too?  What then for the cause?

[Beguile's Mistress]

In a world where protest is important to the betterment of all humanity Ghandi knew the power of doing it peacefully.  His wisdom showed that descending to violence cheapens the cause and makes an enemy of the protester.  It's a shame that the lesson still needs to be taught today.

[Cassandra LeMay]

And considering how racially charged this issue is the fact that nine out of the twelve jurors were white is just the icing on the bullshit cake. There's no Indian,  Asian, or Hispanic people living in Ferguson?

As far as I understand it, juries are pre-selected and serve for a certain time, hearing all cases brought before them while they are on duty. This jury was (to the best of my knowledge) not assembled for this proceeding exclusively. Also I believe it is common for jury composition to follow the demographics of the state, not a single community, (as they will have to hear cases from all over the state) and about 84% of Missouri's population is white.

[Apple of Eris]

As much as I dislike violence myself, I should point out that the United States was founded on political protest that sometimes turned to mob violence that became a revolution. The Boston Tea Party for one was seen by the British as the act of a rioting mob, though Samuel Adams claimed it was a principle protest to defend constitutional rights. Or the burning of a ship in Maryland for carrying tea. The "Sons of Liberty" Burned records, looted homes, tarred and feathered people who cooperated with the British...

The whole foundation of the United States rests on defying political authority with the use of violence to back up that defiance.

I'm not saying that it's right, but it is an American legacy.

[Beguile's Mistress]

Then perhaps it's time to ignore the sins of the past as you see them instead of using them as an excuse and stop these violent criminals who are committing arson and theft and causing people to feel threatened.  It doesn't help and it won't work to make anything better for anyone.  There is absolutely no excuse for the riots and civil disobedience and for people attacking police and then expecting to be let off with a warning after they have destroyed the businesses and lives of people who don't deserve it. 

[DiscoveringEzra]

That quote was in response to someone posting a comment on riots. I guess I should have separated it sufficiently.



Actually Knight, I'm irritated that they called them Anarchists. The Protest at the Macy's parade [was] peaceful.Until the Police grew impatient and started shoving people around with the fence , and then bum rushing people to the ground and arresting them. There was only 30, 40 at most protesting.

People are upset over a protest at a parade calling them anarchist saying they should be shot in the head not arrested, but then not bat an eyelash when a so called church protests funeral of a soldier. I've seen people bring up the fact that children would be there and I understand your concern. But Whether Darren Wilson was justified or not, it still doesn't make the cause any less. Too many unarmed people have been killed by police and nothing happened to the officers. That's the point protesters are trying to make.

Mike Brown was just the straw that broke the camels back, so to speak. It could have been anyone else like John Crawford,22, who was shot and killed by police officers seconds within arriving to the scene. He was holding a rifle that Walmart sold in their store, while talking on the phone. His shooting was deemed justified even though the 911 caller completely lied and said that he was waving it around and pointing it at people. Surveillance later found that at no time was he waving it around or aiming it at people.


Alot of people mentioned about the children at the parade and how their parade experience would be ruined, by the protest.  what about the safety of these children?

* Tamar E Rice, 12, who was Shot and killed by police officers within seconds of them arriving to the scene. He was playing with an airsoft gun at the local playground. The caller mentioned that " It's probably fake, but I don't know" (I'm Paraphrasing) people are already starting to smear his name. 

*Aiyana Stanley-Jones,7, Shot in the head by police officers while sleeping on the couch during a no-knock raid. Although the home they were supposed  to be raiding was next door in a duplex, they decided to raid BOTH  sides of the home.

we can even go back to 1944

*George Stinney, 14, Accused of murdering two girls, and Executed. Stinney, according to police, confessed to the crime. No witness or evidence that might vindicate him was presented during a trial that was over in fewer than three hours. An all-white jury convicted him in a flash, 10 minutes, and he was sentenced to "be electrocuted, until your body be dead in accordance with law. And may God have mercy on your soul," court documents say.( his cell mate reported that he continued to deny killing them saying " I didn't do it. I didn't do it" " And " Why would they kill me for something I didn't do?" They are seeking a New trial and it may go in his favor but Its 70 years too late."


MLK Also said  "I would be the first to say that I am still committed to militant, powerful, massive, non­-violence as the most potent weapon in grappling with the problem from a direct action point of view... But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard." -MLK

Protesters aren't blowing smoke up our asses or doing it just for fun, their cause has real merit to it, and they should be heard. This is not Just a bout Mike Brown, It's much much larger than Mike Brown.

People say Racism is over and that Blacks are too emotional. Just take a look around you may be surprised at how wrong that statement it. I'll give you a starting point with this whole ordeal don't just look at the articles or Youtube videos. Read the comments too. Anonymity gives people the courage to say what they are really thinking.

[DiscoveringEzra]

OMO, that post was a lot larger than I entended. O.O

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

MLK also said "A riot is the language of the unheard" ....

Also, Gandhi was actually a terrible person but that's kind of another matter entirely.

[Knightshadow]

Thank you, Dicoveringezra. That was actually very enlightening and I am changing my opinion of the Macy's anarchy claims. The facts you cited about the innocent children being shot are tragedies. I cannot blame the anger then, being a father myself. If those were the actions of police in my neighborhood, one would then need to label me an anarchist or terrorist, for I would have no mercy. Vengeance would be in my heart and violence would be in my actions.

[Cycle]

I think posts like this are why I mentioned in the OP about reading the evidence and testimony.

It is worth point out two things about the available evidence: 

(1) What is publicly available right now is not a complete set of the evidence presented to the Grand Jury.  The documents released are incomplete.  Not all of the witness transcripts have been released, and many reports are missing pages.  Indeed, until a Court orders it, we the public will never be allowed to see everything since Grand Jury proceedings are supposed to be confidential normally.

(2) It is not a Grand Jury's job to determine guilt or innocence.  They only look at the evidence presented by the prosecutor and decide if there is enough to indict--that is, present it to an actual jury to determine guilt or innocence.  In most states, and I believe Missouri, even if one Grand Jury opts not to indict, that does not mean the prosecutor can't proceed with prosecution anyway, or hand it to a second Grand Jury.  So here, I believe if McCulloch wants to prosecute Wilson, he still can.  Regardless, the point is, the Grand Jury's evidence doesn't have to convince anyone that Wilson is guilty, only that a trial should be held.

[Apple of Eris]

Once again, John Stewart and the Daily Show summarize pretty much all my thoughts up in a funny and much more succinct manner than I could ever do:

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/xl1k7u/instigate?xrs=synd_facebook_120214_tds_34

And this from an article in the huffington post, listing a number of unarmed black shot by white officers:

Eric Garner's death in July was ruled a homicide resulting from a police chokehold. He was unarmed, black, and here's the Time Magazine video of his death. Garner had just broken up a fight and was accused of selling cigarettes. This November, the City of Cleveland reached a $3 million settlement with the families of Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams. Cleveland police officers killed the unarmed black couple after firing 137 bullets at their car. In 2013, The City of Orange County agreed to pay $4.4 million to the family of Manuel Loggins Jr. The former Marine sergeant was unarmed, black, and was shot to death by police in front of his two daughters. After watching their father die, the two young girls were held for 13 hours by police for questioning. In 2011, San Francisco's BART agreed to a settlement of $2.8 million for the shooting of Oscar Grant III, after the unarmed black man was killed by a former officer. In 2010, New York agreed to pay $7 million to the family of Sean Bell, an unarmed black man shot and killed by police. It was Bell's wedding day. In 2011, five New Orleans police officers were convicted of killing Ronald Madison, an unarmed black man. Madison was also mentally disabled. In 1999, 41 bullets were shot at unarmed Amadou Diallo by four officers and New York settled with the West African immigrant's family for $3 million. This September, a former South Carolina state trooper was fired and now faces charges for shooting Levar Jones (Jones survived), an unarmed black man.

This August alone, 4 unarmed black males were killed by police. In Brooklyn this month, Akai Gurley was shot and killed in the darkened stairwell of a housing project. Gurley was unarmed and his death was ruled a homicide. The other day, police shot at an unarmed black man holding his daughter, but thankfully neither were killed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/three-reasons-why-black-m_b_6245962.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592


This isn't some isolated incident, and that's why so many people are rioting and protesting, it's another symptom of a systemic and deep rooted bias against African Americans and other minorities. Regardless of the number of people who want to dismiss it by calling a kid who stole $50 worth of cigars a 'thug' or other label which by the way, when discussing a white teen conducting similar crimes the teens are normally called 'troubled' or something similar, this is an issue and problem in our society and it needs to be discussed honestly and openly, and sadly it seems that the only way to draw attention to the issue is through civil disobedience.

[Cherri Tart]

Just a little perspective. a lot of us (i say us, because i took part in non-violent protests in my city) aren't saying that M. Brown was some sort of saint. he may very well have been a criminal. the issue at hand, isn't about whether Michael performed a criminal act, the issues are that:

1) he was black (yes, this IS about race) and go to, lately, for taking down black men is lethal force. btw, i can cite several recent cases where a white kid was taken down without lethal force while doing something much worse than Brown, and in at least one of those instance, the guy was armed and was being chased by cops after trying to shoot someone.

2) whenever something like this happens, it seems there is no justice and pretty much everyone goes straight towards character assassination on the victim (Brown). let me remind you - an 18 year old kid was killed. this isn't a movie. this is real life.

if you look at the stats, you'll understand why there is so much rage in the black community, or those sympathetic to it. it seriously feels like open season on black men lately. pretty soon there will be pictures of white cops posed, their foot on the neck of the trophy black man they just shot. would i prefer the protests be non violent? yes - MLK is actually a hero of mine. do i condone the rioting a looting? no, but i DO understand it. what would be nice is everyone stop condemning the aftermath of this and, instead, putting energy into creating change. what would be nice would be if we've seen the last of the headline:  white cop kills unarmed black kid. just because Ferguson is the hot news story recently, doesn't mean it's still not happening around the country...

black men are shot, beat up, arrested, hasselled, stopped, searched, etc, for no reason other than they are black on a daily basis. i know this for a fact, i have seen it happen all too often. it needs to change. WE need to change.

in closing, i'll leave you with this to ponder - today's news, NYC.

Sparking protests in several cities, social media outrage and a U.S. civil rights probe, a New York City grand jury declined to indict a white police officer in the death of a black man put in a chokehold after selling untaxed cigarettes.

The grand jury found "no reasonable cause" to indict officer Daniel Pantaleo, who was attempting to arrest Eric Garner, 43, on July 17.

As angry crowds gathered tonight to protest in Manhattan, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Justice Department is opening a federal civil rights inquiry.

Holder, while urging calm in the aftermath of yet another controversial grand jury action, promised that the federal inquiry would be "independent, thorough and fair.''

President Obama said the grand jury decision will spark strong reaction from the public, especially in the wake of a similar decision in Missouri last week not to indict officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of unarmed Michael Brown.

"There was a decision that came out today by a grand jury not to indict police officers who had interacted with an individual named Eric Garner in New York City -- all of which was caught on video tape and speaks to the larger issues that we've been talking about now for the last week, the last month, the last year and, sadly, for decades," Obama said.

"And that is the concern on the part of too many minority communities that law enforcement is not working with them and dealing with them in a fair way . . .this is an issue that we've been dealing with for too long, and it's time for us to make more progress than we've made. And I'm not interested in talk, I'm interested in action."

The medical examiner had ruled Garner's death a homicide. State charges could have ranged from murder to reckless endangerment.

Garner, who had asthma, could be heard on a cellphone video shouting, "I can't breathe" at least eight times as Pantaleo takes him down in what appears to be a chokehold, an action the New York Police Department prohibits. He died in a hospital hours later.

The video was shot by a citizen standing near the confrontation.

Family members expressed shock at the grand jury news - but said they will not give up the pursuit of justice.

"The fight isn't over - it's just begun," said the widow of Eric Garner, Esaw Garnder. She added that her husband would not be around for Christmas or any other special day anymore with the family.

"Why? Because a cop did wrong," she said to a room packed with about 200 community members and members of the media. "As long as I have a breath in my body, I will fight the fight."

Family lawyer Jonathan Moore said he was "actually astonished based on the evidence of the videotape, and the medical examiner, that this grand jury at this time wouldn't indict for anything."

In his first public comments, Pantaleo said he prays for Garner's family and hopes they accept his condolences.

"I became a police officer to help people and to protect those who can't protect themselves," he said in the statement. "It is never my intention to harm anyone, and I feel very bad about the death of Mr. Garner."

Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a banned maneuver, because Garner was resisting arrest. They said his poor health was the main reason he died.

Standing with the widow, mother and children of Garner, the Rev. Al Sharpton decried the grand jury decision at the Harlem, N.Y., headquarters of Sharpton's National Action Network, a civil rights organization.

"How many people have to die before people have to understand this is not an illusion?" Sharpton asked, as one of Garner's daughters wiped away tears.

"This is a reality that America has got to come to terms with," he said.

Sharpton called for a national march to take place in Washington Dec. 13 to pres

***


btw, Mr Garner's crime? selling ciggerettes on the street. no, seriously.

[Inkidu]

Perhaps its my own naivete about how the world works. Maybe we haven't really done a damn thing for the racial divides in this nation, maybe I just don't get how it works because the argument to me isn't a racial one, but a one of whether or not the shooting was justified, but I just don't think the cop got up today, put on his blues and pinned on his badge and said, "Today I'm gonna' kill me a black person."

I'd rather have my naivete. 

[fireflights]

One thing I have learned in my lifetime is, it is human nature to hate. You can try to disagree with me if you want, but look at everything through history. Fear and hate prompt just about everything to do with our world, most of the wars were about fear and hate, one group hated the other, which bred fear that they would come at them, and in turn went after them. It's the same through history, yes, there were other reasons as well, but hidden within their reasons were always fear and hate. We are a volatile race, all of us regardless of the color of our skin. we will be killing each other until the end of days and it's sad, it truly is. Because we don't have to be like this, but it's like we are wired to be this way. We can choose to go another route then the path we are on, but the choices have to come from inside all of us, and so many just aren't willing to change. So while no, they don't go out with the thought that they are going to kill anyone *black or white* they still will go out each day and that result will happen sadly. Cops are out there to protect us, but like the government, we are now left with wondering just who they are really in to protect, the people or themselves.

[Cherri Tart]

Perhaps its my own naivete about how the world works. Maybe we haven't really done a damn thing for the racial divides in this nation, maybe I just don't get how it works because the argument to me isn't a racial one, but a one of whether or not the shooting was justified, but I just don't think the cop got up today, put on his blues and pinned on his badge and said, "Today I'm gonna' kill me a black person."

I'd rather have my naivete.

nope, i agree, i don't think he did. what i am prepared to accept, however, is that his reaction to Michael Brown might have been intensified by his skin color. what i do know for certain is that a disproportionate number of lethal or even not lethal, yet still beyond the norm, are perpetrated by white cops against people of color.

[Cassandra LeMay]

Perhaps its my own naivete about how the world works. Maybe we haven't really done a damn thing for the racial divides in this nation, maybe I just don't get how it works because the argument to me isn't a racial one, but a one of whether or not the shooting was justified, but I just don't think the cop got up today, put on his blues and pinned on his badge and said, "Today I'm gonna' kill me a black person."

I'd rather have my naivete.

That may not be what cops have on their minds, but they might not have the best attitude towards blacks either. CBS recently had an article that I found very interesting, pointing out that in St. Louis County there are many small communities that rely heavily on fines to bolster their budgets.

Imagine you are a cop who knows that if he doesn't ticket a lot of people the municipality might not have the money to pay him a salary. Add to that a predominantly black population and it might breed an attitude that treats these (often poor) people as cash cows. That's not a healthy attitude for a police officer to have, as it dehumanizes the people the police deals with on a daily basis.

[Caehlim]

but I just don't think the cop got up today, put on his blues and pinned on his badge and said, "Today I'm gonna' kill me a black person."

That wouldn't necessarily be required for the shooting to have had a racial component or to be symptomatic of a present environment of racial inequality and hostility within Ferguson, Missouri.

However, nor would it be entirely out of the question. Historically there have been people, even police officers, who have done exactly as you describe (although I doubt they used 'black person' in their internal monologue). Others have, while not having premeditated the crime all day, chosen with that exact motivation in mind to commit murder when the opportunity presented itself or when they encountered a member of a minority who did not display the attitude they wished.

Since these things are a possibility, I think you're right that it would be naive to simply assume that he did not. An investigation is required. Perhaps the grand jury was sufficient investigation, perhaps not. I'm really not equipped to know. However as a society we can't simply take on face value that all members of law enforcement are upstanding, honest or lawful individuals. Some are dangerous bigots or people who enjoy exerting power over others. (I feel I should also add that many aren't, and I have the utmost respect for legitimate police officers who do their duty to protect the community).

[Ephiral]

That may not be what cops have on their minds, but they might not have the best attitude towards blacks either. CBS recently had an article that I found very interesting, pointing out that in St. Louis County there are many small communities that rely heavily on fines to bolster their budgets.

Imagine you are a cop who knows that if he doesn't ticket a lot of people the municipality might not have the money to pay him a salary. Add to that a predominantly black population and it might breed an attitude that treats these (often poor) people as cash cows. That's not a healthy attitude for a police officer to have, as it dehumanizes the people the police deals with on a daily basis.

I linked a couple things upthread far worse than that: Current research indicates that even people who are actively trying not to be racist tend to think unarmed black people are carrying weapons more often than whites, and white people faced with split-second shoot/don't shoot decisions are more likely to shoot black people. So yes, it's entirely possible for someone to go to work planning to be fair and equitable, and still be racist when the time comes to decide to shoot.

[DiscoveringEzra]

Perhaps its my own naivete about how the world works. Maybe we haven't really done a damn thing for the racial divides in this nation, maybe I just don't get how it works because the argument to me isn't a racial one, but a one of whether or not the shooting was justified, but I just don't think the cop got up today, put on his blues and pinned on his badge and said, "Today I'm gonna' kill me a black person."

I'd rather have my naivete.

Ignoring the issue won't make the problem go away. And imo just as bad as those saying, he deserved to DIE.
Saying you rather keep your naivete, is basically saying "Im scared, therefore I don't care what happens to other people.Id rather keep my rosy veiw of the world, rather than try to understand "

He punched a poor, defenseless, cop a few times, so that monster, thug, Negro needed to to get shot 6 times and fired at 12 times. His body was found 100 feet away from the initial scuffle? Never mind that! He reached for the gun, but he didnt get it, he got shot in the hand and ran away, and then he turned to the terrified officer, who for some reason got out of the safety of his car, and charged him! He Deserved it all!!!

My question is when a gun is drawn what black person charges at the person, what would any person in their right minds charge toward a loaded gun. If a gun is drawn immediate reaction is to put your hands up. We were groomed to do this, right? Peoples first reaction to pain is get away from the thing that caused you pain. So whether he punched the cop and scuffled for his gun, when he got shot, Brown most likely took off, why would he charge at someone who already shot him? Its possible, but is it probable, and logical. Black people already joke about how they run first and ask questions later.

Another question is, If Darren Wilson feared for his life, said that Mike Bown was huge compared to him, and that he looked like a devil, Why did he get out of the car to continue to engage a man he was terrified of. Especially if the threat was going away from you. He feared for his life? So, rather than rolling up the window ,following in his, SUV and waiting for back up; He gets out of his SUV, and calls to the guy who he claimed almost killed him.

Was the arrest more important than his own life. I though a cops objective was to get home safe. But he basically put his own life in jepordy if Mike was such a threat to him. That or he lied aboutbe so afraid  and was pissed that this guy reached in his car and punched him. He shot and when Brown punched him he got even more mad that "this asshole is getting away".

Or he may have been scared when he got punched because "omg some one punched me", and he shot. But once he left the one thing that could protect him, ,his SUV,and rengaged a retreating figure, it's no longer self-defence.

[Inkidu]

Ignoring the issue won't make the problem go away. And imo just as bad as those saying, he deserved to DIE.
Saying you rather keep your naivete, is basically saying "Im scared, therefore I don't care what happens to other people.Id rather keep my rosy veiw of the world, rather than try to understand "

Please don't insult me, and don't ascribe agency to what I think or feel without me having actually voiced. I was trying to illustrate that even if this has become a racial issue, I doubt, sincerely that it started out that way. He might have been pissed that someone punched him and wanted to kill him, but to say he did it just because Brown was black is more the assumption of racism than the actual fact.

[DiscoveringEzra]

You dont have to directly say something for a point to be made. You saying and I quote "I rather have my naivete" after saying "Perhaps its my own naivete about how the world works." Kind of implies that you'd rather be ignorant to the situation. Mean to word it that way, but thats how it reads. And im sure Darren Wilson didn't have an agenda on/itching to kill black people, but then again this isnt entirely about Darren Nor Mike.

It may have started out as, people were angry that Mick was left 4hrs in the sun. Or that NOTHING was done until the people of Ferguson got pissed that Nothing was being done. Hell the family didnt even get an apology nor did city officials come to speak with them even after all this mess. If Ferguson citizens didnt get fed up over the repeated mistreatment by their cops they whould have protested, and Mike would have swept under the rug, and Darren would still be working  for Ferguson (he woukd have ben a million dollars poorer but thats not the point) yeah they gathered evidence and took statement, but unfortunately it would have been put in a box and shelved

No Darren Wilson didn't deside to go out find the nearest black person to shoot, but you cant tell me that Mike  being black didn't help Darren make his desision alot quicker.

You cant tell me that out of all the cases ive seen white people more often than not will be killed if they commit a crime or is acting suspicious. You can not tell me that  Mike Borwn, Eric Garner, Tymar Rice, and John Crawford had any chance with the police. That it was their own fault for being shot or choked to death by police

no one is saying that Darren Wilson killed Mike Brown because hes black; they are sayig Darren wilson was allowed to keep his job and stay anonymous for weeks, because Mike was a black man. Darren encountered two Jaywalkers and one ends up dead shot at twelve times hit 6. And Yet he still hasnt been at the very least had a trial over the gross neglect of his own police training, if he even had any.

Im not insulting you, but the fact that you would rather continue to be naive about legitimate issues happeing now, is insulting.

[Iniquitous]

He punched a poor, defenseless, cop a few times, so that monster, thug, Negro needed to to get shot 6 times and fired at 12 times. His body was found 100 feet away from the initial scuffle? Never mind that! He reached for the gun, but he didnt get it, he got shot in the hand and ran away, and then he turned to the terrified officer, who for some reason got out of the safety of his car, and charged him! He Deserved it all!!!

*twitches*

That attitude right there? It really needs to go. Why? Because let me tell you something - cops put their lives on the line every single time they put their blues on and go to work. "Punched a poor, defenseless cop"? He went for the cops GUN and that implies Michael had every intention of using it on the cop.

Disagree with me if you want but I would have shot the thug myself!

There's a song - not sure if you've heard it. "I fought the law and the law won". That applies here. Michael thought he was a big bad ass, thought he could attack a cop IN HIS CAR, try to take his gun, told the cop he was too much a pussy to shoot him. Guess what? Wilson wasn't too much of a pussy after all.

If you are going to be the asinine idiot that attacks a cop in his car and then charge the cop after he's already shot you ONCE, then you are going to end up dead. Period. And, quite frankly, I think that is where such a thug needs to be. He was not the gentle giant the media presents. He was a bully, he was a criminal and he did something utterly stupid that cost him his life. Do I think the color of his skin came into it?

Nope.

Next, read the damn witness reports. Your opinion on what someone's first reaction doesn't matter here. Witnesses - many of whom are black - state that Michael Brown was the aggressor AND that he did charge the cop. This whole "hands up, don't shoot" shit pisses me off because it has already been proven to be a lie and yet no one will let it fucking go. Michael Brown was not, I repeat this again, was NOT executed by the police.

Wilson did what he was trained to do. Follow the perpetrator. He did call for backup, however, cops are trained to follow suspects/perpetrators. They are also trained to stop criminals - which, at that point, Michael Brown was a criminal. It is against the law to attack a police officer - just saying. Wilson had a duty to get out of that car and try to arrest him. Was it his fault Michael Brown thought he could intimidate him and get away with a crime? No. It was Michael Brown's idiocy that got him killed.

Who in their fucking right mind thinks "if I charge the cop they won't shoot me, they'll run?" Really? I mean, really?! Guess he learned the lesson that his parents (who apparently did not have much to do with his child rearing) failed to teach him the hard way.

I have stated this before - I have grown up in a family chock full of law enforcement.  I hear the stories from their shifts. I know the fear that I'll get a call that someone in my family has been killed while on the job because idjits like Michael Brown have some idea in their head that they can attack the cops. A cop has a split second to make a decision when they are on duty - they cannot hesitate. If they, for any reason, feel that someone is a threat to their safety, they have to act upon it. Not question whether it is a rational fear or whether they should hide in their vehicle.

It disgusts me to see so many arm chair critics blasting what they know nothing about. You think you know better? Go to the police academy, get trained by the professionals then go out on the streets and learn what it is like to have to make a life or death decision in the blink of an eye. Then come back and talk to me. Your tune will change, guarantee you that.

[DiscoveringEzra]

*twitches*

That attitude right there? It really needs to go. Why? Because let me tell you something - cops put their lives on the line every single time they put their blues on and go to work. "Punched a poor, defenseless cop"? He went for the cops GUN and that implies Michael had every intention of using it on the cop.

Disagree with me if you want but I would have shot the thug myself!

There's a song - not sure if you've heard it. "I fought the law and the law won". That applies here. Michael thought he was a big bad ass, thought he could attack a cop IN HIS CAR, try to take his gun, told the cop he was too much a pussy to shoot him. Guess what? Wilson wasn't too much of a pussy after all.

If you are going to be the asinine idiot that attacks a cop in his car and then charge the cop after he's already shot you ONCE, then you are going to end up dead. Period. And, quite frankly, I think that is where such a thug needs to be. He was not the gentle giant the media presents. He was a bully, he was a criminal and he did something utterly stupid that cost him his life. Do I think the color of his skin came into it?

Nope.

Next, read the damn witness reports. Your opinion on what someone's first reaction doesn't matter here. Witnesses - many of whom are black - state that Michael Brown was the aggressor AND that he did charge the cop. This whole "hands up, don't shoot" shit pisses me off because it has already been proven to be a lie and yet no one will let it fucking go. Michael Brown was not, I repeat this again, was NOT executed by the police.

Wilson did what he was trained to do. Follow the perpetrator. He did call for backup, however, cops are trained to follow suspects/perpetrators. They are also trained to stop criminals - which, at that point, Michael Brown was a criminal. It is against the law to attack a police officer - just saying. Wilson had a duty to get out of that car and try to arrest him. Was it his fault Michael Brown thought he could intimidate him and get away with a crime? No. It was Michael Brown's idiocy that got him killed.

Who in their fucking right mind thinks "if I charge the cop they won't shoot me, they'll run?" Really? I mean, really?! Guess he learned the lesson that his parents (who apparently did not have much to do with his child rearing) failed to teach him the hard way.

I have stated this before - I have grown up in a family chock full of law enforcement.  I hear the stories from their shifts. I know the fear that I'll get a call that someone in my family has been killed while on the job because idjits like Michael Brown have some idea in their head that they can attack the cops. A cop has a split second to make a decision when they are on duty - they cannot hesitate. If they, for any reason, feel that someone is a threat to their safety, they have to act upon it. Not question whether it is a rational fear or whether they should hide in their vehicle.

It disgusts me to see so many arm chair critics blasting what they know nothing about. You think you know better? Go to the police academy, get trained by the professionals then go out on the streets and learn what it is like to have to make a life or death decision in the blink of an eye. Then come back and talk to me. Your tune will change, guarantee you that.

Look at the pot calling the kettle black. Looks to me as if your an amchair critic yourself. But unlike me you can't go to an Academy to be black. Im not the one spoutting off stuff like it was PROVEN FACT. Many witness say that he DID Have his hands up 15 or 16 of them. Many also said that wilson was firing wilst he was running. Some said he didnt and some said they didnt know the MAJORITY, Said that he did.  That he turned and put his hands up. For some reason only 7 people including Wilson Brown said that he was charging at him [out of the 27 or 28 witnesses.] One even said that there was a scuffle in the car, daren was trying to pull on Mike and that Mike was trying to push away, a shot was heard and Mike ran. Why in gods name would he turn around and come running back to the man who already shot you once. Like i said before the threat was running away. A split second desision is not needed when this supposed threat is 35 to a 100 feet away.  And the fact that you spout the same things that all the other Darren Wilson supporters say show just how much Im glad your not a cop. The fact that you can with good conscious say that Mike was THUG CRIMINAL, and that even though he was 35 feet away from you .you would still shoot at him 12 times. You would continue to shoot even if he was going down to the ground.  If Brown was a hundred feet from the car and was shot 35 feet from Wilson, why would Wilson go after a Man he claimed almost killed him for 65 feet . And if he was shot 35 feet away from wilson and he charged him like you said, dont you think that he would have been farther than 35 feet. Not the split second you said now is it.


All im doing is stating speculation i dont know what actually happened. then again you were there so you know exactly what happened, am i right? 

And there is no need to be rude, I've never insuted a person on this thread or Darren for that matter as much you have done me, and Mike as well as his family.Hell i even gave Darren the benefit of the doubt. I didt go out cold cocked as scream "Darren Wilson, that pig shot that boy in cold blood because he was black!" So why do you feel the need to. Show some restraint and then maybe we can have a legitimate conversation.

I dont know what happened i wasn't there, all I can do is read the information and speculate what could have happened. Maybe you should do the same and stop trying to say you know exactly what happened, because no one but Wilson,Brown and only few other actually know.

You say my attitude is the one that needs to go ,before being extremely, rude patronizing, and all around nastyhow does that work? Before you get in your feelings again how about you read some of #alivewhileblack but the cops are heros right. Dont get me wrong i have respect for cops but im not going to bend over and let more and more of them screw me and other people with out saying somethig.

[Kythia]

Do you know what this reminds me of?  This adorable image of a kitten holding a cupcake:



Look at his little eyes?  Have you got a present for me, Mr Snufflekins?  Yes you have.

Look at the picture of the kitten holding a cupcake everyone.  LOOK AT IT

[DiscoveringEzra]

Do you know what this reminds me of?  This adorable image of a kitten holding a cupcake:



Look at his little eyes?  Have you got a present for me, Mr Snufflekins?  Yes you have.

Look at the picture of the kitten holding a cupcake everyone.  LOOK AT IT

Lol thank you. I cant look away from its cuteness.

[Iniquitous]

Look at the pot calling the kettle black. Looks to me as if your an amchair critic yourself. But unlike me you can't go to an Academy to be black. Im not the one spoutting off stuff like it was PROVEN FACT. Many witness say that he DID Have his hands up 15 or 16 of them. Many also said that wilson was firing wilst he was running. Some said he didnt and some said they didnt know the MAJORITY, Said that he did.  That he turned and put his hands up. For some reason only 7 people including Wilson Brown said that he was charging at him [out of the 27 or 28 witnesses.] One even said that there was a scuffle in the car, daren was trying to pull on Mike and that Mike was trying to push away, a shot was heard and Mike ran. Why in gods name would he turn around and come running back to the man who already shot you once. Like i said before the threat was running away. A split second desision is not needed when this supposed threat is 35 to a 100 feet away.  And the fact that you spout the same things that all the other Darren Wilson supporters say show just how much Im glad your not a cop. The fact that you can with good conscious say that Mike was THUG CRIMINAL, and that even though he was 35 feet away from you .you would still shoot at him 12 times. You would continue to shoot even if he was going down to the ground.  If Brown was a hundred feet from the car and was shot 35 feet from Wilson, why would Wilson go after a Man he claimed almost killed him for 65 feet . And if he was shot 35 feet away from wilson and he charged him like you said, dont you think that he would have been farther than 35 feet. Not the split second you said now is it.


All im doing is stating speculation i dont know what actually happened. then again you were there so you know exactly what happened, am i right? 

And there is no need to be rude, I've never insuted a person on this thread or Darren for that matter as much you have done me, and Mike as well as his family.Hell i even gave Darren the benefit of the doubt. I didt go out cold cocked as scream "Darren Wilson, that pig shot that boy in cold blood because he was black!" So why do you feel the need to. Show some restraint and then maybe we can have a legitimate conversation.

I dont know what happened i wasn't there, all I can do is read the information and speculate what could have happened. Maybe you should do the same and stop trying to say you know exactly what happened, because no one but Wilson,Brown and only few other actually know.

You say my attitude is the one that needs to go ,before being extremely, rude patronizing, and all around nastyhow does that work? Before you get in your feelings again how about you read some of #alivewhileblack but the cops are heros right. Dont get me wrong i have respect for cops but im not going to bend over and let more and more of them screw me and other people with out saying somethig.

Again, the witness reports state that Brown was the aggressor. The crime scene reports state that Wilson was firing while backing up, which supports the statements that he charged Wilson. The trajectory of the bullets show that the fatal shot came from Brown being in a position with his head lowered, as if he was in a charging position.

The evidence - the things that cannot lie, the facts - all support Wilson’s side of the story. Sorry, but when the facts support the guy you hate, you either accept the fact that the martyr everyone is trying to hold up is in the wrong or you continue to refuse to accept the truth.

Michael Brown is not the martyr so many want him to be. He is not a good choice for poster boy on this issue. I have no sympathy for him - he attacked a cop, he paid the ultimate price for the stupidity. I even have a hard time having sympathy for his family when they are trying to incite riots (stepfather screaming to burn this bitch down anyone?), the parents being investigated for beating up Brown’s grandmother (the woman who raised him) because she was selling shirts with Michael’s name on them.

Michael’s own friend testified that, not only had Michael just robbed a store, but he was the aggressor and that there was never a “hands up, don’t shoot” position.

I will be flat honest. I will almost always take the side of the police officer. I have had the advantage of hearing the sides of the cops thanks to being raised with them. Are there bad cops? Of course. Are some of them racist? Sure. Does that mean all cops are bad? No. And what I said still applies. A cop has a split second to make a decision - sometimes the choice made is wrong. Sometimes it is right. Sometimes it is impossible to know.

And before you try to imply I am racist, you might want to get to know me. Just saying.

[DiscoveringEzra]

Again, the witness reports state that Brown was the aggressor. The crime scene reports state that Wilson was firing while backing up, which supports the statements that he charged Wilson. The trajectory of the bullets show that the fatal shot came from Brown being in a position with his head lowered, as if he was in a charging position.

The evidence - the things that cannot lie, the facts - all support Wilson’s side of the story. Sorry, but when the facts support the guy you hate, you either accept the fact that the martyr everyone is trying to hold up is in the wrong or you continue to refuse to accept the truth.

Michael Brown is not the martyr so many want him to be. He is not a good choice for poster boy on this issue. I have no sympathy for him - he attacked a cop, he paid the ultimate price for the stupidity. I even have a hard time having sympathy for his family when they are trying to incite riots (stepfather screaming to burn this bitch down anyone?), the parents being investigated for beating up Brown’s grandmother (the woman who raised him) because she was selling shirts with Michael’s name on them.

Michael’s own friend testified that, not only had Michael just robbed a store, but he was the aggressor and that there was never a “hands up, don’t shoot” position.

I will be flat honest. I will almost always take the side of the police officer. I have had the advantage of hearing the sides of the cops thanks to being raised with them. Are there bad cops? Of course. Are some of them racist? Sure. Does that mean all cops are bad? No. And what I said still applies. A cop has a split second to make a decision - sometimes the choice made is wrong. Sometimes it is right. Sometimes it is impossible to know.

And before you try to imply I am racist, you might want to get to know me. Just saying.

Who charges with their head down? You usually are looking the person your running toward.  So if he was shot in the top of the head, while he is charging, as you said, he would have  to be a very short man. Michael Brown was 6'4 how does a bullet getting the top of his head if he was running to wards the cop bum rushing him as they say. 

Im not accusing you of being racist. Merciless, hateful, and grossliy privileged, yes. A mean woman who doesn't try to see it from both sides . Whos willing to say "That a man deserves to be shot and left in the street for over 4 hrs, because he stole some cigars. He deserved to be  called a devil, thug, disgusting animal ,because he stole cigars. He deserved to be shot at 12 times after running away 100 ft because he put a red mark on the police officers cheek. Racist I dont know you to say that but someone I'm glad I dont know. Yes. People get off for way more than that. Ethan Couch anyone. And people who are more viscious get to live so they can later marry while in prison, like Charles Manson? Disgusting people get to live long enough to listen to the evidence brought against them and serve their sentence like Ted fucking Bundy, and others can be part of terroristic acts yet some how still live to face trial like Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. But a guy who pushed a clerk jaywalked and punched a cop ( im not going to add reaching for a gun cause noone but Darren Wilson knows that for sure, No lets keep it there have been situations where the person did clearly reach for the officers gun, yet they still were able to come out of it alive,) deserved to never be able to face a trial.



And an independent Forensic Pathologist(Dr. Cyril Wecht)  used the evidence - the things that cannot lie, the facts - to determine him having his hands up, and falling when he was shot in the top of the head.

Dr. Wecht: I don't like to be dogmatic, but there is only one way this scenario plays out when you look at the bullet wounds.  There are two wounds, one in the forearm entering dorsally and exiting in the front and the other in the upper arm entering in the front and exiting in the back. Both had an upward trajectory. Michael Brown was 6' 5", Officer Wilson is 6'.
The only way that you have an upward trajectory is with the arm like this [Holds his hand up to shoulder height, palm facing forward] and the shots fired. And you have two shots that strike Michael Brown in the chest, and they both have a downward trajectory. How do you get that with a 6'5" guy being shot by a 6' guy?  And then you have two wounds in the head that a parallel to the ground.  When you put the body on the table, their perpendicular.

The only way you can get that is that his body is continuing to fall. The scenario is that Michael Brown was shot first in the arm, then as he is beginning to fall he is shot in the chest, and as he continues to fall he shot in the head. And he falls prone. He's 30-35' away.

What happened at the car is significant mostly because, and no one talks about this, for what was Officer Darren Wilson's attitude?  Was he teed off? "This kid has just struggled with me with my gun" and the kid is now 30-35' away. He's unarmed, he's in short pants and a t-shirt.  Where is this imminent threat? If he believes that this kid is a threat to his life then how in the world can he be out there as a police officer, dealing with people that have weapons, dealing with people that are really berzerk and people that really pose a serious threat? 

No, this is [an] absurd scenario as far as I'm concerned in terms of Wilson's defense.

_______________

Dr. Wecht: It was premature, as I stated, to proclaim that all the shots came from the front because, as I stated, the arm can move in different directions.
...

With the shot coming downward, entering the eye and exiting the jaw, re-entering in the right clavical, that clearly is up-downward, so you have somebody who is falling. If you want to conjecture that he was charging like a mad bull toward an officer with a gun, I find that unlikely, most likely he was already toppling when that shot was fired - moving in a downward trajectory.

[Avis habilis]

That's enough out of both of you. If you think a post has violated E's rules, hit the "report to moderator" link. You don't get to squabble with each other in the thread.

Don't do it again.

[la dame en noir]

All I'm seeing is that witness reports say this and that...without any evidence/links given in the argument.

I would give my two cents, but someone will accuse me of being racist...because from what i'm seeing...black people can't express their concerns or how they're being treated without being called racist.

[Deamonbane]

Do you know what this reminds me of?  This adorable image of a kitten holding a cupcake:



Look at his little eyes?  Have you got a present for me, Mr Snufflekins?  Yes you have.

Look at the picture of the kitten holding a cupcake everyone.  LOOK AT IT

Your association needs to be looked at *teases*

[Kythia]

Your association needs to be looked at *teases*

I have no idea what that means.

[Knightshadow]

Iniquitous Opheliac and DiscoveringEzra,

Unfortunately, I find both your arguments have merit, minus the name-calling. Both of you make valid points from your perspective and your correlations (again from YOUR perspectives) are sound and understandable.  Neither of you will change the other's mind, so we are at an impasse.

Suffice it to say, if we disagree on the application of the law, then we should consider re-writing the law to accommodate the changing times.

[DiscoveringEzra]

Iniquitous Opheliac and DiscoveringEzra,

Unfortunately, I find both your arguments have merit, minus the name-calling. Both of you make valid points from your perspective and your correlations (again from YOUR perspectives) are sound and understandable.  Neither of you will change the other's mind, so we are at an impasse.

Suffice it to say, if we disagree on the application of the law, then we should consider re-writing the law to accommodate the changing times.

Yes, I didnt mean to name call, but the harsh answer I received got me a bit upset. I'm not really trying to change minds, not that it wouldnt be welcome.  Im just trying to bring pure speculation from what I've seen, read , experienced  (not about the case) and heard. What I got from Darrens own accounts "I felt like a child holding on to Hulk Hogan"-Darren Wilson. Is the he couldnt effectively defend himself without a gun, thats, why I said what I said. I was not speaking of any other officer in this thread. Ididnt generalize either. Like I said I respect cops, but lately the respect is dwindling. But i guess that neother here nor there. (Not trying to be mean or anything)

Trying  to Justify the fact that a man is dead for a crime that doesn't equate Death upsets me.  Noone would do it if Darren was the one who was killed. Mike would still be the demon in the issue.

The fact that coverage is disproportionate as well is putting gasoline on an explosion. When the media treats white suspects and killers better than black victims, and no one bats an eye lash, then its a problem. A very big problem, but its OK they are just thugs and criminals, right?

If someone was speaking to you politely as Wilson said he did to Brown. Then why such the violent reaction. Im guessing that Brown would be mildly annoyed or frightened as why he was being hailed by the police "Did they aready know what i did?" "Lets get the fuck out of here." My brother said that if he saw the police he would run, getting away is first priority, cause you dont know what they'll do. Maybe he(Brown) would he would have ran immidately. But if Wilson was as harsh as the friend said, then yeah I could see Brown getting pissed and saying "Fuck you!" Resulting in both parties getting mad. Lets not forget both were and are still human. I still dont think its plausible that bown would have just attacked Wilson for nothing, and then continue to attack after he was shot, and had successfully gotten away.  Him turning back around could have been the other shots going towards him. He didn't want to get shot ( noone wants to get shot ), so maybe he figured if he gave up then he would not get hit and just have to  bail out later. Hes a big guy, he wouldn't be able to run too fast. Who knows. 

[Apple of Eris]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/ferguson-marchers-met-with-gunfire-racial-slurs-fried-chicken-and-a-melon/

This here. Unarmed protestors marching from Ferguson to Jefferson City are met with some rather vile and disgusting racist attacks in at least two small towns along the way. But lets all pretend that America is a post racial society and that racism doesn't exist anymore and that certainly no police officer could use excessive force simply because of the color of a person's skin.

I am so disgusted and angry right now...

[Cherri Tart]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/ferguson-marchers-met-with-gunfire-racial-slurs-fried-chicken-and-a-melon/

This here. Unarmed protestors marching from Ferguson to Jefferson City are met with some rather vile and disgusting racist attacks in at least two small towns along the way. But lets all pretend that America is a post racial society and that racism doesn't exist anymore and that certainly no police officer could use excessive force simply because of the color of a person's skin.

I am so disgusted and angry right now...

Then don't read this article...

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/i-hate-nggers-that-is-all-5-ohio-deputies-probed-for-years-of-racist-text-messages/#.VIDKvY7HuxN.facebook

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

Has anyone seen this yet?

KU Journalism student shreds case against Mike Brown

I'ma just copy and paste it in here. I pasted in the links too.

Shelby Lawson is a student at the University of Kansas, majoring in Journalism and Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies. Lawson posted the following to her Facebook page:
“Alright y’all. I’d like to clear a few things up. This is a general address to the long list of misconceptions and inconsistencies and abuses of power that exist surrounding the killing of Mike Brown. I have researched these points and provided sources in case you wish to do some reading of your own.
-The most common misconception I’m hearing is that Mike Brown was significantly larger than Officer Wilson. This is incorrect. On page 198 of the official grand jury transcript, you can see that Officer Wilson testifies he is 6 ft 4 and weighs 210 lbs, the same size as Mike Brown.
(source)
-Mike Brown was NOT stopped because he was a suspect in crime. He and his friend Dorian Johnson were stopped for jaywalking, as Darren Wilson testifies to on page 208 of his grand jury testimony.
-Mike Brown WAS fleeing from Officer Wilson when he was fatally shot. Wilson confirms this on page 281 of his grand jury testimony.
-Officer Wilson broke police self-defense protocol, which teaches to disarm and incapacitate rather than kill and teaches officers to go for body shots. Officer Wilson shot Mike Brown twice in the head, after he shot him four times in his arm and torso.
(source)
-Ferguson Police ignored protocol and refused to interview or take a statement from the eyewitness present from Officer Wilson’s initial contact with Mike Brown until his death.
(source)
-The forensic examiner broke protocol by failing to take crime scene photos. On page 95 of the grand jury transcript, she claims that this was because her camera had died, however, she goes on to describe how she immediately followed Wilson to the hospital in order to photograph his “injuries.”
-Forensic investigators broke protocol by failing to test Officer Wilson’s gun for fingerprints, since Wilson claims that Brown grabbed his gun and caused it to misfire. Page 39, grand jury transcript.
-Darren Wilson was then allowed to break protocol by washing the blood off of himself before it could be photographed, making it impossible to analyze blood spatter patterns and determine what position Mike Brown was in when Wilson first shot him. Wilson recounts this on page 10 of his official police interview.
(source)
-While Officer Wilson’s story of what happened that day has changed at least three times, six separate eyewitnesses, four of whom have never met each other, all have identical accounts of what happened. They were never interviewed by police.
(source)
-These eyewitnesses all agree that Darren Wilson was the aggressor and that Mike Brown was shot while surrendering, with his hands in the air and that his last words were “I don’t have a gun. Stop shooting.”
-This is backed up by Mike Brown’s autopsy, which suggests that Mike Brown would have had to be in the hands-up position for the bullets to enter his hand and arm the way they did.
(source)
-Furthermore, in a press conference, the coroner who performed Mike Brown’s autopsy relays that there was no trace of gun shot residue anywhere on his body, proving that Wilson’s claim that Mike Brown grabbed his gun, causing it to misfire, is impossible and untrue.
(source)
-Ferguson Police lied about the distance Mike Brown was from Officer Wilson when he was killed. They reported it was 35 ft. but it was in fact 148 ft.
(source)
-Owner of Ferguson Market states that he did not call police to report a theft of cigars, that the theft had nothing to do with Mike Brown, and that the man on the security footage is not Mike Brown.
(source)
-The prosecuting attorney for the case against Darren Wilson has helped raise $600,000 in donations for Darren Wilson, creating a clear conflict of interest.
(source)
-The police department that Officer Wilson worked for prior to coming to Ferguson was disbanded after multiple instances of racial profiling.”
(source)

[Caehlim]

While I don't disagree overall, just one point I feel should be clarified.

-Officer Wilson broke police self-defense protocol, which teaches to disarm and incapacitate rather than kill and teaches officers to go for body shots. Officer Wilson shot Mike Brown twice in the head, after he shot him four times in his arm and torso.

Police are trained to aim for the body to increase lethality, not decrease it. (I posted a source for this earlier in this thread). Firearms are only intended to be used by police in order to provide lethal force. They are told not to aim for head shots because they're unlikely to hit with them, not out of any intention to keep the person alive.

If the range was 148 feet as she mentions elsewhere in her report, then chances are that bullets striking the head were shots aimed at the chest which missed rather than deliberately aimed and precise shots. Particularly if he fired multiple shots in rapid succession as recoil tends to pull your aim upwards.

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

(I posted a source for this earlier in this thread).

Sorry for any redundancy on my part... I haven't fully read the rest of this thread, just skimmed it, because it was honestly making my blood boil. shrugz

[Caehlim]

Sorry for any redundancy on my part... I haven't fully read the rest of this thread, just skimmed it, because it was honestly making my blood boil. shrugz

That's okay, I was just feeling too lazy to find the link again.

[consortium11]

Has anyone seen this yet?

KU Journalism student shreds case against Mike Brown

I'ma just copy and paste it in here. I pasted in the links too.

I sort of dislike to "shred" a "shredding" but some points leaped out at me.

First, a general one; including evidence from media reports (frequently from within the first week or two when everything was confused) which was in turn discredited by the evidence in the Grand Jury strikes me as somewhat deceptive; especially as some of the things mentioned above are directly contradicted by the evidence submitted to the Grand Jury.

To pick up on some specific points:

-Mike Brown WAS fleeing from Officer Wilson when he was fatally shot. Wilson confirms this on page 281 of his grand jury testimony.

This is mis-stating what Wilson says on p281... to put it in context:

One thing you guys haven't asked that has been asked of me in other interviews is, was he a threat, was Michael Brown a threat when he was running away? People asked why would you chase him if he was running away now?

It's clear that when Wilson was discussing Brown fleeing it was in the context of his decision to chase, not to shoot.

Officer Wilson broke police self-defense protocol, which teaches to disarm and incapacitate rather than kill and teaches officers to go for body shots. Officer Wilson shot Mike Brown twice in the head, after he shot him four times in his arm and torso.

This strikes me as being pretty contradictory in-and-of itself; if he'd already shot Brown in the torso then he had gone for body shots. Moreover I can't find a source for what Ferguson police self-defense protocol requires but I rather suspect it doesn't include a "shoot to incapacitate" section; pretty much every time I've heard the idea of "shoot to wound" discussed by experienced firearm users it's dismissed as a Hollywood fallacy... there are no places that are reliably non-lethal to shoot (a shot aimed at the knee cap may well catch the femoral artery for example). A shot at the body would have to be classed as a lethal shot (or at least an attempt at one).

-While Officer Wilson’s story of what happened that day has changed at least three times, six separate eyewitnesses, four of whom have never met each other, all have identical accounts of what happened. They were never interviewed by police.

Of the six witnesses mentioned in that link at least four of them openly testified before the Grand Jury, one of them appears to have as an unnamed witness and the only one I haven't been able to find evidence of (but may still be another one of the unnamed witnesses) openly says he spoke to the FBI about the shooting.

Moreover all of the evidence they offered to the Grand Jury had differences to what they told the media; some relatively minor some notable. Of particular note may be one of the construction workers who testified that three officers pursued Brown.

-These eyewitnesses all agree that Darren Wilson was the aggressor and that Mike Brown was shot while surrendering, with his hands in the air and that his last words were “I don’t have a gun. Stop shooting.”

1) An above point tries to suggest that Brown was shot when fleeing... so why is it being argued below that he was shot when surrendering?

2) The blood splatter evidence indicates that Brown was moving away from Wilson, stopped, turned and came back towards Wilson. That corresponds with Wilson's account that Brown stopped, turned and charged him after originally running away. Now, that doesn't prove that he charged Wilson... he could have turned and walked towards Wilson while surrendering... but none of the witnesses who put forward the "hands up, don't shoot" take on the events said that Brown came towards Wilson at all while surrendering, instead saying he was stood still.

3) Several of them attested at various times that Brown was shot in the back. There's only one wound to the back; the back of one of Wilson's arms.

-This is backed up by Mike Brown’s autopsy, which suggests that Mike Brown would have had to be in the hands-up position for the bullets to enter his hand and arm the way they did.

1) Not according to either autopsy (the state one and the one arranged by Brown's family/supporters) as entered at the Grand Jury or the testimony of the medical examiner and forensic expert (again, arranged by Brown's family/supporters) both of which make clear that they're unable to tell exactly where his hands were positioned.

2) The only wound to Brown's hand was a shot to his thumb. The gunpowder residue from this wound on the rest of Brown's hand indicates that this was caused by a gunshot from 6-9 inches away and skin tissue from Brown's thumb was found within Wilson's car (agreed by both sides). This corresponds with Wilson's testimony that the pair struggled for his gun and pretty much outright refutes the idea that the wound to the hand was inflicted when Brown had his hands up surrendering and was shot at distance.

-Furthermore, in a press conference, the coroner who performed Mike Brown’s autopsy relays that there was no trace of gun shot residue anywhere on his body, proving that Wilson’s claim that Mike Brown grabbed his gun, causing it to misfire, is impossible and untrue.

Which he went back on in his Grand Jury testimony having had more time to examine the body (his first assessment that there was no powder/residue was done by eyesight alone). Page 40 and 41, Volume 23 covers his testimony on this; he accepts that there was gun powder residue and that the wound to the hand was caused by a shot from "within a few inches".

-Owner of Ferguson Market states that he did not call police to report a theft of cigars, that the theft had nothing to do with Mike Brown, and that the man on the security footage is not Mike Brown.

Contradicted by the evidence of Dorian Johnson (Brown's friend) who openly admits that Brown was in the store and that Brown then stole the cigarillos. Moreover the police did receive a call about the theft and dispatched an officer to investigate (who in turn was the first officer outside of Wilson to the scene of the shooting).

All in all the only "shredding" which seems to hold up is that related to police procedure in the wake of the shooting; that's important certainly and something that should be paid attention to.

But for the stuff around the shooting itself? It seems to basically be a combination of misreading evidence from the Grand Jury and relying on "evidence" and media reports that were later either retracted or contradicted by stronger evidence.

[TaintedAndDelish]

Shelby Lawson is a student at the University of Kansas, majoring in Journalism and Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies.

It sounds like Shelby will make a fine journalist by today's standards.

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

It sounds like Shelby will make a fine journalist by today's standards.

[Inkidu]

I promised myself I wouldn't come back here, but I had the same suspicions as the above Fry-pic. :P

[TaintedAndDelish]

A little off topic, but amusing. Being unfamiliar with this image, I had to google it and came accross this:

About

Futurama Fry is an image macro series that uses a still of Fry squinting his eyes from the TV show Futurama, and is typically paired with overlaid text using a phrasal template. The top line reads “Not sure if X”, with “or just Y” as the bottom line, and is used to represent an internal monologue.

Origin

In the Season 2, Episode 6 episode of Futurama titled “The Lesser of Two Evils”, Fry can be seen making the face shortly after being found searching Leela’s underwear drawer at around 15 minutes into the episode.[1]

lol

[consortium11]

I should also note that the post I replied to (or, more accurately, the facebook message referenced in the post) is exactly why I said people should read the Grand Jury evidence... and if a secondary source references it then double check that it says what the secondary sources says it does (i.e. "shot when fleeing" and using Wilson's testimony to "prove" it). Yes, the Grand Jury documents are intimidating (23 volumes at 200+ pages each or so) but there's indexed and searchable versions out there, some of which highlight and link to key parts.

Even a cursory knowledge of the Grand Jury testimony would have immediately made some of the listed points stand out as false (the "hands up" position being the only possible one, the supposed lack of gun residue, that the theft had nothing to do with Brown, that six people referenced in the article hadn't been interviewed) and that others seeming deliberately ignore evidence that was undisputed (blood splatter indicated Brown advanced towards Wilson, that the wound to the hand had to be caused by a gunshot from inches away). Others take about a minute to double check (the "shot when fleeing" from p281).

I can't think of a case where it's been simpler or easier to double check what secondary sources say. Don't let that opportunity go to waste. If you're interested in this case or discussing it do a favour to yourself and at least glance over the primary evidence.

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

Why read the documents myself when other people are so eager to condescendingly explain them to me? :P

[Beguile's Mistress]

Why read the documents myself when other people are so eager to condescendingly explain them to me? :P

Because when two different interpretations of the same facts differ as much as the interpretations of the testimony the only fair way to be sure is to read the testimony yourself rather than let someone else tell you what to believe.  It's easy to believe the version that sounds good to you but is it fair?

[SouvlakiSpaceStation]

Erm, that question was sarcastic and wasn't meant to be taken seriously. But thanks nonetheless. I think I'll try to ignore this thread from now on.

[Sethala]

So, I pondered about this for a while, and here's my take on what I think happened...

First, I'm assuming (thanks to other posts in this thread) that there was a struggle for the gun inside Wilson's car, because Brown was shot in the hand at very close range, and I don't think it's contested that Wilson was punched in the face during the struggle.  I'm also assuming that Wilson didn't know Brown was involved in the robbery at first, although he may have realized something was up, but Brown didn't know that Wilson didn't know, and it's possible he thought Wilson was there because of the robbery.

So, building off of that, when Wilson finally got out of his car after Brown ran off, he had been shoved back into his car as he was trying to get out, was punched, had struggled with the assaulter for his own gun, likely with his life on the line, and just had the gun go off a few inches away from his head.  I don't think it's unreasonable to say that he's not exactly in a clear state of mind.  When he gets out of his car and has the guy that likely tried to kill him turn around, he probably panicked and fired, less out of a desire to kill and more out of fear of his own life.  The discrepancies in his testimony aren't too unreasonable when you realize that he was likely in shock when everything happened, which makes it very hard to remember many details about things.  Granted, I don't know what police training is like or if he'd be trained to remember such details immediately after fighting for his life, so perhaps it is reasonable to assume he'd be able to spot such things when under intense pressure.

Did Brown's race come into it?  Very possibly, there is a stereotype of black people and drug use, violence, or gangs, and while I'm not saying Wilson consciously agreed with such a stereotype, his subconscious could have easily connected "dark-skinned person" to "dangerous enemy" when under such pressure, and it's possible he wouldn't have that subconscious reaction if it was a white person.  Does that make Wilson racist?  I don't think so, if it was something he just subconsciously thought in the brief span of seconds everything happened in, but it's not something I'd rule out either.  Do I think Brown deserved what happened?  Honestly, I don't care who you are, if you're going to fight with someone over a loaded gun you should expect that someone might get shot, and that the person you're fighting with might not be in a proper state of mind when you stop fighting.  That doesn't mean you deserve to get shot, but it does mean you don't get to complain about the consequences of your actions.

If my assumptions are true though, does anyone else see any flaws with my line of thinking?

[Dimir]

More updates out of Ferguson, Missouri, including that the police chief will resign in two months. Also two police officers (not Ferguson officers) were shot and wounded last night and protests are still going on. Other agencies are now policing the city.  I feel the debate now turns to who is going to manage the police department and what will be the future of this city, since there is very little order at the moment.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/12/shots-fired-ferguson/70194012/

[Cycle]

Here is the Department of Justice's Press Release and actual Report on the Ferguson Police Department.

[Caehlim]

Here is the Department of Justice's Press Release and actual Report on the Ferguson Police Department.

Wow, I haven't read the report properly yet, but just from the chapter titles in the report that's a really damning condemnation. I'm going to read through the rest of this today and see what the full situation is.

[consortium11]

Wow, I haven't read the report properly yet, but just from the chapter titles in the report that's a really damning condemnation. I'm going to read through the rest of this today and see what the full situation is.

It's pretty damning.

In summary, the Ferguson Police Department (and the Municipal Court that falls under its supervision) is quite clearly presented as being primarily a revenue gathering organisation rather than one actually interested in protecting the community. This comes from the higher ups in the city who frequently make clear that the police force needs to bring in more and more revenue and manifests with officers being evaluated on their "productivity"... in essence how many arrests and citations which lead to fines they issue.

Because of that officers frequently abuse the law and breach the constitution, stopping, searching and arresting when there is no reason to. The municipal court is just as bad, routinely handing out fines, not offering community service and making a habit out of imposing punitive fines on people who can't afford to pay them, issuing arrest warrants for failure to pay and then imposing additional fines. Combine all that with officers routinely using excessive force... and viewing force as something to be used not to protect themselves or the community but instead as a punitive measure against anyone who annoys them. The throw in a whole bunch of the sort of small-town corruption that frequently crops up; officers and officials having their own speeding tickets written off etc etc.

The racial stuff is slightly less clear cut but still pretty damning. The effect of the above issues is disproportionately felt by the African-American community; while making up 67% of the population they are involved in 90%+ of the arrests. As for why this is, there's no smoking gun in the report although it does list a number of racist jokes shared by email within the police department and how there was no punishment or even requests for it to stop; instead they were forwarded on. In essence the report says that there has to be a reason for the disproportionate treatment of African-Americans, they can't find any legitimate reason for why that would be so, thus (especially when the racist jokes are taken into account) it is most likely racism.

[Caehlim]

After reading that report I can understand why people are so angry in Ferguson. Far more going on than just the shooting death that we heard about, although that seemed to be what finally pushed people too far.

[Callie Del Noire]

After reading that report I can understand why people are so angry in Ferguson. Far more going on than just the shooting death that we heard about, although that seemed to be what finally pushed people too far.

What is surprising is that for the fine driven revenue angle, Fergason isn't that atypical. A bit further along the bend of the bell curve but a lot of towns rely on fines, it's only come up more as some of the more extreme examples come to light

Society Hill, SC is the big one in my mind. I lived just north of it for high school and we'd visit family about an hour and a half away. In 3 1/2 years, going thru 2 times a month, I NEVER saw the locals not pulled over writing up someone. Three cars. We broke down there one Saturday afternoon and saw something like 6 stops in 4 hours in front of the truck stop we were at. Of course that was in the 80s. One of my coworkers got a ticket for doing 2 miles over the limit.

There are two towns up here between Jax and Gainesville so bad that folks put up BILLBOARDS coming into town. One of my buds had a picture of the local cops using it as cover for a speed trap. Of course there is a bill up the way here in Florida that is supposed to address that issue. Any municipality generating more that 40% (I think) of its budget in fines is about to get hammered.

It's called, ironically for one of those towns, as the Waldo Bill. Passed the senate, and looks to do the same in the house. Gov Voldermort..Er Scott is said to be happy to sign it.

http://wjcl.com/2015/04/08/traffic-ticket-quotas-could-become-illegal-in-florida/

The situation in Fergason opened my eyes to it being more than just speeding ticket quotas though.