Looting in Missouri after cops shoot 18 year old (1 Viewer)

[Rayderr]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Was Brown really 6'4", 290 lbs.? He was 290?

yes he was a fat dude

How old was he?

18

Has anyone seen a picture of the cop?

CNN showed a video (post shooting) of the cop and another cop near the body after the shooting. He looked like an older guy with white hair. Any details on him? He looked like an older guy to me.

Did someone break into Saints' account and is posting under his name? How do you not know this stuff if you lead the thread in posts?

Sorry, man, just asking, I had the word "teen" down, wasn't sure of the exact age or the guy's exact build. I appreciate the patient responses.

 

[TheIronSheik]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

Racist.

 

[jonessed]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Not really.

They apparently felt that one of their officers was being unfairly disparaged by the community and the media.

While the merits of releasing the video are open to question I don't think they are obligated to simply take the brunt of public criticism with no PR response.

 

[TobiasFunke]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

 

[TobiasFunke]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Not really.

They apparently felt that one of their officers was being unfairly disparaged by the community and the media.

While the merits of releasing the video are open to question I don't think they are obligated to simply take the brunt of public criticism with no PR response.

How exactly did the robbery info help with the fact that their officer was being unfairly disparaged? He had nothing to do with the robbery!

They are obligated to protect and serve the community- I know that's just an LAPD slogan but it pretty well captures what we expect of law enforcement in this country. I bet some version of that even appears on Ferguson police oaths or property or something.

So explain to me how including the information about the robbery (and nothing else about the events surrounding the killing, including the fact that the stop was unrelated to the robbery) protected and served the community.

 

[msommer]

BBC's article on the autopsy findings:

Jump media player

Jump media player
Media player help

Out of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue.

Michael Brown's mother Lesley: "Make this man accountable for his actions"

Both men said more information was needed, including x-rays from the initial autopsy, the medical evaluation of Mr Wilson and an examination of the clothes Mr Brown was wearing at his time of death.

Dr Baden said there were no signs of a struggle, as abrasions around the teenager's face were likely from falling to the pavement after being shot.

He also believed Mr Wilson did not shoot him at close range as there was no gunpowder residue on his body, suggesting the officer was at least 2ft away.

Another autopsy on Mr Brown by the US justice department, in addition to examinations by Dr Baden's and St Louis county officials.

 

[Greggity]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Not really.

They apparently felt that one of their officers was being unfairly disparaged by the community and the media.

While the merits of releasing the video are open to question I don't think they are obligated to simply take the brunt of public criticism with no PR response.

How exactly did the robbery info help with the fact that their officer was being unfairly disparaged? He had nothing to do with the robbery!

They are obligated to protect and serve the community- I know that's just an LAPD slogan but it pretty well captures what we expect of law enforcement in this country. I bet some version of that even appears on Ferguson police oaths or property or something.

So explain to me how including the information about the robbery (and nothing else about the events surrounding the killing, including the fact that the stop was unrelated to the robbery) protected and served the community.

They got this loose cannon of a guy off the streets. Id say they protected and served....

 

[Rayderr]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

 

[jonessed]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Not really.They apparently felt that one of their officers was being unfairly disparaged by the community and the media.

While the merits of releasing the video are open to question I don't think they are obligated to simply take the brunt of public criticism with no PR response.

They are obligated to protect and serve the community- I know that's just an LAPD slogan but it pretty well captures what we expect of law enforcement in this country. I bet some version of that even appears on Ferguson police oaths or property or something.

So explain to me how including the information about the robbery (and nothing else about the events surrounding the killing, including the fact that the stop was unrelated to the robbery) protected and served the community.

They claim the officer didn't pull Brown over because of the robbery, but whether he knew about it seems to be unclear. The department has been inconsistent with their statements on this.

I don't believe the local PD was in charge of the shooting investigation at that point so I doubt they were in a position to release much information about it specifically.

I imagine some of this will be cleared up when more information is released by the state or the JD.

 

[msommer]

Couple of things interesting in that article I think:

Shawn Parcells, a forensic pathologist who assisted Dr Baden, said a wound to Mr Brown's right arm may have been sustained as he had his hands up, "but we don't know".

He said the wound was consistent either with having his back to the officer or facing the officer with his hands above his head or in a defensive position.

and

Dr Baden said there were no signs of a struggle, as abrasions around the teenager's face were likely from falling to the pavement after being shot.

 

[jonessed]

Couple of things interesting in that article I think:

Shawn Parcells, a forensic pathologist who assisted Dr Baden, said a wound to Mr Brown's right arm may have been sustained as he had his hands up, "but we don't know".

He said the wound was consistent either with having his back to the officer or facing the officer with his hands above his head or in a defensive position.

and

Dr Baden said there were no signs of a struggle, as abrasions around the teenager's face were likely from falling to the pavement after being shot.

I think the struggle is the only thing consistent in just about every story.

 

[Captain Quinoa]

This is not a proper reaction to American citizens

http://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1393696/mike-brown.jpg

How are those black kneepads just floating in the air?

 

[TobiasFunke]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Where did I say they needed to release all the info? I don't even mention the delays as a problem here (although they were- incident reports are usually filed immediately and publicly available). I said release the name or release all relevant info you have. Releasing just the fact that he was involved in a robbery and then NOT saying the shooting was unrelated? Come on. How can you think the PD has even a shred of credibility based on that alone? And that's before we talk about the arrests of journalists, the media blackouts, the rifles pointed at innocent protestors, the wide number of eyewitness accounts and photographs showing the police being needlessly confrontational, the department's history, and on and on and on. Yeah, sure- a couple idiots stealing TVs is the real problem here.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Not really.They apparently felt that one of their officers was being unfairly disparaged by the community and the media.

While the merits of releasing the video are open to question I don't think they are obligated to simply take the brunt of public criticism with no PR response.

They are obligated to protect and serve the community- I know that's just an LAPD slogan but it pretty well captures what we expect of law enforcement in this country. I bet some version of that even appears on Ferguson police oaths or property or something.

So explain to me how including the information about the robbery (and nothing else about the events surrounding the killing, including the fact that the stop was unrelated to the robbery) protected and served the community.

They claim the officer didn't pull Brown over because of the robbery, but whether he knew about it seems to be unclear. The department has been inconsistent with their statements on this.

I don't believe the local PD was in charge of the shooting investigation at that point so I doubt they were in a position to release much information about it specifically.

I imagine some of this will be cleared up when more information is released by the state or the JD.

The cop may have not known Brown just committed a robbery, but Brown knew....This may have led up to a confrontation...Maybe Brown thought the cop was coming for him due to the robbery and things escalated from there.

 

[Gawain]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Where did I say they needed to release all the info? I don't even mention the delays as a problem here (although they were- incident reports are usually filed immediately and publicly available). I said release the name or release all relevant info you have. Releasing just the fact that he was involved in a robbery and then NOT saying the shooting was unrelated? Come on. How can you think the PD has even a shred of credibility based on that alone? And that's before we talk about the arrests of journalists, the media blackouts, the rifles pointed at innocent protestors, the wide number of eyewitness accounts and photographs showing the police being needlessly confrontational, the department's history, and on and on and on. Yeah, sure- a couple idiots stealing TVs is the real problem here.

So, you're saying the community wanted information that made Brown look impeccable, wanted the officer arrested, convicted and executed before any facts were known and wanted free tvs.

 

[Greggity]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Where did I say they needed to release all the info? I don't even mention the delays as a problem here (although they were- incident reports are usually filed immediately and publicly available). I said release the name or release all relevant info you have. Releasing just the fact that he was involved in a robbery and then NOT saying the shooting was unrelated? Come on. How can you think the PD has even a shred of credibility based on that alone? And that's before we talk about the arrests of journalists, the media blackouts, the rifles pointed at innocent protestors, the wide number of eyewitness accounts and photographs showing the police being needlessly confrontational, the department's history, and on and on and on. Yeah, sure- a couple idiots stealing TVs is the real problem here.

So, you're saying the community wanted information that made Brown look impeccable, wanted the officer arrested, convicted and executed before any facts were known and wanted free tvs.

Sounds about right, wish i lived there lol

 

[TobiasFunke]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Where did I say they needed to release all the info? I don't even mention the delays as a problem here (although they were- incident reports are usually filed immediately and publicly available). I said release the name or release all relevant info you have. Releasing just the fact that he was involved in a robbery and then NOT saying the shooting was unrelated? Come on. How can you think the PD has even a shred of credibility based on that alone? And that's before we talk about the arrests of journalists, the media blackouts, the rifles pointed at innocent protestors, the wide number of eyewitness accounts and photographs showing the police being needlessly confrontational, the department's history, and on and on and on. Yeah, sure- a couple idiots stealing TVs is the real problem here.

So, you're saying the community wanted information that made Brown look impeccable, wanted the officer arrested, convicted and executed before any facts were known and wanted free tvs.

I guess this is all you've got left?

Pro tip- next time just don't reply.

 

[Fennis]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Of all government agencies, the consist lack of transparency by PDs is a major cause of issues. PDs need to modernize and understand they are there to serve the public and stop with the constant circling of the wagons. Its not just a Ferguson problem, but a problem across many many PDs

 

[fourd]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Not really.

They apparently felt that one of their officers was being unfairly disparaged by the community and the media.

While the merits of releasing the video are open to question I don't think they are obligated to simply take the brunt of public criticism with no PR response.

How exactly did the robbery info help with the fact that their officer was being unfairly disparaged? He had nothing to do with the robbery!

They are obligated to protect and serve the community- I know that's just an LAPD slogan but it pretty well captures what we expect of law enforcement in this country. I bet some version of that even appears on Ferguson police oaths or property or something.

So explain to me how including the information about the robbery (and nothing else about the events surrounding the killing, including the fact that the stop was unrelated to the robbery) protected and served the community.

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Where did I say they needed to release all the info? I don't even mention the delays as a problem here (although they were- incident reports are usually filed immediately and publicly available). I said release the name or release all relevant info you have. Releasing just the fact that he was involved in a robbery and then NOT saying the shooting was unrelated? Come on. How can you think the PD has even a shred of credibility based on that alone? And that's before we talk about the arrests of journalists, the media blackouts, the rifles pointed at innocent protestors, the wide number of eyewitness accounts and photographs showing the police being needlessly confrontational, the department's history, and on and on and on. Yeah, sure- a couple idiots stealing TVs is the real problem here.

Of course some of it could also be attributed to the fact that this is Ferguson, MO. I'm sure they are prepared for the type of scrutiny they are now under and go through all the scenarios when releasing information. As opposed to those supporting the family of Michael Brown, who are PR masters and looking to get the exact reaction they have gotten from those outraged before any "facts" are known. Is it really going to matter what the actual facts are once everyone "knows" what happened?

 

[Fennis]

This is not a proper reaction to American citizens

http://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1393696/mike-brown.jpg

How are those black kneepads just floating in the air?

which ones?

 

[jonessed]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Of all government agencies, the consist lack of transparency by PDs is a major cause of issues. PDs need to modernize and understand they are there to serve the public and stop with the constant circling of the wagons. Its not just a Ferguson problem, but a problem across many many PDs

I think squad car and officer cameras could improve this quite a bit.

My understanding is that it's generally a hurdle with police unions. It's really up to local citizens to force the issue.

 

[fourd]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Of all government agencies, the consist lack of transparency by PDs is a major cause of issues. PDs need to modernize and understand they are there to serve the public and stop with the constant circling of the wagons. Its not just a Ferguson problem, but a problem across many many PDs

I agree with this, yet it can be hard when there is a side with another agenda looking to get their spin on things before the actual facts are determined.

 

[Rayderr]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Where did I say they needed to release all the info? I don't even mention the delays as a problem here (although they were- incident reports are usually filed immediately and publicly available). I said release the name or release all relevant info you have. Releasing just the fact that he was involved in a robbery and then NOT saying the shooting was unrelated? Come on. How can you think the PD has even a shred of credibility based on that alone? And that's before we talk about the arrests of journalists, the media blackouts, the rifles pointed at innocent protestors, the wide number of eyewitness accounts and photographs showing the police being needlessly confrontational, the department's history, and on and on and on. Yeah, sure- a couple idiots stealing TVs is the real problem here.

Where did I say a couple idiots stealing tvs were the problem? Hell, I don't think I've ever even talked about the riots themselves here.

Seriously Tobias, take some deep breaths. Maybe go out for a walk and get some fresh air.

The 'community' (for a lack of better term) has been hammering the FPD over the lack of information that had been released. They demanded repeatedly that the officer's name be released. They want to know if he was wearing a camera, they want to know why he stopped Brown, they want to know every detail possible. So the details start getting release. And then people get pissed when some of the details don't match the story they've committed to. Cognitive dissonance is a #####. And I'm sorry if you or others are having trouble coping with it, but that's what happens when you form judgements based on little and/or incorrect facts and your pride doesn't let you admit that maybe you were wrong.

 

[Gary Coal Man]

RASMUSSEN REPORTS

The shooting incident in a St. Louis suburb is still under investigation, and just over half of Americans are not sure yet whether the police officer involved is guilty of murdering a black teenager. But most blacks have already made up their minds that the policeman should be found guilty. Blacks are also more convinced that the violent protests since the shooting occurred are mostly legitimate outrage rather than criminal activity.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 23% of all American Adults believe the police officer who shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri should be found guilty of murder. Twenty-six percent (26%) think he was acting in self-defense. Fifty-one percent (51%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of black adults, however, think police officer Darren Wilson should be found guilty of murder, compared to just 17% of whites and 24% of other minority Americans. Most whites (56%) and a plurality (49%) of other minorities are undecided.

A similar racial divide could be seen throughout the trial of George Zimmerman who shot and killed a black teenager in Florida in 2012 and was subsequently found not guilty in a jury trial.

When it comes to the mob violence that has occurred in Ferguson since the shooting, 25% of Americans think it has been primarily legitimate outrage over what happened. But 52% think it has been mostly criminals taking advantage of the situation. Another 23% are not sure. The Missouri State Police and the state National Guard have been called in to deal with the ongoing violence in Ferguson.

While most whites (54%) and other minority Americans (53%) believe the violence has been chiefly criminals taking advantage of the situation, just 35% of blacks agree. Slightly more (41%) think the mob violence has been primarily legitimate outrage, a view shared by 24% of whites and 21% of other minorities. Roughly a quarter of all three groups are undecided.

The national telephone survey of 1,000 Adults was conducted by Rasmussen Reports on August 15-16, 2014. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 2 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Fieldwork for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

But Americans across the board give mixed reviews to the police response to the mob violence in Ferguson and also question the militarization of the local police on display in the days since the shooting. Twenty-seven percent (27%) think the police response was good or excellent, while just as many (28%) rate it as poor.

Men and those 40 and over give the police response higher positive marks than women and younger voters do. Blacks are more than twice as likely as whites and other minority adults to rate the police response as poor.

Thirty-one percent (31%) of all Americans favor the use of military-grade weapons and equipment by their local police, but a plurality (46%) is opposed. A sizable 23% are not sure. Adults of all races have similar reservations about the show of police force on display in Ferguson this past week.

Fifty-four percent (54%) of Democrats and 50% of those not affiliated with either major party oppose the use of military-grade weapons and equipment by the police. A plurality (45%) of Republicans thinks it's a good idea.

Just 19% of all voters think it would be good for America if only government officials like police officers and the military were allowed to have guns. More than ever (72%) think that would be bad for the nation.

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Americans have been following recent news reports about the police shooting in the St. Louis suburb, but only 30% say they’ve been following Very Closely. Blacks are following much more closely than whites and other minority adults.

Only 34% of Americans now rate race relations in the United States as good or excellent. Just 31% think those relations are getting better. Only 16% of voters think life for young black Americans has gotten better since President Obama’s election in November 2008, while 22% believe it’s gotten worse.

Forty-six percent (46%) think the U.S. justice system is fair to black and Hispanic Americans, but 36% disagree. However, 80% of black voters think the system is unfair to minorities.

In some areas of the country, police officers wear body-worn cameras (BWCs) mainly to monitor their practices and interactions with the public. Just over half of all voters nationwide like the idea of police officers wearing cameras, but a plurality thinks it wouldn’t have much impact on crime.

Eighteen percent (18%) of Americans think the tactics used by police officers where they live are too harsh, but nearly as many (15%) think those tactics aren’t harsh enough. Most (57%) say the tactics used by local law enforcement are about right. Fifty-one percent (51%) think America needs more cops.

 

[Sweet J]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Not really.

They apparently felt that one of their officers was being unfairly disparaged by the community and the media.

While the merits of releasing the video are open to question I don't think they are obligated to simply take the brunt of public criticism with no PR response.

Video is really only relevant if we knew that the cop had seen the video. I guess an argument could be made that the video was relevant if the cop thought Brown may be involved in the robbery, even if he hadsn't seen the video. But I'm not sure it would be relevant if the cop hadn't seen it himself.

 

[TobiasFunke]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Where did I say they needed to release all the info? I don't even mention the delays as a problem here (although they were- incident reports are usually filed immediately and publicly available). I said release the name or release all relevant info you have. Releasing just the fact that he was involved in a robbery and then NOT saying the shooting was unrelated? Come on. How can you think the PD has even a shred of credibility based on that alone? And that's before we talk about the arrests of journalists, the media blackouts, the rifles pointed at innocent protestors, the wide number of eyewitness accounts and photographs showing the police being needlessly confrontational, the department's history, and on and on and on. Yeah, sure- a couple idiots stealing TVs is the real problem here.

Where did I say a couple idiots stealing tvs were the problem? Hell, I don't think I've ever even talked about the riots themselves here.

Seriously Tobias, take some deep breaths. Maybe go out for a walk and get some fresh air.

The 'community' (for a lack of better term) has been hammering the FPD over the lack of information that had been released. They demanded repeatedly that the officer's name be released. They want to know if he was wearing a camera, they want to know why he stopped Brown, they want to know every detail possible. So the details start getting release. And then people get pissed when some of the details don't match the story they've committed to. Cognitive dissonance is a #####. And I'm sorry if you or others are having trouble coping with it, but that's what happens when you form judgements based on little and/or incorrect facts and your pride doesn't let you admit that maybe you were wrong.

"Cognitive dissonance" is looking at the press conference from Friday and thinking it was merely the details starting to be released. Is that really what you think? They decided they should share the name, a gesture that had turned from a courtesy to a huge symbol, and just happened to also share the info about the robbery because that was the only detail they'd firmed up at the time? Even though they actually hadn't firmed it up at all, since they later admitted the initial stop was unrelated to the robbery?

Come on. You are smart enough to know better. We both have a pretty good idea of what was going on Friday at that conference. After public pressure forced them to ID the shooter, the police shared a mostly irrelevant detail about the victim in a misguided attempt to win a PR war against the people they're supposed to be serving. That should be obvious to everyone.

 

[[icon]]

I think it's safe to assume the officer heard a report of the theft over the radio.

Given the suspect's atypical size, there was certainly reasonable suspicion to stop and question Brown. There are probably a limited number of 6'4" 300lb young men wearing a white t shirt and tan shorts in that immediate area.

 

[lod01]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Absolutely no problem with posting facts.

Fact: dude robbed the store.

Non-fact: Dude is a harmless, gentle giant.

You appear to side with the non-facts and do not like the facts coming out. You should join Sinn Fein. You've lost your mind as well.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I think it's safe to assume the officer heard a report of the theft over the radio.

Given the suspect's atypical size, there was certainly reasonable suspicion to stop and question Brown.

I'm not sure what you mean. The police admitted the stop was unrelated several days ago and as far as I know there's been no evidence to the contrary since then.

 

[Fennis]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Of all government agencies, the consist lack of transparency by PDs is a major cause of issues. PDs need to modernize and understand they are there to serve the public and stop with the constant circling of the wagons. Its not just a Ferguson problem, but a problem across many many PDs

I think squad car and officer cameras could improve this quite a bit.

My understanding is that it's generally a hurdle with police unions. It's really up to local citizens to force the issue.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/what-happens-when-police-officers-wear-body-cameras-1408320244

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

Sometimes, like the moments leading up to when a police officer decides to shoot someone, transparency is an unalloyed good. And especially lately, technology has progressed to a point that it makes this kind of transparency not just possible, but routine.

So it is in Rialto, Calif., where an entire police force is wearing so-called body-mounted cameras, no bigger than pagers, that record everything that transpires between officers and citizens. In the first year after the cameras' introduction, the use of force by officers declined 60%, and citizen complaints against police fell 88%.

It isn't known how many police departments are making regular use of cameras, though it is being considered as a way of perhaps altering the course of events in places such as Ferguson, Mo., where an officer shot and killed an unarmed black teenager.

What happens when police wear cameras isn't simply that tamper-proof recording devices provide an objective record of an encounter—though some of the reduction in complaints is apparently because of citizens declining to contest video evidence of their behavior—but a modification of the psychology of everyone involved.

The effect of third-party observers on behavior has long been known: Thomas Jefferson once advised that "whenever you do a thing, act as if all the world were watching." Psychologists have confirmed this intuition, showing that something as primitive as a poster with a pair of glaring eyes can make test subjects behave better, and even reduce theft in an area.
One problem with the cameras, however, has been cost. Fortunately, fierce competition between the two most prominent vendors of the devices, which makes the cameras used by Rialto police, has driven the price of individual cameras down to between $300 and $400. Unfortunately, one place where expenses can mount is in the storage and management of the data they generate.

Both Taser and Vievu offer cloud-based storage systems for a monthly subscription fee. Think of it as an evidence room-as-a-service, where vendors are happy to see police departments outsource some of their most critical functions, and be subject to the same kind of vendor lock-in that can make corporate IT managers weary of the cloud.

But Taser's system stores video data on cloud, where prices are falling rapidly, and there isn't much about cameras from either vendor that couldn't be reproduced by an enterprising startup. Given that body-worn cameras use components from the mobile industry, where prices are ground down by scale and competition, it's possible police forces will soon be able to come up with their own solutions, or use off-the shelf products such as Google Glass.

These are all reasons that Michael White, a professor of criminology at Arizona State University and, as the sole author of the Justice Department's report on police and body-mounted cameras, says the cameras, now a curiosity, could soon be ubiquitous. It has happened before: Taser's guns went from introduction to use by more than two-thirds of America's 18,000 police departments in about a decade. "It could be as little as 10 years until we see most police wearing these," says Dr. White.

Not everyone is happy about this possibility. After an order by a federal judge that the New York Police Department equip officers with body-worn cameras in some districts, the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association issued a report declaring that they would be an "encumbrance." In the mid-1990s the rollout of dashboard cameras, now standard issue in most patrol cars, met the same resistance, which is why Dr. White says it is important that the adoption of this technology be accomplished through consensus.


"There is a presumption that citizens will be happy with this because it seems to provide more transparency and accountability, but that might not be the case, especially in areas where there are long-term tensions between police and their communities," says Dr. White.

Still, privacy issues abound, and rules about protecting both witnesses and police must be established and tested. Officers would have to turn on their cameras during every encounter with citizens, argues the American Civil Liberties Union, but there might be exceptions, such as when officers are interviewing victims of assault, says Dr. White.

None of these issues have stopped police forces in the U.K., where departments have a decade head start on their counterparts in the U.S., from ever-wider adoption. Police in England and Wales are engaged in large-scale trials, and the aim is to make body-worn cameras standard issue.

In the U.K., where tests with them began in 2005, studies have shown that they aid in the prosecution of crimes, by providing additional, and uniquely compelling, evidence. In the U.S., in some instances they have shortened the amount of time required to investigate a shooting by police from two-to-three months to two-to-three days.

And they represent yet one more way we are being recorded by means that could eventually be leaked to the public.

Of course, sometimes events happen that accelerate the adoption of a technological fix. The tragic irony is that police in Ferguson have a stock of body-worn cameras, but have yet to deploy them to officers.

 

[Greggity]

You can get on the cops for the timing of the video release, but to say that the video isn't relative is hogwash.

If Brown's character is going to be built up, "college student, gentle giant" there's no reason why "criminal, strong-arm robber" shouldn't also come into play.

This right here is the problem exactly. Your mindset seems to be police vs. community. "They made him sound like a great guy so the police have a right to say otherwise."

You see the problem with that, right?

Or....

The community demands information, the police release information.

You've gotta be kidding me. The community demanded to know if the victim had committed a crime earlier in the day that was unrelated to the reason he was stopped by the police?

Either release just the name or release all information relevant to the incident. It's really not that hard. Releasing the name and then some of the other information clearly chosen to make the victim look bad while keeping most of the rest of the information about the incident a secret (including the fact that the roberry was not the reason he was stopped) destroyed what little credibility they had at that point.

Bizarre to me to see people here who usually challenge public figures/the government at the drop of a hat blindly accept the obviously flawed accounts of an incompetent police department that has shown no interest in accountability.

Ever think that the delays are because they want to do due process and make sure all the info is correct before releasing it? This ain't CSI where someone commits a crime and 44 minutes later the person has been arrested and thrown in jail. It's that type of mentality that leads us to these situations where people are outraged and demanding justice without even know half the facts.

Where did I say they needed to release all the info? I don't even mention the delays as a problem here (although they were- incident reports are usually filed immediately and publicly available). I said release the name or release all relevant info you have. Releasing just the fact that he was involved in a robbery and then NOT saying the shooting was unrelated? Come on. How can you think the PD has even a shred of credibility based on that alone? And that's before we talk about the arrests of journalists, the media blackouts, the rifles pointed at innocent protestors, the wide number of eyewitness accounts and photographs showing the police being needlessly confrontational, the department's history, and on and on and on. Yeah, sure- a couple idiots stealing TVs is the real problem here.

Where did I say a couple idiots stealing tvs were the problem? Hell, I don't think I've ever even talked about the riots themselves here.

Seriously Tobias, take some deep breaths. Maybe go out for a walk and get some fresh air.

The 'community' (for a lack of better term) has been hammering the FPD over the lack of information that had been released. They demanded repeatedly that the officer's name be released. They want to know if he was wearing a camera, they want to know why he stopped Brown, they want to know every detail possible. So the details start getting release. And then people get pissed when some of the details don't match the story they've committed to. Cognitive dissonance is a #####. And I'm sorry if you or others are having trouble coping with it, but that's what happens when you form judgements based on little and/or incorrect facts and your pride doesn't let you admit that maybe you were wrong.

"Cognitive dissonance" is looking at the press conference from Friday and thinking it was merely the details starting to be released. Is that really what you think? They decided they should share the name, a gesture that had turned from a courtesy to a huge symbol, and just happened to also share the info about the robbery because that was the only detail they'd firmed up at the time? Even though they actually hadn't firmed it up at all, since they later admitted the initial stop was unrelated to the robbery?

Come on. You are smart enough to know better. We both have a pretty good idea of what was going on Friday at that conference. After public pressure forced them to ID the shooter, the police shared a mostly irrelevant detail about the victim in a misguided attempt to win a PR war against the people they're supposed to be serving. That should be obvious to everyone.

Who cares if its unrelated to the robbery. Is that a "no fairsies"?

 

[Gawain]

I think it's safe to assume the officer heard a report of the theft over the radio.

Given the suspect's atypical size, there was certainly reasonable suspicion to stop and question Brown.

I'm not sure what you mean. The police admitted the stop was unrelated several days ago and as far as I know there's been no evidence to the contrary since then.

But it's not unrelated to Brown's mindset. While the officer may not have put the robbery with the stop, Brown may have thought that's why he was getting police attention. No one should be killed over a strong-arm robbery, but his actions earlier in the day make it much more likely that he would react to the officer with hostility.

 

[Greggity]

I think it's safe to assume the officer heard a report of the theft over the radio.

Given the suspect's atypical size, there was certainly reasonable suspicion to stop and question Brown.

I'm not sure what you mean. The police admitted the stop was unrelated several days ago and as far as I know there's been no evidence to the contrary since then.

But it's not unrelated to Brown's mindset. While the officer may not have put the robbery with the stop, Brown may have thought that's why he was getting police attention. No one should be killed over a strong-arm robbery, but his actions earlier in the day make it much more likely that he would react to the officer with hostility.

 

[TheIronSheik]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

But I was under the belief that the reason cops don't have these is because of the cost. Is that a wrong assumption?

 

[[icon]]

I think it's safe to assume the officer heard a report of the theft over the radio.

Given the suspect's atypical size, there was certainly reasonable suspicion to stop and question Brown.

I'm not sure what you mean. The police admitted the stop was unrelated several days ago and as far as I know there's been no evidence to the contrary since then.

I had heard that statement but didn't know how concrete it was. It seems a ton of "facts" in this case have been turned on their head in the last few days. If that has still held true then all good. Regardless, kid's size/attire/proximity would have been more than enough to evoke reasonable suspicion.

 

[lod01]

I think it's safe to assume the officer heard a report of the theft over the radio.

Given the suspect's atypical size, there was certainly reasonable suspicion to stop and question Brown. There are probably a limited number of 6'4" 300lb young men wearing a white t shirt and tan shorts in that immediate area.

I think that would depend on when the store owner reported it. The time frame is 7 minutes I believe.

 

[Fennis]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

But I was under the belief that the reason cops don't have these is because of the cost. Is that a wrong assumption?

according to the article the costs have come down. The article also says that Ferguson police had cameras purchased, but not deployed.

The unions are also often against it as cops don't want to be video taped all the time.

 

[msommer]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

But I was under the belief that the reason cops don't have these is because of the cost. Is that a wrong assumption?

A bit further up in the thread it was stated that the police unions are arguing against it. So might not be the cost (that objection more likely to come from the brass)

 

[Gawain]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

But I was under the belief that the reason cops don't have these is because of the cost. Is that a wrong assumption?

Cost is much less a factor now (IMO) than cops don't want to be filmed. There's a reason the PBA's are against their use.

 

[[icon]]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

Agreed 100%. I'd be all for widespread adoption of body cameras on officers assuming it doesn't impede their normal efforts (not sure why it would).

My only concern would be an increase in "baiting" attempts by malicious individuals looking to get cops to act up on tape for personal or financial gain. Benefits would still outweigh the negatives, but just throwing that out there.

 

[lod01]

I think it's safe to assume the officer heard a report of the theft over the radio.

Given the suspect's atypical size, there was certainly reasonable suspicion to stop and question Brown.

I'm not sure what you mean. The police admitted the stop was unrelated several days ago and as far as I know there's been no evidence to the contrary since then.

But it's not unrelated to Brown's mindset. While the officer may not have put the robbery with the stop, Brown may have thought that's why he was getting police attention. No one should be killed over a strong-arm robbery, but his actions earlier in the day make it much more likely that he would react to the officer with hostility.

That's the way I see it. Dude just robbed a store, cop then pulls up along side him. Only one person knows the dude robbed the store and that is the dude....but he doesn't know if the cop knows yet but since the cop is now in his face, he thinks maybe the cop does know. Situation escalates. Thief is dead. Thief really could have used a police scanner.

 

[Greggity]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

Agreed 100%. I'd be all for widespread adoption of body cameras on officers assuming it doesn't impede their normal efforts (not sure why it would).

My only concern would be an increase in "baiting" attempts by malicious individuals looking to get cops to act up on tape for personal or financial gain.

That would NEVER happen in a place like Ferguson.....

 

[TobiasFunke]

I think it's safe to assume the officer heard a report of the theft over the radio.

Given the suspect's atypical size, there was certainly reasonable suspicion to stop and question Brown.

I'm not sure what you mean. The police admitted the stop was unrelated several days ago and as far as I know there's been no evidence to the contrary since then.

I had heard that statement but didn't know how concrete it was. It seems a ton of "facts" in this case have been turned on their head in the last few days. If that has still held true then all good. Regardless, kid's size/attire/proximity would have been more than enough to evoke reasonable suspicion.

Reasonable suspicion of what? Again, the initial stop was unrelated to the robbery. That's pretty much the only detail that has gone unrefuted in this whole thing. Who cares if some hypothetical officer could have heard the report and IDed the victim as the suspect and stopped him for that reason. The actual officer didn't do that. He stopped him because he was walking in the middle of the street. End of story.

 

[fatness]

I can at certain angles. If the bullet was basically sliding along the forearm (for the lack of a better description) and entered there it makes sense. If it's head on like it would have exited exactly opposite on the other side, that imo is only explainable if he was shot with his arms up.

Okay this has to be shtick at this point...

Not at all. As I said in the previous post, it's all about trajectories. Some trajectories are going to strengthen the officer's case. Other's are gonna strengthen the witnesses' statements about his hands being in the air. Just seeing where the bullet hit on the arms could go either way.

Someone agrees with you.

On Monday Dr Baden, a veteran of the New York City medical examiner's office and nationally prominent forensic pathologist, said his preliminary findings could answer the family's basic questions, including how many times he was shot and if he suffered.

He and forensic pathologist Shaun Parcells said Mr Brown was shot at least six times, twice in the head. They believed at least two bullets left re-entry wounds.

Mr Parcells said a wound to Mr Brown's right arm may have occurred with his hands up, "but we don't know". He said the wound was consistent either with having his back to the officer or facing the officer above his head or in a defensive position.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-28839522

 

[jonessed]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

But I was under the belief that the reason cops don't have these is because of the cost. Is that a wrong assumption?

No, but I know in CA there have also been issues with police unions.

It's really up to the local communities to push for it. Unfortunately, the communities that need it the most probably have less community involvement to begin with.

 

[lod01]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

But I was under the belief that the reason cops don't have these is because of the cost. Is that a wrong assumption?

according to the article the costs have come down. The article also says that Ferguson police had cameras purchased, but not deployed.

The unions are also often against it as cops don't want to be video taped all the time.

Still quite an expense. Like $4600 retail for the in car cameras then maintenance on each one now runs over $250 per camera system. Then you need a server and a boatload of storage space... then you gotta back it up. Then you gotta pay me to make it work.

Trust me, it's not cheap.

 

[Rayderr]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

But I was under the belief that the reason cops don't have these is because of the cost. Is that a wrong assumption?

Cost is much less a factor now (IMO) than cops don't want to be filmed. There's a reason the PBA's are against their use.

But cost is still a factor. Last data I saw listed 780,000 police officers in the us. Let's assume only half (390,000) of those actually go out on patrol. If the cameras cost $100 each, that's $39million. But we haven't even gotten to the necessary infrastructure necessary to have the cameras downloaded everyday and kept on file (and a backup kept elsewhere) .

I agree it's a good idea, but many question if it's economically viable solution for situations that occur rather rarely.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I think it's safe to assume the officer heard a report of the theft over the radio.

Given the suspect's atypical size, there was certainly reasonable suspicion to stop and question Brown.

I'm not sure what you mean. The police admitted the stop was unrelated several days ago and as far as I know there's been no evidence to the contrary since then.

But it's not unrelated to Brown's mindset. While the officer may not have put the robbery with the stop, Brown may have thought that's why he was getting police attention. No one should be killed over a strong-arm robbery, but his actions earlier in the day make it much more likely that he would react to the officer with hostility.

I agree. I brought it up as a criticism of the Ferguson PD, not to argue that the victim behaving badly couldn't possibly have played some role in the incident.

My point was that the Friday AM press conference was a total sham, the worst of several things the police did to escalate the situation. You either release the name and nothing else, or you release all the relevant info you have and you answer questions from the media. You don't release the name and the fact that the victim was a robbery suspect and then flee the podium like it's on fire, leaving out the fact that the initial stop was unrelated to the robbery until you're pressed on it later that day. That absolutely destroyed whatever little credibility and public trust they had left at that time.

 

[lod01]

What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras

Use of force by police officers declined 60% in first year since introduction of cameras in Rialto, Calif.

FYI - I cut out some of that post just to make it easier to read, not to try and edit anything. But I did want to touch on this: I think it would be awesome if all cops had body cameras. I think it would be beneficial to everyone, the cops as well as the community.

But I was under the belief that the reason cops don't have these is because of the cost. Is that a wrong assumption?

Cost is much less a factor now (IMO) than cops don't want to be filmed. There's a reason the PBA's are against their use.

But cost is still a factor. Last data I saw listed 780,000 police officers in the us. Let's assume only half (390,000) of those actually go out on patrol. If the cameras cost $100 each, that's $39million. But we haven't even gotten to the necessary infrastructure necessary to have the cameras downloaded everyday and kept on file (and a backup kept elsewhere) .

I agree it's a good idea, but many question if it's economically viable solution for situations that occur rather rarely.

Little low there dude. Camera also then feeds back to the VPU for storage in the car before it uploads to the server.

It's over 5 grand per if you want a reliable system that prevents a defense lawyer from saying you tampered with the video.