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

[Christo]

Has anyone figured out why it was significant that the store customer rather than the store clerk called 911?

I think it's significant, because it might not have been a robbery. In fact, I have not heard any confirmation from the store owner that it in fact WAS a robbery. And if it wasn't a robbery, then I have less reason to be skeptical of Johnson's testimony- which is my only interest in the robbery in the first place. Otherwise, whether or not Brown robbed a store is immaterial to what happened to him afterwards, IMO.

A customer called the police, but the store proprietor told the police when they arrived that Brown took the cigarillos and pushed him on the way out of the store. It's in the police report:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/ferguson-police-report?page=2

OK thanks. In that case we can discount Johnson's story, since he clearly not to be trusted. Brown's actions are irrelevant IMO to what took place with Wilson.

HTH can you say that?

 

[timschochet]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it. First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

 

[Christo]

Looks like ABC is running with the orbital fracture story now

The Ferguson police officer who shot and killed an unarmed teenager suffered “a serious facial injury” in the altercation before firing the fatal shots, according to a source close to the officer who spoke to ABC News today.

The characterization about Officer Darren Wilson being injured in his confrontation with Michael Brown emerged on the day that a grand jury was expected to begin hearing evidence in the shooting. Attorney General Eric Holder is also visiting Ferguson today, meeting with community leaders and groups to discuss the tension over the shooting.

Brown, 18, was shot and killed by Wilson on Aug.9, and protesters have been angrily calling for Wilson's arrest and indictment since that day.

St. Louis County Prosecutor David McCullough cautioned today that a decision on whether or not the officer would be indicted will not come quickly. He told ABC News "our target date is the middle of October" for wrapping up the evidence and asking the jury to decide whether to charge Wilson. Grand juries typically meet one day a week.

A source close to Wilson told ABC News that during the struggle at the patrol car, Wilson suffered “a serious facial injury.”

The injury was not described, but last week Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson said that Wilson had swelling to the side of his face

http://abcnews.go.com/US/ferguson-shooting-grand-jury-decide-october-charge-cop/story?id=25047905

Or at least some kind of facial injury, I guess.

Fox News is reporting that a source "close to the department's top brass" described the injury as an orbital fracture. Still no pictures or medical report.

Darren Wilson, the Ferguson, Mo., police officer whose fatal shooting of Michael Brown touched off more than a week of demonstrations, suffered severe facial injuries, including an orbital (eye socket) fracture, and was nearly beaten unconscious by Brown moments before firing his gun, a source close to the department's top brass told FoxNews.com.

“The Assistant (Police) Chief took him to the hospital, his face all swollen on one side,” said the insider. “He was beaten very severely.”


According to the well-placed source, Wilson was coming off another case in the neighborhood on Aug. 9 when he ordered Michael Brown and his friend Dorain Johnson to stop walking in the middle of the road because they were obstructing traffic. However, the confrontation quickly escalated into physical violence, the source said..
“They ignored him and the officer started to get out of the car to tell them to move," the source said. "They shoved him right back in, that’s when Michael Brown leans in and starts beating Officer Wilson in the head and the face.

The source claims that there is "solid proof" that there was a struggle between Brown and Wilson for the policeman’s firearm, resulting in the gun going off – although it still remains unclear at this stage who pulled the trigger. Brown started to walk away according to the account, prompting Wilson to draw his gun and order him to freeze. Brown, the source said, raised his hands in the air, and turned around saying, "What, you're going to shoot me?"

At that point, the source told FoxNews.com, the 6 foot, 4 inch, 292-pound Brown charged Wilson, prompting the officer to fire at least six shots at him, including the fatal bullet that penetrated the top of Brown's skull, according to an independent autopsy conducted at the request of Brown's family.

Wilson suffered a fractured eye socket in the fracas, and was left dazed by the initial confrontation, the source said. He is now "traumatized, scared for his life and his family, injured and terrified" that a grand jury, which began hearing evidence on Wednesday, will "make some kind of example out of him," the source said.

The source also said the dashboard and body cameras, which might have recorded crucial evidence, had been ordered by Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson, but had only recently arrived and had not yet been deployed.

St. Louis County police, who have taken over the investigation, did not return requests for comment about possible injuries suffered by Wilson.

Edward Magee, spokesman for St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCullough, said the office will not disclose the nature of the evidence it will reveal to a grand jury.

"We'll present every piece of evidence we have, witness statements, et cetera, to the grand jury, and we do not release any evidence or talk about evidence on the case."

Nabil Khattar, CEO of 7Star Industries – which specializes in firearms training for law enforcement and special operations personnel – confirmed that police are typically instructed to use deadly force if in imminent danger of being killed or suffering great bodily injury.

“You may engage a threat with enough force that is reasonably necessary to defend against that danger,” he said.

Wilson is a six-year veteran of the Ferguson police force department, and has no prior disciplinary infringements.

Massive protests have since taken over the St. Louis community, prompting Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon last Thursday to place Highway Patrol Capt. Ron Johnson at the helm of security operations in an effort to calm ongoing tensions. The federal government is also investigating the death, and Attorney General Eric Holder has taken the lead – calling “the selective release of sensitive information” in the case “troubling.”

On Friday, Ferguson police released surveillance video showing Brown stealing cigars from a convenience store just before his death. Jackson came under intense criticism for disclosing the tape and a related police report as he also insisted that the alleged robbery and the encounter with Wilson were unrelated matters. Brown’s family, through their attorney, suggested the tape’s release was a strategic form of “character assassination.”

However, FoxNews.com’s source insisted that there was absolutely no spin agenda behind the tape’s release and that there were a number of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) media requests filed by media outlets seeking it. Tom Jackson is said to have waited on publicly releasing it, and did not want it shown until Brown’s grieving mother first had the chance to see it.

“He defied the FOIAs as long as he could,” noted the insider. “A powerful, ugly spin has completely ruined public discourse on this whole situation.” (Link)

Follow @holliesmckay www.twitter.com/holliesmckay

So he beat the guy badly enough to cause an orbital fracture, but there were no signs of bruising on his hands? That seems weird.

Maybe he used the cigar box.

 

[timschochet]

Also, just to clarify, we don't know what Wilson's defense is. All we have is a radio call from a woman claiming to be a friend of Wilson's wife.

 

[Christo]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Your opinion on this case is extremely malleable.

Thank you. At this point, everyone should be malleable. As you have pointed out, there is much more that we don't know than we do. As each new fact comes in, that should change your opinion, so long as you are a reasonable person without a particular ax to grind.

There's a difference between discussing what could have happened and stating what you think happened.

 

[Jim11]

Also, just to clarify, we don't know what Wilson's defense is. All we have is a radio call from a woman claiming to be a friend of Wilson's wife.

http://www.foxnews.c...wn-says-source/

Missouri cop was badly beaten before shooting Michael Brown, says source

 

[Jim11]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

Yes, because what kind of guy Brown was has no bearing on whether he might be the kind who would confront a police officer.

 

[Henry Ford]

Maybe he used the cigar box.

They were Swisher Sweets. I don't even think you can mildly annoy someone with the packaging from those. Paper cut?

 

[Sinn Fein]

I'm sure this has been posted before but it's worth a look again.Interactive map regarding what your local PD has purchased.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/15/us/surplus-military-equipment-map.html?_r=1#body_armor

Click on each category to break it down

Cool. I see Pima County, Arizona, purchased 455 night vision pieces, 282 body armor pieces, and 151 assault rifles. Maricopa County Arizona purchased 1,696 night vision pieces, 406 assault rifles, and 4 mine-resistant vehicles, but... they're probably drooling over Santa Barbara County California's purchase of 2 grenade launchers and 6 helicopters.

Again, by "purchased" you mean "got for free."

That certainly makes me feel better.

The point is that PD's need equipment. They can do it one of two ways. Pay huge amount of money to get it. Or pay nothing to get it. Sure, the free way may mean that some of their equipment may be slightly more than what they need. But it saves them millions and millions of dollars. Do you want taxes raised? I'm guessing not. Which means that option 1 is really not an option at all.

Nothing is Free - you are paying for it with your taxes, one way or the other - so this is a disingenuous argument.

Really just another way to keep the industrial military complex in business.

 

[Christo]

Maybe he used the cigar box.

They were Swisher Sweets. I don't even think you can mildly annoy someone with the packaging from those. Paper cut?

Not a cigar. A cigar box.

 

[Henry Ford]

Maybe he used the cigar box.

They were Swisher Sweets. I don't even think you can mildly annoy someone with the packaging from those. Paper cut?

Not a cigar. A cigar box.

Yes, for swisher sweets it's made of cardboard approximately the thickness of double-ply toilet paper. These aren't cubans.

 

[timschochet]

Also, just to clarify, we don't know what Wilson's defense is. All we have is a radio call from a woman claiming to be a friend of Wilson's wife.

http://www.foxnews.c...wn-says-source/Missouri cop was badly beaten before shooting Michael Brown, says source

what does this have to do with what I wrote?

 

[Henry Ford]

That's like fracturing someone's skull by hitting it with a pack of cigarettes or a package of spaghetti.

 

[sublimeone]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

The guy just strong armed a convenience store worker for a box of blunts and attacked a cop... what makes you think he always makes the most practical choices?

 

[timschochet]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

Yes, because what kind of guy Brown was has no bearing on whether he might be the kind who would confront a police officer.

there is nothing about that robbery that would indicate that Brown is the sort of guy that would charge a policeman firing bullets at him.

 

[timschochet]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

The guy just strong armed a convenience store worker for a box of blunts and attacked a cop... what makes you think he always makes the most practical choices?

are you guys for real? I'm not talking about practical choices. I'm talking about charging a cop firing bullets at you. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? #### no.

 

[bryhamm]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

99 opinions and willing to state them all.

Come back tomorrow. He's going for an even 200.

 

[sublimeone]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

The guy just strong armed a convenience store worker for a box of blunts and attacked a cop... what makes you think he always makes the most practical choices?

are you guys for real?I'm not talking about practical choices. I'm talking about charging a cop firing bullets at you. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? #### no.

How likely is it for someone who just attacked a cop?

 

[Christo]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

The guy just strong armed a convenience store worker for a box of blunts and attacked a cop... what makes you think he always makes the most practical choices?

are you guys for real?I'm not talking about practical choices. I'm talking about charging a cop firing bullets at you. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? #### no.

More likely than a guy who'd just delivered meals to shut-ins.

 

[sublimeone]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

Yes, because what kind of guy Brown was has no bearing on whether he might be the kind who would confront a police officer.

there is nothing about that robbery that would indicate that Brown is the sort of guy that would charge a policeman firing bullets at him.

What about assaulting the worker? Or assaulting the cop? does that give you any sort of indication of the type of individual Brown was?

 

[Politician Spock]

I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Yet, you're making strong statements about what kind of guy Wilson is. To you Wilson is a murder kind of guy. But when others point out that Brown was a robber kind of guy, you say you don't care what kind of guy Brown was. How convenient.

 

[timschochet]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

The guy just strong armed a convenience store worker for a box of blunts and attacked a cop... what makes you think he always makes the most practical choices?

are you guys for real?I'm not talking about practical choices. I'm talking about charging a cop firing bullets at you. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? #### no.

How likely is it for someone who just attacked a cop?

to turn around , run 30 feet , then turn around again and charge the cop who is now holding a gun out? You tell me.

 

[timschochet]

I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Yet, you're making strong statements about what kind of guy Wilson is. To you Wilson is a murder kind of guy. But when others point out that Brown was a robber kind of guy, you say you don't care what kind of guy Brown was. How convenient.

No. I don't know what kind of guy Wilson is either. If I had to guess, he's a good guy who lost his temper in the heat of the moment. Hell , I might lose my temper too if some young punk is hitting me. But that doesn't justify shooting him.

 

[sublimeone]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

The guy just strong armed a convenience store worker for a box of blunts and attacked a cop... what makes you think he always makes the most practical choices?

are you guys for real?I'm not talking about practical choices. I'm talking about charging a cop firing bullets at you. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? #### no.

How likely is it for someone who just attacked a cop?

to turn around , run 30 feet , then turn around again and charge the cop who is now holding a gun out? You tell me.

More likely than a cop with a clean record just deciding today is the day I'm going to carry out my 6-year plan to take out a blackie. Let's see... Now if I can just find one who just committed a crime, and bait him into assaulting me I can unload my clip into him in broad daylight...

 

[BustedKnuckles]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

The guy just strong armed a convenience store worker for a box of blunts and attacked a cop... what makes you think he always makes the most practical choices?

are you guys for real?I'm not talking about practical choices. I'm talking about charging a cop firing bullets at you. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? #### no.

How likely is it for someone who just attacked a cop?

to turn around , run 30 feet , then turn around again and charge the cop who is now holding a gun out? You tell me.

i gotta agree with Tim here...unless that kid wanted to die by cop and was suicidal it makes no sense.....and wow is that cop a heck of a shot ...hit his charging and moving target 6 times with a fractured eye socket...im impressed

 

[bryhamm]

I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Yet, you're making strong statements about what kind of guy Wilson is. To you Wilson is a murder kind of guy. But when others point out that Brown was a robber kind of guy, you say you don't care what kind of guy Brown was. How convenient.

No. I don't know what kind of guy Wilson is either. If I had to guess, he's a good guy who lost his temper in the heat of the moment. Hell , I might lose my temper too if some young punk is hitting me. But that doesn't justify shooting him.

 

[Christo]

I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Yet, you're making strong statements about what kind of guy Wilson is. To you Wilson is a murder kind of guy. But when others point out that Brown was a robber kind of guy, you say you don't care what kind of guy Brown was. How convenient.

No. I don't know what kind of guy Wilson is either. If I had to guess, he's a good guy who lost his temper in the heat of the moment. Hell , I might lose my temper too if some young punk is hitting me. But that doesn't justify shooting him.

I'm too dumbfound to find the smilie. No, wait. There it is.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Brown charged Wilson AGAIN attacking and beating him. Wilson shoots Brown. Not sure where the outrage is here. Wilson has a right to defend himself with deadly force if there appears to be a threat. Brown more than qualified that threat.

 

[timschochet]

Whenever someone mentions Brown charging I keep thinking of that one dude from the Mike Tyson Punchout game.

 

[Limp Ditka]

Jeebus, Tim

 

[Desert_Power]

I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Yet, you're making strong statements about what kind of guy Wilson is. To you Wilson is a murder kind of guy. But when others point out that Brown was a robber kind of guy, you say you don't care what kind of guy Brown was. How convenient.

No. I don't know what kind of guy Wilson is either. If I had to guess, he's a good guy who lost his temper in the heat of the moment. Hell , I might lose my temper too if some young punk is hitting me. But that doesn't justify shooting him.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Brown charged Wilson AGAIN attacking and beating him. Wilson shoots Brown. Not sure where the outrage is here. Wilson has a right to defend himself with deadly force if there appears to be a threat. Brown more than qualified that threat.

thanks for straightening this whole mess out....good job

 

[sublimeone]

The injury to Wilson's face makes it more likely, at least to me, that he committed a crime here.

My likely scenario: Wilson stops Brown and Johnson. A scuffle occurs. Brown hits Wilson in the face, causing the injury. The two kids take off running. Wilson fires his gun. The first shot either misses or wings Brown in the arm. Brown turns around, and either raises his arms in surrender or does not, just turns around. (Not sure what happened to Johnson at this point.)

And here is where the crime is committed by Wilson: in fear or rage or both, Wilson does not ask Brown to surrender. He does not instruct Brown to lie down on the ground. Instead, he fires his remaining bullets at Wilson. And that's murder.

There's probably no way to prove it, but that's what I think probably happened.

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt to the guy who just robbed a convenience store and attacked a cop instead of the cop?

Because he's not exactly a deep thinker.

yeah that must be it.First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Second because of the distance involved. If there is evidence from Brown's clothes that they were closer than 25-30 feet apart, that would change my thinking. But if I accept that distance, then the only defense for what Wilson did is if Brown had run away from the scuffle, then turned around and charged Wilson. And that seems extremely implausible to me.

The guy just strong armed a convenience store worker for a box of blunts and attacked a cop... what makes you think he always makes the most practical choices?

are you guys for real?I'm not talking about practical choices. I'm talking about charging a cop firing bullets at you. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? #### no.

How likely is it for someone who just attacked a cop?

to turn around , run 30 feet , then turn around again and charge the cop who is now holding a gun out? You tell me.

i gotta agree with Tim here...unless that kid wanted to die by cop and was suicidal it makes no sense.....and wow is that cop a heck of a shot ...hit his charging and moving target 6 times with a fractured eye socket...im impressed

how much sense does it make to attack a police officer in the first place?

 

[MaxThreshold]

Brown charged Wilson AGAIN attacking and beating him. Wilson shoots Brown. Not sure where the outrage is here. Wilson has a right to defend himself with deadly force if there appears to be a threat. Brown more than qualified that threat.

thanks for straightening this whole mess out....good job

NP. That's what I'm here for. People can move on to being outraged about something else now. Waste your energy on something that deserves it.

 

[Sand]

First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Ridiculous statement. The robbery could have had a great deal to do with motivation and actions. We'll find out soon enough.

 

[Politician Spock]

I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Yet, you're making strong statements about what kind of guy Wilson is. To you Wilson is a murder kind of guy. But when others point out that Brown was a robber kind of guy, you say you don't care what kind of guy Brown was. How convenient.

No. I don't know what kind of guy Wilson is either. If I had to guess, he's a good guy who lost his temper in the heat of the moment. Hell , I might lose my temper too if some young punk is hitting me. But that doesn't justify shooting him.

So Brown assaulted Wilson with a cool, calm, stable sound of mind?

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Brown charged Wilson AGAIN attacking and beating him. Wilson shoots Brown. Not sure where the outrage is here. Wilson has a right to defend himself with deadly force if there appears to be a threat. Brown more than qualified that threat.

thanks for straightening this whole mess out....good job

NP. That's what I'm here for. People can move on to being outraged about something else now. Waste your energy on something that deserves it.

You should just go right down the list of threads straightening everyone out....we wont ever have to discuss anything else ever again...who needs their own opinions when we have you to give us one

 

[Jim11]

First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Ridiculous statement. The robbery could have had a great deal to do with motivation and actions. We'll find out soon enough.

Just one of many. Tim has a new theory of what happened about every 5 minutes.

 

[Gary Coal Man]

Whenever someone mentions Brown charging I keep thinking of that one dude from the Mike Tyson Punchout game.

To the best of my knowledge, Bald Bull never shook down Great Tiger for cigarillos.

 

[Greggity]

Has anyone figured out why it was significant that the store customer rather than the store clerk called 911?

I think it's significant, because it might not have been a robbery. In fact, I have not heard any confirmation from the store owner that it in fact WAS a robbery. And if it wasn't a robbery, then I have less reason to be skeptical of Johnson's testimony- which is my only interest in the robbery in the first place. Otherwise, whether or not Brown robbed a store is immaterial to what happened to him afterwards, IMO.

A customer called the police, but the store proprietor told the police when they arrived that Brown took the cigarillos and pushed him on the way out of the store. It's in the police report:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/ferguson-police-report?page=2

OK thanks. In that case we can discount Johnson's story, since he clearly not to be trusted. Brown's actions are irrelevant IMO to what took place with Wilson.

HTH can you say that?

Because he is Tim the crochet man! I personally think how Brown reacted when initially confronted by the cop is why he is dead today. Any normal, law abiding citizen would be alive and his damn skin color doesn't matter. For those that think this cop killed brown just because he was black or bored that day really need their head examined....

 

[MaxThreshold]

Brown charged Wilson AGAIN attacking and beating him. Wilson shoots Brown. Not sure where the outrage is here. Wilson has a right to defend himself with deadly force if there appears to be a threat. Brown more than qualified that threat.

thanks for straightening this whole mess out....good job

NP. That's what I'm here for. People can move on to being outraged about something else now. Waste your energy on something that deserves it.

You should just go right down the list of threads straightening everyone out....we wont ever have to discuss anything else ever again...who needs their own opinions when we have you to give us one

EXACTLY! Busted Knuckles get's it!

 

[sublimeone]

First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Ridiculous statement. The robbery could have had a great deal to do with motivation and actions. We'll find out soon enough.

Just one of many. Tim has a new theory of what happened about every 5 minutes.

he twists and contorts all reason so that he can justify what he already knew to be true before considering the evidence.

 

[msommer]

Brown charged Wilson AGAIN attacking and beating him. Wilson shoots Brown. Not sure where the outrage is here. Wilson has a right to defend himself with deadly force if there appears to be a threat. Brown more than qualified that threat.

thanks for straightening this whole mess out....good job

NP. That's what I'm here for. People can move on to being outraged about something else now. Waste your energy on something that deserves it.

You should just go right down the list of threads straightening everyone out....we wont ever have to discuss anything else ever again...who needs their own opinions when we have you to give us one

EXACTLY! Busted Knuckles get's it!

You seriously need to have your sarcasm meter checked, dude

 

[MaxThreshold]

Brown charged Wilson AGAIN attacking and beating him. Wilson shoots Brown. Not sure where the outrage is here. Wilson has a right to defend himself with deadly force if there appears to be a threat. Brown more than qualified that threat.

thanks for straightening this whole mess out....good job

NP. That's what I'm here for. People can move on to being outraged about something else now. Waste your energy on something that deserves it.

You should just go right down the list of threads straightening everyone out....we wont ever have to discuss anything else ever again...who needs their own opinions when we have you to give us one

EXACTLY! Busted Knuckles get's it!

You seriously need to have your sarcasm meter checked, dude

As do you.

 

[timschochet]

First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Ridiculous statement. The robbery could have had a great deal to do with motivation and actions. We'll find out soon enough.

Again, I disagree. Right now the only thing that matters is that Wilson shot Brown from a distance of 30 feet, and Brown was unarmed. Unless you believe that Brown was charging at Wilson, there is no other justification for this act- I don't care if Brown was a mass murderer, a child rapist or whatever. I don't care if he spent the last 10 minutes prior pummeling Wilson to the ground, breaking his arm, etc. He's 30 feet away at the time the shots are fired, and he's unarmed. So he can't be a threat, unless he's charging at Wilson. So once again, that means that in order to justify the shooting, we have to believe that Wilson would be willing to charge at a policeman firing bullets at him, like George Pickett at Gettysburg. There is NO prior action by Brown that we know of, not the robbery, not hitting the policeman earlier, that would make him being willing to rush into death any more plausible. So Christo and others can laugh at me all you want, but I atill say the robbery is irrelevant. EVERYTHING is irrelevant that doesn't either prove Brown was charging, or prove that Wilson had some other plausible reason for shooting him from 30 feet away. That's the heart of the matter.

 

[Mr Non Sequitur]

are you guys for real?I'm not talking about practical choices. I'm talking about charging a cop firing bullets at you. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? #### no.

Multiple shots to me adds credibility to the police officer's version. He tried to fire a couple shots to disable and finally had to put this 6-4/250 lb "Kid" down with a shot to the head.

Apparently Brown thought the cop was hot on his trail even though the officer didn't know he had robbed a convenience store. Brown shoved the officer or met the officer at the door of his patrol car and the two even wrestled inside the car if you believe some of the stories. It sounds like the gun might have gone off in the car, perhaps even hitting Brown and then he started running fearing for his life, it's possible the officer shot him again to stop him, now Brown feels he is going to be killed and fighting for his own life decided to try and rush the officer and that's when the final shot or shots were fired.

Not saying what I just wrote is true but the officer's story corroborates well with the multiple shots fired, at least IMO.

 

[Politician Spock]

First off the robbery is insignificant to me. I don't care what kind of guy Brown was.

Ridiculous statement. The robbery could have had a great deal to do with motivation and actions. We'll find out soon enough.

Again, I disagree. Right now the only thing that matters is that Wilson shot Brown from a distance of 30 feet, and Brown was unarmed. Unless you believe that Brown was charging at Wilson, there is no other justification for this act- I don't care if Brown was a mass murderer, a child rapist or whatever. I don't care if he spent the last 10 minutes prior pummeling Wilson to the ground, breaking his arm, etc. He's 30 feet away at the time the shots are fired, and he's unarmed. So he can't be a threat, unless he's charging at Wilson.So once again, that means that in order to justify the shooting, we have to believe that Wilson would be willing to charge at a policeman firing bullets at him, like George Pickett at Gettysburg. There is NO prior action by Brown that we know of, not the robbery, not hitting the policeman earlier, that would make him being willing to rush into death any more plausible. So Christo and others can laugh at me all you want, but I atill say the robbery is irrelevant. EVERYTHING is irrelevant that doesn't either prove Brown was charging, or prove that Wilson had some other plausible reason for shooting him from 30 feet away. That's the heart of the matter.

So you've concluded that Wilson decided in the heat of the moment to do something irrational, but you can't imagine Brown deciding in the heat of the moment to do something irrational. How convenient.

 

[boots11234]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/20/missouri-cop-was-badly-beaten-before-shooting-michael-brown-says-source/ I'm calling it. Wilson was getting the snot beat out of him and shot him. Case closed. Stop defending this D bag.

 

[jonessed]

The down side of making this all about Brown is that if the officer's story is proven correct everything else that happened after is going to be painted as a massive over-reaction

Some of the police actions are a problem and I doubt it's unique to Ferguson. The media may have hitched their wagon to the wrong horse though, which sucks. It's going to be a hard message to sell if Brown wasn't an obvious victim in this.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Has their been a good explanation for the bullets to the arm? I find it unlikely that the cop was able to hit the arm as many times as he did, if the arms were raised, but at the same time, I would have expected multiple-entries for a single shot if he was running - assuming the arm would be bent like anyone who was running hard would have them.

So, I guess, neither story makes sense to me right now.