Looting in Missouri after cops shoot 18 year old (3 Viewers)

[jamny]

Hmmm. They're showing still photos from a robbery that occurred that the officer was investigating. Seems Mike Brown is a suspect.

video to be released of robbery

 

[Limp Ditka]

So white shirt / red cap is going to be the new hoodie?

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

So you are walking down the street (when you should be on the sidewalk) and a cop pulls up along side of you and say to get on the sidewalk. Do you:

A. Keep walking while saying something to the cop.

B. Say 'yes sir' (since you are an idiot in the first place for walking where cars drive).

Hint: The kid chose A and is now dead.

Depends. If I'm three houses from where I live, I keep walking, point, and say "I'm walking to that house right there. Sorry if I was in your way."

Well, in this case you would apparently be dead. Sorry, but your answer is flat out wrong and as dumb as one could be. You are on a road buddy. In reality, someone could come from behind and flat out run you over and it won't be their fault.

Please don't run over people walking in the street in the expectation that you're immune from criminal liability. Assuming you see someone, then yes, you would be at fault.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

"I didn't know exactly what was going on, but I knew it didn't look right for someone to be wrestling with the police through the police window, but I didn't get a video because a shot was fired through the window, so I tried to get out of the way," Mitchell said.


Mitchell then described what she saw happen between Brown and the police officer.

"As I pull onto the side, the kid, he finally gets away, he starts running. As he runs the police get out of his vehicle and he follows behind him, shooting," Mitchell said. "And the kid's body jerked as if he was hit from behind, and he turns around and puts his hands up like this, and the cop continued to fire until he just dropped down to the ground and his face just smacks the concrete."

Mitchell clarified she heard a shot after she saw Brown trying to pull away from the cop, and said even after Brown turned to face the cop and put his hands in the air, "the cop continued to come up on him and shoot him until he fell down to the ground." She said she counted "more than about five or six shots."

Mitchell also said she only saw one officer involved in the incident, and described him as a "white male, kind of tall, not too big."

Mitchell said she received no pressure to change her story from detectives who on the case, but said the cops that arrived at the scene "were very rude" to bystanders and "didn't want to tell" the public what had happened.

"They showed no kind of remorse for what happened to the kid at all," she said.

Mitchell's attorney said she gave a statement to the St. Louis County detectives right after the incident.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/13/tiffany-mitchell-michael-brown_n_5677003.html

She sounds like a credible witness, why does she need an attorney?

You can laugh all you want....She witnessed a crime.....she tells her version of what she saw......she goes home until there is a trial....She didn't do anything wrong, she didn't commit a crime..... Interview Room: So miss Mitchell what did you see the day Mr. Brown was shot?.... Attorney for Mitchell :...Don't answer that?....WTF.....Unless you think that the Ferguson Police Department, the State Police, The FBI and the State attorney are all corrupt. Ridiculous.....Who is going to pay for her expenses?

 

[fatness]

Hmmm. They're showing still photos from a robbery that occurred that the officer was investigating. Seems Mike Brown is a suspect.

You're trying too hard.

If he was a suspect why did the cop drive up and tell him to get off the street, instead of just questioning him or taking him in?

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

So white shirt / red cap is going to be the new hoodie?

Also, never pose for a picture while giving the finger. Only hoodrats (and drunk 40 somethings posing at the General Lee, hey Zilla) do that.

 

[jamny]

Hmmm. They're showing still photos from a robbery that occurred that the officer was investigating. Seems Mike Brown is a suspect.

You're trying too hard.

If he was a suspect why did the cop drive up and tell him to get off the street, instead of just questioning him or taking him in?

I'm just relaying what I'm seeing on TV.

 

[fatness]

"I didn't know exactly what was going on, but I knew it didn't look right for someone to be wrestling with the police through the police window, but I didn't get a video because a shot was fired through the window, so I tried to get out of the way," Mitchell said.


Mitchell then described what she saw happen between Brown and the police officer.

"As I pull onto the side, the kid, he finally gets away, he starts running. As he runs the police get out of his vehicle and he follows behind him, shooting," Mitchell said. "And the kid's body jerked as if he was hit from behind, and he turns around and puts his hands up like this, and the cop continued to fire until he just dropped down to the ground and his face just smacks the concrete."

Mitchell clarified she heard a shot after she saw Brown trying to pull away from the cop, and said even after Brown turned to face the cop and put his hands in the air, "the cop continued to come up on him and shoot him until he fell down to the ground." She said she counted "more than about five or six shots."

Mitchell also said she only saw one officer involved in the incident, and described him as a "white male, kind of tall, not too big."

Mitchell said she received no pressure to change her story from detectives who on the case, but said the cops that arrived at the scene "were very rude" to bystanders and "didn't want to tell" the public what had happened.

"They showed no kind of remorse for what happened to the kid at all," she said.

Mitchell's attorney said she gave a statement to the St. Louis County detectives right after the incident.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/13/tiffany-mitchell-michael-brown_n_5677003.html

She sounds like a credible witness, why does she need an attorney?

You misspelled "want".

 

[KCitons]

So you are walking down the street (when you should be on the sidewalk) and a cop pulls up along side of you and say to get on the sidewalk. Do you:

A. Keep walking while saying something to the cop.

B. Say 'yes sir' (since you are an idiot in the first place for walking where cars drive).

Hint: The kid chose A and is now dead.

Depends. If I'm three houses from where I live, I keep walking, point, and say "I'm walking to that house right there. Sorry if I was in your way."

Well, in this case you would apparently be dead. Sorry, but your answer is flat out wrong and as dumb as one could be. You are on a road buddy. In reality, someone could come from behind and flat out run you over and it won't be their fault.

Please don't run over people walking in the street in the expectation that you're immune from criminal liability. Assuming you see someone, then yes, you would be at fault.

Tony Stewart could have used this advice last week.

 

[Slapdash]

"I didn't know exactly what was going on, but I knew it didn't look right for someone to be wrestling with the police through the police window, but I didn't get a video because a shot was fired through the window, so I tried to get out of the way," Mitchell said.


Mitchell then described what she saw happen between Brown and the police officer.

"As I pull onto the side, the kid, he finally gets away, he starts running. As he runs the police get out of his vehicle and he follows behind him, shooting," Mitchell said. "And the kid's body jerked as if he was hit from behind, and he turns around and puts his hands up like this, and the cop continued to fire until he just dropped down to the ground and his face just smacks the concrete."

Mitchell clarified she heard a shot after she saw Brown trying to pull away from the cop, and said even after Brown turned to face the cop and put his hands in the air, "the cop continued to come up on him and shoot him until he fell down to the ground." She said she counted "more than about five or six shots."

Mitchell also said she only saw one officer involved in the incident, and described him as a "white male, kind of tall, not too big."

Mitchell said she received no pressure to change her story from detectives who on the case, but said the cops that arrived at the scene "were very rude" to bystanders and "didn't want to tell" the public what had happened.

"They showed no kind of remorse for what happened to the kid at all," she said.

Mitchell's attorney said she gave a statement to the St. Louis County detectives right after the incident.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/13/tiffany-mitchell-michael-brown_n_5677003.html

She sounds like a credible witness, why does she need an attorney?

You can laugh all you want....She witnessed a crime.....she tells her version of what she saw......she goes home until there is a trial....She didn't do anything wrong, she didn't commit a crime..... Interview Room: So miss Mitchell what did you see the day Mr. Brown was shot?.... Attorney for Mitchell :...Don't answer that?....WTF.....Unless you think that the Ferguson Police Department, the State Police, The FBI and the State attorney are all corrupt. Ridiculous.....Who is going to pay for her expenses?

Talking to police without an attorney present is idiotic.

 

[jamny]

The incident report of the robbery identifies the suspect as Michael Brown. A half mile away from the shooting.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

"I didn't know exactly what was going on, but I knew it didn't look right for someone to be wrestling with the police through the police window, but I didn't get a video because a shot was fired through the window, so I tried to get out of the way," Mitchell said.


Mitchell then described what she saw happen between Brown and the police officer.

"As I pull onto the side, the kid, he finally gets away, he starts running. As he runs the police get out of his vehicle and he follows behind him, shooting," Mitchell said. "And the kid's body jerked as if he was hit from behind, and he turns around and puts his hands up like this, and the cop continued to fire until he just dropped down to the ground and his face just smacks the concrete."

Mitchell clarified she heard a shot after she saw Brown trying to pull away from the cop, and said even after Brown turned to face the cop and put his hands in the air, "the cop continued to come up on him and shoot him until he fell down to the ground." She said she counted "more than about five or six shots."

Mitchell also said she only saw one officer involved in the incident, and described him as a "white male, kind of tall, not too big."

Mitchell said she received no pressure to change her story from detectives who on the case, but said the cops that arrived at the scene "were very rude" to bystanders and "didn't want to tell" the public what had happened.

"They showed no kind of remorse for what happened to the kid at all," she said.

Mitchell's attorney said she gave a statement to the St. Louis County detectives right after the incident.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/13/tiffany-mitchell-michael-brown_n_5677003.html

She sounds like a credible witness, why does she need an attorney?

You can laugh all you want....She witnessed a crime.....she tells her version of what she saw......she goes home until there is a trial....She didn't do anything wrong, she didn't commit a crime..... Interview Room: So miss Mitchell what did you see the day Mr. Brown was shot?.... Attorney for Mitchell :...Don't answer that?....WTF.....Unless you think that the Ferguson Police Department, the State Police, The FBI and the State attorney are all corrupt. Ridiculous.....Who is going to pay for her expenses?

Talking to police without an attorney present is idiotic.

Yeah if you are accused of a crime....I agree....

 

[Captain Quinoa]

Andrew Kaczynski ‏@BuzzFeedAndrew 2m

Darren Wilson named as officer in Michael Brown shooting.

Is that the name that Anon posted yesterday or did they just cause someone else all kinds of headaches?

Anonymous got it wrong. This is a different name. I haven't seen a picture yet but I am sure this name will be in top of google in no time.

If they're gonna assume this role of vigilante that they seem to want to, I expect better and I'd like an apology for this.

Sorry.

 

[hagmania]

Andrew Kaczynski ‏@BuzzFeedAndrew 2m

Darren Wilson named as officer in Michael Brown shooting.

Is that the name that Anon posted yesterday or did they just cause someone else all kinds of headaches?

Anonymous got it wrong. This is a different name. I haven't seen a picture yet but I am sure this name will be in top of google in no time.

So, when does this get addressed? This is not the first time they have been completely wrong in this type of situation, right?

I honestly think it is.

There should be some sort of explanation from them.

 

[JZilla]

So white shirt / red cap is going to be the new hoodie?

Also, never pose for a picture while giving the finger. Only hoodrats (and drunk 40 somethings posing at the General Lee, hey Zilla) do that.

Sounds like a good pic, I'd like to see it

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Public speaking isn't one of the chief's strong suits

 

[jamny]

still photos

 

[gianmarco]

Now as far as this case is concerned, that part really doesn't matter when you shoot someone in the back. Just like the Tony Stewart case, where both involved were idiots, the same applies here and the outcome is the same. One idiot dead the other idiot's life is changed forever.

I'd also like to know why the other kid was not shot at. Seems very odd. He was right there too.

I disagree with the bolded. One may have been an idiot, the other is suppose to have the training to handle a situation like this. Shooting someone in the back is something a housewife does to a cheating husband. Not something a trained cop does.

That's why they are both idiots. Kid is an idiot for walking down the middle of the road AND not leaving the road when a cop tells him to.Cop is an idiot for shooting a kid in the back, and then continuing to shoot him until he's dead.

Wrong.

One might be an idiot. But the other isn't. That's called a murderer.

 

[timschochet]

I don't think it was a good idea for the police chief to give out the name of the officer. Don't care how much demand there was. Nothing good can come of this.

 

[Witz]

Haven't gone through all 20 pages but has the police officer involved given his version of the event yet or is the information we have so far just from the other individual who was with Brown (i.e. what the officer said, how the events went down, etc)? Not talking about the witnesses who weren't in the same spot as the incident.

 

[urbanhack]

I don't think it was a good idea for the police chief to give out the name of the officer. Don't care how much demand there was. Nothing good can come of this.

NOTED

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I don't think it was a good idea for the police chief to give out the name of the officer. Don't care how much demand there was. Nothing good can come of this.

Realistically, I don't think there was any way to keep this secret. It was going to leak sooner or later.

I understand that this places the officer in danger, but you could make the same argument about anybody who has been charged with a crime. The public's right to know about police misconduct outweighs the harm IMO.

 

[timschochet]

I'm not buying this-yet. It could very well be. But it's also possible he just screwed up without bad intent. The facts are not clear at this point.

Now as far as this case is concerned, that part really doesn't matter when you shoot someone in the back. Just like the Tony Stewart case, where both involved were idiots, the same applies here and the outcome is the same. One idiot dead the other idiot's life is changed forever.

I'd also like to know why the other kid was not shot at. Seems very odd. He was right there too.

I disagree with the bolded. One may have been an idiot, the other is suppose to have the training to handle a situation like this. Shooting someone in the back is something a housewife does to a cheating husband. Not something a trained cop does.

That's why they are both idiots. Kid is an idiot for walking down the middle of the road AND not leaving the road when a cop tells him to.Cop is an idiot for shooting a kid in the back, and then continuing to shoot him until he's dead.

Wrong.One might be an idiot. But the other isn't. That's called a murderer.

 

[jonessed]

Andrew Kaczynski ‏@BuzzFeedAndrew 2m

Darren Wilson named as officer in Michael Brown shooting.

Is that the name that Anon posted yesterday or did they just cause someone else all kinds of headaches?

Anonymous got it wrong. This is a different name. I haven't seen a picture yet but I am sure this name will be in top of google in no time.

If they're gonna assume this role of vigilante that they seem to want to, I expect better and I'd like an apology for this.

I'm generally supportive of what they do, but this was moronic. Hopefully their credibility takes a big hit and they get the message not to #### things like this up.

 

[TheIronSheik]

I don't think it was a good idea for the police chief to give out the name of the officer. Don't care how much demand there was. Nothing good can come of this.

I thought the same thing. I understand why people want it. And it may seem like they're hiding something by not giving out the name. But maybe wait until things cool down just a little.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

still photos

Even if he robbed a midget, that still doesn't justify shooting him in the back ..if that is what actually happened.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Gotta imagine that police officer is far, far away from Ferguson right now. Of course, it won't stop people burning his house down or whatever.

 

[jamny]

still photos

Even if he robbed a midget, that still doesn't justify shooting him in the back ..if that is what actually happened.

I agree

 

[KCitons]

still photos

simple enough. I doubt Brown had time to go home and change. Should be easy to match the clothes he was wearing when he was shot to the ones in the photos

 

[Gary Coal Man]

I don't think it was a good idea for the police chief to give out the name of the officer. Don't care how much demand there was. Nothing good can come of this.

Realistically, I don't think there was any way to keep this secret. It was going to leak sooner or later.

I understand that this places the officer in danger, but you could make the same argument about anybody who has been charged with a crime. The public's right to know about police misconduct outweighs the harm IMO.

Agreed.

 

[timschochet]

I don't think it was a good idea for the police chief to give out the name of the officer. Don't care how much demand there was. Nothing good can come of this.

Realistically, I don't think there was any way to keep this secret. It was going to leak sooner or later.

I understand that this places the officer in danger, but you could make the same argument about anybody who has been charged with a crime. The public's right to know about police misconduct outweighs the harm IMO.

You can't make the same argument because most crimes dont result in large scale protests and violence. I think under the circumstances you hold back the name as long as possible. The cop is now in danger, and so is his family.

 

[Henry Ford]

So you are walking down the street (when you should be on the sidewalk) and a cop pulls up along side of you and say to get on the sidewalk. Do you:

A. Keep walking while saying something to the cop.

B. Say 'yes sir' (since you are an idiot in the first place for walking where cars drive).

Hint: The kid chose A and is now dead.

Depends. If I'm three houses from where I live, I keep walking, point, and say "I'm walking to that house right there. Sorry if I was in your way."

Well, in this case you would apparently be dead. Sorry, but your answer is flat out wrong and as dumb as one could be. You are on a road buddy. In reality, someone could come from behind and flat out run you over and it won't be their fault.

If someone came down my street, which has a posted speed limit of 20 mph, and flat out ran me over without me somehow knowing there was a car coming, while I was walking along the street to get to my house from a neighbor's house, it would be the most surprising thing that's ever happened to me.

Some people live in actual neighborhoods where people wander around from house to house and know each other. There are more pedestrians on my street than cars.

 

[fatness]

still photos

Even if he robbed a midget, that still doesn't justify shooting him in the back ..if that is what actually happened.

I agree

Agree.

 

[Henry Ford]

So white shirt / red cap is going to be the new hoodie?

Also, never pose for a picture while giving the finger. Only hoodrats (and drunk 40 somethings posing at the General Lee, hey Zilla) do that.

Relevant

 

[Limp Ditka]

I don't think it was a good idea for the police chief to give out the name of the officer. Don't care how much demand there was. Nothing good can come of this.

Nothing good can come out of this? Tell that to the guy that anonymous incorrectly named.

 

[Quez]

The victim definitely wasn't innocent here. He basically walked into the gas station and bullied the little Indian man. You can easily see the guy cowering in the stills.

Then he likely walked out and went to get in his car and leave when the officer approached asking him to get out of his vehicle. He likely ignored the officer, and proceeded to back up. Officer opens door tries to grab him, he backs up while officer is attempting to apprehend. Which is considered using the vehicle as a weapon, so the officer shoots him.

If the story ended there I might consider siding with the officer, but then it sounds like the officer proceeded to "finish him" off by executing the guy in broad daylight in front of witnesses.

 

[Henry Ford]

"I didn't know exactly what was going on, but I knew it didn't look right for someone to be wrestling with the police through the police window, but I didn't get a video because a shot was fired through the window, so I tried to get out of the way," Mitchell said.


Mitchell then described what she saw happen between Brown and the police officer.

"As I pull onto the side, the kid, he finally gets away, he starts running. As he runs the police get out of his vehicle and he follows behind him, shooting," Mitchell said. "And the kid's body jerked as if he was hit from behind, and he turns around and puts his hands up like this, and the cop continued to fire until he just dropped down to the ground and his face just smacks the concrete."

Mitchell clarified she heard a shot after she saw Brown trying to pull away from the cop, and said even after Brown turned to face the cop and put his hands in the air, "the cop continued to come up on him and shoot him until he fell down to the ground." She said she counted "more than about five or six shots."

Mitchell also said she only saw one officer involved in the incident, and described him as a "white male, kind of tall, not too big."

Mitchell said she received no pressure to change her story from detectives who on the case, but said the cops that arrived at the scene "were very rude" to bystanders and "didn't want to tell" the public what had happened.

"They showed no kind of remorse for what happened to the kid at all," she said.

Mitchell's attorney said she gave a statement to the St. Louis County detectives right after the incident.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/13/tiffany-mitchell-michael-brown_n_5677003.html

She sounds like a credible witness, why does she need an attorney?

You can laugh all you want....She witnessed a crime.....she tells her version of what she saw......she goes home until there is a trial....She didn't do anything wrong, she didn't commit a crime..... Interview Room: So miss Mitchell what did you see the day Mr. Brown was shot?.... Attorney for Mitchell :...Don't answer that?....WTF.....Unless you think that the Ferguson Police Department, the State Police, The FBI and the State attorney are all corrupt. Ridiculous.....Who is going to pay for her expenses?

Talking to police without an attorney present is idiotic.

Yeah if you are accused of have any knowledge relevant to a crime that wasn't perpetrated against you or are afraid of the local police....I agree....

Fixed

 

[fatness]

This sheds no light on whether Michael Brown was involved in a robbery the day he was killed, but is worth knowing.

Michael Brown had no criminal background

 

[lod01]

Now as far as this case is concerned, that part really doesn't matter when you shoot someone in the back. Just like the Tony Stewart case, where both involved were idiots, the same applies here and the outcome is the same. One idiot dead the other idiot's life is changed forever.

I'd also like to know why the other kid was not shot at. Seems very odd. He was right there too.

I disagree with the bolded. One may have been an idiot, the other is suppose to have the training to handle a situation like this. Shooting someone in the back is something a housewife does to a cheating husband. Not something a trained cop does.

That's why they are both idiots. Kid is an idiot for walking down the middle of the road AND not leaving the road when a cop tells him to.Cop is an idiot for shooting a kid in the back, and then continuing to shoot him until he's dead.

Wrong.

One might be an idiot. But the other isn't. That's called a murderer.

So a murderer is not an idiot? I beg to differ.

 

[Henry Ford]

The victim definitely wasn't innocent here. He basically walked into the gas station and bullied the little Indian man. You can easily see the guy cowering in the stills.

Then he likely walked out and went to get in his car and leave when the officer approached asking him to get out of his vehicle. He likely ignored the officer, and proceeded to back up. Officer opens door tries to grab him, he backs up while officer is attempting to apprehend. Which is considered using the vehicle as a weapon, so the officer shoots him.

If the story ended there I might consider siding with the officer, but then it sounds like the officer proceeded to "finish him" off by executing the guy in broad daylight in front of witnesses.

What?

 

[Quez]

Andrew Kaczynski ‏@BuzzFeedAndrew 2m

Darren Wilson named as officer in Michael Brown shooting.

Is that the name that Anon posted yesterday or did they just cause someone else all kinds of headaches?

Anonymous got it wrong. This is a different name. I haven't seen a picture yet but I am sure this name will be in top of google in no time.

So, when does this get addressed? This is not the first time they have been completely wrong in this type of situation, right?

Their response was basically "we do not have the access the police have so accidents happen. If you all would of just released the name to begin with this wouldn't of happened"

 

[Gary Coal Man]

Gotta imagine that police officer is far, far away from Ferguson right now.

I have word from reliable sources that the officer is staying with this guy.

 

[Captain Quinoa]

The victim definitely wasn't innocent here. He basically walked into the gas station and bullied the little Indian man. You can easily see the guy cowering in the stills.

Then he likely walked out and went to get in his car and leave when the officer approached asking him to get out of his vehicle. He likely ignored the officer, and proceeded to back up. Officer opens door tries to grab him, he backs up while officer is attempting to apprehend. Which is considered using the vehicle as a weapon, so the officer shoots him.

If the story ended there I might consider siding with the officer, but then it sounds like the officer proceeded to "finish him" off by executing the guy in broad daylight in front of witnesses.

What?

I see we've reached the stage where random people pop in and make stuff up.

 

[Quez]

The victim definitely wasn't innocent here. He basically walked into the gas station and bullied the little Indian man. You can easily see the guy cowering in the stills.

Then he likely walked out and went to get in his car and leave when the officer approached asking him to get out of his vehicle. He likely ignored the officer, and proceeded to back up. Officer opens door tries to grab him, he backs up while officer is attempting to apprehend. Which is considered using the vehicle as a weapon, so the officer shoots him.

If the story ended there I might consider siding with the officer, but then it sounds like the officer proceeded to "finish him" off by executing the guy in broad daylight in front of witnesses.

What?

Sorry, did this not happen? I may not be 100% correct but this was my understanding of what happened. Didn't he walk across the street and get in a car or something?

 

[fatness]

The victim definitely wasn't innocent here. He basically walked into the gas station and bullied the little Indian man. You can easily see the guy cowering in the stills.

Then he likely walked out and went to get in his car and leave when the officer approached asking him to get out of his vehicle. He likely ignored the officer, and proceeded to back up. Officer opens door tries to grab him, he backs up while officer is attempting to apprehend. Which is considered using the vehicle as a weapon, so the officer shoots him.

If the story ended there I might consider siding with the officer, but then it sounds like the officer proceeded to "finish him" off by executing the guy in broad daylight in front of witnesses.

What?

Quez knows things the police and witnesses don't know?

 

[jamny]

The victim definitely wasn't innocent here. He basically walked into the gas station and bullied the little Indian man. You can easily see the guy cowering in the stills.

Then he likely walked out and went to get in his car and leave when the officer approached asking him to get out of his vehicle. He likely ignored the officer, and proceeded to back up. Officer opens door tries to grab him, he backs up while officer is attempting to apprehend. Which is considered using the vehicle as a weapon, so the officer shoots him.

If the story ended there I might consider siding with the officer, but then it sounds like the officer proceeded to "finish him" off by executing the guy in broad daylight in front of witnesses.

What?

Sorry, did this not happen? I may not be 100% correct but this was my understanding of what happened. Didn't he walk across the street and get in a car or something?

wow, not even close.

 

[TheIronSheik]

Gotta imagine that police officer is far, far away from Ferguson right now. Of course, it won't stop people burning his house down or whatever.

I heard a rumor saying he booked a flight on Malaysian Airlines to disappear.

 

[Captain Quinoa]

The victim definitely wasn't innocent here. He basically walked into the gas station and bullied the little Indian man. You can easily see the guy cowering in the stills.

Then he likely walked out and went to get in his car and leave when the officer approached asking him to get out of his vehicle. He likely ignored the officer, and proceeded to back up. Officer opens door tries to grab him, he backs up while officer is attempting to apprehend. Which is considered using the vehicle as a weapon, so the officer shoots him.

If the story ended there I might consider siding with the officer, but then it sounds like the officer proceeded to "finish him" off by executing the guy in broad daylight in front of witnesses.

What?

Sorry, did this not happen? I may not be 100% correct but this was my understanding of what happened. Didn't he walk across the street and get in a car or something?

Leave

 

[Henry Ford]

The victim definitely wasn't innocent here. He basically walked into the gas station and bullied the little Indian man. You can easily see the guy cowering in the stills.

Then he likely walked out and went to get in his car and leave when the officer approached asking him to get out of his vehicle. He likely ignored the officer, and proceeded to back up. Officer opens door tries to grab him, he backs up while officer is attempting to apprehend. Which is considered using the vehicle as a weapon, so the officer shoots him.

If the story ended there I might consider siding with the officer, but then it sounds like the officer proceeded to "finish him" off by executing the guy in broad daylight in front of witnesses.

What?

Sorry, did this not happen? I may not be 100% correct but this was my understanding of what happened. Didn't he walk across the street and get in a car or something?

I read this and thought you were posting in the wrong thread at first. That's how completely nonsensical your post is.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Now as far as this case is concerned, that part really doesn't matter when you shoot someone in the back. Just like the Tony Stewart case, where both involved were idiots, the same applies here and the outcome is the same. One idiot dead the other idiot's life is changed forever.

I'd also like to know why the other kid was not shot at. Seems very odd. He was right there too.

I disagree with the bolded. One may have been an idiot, the other is suppose to have the training to handle a situation like this. Shooting someone in the back is something a housewife does to a cheating husband. Not something a trained cop does.

That's why they are both idiots. Kid is an idiot for walking down the middle of the road AND not leaving the road when a cop tells him to.Cop is an idiot for shooting a kid in the back, and then continuing to shoot him until he's dead.

Wrong.

One might be an idiot. But the other isn't. That's called a murderer.

So a murderer is not an idiot? I beg to differ.

Just out of curiosity. If someone were to post the most outrageous example of false equivalence that I've ever seen on the internet, would THAT person be an idiot?