Looting in Missouri after cops shoot 18 year old (2 Viewers)

[avoiding injuries]

A person can cover 35 ft in what? 2 seconds? 3 maybe? That's not like he was a football field away and the cop hit him with a sniper rifle.

yes. We've been over this. If Brown was charging. What makes you think he was, beyond that Wilson said so after the fact?

African American witness testimony corroborating Wilsons story of him charging.

There were several witnesses who contradicted each other on this point. I have not read their testimonies so I have no idea which ones are more credible than others. Perhaps if I do I will change my mind. But I think that when faced with contradictory testimony of this type, it's a reasonable conclusion to disregard all of it. I certainly don't think it's wise to pick and choose.

LOL. Just when I think he couldn't get any better.

Hey, we have witnesses that corroborated Wilson's story. But tim says that there are others that didn't (psst ... they were discredited because it didn't match the physical evidence), so let's just throw all of it out. Really? So all it takes in your mind is someone to counter a witness story and you want to throw it all out. Instead of maybe digging into things to try and figure out what is credible and what isn't ... like maybe what the grand jury did.

Youre very good at repeating what the prosecutor said. Can you describe what the physical evidence was that matched some testimony and not others?

Multiple people just f'ing did ... that Brown was moving towards Wilson

The blood in the car and on WilsonGun residue on brown

Physical injuries to Wilson

Blood splatter well past where Brown ended up

Direction and pattern of blood splatter that is consistent with moving toward/charging

Entry sites of bullets

 

[Doug B]

This is all true, but it also makes no sense within the pattern of specific events which occurred in this instance.

I think this is a general problem we all have when evaluating what happened -- the full timeline of specific events is incomplete so we're left to fill in the gaps in ways suggested by our own biases and life evperiences. Not a one of us can escape that -- certainly not me.

Furthermore, we already know that whenever a police officer is involved in a questionable shooting, the explanation given by the officer is always that the victim was life threatening "reaching for his gun" etc. in this instance Wilson testified that Brown, while charging was reaching into his waistband, presumably for a gun. But if Brown had a gun, why didn't he produce it at the car?

This gets to what I meant about "hair-trigger moment. I don't expect Wilson to be thinking logically about the events temporally immediate to the altercation in the car and first firearm discharge. The fact that Brown didn't initially approach Wilson's car with a gun isn't important ... at least not to my personal interpretation of events.

And if Brown had a gun, why is he charging?

I don't think Brown was charging, either.

Does any of this make sense to you? It only makes sense to me within the context of Wilson saying whatever he can to justify a quick shooting that might not have been warranted.

I can come up with a few (slightly) different scenarios that make sense to me and don't require Wilson to be acting/testifying in bad faith. However, I have to fill in the "specific events" gaps in speculative, umprovable ways. Just as we all do

 

[timschochet]

Look here's the part that doesn't make sense to me: if Brown assaulted Wilson at the car with the intent to kill Wilson, why didn't he finish it right there. Why did he walk or run away at least 30 feet, wait until Wilson got out of the car with his gun in hand and then charge Wilson at full speed as bullets are flying past him? No matter how many times I hear this scenario, I just can't see it happening.

Doesn't it make much more sense that Brown, who was a stupid thug, tried to punch Wilson, maybe even went for Wilson's gun, failed and got shot in the hand, took off and fled, so Wilson got out of the car, yells at Brown to stop, Brown turns around, and Wilson in a state of fury and fear shoots him dead? That's a story I can buy. I don't even particularly blame Wilson (though it would be a wrongful death). But this charging stuff has got to be nonsense.

Wow. Here's what you said after the prosecutor spoke the other night:

Yep. It was this charge that always made me doubt Wilson's story. I never believed it likely that any unarmed person, even a thug, would charge a police officer firing bullets at him. But I guess it actually did happen. Brown must have been one crazy mother####er.

But here we are, a mere two days later with no additional evidence having been presented, and you're waffling again.

Thank you. Thank you. I knew he was watching the prosecutor speak because he was "live posting". The prosecutor laid out the evidence that was presented and it was consistent with Brown turning back and moving toward/charging Wilson. He specifically talked about the blood splatter, time and distance. Post Leader agrees it actually happened, like any other reasonable person would after listening, but something happens in his head to make him change his mind.

Is it to generate more discussion? To drive other posters crazy? To assure he doesn't fall to 2nd in post count? Why? What could have happened to make him leave reality and go with his "hunch".

ive explained this in detail this morning. Apparently you chose to ignore it. In sum, the evidence presented by the prosecutor has not, IMO, backed up what he related in his statement Monday night.

 

[bryhamm]

A person can cover 35 ft in what? 2 seconds? 3 maybe? That's not like he was a football field away and the cop hit him with a sniper rifle.

yes. We've been over this. If Brown was charging. What makes you think he was, beyond that Wilson said so after the fact?

African American witness testimony corroborating Wilsons story of him charging.

There were several witnesses who contradicted each other on this point. I have not read their testimonies so I have no idea which ones are more credible than others. Perhaps if I do I will change my mind. But I think that when faced with contradictory testimony of this type, it's a reasonable conclusion to disregard all of it. I certainly don't think it's wise to pick and choose.

LOL. Just when I think he couldn't get any better.

Hey, we have witnesses that corroborated Wilson's story. But tim says that there are others that didn't (psst ... they were discredited because it didn't match the physical evidence), so let's just throw all of it out. Really? So all it takes in your mind is someone to counter a witness story and you want to throw it all out. Instead of maybe digging into things to try and figure out what is credible and what isn't ... like maybe what the grand jury did.

Youre very good at repeating what the prosecutor said. Can you describe what the physical evidence was that matched some testimony and not others?

Multiple people just f'ing did ... that Brown was moving towards Wilson

im talking about charging Wilson. That's the key.

You are so hung up on "charging" that you are failing to see the bigger picture. THAT'S the key.

 

[Apple Jack]

What happened with the two contractors in the video who watched it with one saying something along the lines of "what is [Wilson] doing, he has his hands up" as Wilson shot him? Am I misremembering how that went?

 

[Bucky86]

What happened with the two contractors in the video who watched it with one saying something along the lines of "what is [Wilson] doing, he has his hands up" as Wilson shot him? Am I misremembering how that went?

I was just thinking the same thing? Anyone read their testimony to the Grand Jury?

 

[lod01]

Very simple question for all you who disagree with me: if Brown did not charge Wilson, was this a justified killing? Yes or no? If your answer is yes, please explain why.

Absolutely not. He doesn't even have to get down on the ground. If he was just standing there, it's murder. That's pretty simple.

 

[mcintyre1]

No matter what the physical evidence is and witness testimony that matches with the physical evidence and officer Wilson's testimony you just refuse to believe it. I told you back in August you wouldn't believe it and you still don't.

Have you actually read most of the witness testimony and looked at the evidence? The majority of accounts only match Wilson's testimony in that Brown turned back toward Wilson and moved in his direction before he died. So far I've found 3 people that claim he "ran", and 10+ who indicated that it was something less than a run, or even a "stumble." You're accepting the words of the prosecutor (aka Defense Attorney in this case) and Wilson blindly, without assessing what all of the witnesses have to say. Some of them were clearly discredited, but that was a much smaller number than the ones who were not discredited and whose accounts differ from Wilson's. This should have gone to trial.

 

[bryhamm]

Look here's the part that doesn't make sense to me: if Brown assaulted Wilson at the car with the intent to kill Wilson, why didn't he finish it right there. Why did he walk or run away at least 30 feet, wait until Wilson got out of the car with his gun in hand and then charge Wilson at full speed as bullets are flying past him? No matter how many times I hear this scenario, I just can't see it happening.

Doesn't it make much more sense that Brown, who was a stupid thug, tried to punch Wilson, maybe even went for Wilson's gun, failed and got shot in the hand, took off and fled, so Wilson got out of the car, yells at Brown to stop, Brown turns around, and Wilson in a state of fury and fear shoots him dead? That's a story I can buy. I don't even particularly blame Wilson (though it would be a wrongful death). But this charging stuff has got to be nonsense.

An alternative hypothesis.

The struggle took place in the car, for whatever reason or on whatever provocation, and regardless of who initiated it. It took place. During the struggle Wilson's gun discharged at least once, and I understand more likely twice. At least one of these shots grazed Brown's thumb and came with some searing hot gunshot residue going into his flesh. Now this likely hurt, was startling, caused both parties an adrenaline rush triggering fight or flight responses which beginning to obviate them analyzing their next moves 100% logically. (Now Wilson's training should have helped with this some, but it is difficult in training to really simulate situations to the point of producing rushes of adrenaline). we need also understand that discharge of a weapon in a car would be incredibly loud, would leave a painful ringing in the ears, and with the accompanying discharge of smoke would be disorienting.

At any rate, brown, being wounded and startled, would naturally, reflexively, begin retreating. It would be less natural for Wilson to immediately pursue, this would have to be a volitional action after some fractions of a second or more consideration.

When Wilson exits the car brown has had whatever time to compose himself that it would take to travel whatever distance he got. I think we all agree this is not a long time, seconds at the most. As for Wilson he is now confronted with a split attention task. Outside the car is not just Brown, but brown's cohort. It seems possible, likely even given common experience that Brown and the cohort were shouting back and forth, I mean brown had just been shot. Officer Wilson may have been directing his attention, and his gun, back and forth between the two as yet less than fully assessed risks. During this process Brown may have seen an opportunity to advance on Wilson. he may have been encouraged to do so by his cohort, egged on as it were.

What we know from common experience is that criminals avoid apprehension. We also know that in fight or flight response scenarios one can turn instantly from the one response to the other. Experience tells us that young men misapprehend their abilities and competencies. Experience, no history also shows that folks will charge at and fight armed Officers.

You are trying to apply logic to an illogical situation involving rage, injury, pain, fear, and desire to escape. The fat man may have decided his best escape is not to run, but to fight. Fat people understand that their running ability is limited after short distances. they are built for charging, not for marathons. For all we know he may have thought the Officer was stunned from his blows and shot. The officer may have been disoriented and staggering.

I am not advocating this position. I am advocating that to dismiss it out of hand may be precipitous and may involve not assessing all the factors. You want to apply logic, but you ignore the human condition, and you forget to paint an accurate scenario, one involving Brown's friend in the picture as well. A person who is an independent actor, who likely was not a silent statue during the encounter, and even had he been he would have still created some split attention tsk for the officer potentially presenting Brown an opportunity for charging Wilson.

very

 

[timschochet]

DougB and Ditkaless Wonders making very good rebuttal arguments to my points this morning.

 

[GoBirds]

Just saw the pic on Facebook of Brown with a wad of $ in his mouth pointing a gun at the camera. Seems like a good kid.

 

[Doug B]

Very simple question for all you who disagree with me: if Brown did not charge Wilson, was this a justified killing? Yes or no? If your answer is yes, please explain why.

I think the killing can be legally justified without a charge. My personal explanation is the "hand moved to waistband" theory plys what I wrote in post #8313 (which you have already responsed to ... thread moved fast!).

 

[lod01]

What happened with the two contractors in the video who watched it with one saying something along the lines of "what is [Wilson] doing, he has his hands up" as Wilson shot him? Am I misremembering how that went?

I was just thinking the same thing? Anyone read their testimony to the Grand Jury?

I would guess that their stories did not add up to the forensic evidence thus their testimony was tossed. Since it doesn't give names, you won't know. Or they changed their story as the report states. There were some that changed their stories.

 

[Bucky86]

What happened with the two contractors in the video who watched it with one saying something along the lines of "what is [Wilson] doing, he has his hands up" as Wilson shot him? Am I misremembering how that went?

I was just thinking the same thing? Anyone read their testimony to the Grand Jury?

I would guess that their stories did not add up to the forensic evidence thus their testimony was tossed. Since it doesn't give names, you won't know. Or they changed their story as the report states. There were some that changed their stories.

So, they were able to make up their stories within seconds of witnessing the shooting?

 

[Henry Ford]

Just saw the pic on Facebook of Brown with a wad of $ in his mouth pointing a gun at the camera. Seems like a good kid.

That picture is an example of why people think the police are lying sacks of #### in certain circumstances.

Link

Officer Marc Catron’s postings have garnered outrage on social media, due to his strong comments about Brown, who was fatally wounded by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9.

From KCTV 5:

He shared a picture that he and others have claimed is Brown in a compromising position, but it’s actually an accused killer from Oregon. A spokeswoman for the Kansas City Police Department said this is a personnel issue that will be addressed with the officer. The department also provided a copy of the department’s eight-page social media policy.“Because members of this department are held to a higher standard than general members of the public, the online activities of members of this department shall reflect such professional expectations and standards,” the department policy states.

Two cousins were accused in Oregon of using a sledge hammer to kill their great-grandmother last year. In one of the photos, Joda Cain has a wad of money stuffed in his mouth while pointing a gun at the camera.

People have posted this photo of Cain to Facebook, including KCTV5′s Facebook page, claiming that it’s Brown, when it’s not. Catron posted the photo of Cain to his Facebook page and wrote, “I’m sure young Michael Brown is innocent and just misunderstood. I’m sure he is a pillar of the Ferguson community.”

 

[Harry Manback]

This is so stupid. What a pathetic person to rally a charge around.

There are likely dozens of better cases to protest against. And they choose a waste of space who bullied/battered a shop keeper, defied an officers direct orders, attempted to take his weapon, assaulted him, continued to defy lawful orders and charged him a second time.

Wah wah. I've lost zero sleep over his death and will continue to sleep peacefully.

 

[lod01]

What happened with the two contractors in the video who watched it with one saying something along the lines of "what is [Wilson] doing, he has his hands up" as Wilson shot him? Am I misremembering how that went?

I was just thinking the same thing? Anyone read their testimony to the Grand Jury?

I would guess that their stories did not add up to the forensic evidence thus their testimony was tossed. Since it doesn't give names, you won't know. Or they changed their story as the report states. There were some that changed their stories.

So, they were able to make up their stories within seconds of witnessing the shooting?

Absolutely. 'Hands up, don't shoot'. The fact that their testimony is either not in there because they were not located (there were some people that they couldn't locate), or their story didn't match up so the part about the hands up was tossed. Pretty basic.

 

[StrikeS2k]

Very simple question for all you who disagree with me: if Brown did not charge Wilson, was this a justified killing? Yes or no? If your answer is yes, please explain why.

Yes. There had already been one confrontation at the police car, with the dead guy trying to take the officer's gun. If the same perpetrator makes another attempt at confronting the police officer I have no problem with that police officer nullifying the threat. I don't care whether he was walking, skipping, dancing, or running if there is even the appearance that he's creating another confrontation with the police officer the officer has the right to nullify the threat IMO. Since we have discussed in other threads that when cops shoot they don't shoot to wound the logical conclusion is that the cop would shoot to kill.

 

[GoBirds]

Just saw the pic on Facebook of Brown with a wad of $ in his mouth pointing a gun at the camera. Seems like a good kid.

That picture is an example of why people think the police are lying sacks of #### in certain circumstances.Link

Officer Marc Catron’s postings have garnered outrage on social media, due to his strong comments about Brown, who was fatally wounded by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9.

From KCTV 5:

He shared a picture that he and others have claimed is Brown in a compromising position, but it’s actually an accused killer from Oregon. A spokeswoman for the Kansas City Police Department said this is a personnel issue that will be addressed with the officer. The department also provided a copy of the department’s eight-page social media policy.“Because members of this department are held to a higher standard than general members of the public, the online activities of members of this department shall reflect such professional expectations and standards,” the department policy states.

Two cousins were accused in Oregon of using a sledge hammer to kill their great-grandmother last year. In one of the photos, Joda Cain has a wad of money stuffed in his mouth while pointing a gun at the camera.

People have posted this photo of Cain to Facebook, including KCTV5′s Facebook page, claiming that it’s Brown, when it’s not. Catron posted the photo of Cain to his Facebook page and wrote, “I’m sure young Michael Brown is innocent and just misunderstood. I’m sure he is a pillar of the Ferguson community.”

Wow dumb move by that guy if that's the case.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

DougB and Ditkaless Wonders making very good rebuttal arguments to my points this morning.

I'm not rebutting or advocating, I am still hypothesizing. I remain unclear on the matter, thought I do fall in love with my own hypothesis. That is one danger of being arrogant.

 

[Doug B]

Again, I can buy into that. However, under your scenario, Wilson is probably guilty of wrongfully killing Brown.

... here's where we part ways: to me, once a policeman gets into a fight-pr-flight hair-trigger moment with an adversary -- however it happens -- he has carte blanche. I don't think the state can expect policeman to carry arms, but be proscribed in that partiuclar way** towards their use,.

** a way in which the Michael Brown shooting -- given my scenario in post #8313 -- is wrongful.

 

[mcintyre1]

A person can cover 35 ft in what? 2 seconds? 3 maybe? That's not like he was a football field away and the cop hit him with a sniper rifle.

yes. We've been over this. If Brown was charging. What makes you think he was, beyond that Wilson said so after the fact?

African American witness testimony corroborating Wilsons story of him charging.

There were several witnesses who contradicted each other on this point. I have not read their testimonies so I have no idea which ones are more credible than others. Perhaps if I do I will change my mind. But I think that when faced with contradictory testimony of this type, it's a reasonable conclusion to disregard all of it. I certainly don't think it's wise to pick and choose.

Now you're just being ignorant. Read about the ####### case and gain a clue before you come in here with your unsubstantiated opinions.

The most credible eyewitnesses to the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., said he had charged toward Police Officer Darren Wilson just before the final, fatal shots

It's the first ####### sentence in this article:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/us/witnesses-told-grand-jury-that-michael-brown-charged-at-darren-wilson-prosecutor-says.html?referrer=

..., the St. Louis County prosecutor said Monday night.

It's not the article saying those were the most credible eyewitnesses, it's the prosecutor.

If you're going to get angry at other people's supposed "ignorance," at least finish reading "the first ####### sentence of this article" before you come in here ranting and raving.

So ####### what? He said it because that's what the GJ determined. Haven't you figured out that they allowed the GJ to make the decision?

That's an incredibly naive view of how a GJ actually functions. Grand Juries, almost without fail, do what the prosecutor wants. This prosecutor has a record of protecting police in a questionable shooting (according to subsequent federal investigation that discredited the 3 witness accounts he allowed to be given before his Grand Jury). You can't credibly say that this prosecutor (or any prosecutor, really) should be presumed to be unbiased in a case involving a police officer. Statistics show us that that frequently just isn't the case.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Just saw the pic on Facebook of Brown with a wad of $ in his mouth pointing a gun at the camera. Seems like a good kid.

That picture is an example of why people think the police are lying sacks of #### in certain circumstances.Link

Officer Marc Catron’s postings have garnered outrage on social media, due to his strong comments about Brown, who was fatally wounded by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9.

From KCTV 5:

He shared a picture that he and others have claimed is Brown in a compromising position, but it’s actually an accused killer from Oregon. A spokeswoman for the Kansas City Police Department said this is a personnel issue that will be addressed with the officer. The department also provided a copy of the department’s eight-page social media policy.“Because members of this department are held to a higher standard than general members of the public, the online activities of members of this department shall reflect such professional expectations and standards,” the department policy states.

Two cousins were accused in Oregon of using a sledge hammer to kill their great-grandmother last year. In one of the photos, Joda Cain has a wad of money stuffed in his mouth while pointing a gun at the camera.

People have posted this photo of Cain to Facebook, including KCTV5′s Facebook page, claiming that it’s Brown, when it’s not. Catron posted the photo of Cain to his Facebook page and wrote, “I’m sure young Michael Brown is innocent and just misunderstood. I’m sure he is a pillar of the Ferguson community.”

Wow dumb move by that guy if that's the case.

It is the case. The story is months old, check the dates on it.

Maybe next time fact-check your Facebook feed before you rush to an online forum to trash a dead kid? Just a thought.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

Very simple question for all you who disagree with me: if Brown did not charge Wilson, was this a justified killing? Yes or no? If your answer is yes, please explain why.

Yes, if he was truly reaching in his waistband as stated....Wilson shouldn't or wouldn't have to wait and see what he came out with....Of course he may have just been pulling up his pants...But even that could get you killed after a fight and flight scenario.

 

[Doug B]

However they had witnesses saying that Wilson was firing at Brown as Brown was running away...then brown stopped and turned and was shot at again as he moved forward

I don't believe the forensic analysis supported that in the end, though.

What I think likely happened is that those eyewitnesses didn't process the "gunshot in the car + Brown subsequent movement away from the car" accurately. Again, just what I think.

 

[tdoss]

The sad thing is the town of Ferguson will now die. The business`s that have been destroyed may not return. New business will not open there. Feel bad for the law abiding residents of Ferguson who have no other place to go.

How did the car not already have a dash cam or something?

 

[kentric]

4 and a half minutes of silence in NY for Michael Brown? Are you ####### kidding me? Let me get this straight, if I want to be an immortalized hero in America all I have to do is rob a convenience sore, bully an old man, walk in the middle of the street, talk back to a cop, punch him, try to grab his gun, and then disobey his commands when he draws his gun and continue to walk towards him?And people have the nerve to mention this punk in the same sentence as Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks. What a joke.

Um, Michael Brown is not being immortalized as a hero in America. Maybe in a parallel universe, but not in this one.

LOL. Dude, a crowd of about 2,000 people just stopped in front of the United Nations and observed a moment of silence "in his memory" for 4 and a half minutes!! That might be the longest moment of silence in history, at least since Borat. And do you not see all the people wearing Michael Brown shirts and hats? People are going to be naming their children after this piece of ####.

He is considered a victim. That is what the silence was for. He is not being recognized by anyone as a hero from what I have seen.

Michael Brown a victim???1. He robbed a convenience store, on camera, for a handful of $1 cigarillos.

2. He assaulted the owner, an old man literally half his size.

3. Instead of just leaving, he turns back into the store (and the camera) to intimidate the guy some more (I assume in the hopes he won't call the cops)

4. While holding stolen property in one hand, with drugs in his pocket, he brazenly walks in the middle of the road instead of the sidewalk.

5. When a cop tells him to get out of the street he doesn't (despite 4).

6. He taunts the cop, then attacks him inside his car and tries to grab his gun.

7. When the cop tells him to freeze, he charges him.

And Mike Brown was a victim? Please tell me, in what crazy, fukced up universe is a belligerent assshat like this considered a victim?

Obviously I don't buy your version of events. This was an unarmed teenager shot 30-40 feet away according to witnesses. That qualifies as a victim to me. And the robbery is irrelevant to his shooting since it didn't appear that Wilson knew about it.

You really need to catch up with the story if you want to make any sense in your posts.

The GJ testimony states that Wilson did in fact know aobut the robbery.

 

[Henry Ford]

Just saw the pic on Facebook of Brown with a wad of $ in his mouth pointing a gun at the camera. Seems like a good kid.

That picture is an example of why people think the police are lying sacks of #### in certain circumstances.Link

Officer Marc Catron’s postings have garnered outrage on social media, due to his strong comments about Brown, who was fatally wounded by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9.

From KCTV 5:

He shared a picture that he and others have claimed is Brown in a compromising position, but it’s actually an accused killer from Oregon. A spokeswoman for the Kansas City Police Department said this is a personnel issue that will be addressed with the officer. The department also provided a copy of the department’s eight-page social media policy.“Because members of this department are held to a higher standard than general members of the public, the online activities of members of this department shall reflect such professional expectations and standards,” the department policy states.

Two cousins were accused in Oregon of using a sledge hammer to kill their great-grandmother last year. In one of the photos, Joda Cain has a wad of money stuffed in his mouth while pointing a gun at the camera.

People have posted this photo of Cain to Facebook, including KCTV5′s Facebook page, claiming that it’s Brown, when it’s not. Catron posted the photo of Cain to his Facebook page and wrote, “I’m sure young Michael Brown is innocent and just misunderstood. I’m sure he is a pillar of the Ferguson community.”

Wow dumb move by that guy if that's the case.

It is the case. The story is months old, check the dates on it.

Maybe next time fact-check your Facebook feed before you rush to an online forum to trash a dead kid? Just a thought.

Or look at the photos. Those are clearly not the same guy.

 

[GoBirds]

Just saw the pic on Facebook of Brown with a wad of $ in his mouth pointing a gun at the camera. Seems like a good kid.

That picture is an example of why people think the police are lying sacks of #### in certain circumstances.Link

Officer Marc Catron’s postings have garnered outrage on social media, due to his strong comments about Brown, who was fatally wounded by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9. From KCTV 5:

He shared a picture that he and others have claimed is Brown in a compromising position, but it’s actually an accused killer from Oregon. A spokeswoman for the Kansas City Police Department said this is a personnel issue that will be addressed with the officer. The department also provided a copy of the department’s eight-page social media policy.“Because members of this department are held to a higher standard than general members of the public, the online activities of members of this department shall reflect such professional expectations and standards,” the department policy states.

Two cousins were accused in Oregon of using a sledge hammer to kill their great-grandmother last year. In one of the photos, Joda Cain has a wad of money stuffed in his mouth while pointing a gun at the camera.People have posted this photo of Cain to Facebook, including KCTV5′s Facebook page, claiming that it’s Brown, when it’s not. Catron posted the photo of Cain to his Facebook page and wrote, “I’m sure young Michael Brown is innocent and just misunderstood. I’m sure he is a pillar of the Ferguson community.”

Wow dumb move by that guy if that's the case.

It is the case. The story is months old, check the dates on it.

Maybe next time fact-check your Facebook feed before you rush to an online forum to trash a dead kid? Just a thought.

Sorry I haven't dedicated the hours to this you have, that doesn't change the fact he was breaking the law and assaulted a cop. Never want to see this outcome but avoiding those 2 actions is a great way to stay out of trouble.

 

[JohnnyU]

Didn't the cop have bruises on his face and neck from the beating Brown was giving him? The cop seemed to have acted the way he should have and Brown pretty much sealed his own fate by his actions.

 

[rick6668]

Doesn't it make much more sense that Brown, who was a stupid thug, tried to punch Wilson, maybe even went for Wilson's gun, failed and got shot in the hand, took off and fled, so Wilson got out of the car, yells at Brown to stop, Brown turns around, and Wilson in a state of fury and fear shoots him dead? That's a story I can buy. I don't even particularly blame Wilson (though it would be a wrongful death). But this charging stuff has got to be nonsense.

I believe this is a rough sketch of what happened, but that there was a little more going on at the "Brown turns around" step. That was a hair-trigger moment when a sudden, typically-innocuous movement leads to shots fired.

Fair enough. I can buy that. I would suggest that the full blown charge was fabricated afterward.

however they had witnesses saying that Wilson was firing at Brown as Brown was running away...then brown stopped and turned and was shot at again as he moved forward

Read the Grand Jury reports. The ones I have read so far that have witnesses saying that officer Wilson was shooting at him while he was running away and that his body jerked from getting shot. Then he stopped, turned around and put his hands up and the officer kept moving forward shooting him until he hit the ground. The physical evidence contradicts this.

Here's one I was just reading.

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370496-grand-jury-volume-7.html

 

[lod01]

..., the St. Louis County prosecutor said Monday night.

It's not the article saying those were the most credible eyewitnesses, it's the prosecutor.

If you're going to get angry at other people's supposed "ignorance," at least finish reading "the first ####### sentence of this article" before you come in here ranting and raving.

So ####### what? He said it because that's what the GJ determined. Haven't you figured out that they allowed the GJ to make the decision?

That's an incredibly naive view of how a GJ actually functions. Grand Juries, almost without fail, do what the prosecutor wants. This prosecutor has a record of protecting police in a questionable shooting (according to subsequent federal investigation that discredited the 3 witness accounts he allowed to be given before his Grand Jury). You can't credibly say that this prosecutor (or any prosecutor, really) should be presumed to be unbiased in a case involving a police officer. Statistics show us that that frequently just isn't the case.

You need to watch some TV and listen to what is discussed about this GJ. The prosecutor let the GJ have every shred of evidence in order that THEY make the decision, not him. One of the guys on CNN last night explained it and said it's the way NY does it in all cases involving a police officer. They take it out of the hands of anyone bias and put it in the hands of a neutral GJ.

Now if you still believe the prosecutor was bias and his bias caused the verdict, explain exactly how that happened. I would really love to hear it. You may want to read the report first.

 

[Cjw_55106]

I'll put the over/under at one for the amount of people who changed their minds because of this thread.

 

[Henry Ford]

I'll put the over/under at one for the amount of people who changed their minds because of this thread.

Sure, but he did it ten times.

 

[timschochet]

We have a bigger problem here that needs to be discussed: first off, I want to re-emphasize that even with my disagreement with most of you about what actually happened, I don't believe there was enough evidence to indict Officer Wilson of a crime. And I certainly don't believe that he ever would have been convicted of a crime. On those fundamental points most of us posting here are in agreement.

Which leads to the problem: although there has been no polling as of yet, it seems pretty clear over the last few days that a majority of blacks, probably a strong majority, believe this result (no indictment) was a gross injustice. In fact, I am betting that this will be the biggest divide between blacks and whites since the OJ trial, and basically for the same reason: whites trust the police. Blacks don't. Yes these are generalities, but they are generally true.

What are we to do about this?

 

[mcintyre1]

A person can cover 35 ft in what? 2 seconds? 3 maybe? That's not like he was a football field away and the cop hit him with a sniper rifle.

yes. We've been over this. If Brown was charging. What makes you think he was, beyond that Wilson said so after the fact?

African American witness testimony corroborating Wilsons story of him charging.

There were several witnesses who contradicted each other on this point. I have not read their testimonies so I have no idea which ones are more credible than others. Perhaps if I do I will change my mind. But I think that when faced with contradictory testimony of this type, it's a reasonable conclusion to disregard all of it. I certainly don't think it's wise to pick and choose.

LOL. Just when I think he couldn't get any better.

Hey, we have witnesses that corroborated Wilson's story. But tim says that there are others that didn't (psst ... they were discredited because it didn't match the physical evidence), so let's just throw all of it out. Really? So all it takes in your mind is someone to counter a witness story and you want to throw it all out. Instead of maybe digging into things to try and figure out what is credible and what isn't ... like maybe what the grand jury did.

You really need to actually read some of this witness testimony. Yes, there were some witnesses that were discredited after their stories didn't align with the police, but the majority of witness accounts were not discredited in this manner. One of those "discredited" witnesses (who saw the entire chase + shooting, nothing at the car, from about 30 feet behind, looking up after hearing the initial shots in the car) said that he believed Brown was shot in the "hip and leg" because of the way Brown's body made a jerking motion while he was running away and before he stopped. Reasonable assumption to make for a lot of people, I'd think. Maybe it took that long for Brown to process the pain of being shot in the hand/arm. When confronted with the difference, he stated that he was probably wrong and that he had made that conclusion based on the motion of Brown's body. The rest of his testimony closely tracks with the testimony of several other witnesses (who again, have not been discredited), who indicated that Brown turned back, moved toward Wilson (not running, explicitly) and had at least one arm raised to chest level (some say both, others indicate only one).

Those of us who are questioning the decision don't trust that the prosecutor ever wanted this to end in indictment, and presented the evidence in such a way to get that result (eg. it appears he only cross examined witnesses that contradicted Wilson's story, not witnesses that confirmed it).

 

[Yankee23Fan]

And people wonder why juries find some people guilty or not guilty or award massive amounts of money for spilling coffee on your lap or whatever it is that gets the thread newshounds on fire when a jury does something.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Didn't the cop have bruises on his face and neck from the beating Brown was giving him? The cop seemed to have acted the way he should have and Brown pretty much sealed his own fate by his actions.

I've sustained far greater injury having sex with my wife. Of course she is a vigorous minx.

 

[mcintyre1]

A person can cover 35 ft in what? 2 seconds? 3 maybe? That's not like he was a football field away and the cop hit him with a sniper rifle.

yes. We've been over this. If Brown was charging. What makes you think he was, beyond that Wilson said so after the fact?

African American witness testimony corroborating Wilsons story of him charging.

There were several witnesses who contradicted each other on this point. I have not read their testimonies so I have no idea which ones are more credible than others. Perhaps if I do I will change my mind. But I think that when faced with contradictory testimony of this type, it's a reasonable conclusion to disregard all of it. I certainly don't think it's wise to pick and choose.

Now you're just being ignorant. Read about the ####### case and gain a clue before you come in here with your unsubstantiated opinions.

The most credible eyewitnesses to the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., said he had charged toward Police Officer Darren Wilson just before the final, fatal shots

It's the first ####### sentence in this article:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/us/witnesses-told-grand-jury-that-michael-brown-charged-at-darren-wilson-prosecutor-says.html?referrer=

..., the St. Louis County prosecutor said Monday night.

It's not the article saying those were the most credible eyewitnesses, it's the prosecutor.

If you're going to get angry at other people's supposed "ignorance," at least finish reading "the first ####### sentence of this article" before you come in here ranting and raving.

So ####### what? He said it because that's what the GJ determined. Haven't you figured out that they allowed the GJ to make the decision?

That's an incredibly naive view of how a GJ actually functions. Grand Juries, almost without fail, do what the prosecutor wants. This prosecutor has a record of protecting police in a questionable shooting (according to subsequent federal investigation that discredited the 3 witness accounts he allowed to be given before his Grand Jury). You can't credibly say that this prosecutor (or any prosecutor, really) should be presumed to be unbiased in a case involving a police officer. Statistics show us that that frequently just isn't the case.

You need to watch some TV and listen to what is discussed about this GJ. The prosecutor let the GJ have every shred of evidence in order that THEY make the decision, not him. One of the guys on CNN last night explained it and said it's the way NY does it in all cases involving a police officer. They take it out of the hands of anyone bias and put it in the hands of a neutral GJ.

I don't need to watch the TV. I've spent my last two whole evenings reading that evidence. Yes, he wasn't in the room, but I've read accounts from other state level prosecutors indicating that he wouldn't need to be. He still gets to frame the case, what is presented, who is interviewed, and that the GJ begins to pick up on cues from the prosecuting team as to whether they're looking for an indictment or not. There are people inside of this system that criticize it as less than optimal if not biased. Excuse me if I believe them over you.

 

[Henry Ford]

Didn't the cop have bruises on his face and neck from the beating Brown was giving him? The cop seemed to have acted the way he should have and Brown pretty much sealed his own fate by his actions.

I have similar bruises on my leg from bumping into the coffee table this morning. Shot that ###### six times before I left the house.

 

[timschochet]

McIntyre making excellent points here...especially for a Nebraska fan.

 

[Doug B]

Which leads to the problem: although there has been no polling as of yet, it seems pretty clear over the last few days that a majority of blacks, probably a strong majority, believe this result (no indictment) was a gross injustice. In fact, I am betting that this will be the biggest divide between blacks and whites since the OJ trial, and basically for the same reason: whites trust the police. Blacks don't. Yes these are generalities, but they are generally true.

What are we to do about this?

The problem is even bigger than that, and totally intractable in our lifetimes:

There should be no groups of Americans that view themselves at out on an island, alone, cut off from American society at large. I asked this several pages back, and ask again: Is disposession an effect that the world has on a person, or is disposession an effect that the psyche has on a person? Is disposession internal or external -- or both?

 

[lod01]

I'll put the over/under at one for the amount of people who changed their minds because of this thread.

Sure, but he did it ten times.

 

[Henry Ford]

Which leads to the problem: although there has been no polling as of yet, it seems pretty clear over the last few days that a majority of blacks, probably a strong majority, believe this result (no indictment) was a gross injustice. In fact, I am betting that this will be the biggest divide between blacks and whites since the OJ trial, and basically for the same reason: whites trust the police. Blacks don't. Yes these are generalities, but they are generally true.

What are we to do about this?

The problem is even bigger than that, and totally intractable in our lifetimes:

There should be no groups of Americans that view themselves at out on an island, alone, cut off from American society at large. I asked this several pages back, and ask again: Is disposession an effect that the world has on a person, or is disposession an effect that the psyche has on a person? Is disposession internal or external -- or both?

It's both, and it snowballs.

 

[SIDA!]

Woke up this morning here in Minneapolis without having watched then news last night to see that there were 1,000+ protesters here locally, and that two cars/vans essentially drove through the crowds.

#1 - http://www.startribune.com/video/283893441.html#sfcri

#2 - http://www.startribune.com/video/283919501.html#sfcri

WTF?! I'm absolutely dumbfounded how people are clinging to this as some massive injustice and willing to rally because of this ruling, when the evidence would reasonably lead one down the path towards this being a justifiable shooting of an 18 year old whom had just committed a "hey I'm taking #### from your store so what are you going to do about it" theft.

The wheels have officially come off of this country. Find a better cause to rally around and do dumb #### like blocking traffic. I hope one of these idiots' family members needs medical care and can't get it because they're blocking streets in support of a criminal whom was killed.

Why make any arrests of the people blocking streets and vandalizing the guy's vehicle? Just arrest the law abiding citizen trying to get home. Fantastic.

 

[lod01]

I don't need to watch the TV. I've spent my last two whole evenings reading that evidence. Yes, he wasn't in the room, but I've read accounts from other state level prosecutors indicating that he wouldn't need to be. He still gets to frame the case, what is presented, who is interviewed, and that the GJ begins to pick up on cues from the prosecuting team as to whether they're looking for an indictment or not. There are people inside of this system that criticize it as less than optimal if not biased. Excuse me if I believe them over you.

Excuse me if I believe the GJ and the evidence over your fiction. I use common sense. You use emotion.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

We have a bigger problem here that needs to be discussed: first off, I want to re-emphasize that even with my disagreement with most of you about what actually happened, I don't believe there was enough evidence to indict Officer Wilson of a crime. And I certainly don't believe that he ever would have been convicted of a crime. On those fundamental points most of us posting here are in agreement.

Which leads to the problem: although there has been no polling as of yet, it seems pretty clear over the last few days that a majority of blacks, probably a strong majority, believe this result (no indictment) was a gross injustice. In fact, I am betting that this will be the biggest divide between blacks and whites since the OJ trial, and basically for the same reason: whites trust the police. Blacks don't. Yes these are generalities, but they are generally true.

What are we to do about this?

Depends on if you can have an adult conversation about the true problems in the black community and the stuff that is truly their own fault, or if any such conversation would automatically devolve into a racism argument.

There are plenty of "black" communities in New Jersey. I could fix most of them with fiat power in about 5 years. I would be labeled a racist of the highest order.

 

[SIDA!]

My view is that the looters, people like SIDA who want to go killing sprees in their stores, and people who drive over pedestrians because they're late for work are all basically the same kind of person. Henry Ford was making a "social compact" argument yesterday to explain where the looters were coming from. I'm wondering if he would apply the same argument to the ######s who think it's okay to plow through a crowd of protestors who are blocking traffic.

Why do you intentionally mischaracterize me to make a moronic statement? Yeah, I am basically the same guy as a ####### looter stealing other people's #### and destroying their property. Go #### yourself.

 

[StrikeS2k]

We have a bigger problem here that needs to be discussed: first off, I want to re-emphasize that even with my disagreement with most of you about what actually happened, I don't believe there was enough evidence to indict Officer Wilson of a crime. And I certainly don't believe that he ever would have been convicted of a crime. On those fundamental points most of us posting here are in agreement.

Which leads to the problem: although there has been no polling as of yet, it seems pretty clear over the last few days that a majority of blacks, probably a strong majority, believe this result (no indictment) was a gross injustice. In fact, I am betting that this will be the biggest divide between blacks and whites since the OJ trial, and basically for the same reason: whites trust the police. Blacks don't. Yes these are generalities, but they are generally true.

What are we to do about this?

How about changing the word "trust" to "respect" and I think you'll have identified the problem a bit more precisely. Then we can talk about solutions.

 

[Doug B]

McIntyre making excellent points here...especially for a Nebraska fan.

Quoting tim, addressing McIntyre:

The grand jury proceedings were political cover for a prosecutor that would have, ordinarily, simply dismissed the case altogether because he was certain the state could not convict at trial. Given that, I can't really fault the proceedings -- while the outcome may be statistically unusual as far as grand juries go, it's not right to compare what happened here with the usual grand jury proceeding. What happened here should instead be compared to all the cases that the prosecutor's office summarily dismiss for lack of evidence or insufficent evidence to convict.