Michael Brown shooting

[Casper]

I don't think the article was clear on exactly what made the caller think he was loading it.   Nor was it clear if/why he had taken the thing out of the box.   Was it somethign innocent like the box was already opened and he was making sure nothing was missing before buying it?  Was he planning to rob the store with it?  Was he taking a selfie?  Was he sending a pic to someone saying; "Is this the one you wanted?"    Too many unanswered questions.

 

Hence the store surveillance videos need released. 

[Scruit]

I am expecting the police to produce a weapon.  They'll say he was reaching for it or used it.  And they're the police so it must be true, right?

 

- If they say the cop was in the wrong then you were right to distrust them. 

- If they say they can prove the cop was in the right then it is clearly a cover-up and you were right to distrust them.

 

See how that looks to impartial folks?

[Pokey]

Black people are disproportionately incarcerated, but if you believe for a second it's because they commit more crime, you're pretty gullible.

 

I am gullible? That is quite funny coming from you. If I am gullible in your eyes, I can assure you are naive and ignorant in many eyes.

[Scruit]

Hence the store surveillance videos need released. 

 

Absolutely. 

[Tpoppa]

- If they say the cop was in the wrong then you were right to distrust them. 

- If they say they can prove the cop was in the right then it is clearly a cover-up and you were right to distrust them.

 

See how that looks to impartial folks?

 

There are no reports of a weapon yet.  There are at least 3 reports of Brown being shot when running away.  Then being executed when attempting to surrender.  Even if he did have a weapon (no reason to believe that at this point), how would that endanger the officer if he was running away or surrendering?  Where in that scenario is deadly force justified?   

 

Is that impartial enough for you?

 

I have no doubt that we hear the encounter described in the officers words.  Shit, he'll probably sound like a hero.  What we won't hear is Brown's side of the story. 

Edited August 15, 2014 by Tpoppa

[Pokey]

If he was shot and then assassinated in that scenario, then that is way beyond messed up and I hope those responsible are punished. Now tell me where the handbook says to riot and destroy your own neighborhoods and places of business? I am sorry.....but that is just a special kind of stupid.

[madcat6183]

Now now, no name calling.  Just debating.

 

Also FWIW, if I saw someone walking around with that BB gun, or doing anything with it in a Walmart you better believe I am dialing 911 too, and probably willing to draw if it looked like he was pointing it at someone.  That BB gun looks very much like a real rifle, and that BB gun could inflict death I am sure to a child or baby, probably even an adult.  On top of that, why was he messing with it out of the package anyways, they aren't just on shelves to play with. 

[madcat6183]

If he was shot and then assassinated in that scenario, then that is way beyond messed up and I hope those responsible are punished. Now tell me where the handbook says to riot and destroy your own neighborhoods and places of business? I am sorry.....but that is just a special kind of stupid.

I agree with this 100% for the record.

[magley64]

The looting is possibly a side effect of rampant consumerism, and a materialistic society. Rioting is an expression of anger.

[Scruit]

There are no reports of a weapon yet.  They are at least 3 reports of Brown being shot when running away.  Then being executed when attempting to surrender.  Even if he did have a weapon (no reason to believe that at this point), how would that endanger the officer if he was running away or surrendering?  Where in that scenario is deadly force justified?   

 

Is that impartial enough for you?

 

I have no doubt that we hear the encounter described, in the officers words.  Shit, he'll probably sound like a hero.  What we won't hear is Brown's side of the story. 

 

That's more like it, except 'executed when he tried to surrender' implies intent to kill, and that the witnesses are accurate/honest - neither of which have been either established or refuted.  Impartialiaty requires we use "killed while reportedly surrendering", which is a proven fact.

 

 

I have no answers, but I will break down your questions even further...

 

"How would it endanger the officer if he was running away?"

- Did the officer remain with/in his vehicle and shoot from a distance, or did he chase Brown and shoot from a closer distance?

 

"How would it endanger the officer if he was surrendering?"

- What action did Brown undertake that made the witnesses believe he was surrendering?

- How far was brown from the officer when he turned to face him?

- Could the action that the witnesses believed was "surrendering" have been interpreted another way?  We are hearing "hands up" but does that mean directly upwards and reaching for the sky, or up and forward at 45 deg, or hands in front of himself forward, or in a position or at a range where it could be interpreted as a fighting posture?

 

"Where is deadly force justified?"

- Does that state grant police the power to use deadly force to prevent the escape of a felon?  violent felon?  armed felon?   Or is deadly force not allowed on someone running away?

- What started the physcial altercation with the officer inside his car and Brown outside?  Was that a "violent felony"?

- Did the officer know that Brown was unarmed?   We know that now, but did the officer know that at the time?   

Edited August 15, 2014 by Scruit

[Scruit]

derp

Edited August 15, 2014 by Scruit

[Tpoppa]

Two other accounts seem to match this story. This kid was his friend, so I'm sure he's somewhat biased. I consider that when viewing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlMjhoYPmZ8

Edited August 15, 2014 by Tpoppa

[Scruit]

Two other accounts seem to match this story. This kid was his friend, so I'm sure he's somewhat biased. I consider that when viewing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlMjhoYPmZ8

 

Matching witness stories are very compelling.  I would ask if the friend in the first video was the same person that was with Brown at the store where the police allege that Brown committed the robbery   (shoplifting becomes robbery if force or threats are used to effect escape)     If so, then I'd ask if there's other parts of the events surrounding the altercation with police that this firend is either omitting or fabricating to avoid any legal troubles of his own.

 

Similarly, i'd ask if the police are omitting or fabricating anything to avoid liablity?

 

And I have no doubts that it'll go down like the court hearing where Bart Simpson and Monty Burns give wildly different accounts of how Bart was run over by Burns' car - and I have no doubt that, as in the Simpsons, neither is being fully honest and the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Scruit

[Bad324]

The looting is possibly a side effect of rampant consumerism, and a materialistic society. Rioting is an expression of anger.

I call bullshit on this. Plenty of anger inducing things happen in suburbs and other areas, why is there no looting taking place in these areas?

It's an excuse to act like animals and get shit for free. Well the looting part anyway. If you recall the Rodney King riots and looting, there is video footage of someone saying it's ok because it should be considered reparations. That shit is tired in my opinion

Edited August 15, 2014 by Bad324

[ScubaCinci]

Pics and vids of him robbing the place are starting to hit all the news outlets now. Did he deserve to be shot and killed? Unlikely. But I can't help but feel that if you choose to behave badly, expect bad things to happen to you eventually and not necessarily commensurately. He didn't get shot because he was picking flowers in the park.

[Scruit]

Pics and vids of him robbing the place are starting to hit all the news outlets now. Did he deserve to be shot and killed? Unlikely. But I can't help but feel that if you choose to behave badly, expect bad things to happen to you eventually and not necessarily commensurately. He didn't get shot because he was picking flowers in the park.

 

Just goes to show that these things are never quite as simple as either side claims.

[Tpoppa]

Not much good information in this video.  But you can see the crime scene & the body in the street.  This is the scene that led to the unrest, looting, and riots.

 

[magley64]

I call bullshit on this. Plenty of anger inducing things happen in suburbs and other areas, why is there no looting taking place in these areas?

It's an excuse to act like animals and get shit for free. Well the looting part anyway. If you recall the Rodney King riots and looting, there is video footage of someone saying it's ok because it should be considered reparations. That shit is tired in my opinion

Because those people can afford the things in the stores, those people feel as though they're a part of that community, that they belong. Clearly the people looting are disenfranchised, and don't feel that they are accepted members of that society. In no way does that justify it, one can attempt to understand something without endorsing it.

[InyaAzz]

If you want numbers, there right here:

 

http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/14/ferguson-police-have-a-long-troubling-re

 

Umm, something is seriously WRONG with the Ferguson police department.

[Tpoppa]

Ferguson chief: Robbery separate from contact between Brown, officer.

 

2 separate, unrelated events.

 

Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson told reporters Friday that "the initial contact between" Michael Brown and the police officer who fatally shot him was not related to the alleged convenience store robbery committed nearby a short time earlier.  The officer approached Brown not because of the robbery, but "because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic," Jackson said.

 

 

So, apparently this was over jay walking.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Tpoppa

[Casper]

Ferguson chief: Robbery separate from contact between Brown, officer.

 

2 separate, unrelated events.

 

Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson told reporters Friday that "the initial contact between" Michael Brown and the police officer who fatally shot him was not related to the alleged convenience store robbery committed nearby a short time earlier.  The officer approached Brown not because of the robbery, but "because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic," Jackson said.

 

 

So, apparently this was over jay walking.

 

jaywalking ≠ obstructing traffic

[Tpoppa]

jaywalking ≠ obstructing traffic

Fair enough.  But my point was that this encounter and subsequent shooting and death escalated from of some kind of illegal walking practice.

 

They may be more detail forthcoming.

 

 

Edit:  Watch this.  The chief seems pretty nervous.

 

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/crime/2014/08/15/bts-ferguson-police-chief-security-footage.cnn.html

Edited August 15, 2014 by Tpoppa

[bandit12]

 Police are sworn to protect all citzens, not just the ones they happen feel are savory individuals.   

 

Unless I've got it wrong, they don't have to protect anyone.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html

[Scruit]

Fair enough.  But my point was that this encounter and subsequent shooting and death escalated from of some kind of illegal walking practice.

 

They may be more detail forthcoming.

 

 

 

 

It is somewhere on a sliding scale from one extreme which is the officer thinking; "Jaywalker - I'll shoot him", to the other extreme, which is Brown launching an unprovoked attack on the officer.  The truth is likely somewhere in the middle.

 

Don't forget that Brown knows he just robbed a store, even if the officer didn't.  This could have influenced how he interacted with the officer.

Edited August 16, 2014 by Scruit

[Tpoppa]

It is somewhere on a sliding scale from one extreme which is the officer thinking; "Jaywalker - I'll shoot him", to the other extreme, which is Brown launching an unprovoked attack on the officer.  The truth is likely somewhere in the middle.

 

Don't forget that Brown knows he just robbed a store, even if the officer didn't.  This could have influenced how he interacted with the officer.

 

I appreciate your counter point, but I think you are putting too much stock in the "benefit of the doubt" when there are key items that are not in doubt.

 

There are undeniable facts.

1.  An 18 year old unarmed kid is dead at the hands of the FPD.

2.  There are multiple eye witness accounts that agree that the kid was retreating and then trying to surrender when he was shot and killed.  

3.  Tear gas was shot at reporters by the FPD to prevent filming.  Reporters were arrested to also prevent filming.  That kind of shit happens in Iran & Syria, not in the US.  

4.  The Missouri Governor relieved the FPD of their duty in handling the riot that they played a large part in instigating.  When is the last time you remember that happening on American soil?

 

All signs point to a police department run amok.  They clearly did not want outside involvement or attention from the press.  Now they're under the national microscope.  

 

Did you watch the statement from the police chief about the robbery not being connected?  Those were not the words of a confident man that believes the situation was handled properly.