Michael Brown shooting.

#451 Edited by lamprey263 (23962 posts) -

I'm curious how they're going to even attempt to excuse the shooting as self defense when the body was found 35 feet away from the police car. Furthermore, there's that article that's going around saying the officer had a broke eye orbital socket, which started on some no name right wing rag website with no journalistic standards and was basically regurgitated on every other right wing outlet, the Daily Kos had an interesting take on this claim to call bullshit...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/21/1323510/-Callig-B-S-on-Darren-Wilson-s-broken-eye-orbital

Q - How was Michael Brown able to generate so much power in a punch as to break the officers eye socket when his movements were constrained by the tight quarters inside the cruiser window?

Q - Why was no mention made of this injury until ten days after the shooting? We know that the FPD and SLC prosecutor were throwing everything out there they could find in their efforts to demonize Michael Brown and defend officer Wilson. If his injuries were as bad as they claim, there is no doubt in my mind that they would have been parading photos of his battered face all over the TV machine.

Q - In the autopsy report, the doctor claimed that there were no indications on Michael Brown's body of a physical struggle. Unless the doctor is quite incompetent, one would expect that this analysis included an examination of Michael's hands. If he had hit the cop so hard as to break his eye orbital, one would expect to see trauma to his hand and knuckles. No such trauma was reported.

Q - According to a timeline of the incident, there was an ambulance there within a few minutes as it was responding to another call in the area. While it was reported that they stopped to assess Michael Brown, there is no mention of them providing any sort of medical assistance to Wilson.

Q - In Piaget Crenshaw's video of the immediate aftermath of the shooting, Wilson can be seen wandering around the crime scene and conversing with officers. If he was truly so badly injured it should be apparent in how he appears in the video. His face looked clean, and his demeanor was not that of someone who was severely injured. No attention was being given by any of those present to his supposed injuries.

Q - Far from being attended to and taken to the hospital for care - things one would reasonable expect in such circumstances - officer Wilson DRIVES away in his cruiser. For a man who was moments ago almost knocked unconscious, this seems unreasonable as well. Why would the other officers allow him to drive if he had just undergone such a traumatic experience?

There's things to suggest the police have no intention to fairly investigate this shooting. For instance, there's no detailed police report of what happened nearly two weeks after this happened, which prosecutors announced yesterday. Police refused to interview key witnesses. They went on a smear campaign against Michael brown but refused to offer any details of the autopsy, how many shots were fired and how many hit, and the name of the officer involved. The only thing they did reveal was the officer's name, and that's only because Anonymous beat them to the punch and hacked the Ferguson police computers and got the dispatch tapes, interesting details on that end as they note that officers on the scene did not report the shooting when it happened, and rather made calls for crowd control, and the police headquarters didn't even learn about the shooting until seeing it on the news.

#452 Posted by Leejjohno (14088 posts) -

@lamprey263: They are protecting themselves from consequences. It's nothing new... it's called closing ranks.

Imagine you worked as a cop and you witnessed whatever it was that happened. Would you want to be the one cop with a totally different version of events? If the media weren't covering this so aggressively you'd probably regret dropping a colleague in the deep end. As long as nobody is taking the yam out of your savouring mouth who cares?

#453 Posted by DaJuicyMan (3515 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

@airshocker said:
@DaJuicyMan said:

This thread has revealed to me who the racists are in OT. Didn't know there were so many.

Who are the racists, exactly?

I'd be concerned if it's not obvious to you.

So are you going to actually answer the question, or what? Your statement makes it seem like this entire thread is full of racists when it isn't. It also lumps everybody into your statement by your lack of naming names.

I know I haven't said anything that could be construed as racist. So who are you talking about?

I don't believe you are one of them. Is that good enough? I'm not trying to get modded or start some flame war.

#454 Edited by DaJuicyMan (3515 posts) -
@LJS9502_basic said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

@Boddicker: Ferguson only has something like 4 black police officers employed.

That basically means nothing unless you can show us first applicants...and second....qualified applicants.

Second I haven't read this entire thread....so I can't say with any accuracy that racism is prevalent. I can say that as with any demographic some racists will be within. Law of averages. However, criticizing cultural aspects is not inherently racist and you may have exaggerated the racism herein.

Boddicker asked how many black officers were employed by the city. I answered. Any meaning you see beyond that is purely your doing.

#455 Posted by resevl4rlz (3278 posts) -
@seahorse123 said:

The media is trying to whip up racial tensions, this is just the beginning in the social unrest as the militarisation of the police continues until martial law is declared in the major cities.

please for the love of god, stop worshiping and watching alex jones

#456 Posted by lamprey263 (23962 posts) -

@Leejjohno said:

@lamprey263: They are protecting themselves from consequences. It's nothing new... it's called closing ranks.

Imagine you worked as a cop and you witnessed whatever it was that happened. Would you want to be the one cop with a totally different version of events? If the media weren't covering this so aggressively you'd probably regret dropping a colleague in the deep end. As long as nobody is taking the yam out of your savouring mouth who cares?

So it's okay because everyone else is corrupt? That doesn't excuse things. But I can understand why nobody wants to rock the boat, they'll lose their jobs or worse. And yeah nobody else will be on their side and it would be a pretty pointless one side battle. Still, doesn't make the system right.

#457 Posted by Master_Live (14662 posts) -

Convicting Darren Wilson Will Be Basically Impossible

#458 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3910 posts) -

@Motokid6 said:

This jury has got its work cut out for them. How the hell can they decided on a verdict with only forensics and eye witness reports?

And what if the cop walks away with anything less then a murder conviction? Will Ferguson burn down?

that's a lot of evidence....

#459 Posted by AutoPilotOn (8507 posts) -

Is the report of a young white male killed by black cop in Utah true? I can only find it on conservative websites. If it is true why is it not news?

#460 Posted by Leejjohno (14088 posts) -

@lamprey263 said:

@Leejjohno said:

@lamprey263: They are protecting themselves from consequences. It's nothing new... it's called closing ranks.

Imagine you worked as a cop and you witnessed whatever it was that happened. Would you want to be the one cop with a totally different version of events? If the media weren't covering this so aggressively you'd probably regret dropping a colleague in the deep end. As long as nobody is taking the yam out of your savouring mouth who cares?

So it's okay because everyone else is corrupt? That doesn't excuse things. But I can understand why nobody wants to rock the boat, they'll lose their jobs or worse. And yeah nobody else will be on their side and it would be a pretty pointless one side battle. Still, doesn't make the system right.

No it doesn't and I'm not excusing the corruption. Just trying to imagine what it's like from their side.

That's why people don't trust cops. They all wear the same uniform and unless you know them as individuals you have to tar them all with the same brush. That's why I can't abide people defending them, particularly if the said people are coppers themselves.

Truth is that when you have a rotten orchard you can't really salvage it.

#461 Posted by LJS9502_basic (151093 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@Motokid6 said:

This jury has got its work cut out for them. How the hell can they decided on a verdict with only forensics and eye witness reports?

And what if the cop walks away with anything less then a murder conviction? Will Ferguson burn down?

that's a lot of evidence....

There is no evidence yet....it's not at trial.

#462 Edited by SoftwareGeek (403 posts) -

@BranKetra said:

@softwaregeek said:

@_williamwallace said:

Kids fault he's dead.

Most rational people aren't arguing that it's the kids fault he's dead. It absolutely is his fault. He started it, the cop finished it. Now the question is whether or not the cop was justified in shooting the kid. If the kid had never started any problems, there wouldn't have been any problems. He bit off more than he could chew and he paid the ultimate price for it.

There are two conflicting sides to this incident. The police officer involved and those who say he did not begin the physical aspect of it are one side. The other side are witnesses saying that officer, Wilson, began the physical altercation. As I understand this situation, there has there been no definitive proof shown to any media source validating either side. If you know something to the contrary, please do everyone a favor by presenting it. Otherwise, please stop making stories.

There's an eyewitness account on MSNBC that the physical altercation had begun while the officer was in his car. That's enough for me to decide that Mr. Brown had started the altercation. A police officer with all their training would not start a physical confrontation with a much bigger man while said police office is still sitting inside his car. They eyewitness has video of that backs up his story, however he did not film the actual shooting.

#463 Edited by SoftwareGeek (403 posts) -

@lamprey263

You actually make some decent points. But they are all irrelevant because if this goes to trial, the officer is simply going to say Michael went for his gun and that's going to be all that's needed. There's enough circumstantial evidence that supports the officer's story. There's not enough definitive evidence to say otherwise. As far as the video goes that you alluded too, there's not enough detail to make out much of anything. Again, the injury and it's severity are irrelevant. There's already eye witness accounts that the physical confrontation started in the officers car and video that backs it up. You can see that on MSNBC. I find it deplorable that the reporter was trying to lead that witness into saying that Michael brown had his hands up. The witness stuck to telling what he saw and I applaud him for that.

#464 Posted by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

At the end of the day it's all speculation based on other people's statements.

Lamprey263's post at the top of this page is quite interesting and makes some good points against the cops claim that Wilson was badly injured.

If they have pics of Wilson's injuries X-rays and a medical report then that will clear that up, I wouldn't trust just a medical report though.

#465 Posted by BranKetra (48625 posts) -

@softwaregeek said:

@BranKetra said:

@softwaregeek said:

@_williamwallace said:

Kids fault he's dead.

Most rational people aren't arguing that it's the kids fault he's dead. It absolutely is his fault. He started it, the cop finished it. Now the question is whether or not the cop was justified in shooting the kid. If the kid had never started any problems, there wouldn't have been any problems. He bit off more than he could chew and he paid the ultimate price for it.

There are two conflicting sides to this incident. The police officer involved and those who say he did not begin the physical aspect of it are one side. The other side are witnesses saying that officer, Wilson, began the physical altercation. As I understand this situation, there has there been no definitive proof shown to any media source validating either side. If you know something to the contrary, please do everyone a favor by presenting it. Otherwise, please stop making stories.

There's an eyewitness account on MSNBC that the physical altercation had begun while the officer was in his car. That's enough for me to decide that Mr. Brown had started the altercation. A police officer with all their training would not start a physical confrontation with a much bigger man while said police office is still sitting inside his car. They eyewitness has video of that backs up his story, however he did not film the actual shooting.

There are eyewitness accounts saying that the officer started the altercation, but you do not seem to even be considering them. The grand jury is going to because that is how fair and balanced decisions are made.

#466 Edited by Renevent42 (5277 posts) -

I don't think Lamprey263's questions/points are compelling in the least.

(PA - Possible Answer...I don't make any claims as to what happened, these are just simple explanations that could easily explain the question)

Q - How was Michael Brown able to generate so much power in a punch as to break the officers eye socket when his movements were constrained by the tight quarters inside the cruiser window?

PA - It was reported he pushed the officer back into the car, and was fighting with him through the window. So he was possible on his feet, and could have easily thrown a punch with sufficient force. Beyond that, Michael Brown is nearly 300 pounds so he is a huge guy and would not need a boxing ring's worth of space to do damage, even a short ranged arm punch from a guy that size could easily inflict severe damage.

Q - Why was no mention made of this injury until ten days after the shooting? We know that the FPD and SLC prosecutor were throwing everything out there they could find in their efforts to demonize Michael Brown and defend officer Wilson. If his injuries were as bad as they claim, there is no doubt in my mind that they would have been parading photos of his battered face all over the TV machine.

PA - There actually was mention the cop went to the hospital from the very beginning...while not specific the fact there was a scuffle and the cop had some kind of injury is nothing new. They not doing whatever you expect they do doesn't disprove (if he does in fact have injuries) that. It's kind of a strawman anyways, as the initial reports said his face was swollen, and that's consistent with a fractured orbital (I've actually seen one, also due to a strike to the face).

Q - In the autopsy report, the doctor claimed that there were no indications on Michael Brown's body of a physical struggle. Unless the doctor is quite incompetent, one would expect that this analysis included an examination of Michael's hands. If he had hit the cop so hard as to break his eye orbital, one would expect to see trauma to his hand and knuckles. No such trauma was reported.

PA - While bruising/cuts on hands are good indicators of struggle, the lack of them do not mean that one did not take place. Some people's hands are bigger/thicker skin/etc or they cleanly hit in such a way that while they did strike someone, bruising/cutting of the hands do not occur. Punching someone does not 100% of the time leave marks on the attackers hands.

Q - According to a timeline of the incident, there was an ambulance there within a few minutes as it was responding to another call in the area. While it was reported that they stopped to assess Michael Brown, there is no mention of them providing any sort of medical assistance to Wilson.

PA - Lack of mention is only that...lack of information. Beyond that, it was reported that he did receive treatment in the hospital...so even if the ambulance didn't treat him initially so what? What real difference does that make if he had the injury and was treated later at the hospital?

Q - In Piaget Crenshaw's video of the immediate aftermath of the shooting, Wilson can be seen wandering around the crime scene and conversing with officers. If he was truly so badly injured it should be apparent in how he appears in the video. His face looked clean, and his demeanor was not that of someone who was severely injured. No attention was being given by any of those present to his supposed injuries.

PA - Sorta of a strawman again...it was reported his face was swollen not smashed up/bleeding. The video was not excellent and he was far away. This is similiar to the Zimmeran thing, where people saw one video and claimed there were no injuries, but closer/better video clearly showed injury.

Q - Far from being attended to and taken to the hospital for care - things one would reasonable expect in such circumstances - officer Wilson DRIVES away in his cruiser. For a man who was moments ago almost knocked unconscious, this seems unreasonable as well. Why would the other officers allow him to drive if he had just undergone such a traumatic experience?

PA - I've personally seen people drive away after getting punched and with their orbital fracture (same person from the above mention). Just because someone get's smashed in the face and even suffers serious injury doesn't mean they are incapacitated for hours. We know the officer had some time after the incident (in the video) so he had some time to clear his head a bit. It was even stated by a bystander that the cop looked dazed.

Anyways I don't think the claim of a fractured orbital has to be even true for the shooting to be justified. If MB punched the officer (not fracturing, but still swelling his face), struggled over his gun, then later turned and charged the cop that probably enough to justify the shooting. We obviously need more info of course, not saying that is what happened...simply pointing out there are scenarios which are not inconsistent with what we know now that would justify his actions.

#467 Edited by thebest31406 (3377 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

Convicting Darren Wilson Will Be Basically Impossible

It's a tragic reality that, for the past decade or so, most US "states" have abandoned arguably the most elementary yet vital tenet within common law justice regarding the 'use of force' in favor of a uncivilized, morally barren, wild west style standard. This relatively new norm implies that one's killing is justified unless proven otherwise, grossly undermining the burden of proof required when taking one's life. This blatant disregard for life shouldn't surprise me given the US's deplorable human rights record. Still, it's disappointing.

That's why it's so refreshing to see the thousands on the street protesting the unjust use of force by the police rather than indulging themselves in this typically corporate, 'Court TV' propaganda. The grievance goes far beyond this isolated incident so their concerns won't be limited to the state's discretion over this particular scenario. I'd wager that these folks won't be satisfied until some fundamental changes are made - whether the cop is acquitted or not.

#468 Posted by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@_williamwallace:

"Kids fault he's dead"

How you know, was you there? Wonder if you would still say that if it was your kid before hearing the actual evidence.

Not that I would wish that on anyone.

#469 Posted by PurpleLabel (302 posts) -

@AutoPilotOn said:

Is the report of a young white male killed by black cop in Utah true? I can only find it on conservative websites. If it is true why is it not news?

I'd like more info on this as well.

#470 Posted by indzman (17824 posts) -

@purplelabel said:

@AutoPilotOn said:

Is the report of a young white male killed by black cop in Utah true? I can only find it on conservative websites. If it is true why is it not news?

I'd like more info on this as well.

#471 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3910 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@Motokid6 said:

This jury has got its work cut out for them. How the hell can they decided on a verdict with only forensics and eye witness reports?

And what if the cop walks away with anything less then a murder conviction? Will Ferguson burn down?

that's a lot of evidence....

There is no evidence yet....it's not at trial.

there's the forensics report which has been mentioned multiple times, the eye withnesses.

u dumb? Just because there hasn't been a trial yet, but there is evidence.

#472 Posted by Master_Live (14662 posts) -

#473 Posted by thebest31406 (3377 posts) -

An interesting read: If Ferguson Were In The UK, Michael Brown Would Almost Certainly Be Alive

ThinkProgress asked Newburn how British cops handle suspects who, for example, were carrying a knife like Powell. “There are a number of things that might happen,” he said. For one thing, he acknowledged that sometimes police who fear particular danger from a suspect might call in back-up officers with guns to provide increased protection. But that’s the exception rather than the rule. “In the main I think they would generally seek to deal with that circumstance in a different way,” he said. Two first-level options might be negotiation or attempt to disarm the person. In the instance of Powell’s shooting, officers started shooting seconds after exiting the car, on the rationale that a person with a knife can lunge at you in even less time than that.

Another tool he said British cops are very likely to use as an alternative to a gun is a Taser, a less-lethal weapon intended to immobilize suspects without killing them, although they do occasionally lead to death — particularly when misused.

“It would be much more likely under that circumstance I think that the person with the knife would be Tasered,” Newburn said.

Tasers were developed on this very rationale: that they could incapacitate suspects deemed to be a threat without killing them. But many don’t perceive them as a magic bullet. Long, the American use of force expert, noted that Tasers don’t incapacitated suspects all of the time quickly enough, so they might not save officers who believed they were facing death.

But a 2008 study funded by the U.S. Department of Justice explained that Tasers are very effective at distances of 15 feet or less, and instances when the tool fails are often when the subject is too far away. “My sense is that police have most of the weaponry, as it were, that they need,” Newburn said of British officers.

Japan provides a different sort of contrast, because officers do carry guns. But almost no one else does. Police are also given more training than in the United States, and place a heavy focus on martial arts training because police “are expected to use [firearms] in only the rarest of circumstances,” according to David Kopel, who studied Japanese gun control. The message seems to be working, because Japanese cops have killed just one person in the past six years, according to the Economist.

#474 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3910 posts) -

@thebest31406 said:

An interesting read: If Ferguson Were In The UK, Michael Brown Would Almost Certainly Be Alive

ThinkProgress asked Newburn how British cops handle suspects who, for example, were carrying a knife like Powell. “There are a number of things that might happen,” he said. For one thing, he acknowledged that sometimes police who fear particular danger from a suspect might call in back-up officers with guns to provide increased protection. But that’s the exception rather than the rule. “In the main I think they would generally seek to deal with that circumstance in a different way,” he said. Two first-level options might be negotiation or attempt to disarm the person. In the instance of Powell’s shooting, officers started shooting seconds after exiting the car, on the rationale that a person with a knife can lunge at you in even less time than that.

Another tool he said British cops are very likely to use as an alternative to a gun is a Taser, a less-lethal weapon intended to immobilize suspects without killing them, although they do occasionally lead to death — particularly when misused.

“It would be much more likely under that circumstance I think that the person with the knife would be Tasered,” Newburn said.

Tasers were developed on this very rationale: that they could incapacitate suspects deemed to be a threat without killing them. But many don’t perceive them as a magic bullet. Long, the American use of force expert, noted that Tasers don’t incapacitated suspects all of the time quickly enough, so they might not save officers who believed they were facing death.

But a 2008 study funded by the U.S. Department of Justice explained that Tasers are very effective at distances of 15 feet or less, and instances when the tool fails are often when the subject is too far away. “My sense is that police have most of the weaponry, as it were, that they need,” Newburn said of British officers.

Japan provides a different sort of contrast, because officers do carry guns. But almost no one else does. Police are also given more training than in the United States, and place a heavy focus on martial arts training because police “are expected to use [firearms] in only the rarest of circumstances,” according to David Kopel, who studied Japanese gun control. The message seems to be working, because Japanese cops have killed just one person in the past six years, according to the Economist.

But the cop might be dead.

#475 Edited by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch: the cop could see that Brown was a big old boy, plus he had Dorian with him so two against one, why didn't the cop call for some back up b4 confronting them?

Maybe because he knew if they got out of line he can just shoot them.

#476 Posted by Jacanuk (4566 posts) -

@BranKetra said:

@softwaregeek said:

@BranKetra said:

@softwaregeek said:

@_williamwallace said:

Kids fault he's dead.

Most rational people aren't arguing that it's the kids fault he's dead. It absolutely is his fault. He started it, the cop finished it. Now the question is whether or not the cop was justified in shooting the kid. If the kid had never started any problems, there wouldn't have been any problems. He bit off more than he could chew and he paid the ultimate price for it.

There are two conflicting sides to this incident. The police officer involved and those who say he did not begin the physical aspect of it are one side. The other side are witnesses saying that officer, Wilson, began the physical altercation. As I understand this situation, there has there been no definitive proof shown to any media source validating either side. If you know something to the contrary, please do everyone a favor by presenting it. Otherwise, please stop making stories.

There's an eyewitness account on MSNBC that the physical altercation had begun while the officer was in his car. That's enough for me to decide that Mr. Brown had started the altercation. A police officer with all their training would not start a physical confrontation with a much bigger man while said police office is still sitting inside his car. They eyewitness has video of that backs up his story, however he did not film the actual shooting.

There are eyewitness accounts saying that the officer started the altercation, but you do not seem to even be considering them. The grand jury is going to because that is how fair and balanced decisions are made.

And which eyewitness´s is this since you seem to think there is more than Browns friend. And that "eyewitness" has zero credibility.

#477 Edited by LJS9502_basic (151093 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@Motokid6 said:

This jury has got its work cut out for them. How the hell can they decided on a verdict with only forensics and eye witness reports?

And what if the cop walks away with anything less then a murder conviction? Will Ferguson burn down?

that's a lot of evidence....

There is no evidence yet....it's not at trial.

there's the forensics report which has been mentioned multiple times, the eye withnesses.

u dumb? Just because there hasn't been a trial yet, but there is evidence.

Evidence is introduced at trial. This is not at trial. Forensic report? You have bits and pieces. Right now you have conflicting witness statements to the media. That is not evidence.

And I wouldn't call anyone "dumb" if I created a post like you did.

#478 Edited by MakeMeaSammitch (3910 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@MakeMeaSammitch: the cop could see that Brown was a big old boy, plus he had Dorian with him so two against one, why didn't the cop call for some back up b4 confronting them?

Maybe because he knew if they got out of line he can just shoot them.

Maybe he didn't assume the worst and had to react when the worst happened. It would be pretty insane if a cop asked for back up every time they approached somebody. Just look at traffic tickets; what a cluster fuck they would be if cops needed back up just to approach the driver.

#479 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3910 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@Motokid6 said:

This jury has got its work cut out for them. How the hell can they decided on a verdict with only forensics and eye witness reports?

And what if the cop walks away with anything less then a murder conviction? Will Ferguson burn down?

that's a lot of evidence....

There is no evidence yet....it's not at trial.

there's the forensics report which has been mentioned multiple times, the eye withnesses.

u dumb? Just because there hasn't been a trial yet, but there is evidence.

Evidence is introduced at trial. This is not at trial. Forensic report? You have bits and pieces. Right now you have conflicting witness statements to the media. That is not evidence.

And I wouldn't call anyone "dumb" if I created a post like you did.

You have a very strange habit of debating semantics on everything.

#480 Edited by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch: "Maybe he didn't assume the worst and had to react when the worst happened. It would be pretty insane if a cop asked for back up every time they approached somebody. Just look at traffic tickets; what a cluster fuck they would be if cops needed back up just to approach the driver."

Traffic tickets lol when Wilson realised that Brown was the suspect in a "strong arm" robbery he should have called in backup before he tried to detain Brown, there was a cop apparently in the area who was actually dealing with the case, that cop would have been there in no time at all. If Wilson had done that maybe Brown would be in jail, and Wilson wouldn't be possibly facing jail, and a ruined career.

#482 Edited by PurpleLabel (302 posts) -

@tacoma1972 said:

All I know is the black community acts like a joke when these things happen. Everything is the white mans fault. Ahhhhh the poor oppressed black man, I feel so bad for you, NOT. Have you seen the statistics for that community. It used to be 75% white now it is like 30%, why is this. I think it's because the black community is breeding like rabbits when they can't afford to raise a family or the dads just breed and leave. Pisses me off. Oh well. I make 130,000 a year and have a modest house, nice vehicles, two kids and still have to save for my retirement and their education. How is it they can have so many kids. An irresponsible community that needs to look at curing its problems and quit blaming it on the white man.

Even if all of that was true, you're attitude towards the situation doesn't help. Too many generalizations, stereotypes and flat out racism.

#483 Edited by MakeMeaSammitch (3910 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@MakeMeaSammitch: "Maybe he didn't assume the worst and had to react when the worst happened. It would be pretty insane if a cop asked for back up every time they approached somebody. Just look at traffic tickets; what a cluster fuck they would be if cops needed back up just to approach the driver."

Traffic tickets lol when Wilson realised that Brown was the suspect in a "strong arm" robbery he should have called in backup before he tried to detain Brown, there was a cop apparently in the area who was actually dealing with the case, that cop would have been there in no time at all. If Wilson had done that maybe Brown would be in jail, and Wilson wouldn't be possibly facing jail, and a ruined career.

so brown is going to stand around and wait while back up arrives?

Very unrealistic.

#484 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3910 posts) -

@purplelabel said:

@tacoma1972 said:

All I know is the black community acts like a joke when these things happen. Everything is the white mans fault. Ahhhhh the poor oppressed black man, I feel so bad for you, NOT. Have you seen the statistics for that community. It used to be 75% white now it is like 30%, why is this. I think it's because the black community is breeding like rabbits when they can't afford to raise a family or the dads just breed and leave. Pisses me off. Oh well. I make 130,000 a year and have a modest house, nice vehicles, two kids and still have to save for my retirement and their education. How is it they can have so many kids. An irresponsible community that needs to look at curing its problems and quit blaming it on the white man.

Even if all of that was true, you're attitude towards the situation doesn't help. Too many generalizations, stereotypes and flat out racism.

the dad thing isn't.

#485 Edited by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch: @MakeMeaSammitch: "so brown is going to stand around and wait while back up arrives?"

"Very unrealistic."

What an argumentative and stupid comment, of course I don't expect Brown to wait, do you just argue for the sake of arguing? I merely said that Wilson could have called for back up b4 confronting Brown, yet you find something wrong with that. It's funny the lengths you will go to defend Wilson, even dismissing logical criticism. Maybe if Brown knew back up was on the way he would have behaved a bit more politely, maybe.

Cops often call for back up and then approach a suspect especially when out numbered and in this case when one of the guys is a big old boy.

#486 Edited by Renevent42 (5277 posts) -
@xeno_ghost said:

@MakeMeaSammitch: @MakeMeaSammitch: "so brown is going to stand around and wait while back up arrives?"

"Very unrealistic."

What an argumentative and stupid comment, of course I don't expect Brown to wait, do you just argue for the sake of arguing? I merely said that Wilson could have called for back up b4 confronting Brown, yet you find something wrong with that. It's funny the lengths you guys will go to defend Wilson, even dismissing logical criticism. Maybe if Brown knew back up was on the way he would have behaved a bit more politely, maybe.

Funny lengths in defense? Seriously? So now cops shouldn't confront young black males without backup? Why? Because without backup the young black male may attack them, and if the cop shoots them, it's still the cop's fault? I think it's fairly obvious at this point that no matter what information is released the cop's actions will never be ok in some people's eyes. Even if it turns out that the cop was attacked/charged and acted appropriately, people will still try and find ways to pretend they are at fault because of some theoretical 'thing' the cop should have done instead that would have prevented (maybe) the cop from being attacked.

The ridiculous lengths people are going to defend Brown is what's crazy. Most people had made up their mind that Brown was just a nice boy who was shot in the back with his hands up execution style the very day the news broke based on jack shit mostly. You know why? Because the bottom line for some people will always be based around 'white cop' and 'black man'.

#487 Edited by LJS9502_basic (151093 posts) -

@xeno_ghost: Speculation doesn't help. We don't know the time line. And frankly with more witnesses and statements it's looking more and more likely Brown was not just an innocent. I will say I believe racism does still exist....will always exist...however always assuming everything is racism does nothing to alleviate the problem and can exacerbate it. Look what happened in Ferguson. Now I admit I don't know the city and perhaps this is a common occurrence but then would we not have heard about the city before this?

When all is said and done.....assigning racism to all events is just as detrimental as racism. It keeps division going.

#488 Edited by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic: Wilson initially didn't know that Brown was a suspect in a robbery, his reason for stopping them was they were walking on the road, Jackson said that Wilson saw the cigars on Brown and realised he was a suspect, at that point Wilson could have called back up but he didn't he decided to act alone with no back up on the way which resulted in him having to use deadly force, another pair of hands on the scene would have been able to subdue Brown without deadly force, Jackson said there was a different cop dealing with the robbery so that cop would have only been a few minutes away if that.

#489 Posted by LJS9502_basic (151093 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@LJS9502_basic: Wilson initially didn't know that Brown was a suspect in a robbery, his reason for stopping them was they were walking on the road, Jackson said that Wilson saw the cigars on Brown and realised he was a suspect, at that point Wilson could have called back up but he didn't he decided to act alone with no back up on the way which resulted in him having to use deadly force.

That seems a contradiction. A casual stop would not entail back-up. Assuming he's a suspect in a robbery would. Are we sure of this? Because cops generally do call for back-up in potential dangerous situations. Nonetheless, I can't see why anyone would go to the lengths they have for someone that breaks the law....in their own community. Yes....have a thorough investigation. Make sure it happens. But rioting and threats? I don't see it....

#490 Edited by Renevent42 (5277 posts) -
@xeno_ghost said:

@LJS9502_basic: Wilson initially didn't know that Brown was a suspect in a robbery, his reason for stopping them was they were walking on the road, Jackson said that Wilson saw the cigars on Brown and realised he was a suspect, at that point Wilson could have called back up but he didn't he decided to act alone with no back up on the way which resulted in him having to use deadly force.

No, if the cop's side of the story is true then it was being attacked, brown struggling over his gun, and then finally being charged by Brown that resulting in him having to use deadly force. If you want to talk about things that could have been done to prevent this, how about Brown not strong arm robbing a store and then not attacking a cop instead?

#491 Edited by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@Renevent42: if you read my previous post you will realise that I've pretty much accepted that Brown was wrong and got what he was due if indeed he attacked the cop and then bum rushed the cop when Wilson had his gun drawn, you guys get so deffensive it's lol funny, I'm just saying that for Wilson's own safety he could have called for back up before confronting Brown then maybe at the point when Brown had assaulted the Wilson and fled from the car, assistance would have arrived, I'm thinking of the Wilson's well being because now Wilson possibly faces jail and a ruined career, also I'm not taking sides as I don't know the true story and I wasn't there.

#492 Posted by Renevent42 (5277 posts) -
@xeno_ghost said:

@Renevent42: if you read my previous post you will realise that I've pretty much accepted that Brown was wrong and got what he was due if indeed he attacked the cop and then bum rushed the cop when Wilson had his gun drawn, you guys get so deffensive it's lol funny, I'm just saying that for Wilson's own safety he could have called for back up before confronting Brown then maybe at the point when Brown had assaulted the Wilson and fled from the car, assistance would have arrived, I'm thinking of the Wilson's well being because now Wilson possibly faces jail and a ruined career, also I'm not taking sides as I don't know the true story and I wasn't there.

So if you accept Brown is wrong in that situation, what's the point of coming up with all sorts of 'should have' and other scenarios? It's just as easy to say that the whole thing could have been avoided if Brown just got out of the street, or hell, how about if he hadn't robbed a store and attacked a cop in the first place? How do we know that the cop didn't call for backup? It sounds like once the cop suspected Brown of the robbery the whole thing went down quick.

Regardless of it you admitted that Brown may be in the wrong, you are still attempting to shift blame.

#493 Edited by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@tacoma1972: I will laugh when one of your kids bring home a black boyfriend or girlfriend, unless you intend to raise them as racist as you are.

#494 Edited by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@Renevent42: "No, if the cop's side of the story is true then it was being attacked, brown struggling over his gun, and then finally being charged by Brown that resulting in him having to use deadly force. If you want to talk about things that could have been done to prevent this, how about Brown not strong arm robbing a store and then not attacking a cop instead?"

I agree it's Browns fault he found himself in that situation, but I think you need to research the cops account because the cop tried to confront Brown once he realised Brown had the cigars, I'm simply saying he could have called back up b4 and then stepped out the car to detain Brown which is when the struggle began.

"Regardless of it you admitted that Brown may be in the wrong, you are still attempting to shift blame."

I'm not shifting blame at all, but two wrongs don't make a right, even though Brown was in the wrong, when the evidence is up and it goes to trial Wilson may still find himself in trouble for excessive force even though Brown had previously assaulted the officer.

#495 Edited by Renevent42 (5277 posts) -
@xeno_ghost said:

@Renevent42: "No, if the cop's side of the story is true then it was being attacked, brown struggling over his gun, and then finally being charged by Brown that resulting in him having to use deadly force. If you want to talk about things that could have been done to prevent this, how about Brown not strong arm robbing a store and then not attacking a cop instead?"

I agree it's Browns fault he found himself in that situation, but I think you need to research the cops account because the cop tried to confront Brown once he realised Brown had the cigars, I'm simply saying he could have called back up b4 he tried to step out the car and detain Brown which is when the struggle began.

"Regardless of it you admitted that Brown may be in the wrong, you are still attempting to shift blame."

I'm not shifting blame at all, but two wrongs don't make a right, even though Brown was in the wrong, when the evidence is up and it goes to trial Wilson may still find himself in trouble for excessive force.

There's nothing wrong with a cop confronting a robbery suspect. See? The fact you are pretending that's some kind of wrong is kinda shifting blame. Anyways if Wilson eventually faces excessive force charges, it won't be because he didn't call for backup, it will be because Wilson didn't follow use of force protocols, used more force than needed, or something along those lines. Maybe it will be found that evidence suggest MB was neutralized at some point but the officer didn't stop shooting.

#496 Edited by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@Renevent42: " See? The fact you are pretending that's some kind of wrong is kinda shifting blame"

How am I shifting blame if I'm saying two wrongs don't make a right, Brown is obviously wrong in his actions, but it may turn out that Wilson was wrong in his actions also, the blame will ultimately lie with Brown he started the sequence of events with the robbery. But Wilson's poor judgment and decision making didn't help his cause.

"There's nothing wrong with a cop confronting a robbery suspect"

So ok you are a cop you have a misses and kid at home. While on duty by yourself you come across two potentially dangerous strong arm robbers, one of them is of considerable size, you decide to go in for the takedown and you don't call back up first. You reckon that's a perfectly acceptable procedure for a lone cop to follow?

#497 Edited by LJS9502_basic (151093 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@Renevent42: " See? The fact you are pretending that's some kind of wrong is kinda shifting blame"

How am I shifting blame if I'm saying two wrongs don't make a right, Brown is obviously wrong in his actions, but it may turn out that Wilson was wrong in his actions also, the blame will ultimately lie with Brown he started the sequence of events with the robbery. But Wilson's poor judgment and decision making didn't help his cause.

"There's nothing wrong with a cop confronting a robbery suspect"

So ok you are a cop you have a misses and kid at home. While on duty by yourself you come across two potentially dangerous strong arm robbers, one of them is of considerable size, you decide to go in for the takedown and you don't call back up first. You reckon that's a perfectly acceptable procedure for a lone cop to follow?

Well if you allow that Brown was wrong in his actions then you cannot find Wilson wrong in his. You are contradicting yourself.

#498 Edited by Renevent42 (5277 posts) -
@xeno_ghost said:

@Renevent42: " See? The fact you are pretending that's some kind of wrong is kinda shifting blame"

How am I shifting blame if I'm saying two wrongs don't make a right, Brown is obviously wrong in his actions, but it may turn out that Wilson was wrong in his actions also, the blame will ultimately lie with Brown he started the sequence of events with the robbery.

"There's nothing wrong with a cop confronting a robbery suspect"

So ok you are a cop you have a misses and kid at home. While on duty by yourself you come across two potentially dangerous strong arm robbers, one of them is of considerable size, you decide to go in for the takedown and you don't call back up first. You reckon that's a perfectly acceptable procedure for a lone cop to follow?

Let's not mix issues here...when you say "two wrongs don't make a right" you are suggesting that the cop's action (confronting Brown without backup) is a wrong...therefore two wrong's don't make a right. If the cop is found to have also done wrong (ie use excessive force) that would be two wrongs, and then I would agree two wrongs don't make a right. A cop confronting a robbery suspect isn't in any way, shape, or form a wrong though.

Regarding the scenario you laid out, yes, I think if the cop initially thought he could handle the situation alone then it was acceptable procedure. Airshocker can correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think there's any police policy saying a cop cannot confront a suspect alone, especially when, you know, the cop has the suspect right in front of him.

We also don't know exactly what happened in that time...maybe the cop did report prior to confronting him. Maybe the cop noticed the cigars, radio'd in that he sees the suspect, then goes in to question Brown.

#499 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3910 posts) -

@Renevent42 said:
@xeno_ghost said:

@MakeMeaSammitch: @MakeMeaSammitch: "so brown is going to stand around and wait while back up arrives?"

"Very unrealistic."

What an argumentative and stupid comment, of course I don't expect Brown to wait, do you just argue for the sake of arguing? I merely said that Wilson could have called for back up b4 confronting Brown, yet you find something wrong with that. It's funny the lengths you guys will go to defend Wilson, even dismissing logical criticism. Maybe if Brown knew back up was on the way he would have behaved a bit more politely, maybe.

Funny lengths in defense? Seriously? So now cops shouldn't confront young black males without backup? Why? Because without backup the young black male may attack them, and if the cop shoots them, it's still the cop's fault? I think it's fairly obvious at this point that no matter what information is released the cop's actions will never be ok in some people's eyes. Even if it turns out that the cop was attacked/charged and acted appropriately, people will still try and find ways to pretend they are at fault because of some theoretical 'thing' the cop should have done instead that would have prevented (maybe) the cop from being attacked.

The ridiculous lengths people are going to defend Brown is what's crazy. Most people had made up their mind that Brown was just a nice boy who was shot in the back with his hands up execution style the very day the news broke based on jack shit mostly. You know why? Because the bottom line for some people will always be based around 'white cop' and 'black man'.

Pretty much this. I can see the media storm now when they put up an order to call for back up whenever a cop approaches anybody black.

#500 Posted by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

@Renevent42: "Funny lengths in defense? Seriously? So now cops shouldn't confront young black males without backup? "

I over looked this before but I want to address it now, why are you making the point I was making, into a race thing? When the fuck did I say police shouldn't approach "black males" without backup? Remind me never to engage you in discussion again.

I don't give two flying fucks what colour the suspects are, in my opinion, a lone cop should always call for back up when confronting a couple of suspects or a suspect that might prove difficult to handle because of there size, my opinion has nothing to do with race unlike yours.