MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #11

[Sonya610]

Question, re chat is there a capability to "record" chat?

I don't use a webcam so I don't know what the current capabilities on most are BUT...

You can get software online that will record anything on your computer screen, live streaming video, movies, etc... It uses up a LOT of space (the type i am familiar with) so folks do not typically use it unless they know they want to save/replay the recording.

If anyone is into camming and they think it can't be recorded well...don't learn the hard way (no pun intended).

 

[aa9511]

Lack of other voices or noises makes me question whether this is even authentic. Chatting dude doesn't even flinch after presumably hearing multiple gunshots. His voice doesn't change, he doesn't acknowledge them in any way. That makes this one bizarre tape, IMO.

Someone last night hypothesized that he could have been talking on a headset or with headphones. That makes sense to me.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

11SL-CR00935-01

1222-CR01359-01

Zip codes for both cases have a residence in north St. Louis County. Again, without a birthdate or ssn, don't know how to confirm it. At least on casenet.

I checked the MO DOC and that photo may be him, but this guy is suppose to be 6.2 tall according to the information at MO DOC
https://web.mo.gov/doc/offSearchWeb/search.jsp

That doesn't seem like a common name to me, but that's just me.

 

[CARIIS]

or he did not give a da3n what was going on men men men!!

also i had to take 5 minutes to figure out what KWIM meant antoher speller like me? Oh I got it== text lcodes

wonder how long it will before it gets to: jklij kljlk ioiuiulj oulhrfr jii hui ?

BBM

You noticed that too? OMG I cant believe anyone would just sit there while all of these gunshots were going on and continue to chat sexy to whomever. It does make me think that gunfire is normal in that area. It has to be or the man would have told the woman 'holy moly, let me see WTH is going on.'

 

[Sonya610]

It's unlikely that the 9 "white" grand jurors are all white-white imo.

Yes, true, could be Mestizo/Hispanic or Indian etc.... regardless I don't think that will color their opinion much in this case.

If any of the 9 were mixed race (mixed to include AA) that would likely have been stated.

 

[bettybaby00]

Morning :seeya:

Wanted to bring this into the discussion, the SCOTUS opinion from Plumhof v. Rickard, decided in May of this year. This was a police shooting case in the context of a high speed car chase, but, along with Gardner, which it cites (posted somewhere in these threads), clarifies, I think what the narrow issues will be here.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-1117_1bn5.pdf



This would seem to bode well for DW. If in less than a minute he got the BOLO, realized Brown fit the description, confronted Brown, and if Brown assaulted him and/or went for his gun, this would definitely be a rapidly evolving situation. Assaulting a police officer is a felony, right? It's hard to imagine if in fact that is how things went down making an argument that a reasonable officer in the circumstance described would not have seen Brown as a threat.



BBM. This passage would seem to play both ways. J. Alito is pretty clear about the officer having a right to shoot until the threat has ended. However, in light of the audio, if in fact it is authentic, is that pause enough to be a second round of shots? Arguably so. Was Brown so incapacitated at that time that any threat of continued flight was ended? Keep in mind as well that this case is a car chase case. A speeding car can indeed be a very lethal weapon. If this goes to trial, a lot of this may weigh on exactly how much of a threat the jury considers Brown at the time of the incident. Yes, one side will argue that he is a 6'4" 300 lb guy who strong armed a clerk, assaulted an officer, tried to get his gun, then attempted to flee. The other side may well say yes, but at the end of all that he was still an unarmed man on foot, and that the risk from an unarmed man on foot was not significant enough to warrant deadly force.



This should tell us that everything matters: The cigar theft, the shoving the clerk, the officer's demeanor, Brown's demeanor, what happened with the car door, etc. etc. I think the two biggest things in this case will end up being 1) Were Wilson's actions at the scene what a reasonable officer in the same position would have done? and 2) Was MB such a threat to the community that deadly force was required to prevent further serious harm to the officer or others.

IANAL, and all that.

ETA: It's worth mentioning that the petition here stemmed from a civil suit and not a criminal conviction. However it would seem that the logic is essentially the same. In both cases the grounds for civil and criminal liability here revolve around the taking of the life of a suspect by an officer and whether that was justified.

BBM

Really great post!

From the decision:

It stands to reason that, if police officers are justified in firing at a suspect in order to end a severe threat to public safety, the officers need not stop shooting until the threat has ended. ​

To me, if the "officer was attacked and there was a struggle over the gun" narrative is shown to be true, then his actions meet the "requirements" of points 1&2.

When The lawyers representing the family continually assert that the only thing that "matters" is the shooting itself, it's a misrepresentation that has nothing to do with the law as I read it. Even if it's determined that the robbery has no connection, the fact that MB attempted to physically disarm OW means his actions would be considered one of the most serious threats an officer will ever face, and their training is going to tell them that the threat has to be stopped.

JMO

 

[aa9511]

ahh FINALLY!!!
I guess my post earlier was removed...
TOLD you OW was talking now...
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1408/25/sitroom.02.html

I just had to wait for transcripts.

BLITZER: Just hours after the funeral for 18-year-old Michael Brown, we're getting new information about the investigation into his killing by Ferguson, Missouri, police officer Darren Wilson.

Let's go to our justice reporter, Evan Perez. He's joining us now from Ferguson.

You're learning new information from your sources about what officer Wilson is telling investigators, is that right, Evan?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf.

We're hearing that he has told investigators that as he was coming back from answering a medical call, a medical emergency call nearby, he came across these two young men, Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson, the friend, and he found them walking down the middle of the street.

And according to the account that he's provided to investigators, he told them to move out of the way out of the middle of the street and to go on to the sidewalk. He said they refused, that they were blocking his path as he was trying to make his way down the road and that's how this confrontation began.
Obviously, this is very important because some of the portrayals frankly from the accounts has been that Michael Brown was shot down, you know, essentially for jaywalking and the officer is telling a more complicated story perhaps, Wolf.

*cnt'd at link....

***there was no leaving and reversing car and squealing brakes backing up. It never happened.moo
All posts are MOO

So just because he says it, it's automatically the truth?

How would they be blocking his path? That would mean he told them to move off the street while his vehicle was still behind them. This could have happened, but that would put in yet another version of the story. He could have come up behind them and put his head out the window and told them to move. That would be the only way they could have "blocked his path."

So now we have two versions of the very first moment: One that he pulled up to the side, one that he came up behind them.

I'm getting very confused!

 

[popsicle]

Ray Downs ‏@RayDowns 44s
#Ferguson getting lawyered up: "45 Local Law Professors, Lawyers, Advocates Sign Pledge to Aid Ferguson" http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2014/08/45_local_law_professors_lawyers_advocates_sign_pledge_to_aid_ferguson.php …

 

[aa9511]

just MO, but I've never understood the stance (here, and many other places) that wiki is not a credible source. ie: 255 sources are cited below the Tamerlan Tsarnaev article that was linked, and (like the usual wiki articles) the majority are MSM (major newspapers, networks, expert and/or legal witness interviews, etc). so if one questions the article's content, the sources are easily available for fact-checking. this is not directed at any particular poster, I just have never understood the wiki-bias
_ _ _ _ _

Captain Quil = a shot of Captain Morgan mixed with a shot of NyQuil

bbm

That sounds like a big shot of Ugh, Gross.

 

[DebinGA]

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-28929087

NYT under fire for describing MB as "no angel" in its mostly MB-favorable piece.

 

[Tawny]

The audio recording supports either side, depending on how you interpret it.

Shots to stop a fleeing felon who just assaulted an officer, pause, shots to stop an aggressor charging toward an officer. Justified.
Shots fired at an unarmed man's back, pause to hear surrender, shots to execute. Unjustified.

Spin, spin, spin.

 

[bettybaby00]

The store owner DID cooperate immediately after the robbery.

I don't think he needed additional intimidation, he saw the QT get looted and burned to the ground with warnings about "Snitches getting Stitches" painted on it. That message was surely more than enough!

I honestly don't think anyone on the street knew he was involved until it was announced (and then his store was looted promptly that night).

Still catching up!

That "snitches get stitches" graffiti was on the store that they robbed???

 

[Sonya610]

Still catching up!

That "snitches get stitches" graffiti was on the store that they robbed???

No, that was on the QT that was looted/burned down the first night of the rioting (days before the robbery hit the news, when the store robbery video came out THEN that store was looted hours later).

No doubt the tiny shop owner saw what happened to the QT and also saw the "snitch" signs, he knew he would be next if the robbery became public. No further threats would have been required.

 

[bettybaby00]

CNN is TRYING so hard to make this audio the smoking gun. They are saying the PAUSE proves that the officer shot the second group of shots needlessly, and illegally.

Not surprised. It will be interesting to hear analysis on FOX, as I'm sure they will have a counter perspective, ie a cop or an attorney who has defended a similar type of case.

 

[TexanMom]

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-28929087

NYT under fire for describing MB as "no angel" in its mostly MB-favorable piece.

Truth hurts? A person who commits strong arm robbery and assaults a police officer is NO angel! He was pretty much a <modsnip>, IMO.

 

[LambChop]

I am confused. How did this audio get released if it was turned over to the FBI? Nothing official has been released yet.

 

[aa9511]

So on CNN this morning, they had 2 attorneys on, calling this new audio tape A GAME CHANGER, supporting MB, and saying the pause means...something. I am not clear what it means, but they are saying it better be taken right to the GJ because it will ensure an indictment.

So why is the pause such a 'game changer?'

I would think it totally depends upon what OW already told the investigators. I thought he said MB ran off, then turned back around, and came at him again...IF SO, the pause makes sense. IMO :cow:

I think that people's words are sometimes just that - words. Both sides are going to come up with a story which is going to fit what the evidence says. For example, with this new recording and the pause, of course OW would not give a story during the trial which has no pause between the gunshots, b/c that would be such an obvious lie. Same goes for Dorian. Their lawyers are going to match sure their stories go with the evidence.

If it goes to trial, it will be the supporting witnesses and forensic evidence which will tell the real story.

JMO.

 

[jjenny]

I think that people's words are sometimes just that - words. Both sides are going to come up with a story which is going to fit what the evidence says. For example, with this new recording and the pause, of course OW would not give a story during the trial which has no pause between the gunshots, b/c that would be such an obvious lie. Same goes for Dorian. Their lawyers are going to match sure their stories go with the evidence.

If it goes to trial, it will be the supporting witnesses and forensic evidence which will tell the real story.

JMO.

The pause is like two seconds long. I am not sure how that qualifies as some sort of "bombshell." And that is assuming that this recording is real to begin with.

 

[cady]

It's unlikely that the 9 "white" grand jurors are all white-white imo.

From YouTube video of DJ above:

Just after DW failed to pull MB into the cruiser: "He pulled out his weapon. His weapon was drawn. He said, 'I'll shoot you. I'm going to shoot.' And in the same moment the first shot went off. And we looked down, and he was shot. Blood coming from him. And we took off running."

Who was shot? MB?

I think his claim was that MB was shot. What bothers me is that I have thought that maybe that shot explains the thumb graze wound, but Baden said that as far as he could tell, there were no short-range shots. It seems that if the hand graze wound happened with the first shot, it would have been at close range. ???? JMO

 

[jjenny]

I am confused. How did this audio get released if it was turned over to the FBI? Nothing official has been released yet.

Appears to be released by the lawyer of the guy who recorded it.