MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #12

[reedus23]

"not to sway the public and possibly cloud the judgment of any possible future jurors"????

What about releasing the video of the store robbery? Surely that will sway and cloud the judgment!!

Goes BOTH ways. The store robbery video was released by the POLICE.

There are a lot of posters on this thread who repeatedly mention the robbery to explain MB's state of mind and just take it as a given that he MUST have assaulted the police officer because of what he did in THAT VIDEO.

YES it's an ONGOING INVESTIGATION. That means you don't release any information about the INVESTIGATION as a whole. Not release damaging information for one party and not a thing for the other.

Or the injuries to the officer. Or the cop's wife's friend. It works both ways. Like I said, for the sake of investigations I wish they'd ALL keep quiet but if they ALL kept quiet, what would we have to talk about.

 

[bettybaby00]

Found the interview w/police chief...

LEMON: But you understand the controversy and the outrage because family members and not only family members, but people in the community say that you are trying to discredit him, trying to soil his reputation, and trying to divert attention to something else besides the actual shooting.

JACKSON: We are not. We try to sit on this thing as long as we could. I didn't want to release it. I was told by my city attorney that she was concerned that people would file lawsuits about it if we didn't release the tape.

LEMON: I quote what the family says, the family says, this tape release was devious and that you're assassinating the character of their son by releasing the video attempting to smear the character of the victim and essentially blaming the victim. What do you say to that charge?

JACKSON: That's absolutely not true. I had no intent other than to comply with the freedom of information request. My heart goes out to her. I feel so terribly bad for her. It's a terrible tragedy all around.

I found the following interesting in the same transcript...talking heads discussing the robbery video.

DANNY CEVALLOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, look, Wolf, clearly I'm bias. I'm a criminal defense attorney so I feel like I've spending a lot of time asking and not getting police records. So to me, a matter of two weeks doesn't seem shocking when many of us fought for records for over a year. But in a case like this, I don't think we shouldn't (typo?) be so quick to jump to that this is some conspiracy. Rather, this maybe a police department that's just not equipped to deal with this level of attention.

But I have to caution everyone, yesterday we had no information and we complained. Today, now, we're complaining that we don't like the way the information was released. No matter what we have to agree that having the information today where at least in a better position than yesterday when we had nothing. And although, people might have wanted it on day two or day three, the reality is, is that in an investigation, marshalling this evidence is not an overnight process.


BLITZER: Danny, there is two separate investigations now underway in St. Louis county investigation as well as a federal investigation, the justice department, the FBI investigation. Are you confident when all the investigations are complete we will know exactly what happened?

CEVALLOS: I can't possibly be confident about that at this point, Wolf. But we've got a lot more information than we did before. And I have to believe once we get the officer's statement, which we really haven't heard from him, once we get that side of the story, this entire case boils down. Based on what we've heard today and what a swing of events back and forth today, everything comes down to what was in that officer's heart and mind at the moment that he stopped Michael Brown. Because if he was aware of the robbery on any level, it is different than if he was just stopping them for jaywalking.

And I have to add, we need to stop using the word shoplifting. It seems from the video that this was a theft plus force, which under the law is a robbery and in Missouri that's a class B felony. If the officers was aware of a violent crime like that, that does change the legal contours. But we don't know what he knew and when he knew it yet. I believe, Wolf, though, that we will soon.

BLITZER: Yes. We know he's been interviewed twice, the police officer who killed this 18-year-old.
++++++

RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A convenience store Saturday morning, what you are about to see is what police call a strong-armed robbery. They say that's Michael Brown entering the store, white t-shirt, long tan shorts and a red cardinals baseball hat. His friend Dorian Johnson right behind him. It's 11:52 a.m. and 58 seconds, according to the police's incident report. The surveillance camera shows four seconds later, Brown is at the counter.

Watch closely. See this store employee in the red shirt? Apparently coming from the restroom. She goes behind the counter. Just 12 seconds later, police say Brown reaches for a box of swisher sweet cigars and hands them to Johnson without paying for them. What happens next is a bit on cured by a display case but watch closely here. Police say there is some sort of confrontation involving Brown, a struggle. Police say Brown grabbed more cigars. He had been in the store now just 32 seconds.

Seventh seconds later, Brown's friend Johnson puts the box of cigars Brown handed him back on the counter returning them, but police say Brown just seconds later bends down to pick up some cigars he dropped, even looks a customer in the eye then makes his way to the door.

At the door, about ten seconds later, a store employee who appears to have a set of keys in his hand attempts to put himself between the man believed to be Brown and the exit door. Still holding the cigars in his right hand, the man police say is Brown grabs the clerk with his left hand and clearly shoves him back into a display rack.

It all might have ended there, but take a look at what happens next. Just about one minute into this. Police say instead of leaving right away, Brown turns back one final time, advancing on the store employee who tried to stop him. Towering over him, police say it was an attempt to intimidate the employee who quickly backs down. Only then does Brown turn and exit at 11:54 a.m. He's in and out of the store in one minute and two seconds, about ten minutes later, he's dead.

Just found the above interesting as it's a perspective from 8/15

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1408/15/acd.01.html

 

[TheDuchess]

Fox News Megyn Kelly interviews Attorney Daryl Parks 8-26-2014. Around 4 min 34 sec.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/37505293...ses-fallout-over-investigation/#sp=show-clips

Megan Kelly is simply super-crazy-freaky-smart!

 

[bettybaby00]

I hear ya Lambchop. Not just for the reasons stated in your post, but as a lawyer, they know that the more tellings of a story, the more inconsistencies there will be. Anyone who doesn't have some inconsistencies in multiple tellings has been too well coached. So why would an attorney allow his client to give more statements that will only be picked apart for inconsistencies.

Now, on the flip side...as a member of WS I don't know what we'd talk about if people didn't talk to the press.

:lol:

 

[Foxfire]

Seems to me when the Chief of Police was asked by someone in the media why the video was released his reply was ''Because YOU requested it through the FOIA so I had to release it''. Anyone else remember that?

Yes, Apollo, I do, and the USAG Eric Holder, was infuriated that the video was released to the public...

Missouri cop was badly beaten before shooting Michael Brown, says source
By Hollie McKayPublished August 20, 2014FoxNews.com
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/2...en-before-shooting-michael-brown-says-source/

<sniped - read more>
The federal government is also investigating the death, and Attorney General Eric Holder has taken the lead – calling “the selective release of sensitive information” in the case “troubling.”

 

[Lovejac]

MB had just slammed a door into him and punched him in the face. I'd assume he reasonably believed MB was a danger to those around him.

If trying to take an officer's loaded weapon isn't reasonable danger, then I don't know what is.

 

[reedus23]

I know. I was just commenting on it with my thoughts No disrespect intended!

Also, we'd talk about a whole lotta nothin' if no one talked to media LOL

Thanks. I was really just wanting to make sure people knew I wasn't saying otherwise or that I was saying anything at all. :lol:

 

[EvilSoup]

Witness testimony will be worthless if it does not line up with the forensic evidence...and with inconsistent and changing stories. I would say their witnesses are just a little biased ...lol.

And eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable.

I remember while taking a journalism course in college, there was a staged scenario during class that we students were not expecting and did not realize at the time was staged. After the fact, our instructor then had us all write down our accounts, then she asked us to write our answers to a handful of specific questions.

As you may imagine, very few of us "witnessed" the same scene. There were some basic similarities, but we were all over the map on specifics. And none of us had an agenda.

That really stuck with me.....

 

[Lovejac]

"not to sway the public and possibly cloud the judgment of any possible future jurors"????

What about releasing the video of the store robbery? Surely that will sway and cloud the judgment!!

Goes BOTH ways. The store robbery video was released by the POLICE.

There are a lot of posters on this thread who repeatedly mention the robbery to explain MB's state of mind and just take it as a given that he MUST have assaulted the police officer because of what he did in THAT VIDEO.

YES it's an ONGOING INVESTIGATION. That means you don't release any information about the INVESTIGATION as a whole. Not release damaging information for one party and not a thing for the other.

We discussed the release of the video of MB committing strong armed robbery in many past threads.

It HAD to be released because of sunshine laws.

 

[tlcya]

The release of Wilson's name comes after Jackson said he wouldn't identify the man out of concerns for his safety, citing death threats made to Ferguson police and on social media. Jackson said that Wilson was treated for injuries he sustained Saturday.
Before he released the name, Jackson discussed a robbery that had occurred shortly before Brown's death on Aug. 9. He said that police were releasing footage and records related to that robbery, responding to "sunshine" requests for public information.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...elease-name-of-officer-who-shot-michael-brown

https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.scri...50697.pdf?wmode=opaque#viewer.action=download

[FONT=proxima_nova_rgregular]Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson released the video Friday, telling reporters that he had no choice because the media requested the release under the Freedom of Information Act. The Department of Justice, which is conducting its own investigation into Brown’s Aug. 9 death, has had a copy of the footage all along and never considered releasing it to the public, the source said.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/mi...t-release-michael-brown-robbery-video-n182346


[/FONT]

 

[EvilSoup]

I agree. I do not think she saw a darn thing of consequence but was simply parroting what she heard others saying they witnessed. There was no they. There was a he. Her continued referrals to "they" and "them" tells me she never saw "him" (ODW) do anything.

IDK about the use of "they". I hear people do that often when referring to a person without using gender-specific pronouns.

However, I do think she was just parroting what others were saying. And she may not even realize she didn't see it all if she heard it told enough.

I know there were some stories my family told so often, I could swear I was there. I have actual memories, but they can't possibly be real because I wasn't born yet. :lol:

 

[PaperDoll]

IMO I'm glad that video was released, it helps put the pieces together. I don't believe all police officer would just shoot someone without some good cause, so I feel you need to pry into past behavior so you can get a feel for things.

 

[Minette]

Noticed that it said that DW has spoken to investigators twice. So even though he's not talking to us, he's talking to (I'm assuming) both local & federal investigators.

 

[TheDuchess]

Question for all you brilliant WSers. I keep hearing about the fact that DW did not know about the armed robbery at the initial contact with MB and DJ. But has there ever been any kind of statement that indicated DW knew about (or didn't know about) the armed robbery at some point during the incident?

 

[nothingnew]

I can't even imagine what the public reaction would be if, a year or two from now during the criminal/civil trial of defendant Darren Wilson, the robbery tape made its first public appearance.

No kidding! And think about if no one had called 911 in the first place, there would probably not BE a tape.

 

[LambChop]

Or the injuries to the officer. Or the cop's wife's friend. It works both ways. Like I said, for the sake of investigations I wish they'd ALL keep quiet but if they ALL kept quiet, what would we have to talk about.

But aren't witnesses for the prosecution different than a defendant who may want to defend himself by use of the public media. Aren't the rules different in terms of whatever a defendant says in the public area can be used against him. Don't defendants have the right to remain silent if they choose to do so, but they also have the right to defend themselves.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/sixth_amendment

 

[Linda7NJ]

Linda7NJ;10901302]IMO
It's all about the civil suit and tainting a future jury pool.
That's the goal.
It's to increase any possible settlement...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]

....

 

[Frydaddy]

Great post Frydaddy. I do enjoy reading your takes and certainly, there are reasons to call into question each witness' statements. Heck, there's obvious reason to call OW's eventual statements into question because he has an obvious reason to make them self serving. What my bullet points was attempting to do, was take all of the various statements, regardless of how questionable other aspects of their statements are, and see if there weren't a common set of facts that could be agreed upon by all sides. Re-reading my bullets, the one change I wish I would have made is to say MB disengaged from the officer's vehicle, not from the officer himself, because that part may still be up for debate.

As to Black Canseco and the import of what those facts in the bullets mean, I wasn't trying to draw conclusions, or at least I hope I wasn't. Just trying to see what, if any, common ground there is within the statements that we have heard.

Just wanted to say that what you are doing is great...fantastic in fact. By all means there should be bulldogs on both sides trying to hammer out the truth.

The way I go about this is likely different than some, not necessarily the right way or the way others should go about it, but just what works for me. Once I have decided something is non-essential, I will no longer consider it...too big a pile of info to keep what I feel is useless information in the mix.

Thus, I leave behind Crenshaw and Mitchell, don't even consider their information as credible, I feel their accounts back up what Dorian told them at the scene the day of the shooting. More or less the same vibe with Brady and any other witness that comes forward who didn't see things from the onset or have issues with their depositions with the media. If people saw something favorable to an excessive force story, with all the cameras around, I fail to see how people will pop up some two weeks later. That said, I haven't completely dismissed Brady or the audio of gunshots because I haven't had time to dissect those two issues like I did with Crenshaw and Mitchell.

Agree that Wilson has as much or more motive to craft a story favorable to himself, so Josie cannot be relied upon as a gospel type witness. That said, not only does Dorian have ample reason to modify his story, but his account makes very little sense relative to the information most agree on. Plus, he seemed to relish the spotlight in the first few interviews. And what was with all the yelling? LOL

To me, the Black Canseco witness is the most compelling for three reasons. One, no motive to slant his account. Two, he hasn't sought out his 15 minutes of camera time. Three, by appearances, no one has been able to impeach his account, only ignore it for the most part. Gotta be a reason why no one can explain his account, could be it's the most accurate one.

 

[DebinGA]

Question for all you brilliant WSers. I keep hearing about the fact that DW did not know about the armed robbery at the initial contact with MB and DJ. But has there ever been any kind of statement that indicated DW knew about (or didn't know about) the armed robbery at some point during the incident?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...souri-police-michael-brown-shooting/14098369/

 

[LambChop]

Another question because I may have missed this. Did the witnesses in the car that DJ was hiding behind ever come forward? I would think they had a good view of what happened.