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

[reedus23]

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

With all due respect, I don't think I was addressing anything about DW. Others released information about injuries. Others released information about the robbery. Josie made the statement, not DW.

As it relates to DW and whether he is any different than any of the others, I suppose they all have the "right" to go to the media if they choose to. Just as with the others, though, I'd suggest it wouldn't be wise for DW himself to do so and he is probably wisely listening to his attorney.

 

[Minette]

So, I have been thinking about these police body cams, and I have some questions if anyone has any knowledge of them. I mean, are they intended to on ALL the time even when an officer is just driving around in the car or only when he or she gets out of the car to interact with the public? Because I personally would find it extremely creepy to have my every action recorded, especially when as my mother used to so delicately put, I needed to 'express air.' Just an example. But supposing they are activated only when the officer interacts with a civilian--how long would those tapes be kept? If a person was arrested but later cleared would the tape be erased or attached to an arrest record? Would the tapes be connected with fingerprints or DNA? Would they all be allowable in future court cases? I mean, in this situation I can see the benefit of having them, but I can also see that they could give the government a *whole* lot of info that could follow you around forever.

Or maybe I'm just paranoid. What do y'all think about the application of tapes obtained via LE body cams?

 

[SilkySifaka]

That pause is 2-3 seconds long. So they are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Lawyers and prosecutors have always said that premeditation can occur in the blink of an eye. A lot less than 2 or 3 seconds. So that is what I believe.

For those who asked if we would feel differently if races were reversed, it is my contention the shooting would never have happened if that was the case

 

[Minette]

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.

Talk about some true eye witnesses!

 

[SStarr33]

This is kind of weird--this eyewitness says MB stumbled forward about 25 feet.

http://fox2now.com/2014/08/12/witness-claims-he-saw-what-happened-when-michael-brown-was-shot/

 

[Oceans]

Witness Statements and the media

You may discuss the case with anyone you wish. The choice is yours, but it is not always a good idea. Be sure you know to whom you are talking when you discuss the case. If a defendant approaches you and you find this upsetting, please tell the Antitrust Division attorney immediately. While you may discuss the case with the media if you wish, we encourage you not to do so since you are a potential witness in a criminal case and the rights of the government and the defendant to a fair trial could be jeopardized by pre-trial publicity.

In the interest of ensuring a fair trial, after you have testified in court, you should not discuss with other witnesses what was said during your testimony until after the case is over. Thus, please do not ask other witnesses about their testimony or volunteer information about your own.

More at link:


http://www.justice.gov/atr/victim/vwhandbook.htm


My question is all attorney's know this so why would they permit their clients to give a public statement to the media when they know it will interfere with the investigation? It's not as if the witnesses are defendants.

In this case, I strongly believe that DJ was used to influence the public opinion, to "paint a certain picture" for the public to gain sympathy and support for MB. And it has nothing to do with the truth, it has all to do with image, IMO.

DJ would not be a credible and valuable witness anyway, as he was the accomplice in the strong-arm robbery. Furthermore, he had lied to LE in the past and has this warrant.

IMO, it is also important to realize that lying to the public and to the media is NOT a crime! His statements could be held against him in a court but as he is not a credible witness from the start, I think it does not really matter.

DJ's lawyer pointed out, he was truthful and forthcoming with FBI. Lying to FBI is a crime! I believe that DJ is aware of this. And I believe his statements to FBI differ greatly from what he has told the public and the media. JMO.

 

[DebinGA]

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
.

respectfully snipped by me

IMO DJ is a wily little guy who's gotten by on his wits. Fear may have motivated his "excited utterances" immediately after the shooting. He wanted to make quite clear to the community, before potential bullies came calling, exactly what his story was going to be. I think he's also wily enough to tell the actual truth in his sworn statement to police.

 

[reedus23]

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.

Frydaddy, I went and started reading your post on the media thread but before I got to your analysis of the statements I stopped because I wanted to read them for myself and get my initial take before reading others analysis. You've put in a ton of time and did great work on that and I thank you for that. I cannot listen to the video interviews where I am right now and it appeared you had transcribed the statements. If so, even more kudos for taking that kind of time. That's no small undertaking. However, I didn't see where the transcriptions were. Did I just completely overlook them? Did I miss a link? Were they not in that post?

Thanks again. I have some thoughts on Black Canseco and would love to discuss that with you down the road, but I'd really like to get through all the statements first.

 

[SStarr33]

Lawyers and prosecutors have always said that premeditation can occur in the blink of an eye. A lot less than 2 or 3 seconds. So that is what I believe.

For those who asked if we would feel differently if races were reversed, it is my contention the shooting would never have happened if that was the case

Why would you think that? White people get shot all of the time by the police. If OW was just wanting to take down black men, why did he shoot DJ too?

 

[LambChop]

With all due respect, I don't think I was addressing anything about DW. Others released information about injuries. Others released information about the robbery. Josie made the statement, not DW.

As it relates to DW and whether he is any different than any of the others, I suppose they all have the "right" to go to the media if they choose to. Just as with the others, though, I'd suggest it wouldn't be wise for DW himself to do so and he is probably wisely listening to his attorney.

What others released information other than what was requested under the sunshine law. Not talking about private citizens talking with media but officials. Wasn't all the info released in a news conference by the Chief according to sunshine law requests, such as the officer's name, injuries and the video? If not do you have a link?

This may help clear up the injury information released.

http://www.newsweek.com/ferguson-police-chief-says-officer-involved-shooting-was-injured-264511

 

[TheDuchess]

O//T - hope it is OK to post here - this happened last week in my home town

http://couriernews.suntimes.com/2014/08/26/state-police-probe-death-carpentersville-man-custody/

"The Illinois State Police Public Integrity Unit has been asked to investigate the death of a Carpentersville man shortly after his arrest, officials said Monday.

According to Carpentersville police officials in a prepared statement, officers conducted a traffic stop on a vehicle driven by Joshua Paul, 31, at about 5:26 p.m. Aug. 17, in the area of 251 Springhill Road.

According to police, Paul had committed a traffic violation, and officers believed he was driving on a revoked license and was wanted on warrants for previous traffic violations.

When officers told Paul he was being placed under arrest, Paul stepped away from the officers and attempted to re-enter his vehicle and a brief physical struggle ensued as officers attempted to place Paul into custody, police said.

During the struggle Paul suffered a laceration to his chin and officers immediately called paramedics to the scene. Paul was then transported to Advocate Sherman Hospital for treatment of the laceration.

Sherman personnel told officers Paul required medical attention beyond that for the laceration on his chin, police said.

Paul’s condition deteriorated at the hospital where he died several hours later. “Out of respect to the family and loved ones of Mr. Paul, and in order to ensure that a thorough and independent investigation is performed by the Illinois State Police, no further details regarding this matter will be released at this time,” the release stated.

Both officers involved in the arrest remain on duty."

I'm not sure if relevant, but man who died is openly gay and was engaged to be married. Since he is among a somewhat "protected class" that may have some significance in the story, but who knows. I don't know much other than gossip in the community, but the family and friends are crying foul, as he was unarmed and this took place at a simple traffic stop. He wasn't known as a violent offender or anything like that, but did appear to resist arrest. It also seems as though what was initially thought to be a minor injury, turned quickly into something far greater.

The most interesting thing I noticed is that the Carpentersville PD immediately turned this over to the State Police for investigation. I am not sure if that is typical or what the situation is. They are being extremely tight lipped about the entire incident.

 

[SStarr33]

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

I wonder where the cigars went?

Wilson, he said, initially stopped Brown for blocking traffic, but as he began driving past Brown, he noticed Brown was holding cigars.

 

[Tawny]

This is kind of weird--this eyewitness says MB stumbled forward about 25 feet.

http://fox2now.com/2014/08/12/witness-claims-he-saw-what-happened-when-michael-brown-was-shot/

If he were charging, as has been stated by at least one witness (audio), he would stumble forward quite a bit as he fell. Bear in mind a witness may not truly grasp the exact distance, but he would have stumbled forward pretty far. IMO

 

[TheDuchess]

respectfully snipped by me

IMO DJ is a wily little guy who's gotten by on his wits. Fear may have motivated his "excited utterances" immediately after the shooting. He wanted to make quite clear to the community, before potential bullies came calling, exactly what his story was going to be. I think he's also wily enough to tell the actual truth in his sworn statement to police.

BBM - I wouldn't be so sure about that, considering his previous charge of lying to the police...

 

[Tawny]

I wonder where the cigars went?

Wilson, he said, initially stopped Brown for blocking traffic, but as he began driving past Brown, he noticed Brown was holding cigars.

Turned over to police?

 

[Lovejac]

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.

I haven't heard a peep about them. And given DJ's history of false statements, I really doubt there was anyone in that car at all.

 

[reedus23]

So, I have been thinking about these police body cams, and I have some questions if anyone has any knowledge of them. I mean, are they intended to on ALL the time even when an officer is just driving around in the car or only when he or she gets out of the car to interact with the public? Because I personally would find it extremely creepy to have my every action recorded, especially when as my mother used to so delicately put, I needed to 'express air.' Just an example. But supposing they are activated only when the officer interacts with a civilian--how long would those tapes be kept? If a person was arrested but later cleared would the tape be erased or attached to an arrest record? Would the tapes be connected with fingerprints or DNA? Would they all be allowable in future court cases? I mean, in this situation I can see the benefit of having them, but I can also see that they could give the government a *whole* lot of info that could follow you around forever.

Or maybe I'm just paranoid. What do y'all think about the application of tapes obtained via LE body cams?

Great thoughts and I don't know the answers. Just some thoughts. Originally, my opinion was that they should be on at all times while on duty. I don't know the realities of being able to store that much data though. Maybe the simple answer is, if an officer is involved in any kind of confrontation, there is a presumption that the officer was acting unlawfully if the camera was off. It's just a presumption, so it can be overcome with evidence that he acted lawfully but that evidence cannot rely solely on the cop's word. I would think that this would give an officer to ensure his camera is turned on before any interaction with the public and yet give him discretion to turn it off if he's just driving or sitting in his car with nothing going on, maybe talking on the phone to his wife. I don't know, just throwing something out there.

 

[SStarr33]

Turned over to police?

Seems like we would see them spilled all over the scene. I wonder if they fell into OW's truck in the struggle

 

[Frydaddy]

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.

I found a handful of reasons to impeach her, I honestly fail to see how anyone could even refer to her as an eyewitness as of today.

 

[DebinGA]

BBM - I wouldn't be so sure about that, considering his previous charge of lying to the police...

Yes, DJ gave police the wrong age and middle name, but he also got a police record out of it. He just strikes me as not so dumb he'd knowingly commit the same offense twice.