MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #15

[K_Z]

View attachment 58052

I have the upmost respect for every police officer that risks their life EVERY damn day for a pittance.

IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No kidding, a pittance! OW's salary was listed in an article as $45K. That's less than most registered nurses, and most public school teachers make. IMO, that is not NEARLY enough salary for the tremendous and unpredictable danger patrol officers face, especially in poor, crime ridden neighborhoods.

I personally feel that some duty patrol "zip codes" are so violent, and so incredibly dangerous for LEOs, that duty there should qualify officers to be eligible for incentive pay-- hazardous duty incentive pay (HDIP), just as military members receive in war and combat zones. I received HDIP for a number of assignments I had while I was active duty. Police officers in hazardous duty assignments deserve no less than our military members, IMO.

An example of HDIP:

http://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/hazardous.html

If you have to don riot control gear as part of your duty day, and face out-of-control rioters, looters, and violent criminals, you should be well compensated for the tremendous danger involved, IMO.

Frankly, I have no idea why anyone would want to be a LEO in some of these dangerous neighborhoods. I kind of view it as a calling, like teaching and missionary work. But then, most people wouldn't want to do my job either, so I guess I'm just awfully glad there are police, and firefighters, and paramedics willing to put their own lives on the line to keep me and my family and neighbors safe.

 

[K_Z]

As far as the donations go, I'd like to jump in. This freakshow, IMO, is definitely NOT a part of OWs job. It should never be.

IMO, I think a law needs to be passed (and perhaps this fund can help start a campaign for such a law) that unless charged with a crime, LEOs names should NEVER be released in cases like this. There is no reason that an officer of the law just doing his job needs to have his personal name released to the public, forcing him underground, fearing for his safety and the safety of his family. They could call it "Officer Darren Wilson's Law.

The chief says an officer should have a reasonable expectation to go home at the end of his shift. So too should an officer have a reasonable expectation not to be vilified in the media and by mobs of people searching for his home, digging into his background, etc...UNLESS, he is charged with a crime...then have at it.

BRAVO!! I totally agree. I wrote a post a day or so ago about the use of "on the job" aliases, and health care professionals using aliases, or first name and initial, so as not to be stalked or harassed by patients or family members that are mentally unbalanced, or have a grudge, or fantasize about a dating relationship. Officers, IMO, should be able to use a badge number only, that rotates perhaps, to protect their families and personal safety.

It is beyond sickening, IMO, to see what is happening to this officer, who has not been charged with any crimes! His entire life is in chaos, his career in tatters, his safety in jeopardy every second, IMO. And yet, hundreds of looters and rioters, and people making death threats, go un-arrested and entirely un-punished. Literally hundreds of people clearly exhibiting CRIMINAL ACITVITY should have been arrested, jailed, and charged for their violent activities during what the media euphemistically chose to title "protests" in Ferguson.

I don't even begin to understand how something like this can happen in my country.

 

[Truthy]

LOL. When I was driving through rural Mississippi with my teenage niece (we are both white) we got pulled over for "no apparent reason" and the cop asked a bunch of questions like "Where are you going?" "Why are you going to Atlanta?" "What are you going to do there? Do you have a job??" etc...

He said he pulled us over because he thought my niece wasn't wearing her seatbelt, he didn't give me a ticket (the real reason was most certainly our CA plates, he was bored and curious).

Point is if I were NOT White it would be one of those obvious cases of "racial profiling by a racist small town Southern cop" etc..."

I think the point is if you were in some towns, like Ferguson you'd be twice as likely to have your car searched if you weren't white. (Link if you need it- but seen it here posted plenty)
Now you can say it doesn't matter, but it actually does create worse outcomes - all things being equal- for the black community there. IMHO, there is no basis in it, as the whites searched more often have drugs.

All MOO.

 

[reedus23]

Interesting if true.

Yeah, she wasn't too happy about it. He's missing the start of the semester because of it all. I don't know if the numbers are scaled back, but I have a hard time believing she's wrong. It's her son after all and she had no reason to lie to me. While I didn't ask when, the impression I had was that it wasn't just today, but they've been deployed in some number for some time still. Maybe they just have them sitting in wait in case needed.

 

[popsicle]

Charles C. Johnson @ChuckCJohnson · 3h

Multiple journalists telling me to watch my back for press conference, hearing tomorrow. #Ferguson #MichaelBrown records

What does he mean?

 

[jmcgladr]

As far as the donations go, I'd like to jump in. This freakshow, IMO, is definitely NOT a part of OWs job. It should never be.

IMO, I think a law needs to be passed (and perhaps this fund can help start a campaign for such a law) that unless charged with a crime, LEOs names should NEVER be released in cases like this. There is no reason that an officer of the law just doing his job needs to have his personal name released to the public, forcing him underground, fearing for his safety and the safety of his family. They could call it "Officer Darren Wilson's Law.

The chief says an officer should have a reasonable expectation to go home at the end of his shift. So too should an officer have a reasonable expectation not to be vilified in the media and by mobs of people searching for his home, digging into his background, etc...UNLESS, he is charged with a crime...then have at it.

What about the person they shot? I think that if OW's name was not to be released, then MB's name should not have been released either. After all, MB was the victim, not the shooter. I don't think it's possible to keep these things quiet though, b/c of the First Amendment rights of the media and ordinary citizens.

 

[reedus23]

Charles C. Johnson ‏@ChuckCJohnson 5m
#Michaelbrown hearing 7900 Carondelet Clayton, MO 63105Division 2, fl 310:30 am, may want to arrive early because of security delays.

I may sit in on it. Gonna be in Clayton at 9. Think I might jump in real quick. Thanks for posting the time and Division.

 

[reedus23]

On their FB page they said they were setting up a Paypal so people could donate.

Thanks. Seems silly to me that people who see fit couldn't contribute.

 

[K_Z]

Once I saw the Attorney General of the U.S. send 50 FBI agents into Ferguson to investigate my actions during 8 seconds of my life, I'd want all the support, monetary and otherwise, I could get.

Exactly. I'm dismayed and appalled that the AG and POTUS have involved themselves in this. There ARE hate crime cases, very clear cut and unambiguous, and cases of excessive force by LE, but THIS case, IMO, is a looooong way from being the "kind" of case that should attract the attention of DOJ (and I personally know 2 lawyers who work for DOJ in DC, and one of them thinks this is pretty dubious as a civil rights case-- and she is extremely liberal in her views).

As someone a thread or 2 back said (Linda7NJ?), THIS is not the case to fall on your sword for, IMO. This is not an "index case" for any kind of activism or new laws, IMO.

IMO, OW deserves all the support he can get, especially monetary. He is a real victim, who has suffered real damages from this fiasco, IMO. And he has not been charged with anything. It will be months, if ever, he can return to any semblance of normalcy, IMO. He will have to move, IMO, for his own safety, and probably can't ever return to his home to pack up.

 

[Linda7NJ]

What about the person they shot? I think that if OW's name was not to be released, then MB's name should not have been released either. After all, MB was the victim, not the shooter. I don't think it's possible to keep these things quiet though, b/c of the First Amendment rights of the media and ordinary citizens.

IMO that not true.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investi...youth-shot-himself-death-says-coroner-n185016

Still haven't released these officers names.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[reedus23]

Acoustic experts detail purported Ferguson shooting

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...c-experts-detail-purported-ferguson-shooting/

When the purported recording was revealed earlier this week, the experts analyzed it, said Ralph Clark, chief executive officer of [ShotSpotter technology].

Takeaways: the shootings all took place within about 6.5 seconds. There was a 3 sec pause between shot #6 and shot #7. The shooter didn't move more than 4 feet.

That's interesting stuff. Any idea how reliable this group is? Are they pretty reputable? Used by all sides? Seems they work with LE in some fashion. Interesting stuff.

 

[reedus23]

How does a Grand jury know who to call as witness's beyond what the State calls? If they are only given information from the prosecution, how would the Grand Jury know that there are other witness's that could be of value to them?

Maybe they have access to police reports and interviews that show who is a witness. If the State doesn't use certain witness's that could help the Grand Jury, they may call them on their own. Is this correct? Or am I off base?

If witness X says they were sitting outside with person Y and saw what happened but the state doesn't bring in person Y, I think they could ask that person Y be brought in.

ETA - Purely accidental, but read my post and guess what I did. Used the word "they" in reference to the single person, witness X.

 

[reedus23]

No kidding, a pittance! OW's salary was listed in an article as $45K. That's less than most registered nurses, and most public school teachers make. IMO, that is not NEARLY enough salary for the tremendous and unpredictable danger patrol officers face, especially in poor, crime ridden neighborhoods.

I personally feel that some duty patrol "zip codes" are so violent, and so incredibly dangerous for LEOs, that duty there should qualify officers to be eligible for incentive pay-- hazardous duty incentive pay (HDIP), just as military members receive in war and combat zones. I received HDIP for a number of assignments I had while I was active duty. Police officers in hazardous duty assignments deserve no less than our military members, IMO.

An example of HDIP:

http://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/hazardous.html

If you have to don riot control gear as part of your duty day, and face out-of-control rioters, looters, and violent criminals, you should be well compensated for the tremendous danger involved, IMO.

Frankly, I have no idea why anyone would want to be a LEO in some of these dangerous neighborhoods. I kind of view it as a calling, like teaching and missionary work. But then, most people wouldn't want to do my job either, so I guess I'm just awfully glad there are police, and firefighters, and paramedics willing to put their own lives on the line to keep me and my family and neighbors safe.

I don't know how much more they make elsewhere, but I suspect that is another reason FPD has a hard time retaining their better cops. Besides the fact that I'd rather make 45k in west county where I write tickets all day instead of 45k in a higher crime area.

ETA - Yes, WAY underpaid in other words. Though I think a lot of people are underpaid, including myself.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

What about the person they shot? I think that if OW's name was not to be released, then MB's name should not have been released either. After all, MB was the victim, not the shooter. I don't think it's possible to keep these things quiet though, b/c of the First Amendment rights of the media and ordinary citizens.

. . . . and MB's safety could not be further jeopardized, while OW's certainly still could. Safety first.

 

[popsicle]

FOX2now ‏@FOX2now 9m
Mid-Missouri man describes repeated lies by witness in Michael Brown Shooting Case #STL http://ift.tt/1vLqyGH

 

[reedus23]

What about the person they shot? I think that if OW's name was not to be released, then MB's name should not have been released either. After all, MB was the victim, not the shooter. I don't think it's possible to keep these things quiet though, b/c of the First Amendment rights of the media and ordinary citizens.

Nope. I disagree all the way around. I would much rather have complete transparency all the way around. It's completely unfortunate when an officer is involved in a shooting, justified or unjustified, but transparency in such cases is important to me. I don't care if they withhold it to a later time, when all of the information is presented in a coherent fashion instead of being leaked piece meal. But I think it's important that not just the names of those involved are provided, but what steps were taken in investigating the incident, what was found from that investigation and the reasoning or rationale for whatever decision is made. If an officer is going to use lethal force, which they are perfectly entitled to use and should use under the right circumstances, I as a citizen want it to be confirmed as transparently as possible that he not only was acting within the color of the law but that he is not a threat to step outside of the law down the road.

Oh, and I want to know his name in case I'm pulled over by the officer down the road.

 

[reedus23]

Regarding tomorrows hearing, while it's not unheard of for a ruling to be made on the spot, do not be surprised one bit if the Judge takes it under advisement, maybe even allowing both sides to further brief the issue if there is a particular issue raised during the hearing that was not adequately briefed.

http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/da...ered_to_allow_press_public_into_courtroom.php

Some recent action the Judge in Division 2 took recently. None too happy with how municipal courts were limiting how people were being limited in how they can attend their own court appearances. I have seen several occasions where a lady would show up with her child for night court for her court date because she couldn't find a baby sitter. The cops for these municipalities literally gave them the option of 1. leave their kid (sometimes babies) outside while they go inside to court for a couple of hours or 2. leave with your child and have a warrant issued for her arrest for failure to appear. To be clear....not the cop's fault. He was only enforcing the court's rules. But troubled me when I saw it and glad to hear McShane took some actions to rectify it. Very fair and smart judge. Will listen to both sides and rule as she believes the law dictates. Regardless of the ruling, also expect it to be appealed. Just my guess.

 

[reedus23]

http://judgepedia.org/Maura_McShane

http://www.showmecourts.org/2008-elections/judge-mcshane

More on McShane. Former prosecuting attorney.

 

[jmcgladr]

IMO that not true.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investi...youth-shot-himself-death-says-coroner-n185016

Still haven't released these officers names.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just glancing through, that seems like a horrible case! Extremely dubious IMO that that suspect shot himself. At any rate though, I didn't mean that it wasn't legally or technically possible, it's just not too possible in reality IMO, because people tend to talk. A friend of the accused officer, a friend or relative of the suspect, a witness, whoever - there is just a lot of media pressure to talk.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Nope. I disagree all the way around. I would much rather have complete transparency all the way around. It's completely unfortunate when an officer is involved in a shooting, justified or unjustified, but transparency in such cases is important to me. I don't care if they withhold it to a later time, when all of the information is presented in a coherent fashion instead of being leaked piece meal. But I think it's important that not just the names of those involved are provided, but what steps were taken in investigating the incident, what was found from that investigation and the reasoning or rationale for whatever decision is made. If an officer is going to use lethal force, which they are perfectly entitled to use and should use under the right circumstances, I as a citizen want it to be confirmed as transparently as possible that he not only was acting within the color of the law but that he is not a threat to step outside of the law down the road.

Oh, and I want to know his name in case I'm pulled over by the officer down the road.

I, too, want to know everything as soon as I can but understand that an investigation to give us the honest facts that you enumerated might not happen as soon as we wished. I don't believe the unnamed police officer under investigation would be out on duty pulling anyone over ~ so please don't worry. His name would be and obviously has been released so anyone who wants can be on the lookout while he's not even on duty.