MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #16

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, I just turned it on and I actually think this is a good start. Let them express their frustration and their anger. Engage with them but not in a way that has the rigidity of a formal council meeting. Frankly, they should get off the stage too. Stop giving the appearance that you are superior to any of them. Engage with them not to them. Frankly, I think what they're doing right now is fine now that I turn it on. It must have been different earlier.

It IS a city council meeting. What are they supposed to do? Sit on the floor in a drum circle?
 
Um, they won't like them either.

Maybe not. But I'd bet they're all better cops than the Ferguson cops. Ask any cop in the area if they have a choice of working at Ferguson or working for the County which they'd work for. I think there's a small segment that won't like cops regardless of who they are. I would agree with that though.
 
Haven't watched a second of it. Just got online a few minutes ago and figured I missed most of it. My guess is that there is very little of Robert's Rules of Order being followed by the people but anyone that thought there would be is kidding themselves. You have angry, pissed off people that think the system has failed them, the system that is at that meeting. You also have people that have never lived their lives according to Robert's Rules of Order and IF the intent of the meeting is to re-establish trust with the community, such a rigid structure probably isn't the best way.

reedus23, in order to re-establish (or better yet, establish) trust requires two way communication. Robert's Rules were never even contemplated. Only AA people have been welcomed to talk. Trust is not going to be born here, that's for sure, and it's not the fault of the white people this time, no matter how anyone might try to blame them or excuse the prejudiced behavior of the others.
 
Current chick just stated that 80% of black people are locked up in jail. :facepalm:
 
Some do some don't. If I remember, I'll take pictures and post all the hoops on all the roads, even ones with a double yellow.

Would appreciate. I'm pretty old & have done a lot of driving around & have never seen a basketball hoop on a street. Always interested in seeing new things.
 
Trust me, I fully understand how silly the term jaywalking sound. Silly term for what was at the time a silly list.

The "silly list" for reference:

1. It's far from "settled" that MB had a "clean record". The evasiveness and word parsing of everyone involved with the hearing for the juvenile records, in addition to Crump and Parks words (linked many times in earlier posts), telegraphs that there "is" a juvenile record that is being withheld. Two media entities continue to pursue release of these records. No one (well, beyond MB's mom), and including the JUDGE, is willing to say there are "no" juvenile records, which would END the pursuit to have anything that exists, released.

2. MB would likely have been charged with Robbery (not theft, not shoplifting-- big difference between these) in the Second degree for the convenience store robbery. Likely, assault charges would have been also attached. Maximum penalty for Robbery in the Second Degree in MO is 5-15 years. And we haven't begun to sort out the level of assault of the store clerk, and whether that was a felony or misdemeanor. And I personally believe if MB had lived to be charged, busting/ plea bargaining the robbery down to a misdemeanor "theft" would not have been possible, in light of the assault of the LEO which followed a mere 10min later, with a struggle for the officer's weapon. Likely attempted murder would have been charged for that. IMO.

http://www.missouri-criminal-defense.com/offenses/

http://www.missouri-criminal-defense.com/assault/

3. There is not a thing in MO law that I can find that states that the recipient of an assault must be rendered "unconscious" for it to be considered "serious" under the law.

4. And then we move into the multiple potential felony and misdemeanor penalties for the defiance of a request to move to the sidewalk, the assault of the police officer, the struggle over the officer's weapon, and all of the rest of the circumstances, and MB would have unquestioningly faced decades of prison time for his actions of Aug 9.

No, this would never, ever have been plea bargained down to something that was penalized with diversion or community service, had MB lived to be charged. OW was not a civilian , or an equal under the law, in the encounter with MB-- he was a sworn peace officer, an authority figure. I know that this imbalance of power chafes at some people, presumably those who have a big psychological or emotional problem with authority figures, but the fact is that they were not "equals" in the eyes of the law when the beginning of the encounter with MB, DJ, and OW began. This was not a bar brawl between civilians. Attacking a sworn police officer guarantees felony charges at a minimum, and struggling with a LEO over his/ her weapon is astonishingly brash and unwise, and very well might lead to the officer shooting you, dead.


I had started a list awhile ago of charges Michael might have faced. I've seen others post some too. Maybe a running list would help?

Here were some I considered:

Strong arm robbery (2nd degree robbery) - Class B felony
Assault
Assault on LE
Disorderly conduct
Resisting or interfering with arrest - Class D Felony. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5750000150.htm


Obstructing a police officer
Failure to follow a lawful order (2x don't walk on road, which blocked traffic; freeze)
Attempted murder if his hand caused gun to fire

*If* he had any charges pending but not yet adjudicated, those could factor in.

If he had a significant juvenile record and was charged with a felony, it could've come in to play.

If he was gang affiliated, that can be considered.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ld-be-admissible-at-a-federal-criminal-trial/

It's also unlawful for a person who's neither driving or in an vehicle to disobey an officer's order to stop, such as by running away on foot or some other means.
http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/criminal-law-crime-definition-faqs.html


I think these are important and could go to Michael's state of mind and why he fought so hard to avoid apprehension, particularly if he was on probation, had a deferred adjudication or sentence, had pending charges or was part of a diversion program with conditions.

Good list. Don't forget obstructing traffic. Or as the other side likes to call it 'jaywalking' :giggle:
 
As long as people continue minimizing and rationalizing such irrational demands and unacceptable behavior, it will continue.

Neither the behavior, nor the excuses of it are conducive to progress and understanding.

I wish I could see a light at the end of the tunnel, but too many people who should know better and could help if they chose, instead just enable, if not agitate.

:offtobed:

Sent via Tapatalk for S4
 
So I take it they destroyed nothing and injured no one and were expressing their frustration and anger?

reedus23, this is your grading process? If nothing is destroyed and no injuries, then all is good? No, this low expectation does not solve any problems. As a matter of fact, maybe people being content with this low standard of behavior is a major piece of the problem? Just trying to think out of your box.
 
Let's stay on topic for the next thread. Enough with the streets unless it is relevant to MB.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
161
Guests online
1,759
Total visitors
1,920

Forum statistics

Threads
606,081
Messages
18,198,136
Members
233,730
Latest member
n.zajk0wska
Back
Top