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

[jjenny]

What do you want to bet that if a no bill is returned that it won't be the end of the story...Eric Holder is still waiting in the wings....

As far as I can tell, Zimmerman is still running around free after his trial. No federal trial in sight and presumably not going to happen.

 

[TexanMom]

What do you want to bet that if a no bill is returned that it won't be the end of the story...Eric Holder is still waiting in the wings....

I'm sure he will try to bring about civil rights violation charges.

 

[tandt]

It's sad that our expectations (black/white/whatever) for our teens are set so low. Today it seems to be fine that they do a little drugs, steal a little stuff, and act a little anti-social. The higher the bar is set, the better the people. In my opinion, the expectations are so low that certain parts of this country are DEvolving into chaos, third world countries, becoming cities like Camden, Detroit, etc, ad nauseum. Maybe if parents, and society, as a whole, expected better, we would get that? Raise the bar, get better kids.

That requires work to achieve and society doesn't care enough to put in said work. Let it be someone else's problem-- like a teacher or coach or clergy.

In our self-involved society today, everyone's out for themselves, and some people even putting their children's future behind their 'selfie.'

 

[aa9511]

I think the more salient point is this...if you use the tools on Google Maps and look how far down Canfield the officer would have been coming from and you see two people walking down the middle of the road for say a tenth of a mile or more and they make no real attempt to move toward the curb or sidewalk, not for a car, not for the fact it's a police car, what would go through your mind if you were the cop? I think this would push just about anyone's button, if for no other reason than you are going out of your way to mess with someone. One thing I have always questioned about this is why someone who just stole cigars would call attention to themselves immediately after. Not a psychologist, but I'd think the normal human brain would say or do whatever it takes to get the cop to keep on going. I certainly wouldn't try to negotiate or incite a further interaction.

Ok, I understand.

I guess I was trying to say that this latest "relevation" is adding yet another version of the story to the list we already have.

Prior to this, all the versions said that OW backed up. Even the police chief stated this as fact.

Now all of a sudden, someone is saying, well no he never backed up. That actually the boys were blocking his path.

It just seems like lies are circling all around.

 

[jjenny]

Ok, I understand.

I guess I was trying to say that this latest "relevation" is adding yet another version of the story to the list we already have.

Prior to this, all the versions said that OW backed up. Even the police chief stated this as fact.

Now all of a sudden, someone is saying, well no he never backed up. That actually the boys were blocking his path.

It just seems like lies are circling all around.

From DJ's own words, they were in the middle of the road, but that cars still managed to get around them.
They were blocking the path but cars still were able to get around them.

 

[reedus23]

My understanding is first he run away then turned around. And then either bum rushed the police officer, or put his hands up surrendering (depending on which version you believe).

And this is ultimately the real question. The other stuff is background noise. The question is whether deadly force was immediately necessary will ultimately come down to was he surrendering himself to arrest (whether his hands were up or not) or was he charging the officer. The robbery, the confrontation, racist cops, police departments out of control and all the other issues are just background noise shouted by one side or the other to try to make their respective side look better and disparage the opposing view. Ultimately, it all boils down to, was he surrendering himself to arrest and thereby not making deadly force immediately necessary or was he charging the officer making the use of deadly force immediately necessary.

 

[DebinGA]

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

NYT under fire for describing MB as "no angel" in a long, MB-favorable piece.

http://www.donotlink.com/framed?528263

NYT Public Editor and black NYT writer of very MB friendly piece, which began with a description of an angelic vision that so excited MB that he called his father in the middle of the night about it, have both apologized for later in the article describing MB as "no angel" as a few troubling details of his life were noted. Writer wishes he'd used "not perfect" instead. Outrage also over the black writer mentioning MB's interest in rap-song writing, as noting that indisputable fact equates to saying MB was a criminal.

 

[Frydaddy]

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

As I understand it, the lawyer found out about the video the week before through a "mutual friend". My best guess is that if this whole audio recording is legit, she heard it first, gave it to MB's people next, then gave it to the FBI right before offering to CNN.

Nearly everything from MB's camp has appeared to be an effort to try this case in the court of public opinion, I can't think for the life of me why they'd want to release this to CNN unless they were trying to manipulate the public. There is no way a lawyer would release anything that might help the officer go free, so they must have some theory that this proves something otherwise or they think this will stir the public to further protest in an effort to react with an indictment. If they've had it for a week, my guess is they've been over it 1000 times in strategy sessions. Look at Crenshaw...she released some video early, then released more later. If someone's only concern is to see the truth come out, why all the strategic release of information?

 

[bettybaby00]

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.

Ok, thanks for clarifying!

 

[Trident]

I personally believe the audio IS real, the fact the guy sounds so ridiculous as he says "You look so pretty" makes it legit to me.

The thought crossed my mind the sound of shooting could have come from his TV set. Is there a time/date stamp on this audio?

 

[reedus23]

What do you want to bet that if a no bill is returned that it won't be the end of the story...Eric Holder is still waiting in the wings....

Oh, no question that he is.

 

[Irisha]

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

IMO, 2 hrs. after owner of audio was interviewed by FBI, attorney ran to <modsnip> Lemon for interview on CNN.

 

[cady]

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

I think it was released by his attorney. She said he had been interviewed by FBI. My guess is FBI is checking out his equipment, and attorney has a copy. I doubt that FBI will confirm or deny authenticity while GJ is in session. JMHO

 

[Frydaddy]

Ok, I understand.

I guess I was trying to say that this latest "relevation" is adding yet another version of the story to the list we already have.

Prior to this, all the versions said that OW backed up. Even the police chief stated this as fact.

Now all of a sudden, someone is saying, well no he never backed up. That actually the boys were blocking his path.

It just seems like lies are circling all around.

Based on the position of the diagonally parked SUV, it would be hard to get it there without backing up. The caveat here is if that is not Wilson's SUV or if it was moved. I guess there could be a way where he angled into the other lane a little, said his piece, then started to get back over and stopped it there. Hard to say without hearing from Wilson first. I wish someone would interview these witness and ask them to lay out the location of everything in their testimony, but I am sure their lawyers would put the kibosh on that due to knowing their stories are sketchy enough as it is.

 

[bettybaby00]

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.

But the "witnesses" can't change their story now....they've already given their OFFICIAL statements, both to local authorities, and the FBI. Dorian in particular is already going to be called out for changing his story.

Does anyone know how/if OW would be required to make his statement? If I understand it, he never filled out an incident report that day, I don't get that :dunno:

 

[cady]

I would think so but maybe if MB's hand was raised in a fist ready to strike again, the bullet could have grazed it then? Just throwing that out there, nothing to back it up.

Possible. But that would have been at close-range, as well. JMO

 

[magnolia]

I agree and I hope they also have the courage to issue an indictment if that is what is supported by the evidence. Handing down an indictment against LE can be a scary thought anytime. Add to it the attention this case has received and it could be even more difficult as I suspect there is going to be backlash from either side depending on the result.

Regarding the bolded portion, I don't know if I've seen an answer to my question yet. Justification is a legal defense and it is to be injected into a case by a defendant. It certainly seems that the prosecuting attorney's office has decided it will put on the dual hat of prosecuting attorney and defense attorney by presenting all of the evidence, including evidence that supports a defense and is usually put on by a defense attorney. Is this typical? Is the concern that I have for my prosecuting attorney also playing the role of defense attorney unwarranted? If I were the defendant instead of a police officer, I just don't see a prosecuting attorney going to any lengths to provide a grand jury with evidence supporting my defense. Also, does a grand jury even get the opportunity to consider justification? It would seem to me that their responsibility is only to consider if there is sufficient evidence to indict (the "Brown" witnesses) and any evidence of justification (the Wilson "witnesses") is considered at a later date after the defense of justification has actually been injected by the defendant. The statute clearly says it is the burden of the defendant to inject justification into a case and at this point there is no defendant, so how does justification even get injected into the case at the GJ stage?

BBM- I'm concerned about the opposite. Will the GJ have enough courage to not issue an indictment if the evidence doesn't support it. I think most GJ's would be more intimidated by the massive protests than concern over indicting a member of LE. I'm even more concerned about the same if this goes to trial. A guy on CNN was talking about this very thing last night.

IMO

 

[SStarr33]

New Dorian interview with Don Lemon. Not sure if it has been posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbyGwbcyOWs

 

[reedus23]

As I understand it, the lawyer found out about the video the week before through a "mutual friend". My best guess is that if this whole audio recording is legit, she heard it first, gave it to MB's people next, then gave it to the FBI right before offering to CNN.

Nearly everything from MB's camp has appeared to be an effort to try this case in the court of public opinion, I can't think for the life of me why they'd want to release this to CNN unless they were trying to manipulate the public. There is no way a lawyer would release anything that might help the officer go free, so they must have some theory that this proves something otherwise or they think this will stir the public to further protest in an effort to react with an indictment. If they've had it for a week, my guess is they've been over it 1000 times in strategy sessions. Look at Crenshaw...she released some video early, then released more later. If someone's only concern is to see the truth come out, why all the strategic release of information?

Here is the problem if you put yourself in the shoes of MB's camp. In order to support an indictment, evidence has to be turned over to an entity you already don't trust. Conversely, LE doesn't have to share anything with MB's camp. Certainly, taking it to CNN is an attempt to shape public opinion, no different that FPD releasing the robbery video/info. Both sides have had a strategic release of information. Personally, and this might be wrong, but I almost expect it from personal attorneys. For whatever reason, I hold my public officials to a higher standard and wish they wouldn't play the same silly games, though I understand they have to to counteract the other side.

 

[popsicle]

As I was scanning video's, I saw something that may or may not be anything relevant...

Pause this video at 0:07, note the bald man over DJ's left shoulder

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQeni0qt8Vo

Pause this video at 0:56, note same bald man behind white bald man, who is leading off Piaget and Tiffany to most likely get their statement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7tTsEYE3Ms

The reason I find this relevant is that this is the same general area in both videos. I've said that I thought neither Piaget or Tiffany saw anything. That they all saw the exact same thing, described exactly the same from different angles, seemed odd to me. Now we have video of these three witnesses congregating in the same spot with the same folks (including Mike's mom) at nearly the same time. I think this is where Piaget and Tiffany picked up this story and ran with it.

What about this guy? Think he could be the same one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkFsDx7SCWw