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

[jmcgladr]

Yep - quite aware of how websleuths and the real world work just fine. Never said I didn't. Just saying that just because people WANT charges filed and WANT a conviction doesn't mean they are going to get it.

That said, it is generally a good rule of thumb to begin any discussion in cases like this with the presumption of innocence and work your way toward guilt. It seems like there are a LOT of people that have rushed to judgment in this case (I was one of them!) and some refuse to walk it back. But seriously....in any of the cases we discuss on here...don't you agree that it is in fact a good rule of thumb to begin with innocence and some level of suspicion and expect those who are accusing someone of something to give some proof?

I mean...I can tell you all right now that Anderson Cooper just came over and broke into my house and stole my lunchbox. I would expect all of you intelligent people to ask me for proof, whether in a court of law or not. I don't think anyone would expect Anderson Cooper to have to provide anyone with proof that he didn't. No. I would expect a level of suspicion and would be expected to offer some kind of proof in order for you to even consider such a thing.

That hasn't been the case here. People started calling OW a racist cold blooded killer from the very start of this whole mess. My point is that prior to this incident, we have a cop with a perfect record. So I would expect people to logically think that claims of gunning an unarmed man down who has his hands in the air surrendering might seem a little suspicious and would want some proof. We've so far got a few eyewitnesses who have made their rounds of the news programs, lawyers in tow and seemingly millions of people talking about some intangible outrage over police brutality and racial strife.

But there has been NOTHING else to show that OW is anything more than an excellent police officer who was just doing his job on August 9, 2014 and had the very unfortunate circumstance of being assaulted by DB.

If I may ask though, what about the presumption of innocence for MB? Not many people here seem to be allowing for that. I understand, of course, that we can't presume him innocent of the robbery, since that is on video, but we CAN presume him innocent of attacking OW and of "charging" OW, because those things are not established facts at this time. But that's not happening, for the most part.

 

[Oceans]

Anderson Cooper, CNN, was just discussing the audio tape again. During the show, videos were played, showing images after the shooting, LE, people, the police cars etc.

For a moment, they showed a close-up of a police car with quite some blood on the bottom of the driver's door!

Did anyone see this as well?

 

[zenreaper]

BBM.

ITA. I was in a state of denial for weeks over the CA trial. I honestly went slack jawed!

It made me remember my dad's comment after the OJ verdict. My dad was not the most, um, objective guy when it came to minorities. (Putting it as nicely as I can).

When the verdict was announced, he turned off the TV, said "well, that's it. He is not guilty." I was flummoxed and said "Whaaaaaa? Daddy, we both know he is guilty!". He said "In order for our legal system to exist, we have to respect the process and the outcome. If OJ is acquitted, I don't have to like it, but I respect our legal system." :thud:

But he was right and I tried to remember that even when I don't actually believe it. But it's so haaaard. (Looking at YOU, Casey Anthony)

I have been saying the same thing for years. We stand by our justice system, right or wrong.

 

[Truthy]

BBM.

ITA. I was in a state of denial for weeks over the CA trial. I honestly went slack jawed!

It made me remember my dad's comment after the OJ verdict. My dad was not the most, um, objective guy when it came to minorities. (Putting it as nicely as I can).

When the verdict was announced, he turned off the TV, said "well, that's it. He is not guilty." I was flummoxed and said "Whaaaaaa? Daddy, we both know he is guilty!". He said "In order for our legal system to exist, we have to respect the process and the outcome. If OJ is acquitted, I don't have to like it, but I respect our legal system." :thud:

But he was right and I tried to remember that even when I don't actually believe it. But it's so haaaard. (Looking at YOU, Casey Anthony)

I wish I could believe in it- but since learning about how many hundred people have been exonerated by DNA evidence by the Innocence Project and others, I know the system is indeed fallible.

WWW.innocenceproject.

All IMHO.

 

[EvilSoup]

Wow. Me, too.

I had always envisioned Officer Wilson being behind them.

So he was behind them, passed them and then backed up diagonally to wait for them as they were walking up to his car.

DJ caught in another lie

But how did he pass them at all if they were blocking the road and obstructing traffic? I really wish we could see exactly how things happened.

People walk down the street all the time in my neighborhood which is an older established "village" in a large city. We just slow down and go around. Some streets have sidewalks, some don't. We have lots of runners and walkers and stroller walkers and dog walkers and they all walk in the road. Not out on major roads like Memorial, but on the residential streets, yeah. It's not a problem. I never really gave it a thought until the MB shooting.

 

[Truthy]

If I may ask though, what about the presumption of innocence for MB? Not many people here seem to be allowing for that. I understand, of course, that we can't presume him innocent of the robbery, since that is on video, but we CAN presume him innocent of attacking OW and of "charging" OW, because those things are not established facts at this time. But that's not happening, for the most part.

No, it isn't. I am kind of shocked at the sleuthing and nastiness going on towards the four witnesses also. I wonder, is this normal here? I don't recall such hostility (in any other cases) directed toward the only witnesses out there so far.

 

[EvilSoup]

I have been saying the same thing for years. We stand by our justice system, right or wrong.

My add-on would be that we also work hard to fix the things that do NOT work. But not through vigilantism. We vote, we petition, we legally protest. That's how we make it good!

 

[SStarr33]

Anderson Cooper, CNN, was just discussing the audio tape again. During the show, videos were played, showing images after the shooting, LE, people, the police cars etc.

For a moment, they showed a close-up of a police car with quite some blood on the bottom of the driver's door!

Did anyone see this as well?

No, but I would love to see it.

 

[Muffet]

Not new, but I missed this comparison of the two stories:

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/08/us/ferguson-brown-timeline/

DW was driving away from the sick call and saw in front of him the two males in the middle of the road. He spoke to them, continued past them, stopped, reversed and ended up in front of them again with his cruiser on the diagonal, blocking their continued trek down the middle of the street. Right? If so, how could DJ's tale of DW stopping inches from them, opening his door so hard it hit them and ricocheted back and hit DW possibly happen since they weren't parallel to each other?

LOL Think maybe DJ was trying to tailor his tale to fit what he knew was likely to come out anyway? He needed to explain why the officer got thrown back into the car, and why MB could be seen half in there making punching motions, MB's coming out bloody after the gun went off in the car.. among other things.

Unfortunately for him, he's not a great liar. I almost pity him, since he's not a bully, but then I think about how his spin got those riots going.

I'm not sure he's malicious, but IMO, he's definitely earned the title of dangerous menace.

 

[Amber29]

I know undercover and off duty police do not have to wear name tags- that is why I said on duty. On uniformed duty.
There are codes of conduct that LE agree to while on duty as to what constitutes being "in uniform". I remember my brother saying people were writtten up for having part of their gear missing or yes, obsecuring their badge number.
Again, I said nothing about taking photos, but officers failing to give their names to those they were arresting.
I mentioned two specific things, and no one here seems to know if these cops were breaking the rules yet. In the NYPD, they were pretty die hard rules, but no one seems to know about the FPD. Not seeing any links specifically adressing these issues, except to say officers did it out of fear.
But you really did not address the two specific issues I spoke about- was not discussing plain clothes cop or photography, and I thought I was pretty clear on that.

It seems few states have made this a law about identification of a police officer. Although some police departments have made it a rule. So the question is does STL County or Ferguson pd?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ice_officers_have_to_identify_themselves.html
Yes. Massachusetts law requires police officers to carry identification cards and present them upon request. Officers are also required to wear a "badge, tag, or label" with their name and/or identifying number. The law is aimed at precisely the situation in question—suspects who feel their rights are being violated. Few other states impose this requirement on their officers as a matter of law, but many individual police departments, such as the New York Police Department, have adopted it (PDF) as a matter of policy.

 

[Lovejac]

If I may ask though, what about the presumption of innocence for MB? Not many people here seem to be allowing for that. I understand, of course, that we can't presume him innocent of the robbery, since that is on video, but we CAN presume him innocent of attacking OW and of "charging" OW, because those things are not established facts at this time. But that's not happening, for the most part.

I came to this thread furious that LE had gunned down a "college bound teenager walking to grandmas house in broad daylight" which was my belief after listening to CNN, MSNBC, Fox.

Then I started reading more and learning more and here I am. So, yeah, I presumed MB innocent in the beginning. Not anymore though.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

I wish I could believe in it- but since learning about how many hundred people have been exonerated by DNA evidence by the Innocence Project and others, I know the system is indeed fallible.

WWW.innocenceproject.

All IMHO.

Truthy----did you do the math and find out what the statistical odds are? 317 were exonerated out of how many hundreds of thousands of cases of where they got it right? What does the 317 represent? 1/100th of 1%???
Some might call that a strawman argument.
Some may say that one wrong on an innocent person is one too much (and I would question them with) so does that mean we should let everyone go free. One extreme viewpoint deserves the other extreme if that's the path we want to go down.
My point is that it is easy to focus on that 317 number but I'm sure it represents such a small statistic of how many cases they got right, if you know what I mean. Just trying here to put things in perspective.

I still believe we have the best justice system in the world right here in the USA.
In Europe, you are guilty until you can prove your innocence.

And as more advancements are made in DNA/forensic detection, more accuracy can be assured.


moo

 

[LambChop]

Freedom of Speech:

While we believe very much in the freedom of speech & expression, you DO NOT have an absolute right to say whatever you want in this community. WS is based in the United States, but is not an agency of the Federal or any State government - so the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution and similar State amendments regarding your right to free speech DO NOT APPLY HERE. Anything that goes against our core beliefs and the purpose for which this community was designed may not be allowed. Posts and comments that are meant to incite conflicts between members or outside parties are strictly prohibited. WS Administration has the absolute right to edit, modify, close or delete any content found in this community. While this rarely, if ever happens, we will not tolerate individuals or groups creating problems with the overall membership.

 

[jmcgladr]

I have been thinking over the last few days about this case and the oddities that don't make sense. I have a thought that I wonder if anyone else has considered. I am not trying to put down MB by saying this either, as this is not IMO a personality flaw or any such thing. I am aware that the late teens to early 20s are a prime time for the onset of schizophrenia in young men. I have known several schizophrenics myself. I have to wonder, putting together the "vision" he had shortly before the shooting incident, the aggressiveness toward the shopkeeper, and most of all, the *possible* (as I have said, not yet proven) attack on OW, and charging into gunfire, which is highly unusual, if this young man was possibly showing the beginning signs of (untreated) schizophrenia. The actions would correspond quite well from what I understand of this illness. It is a highly controllable illness once treatment is established, but it can be very dangerous to the sufferer and those around him/her when it is untreated.

Disclaimer: This is only one possibility, out of many that have been mentioned. I hope nobody takes it the wrong way. I am not a psychiatrist or anything of the sort. This is just something that occurred to me.

 

[Starry Night]

But how did he pass them at all if they were blocking the road and obstructing traffic? I really wish we could see exactly how things happened.

People walk down the street all the time in my neighborhood which is an older established "village" in a large city. We just slow down and go around. Some streets have sidewalks, some don't. We have lots of runners and walkers and stroller walkers and dog walkers and they all walk in the road. Not out on major roads like Memorial, but on the residential streets, yeah. It's not a problem. I never really gave it a thought until the MB shooting.

Evil
it is a huge difference between walking down the street and walking down the MIDDLE of the street. Officer told them to get off the street and they casually told him-'we're almost home'. To me-that is the beginning of a diss towards law enforcement. It certainly was a reason for the officer to back up.
What happened after that is anybody's guess.

 

[Lovejac]

But how did he pass them at all if they were blocking the road and obstructing traffic? I really wish we could see exactly how things happened.

People walk down the street all the time in my neighborhood which is an older established "village" in a large city. We just slow down and go around. Some streets have sidewalks, some don't. We have lots of runners and walkers and stroller walkers and dog walkers and they all walk in the road. Not out on major roads like Memorial, but on the residential streets, yeah. It's not a problem. I never really gave it a thought until the MB shooting.

There are a couple of teenagers in our neighborhood that walk down the middle of the road :gaah:

I can get around them if I go slow and if no cars are parked in the street and I have a big ole mini-van, but it's aggravating as he!!

 

[EvilSoup]

No, it isn't. I am kind of shocked at the sleuthing and nastiness going on towards the four witnesses also. I wonder, is this normal here? I don't recall such hostility directed toward the only witnesses out there so far.

This case is weird, because should this case go to trial, OW would be the defendant. So that is not our usual stance. We usually are on the side of the prosecution. (By "we" I mean WS members in most of the current and archived cases I have slavishly read).

However, because there have been no charges as yet, BOTH parties are considered victims.

HOWEVER, because both parties are victims/perps, the usual rules are amended to allow sleuthing as reported by MSM.

Do I have this right, mods? I am feeling like I finally surfed the crest.....hope I "got" it! :lol:

 

[SStarr33]

Anderson Cooper, CNN, was just discussing the audio tape again. During the show, videos were played, showing images after the shooting, LE, people, the police cars etc.

For a moment, they showed a close-up of a police car with quite some blood on the bottom of the driver's door!

Did anyone see this as well?

Where exactly was the blood?

 

[SStarr33]

This case is weird, because should this case go to trial, OW would be the defendant. So that is not our usual stance. We usually are on the side of the prosecution. (By "we" I mean WS members in most of the current and archived cases I have slavishly read).

However, because there have been no charges as yet, BOTH parties are considered victims.

HOWEVER, because both parties are victims/perps, the usual rules are amended to allow sleuthing as reported by MSM.

Do I have this right, mods? I am feeling like I finally surfed the crest.....hope I "got" it! :lol:

Same as the Zimmerman case.

 

[EvilSoup]

There are a couple of teenagers in our neighborhood that walk down the middle of the road :gaah:

I can get around them if I go slow and if no cars are parked in the street and I have a big ole mini-van, but it's aggravating as he!!

It is sort of annoying here, but mostly because the young moms with strollers in fit gear are in SUCH good shape and I am trying to maneuver my SUV around them while cramming a scone into my mouth.

Scones are SOOOOO delicious!