MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #13

[tlcya]

Exactly, his assistant clarified some things about the grazing and arm positions, but everyone wanted to dismiss that a week ago and go with what they THOUGHT Baden was saying because it supported their take on things. Now? Not so much. All interesting, IMHO.

I have been away much of the week from this thread/case. Hase Baden now stated something other than what he originally stated which I took to mean:

a) I am limited somewhat by the lack of certain evidence and the fact that a previous autopsy has been performed.

b) MB was shot in his front but it is possible one of those wounds came to his inner forearm while running away we just don't know

c) All of his wounds were non fatal saving the last shot which entered the top of his skull

 

[Montjoy]

And the take away should be?

Because the message I am hearing....it's perfectly okay to commit a strong armed robbery, disobey an officer of the law and it's acceptable to assault a police officer.

RSBM --

I've never read anyone suggesting any of this here.

 

[CoolJ]

BBM.
That he was in fear for his life.

I feel that this is going to be hard to PROVE either way. So, assuming what we have heard to be OW's version is actually his version. Do we just take his word for it? Should we give LE the benefit of the doubt in all cases of he said/she said.
I remember when I was a kid, I was with a few friends messing around, throwing snowballs and what not on private property. That day that private property had some damage to some windows. That damage was done by another group of friends that were there that day. I saw it happen. A cop came by to check things out and specifically pointed at me and said he drove by earlier and saw me up by the broken window ( I was nowhere near it). He said to me "who do you think is going to be more believable to a judge, a 13 yr old punk kid or me, a 15 yr veteran police officer?
Yes much smaller scale, but what he said is true, LEO's get he benefit of the doubt when it is their word versus another. I think they take advantage of that fact. I think a LEO should have to corroborate what they say just like the rest of us.

 

[Ladylub]

If this case does go to trial, what do you good folks think OW's defence is going to be? That he was in fear for his life, he was in fear for someone else's life, or he had the right to shoot in order to stop a fleeing felon?

Fear for his own life and right to shoot a fleeing felon with both sides agreeing there was an altercation at/in the car.

 

[TorisMom003]

I feel that this is going to be hard to PROVE either way. So, assuming what we have heard to be OW's version is actually his version. Do we just take his word for it? Should we give LE the benefit of the doubt in all cases of he said/she said.
I remember when I was a kid, I was with a few friends messing around, throwing snowballs and what not on private property. That day apparently that private property had some damage to some windows. That damage was done by another group of friends that were there that day. I saw it happen. A cop came by to check things out and specifically pointed at me and said he drove by earlier and saw me up by the broken window ( I was nowhere near it). He said to me "who do you think is going to be more believable to a judge, a 13 yr old punk kid or me, a 15 yr veteran police officer?
Yes much smaller scale, but what he said is true, LEO's get he benefit of the doubt when it is their word versus another. I think they take advantage of that fact. I think a LEO should have to corroborate what they say just like the rest of us.

There is at least one eye witness that has been heard telling what occurred that appears to match up with Wilson's recall of the incident. Now as far as I know this person has not gone to the media and has not been identified to the public. We have also heard that there are 12 (give or take) witnesses that also back up Wilson's recall of the incident.

This is not going to be a case of he said/she said between only Wilson and the witnesses that claim Brown was shot for no reason with his hands in the air while trying to surrender.

MOO

 

[Linda7NJ]

RSBM --

I've never read anyone suggesting any of this here.

I was specifically speaking to those that make excuses for his behavior and believe Brown should have been permitted to flee....or at the very most shot in a leg.

I've read that here and IMO it's the sentiment of many of those in the media from Ferguson.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jmcgladr]

Fear for his own life and right to shoot a fleeing felon with both sides agreeing their was an altercation at/in the car.

Both sides agree there was an altercation BUT it has not been shown who was the instigator in that altercation. Was it MB or OW, or both? That, to me, is a HUGE question!

 

[jggordo]

I believe that St Louis County knew before 12:47 PM about the incident as they were dispatching cars earlier.

**If you visit this "scanner chatter" please remember scanner chatter TOS rules.**

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...0898788&highlight=scanner+rewind#post10898788

 

[CoolJ]

He was not jaywalking at the time. Jaywalking is crossing the street when there is no light and/or crosswalk. What he was doing was walking down the middle of the road. It also does not matter at all if Wilson knew what had occurred at the store. Brown knew what had occurred and what his own state of mind was. The matter of going after a police officer has zero to do with if the police officer knew of the crime that had occurred just before, and more (everything) to do with the criminal knowing what had occurred.

MOO

Semantics.. Jaywalking is walking down the middle of the street also. FPD chief said from the beginning that it was jaywalking. IMO what was going on inside MB's head does not matter when decided justified or not. It is what was in OW's head at the time that matters.

 

[TorisMom003]

It is really hard to tell. It will depend on what comes out. It will be harder to me to claim self defense if their is a break in the bullet firing as the tape seems to show.

A pause in the firing would tell me that Wilson paused to see if Brown was stopping his advance towards Wilson or if Brown was continuing to advance towards Wilson. If Brown had stopped, the firing would not have continued. However, since it did continue, then the threat was not over and Wilson was still being charged at.

MOO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Did you follow the Rebecca Zahau case? Her body was left outside for a lot longer than 4 hours for the media flying overhead to take all of the photos that they wanted. She was not even covered with a sheet even though she was completely nude. The ME had other things to do so she was left in the open, uncovered, until the ME arrived.

I have kept up with many cases and the body laid at the scene for 10 hours or more. I don't know why they were complaining about 4 hours which is a short length of time. The entire scene has to be mapped off showing MB laying there. Photographs and videos have to be taken and all sorts of investigation of the scene must be done first before the body can be removed. The body is the most relevant part of any crime scene. There is a lot more to do at a scene than taking the body to the morgue.

Some State Medical Examiner/Coroner Offices requires that the body is not to be covered by LE until they personally arrive at the scene or someone on their staff arrives. It may be a state law in some states.

For MB's body to be covered with a sheet within 8 minutes is extremely rare and the body laying there for only 4 hours is not a long period of time. It does show me that LE was trying to give MB's body respect no matter what the naysayers say. Most likely if they whisked him away quickly they would have something negative to say about that too. LE were in a no win position no matter what they did, imo.

IMO

 

[Linda7NJ]

Fear for his own life and right to shoot a fleeing felon with both sides agreeing their was an altercation at/in the car.

IMO Wilson had an obligation and the duty to stop Brown, by any means necessary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

A pause in the firing would tell me that Wilson paused to see if Brown was stopping his advance towards Wilson or if Brown was continuing to advance towards Wilson. If Brown had stopped, the firing would not have continued. However, since it did continue, then the threat was not over and Wilson was still being charged at.

MOO

That is certainly one explanation for it, But I don't know what THE answer is because I can see many possibilities.

 

[Phoebeb]

I'd like to know what he was saying with animation to the officer next to him in the Piaget video while they are viewing the body. And also, what that officer is saying to him. JMO

I think he would naturally be relaying what had just happened. I know I would! Looks like his arms were moving as he was talking to the other LE

 

[cady]

He was not jaywalking at the time. Jaywalking is crossing the street when there is no light and/or crosswalk. What he was doing was walking down the middle of the road. It also does not matter at all if Wilson knew what had occurred at the store. Brown knew what had occurred and what his own state of mind was. The matter of going after a police officer has zero to do with if the police officer knew of the crime that had occurred just before, and more (everything) to do with the criminal knowing what had occurred.

MOO

I see what you are saying, but I don't think that MB's state of mind is an issue. It is interesting to us, but not an issue. If he were deemed to be psychotic, that wouldn't go to the issue of whether or not DW was in fear for his life. The verbal or physical threat and how it is perceived by DW is what goes to justifiability, for bringing his weapon into the scenario......and his perception of threat until the last shot is fired. Just the way I see it. JMO

 

[TorisMom003]

Semantics.. Jaywalking is walking down the middle of the street also. FPD chief said from the beginning that it was jaywalking. IMO what was going on inside MB's head does not matter when decided justified or not. It is what was in OW's head at the time that matters.

I am unsure as to how this determination has been brought about. It definitely does matter what was going on in Brown's head at the time. It matters if Brown decided that he was NOT going to be arrested now that he was an adult and he tried to take Wilson's gun. It matters if Brown decided that he was going to attack Wilson, both in the SUV and outside of the SUV. It matters a lot as to what was going on in Brown's head.

MOO

 

[jmcgladr]

A pause in the firing would tell me that Wilson paused to see if Brown was stopping his advance towards Wilson or if Brown was continuing to advance towards Wilson. If Brown had stopped, the firing would not have continued. However, since it did continue, then the threat was not over and Wilson was still being charged at.

MOO

But what do we have to back up that theory? Do police officers never shoot at people who are standing still and not threatening them, or are surrendering? I'd say they probably SHOULDN'T do this under most circumstances, but I think we've all read of cases where they have. Police officers make mistakes, or can be running on adrenaline and not thinking the situation through, just like any other humans.

 

[CoolJ]

And the take away should be?

Because the message I am hearing....it's perfectly okay to commit a strong armed robbery, disobey an officer of the law and it's acceptable to assault a police officer.
Mike Brown should have been permitted to continue skipping down the street ....
Mike Brown was no saint, no innocent cherub. He's not the one to be held out as some sacrificial lamb that was slaughtered in the street.

No! The take away should be ....STOP committing violent crimes. When caught, surrender, don't flee, don't attack officers, don't reach for their guns. It's dangerous and by doing so ....death is a very real possibility.

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IMO the only reasons of the above that should give LE the right to use lethal force is if they were being attacked (not, had been attacked, but in the process of being attacked) or if someone is going for their gun (not, went for their gun, but is in the process of going for their gun). None of which has been proven yet IMO. I do not think a LEO should be allowed to use lethal force because a suspect is fleeing but that is just my personal opinion, the laws are fuzzy on this topic.

 

[TorisMom003]

But what do we have to back up that theory? Do police officers never shoot at people who are standing still and not threatening them, or are surrendering? I'd say they probably SHOULDN'T do this under most circumstances, but I think we've all read of cases where they have. Police officers make mistakes, or can be running on adrenaline and not thinking the situation through, just like any other humans.

We have the eye witness that can be heard on one of the videos stating that Brown continued to go towards Wilson, as if the shots were missing him. This man has not been identified to the media, has not spoken to the media. We also have Wilson's police history. Just because one (or a few) officers may react in a certain way does not mean that Wilson would follow that same path. Just like we can not say that because one (or a few) criminals behave in a certain way that Brown would follow that same path.

MOO

 

[TheDuchess]

I think he would naturally be relaying what had just happened. I know I would! Looks like his arms were moving as he was talking to the other LE

What video are you guys talking about? TIA