MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #14

[Elley Mae]

Driving with a suspended license, no insurance, etc are not what I call minor traffic offenses. The law is the law. If folks don't want to pay the fines for breaking the law, then they shouldn't break the law.

MOO

I read the npr article, its as if they shouldn't have to pay because they are poor. jmo

 

[Trident]

Racial tensions are part of the problem in Ferguson, but there are other factors at work.

The town of Ferguson balances it's budget with fines for minor infractions. The police are expected to issue tickets for things that would at most result in a warning in other communities. A recent study found the average household in Ferguson owes about $2,500 in fines and fees.

The people of Ferguson do not see the police as part of the community. The police seem to share this attitude. It isn't helped by the fact that most of the officers live outside of town.

Compared to Canada, police in the US are quick to resort to lethal force. Just a few days after MB was shot, a clearly disturbed man was gunned down only a few miles from Ferguson. The police made no attempt to calm him down when they arrived on the scene. Nor did they attempt to subdue him with non lethal weapons. They just got out of the car with firearms drawn and started yelling. When the suspect made a small move toward the police, they started shooting and kept firing even after he was down.

Link???

 

[bettybaby00]

:bump:

The way I'm reading this, pretty much every witness we're aware of has at least one of these credibility issues.

NOTE:was intending to post this in last thread but you know how that door closes...so bringing this over

Those witnesses will be questioned about what they SAW, who they spoke to and when, who else was there, and all kinds of questions about whether they discussed the content of their testimony with others and who those people were. The value of witness testimony is entirely dependent on their credibility. When credibility is lacking their testimony can be discounted.

Even at a GJ proceeding the DA has to present exculpatory evidence, including witness impeachment evidence. The DA can't just present witness testimony he/she knows is impeachable without disclosing that information. If an indictment does issue, I think a defense attorney would have a field day with the witness testimony here. And that's without knowing anything about the background of the witnesses, other than the criminal record of DJ which contains a conviction for an offense very relevant to character/propensity for telling the truth. There's also so much video and audio and taped interviews.

MO jury instructions are similar to those in other jurisdictions:

In deciding what the facts are, you may have to decide what testimony you believe and what testimony you do not believe. You may believe all of what a witness said, or only part of it, or none of it. In deciding what testimony of any witness to believe, consider the witness's intelligence, the opportunity the witness had to have seen or heard the things testified about, the witness's memory, any motives that witness may have for testifying a certain way, the manner of the witness while testifying, whether that witness said something different at an earlier time, the general reasonableness of the testimony, and the extent to which the testimony is consistent with other evidence that you believe.

The actual instructions may vary. Example from case upheld on appeal:

You are instructed that you are the sole judges of the credibility of the witnesses and of the weight and value to be given to their testimony. In determining such credibility and weight you will take into consideration the character of the witness, his or her demeanor on the stand, his or her interest, if any, in the result of the trial, his or her relation to or feeling toward the parties to the trial, the probability or improbability of his or her statements as well as all the other facts and circumstances given in evidence.

forms.lp.findlaw.com/form/courtforms/fed/cir/c8/d/ned/ned000008.pdf

MO cases set out the proper standards and requirements for impeachment:

[During cross examination, a witness may be impeached at anytime by inquiring of the witness about any matter (even a collateral matter) involving (1) the witness's ability to perceive, (2) the witness's bias, (3) the witness's prior inconsistent statements, (4) the witness's prior convictions, or (5) evidence of the witness's character for truthfulness and veracity.

The ability to use extrinsic evidence to impeach (that is to say, documentary or testimonial evidence offered to combat a witness's denial of a matter during cross examination) varies depending on the method of impeachment employed. Parties are permitted to introduce extrinsic evidence to impeach a witness by showing his or her inability to perceive the events testified to; prior convictions; or to show bias, prejudice or interest in the proceeding, regardless of whether the subject of the extrinsic evidence is independently material to the case. Parties are permitted to introduce extrinsic evidence of a witness's prior inconsistent statement...

STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent, v. ROBERT M. ALLISON, Appellant, MO Ct of Appeals, September 14, 2010

Originally Posted by TorisMom003
I do believe that LE mishandled at least one thing at the very start of this case. The witnesses should have never been allowed to congregate together and be allowed to share their versions with each other. However, I also understand that at the time LE had bigger issues on their hands that they were dealing with.

MOO

 

[Trident]

I read the npr article, its as if they shouldn't have to pay because they are poor. jmo

IF they are poor, after all the social programs they have, why don't they move where there are jobs? Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do. We ALL do, black, white, yellow, or green. Griping gets no one anywhere, although rioting and intimidation do seem to work. Third world crap as far as I'm concerned, and I do not want to live in the third world. Maybe Ferguson needs to raise their goals beyond a high school diploma from an unaccredited school, and aim for reality.

I am so done with this "poor me" garbage, and I spent the largest part of my life as a liberal.

My opinion, of course.

 

[Frydaddy]

Maybe some do but some never do.

I watch MSM cable news outlets everyday. Lots of misinformation is put out that they never retract nor correct. They just run with the misinformation over and over again.

Imo, journalism has changed. There was a time if the media had a video they would never put it on the air UNTIL it was vetted to be authentic but now they air it anyway knowing it hasn't been authenticated at the time.

Journalism has become more about ratings and being the one to have 'breaking news' than worrying about what they put out is the truth or not. They just run with it nowadays.

Another drastic change I have seen is reporters are reporting with a biased slant these days depending on the agendas of the media outlet they work for. I have also seen them try to be part of the story itself and making the story about them instead of just reporting the facts. Don Lemon has been the worst concerning this case, imo. Real journalist years ago did not inject their own personal emotions and opinions about any case. They remained neutral as they should have and simply reported the facts and the citizens could decide what to believe based on the vetted facts that were released. Those days have been long gone and will never return, imo.

In this case I have even seen some reporters be a part of inciting the anger and passions of others hoping something bad would happen so they would have the latest breaking news story.

Of course they can be sued but they rarely are and they really don't care if they are anyway. Even if they have to pay out funds later on the rating boost they got for putting out misinformation offsets it.

Some of the MSM have been the worst reporters concerning this case. IMO

IMO

Excellent post! "News" has become a very provocative business that is always slanted a certain way. Two things that stood out to me in the coverage of this case. One, the witnesses brought their lawyers in anticipation of tough questions being asked, yet none ever were. Two, none of the interviews were done by Fox (that I recall). The combination of those two things gives the impression that the media is complicit in furthering a particular narrative, the antithesis of that narrative has to come from blogs and boards like this. Which makes me wonder, do you think other sites get to link to WS as a legitimate source of information? Half kidding here, but I think this site is as close as you'll find in exploring both sides of a situation.

 

[tlcya]

Good morning fellow case followers! Checking in for news and updates. Hopefully it was a relatively peaceful night in Ferguson. Anything breaking? Any word on GJ? Any other mucky mucks or elected officials stick their foot in it again? Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Racial tensions are part of the problem in Ferguson, but there are other factors at work.

The town of Ferguson balances it's budget with fines for minor infractions. The police are expected to issue tickets for things that would at most result in a warning in other communities. A recent study found the average household in Ferguson owes about $2,500 in fines and fees.

The people of Ferguson do not see the police as part of the community. The police seem to share this attitude. It isn't helped by the fact that most of the officers live outside of town.

Compared to Canada, police in the US are quick to resort to lethal force. Just a few days after MB was shot, a clearly disturbed man was gunned down only a few miles from Ferguson. The police made no attempt to calm him down when they arrived on the scene. Nor did they attempt to subdue him with non lethal weapons. They just got out of the car with firearms drawn and started yelling. When the suspect made a small move toward the police, they started shooting and kept firing even after he was down.

IMO that was no small move that guy made. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bettybaby00]

The town of Ferguson balances it's budget with fines for minor infractions. The police are expected to issue tickets for things that would at most result in a warning in other communities. A recent study found the average household in Ferguson owes about $2,500 in fines and fees.

Most of the fines are for minor traffic offenses.
http://www.npr.org/2014/08/25/343143937/in-ferguson-court-fines-and-fees-fuel-anger

I mentioned previously that my town is an incorporated village with its own Police Dept. We also have a "Main Street" with local shops and businesses. It's a well known fact that our PD continuously stakes out the parking lots of these businesses looking to ticket any and every car they can. Expired registration, or inspection stickers, time limit violations, handicapped parking, parked the wrong way (most of our lots mandate parking heading in), train station lots require a permit, etc. the village also has a code against commercial traffic except for local delivers. Cops continually pull over trucks and often issue a number of tickets b/c many of these trucks are driving with faulty equipment. My point being, every month 100s upon 100s of residents get ticketed, and you know what? We learn our lesson, pay the ticket and get over it.

The only way that $2,500 number conceivably makes sense is b/c the fines aren't being paid. If you keep getting them, and don't pay them, the penalties are huge.

I find it extremely hard to believe that number is in any way accurate.

 

[Footwarrior]

Link???

See page 31 of this document, a white paper from a public defenders group:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vwptqn3mhq9xvy7/ArchCity Defenders Municipal Courts Whitepaper.pdf

 

[Trident]

IMO that was no small move that guy made. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, I don't think it was a small move either, but on the other hand, I'm not sure what he was trying to prove, if he was in his right mind. Do you know why he took the drinks, set 'em on the wall, and stood back to be executed? I sure as 'ell don't, unless he was not in his right mind.

I don't even understand why they killed him, or why there wasn't a riot at that point. I would have understood that.

 

[Suthrnqt]

“I tell these kids, if you don’t like the rules, go to law school. We need black lawyers, black judges. But this griping in the streets will get you dead. It means nothing,” she said. “You want to fight? Fight for utility rates to go down like we did back in the ’60s when I was a little kid. Fight for something that means something. Fight for getting somebody’s rent paid.”


http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/pro-darren-wilson-rally-finds-unlikely-hero


:clap:

A voice of reason amongst all the chaos. Well said. :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[Linda7NJ]

No, I don't think it was a small move either, but on the other hand, I'm not sure what he was trying to prove, if he was in his right mind. Do you know why he took the drinks, set 'em on the wall, and stood back to be executed? I sure as 'ell don't, unless he was not in his right mind.

I don't even understand why they killed him, or why there wasn't a riot at that point. I would have understood that.

Not in his right mind could be due to drugs or mental Heath issues...IMO

That incident was discussed in great depth earlier...complete with a police training video explaining the 21 foot rule.

He clearly was a danger.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[imamaze]

A biased slant, news being slanted in a certain way? I'm pretty old guys, been around a long time and hasn't that always been the case? I mean is it humanly possible to report news and not have a slanted or 'your' view of what's going on? and even if that is the case don't 'we' the ones watching the news gravitate to news we agree with? I mean I just don't see that being any different. 'We' all have our own views and its generally based on 'our' life experiences. This includes the African American community. Their distrust of law enforcement comes from life experiences. All very understandable in my opinion.

I am very pro law enforcement, have had all good experiences with them, do I think certain groups are targeted by 'some' in law enforcement? Yes I do so although I do think OW was assaulted, I can certainly understand all the distrust in this community.

All my opinion only and posting as Ima, not a moderator.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I don't know if this has been posted already, but anyway, I thought the piece quite interesting.

Biased Coverage of Police Acts

http://www.theledger.com/article/20140831/EDIT02/140839898?tc=ar

********************

Where is the wall to wall coverage on unarmed Dillon Taylor who was shot dead by a black cop?

 

[DebinGA]

NPR: "Typically, he says, someone gets stopped for a rolling stop at a stop sign, or for a broken tail light. Then police find other problems. "It's driving while suspended, no proof of insurance and failure to register a vehicle," he says. The fines and fees can add up to hundreds, even thousands of dollars."

None are minor offenses. Everyone stopped for a minor offense must produce a current driver's license, proof of insurance, and car registration. I imagine that's the law throughout America.

 

[tlcya]

“I tell these kids, if you don’t like the rules, go to law school. We need black lawyers, black judges. But this griping in the streets will get you dead. It means nothing,” she said. “You want to fight? Fight for utility rates to go down like we did back in the ’60s when I was a little kid. Fight for something that means something. Fight for getting somebody’s rent paid.”


http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/pro-darren-wilson-rally-finds-unlikely-hero


:clap:

The daughter of a St. Louis civil rights activist who worked with “the table-flippers and the cage-rattlers of the day” to fight segregation, she said she understands the plight of African-Americans clearly, but she has little patience for the tactics of the young people who took to the streets in the wake of Brown’s death.

SNIP

“I don’t care if there’s anybody who looks like me. The only people I care who look like me have this shirt on,” she said. ‘That’s who looks like me. Those are my people.”

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/pro-darren-wilson-rally-finds-unlikely-hero

Wow, thank you momrids, I love this lady. Her sentiments echo what I have read in these threads by so many. If you want to fight social injustice get out there and fight it by all means. I have little patience with the Ferguson debacle but that does not mean I do not fully support the right of the people to go about affecting real change. She gets it. Maybe because she grew up around true activism and is therefore likely actually informed about true social injustice and what it takes to affect change rather than trash a city in an attempt to strongarm what you want from city and county officials.

Bravo to her.

 

[TheDuchess]

IMO that was no small move that guy made. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well here is a question....let's say no one made a move. Officer standing with gun drawn on the suspect, who is holding a knife. He tells the suspect several times to drop the knife, yet the suspect stands still and refused to drop the knife. Can/should the officer shoot?

 

[Trident]

Not in his right mind could be due to drugs or mental Heath issues...IMO

That incident was discussed in great depth earlier...complete with a police training video explaining the 21 foot rule.

He clearly was a danger.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd like to give ya a heads up, but it was clear to me that young man was executed. He wasn't even close to LE. They just killed him for not much reason, in my opinion.

On the other end of the spectrum, there was good reason, as far as I'm concerned, to shoot MB after assaulting DW.

I just calls it as I sees it.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Well here is a question....let's say no one made a move. Officer standing with gun drawn on the suspect, who is holding a knife. He tells the suspect several times to drop the knife, yet the suspect stands still and refused to drop the knife. Can/should the officer shoot?

Not enough information for me to have an opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tlcya]

NPR: "Typically, he says, someone gets stopped for a rolling stop at a stop sign, or for a broken tail light. Then police find other problems. "It's driving while suspended, no proof of insurance and failure to register a vehicle," he says. The fines and fees can add up to hundreds, even thousands of dollars."

None are minor offenses. Everyone stopped for a minor offense must produce a current driver's license, proof of insurance, and car registration. I imagine that's the law throughout America.

Considering I got a ticket for my plate registration being out of date two weeks ago that is costing me a $120 fine to make right and I am the working poor who has spent the last three summers living without gas in my home because I can't afford the bill, I am less than impressed by those who use it as an excuse to say the rules are unfair. Insurance is a requirement. Registration is a requirement. A valid Drivers License is a requirement. I broke the rules, I was at a stoplight. A police officer rolled up behind me, and sure enough as soon as the light changed he pulled me over. Did I scream it is unfair and raise a ruckus? No.

Because the laws and rules apply to me (a poor person) just as much as they do to others. I accepted my ticket, apologized for my error, drove off from the police officer, went immediately and addressed the registration problem, went without the rest of the week and this week am paying my fine - no mean feat when you make what I make.

What I did not do was claim I had been profiled or picked on or that I am poor and should get a bye or get mouthy with the officer who pulled me over while doing his job.