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

[reedus23]

Eyewitness testimony from DJ.

Yepp.

 

[reedus23]

This eyewitness?

https://twitter.com/SmokeyMcPot_/status/348431962349895680

I take it you don't smoke? Not sure what that has to do with anything but ok, dude likes to smoke. Heck, I think even the WaPo article said as much.

 

[katydid23]

First paragraph...I will again use my hypothetical. If I walk up to a cop, punch him in the face and lay down in the street with my arms spread wide, hands open, showing I have no weapon and surrendering to arrest, that cop has no right to shoot me under the law. I completely understand that this is an extreme example but I don't know how else to get my point across that MB could have been a sole instigator and and felon and sucker punched DW, but if he had surrendered himself to arrest prior to those fatal shots, there is no justification because the use of deadly force was not immediately necessary to effect the arrest. That is not condoning MB's actions at all. I hardly believe MB is a saint. But if an arrest was able to be effectuated without the use of deadly force, it doesn't matter how gross or how wrong MB's actions were previously, he should have been arrested.

Please tell me where I said anything that remotely said the cop deserved to be assaulted? If I said that, I will apologize. Do I think the cop was rude? Probably by my definition of rude, but maybe he needed to be or maybe that isn't considered rude by others. But that doesn't come anywhere near saying it warrants someone assaulting an officer.

I think either I haven't been clear in my position or you are misunderstanding or misstating my position.

Correct, under the example you stated above, there would be no reason to shoot.

But that is NOT what happened in this case. Reportedly, they struggled over the gun, which went off in the struggle. And THAT can be seen as attempted murder of a LE officer. You cannot do that and expect to run off and not meet with lethal force to stop you.

In your example, you laid down and complied. Again, that did not happen in this case. After blindsiding the cop, he ran, and at that point, the officer has to assume he is dangerous. He may be wanted for serious crime, may be mentally off his rocker and violent, and so he may car jack someone or take some child hostage. How would the locals have reacted if the officer sat in his car and waited for backup and something like that had happened?

I know you didnt say outright that he deserved to be assaulted. But several times you have said that both parties are at fault and it is complicated. And I am saying that even if he did say 'get out of the effin road' [ altho I doubt that was the first thing he said to them] , it still does not mean MB had a right to attack him. jmo

 

[popsicle]

Who to believe, your eyes or a lying witness. :lol:

 

[reedus23]

Who was successful, Mr Sharpt*n---you? How does one measure success in this type of thing?
Did someone gain financially?
Were more people given perks, respect, advantages?

I really want to know in a measurable way what type of success can be expected from all this?

I don't know how you measure it in this instance. Maybe changes within the FPD. Maybe the FPD wearing body cams. Wait. That change has already come about.

As to the previous protest, I would assume if it's an important enough issue, you can go and look up to see how many minority contracts have been awarded. I think that was the issue. Can't remember if the target was the City, the County or the State though.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

My only response is....my loved ones would be rich.

I guess it just comes down to me thinking the role of LE is not to test them to see if they can take people's violence and antagonism then those people feign forgiveness and it is all simply fine and dandy.

 

[tlcya]

Yepp. I 100% get yours. I would not want DW to be tried or convicted for an unjustified shooting if that shooting was, in fact, justified, simply because outside pressures have been brought to bear. Maybe I need to be more vocal on both sides of the equation because I think it's equally wrong for either side to reach or jump to any conclusions without the facts. I suppose the problem is I feel like I'm always responding to posts here and, well, there's not too many posts from the other side even posted here. If the good Mr. Shahid or whatever his name is came in here posting that he should be convicted without an investigation or GJ hearing I'd be just as quick to tell him he's off his rocker.

Thank you. That clarifies things for me a great deal. I could see that you and I were very close if not the same in a lot of our basic beliefs on the larger issues this case has seemed to polarize. I was just getting the mistaken impression by a few of your recent posts that you seemed to feel very strongly that there was criminal behavior in this case and were closed to the possibility that this shooting may be justified.

Likewise people may be getting the impression by my passionate posting on this case that I am not open to the possibility that ODW acted improperly.

Now I see more clearly that you are affording the victim and the eyewitnesses more leaway and I am affording ODW more leaway but both of us are open to the possiblity we are wrong if and when more or better evidence comes to light either of us could change our views on this case.

Thank you for that. I feel we are closer in our POVs than I at first thought, we are simply giving differing evidence and information differing weight at this time and as more comes to light either of us could see those scales we are weighing with tip another direction.

 

[reedus23]

He should have said "A vigorous investigation"......and yes, there is a big difference between "investigation" and "prosecution" in my mind.

moo

I think the public would have had a better understanding of it if he had used that word. I'd agree with you. I understand a vigorous prosecution to mean something else and frankly took it as a carefully worded politicized statement that is not inaccurate but could easily be taken the wrong way. So bottom line, yes, I agree. Should have used a different term.

 

[katydid23]

If there's any struggle at the car, to me it makes more sense than DW pulling MB into the car and it makes more sense than MB deciding his 300 pounds or whatever it is could get through that window and get a gun. That or there was no scuffle at all.

He was never trying to get through a window to get a gun. He shoved the cop back into the car, reportedly. And then began punching him. I am not sure the door was ever closed at this time. I doubt that MB ever planned on grabbing the gun. But once the cop went for his weapon, MB had no choice. :cow:

 

[popsicle]

Mother of murder victim calls for focus on black on black crime


Cook is also frustrated because she recently reached out to community leaders to participate in her annual march against crime and got no response.

‘What angers me the most is the community leaders, religions leaders where were you when I sent you an email to march with us it hurts. We are all hurting since we don`t have our children anymore.’ Said Cook

http://fox2now.com/2014/09/01/mother-of-murder-victim-calls-for-focus-on-black-on-black-crime/

 

[katydid23]

Should it?

If your significant other was killed by John Doe, would you want John Doe's family investigating if John Doe did anything wrong? Would it make you feel better if, during that investigation of John Doe, John Doe's family were wearing shirts saying they are fully behind John Doe? I'm not begrudging them the right to show support but I can understand why some would have no faith in a system set up this way. I just think the system needs to be changed. I wouldn't mind some sort of special committee that investigates all officer involved shootings that includes citizens of the community. I'm sure it has it's pitfalls and I don't claim to have thought the whole process out, but the system as is seems wrong.

There is. It's called the GRAND JURY. :wink:

 

[katydid23]

Now I am confused. Do we even know that the officer cursed at DJ and MB to move to the sidewalk?

Nope. But I was just saying, that EVEN IF he did, it was not enough reason for him to be assaulted. I don't think he did start his interaction with them by swearing. But there is a chance that IF he had to back up because they refused his initial request, then he MIGHT have been more forceful the 2nd time.

It is interesting and refreshing, that DJ did not accuse OW of calling him any racial epithets however.

 

[Phoebeb]

DeDee, I can't quite figure it out myself :facepalm: I'm not one to ever make excuses for criminals and liars. I don't know why I feel this way.

I agree with every single word of your post and I know that DJ is partially responsible for this mess that plagues Ferguson. I just feel like this could be a real watershed moment for DJ. :dunno:

Maybe my brain is being taken over by alien mind control. Where is that tin foil hat?

I'm right there with you... inexplicably....

 

[reedus23]

I will respond to yours with my own. How am I and others who share my POV to take those who say the system is corrupt top to bottom and can't be trusted to properly and fairly investigate this case seriously when they do not seem at all interested themselves in availing themselves of the readily available facts of this case? The worm turns both directions in other words.

By facts of this case I refer to the continued chants of "hands up don't shoot" when Piaget, and DJ both readily admit (now) that Michael Brown's hands were not above his head and he did not in fact say anything let alone "I am unarmed don't shoot." or "I surrender" which is what many still seem to believe happened in this case.

Or is it yet another instance where this case is just a symbol so accuracy matters not, its simply statement of a larger thing?

Please understand there is no snark intended in the above. I really do want to understand why you feel as you do. I am trying to stay focused on this case. If there is a problem with the general system or officials in the Ferguson area, that is going to be investigated, The feds are on the scene. Those concerns seem to be being taken seriously at this point.

When will these citizens be heading home and back to their lives?

First, I would point out that in my question, we were talking about an agency that is actually charged and has the authority to do something, i.e. investigate the case. They may very well be capable of investigating it, but the apparent bias calls it into question when they are already saying they support DW.

In your questions, yes, I wish the community as well would wait until we do know the facts. They shouldn't obviously be calling for a conviction or prosecution when we know nothing.

I'm not sure how you think I feel. Boy I hope that doesn't sound snarky either. I'm just not quick to say it was justified because we don't know anything.

 

[branwynbreeze]

Eric Holder

JMO

Here is my question. How is a community supposed to have any faith in the St. Louis County PD and the St. Louis County DA to fully investigate their own when there are these statements of support or solidarity? I fully understand why they do and don't begrudge them the right to. But serious question, how is a community supposed to feel any fair investigation is being conducted if they are also saying, at the same time, they are fully behind the person being investigated. I just don't get that.

 

[tlcya]

First, I would point out that in my question, we were talking about an agency that is actually charged and has the authority to do something, i.e. investigate the case. They may very well be capable of investigating it, but the apparent bias calls it into question when they are already saying they support DW.

In your questions, yes, I wish the community as well would wait until we do know the facts. They shouldn't obviously be calling for a conviction or prosecution when we know nothing.

I'm not sure how you think I feel. Boy I hope that doesn't sound snarky either. I'm just not quick to say it was justified because we don't know anything.

make sure you go back a page and read mine to another of yours [ETA currently post number 949]. I think we are closer than you think and explain why.

Thanks again for the civilized discourse on what I know is a really tough case for all of us to discuss responsibly. your posts always challenge me to examine my viewpoints closely and for that I am sincerely appreciative.

 

[branwynbreeze]

Both side agree there was a tussle.

If there's any struggle at the car, to me it makes more sense than DW pulling MB into the car and it makes more sense than MB deciding his 300 pounds or whatever it is could get through that window and get a gun. That or there was no scuffle at all.

 

[DebinGA]

Whatever tone DW used to order DJ onto the sidewalk, it had no effect if we believe DJ that after informing the officer they were almost at their "destination," he and MB continued down the middle of the street, leaving DW still stopped in the same spot. Isn't ignoring a police order a crime?

 

[Lovejac]

Now I am confused. Do we even know that the officer cursed at DJ and MB to move to the sidewalk?

Just the word of DJ and, umm
Well, you know

 

[reedus23]

There is. It's called the GRAND JURY. :wink:

In this case, who gathered the information to give to the GJ?

I have enjoyed the discussion as always. In fact, continued typing with a tornado was miles away until lost power. Best shut it down for the night. Good night all.