MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #16

[Dana]

Off topic but thanks for the laugh, I needed it.

BBM: I read "twerking" :hilarious:

I have a horrible toothache and headache. It hurts to laugh but this was worth it!! TY!

 

[Lovejac]

Or if you're a typical middle class kid, whose parent paid for most costs of a first car. And bailed their kid out of trouble a few times, which a few Sleuthers have described doing in the last thread. Yep, things like that can make all the difference in life.

I'm sensing that people working hard to have a middle class life and then taking care of their family members is upsetting to you. :waitasec:

Or am I misunderstanding your post?

 

[Truthy]

Thank you, Klood-N! It's not as if MB was profiled. He robbed a store, assaulted the clerk, then ignored a police officer's lawful order to get out of the street, then assaulted the police officer, then fled, then turned and charged the police officer. There was no profiling going on there, and this case isn't about profiling.The activists and instigators are trying to use this case as if it's their own personal candy store to demand everything they've ever wanted.

This case isn't about profiling, and it's not about traffic tickets. It's about a very large powerful man who committed several violent acts in a very short space of time, and who suffered the consequences of his choices.

Link to where he was identified as a robbery suspect BEFORE he was stopped by police?
I have never seen that claimed before.

 

[sonjay]

I think you're missing the point. Why don't more white people have warrants? Because all whites are responsible? Why are so many of the warrants disproportionately for blacks? It's not whether or not a particular person should have a warrant, but what about the enforcement is leading to such a disparity and being so lopsidedly oppressive for one group but not the other.

If and when they stop making death threats against OW and others, people might be more willing to consider these issues. But this case isn't about warrants or profiling. This case is about a man who assaulted a store clerk and then a police officer.

 

[sonjay]

Link to where he was identified as a robbery suspect BEFORE he was stopped by police?
I have never seen that claimed before.

Nor have I claimed it, and I don't understand why you're asking me for a link.

 

[tlcya]

oceanblueeyes...my thoughts on some of your points.


I really don't get all the angst over this. Amnesty days is not unusual in our area. If you are the right person, you can also simply ask for your charges to be dismissed and again, if you're the right person, they will be. I'd suggest that the majority of residents in Ferguson are not the right people. I would hope that people are just as incredulous over the fact that cops are rarely written tickets. Speeding and drinking and driving are frankly much more dangerous than driving while suspended in most cases. I would love to see a study done that shows the percentage of traffic tickets that are issued that are to police officers. Just seems to be a double standard (not necessarily you) by some when it comes to these things.



Our rates are so high because insurance companies like to make billions of dollars.



What about those that do try to appear in court but are denied for whatever reason? According to some others here, one is not entitled to their day in court and should just mail in their payments.



I don't know if one municipality's actions or one County's actions dictate what the rest of the country does, but given that amnesty days are already held here on occasion, I would suggest yes, contact your local politicians and tell them you want it too. Bankrupt? You're right. Some just might.



I never wear my seat belt and I've never been pulled over just for that. But then, I'm white. FYI - On your side of the argument...a seat belt ticket is only like $10.



I am afraid you have missed the point then.

JMO

I don't think we have. I think we simply disagree with the point.

 

[CuriousGuy]

I think you're missing the point. Why don't more white people have warrants? Because all whites are responsible? Why are so many of the warrants disproportionately for blacks? It's not whether or not a particular person should have a warrant, but what about the enforcement is leading to such a disparity and being so lopsidedly oppressive for one group but not the other.

Could it be the law breakers in this instance are primarily blacks? Or is everything a grand conspiracy to oppress minorities?

 

[reedus23]

Legally, it is not a 'belief' that is to be looked at with 20/20 hindsight. It is up to the officers reasonable belief in the moment. And given the injuries to his face, and the struggle over the gun, and the shot fired, imo, he had a reasonable belief that this was a very dangerous man.

Especially if the cop was blindsided, bumrushed. That makes him believe it is a very violent, impulsive person, who is acting irrationally. It becomes the officers responsibility to stop this man who assaulted him, imo.

eta: it does not matter if the suspect tried to attack anyone else at the time of the shooting. Just the fact that he was running from the officer, who he tried to kill, when they struggled over the gun, is enough to make him a public threat.

We'll just agree to disagree again respectfully. I'm not buying into the theory that he was a threat to the public at large at the moment of the fatal shots unless he was arrested. I suspect, without doing any legal research, that those instances involve situations where a person is more than a theoretical threat to the public. It's all kind of moot though, because I do think, as you point out, that there is a question of whether or not he was a threat to DW himself. I also agree, it's all not necessarily with hindsight and that it's not just a blind belief by the officer but a reasonable belief at that time.

The main point of my post was that the part that seems to get lost in a lot of the conversation is not only must DW have either believed a felony was committed or that MB was a threat, but that deadly force was immediately necessary to effect the arrest. That language in the statute is the part that I think the majority of the case will come down to. While threat/no threat will be discussed I'm sure, I think the major point will be whether deadly force was immediately necessary...i.e. had MB surrendered himself to arrest or not. While we have some of the picture we hardly have the full picture to determine which is the case.

 

[reedus23]

Can't believe a young man is dead and this has become the traffic ticket thread.

I was shaking my head about that too.

 

[Footwarrior]

The death of Michael Brown was the spark that set off the protests. The traffic tickets are one of the reasons the people of Ferguson do not trust their own police force. That distrust was the fuel the spark ignited.

 

[scottiemom]

CNN just now covering the livery driver. Websleuths beats 'em again!!

 

[reedus23]

So they should get a blanket get-out-of-jail-free card for all non-violent offenses? Sorry, not in my book. And anyway, there's already an annual amnesty program. How many warrants are these people collecting every year, that it becomes such a problem during a 12-month period in between amnesties?

IMO, a big part of the problem is people who simply don't believe the rules that apply to the rest of us should apply to them. Granting a blanket amnesty would only encourage that attitude to continue and to become more entrenched.

You wanna live in a civilized society? You gotta play by civilized society's rules. Perhaps if MB had learned to play by the rules of a civilized society, he would still be alive.

Apparently Ferguson issues over 30,000 despite only having 20,000+ residents.

 

[reedus23]

She said media, not FPD. And, the investigation was immediately handed over to StL, and Chief Belmar held a press conference releasing that info the very next morning.

That's not exactly getting out in front of it. The City released their statement within hours, if that long.

 

[sonjay]

The death of Michael Brown was the spark that set off the protests. The traffic tickets are one of the reasons the people of Ferguson do not trust their own police force. That distrust was the fuel the spark ignited.

So the response is, "Death to Darren Wilson! And get-out-of-jail-free cards for the rest of us! Or we'll huff and we'll puff and we'll blow this town down."

No. Just no.

 

[CHERIE.T]

Could be fingerprints or other evidence. That evidence will go to GJ too, sounds like.

The source claims that there is "solid proof" that there was a struggle between Brown and Wilson for the policeman’s firearm

Edward Magee, spokesman for St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCullough, said the office will not disclose the nature of the evidence it will reveal to a grand jury.

"We'll present every piece of evidence we have, witness statements, et cetera, to the grand jury, and we do not release any evidence or talk about evidence on the case."
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/2...en-before-shooting-michael-brown-says-source/

Yea, that was discussed here when the shooting was first reported.
Remember to check out all our WS threads on this case.

 

[reedus23]

If and when they stop making death threats against OW and others, people might be more willing to consider these issues. But this case isn't about warrants or profiling. This case is about a man who assaulted a store clerk and then a police officer.

Yes and no. There is definitely a specific case involving the question of whether or not a cop was justified in killing another. But what I have heard between all of the rhetoric has as much to do with those other issues as they do the facts of this specific case. That is also why I feel the DOJ investigation frankly is more important to the community than if one cop is charged or not charged in one specific case.

 

[sonjay]

Apparently Ferguson issues over 30,000 despite only having 20,000+ residents.

The number of tickets Ferguson issues, and the number of arrest warrants the scofflaws of Ferguson accumulate, have nothing to do with the shooting of MB.

 

[Oceans]

Off topic but thanks for the laugh, I needed it.

BBM: I read "twerking" :hilarious:

Hahaha! Don't scare me like that! For a second I thought, I misspelled it! :innocent:

 

[reedus23]

Could it be the law breakers in this instance are primarily blacks? Or is everything a grand conspiracy to oppress minorities?

I think that is what the DOJ investigation is needed for. To determine if there are enforcement issues or not. To suggest that there isn't enough information out there already that at least justifies looking into it is, well an opinion that one is entitled to I suppose. I'll leave the last question alone.

 

[Minette]

We'll just agree to disagree again respectfully. I'm not buying into the theory that he was a threat to the public at large at the moment of the fatal shots unless he was arrested. I suspect, without doing any legal research, that those instances involve situations where a person is more than a theoretical threat to the public. It's all kind of moot though, because I do think, as you point out, that there is a question of whether or not he was a threat to DW himself. I also agree, it's all not necessarily with hindsight and that it's not just a blind belief by the officer but a reasonable belief at that time.

The main point of my post was that the part that seems to get lost in a lot of the conversation is not only must DW have either believed a felony was committed or that MB was a threat, but that deadly force was immediately necessary to effect the arrest. That language in the statute is the part that I think the majority of the case will come down to. While threat/no threat will be discussed I'm sure, I think the major point will be whether deadly force was immediately necessary...i.e. had MB surrendered himself to arrest or not. While we have some of the picture we hardly have the full picture to determine which is the case.

If he did assault a police officer then he DID commit a felony and he WAS a danger to the public at large because LEOs are those we pay to enforce the laws that we the public have made and an assault on one of them is an assault on the law and on the public by proxy. To me, the cigar theft or the refusing to stop walking in the middle of the street weren't the issue, it was assaulting a police officer. If he did that (REGARDLESS of how severe the injuries to OW ended up being) and if he did anything other than immediately freeze and not make any movements toward OW or towards escaping whatsoever (REGARDLESS of what position his hands may or may not have been in) then in my opinion it was a justified shooting. It is very easy to have 20/20 vision when you aren't the one being confronted by TWO individuals (and maybe DJ did not make a single aggressive movement or statement, NEVERTHELESS there were still two of them and one officer and a split second decision to be made. At the moment of the shooting, OW was not privy to MB's hopes, dreams, academic aspirations, juvenile record, age, number of loving family members, potential conversion to religion, preference of playing football or not or ANYTHING other than his actions immediately preceding the shooting. THOSE are what got him shot, IMO. Everything else is just hindsight.

MOO, etc.