MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #18

[tlcya]

All the things that Crump said ' we KNOW about MB---OW did not know those things at the time.

'we know he was 18'---OW did not know that

' we know he was unarmed..' --OW did not know that, but he did know that he was dangerous because he had just been assaulted by him.

' we know his body laid baking in the sun for 4 hours...' --- WHY was that, Mr Crump? Was that OW's fault? Or the FPDs fault?

' we know he was facing no criminal charges..." --OW did not know that. In fact, he probably thought he was a suspect in the prior robbery. '

' this has been confirmed by court and police' ...---not really. I think the opposite, actually.

' MB had no arrest record.' ---I am not sure this is correct. But we will see, I guess.

But the important thing about this letter is that the long list of things that Crump points out that we KNOW, are things thats the officer did not know at the time of the confrontation. He didnt know he was an 18 yr old unarmed 'innocent' kid. He only knew what he was experiencing in their brief and violent interaction.

Social media grabbing unflattering allegations about the shooting swings both ways

For instance

We know MB did not have his hands above his head as was first reported and a move which is still mimicked by protesters over a month later

We know MB had committed a strong arm robbery minutes before his encounter with OW, whether OW knew that or not matters not to me as it speaks to MB's possible state of mind and attitude that day, no matter how it is spun it's not good look for the innocent teen jaywalking narrative.

We know that per FPD MB punched OW and struggled over the gun with him at the car, also not a good look.

We know that MB was not executed via gunshots to his back as he ran and that in fact the last shots, including the one that was the fatal wound to the head came as he was advancing by some means toward OW and now reports from recent witnesses say that OW was retreating by backing up as he fired which lends credibility to the MB WAS advancing toward OW in some manner as he was being fired upon.

We know that MB did not say as first reported "Don't shoot - I'm unarmed" per DJ statements which started out indicating MB did just that but have evolved and been "clarified" as evidence came to light disputing his initial version.

And yet many of these fallacies are still very prevalent in social media and being used to vilify and call for the immediate incarceration of OW.

The knife cuts both ways. JMO

 

[Klood-N]

Klood-N your empathy and compassion for MB and his struggle(s) are commendable. imo It is very sad that there may be people exploiting his death for some cause. But what if it is as simple as MB was an up and coming "hustla" and made that choice early on. There are too many opportunities for individuals to make choices and resources available in this country. And (hypothetically) I wonder if we will ever hear the narrative that MB and DJ were criminals and on the way to becoming "gangsters" if it turns out that this is the case. Minimizing the crimes even if committed by teenagers, helps destroy communities when young criminals are given to their own devices (ie gang activity includes drug trafficking, human trafficking, prostitution etc, these are crimes against innocents that destroy their lives and neighbors where such activity continues). The coddling has to stop at some point because to me it's part of the reason these types of behaviors/crimes continue. So while I do understand MB's upbringing, imo all humans suffer but we make choices to do "good" and minimize suffering of others. Rich, poor, etc we all struggle whether it's abusive relationships, mental disorders, etc. no one has a perfect life, but not everyone goes around strong-arming shopkeepers and assaulting cops b/c they are feeling emotional pain. You are putting MB in the best possible light and that is very respectful to MB.

Thank you. Trust me, plenty won't think I'm putting him in the best light and that to even mention these factors is to "character assassinate" him. Actually, I started to turn to that portion of it, then realized that my original intent was to talk abt DebinGA's post. I snipped a bunch out. This is the short version, lol. But yes, I'm all for each person taking responsibility. Michael's consequences cost him his life this time. Every day we face tons of choices. How we face them and challenges is up to us. In fact, I hate that early run-ins with the law are pled down. Make it such a shocking sting and inconvenience more realize this is not the path of least resistance. Too often crime is exactly that. I agree with you.

 

[TexanMom]

Social media grabbing unflattering allegations about the shooting swings both ways

For instance

We know MB did not have his hands above his head as was first reported and a move which is still mimicked by protesters over a month later

We know MB had committed a strong arm robbery minutes before his encounter with OW, whether OW knew that or not matters not to me as it speaks to MB's possible state of mind and attitude that day, no matter how it is spun it's not good look for the innocent teen jaywalking narrative.

We know that per FPD MB punched OW and struggled over the gun with him at the car, also not a good look.

We know that MB was not executed via gunshots to his back as he ran and that in fact the last shots, including the one that was the fatal wound to the head came as he was advancing by some means toward OW and now reports from recent witnesses say that OW was retreating by backing up as he fired which lends credibility to the MB WAS advancing toward OW in some manner as he was being fired upon.

We know that MB did not say as first reported "Don't shoot - I'm unarmed" per DJ statements which started out indicating MB did just that but have evolved and been "clarified" as evidence came to light disputing his initial version.

And yet many of these fallacies are still very prevalent in social media and being used to vilify and call for the immediate incarceration of OW.

The knife cuts both ways. JMO

Funny, I didn't see any of these facts mentioned in Dana Milbanks op-ed for the Washington Post. It's a shame that the media is just is as complicit in pushing the false narratives about this case.

 

[bettybaby00]

Funny, I didn't see any of these facts mentioned in Dana Milbanks op-ed for the Washington Post. It's a shame that the media is just is as complicit in pushing the false narratives about this case.

So true....and it's unbelievable to me that most people don't realize how they're being manipulated, regardless of the topic.

 

[MyBelle]

Funny, I didn't see any of these facts mentioned in Dana Milbanks op-ed for the Washington Post. It's a shame that the media is just is as complicit in pushing the false narratives about this case.

I'm amazed the media doesn't recognize the agenda in play. It's a huge elephant in the room.

 

[LambChop]

:modstop:


No more discussions on schools. It is off topic.

 

[bettybaby00]

I'm amazed the media doesn't recognize the agenda in play. It's a huge elephant in the room.

It's not about not seeing it, they see it, and they embrace it.

 

[al66pine]

Back to Ferguson City Council & ppl's comments - at meeting, to MSM, in Soc Media -
It's insulting that Ferg City Councilpassed new law re Citizen Review Bd/Public Safety Bd without 'consulting them.'

From what I understand about municipal council procedure, it is similar to Mo. state legis procedure.
Any person (Ferg res or non-res., any group, any special interest can ask a member to introduce a bill,
i.e., a proposed law/ordinance. A council member can introduce a bill without any further steps.
Often or at least sometimes, city council sponsor discusses proposal w constituents, holds town hall meetings, etc.
So accusations - by ppl at meeting or in MSM - about city council violating Mo Sunshine Laws,
w secret meetings in back room for (racial or any other type of) conspiracies, imo, appear to have no basis.

Some MSM stated (sorry, no links): council 'passed new laws'although it appears, imo, MSM sh/state instead:
Sept 9 Mayor Knowles introduced bill 7063, which will, if/when passed, establishes Citizen Review Bd/Public Safety Bd.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/239427005/BILL-NO-7063-Establishing-Public-Safety-Commission.

If we take time to read it, we notice - end of bill states Sept 9, 2014 "first reading"
and ........................................................................Sept 23, 2014 "second reading."

To some or many, it may be a forgone conclusion that the bill will pass, but imo, it is not yet law.

JM2cts JMO MOO IMO

 

[katydid23]

Back to Ferguson City Council & ppl's comments - at meeting, to MSM, in Soc Media -
It's insulting that Ferg City Councilpassed new law re Citizen Review Bd/Public Safety Bd without 'consulting them.'

From what I understand about municipal council procedure, it is similar to Mo. state legis procedure.
Any person (Ferg res or non-res., any group, any special interest can ask a member to introduce a bill,
i.e., a proposed law/ordinance. A council member can introduce a bill without any further steps.
Often or at least sometimes, city council sponsor discusses proposal w constituents, holds town hall meetings, etc.
So accusations - by ppl at meeting or in MSM - about city council violating Mo Sunshine Laws,
w secret meetings in back room for (racial or any other type of) conspiracies, imo, appear to have no basis.

Some MSM stated (sorry, no links): council 'passed new laws'although it appears, imo, MSM sh/state instead:
Sept 9 Mayor Knowles introduced bill 7063, which will, if/when passed, establishes Citizen Review Bd/Public Safety Bd.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/239427005/BILL-NO-7063-Establishing-Public-Safety-Commission.

If we take time to read it, we notice - end of bill states Sept 9, 2014 "first reading"
and ........................................................................Sept 23, 2014 "second reading."

To some or many, it may be a forgone conclusion that the bill will pass, but imo, it is not yet law.

JM2cts JMO MOO IMO

EXACTLY> nothing was passed. The way city council works is that someone puts forth a PROPOSAL to address a specific problem. And then it is discussed at various meetings and it is shaped and expanded or it is dropped. If the locals want to have input, they can come to future meetings and listen. learn then ask to speak and give their input.

 

[TheDuchess]

I'm amazed the media doesn't recognize the agenda in play. It's a huge elephant in the room.

It's not surprising if the media is actually friends with the elephant!

 

[ontheclock]

I wish I knew how to double quote both TheDutchess and bettybaby00. I couldn't agree more.

 

[reedus23]

Don't twist it. The fact is he's not a suspect. And that's a difference between him and Michael.

Link to this shooting being an exception to standard procedure.

Twist what? I'll use the words of the DA...the subject of the investigation. Not sure how much different that is from saying one for whom there is suspicion they have committed a crime, but I suppose there is a difference.

Here ya go. http://www.newsbeat.me/news/grand-j...now/017e24e8-78e9-3681-b595-9c414f0f0f73.html

In St. Louis County, all homicide cases go before a grand jury, according to the county prosecutor's office.

Does not say that all police involved shootings go to a GJ. Do you have a link that says they do? We might have competing links.

 

[bettybaby00]

Back to Ferguson City Council & ppl's comments - at meeting, to MSM, in Soc Media -
It's insulting that Ferg City Councilpassed new law re Citizen Review Bd/Public Safety Bd without 'consulting them.'

From what I understand about municipal council procedure, it is similar to Mo. state legis procedure.
Any person (Ferg res or non-res., any group, any special interest can ask a member to introduce a bill,
i.e., a proposed law/ordinance. A council member can introduce a bill without any further steps.
Often or at least sometimes, city council sponsor discusses proposal w constituents, holds town hall meetings, etc.
So accusations - by ppl at meeting or in MSM - about city council violating Mo Sunshine Laws,
w secret meetings in back room for (racial or any other type of) conspiracies, imo, appear to have no basis.

Some MSM stated (sorry, no links): council 'passed new laws'although it appears, imo, MSM sh/state instead:
Sept 9 Mayor Knowles introduced bill 7063, which will, if/when passed, establishes Citizen Review Bd/Public Safety Bd.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/239427005/BILL-NO-7063-Establishing-Public-Safety-Commission.

If we take time to read it, we notice - end of bill states Sept 9, 2014 "first reading"
and ........................................................................Sept 23, 2014 "second reading."

To some or many, it may be a forgone conclusion that the bill will pass, but imo, it is not yet law.

JM2cts JMO MOO IMO

Unfreaking believable :facepalm:

And yet French et al are insulted and outraged over what "was done" meanwhile it hasn't even passed yet????

I'm finding it really hard right now to find any sympathy for these people after having just watched the greta van susteren interview with James Foley's parents. Talk about having grace and dignity in the face of unimaginable tragedy.

 

[reedus23]

VIDEO Debunks #MichaelBrown Coached Witnesses
At gotnews

<modsnip>. <modsnip> People milling about talking about what they saw is hardly coaching anyone. That is an unbelievable stretch, even for Johnson or whoever runs that site. If anything, Johnson could have dogged the FPD or the County PD for not identifying and separating witnesses. <modsnip>The cop was standing right there.

 

[popsicle]

St. Louis grand jury weighs charges in Ferguson shooting

..... McCullough, whose office has prosecuted more than 700 murder cases since 1991, has overseen 33 prosecutions of police officers during his 23-year term but has never pressed charges against an officer accused of killing a suspect.

......said prosecutors review several police shootings each year but rarely pursue charges, largely because laws give police a broad latitude to defend themselves and use deadly force if they believe they are in imminent danger.

..... there were four cases of police shootings he has brought to a grand jury. None resulted in criminal charges, including a much publicized 2000 case of two law enforcement officers who shot and killed two unarmed black men during a drug bust.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0H62LJ20140911?irpc=932

There is this info from earlier.

 

[reedus23]

I've listened to the gotnews video 10 times and really am not connecting the dots on what I am supposed to be hearing...I've seen these videos plenty of times already, and to me it just sounds like people standing around talking about what they saw...I didn't hear any "crafting" going on, other than perhaps inadvertent, which is what I always thought had happened. I figured people saw what they saw, discussed it and filled in the blanks for one another. Not that they necessarily "conspired" or anything...but even the discussions going on do add a taint to the testimonies...anyone hear anything else I should be looking for???

There is nothing else. It is Johnson generating clicks with a sensational claim. Edited out my personal thoughts on Johnson.

 

[popsicle]

I wish I knew how to double quote both TheDutchess and bettybaby00. I couldn't agree more.

Every post you want to quote, click on the box with little + sign next to it(bottom right on the post)....except on the last post that you want to quote, on that one you click the "reply with quote". Sorry, I am terrible at explaining stuff.

 

[LambChop]

We were following CJ's tweets while he was trying to get MB's juvenile records released by way of a lawsuit. Other than that we probably want to stay away from any political discussions CJ enters into. If you feel it has value that would be directly related to this case a MOD can always review it.

Thanks, Lambchop

 

[bettybaby00]

I wish I knew how to double quote both TheDutchess and bettybaby00. I couldn't agree more.

Every post you want to quote, click on the box with little + sign next to it(bottom right on the post)....except on the last post that you want to quote, on that one you click the "reply with quote". Sorry, I am terrible at explaining stuff.

LOL I didn't even see Onetheclock's post!

And who the heck knew that's what that little button was for!

One day I pressed it to see what it was for, and when nothing happened, I figured "oh well" :blushing:

Eta: you're not terrible explaining it, I got it just fine

 

[Minette]

"If his hands were up, it's murder"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, no.