MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #19

[sonjay]

But again-- the absence of an orbital fracture means nothing, really.

Exactly.

The presence of an orbital fracture would be additional supporting evidence of the nature and severity of the assault at the SUV. But the absence of an orbital fracture wouldn't negate the assault, wouldn't magically make the "turn and advance on OW" non-existent, and wouldn't magically make the shooting unjustified.

The orbital fracture was reported based on several unnamed sources. It was refuted by an unnamed source. Its existence or non-existence lies a long way toward the "rumor" end of the spectrum.

OTOH, we have named sources giving us lots of information that, IMO, lie more toward the "fact" end of the spectrum. I tend to pay more attention to those, and to the small amount of actual hard evidence that we do have that's very far toward the "fact" end of the spectrum.

I weigh the credibility of the witnesses individually. Does their story change with each re-telling? Does it make logical sense? Is it internally consistent? Does it correlate with the few hard facts that we have? Does it contradict what other witnesses have said? Could they have seen what they claim to have seen from the vantage they claim to have had? Does their demeanor while recounting the story look and sound like they're truthfully describing what they saw? The GJ will weigh all of those things, and if it should go to trial, so would the trial jury.

 

[sonjay]

But the grand jury are most likely not experts in these matters either, yet you consider it OK for THEM to decide whether the shooting was justifiable, and whether charges should be brought. What's the difference, other than THESE ordinary folks are called a "grand jury"? The members of the grand jury have no unique qualifications, in fact they haven't even been screened for bias - that is why the grand jury process bothers me.

The GJ, at least in this case, is going to see and hear all of the evidence, all of the witnesses. Not just the narrative of a single witness who saw things from a single vantage point and adds their own political and racial spin to what they saw. Plus, all they're doing is deciding if there's sufficient evidence to proceed with charges against the police officer. If it should go to trial, the actual jury would also hear from expert witnesses who are qualified to interpret things.

The GJ system may not be perfect, but being that we're all humans and all imperfect, we'll probably never be able to come up with a perfect system. It's what we've got, and I don't see it going away anytime soon.

If you would prefer to toss out the GJ system, the way to do it is through the normal political and legislative process, not to make a special exception for one particular case.

 

[sonjay]

Seriously, there's probably more of a spectrum than hard line between "rumor" and "fact."

Rumors - any old Joe, bad source - avoid

Spurious claims - as in spin from lawyers (Eg, lying uncovered for hours)

Leaks from officials - get fuzzy. Depends on both the numbers and reliability of the sources and how they fit or conflict with known facts.
Public statements from officials - I take as facts within context.

Public releases of reports, test results, forensics... Fact.

Thank you, excellent post!

I would rank "spurious claims" (that we know are false) as worse than rumors from any old Joe. The rumors from Joe may or may not be true -- sometimes the most outrageous rumors turn out to be factually true -- while we know the spurious claims are false.

I would add witnesses -- named witnesses, who are willing to have their name attached their story publicly -- as better than rumors, generally. IMO, some named witnesses can be more reliable than leaks from officials, and others can be very unreliable. Named witnesses actually would be in various places in your ranking, so I guess there's not one spot where they can be ranked.

Publicly available photos and videos (as long as they're not photochopped) are generally very reliable as far as showing what they show at a particular moment in time. Although, as we know, photos & vids can show things only from a particular angle or fail to include things that can vastly change our perception of what they show.

 

[Frydaddy]

Well, folks were offered the chance to describe what is pertinent in the testimony of Crenshaw, Mitchell, and Johnson. Thus far, no takers. Appears that while were not supposed to dismiss them without facing subtle, veiled insults, no one can give a credible reason why anyone should believe them. So what does that say?

Have a good day all!

 

[Lovejac]

I'm not sure why you think it's "a wild story", "gilding the lily", and misinformation, which means false or inaccurate. Multiple news agencies have reported different sources for the orbital fracture information. The initial report through Gateway Pundit was from one source in LE and one source in the prosecutor's office, then re-confirmed with a 3rd local source. Fox's source was someone close to top brass, etc. Do you think each separate news agency is lying about having a source, or about what their source said? Do you think each source lied?

Here's many of the reports regarding Wilson's injuries. Which do you take issue with?


That Brown was unarmed is undisputed -- St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar said every casing found at the scene was from the officer's weapon -- but he said at a Sunday news conference that Brown was not an innocent victim.

"The genesis of this was a physical confrontation," Belmar said, adding that Ferguson police asked his office to investigate the case.

Without revealing what led to the dispute, Belmar said the preliminary investigation showed that the Ferguson officer tried to exit his vehicle, but Brown pushed him back into the car, "where he physically assaulted the police officer" and struggled over the officer's weapon, Belmar said.

The officer was taken to an area hospital where he was treated for a "swollen face," Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson said, adding he had not personally seen the officer's injury.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/11/us/missouri-ferguson-michael-brown-what-we-know/

The officer who shot Brown was injured in the confrontation and the “side of his face was swollen,” Jackson said. The officer was treated at a hospital, the chief said, and he was “very shaken.”
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ferguson-police-shooting-08132014-story.html

Jackson, who spoke on the phone with News 4's Laura Hettiger Wednesday morning, said the officer "was hit" and the "side of his face was swollen."
http://www.kmov.com/special-coverag...oting-suffered-facial-injuries-271079471.html

Darren Wilson, the Ferguson, Mo., police officer whose fatal shooting of Michael Brown touched off more than a week of demonstrations, suffered severe facial injuries, including an orbital (eye socket) fracture, and was nearly beaten unconscious by Brown moments before firing his gun, a source close to the department's top brass told FoxNews.com.

“The Assistant (Police) Chief took him to the hospital, his face all swollen on one side,” said the insider. “He was beaten very severely.”

Wilson suffered a fractured eye socket in the fracas, and was left dazed by the initial confrontation, the source said. He is now "traumatized, scared for his life and his family, injured and terrified"...
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/2...en-before-shooting-michael-brown-says-source/

A family friend of Wilson’s told The Washington Post that Wilson suffered a fractured eye socket. Ferguson police have said that Wilson’s face was injured and he needed medical treatment...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ecutors-have-not-spoken-to-darren-wilson-yet/


"Nancy, without question, there was some level of interaction, strong interaction, between the officer and Michael at the car. We don`t deny that,” Daryl Parks, attorney for Brown’s family said Monday night. “I think as evidence comes out, you'll see and hear more of that.
http://www.hlntv.com/video/2014/08/18/michael-brown-shooting-autopsy-fight-car

PARKS: Nancy, without question, there was some level of interaction, strong interaction, between the officer and Michael at the car. We don`t deny that. I think as evidence comes out, you`ll see and hear more of that. But that`s not what killed him.

GRACE: But wait a minute. When we first started --

PARKS: What killed him were the kill shots.

GRACE: -- you told me that the cop grabbed him from inside the car, and was struggling with him that way.

PARKS: I didn`t tell you that. I told you there was an interaction. This would be the first time you talking to me about them at the car. So that interaction didn`t happen at the car. More than a tussle, I would call it...


PARKS: Nancy, you`re talking about two different things. The part about the gun involved when the officer was in the car and attempted to get out of the car, first of all, and I admitted to you there was some type of altercation that happened as the officer was in the car and Michael was outside of the car...

NG: ...Daryl, I want to get back to the physical confrontation with the police officers. In your scenario, when does that happen in relation to the other bullets fired?

PARKS: Nancy, from the evidence that we have so far, there was something that happened between Michael and the officer while the officer was in the car, without question. I think that the evidence in this case, though, will have to look at what the injuries to the officer and the injuries to Michael that may be attributed to whatever happened as Michael stood outside of the car.

"that cut mark plus the other injuries to Michael`s hand plus whatever injuries to the officer, then you can start explaining what may have happened in the car."


http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1408/18/ng.01.html

:31 forward, listen at :41 "there may have been blows, they had an altercation" - Daryl Parks

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/the-kelly-file/index.html#/v/3739124713001

DARYL PARKS, BROWN FAMILY ATTORNEY: "...without question we know, that there was a major altercation at the car. There's no question about that, so you will never hear me say there wasn't a major altercation within the car. There was even a gunshot...within the car"
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1408/20/ng.01.html

Officer Darren Wilson also reportedly suffered injuries to his face and neck.
http://fox2now.com/2014/08/21/fox-2...-from-witnesses-of-fatal-mike-brown-shooting/

Hospital X-rays of the injury have been submitted to the St. Louis County prosecuting attorney and will be shared with a grand jury now weighing evidence to determine whether Officer Darren Wilson should be charged in the shooting.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...7524ea-293c-11e4-958c-268a320a60ce_story.html

WOW Klood-N! You are awesome! :loveyou:

To have all of that information, in one post, about MB assaulting Officer Wilson is so very helpful :tyou:

 

[Lovejac]

I am confused as to why even participate if waiting for the opinion of the GJ?

Surely, the goal is to try to ferret out the truth ...that's why we are all here, no?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. We're Websleuthers :websleuther:

We sleuth the web. That's what we do

 

[bettybaby00]

I agree, Linda7NJ. It's really a huge problem, nationwide. And IMO, the root of the problem lies with how parent/s choose to parent, or NOT parent, their children. And we can't fix that, IMO. All of us have an equal right to breed (or adopt), and then screw up our children, lol!

:lol:

When my kids try and argue or negotiate a decision they don't like, my answer is always the same.

"This isn't a democracy."

 

[TheDuchess]

Excellent post, Dana. MB attorney Daryl Parks stated several interesting things in this FOX News interview:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LANo51UiDqg&list=UUtBVdXXCwSU7gUGVj0D_g-g&index=330

Including his answer to whether MB turned around and then moved toward OW:

"I think if you're surrendering, you don't walk away from the person ... you walk to him to surrender."

Uh huh.

Wow...that is a HUGE admission!!! And yet one more thing we can add to the long list of evidence that supports a justified shooting that is either discounted or embraced by the MB camp. So that's what we are going with now???? When you surrender you walk toward the officer??? My 5 year old nephew knows that you wouldn't walk toward a cop who has a gun on you. Am I being Punked? Is he seriously trying to say that walking toward an officer is now the universal sign of surrender????

Even the gangbangers must be giving him the side eye on this one??? Sure kids. The next time an officer has his gun on you and tells you to freeze put your hands in air and immediately walk toward the officer in order to give yourself up.

 

[TheDuchess]

Excellent post, Dana. MB attorney Daryl Parks stated several interesting things in this FOX News interview:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LANo51UiDqg&list=UUtBVdXXCwSU7gUGVj0D_g-g&index=330

Including his answer to whether MB turned around and then moved toward OW:

"I think if you're surrendering, you don't walk away from the person ... you walk to him to surrender."

Uh huh.

The link brings me to a CNN video about ISIS.

 

[Elley Mae]

WOW Klood-N! You are awesome! :loveyou:

To have all of that information, in one post, about MB assaulting Officer Wilson is so very helpful :tyou:

I would be great if it were on a banner and flown over Ferguson for all the residents to see. jmo

 

[SnoopyDawgDawg]

And if I were patrolling in a crime ridden, gang infested neighborhood, YES, I would ASSUME all citizens are armed, until proven otherwise! But that's just me.

I have a code that has served me well for [mumblemumble] years: Assume all snakes are poisonous and assume all guns are loaded, and you will likely live longer. I guess I need to add "assume all citizens are armed" to the mix. I'm not a cop, but I'm thinking that advice would pretty much work for anyone nowadays.

 

[DebinGA]

We've seen multiple snippets of cell phone vids at Canfield Green, but what about the Canfield Green surveillance cameras outside? I was reading about the explosion in negligence claims filed by renters against landlords for failure to provide crime deterrents like outside cameras, particularly in the complex's parking lots and public areas. If the shooting had occurred at night, Crump may have claimed the lack of sufficient lighting played a part. Canfield Green must have had outside cameras in place, so where are those vids?

How dangerous was Canfield Green? Any reporting on how many times police have answered calls from there during the last 5 years, and what was the nature of the calls?

 

[DebinGA]

The link brings me to a CNN video about ISIS.

Oh dear, I'll find the right one with Daryl Parks on with Megan Kelly.

 

[bettybaby00]

We've seen multiple snippets of cell phone vids at Canfield Green, but what about the Canfield Green surveillance cameras outside? I was reading about the explosion in negligence claims filed by renters against landlords for failure to provide crime deterrents like outside cameras, particularly in the complex's parking lots and public areas. If the shooting had occurred at night, Crump may have claimed the lack of sufficient lighting played a part. Canfield Green must have had outside cameras in place, so where are those vids?

How dangerous was Canfield Green? Any reporting on how many times police have answered calls from there during the last 5 years, and what was the nature of the calls?

IIRC there was a news report about the cameras in the area being removed as evidence.

At the time I remember thinking, why do the cameras actually need to be remove? Wouldn't the tapes just be handed over?

I'll see if I can find a link.

Eta: sorry can't find it...add salt

 

[DebinGA]

Oh dear, I'll find the right one with Daryl Parks on with Megan Kelly.

Here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNMhQaaMdeg

Around the 2:40 mark, Megyn Kelly asks Daryl Parks what if the head shots occurred when "Michael Brown was aggressing toward the officer?" ... then Parks noted even if MB did so "he was a wounded man." Then Daryl Parks said, "I think if you're surrendering, you don't walk away from the person, you walk to him .. to surrender."

 

[Trident]

I'm wondering if without a video, some are not capable of forming opinions....?
How sad that's the standard that's now expected by a small chunk of society.
Between folks expecting video and the CSI Effect having them expecting DNA it's becoming a criminals paradise. IMO
That's pretty frightening too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe once people understand that certain segments of our population have different ways of processing information, due to culture, genes, life experience, what have you, we will all be in a better place to understand and discuss the whys and wherefores of what is going on in Ferguson. In my opinion we are dealing with two diverse (lovely word that) cultures, that do not have the same understanding, background, or goals. I wonder what hope there is for any sort of reconciliation in this case, or in the case of Ferguson as a whole. I see Ferguson becoming another Detroit, Camden, Philadelphia, etc, etc. - violent places that add nothing but crime to America.

America needs to come together with a common goal, a common language, common laws. Without that, we are doomed, the same as Rome and many other societies.

:cow: :cow: That's a cry for help

 

[DebinGA]

Eta: sorry can't find it...add salt

Thanks for trying. I remember that report too, and hope it's true. Video from an inanimate object is hard to dispute, unless it's been cropped/edited.

 

[Klood-N]

IIRC there was a news report about the cameras in the area being removed as evidence.

At the time I remember thinking, why do the cameras actually need to be remove? Wouldn't the tapes just be handed over?

I'll see if I can find a link.

Eta: sorry can't find it...add salt

You're right that was stated somewhere, maybe Piaget? Iirc, later an official (prosecutor's office or LE?) said there was no video of the entire incident, or something along those lines. If I come across those quotes again, I'll add them.

 

[Klood-N]

Here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNMhQaaMdeg

Around the 2:40 mark, Megyn Kelly asks Daryl Parks what if the head shots occurred when "Michael Brown was aggressing toward the officer?" ... then Parks noted even if MB did so "he was a wounded man." Then Daryl Parks said, "I think if you're surrendering, you don't walk away from the person, you walk to him .. to surrender."

Great find! :thumb:

 

[LambChop]

Why would MB ever attack a police officer? Are we desensitizing our youth?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...9e26c2-5154-11e3-9fe0-fd2ca728e67c_story.html

Youngsters interviewed in Columbia Heights said they knew about the knockout game from the simulation video game “Grand Theft Auto,” in which players build a criminal empire and assume roles of thugs who can carjack drivers, shoot people, pick up prostitutes and randomly knock people to the ground.