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

[katydid23]

Someone remind me again why we care about any juvenile records either way? If they don't amount to what would have been an A or B felony, who really cares? Other than those who just want more ammo to bash MB. Will it play any role what so ever beyond that?

The question everyone wants answered is WHO was the aggressor. Was it MB or OW. Dorian claims it was OW that rolled up on them and was being aggressive and set the confrontation into violent motion.

OW claims that MB as the aggressor and he blindsided the officer, assaulting him violently. I think the juvenile records might shine some light upon that question. jmo

 

[krimekat]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...uson-missouri-teen-shooting-witness/13992387/

right here is the beginning of the narrative

According to Johnson, the officer pursued Brown and fired another shot. which struck Brown in the back. He said Brown turned and faced the officer with his hands raised.

and Baden's spouting off to the media proved this narrative wrong/incorrect

Dorian IMHO is responsible for the crazy that ensued in Aug & continuing today

 

[krimekat]

The question everyone wants answered is WHO was the aggressor. Was it MB or OW. Dorian claims it was OW that rolled up on them and was being aggressive and set the confrontation into violent motion.

OW claims that MB as the aggressor and he blindsided the officer, assaulting him violently. I think the juvenile records might shine some light upon that question. jmo

or that video shot what 10 mins prior to the altercation at the SUV

 

[katydid23]

When I read the first time that the "records" had been asked for and the judge denied the release of said records, that pretty much answered it for me, no flash cards required.

If he had no record, they would have released the 'clean record' as proof.

 

[krimekat]

According to FPD, that wasn't put together until later that night or the next day. At least until FPD comes out and explains there own records.

I'm certain they will -- heck, many of us in south StL figured it out that night by listening to the scanner traffic

 

[krimekat]

We've been down this road before. The police reports for the robbery includes a an entry at around 7:00 that night indicating that no one matching the description of the robbery suspects had been found as of that time. Many gave reasons for such an entry. Some of those may or may not be accurate but I'd have to hear that from FPD before I believe that their own words don't say what they say. I haven't seen any explanation given that would make me go, oh, yeah, I misread that or oh, yeah, I see where they simply had the wrong time in there.

what?! I haven't seen that . . . as I have stated, many of us nerds knew what was going down in Ferguson on 9 Aug -- just needed a scanner feed & a FB account; like connect-the-dots

 

[Linda7NJ]

My thoughts in red.

I can't see red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

We've been down this road before. The police reports for the robbery includes a an entry at around 7:00 that night indicating that no one matching the description of the robbery suspects had been found as of that time. Many gave reasons for such an entry. Some of those may or may not be accurate but I'd have to hear that from FPD before I believe that their own words don't say what they say. I haven't seen any explanation given that would make me go, oh, yeah, I misread that or oh, yeah, I see where they simply had the wrong time in there.

I would imagine...there were bigger things going on between the shooting & 7pm. The only person with that knowledge was Wilson, who was injured and at the ER.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[katydid23]

Yeah, we have a divergence of opinion on that and that's fine.

Canfield was NOT a main thoroughfare though. It might be considered a main thoroughfare to some from smaller communities I guess, but to me a main thoroughfare here in St. Louis is Olive or Manchester or Lindbergh or 141 or the like. Not some small street that is bounded by residential living on either side.

The guys were BLOCKING traffic. That is the only road into the apt. complex. By walking down the middle of the road, drivers would have to go INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC to get around them. I just don't understand why you think it is 'frivolous' for the officer to ask them to get out of the road.

 

[Skimo1]

We've been down this road before. The police reports for the robbery includes a an entry at around 7:00 that night indicating that no one matching the description of the robbery suspects had been found as of that time. Many gave reasons for such an entry. Some of those may or may not be accurate but I'd have to hear that from FPD before I believe that their own words don't say what they say. I haven't seen any explanation given that would make me go, oh, yeah, I misread that or oh, yeah, I see where they simply had the wrong time in there.

I believe that the FPD certainly knew before 7:00pm on August 9th that Michael Brown was a suspect in the convenience store robbery, as at around 6:00pm on August 9th there was a public social media post from a close member of Michael Brown's family stating that Mike "did not steal any rellos." If Michael Brown's family already knew he was a suspect in the robbery of cigarillos from the market and were going into denial mode within hours of the shooting, then I'm sure law enforcement knew and were probably the source of the family's info regarding the robbery. I think we're just misreading that police report.

 

[sonjay]

I believe that the FPD certainly knew before 7:00pm on August 9th that Michael Brown was a suspect in the convenience store robbery, as at around 6:00pm on August 9th there was a public social media post from a close member of Michael Brown's family stating that Mike "did not steal any rellos." If Michael Brown's family already knew he was a suspect in the robbery of cigarillos from the market and were going into denial mode within hours of the shooting, then I'm sure law enforcement knew and were probably the source of the family's info regarding the robbery.

That Twitter guy who "live tweeted" the shooting posted at 4:33pm on the day of the shooting "apparently he stole some rellos."

There were tweets by a number of different people that MB was shot for stealing candy. (Did they really think he stole candy, or is that a slang term for rellos?)

It was apparently pretty common knowledge fairly early on that MB had stolen something.

But honestly, I don't even know why it matters. MB preached the word of Jesus to a random construction worker, then committed a strong-arm robbery, then approx. 10 minutes later assaulted a police officer, then approx. a minute later launched a renewed assault on the police officer. He got shot dead for that. Who cares when police closed out the robbery report? Why does it matter? The suspect was dead.

 

[Dana]

:welcome:

Welcome to WS Skimo1 !!

 

[oh_gal]

The question everyone wants answered is WHO was the aggressor. Was it MB or OW. Dorian claims it was OW that rolled up on them and was being aggressive and set the confrontation into violent motion.

OW claims that MB as the aggressor and he blindsided the officer, assaulting him violently. I think the juvenile records might shine some light upon that question. jmo

(b/u by me)
That ^ not only doesn't make any sense...it's not logical. This wiry, skinny LEO is going to roll up on this giant of a kid AND his buddy...(2 against 1), and get aggressive, just because? Does that make sense? (I know you weren't saying that).

 

[DebinGA]

If the stolen cigarillos weren't found on or near MB, where were they? On DJ? Or perhaps handed off to UG (Unknown Guy with them in store video)? MB had them all in his right hand, as he roughed up the store guy and flung him into the rack using his left hand.

http://fox2now.com/2014/08/15/raw-v...show-michael-brown-robbing-convenience-store/

 

[Oceans]

My thoughts in red.

I can't see red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh wow! You just reminded me of a good friend!

I took the liberty to change reedus response to "bold" instead of red. Hope, that helps.

Originally Posted by Frydaddy View Post

LOL - It is getting somewhat silly, the number of things that are portrayed as no big deal. I recall that some speculated that Big Mike had a tab going at the FM&L for his Swishers in an attempt to minimize the strong arm robbery. Those people are idiots.

Strong arm robbery...no big deal It's relevant. I don't know that it's so relevant that I'd constantly be shouting it from the mountain tops.

Hands on store owner...no big deal It's relevant, though it's redundant of above.

Walking down the middle of the street with a cop approaching... no big dealNo big deal at all.

Blowing off a cop's directions...no big deal A deal, but not a big deal.

Tussle...no big deal It's relevant.

Cop's facial injuries...no big deal Whatever they are, it's relevant.

Possible gang ties...no big deal Not sure it's relevant even if true. Courts are split on it. On the one side, they want to avoid guilt by association. On the other, I think such evidence has been used to identify a defendant(perp wore green, defendant's gang wore green) or to impeach if a defendant claims he never was in a gang.

Drug use...no big deal To the issues in this case? If it came back with PCP or Bath Salts, I'd find it very relevant.

Possible juvenile criminal record...no big deal At this point, irrelevant because he has nothing that constitutes the more serious offenses. Beyond that, depends on what it is. Someone earlier made a point of Assaulting an Officer being a class C felony. I would find that relevant.

No shots in back...no big deal It's relevant in so far as if there were, this case would probably be over already. It's not determinative of justification though.

Witness inconsistency...no big deal Could be an issue. What I find ironic is that I have seen both sides of this argued in support of OW though. The witness statements are inconsistent and therefore can't be believed and the witness statements are too consistent meaning their stories are contrived.

False narrative to start with...no big deal I don't even know what this means as far as relating to whether there was justification or not.

Dunno, seems like awfully low standards for one side, other side needs notarized copies of Grand Jury evidence to have an opinion.

My thoughts in red.

 

[oh_gal]

Yeah, we have a divergence of opinion on that and that's fine.

Canfield was NOT a main thoroughfare though. It might be considered a main thoroughfare to some from smaller communities I guess, but to me a main thoroughfare here in St. Louis is Olive or Manchester or Lindbergh or 141 or the like. Not some small street that is bounded by residential living on either side.

Does that mean it's ok to saunter down the middle of the road, blocking the roadway?

 

[bettybaby00]

I believe that the FPD certainly knew before 7:00pm on August 9th that Michael Brown was a suspect in the convenience store robbery, as at around 6:00pm on August 9th there was a public social media post from a close member of Michael Brown's family stating that Mike "did not steal any rellos." If Michael Brown's family already knew he was a suspect in the robbery of cigarillos from the market and were going into denial mode within hours of the shooting, then I'm sure law enforcement knew and were probably the source of the family's info regarding the robbery. I think we're just misreading that police report.

:welcome: looking forward to reading your posts

 

[Linda7NJ]

Oh wow! You just reminded me of a good friend!

I took the liberty to change reedus response to "bold" instead of red. Hope, that helps.

Originally Posted by Frydaddy View Post

LOL - It is getting somewhat silly, the number of things that are portrayed as no big deal. I recall that some speculated that Big Mike had a tab going at the FM&L for his Swishers in an attempt to minimize the strong arm robbery. Those people are idiots.

Strong arm robbery...no big deal It's relevant. I don't know that it's so relevant that I'd constantly be shouting it from the mountain tops.

Hands on store owner...no big deal It's relevant, though it's redundant of above.

Walking down the middle of the street with a cop approaching... no big dealNo big deal at all.

Blowing off a cop's directions...no big deal A deal, but not a big deal.

Tussle...no big deal It's relevant.

Cop's facial injuries...no big deal Whatever they are, it's relevant.

Possible gang ties...no big deal Not sure it's relevant even if true. Courts are split on it. On the one side, they want to avoid guilt by association. On the other, I think such evidence has been used to identify a defendant(perp wore green, defendant's gang wore green) or to impeach if a defendant claims he never was in a gang.

Drug use...no big deal To the issues in this case? If it came back with PCP or Bath Salts, I'd find it very relevant.

Possible juvenile criminal record...no big deal At this point, irrelevant because he has nothing that constitutes the more serious offenses. Beyond that, depends on what it is. Someone earlier made a point of Assaulting an Officer being a class C felony. I would find that relevant.

No shots in back...no big deal It's relevant in so far as if there were, this case would probably be over already. It's not determinative of justification though.

Witness inconsistency...no big deal Could be an issue. What I find ironic is that I have seen both sides of this argued in support of OW though. The witness statements are inconsistent and therefore can't be believed and the witness statements are too consistent meaning their stories are contrived.

False narrative to start with...no big deal I don't even know what this means as far as relating to whether there was justification or not.

Dunno, seems like awfully low standards for one side, other side needs notarized copies of Grand Jury evidence to have an opinion.

Oh thank you!!!!

I can see in color in real life, just not on my phone using tapatalk


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lovejac]

LOL - It is getting somewhat silly, the number of things that are portrayed as no big deal. I recall that some speculated that Big Mike had a tab going at the FM&L for his Swishers in an attempt to minimize the strong arm robbery.

Strong arm robbery...no big deal
Hands on store owner...no big deal
Walking down the middle of the street with a cop approaching...no big deal
Blowing off a cop's directions...no big deal
Tussle...no big deal
Cop's facial injuries...no big deal
Possible gang ties...no big deal
Drug use...no big deal
Possible juvenile criminal record...no big deal
No shots in back...no big deal
Witness inconsistency...no big deal
False narrative to start with...no big deal

Dunno, seems like awfully low standards for one side, other side needs notarized copies of Grand Jury evidence to have an opinion.

:hilarious: Absolutely!

When you have such low standards for kids, they come to expect rewards for wiping their butt and tying their shoes.

 

[Oceans]

Oh wow! You just reminded me of a good friend!

I took the liberty to change reedus response to "bold" instead of red. Hope, that helps.




Oh thank you!!!!

I can see in color in real life, just not on my phone using tapatalk


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hahaha! I'm happy for you!

For a minute I thought you were color-blind like my friend. I can not even image how that is!