MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #3

[SilkySifaka]

It's IMO disgusting the way Krump and others manipulate the gullible for their own agenda.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Personally I am glad they are there to support the family.

 

[Muffet]

I just heard Mr Crump say something VERY interesting to the crowd, while standing with MB's parents at the rally.

I'd like to see it gain, but he said, almost in a warning tone, to the crowd:

" Now YOU all are going to hear some talk about young Michael Brown in the next few days...and do not let it distract us from the truth/...."

I am paraphrasing, but that is the essence. It sounded to me like he was warning folks about another shoe about to be dropped. Maybe the tox results or the autopsy?

In other words, "don't let the facts get in the way of our cherry-picking together a narrative that condemns an innocent cop. " lol

 

[Wysteria]

I find it peculiar that details of the autopsy performed days ago have not been released yet - either officially or through family channels. The autopsy should conclusively answer the question of whether Brown was shot from the front or from the back (as alleged by witnesses). For sure the family would be privy to the autopsy results and I would be surprised if their lawyer has not reviewed the report.

If the autopsy supported the allegations that the officer shot Brown in the back as he was fleeing wouldn't you think that we would have heard about this from the family's lawyer by now? Instead the family lawyer has advised that the family will have a second autopsy performed by Dr. Michael Baden. Why the need for a second autopsy? Is the family not happy with the conclusions of the autopsy performed by the State? Adding to the intrigue is the news that Eric Holder has ordered another autopsy to be performed - the same Eric Holder that tried to suppress release of the video of Michael Brown committing a violent strong-arm robbery.

BBM

Great points, thank you.
Yes.
No.
Additionally; even if the autopsy does show a shot to the back, I still think that the LEO shot to protect himself and the public.

 

[William N]

Michael is dead. He was unarmed. Shot multiple times. Left in the road uncovered as documented by neighbor's video. Daren Wilson is on paid leave. Neither stealing nor jaywalking is punishable by death. We don't know if he reached for the officers gun or about the assault on Wilson. I'm not going to depend on witness statements or the officers because I don't think either is objective. Based on the things we DO know, yeah I'd say Michael is a victim.

Would you consider the store clerk MB assaulted/intimidated a victim?

 

[Linda7NJ]

We don't know if it was in self defense though. IMO I don't think it's ethical to discredit witness statements, but then base my opinion on a conflicting witness statement. Everyone has the same ability to lie and bend the truth to fit a scenario. I don't know if I agree with the statement that an officer would shoot an unarmed man that many times. If it turned out that MB did attack him, I could see one shot. But I think the excessive amount of shots is what bothers people about the case, at least that's what bothers me the most. He was an officer for 6 years, so I would think he would be capable of apprehending a suspect without gunfire or at least shoot him in the leg or somewhere to disable movement. But then again, I don't know what prompted the shooting or the severity of the physical assault. I'm just spit-balling. Where was it said that he was kneeling and begging for his life? I haven't read that anywhere unless someone posted about it and I missed it. I've only read that he had his hands up and told Johnson to run. I don't know if he even had his hands up to be honest because that's only been reported through witnesses. I don't discredit any of them. I just don't feel that they are objective enough because of the circumstances.

I do not understand where the notion comes from that an officer defending himself should shoot someone in the leg. Movies???

They're not ever going to aim for a leg.

IMO



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Amber29]

I just heard Mr Crump say something VERY interesting to the crowd, while standing with MB's parents at the rally.

I'd like to see it gain, but he said, almost in a warning tone, to the crowd:

" Now YOU all are going to hear some talk about young Michael Brown in the next few days...and do not let it distract us from the truth/...."

I am paraphrasing, but that is the essence. It sounded to me like he was warning folks about another shoe about to be dropped. Maybe the tox results or the autopsy?

Well I can't wait to hear what he's referring to. This is more proof IMO that the actual truth isn't going to matter.

 

[SStarr33]

I doubt the community is behind all the looting and pillaging. I think the instigators are outsiders who take road trips to seize any excuse to instigate. Why the cops don't roll up and make massive arrests like the Chicago cops do with the rowdy drunks downtown on St. Paddy's Day is beyond me.

I saw a story that said all those that have been arrested live within a 5 mile radius of where the rioting is happening. I will see if I can find it.

 

[Linda7NJ]

If in fact this is what happened I cannot understand why LE did not charge Dorian Johnson as an accessory to the strong-arm robbery. He was with Brown when the robbery occurred and he was in possession of the stolen goods. I suspect LE didn't want to charge Dorian Johnson fearing it would further inflame the situation in Ferguson. I wonder if Eric Holder had anything to do with the decision not to lay charges.

When DJ was handed merchandise in the store, he looked at it, and placed it back on the counter. It was obvious he wanted no part of stealing anything. IMO

He made the mistake of hanging out with Brown that day. IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SStarr33]

Personally I am glad they are there to support the family.

They are there to further their careers.

 

[MyBelle]

We don't know if it was in self defense though. IMO I don't think it's ethical to discredit witness statements, but then base my opinion on a conflicting witness statement. Everyone has the same ability to lie and bend the truth to fit a scenario. I don't know if I agree with the statement that an officer would shoot an unarmed man that many times. If it turned out that MB did attack him, I could see one shot. But I think the excessive amount of shots is what bothers people about the case, at least that's what bothers me the most. He was an officer for 6 years, so I would think he would be capable of apprehending a suspect without gunfire or at least shoot him in the leg or somewhere to disable movement. But then again, I don't know what prompted the shooting or the severity of the physical assault. I'm just spit-balling. Where was it said that he was kneeling and begging for his life? I haven't read that anywhere unless someone posted about it and I missed it. I've only read that he had his hands up and told Johnson to run. I don't know if he even had his hands up to be honest because that's only been reported through witnesses. I don't discredit any of them. I just don't feel that they are objective enough because of the circumstances.

BBM. Officers are not trained to shoot to disable, they are trained to shoot to stop the threat of harm. Their first duty is to protect their own life and that of the public, not the fleeing, dangerous suspect. We still don't know how many shots were fired that actually struck Brown.

JMO

 

[TaylurRose02]

Would you consider the store clerk MB assaulted/intimidated a victim?

A victim of theft and intimidation, of course. But the clerk didn't call 911. What does the clerk being a victim have to do with anything?

 

[MyBelle]

I saw a story that said all those that have been arrested live within a 5 mile radius of where the rioting is happening. I will see if I can find it.

That would be great because the CNN reporter said last night that he had been there for several days and had talked to many people but didn't see many last night.

 

[TaylurRose02]

I do not understand where the notion comes from that an officer defending himself should shoot someone in the leg. Movies???

They're not ever going to aim for a leg.

IMO



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why not? It would immobile him and disable him from continuing attack without having to take his life. I don't understand why that's so out of the question? <mod snip>

 

[Linda7NJ]

Who is <modsnip> on CNN now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KEVINinTO]

I don't know if I agree with the statement that an officer would shoot an unarmed man that many times. If it turned out that MB did attack him, I could see one shot. But I think the excessive amount of shots is what bothers people about the case, at least that's what bothers me the most. He was an officer for 6 years, so I would think he would be capable of apprehending a suspect without gunfire or at least shoot him in the leg or somewhere to disable movement. But then again, I don't know what prompted the shooting or the severity of the physical assault. .

When deadly force is justified - officers are trained to aim for the center mass of the attacker - i.e. chest area. They are not trained to shoot attackers in the feet so as to inflict survivable injuries. The objective is to kill (hence the term "deadly force"). We don't know how many shots were fired but having seen video's of similar shootings it does not take very long for an officer in a life or death situation to squeeze off 8 rounds of gunfire. It happens in mere seconds.

 

[MyBelle]

A victim of theft and intimidation, of course. But the clerk didn't call 911. What does the clerk being a victim have to do with anything?

The clerk is a victim of strong-arm robbery, assault and battery. It has everything to do with this case, imo.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Why not? It would immobile him and disable him from continuing attack without having to take his life. I don't understand why that's so out of the question? <mod snip>

<mod snip>

Police are trained to shoot center mass.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cady]

I have wondered about this as well. Were the cigarillo's found on or near the body of Michael Brown? Were they located ? Could it be that Brown handed the Cigarillo's to Dorian Johnson? This is an important question because LE decided not to charge Dorian Johnson as an accomplice in the robbery. If in fact Dorian Johnson was in possession of this stolen merchandise he should have been charged.

He should have been arrested right then and there as the co-suspect in the robbery BUT at that point in time police had not viewed the video which clearly identified both MB and DJ as the perps. JMO

 

[JLSChook]

I do not understand where the notion comes from that an officer defending himself should shoot someone in the leg. Movies???

They're not ever going to aim for a leg.

IMO



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

2 words: Center Mass

 

[William N]

A victim of theft and intimidation, of course. But the clerk didn't call 911. What does the clerk being a victim have to do with anything?

It shows MB wasn't the "gentle giant" we were told he was.

By any definition, MB had just committed the felony of strong-arm robbery. IMO it explains why he would attack a cop.