Officer kills unarmed, black teen; St. Louis riots

[jmt225]

Why does no one protest/talk about white on white crime?

Because the media doesn't cover it unless it's a mass shooting or involves a pretty white woman, and even mass shootings are now getting very little play in the media.

Just like the media doesn't cover black-on-black crime.

The media doesn't cover black-on-white crime.

They cover white-on-black crime though because it GUARANTEES ratings and constant debate from all sides. And people always bite right into it like the sheep that we all are.

After taking it all in, I don't buy for a second that Brown had his hands up surrendering and Wilson then killed him execution style. I believe that Brown charged Wilson, and it wouldn't shock me if it's true that Brown went after his gun. HOWEVER, that does not justify shooting the guy 6 times. I just can't wrap my head around that part of it the more I've thought about it.

Norcal has a point when he says I nor anybody else has zero right to judge how we'd handle it if we've never found ourselves in a kill-or-be-killed situation, but the problem is that cops are supposed to be trained for these situations, we regular civilians are not. Cops are supposed to be trained to handle these kinds of situations in a manner where the criminal gets captured alive, UNLESS he is armed and dangerous.

There definitely is a problem within law enforcement with how they treat minorities, and how well they're protected from situations like this. That is a problem, no doubt about it.

However, it is far from the biggest problem in this country. This cop here in Milwaukee nailed it...

[YOUTUBE]T7MAO7McNKE[/YOUTUBE]

And it's not just crime, it's education, politicians, the media, ... it's every fucking thing.

You just got to laugh at it at this point and just worry about yourself and loved ones. It's a dog-eat-dog World and IMO the best way to not get caught up in the bullshit is not putting other tragedies on your shoulders that the media tells you to, and to simply live your life the best way you can that leads to your happiness.

If someone decides to become a cop, soldier, or true community activist to try and help change this country for the better, then I applaud anyone who does so and wish them nothing but the best. However, 99.9% of the chumps on the internet bitching are losers who don't do anything but bitch on social media and forums alike, 99.9% of the clowns we see on the news showing their "outrage" are money grubbing assholes who don't really give a fuck about anything except their pockets, and 99.9% of the protesters we see on the street are attention seeking morons who are only protesting because they don't have anything else better to do and want to feel important about themselves.

I know that comes across as very cynical, but at the moment I just can't be convinced otherwise.

 

[enviousdominous]

But there was. The autopsy showed residue in browns hand wound was consistent of that which comes off a gun barrel when it interacts with a bullet going through it. The entry wound was also consistent with someone having their hand wrapped around the front of the barrel, just the way officer wilson said it was.

The ballistics study on the other entry/exit wounds (specifically the fatal one, which entered right above the hairline, and exited through the lower jaw/bottom of the mouth) also supported him charging the officer in the fashion the officer said he did.

Okay, I said "irrefutable evidence". I've researched the story behind the supposed residue, and it's just as iffy as your version of the events.

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370764-fed-int-witness-63.html

That link is the transcript of an interview with a medical examiner who conducted the third autopsy on behalf of the Federal Government. Click the link and scroll to page 29. Microscopic residue was found on the hand of Michael Brown, residue that in the opinion of that Doctor could have come into contact with Michael Brown if a gun was fired in "close proximity".

Don't lecture me on a supposed "ballistics study". Even the medical examiners admit that their conclusions are speculative at best. One could assume that either Michael Brown charged, or was shot as he was slumping forward from the pain of his other wounds.

Just the way Officer Wilson said it was? I don't think you even bothered reading any of Darren Wilson's interviews. He never said that Michael Brown had his hand "wrapped around the front of the barrel". I have no idea where you got that snippet from, so please cite your references.

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370766-interview-po-darren-wilson.html

That link is a transcript of an interview with Darren Wilson. Skip to page seven, and show me where he claims that Michael Brown had his hand "wrapped around the front of the barrel" of the gun.

You know what's really odd is how on page eight Darren Wilson claims that after the first shot, Michael Brown kept coming at him. I've reviewed every witness statement regarding the shooting, even the few that claim that Michael Brown didn't have his hands up and charged Darren Wilson. All of them recall Michael Brown running away after the shot rang out, not a single witness statement claims that after the first shot Michael Brown continued an altercation with the police officer.

 

[enviousdominous]

The witnesses, when cross examined, we're shown to be either inconsistent in their retelling of the events, or admitted they straight out made up that they were even there....and were simply repeating hearsay.

NorCal, I love you, so this is going to be the poetic version of what I'd end up saying to anybody else.

If you're going to push the idea that all witnesses were shown to be either liars or truly unable to recall what they saw exactly under cross examination, then you should really cite a few examples as the entirety of the grand jury proceedings are available online. I'm sure that right-wing news porn loves to jump to those kinds of conclusions, so to separate yourself from them it'd be a good idea to back up what you're repeating.

Recognize that Darren Wilson was never cross-examined.

This was proven beyond reasonable doubt with every means of science we utilize to justify or condemn. Everyone needs to stop trying to gloss over the fact that brown was 100% at fault, and everything the officer did was well within the prescribed ROE.

Umm, you know it would really help us not gloss over Michael Brown's faults if you made an attempt to explain exactly what you mean by that. You don't know for certain what the officer did, or how the Ferguson PD spells out its rules of engagement.

Man, I sure love watching people who have never been in a life or death situation talking about what someone should or should not do.

Oh, no shit? Just curious since you decided to bring it up. What life or death situation that you experienced gives you enough validation to ridicule anyone's suggestion for how Darren Wilson should have behaved? Also, when did you get your combat action badge?

 

[One Punch Doug Crashin]

If you believe the official story you're a fucking idiot. IF you believe in a third party site like copblock without doing the research yourself, you're a fucking idiot. We are never going to know what actually happened because fuck you, that's why.

 

[Akhilleus]

If you believe the official story you're a fucking idiot. IF you believe in a third party site like copblock without doing the research yourself, you're a fucking idiot. We are never going to know what actually happened because fuck you, that's why.

Copblock is probably the stupidest most ignorant site I've ever seen in my life. And the best part about it is even after that I would bet that every single one of those cops would give their own lives to save their haters, every single time.

 

[Torgo]

Best thing to come out of this mess:

 

[Mighty NorCal]

If you're going to push the idea that all witnesses were shown to be either liars or truly unable to recall what they saw exactly under cross examination, then you should really cite a few examples as the entirety of the grand jury proceedings are available online.

I'm sure that right-wing news porn loves to jump to those kinds of conclusions, so to separate yourself from them it'd be a good idea to back up what you're repeating.





Oh, no shit? Just curious since you decided to bring it up. What life or death situation that you experienced gives you enough validation to ridicule anyone's suggestion for how Darren Wilson should have behaved? Also, when did you get your combat action badge?

You know, in my time here, I have gotten pretty used to having to be the one in a debate or conversation to maintain their respect and dignity when dealing with an opposing side....I can honestly say im pretty surpirsed and disappointed to have that continue when dealing with you. Did not expect that. I will continue to do so, as you have clearly decided not to.

First off, I am the first person around here to make fun of right wingers and their "news". Matter of fact, I mock anyone who does the whole party line thing, no matter which side you chose. Furthermore, blaming the right wing in this situation of clear race baiting is utterly laughable. A white cousin of mine was recently gunned down in my home town in almost the exact same situation as the Mike Brown case. There were no national news cameras, nor did anyone burn our town down.

Everything I am saying is straight from the DA's very eloquent, and extremely detailed statement to the public, which was broadcasted live on EVERY news station. The witnesses, the ballistics, the autopsy(though the second two are easily accessable online)

No one was there when this happened, you are correct. However, the evidence supports one story above all the others. Everyone is acting so utterly aloof to how reasonable doubt works here, its almost funny. The autopsy findings were speculative? I suppose the smoke of a fire from far away could also be called as such.

So he has residue on his hand, and wound on his hand, but we still "cant say for sure" if he was trying to get the gun like the officer said? Really? Do all of you want to blame the big evil white cop THAT BADLY?

As far as everyone being so smart and calling others "fucking idiots" for beliving the official story, welp, I believe the offical story because the official story is what the autopsy and ballistics support. I dont know any other way to argue that.


As for you last little part, first of...Very nice, classy. TO answer your question....I have been in plenty of those situations. And if you have been to places you say you have, you have been in them too....And perhaps did not even realize it. Which is worriesome. You seem(ed) like a decent guy. However, I am not the type to sit here and extol all of my ventures all over to a bunch of kids on an internet wrestling forum. Besides, do you sincerely need a combat action medal to be in life or death situation?

Also, it was not in any way directed at you, my comment. General statement. Would you sincerely sit here and say with our level of training and expereince in hostile places that BOTH of us are not more qualified to speak on a situation of a belligerent trying to disarm you and harm you than a 19 year old who works at Staples? Come on.

 

[Torgo]

Breaking news: Wilson resigned.

http://news.yahoo.com/ferguson-officer-shot-michael-brown-resigns-233328989.html

Hope he's got cash, I don't think the Browns are going to let go anytime soon.


Also, excellently said Mr.Norcal, sir.

 

[Milkyway!]

No mother should have to fear for her son's life every time he robs a store.

 

[Old Timer]

Ouch

 

[enviousdominous]

You know, in my time here, I have gotten pretty used to having to be the one in a debate or conversation to maintain their respect and dignity when dealing with an opposing side....I can honestly say im pretty surpirsed and disappointed to have that continue when dealing with you. Did not expect that. I will continue to do so, as you have clearly decided not to.

I'm not questioning your dignity. I'm asking for a citation of some kind, not a vague reference to original research. If I've disappointed you, I really don't think it's my fault. Now then, onto the actual debate.

First off, I am the first person around here to make fun of right wingers and their "news". Matter of fact, I mock anyone who does the whole party line thing, no matter which side you chose. Furthermore, blaming the right wing in this situation of clear race baiting is utterly laughable. A white cousin of mine was recently gunned down in my home town in almost the exact same situation as the Mike Brown case. There were no national news cameras, nor did anyone burn our town down.

I'm not in any way blaming the right wing for anything. This case HAS polarized the media in a way where emphasis from either side points to their own interpretation of what happened, this case involves Fox News speculating that Michael Brown was a thug and MSNBC speculating that he was an innocent victim. I'll admit that I made that judgement in haste and I apologize.

While we're sharing personal stories, my girlfriend is black and her father was killed by a young black man who she desribes as "Not doin' nuttin'" before killing her father. He didn't get his story on the front page either, my condolences to you for your loss.

Everything I am saying is straight from the DA's very eloquent, and extremely detailed statement to the public, which was broadcasted live on EVERY news station. The witnesses, the ballistics, the autopsy(though the second two are easily accessable online).

Fine, you're quoting the DA. He wasn't under oath and it's my understanding that his father was killed by a black man when he was 12. This is all original research on my part, but I'd rather hear statements from an actual expert on ballistics.

No one was there when this happened, you are correct. However, the evidence supports one story above all the others. Everyone is acting so utterly aloof to how reasonable doubt works here, its almost funny. The autopsy findings were speculative? I suppose the smoke of a fire from far away could also be called as such.

For fucks sake man, follow along. Every doctor who's participated in an autopsy of Michael Brown has had to hide behind the term speculation when the media had tried to run with their findings to jump to either conclusion. Judy Melinek originally said that the wound to Michael Brown's thumb "could" indicate that he was reaching for the gun, later she had elaborate on that statement to admit that she's in no way certain of anything definitive as it was very early in the investigation. If I see smoke, I don't call 911 and scream to the dispatcher that a forest is burning down.

So he has residue on his hand, and wound on his hand, but we still "cant say for sure" if he was trying to get the gun like the officer said? Really? Do all of you want to blame the big evil white cop THAT BADLY?

Okay, you can stop trying to defend your "respect and dignity". That last paragraph completely betrayed any I might have for you.

You're telling me that a wound caused by a gun on someone's hand must obviously mean that the wounded individual attempted to take the gun. I don't know how I can possibly unconvince you of that kind of stupidity, so I'll let you have that one. You think I just want to blame Darren Wilson because he's white? Fuck it. You're a fucking moron, a piss poor excuse for an airman and I'm done remembering that you exist.

 

[jmt225]

On Christmas morning you reply to a near month old post in that manner? What a pleasant life you must lead.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

So you are maintaining the DA was being untruthful in a nationally televised statement due to prejudice of his own? I mean....If that's what you want to go with, that's all you, brotha.

You're telling me that a wound caused by a gun on someone's hand must obviously mean that the wounded individual attempted to take the gun.

Because the officer SAID that is what happened? And because not only was there a wound, but residue from the gun barrel, which only plausibly ends up in the wound if the individuals hand was either on, or in direct proximity to the gun? Im totally unsure how that very simple logic can inflame you so much.

I'm done remembering that you exist.

I can only hope you are a man of your word.


I wish you a merry Christmas.

 

[Shocky]

I wish this was in the Bar Room to give an appropriate response to Envious and his Dipshit of the Year comment.

 

[Boring]

Best thing to come out of this mess:

Why is Floyd Mayweather hugging that cop? Did the cop save him from Manny Pacquiao or something?

 

[Alastor]

Why is Floyd Mayweather hugging that cop? Did the cop save him from Manny Pacquiao or something?

I think that's John Cena hugging Xavier Woods with Cesaro looking on in the background. Is that Brie Bella taking a picture there too?

 

[One Punch Doug Crashin]

I wish this was in the Bar Room to give an appropriate response to Envious and his Dipshit of the Year comment.

Ya really.

 

[Boring]

I've seen like a thousand cops episode where the cop subdues the assailant by putting his knee on his head, neck, upper body.

If you are a UFC fan, you'd know that if Joe Rogan were watching the Eric Garner footage he's say "the choke isn't locked in." Also, if an MMA move can't be applied to help cops apprehend criminals, shouldn't it be illegal in MMA? We don't want to see a Garner type death reiterated in MMA do we? Ban choke holds?

Point is, cops stick their knee into a perps back all the time and I'd guess that may have had something to do with the Garner death, but since it isn't illegal, it doesn't matter.

All in all, I enjoy working for a defense attorney.

 

[Reflection]

I've seen like a thousand cops episode where the cop subdues the assailant by putting his knee on his head, neck, upper body.

...where oversmart cowardly cops over-dramatise everything and do the whole "GET DOWN ON THE GROUND!!!! WE ARE GONNA TASE YOU!!!!" routine at the drop of a hat, while mounting on the poor guy's back and yelling "STOP RESISTING!!!!" even if the guy is just laying there. That show?

Also, if an MMA move can't be applied to help cops apprehend criminals, shouldn't it be illegal in MMA? We don't want to see a Garner type death reiterated in MMA do we? Ban choke holds?

First, those are trained fighters with a referee to stop the match if needed. Secondly, apprehending a suspect or making the opponent submit, is one thing; keeping it locked in until he is dead, is another.

Point is, cops stick their knee into a perps back all the time and I'd guess that may have had something to do with the Garner death, but since it isn't illegal, it doesn't matter.

It matters. Making someone lay down on his tummy in front of 100 other people, then climbing on his back, twisting his arm and sticking a knee to his neck/shoulder, while handcuffing him, is extremely disrespectful, violent and uncivilized... and often, it is this rude approach that makes suspects react violently as well. Unless the "suspects" (that are "innocent until proven guilty," I might add) lie down like a little bitch with no dignity, they are "resisting arrest" and either get shot with thousands of volts, or worse, suffer the same fate as that fat guy.
Last year around this time, the police in USA handcuffed and arrested an Indian diplomat in front of her kids, then did strip search and cavity search on her back at the station, finally locked her with drunkards and thieves for the night. The offence she was booked for- paying her maid less than a certain amount of salary. Why the handcuffs and cavity search? "Oh, it's just a part of the procedure." Bullshit procedure.

All in all, I enjoy working for a defense attorney.

Cleaning toilets for a defence attorney doesn't make you one too.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

The coroner said he died of cardiac arrest, IE a heart attack, among other fat/unhealthy guy conditions. Not from a collapsed wind pipe or anything like that.

He got into a struggle, and due to his health conditions, had a heart attack.


You guys sure love making posts without getting the entire story.


that said, the hold had been banned, and he knew it was banned, so he should be in trouble for that part of it.

and its just the type of attitude "oh I wont lay down like a little bitch" that makes people think they can resist arrest or not do what police tell them to and get upset when they are roughly handled.

 

[Daggdag]

Here's what really irritates me: You have people on both sides claiming certainty regarding key details and you have people using original research to sway public opinion in relation to points that have nothing to do with the incident itself.

The key detail of the struggle within the suv; there is no irrefutable evidence that Michael Brown attempted to take Darren Wilson's gun.

The key detail of if Michael Brown had his hands raised; the only witness statements I've found that dispute this were from Darren Wilson and another witness. That other witness testified that Michael Brown did not have his hands raised in the air, but was instead showing his palms at shoulder height to Darren Wilson. That witness also claimed that Michael Brown did not charge at Darren Wilson.

The key detail of whether or not Michael Brown charged toward Darren Wilson; the only person who reported that Michael Brown had charged at Darren Wilson was Darren Wilson. If you're going to dispute witness testimony on the basis that they likely suffered from the Rashamon Effect and can't be trusted, you must also dispute Darren Wilson's claim that his life was in danger because he perceived as much.

Then there's the release of the surveillance camera's recording of Michael Brown forcefully stealing a box of cigarillos, this video was released during the investigation. The FPD chose not to investigate who had released the footage to the media. I believe that the footage was released to sway public opinion toward the idea that Michael Brown was capable of becoming a homicidal maniac. Maybe it was released by mistake, either way it's foolish to use that example to validate Darren Wilson's actions that day. You don't execute someone for robbery.

Thankfully the entire transcript of the case presented to the Grand Jury is available online for our reference. It's not common for things like that to be made public.

The issue with many of those witnesses is that while testifying to the Grand Jury, they could not keep their stories straight and changed many details. You cant trust testamony from witnesses like that.

 

[Reflection]

In yet another case of American police brutality and racism, a 57-year old Indian man has been rendered temporarily paralyzed and in need of surgery in Alabama, after the police used excessive force- something they are (in)famous for doing in the USA.
http://m.timesofindia.com/india/US-cops-leave-Indian-temporarily-paralyzed/articleshow/46205592.cms
Apparently, someone made a call to the cops that a suspicious (read non-white) character is walking in the neighbourhood. The cops must have entered the scene and did their usual stuff- " LET ME SEE YOUR HANDS!!! GET DOWN ON THE GROUND!!!! ah fuck it, lets tackle him down."

The police department is insisting that there was some communication problem between the man and the officers, but he was clearly saying his house number and pointing towards it when approached by the police. The police has said that the caller mentioned that that the man was looking into people's garages, but that charge has been denied and is most likely false, or an exaggeration at the most. When you walk across the footpath, you may look left and right towards cars and stuff- nothing wrong with that. On the positive side, the police department has suspended the coward and wished the victim a speedy recovery.

But why was he a victim? Because he was a "suspicious character". Why was he a suspicious character? Because of his brown skin. U.S. Govt needs to stop lecturing other countries on communalism, equality, tolerance and shit when incidents like this are regularly happening in its own country.

 

[Shocky]

Seems you conveniently left out the part where Mr. Patel put his hands in his pocket. The situation sucks, and the officer should be removed.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Seems you conveniently left out the part where Mr. Patel put his hands in his pocket. The situation sucks, and the officer should be removed.

Seems to happen quite often in these situations.



But yes, carte blanch is not to be given in such situations.

 

[L@RISANO]