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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blue_Dolphin308

We can't help everyone, But everyone can help some
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Messages
3,411
Reaction score
129
The fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager Saturday by a police officer in a St. Louis suburb came after a struggle for the officer’s gun, police officials said Sunday, in an explanation that met with outrage and skepticism in the largely African-American community.The killing of the youth, Michael Brown, 18, ignited protests on Saturday and Sunday in Ferguson, Mo., a working-class suburb of about 20,000 residents. Hundreds of people gathered at the scene of the shooting to question the police and to light candles for Mr. Brown, who was planning to begin college classes on Monday.
Mr. Brown’s stepfather, Louis Head, held a cardboard sign that said, “Ferguson police just executed my unarmed son.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/us/police-say-mike-brown-was-killed-after-struggle-for-gun.html


http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...own-St-Louis&p=10861113&posted=1#post10861113

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-teen-Michael-Brown-2&p=10867195#post10867195

Media Thread


Thread #1

Thread #2

Thread #3

Thread #4

Thread #5

Thread #6

Thread #7

Thread #8

Thread #9

Thread #10

Thread #11

Thread #12

Thread #13

Thread #14

Thread #15

Thread #16

Thread #17

Thread #18
 
:modstop:

A couple of things:

1) We are not going to allow links to blogs in this case without prior approval. And approvals will be tough to get.

2) Posts directed at other posters rather than the case will earn a TO without explanation. If you have a problem with another member, use the alert feature and scroll on by OR use the ignore feature and keep it to yourself
 
reedus23 said:
And thus the reason an indictment should be handed down and a jury given the responsibility of interpreting what they describe.

Ahem.... you're forgetting one tiny little but very important fact: a jury gets to interpret only if the GJ determines that there is probably cause to indict and returns true bill. I hope you're not suggesting that the GJ should be disbanded and OW arrested and charged without an indictment!

The fact is, not a single one of the alleged witnesses is an expert in the legal justification for self-defense, or the very real dangers facing police officers, or the duties, right and obligations of police officers. They do not get to decide whether or not OW had a legally justifiable reason to shoot MB, and they are not qualified to determine if MB was a threat to OW, or whether MB was surrendering to OW or charging OW. The best thing they could do, as witnesses, would be to drop the politically charged interpretations of what they saw, and simply report what they saw.
 
Originally Posted by reedus23
And thus the reason an indictment should be handed down and a jury given the responsibility of interpreting what they describe.


Ahem.... you're forgetting one tiny little but very important fact: a jury gets to interpret only if the GJ determines that there is probably cause to indict and returns true bill. I hope you're not suggesting that the GJ should be disbanded and OW arrested and charged without an indictment!

The fact is, not a single one of the alleged witnesses is an expert in the legal justification for self-defense, or the very real dangers facing police officers, or the duties, right and obligations of police officers. They do not get to decide whether or not OW had a legally justifiable reason to shoot MB, and they are not qualified to determine if MB was a threat to OW, or whether MB was surrendering to OW or charging OW. The best thing they could do, as witnesses, would be to drop the politically charged interpretations of what they saw, and simply report what they saw.

I was about to bring this over as well. You pretty much took the words right out of my mouth. Or put another way, you type faster! ;)
 
Linda7NJ said:
IMO they didn't make a mistake, it was a deliberate manipulation.

I agree, and this isn't the first time CNN has done something like that.

I find it quite interesting that even though both the construction worker witnesses have said that MB was moving toward MB -- and thus bolstering the self-defense justification -- all the MSM have promo'd that recording with headlines that say that MB was surrendering.

I'm convinced that if it was revealed tomorrow that OW was wearing a bodycam after all, and it showed MB turning, putting his hands up, then lowering his arms and charging... the MSM would edit out the charging part and announce that OW's bodycam revealed that MB really was surrendering. That's how absurd this case has gotten.
 
I was about to bring this over as well. You pretty much took the words right out of my mouth. Or put another way, you type faster! ;)

ITA. We have a GJ for a reason. Let them do their job.
 
Say what you will about some of the political blogs, but some of them really do some groundbreaking research and can uncover some pretty interesting information. Funny how accurate some of our most "non-MSM" sources have been ,i.e. Josie, the radio station, etc...I think there is a LOT of information floating around out there that can easily be gotten and reported...and I said it a couple of weeks ago...why would a reporter need a court order to find the juvenile records of someone? Just do what you're paid to do - get out there and find the story. Find the PEOPLE....
 
Ahem.... you're forgetting one tiny little but very important fact: a jury gets to interpret only if the GJ determines that there is probably cause to indict and returns true bill. I hope you're not suggesting that the GJ should be disbanded and OW arrested and charged without an indictment!

The fact is, not a single one of the alleged witnesses is an expert in the legal justification for self-defense, or the very real dangers facing police officers, or the duties, right and obligations of police officers. They do not get to decide whether or not OW had a legally justifiable reason to shoot MB, and they are not qualified to determine if MB was a threat to OW, or whether MB was surrendering to OW or charging OW. The best thing they could do, as witnesses, would be to drop the politically charged interpretations of what they saw, and simply report what they saw.

Meh. The witnesses are what they are. I am sure if their interpretations favored OW, some wouldn't mind the politically charged interpretations.
 
Say what you will about some of the political blogs, but some of them really do some groundbreaking research and can uncover some pretty interesting information. Funny how accurate some of our most "non-MSM" sources have been ,i.e. Josie, the radio station, etc...I think there is a LOT of information floating around out there that can easily be gotten and reported...and I said it a couple of weeks ago...why would a reporter need a court order to find the juvenile records of someone? Just do what you're paid to do - get out there and find the story. Find the PEOPLE....

And some of them like the playhouse and than johnsonite are just plain silly. And the comments on them are even worse. How in the world do you know if Josie is right?
 
Say what you will about some of the political blogs, but some of them really do some groundbreaking research and can uncover some pretty interesting information. Funny how accurate some of our most "non-MSM" sources have been ,i.e. Josie, the radio station, etc...I think there is a LOT of information floating around out there that can easily be gotten and reported...and I said it a couple of weeks ago...why would a reporter need a court order to find the juvenile records of someone? Just do what you're paid to do - get out there and find the story. Find the PEOPLE....

That was the mindset on the blog. And if CJ or the StLD really wants to find those people they will. CJ especially states he got the info from someone in LE, and if that is really true, them they can be found.
 
That was the mindset on the blog. And if CJ or the StLD really wants to find those people they will. CJ especially states he got the info from someone in LE, and if that is really true, them they can be found.

I agree with this. I've always wondered/though...even if juvenile records in and of themselves aren't admissible, would the testimony of those involved in prior incidents? The records are sealed but that doesn't mean the incidents themselves are. JMO.

ETA - And also why I said CJ should name his sources and have them own their statements that MB was involved in a 2nd degree murder.
 
And some of them like the playhouse and than johnsonite are just plain silly. And the comments on them are even worse. How in the world do you know if Josie is right?

She may not be completely accurate. But if she was way off, I think the chief would have commented already. Or the officers attorney. Also, I think she might have been asked to go on the air, and 'leak' his story, so people would have some idea of his side of the story. jmo
 
I agree, and this isn't the first time CNN has done something like that.

I find it quite interesting that even though both the construction worker witnesses have said that MB was moving toward MB -- and thus bolstering the self-defense justification -- all the MSM have promo'd that recording with headlines that say that MB was surrendering.

I'm convinced that if it was revealed tomorrow that OW was wearing a bodycam after all, and it showed MB turning, putting his hands up, then lowering his arms and charging... the MSM would edit out the charging part and announce that OW's bodycam revealed that MB really was surrendering.
That's how absurd this case has gotten.

Me too! I'm still not over my hissy fit about it. :lol:



Sent via Tapatalk for S4
 
She may not be completely accurate. But if she was way off, I think the chief would have commented already. Or the officers attorney. Also, I think she might have been asked to go on the air, and 'leak' his story, so people would have some idea of his side of the story. jmo

Plus there is this, by CNN, no less:


A source with detailed knowledge of the investigation later told CNN the caller's ["Josie's"] account is "accurate," in that it matches what Wilson has told investigators.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/18/us/missouri-teen-shooting/?c=&page=0




Sent via Tapatalk for S4
 
Having said that, things can get muddled in the passing, so I agree it may not be 100% accurate.

My gut says it's accurate enough. But I wouldn't be surprised if MB wasn't running towards ODW at "full speed". What is considered a "bum rush" varies pretty broadly, according to all I've read.

I think we could get a little better calculation of the speed if we gathered all we have on the distances and compared them to the audiotape.

eg, say we go by the construction worker's statement that ODW was trailing MB by 10-15 feet. MB turns around, ODW shoots while backing up. MB lands a bit less than 10 feet (? going by memory, just as a start).

If that's true*, then I have trouble seeing MB running at full speed. It could have seemed like full speed (or prepping for full speed) to ODW though. When I see him in Piaget's video, he really does appear to be both devastated and disoriented. His own stance is wide - ataxia is written all over him.

*Obviously, that's only one scenario to play with.


ETA: regarding the audio, how far did the audio analyst say Wilson moved from start to finish? I thought it was a very short distance, like 6 feet. That is either false, or Wilson didn't start shooting right away.

I'd give ODW at least a couple seconds to get out of the car, giving MB quite a head start.

I'm tired, but I would enjoy reconstructing the variety scenes by witness, with more focus and details.
 
Having said that, things can get muddled in the passing, so I agree it may not be 100% accurate.

My gut says it's accurate enough. But I wouldn't be surprised if MB wasn't running towards ODW at full speed. What is considered a "bum rush" varies pretty broadly, according to all I've read.

I think we could get a little better calculation of the speed if we gathered all we have on the distances and compared them to the audiotape.

eg, say we go by the construction worker's statement that ODW was trailing MB by 10-15 feet. MB turns around, ODW shoots while backing up. MB lands a bit less than 10 feet (? going by memory, just as a start).

If that's true*, then I have trouble seeing MB running at full speed. It could have seemed like full speed (or prepping for full speed) to ODW though. When I see him in Piaget's video, he really does appear to be both devastated and disoriented. His own stance is wide - ataxia is written all over him.

*Obviously, that's only one scenario to play with.


Sent via Tapatalk for S4

Exactly right about the 'muddled' possibility. OW told his girlfriend, who is also a Ferguson cop, and she apparently told her friend what happened. IIRC. So it is going to lose a little in translation. But the gist of the story is there.

I agree that he was not likely 'running' full speed back at him. But he might have been 'lunging' towards him, arms up, talking threateningly. Or maybe he only took one or 3 steps. So I agree it would be useful to measure. I'll bet the investigators did just that by comparing the forensics of the scene with the story OW told.
 
Exactly right about the 'muddled' possibility. OW told his girlfriend, who is also a Ferguson cop, and she apparently told her friend what happened. IIRC. So it is going to lose a little in translation. But the gist of the story is there.

I agree that he was not likely 'running' full speed back at him. But he might have been 'lunging' towards him, arms up, talking threateningly. Or maybe he only took one or 3 steps. So I agree it would be useful to measure. I'll bet the investigators did just that by comparing the forensics of the scene with the story OW told.

And if the space was only 10-15 feet between them, a few steps is scary.

Before I go, I also wonder why so few acknowledge lately that even Piaget said MB never got his hands above chest level...?
 
And if the space was only 10-15 feet between them, a few steps is scary.

Before I go, I also wonder why so few acknowledge lately that even Piaget said MB never got his hands above chest level...?

I think that is MAJOR that she said he never got his hands above his mid-chest area. And people still say that she is one of the witnesses saying his hands were up.

Also, she said he may have taken a step about a centimeter towards OW. Sorry Piaget, but a man that is 6ft4 and 300 lbs, cannot move just a centimeter in one step. If he took a step, then he took a step. And they were pretty close together at that point.

Imo, if MB truly wanted to surrender then there would be no reason to turn around to face the officer. I am sure he has seen how LE does it. They have the suspects stay with their BACKS TURNED, and hands up or behind their necks. If the suspect turns to face the officer he may get shot. I am sure MB would have known that. [Didn't he ever watch cops? :cop:]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
59
Guests online
2,382
Total visitors
2,441

Forum statistics

Threads
590,011
Messages
17,928,964
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top