MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #8

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks, I will do.

I'm a new poster, but i've followed tons of stuff on WS just lurking. Its very addictive, going down the rabbit hole of info and discussion on WS. I wasn't going to do it for this case. but I think i'll start now. Thanks again.

Another suggestion I have found to be helpful, I have a file saving the posts with links to main stream media tv or newspaper articles that are posted so that I can retrieve the links readily when I post a fact. You will be asked for a link from time to time to back up your statements. Again, welcome to websleuths! Even if your opinion is different from mine, I look forward to reading your posts.
 
Yes it is possible he made a mistake in judgement. Most folks are talking about this case as though it is either black or white (bad choice of word I know) but the fact is there are many many shades of grey in between. I don't think MB was looking for any out of the ordinary trouble that day and I don't think Wilson killed MB with "malicious intent" ... In my mind I think if it is found that there was a way Wilson could have handled this situation in such a way that a young boy didn't end up killed, then I think he should be charged, not necessarily 1st or 2nd degree murder but ... Manslaughter maybe??

I don't think it's going to work that way. If the officer was attacked and they struggled over the gun, then his priority was NOT to find a way to make sure the attacker was unharmed. His number one priority was to protect himself and the public. jmo
 
Welcome Iwazaru!!

I posted earlier that we needed a fact thread for this case, but what we might need is a media thread. What do you guys think? There are tons of interviews--some of them are old and I am just now seeing them.

That would be wonderful! I am a grandmother who is computer and technology challenged! LOL
Before I started saving a few links that I knew would be needed later, I have spent a lot of time trying to find a previously mentioned link so that I could post a reply to someone or a statement I wanted to make.
 
JMO, but if the chief was "wrong" when he announced that MB physically assaulted Officer Wilson and went after his gun, then when the Brown family's attorney, Parks, was asked about it, he would have had much different answers than these:

To Nancy Grace:

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,” Daryl Parks, attorney for Brown’s family said Monday night.

“I think as evidence comes out, you'll see and hear more of that. But that`s not what killed him.”

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2014/08/18/michael-brown-shooting-autopsy-fight-car


Same basic admission when Megyn Kelly asked few nights ago, but with a "blow" thrown in:

Parks: "In all due fairness, at the very beginning, at the car, there was a very serious situation between Michael and the officer, without question, in which there may have been blow-they had an altercation.

And at some point, the officer's gun may have come out and a shot's fired."

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

I'm sorry, but imo, if the Browns' attorney himself believed MB didn't physically assault officer Wilson, he would not have answered this way.
 
I think Brady meant that DJ had left the driver's side of the police car and was running away when he saw him 5 feet on the passenger side. Then he continued on to duck behind the white car that was parked, but where is the white car in the video he took? I've never seen that- another witness talked about DJ hiding behind a white Monte Carlo. Confused because this new video seems to be filmed directly after the shooting- you can see the backup police car pulling away to block traffic.

k, my take on this new video after only one viewing….

he makes a couple of compelling statements:

*MBs arms are in the window of the car, says Brady (OMG i just got the architect joke from yesterday :facepalm:) while making punching motions with his fists
*tries to walk that statement back when asked if MB is punching officer, when 1st asked says, "i don't know YET? (YET?????? what does that mean?)
*when asked again, he says he used that arm motion to "show how his (MBs) arms are in the window" (aren't you then mimicking MBs actions????)
*asked if OW is punching MB, and says "yes, his arms are moving ALSO"..while again using punching motions with his own arms
*uses the words altercation and punching
*says DJ was at the front of the car, not next to MB
*doesn't see entire event b/c at start he is inside his apt., and as MB breaks away from the car he goes downstairs to street level (outside?) to watch the rest. does not specify how far that is, and i'm not sure what he says about how long it took him.
*says he didn't hear if there was a gunshot "at the car"

didn't hear the rest clearly b/c i was typing and listening at the same time. :)




oh man, toward the end they play Tiffany's statement concerning MBs arms being raised and OW continuing to shoot at him, and asks, is that how you saw it? WTF????

*Brady says i didn't really see his hands up

OMG anchor says "well your word choices may be different but I think you're stories are the same. WTF??????

overal take aways…..
i think if questioned by the police or the Feds, i'm not sure what he'd say. he sounds sure of certain things, but not others.
this anchor is a try hard, and attempts to get him to make statements that the anchor wants to hear. IMO
 
I'm not sure it was in this interview or not, but somewhere Dorian said MB handed him the boxes of cigarillos that he was holding. Looked like they left the store with several boxes remembering when we see MB stoop down to pick up what he dropped in convenience store video.

At 2:40 here, Dorian says the Big Mike has cigarellos in his hands:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-wlDI6hg18

DJ really is the black Eddie Haskell:) TY to whoever it was who first made this comparison. It is perfection:)
 
Welcome Iwazaru!!

I posted earlier that we needed a fact thread for this case, but what we might need is a media thread. What do you guys think? There are tons of interviews--some of them are old and I am just now seeing them.
Media threads are great but they only work if people post to the main thread and the media thread... not many remember to do that. jmo
 
I don't think it's going to work that way. If the officer was attacked and they struggled over the gun, then his priority was NOT to find a way to make sure the attacker was unharmed. His number one priority was to protect himself and the public. jmo

From Supreme Court decision posted much earlier by someone I wish I could remember:

"The Graham decision found that an officer’s use of force should be considered on the facts of each case. Officers are to weigh the seriousness of the crime, whether the suspect poses a threat to the safety of police or others and whether the suspect is trying to resist arrest. “The ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight,” [Chief Justice] Rehnquist wrote."
 
JMO, but if the chief was "wrong" when he announced that MB physically assaulted Officer Wilson and went after his gun, then when the Brown family's attorney, Parks, was asked about it, he would have had much different answers than these:

To Nancy Grace:

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,” Daryl Parks, attorney for Brown’s family said Monday night.

“I think as evidence comes out, you'll see and hear more of that. But that`s not what killed him.”

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2014/08/18/michael-brown-shooting-autopsy-fight-car


Same basic admission when Megyn Kelly asked few nights ago, but with a "blow" thrown in:

Parks: "In all due fairness, at the very beginning, at the car, there was a very serious situation between Michael and the officer, without question, in which there may have been blow-they had an altercation.

And at some point, the officer's gun may have come out and a shot's fired."

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

I'm sorry, but imo, if the Browns' attorney himself believed MB didn't physically assault officer Wilson, he would not have answered this way.
And you can bet he is downplaying what did happen. imo
 
Retweeted by Ray Downs
Jake Tapper ‏@jaketapper 48m
St Louis County police officer, shown here speaking to Oath Keepers, relieved of duty

[video=youtube;1XA_yW7Z5OM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XA_yW7Z5OM&sns=tw[/video]



This guy is (was) a Sgt. in STL Sheriffs Dept.. Guess he shoved DL and they got the dirt on him. The guy's a piece of work I'll give you that. Makes one wonder how (if) deep this mentality is within LE there.

JMO
 
iirc, DW was questioned twice by police. Once right after the shooting and later in a police interview. So I assume Belmar knew of DW's statement early on.

Well first of all I haven't said that is what I think. IMO that is all that can be determined from reports so far. I have said numerous times that I don't think there is enough legitimate information(hell, there may not be any legitimate information being released, too hard to tell through all the lies) to make a sound conclusion yet. And if this was an unjustified killing what exactly do you expect Wilson to say? You think he is gonna throw himself under the bus? And as far as Belmar, well where is he getting the info from??
 
From Supreme Court decision posted much earlier by someone I wish I could remember:

"The Graham decision found that an officer’s use of force should be considered on the facts of each case. Officers are to weigh the seriousness of the crime, whether the suspect poses a threat to the safety of police or others and whether the suspect is trying to resist arrest. “The ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight,” [Chief Justice] Rehnquist wrote."

I saved this link from earlier. Sorry that I can't give credit to whomever posted it.
" The key question about Wilson’s killing on Aug. 9 is whether a reasonable officer with a similar background would have responded the same way."


http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/08...e-court-case-to-shape-ferguson-investigation/
 
I think they broadcast 2 hours of St Louis Cty scanners, not Ferguson. But maybe they have posted something else since.

Does anyone remember at the very beginning of this when Anonymous posted recordings of the dispatchers? Does anyone have a link handy? I'm happy to search, but just thought I would check first.
 
And you can bet he is downplaying what did happen. imo
I'm with you. Don't you love all the uses of "may"? LOL

For some reason, my favorite after the "blow" oops is, "and at some point the officer's gun may have come out and a shot's fired."
 
It has been all over the news. The shot that killed him went through the top of his head meaning his head was down not straight up.
I have big issues with 6 bullets and I have big issues with MB's head being down when he is shot directly in the top of the head. It stands to reason that MB could have been going down already at that point from the other bullets.

There is something very wrong here. I can see a lot of possibilities here but so far most of them end with DW making a grave error in judgment. IMO

yes its been all over the news, but not everything that has been reported is based on what Baden stated at the press conference and during interviews.

This one here looks like his head was bent downward,” he said, indicating the wound at the very top of Mr. Brown’s head. “It can be because he’s giving up, or because he’s charging forward at the officer.”

this is the statement he reiterates over and over again. and he also stated….

only three bullets were recovered from his body. But he has not yet seen the X-rays showing where the bullets were found, which would clarify the autopsy results.

Nor has he had access to witness and police statements. Right now there is too little information to forensically reconstruct the shooting.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/u...-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?_r=0

Baden never veers from this statements b/c he knows better. Parcells….not so much.

when the full autopsy is complete, we'll definitely know more.

Does anyone know if the ARs will be publicly released? I would like to see the one done by Dr. Mary Carr, and the federal ME.
 
I left this link open thinking it might come up again.
"The key question about Wilson’s killing on Aug. 9 is whether a reasonable officer with a similar background would have responded the same way."

25-Year-Old Supreme Court Case To Shape Ferguson Investigation

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/08...e-court-case-to-shape-ferguson-investigation/
I've really been thinking about this a lot. I really think other officers would have done the same thing. Do you really think another police officer would have thought it was ok to do assault and battery on him and then possibly bum rushed him or her. I don't think they would have shot him 4 times in the arm. Just shoot to kill and be justified.It's not ok to assault a police officer.
 
Is there a back story on this? I must have missed it. Tx

Never mind, it's up page. You guys are going too fast today, LOL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
3,122
Total visitors
3,243

Forum statistics

Threads
592,566
Messages
17,971,089
Members
228,816
Latest member
shyanne
Back
Top