MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #16

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
 
here. subscription made
 
okay, I am so darned confused. How can there be two thread 15s? and why is the old one still open if this one is too? I think I might need a nap. I am on medication so maybe it is just that I am feeling loopy
 
It is not the law that needs interpreting. We know it means OW would have to have a probable fear for his life or someone else's.

What needs interpreting is whether or not OW had probable reason to believe that. It is your opinion he did, that is fine, I respect that. It is not however, a fact.

Obviously, it is a fact because Wilson shot Brown dead because he was a threat and Wilson knows and followed the law. This case screams probable cause that Brown was a threat to the officer and the public. Fact, not opinion.

(Links to strong arm robbery, Brown assaulting Wilson and trying to get his weapon, and TN vs. Garner are linked in these threads ad nauseam)

Also see LambChop's link in the previous thread:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5630000046.htm
 
okay, I am so darned confused. How can there be two thread 15s? and why is the old one still open if this one is too? I think I might need a nap. I am on medication so maybe it is just that I am feeling loopy

:floorlaugh:

I was testing you all to see if anyone was awake. No, really, Beach had made up a new thread #15 not realizing I had already made one. I just forgot to go in and change the number. Hey, it happens.
 
Obviously, it is a fact because Wilson shot Brown dead because he was a threat and Wilson knows and followed the law. This case screams probable cause that Brown was a threat to the officer and the public. Fact, not opinion.

(Links to strong arm robbery, Brown assaulting Wilson and trying to get his weapon, and TN vs. Garner are linked in these threads ad nauseam)

Also see LambChop's link in the previous thread:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5630000046.htm

Who was he a threat to when he was running away?
 
Obviously, it is a fact because Wilson shot Brown dead because he was a threat and Wilson knows and followed the law. This case screams probable cause that Brown was a threat to the officer and the public. Fact, not opinion.

(Links to strong arm robbery, Brown assaulting Wilson and trying to get his weapon, and TN vs. Garner are linked in these threads ad nauseam)

Also see LambChop's link in the previous thread:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5630000046.htm



Some sleuthers have claimed that the Chief mispoke - several times- while discussing the incident's details. Yet his statements and some random Josie's person (neither of whom was actually there) are still deemed more credible than what- a half a dozen witnesses that were there? Say what?!?!
That is interesting! I think I will wait for facts in the form of evidence.
Evidence and direct testimony rules. MOO, smarter to wait to judge.
 
Some sleuthers have claimed that the Chief mispoke - several times- while discussing the incident's details. Yet his statements and some random Josie's person (neither of whom was actually there) are still deemed more credible than what- a half a dozen witnesses that were there? Say what?!?!
That is interesting! I think I will wait for facts in the form of evidence.
Evidence and direct testimony rules. MOO, smarter to wait to judge.

Excellent post.
 
Some sleuthers have claimed that the Chief mispoke - several times- while discussing the incident's details. Yet his statements and some random Josie's person (neither of whom was actually there) are still deemed more credible than what- a half a dozen witnesses that were there? Say what?!?!
That is interesting! I think I will wait for facts in the form of evidence.
Evidence and direct testimony rules. MOO, smarter to wait to judge.

BBM - Well we do know some facts and they contradict the most important statement of the eye witnesses - that he was shot in the back, that he had his arms raised in surrender....
 
Some sleuthers have claimed that the Chief mispoke - several times- while discussing the incident's details. Yet his statements and some random Josie's person (neither of whom was actually there) are still deemed more credible than what- a half a dozen witnesses that were there? Say what?!?!
That is interesting! I think I will wait for facts in the form of evidence.
Evidence and direct testimony rules. MOO, smarter to wait to judge.
Nobody seems to even be mentioning Josie to support a justified shooting so I am confused by your posts.
 
No more references to G. Zimmerman or it could get you a short vacation. There is no connection or similarity between the two cases.

Also, many of the posters have worked very, very hard in doing research and getting information such as, the ME reported all shots were to MB's front, between the recording of the shots and the fact that MB fell face down means he was facing the officer when he was shot (which, ironically matches the ME report). Given what we know about how fast the officer fired it is not feasible MB was shot in the back. It would defy physics. Stating, "I heard" is not a fact, nor opinion. It would be considered a rumor which only leads to baiting. Just do not do it. Verify your facts and state so clearly before telling another poster they are wrong. Opinions are opinions and disagreements about them are permitted. Our goal here is to get to the truth and posting rumors as facts will not get us there, so please post responsibly.
 
Please read carefully.

Missouri Statute Section 563.046
Defense of Justification

Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest.

563.046. 1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.

2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful.

3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is
justified in using deadly force only

(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary
to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested

(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or
(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.
4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.
(L. 1977 S.B. 60)
[SIZE=-2] Effective 1-1-79
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5630000046.htm


Okay, everybody got it? There may be a quiz later.[/SIZE]
 
Some sleuthers have claimed that the Chief mispoke - several times- while discussing the incident's details. Yet his statements and some random Josie's person (neither of whom was actually there) are still deemed more credible than what- a half a dozen witnesses that were there? Say what?!?!
That is interesting! I think I will wait for facts in the form of evidence.
Evidence and direct testimony rules. MOO, smarter to wait to judge.

BBM
Half a dozen witnesses that all tell different versions. The 3 main eye witnesses that have done the media rounds can't even keep their versions straight. It's hard to believe anything coming from the "eye witnesses" period. The stories don't even add up or make sense, bottom line.
 
Nobody seems to even be mentioning Josie to support a justified shooting so I am confused by your posts.

What are the incontrovertible facts that so many posters keep alleging? There are different witness statements and some alleged statements alleged to support OW's version. We don't know OW version for sure just alleged versions. Not sure how so many can be so certain of so many facts that are not in evidence.

Garner v. Tennessee trumps Missouri Statute on use of force. Federal law and Supreme Court decisions trump state law, just ask Bob McDonnell. He broke no state laws and many MSM "experts" thought he would never be convicted, but he was found guilty on most charges, because he broke federal law. Didn't matter what the state laws were. I live in VA and could not believe how badly the MSM was blowing the coverage for over a year.
 
Who was he a threat to when he was running away?

IMO, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, and MB had already assaulted the store keeper and Officer Wilson, so the next person he came upon could have been in danger too.
 
IMO, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, and MB had already assaulted the store keeper and Officer Wilson, so the next person he came upon could have been in danger too.
So he gets away and then it is just open season? He now has a bounty on his head?
That just isn't the way it works.
 
No more references to G. Zimmerman or it could get you a short vacation. There is no connection or similarity between the two cases.

Also, many of the posters have worked very, very hard in doing research and getting information such as, the ME reported all shots were to MB's front, between the recording of the shots and the fact that MB fell face down means he was facing the officer when he was shot (which, ironically matches the ME report). Given what we know about how fast the officer fired it is not feasible MB was shot in the back. It would defy physics. Stating, "I heard" is not a fact, nor opinion. It would be considered a rumor which only leads to baiting. Just do not do it. Verify your facts and state so clearly before telling another poster they are wrong. Opinions are opinions and disagreements about them are permitted. Our goal here is to get to the truth and posting rumors as facts will not get us there, so please post responsibly.

All the shots were on the front of the diagram. There is no evidence by Ms. Case that proves for certain all the shots, specifically the ones on his hands and arms were delivered while Michael Brown was facing Officer Wilson. There were four shots, most likely taken once MB turned back towards OW. However, 6 shots hit MB and some of those shots most likely were hit when Brown was fleeing.
 
So he gets away and then it is just open season? He now has a bounty on his head?
That just isn't the way it works.

It is here apparently, state law trumps Supreme Court decisions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
63
Guests online
1,676
Total visitors
1,739

Forum statistics

Threads
590,011
Messages
17,928,921
Members
228,037
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top