MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #12

[katydid23]

I hope you are right, I can't say LE has inspired a lot of confidence with their response to the situation, or the protests. I am still stunned by the images or them pointing rifles into the crowd. Very troubling to see that inappropriate behavior as well as death threats and slurs leveled at protesters.

What about the death threat and slurs FROM the protestors? And the inappropriate behavior from the protestors? Like shooting people, and throwing molotov cocktails, setting stores on fire, looting?

 

[krimekat]

Why do I get upset about this thinking about how, if there were no rioting, all that money could have probably outfitted every cop with a body cam. But then we might not be talking about body cams if not for the rioters.

there's not enough $$$$$$$$$$$$ prior to rioting & now that many businesses are gone & people will move, where are they going to find that $$$$$$$$$$$$!? Just another blighted area of StL County

 

[hambirg]

I agree and I hope they also have the courage to issue an indictment if that is what is supported by the evidence. Handing down an indictment against LE can be a scary thought anytime. Add to it the attention this case has received and it could be even more difficult as I suspect there is going to be backlash from either side depending on the result.

Regarding the bolded portion, I don't know if I've seen an answer to my question yet. Justification is a legal defense and it is to be injected into a case by a defendant. It certainly seems that the prosecuting attorney's office has decided it will put on the dual hat of prosecuting attorney and defense attorney by presenting all of the evidence, including evidence that supports a defense and is usually put on by a defense attorney. Is this typical? Is the concern that I have for my prosecuting attorney also playing the role of defense attorney unwarranted? If I were the defendant instead of a police officer, I just don't see a prosecuting attorney going to any lengths to provide a grand jury with evidence supporting my defense. Also, does a grand jury even get the opportunity to consider justification? It would seem to me that their responsibility is only to consider if there is sufficient evidence to indict (the "Brown" witnesses) and any evidence of justification (the Wilson "witnesses") is considered at a later date after the defense of justification has actually been injected by the defendant. The statute clearly says it is the burden of the defendant to inject justification into a case and at this point there is no defendant, so how does justification even get injected into the case at the GJ stage?

Don't get me wrong, a part of me agrees with what you are saying. But part of me says, how is an officer involved shooting any different than any other case. I can understand a prosecuting attorney NOT submitting a case to a GJ because of evidence of justification, but once the decision is made to submit it, I still feel uncomfortable with a prosecuting attorney playing defense counsel. Just not sure how justification is any different because an officer is involved versus an ordinary citizen claiming justification. I would agree about providing forensic evidence, but the role of the prosecuting attorney, once he has decided there is enough to take it to a grand jury, is to show how the forensics match up to the evidence that supports an indictment. His job isn't to play defense attorney. Just have a problem with that and probably just have to accept that it's my problem and move on.

Many thanks. I have read the justification statutes and certainly understand there is an additional one for LEO. It incorporates the non-LEO justification and then also expands it for LEO.

The issue I was talking about was a little bit different, and that is how a prosecuting attorney handles a GJ and how it should be consistent whether a civilian is involved or a LEO. He shouldn't put on the hat of defense counsel only when LEO is involved and not when an ordinary citizen is involved.

I hope you read this so you don't spend time looking for it. I certainly get the laws are different and the elements of each are different. Thank you as always.

Sorry, I've come to the realization that I am NOT going to ever catch up. So. . .

BBM. . .this makes me so incredibley sad!!! You clearly do not understand the role of the prosecutor within a Grand Jury hearing. There sole job is to present ALL of the evidence to the Grand Jury. It may not be written as law in each state, but it is grounds for disbarment if they do not! Yes, it may be a cover your *advertiser censored* situation, but they are at the mercy of the GJ.

It is NOT a trial! The prosecutor does NOT present any argument. The GJ is free to call any witnesses they choose. There sole purpose is to present to the jury the evidence under the law and leave it up to the GJ if there is enough evidence to bring the case to trial. Their job is in NO WAY to convince the jury to indict so they may procede to trial. That is NOT their job. That people think this is just goes to show how very little John Q Public understands the law. It makes me ill that people think it is. A prosecutor is REQUIRIRED under their ethical guidlines set out by the ABA to inform a jury if they do not believe the evidence supports an indictment under the law.

To in any way imply that an attorney, who spent YEARS of his/her life to reach a point where they swear to uphold the law and to seek justice would risk being disbarred because someone who is grossly misinformed about the legal system, claims it to be so, makes me angry.

Just so I am PERFECTLY clear. . .a prosceuting attorney has an ETHICAL DUTY to present ALL the evidence, whether it supports an indictment or not.They also have an ETHICAL DUTY to inform a GJ if they believe the evidence does not support an indictment under the law. To NOT do so is grounds for disbarment. Do your own research. It is all right there for anyone who actually wants to educate themselves from the ABA.

I have no medical background and I would NEVER throw around accusations regarding medical procedures that I know NOTHING about. <modsnip>. :furious:

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

I hope you are right, I can't say LE has inspired a lot of confidence with their response to the situation, or the protests. I am still stunned by the images or them pointing rifles into the crowd. Very troubling to see that inappropriate behavior as well as death threats and slurs leveled at protesters.

Well, I for one would not protest, challenge, riot, loot, etc because I know what authorities and government can do.
I think it is quite naive if a person thinks we are still in the 1960's and the weaponry/technology of LE and military hasn't advanced tremendously.
Trust me, the LE and Nat'l Guard efforts at the protest in Fergus*n were very mild as opposed to what they could have done.

Welcome to the new America.

It is what it is.

 

[bettybaby00]

I <3 Megyn.

She kicks a$$

 

[CARIIS]

IMO some things any juvi record can indicate about any one ....General only!

do the deceased have privacy rights as it relates to juvi record?


I want to clarify this before proceeding I am not stating that any of the below happened. I am not making any notions about the MB case itself . Below is the abdunace of information one can glean, if a juv has a criminal history.

That involvement with a juvi as it relates to criminal activity (if it happened) provided us lots of info because there are all sorts of agencies and adults involved when juv are having difficulties


Not saying any of this applies to this situation - as far as juvi criminal records -- the info you can learn about:

Its like court orders can give insight into other dynamics in the childs life

a lot if it a list of charges but you can get adjucation stuff it just adds to an image , beliefs about LE, beliefs about violence, beliefs about society in general, rules in or out drug use more than pot, (crack?Aggression?).

Can rule in or rule out gang activity if there is any, can explain involvement of family members in terms of the childs issues, can provide some insight into the reason for the parents divorce, was there domestic violence in the house, what was ones academic perofmace ones behaoririal issues in a school setting with peers , with teachers (assalt on a teacher) , how much exposure did one have in a juvi detention center (trust me its like taking a class in how to be antisocial),the things they share with one another - and none of it are social skills!)

how many fights did one get into if one was in juv detention(indicates authority figure issues) were these fights with peers or auth figures. , how truant was one as far as school , if there was huge truancy issues what was the child doing instead of being in school, ( social services would be involved ) was the child held back a grade (age grade correlation)_

was there a building history in terms of crimes as it relates to progression in seriousness of criminal thinking patterns, was the child given probation officer, (or eauivlant) how did the child handle that if there was one , (back to authority figures and control issues) was family services ever involved with ones family, any indicators of sexual abuse (any sex related crimes) , what about substance abuse in a childs house

how intense was a families financial pressures, what disciplinary practices were parents using in the home, was there family structure, consitancy in parenting, what did the child think about the stepfather (assulat him?) ,Ones relationship with siblings (charge with choking sibling? ) , Any involvement in dealing (can give data about who one is hangin out with) Any setting fires charges?

Its not like a therapists psycho social but when the system gets involved there are lots of "stuff", names , reasons for judges actions sentence's - you can just get stuff - you can get a feeling , the parent has to be involved in picking up a child from jail , or juvi, does the kid stay in jail for 2 days cause mom cant get the child, does a parent come visit a child in juvi,

what do staff notice about child before or after a visit from a family member,(assulated correction officer after visit ), is a child even pretending to just play by the rules, or is the child just overtly hostile, indifferent, what kind of mental illness (is the child clinically depressed, manic, learning disabilities is there an inability to understand the "rules", impulse control issue related crimes ? (mauling a peer so bad that vistim stays in hospital for 3 weeks)

it just can be or give impressions most kid stuff is acting out - role models , environment, I posted about Normandy High - I am not certain how anyone might turn out after being in that joint - that place was worse than the jail for juvi I worked at.

THAT place needed the national guard and more than we saw the last 3 weeks it was numbing what was going on in that school. Thats exposure to nothing other than serious crimes did one keep catching charges while there? Data!

ANd it is hard to explain it is not like the juvi record lists this stuff - it can give a picture tho

like beating up a brohter
a teacher (got expelled?)
a mom
dealing drugs
charged while under influence of something
truancy parents can get trouble - gives you data about family
and sexual related charges ( could indicate being abused) you can tell if family services ever had to get involved-data about family system and degree of dysfunction etc by charges - some charges automatically trigger family services ( stealing electcity from neighbor casue his moms power had been cut off for inability to pay bill) just stuff like that
arrest for protecting mom against dad (striking parent domestic violence stuff )
arson (impuse control problems?) History of playing with fire ?
Gun fetish (how many charges involved use of a gun)
ordered BACK to detention - why what happended (not in school for 25 days!)
arrested for possesion ( was it an ounce personal use --or a pound --dealing)
LE comes to house casue husband called and the kid and mom are bleeding (domestic violance concerns)
Frequency LE comes to the home resulting in charges? Or are most of the charges street related?
KNives used?


Are charges more about acting out (breaking windows for no reason, egging someone, throwing rocks, keying car? )
Stealing cars or diapers or food for mom?
Is home repulsive when LE needs to come to house ?

witness statement in arrest reports
etc etc

Again not talking about this case , not implying anything just explaining my interest in the juvi record IF there is one

 

[reedus23]

My 22 yr old mixed race daughter first told me about this. And that was her description exactly. A college kid, walking to grandmas, grabbed by the neck by a white cop for jaywalking, and then shot in the back when he tried to break away. I was so heated and I came here to read about it and quickly realized it was not the entire story. :no:

And I shared some of the new revised info with her and she is being pretty reasonable about it. Even tries to explain it better to her friends, but she says they do not want to hear it.

Unfortunately, I don't think the FPD saw this thing blowing up and didn't get out in front of it as much as they could have. And if they were trying, the media was doing a good job of quashing it because I don't remember hearing much from FPD until stuff was out of control. The City, in their shooting, had the benefit of seeing what Ferguson had gone through, but my experience has been that the City has always done a pretty good job of getting out in front of a story right away. Of course, due to sure numbers, they also unfortunately have more experience in officer involved shootings.

 

[reedus23]

Same experience with my 17 year old. She kept saying, "but it's on Instagram!"

I replied, "honey we need to talk"

If nothing else it's served as a teaching moment about not believing everything you hear/read (especially FB/Instagram) until you become informed about the facts.

Twitter was the worst with this case. I didn't follow the Martin case so I don't know what it was like there.

 

[Irish_Eyes]

O/T, but I really miss Larry King Live on CNN. The network just isnt't the same without him.

I miss Tim Russert. I thought he asked hard hitting questions of all parties, regardless of politics, but still somehow always came out looking like someone you wouldn't mind kicking back and having a beer with.

 

[reedus23]

This time of 18:54 was explained way upthread. I'm sure MB was identified at the scene as the robbery suspect as the first responder was the one who put out the description I believe. Don't know if OW was aware.

Can I ask for the cliff notes on that explanation because I missed it. Seems to say what it says. Simple mistake?

 

[Muffet]

First contact wasn't for the robbery, it was for them walking down the middle of the street. LE agrees, DJ agrees. That has not changed. Although it may have been misreported but I do not think that information has changed.

Is the page 15 the one from the incident report where they still have an active search for suspects. The links are bad. It sounds as if the dispatcher did not clear it from their records because they had not been notified that these two were the two they were looking for. DW may have suspected they were but he had other things to worry about after the shooting, plus he is not the investigator. Didn't they get the tape later on in the day or early evening? So it was not possibly cleared because there was no proof until they were able to get the tape that showed MB was indeed the suspect. Remember DJ said he had joined MB while he was walking down the street so investigators took his statement as the truth. jmo

:thumbup:

I think people also get confused if they forget that the robbery wasn't made public until the following Friday.

Until then, yes, the police chief left out any comments about the robbery and BOLO. But from then on, he consistently said that the initial stop was for walking in the street, but that Officer Wilson made the connection during the altercation.

I tend to think he realized it when he passed by and gave them another look when they didn't get out of the road, and that's why he backed up.
Some thought the report this morning that they were in his way meant he couldn't have passed them after that. I don't think that's conclusive, but who knows.

Either way, I've kept track of the official reports, and they line up fine.



... Regarding the record entry... Reading both relevant tables, I thought it looked just like the sort of timestamp artifacts I experienced when I was doing some freelance database work. The date wasn't always a reflection of when I did something, but when I added the fact that I did it to the record. The second page notes that something was added to the record at that very time.

So, yes. I don't see any red flags with regard to either statements or the report, either.

And if there were, and it mattered? Parks would be all over it himself.

 

[reedus23]

there's not enough $$$$$$$$$$$$ prior to rioting & now that many businesses are gone & people will move, where are they going to find that $$$$$$$$$$$$!? Just another blighted area of StL County

Mouse races??? I kid not. My kid's baseball team raised over $7,000 with a mouse race fundraiser and that's what it cost to outfit Ellisville PD according to their mayor.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Why do I get upset about this thinking about how, if there were no rioting, all that money could have probably outfitted every cop with a body cam. But then we might not be talking about body cams if not for the rioters.

You know about the police body cam in the Dillon Taylor case, right?

 

[Oceans]

[/B]

Yes, I always want the people I don't agree with to not be given air-time on TV but well, we don't always get what we wish for. Sometimes it helps to throw something at the tv.

It's not the point that she gets no air-time. Let her make her points. What I don't like: that Sunni H. barely lets the other members of the panel speak. And when they do, she does not even let them finish but interrupts them.

 

[CARIIS]

a rap song! come on now !!

Sadly, 'm waiting for someone to make "you are pretty, so fine" into a song on Youtube.

 

[CARIIS]

Frankly the first time i heard it i was confused the second time i played i was surprised they aired it.

. IMO is sounds more like sex based, that relationship based!

I WISH the news networks would give a HEADS UP prior to that audio video telling their viewers to try to block out the main sounds and focus on the background shots. By the time my attention gets to the gunshots, they are already almost over.

 

[reedus23]

Sorry, I've come to the realization that I am NOT going to ever catch up. So. . .

BBM. . .this makes me so incredibley sad!!! You clearly do not understand the role of the prosecutor within a Grand Jury hearing. There sole job is to present ALL of the evidence to the Grand Jury. It may not be written as law in each state, but it is grounds for disbarment if they do not! Yes, it may be a cover your *advertiser censored* situation, but they are at the mercy of the GJ.

It is NOT a trial! The prosecutor does NOT present any argument. The GJ is free to call any witnesses they choose. There sole purpose is to present to the jury the evidence under the law and leave it up to the GJ if there is enough evidence to bring the case to trial. Their job is in NO WAY to convince the jury to indict so they may procede to trial. That is NOT their job. That people think this is just goes to show how very little John Q Public understands the law. It makes me ill that people think it is. A prosecutor is REQUIRIRED under their ethical guidlines set out by the ABA to inform a jury if they do not believe the evidence supports an indictment under the law.

To in any way imply that an attorney, who spent YEARS of his/her life to reach a point where they swear to uphold the law and to seek justice would risk being disbarred because someone who is grossly misinformed about the legal system, claims it to be so, makes me angry.

Just so I am PERFECTLY clear. . .a prosceuting attorney has an ETHICAL DUTY to present ALL the evidence, whether it supports an indictment or not.They also have an ETHICAL DUTY to inform a GJ if they believe the evidence does not support an indictment under the law. To NOT do so is grounds for disbarment. Do your own research. It is all right there for anyone who actually wants to educate themselves from the ABA.

I have no medical background and I would NEVER throw around accusations regarding medical procedures that I know NOTHING about. Sorry, but all of the misinformation and uneducated accusations make me a bit cranky. :furious:

Well, I wish you were around long ago. Yepp, didn't make any sense to me and caused me concern. I get they have to turn over all evidence, particularly exculpatory evidence to the other side. I did not know they HAVE to present it all to the GJ and I think you can see where I was beginning by asking questions about it. Unfortunately, you weren't there to educate me at the time. With no one answering the question for me, the following from the statute is what created confusion to me:

4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.

Since there is no defendant until charges are filed, I did not see how the issue could be brought up by a prosecuting attorney because that would be the prosecuting attorney injecting the issue, not the defendant. Having said that, as you keep on reading, you will see where I found and posted the jury instruction on justification that clearly says it's the prosecutor's burden to establish the defendant was not entitled to use force. As that burden is on the prosecutor, you will see that I acknowledged how and why he would bring that before a GJ.

Having said all of that, I would be curious to hear your thoughts on if you see any inconsistency between the jury instruction and the statute.

 

[CARIIS]

Does death eradicate ones privacy rights ?? IE juv record?

I haven't been able to find a free version to verify if this jury instruction has changed but thought I'd throw it out there on justification since we've talked about the statutes as well. For those not familiar, jury instructions are read to the jury at the end of a case and give the law that guides the jury when determining what the facts are and ultimately reaching a decision. In Missouri, they have Approved Instructions that are mandatory to use where appropriate. I found this article (have no idea who they are or their reliability) that provides the entire Missouri Approved Instruction.



This also answers my question from ages ago about the prosecuting attorney presenting evidence that supports a defense. The instruction plainly puts the onus on the prosecuting attorney to establish BARD that the officer was not entitled to use force.

 

[reedus23]

You know about the police body cam in the Dillon Taylor case, right?

Nope. Sorry to say I never heard of that case.

 

[tlcya]

Good night all. Thanks for the really good discourse this evening.