Has it been confirmed that it was him? Or did he just fit description?
Michael Brown shooting.
@Motokid6: I think white. I know they said the police force is overwhelming white compared to the areas 70% black population.
@Jacanuk: "What a nice and innocent guy that Brown was. And of course he wouldn't use his size against a lone cop. Or try to resist arrest for that robbery"
so does that mean he deserved to be shot and killed? He was un armed, ok he's a big boy so why's that cop trying to be a hero and going after him by himself which ended up him having to use deadly force, if he waited for back up surely things would have ended differently.
@Motokid6 said:
@AutoPilotOn: I see. Hypothetically speaking though what if the cop was black? Would this topic even exist?
Yes, because it'd still be a case of a police officer using excessive force, and it'd still be a case of the police subjugating protesters and trying to silence the media.
@Motokid6: IMO it would be only a local story or side note in national news at best.
@xeno_ghost: Justice is for the legal system and did brown deserve to be shot and killed , well no unless he put the cop in a position where he had no other choice.
But looking at Brown´s size and the fact that he just had committed a robbery it makes it less likely that the cop didn't actually fear for his life and used what force he felt needed to secure his safety. And it certainly isn't like his "friend" and the black community wanted to portray this , some random racist cop seeing two peaceful and innocent black kids and deciding to mess them up.
@Motokid6 said:
@AutoPilotOn: I see. Hypothetically speaking though what if the cop was black? Would this topic even exist?
Highly doubt it because im sure cops who shoot and kill suspects aren't limited to just white cops. So do you remember any similar cases where the cop was black? i sure dont.
@Jacanuk: "Highly doubt it because im sure cops who shoot and kill suspects aren't limited to just white cops. So do you remember any similar cases where the cop was black? i sure dont"
Anything that paints blacks in a negative a negative way is big news. Media knows blacks are gonna riot after such an incident, and they want the whole world to see black people acting like anilmals.
@xeno_ghost: weird I always see it the other way around. Anything that can be white on black is huge news. Meanwhile cities like Chicago have 229 murders this year alone mostly black on black and not one makes news nationally.
@AutoPilotOn: the gang problem is old news I guess, that shit happens so frequently it makes no sense to make a big deal of it. Where as when A white cop kills a black kid the media knows there is going to be a shit storm after such a incident. So the world gets to see blacks living up to an already bad name by rioting and looting.
@xeno_ghost said:
@AutoPilotOn: the gang problem is old news I guess, that shit happens so frequently it makes no sense to make a big deal of it. Where as when A white cop kills a black kid the media knows there is going to be a shit storm after such a incident. So the world gets to see blacks living up to an already bad name by rioting and looting.
it's makes program director's jobs at cnn very easy for the next week. they don't need to look for other news report for a while.
and plane crashes. cnn loves fucking plane crashes
@KHAndAnime said:
If a civilian receives death threats, proper measures are taken to make sure that the threats are dealt with. In the officer's situation, this is the best way of dealing with death threats. What's bullshit about death threats? If African American families threatened your life, you would cry like a baby and run to the police, asking them to protect you...
Or are you going to pretend to be an internet bad ass and act like the police have no justification in their decision?
The police are treated differently than a civilian. Whether or not you believe it is of no concern to me, Clearly, understanding reality isn't your strong suit. Stick with fantasy. There are plenty of precautions that could have been taken days ago before, today, releasing the name of the officer. The Police are held to one set of standards and civilians held to another. Using your "logic" why was the name revealed this morning?
@InEMplease said:
@comp_atkins: Loves fucking plane crashes.
Plainsexual.
larry literal
This whole situation is so fucked. Police chief in a conference just said the incident between Michael Brown and the Officer WAS NOT about the robbery at all. Officer did not know about it, and did not think Brown was a suspect. Chief also acknowledged that there is questions if the person on tape is Mike Brown. But even if it is...the tape has nothing to do with the shooting, and shouldn't have even been released. This also means that the friend's story of them only being approached by the officer because they were walking in the road is true. Clusterfuck level to 11.
@SaintLeonidas: unless if it was him at robbery and they thought the officer was into him... I really don't know..
@purplelabel said:
@Shottayouth13- said:
@purplelabel said:
I just don't understand why people have to riot and loot. It never seems to ever happen when any other race is involved?
Correct me if i'm wrong.
Yeah. Wrong wrong wrong.
Rioting isn't race specific. Try harder.
Give me examples that are in the same situation as this?
I do not mean to be rude. Please do us all a favor and study history. Your assertion through a lack of knowledge is offensive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States
If anyone is staying informed about this situation, a large portion of the Ferguson, Missouri population not trusting the local police should be obvious. To mediate, I know people can be dishonest, but when that large of a group states a disconnect between law enforcement and themselves, I understand that something like body cameras would be very beneficial to ease tensions in this situation because it did in the past.
One last thing: If a user posts racial slurs, moderations will be issued. That is a rule here, so if you did not know that then you need to review the community Code of Conduct. When a user quotes another user saying a slur, similar action can transpire.
@SaintLeonidas said:
This whole situation is so fucked. Police chief in a conference just said the incident between Michael Brown and the Officer WAS NOT about the robbery at all. Officer did not know about it, and did not think Brown was a suspect. Chief also acknowledged that there is questions if the person on tape is Mike Brown. But even if it is...the tape has nothing to do with the shooting, and shouldn't have even been released. This also means that the friend's story of them only being approached by the officer because they were walking in the road is true. Clusterfuck level to 11.
Well, just because the officer didn't know about the robbery does not mean that Brown didn´t assume he did and therefore acted on that assumption.
@Jacanuk said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
This whole situation is so fucked. Police chief in a conference just said the incident between Michael Brown and the Officer WAS NOT about the robbery at all. Officer did not know about it, and did not think Brown was a suspect. Chief also acknowledged that there is questions if the person on tape is Mike Brown. But even if it is...the tape has nothing to do with the shooting, and shouldn't have even been released. This also means that the friend's story of them only being approached by the officer because they were walking in the road is true. Clusterfuck level to 11.
Well, just because the officer didn't know about the robbery does not mean that Brown didn´t assume he did and therefore acted on that assumption.
Multiple eyewitness testimonies indicate that Brown was either running away or surrendering when the officer shot him full of bullets.
So the officer still used excessive force. Shocking as it may be to hear, the police are actually supposed to have rules about that. i.e. they aren't allowed to kill people who are surrendering or not an immediate threat.
@PannicAtack: Yes, eye-witnesses including the person who just robbed a store with Brown. His version, of course, was that they were just gingerly walking down the street mindin' their business. Remember, all these eye/character witnesses would tell you he was just a good boy and a gentle giant who would never do anyone any harm. Eye witness testimony is unreliable in general...hell just today they released a story where they might charge someone in Kendrick Johnson case who admitted to making false testimony.
Anyways I thought the claim the cop just shot him dead for no reason pretty dubious even initially, and now with more info the picture is starting to get much clearer. Don't get me wrong, we still don't know all the facts, and there is a possibility the cop still used excessive force and should be criminally prosecuted.
I've lost all sympathy for the victim, now that I'm aware that he was guilty of strong-arming a store clerk, stealing cigarettes, and intimidating another employee of the store he robbed.
@emil_fontz said:
I've lost all sympathy for the victim, now that I'm aware that he was guilty of strong-arming a store clerk, stealing cigarettes, and intimidating another employee of the store he robbed.
Well I am certainly not loosing any sleep over this thug, but let's say the cop did use excessive force, it still needs to be prosecuted and the family would still deserve justice. We do have laws, and yes they protect even the less savory people in our country.
I think there's a lot more info that is still yet to be released, and I am withholding judgement until then.
@emil_fontz said:
I've lost all sympathy for the victim, now that I'm aware that he was guilty of strong-arming a store clerk, stealing cigarettes, and intimidating another employee of the store he robbed.
Doesn't matter AT ALL whether you have sympathy for him or not. If all the eye witness reports are true, he was gunned downed while unarmed and surrendering. That is not justice, especially considering his alleged crimes (again, even the police chief said they understand that the man in the video may not be Michael Brown).
@PannicAtack said:
@Jacanuk said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
This whole situation is so fucked. Police chief in a conference just said the incident between Michael Brown and the Officer WAS NOT about the robbery at all. Officer did not know about it, and did not think Brown was a suspect. Chief also acknowledged that there is questions if the person on tape is Mike Brown. But even if it is...the tape has nothing to do with the shooting, and shouldn't have even been released. This also means that the friend's story of them only being approached by the officer because they were walking in the road is true. Clusterfuck level to 11.
Well, just because the officer didn't know about the robbery does not mean that Brown didn´t assume he did and therefore acted on that assumption.
Multiple eyewitness testimonies indicate that Brown was either running away or surrendering when the officer shot him full of bullets.
So the officer still used excessive force. Shocking as it may be to hear, the police are actually supposed to have rules about that. i.e. they aren't allowed to kill people who are surrendering or not an immediate threat.
Multiple? and one was his friend who just robbed a store with him, not to mention that we have no clue what happened up to that point where the officer drew his weapon and Brown "ran"
And i am sure that the right people will look at the incident not to mention look at the video cam cop cars have and come to the right conclusion. So if they deem it excessive force then it is of course that.
But im not going to jump on the cop-hating train just because some gangbanger who just robbed a shop says the cop was of course at fault.
I've seen both videos and I'd be very surprised if it wasn't Michael Brown...same build, same shoes, same hat, same shirt...and just minutes from where the robbery occurred. All of this, in a town of just 22K people. I mean, yeah if we want to get technical there's always a chance it's not, but I think that chance is very very slim.
@Jacanuk said:
@PannicAtack said:
@Jacanuk said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
This whole situation is so fucked. Police chief in a conference just said the incident between Michael Brown and the Officer WAS NOT about the robbery at all. Officer did not know about it, and did not think Brown was a suspect. Chief also acknowledged that there is questions if the person on tape is Mike Brown. But even if it is...the tape has nothing to do with the shooting, and shouldn't have even been released. This also means that the friend's story of them only being approached by the officer because they were walking in the road is true. Clusterfuck level to 11.
Well, just because the officer didn't know about the robbery does not mean that Brown didn´t assume he did and therefore acted on that assumption.
Multiple eyewitness testimonies indicate that Brown was either running away or surrendering when the officer shot him full of bullets.
So the officer still used excessive force. Shocking as it may be to hear, the police are actually supposed to have rules about that. i.e. they aren't allowed to kill people who are surrendering or not an immediate threat.
Multiple? and one was his friend who just robbed a store with him, not to mention that we have no clue what happened up to that point where the officer drew his weapon and Brown "ran"
And i am sure that the right people will look at the incident not to mention look at the video cam cop cars have and come to the right conclusion. So if they deem it excessive force then it is of course that.
But im not going to jump on the cop-hating train just because some gangbanger who just robbed a shop says the cop was of course at fault.
OMG...Ferguson police cars don't have dash cams. This is known to all actually following the situation.
Also, "gangbanger"...pst, your racism is showing. There is no knowledge of any gang association. He was a high school grad who was college bound. But I mean, he was a black teen, so of course he was in a gang...
Here is a thought. STOP fucking posting when you clearly, as I already said previously, have a total misunderstanding of the entire situation.
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
I've lost all sympathy for the victim, now that I'm aware that he was guilty of strong-arming a store clerk, stealing cigarettes, and intimidating another employee of the store he robbed.
Doesn't matter AT ALL whether you have sympathy for him or not. If all the eye witness reports are true, he was gunned downed while unarmed and surrendering. That is not justice, especially considering his alleged crimes (again, even the police chief said they understand that the man in the video may not be Michael Brown).
To me, the behavior he demonstrated in the video suggests that he has an aggressive personality. More than likely he assaulted or battered the officer.
@emil_fontz said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
I've lost all sympathy for the victim, now that I'm aware that he was guilty of strong-arming a store clerk, stealing cigarettes, and intimidating another employee of the store he robbed.
Doesn't matter AT ALL whether you have sympathy for him or not. If all the eye witness reports are true, he was gunned downed while unarmed and surrendering. That is not justice, especially considering his alleged crimes (again, even the police chief said they understand that the man in the video may not be Michael Brown).
To me, the behavior he demonstrated in the video suggests that he has an aggressive personality. More than likely he assaulted or battered the officer.
Right, yeah, that makes sense because pushing a small, "older" shop keeper in a store that looks deserted definitely means he would also attack an armed officer in the middle of a street that had many people on the sidewalks/in front of their homes...If you are going to make an assumption, you might want to actually put some thought into it.
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
I've lost all sympathy for the victim, now that I'm aware that he was guilty of strong-arming a store clerk, stealing cigarettes, and intimidating another employee of the store he robbed.
Doesn't matter AT ALL whether you have sympathy for him or not. If all the eye witness reports are true, he was gunned downed while unarmed and surrendering. That is not justice, especially considering his alleged crimes (again, even the police chief said they understand that the man in the video may not be Michael Brown).
To me, the behavior he demonstrated in the video suggests that he has an aggressive personality. More than likely he assaulted or battered the officer.
Right, yeah, that makes sense because pushing a small, "older" shop keeper in a store that looks deserted definitely means he would also attack an armed officer in the middle of a street that had many people on the sidewalks/in front of their homes...If you are going to make an assumption, you might want to actually put some thought into it.
Say what? If we are going to assume it was MB who just committed strong-armed robbery, then yeah, that's exactly the type of person who get's into violent confrontations with the police. Especially when they literally just committed the crime and are probably not trying, to you know, go to jail. Not only does the previous encounter show that he isn't the "gentle giant" that has been claimed, but it would also show some motive as to how the confrontation may have started.
Again, there's nowhere near enough info release yet to know how this all went down, but make no mistake, the strong-armed robbery thing (if true) absolutely hurts their case. I'd suggest you put some thought into it next time instead of scolding others...
Has nobody here brought up how in 2009 Ferguson police beat the shit out of a guy because they thought he was someone else, realized their mistake, but then charged the guy they beat up with "destruction of property" because he bled over their uniforms? (Also, funny story, the surveillance footage that shows this guy getting beat up just so happened to malfunction so he didn't have admissible proof of the beatdown.) If you're gonna try assassinating Michael Brown's character because he stole some stuff from a convenience store then might as well bring up an incident like this to see what type of assholes this city employs to "protect and serve".
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/15/the-day-ferguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html
Ferguson's police department are like comic book villains. I'm glad Ron Johnson actually seems to know what the hell he's doing because otherwise I think they'd still be trying to keep the peace by shooting people with rubber bullets.
@JML897 said:
Has nobody here brought up how in 2009 Ferguson police beat the shit out of a guy because they thought he was someone else, realized their mistake, but then charged the guy they beat up with "destruction of property" because he bled over their uniforms? (Also, funny story, the surveillance footage that shows this guy getting beat up just so happened to malfunction so he didn't have admissible proof of the beatdown.) If you're gonna try assassinating Michael Brown's character because he stole some stuff from a convenience store then might as well bring up an incident like this to see what type of assholes this city employs to "protect and serve".
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/15/the-day-ferguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html
Ferguson's police department are like comic book villains. I'm glad Ron Johnson actually seems to know what the hell he's doing because otherwise I think they'd still be trying to keep the peace by shooting people with rubber bullets.
Discussing the facts surrounding a case isn't character assassination. That revolves around saying false things, or maliciously bringing up things that are not related to a given situation/person. Talking about the fact that MB most likely was in involved in a strong armed robbery (and so was one of the witnesses) just minutes before he was shot isn't character assassination, it's obviously relevant.
@Renevent42 said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
I've lost all sympathy for the victim, now that I'm aware that he was guilty of strong-arming a store clerk, stealing cigarettes, and intimidating another employee of the store he robbed.
Doesn't matter AT ALL whether you have sympathy for him or not. If all the eye witness reports are true, he was gunned downed while unarmed and surrendering. That is not justice, especially considering his alleged crimes (again, even the police chief said they understand that the man in the video may not be Michael Brown).
To me, the behavior he demonstrated in the video suggests that he has an aggressive personality. More than likely he assaulted or battered the officer.
Right, yeah, that makes sense because pushing a small, "older" shop keeper in a store that looks deserted definitely means he would also attack an armed officer in the middle of a street that had many people on the sidewalks/in front of their homes...If you are going to make an assumption, you might want to actually put some thought into it.
Say what? If we are going to assume it was MB who just committed strong-armed robbery, then yeah, that's exactly the type of person who get's into violent confrontations with the police. Especially when they literally just committed the crime and are probably not trying, to you know, go to jail. Not only does the previous encounter show that he isn't the "gentle giant" that has been claimed, but it would also show some motive as to how the confrontation may have started.
Again, there's nowhere near enough info release yet to know how this all went down, but make no mistake, the strong-armed robbery thing (if true) absolutely hurts their case. I'd suggest you put some thought into it next time instead of scolding others...
Pushing a smaller guy =/= mean you are willing to confront an armed officer. That is a HUGE assumption to make, especially if you are going off of one incident. Plus, as I mentioned, they were in the middle of the street in a residential neighborhood. If Michael Brown thought the cop confronting him was because of the robbery, and he didn't want to go to jail, he would have ran. You really think he thought "well, if I fight or possibly kill the cop I'll get off free!"...makes no sense.
@SaintLeonidas said:
OMG...Ferguson police cars don't have dash cams. This is known to all actually following the situation.
Also, "gangbanger"...pst, your racism is showing. There is no knowledge of any gang association. He was a high school grad who was college bound. But I mean, he was a black teen, so of course he was in a gang...
Here is a thought. STOP fucking posting when you clearly, as I already said previously, have a total misunderstanding of the entire situation.
Why do people keep bringing up that he was going to go to college? I keep seeing that and I think "so what"? Bad/violent people go to college all the time. Mike Brown doesn't look like much of a "gentle" giant in that video, he looks like a violent criminal. The kind of violent criminal who would make a move to grab a cops gun when he was in trouble. It also shows what kind of person his friend is as well, which casts into doubt the credibility of his testimony. (keeping in mind eye witness testimony is already notoriously dicey as is)
It could turn out the officer was in fact in the wrong, but it needs to stop being an automatic accusation of racism against anyone who asks for time for the investigation to play out as the cop may be telling the truth, or who questions the narrative that has been built around Mr.Brown.
@Renevent42 said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
I've lost all sympathy for the victim, now that I'm aware that he was guilty of strong-arming a store clerk, stealing cigarettes, and intimidating another employee of the store he robbed.
Doesn't matter AT ALL whether you have sympathy for him or not. If all the eye witness reports are true, he was gunned downed while unarmed and surrendering. That is not justice, especially considering his alleged crimes (again, even the police chief said they understand that the man in the video may not be Michael Brown).
To me, the behavior he demonstrated in the video suggests that he has an aggressive personality. More than likely he assaulted or battered the officer.
Right, yeah, that makes sense because pushing a small, "older" shop keeper in a store that looks deserted definitely means he would also attack an armed officer in the middle of a street that had many people on the sidewalks/in front of their homes...If you are going to make an assumption, you might want to actually put some thought into it.
Say what? If we are going to assume it was MB who just committed strong-armed robbery, then yeah, that's exactly the type of person who get's into violent confrontations with the police. Especially when they literally just committed the crime and are probably not trying, to you know, go to jail. Not only does the previous encounter show that he isn't the "gentle giant" that has been claimed, but it would also show some motive as to how the confrontation may have started.
Again, there's nowhere near enough info release yet to know how this all went down, but make no mistake, the strong-armed robbery thing (if true) absolutely hurts their case. I'd suggest you put some thought into it next time instead of scolding others...
Fact: The St Louis County Police Chief, Jon Belmar, says the officer shot Michael Brown when they were 35 feet away from each other. If the officer shot Brown at point-blank range at the car or something, he could make the argument that he shot him because of a struggle. You can't make that argument when Michael Brown was unarmed and 35 feet away from the officer.
I think there's a good chance that Michael Brown was an immature/asshole teenager and there very well could have been some point where he struggled with the officer. That means Michael Brown should have been arrested and put on trial. Not shot at 7 times when he was 35 feet away from the officer and posed no immediate threat.
@Renevent42 said:
@JML897 said:
Has nobody here brought up how in 2009 Ferguson police beat the shit out of a guy because they thought he was someone else, realized their mistake, but then charged the guy they beat up with "destruction of property" because he bled over their uniforms? (Also, funny story, the surveillance footage that shows this guy getting beat up just so happened to malfunction so he didn't have admissible proof of the beatdown.) If you're gonna try assassinating Michael Brown's character because he stole some stuff from a convenience store then might as well bring up an incident like this to see what type of assholes this city employs to "protect and serve".
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/15/the-day-ferguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html
Ferguson's police department are like comic book villains. I'm glad Ron Johnson actually seems to know what the hell he's doing because otherwise I think they'd still be trying to keep the peace by shooting people with rubber bullets.
Discussing the fact surrounding a case isn't character assassination. That revolves around saying false things, or maliciously bringing up things that are not related to a given situation/person. Talking about the fact that MB most likely was in involved in a strong armed robbery (and so was one of the witnesses) just minutes before he was shot isn't character assassination, it's obviously relevant.
How is it relevant? It would ONLY be relevant if the police department released the incident report of the actual confrontation. Which they haven't. If they did, then they could say - if it showed Brown fought the officer - that it was the robbery that led to this.
But again, the cop who shot him DID NOT know about the robbery. All we know, based on the only evidence given so far about THE SHOOTING, is that Brown was shot surrendering. The tape has nothing to do with the actual incident based on what is known. The tape should have only been released AFTER we knew what actually happened. To release it first very clearly seems to be an attempt to tarnish Brown's image while the Ferguson police continue to sit on evidence.
@SaintLeonidas said:
@Renevent42 said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
@emil_fontz said:
I've lost all sympathy for the victim, now that I'm aware that he was guilty of strong-arming a store clerk, stealing cigarettes, and intimidating another employee of the store he robbed.
Doesn't matter AT ALL whether you have sympathy for him or not. If all the eye witness reports are true, he was gunned downed while unarmed and surrendering. That is not justice, especially considering his alleged crimes (again, even the police chief said they understand that the man in the video may not be Michael Brown).
To me, the behavior he demonstrated in the video suggests that he has an aggressive personality. More than likely he assaulted or battered the officer.
Right, yeah, that makes sense because pushing a small, "older" shop keeper in a store that looks deserted definitely means he would also attack an armed officer in the middle of a street that had many people on the sidewalks/in front of their homes...If you are going to make an assumption, you might want to actually put some thought into it.
Say what? If we are going to assume it was MB who just committed strong-armed robbery, then yeah, that's exactly the type of person who get's into violent confrontations with the police. Especially when they literally just committed the crime and are probably not trying, to you know, go to jail. Not only does the previous encounter show that he isn't the "gentle giant" that has been claimed, but it would also show some motive as to how the confrontation may have started.
Again, there's nowhere near enough info release yet to know how this all went down, but make no mistake, the strong-armed robbery thing (if true) absolutely hurts their case. I'd suggest you put some thought into it next time instead of scolding others...
Pushing a smaller guy =/= mean you are willing to confront an armed officer. That is a HUGE assumption to make, especially if you are going off of one incident. Plus, as I mentioned, they were in the middle of the street in a residential neighborhood. If Michael Brown thought the cop confronting him was because of the robbery, and he didn't want to go to jail, he would have ran. You really think he thought "well, if I fight or possibly kill the cop I'll get off free!"...makes no sense.
He grabbed the dude and threw him around. That incident was just minutes before. People assault cops and others in the middle of the street all the time...not that uncommon. You don't know he would have ran, total assumption on your part.
Yes, and sorry, evidence of strong-armed robbery just minutes before will hurt him (if true) and for good reason.
@Buckhannah said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
OMG...Ferguson police cars don't have dash cams. This is known to all actually following the situation.
Also, "gangbanger"...pst, your racism is showing. There is no knowledge of any gang association. He was a high school grad who was college bound. But I mean, he was a black teen, so of course he was in a gang...
Here is a thought. STOP fucking posting when you clearly, as I already said previously, have a total misunderstanding of the entire situation.
but it needs to stop being an automatic accusation of racism against anyone who asks for time for the investigation to play out as the cop may be telling the truth, or who questions the narrative that has been built around Mr.Brown.
Um...did you not read the post I was quoting? You know, the one where someone who clearly has limited knowledge of the whole situation called Brown a gangbanger. Which he assumed was true because Brown is black and possibly committed theft. Brown's background is incredibly relevant in that case.
Plus, a person's character is ALWAYS used in courts and during investigations.
@SaintLeonidas said:
@Renevent42 said:
@JML897 said:
Has nobody here brought up how in 2009 Ferguson police beat the shit out of a guy because they thought he was someone else, realized their mistake, but then charged the guy they beat up with "destruction of property" because he bled over their uniforms? (Also, funny story, the surveillance footage that shows this guy getting beat up just so happened to malfunction so he didn't have admissible proof of the beatdown.) If you're gonna try assassinating Michael Brown's character because he stole some stuff from a convenience store then might as well bring up an incident like this to see what type of assholes this city employs to "protect and serve".
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/15/the-day-ferguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html
Ferguson's police department are like comic book villains. I'm glad Ron Johnson actually seems to know what the hell he's doing because otherwise I think they'd still be trying to keep the peace by shooting people with rubber bullets.
Discussing the fact surrounding a case isn't character assassination. That revolves around saying false things, or maliciously bringing up things that are not related to a given situation/person. Talking about the fact that MB most likely was in involved in a strong armed robbery (and so was one of the witnesses) just minutes before he was shot isn't character assassination, it's obviously relevant.
How is it relevant? It would ONLY be relevant if the police department released the incident report of the actual confrontation. Which they haven't. If they did, then they could say - if it showed Brown fought the officer - that it was the robbery that led to this.
But again, the cop who shot him DID NOT know about the robbery. All we know, based on the only evidence given so far about THE SHOOTING, is that Brown was shot surrendering. The tape has nothing to do with the actual incident based on what is known. The tape should have only been released AFTER we knew what actually happened. To release it first very clearly seems to be an attempt to tarnish Brown's image while the Ferguson police continue to sit on evidence.
Oh geeze...what tripe. Yes, someone being involved in a strong-armed robbery just minutes before is clearly relevant to the case. Beyond that, we have only heard the eye-witness testimony so far, much of which is from a person who was very probably his accomplice in that robbery.
With so little information on what happened after that point, I am not willing to pretend I know what happened. Hell, I even said that it's very possible that the officer is negligent. I am not going to go on an emotional rampage though and pretend we have the facts here, because we don't.
@Jacanuk said:
@PannicAtack said:
@Jacanuk said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
This whole situation is so fucked. Police chief in a conference just said the incident between Michael Brown and the Officer WAS NOT about the robbery at all. Officer did not know about it, and did not think Brown was a suspect. Chief also acknowledged that there is questions if the person on tape is Mike Brown. But even if it is...the tape has nothing to do with the shooting, and shouldn't have even been released. This also means that the friend's story of them only being approached by the officer because they were walking in the road is true. Clusterfuck level to 11.
Well, just because the officer didn't know about the robbery does not mean that Brown didn´t assume he did and therefore acted on that assumption.
Multiple eyewitness testimonies indicate that Brown was either running away or surrendering when the officer shot him full of bullets.
So the officer still used excessive force. Shocking as it may be to hear, the police are actually supposed to have rules about that. i.e. they aren't allowed to kill people who are surrendering or not an immediate threat.
Multiple? and one was his friend who just robbed a store with him, not to mention that we have no clue what happened up to that point where the officer drew his weapon and Brown "ran"
And i am sure that the right people will look at the incident not to mention look at the video cam cop cars have and come to the right conclusion. So if they deem it excessive force then it is of course that.
But im not going to jump on the cop-hating train just because some gangbanger who just robbed a shop says the cop was of course at fault.
What about Tiffany Mitchell? What about Piaget Crenshaw? Were they part of the robbery, too? Their accounts say that, yes, Brown was either running away or had his arms up.
Yes, I am getting on the "cop-hating train," because the actions of the police have been disgusting. Even if everything about the robbery is true, that changes nothing about the officer's use of excessive force, and it certainly doesn't justify the arrests of and assaults on reporters.
Also, "gangbanger"?
@SaintLeonidas said:
You really think he thought "well, if I fight or possibly kill the cop I'll get off free!"...makes no sense.
Violent bullies rarely display much in the way of logical thinking, in my experience.
@Buckhannah said:
@SaintLeonidas said:
You really think he thought "well, if I fight or possibly kill the cop I'll get off free!"...makes no sense.
Violent bullies rarely display much in the way of logical thinking, in my experience.
It's a stupid argument. It's like boiling down the other side of the argument to:
"I'll just gun down a nice peace-loving kid in broad daylight in the middle of the street then I'll go get some donuts!"
Situation is obviously far more complex than either stupid statements makes it into.
Twitter timeline by a witness, start from the bottom. The guy who made these tweets had zero affiliation with anyone involved and tweeted this while it was happening (meaning before any media would influence what he sent out there one way or the other).
https://twitter.com/7im/timelines/499639344613695488
"dude was running and the cops just shot.him. i saw him die bruh"
"the first two (shots were from behind), the next 5 werent, he turned around"
Whether Michael Brown robbed the store or not (and he probably did), how could anyone side with the cop on this? There's so much evidence that shows the cop shot him from a distance and not immediately during any type of struggle.
@JML897 said:
Twitter timeline by a witness, start from the bottom. The guy who made these tweets had zero affiliation with anyone involved and tweeted this while it was happening (meaning before any media would influence what he sent out there one way or the other).
https://twitter.com/7im/timelines/499639344613695488
"dude was running and the cops just shot.him. i saw him die bruh"
"the first two (shots were from behind), the next 5 werent, he turned around"
Whether Michael Brown robbed the store or not (and he probably did), how could anyone side with the cop on this? There's so much evidence that shows the cop shot him from a distance and not immediately during any type of struggle.
Because, twitter timelines from supposed eye-witnesses do not constitute absolute proof. I think it's already clear at least one of them is at the very least leaving out information, and it's possible the others are too (even with no affiliation). I already spoke about the person in the Kendrick Johnson case who was unaffiliated with KJ, but still made false testimony and even admitted to it.
We still haven't seen the police report or the police side of things, the investigation is not complete, and we don't even know basic stuff like the extent of the officer's wounds.
For anyone to be absolutely convinced they know what happened that day and be so emotionally invested in it at this early point with so little information shows a huge prejudice in their way of thinking. It very well may be the cop is a murderer, I agree, but there's no way to know at this point.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment