No indictment - Ferguson

Luv_Studd · Nov 25, 2014

This is a tough topic and perhaps pointless to post about it here. But, my feelings are somewhat torn....unless you were actually first-hand witness to the event, it's impossible to be completely be on one side or the other if one leaves their emotions at the door.

It's clear that this nation has many problems to figure out with poverty, reckless & criminal behavior, racial tolerance, racial profiling, etc. Unless law enforcement & society deals with the complicated root causes on these issues, there will likely be another Ferguson.

One the one side, they are calling the officer a murderer and the failure of the system to indict Wilson as yet another injustice to blacks in America, and on the other side you have Officer Wilson defending himself as he was confronted aggressively by an unarmed Brown.

Apparently witnesses to the situation gave testimony which as a whole believed Wilson's side to be true, though it seems there were alternate variations of the events that would discount Wilson's version.

The media and outside influences do not help one bit.

Did Michael Brown have to die? I think not. But then again, if I were in that situation (though not a cop) and if Brown was aggressively coming at me, would I have done the same thing? Probably.

As a police officer, I have to believe there are procedures to avoid shooting someone to death, especially if they are unarmed. Apparently Wilson had mace, but no taser gun. Could he have shot him in the legs or got in his car to a more secure location while back up arrive?

Al · Nov 25, 2014

How to kill black people legally:

1. Become a police officer.
2. Kill black people.
3. Say you were afraid of black people you killed.
4. Get off scot-free with no trial.

Yes, I'm exaggerating, but sometimes that's what it seems like. Believe whatever you want in your comfortable suburban house in your safe neighborhood. Black people are NOT equal in this country in 2014.

Mike Brown and his parents deserved better, regardless of whether or not Mike Brown stole something from a store. He was unarmed; we can all agree on that.

Sir_Brizz · Nov 25, 2014

The problem with cases like this is that they are way too emotionally charged, and the media only makes it worse. What other choice did the jury have? Based on what we know from many biased sources on many sides of this topic, there is too little information about what actually happened to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that what the cop did was wrong.

I am glad that people are calling for more officers to have cameras on. It bothers me that people who should be exemplars of the law are often the ones most likely to thwart it.

Al · Nov 25, 2014

Sir_Brizz said:
I am glad that people are calling for more officers to have cameras on. It bothers me that people who should be exemplars of the law are often the ones most likely to thwart it.

Wait a minute. Two things we agree on in one day?! The world might actually have a chance.

[GU]elmur_fud · Nov 25, 2014

I don't know much about the issue at hand, I do know a lot about Missouri having lived 11 years of my life there. It is a backwater racist filled cesspool of jerks with a considerable portion of the population being KKK.

Jacks:Revenge · Nov 25, 2014

so I live in Denver, CO but I went to college @ Columbia Missouri (Mizzou Tigers).
most of my friends and family live in St Louis, right next door to Ferguson.

normally I tune these events out. I didn't watch the OJ verdict and I didn't care what happened to Zimmerman. but I've been following the Brown case because of how close to home it hits. I was on the phone with a few people who live close enough to tune in the local police scanner and we were watching the Grand Jury decision last night.

Luv_Studd said:
Did Michael Brown have to die?

you're asking the wrong question.
taken from another forum... for those who didn't pay attention, this is extremely accurate:

according to the Grand Jury summary that was released tonight...

- Michael Brown and friend steal box of cigars from a store.
- officer Wilson is finishing up a nearby call and responds to a reported shoplifting by a suspect wearing red shirt, brown khakis, and yellow socks.
- when he arrives, Wilson parks his car in the street blocking the forward progress of 2 males walking in the middle of the road, after noticing that one of the males had a red shirt, brown shorts, yellow socks, and box of Swisher Sweets.
- Michael Brown and friend exchange words with Wilson wile the officer is still in the vehicle. Brown's friend returns to the curb while Brown approaches Wilson's squad car.
- Brown continues to argue with Wilson as the officer is inside the vehicle until Brown is standing at the door and begins to reach inside. a struggle or some kind of quick fight ensues during which Wilson and Brown reach for Wilson's gun.
- Wilson fires 2 shots inside of the vehicle, one of which was never recovered and the second of which grazed Brown on his forearm.

got it so far?

- at this point, Brown retreats from the vehicle as his friend retreats to a side street.
- Wilson now exits his vehicle and begins to chase Brown on foot, verbally requesting that he stop and and surrender, with his gun drawn but not firing or aiming at Brown.
- after a short chase, perhaps less than 100 yards, Brown stops running and so Wilson also stops running but raises his gun at aims at the victim.
- Brown and Wilson are standing still, exchanging words again. as they argue Brown begins to approach Wilson.
- Wilson fires a handful of shots into Brown's center-of-mass.
- Brown staggers toward Wilson but does not stop forward progress.
- Wilson fires an additional handful of shots at Brown's forehead, fatally wounding him.
- about 90 seconds after the first shot was fired, a 2nd officer arrives on the scene to provide Wilson with backup, at which point the incident is over.

this is according to over 60 different witnesses.
this is according to over 170 hours of testimony.
the Grand Jury deliberated for almost a month, meeting on at least 25 individual days spent pouring over all the physical evidence, hearing presentations from both sides, and detailed autopsy results from 3 different forensic investigators (each of which agreed with each other's findings).

Michael Brown was never shot in the back.
all entry wounds were forward-facing.
Michael Brown was unarmed.
Michael Brown did shoplift at a gas station.

officer Wilson was cleared of negligent / homicide charges.
but he did cause the death of this young man.

Jacks:Revenge · Nov 25, 2014

as for my own thoughts?

I think one of the biggest issues is how law enforcement engages with the people that it's supposed to work for.

in a typical city like Ferguson, the makeup of police and the training the police receive does not reflect the standards and/or values of the community.
- mostly white police, mostly black residents
- police are relatively hostile and distrusting towards citizens, assuming the worst during every call
- "protect and serve" seems to apply more and more to fellow officers than to community members
- lethal force is too often the first and/or only alternative during an encounter, where is the tazor / mace / baton? anything other than guns and bullets? I know we have these tools at our disposal, why are they not being trained to apply them quicker? your firearm should always be last resort

I'm also going to leave this here for the sake of some fucking perspective:

https://storify.com/betakateenin/white-people-riots

goddamn thugs

Crotale · Nov 25, 2014

Sir_Brizz said:
The problem with cases like this is that they are way too emotionally charged, and the media only makes it worse. What other choice did the jury have? Based on what we know from many biased sources on many sides of this topic, there is too little information about what actually happened to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that what the cop did was wrong.

Agreed on the emotional response to the killing of Brown and the decision not to prosecute Wilson. But one technicality I wanted to correct you on is that the level of burden to prosecute was the lowest of all legal burdens: probable cause.

There was insufficient evidence to find probable cause, and if you note the efforts of the grand jury as Jacks laid out, there was a shit ton of evidence and testimony provided to examine and weigh. All that was needed to meet the legal threshold was any one single piece of evidence showing this officer to have disregarded the law in any manner, and there was not enough evidence to meet that minimal burden.

Another point to note is the toxicology report. Brown has 12 nanograms per /ML of Delta-9-THC in his blood, but none in his urine. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but this indicates he had ingested the drug not too long before he was killed. Impairment under the influence of marijuana with 5 nanograms per ML of Delta-9-THC is equivalent to .08 blood-alcohol content, so the levels in Browns blood meant he was under the influence when he was killed.

Balton · Nov 25, 2014

Kneecapping was not an option? Couldn't you make a case surrounding use of excessive force?

N1ghtmare · Nov 25, 2014

At the distance Wilson was shooting, he had to focus a great deal to aim accurately. Officers are trained to shoot for the torso in all situations requiring guns to avoid missing and hitting someone else. If officers were trained to aim for legs or arms depending "on the situation" then there would be thousands of more cases like this where it is unclear whether the proper force was used, and even thousands more where bysanders get shot. It is much easier to say that if excessive force is necessary, aim for the chest (the most likely place to land an accurate shot to incapacitate the target). The questions being of course, when are firearms necessary, which becomes much easier to define if the usage always assumes a shoot to kill or incapacitate.

The amount of shots fired by Wilson probably testifies to the distance.

Cameras are cheap and small enough to be equipped on every officer. This would clear up most situations of uncertainty; tasers issued as a first use option should be more reinforced. Having almost finished a degree and being on a college campus, I know a situation like this would be handled with taser first on college students.

dr.flay · Nov 25, 2014

Race is not the issue.
"Us and them" is the issue.

I followed the recent case of the homeless dude (white BTW.), that was brutally beaten and tazered for over 30 minutes on CCTV, by 6 police men, until he died.

You can see the whole thing from start to finish.
1 Police man approaches the skinny dude and tells him "You are going to get f*cked up" (audio is that clear on the footage.)
He then tries to run, and they are so scared and overwhelmed by an unarmed, half-naked skeletal man, that it takes no less than 6 brave defenders of the public, to "subdue" a member of this....member of the public.
Repeatedly, over and over and over, for over a half an hour, long after he stopped begging for his life any more).

Man those American popo can't be very good if it takes 6 men (each more than twice his size), to take down 1 under-fed homeless dude.
Most of the "Door-men" I know in the UK will happily take down several opponents in 1 go (an why some Police turn a blind-eye).

Anyway, back in the court-room it was sort of assumed that the damning evidence would see these Police men under the hammer of justice.

Mysteriously the Judge tried to avoid watching the footage as long as possible, until it was no longer an option.
Why would a Judge go out of their way to not view the main evidence? is anyone's guess.

Surprise, surprise, all 6 were found not guilty of killing the man, they killed on video.

The US Police think they are in a war-zone, and so behave like it.
If governments honestly believe their own streets are a war-zone, then why are there civilians with guns, and not soldiers instead ?

1 thing that needs to change in the USA, is being able to make public interest stories like this "exclusive".
When a Police man in any State is in court, all state news channels should carry it.
Only the curious on Yotube find the exclusives later on.

I also think that all Police and Politicians that are busted, should get heavier instead of lighter sentences.
Surely they should be held even more accountable for their actions, if they claim to be doing it in our name ?

It is stupid. What deterrent is it for our overlords not to be dick-heads, when they get lesser sentences or a simple slap on the wrist ?

Luv_Studd · Nov 26, 2014

If you have time to read through the witness interviews, there is a lot of conflicting viewpoints:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/25/us/evidence-released-in-michael-brown-case.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=b-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

A couple I read seem to corroborate Wilson's point of view; which, if that's true, would indicate he's telling the truth. Various others paint a picture of Brown holding his hands up and being shot in cold blood.

cryptophreak · Nov 26, 2014

Balton said:
Kneecapping was not an option?

Imagine you had a bug on your shirt and I used a chainsaw to get it off for you. That would be unwarranted and irresponsible use of a dangerous tool.

Well, that's what kneecapping is. Firearms are deadly weapons. They produce semi-controlled explosions that tear large holes in flesh. They are not easily controlled in stressful situations, pistols especially. If you mean to kill someone, a gun is a great tool. If you mean to merely stop someone, it’s a real moron move.

This is why cops carry a variety of less-lethal options.

--

Note that I own a variety of firearms and train with them at least weekly, in cooperation with my military, ex-military, and gunsmith friends. I approve of guns and know how to use them. Kneecapping is dumb.

Crotale · Nov 26, 2014

cryptophreak said:
Imagine you had a bug on your shirt and I used a chainsaw to get it off for you. That would be unwarranted and irresponsible use of a dangerous tool.

Well, that's what kneecapping is. Firearms are deadly weapons. They produce semi-controlled explosions that tear large holes in flesh. They are not easily controlled in stressful situations, pistols especially. If you mean to kill someone, a gun is a great tool. If you mean to merely stop someone, it’s a real moron move.

This is why cops carry a variety of less-lethal options.

--

Note that I own a variety of firearms and train with them at least weekly, in cooperation with my military, ex-military, and gunsmith friends. I approve of guns and know how to use them. Kneecapping is dumb.

Wilson said that the position he was in during the struggle prevented him from grabbing his mace. That is besides the fact, as Brown tried to get his gun. At that point, Wilson was legally authorized to use deadly force.

Jacks:Revenge · Nov 26, 2014

Luv_Studd said:
If you have time to read through the witness interviews, there is a lot of conflicting viewpoints:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/25/us/evidence-released-in-michael-brown-case.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=b-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

A couple I read seem to corroborate Wilson's point of view; which, if that's true, would indicate he's telling the truth. Various others paint a picture of Brown holding his hands up and being shot in cold blood.

the Grand Jury already addressed the conflicting witness accounts.
Brown was never shot in the back. Brown was not surrendering or holding his hands up.

all entry wounds were forward-facing.

Mister_Prophet · Nov 26, 2014

When something like this happens for a lot of people it becomes about every black kid who was shot by a cop and not about this black kid shot by this cop. I'm not going to weep for someone who robbed a place and then got shot after trying to wrestle away a cop's gun, if that's the truth of what happened. And if it is, what does anyone think he would have done if he actually got his hands on the cop's gun? Fill in the blank, move on. In this world of unjust things, worse things happen to people who don't deserve it every other day.

Asking for a keener eye on the activities of police officers is a fine idea though.

Balton · Nov 26, 2014

cryptophreak said:
Well, that's what kneecapping is. Firearms are deadly weapons. They produce semi-controlled explosions that tear large holes in flesh. They are not easily controlled in stressful situations, pistols especially. If you mean to kill someone, a gun is a great tool. If you mean to merely stop someone, it’s a real moron move.

Yes, it's a moron move, having said that, shooting a couple rounds to the centre of the mass and finishing with a headshot to merely stop someone is exactly like using your bug stomping chainsaw. I merely mentioned that option as the less evil but still next dumb thing that officer could have done. Hence moron move shall fit perfectly to describe the complete situation including what Brown did.

Here is what I think: You can not subdue a suspect and your life is not in direct danger or that of others? You call for backup and follow the suspect at safe distance until said backup arrives and continue the subduing.

I am simply surprised that the slaying of a man over a carton of cigars seems to be ok when there could have been more options.

p.s. 10 years ago I could've probably beat you at target practice, granted the pistol/rifle is in good condition. That was when I had to get my military service done which was not voluntary. Before that and afterwards I never shy away to fire a few rounds or more likely some shells, hunting in Italy. So I am no stranger to guns and personally I like them. The gun issue is not about the guns but keeping them from that 1% of crazy people, the criminals and those who can't handle heat. At this point I think your country is not handling that issue too well but I don't think this is an issue in this case.

Mister_Prophet said:
Asking for a keener eye on the activities of police officers is a fine idea though.

The few friends I have working as police would welcome carrying a camera.

Sir_Brizz · Nov 26, 2014

It's hard to say if the cop was being dumb. The Grand Jury finding was that he hadn't done anything wrong. The situation could have turned out differently if a number of varied criteria had gone differently, but they didn't.

It's not like Brown was an exemplar of society. And it's not like he was a small person, either.

If this case leads to more officers wearing cameras then that is a good enough outcome. More officers should also be trained in less lethal methods of handling situations like this. That being said, it's not like tasers are not lethal. There are plenty of cases of victims having their heart stop when being tasered. You are electrocuting someone, after all. In some ways that is less humane.

cryptophreak · Nov 26, 2014

Balton, all good points.

I’m fairly fanatical in my opposition to any limitation on gun ownership for any reason (“shall not be infringed”), but that’s another topic altogether.

Jacks:Revenge · Nov 26, 2014

cryptophreak said:
(“shall not be infringed”)

it was a ridiculous thing to write in 1791, and we've been paying the consequences ever since.

No indictment - Ferguson

Member

Reaper

Administrator

Reaper

I have balls of Depleted Uranium

╠╣E╚╚O

╠╣E╚╚O

_________________________ _______________

The Beast of Worship

Sweet Dreams

Dr.Flay™

Member

unbalanced

_________________________ _______________

╠╣E╚╚O

.

The Beast of Worship

Administrator

unbalanced

╠╣E╚╚O

___________ _

___________ _