Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Teague · **#141** by **Teague** » Nov 28, 2014 10:24 am

So the witness reports are unclear and there's no reliable report to say that Brown charged the officer or that Brown attacked the officer first but we do know that racism exists with this police department. We also know Brown is quite happy to use his size to intimidate people to steal things as is an asshole. We also know (some of us anyway) that he wasn't "drugged up" he was stoned - maybe... as THC stays in your system for ages it would be hard to tell. Perhaps we should also point out he had .45 of caffeine in his system too?

We also know that Brown was killed nowhere near the car and that the officer was so fearful for his life he chased after Brown without calling for backup (or did he?). We also know the jury were given false information about shooting a fleeing suspect and we also know the prosecution were bought off with a hooker sporting a strapon.

kennyc · **#142** by **kennyc** » Nov 28, 2014 11:32 am

Isn't the imagination a wonderful thing?

kennyc · **#143** by **kennyc** » Nov 28, 2014 11:35 am

WayOfTheDodo wrote:
I'm With Stupid wrote:To me, it's pretty surprising that the best Wilson himself can do is "multiple." Even if in the heat of the moment, he can't remember, surely it's routine to record these things afterwards, if only for general administration? And it's not exactly hard to find out how many bullets you fired using simple maths.

Not exactly surprising. When some huge, stoned thug is trying to smash your head the last thing on your mind is probably to count your bullets. As for why he didn't "do the maths," maybe he didn't get around to doing it before being questioned about it.

Hell even Dirty Harry has an issue with counting.

kennyc · **#144** by **kennyc** » Nov 28, 2014 12:26 pm

Pharrell says (and he's right):

Pharrell Williams: Mike Brown Asked for Trouble Before He Was Shot Dead
November 28, 2014 08:24:24 GMT

The 'Happy' hitmaker comments on a surveillance video showing Brown stealing cigarillos from a convenience store and intimidating the shop owner before Officer Darren Wilson shot him.

Pharrell Williams angered some people with his response to the decision made by a grand jury in Ferguson, Missouri not to indict Officer Darren Wilson. The "Happy" hitmaker said in a new interview with Ebony that the cop shouldn't have shot and killed Mike Brown. However, he argued that the teen's "buly-ish" behavior was also to blame for the shooting.

....

http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00077589.html

kennyc · **#145** by **kennyc** » Nov 28, 2014 4:18 pm

Tough to make a case against police in shootings

WASHINGTON - (AP) -- A Missouri grand jury's decision not to indict a policeman for the killing of Michael Brown illustrates the difficulty of bringing criminal charges against officers in fatal shootings and points to the likelihood of a similar outcome for a federal civil rights probe of the case.

The panel concluded Monday that the Aug. 9 shooting of the unarmed black 18-year-old was legally justified and that no charges were warranted against Officer Darren Wilson. That outcome is by far the norm rather than the exception in investigations of police shootings because of latitude afforded law enforcement in using deadly force.

The Justice Department is continuing to investigate the shooting for potential civil rights violations. But federal investigations of police shootings face an even tougher legal standard, requiring proof that an officer willfully violated a victim's civil rights. Testimony from Wilson that he felt threatened, and forensic evidence suggesting a tussle between the two in the officer's patrol car, almost certainly complicates any efforts to seek federal charges.

Under federal law, "you have to prove as a prosecutor that the officer knew at the moment that he pulled the trigger that he was using too much force, that he was violating the Constitution," said Seth Rosenthal, a former Justice Department civil rights prosecutor.

"Federal civil rights crimes are more difficult to prove than at least some of the crimes" contemplated by the grand jury, he said.
....

http://www.newsday.com/news/region-stat ... -1.9660528

laklak · **#146** by **laklak** » Nov 28, 2014 4:29 pm

We know, from the forensic evidence, that Brown was partially inside the cop's car when the first two shots were fired. We also know, from the forensic evidence, that Brown was not shot in the back while running away. Therefore, we can discount any witness statements claiming he wasn't inside the car or was shot while running away. Both these known facts support Wilson's narrative, as does the position of shell casings and some of the eye witness accounts.

Teague · **#147** by **Teague** » Nov 28, 2014 4:45 pm

Yes but we don't know how Brown got in the car or how much of him was in it - it could have been as little as a finger. Most witness don't say he charged forward either?

kennyc · **#148** by **kennyc** » Nov 28, 2014 4:52 pm

Saints tight end Benjamin Watson's post on Facebook about the Ferguson decision and protests in Missouri has gone viral.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/nfl-players ... oes-viral/

Spearthrower · **#149** by **Spearthrower** » Nov 28, 2014 10:36 pm

WayOfTheDodo wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
that black people in the area have no rationality for believing that systematic racism is involved here.

They seem to automatically assume that anything involving a black guy and a white guy where the white guy isn't the one getting killed is racism.

'They' being the local black population who presumably are basing it on their actual experiences with the local police force.

When I say 'systematic racism' - I am not saying that the cop was racist, or that the cops in that force are racist, but rather that it's something inherent in our psychology, and it's deeply ingrained in some parts of the US with the government employees just as affected.

I'd hazard a guess that they think they've got good reasons for claiming racism, and they don't just mean that individual cop.

Onyx8 · **#150** by **Onyx8** » Nov 28, 2014 11:32 pm

Perhaps 'systemic' then, rather than 'systematic'?

Steve · **#151** by **Steve** » Nov 29, 2014 12:44 am

I would call it both systemic and systematic. Look at the stop and frisk programs in NYC, for example. Always with the black guys.

GT2211 · **#152** by **GT2211** » Nov 29, 2014 4:04 am

Teague wrote:
WayOfTheDodo wrote:
I'm With Stupid wrote:To me, it's pretty surprising that the best Wilson himself can do is "multiple." Even if in the heat of the moment, he can't remember, surely it's routine to record these things afterwards, if only for general administration? And it's not exactly hard to find out how many bullets you fired using simple maths.

Not exactly surprising. When some huge, stoned thug is trying to smash your head the last thing on your mind is probably to count your bullets. As for why he didn't "do the maths," maybe he didn't get around to doing it before being questioned about it.

You have no idea about drugs, do you.

Haven't you seen Reefer Madness?

It makes perfect sense that after smoking the marijuanas someone would go up and start smashing a cop's face in.

Spearthrower · **#153** by **Spearthrower** » Nov 29, 2014 6:59 am

Onyx8 wrote:Perhaps 'systemic' then, rather than 'systematic'?

I think they essentially mean the same thing with respect to this point: inherent in a system.

DarthHelmet86 · **#154** by **DarthHelmet86** » Nov 29, 2014 8:42 am

Spearthrower wrote:
Onyx8 wrote:Perhaps 'systemic' then, rather than 'systematic'?

I think they essentially mean the same thing with respect to this point: inherent in a system.

I wonder how much is directly tied to race and how much is tied to social status. And of course how race is tied into social status. It is clear there are problems in many police forces of targeting minorities, often those who are in the poorest segments of society. Often with there being some reasoning about crime levels within that poorest segment being higher. It does lead to aggressive and confrontational attitudes towards the police, which often fuel the idea that segment needs harder policing.

A lot of this seems to be very catch 22 to me, a circle of attitudes that feed into each other making it harder and harder to break out of them. The police are part of the problem but so is society at large and more needs to be done to break attitudes on all sides no matter how right they seem or feel to be. I have no clue how we would go about breaking such attitudes, the police play a major part in that attitude with how they interact with society. But even if they did everything right would that be all we needed? Or would more still need to be done to help the groups stuck in that poorest segment to rise higher up the social income scale? I suspect that far more needs to be done than people are willing to admit, work from both sides of the fence.

Rachel Bronwyn · **#155** by **Rachel Bronwyn** » Nov 29, 2014 9:01 am

Race dictates social status to a large extent.

DarthHelmet86 · **#156** by **DarthHelmet86** » Nov 29, 2014 9:06 am

It seems to be in a lot of cases yes, but it is not the sole factor or perhaps even the largest. Otherwise there would be no rich African Americans and no poor white people. But there are and it seems to me a large factor of it is also social status of your parents no matter your "race". Poor people breed more poor people, rich people breed more rich people.

Spearthrower · **#157** by **Spearthrower** » Nov 29, 2014 11:10 am

DarthHelmet86 wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
Onyx8 wrote:Perhaps 'systemic' then, rather than 'systematic'?

I think they essentially mean the same thing with respect to this point: inherent in a system.

I wonder how much is directly tied to race and how much is tied to social status. And of course how race is tied into social status. It is clear there are problems in many police forces of targeting minorities, often those who are in the poorest segments of society. Often with there being some reasoning about crime levels within that poorest segment being higher. It does lead to aggressive and confrontational attitudes towards the police, which often fuel the idea that segment needs harder policing.

A lot of this seems to be very catch 22 to me, a circle of attitudes that feed into each other making it harder and harder to break out of them. The police are part of the problem but so is society at large and more needs to be done to break attitudes on all sides no matter how right they seem or feel to be. I have no clue how we would go about breaking such attitudes, the police play a major part in that attitude with how they interact with society. But even if they did everything right would that be all we needed? Or would more still need to be done to help the groups stuck in that poorest segment to rise higher up the social income scale? I suspect that far more needs to be done than people are willing to admit, work from both sides of the fence.

I think the first step is simply familiarity. Here in Thailand, people are generally quite racist against blacks and Indians. My first day teaching here, I saw a black British teacher walk into a class and one of the Thai kids started crying as soon as he saw the teacher was black. I fairly regularly hear Thais from the villages commenting on wonder about what white people do e.g. 'White people smoke cigarettes?!?!?'. Seeing people as the 'other' and fearing them is one of the great evolutionary burdens we have to shuck off somehow. Of course, for familiarity to work, people actually need to live together unsegregated, which leads into your point about social status. If the system generally disfavours people of one ethnicity; they get fewer opportunities, poor educational facilities, and there are no prospects - this serves to segregate them and reiterates itself through generations.

Spearthrower · **#158** by **Spearthrower** » Nov 29, 2014 11:12 am

DarthHelmet86 wrote:It seems to be in a lot of cases yes, but it is not the sole factor or perhaps even the largest. Otherwise there would be no rich African Americans and no poor white people. But there are and it seems to me a large factor of it is also social status of your parents no matter your "race". Poor people breed more poor people, rich people breed more rich people.

Note, though, that simply being rich doesn't equate to a high social status - it might buy access, but it doesn't necessarily buy acceptance.

DarthHelmet86 · **#159** by **DarthHelmet86** » Nov 29, 2014 11:21 am

Spearthrower wrote:
DarthHelmet86 wrote:It seems to be in a lot of cases yes, but it is not the sole factor or perhaps even the largest. Otherwise there would be no rich African Americans and no poor white people. But there are and it seems to me a large factor of it is also social status of your parents no matter your "race". Poor people breed more poor people, rich people breed more rich people.

Note, though, that simply being rich doesn't equate to a high social status - it might buy access, but it doesn't necessarily buy acceptance.

Very true, and once again we see racial interactions coming into play again. As I said I think this is a very complex beast, no simple answer to be found. I agree with you that part of the solution would be integrating the police better into society so they aren't the "other". But in large cities that is hard, there will always be people in the police that fit the "other". Race surely plays a large part, but in this case if the officer had been African American I doubt that would have made any difference to the reaction to the incident. He would be the "other" a traitor to his normal group for being part of the oppressor.

Jerome Da Gnome · **#160** by **Jerome Da Gnome** » Nov 29, 2014 2:30 pm

I am just amazed at some of the posters when reading this thread and the other.

Here we have a 6' 4" 300 lbs felony strong armed robbery suspect physically assaulting a police officer and the cop should not have shot, yet a 12 year old having a toy gun in his waist band deserves immediate execution.

I will put it down to years of propaganda in which the word "gun" causes a pavlov's dog reaction.

Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Re: Ferguson vs. the Police PT. 2

Who is online