• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Michael Brown Shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
I Am The Scum said:
You're really gullible to be falling for the police department's bait and switch.

If Brown had been suspected of setting an orphanage on fire 10 minutes prior, the status of the shooting does not change.
Click to expand...

What this information does for you is helps you understand a couple of things:

1.) What sort of person Brown was, and that he was willing to use violence and his size to get his way and avoid consequences for his behavior.

2.) Why he might have felt the stakes were higher than just jaywalking when an officer pulled up and showed a sustained interest in he and his friend, and why he might have, in turn, decided it was time to employ his size and violence again to avoid consequence. Apparently up to and including assault and battery, and possibly even attempted murder, on a police officer who merely sought to question him.

I would've thought that was obvious.

But if you want to throw your lot in with the criminal scum of our society, and spit on the police officers who try to keep them under control... have a blast. Let me know how that works out for society long term.
 
newyorkguy said:
I agree with you, it looks like Mike Brown in the convenience store shoplifting incident. I don't agree with your implication that this justifies the police officer shooting him and certainly doesn't justify shooting him multiple times. There appears to be physical evidence that supports the witness allegations. This looks like murder to me.
Click to expand...

But the police don't claim to have shot him because he robbed a store; they only claim that's why he was initially stopped. According to the police the reason he was shot was because he reached into a police car and struggled for an officer's gun. I would say that justifies a shooting, and turning around at the last second and throwing your hands up when you realize the cop has finally gotten his gun free and is starting to raise it at you is somewhat too little, too late in that situation.

The problem is, the police in this incident have sacrificed their credibility through their own incompetence. They could've released the robbery video on the very first day; it's pretty obvious Brown is the suspect. It wouldn't have stopped his family and friends from being angry, but it would've stopped the entire city, state, and a good part of the nation from considering it the completely random and senseless shooting they believe it was. I don't find that police department credible at this point in time, quite simply.
 
Redtail said:
So... does this mean that all of the things the cops did during the protests can be ignored?
Click to expand...

Of course. That's what being a "skeptic" is all about. In fact, just by proclaiming Brown to be a "robber" (instead of the more common "shoplifter" the situation more accurately describes) we've now shown Brown to be the violent one, not the cop who shot him nearly ten times while his hands were up, or the police who went out with riot gear every night, sending tear gas at innocent protesters and media alike. Clearly, shoplifters must be dealt with harshly, as the Zimmerman fanclub has so generously explained.
 
Kaosium said:
Looks like it, also Dorian Johnson has some...additions...to his account. I can't follow everything said here, but apparently this occurred at the Ferguson Market, not the Quik Trip that was trashed.
Click to expand...
Not a single word out of Johnson's mouth can be taken as truth. I wonder if he will be charged with anything. Did I read that the cops never took a sworn statement from him? Maybe he could be charged if he did. I think it's illegal to lie in sworn statements.
 
Unabogie said:
Of course. That's what being a "skeptic" is all about. In fact, just by proclaiming Brown to be a "robber" (instead of the more common "shoplifter" the situation more accurately describes) we've now shown Brown to be the violent one, not the cop who shot him nearly ten times while his hands were up, or the police who went out with riot gear every night, sending tear gas at innocent protesters and media alike. Clearly, shoplifters must be dealt with harshly, as the Zimmerman fanclub has so generously explained.
Click to expand...

Nothing but rubbish appeals to emotion. *yawn*
 
Unabogie said:
Of course. That's what being a "skeptic" is all about. In fact, just by proclaiming Brown to be a "robber" (instead of the more common "shoplifter" the situation more accurately describes) we've now shown Brown to be the violent one, not the cop who shot him nearly ten times while his hands were up, or the police who went out with riot gear every night, sending tear gas at innocent protesters and media alike. Clearly, shoplifters must be dealt with harshly, as the Zimmerman fanclub has so generously explained.
Click to expand...

Shoplifters don't usually rough up the cashier.

That's a strongarm robbery, not shoplifting.

Shoplifters grab and run, or conceal and try to sneak out.
 
William Parcher said:
Johnson's eyewitness story is a fabrication and meant to be a distraction from the reality of what really happened.

"We had just robbed a store and then a cop pulled up to us in the street..." Words he never said.

Then we now know the cop probably didn't order them to stop walking in the street and instead confronted them as fitting the description of the robbers. When Johnson talked about what happened he was probably fearful that he might be charged in the robbery. Everything he said about the shooting must be discarded as baloney.
Click to expand...

Ding ding ding! Fantastic post, and keen insight.

Only thing you left out is that unfortunately, due to the "ethic" in that community, and the solidarity, and the endorsement of criminal behavior being nearly universal... and the hatred for whites/police being likewise pretty much universal... any "witness testimony" coming out from anyone around the area should be discarded as baloney too.

I consider the officer to be the only trustworthy witness who was present, at least that I'm aware of at this time.

Checkmite said:
But the police don't claim to have shot him because he robbed a store; they only claim that's why he was initially stopped. According to the police the reason he was shot was because he reached into a police car and struggled for an officer's gun. I would say that justifies a shooting, and turning around at the last second and throwing your hands up when you realize the cop has finally gotten his gun free and is starting to raise it at you is somewhat too little, too late in that situation.
Click to expand...

Exactamundo.

Checkmite said:
The problem is, the police in this incident have sacrificed their credibility through their own incompetence. They could've released the robbery video on the very first day; it's pretty obvious Brown is the suspect. It wouldn't have stopped his family and friends from being angry, but it would've stopped the entire city, state, and a good part of the nation from considering it the completely random and senseless shooting they believe it was. I don't find that police department credible at this point in time, quite simply.
Click to expand...

The problem is the police have rules about evidence release, particularly in the very early stages of an ongoing investigation. These rules are in place for a reason, and I personally don't think it's the police's responsibility to violate those rules in order to appease emotional idiots.

I think it's emotional idiots' responsibility to not be emotional idiots, and to grow up and learn to be more cynical about certain "communities" and more world-wise about things like... evidence release procedures.

I think it's entirely okay for someone in the general public to just not care about this kind of stuff, and not know anything bout such procedures... but I do insist that people scale their passion levels to their information levels, and if they decide to be all upset they should at least somehow tether this to real data, both about the specific case and cases in general. Apparently that's a LOT to ask though, judging from society's reaction to this case and Trayvon.
 
Unabogie said:
Of course. That's what being a "skeptic" is all about. In fact, just by proclaiming Brown to be a "robber" (instead of the more common "shoplifter" the situation more accurately describes) we've now shown Brown to be the violent one, not the cop who shot him nearly ten times while his hands were up, or the police who went out with riot gear every night, sending tear gas at innocent protesters and media alike. Clearly, shoplifters must be dealt with harshly, as the Zimmerman fanclub has so generously explained.
Click to expand...
Shoplifting is different than what happened. When you grab and rough the intervening shopkeeper in the act of shoplifting you become a robber.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
What this information does for you is helps you understand a couple of things:

1.) What sort of person Brown was, and that he was willing to use violence and his size to get his way and avoid consequences for his behavior.

2.) Why he might have felt the stakes were higher than just jaywalking when an officer pulled up and showed a sustained interest in he and his friend, and why he might have, in turn, decided it was time to employ his size and violence again to avoid consequence. Apparently up to and including assault and battery, and possibly even attempted murder, on a police officer who merely sought to question him.
Click to expand...

Against a police officer inside his vehicle? Dorian Johnson just blew his credibility to the four winds, but the physical evidence here isn't particularly easy to explain even if he was being stopped for what amounts to strong-armed shoplifting instead of jaywalking. The number of bullets in Michael Brown is still going to matter, as is where he was and what he was doing when shot.
 
Unabogie said:
In fact, just by proclaiming Brown to be a "robber" (instead of the more common "shoplifter" the situation more accurately describes) we've now shown Brown to be the violent one...
Click to expand...

LTC8K6 said:
Shoplifters don't usually rough up the cashier.

That's a strongarm robbery, not shoplifting.

Shoplifters grab and run, or conceal and try to sneak out.
Click to expand...

Yep, LTC8K6 has it exactly right.

And unsurprisingly, Unabogie wants definitions to change to fit his desired narrative better.

If I go into a store and walk off down an aisle far from the cash register, and slip some items into my coat, and then try to walk out (with or without paying for something else) that's shoplifting. They try to use cameras around stores and loss prevention agents who follow at a distance and observe, to counteract that.

If instead I walk right up to the counter and grab things in plain view, which are on the counter... and make no effort at all at concealing what I'm doing, and then rely on my physical size and strength to neutralize the employee's attempts to stop me leaving... that'd be... wait for it...

strongarm robbery.
 
NoahFence said:
Well he pretty clearly failed in getting the officer's gun, so he remained unarmed.
Click to expand...

And thank goodness for that.

How many keystrokes and megabytes and minutes of footage on news stations do you think would've been dedicated to the story where Brown got the officer's gun and killed him with it?

One one billionth of what is being generated by the current story? If that?

I would *much* rather have Brown end up dead than the officer. Good outcome, IMO.
 
I'm afraid that many people are still going to think that Johnson's story is the only accurate one. He talks about arms raised in the air and then shooting Brown multiple times. Johnson probably assumes that other witnesses will repeat what he said even if they saw nothing like that happen or even that they did not observe the incident at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom