• 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.
newyorkguy said:
You know what's next? Why do guys Brown's age want cigars to begin with? To make blunts, dump out the tobacco and load them up with marijuana. So Brown and his confederate may well have been marijuana users.

One thing I wonder though is, the time between the shoplifting of the cigars and the confrontation with the police seems to have been fairly short. Did the police recover the cigars? I agree the assailant in the store video looked like the same man lying dead in the street in the news photo. But it could've been different people. The photos aren't conclusive.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you are getting into 9/11 truther area here.
with the photos bit.
 
dudalb said:
According to one commentator, Under Missouri Law a felon fleeing the scene of a violent crime can be shot while fleeing. I would be surprised if New York Law did not permit shooting a fleeing suspect under those circumstances.
Click to expand...

I think the rule is for violent felonies. There is a distinction drawn between a suspect who is a) in the act of committing a violent felony, b) one who is suspected of having committed a violent felony and c) one who is suspected of having committed a violent felony and is fleeing. I think the officer can only use deadly force only in a. There is also a body of law regarding the use of force to prevent great bodily harm or death. It has to be imminent.

Society and the courts try to limit the number of people who are shot to death by police. It's not a neutral act. There have been Supreme Court decisions about this. The suspect is entitled to the presumption of innocence, the right to remain silent, the right to legal counsel etc. If the police kill suspects while taking them into custody all the rights become meaningless.

I question whether stealing cigars, chest bumping the storekeeper, even verbally threatening him, meets the legal definition of a "violent crime." Given the furor over this incident, especially by officials, I'm getting the clear impression that this officer probably broke the law.
 
casebro said:
This link form post 443 does give a time line:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_52c40b84-ad90-5f9a-973c-70d628d0be04.html

Seems to me Wilson must have called for back up, and checked in, if they know what time he encountered Brown. Which makes me think he did suspect him of being the strong arm robbery suspect.

When Wilson reversed the car, Brown figured he had been ID'd, and got defensive, slamming the car door on the officer?
Click to expand...


Not established and certainly not relevant to the shooting. There is no evidence what was in Wilson's mind, or Brown's. Neither is in any way relevant to the shooting.
 
LTC8K6 said:
It's Johnson's testimony that is likely to be dismissed.

I would hold everything he said in abeyance at this point.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but it's probably not wrong in every instance. Not that it's going to make very good evidence without support from more substantial sources--like the physical evidence.

This makes me wonder more about the anonymous witness account from the Fox affiliate. There the newsperson talked over that person and gave the impression they were saying three cops were there for the final shooting, which fit(s) with nothing else I've seen. I wonder even more now of that was a press error or that was actually what the person said they witnessed.
 
newyorkguy said:
I think the rule is for violent felonies. There is a distinction drawn between a suspect who is a) in the act of committing a violent felony, b) one who is suspected of having committed a violent felony and c) one who is suspected of having committed a violent felony and is fleeing. I think the officer can only use deadly force only in a. There is also a body of law regarding the use of force to prevent great bodily harm or death. It has to be imminent.

Society and the courts try to limit the number of people who are shot to death by police. It's not a neutral act. There have been Supreme Court decisions about this. The suspect is entitled to the presumption of innocence, the right to remain silent, the right to legal counsel etc. If the police kill suspects while taking them into custody all the rights become meaningless.

I question whether stealing cigars, chest bumping the storekeeper, even verbally threatening him, meets the legal definition of a "violent crime." Given the furor over this incident, especially by officials, I'm getting the clear impression that this officer probably broke the law.
Click to expand...

Most of the commentators say when Brown manhandled the clerk, it did become ,technically, a violent crime.
The term Strong Arm Robbery is used for a robbery where violence is used but no weapon is involved.
Accept it;Brown as not the little angel he was being portrayed as.
Whether or not the officer was justified in multiple shots is another thing.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
You maybe want to do some further reading regarding your understanding of:

1) The facts of the case

2) The concept of "zero"
Click to expand...

I tried to be very cautious as to the facts I chose and stated as facts. Could you point out which, if any, are not agreed on by both sides? Beyond that, I pointed out how even if the facts are only as the police claim, then shooting would still be illegal. Could you point out how this was not true?
 
Kaosium said:
Indeed, but it's probably not wrong in every instance. Not that it's going to make very good evidence without support from more substantial sources--like the physical evidence.

This makes me wonder more about the anonymous witness account from the Fox affiliate. There the newsperson talked over that person and gave the impression they were saying three cops were there for the final shooting, which fit(s) with nothing else I've seen. I wonder even more now of that was a press error or that was actually what the person said they witnessed.
Click to expand...

Just to avoid a rant, I have to point out that a Fox affliate is NOT the same as Fox News.
 
Unabogie said:
Was this report written before or after the shooting?
Click to expand...
One of the police chief interviews replayed:

"The officer told them to get off the street, one complied, one didn't, the officer went back."

Clearly not an officer looking for a robbery suspect.

The cigarillo theft is a convenient coincidence but is going to be a red herring.
 
Last edited:
Giz said:
Yeah, that's what I was getting at. It isn't necessarily clear that (and unarmed, retreating) Brown would satisfy the condition of "significant and serious threat".

There is a potential (warning: wild speculation follows) that initial close-range shots may have been justified but then later long-range shots were not strictly necessary nor justified and were fired due to anger and adrenaline.

Hopefully our understanding will continue to evolve.

About the only thing known for sure is that the local/regional police don't do non-confrontational crowd control very well.
Click to expand...

100% agree that it is very unclear if the shooting of Brown met th significant and serious threat rule.

Guaranteed:The worst charge that the cop will face is manslaughter.
 
dudalb said:
According to one commentator, Under Missouri Law a felon fleeing the scene of a violent crime can be shot while fleeing.
Click to expand...

Okay, but how long after the felon has left the vicinity without being pursued can he still be said to be "fleeing the scene"? 5 minutes? 10? An hour?

It's my understanding that laws which allow the shooting of a fleeing felon only allow a direct witness to do the shooting. You as a third party can't shoot a guy who's running down the street nearby you just because someone yells "he robbed me!", for example.
 
Redtail said:
Maybe I missed something, what does his being right handed have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

The hand he would have most likely used to grab the gun off of the seat next to him and point it at the officers had a cigar in it.

ETA: Just for clarification, when I said "walked" it was after an internal investigation, not a trial.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
One of the police chief interviews replayed:

"The officer told them to get off the street, one complied, one didn't, the officer went back."

Clearly not an officer looking for a robbery suspect.

The cigarillo theft is a convenient coincidence but is going to be a red herring.
Click to expand...

At this time we can't say with certainty whether the officer was initially interested in them because they matched the description from the robbery, or if he became aware of the description while he was interacting with them/aware of them (called in and asked for it to be repeated or expanded upon? Coincidentally it came through at the time? who knows) or if he was utterly unaware of the robbery.

But regardless of what the cop knew and when he knew it, US knowing now about it helps shed light on why Brown might have been adamant that he was not going to willingly interact with this officer, because HE would have believed the cops were looking to question him about the robbery whether they were or not.

He may have realized that serious prison time could result from a strong arm robbery, or he may not have. But either way, I doubt he wanted to be interacting with cops at that time, and again... this helps us understand why he behaved in the way the officer said he did.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
One of the police chief interviews replayed:

"The officer told them to get off the street, one complied, one didn't, the officer went back."

Clearly not an officer looking for a robbery suspect.

The cigarillo theft is a convenient coincidence but is going to be a red herring.
Click to expand...


"My Mind Is Made Up,Don't Confuse Me With Facts"

theory that the security cameras evidence was faked coming in 3...2...1....
 
Skeptic Tank said:
...
The cop who shot him had been looking for he and his friend in particular, after the store owner called them about the strong armed robbery.....
Click to expand...
And yet the police chief said the stop was for jaywalking, and the officer did not use a procedure surely indicated when stopping two strong armed robbery suspects.
 
Checkmite said:
Okay, but how long after the felon has left the vicinity without being pursued can he still be said to be "fleeing the scene"? 5 minutes? 10? An hour?

It's my understanding that laws which allow the shooting of a fleeing felon only allow a direct witness to do the shooting. You as a third party can't shoot a guy who's running down the street nearby you just because someone yells "he robbed me!", for example.
Click to expand...
But the suspect became a violent felon the moment he assaulted the cop at the car. Then 35 feet away he is shot dead.
 
dudalb said:
"My Mind Is Made Up,Don't Confuse Me With Facts"

theory that the security cameras evidence was faked coming in 3...2...1....
Click to expand...
Not sure if this is aimed at me but I can clearly see it's Brown and Johnson in the mini-mart video.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom