Michael Brown Shooting

[The Central Scrutinizer]

First we need a felony charge, then we indict or not.

No.

The explanation from STL County probably should have said "potential" felony.

 

[marplots]

If it did indeed seem entirely reasonable to you to extrapolate that the incident with the girlfriend had weight when looking back at his actions with regards to Mr. Martin, why is it different in this case, wherein pretty clear evidence of Mr. Browns aggression is available. Evidence that not only shows how he acts, but how he was acting on that very day.

The problem is in lumping aggression into some tidy bundle. It is possible that Brown was the sort of fellow who always acted aggressively when confronted. But it's just as likely that the store incident was unusual for him.

I can't simply assume that pushing a store clerk equates to attacking a police officer - those dots are too far apart to connect without some healthy doubt. I'd like to hear what the cop has to say and what injuries he suffered.

And, if Brown "went off" it's still strange. How did he get to be 18 without something already in the books? After all, he didn't become a large guy overnight. It's odd. And when things are odd, we ought to step back a bit and see what else we can find out.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Yes, in most places, the GJ is a rubber stamp for the prosecutor. I am not sure how they work in this jurisdiction, though.

In NC, the GJ is almost guaranteed to agree with the prosecutor.

Almost always. IIRC, it was north of 90%.

 

[Mumbles]

I'm sure it is. I grew up in New York, in a multi-racial environment. I remember seeing the black kids get hassled by the cops all the time. For things and in ways the white kids didn't get hassled for. My buddy Rudy was like you, he wanted to believe in the system. My buddy Freddy was different. He didn't believe. Period!

But I know even now, black guys have told me, "It's a lot of pressure, man. Sometimes it gets to you." In fact I thought maybe that's what touched this whole thing off with the cop and Michael Brown. That maybe the cop starting talking really bad to him and Brown was eighteen-years-old, he's not used to that, and he went off. Who knows, maybe that is what happened.

That may be true. That's one reason why I think that Wilson's initial report is important. It will tell us what he saw, what he was thinking. Without it, were relying on the ever-shifting chief's statements, and that simply isn't good enough for him.

I believe, strongly, that Davis should be allowed to defend himself. I stand strongly against him, at the moment, but I'd like to see what his initial view was.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Mr. Zimmerman was ( again, without the evidence of a video recording like we have with Mr. Brown ) actively seeking out a confrontation which might give him a chance to use his gun. And as a juror I would have been in favor of conviction.

I believe johnny karate was referring to a 2005 incident in which Zimmerman was initially charged with "resisting officer with violence" and "battery of law enforcement officer", but, you know... not shot to death.

 

[Mumbles]

The likelihood escalates when you witness the way he was behaving that day.

Scram.

 

[Giz]

The story Zimmerman told was impossible, given the evidence. In fact, his claim of self-defense was ridiculous

Still can't accept you were wrong can you?

 

[Distracted1]

The problem is in lumping aggression into some tidy bundle. It is possible that Brown was the sort of fellow who always acted aggressively when confronted. But it's just as likely that the store incident was unusual for him.

I can't simply assume that pushing a store clerk equates to attacking a police officer - those dots are too far apart to connect without some healthy doubt. I'd like to hear what the cop has to say and what injuries he suffered.

And, if Brown "went off" it's still strange. How did he get to be 18 without something already in the books? After all, he didn't become a large guy overnight. It's odd. And when things are odd, we ought to step back a bit and see what else we can find out.

There was more to his violence than is adequately conveyed by the statement " pushing the store clerk ". He made it quite clear to the man that further attempts to stop him from stealing what he wanted to steal would result in a much more severe beating. If someone can't see that it's either because they don't want to see it, or they have never been in the presence of a truly violent person.

 

[Mumbles]

Still can't accept you were wrong can you?

You, too. Scram.

 

[newyorkguy]

<snip>
I believe, strongly, that Davis should be allowed to defend himself. I stand strongly against him, at the moment, but I'd like to see what his initial view was.

You mean Wilson, right?

I have said before, I have known a lot of cops. It's just my impression would be, once Wilson regained control of the firearm and Brown is no longer attempting to wrest it away than he's got to take Brown into custody. At that point Wilson no longer has the right to shoot him. I'm familiar with cases in New York where officers have claimed the suspect tried to take their gun. I don't remember any of them being shot once they stopped trying to wrestle for the gun. Unless it went off or was fired in self defense during the struggle.

One factor may be, maybe Wilson was physically afraid of Brown. Maybe he felt if Brown tries to come back and take my gun maybe this time he'll get it. Ferguson Missouri isn't New York. Wilson was alone. Backup may have been minutes away. Maybe Wilson felt if I try and fight this kid I'm going to get my butt kicked and he'll take my gun. So Wilson decided to kill Brown.

Is that within the law? In New York I would say no, in Missouri I'm not sure.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

You, too. Scram.

Or what?

 

[shuize]

There was more to his violence than is adequately conveyed by the statement " pushing the store clerk ". He made it quite clear to the man that further attempts to stop him from stealing what he wanted to steal would result in a much more severe beating. If someone can't see that it's either because they don't want to see it, or they have never been in the presence of a truly violent person.

Agreed. Watching the video, I'd be willing to bet Michael Brown's last words to the shopkeeper were something to the effect of "You want more?" or "What are you going to do about it, Bitch?"

 

[marplots]

There was more to his violence than is adequately conveyed by the statement " pushing the store clerk ". He made it quite clear to the man that further attempts to stop him from stealing what he wanted to steal would result in a much more severe beating. If someone can't see that it's either because they don't want to see it, or they have never been in the presence of a truly violent person.

I missed that in the audio. The tape I saw was video only. The phrase, "much more severe beating," is interesting. Do you mean the part on the video tape is already a "beating?"

I do appreciate how we can now add in something that didn't happen (a much more severe beating) as having evidential value. Why do I get the impression that this guy, being so large and all, is enough to appear threatening to some?

 

[LTC8K6]

WT

 

[Distracted1]

I missed that in the audio. The tape I saw was video only. The phrase, "much more severe beating," is interesting. Do you mean the part on the video tape is already a "beating?"

I do appreciate how we can now add in something that didn't happen (a much more severe beating) as having evidential value. Why do I get the impression that this guy, being so large and all, is enough to appear threatening to some?

Maybe because of the videotape showing him threatening someone?

 

[Meed]

The likelihood escalates when you witness the way he was behaving that day.

I would agree that it does up the likelihood at least a little.

But what do you think the likelihood is that Wilson shot Brown when he was running away? What do you think the likelihood is that Wilson shot Brown when he stopped running away and turned around? I would say the likelihood of both those things is looking pretty high at this point.

There are three circumstances under which Wilson reportedly shot/shot-at Brown.

1. At the car. It's hard to know what happened here because the only witnesses were Johnson and Wilson. There may be other evidence such as Wilson sustaining bruising, Brown having signs of having been choked and so on. The way of justifying the shooting will be the claim that it was self defense.

2. While Brown was running away. Multiple witnesses saw Brown running away and saw him being shot/shot-at before turning around. And if he was actually shot in the back, forensics will confirm it. Since 1985, I believe that police are not supposed to shoot fleeing suspects unless they are believed to be a threat to the officer or to others (civilians). It does not appear to me that Brown was a threat to the level that justified this shooting even if he attacked the cop at his car. However, I don't know what the legal precedent on this (i.e. what constitutes "a threat") is.

3. After Brown turned around. Multiple witnesses saw Brown being shot multiple times after turning around. Some say he had his hands up. The only defense to this I've heard is the claim that he was charging violently toward the cop. However, most of the witness accounts don't paint anything like that picture. @TheePharoah (who seemingly had no desire to go public and was merely reporting what he had just seen to his twitter followers), for example, described Brown as having been shot for no reason.

 

[newyorkguy]

Looks like this might be one of the worst nights in Ferguson, judging by the live cams and tweets, etc.

There's a thread for that. Here

 

[Distracted1]

I missed that in the audio. The tape I saw was video only. The phrase, "much more severe beating," is interesting. Do you mean the part on the video tape is already a "beating?"

I do appreciate how we can now add in something that didn't happen (a much more severe beating) as having evidential value. Why do I get the impression that this guy, being so large and all, is enough to appear threatening to some?

Ooops, you got me! I was making up a beating, I thought no one would notice since that recording is so hard to access, and I would be able to slip that into the general discussion undetected, drats!
He assaulted the clerk, and made it clear further protest would result in further assault. Better?

 

[Mumbles]

Or what?

Or scram. That's what.

You mean Wilson, right?

I have said before, I have known a lot of cops. It's just my impression would be, once Wilson regained control of the firearm and Brown is no longer attempting to wrest it away than he's got to take Brown into custody. At that point Wilson no longer has the right to shoot him. I'm familiar with cases in New York where officers have claimed the suspect tried to take their gun. I don't remember any of them being shot once they stopped trying to wrestle for the gun. Unless it went off or was fired in self defense during the struggle.

One factor may be, maybe Wilson was physically afraid of Brown. Maybe he felt if Brown tries to come back and take my gun maybe this time he'll get it. Ferguson Missouri isn't New York. Wilson was alone. Backup may have been minutes away. Maybe Wilson felt if I try and fight this kid I'm going to get my butt kicked and he'll take my gun. So Wilson decided to kill Brown.

Is that within the law? In New York I would say no, in Missouri I'm not sure.

I dunno what, exactly the law says in each state. It strikes me as unfair if, assuming Wilson was actually struggling to control a firearm, that he would be completely rational. After all, he is a human. He may need to lose his job over it, but I don't necessarily see where it should lead to a criminal trial - a trial which can cost millions of dollars, and could really ruin him.

But, again, I'd like to hear what he says happened, before drawing any conclusion.

 

[Brainster]

The problem is in lumping aggression into some tidy bundle. It is possible that Brown was the sort of fellow who always acted aggressively when confronted. But it's just as likely that the store incident was unusual for him.

Just as likely? I mean, let's even assume that's true, that 50% of the time he acts aggressively and 50% of the time he backs down. He's just had an incident a couple of minutes before where he acted aggressively and got what he wanted.

I can't simply assume that pushing a store clerk equates to attacking a police officer - those dots are too far apart to connect without some healthy doubt. I'd like to hear what the cop has to say and what injuries he suffered.

And, if Brown "went off" it's still strange. How did he get to be 18 without something already in the books?

It's called a juvenile record and sealed when he turns 18. Maybe he was a choirboy; maybe he wasn't. At this point it is unlikely we will ever find out.