Michael Brown Shooting

[Ammonitida]

So it is conceivable he was shot from behind while running away. That's interesting.

It's neutral, but given the frontal entry points of the other arm wounds, the graze wound probably came from the front as well, all being fired in rapid succession at a moving target.

 

[Monketi Ghost]

I reiterate my challenge:

I'll willingly admit to being wrong if the coming reports show the cop wasn't justified in shooting.

Anyone wanna join that group, the potential "I was wrong" list? Sign up!

 

[William Parcher]

So it is conceivable he was shot from behind while running away. That's interesting.

It's even more interesting if you imagine that Wilson was always only aiming at the box of cigars and kept missing.

 

[stanfr]

Yeah, stop with your "unarmed black boy" nonsense. Brown was "armed" with his ARMS when he attacked the store clerk, with his ARMS.

A person's arms can be deadly weapons, and it's quite likely that Brown possessed the mentality to use them as such, as evidenced by his assault and intimidation on that store clerk.

Well, while I agree with you that Brown was thuggish, if your characterization of him as 'low-life scum' etc, one would have expected him to have beaten the clerk to a pulp. Someone earlier joked about the 'little guy starting it'--but in response to a view as extreme as yours it's actually a vaild point--Brown was pushing/strong-arming the clerk out of the way, it was meant as intimidation for sure, but if Brown was as violent as you claim, he could have easily knocked the clerk to the ground with one swat. Thug? arguably. Robber? By definition. Violent aggressor? I don't think the video supports that conclusion.

 

[Lerxst]

Yes, Brown was unarmed.

But why the bickering about what unarmed means unless you are trying to argue that Brown was not a threat to Wilson? Why the bickering about the definition of violence and felony unless you are trying to argue that Brown would never do such a thing?

Since we've argued about just about every other definition, we might as well be fair:

ex·e·cu·tion noun \ˌek-si-ˈkyü-shən\

: the act of killing someone especially as punishment for a crime

: the act of doing or performing something

It cannot be established that Brown was enough of a threat that lethal force needed to be used. It also cannot be established that Brown did nothing wrong and had no part in the conflict between these two men. There has to be a reason why this conflict started and then escalated to that point. I don't see a reason for lethal force to be used, at least not enough evidence for that, but I also don't see enough evidence to justify using the word "execution".

 

[LTC8K6]

So what are we going to have, 5 or 6 different interpretations of the autopsies?

 

[Lerxst]

I reiterate my challenge:

I'll willingly admit to being wrong if the coming reports show the cop wasn't justified in shooting.

Anyone wanna join that group, the potential "I was wrong" list? Sign up!

Sign me up

 

[LTC8K6]

Why wouldn't Brown get behind cover like Johnson did if shots were being fired?

 

[Distracted1]

Lots of talk about " skeptical-ness " in this thread.
Seems to me that the positive assertion from page one is that the policeman unjustly killed an innocent teen.
Doesn't skepticism in that case, mean questioning that assertion. How is it a display of skepticism to take that initial narrative at face value?

 

[newyorkguy]

Or that's the hit from the struggle at the car...

Or...

Or...

It's neutral, but given the frontal entry points of the other arm wounds, the graze wound probably came from the front as well, all being fired in rapid succession at a moving target.

It's revealing that you both feel an immediate need to try and knock this down when I merely said, quoting a pathologist who examined the body, it was conceivable. I thought that was interesting because some of the posters have completely ruled that possibility out.

Are you arguing it isn't conceivable?

 

[jimbob]

Rat alluded to what I consider the problem in another thread.

The Ferguson authorities have managed to be particularly inept in their handling of this case, which, given their history* is going to add to mistrust.



I realise it is possibly different in the US, as the police will have a higher possibility of facing criminals armed with firearms, but in the UK, pepper spray or a tazer would probably be deployed - there would certainly be an inquiry if a tazer was used, I don't know about pepper spray.




*Arresting someone due to a mistake (same surname) then not releasing him but beating him up and then trying to charge him with damage to federal property for bleeding on the police uniforms.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It's neutral, but given the frontal entry points of the other arm wounds, the graze wound probably came from the front as well, all being fired in rapid succession at a moving target.

One shot came from the car and the cop then had to get out.

But your claim also requires Brown turning around when no shots were being fired at him.

As for the graze wound, it's really a minor point. The witnesses thought they saw a body jerk they believed was Brown being hit. That's interpretation of Brown's movement.

But that Wilson was firing before Brown turned around, that would be something the witnesses had more direct knowledge of.

Unless someone tampered with Wilson's initial testimony, it would be pretty unusual for him not to say he shot at the fleeing suspect, or waited until Brown was coming toward him.

 

[Distracted1]

I reiterate my challenge:

I'll willingly admit to being wrong if the coming reports show the cop wasn't justified in shooting.

Anyone wanna join that group, the potential "I was wrong" list? Sign up!

For certain values of " justified "

 

[newyorkguy]

Lots of talk about " skeptical-ness " in this thread. Seems to me that the positive assertion from page one is that the policeman unjustly killed an innocent teen. Doesn't skepticism in that case, mean questioning that assertion. How is it a display of skepticism to take that initial narrative at face value?

I think your putting the cart in front of the horse. When police shoot an unarmed eighteen year old six times and the officer is not charged with anything isn't it reasonable to be a little skeptical about THAT? Isn't it reasonable to be skeptical about the criminal justice system's ability (and willingness) to hold police officers responsible for misconduct?

 

[dudalb]

Yeah, stop with your "unarmed black boy" nonsense. Brown was "armed" with his ARMS when he attacked the store clerk, with his ARMS.

A person's arms can be deadly weapons, and it's quite likely that Brown possessed the mentality to use them as such, as evidenced by his assault and intimidation on that store clerk.

You don't seem to understand the common meaning of the word "armed".

I HATE it when people play semantics and try to use their own personal definitions of words.

 

[pakeha]

I'm not saying Mrs. Brown didn't say that. The quote I saw was from one of Brown's former teachers who said that.

Here's one source for the quote

Trying to piece together the incident that killed Brown has been tough for his friends and family. Seeing Brown on the street, he looked intimidating. He was a big man. But he was not threatening, they said.

The county prosecutor said Brown had no adult criminal history. And Brown’s family didn’t think it was in his nature.

“We called him the gentle giant. He was a gentle giant,” said Charles Ewing, Brown’s uncle.

His family tried to get him to play football. Brown was too timid for the sport, Ewing said.

“He had never gotten into a fight in his entire life,” said Duane Finnie, a family friend.

www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mik...4d65e6-2257-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html

More about the young man's Uni career

Michael Brown had struggled in school, but had graduated Aug. 1 from Normandy High School, and had been staying at his grandmother's apartment in Ferguson this summer. Family members said that hre planned to start this past week at Vatterott Educational Centers, a vocational technical college, in pursuit of a career as a heating and air conditioning engineer.

http://news.yahoo.com/ferguson-shooting-whats-known-now-michael-brown-123335396.html

he was to start at a local technical school to learn how to fix furnaces and air conditioners. he was to start at a local technical school to learn how to fix furnaces and air conditioners.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...4d65e6-2257-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html

 

[jhunter1163]

I think your putting the cart in front of the horse. When police shoot an unarmed eighteen year old six times and the officer is not charged with anything isn't it reasonable to be a little skeptical about THAT? Isn't it reasonable to be skeptical about the criminal justice system's ability (and willingness) to hold police officers responsible for misconduct?

You're assuming there was police misconduct, which is (at least to my mind) hardly proven. Yes, Brown was unarmed in the sense that he didn't have a weapon, but it's disingenuous to suggest that a six-foot-four, 290-pound man (which Brown was, despite his youth) with a demonstrated tendency toward aggression (see the robbery video, plus the assault in the police car) did not, or could not, present a threat to Officer Wilson.

 

[Wolrab]

I watched some of the press conference this morning. Throwing around "execution" and "murder" aren't going to help. The eyewitnesses may or may not be right. The preliminary autopsy results are ambiguous at best. Speculation is worse than useless.

Sometimes investigations need to be completed before being made public. This is nearly impossible to imagine in today's instant news digital age.

I can honestly say no one knows exactly what happened and that only time and a thorough investigation by disinterested parties may find the truth.

Plenty of people here are willing to let their biases skew their critical thinking skills with the flimsiest evidence.

 

[Distracted1]

So it is conceivable he was shot from behind while running away. That's interesting.

Of course it is conceivable.
It's conceivable Mr.Brown was on his knees begging for his life and the officer used him for target practice.

Before sending a man to prison for life, isn't the burden of proof a little higher than " conceivable ". Don't we, as skeptics, need to look at what evidence there is critically before allowing an accused criminal to be lynched regardless of which group he belongs to, and what that groups actions have been in the past?

 

[Ammonitida]

Well, while I agree with you that Brown was thuggish, if your characterization of him as 'low-life scum' etc, one would have expected him to have beaten the clerk to a pulp. Someone earlier joked about the 'little guy starting it'--but in response to a view as extreme as yours it's actually a vaild point--Brown was pushing/strong-arming the clerk out of the way, it was meant as intimidation for sure, but if Brown was as violent as you claim, he could have easily knocked the clerk to the ground with one swat. Thug? arguably. Robber? By definition. Violent aggressor? I don't think the video supports that conclusion.

I take back the "lowlife scumbag" label I placed on him. On reflection, that is too harsh of a description, atm. He was an *******, who was evidently capable of violence if someone got in his way (like a cop for example). It remains to be seen if the shooting was justified.