• 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.
sir drinks-a-lot said:
Is it just me, or does anyone else here think that there is a ****-ton of evidence that hasn't been released yet? Shell casings, locations of everything, injuries to Wilson and Brown, etc...
Click to expand...

Kaosium said:
It's not just you.
Click to expand...

It seems odd, then, that people (in this thread and in the world in general) have already reached conclusions about what happened on that street. It remains a possibility, as with most big cases, that we may never definitively know what happened.

We do largely know what was said and what has happened after the shooting and, for me, that has largely resulted in a loss of credibility for all the parties involved. Short of a yet-unseen start-to-finish video of the event, I don't see how this could resolve itself in a way that won't leave some pretty big questions.
 
newyorkguy said:
Historically juries do not like to convict police officers for murder. I mentioned the case when I was a kid, in Brooklyn back in the 1960s. Two cops named Walker and Pepitone. Witnesses said Walker chased after an unarmed kid running after the car he was driving -- which was stolen -- was pulled over. Witnesses said Walker chased him, appeared to be catching up but then drew his gun, fired and killed him. Walker claimed the kid drew a knife. Witnesses said Walker planted the knife after the shooting. Walker's own partner testified against him. He said they were chasing after the kid, Walker drew his gun and fired. Pepitone said he had no idea why Walker did that. There was no knife. The knife found at the scene was planted by Walker. He carried it with him for that purpose. To some people Pepitone was a standup guy.

Except the jury believed Walker and he was acquitted. News columnist Jimmy Breslin wrote about the case. He wrote about how afterwards Pepitone was shunned by fellow officers. He had garbage dumped in his locker, no one wanted to work with him. I think he finally resigned. One of the cops, speaking anonymously, told Breslin, "We weren't asking Pepitone to lie. To say he saw the knife. We were asking him to just keep his mouth shut. To say he didn't know what happened. That's all."
Click to expand...
Wanting to learn more about this case, I did a quick Google search for "Breslin Walker Pepitone".

Nothing relevant came up on the first page of results, but the search did turn up this interesting story, which I am sure is a complete coincidence:

http://bostondirtdogs.boston.com/2007/08/the_toughest_day_in_red_sox_hi.html

The story talks about a game played in 1968 between the New York Yankees and the Boston Red Sox in Yankee Stadium, in the Bronx. During the game, Yankee first baseman Joe Pepitone goes out on a fly catch. Writer Jimmy Breslin was present that day, as was radio engineering Al Walker.

Obviously, my google-fu sucks. Either that, or the Internet has no good reference for Breslin's account of the police shooting case. That's totally plausible, for what was likely a local story from fifty years ago.

newyorkguy, since you quoted one of Breslin's sources verbatim, I assume you have good reference yourself, either online or hardcopy. Would you mind sharing the hyperlink or publication details (title, page number, etc.)?
 
Unabogie said:
Is it just me, or is there something weird about people who have decided to reject any eyewitness testimony as being inherently suspect, just because of the color/social status of the people who saw the shooting?
Click to expand...

Maybe just you?

It's probably just me, but this is how I see it:

"The cop probably murdered that kid. And here's some eyewitness testimony that supports that narrative."

"Don't get too attached to that narrative. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable."

"Shut up! Here's more testimony that supports the narrative!"

"And here's some testimony that supports a contradictory narrative. What now?"

"Why do you only accept testimony that contradicts my narrative? I thought you said eyewitness testimony was unreliable!"
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Maybe just you?

It's probably just me, but this is how I see it:

"The cop probably murdered that kid. And here's some eyewitness testimony that supports that narrative."

"Don't get too attached to that narrative. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable."

"Shut up! Here's more testimony that supports the narrative!"

"And here's some testimony that supports a contradictory narrative. What now?"

"Why do you only accept testimony that contradicts my narrative? I thought you said eyewitness testimony was unreliable!"
Click to expand...

Well, now it's just you. ;)

It's not my narrative. There are multiple witnesses who all saw the same thing. On the other side, there's Darren Wilson. In order to believe his version, all the other people must be lying. Their two versions of the events are not close enough to be explained away by unreliable witnesses. Either Brown was "charging Wilson at full speed", as "Josie" says is Wilson's claim, or he was on his knees. They can't both be true.

ETA: If there are other witnesses who come forward and contradict the ones we know about, I'm perfectly willing to change my stance. But so far it's just everyone else's word against Wilson. I'm not willing to believe a cop over half a dozen other people whose only reason to lie is that "they hate cops" or "they side with their own".
 
Last edited:
jimbob said:
In the UK any police shooting or death involving police is automatically referred to the police complaints commission.

There are still problems with charging officers. but at least the raw data is collected and investigated.
Click to expand...

There is no agency in the US central government with comparable authority and responsibility to investigate actions by regional or local law enforcement agencies. As far as I can tell, the American system of government appears to be much more centralized than anarcho-libertarians would like, but still much less centralized than most citizens of the UK might expect, or even understand.
 
Upchurch said:
It seems odd, then, that people (in this thread and in the world in general) have already reached conclusions about what happened on that street. It remains a possibility, as with most big cases, that we may never definitively know what happened.

We do largely know what was said and what has happened after the shooting and, for me, that has largely resulted in a loss of credibility for all the parties involved. Short of a yet-unseen start-to-finish video of the event, I don't see how this could resolve itself in a way that won't leave some pretty big questions.
Click to expand...

I think the physical evidence will go a long way towards establishing which of the witnesses saw it and remember it best.
 
theprestige said:
Wanting to learn more about this case, I did a quick Google search for "Breslin Walker Pepitone".
<snip>
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're eager to learn more about this. Let me ask you this. Do you have memories? Do you normally maintain documentation for all of them?

Actually I can point you to a cite but you'll have to go to a public library and look through a New York Times index for the years 1963-1965. You'd be surprised how many libraries have them. You should be able to find it, too. The Breslin cite I referenced was from a news column he wrote. He was a columnist for the New York Daily News and, later the New York Post. How do you find that one? That I don't know. Without going to the New York Public Library and going through the microfilm collection of those two papers. Once you've narrowed down the date of the trial that shouldn't be impossible.

Let's cut to the chase: you're implying I made this whole thing up, correct? May I ask why you think that?
 
Skeptical Greg said:
You know that for a fact, or you are just taking a “source close to the investigation's ” word for it because it supports your position?

But let's pretend we know there was no bone facture, I guess swelling around the face and eyes can be brushed aside as having no bearing on the situation?
Click to expand...

If CNN has vetted this, I believe it. It fits the observed facts.
 
Frankly, I am suspicious of any "Source close to the investigation" who leaks to a site with an obvious poltical bias,does not matter if the bias is left or right
 
theprestige said:
There is no agency in the US central government with comparable authority and responsibility to investigate actions by regional or local law enforcement agencies. As far as I can tell, the American system of government appears to be much more centralized than anarcho-libertarians would like, but still much less centralized than most citizens of the UK might expect, or even understand.
Click to expand...

The DoJ does have the authority to investigate local law enforcement agencies. They certainly don't look at every single shooting, as the UK does (apparently).

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...tigations-into-police-departments-nationwide/

I'm also not exactly sure what powers they wield in those cases. Whether they can disband a police force, or prosecute any police officer in said force.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom