Michael Brown shooting II

[quadraginta]

A precedent for what? Releasing of juvenile records for victims of police shootings?

Do we anticipate a lot of those in the future, in Ferguson?

A precedent for releasing juvie records would be quite enough. No need for the extra embellishment.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

These witnesses may distrust the police or the prosecutor's office and find them hostile. These witnesses may think they will be forced to do or say things they do not want to do.

In short, these witnesses live in a community in which it is not entirely unreasonable for them to fear law enforcement. I don't blame them for wanting some protection, only if it's just for peace of mind.

It's not a difficult concept when you live in a community where you don't trust the police and you see things like this:

Man Who Shot Eric Garner Chokehold Video Arrested

Can't read the wsj story, so not sure what your point was there.

I understand people mistrust , or perhaps even fear law enforcement.

It still doesn't really help me understand what a lawyer is going to do for them ... make them feel better, like a giant teddy bear ?

I suppose it's really no matter. I just find it odd that the witnesses who are most vocal, and making the media rounds, also need an attorney. Frankly, it colors my perception of them negatively (not that they care, I'm sure).

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Attacking a victim's character is not typically allowed in any case. Why should it be allowed here?

It probably shouldn't, if that's the only reason.

Then again, the judge probably shouldn't have said anything, including the part about the class A and B felonies ... that's a slippery slope the judge started down, releasing partial info, somewhat arbitrarily, IMO. But IANAL, so my opinion matters not a whit.

Are the people calling for Brown's juvenile records also expressing the same concerns about any complaints on record against Wilson from the Jennings police department that was full of corruption and racism?

Does it matter if they are, or is that just some wierd tu quoque, considering there is no evidence against wilson that he did anything wrong while in Jennings.

If there is evidence that wilson did something wrong, I haven't seen it, have you ?

 

[WildCat]

Can't read the wsj story, so not sure what your point was there.

The guy who took the video has been arrested on average every 2 months since he was 16 years old and was arrested again shortly after the video was taken, this time for gun possession. And somehow this means there's a conspiracy to retaliate against him for taking the video. I guess taking a video of police brutality means you should never be arrested again, not even for having a gun in public illegally.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Can't read the wsj story, so not sure what your point was there.

I understand people mistrust , or perhaps even fear law enforcement.

You don't need to read the WSJ article. Not only can you tell from the title, you could easily Google it from the title if you were interested.

It still doesn't really help me understand what a lawyer is going to do for them ... make them feel better, like a giant teddy bear ?

I suppose it's really no matter. I just find it odd that the witnesses who are most vocal, and making the media rounds, also need an attorney. Frankly, it colors my perception of them negatively (not that they care, I'm sure).

IOW, you cannot see the world from the POV of these people.

It probably shouldn't, if that's the only reason.

Then again, the judge probably shouldn't have said anything, including the part about the class A and B felonies ... that's a slippery slope the judge started down, releasing partial info, somewhat arbitrarily, IMO. But IANAL, so my opinion matters not a whit.

Does it matter if they are, or is that just some wierd tu quoque, considering there is no evidence against wilson that he did anything wrong while in Jennings.

If there is evidence that wilson did something wrong, I haven't seen it, have you ?

Help me clear this up. There is no evidence Brown was coming at Wilson when the fatal shots were fired except perhaps the assumptions we can make about Wilson's account of the events. But you think Brown's record of past petty crimes, if one exists, is relevant.

Yet there are multiple witnesses that say they saw Wilson shoot Brown as he tried to surrender, and you think the fact Wilson came from a department where the whole department was implicated and so bad they fired the lot of them for racial bigotry (call it bias if you like) and corruption, but you think there is no evidence officials and/or the public might have a legitimate interest in checking if Wilson was implicated in anything that brought the Jennings Police Department down?

 

[pakeha]

The three officers? One shooting and two not? Does any other witness put two other officers there during the shooting?

That's an odd sort of report.
Is there any follow-up on it?

[ . . . ]
Could one or both of you help me understand more specifically how an attorney can actually help protect whatever interest these witnesses think they have in this case ?

IMO the most likely situation here involves attorneys creating work, publicity and creds for themselves.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The guy who took the video has been arrested on average every 2 months since he was 16 years old and was arrested again shortly after the video was taken, this time for gun possession. And somehow this means there's a conspiracy to retaliate against him for taking the video. I guess taking a video of police brutality means you should never be arrested again, not even for having a gun in public illegally.

No, it means it's understandable that a population which actually is persecuted by police might feel they need a lawyer even if they are only a witness.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

You don't need to read the WSJ article. Not only can you tell from the title, you could easily Google it from the title if you were interested.

I should google for evidence you need to make your point ? I don't think that's how it works.

The guy who took the video has been arrested on average every 2 months since he was 16 years old and was arrested again shortly after the video was taken, this time for gun possession. And somehow this means there's a conspiracy to retaliate against him for taking the video. I guess taking a video of police brutality means you should never be arrested again, not even for having a gun in public illegally.

It seems there is more than not trusting the police ?

IOW, you cannot see the world from the POV of these people.

Perhaps not. Or perhaps they have different motives than you ascribe to them.

Help me clear this up. There is no evidence Brown was coming at Wilson when the fatal shots were fired except perhaps the assumptions we can make about Wilson's account of the events. But you think Brown's record of past petty crimes, if one exists, is relevant.

Where did you get that I think they are relevant ?

Attacking a victim's character is not typically allowed in any case. Why should it be allowed here?

It probably shouldn't, if that's the only reason.

Yet there are multiple witnesses that say they saw Wilson shoot Brown as he tried to surrender, and you think the fact Wilson came from a department where the whole department was implicated and so bad they fired the lot of them for racial bigotry (call it bias if you like) and corruption,but you think[ there is no evidence officials and/or the public might have a legitimate interest in checking if Wilson was implicated in anything that brought the Jennings Police Department down?

You dodged the question.

The issue is that there is no evidence against wilson that he did anything wrong while in Jennings, is there ?

 

[Mumbles]

No, it means it's understandable that a population which actually is persecuted by police might feel they need a lawyer even if they are only a witness.

Or, perhaps it means that having a lawyer is simply a good idea when dealing with complex legal proceedings of any sort.

Which is true.

this is basic sense, really. You're dealing with this complex? Get with someone who has some understanding of the complexity.

The witnesses getting lawyers makes perfect sense to me.

You may as well ask "Well gee, why hasn't Darren Wilson given his story to the media?" Well he'd be a complete divot for doing so, that's why. And that's true of the witnesses as well.

If you're smart, you get a lawyer whenever you're doing so etching like this. The end.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I should google for evidence you need to make your point ? I don't think that's how it works.

The case had been a major news headline for weeks a short time ago, it involved a cop that killed an unarmed man being arrested, I posted a link and the headline said exactly what the link did, "Man Who Shot Eric Garner Chokehold Video Arrested". A witness that videotaped the death in a police shooting was arrested.

If you couldn't open the link I cited, unless the link was bad, and I checked, it wasn't, I'm not sure how that makes my citation inadequate.

It seems there is more than not trusting the police ?

The issue is not about that man's arrest, it is a reason black witnesses are afraid of white cops and feel they want legal advice before giving their witness testimony.

If you don't get it why some people fear the police, well, what more can anyone say?

Perhaps not. Or perhaps they have different motives than you ascribe to them.

I don't suppose you can see the irony of suspecting the witnesses need lawyers for nefarious reasons while you discount the idea said witnesses might simply fear police have similarly misapplied prejudice?

You have gone out of your way to excuse your dismissal of all the black witnesses, claiming it's not about prejudice at all, and then you post things like a prejudice that a witness who fears the police must have something to hide. No, they live with arrests for walking and driving while black. It's been well documented in police statistics. The police department in the city next to Ferguson fired an entire police force for corruption and racial bias. Yet you think all those black citizens in the area who came forward must be guilty of something if they are afraid of the police?

Of course the one witness who had a partial report that maybe, if stretched out enough, might just support your preconceived bias, Brown must have looked like he was charging at Wilson when Wilson killed him. Even though that witness said moving toward, definitely not rushing Wilson, more like stumbling. But you are discounting all that and only picking out words, not even sentences, that might support Wilson's fear of Brown.

Where did you get that I think they are relevant ? ...

You dodged the question.

The issue is that there is no evidence against wilson that he did anything wrong while in Jennings, is there ?

I didn't dodge it, I answered it. Brown is dead. He was unarmed. Multiple witnesses say he was trying to surrender. No witness said he was charging at Wilson.

So no matter what Brown did hours ago, or in the past, it is not going to provide evidence he was not surrendering but was charging at Wilson.

On the other hand, you have Wilson who shot an unarmed kid in the top of his head as Brown was either stumbling, falling or trying to get on the ground and multiple witnesses say he was trying to surrender. If Wilson was a bigot, if he was overly aggressive, if he used excessive force in the past, all of that is directly applicable to his over reaction here.

You might have a thread of a case about Brown's record if we had no witnesses, no audio recording and no autopsy that showed Brown's head was not in a position charging at Wilson, he was bent over going down. Anything in Brown's record would be nothing more than trying to poison the well.

 

[Giz]

I should google for evidence you need to make your point ? I don't think that's how it works.

​

It seems there is more than not trusting the police ?



Perhaps not. Or perhaps they have different motives than you ascribe to them.



Where did you get that I think they are relevant ?

​

You dodged the question.

The issue is that there is no evidence against wilson that he did anything wrong while in Jennings, is there ?

Really? You want evidence rather than just accepting that in a confrontation between a strong arm robber and a cop that it must have been the cop that acted wrongly?

 

[Cylinder]

The roadside memorial to Michael Brown burned down:

Brown memorial destroyed by fire

Police speculate candles are the cause of a fire that destroyed a Michael Brown memorial on Canfield Drive Tuesday morning.


The memorial, created in the days after Brown was fatally shot on Aug. 9 by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, is feet away from where Brown died.

A News 4 photographer on the scene said firefighters used extinguishers, not hoses, to control the flames.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The case had been a major news headline for weeks a short time ago, it involved a cop that killed an unarmed man being arrested, I posted a link and the headline said exactly what the link did, "Man Who Shot Eric Garner Chokehold Video Arrested". A witness that videotaped the death in a police shooting was arrested.

If you couldn't open the link I cited, unless the link was bad, and I checked, it wasn't, I'm not sure how that makes my citation inadequate.

I'm not subscribed to the WSJ, the link worked - I saw the headline and the first sentence. The problem was, that didn't tell me much ... a guy who broke the law was arrested ? I guess the idea is if he had a lawyer, the Police wouldn't arrest him for breaking the law ?

The issue is not about that man's arrest, it is a reason black witnesses are afraid of white cops and feel they want legal advice before giving their witness testimony.

If you don't get it why some people fear the police, well, what more can anyone say?

K'm not sure that should be a racial fear, or a simply us -vs- them fear you think anyone should have when dealing with the police.

I don't suppose you can see the irony of suspecting the witnesses need lawyers for nefarious reasons while you discount the idea said witnesses might simply fear police have similarly misapplied prejudice?

Nope.

You have gone out of your way to excuse your dismissal of all the black witnesses, claiming it's not about prejudice at all, and then you post things like a prejudice that a witness who fears the police must have something to hide. No, they live with arrests for walking and driving while black. It's been well documented in police statistics. The police department in the city next to Ferguson fired an entire police force for corruption and racial bias. Yet you think all those black citizens in the area who came forward must be guilty of something if they are afraid of the police?

Please quote my posts - you are putting words in my mouth, or have simply misunderstood me.

I'll repeat this for you -
I am dismissing Johnson as a witness for obvious reasons. Self serving, history of lying to the police.
Crenshaw knows brown, and has changed her story to fit released facts as her interviews move forward in time.
Mitchell works with Crenshaw.
They were all seen together prior to giving their statements.
This makes cautious about accepting their media statements at face value.
James McKnight, Philip Walker and the construction worker who didn't see three police shoot brown all tell reasonably consistent stories.
The construction worker who saw three officers shoot brown clearly was mistaken, and hist distances are way off - and that calls into question the rest of his statements.

That's really not a "dismissal of all the black witnesses", is it ?

And I don't claim that the ones who have attorneys and made a media circuit have something to hide, I said that it makes it seem as if they may have ulterior motives, or a hidden agenda.
They may have that and fear of the police. As others pointed out, it may be the attorneys are simply cashing in on their 15 minutes of fame as well.

I don't know ... you don't know. So my conjecture is as good as yours.

Of course the one witness who had a partial report that maybe, if stretched out enough, might just support your preconceived bias, Brown must have looked like he was charging at Wilson when Wilson killed him. Even though that witness said moving toward, definitely not rushing Wilson, more like stumbling. But you are discounting all that and only picking out words, not even sentences, that might support Wilson's fear of Brown.

I would appreciate it if you can quote where I claimed that I believe brown was charging wilson?

I have not claimed that, only that the evidence appears to support that brown was continuing to move towards wilson. And I don't believe that is the same thing as charging, or surrendering.

I didn't dodge it, I answered it. Brown is dead. He was unarmed. Multiple witnesses say he was trying to surrender. No witness said he was charging at Wilson.

And neither did I.

The question was regarding Wilson and the Jennings police force. You didn't answer it.

So no matter what Brown did hours ago, or in the past, it is not going to provide evidence he was not surrendering but was charging at Wilson.

I agree. Let me point out again that I am not advocating that browns juvenile record should be revealed.

On the other hand, you have Wilson who shot an unarmed kid in the top of his head as Brown was either stumbling, falling or trying to get on the ground and multiple witnesses say he was trying to surrender. If Wilson was a bigot, if he was overly aggressive, if he used excessive force in the past, all of that is directly applicable to his over reaction here.

You might have a thread of a case about Brown's record if we had no witnesses, no audio recording and no autopsy that showed Brown's head was not in a position charging at Wilson, he was bent over going down. Anything in Brown's record would be nothing more than trying to poison the well.

Perhaps I wasn't clear earlier when I pointed out I didn't believe that they should have said anything about it, not even the no felonies, because that's a slippery slope of partially revealing. They should have said nothing.

Let me point out again that I am not and was not advocating that browns juvenile record should have been revealed.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Or, perhaps it means that having a lawyer is simply a good idea when dealing with complex legal proceedings of any sort.

Which is true.

this is basic sense, really. You're dealing with this complex? Get with someone who has some understanding of the complexity.

The witnesses getting lawyers makes perfect sense to me.

You may as well ask "Well gee, why hasn't Darren Wilson given his story to the media?" Well he'd be a complete divot for doing so, that's why. And that's true of the witnesses as well.

If you're smart, you get a lawyer whenever you're doing so etching like this. The end.

I agree with you in general. But I don't see being a witness as a complex issue.

I write down what I saw and give it to you. You give me a copy of what I wrote. The end.

What did I miss ?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The roadside memorial to Michael Brown burned down:

Brown memorial destroyed by fire

Here is another knock against crenshaw:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=907799039249878&set=vb.100000593702301&type=3&permPage=1


Apparently when she first posted it, it said:

Piaget Crenshaw
police burned down mike brown memorial

I don't think she is going to make a very good witness for the prosecution (if it gets that far)

 

[TheL8Elvis]

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_23ebb554-39f1-5285-b311-ffcefc96d6fb.html

DOJ to give update on investigation of Ferguson police department tonight

The Department of Justice Civil Rights Division will host a meeting Wednesday evening as part of its investigation of the Ferguson Police Department.

The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at the student center at St. Louis Community College at Florissant Valley Campus, 3400 Pershall Road.

Members of the Department of Justice will give information about its investigation of the police department and allegations that its officers use excessive force.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

http://fox2now.com/2014/09/24/bob-m...-november-grand-jury-to-get-range-of-charges/

ST. LOUIS, MO (KTVI) – St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch is presenting the evidence in the Michael Brown case to a grand jury. He went on McGraw Milhaven’s show on 550AM KTRS Wednesday morning to clear up some public perceptions about his involvement in the case. His interview on the AM talk show went on for over 15 minutes. Watch the entire conversation in the YouTube clip in this article.

He says that the prosecutors are not just letting the Grand Jury pick a range of charges. They will present many options to the Grand Jury for officer Darren Wilson ranging from murder to manslaughter.

 

[johnny karate]

Here is another knock against crenshaw:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=907799039249878&set=vb.100000593702301&type=3&permPage=1
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/500445422d725c2f48.jpg[/qimg]

Apparently when she first posted it, it said:

Piaget Crenshaw
police burned down mike brown memorial

I don't think she is going to make a very good witness for the prosecution (if it gets that far)

Maybe. Maybe not. Either way, there are plenty of other witnesses who saw Officer Wilson shoot Michael Brown to death while Brown had his hands up.

So honestly, I'm not too sure why we need to obsess over the character or behavior of any one particular witness.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Here is another knock against crenshaw:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=907799039249878&set=vb.100000593702301&type=3&permPage=1
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/500445422d725c2f48.jpg[/qimg]

Apparently when she first posted it, it said:

Piaget Crenshaw
police burned down mike brown memorial

I don't think she is going to make a very good witness for the prosecution (if it gets that far)

And you have proof she changed the FB entry?

 

[plague311]

Maybe. Maybe not. Either way, there are plenty of other witnesses who saw Officer Wilson shoot Michael Brown to death while Brown had his hands up.

So honestly, I'm not too sure why we need to obsess over the character or behavior of any one particular witness.

Despite the implication that every witness is saying the same thing, it's not entirely true. Witnesses have changed their stories, some have changed as evidence comes out, and some witnesses say they saw things that fly in the face of the physical evidence. (3 shooters, how many shots, where\when he was hit) All of that varies from statement to statement.

It's blatantly incorrect to say that every witness has the same story line, not to mention that some were seen standing next to each other previous to giving a recollection of the events. Even the articles about the construction worker, and the video, show people screaming that Brown had his hands up. It's something that spread immediately after the incident, whether it was true or not.