Michael Brown shooting II

[Giz]

Hmmm...maybe even?

Yeah, a strongarm robber compared to a cop with clean record and awards for good conduct. I mean, there's no way to guess who was more likely to commit wrongdoing is there?

Jeez...

 

[Mike!]

Which shot is the one described in Wilson's testimony?

I think everyone agrees, the last shot fired was, the last shot fired.

 

[NoahFence]

Huh?? You need to read some of the other forum threads. Start with the 12 year old with the pellet gun, then try the chokehold Garner dude. 2 people, neither assaulted a cop...both dead. Videos in both cases. If a video had surfaced of Brown walking (not charging) at Wilson, we'd still be sitting here discussing how the GJ let him off. That's just the way it goes...

EDIT: well it seems RandFan already pointed this out, and you admonished him for going off topic when you brought it upon yourself with that ridiculous statement...so it bears repeating.

Another one who can't stay focused.

This has zero to do with that 12 year old, or the guy who got killed in that chokehold. Both of which are monumental, negligent screw ups by the cops involved in my opinion.

Michael Brown attacked a cop. End of story. Get off your high horse and just accept reality in this case.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The act of sending it to the GJ certainly wasn't irregular (aside from the fact that a less public case may never have even gotten that far) What was irregular was the way the prosecutor basically acted as Wilson's defense counsel in the proceedings. Makes one take pause....
This case on the other hand has the huge advantage of having video of the incident, no avoiding that.

Please provide the evidence for the hilited. Thanks in advance.

Show me the slightest bit of cross-examination by the prosecutor and then we can talk.

Really ? You won't back up your claim until I demonstrate something to you I never claimed ?

If you don't know the difference between direct and cross- examination, look them up.

I know the difference. What I don't know is how it is relevant to your claim.

 

[Giz]

Another one who can't stay focused.

This has zero to do with that 12 year old, or the guy who got killed in that chokehold. Both of which are monumental, negligent screw ups by the cops involved in my opinion.

Michael Brown attacked a cop. End of story. Get off your high horse and just accept reality in this case.

But but... other cops have been bad, so why can't we sacrifice this innocent cop to make up for it? What could be unjust about that?


(Being serious for a moment to make a general point): Campaigning to end police abuses is a noble effort... but this wasn't one of those abuses. Latching onto it just damages your credibility.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Walking, even at that speed, is not surrendering. Here's a demonstration of a 3mph "walk", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdGyXIlftD0

Charging at that speed after having assaulted Wilson still meant that Brown was a threat. If he had stopped and surrendered like he was told to do, Brown would be alive today. But the fact is, he charged at Wilson, like witness 48 said. The majority of other witnesses who say he didn't charge are liars. http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/1499/4375/original.jpg

Interesting chart. Had not seen it before, thanks.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

No he hasn't. There was no adversarial system in the Grand Jury room.

BTW: Had Wison actually gone to trial and had the adversarial system worked, I would have accepted the verdict but not necassarily Wilson's innocence. I'm pretty sure OJ was guilty of murdering Nicole even though he was found not-guilty.

For clarification - the implication is you don't accept the validity of the grand jury system ?

 

[stanfr]

Walking, even at that speed, is not surrendering. Here's a demonstration of a 3mph "walk", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdGyXIlftD0

Charging at that speed after having assaulted Wilson still meant that Brown was a threat. If he had stopped and surrendered like he was told to do, Brown would be alive today. But the fact is, he charged at Wilson, like witness 48 said. The majority of other witnesses who say he didn't charge are liars. http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/1499/4375/original.jpg

good grief, just looking at that second link makes me want to shoot an unarmed person...it's no wonder you're confused.

 

[NoahFence]

But but... other cops have been bad, so why can't we sacrifice this innocent cop to make up for it? What could be unjust about that?


(Being serious for a moment to make a general point): Campaigning to end police abuses is a noble effort... but this wasn't one of those abuses. Latching onto it just damages your credibility.

Indeed. Police abuses are real, and dangerous. THIS case, Michael Brown, is not an example of it.

 

[stanfr]

Yeah, a strongarm robber compared to a cop with clean record and awards for good conduct. I mean, there's no way to guess who was more likely to commit wrongdoing is there?

Jeez...

If you just robbed a store, would you be looking to pick a fight with the first cop you spotted? Granted, if you did that you're not thinking rationally to start with, but I don't think you can assume the prior incident predicts future behavior. Brown had a clean record too, he died with one.

 

[Frank Newgent]

Which of these two people is more likely to start a physical confrontation?

The racist white cop.

I was thinking it would be the other guy, not the American.

 

[stanfr]

Another one who can't stay focused.

This has zero to do with that 12 year old, or the guy who got killed in that chokehold. Both of which are monumental, negligent screw ups by the cops involved in my opinion.

Michael Brown attacked a cop. End of story. Get off your high horse and just accept reality in this case.

I can accept that Brown attacked a cop (not sure whether the attack was provoked or not). What I find hard to accept is that he had to die for it. Most of the Wilson supporters here find that extremely easy to accept. Given your (correct) analysis of those other cases I'm surprised you so easily think Brown deserved to die.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Indeed. Police abuses are real, and dangerous. THIS case, Michael Brown, is not an example of it.

Neither is the 12 year old in Ohio.

Eric Garner may be an example of it, but there are certainly many factors there which help us understand what happened and why. Still, I would agree that it was handled poorly and went down badly.

I don't fault them for not indicting that cop, it seemed that the bigger factors in his death were his poor health and poor choice re: resisting arrest.

John Crawford in the Walmart shooting may be an example of cops being too trigger-happy or afraid of a potential shooter, but I still wouldn't indict there.

All of these people did incredibly stupid things leading up to their deaths. They put cops in situations where mistakes and fear are likely. Cops are human. There's got to be some allowance for that.

When I think of "abuse of police power" I think of someone who is repeatedly punching a woman they've already got on the ground like in California recently, or socking some guy in the head really hard to get him to spit out drugs like we saw recently... or cops who are just seemingly looking for an excuse to beat suspects viciously when it doesn't seem necessary to effect the arrest.

If you just robbed a store, would you be looking to pick a fight with the first cop you spotted? Granted, if you did that you're not thinking rationally to start with, but I don't think you can assume the prior incident predicts future behavior. Brown had a clean record too, he died with one.

His juvenile record was unsealed and published?

 

[stanfr]

​

Really ? You won't back up your claim until I demonstrate something to you I never claimed ?



I know the difference. What I don't know is how it is relevant to your claim.

You clearly don't know the difference or you wouldn't be asking me ridiculous questions. I'm not making the claim that the ADA actually was his defense counsel, I'm pointing out what most of the lawyers and judicial experts have already noted, that the ADA treated Wilson with kid gloves, and the testimony was all direct testimony, with the ADA actually guiding Wilson on critical points that would help to exonerate him. Perhaps If I can find some spare time Ill come up with a lengthy list of examples of this, since you don't seem to be able to recognize them by yourself. If he is ostensibly the person you are seeking to bring charges against (clearly they had no intention to...) then they wouldn't have treated him that way. How familiar are you with Grand Juries?

 

[jhunter1163]

I can accept that Brown attacked a cop (not sure whether the attack was provoked or not). What I find hard to accept is that he had to die for it. Most of the Wilson supporters here find that extremely easy to accept. Given your (correct) analysis of those other cases I'm surprised you so easily think Brown deserved to die.

I don't think Brown deserved to die, but it was his own actions that caused his death. Wilson acted as his training dictated, and in the heat of the moment nothing else would be expected.

 

[stanfr]

Neither is the 12 year old in Ohio.

Eric Garner may be an example of it, but there are certainly many factors there which help us understand what happened and why. Still, I would agree that it was handled poorly and went down badly.

I don't fault them for not indicting that cop, it seemed that the bigger factors in his death were his poor health and poor choice re: resisting arrest.

John Crawford in the Walmart shooting may be an example of cops being too trigger-happy or afraid of a potential shooter, but I still wouldn't indict there.

All of these people did incredibly stupid things leading up to their deaths. They put cops in situations where mistakes and fear are likely. Cops are human. There's got to be some allowance for that.

When I think of "abuse of police power" I think of someone who is repeatedly punching a woman they've already got on the ground like in California recently, or socking some guy in the head really hard to get him to spit out drugs like we saw recently... or cops who are just seemingly looking for an excuse to beat suspects viciously when it doesn't seem necessary to effect the arrest.



His juvenile record was unsealed and published?

Point taken, but in this case id be surprised if someone didn't 'snitch' about it. Frankly, I'm surprised they (media etc) haven't dragged out Wilson's ex to try to get negative comments from her about her ex!

 

[NoahFence]

I can accept that Brown attacked a cop (not sure whether the attack was provoked or not). What I find hard to accept is that he had to die for it. Most of the Wilson supporters here find that extremely easy to accept. Given your (correct) analysis of those other cases I'm surprised you so easily think Brown deserved to die.

That's because the other two cases are so widely different from the Brown case.

Your problem is that you find them (seemingly) identical. I have no idea where that even comes from.

 

[stanfr]

But but... other cops have been bad, so why can't we sacrifice this innocent cop to make up for it? What could be unjust about that?


(Being serious for a moment to make a general point): Campaigning to end police abuses is a noble effort... but this wasn't one of those abuses. Latching onto it just damages your credibility.

Incidentally, as I said from the start, I don't think Brown is a good poster child for fighting police abuse. I keep hoping for someone to convince me that Wilson's actions were justified--have not seen anything yet to convince me, just a lot of members here who seem lacking in real world experience and come to the conclusion that because evidence was laid out by a team that was highly sympathetic to Wilson, and he was 'exonerated', it all must be true, so forget about the multiple witnesses who saw things differently (they're all 'liars') because the physical evidence, which could be twisted in any direction imaginable by a person with preconceived biases, supposedly supports the cop. It's not that black and white (pun-intended) to me.

 

[Ammonitida]

Neither is the 12 year old in Ohio.

Eric Garner may be an example of it, but there are certainly many factors there which help us understand what happened and why. Still, I would agree that it was handled poorly and went down badly.

I don't fault them for not indicting that cop, it seemed that the bigger factors in his death were his poor health and poor choice re: resisting arrest.

John Crawford in the Walmart shooting may be an example of cops being too trigger-happy or afraid of a potential shooter, but I still wouldn't indict there.

All of these people did incredibly stupid things leading up to their deaths. They put cops in situations where mistakes and fear are likely. Cops are human. There's got to be some allowance for that.

When I think of "abuse of police power" I think of someone who is repeatedly punching a woman they've already got on the ground like in California recently, or socking some guy in the head really hard to get him to spit out drugs like we saw recently... or cops who are just seemingly looking for an excuse to beat suspects viciously when it doesn't seem necessary to effect the arrest.



His juvenile record was unsealed and published?

Why wouldn't you indict in the Crawford case? He was talking on his phone when he was gunned down. In no way could he have been perceived as an immediate threat.

 

[stanfr]

That's because the other two cases are so widely different from the Brown case.

Your problem is that you find them (seemingly) identical. I have no idea where that even comes from.

They're definitely different! Where they are the same is that in each case the deceased made actions supposedly defiant to the cop, refusing to comply with orders. That's why people are defending the cops in both those other cases. The only real difference in that respect is that there were videos in that cases. I strongly suspect that if there were a video in the Brown case, you wouldn't be hearing that word 'charge' nearly as much as you're hearing it now.