• 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.
LTC8K6 said:
So, it looks like there may have been no shots in the back, and it looks like there may be an explanation for the multiple shots away from the SUV.

So far, it's looking like the officer has a good chance of being exonerated, imo.

So far...
Click to expand...


Seems like it. Meaning riots in Oakland, Ferguson, etc.
 
Unabogie said:
I suppose you could chalk it up to the store owners being intimidated,
Click to expand...

Yes, they may have been afraid of retaliation. Why piss Brown off even more over some cigars; It's not like he'd go to prison for the rest of his life. In a few weeks or months he'd be back looking to take out his frustrations on somebody.

Steve S
 
Mister Earl said:
Maybe he did knock around a shopkeeper.
Click to expand...


I don't think there's any "maybe" about his robbing and assaulting the shopkeeper. Thus, he was pretty obviously a thug.

My earlier statement was that this incident didn't make much sense until I watched the video. Why would police roll up and start shooting some kid for jaywalking? Of course, the reverse didn't make much sense either. Why would some average kid start a fight with an armed police officer over a jaywalking warning? The answer, as we can see from the store video, is that he was not the gentle giant his friends claim. He was a thug. And the store robbery goes a long way to explain how the encounter with the police escalated.

If Brown was shot again after he surrendered, that is obviously a problem. But this story is no longer the gentle giant on his way to college to cure cancer when the police shot him for jaywalking the media tried to spin it. All the protestors are marching for a thug who got in a fight with police after robbing a store and assaulting a shopkeeper.
 
Distracted1 said:
The man had just attacked the officer, apparently out of nowhere ( from the policeman's viewpoint ) , attempting to do him harm, and get his gun. That made him a violent, dangerous ,felon.
By definition, a violent felon is a danger to others.
Click to expand...

Not according to the USA laws on police shootings as. I have presented them. Did I miss this ruling? Can you please cite it to correct my understanding? Thanks.
 
Lerxst said:
He's 6' 4" and reaching into what was likely an open window. It's certainly possible. The door also at one time opened, so certainly possible for them to have struggled for it.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they didn't struggle for it, however that kind of suggests the gun was drawn, doesn't it? If Dorian Johnson's account of this happening through the window is correct it's pretty much assured. However of course he could be mistaken or lying.


And I'm only stating what I have observed, and not just at this forum. Some people believe Johnson and some people believe Wilson. People say they see Bigfoot all the time, do we believe them?
Click to expand...

Can you think of a way we can determine the likelihood of bigfoot existing as virtually non-existent employing logic and evidence and thus we can pretty much dismiss the witnesses as mistaken or lying?
 
johnny karate said:
If you feel I've personally attacked you, by all means report the post. But I'm not aware that I have.




How is the bold portion not another way of saying "cops can just kill people, and as long as they tell us they had to, we just go ahead and believe them"?

Edit: And by the way, there is evidence to the contrary in the statements of three different witnesses.
Click to expand...
You don't read the statements " cops can just kill people " And. "Sometimes it is okay for LEO's to kill people " as having different meanings?

Please read the entire post, you will find that I make clear reference to investigations of deaths. If the investigation does not uncover credible evidence to contradict the LEO' s story, I believe him.

If you think that is identical in meaning to " as long as they say they had to " then you are missing the meaning.
 
If there are shots in the back, even if Brown attacked the officer there should be severe repercussions.

This incident shows how important that officers are equipped with the same sort of video recording devices that their vehicles have. It would protect both the honest officers who are charged with excesses that they were not guilty of and citizens that are attacked by the rare "rogue cop".

From what I have heard most police officers end up liking the support that the videos give them for their testimony.
 
Frankly I am tried of making the same point again and again and having the discussion by some misdirected to irrelevant aspects. No one seems to have presented clear evidence that Brown was an imminent, direct threat of harm when he was fatally shot. Do so if anyone has such evidence. I will stand corrected, Goodnight.
 
I can't remember where, but I once was a member of a forum where eyewitness accounts weren't the most reliable evidence. I wish could remember...
 
Distracted1 said:
Where do you get that from?
Click to expand...

Did you listen to the audio of the witnesses right after the shooting?

They seem to indicate that Brown was not shot in the back, and that he was shot multiple times when he charged the officer.

Looks like the officer chased Brown after the altercation at the vehicle, and Brown turned around and charged the officer. Then the officer shot him.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Riiight. :rolleyes:

It's not about who I believe. It's my contention the preponderance of evidence (three consistent eyewitness stories) suggests Brown was trying to surrender. However, the autopsy is the thing that will hopefully tell us that answer with more certainty.

Lethal force against a petty shoplifter that resisted arrest was overkill by any sane measure of common sense.

Grabbed at the gun? Maybe if it was pointed at his face. This is a city where black people do not trust white cops. I think that's pretty well established.

So even given the cop's side of the story as told through the police chief's filter, it was needless excessive use of force.

Calling for back up, calling for a K-9 unit to track Brown down, waiting for Brown to show up in the ED with a gunshot, all of those actions would have been reasonable. Shooting a fleeing kid who resisted arrest, no, that was unnecessary.
Click to expand...

I'm simply pointing out that if Wilson's version of the story is true, it would not be inaccurate to call Brown a fleeing felon. I am not saying that justifies shooting him. Some people are saying that however.

Even if he had just committed a robbery, and that seems the only thing that is quite clear here based on the surveillance video, it's still not a justification to shoot him. But it was still a robbery, not shoplifting.

Also, is there a city where black people trust white cops?

I don't believe Wilson's version of the story, but I don't believe Johnson's either. The other problem is that even though people try their best to minimize Brown's behavior prior to meeting up with Wilson, it does indicate that Brown very likely could have been confrontational as he believed he was about to be arrested.

I agree, once we know how many wounds, where they are, and from what range the shots were fired we can start to get to the truth.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Did you listen to the audio of the witnesses right after the shooting?

They seem to indicate that Brown was not shot in the back, and that he was shot multiple times when he charged the officer.

Looks like the officer chased Brown after the altercation at the vehicle, and Brown turned around and charged the officer. Then the officer shot him.
Click to expand...

The clip you posted started at ~6:00 minutes, there seems to be something at ~6:30 which suggests he turned back, is that what you're referring to as a 'charge?'

Or is that what the witnesses reported as him turning around with his hands up?
 
Kaosium said:
The clip you posted started at ~6:00 minutes, there seems to be something at ~6:30 which suggests he turned back, is that what you're referring to as a 'charge?'

Or is that what the witnesses reported as him turning around with his hands up?
Click to expand...

No, "doubling back towards him", and "keeps coming", are what I refer to as a charge,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom