Michael Brown Shooting

[GWCarver]

Why does it take four weeks for toxicology?

I was wondering about that, too. The short answer would be it requires a lot of samples and a lot of different tests...

How are forensic toxicology tests done?

At the time of the autopsy, collection of blood, urine, and tissue samples is done in preparation for the toxicology tests, says Barbarajean Magnani, PhD, MD, chairwoman of the Toxicology Resource committee for the College of American Pathologists. She is also vice-chair of the department of pathology and laboratory medicine at Tufts Medical Center, Boston.

"We collect blood from different areas, such as the femoral vein [in the leg] and heart blood," she tells WebMD. That's because the concentration of drugs can be different, she says, so comparing the concentrations can boost accuracy.

''We collect urine if there is any [in the body] and also use tissues [to test],” Magnani says.

Specimens taken for forensic toxicology testing routinely include, in addition to blood and urine, tissue samples from the liver, brain, kidney, and vitreous humor (the clear ''jelly" found in the eyeball chamber), according to information from the College of American Pathologists. Samples of the stomach contents and bile, a digestive juice secreted by the liver, are also collected routinely.

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/features/the-truth-about-toxicology-tests

 

[Cain]

"Outrageous! A store owner killed a kid for taking cigars!"

Wouldn't've happened. The store owner would've been all like, "Hey, stop! You're a berry, berry bahd man." And then the "robber" would've been all like, "calm down, dawg. I wuz just playin'."

Anyway, after seeing the gif I've gotta say that I don't condone robbery, but Brown looked pretty badass, which is tough since he looks pregnant and he's wearing those ridiculous sandals. If I was into fashion and gay, I'd probably call them scandals.

 

[a_unique_person]

After watching the robbery video, I can't say I am sad that Brown is dead. But I would be even happier if he'd been white since then we'd have one less thug without having to listen to all the "Young black choirboy shot on way to cure cancer" spin the media is feeding us.

 

[jimbob]

I think the strategy is to minimize the crime so that it's easier to make the leap to "it doesn't matter what Brown did", but Brown's actions just prior to his confrontation with the police do matter a great deal.

Brown's previous actions didn't affect the policeman's decisions if the policeman wasn't aware of them.

And we hold the police to a higher level of behaviour compared to the general population because they are public servants in a position of power and trust.

I also don't think it idealistic to require police to be less likely to use deadly force than members of the general public, as confrontation will be part of their expected job.

 

[LTC8K6]

Then he's a lousy shot or he needs to go back for additional training. The point is, he had no business firing his gun into Michael Brown when he was down on the ground, bleeding from his head.

Why do you do that?

No one here at JREF would ever agree that that it would be justified to shoot Brown after he was on the ground.

If the officer fired at Brown after he was down, then that is clearly murder, and the officer will serve a lot of time.

The only exception possible involves Brown having a gun, which is clearly not the case.

I have seen no indication whatsoever that the officer executed a prone Brown with coup de gras shots.

EDIT: Besides, the autopsy will tell us a a lot about the shots, so why don't we just wait for it?

 

[jimbob]

I'm not sure if it was under oath but I consider a police officer who has gone through extensive background checks and been on the force for six years with apparently no complaints against him, to be more reliable than Dorian Johnson and yes even more reliable than the various witnesses around. They would've only really started paying significant attention after gunfire had already begun, I suspect. The cop had a better vantage point than anyone except Michael Brown, who is no longer with us, and would be lying if he was.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...erguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html

On Friday, police finally identified the officer as Darren Wilson, who is said to have no disciplinary record, as such records are kept in Ferguson. We already know that he started out at a time when it was accepted for a Ferguson cop to charge somebody with property damage for bleeding on his uniform and later saying there was no blood on him at all.

It wasn't surprising that he had no disciplinary record about excessive use of force for his first two years, because there was no way of determining whether any officer in Ferguson had been subject to such complaints.

Schottel got another unpleasant surprise when he sought the use-of-force history of the officers involved. He learned that before a new chief took over in 2010 the department had a surprising protocol for non-fatal use-of-force reports.

“The officer himself could complete it and give it to the supervisor for his approval,” the prior chief, Thomas Moonier, testified in a deposition. “I would read it. It would be placed in my out basket, and my secretary would probably take it and put it with the case file.”

No copy was made for the officer’s personnel file.

 

[LTC8K6]

That story suggests Brown stopped at 35' then bumrushed him, but was found 35' away from the truck, that's what I mean by that can't be the story.



Understood.

I don't think the story is that specific. It just says "about" 35 feet, which is an estimate.

Obviously if Brown rushed the officer, and was found dead 35 feet away, then he had to have started farther away than that.

The pictures/vids make it look like the distance between Brown and the SUV is a lot more than 35 feet to me.

 

[LTC8K6]

https://twitter.com/7im/timelines/499639344613695488

That's the only reference I have seen to "on the ground".

It's a reference to how long the body was left there.

https://twitter.com/TheePharoah/status/498191022489231360

It is interesting that on Twitter they knew about the the robbery already.

https://twitter.com/TheePharoah/status/498205424714145793

 

[Mumbles]

Not being sad that a thug -- black or white -- is no longer around to rob, assault, and intimidate people is not racist.

Not really the best description. I used the term to describe a drug dealer who beat the crap out of someone because of a missed payment, sure - but I'm not at all convinced that Brown fits the description.

Also, there's that major problem of people using "thug" as an acceptable replacement for a certain racial slur for black people. And don't bother pointing out that Tupac appropriated the word, since he also thought that it was a replacement for said slur, in the 1990s.

 

[Mumbles]

After watching the robbery video, I can't say I am sad that Brown is dead. But I would be even happier if he'd been white since then we'd have one less thug without having to listen to all the "Young black choirboy shot on way to cure cancer" spin the media is feeding us.

"The media"?

Sure, his family and friends will say that - but that's true of the family and friends of *any* person who gets killed or arrested, or whatever. That's simply human nature - and yes, we see it of white victims as well. And it's true of every profession as well - not merely police. Even the Tsarnaev brothers (the guys who bombed the Boston Marathon) had most of their family talking about how great they were. If you're thinking, you're ready for the teary-eyed mother, and all that. That's simply what you expect their reaction to be.

Now, if someone's family *refuses* to vouch for them, that's when you can be pretty sure that the "victim" was a piece of scum.

 

[shuize]

... I'm not at all convinced that Brown fits the description.

Right. He's a good boy. He just likes to rob people sometimes.

Also, there's that major problem of people using "thug" as an acceptable replacement for a certain racial slur for black people. And don't bother pointing out that Tupac appropriated the word, since he also thought that it was a replacement for said slur, in the 1990s.

I use it regardless of race. When you rob a store, knock the shopkeeper out of the way and then turn around to intimidate him back inside while you walk out with his stuff, you're a thug, plain and simple.

 

[Cylinder]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...erguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html

It wasn't surprising that he had no disciplinary record about excessive use of force for his first two years, because there was no way of determining whether any officer in Ferguson had been subject to such complaints.

That article is...well....confusing.

It's SOP for an officer to fill out his or her own use-of-force report. Who else could fill it out? These reports don't go into a personnel file, they are reviewed by someone in the chain (a department head for small forces or dedicated IA for larger ones). If the event requires disciplinary action, that report/finding stays with the officer -- according to that finding. The author of the article never claims there is no review procedure. Instead, he cites what is a standard practice and shades it with ominous overtones.

The office assistant doesn't know where personnel files are located? So they do seniority, qualification, vacation and benefits how exactly? Is the author claiming there are no files or is he "just asking questions"? I call horse ****.

That's nothing but truther-grade logic -- using the author's own ignorance, appeals to authority and deceptive context-switching as a the path to a predetermined position.

That's not to say that FPD had a standard UOF review policy that was objectively maintained. The author never actually that claim, though.

 

[Mumbles]

Right. He's a good boy. He just likes to rob people sometimes.

False Dichotomy.

We have evidence of *one* robbery - and frankly, a fairly minor one at that. You don't get from one spot to "shoves a cop into his car, jumps in through the window, and then tries to grab a gun". Which is part of why I'm saying, wait for the independent investigation.

I use it regardless of race. When you rob a store, knock the shopkeeper out of the way and then turn around to intimidate him back inside while you walk out with his stuff, you're a thug, plain and simple.

You may want to use it that way. Consider what Richard Sherman said, when he was called a "thug" for yelling after winning a trip to the Superbowl, even though hockey players, and white celebrities like Justin Beiber, manage to avoid the term while acting far worse (much less guys like Ritchie Incognito - or even worse, the MMA Fighter War Machine). It's a racially-charged term now, whether you like it or not.

 

[jimbob]

That article is...well....confusing.

It's SOP for an officer to fill out his or her own use-of-force report. Who else could fill it out? These reports don't go into a personnel file, they are reviewed by someone in the chain (a department head for small forces or dedicated IA for larger ones). If the event requires disciplinary action, that report/finding stays with the officer -- according to that finding. The author of the article never claims there is no review procedure. Instead, he cites what is a standard practice and shades it with ominous overtones.

The office assistant doesn't know where personnel files are located? So they do seniority, qualification, vacation and benefits how exactly? Is the author claiming there are no files or is he "just asking questions"? I call horse ****.

That's nothing but truther-grade logic -- using the author's own ignorance, appeals to authority and deceptive context-switching as a the path to a predetermined position.

That's not to say that FPD had a standard UOF review policy that was objectively maintained. The author never actually that claim, though.

It is more than that - the exchange below implies that the police chief at the time was unaware of any systems.

“The officer himself could complete it and give it to the supervisor for his approval,” the prior chief, Thomas Moonier, testified in a deposition. “I would read it. It would be placed in my out basket, and my secretary would probably take it and put it with the case file.”

No copy was made for the officer’s personnel file.

“Everything involved in an incident would generally be with the police report,” Moonier said. “I don’t know what they maintain in personnel files.”

“Who was in charge of personnel files, of maintaining them?” Schottel asked.

“I have no idea,” Moonier said. “I believe City Hall, but I don’t know.”

Schottel focused on the date of the incident.
“On September 20th, 2009, was there any way to identify any officers that were subject of one or more citizens’ complaints?” he asked. “Not to my knowledge,” Moonier said.
“Was there any way to identify any officers who had completed several use-of-force reports?”

“I don’t recall.”

 

[Azrael 5]

Only just got onto this story and read some of the thread. On news this morning relatives of Brown are claiming he was on his knees surrendering when shot,whats the truth of this-by reading this thread not much!

 

[shuize]

We have evidence of *one* robbery - and frankly, a fairly minor one at that.

We must be living in different worlds. Grabbing stuff from behind a counter, knocking a shopkeeper out of the way, then turning around to intimidate him back in the store while walking away with his stuff is not "minor" -- it's textbook strong-arm robbery -- robbery in the second degree -- a class B felony (5 - 15 years) in Missouri. But, yeah, boys will be boys, right?

You may want to use it that way. Consider what Richard Sherman said, when he was called a "thug" for yelling after winning a trip to the Superbowl, even though hockey players, and white celebrities like Justin Beiber, manage to avoid the term while acting far worse (much less guys like Ritchie Incognito - or even worse, the MMA Fighter War Machine). It's a racially-charged term now, whether you like it or not.

Well, I may want to use it that way because that's what "thug" means. The term is practically synonymous with "robber." Both dictionary.com and Websters Online use "robber" or "robbery" in the definition or example sentence for the term "thug." Yelling alone (Richard Sherman) is not thuggery. Acting like a douche alone (Justin Beiber) is not thuggery. Beating the crap out of your ex-girlfriend (War Machine) is thug behavior. So is assaulting and robbing people (Michael Brown).

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/thug?s=t
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thug

 

[KatieG]

Why do you do that?

No one here at JREF would ever agree that that it would be justified to shoot Brown after he was on the ground.

If the officer fired at Brown after he was down, then that is clearly murder, and the officer will serve a lot of time.

The only exception possible involves Brown having a gun, which is clearly not the case.

I have seen no indication whatsoever that the officer executed a prone Brown with coup de gras shots.

EDIT: Besides, the autopsy will tell us a a lot about the shots, so why don't we just wait for it?

What do you think was in the gun the officer was firing at Michael Brown? I'll answer my question...bullets, the gun in the officer's hand was firing bullets. Bullets are generally deadly if they hit vital organs, like a brain or a heart.

 

[Monketi Ghost]

What do you think was in the gun the officer was firing at Michael Brown? I'll answer my question...bullets, the gun in the officer's hand was firing bullets. Bullets are generally deadly if they hit vital organs, like a brain or a heart.

What you've stated is obvious. Your point is not.

 

[KatieG]

What you've stated is obvious. Your point is not.

Read the post I'm replying too. Perhaps things will become clearer.

 

[Monketi Ghost]

Still missing it. Was it ever a question what is in the gun? Explain it carefully as if the point you were making isn't clear.