Teenager's Death Causes Chaos in Ferguson, Missouri

Care to explain what relation the robbery has to the shooting? Because, as I explained, according to eyewitness reports, there is no evidence to suggest it does.

 

I just thought it might be of interest.

Edit: Here is a relevant article, though: http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/17/6...e-tear-gas-and-riot-gear-as-tensions-flare-up[DOUBLEPOST=1408371504][/DOUBLEPOST]National guard has been sent in.

My mom and I were talking. While the video may not be related to the shooting, it showed that the guy was violent, and if he was that way with a clerk, what was he like with the police. Obviously, we don't know, but perhaps the police officer was defending himself. Either way, though, both my mom and I does agree the police officer overdid it.

The problem now is that people have turned this into a race issue rather than a police shooting issue. While peaceful protesting is fine, there's always one group or several groups that have to cause trouble by rioting, which the peaceful protestors are defending stores against. One peaceful protestor even told a rioter to go do it in a white neighborhood, though that doesn't really help matters.

 

Except that EVERY eyewitness account contradicts the officer's claims. Further, we have footage that alleges that there was no robbery. I'm not going to say for certain that it does, the video is too hard to make out for that, but it is evidence to consider.

However, while you're right that it could have affected how Brown acted towards Wilson, again, every eyewitness account contradicts that claim, it doesn't change that, even in the best possible version of events for him, Wilson is still guilty of either second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter.

As I said earlier, releasing information about the alleged robbery is nothing more than character assassination. That is why it just "happened" to be released at the same time as Wilson's name.

Except that it was a race issue from the start. Ferguson PD have been proven to be guilty of racial profiling with literally over 90% of arrests and traffic stops being against the black population, despite the fact that the white residents in the town are more likely to be breaking the law. Furthermore, we have obvious character assassination, an excessive response by police, even BEFORE last Sunday's riot, protesters attesting to being racially profiled and the case of Henry Davis, who was falsely arrested, beaten, then charged with destruction of property for BLEEDING ON THEIR UNIFORMS.

Whether you like it or not, this is about race. The outcry would have been far smaller had it only been a controversial shooting. This is the result of YEARS of racial tension between the people and a racist police force reaching a boiling point.

EDIT: CNN has just confirmed that the convenience store that Brown allegedly robbed NEVER filed a report about a robbery. Think about that for a moment.

 

"With great powers come great responsibilities".
Because the police is the police (a militia that has government support) they HAVE to show restraint, you can´t ask for restraint of citizens or bandits, but what makes the police a "valid force" is because they are restrained by the people/govern. When they abuse their "power" is just like a 17 year old boy beating on a 2 year old child.
When the police abuse their power they aren't valid anymore. On Brazil this very common as well (I guess everywhere), there were protests before the world cup that were heavily "suppressed" by the police, including shooting bystanders journalists etc..

 

But if the majority of people down in the south are black, how can it be racial profiling? I'm not saying the officer wasn't being racist, but I'm not saying he was, either.

Also, whatever Brown did to get shot gives every black person a bad name in the same way a police officer doing something like this gives all police officers a bad name. Just because police officers here and there are corrupt, doesn't mean they all are.

 

Only 63% of the town is black, but they account for over 90% of arrests. Are you honestly saying that 30% of the town's population is only guilty of less than 10% of the town's crime? Furthermore, it has been shown that white residents of the town are statistically more likely to be breaking the law than the black residents. Yes, the majority of the town is black, but these statistics show that there are serious problems with racial profiling.

Every single witness says that the only thing that started the confrontation was Brown and his friend walking down the street. Are black people not allowed to walk down the street?

Also, stop with the "NOT ALL POLICE" ****. WE KNOW. This isn't about good cops. Just because they're there doesn't excuse the bad cops. We don't need you to say "but these cops are ok" because WE KNOW.

 

...

 

...

 

Even if it should be expected that there would be more arrests solely based on numbers, there is no reason that the crime rate of black people within Ferguson should be close to 90% of all crimes. If it was 60%, that would be more understandable as it's more representative of the black to white population there; 90% of all crimes is incredibly disproportionate.

Unfortunately, this isn't a very sound example because in a 99:1 ratio like that, of course you would get the answer you are expecting/arguing for solely because it is heavily skewed into your favor (more blacks would be arrested because there are more of them).

This I could believe if it were about a TV show or something, but these are first person accounts -- primary sources, of Mike Brown's shooting. They are probably the most accurate sources of evidence we will ever get outside of a video recording or Mike Brown himself.[/quote]

It is proof because the numbers do not match up. There is no way that 60% of a population is committing 90% of the crimes, nor should they encompass 90% of the arrests. At the risk of presenting anecdotal evidence, my city school district is a majority black, about 60% or so. However, in the 2009-2010 school year, only 9% of black males graduated across the district. Is that number turn out not at the very least a cause of some suspicion about the system? Is that not a reason to ask "why are these black men not graduating?"

In the case of Ferguson, the question is "Why is the black population getting arrested so frequently?" The answer to that is that the system is inherently flawed and is one that is systematically racist, not because of any individual's decision, but because that is how it's been since racism was overtly prevalent and has since stayed even if our views as a culture have, for the most part, changed.

It's not about any individual police officer, though. It is about the societal & cultural structure of the police, and why it is bad. Of course there are good police officers, like there are good white people, or good men, or good heterosexual people. The meaning behind statements of "Police/White People/Men/Het People are bad" is that the societal/cultural elevation & priviledges that those people receive over those who are disenfranchised by our society that is the real issue. I know where you're cming from, for the longest time I was confused about it too (and those statements still make me kinda uncomfortable), but that is what people mean by it.

If someone is treating a police officer ****** despite them (officer) being a good person & proving that they are, then yeah, that is where that viewpoint is wrong because it is discriminatory. But the mass general statements like that are about the society, not any individual.

 

I remember as a kid the L.A. riots in the 1990's...

Which happened due to the fact that an African American, Rodney King, was beaten to near death by police officers, all white, publicly for resisting arrest for speeding or something. He did have a history of violence, I do admit, but an all-white jury, despite major publicity of the event on all the news, on all the newspapers, on everything commenting how wrong the cops were, including blow by blow detail on a camera, declared all the cops innocent.

Rioting happened for five days after that, some of the worst rioting in history. Mostly by African Americans.

I am not saying either side was right for what happened, King was noted for a history of violence.

Here's the main issue with what is different between Ferguson and L.A.

The rioting should stop, I do agree... If there's rioting, it should stop. If it's people walking down the streets protesting without doing anything OTHER than that, say throwing rocks, stabbing, knives, looting, shooting... What mobs CAN AND WILL do in a mob mentality, let them protest.

A guy on crutches was shoved around in one of these peaceful protests before being arrested, a guy who couldn't stand on his own two legs. Was shoved around by FULL GROWN police officers, trained officers, mind you... And thrown in jail for protesting peacefully.

I have recently had an encounter with three cops, and note: My last time working with cops was horrible. In front of a dozen witnesses claiming otherwise, they claimed a foreign worker who was watching me through a window, making lewd gestures, and following teenage girls home in his own car, and going into my workplace and trying to drag me over the counter for god knows what...

Said that it was a "Cultural misunderstanding" and: "He doesn't understand how to get women in this country." And blamed me for the whole incident in the police report that really pissed me off because they said he was just hugging me when he was trying to drag me off and I felt "uncomfortable". And again, in front of half a dozen witnesses who saw his behavior themselves and testified with my story that I was correct...

Three cops stopped me walking home when I was having a severe panic attack, all three promised legal action if I wanted to press charges due to my condition at work. In five minutes, they promised me something that no one else outside the office did: A way to stop the harassment without quitting. One gave me her card and promised to do something if I asked. With that, I finally got the leverage to turn around the situation.

There are good cops and bad cops out there... Ones who actually help people and ones who blame victims for the crime, beat people for resisting arrest to near death, shoot unarmed people dead, and beat people who are trying to peacefully protesting. But the bad ones have to be ousted, or we might as well go back to the deep South in the sixties with what happened back then.

If you really want to see how bad a peaceful protest can end, look up the African American protests of the 1960's... If you can stomach it... Most of it is too gruesome to think about, let alone see.

 

Watching the news with Anderson Cooper; new stories are emerging saying Michael Brown bum-rushed the officer.

Officer Wilson, Officer Wilson's friend, and some other people are saying that there was a struggle between Michael Brown and Officer Wilson, and at one point Michael Brown was going for Officer Wilson's hip area to grab his gun, and that's when the shots happened.

A friend of Michael Brown's said they were running and Michael Brown told him to keep running, but he hid behind the first trooper vehicle that appeared, I think is what he said.

Investigations are still underway, and the auto-biopsy was only one part of them.

 

It doesn't matter how the person died...

The first amendment makes it clear that you are granted freedom of speech. Same for religion and press... That's why the Ku Klux Klan lasts as long as they do because of the first amendment... Same for cults, religions, etc... Unless the supreme court or 75% of Congress changes it, it's still the same thing.

These people are not rioting, they're not throwing stones, they're not shooting guns, which is another amendment, The right to bear arms... They are marching down the streets in peaceful protest or at least not doing anything to the cops. And the cops are beating them to keep their mouths shut.

Here's the thing, though:

ANYONE, ANYTIME, CAN PROTEST SOMETHING PEACEFULLY.

Granted, the middle of the night bathing in a fountain to express freedom and probably how drunk you are does legally count for an arrest or a warning. I know, I saw it happen.

But all the same: If there was no shooting going on, if they decided: "It's unfair how they treat us... Lets protest." By the first amendment, they can. The same reason a KKK member can walk around a public place and hand out pamphlets. Or a Jahova's Witness can bang on your door non-stop to try and sell you stuff as long as it's public property.

It's their legal right within the United states.

It's NOT legal for the cops to come in and throw tear gas, arrest people and bully them for them not doing anything wrong other than protests.

Iit doesn't matter BEFORE, it's the NOW that is causing the stir.

 

...

 

...

 

The only account that alleges that Brown rushed Wilson was Wilson's friend, who is very much not a reliable source as she was not an eyewitness and is a biased source. If I remember correctly, even the police report does not say that he rushed Wilson.

Furthermore, every eyewitness account contradicts the claim that Brown went for the gun. And even if he DID go for the gun, Wilson was legally obligated to cease fire as soon as Brown started to surrender. On top of this, Wilson failed to perform standard police procedure. He did not call of backup as soon as Brown got away, despite shots being fired, he did not call of medical assistance, despite shots fired, he did not call in that shots were fired. When bystanders called 911 to report the shooting, dispatch was completely unaware that there was a shooting in the first place and, after Wilson confirmed that there was a shooting, he failed to mention that he was the shooter.

Every eyewitness account agrees with this.

The autopsy that was released is the second autopsy, done by a third-party at the request of Brown's family. Experts have said that, while it impossible to tell what order the shots hit in and that all shots hit from the front, the body shows zero signs of a struggle and the positioning of one of the shots on the arm agrees with Dorian Johnson's (the key witness) account that Brown was surrendering with his hands up. We have not seen the results of the first autopsy conducted by the St. Louis county police, which is suspicious and we are waiting for the results of a third autopsy.

 

There's also something called: Reasonable force.

Not only for the police officers, but people too. If someone breaks into your home and it's boobytrapped while you're gone, and their legs are blown off by a shot gun. (True story in my law book.) They can and will have the right to sue for damages to the robber. Reason: The person being robbed wasn't in danger at the time of the robbery. They cannot set up something to cause damage to said robber unless they're in danger themselves.

If the robber walks in with a gun and you're on the other side of the door with a gun and blow his legs off. Yes, you aren't held responsible because you were in danger. It's the same for a cop: If someone attacks, armed or unarmed, they are allowed to use reasonable force, meaning enough to bring the person down without going excessive. I.E.: The Rodney King beating... If they surrender, the cop isn't allowed to keep on going including shooting the said perpetrator.

It's law, it's what all cops and people have to follow.

And in any case, the cop would at least be suspended for his actions. If not worse. Even IF he lost his head. Due to the fact that he shot someone surrendering and made a poor judgement call.

As for the press, they're under the first amendment too... And should be allowed to be left alone.

I see a lot of heads rolling for this.

 

In the US Supreme Court case Graham v. Connor, it was decided that the force that the police can use must match the situation. In regards to the Brown shooting, as I stated multiple times in this thread, Wilson was legally obligated to cease fire the moment Brown surrendered. Based on the evidence and eyewitness accounts, he is guilty of either second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter because he had no right to use deadly force once Brown attempted to surrender.

And this is based on the BEST POSSIBLE version of events for Wilson. In any other version of the events, he is outright guilty of second degree murder as his attack was not premeditated, but his intent was to kill.

As for the press, we have another journalist arrest, but he was quickly released and immediately went back to work, the media pen the police have set up was in a position to keep the press away from the action, allegedly to keep them safe, but like with the no-fly zone (which has been reestablished today), is more likely to censor them.

So many first amendment violations this week.....

 

...

 

The ACLU is sure as hell going to be earning their paychecks for a while.