Michael Brown shooting and civil unrest Goes Forth

[aceluby]

And while people under the stress of being shot at don't always think straight I do get confused by the narrative where-in Brown attacks an officer, decides it isn't working out, runs away and then thinks "maybe a run up will help" or "I'm going to try the punching plan again"

It's because the narrative makes no logical sense. I've said this multiple times in this thread. Who gets shot, runs away, then 30 ft away with a gun pointed at them decides to bull rush.

And yet this is the scenario the cop presents and is apparently the scenario that makes the most sense to the Fox News crowd.

[aceluby]

Michael Brown was a suspect of a robbery. That, by video evidence, he clear committed. But that's completely independent to the events that caused the shooting.

I have said many times in this thread that I have no problems with an investigation in to Brown's death. For any kid of any racial background to lose his life to some one who is supposed to protect the public is absolutely horrible. What I object to are the claims that there is a racial motive. IMO, it's distracted from the case

MB was not a suspect of robbery. You want to talk about something that's distracted from the case, it's that, and yet you continually bring it out like you have some new information. It has zero bearing on anything.

[Altherion]

Has this statistic been quoted before? Every 28 hours a black man is killed by a police officer, security guard or vigilante, 313 in 2013.

That is actually a surprisingly low number. Take a look at the FBI's murder victims table. In 2013, there were 5352 male, black murder victims so the 313 killed by law enforcement are less than 6% of those killed by someone else. Or, to put it in your dramatic language, a black man is killed by somebody other than law enforcement every hour and 40 minutes. I don't see a table correlating the victims and offenders (except this one which is for a subset of the data), but given that table and the offender data, it is a pretty safe bet that this "someone else" is more likely than not to be another black male. Thus, that 313 is pretty surprising.

[theprincethatwasntpromised]

It's because the narrative makes no logical sense. I've said this multiple times in this thread. Who gets shot, runs away, then 30 ft away with a gun pointed at them decides to bull rush.

And yet this is the scenario the cop presents and is apparently the scenario that makes the most sense to the Fox News crowd.

Witnesses have also told that story.

[theprincethatwasntpromised]

MB was not a suspect of robbery. You want to talk about something that's distracted from the case, it's that, and yet you continually bring it out like you have some new information. It has zero bearing on anything.

The cops were looking for the guy that robbed the store. That happened...

http://www.mediaite.com/online/audio-reveals-fatal-encounter-leading-to-michael-browns-death-took-90-seconds/

"According to the records, obtained through the state’s Sunshine Laws, dispatch first reported a “stealing in progress” at 11:53 AM local time, accurately describing the strong-armed robbery Brown committed shortly before his death. Wilson, who was out responding to another call, called in at noon asking if they needed help. Two minutes later, he called for backup and asked for another car to come to his location. In between those two calls, Wilson had asked Brown and his friend, Dorian Johnson, to stop walking in the middle of the street. “They kept walking, and he then realized that Brown matched the description of the suspect in the stealing call,” the paper reported.

What happened next varies by witness accounts, but the Post-Dispatch recounted the contents of the call:

Forty-one seconds after Wilson’s call, unit 25 reported that he was about to arrive at Wilson’s location, saying he was “going out on Canfield” and accompanied by the sound of his racing engine.

Forty-eight seconds later, another officer had arrived or was about to, announcing, “22’s out.”

At 12:03 p.m., an eyewitness to the shooting Tweeted: “I JUST SAW SOMEONE DIE OMFG.”

If his smartphone’s clock, or Twitter’s, agreed with the clock on dispatch records, Brown was killed less than 61 seconds after the dispatcher acknowledged that Wilson had stopped two men."

[TerraPrime]

Michael Brown was a suspect of a robbery.

I don't think Brown was even a suspect at that point because the store owner and the employee who was shoved had not filed a report. Ergo, no crime, no investigation, no suspect.

Further, the Police Chief had given interviews where he had asserted that Wilson didn't stop Brown on account of the alleged robbery. This is confusing because that seems to be the claim now by either Wilson, or his attorneys, or by his internet supporters.

That, by video evidence, he clear committed.

The video showed that Brown made an attempt to pay but seemed to have insufficient fund for the amount he wishes to purchase. He then placed a few of the items back on the shelf. The physical altercation happened after than as he left the store. In the video I saw, the clerk placed his hand on Brown first before Brown shoved him. Maybe you saw a shortened clip and not the full video?

But that's completely independent to the events that caused the shooting.

I only wish it were so. But people brought up the issue when they described Brown as a "criminal." I take it that you now concede that the term is inappropriate? Either way, it is relevant because some people believe that Brown was indeed a criminal and that colors their interpretation of the events.

So, my statement of fact is accurate - Brown had not been convicted of a crime. In fact, he had not been arrested not indicted, let alone tried and convicted. He might not even have been a suspect depending on the timeline of the reporting by the convenience store clerk. People who continue to use the term "criminal" to describe Brown are either ignorant of the facts, which can be easily remedied, or they don't care about the facts in the attempt to make Brown appear less sympathetic. Is there a third possibility here?

What I object to are the claims that there is a racial motive. IMO, it's distracted from the case

If your true interest is really about seein a fair investigation, then are you upset at Wilson for flagrantly violating procedure in not filing and incident report? Did his failure to follow standard procedure designed to ensure proper investigation make you question his integrity? Are you also angry at the Ferguson police for releasing the convenience store video because as you said, it shouldn't have been a factor in determining whether the fatal shooting was justified or not?

Finally, this is the point where we disagree fundamentally. Racism is assuredly at work in the event of Brown's death, based in the historical record and the pattern of facts in this case. Young black men being detained more frequently with less proven cause for the initial detainment is a reported pattern at Feeguson with data collected not by the Al Sharptons or Jessie Jacksons of the world, but by a law enacted by the State of Missouri. Brown being stopped in the first place, which led to the confrontation that ended with his death, must be explained in the context of a racially biased law enforcement environment in Feeguson. To ignore the racial issues underlying this case would be analogous to examining one death row case involving a black convict while ignoring the the racial biases in the jurisprudence system that leads to that conviction in the first place.

Feeguson is actually a rare case where we have statistics showing racial biases against black people taking place in the law enforcement of the town. It should not be this hard to see that it is a factor in several aspects of the case.

[Wee baby Shamus]

Do you two ever wonder why in police press releases they no longer say that they had apprehended criminals even when the arrests were made during the progression of the crime? You know, the part where they refer to the person being arrested as "the suspect" isntead of "the criminal?"

Re: Wilson's racism

I don't have a strong opinion on whether Wilson is particularly racist, or not. I think he could have carried out the actions he did that day without being a racist, at least in ways that significantly exceeds the racism that we all harbor. So unless I see clear indicator that he's above-the-average racist, I am not keen on condemning him on a fault that we all have.

The portions of this case that do speak to racism are the institutional issues, like how young black men are systemically treated as suspects and handled accordingly, though racial profiling actions and other more overt actions; or like the disparate police enforcement rates against black residents in Ferguson, which is actually data collected by the State of Missouri itself; or like the Police Department's handling of the protests at Ferguson. The individual racism of one Daren Wilson is really not what I would consider as important, in comparison.

The answer to your question is yes I know why those words are used.

My point is that we now know after the shooting of Brown that he was indeed the suspect of the robbery for smokes so there no need to use the word allegedly.

[Larry of the Lawn]

The answer to your question is yes I know why those words are used.

My point is that we now know after the shooting of Brown that he was indeed the suspect of the robbery for smokes so there no need to use the word allegedly.

Thanks for reaffirming that although you can probably give me a great Webster definition of it, you still don't understand what allegedly means. Inigio Montoya memes and shit.

[Wee baby Shamus]

Thanks for reaffirming that although you can probably give me a great Webster definition of it, you still don't understand what allegedly means. Inigio Montoya memes and shit.

Ok, sure whatever.

Since there is video proof of Brown committing the robbery and since he is dead and therefore won't go to court and be convicted of the robbery there is no need to use the word allegedly.

But to please your schematics. Yes the word allegedly is used before a conviction has taken place.

Is that better for you?

[Wise Fool]

So, if you're killed before you go to trial, you're guilty?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

So, if you're killed before you go to trial, you're guilty?

Yup.

http://s1336.photobucket.com/user/Lumpy67/media/Judge_Dredd_01_zps2c401a54.jpg.html

[theprincethatwasntpromised]

I don't think Brown was even a suspect at that point because the store owner and the employee who was shoved had not filed a report. Ergo, no crime, no investigation, no suspect.

Further, the Police Chief had given interviews where he had asserted that Wilson didn't stop Brown on account of the alleged robbery. This is confusing because that seems to be the claim now by either Wilson, or his attorneys, or by his internet supporters.

The video showed that Brown made an attempt to pay but seemed to have insufficient fund for the amount he wishes to purchase. He then placed a few of the items back on the shelf. The physical altercation happened after than as he left the store. In the video I saw, the clerk placed his hand on Brown first before Brown shoved him. Maybe you saw a shortened clip and not the full video?

I only wish it were so. But people brought up the issue when they described Brown as a "criminal." I take it that you now concede that the term is inappropriate? Either way, it is relevant because some people believe that Brown was indeed a criminal and that colors their interpretation of the events.

So, my statement of fact is accurate - Brown had not been convicted of a crime. In fact, he had not been arrested not indicted, let alone tried and convicted. He might not even have been a suspect depending on the timeline of the reporting by the convenience store clerk. People who continue to use the term "criminal" to describe Brown are either ignorant of the facts, which can be easily remedied, or they don't care about the facts in the attempt to make Brown appear less sympathetic. Is there a third possibility here?

If your true interest is really about seein a fair investigation, then are you upset at Wilson for flagrantly violating procedure in not filing and incident report? Did his failure to follow standard procedure designed to ensure proper investigation make you question his integrity? Are you also angry at the Ferguson police for releasing the convenience store video because as you said, it shouldn't have been a factor in determining whether the fatal shooting was justified or not?

Finally, this is the point where we disagree fundamentally. Racism is assuredly at work in the event of Brown's death, based in the historical record and the pattern of facts in this case. Young black men being detained more frequently with less proven cause for the initial detainment is a reported pattern at Feeguson with data collected not by the Al Sharptons or Jessie Jacksons of the world, but by a law enacted by the State of Missouri. Brown being stopped in the first place, which led to the confrontation that ended with his death, must be explained in the context of a racially biased law enforcement environment in Feeguson. To ignore the racial issues underlying this case would be analogous to examining one death row case involving a black convict while ignoring the the racial biases in the jurisprudence system that leads to that conviction in the first place.

Feeguson is actually a rare case where we have statistics showing racial biases against black people taking place in the law enforcement of the town. It should not be this hard to see that it is a factor in several aspects of the case.

Did you listen to the audio? The call went out about the robbery. Wilson asked the other officers if they needed help. I concede he was not convicted of a crime, but to deny that he committed one is ridiculous on your part. It would seem that you are ignorant of the facts, or just don't want to look at them.

I think if any anger should be directed, it should be towards the media for creating this gentle giant narrative. Immediately, the Ferguson PD was under fire because of this bs. I think the video of Brown stealing was released to show that the narrative was not even close to the truth. It definitely says something about the character of Brown.

Once again, I will say that this was not racially motivated. I doubt Wilson's reasoning for moving the two out of the road was due to race. It probably had more to do with them standing in the damn road! But people who want to inject race into this will find a way, even with nothing to substantiate it.

[NestorMakhnosLovechild]

In common, every day usage, the standard for calling someone a "criminal" is that you believe they committed a crime. In common, every day usage, the standard is not that they were convicted in a Court of law beyond a reasonable doubt. This is something that most people do, on all sides of the political spectrum.

For example, feminists encourage people to accept the claims of purported rape victims at face value even though in the vast majority of cases such claims do not result in convictions for rape for the men accused of being rapists.

[TrueMetis]

So, if you're killed before you go to trial, you're guilty?

Isn't that basically the justification for stand your ground laws?

[Wee baby Shamus]

So, if you're killed before you go to trial, you're guilty?

In this case where there is video proof of the "suspect" committing the crime yes.

In 99.999999999% of all other cases, no.

But go ahead and play your "what if" games.

I'm assuming that the people who are debating me right now have either not seen the video proof of Brown committing the robbery or are debating just for the f*ck of it.

My bet is that it is the latter.

[TrueMetis]

In common, every day usage, the standard for calling someone a "criminal" is that you believe they committed a crime. In common, every day usage, the standard is not that they were convicted in a Court of law beyond a reasonable doubt. This is something that most people do, on all sides of the political spectrum.

For example, feminists encourage people to accept the claims of purported rape victims at face value even though in the vast majority of cases such claims do not result in convictions for rape for the men accused of being rapists.

And that's fucking stupid, like when people use the word theory to mean guess and you have people talking about how evolution is "just a theory". Common usage doesn't mean it's good usage.

[theprincethatwasntpromised]

So, if you're killed before you go to trial, you're guilty?

Brown will never be convicted of being guilty. Technically, he was guilty when he committed the crime, before he was shot.

[aceluby]

So have they at least charged the friend as an accomplice to a robbery?

[theprincethatwasntpromised]

In this case where there is video proof of the "suspect" committing the crime yes.

In 99.999999999% of all other cases, no.

But go ahead and play your "what if" games.

I'm assuming that the people who are debating me right now have either not seen the video proof of Brown committing the robbery or are debating just for the f*ck of it.

My bet is that it is the latter.

Definitely the latter. They deny the obvious proof and excuse it because Brown wasn't charged and convicted. By their own logic, wouldn't Wilson also be considered innocent? Uh oh...

[theprincethatwasntpromised]

So have they at least charged the friend as an accomplice to a robbery?

Was he an accomplice?