Michael Brown Case

[cosmicalstorm]

He does not exactly strike me as a innocent little angel. Let's hope there is video or autopsy that provides us with a good idea of what happened.

[Terralthra]

If, you know, that is actually him in that footage.

[Patroklos]

http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Another- ... 89771.html

The police ease up and we get more rioting overnight. One shooting victim in the hospital (not shot by police), one injured officer hit with a brick

The Good: There is video of some protesters blocking entrances to stores to protect them from looters.I am not sure why they were out protesting in the middle of the night though.

The Bad: Police in large part did not intervene apparently on orders not to. No doubt them deciding PR is better than doing their jobs.

Would this have happened with the police out in force as they were before?

[Alyrium Denryle]

http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Another- ... 89771.html

The police ease up and we get more rioting overnight. One shooting victim in the hospital (not shot by police), one injured officer hit with a brick

The Good: There is video of some protesters blocking entrances to stores to protect them from looters.I am not sure why they were out protesting in the middle of the night though.

The Bad: Police in large part did not intervene apparently on orders not to. No doubt them deciding PR is better than doing their jobs.

Would this have happened with the police out in force as they were before?

Looting was going on before. The only difference is that more police brutality would have occurred. Most of the looters are apparently from out of town. Opportunists who go in to loot (linked earlier in this thread) while the police are otherwise distracted, using the legitimate protests as cover.

[Terralthra]

http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Another- ... 89771.html

The police ease up and we get more rioting overnight. One shooting victim in the hospital (not shot by police), one injured officer hit with a brick

The Good: There is video of some protesters blocking entrances to stores to protect them from looters.I am not sure why they were out protesting in the middle of the night though.

The Bad: Police in large part did not intervene apparently on orders not to. No doubt them deciding PR is better than doing their jobs.

Would this have happened with the police out in force as they were before?

The police were out and were dispersing crowds throughout. When the MHP saw protestors and community members talking looters down and blocking them from stores, they stayed in their cars and let the community handle it.

[Gaidin]

The Bad: Police in large part did not intervene apparently on orders not to. No doubt them deciding PR is better than doing their jobs.

What article are you reading? Your article says they did intervene to disperse the crowd. They also had to fire a single tear gas canister last night on a particularly unruly crowd. Care to reassess your statement?

Your link

FERGUSON, Mo. (KMOV.com) -- Multiple police agencies were called to Ferguson early Saturday morning following reports of violence.
About 200 protesters clashed with police at the height of the disturbance at the Ferguson Market, where they began looting. Police said they tried to set the store on fire.
St. Louis County Police tell News 4 there has been more looting of stores near West Florissant. According to police, a liquor store, an electronics store, and a beauty supply store were looted,
About 100 police officers in riot gear moved in to disperse the crowd. One officer was injured by a thrown brick or rock.
Download KMOV News app: iPhone | Android
Police said there was also at least one shooting victim rushed to Christian Northeast Hospital. No other details about that shooting have been released, other than it took place at the intersection of West Florissant and Canfield Drive.
Photos: Computer | Mobile
At one point, protesters locked their arms and turned their backs to police.
There are reports that peaceful protesters, including Alderman Antonio French, attempted to calm tensions. Groups were seen blocking entrances to local stores to keep looters from entering.
There are no official reports of arrests being made. As looting occurred, police dressed in riot gear mainly stood and watched, apparently under orders not to engage.
News 4's Russell Kinsaul reported police arrived on scene around 6:15 a.m. to make sure only authorized people were inside businesses as well as clearing parking lots.
Community members also arrived to start the clean-up process for businesses damaged by looters.

[Patroklos]

No, as it is clearly stated in the article I posted and that you yourself just quoted:

There are no official reports of arrests being made. As looting occurred, police dressed in riot gear mainly stood and watched, apparently under orders not to engage.

[Gaidin]

And that wasn't the only thing happening through the town, Mr. The Police Did Not Intervene. As your own article states a case where they did intervene. With a crowd.

[Simon_Jester]

If, you know, that is actually him in that footage.

This is a relevant question. On the one hand, it would very much surprise me if the Ferguson police were stupid enough to present a video of a robbery they know Brown didn't commit.

On the other hand... well, two points.

One, the Ferguson police are pretty damn stupid in their handling of this, so there's a tiny tiny chance they'd present a fake, footage of a crime from another day or a crime that they faked up, and hope nobody would find out. Unlikely.

Two, the Ferguson police might believe there's a match even if there isn't. Because I could see the two men captured in the footage being described as "Big black guy in a white T-shirt, accompanied by another black guy with dreadlocks." Then some idiot in the Ferguson police department goes "oh, hey, the guy we just shot was big, and the guy with him had dreadlocks." And yet this could be coincidence (there's got to be more than one large man in the neighborhood, and white T-shirts are being worn by practically everyone in town given that it's the middle of August).

So basically, I'm still open to the idea that that isn't actually Brown in the video. Even if it is, it doesn't matter because Brown was not being arrested on charges of robbery. Clearly he was being detained (because otherwise he'd be free to leave), but the only 'charge' the Ferguson police have mentioned against him boils down to "crossing the street in a suspicious manner."

And there is something very wrong with the idea that it's just business as usual to drive up to people on the street for "crossing the street in a suspicious manner," and then wind up shooting them.

[Patroklos]

And that wasn't the only thing happening through the town, Mr. The Police Did Not Intervene. As your own article states a case where they did intervene. With a crowd.

You can quibble if you want to but no reasonable person will ignore the statement in the source they themselves quoted that was the conclusion statement of the article. There may have been some isolated police action but the obvious point of the report is that for all intents and purposes the police as a whole did not act.

But I'll play by your rules, if you want this to mean the police as a whole didn't stand by and watch because a few did something then the protesters all rioted and looted because a few did. Take your pick.

[Terralthra]

And that wasn't the only thing happening through the town, Mr. The Police Did Not Intervene. As your own article states a case where they did intervene. With a crowd.

You can quibble if you want to but no reasonable person will ignore the statement in the source they themselves quoted that was the conclusion statement of the article. There may have been some isolated police action but the obvious point of the report is that for all intents and purposes the police as a whole did not act.

But I'll play by your rules, if you want this to mean the police as a whole didn't stand by and watch because a few did something then the protesters all rioted and looted because a few did. Take your pick.

You're a fucking idiot. The vast majority of the town was peaceful protest, with isolated instigation of rowdiness, dispersed by police action (as is pointed out in your link), and occasional looting, which the police refrained from intervening because the protestors themselves stood in front of the stores and prevented looters from looting them.

[Patroklos]

Your a fucking idiot, as that's exactly what I said. I even broke both of things out as bullets. Learn to fucking read and when you then understand your actual disagreement is with Gaidan respond to him intelligently.

It's spelled out for you as the god damned conclusion of the whole article you cherry picking idiots.

[Borgholio]

State of Emergency declared and curfew now being enforced.

http://www.wisn.com/national/looting-co ... s/27528310

[Terralthra]

Your a fucking idiot, as that's exactly what I said. I even broke both of things out as bullets. Learn to fucking read and when you then understand your actual disagreement is with Gaidan respond to him intelligently.

It's spelled out for you as the god damned conclusion of the whole article you cherry picking idiots.

"Final sentence" is not "conclusion". Your post said "the police eased up and there was rioting", and your later post said "the police as a whole did not act." Both of these statements are incorrect.

Additionally, the fact that you reused an insult I used, but managed to misspell it, is impressive inasmuch as something can be impressive in demonstrating an absence of a quality.

[Patroklos]

Actually they are both completely correct and I have demonstrated this multiple times now. Your ignorance is not my concern, you have been led to water.

Oh no I spent more time being accurate in facts rather than spell checking internet insults! Perhaps you can spend more time reading and understanding rather than flaming and you can be relevant to the conversation again.

[Terralthra]

The police eased up and there was demonstrably less rioting, violence, and looting than on previous nights when they were in their wannabe soldier gear, as the events of Thursday made perfectly clear. The tension level and slight outbreaks of violence Friday were in direct response to the Ferguson PD's release of an inflammatory, irrelevant piece of character assassination against the slain teenager, rather than releasing (as the FOIA request demanded), the incident report on the shooting.

The police as a whole acted in several places to disperse potentially violent crowds throughout the night, but they did not act in those particular instances of looting, where community involvement and non-violent protestors stopped the looting and guarded the buildings against the few instigators and looters. As for why the police did not engage in the looting cases, I'd bet it's because the police don't want to get involved in a confrontation with minimally-armed civilians over property damage, when - as stated previously - the presence of an armed police force inherently escalates a situation and increases the risk of violence against human beings, espeically when there are community leaders on the ground already there trying to defuse the situation.

Hopefully fucktard will leave the thread so we can get back to the topic at hand, to wit:

Police in Ferguson released a video tape allegedly showing slain teen Michael Brown robbing a store even though the Justice Department warned that doing so could inflame racial tensions, CNN is reporting.
Ferguson cops had wanted to release the video on Thursday but held off when federal officials asked them not to release the tape, an unnamed law enforcement official told CNN. That tape allegedly showed Brown stealing cigars from a convenience store before a police officer shot the unarmed 18-year-old in the street last weekend.

Despite holding off Thursday, Ferguson police still decided to release the tape Friday over the Justice Department's objections, according to CNN.

The Justice Department may have been correct about the effect the tape would have.

After a period of relative calm on Thursday night, protests got ugly again on Friday after police released the tape of Brown and revealed that he was a suspect in a robbery the day he was killed last weekend. Police may have made the situation even worse when they revealed later Friday that the officer who killed Brown did not even know he was a robbery suspect — a detail that suggests the convenience-store tape isn't relevant to the shooting.

Brown's family released a statement Friday declaring they were "beyond outraged" at the "character assassination" of their son.

The killing of the unarmed teen in broad daylight on Saturday, Aug. 9 sparked outrage in Ferguson, a city of 21,000 that's a suburb of St. Louis. The city is 67% black but only three members of the 53-member police force there are African-American. Tensions between the local police and community members have likely been simmering for decades, and they erupted into angry protests after Brown's death.

Members of the Ferguson police and St. Louis County police responded to those protests with riot gear, tear gas, and police dogs — a display that has started a national conversation about America's increasingly militarized police forces. Local police were also widely criticized for a lack of transparency about the shooting and for arresting prominent journalists who were covering its aftermath.

The situation began to improve, albeit briefly, after the state's governor, Jay Nixon, relieved local cops Thursday and brought in the state's highway patrol to police the protests. That patrol was led by Capt. Ron Johnson, an African-American and a native of Ferguson, who encouraged members of the patrol to mingle with protesters.

[Patroklos]

The police eased up and there was demonstrably less rioting, violence, and looting than on previous nights when they were in their wannabe soldier gear, as the events of Thursday made perfectly clear.

And this is how we know you are illiterate. I never once said that easing up caused violence, I noted the simple fact that they did ease up and there was more violence above and beyond what had taken place place when they were being criticized for militarizing the situation.

That's a simple fact you will have to accept.

I then asked the question if this would have happened without them easing up. A question, not a statement..

The tension level and slight outbreaks of violence Friday were in direct response to the Ferguson PD's release of an inflammatory, irrelevant piece of character assassination against the slain teenager, rather than releasing (as the FOIA request demanded), the incident report on the shooting.

Perhaps, but the irrelevance of Brown's previous supposed actions has not stopped others from declaring him assaulting a police officer to be impossible because he was previously as clean as the driven snow. That goes both ways.

Also you now have to provide proof that most recent looting and vandalism was caused by that release and nothing else. Good luck.

The police as a whole acted in several places to disperse potentially violent crowds throughout the night, but they did not act in those particular instances of looting, where community involvement and non-violent protestors stopped the looting and guarded the buildings against the few instigators and looters. As for why the police did not engage in the looting cases, I'd bet it's because the police don't want to get involved in a confrontation with minimally-armed civilians over property damage, when - as stated previously - the presence of an armed police force inherently escalates a situation and increases the risk of violence against human beings, espeically when there are community leaders on the ground already there trying to defuse the situation.

Those are great opinions, it is all irrelevant when it is reported as fact that police "mainly" did not intervene. I realize you don't understand English very well as this conversation has proven but that means at least the majority, probably a significant one. So just like the Senate is Democratic despite being close to half Republican when discussing what the police in Ferguson did as a whole it is irrelevant what a small number of them might have done otherwise. The police "mainly" stood by.

And please stop making shit up. Nobody has reported that the protesters were able to stop in full the looting and vandalism going on or that their efforts negated the need for police action either before or during the violence. It's great they helped and they probably did some good but it's the job of police to do that. Whether you like it or not the police didn't do their job.

Hopefully fucktard will leave the thread so we can get back to the topic at hand, to wit.

Tail between your legs, pouting on your way home...

[Terralthra]

The police eased up and there was demonstrably less rioting, violence, and looting than on previous nights when they were in their wannabe soldier gear, as the events of Thursday made perfectly clear.

And this is how we know you are illiterate. I never once said that easing up caused violence, I noted the simple fact that they did ease up and there was more violence above and beyond what had taken place place when they were being criticized for militarizing the situation.

That's a simple fact you will have to accept.

I then asked the question if this would have happened without them easing up. A question, not a statement..

Your accusations of my illiteracy might carry more weight if you weren't functionally unable to tell the difference between Thursday and Friday. The changover from soldier wannabe St. Louis County Police to protect-and-serve Missouri Highway Patrol occurred Thursday. You know, not yesterday, but the day BEFORE yesterday. Thursday was markedly and universally reported as a day of peaceful, non-violent protest and demonstration.

Friday, the Ferguson PD released a load of non-relevant information attempting to characterize Mike Brown as a robber, which obviously means he deserves extralegal execution, right? The protests increase in tension, the MHP come out in riot gear (actual riot gear, you know, pads and shields) to disperse larger groups, with tear gas and flares being used to control movements and keep numbers manageable.

So your question is essentially asking "Is it possible that rather than being incited by blatant character assassination Friday morning, instigators who turned to looting and violence late Friday night were inspired by the eased-down police enforcement of the day before, even though police in riot gear were present when they turned to looting and violence?"

If you really want to ask that question, go ahead, but it really seems like you have basic facts and causation twisted around to support a leading question which only serves to reinforce your own biases.

The tension level and slight outbreaks of violence Friday were in direct response to the Ferguson PD's release of an inflammatory, irrelevant piece of character assassination against the slain teenager, rather than releasing (as the FOIA request demanded), the incident report on the shooting.

Perhaps, but the irrelevance of Brown's previous supposed actions had not stopped others from declaring him assaulting a police officer was impossible because he was previously as clean as the driven snow. That goes both ways.

Also you now have to provide proof that most recent looting and vandalism was caused by that release. Good luck.

Well, as you would have known if you maybe tried reading the link I posted instead of snipping it out in some sort of unwashed victory dance, you'd see that both Cpt. Johnson (the guy who led the police on the only day without violence) and the DoJ (brought in to investigate the FPD and SLCPD) advised against releasing the robbery information because it was inflammatory and would increase conflict and possibly lead to violence.

The police as a whole acted in several places to disperse potentially violent crowds throughout the night, but they did not act in those particular instances of looting, where community involvement and non-violent protestors stopped the looting and guarded the buildings against the few instigators and looters. As for why the police did not engage in the looting cases, I'd bet it's because the police don't want to get involved in a confrontation with minimally-armed civilians over property damage, when - as stated previously - the presence of an armed police force inherently escalates a situation and increases the risk of violence against human beings, espeically when there are community leaders on the ground already there trying to defuse the situation.

Those are great opinions, it is all irrelevant when it is reported as fact that police "mainly" did not intervene. I realize you don't understand English very well as this conversation has proven but that means at least the majority, probably a significant one. So just like the Senate is Democratic despite being close to half Republican when discussing what the police in Ferguson did as a whole it is irrelevant what a small number of them might have done otherwise. The police "mainly" stood by.

"Mainly" didn't intervene in that one fucking looting incident, you idiot. For someone banging on about literacy, you seem incapable of expanding your view past a single word in a single sentence. Read a half-dozen articles and they all say the same thing. Police intervened all over the suburb, but did not intervene in the looting of that small row of stores. For example, you could try this story which says that police intervened in other incidents but not the looting. Or maybe this story, which says that police deployed tear gas and moved in wearing riot gear.

And please stop making shit up. Nobody has reported that the protesters were able to stop in full the looting and vandalism going on or that their efforts negated the need for police action either before or during the violence. It's great they helped and they probably did some good but it's the job of police to do that. Whether you like it or not the police didn't do their job.

I never said any of that was a fact, I hypothesized, as might be marked by the use of the phrase "I'd bet," indicating that is where my judgment of probability lay, not that it was a fact. For someone who continues to attack me based on literacy, you seem rather inept at reading what you're responding to.

Hopefully fucktard will leave the thread so we can get back to the topic at hand, to wit.

Tail between your legs, pouting on your way home...

[mr friendly guy]

TYT has an interesting take on these type of coverage.

If its a white killer, they tend to say nice things about them along the lines of "its out of character." When its a black victim, we get treated to things like "its unknown if he was affiliated with a gang." Why would you assume that? Its just fucking character assassination.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjIbJePROR8

Quick, I think parts of America needs to be democratised.

[Gandalf]

Also, apparently nobody has been declared mentally ill.

Quick, I think parts of America needs to be democratised.

I would argue that they need a full scale humanitarian intervention.

[Simon_Jester]

Which puts me in mind of this piece written last year during the budget-induced government shutdown.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_world_/2 ... if_it.html

[Kon_El]

Police may have made the situation even worse when they revealed later Friday that the officer who killed Brown did not even know he was a robbery suspect — a detail that suggests the convenience-store tape isn't relevant to the shooting.

Brown's family released a statement Friday declaring they were "beyond outraged" at the "character assassination" of their son.

If it really is Brown in the tape it may be less character assassination and more providing motive as to why he would enter the vehicle and try to take the gun. It strengthens the credibility of the cop.

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/168698- ... -shooting/

[Simon_Jester]

There is basically no line between "the police are trying to do character assassination on Brown by providing footage of what might be him robbing a store at the same time they identify the officer who shot him" and "the police are trying to establish a motive for Brown to have grabbed for Wilson's gun as Wilson alleges he did."

Either way, this reduces to "he said, she said." Given the facts of the case that don't appear to be in dispute, the credibility of the police hinges entirely on characterizing Brown as a brutal, deranged, and violent person who would assault an armed man with little or no provocation.

[Kon_El]

I realized that I didn't set the video up.

Witness Conversation Unknowingly Captured at the Scene of the Ferguson Shooting http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/168698- ... -shooting/

[Borgholio]

Protestors are now throwing Molotov cocktails at police in defiance of the curfew.

http://ktla.com/2014/08/17/shooting-in- ... -arrested/