Michael Brown Case

[Borgholio]

People comply with commands - for the most part - and everyone is polite.

Let me ask a question about things from your perspective. I've met some friendly officers in the past but I've also met some real assholes, and it's the assholes that tend to make me want to push back. Friendly cops who treat me as an actual person are more likely to get me to cooperate and be cordial in return. From what you have seen, does that sound accurate? Would wearing a camera tend to force cops to be more polite, since a bad attitude could be recorded and used against the cop later? If that's the case, even if there is no brutality or excessive force being used, simply restoring trust and good relations between cops and civilians would be worth the investment all on it's own.

[cadbrowser]

Would wearing a camera tend to force cops to be more polite?

My personal opinion, yes...at least for a time. If live TV is any indication, you know when someone goes from their "on camera" persona to being real. I think the worst violators will still fuck up and get caught; which will be a good thing IMHO.

[Kamakazie Sith]

People comply with commands - for the most part - and everyone is polite.

Let me ask a question about things from your perspective. I've met some friendly officers in the past but I've also met some real assholes, and it's the assholes that tend to make me want to push back. Friendly cops who treat me as an actual person are more likely to get me to cooperate and be cordial in return. From what you have seen, does that sound accurate? Would wearing a camera tend to force cops to be more polite, since a bad attitude could be recorded and used against the cop later? If that's the case, even if there is no brutality or excessive force being used, simply restoring trust and good relations between cops and civilians would be worth the investment all on it's own.

Yes, it is. People generally like to be treated well and will return it. The other side of police attitude is the reason why they are stopping you. Police are human and many have a passion for what they do and what they enforce. If you're caught violating one of these things that can set them on the bad side right there. (speeding in a school zone). The presence of a camera can help someone keep in check those feelings but not all the time and it depends on what it is.

I've been a proponent of cameras for a long time because I believe it is necessary and fair and I believe it will help US cops in the long run but I am not a proponent because I don't mind or like everything I do being recorded. I dislike it a bit because I'm not a extroverted person.

[Sea Skimmer]

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

Commentary in this video filmed shortly after the shooting indicates it may well have been justified self defense and gone down more or less as the officer claimed.

[Agent Fisher]

Also hearing reports (albeit from right leaning sources that say they got info from St Louis DA's Office) that Officer Wilson suffered an 'Orbital Blowout Fracture to the eye socket'. Which means someone punched him really hard in the face.

Also, I've heard that supposedly Officer Wilson was trying to pull Brown into the vehicle (I've heard this in reports and that's the narrative that Brown's friend is going with), and we know the first round or rounds were fired from inside the vehicle. To me, that, plus the facial damage, says Brown struck him in the face at the car and Wilson drew and fired in defense of his life. For me as an armed security based in a Crown Vic and I'm sure KS and any other officers who post here will agree, your car is your refuge, your way of escape, your castle. So the idea that Wilson would swing the door, hit Brown and then grab him by the shirt and try to pull him down into the vehicle or just plain closer while Wilson was still inside is ridiculous.


That being said, I still haven't found any non right leaning sources to confirm the Officer's injures. Also, support of Officer Wilson's actions being in self-defense does not mean I'm supporting the actions of St. Louis County Police and their handling of the protests and the decisions to deploy SWAT teams in the manner they were used.

[Terralthra]

To me, the fact that the FPD released the incident report of the alleged robbery (I say alleged because the surveillance imagery appears to show the person claimed to be Mike Brown paying for the cigars, and the store owner denies a robbery took place), but not the incident report of the shooting itself says they are hiding something. If there was substantial evidence of clear self-defence - or even arguable or wrong-headed self-defence - they'd want that out there as quickly as possible.

[Simon_Jester]

It would seem logical. Also, if we find that Brown was shot repeatedly from thirty-five feet away, that would tend to undermine the self-defense claim.

[Agent Fisher]

I'm leaning towards the shop owner deciding to say there was no robbery more to save his shop from being torched or looted than anything else. That video, the clothes match what Brown was wearing when he was shot, size and body shape look to be a match as well. Clearly the clerk is trying to stop him from leaving, gets shoved. So, if there was no robbery, why did he try and stop the male in the video from leaving? And it's not uncommon for shop lifters to pay for one item and take others. Less suspicious to walk in, buy something and walk out, rather than walk in, wander around the store and then walk out without paying something.

Also, if Brown was charging at the officer, like the witnesses in the video Skimmer posted say, and as the officer claims, along with the assumption that the officer had already been punch in the face at least once, it'd be very easy for the officer to believe he needed to take lethal measures to ensure his safety. His head would have been spinning from the punch, and a man as large as Brown charging, it's very easy to believe he felt that another punch and he may be knocked out. And if he's knocked out, his gun is open to being taken and used on him or just used in the future in general.

[Mr Bean]

To me, the fact that the FPD released the incident report of the alleged robbery (I say alleged because the surveillance imagery appears to show the person claimed to be Mike Brown paying for the cigars, and the store owner denies a robbery took place), but not the incident report of the shooting itself says they are hiding something. If there was substantial evidence of clear self-defence - or even arguable or wrong-headed self-defence - they'd want that out there as quickly as possible.

Which is my takeaway, Brown may have just got done robbing a store and punched a cop and got shot in response. Had that been the story day 1 then I'm guessing all of this would have blown over. But instead we got silence, equivocation, denials and most importantly highly visible and highly shitty and aggressive police riot response.

Lets say you want to take three days to get the facts together... don't hold a press conference saying we are still investigating and no further questions... don't hold the press conference. Release a statement... you can't ask a statement questions, no one expects a statement to respond to questions. It's a piece of paper/email or fax that contains words that explains everything and lets you dodge any questions.

[Lonestar]

Some of the posters in this thread could be on arfcom talking about how much they wish the hammer was brought down on the protestors, except they're talking about "gunnuts" instead of "urban youths".

Seriously, you guys are the different sides of the same fucking coin, except at least some of those arfcom lemmings have gone out to protest and put their money where their mouth was while you guys are hiding on the Internet rubbing your hands with glee at the prospect of bloodshed.

[madd0ct0r]

Which is my takeaway, Brown may have just got done robbing a store and punched a cop and got shot in response. Had that been the story day 1 then I'm guessing all of this would have blown over. But instead we got silence, equivocation, denials and most importantly highly visible and highly shitty and aggressive police riot response.

uhh, haven't the police already admitted the shooter had no knowledge of the reported robbery? So it's really two independent stories. One is an alleged case of shoplifting, the other is an 18 year old getting shot 6 times by a police officer.

[LaCroix]

How exactly would a fight inside the car make a difference? If the fatal shooting would have happened during the alleged brawl in the car - definitely justified. The first shot within the car? Justified.

But most of the shooting occurred at a later time, not inside the car, but at a distance, with the victim unarmed. There was no threat to the officer's life at this time, so the shooting is unjustified. That's what tasers are for.

[Kon_El]

How exactly would a fight inside the car make a difference? If the fatal shooting would have happened during the alleged brawl in the car - definitely justified. The first shot within the car? Justified.

But most of the shooting occurred at a later time, not inside the car, but at a distance, with the victim unarmed. There was no threat to the officer's life at this time, so the shooting is unjustified. That's what tasers are for.

Assuming the account overheard in the video is accurate.
Brown starts to run, the cop follows him, Brown doubles back and charges the cop. The cop is still feeling the effects of the punch in the face. The gun is already in the officers hand from the fight in his vehicle. At that point lethal force would be justifiable depending on the distances involved.

[Simon_Jester]

Which is my takeaway, Brown may have just got done robbing a store and punched a cop and got shot in response. Had that been the story day 1 then I'm guessing all of this would have blown over. But instead we got silence, equivocation, denials and most importantly highly visible and highly shitty and aggressive police riot response.

uhh, haven't the police already admitted the shooter had no knowledge of the reported robbery? So it's really two independent stories. One is an alleged case of shoplifting, the other is an 18 year old getting shot 6 times by a police officer.

If Brown actually did punch the police officer, it tells us something about his behavior and state of mind. Between the alleged shoplifting (where a store clerk got shoved violently if the video is to be believed) and the shooting (where allegedly Wilson got punched in the face before or during the shooting), there's something of a pattern. Then it would at least be believable that, for whatever reason, Brown was acting violently and aggressively and provoked the shooting, rather than it being a totally random case of the police deciding to harass an unarmed and innocent man.

I can't think of any single thing more likely to make Wilson seem less like a murderer than him getting punched in the face during these events. Even if Wilson did something to provoke Brown to violence, like behaving in a provocative fashion, there's a huge difference between shooting someone who physically attacked you and shooting someone who didn't.

At the same time though, this is very obvious. The Ferguson police could have significantly defused tensions very early in this whole mess by saying "Look, our officer got punched in the face and is in the hospital getting X-rays right now to make sure his skull isn't too badly fractured. This wasn't just a case of a policeman randomly shooting an unarmed, nonthreatening man out of sheer personal viciousness."

So why didn't they?

[Grumman]

uhh, haven't the police already admitted the shooter had no knowledge of the reported robbery? So it's really two independent stories. One is an alleged case of shoplifting, the other is an 18 year old getting shot 6 times by a police officer.

No, they haven't. The police stated that the shooter did not know they were suspects at the initial point of contact. When the cop decided to stop the two men, that decision was only because they were walking in the middle of the road.

[Raw Shark]

I don't find people on the left fantasizing about the other side getting gunned down any more appealing than people on the Right doing it. I just don't see a war on America's streets as a good thing in any scenario.

I think what he means is that the far-right wing loonies have been crowing about a second American Revolution for years now and it's getting so fucking annoying, that it would be poetic justice to see them actually get their war and get their asses handed to them. That's pretty much the only thing that could get these lunatics back in line with the rest of civilization. But yes I agree with you completely, it would only lead to more death and that's not a good thing.

Precisely so. All joking aside, I would of course rather not see anybody shooting at each other at all, but if some of those mouthy douchebags who've spent the last few years spouting off about starting a war are going to actually do it anywhere, I think it'd be swell if they did it in a time and place where they would get soundly defeated, so that the rest of them might shut the fuck up about it.

Some of the posters in this thread could be on arfcom talking about how much they wish the hammer was brought down on the protestors, except they're talking about "gunnuts" instead of "urban youths".

Seriously, you guys are the different sides of the same fucking coin, except at least some of those arfcom lemmings have gone out to protest and put their money where their mouth was while you guys are hiding on the Internet rubbing your hands with glee at the prospect of bloodshed.

So you equate wishing harm on peaceful protestors with wishing harm on violent lunatics? Are you off your meds? If the "gunnuts" want to peacefully protest something (y'know, the kind of protest where you don't threaten violence), I say more power to them, but anybody who wants to overthrow the government instead of effecting reform from within can go fuck themselves.

[Civil War Man]

Assuming the account overheard in the video is accurate.
Brown starts to run, the cop follows him, Brown doubles back and charges the cop. The cop is still feeling the effects of the punch in the face. The gun is already in the officers hand from the fight in his vehicle. At that point lethal force would be justifiable depending on the distances involved.

Another possible chain of events, assuming the account in the video and the report about a punch being thrown is accurate:

Wilson orders Brown and Johnson to get on the sidewalk. Brown tells him to get bent because they are almost home. Wilson decides he's not going to take any lip from a smart-ass kid, and grabs Brown. Brown struggles, and Wilson draws his sidearm in order to intimidate Brown into submitting. Brown sees the gun coming out, instinctively throws a punch, and hits Wilson in the face. The shock of the punch causes Wilson to let go, and possibly reflexively pull the trigger (not necessarily hitting anything, since there was no gunpowder residue on Brown's body according to the released autopsy). Brown and Johnson take off running. Wilson gets out of the car and fires again. Considering that the autopsy report has no entry wounds in the back, any potential shots taken at Brown's back miss. Johnson dives behind a car. Brown turns around, raises his hands (either in surrender or just trying to shield himself) and tells Wilson that he's unarmed. Wilson continues to fire, striking Brown repeatedly in his right arm. Realizing that Wilson is just going to gun him down in the street, Brown enters fight-or-flight mode and starts to run at Wilson. Wilson fires two more times, striking Brown twice in the head and killing him.

That may not have been what happened at all, but it's just an example to show that even if Brown threw a punch or charged, it doesn't necessarily exonerate Wilson.

Like others in the thread, at this point the PD's handling of the situation makes me skeptical of their official accounts. Releasing the stuff about the store robbery at the same time they released Wilson's name, especially since it had no bearing on Wilson's decision to stop them, came across as a blatant attempt to poison the well against Brown.

[Elheru Aran]

The shock of the punch causes Wilson to let go, and possibly reflexively pull the trigger (not necessarily hitting anything, since there was no gunpowder residue on Brown's body according to the released autopsy).

Just going to note this line right here. If Brown had been right up against the car, close enough to punch Wilson in the face while he's sitting in the car, it wouldn't matter if Wilson missed or not, there would be gunpowder residue on Brown's clothes at the very least, possibly on any other exposed parts of Brown's body (hands, arms, etc). You don't have to be extremely close to get gunpowder residue on you, IIRC. It would be very light but it would be there.

Brown's body has been autopsied, but as far as I know his clothes have not been submitted for examination, which is normally part of the procedure. This is curious and I'm wondering just why.

[cadbrowser]

I thought this was fairly interesting as well:

Support spreads for officer in Ferguson shooting

In the days since police in Ferguson, Mo., named Darren Wilson as the officer who shot and killed unarmed 18-year-old Michael Brown, a small, quiet counter-protest, taking place mostly online, has arisen far from the angry, noisy nightly protests roiling Ferguson.

Two Facebook groups supporting Wilson have appeared. Between them, they had nearly 41,000 "Likes" as of Tuesday evening. Supporters also created a GoFundMe.com group aimed at raising $100,000 for Wilson's family. "We stand behind Officer Darren Wilson and his family during this trying time in their lives," a statement on the site said. One donor, who identified herself as Nancy Lawson, pledged $20 and wrote, "Thank you, officer Wilson, for risking your life so we can live in a safe world. I am praying for you."

The site's administrators said they ultimately disabled comments on the site in an attempt "to stop the negative comments." As of Tuesday, four days after police identified Wilson as the officer involved in the Aug. 9 shooting, about 850 donors had pledged more than $32,000.

On Facebook, a commenter who identified himself as Mike Allgire said, "As a retired police officer, I would have shot him also." Allgire added, "The police are not out there to see who can wipe who, but to keep the peace. With a person the size of Mr. Brown, there is no doubt I would have taken the same action. Police officers have an old saying; 'I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by six.' "

One Facebook site, "I Support Officer Wilson," posted a statement Tuesday that said: "The death of Michael Brown is a tragic event. We all must deal with this in our own personal way. However, throughout this trying time, we must remember the men and women of law enforcement are neighbors, fathers, mothers, sons and daughters. Law enforcement officers are a part of the very fabric of our communities we ask them to protect. In times like this, they, too, need to know that the community is behind the work they do for us and that we in the community appreciate all their countless hours of service."

A grand jury was scheduled to begin hearing evidence Wednesday to determine whether Wilson should be charged in Brown's death, but it's unclear how long that may take, said Ed Magee, spokesman for St. Louis County's prosecuting attorney. Magee said Tuesday that local investigators had interviewed Wilson and that he would be "offered the opportunity" to testify before the grand jury. The Justice Department is conducting a separate civil rights investigation, which also could result in charges.

Wilson's supporters gathered Sunday in a St. Louis sports bar — Ferguson is a northwestern suburb of St. Louis — to raise money for the family. "This isn't just about Darren Wilson," one of the organizers, Lawrence LaMontagne, told the International Business Times. "It's about all the first responders and how they've been villainized." LaMontagne, who works in law enforcement, added, "Of course we feel bad for both parties; our hearts go out to the families. But these people have families, too."

At a demonstration earlier, about 150 Wilson supporters cheered and a stack of dark blue T-shirts bearing a police badge and the slogan "Officer Darren Wilson — I stand by you," sold out at $7 apiece.

"He was doing his job," Kaycee Reinisch, 57, told London's Guardian. "And now because of public uproar in Ferguson, he is being victimized."

The demonstration was initially silent, but protesters began cheering as passing cars honked horns. In contrast to the mostly African-American protesters in Ferguson, all but one of the St. Louis demonstrators were white, the Guardian reported. The protest unfolded outside the headquarters of KSDK, a local television news station that had broadcast images of Wilson's home. The station later removed the footage from its website and apologized. Gannett Co. Inc. owns KSDK and publishes USA Today.

Wilson, 28, a six-year police veteran who had no previous complaints against him, is on paid leave and in seclusion.

Sometimes I just don't want to live on this planet anymore.

I like how the media keeps emphasizing this underlined part here. I am curious to know if any of the Fergeson PD's officers have complaints against them.

Looks like Brown has (had?) NO criminal background.

[Borgholio]

all but one of the St. Louis demonstrators were white

What more needs to be said?

[Patroklos]

So you equate wishing harm on peaceful protestors with wishing harm on violent lunatics? Are you off your meds? If the "gunnuts" want to peacefully protest something (y'know, the kind of protest where you don't threaten violence), I say more power to them, but anybody who wants to overthrow the government instead of effecting reform from within can go fuck themselves.

When was the last non peaceful "gunnut" protest, or any group violence at all?

Brown's body has been autopsied, but as far as I know his clothes have not been submitted for examination, which is normally part of the procedure. This is curious and I'm wondering just why.

Nobody said they had not been submitted for examination, but it seems obvious the people responsible for performing autopsies on human bodies are not the same that do chemical analysis of random objects. I believe Baden said he didn't have access to those results, which makes sense as it’s not his competency.

[Raw Shark]

So you equate wishing harm on peaceful protestors with wishing harm on violent lunatics? Are you off your meds? If the "gunnuts" want to peacefully protest something (y'know, the kind of protest where you don't threaten violence), I say more power to them, but anybody who wants to overthrow the government instead of effecting reform from within can go fuck themselves.

When was the last non peaceful "gunnut" protest, or any group violence at all?

Bundy Ranch confrontation: "Gummint" backed down; encouraged the dicks. Also, every "peaceful" protest ever where those assholes openly wore weapons, which is an implicit threat of violence at a planned confrontation whether they have the right to do it or not.

[Borgholio]

When was the last non peaceful "gunnut" protest, or any group violence at all?

Please, don't tell me you've forgotten about the Cliven Bundy standoff already? You know, where a hundred gun nuts set up sniper positions on the freeway overpass ready and waiting to ambush and murder Federal agents for daring to collect back taxes? That may not have resulted in bloodshed but I certainly would not call that peaceful.

Edit - Shark beat me to it.

[RogueIce]

Brown's body has been autopsied, but as far as I know his clothes have not been submitted for examination, which is normally part of the procedure. This is curious and I'm wondering just why.

The only results I'm aware of being released are from the private autopsy conducted by the family after Brown's body was released to them. But the clothes are evidence and would be maintained under the chain of custody...and private persons generally wouldn't qualify.

As far as the "official" results go, it could be quite some time, especially since there's at least the County and/or State as well as the Federal governments involved in this now, each apparently doing their own autopsy and (presumably) forensic examinations.

[Patroklos]

Please, don't tell me you've forgotten about the Cliven Bundy standoff already? You know, where a hundred gun nuts set up sniper positions on the freeway overpass ready and waiting to ambush and murder Federal agents for daring to collect back taxes? That may not have resulted in bloodshed but I certainly would not call that peaceful.

Bundy Ranch confrontation: "Gummint" backed down; encouraged the dicks. Also, every "peaceful" protest ever where those assholes openly wore weapons, which is an implicit threat of violence at a planned confrontation whether they have the right to do it or not.

How is that comparable to a situaton where we have looting, buildings burned down, people actually beaten and shot? You know, ACTUAL violence. The original complaint was "So you equate wishing harm on peaceful protestors with wishing harm on violent lunatics?" If you want to bitch about equating events with vast gulfs regarding their details then you shouldn't be doing so in this case.

And no, open carry is not threatening. Though I would say that one douche from the ranch fiasco (I am sure one of you have that gif on standby) was. But then every arguement concerning the protesters on the whole in Fergusun not being threatening or violent applies there too.

I know you wish there was some instance in recent memory of right wing gun nuts roaming the street burning and looting but that just isn't the case.