Ferguson

[dgfred]

IIRC Baden (private autopsy) said that one of the shots was from behind (in the arm) but that it was likely because his arm was turned/bent.

The kill shot was to the head which was seen as Brown was lowering his head (charging/falling forward?).

I think he also said the shot to the hand was likely in the car because it was from the closest range. He said they couldn't really tell after 4 ft or so how far away the shooter was... which I had not heard before.

 

[JohnRM]

I believe Officer Wilson stated that the kill shot came when it seemed like Mr. Brown was charging at him a final time, but could have been simply stumbling forward to the ground. Or perhaps it could have been someone else who said that. I am unsure.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Okay, I avoid using anything from Fox News as a source, but I heard this on television and the Fox News article was the least ridiculous source I could find on the matter:

Link



So the New York Times decided to release officer Wilson's address just after it was announced he would not be indicted? That does seem a bit suspicious and I think Wilson should be allowed to sue the New York Times for putting him in danger. If anything actually happens to officer Wilson or his wife, I think the owners of the New York Times should be held criminally liable and charged as accomplices in whatever crime is committed against Wilson, his wife, or his property.

Do you know that 'street without specific address' is the standard descriptor police use literally every time they talk about any suspect in any press release? It is the accepted standard way that every other 'neighbor named Wilson' in StLouis county is protected from having to explain that they aren't that Wilson. The NYTimes has 'done to' Officer Wilson exactly what is 'done to' every person accused of a crime who is not a police officer, everywhere. Had the county prosecutor done the same there would be far less of a problem in StLouis county.

 

[Berzerker]

So there is a high probability that Brown was coming back at him?

25 ft according to the prosecutor leaving 10 ft before reaching Wilson

I believe that is exactly what one of the witnesses that was seen as 'more reliable' said.

Yup, the forensics should tell the tale - if Brown charged at Wilson then he must have left blood behind at the location he stopped and turned before charging.

That is frequent advice to rape victims, because it works. If you are pinned and cannot escape, resistance to your attacker becomes futile and will typically only escalate the situation. The decision has to be made as to whether or not you believe that the attacker will let you live afterward.

Yes, it is advice - but you said if the victim didn't take that advice and submit to the crime you'd support the cop killing them. Oh, the rapist is a cop committing a travesty. Did I forget to mention that?

Indeed? Well, Darren Wilson must pay for it with his life! I'm convinced.

What does he have to do with it?

You are creating scenarios where a cop is already assaulting someone rather than the vast majority of cases where beatings only occur AFTER someone resists.

Of course, the cop is always wrong. Got it.

You created the scenario:

I will submit an acknowledgement that cases do occur wherein an officer exceeds his authority, abuses his power, and/or commits some other travesty, but they are a minute fraction of the lot. Furthermore, even in those cases, it typically does not end in death or dismemberment, because most people are smart enough not to resist. For those that do, I have no sympathy and zero tolerance. May death come swiftly.

Cop beats people up and you're fine if he kills them for resisting

maybe you didn't mean that?

 

[JohnRM]

Yes, it is advice - but you said if the victim didn't take that advice and submit to the crime you'd support the cop killing them. Oh, the rapist is a cop committing a travesty. Did I forget to mention that?

Oh yes, because this is most frequently what we're talking about when discussing police abuse. Way to find the most extreme case to make yourself sound credible.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Oh yes, because this is most frequently what we're talking about when discussing police abuse. Way to find the most extreme case to make yourself sound credible.

It was just the quick and convenient case. Ultimately the specifics don't matter. What is illustrated is that you are saying the proper response to egregious behavior is submit and hope for redress later as long as the egregious behavior is inflicted by a cop, and that if you fail to submit under those circumstances not only should the victim expect to be killed, but you would think that expected result was acceptable.

 

[JohnRM]

Generally speaking, I do. This, of course, would have absolutely no application to cases where the abuse of power is a matter of being attacked or killed, given that what you're trying to prevent is already actually occurring.

 

[Berzerker]

Oh yes, because this is most frequently what we're talking about when discussing police abuse. Way to find the most extreme case to make yourself sound credible.

you set the parameters:

I will submit an acknowledgement that cases do occur wherein an officer exceeds his authority, abuses his power, and/or commits some other travesty, but they are a minute fraction of the lot. Furthermore, even in those cases, it typically does not end in death or dismemberment, because most people are smart enough not to resist. For those that do, I have no sympathy and zero tolerance. May death come swiftly.

sounds incredible

 

[Senethro]

Its unfair that other people get the law enforcement that you deserve.

 

[JohnRM]

you set the parameters:



sounds incredible

I have already indicated that I was being facetious when I said that.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Its unfair that other people get the law enforcement that you deserve.

Entered in Tim's book of brilliant things I read somewhere.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I have already indicated that I was being facetious when I said that.

I think the only thing you tried to disclaim was the 'may death come swiftly' part. Did I miss something?

 

[Senethro]

I have already indicated that I was being facetious when I said that.

Were you being facetious when saying black parenting is to blame or that minorities are destroying cities? Its hard to tell.

 

[JohnRM]

I think the only thing you tried to disclaim was the 'may death come swiftly' part. Did I miss something?

That would be correct. Though, I would indicate that I started this whole discussion in the context of cases where individuals refuse police orders and resist arrest, not those extremely rare cases where the police beat on someone for no reason whatever.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

That would be correct. Though, I would indicate that I started this whole discussion in the context of cases where individuals refuse police orders and resist arrest, not those extremely rare cases where the police beat on someone for no reason whatever.

Those cases are extremely rare. I would go so far as to say that there are no cases where police beat on someone for no reason whatsoever. They just give orders until you don't follow one, and then they have a reason. A reason you indicate is perfectly acceptable to you.

Hence why

Its unfair that other people get the law enforcement that you deserve.

struck me as absolutely brilliant.

 

[Leonel]

Entered in Tim's book of brilliant things I read somewhere.

Too late, I'm stealing it.

 

[Senethro]

Its got a nice ring to it, doesn't it? Like you should have already heard it before even though you haven't. Google claims the phrase is original but I'm sure the idea isn't.

 

[MobBoss]

Yup, the forensics should tell the tale - if Brown charged at Wilson then he must have left blood behind at the location he stopped and turned before charging.

Brown's body did fall forward despite being shot in the upper area of the body. If he had been standing straight up, it would have knocked him backwards. Since he fell forward, his body would have to be in a forward position similar to that of someone sprinting forward.

 

[Flying Pig]

A friend of mine posted the video on this page - unfortunately attached to a rather poor and unrepresentative article - which I'd like to share here as a discussion point. Essentially it's of the Milwaukee police chief expressing his frustration that reporters are always keen to highlight police failures but seem to ignore the major crime problems - in his book, the problem is a combination of a lot of very lethal firearms in the hands of a lot of criminals (note that he doesn't actually say that said criminals are mostly black, only their victims; the Conservative Tribune article also conveniently omits the point about too many guns).

Those cases are extremely rare. I would go so far as to say that there are no cases where police beat on someone for no reason whatsoever.

Rare, yes, but police work is stressful enough and the public usually irritating enough that every so often policemen do stupid things out of anger and frustration. Being a policeman is often about biting your tongue and holding yourself to a higher standard than those out of uniform: you often realise that you'd feel perfectly entitled to hit the person in front of you were you meeting as two civilians. That said, part of police training is that the public are often stupid, often uncooperative and sometimes downright disruptive, but you still have to treat them fairly. You have to assume that totally innocent people might run away from you, refuse to answer your questions or generally make your life difficult, because people's decency and good sense seems to go out of the window when faced with a uniform.

 

[MobBoss]

A friend of mine posted the video on this page - unfortunately attached to a rather poor and unrepresentative article - which I'd like to share here as a discussion point. Essentially it's of the Milwaukee police chief expressing his frustration that reporters are always keen to highlight police failures but seem to ignore the major crime problems - in his book, the problem is a combination of a lot of very lethal firearms in the hands of a lot of criminals (note that he doesn't actually say that said criminals are mostly black, only their victims; the Conservative Tribune article also conveniently omits the point about too many guns).



Rare, yes, but police work is stressful enough and the public usually irritating enough that every so often policemen do stupid things out of anger and frustration. Being a policeman is often about biting your tongue and holding yourself to a higher standard than those out of uniform: you often realise that you'd feel perfectly entitled to hit the person in front of you were you meeting as two civilians. That said, part of police training is that the public are often stupid, often uncooperative and sometimes downright disruptive, but you still have to treat them fairly. You have to assume that totally innocent people might run away from you, refuse to answer your questions or generally make your life difficult, because people's decency and good sense seems to go out of the window when faced with a uniform.

I guess his real point is how much responsibility does the community itself bear in cleaning up crime?

I think he's right to be emotional about it.