• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Ferguson: Police Kill 18yo Black Male; Fire Gas/Rubber Bullets Into Protesting Crowds

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stream update:
Credit to Nabs for new links.

http://m.ustream.tv/channel/feelinsofly (PandaUnite.org)
http://new.livestream.com/accounts/9035483/events/3271930 (I am Mike Brown Live from Ferguson, MO)
http://m.ustream.tv/channel/filmthepoliceportland (Film the Police) Not currently live.
https://news.vice.com/article/live-from-ferguson-missouri (Tim/Vice-no comment section) Not currently live.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmqHVKNZkhM (Tim/Vice via YouTube-same as above) Not currently live.
CNN
MSNBC
KDSK local Must disable adblocker.
KTVI local
FOXNEWS

More as they come.

If the CNN or MSNBC stream goes out for you on livenewschat.eu, don't refresh, go back to the previous page. After about an hour or two that site sends you to a new page, just go back. If you refresh and don’t go back, you will be refreshing the wrong page, be aware of the url.
 
Sad npr article this evening. 52% of white people polled said race isn't the big issue in this case, but when split by political party, 68% of (white) democrats said yes of course race is the issue.

Regardless of which party you support, its disturbing that the information is so prismatic.
 
Honestly this will probably sound offensive, but as an outsider, I almost feel like I want this to escalate. I want the police to commit more terrible crimes and not get sent to prison just so people can realize how horribly unequal the justice system is.
Because otherwise they can just claim that Ferguson was an outlier and we all know it isn't. This treatment of minorities by the police and their increasing militarization is occuring nation-wide and it needs to stop.

This type of thing already happens incredibly frequently and people still choose to bury their heads in the sand. That's what is so insanely frustrating about this situation. The rights of citizens and journalists are being horribly trampled upon on our own soil and there are so many prejudiced out who simply can not shit it could save their saves. Hell, our own President has to tiptoe around calling a spade a spade because our political environment would sensationalize the hell of him being visibly upset about this.
 
Are police allowed to turn people away if they are from out of town? On American soil?


Doesn't seem legal.

Just like the "border stops" hundreds of miles away from the border and "no refusal weekends" who's going to stop them?
 
Holy shit, my brother just said he'd probably have shot Michael Brown.

Followed by "I don't understand the black community".

Remember when we had the GAF meet up dinner, HP? I met you and hung out with you (you were a cool dude) so reading this saddens me but I can't help but think your brother isn't alone in having this sentiment here in America.

-___________________-
 

Did you read your link before you tried to correct me?

"We've been reviewing the matter (since Saturday), today we officially opened an investigation into a potential civil rights violation," she said, noting that the decision was not motivated by community outrage. "Regardless of the media attention or the public’s attention to this matter, this is something that we would routinely do."

Again, they are looking into civil rights violations, which is exactly what I said before.
 
Sad npr article this evening. 52% of white people polled said race isn't the big issue in this case, but when split by political party, 68% of (white) democrats said yes of course race is the issue.

Regardless of which party you support, its disturbing that the information is so prismatic.

How can a problem be fixed when the majority of a nation doesn't think there is a problem?
 
Are police allowed to turn people away if they are from out of town? On American soil?


Doesn't seem legal.

Warning: This is just from what I learned a couple years ago in my college law classes; so it might be wrong or not applicable anymore.

It's technically legal. It can be justified what with the police powers listed in the constitution; stuff to do with public safety. It might be found unconstitutional later though. It's all up to how the courts interpret how "reasonable" the actions are given the surrounding circumstances. "Reasonable" is/was actually used as the standard. The way they use their power must apply equally to everyone, and must be reasonable.

Obviously the problem is that "reasonable" is extremely vague. It's been given a narrow view in some cases, but other cases seem to give the police more room to breath.
 
shop owner who got his place torched

BvXbBDiIAAEZSK5.jpg
A really amazing and laudable act of moral courage and understanding.
 
Did you read your link before you tried to correct me?



Again, they are looking into civil rights violations, which is exactly what I said before.


I think YOU need to read the whole thing. Hell, look at the damned headline. And the first line in the damned story.


They say right there they are opening an investigation of the shooting to parallel the local PD's investigation.

Again, their role isn't irrelevant if the outcome is "innocent" or no charges as there is a huge amount of oversight on this.
 
Essentially, we've reached the "tired resignation" part of our game, because again, it's not just poor law enforcement, it's the entire criminal justice system.
 
Remember when we had the GAF meet up dinner, HP? I met you and hung out with you (you were a cool dude) so reading this saddens me but I can't help but think your brother isn't alone in having this sentiment here in America.

-___________________-

It's really interesting how we're complete polar opposites politically (and personality). The real problem is that he's a microcosm of the endemic of apathy towards the news in this country. Everyone just parrots the easiest bit of information.
 
I'm not surprised if it does happen sometimes (I've just never heard of it). Extremely risky for the defendant to give a statement under oath like that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but grand jury hearings are sealed. Do they become unsealed if it goes to trial? I can't recall.
 
I think YOU need to read the whole thing. Hell, look at the damned headline. And the first line in the damned story.


They say right there they are opening an investigation of the shooting to parallel the local PD's investigation.

First off, calm yo ass down.

If you scroll down you'll read that the investigation that they are doing is a civil rights one. That's what the quote that I pulled, from an agency rep no less, said specifically. Also, I guessing you never heard of clickbait, but it's a much more appealing headline if they don't mention civil rights. Shorter, punchier, and more viral.
 
How can a problem be fixed when the majority of a nation doesn't think there is a problem?

I've actually been thinking about this myself lately. Education really is the only way. So education through the actual education system. But also the media reporting these issues and making bigger issues out of them. Unfortunately the majority of these people watch FOX news, who's entire business model is to lie.

Maddow closed her show by reading statement from Nixon saying he will NOT ask the DA to recuse himself from the case.
 
Nope, I got it wrong. From wikipedia:

Wikipedia said:
Grand jury proceedings are secret. No judge is present; the proceedings are led by a prosecutor;[14] and the defendant has no right to present his case or (in many instances) to be informed of the proceedings at all. While court reporters usually transcribe the proceedings, the records are sealed. The case for such secrecy was unanimously upheld by the Burger Court in Douglas Oil Co. of Cal. v. Petrol Stops Northwest, 441 US 211 (1979).[15][16] The dissenting opinion was joined by Justices Burger and Stewart but concurred with the Court's opinion as to the importance and rationale of grand jury secrecy. Writing for the Court, Justice Powell found that "if preindictment proceedings were made public, many prospective witnesses would be hesitant to come forward voluntarily"; "witnesses who appeared before the grand jury would be less likely to testify fully and frankly"; and "there also would be the risk that those about to be indicted would flee, or would try to influence individual grand jurors". Further, "persons who are accused but exonerated by the grand jury [should] not be held up to public ridicule".[15]
United States v. Procter & Gamble Co., 356 US 677 (1958), permitted the disclosure of grand jury transcripts under certain restrictions: "a private party seeking to obtain grand jury transcripts must demonstrate that 'without the transcript a defense would be greatly prejudiced or that without reference to it an injustice would be done'" and must make its requests "with particularity".[15] Further, First Amendment protections generally permit the witnesses summoned by a grand jury to discuss their testimony, although Dennis v. United States, 384 US 855 (1966), found that such public discussion permits release of the transcripts of their actual testimony.[15]
The Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500, requires the government to disclose to the defense any statements made by the accused to the grand jury, and, with respect to non-party witnesses, that after a witness has testified on direct examination at trial, any statement made to the grand jury by such witness be disclosed to the defense.
 
Essentially, we've reached the "tired resignation" part of our game, because again, it's not just poor law enforcement, it's the entire criminal justice system.

Some of us were already there a week ago. I never had any hopes of justice. I'm just tired of the constant reminders that we ain't shit. Black people, Hispanics, women, gays, transfolk - just constantly being reminded at every level of society. I can't feel anything but exhaustion from it at this point.
 
First off, calm yo ass down.

If you scroll down you'll read that the investigation that they are doing is a civil rights one. That's what the quote that I pulled, from an agency rep no less, said specifically. Also, I guessing you never heard of clickbait, but it's a much more appealing headline if they don't mention civil rights. Shorter, punchier, and more viral.

It's more than just in the title and you know it, at least now you do.

In any regards they are conducting their own investigation on the shooting which would also include a look at a civil rights violation if the shooting was unwarranted.

They aren't there simply to advise and look I to civil rights abuse, they are a huge part of this entire thing. And if Wilson is cleared or not charged, it won't simply be because the local PD said so. So again, it's not irrelevant.
 
I've actually been thinking about this myself lately. Education really is the only way. So education through the actual education system. But also the media reporting these issues and making bigger issues out of them. Unfortunately the majority of these people watch FOX news, who's entire business model is to lie.

Maddow closed her show by reading statement from Nixon saying he will NOT ask the DA to recuse himself from the case.

Most of the closed minded people I encounter on subjects like this have turned out completely.

They have no interest in adapting their world view because, at the end of the day, they don't have to. These laws and institutionalized racism issues don't affect them or their lives.

They don't live in places like Ferguson and would likely never visit either because they don't have too.

It is the ultimate perk of being a privileged class--you don't have to give a fuck. You can live your life as it is, whether you care about the experiences of others or not.

Sad but true.
 
Essentially, we've reached the "tired resignation" part of our game, because again, it's not just poor law enforcement, it's the entire criminal justice system.

I mean, I would love to be wrong (see also Renisha Mcbride, Darius Simmons) but two cases out of the what, 300+ murders a year? I can't help but be jaded.
 
Yes, this is how grand juries work.

No it's not.

http://www.uscourts.gov/educational...urts/comparing-trial-juries-grand-juries.aspx

Defendants and their attorneys do not have the right to appear before the grand jury.

Defendants can only be present if the prosecutor consents to it. That means that typically a defense lawyer would always say no if a prosecutor offers consent because there has to be a reason for the prosecutor to offer that.

The whole damn problem with this entire situation is the prosecutor does not want to seek justice for Michael Brown at all. It's incredibly transparent that this is the case, and the prosecutor will drive this case into the ground before it can even make it to court where the public can see a trial unfold. Even bringing it to a grand jury is only being done for show.
 
It's more than just in the title and you know it, at least now you do.

In any regards they are conducting their own investigation on the shooting which would also include a look at a civil rights violation if the shooting was unwarranted.

They aren't there simply to advise and look I to civil rights abuse, they are a huge part of this entire thing. And if Wilson is cleared or not charged, it won't simply be because the local PD said so. So again, it's not irrelevant.

Not trying to rile anyone up, but just clarify: From what they've said, they're looking into the civil issues of the case. That does not automatically imply criminal charges. It does not imply charges against the shooting officer either. If they determine it is a hate crime, that is a criminal charge. However hate crimes are notoriously hard to get a conviction on.
 
So is the broken orbital complete bullshit? People keep posting it on facebook with shitty sources.

The police department said he was treated at a hospital. If they lied about that (and that's something that's easily verifiable during the investigation), heads will roll.
 
Most of the closed minded people I encounter on subjects like this have turned out completely.

They have no interest in adapting their world view because, at the end of the day, they don't have to. These laws and institutionalized racism issues don't affect them or their lives.

They don't live in places like Ferguson and would likely never visit either because they don't have too.

It is the ultimate perk of being a privileged class--you don't have to give a fuck. You can live your life as it is, whether you care about the experiences of others or not.

Sad but true.

Many even try to change the history books. It's disgusting. Can't count how many times here in Texas they've tried to rewrite something or even try to forget the Alamo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom