Ferguson: Police Officer Kills 18yo Michael Brown; Protests/Riots Continue

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shao Kahn on the Lawn said:
"The assailant spun around so quickly that the resultant crosswind staggered the officer and made him fear for his life."
Click to expand...

korra_airbending.gif



Korra_airbending.gif



If only that was possible.
 
I don't understand. There are several witnesses, why is this officer not in custody and under thorough investigation?

You'd only need one witness over here, saying there was an unlawful shooting, to create a response. Really bad governance and lack of oversight.
 
Remember Mya Aaten-White, the woman who was shot during the first protests in Ferguson, and the cops showed up to take the bullet and then never contacted her again? There's been an update on her case finally.

Aaten-White said police have yet to speak to her about the incident. Her alma mater, Howard University, stepped in and appointed a lawyer, but the two were unable to schedule a meeting with police.

"I have a strong distrust from them and they have not done what were supposed to do in my case," Aaten-White said.

News 4 attempted to contact Ferguson police, but the department directed News 4 to a PR firm, the Devin-James Group. News 4 eventually obtained a police report. Devin James said the investigation in ongoing.
Click to expand...

The update is that it has been a month since she was shot AND THE POLICE STILL HAVE NOT INTERVIEWED HER. I had to triple-check the date on the story to believe it.
 
Pizoxuat said:
Remember Mya Aaten-White, the woman who was shot during the first protests in Ferguson, and the cops showed up to take the bullet and then never contacted her again? There's been an update on her case finally.



The update is that it has been a month since she was shot AND THE POLICE STILL HAVE NOT INTERVIEWED HER. I had to triple-check the date on the story to believe it.
Click to expand...

Why are the police directing the journalists to a PR firm?
 
Missouri State Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal, Sept 10, 2014 [YouTube]

Chapelle-Nadal delivers a gripping speech calling Gov. Nixon to the carpet for allowing Senators and constituents to be stripped of their 1st Amendment rights while being tear gassed and treated like animals. She details how MO Governor Nixon allowed the state of emergency to escalate while he did nothing. Senator Chapelle-Nadal brings it all into perspective, detailing personal experiences as well as the racist history of #Ferguson which culminated into the aftermath of the Michael Brown shooting when the MO Governor treated #Ferguson like foreign enemy territory. A must watch speech!​

The part about her experiences at the protests in Ferguson starts at 4:20. She minces no words laying into the police force and Governor Nixon. Powerful stuff.
 
Saint Gregory said:
I'm incredibly interested to know why CNN is treating an anonymous radio caller with the same credibility as an eye witness in this article.

While reading it I was completely confused by this passage



suggesting eye witnesses saw Mike Brown reaching for the officer's gun but when I followed the link to the supporting story all I found was another article recounting the radio interview.

Any person reading the article without taking the time to actually click the link would have come to the conclusion that there were other witnesses at the scene who saw Brown assault Darren Wilson and grab at his gun when that was not the case. What kind of shitty reporting is this?
Click to expand...

That particular line is bad. I'd like to think most other mentions of this "eyewitness" were made to showcase how completely ridiculous their account is, so long as they mention:
  • This is a THIRD-hand account
  • It's based entirely on what Wilson said (to someone else)
  • The content of the account (Lunging/charging BS)
The problem is that even if the above is reported every time that "witness" (ugh) is mentioned, you just know there will be people who'll use it to support their "impartiality." And then there's reporting like this that doesn't explain and newcomers will think there are considerably conflicting eyewitness accounts, like you said.
 
One thing that really bugs me is that Officer Wilson did not file a report of the incident. They actually let him leave town without making an official statement so he can change his story later?
 
Spring-Loaded said:
That particular line is bad. I'd like to think most other mentions of this "eyewitness" were made to showcase how completely ridiculous their account is, so long as they mention:
  • This is a THIRD-hand account
  • It's based entirely on what Wilson said (to someone else)
  • The content of the account (Lunging/charging BS)
The problem is that even if the above is reported every time that "witness" (ugh) is mentioned, you just know there will be people who'll use it to support their "impartiality." And then there's reporting like this that doesn't explain and newcomers will think there are considerably conflicting eyewitness accounts, like you said.
Click to expand...
What makes it worse is that the article reads "eyewitnesses" plural and then lists it first as if it was the prevailing account. It makes it hard to come to any other conclusion other than they're intentionally trying to spread false information.

When did CNN sink to the level reporting stories like they're a conservative blog?
 
Saint Gregory said:
What makes it worse is that the article reads "eyewitnesses" plural and then lists it first as if it was the prevailing account. It makes it hard to come to any other conclusion other than they're intentionally trying to spread false information.

When did CNN sink to the level reporting stories like they're a conservative blog?
Click to expand...

If I had to guess CNN is simply trying to up/maintain controversy. That's what pulls in readers and clicks.
 
Pizoxuat said:
Remember Mya Aaten-White, the woman who was shot during the first protests in Ferguson, and the cops showed up to take the bullet and then never contacted her again? There's been an update on her case finally.



The update is that it has been a month since she was shot AND THE POLICE STILL HAVE NOT INTERVIEWED HER. I had to triple-check the date on the story to believe it.
Click to expand...

The police have more important things to do than to investigate an attempted murder case, the city needs its funding after all.
 
TacticalFox88 said:
If this doesn't end with the entire department getting crucified and nuked from orbit, I'll consider it a complete failure of the justice system.
Click to expand...
Lol... You expect too much from the justice system. They aren't going to prosecute dozens of police departments and hundreds of officers over this. There is a reason the governor declared State of Emergency, to legally justify many of the actions of all these departments.
 
From petitions.whitehouse.gov

Response to Your Petition on the Use of Body-Worn Cameras

By Roy L. Austin, Jr., Deputy Assistant to the President for the Office of Urban Affairs, Justice and Opportunity in the Domestic Policy Counsel.

Since the officer-involved shooting death of Michael Brown on August 9, the nation and the world have borne witness to unrest in the city of Ferguson, Missouri. Across the country, there has been a demand for answers about the circumstances under which Michael was killed, and a demand for solutions.

The petition you added your name to -- proposing a law that would require all state, county, and local police to wear a camera -- is potentially one such solution. Thank you for adding your name, and for participating in this debate via the We the People platform.

There's understandably been much discussion about whether law enforcement officers across the country should use body cameras. In fact, for years, this Administration has advanced the use of cameras, both body-worn and vehicular, and recognized the numerous benefits to making cameras available to law enforcement officers. We support the use of cameras and video technology by law enforcement officers, and the Department of Justice continues to research best practices for implementation.

Today, the Department of Justice's Community Oriented Policing Services Office (COPS) and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) released a report from a September 2013 conference analyzing some of the costs and benefits of law enforcement using body-worn video technology. Some of the benefits the report cites include, but are not limited to:

Evidence that both officers and civilians acted in a more positive manner when they were aware that a camera was present;
New opportunities for effective training of law enforcement officers presented by the use of cameras; and
Useful evidence of interactions was often captured on video
It was noted at this conference that police departments are increasingly adopting the use of body-worn cameras.

In July 2012, to address allegations of unconstitutional conduct by the New Orleans Police Department, the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division and the City of New Orleans filed a consent decree that included expanded use of vehicle cameras, with significant policy and accountability requirements. Through the court-appointed Independent Monitor, the Department of Justice will receive additional information on the impact of expanded camera use.

In addition, the Department of Justice will continue to support grant programs, such as the Community Oriented Policing Services' Community Policing Development Program and the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, and encourage investments in video equipment by law enforcement agencies.

And while we understand that there are a number of benefits to having law enforcement officers use cameras, there continue to be many unanswered questions, including:

What is the most effective type of camera (vehicle, body, weapon) -- and if body, where is it best placed (lapel, ear, belt)?
What are the privacy implications of having officers record interactions with the public?
When should cameras be turned on?
Does every officer on a force need a camera?
How long should video data be maintained and who should have access to it?
What is the impact on community relationships?
The issue of cost also cannot be ignored.

The Department will continue to support the use of video technology, review and evaluate law enforcement agencies that use it, and engage in discussions to answer the questions above to address the manner in which this technology impacts policing, communities, and public safety.

We also know that cameras alone will not solve the problem where there is mistrust between police and communities. As a nation, we must continue to address this lack of trust. Most Americans are law abiding and most law enforcement officers work hard day in and day out to protect and serve their communities. When there is trust between community and law enforcement agency, crimes are more easily solved. And when community members and officers know that they will be treated with fairness and respect, public safety is enhanced.

Every day, the Department of Justice's COPS Office, Community Relations Service (CRS) and Office of Justice Programs (OJP) work with law enforcement and community leaders to help increase mutual trust and respect. This work enhances community-policing initiatives, strengthens departmental problem-solving and mediation skills, and expands departmental cultural awareness of diverse communities. In addition, the Civil Rights Division's investigations and litigation regarding law enforcement agencies seek remedies to promote trust and confidence between law enforcement and the communities they serve.

As Ferguson continues to heal as a community, this Administration will continue to work to ensure that our justice system, across the country, is truly just. We'll continue to work to support the use of video technology, review and evaluate law enforcement agencies that use it, and continue to engage in discussions about how this technology impacts policing, communities, and public safety.

In the meantime, thank you for speaking out. We appreciate your interest and recommendation on this very important issue, and we welcome additional ideas you may have on this topic.
Click to expand...
 
Charles Alan Ratliff said:
From petitions.whitehouse.gov
Click to expand...

What is the most effective type of camera (vehicle, body, weapon) -- and if body, where is it best placed (lapel, ear, belt)?
What are the privacy implications of having officers record interactions with the public?
When should cameras be turned on?
Does every officer on a force need a camera?
How long should video data be maintained and who should have access to it?
What is the impact on community relationships?
The issue of cost also cannot be ignored.
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-body-cameras-cuts-violence-complaints-rialto

California police use of body cameras cuts violence and complaints
Click to expand...

Upon returning to Rialto (city motto: "bridge to progress") he obtained $100,000 (£62,640) in state and federal funding for the Taser-made cameras – about $1,000 each – plus servers and fibre-optic cables. Each officer has his or her own camera, mounted on collars, spectacles or caps, and is expected to activate it during interactions with the public. Encounters are logged and uploaded to a secure digital cloud service, evidence.com.
Click to expand...

Stop the fucking bullshit @ life. These are such bullshit concerns.

Mystery solved.

Infuriating bullshit response with healing bullshit. You cant heal when you're getting shot by cops nation wide, and police don't face any punishment.
 
So about that recent story about the two construction who have come forward saying they saw what happened. Someone took cell phone footage of that, but why were they taking footage of the construction workers and not, you know, the actual shooting?
 
Oblivion said:
So about that recent story about the two construction who have come forward saying they saw what happened. Someone took cell phone footage of that, but why were they taking footage of the construction workers and not, you know, the actual shooting?
Click to expand...
Um, because the shooting happened 3 minutes before they started recording. Google is your friend.
 
BobLoblaw said:
Um, because the shooting happened 3 minutes before they started recording. Google is your friend.
Click to expand...

But even so why were they focused on the witnesses and not the officer and Brown's body?

edit: nevermind. Saw the whole video now.
 
soundahfekz said:
Never. They enjoy being just inflammatory enough to piss reasonable people off, but not enough to draw attention that warrants a ban hammer. gotta love the nomadic devil's advocate group.

"hey guys I haven't really been reading alot, but"

"I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but"

fuck outta here with that shit
Click to expand...

Playing devil's advocate for me means drawing different conclusions from the same data. We can both look at the same information and draw different conclusions. So it means taking on a different perspective (that you might not necessarily agree with) that is equally informed for the sake of argument. But people do this without sufficient data and look suspect as hell. Really, really suspect.
 
"I SUPPORT OFFICER D. WILSON" is an officer inspired design to show support for officer Darren Wilson of the Ferguson Police Department in Missouri. Donations from purchases will be divided between a fund set up for Officer Wilson at www.gofundme.com/supportofficerwilson as well as The BackStoppers Inc. organization which can be visited at www.backstoppers.org for more information. Thank you for your support and thank you to all police officers out there serving and protecting!
Click to expand...

SgzV0SO.png
 
kess said:
SgzV0SO.png
Click to expand...

I really hope the federal investigators are taking note of things like this.

Sure, there is plausible deniability with things like this but at a certain point all of these "coincidences" paint a picture. Also, the implication of impropriety is as bad as impropriety itself.
 
DreamDrop said:
Anyone still think justice will be served?
Click to expand...
I saw a report on MSNBC this week that instead of making his case for the indictment of Darren Wilson, the AG just dumped all (some?) the evidence in front of the Grand Jury and basically told them to figure out whether they should indite. This rarely results in an indictment because the Grand Jury expects the prosecutor to make an affirmative case for why the person should be arrested. Frankly, I don't want McCulloch to even take the case. His prosecution might be lax if he takes the case. We need the DOJ on this one.
 
DreamDrop said:
Anyone still think justice will be served?
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know. I think that in and of itself, this isn't necessarily the red flag that some might be imagining. All else being equal, BackStoppers is a fine and good thing and it's completely proper for Mr. McCulloch to be its V.P.

This might just be a case of the shirt seller latching on to a charity known to be popular with his target audience. That's a pretty normal strategy to add legitimacy to a fund-raising effort.

On the other hand, it's certainly not encouraging.

"The BackStoppers, Inc., is a non-profit association of civic-minded men and women in the St. Louis area and neighboring counties in Missouri and Illinois."

I'd be surprised if some of these civic-minded men and women aren't also among those who Support Darren Wilson, or at the very least their social acquaintances. Somebody must know the shirt guy somehow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

RIP Michael Madsen
2
60
1K
Little Mac replied
British Police Arrest Cosplayer
2
85
932
calico replied
Leonardo DiCaprio set to star in Michael Mann's Heat 2
34
597
Ellis replied
Don't Run from the police
2
74
2K
Mexen replied
Rampage Jacksons stupid ass son nearly kills a wrestler
7 8 9 10 11
515
3K
GateofD replied
Top Bottom