Politics On Politics.

[S8ET6]

I think what you're asking for is a default indictment for any white cop who shoots someone who isn't white based on suspicion that it was race related.

Nope, at this point I think its fair to start asking for an indictment of any cop who shoots someone based upon the suspicion that it may have been unnecessary.

Nothing wrong with check and balances.

So, Brown was killed because he attacked a cop; Martin was killed because he "attacked" Zimmermen ( who wasn't even a cop); Hunt was killed by police because he attacked fictional characters from a comic-con convention with a toy sword; Crawford was killed by police because he was carrying an air gun in Walmart that it appears he intended to purchase; and a 12 year old was killed by police while playing with a toy gun in a cleveland park.

Meanwhile, you've got all of these pro-guns people carrying loaded assault rifles into Wendys/Walmart/Target etc... as well as the Bundy group, guns drawn, daring the Federal Government to remove some cattle off of federal land...

[Oreo931]

Honestly? OK...

1) Alleged. From the reports that I read, a 3rd party called to report what they "thought" was a robbery. By now, I would've expected that the store clerk or owner would have verified that it was a robbery.

2) Wilson's face is bruised - but not the extent that would support his claims of "feeling like a 5yo fighting Hulk Hogan". I would have expected much more significant bruising at the least.

3) I'm not suggesting that Wilson pulled Brown into the car. Remember, Wilson himself initially stated that he did not engage Brown about the incident at the store - he told him to get out of the street. I am suggesting that Wilson tried to display his weapon as a means of intimidation when he told him to get out of the street and he didn't expect Brown to react the way he did. This is key in my mind because it places some culpability upon Wilson

4) Again, I'm not disputing this fact either. But what I am saying is that the evidence doesn't dismiss testimony that Brown's arms weren't in a surrendering position nor does it indicate that Brown was still posing a threat to Wilson's life.

Now, since it appears that we have a dialog going, let me ask you:

Do you honestly not see the conflict of interest in having McCulloch lead the grand jury investigation?

Why was Wilson allowed to place his weapon into evidence himself and why wasn't his initial statements recorded?

Why didn't the ME take pictures or measurements at the crime scene?

Why was Wilson allowed to testify during the grand jury proceedings, but not be cross-examined?

Why, after a weeks worth of buildup over the news, did the announcement happen at night time?

If you're not willing to admit that Mike Brown robbed the store, I am not going to have a discussion with you. Did you even watch the security cam footage??? Read Dorian Johnson's testimony -- he confirms that Brown robbed the store.

FYI, the owner of the store that Mike Brown robbed has had his store targeted and looted two additional times, not including the time it was robbed by Brown. The store was likely targeted because of the store owner's cooperation with police. Remember, there was graffiti on a nearby building that said "Snitches Get Stitches." If I were him, I wouldn't want my face plastered all over the news either.

[Piston Slapper]

Honestly? OK...

1) Alleged. From the reports that I read, a 3rd party called to report what they "thought" was a robbery. By now, I would've expected that the store clerk or owner would have verified that it was a robbery.

You're delusional if you're going to argue with what was caught on tape, which was robbery and assault. No sane person can see that and claim that Michael Brown was anything but a violent criminal. The store owner has been a little busy dealing with the vandals and looters celebrating the death of a criminal with more criminal activities.

Nope, at this point I think its fair to start asking for an indictment of any cop who shoots someone based upon the suspicion that it may have been unnecessary.

Nothing wrong with check and balances.

That's not how it works. The whole point of the grand jury is to see if there is any evidence to support the suspicions. Suspicion alone is not worth taking to trial. If there is evidence to support the suspicion, they'll indict. If there isn't, they won't. The system can't just skip that important step because you want to persecute police for doing their jobs.

So, Brown was killed because he attacked a cop; Martin was killed because he "attacked" Zimmermen ( who wasn't even a cop); Hunt was killed by police because he attacked fictional characters from a comic-con convention with a toy sword; Crawford was killed by police because he was carrying an air gun in Walmart that it appears he intended to purchase; and a 12 year old was killed by police while playing with a toy gun in a cleveland park.

Brown and Martin got what they asked for. The "toy gun" the 12 year old had looked fairly realistic, at a distance they're not going to assume it's fake, 12yo's get their hands on real guns often enough. Crawford and Hunt are the only ones where some real outrage is call for, but in Crawford's case it's more properly directed at the person who called the police and gave a false report rather than the officer responding to a call of that nature.

[Burn-E]

I love how Howard has essentially decided he's going to neg any comment I make in this thread after I declared I was going to put him on ignore.

Reminds me a 7 year old pissed off because he doesn't get his way so he starts acting up just to get some attention.

Moving on to a more political topic, I love how the St Louis Police Officers Association declared that the Rams players should be disciplined (meaning fined) and forced to apologize for expressing their 1st Amendment rights...

And Mikey Mike, what do you think Boehner is going to be able to accomplish with the Tea Party dragging their feet in the House? I think it's going to be a very real struggle to respond to the immigration executive order without screwing up the 2016 elections for the Republican party. Obama has them by the short hairs on this one...

[Kevin.]

NWS

[Fudge_Brownie]

Just because Alain's post had pictures, doesn't mean it's time to spam the thread. If you want to post, try including an opinion. You could even use that video as a point, but I don't think that's what you're doing.

[flyfishing3]

And Mikey Mike, what do you think Boehner is going to be able to accomplish with the Tea Party dragging their feet in the House? I think it's going to be a very real struggle to respond to the immigration executive order without screwing up the 2016 elections for the Republican party. Obama has them by the short hairs on this one...

they will cock block each other big time.

To bad there aren't more seats in congress up in 2016, going to be a landslide for the blues IMO

Nothing is going to get done. and EVERYBODY knows it.

[S8ET6]

If you're not willing to admit that Mike Brown robbed the store, I am not going to have a discussion with you. Did you even watch the security cam footage??? Read Dorian Johnson's testimony -- he confirms that Brown robbed the store.

FYI, the owner of the store that Mike Brown robbed has had his store targeted and looted two additional times, not including the time it was robbed by Brown. The store was likely targeted because of the store owner's cooperation with police. Remember, there was graffiti on a nearby building that said "Snitches Get Stitches." If I were him, I wouldn't want my face plastered all over the news either.

Look, I'm not saying that I am unwilling to admit that Mike Brown robbed the store. Yes, It is possible that he did. What I am saying is who robs a store and then doesn't try to avoid being arrested? Mike Brown didn't run from the scene of the crime - he casually walked out of the door, and knowing that he had just committed a "crime", he didn't try to avoid drawing police attention to himself by either walking on the sidewalk, or following Wilson's directions to get out of the street. That doesn't make sense.

And no, I didn't read DJ's testimony - just heard what he had to say on the day of the shooting, so I'm not disputing your accuracy to that fact. But, I don't understand how you can choose to accept this portion of his testimony, but the whole "shot while trying to surrender" part you discredit. To me, either he is a creditable witness or he's not.

As for the store owner - agreed, he may not have wanted his face plastered all over the news, but he'd have little choice if he was subpoenaed. True, the video doesn't show what would be considered a normal, friendly cash transaction, but I'd be willing to bet that there was more to that part of the story too. For example, most corner stores in the hood will sell cigarettes individually - and often times they will let you pay by using a link card (Food stamps) and then give you cash back. How do we know that they simply weren't negotiating upon the terms of this type of illegal transaction? Maybe Brown wanted 5 cigars instead of the 3 that was offered, and in the video he was seen simply pushing the clerk out of his way with a "get outta here with that BS" gester. I am speculating, sure - but so are you guys when you state that the video "clearly" shows a robbery and assault. I don't know many thugs, but of the ones that I do know, they would have beat the shit out of the clerk in that video under those circumstances - their mindset being "well, if I'm gonna catch a case..." Again, based upon my experiences alot of this just doesn't add up.

And Howard, maybe I am delusional... it sure felt like I was in a delusional state during the summer of 89' when I decided to make a quick run to 7-11 for some milk for my daughter and was stopped, unlawfully handcuffed and detained in a cruiser for over an hour while two officers illegally searched my car for drugs. But i guess that I should just shutup and appreciate the fact that they didn't plant anything in my car, huh?

You seem to be indoctrinated on that whole "police are the good guys" while elsewhere, there are people who know that the police are as shifty as the fucking criminals they claim to protect us from

[survolvo]

You trying to stereotype all cops because of that actions of a few is just as asinine as people stereotyping all blacks because of a few. You are stuck in a state of mind that all cops are corrupt because of one interaction you had over 20 years ago.

[Fudge_Brownie]

Look, I'm not saying that I am unwilling to admit that Mike Brown robbed the store. Yes, It is possible that he did. What I am saying is who robs a store and then doesn't try to avoid being arrested? Mike Brown didn't run from the scene of the crime - he casually walked out of the door, and knowing that he had just committed a "crime", he didn't try to avoid drawing police attention to himself by either walking on the sidewalk, or following Wilson's directions to get out of the street. That doesn't make sense.

Act normal. The philosophy of not being seen running away looking guilty, and drawing attention. There's positive/negatives to both acting normal and running. But I don't think you can say that because he walked out implies much of anything.

The video looks most likely to be a robbery, someone present called it in thinking the same thing, and his friend who was involved said it was. It's possible it wasn't theft, but seems extremely unlikely.

You trying to stereotype all cops because of that actions of a few is just as asinine as people stereotyping all blacks because of a few. You are stuck in a state of mind that all cops are corrupt because of one interaction you had over 20 years ago.

Those aren't equal comparisons. One is a physical trait, the other is a chosen profession. And unfortunately, there's been too many incidents even in the past decade for people to believe those incidents of abuse are an acceptable outlier. I think it's unfair to broadly paint the police nationally, when problems can vary depending on the region, management, and oversight. But I grew up in a fairly reasonable, very safe area, and saw some stuff that showed Officer Friendly isn't as friendly when the right people aren't aren't around. Some were wonderful, upstanding people. But some of their coworkers are hurting their reputation badly, and are good at "turning it off" in the right situations.

[survolvo]

Those aren't equal comparisons. One is a physical trait, the other is a chosen profession. And unfortunately, there's been too many incidents even in the past decade for people to believe those incidents of abuse are an acceptable outlier. I think it's unfair to broadly paint the police nationally, when problems can vary depending on the region, management, and oversight. But I grew up in a fairly reasonable, very safe area, and saw some stuff that showed Officer Friendly isn't as friendly when the right people aren't aren't around. Some were wonderful, upstanding people. But some of their coworkers are hurting their reputation badly, and are good at "turning it off" in the right situations.

Would it be fair for me to generalize all black people to be gangster thugs because I grew up in a fairly unreasonable, very unsafe area, and saw some stuff that showed that black people should be feared?

[S8ET6]

You trying to stereotype all cops because of that actions of a few is just as asinine as people stereotyping all blacks because of a few. You are stuck in a state of mind that all cops are corrupt because of one interaction you had over 20 years ago.

And you assume that my only interaction with police in any way/manner was the one that I had 20 year ago.

I love how some people are able to minimize shit, then look around later like a befuddled Steve Urkel and say "Did I do That?!?!"

[survolvo]

Maybe you are doing something to draw their attention? You put honey out, bees will come. Stop with this whole race thing. Its not about race, its about attitude.

[S8ET6]

Act normal. The philosophy of not being seen running away looking guilty, and drawing attention. There's positive/negatives to both acting normal and running. But I don't think you can say that because he walked out implies much of anything.

The video looks most likely to be a robbery, someone present called it in thinking the same thing, and his friend who was involved said it was. It's possible it wasn't theft, but seems extremely unlikely.

Agreed, which is why I said that I am willing to admit the video was of a robbery in that store - still doesn't address was DJ is a creditable witness in once breath and discredited the next.

[Oreo931]

Look, I'm not saying that I am unwilling to admit that Mike Brown robbed the store. Yes, It is possible that he did. What I am saying is who robs a store and then doesn't try to avoid being arrested? Mike Brown didn't run from the scene of the crime - he casually walked out of the door, and knowing that he had just committed a "crime", he didn't try to avoid drawing police attention to himself by either walking on the sidewalk, or following Wilson's directions to get out of the street. That doesn't make sense.

And no, I didn't read DJ's testimony - just heard what he had to say on the day of the shooting, so I'm not disputing your accuracy to that fact. But, I don't understand how you can choose to accept this portion of his testimony, but the whole "shot while trying to surrender" part you discredit. To me, either he is a creditable witness or he's not.

As for the store owner - agreed, he may not have wanted his face plastered all over the news, but he'd have little choice if he was subpoenaed. True, the video doesn't show what would be considered a normal, friendly cash transaction, but I'd be willing to bet that there was more to that part of the story too. For example, most corner stores in the hood will sell cigarettes individually - and often times they will let you pay by using a link card (Food stamps) and then give you cash back. How do we know that they simply weren't negotiating upon the terms of this type of illegal transaction? Maybe Brown wanted 5 cigars instead of the 3 that was offered, and in the video he was seen simply pushing the clerk out of his way with a "get outta here with that BS" gester. I am speculating, sure - but so are you guys when you state that the video "clearly" shows a robbery and assault. I don't know many thugs, but of the ones that I do know, they would have beat the shit out of the clerk in that video under those circumstances - their mindset being "well, if I'm gonna catch a case..." Again, based upon my experiences alot of this just doesn't add up.

And Howard, maybe I am delusional... it sure felt like I was in a delusional state during the summer of 89' when I decided to make a quick run to 7-11 for some milk for my daughter and was stopped, unlawfully handcuffed and detained in a cruiser for over an hour while two officers illegally searched my car for drugs. But i guess that I should just shutup and appreciate the fact that they didn't plant anything in my car, huh?

You seem to be indoctrinated on that whole "police are the good guys" while elsewhere, there are people who know that the police are as shifty as the fucking criminals they claim to protect us from

It's not simply a possibility that Brown robbed the store, it's fact.

And Dorian Johnson is not a credible witness. He changed his story many times. He also has a criminal history for offenses involving dishonesty. There are only two reasons why I credit the portion of his testimony before the grand jury that Brown robbed the store. First, because that's the only reasonable conclusion one can reach in light of the security footage. Second, because he threw Mike Brown under the bus in order to separate himself from Brown's conduct and avoid being charged himself. Whether he actually knew Brown was going to rob the store is irrelevant to me -- the point is, he testified that Brown did not pay for the items (i.e., stole them), and pushed/shoved the store owner out of the way. The fact that you won't accept what the security footage clearly shows, and what is corroborated by Johnson's testimony, makes your overall position less credible. The fact that Brown was casually walking in the middle of the street following the robbery does not demonstrate that he didn't commit a crime. Remember - Dorian Johnson testified that Mike Brown stole the cigars, which supports what the security footage shows. It's not like Brown had just carried out an elaborate jewelry store heist, he simply ripped off some cigars from a convenience store and strong-armed the clerk. His walking in the middle of the street after doing so just demonstrates his tough-guy mentality and thuggish character. Also, remember, Brown was found with 2+ grams of weed on his person. If he was scared of being arrested, as you speculate, he certainly wouldn't have been walking around carrying drugs.

I would suggest that you read the transcripts from the grand jury proceedings for a better understanding of what actually happened and what the physical evidence shows. The media did not accurately portray what happened for both sides of the spectrum.

Edit: And as far as my views on police are concerned, I know there are good cops, and I know there are bad cops. I've had my fair share of encounters with both -- I wasn't the most responsible teenager growing up. I am in agreement that unfair racial profiling occurs, and that it may even occur more often than not in high-crime areas. But, in my opinion, the person being mistreated can avoid being killed in almost all situations. There are also number of avenues available to pursue claims against bad cops after the fact.