Justice system finds little trust among African-Americans

Picture expired. Demonstrators protest against the August 9 police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri late on August 16, 2014 AFP

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Author Infomation

AFP
AFP
  • 1

    Donald Wells

    Interesting 2 c, no one n jpn commented on this

  • 2

    turbotsat

    Nationally, “although black men made up only 27.8% of all persons arrested from 2003-2009, they made up 31.8 percent of all persons who died in the course of arrest, and the majority of these deaths were homicides,” the American Civil Liberties Union has reported.

    4 percentage points doesn't seem like a big enough difference to complain about.

    Looking at it from the other direction, identified offenders in felonious killings of police for 2011, 43/77 => 56% white offenders, 29/77 => 38% black offenders, where US population overall in 2010 is 72% white, 13% black. The FBI stats for offenders in this case did not include breakdown for Hispanic so the 72% "White" including Hispanics figure from the overall population applies.

    That isn't to say "all black people are bad". It's to say people shouldn't defend criminal behavior. Don't make excuses for criminals OR bad cops.

    As for Chrismas' quote, that's BS, where does he get his info that that is a "a conversation not heard in white American families"?:

    said Christmas, a one-time prosecutor and a leader of Wednesday’s orderly protest. “As African-Americans, we have to tell our kids, when they get to a certain age, our male children, how to deal with the police”—a conversation not heard in white American families, he said.

    Officer feloniously killed:

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/2011/officers-feloniously-killed/officers-feloniously-killed

    Profile of alleged known assailants

    In 2011, 77 alleged offenders were identified in connection with the 72 law enforcement officers feloniously killed. Of those offenders, the following characteristics are known: ...

    43 of the alleged offenders were white, 29 were black, 2 were American Indian/Alaskan Native, and 1 was Asian/Pacific Islander. The race was not reported for 2 offenders. ...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#Race_and_ethnicity

  • -4

    SenseNotSoCommon

    Demonizing Americans is great for business!

    From private sector prisons (US has 5% of the world's population but a quarter of the world's inmates) to gated communities, there's a huge incentive to not invest in that demographic that mere decades ago was subjected to apartheid laws in the home of the brave and the land of the free.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-quigley/fourteen-examples-of-raci_b_658947.html

  • 4

    gaijinfo

    white police officer who pulled the trigger might never face justice.

    a police officer for six years, might get off scot-free.

    Both of these statements presuppose he's guilty. Then he laments the justice system after presuming guilt with ZERO evidence.

  • -6

    yabits

    Both of these statements presuppose he's guilty.

    There's no question he took Brown's life. There's no question he took Brown's life by firing at him from about 25 feet away. There is no independent eyewitness that has Brown making any aggressive move against the officer while the officer is firing at him. More than four eyewitnesses describe Brown's posture and movements as typical of a man who is surrendering and not charging.

    The police officer is a murderer.

  • 5

    Strangerland

    Justice system finds little trust among African-Americans

    And in other news, the sky is blue.

  • -1

    GW

    The US has done a piss poor job in dealing with the after math of slavery, yeah sure its getter better for black people over time, BUT at a damned slow pace, this should have been over & done with ages ago.

    Whenever I visit the states I can almost immediately feel the tension on the air, the US is a great place but its done a terrible job wrt to black people, the US can & should do better, PERIOD!

  • 5

    gaijinfo

    There's no question he took Brown's life by firing at him from about 25 feet away. There is no independent eyewitness that has Brown making any aggressive move against the officer while the officer is firing at him.

    You're kidding, right? There are plenty of witnesses that say the cop was getting beat. You ARE aware he went to the hospital for fractured eyeball socket afterwards, right?

  • 1

    Strangerland

    There's no question he took Brown's life by firing at him from about 25 feet away.

    There are plenty of witnesses that say the cop was getting beat. You ARE aware he went to the hospital for fractured eyeball socket afterwards, right?

    It's pretty clear that there are eyewitness reports that completely contradict each other. That means that there is nothing that can be conclusively determined through media reports at this time.

  • 0

    BertieWooster

    Justice in the US of A depends on how much money you have.

    Got bucks?

    You can get away with anything.

  • -1

    lostrune2

    You ARE aware he went to the hospital for fractured eyeball socket afterwards, right?

    For swollen face but not fractured eye socket:

    http://www.christianpost.com/news/ferguson-officer-did-not-suffer-broken-eye-socket-reports-claim-as-darren-wilson-support-fund-exceeds-200k-125203/

  • 1

    praack

    bertiewooster- the got bucks routine works for all countries for the elites- but not for all, having come from the normal demographic from the Other Side of the Tracks - i can say that majority of kids that went to my high school have gone to jail at least twice, not an overnight lock-up mind you but at least county prison. Blacks were not a high percentage in the area.

    Complaints of police brutality due to favoring those from the other side of railroad tracks or from the highway (yes these were used as excuses) were always prevalent - never was the idea that there was another path other than drug running, thievery etc...

    you can always find an excuse, you can always push people to the edge then blame them but in reality- why are you there? are you really innocent?

  • -2

    Frungy

    StrangerlandAug. 24, 2014 - 01:46PM JST It's pretty clear that there are eyewitness reports that completely contradict each other. That means that there is nothing that can be conclusively determined through media reports at this time.

    Eyewitness reports are always patchy. Why? Because we don't remember a continuous narrative like a video recorder. Instead the brain stores "snap shots". Imagine a security camera taking a pictures a minute, and trying to patch together the story from that. We THINK we remember like a video because the brain "fills in the blanks" with similar material from a wide range of memories, which is why you might be able to play back something you do frequently (like walking to your kitchen) like a video, but with unfamiliar events you're actually supplementing that memory heavily with stuff your brain has "photoshopped". That is why taking witness testimony is really something that should be done immediately, recorded and done by an unbiased expert. The way that police interrogate actually encourages errors as they push someone for details that just aren't there (sure, you THINK you "remember" the facts they're asking for, but actually they're fabrications).

    So, yes, the witnesses are unreliable.

    You know is who reliable? The doctor who did the autopsy. Looking at the wound pattern confirms certain aspects of the witness accounts, namely the distance (about 10 meters / 30 feet, possibly more but not much less) with the witnesses claiming 25 feet (did they have tape measures handy?). The wound pattern is also consistent with the distance, as are the entry and exit wounds.

    In short, there is reliable evidence to be had, and it discounts the officer's version. The video evidence shows no major injury to the officer's face and the ballistic and eyewitness evidence lines up to show the shooting happened at range that means there was no assault going on.

  • -2

    yabits

    In short, there is reliable evidence to be had, and it discounts the officer's version. The video evidence shows no major injury to the officer's face and the ballistic and eyewitness evidence lines up to show the shooting happened at range that means there was no assault going on.

    Which means there is probable cause to charge the officer.

    The fact that the Ferguson Police have not issued a complete incident report, and the fact that charges have not been brought are two major reasons why African-Americans should put little or no faith in the system.

  • 1

    Nirmala Balakrishnan

    seems not fair treatment though there is individual liberty is protected!****

  • 0

    bass4funk

    There's no question he took Brown's life. There's no question he took Brown's life by firing at him from about 25 feet away.

    And there is NO question who put himself in that predicament, brown had total control over the incident, he chose to take the police on. This is a problem that many out of control Black youths have. Many have a F*** da police attitude and THINKING bucking the system or getting in cops face will help them in some strange way prevail and it always ends up badly for these delinquents.

    There is no independent eyewitness that has Brown making any aggressive move against the officer while the officer is firing at him. More than four eyewitnesses describe Brown's posture and movements as typical of a man who is surrendering and not charging.

    Yabits, we don't know that yet. Interesting enough, all seems quiet, probably because the police and the Feds are doing their job as they should, but the stories are changing day by day and we are seeing a totally different side of how the events seem to have turned out. But nothing conclusive.

    The police officer is a murderer.

    And Brown was a criminal, so let's see what the evidence will produce.

    Which means there is probable cause to charge the officer.

    Probable doesn't mean FOR CERTAIN, just means, in theory they COULD charge him, but it all depends and they need to have more facts.

    The fact that the Ferguson Police have not issued a complete incident report, and the fact that charges have not been brought are two major reasons why African-Americans should put little or no faith in the system.

    We have a system where you are innocent until proven guilty! We don't do it like Japan arrest people, not allowing you to see a lawyer and build a solid case around you until we are certain we are going to get a conviction on you, that is just screwed up. Right now, he is on administration leave with pay, pending the investigation, as a protocol, he was already debriefed and any evidence from him on his person and the crime scene were taken away to be analyzed, the same goes with any blood, injuries, gun powder residue, bullet casings, ballistics, forensics, this is all going to take meticulous and consuming time. It's NOT going to be rushed because the Black community WANTS it so. We are NOT a lynch mob and until the hard concrete facts come out, it can be anyone's guess. And the outcome of the pending investigation will NEVER be determined by bystanders or eyewitnesses.

    Question, what would you and the public do if the officer is not indited? Can you accept it, can the Black people accept it? Because there is a possibility that could happen. I don't want to hear anything about the officer being a murderer, that is one persons opinion, some think differently and some just don't know. So once again, if the officer is found that his actions are justifiable, can you and everyone else, including Holder move on, or does he have to find some way to make it stick just like in the Rodney King trail, where the protesters DEMANDED that the officers get convicted or ELSE! It sure looks that way. In EVERY profession you have good and bad. Most cops are good people, they are not gunning down looking for Blacks to kill, that is absurd and insulting. I also believe in many of these lower income communities the Blacks are decent people, it's not about color, it just sickens me that people and idiots like Sharpton have NOTHING to bring to the table but rant and empty rhetoric. Blacks have to take responsibility in their communities for actions and not walk around blaming and thinking Whites owe them. They live in the greatest country, they can be anything, Obama did it. There is NO other country in the world that would (at least for the foreseeable future) elect a Black President or PM with the exception of the African continent. Obama didn't have a silver spoon in his mouth and became one of the most powerful man in the world. It all depends on what you want to make out of yourself.

    @bertie

    Justice in the US of A depends on how much money you have.

    That's EVERYWHERE in the world pretty much! NOT only the US.

    Got bucks?

    You can get away with anything.

    Gangsters, Tyrants, Politicians and Celebrities all have cash and they can all benifit from that. money equals power. Maybe unfair, but it's been like that since the Romans.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    OJ being a celebrity and picking smart lawyers and a loaded jury didn't hurt either.

    BertieWooster: Justice in the US of A depends on how much money you have. Got bucks? You can get away with anything.

  • 2

    yabits

    And there is NO question who put himself in that predicament, brown had total control over the incident,

    The same can be said of anyone who got in the car with Ted Bundy.

    Yabits, we don't know that yet. Interesting enough, all seems quiet, probably because the police and the Feds are doing their job as they should, but the stories are changing day by day and we are seeing a totally different side of how the events seem to have turned out. But nothing conclusive.

    Keep dreaming. Brown will be buried tomorrow and there's a lot of community support right now around the family. Nobody has much faith in the police or justice system, nor should they.

    We have a system where you are innocent until proven guilty!

    Charges are filed and an "innocent" person awaits trial in jail, or arranges bail. They are still innocent until proven guilty.

    I don't want to hear anything about the officer being a murderer

    The officer IS a murderer. A surrendering man killed 30 or more feet from the police car, according to police chief Belmar. Completely unarmed, in full view of at least four independent eyewitnesses.

    that is one persons opinion

    Millions of people have formed that opinion, all around the world.

    Most cops are good people... like Sharpton...Blacks have to take responsibility

    Irrelevant x10

    what would you and the public do if the officer is not indited?

    It will merely confirm what is already known: In America, an unarmed black person can be murdered in broad daylight, in full view of witnesses, and the killer get away scot-free. Brown's name is added to a long and growing list. It would confirm that the justice system in America is a complete and perverse farce.

    My guess is that IF he stands trial and is convicted -- a very big IF because of Missouri law -- the people defending the killer will claim it is all due to external pressure. Wait for it.

  • 0

    bass4funk

    The same can be said of anyone who got in the car with Ted Bundy.

    By the way, where is bundy?

    Keep dreaming. Brown will be buried tomorrow and there's a lot of community support right now around the family. Nobody has much faith in the police or justice system, nor should they.

    No, I don't need to dream, but people need to wake up to reality. And everyone should believe in the system, it's the only one we have or we just go back and hang anyone we suspect of being a criminal without due process. Let's all be vigilantes.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/19/officer-supporters-ferguson-shooting/14259993/

    Here is the reality.

    Charges are filed and an "innocent" person awaits trial in jail, or arranges bail. They are still innocent until proven guilty

    If so, and the police and Feds felt there was a need, they would have done it, but they didn't , he turned in his firearm and for his protection is at a undisclosed location until the time comes to hear what his fate will be, obviously, there was no need to arrest him at this point and time and when and IF that time should come up, then he will.

    The officer IS a murderer.

    And Brown is a criminal.

    A surrendering man killed 30 or more feet from the police car, according to police chief Belmar. Completely unarmed, in full view of at least four independent eyewitnesses.

    There are reports of Brown NOT surrendering, we don't know, but you made your mind up already and that's you, but there are many that don't take a firm position either way. By the way, many of these witnesse that were called in to testify, quite a few have been already dismissed, which means, some of their testimonies are shaky and sketchy. You can have 20 people watch the same thing, but how they process the information and interpret it.

    Millions of people have formed that opinion, all around the world.

    Millions of people have also formed their opinions of the Black urban communities as well and of racists like Al Sharpton and race hustlers like Jessie Jackson.

    Irrelevant x10

    Ok, so it's totally irrelevant if Blacks are racist and insight riots, burn down their own neighborhoods and NOT take personal responsibility, taking care of their kids, confront the out of control Blackmen that are incarcerated and single Black homes, when Sharpton and other so called Black leader or hypocrites educate and let them know they have to step up and take care of their kids and stop blaming Whites for all of their problems, there would be less racism in the country.

    It will merely confirm what is already known: In America, an unarmed black person can be murdered in broad daylight, in full view of witnesses, and the killer get away scot-free. Brown's name is added to a long and growing list. It would confirm that the justice system in America is a complete and perverse farce.

    No, Blacks have nothing to worry about if they don't attack a police officer and try to take on the system and think they can do as they like without ANY repercussions. Brown was a thug, pure and simple, his actions are what got him killed and as long as thugs do these kind of things, this self-perpetuating cycle of out of control Black youths inking they can go up against the police will only create another very possible Brown incident.

  • -3

    Shanique Smith

    "Potentially, it could invite Wilson to appear...."

    Wished they could have invited Brown to appear too. People are acting as if they don't know that there is one law for Blacks and another for Whites. A lot of the crimes Blacks are charged for would have been overlooked if the person was White. The Blacks have already committed a crime, just for being Black. Many will scuff at the remark, but it is the truth.

    Therefore, when crime statistics are quoted, it's quite meaningless to me. How many of those charged are falsely charged? What was the least of these 'crimes'?

    In regards to the Ferguson shooting, if the witnesses were speaking on behalf of the police officer, most of the commenters here would not be talking about contradictions in story. They would argue to the point that all the evidence smoothly blended in. The police contradicted themselves as to whether the officer knew about the shoplifting incident before the murder. Everyone accepted they made a mistake, and whatever explanations the police gave were okay.

    If it was a white youth murdered under the exact circumstances, and it was brought to the public's attention, the outcry would have been different. The youth would not have been painted in such an ugly manner. If the officer was Black and did the same thing to the white youth he would have been prosecuted already.

    After the shooting in Ferguson, the officers went and confiscated every phone and camera of people who admitted to witnessing the murder. I don't recall hearing this happening before in police shooting cases.

    If Brown was so tough, why did he run in the first place? Only to turn around and charge the bullets? The people who keep repeating this over and over need to check their psychological state of mind.

    Africa-Americans have little trust in the justice system, because it keeps failing them.

  • -1

    bass4funk

    Therefore, when crime statistics are quoted, it's quite meaningless to me. How many of those charged are falsely charged? What was the least of these 'crimes'?

    Because you don't want to deal with the facts. Are you in law enforcement? Have you studied crime stats or can you make a counter argument that the stats everywhere are wrong? If you can't and you want to dismiss them, then you are a denier.

    After the shooting in Ferguson, the officers went and confiscated every phone and camera of people who admitted to witnessing the murder. I don't recall hearing this happening before in police shooting cases.

    Prove it. please.

    If it was a white youth murdered under the exact circumstances, and it was brought to the public's attention, the outcry would have been different. The youth would not have been painted in such an ugly manner. If the officer was Black and did the same thing to the white youth he would have been prosecuted already.

    You cannot say that. I have witnessed other occasions in L.A. where that was not the case. We just had a guy a month ago in Long Beach shot two buglers that were in his house, tried to rob his safe and they pursued to beat him almost unconscious, leaving him for badly injured, the man was able to get his gun and when the assailants saw that, they ran out the house. The man followed and shot one of the them who was a woman and she told him that she was pregnant please don't shoot, but he shot and killed her.

    Now he admitted to shooting the woman and has NO regrets. Because on national TV he admitted to killing the woman, her partner got away, he might very well be prosecuted because when he shot the woman, she was out of his house and OFF his property, the man followed them around the corner of his house and aimed for them. Now everyone involved in this case is WHITE. The man is over 80 and they are now investigating if he was in the right, but I believe he will get locked up, because these people weren't a threat anymore once they were off his property, had they been in his house, he could've killed them and NO jury would have convicted him. Point is, color doesn't matter, crime can happen to anyone and anyone can be a thug. We need to stop taking about color. People like Jackson and many urban Blacks and many in the liberal media grossly over exaggerate the race issue.

    If Brown was so tough, why did he run in the first place? Only to turn around and charge the bullets? The people who keep repeating this over and over need to check their psychological state of mind.

    If he was intoxicated or had drugs in his system or if he was just plain stupid, he could've charged the officer. I think people that don't want to see and realize the facts are in DEEP denial.

    Africa-Americans have little trust in the justice system, because it keeps failing them.

  • -1

    Shanique Smith

    @bass4funk I'm not a denier. I am a realist.** Sensenotsocommon**, provided you with a credible enough link above. Here is it again.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-quigley/fourteen-examples-of-racib658947.html

    I tried not to let ethnicity factor into my previous comments on other threads, but now it would be almost impossible seeing that the caption is 'race' related. Citizen on citizen crime is somewhat different for me. All my previous comments were made condemning a police officer who should have acted differently from a civilian. He is supposed to be trained in using techniques to de-escalate a situation. Not escalating it, because he knows whatever happens he will not be in any 'hot water'. The Ferguson police's vocabulary seem to be limited to "freeze" and "I'll kill you." Where is the psychological training? Cursing and calling the individual derogatory names? The incident should not have been escalated pass the car scene. The Ferguson police seem to think they are above the law, so they act in whichever way they please.

    Here is one example why I didn't condemn the officer based on ethnicity: http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/highlight/father-whose-unarmed-son-shot-by-police-10-years-ago-reflects-on-ferguson/53f261c078c90abf87000550?cn=tbla

    Why didn't they also test if the officer had drugs in his system. The youth having drugs in his system is questionable. Do you realize that the officer's report will come after most of the evidence is gathered?

  • 0

    bass4funk

    Why didn't they also test if the officer had drugs in his system. The youth having drugs in his system is questionable. Do you realize that the officer's report will come after most of the evidence is gathered?

    Officers get randomly tested all the time and again after such an incident as protocol. They will do that once he is back in the center, the same goes for the victim. If officer Wilson was under the influence, then that changes everything and he's in big, big trouble, but given the fact they the officers constantly get tested, I would think that would be a very unlikely possibility.

  • -2

    yabits

    There are reports of Brown NOT surrendering, we don't know,

    All reports, including the police, have Brown at least 30-35 feet from the car -- which can only mean, since the altercation started at the car, he was trying to put distance between himself and it. He wasn't dragged to 35 feet away -- he moved to that distance himself. The people who "don't know" what that means can't be trusted to convey much else.

    The Sunday New York Times had a great article on the timeline that had Michael Brown's body left laying out in the hot sun for over four hours. Police chiefs from St. Louis and other districts weighed in on how improper -- and how indecent and disrespectful -- that was. None of them could fathom how that could happen, and it's another reason that demonstrates how poorly served African-American communities are by the police, and why they should have so little trust in them.

  • -5

    bass4funk

    All reports, including the police, have Brown at least 30-35 feet from the car -- which can only mean, since the altercation started at the car, he was trying to put distance between himself and it. He wasn't dragged to 35 feet away -- he moved to that distance himself. The people who "don't know" what that means can't be trusted to convey much else.

    Again, NOT ALL reports say that, it depends on what you read, the media did a horrible job at fire feeding this story. also, how many times have you said the same thing, Yabits? You DON'T KNOW YOU WEREN'T THERE, neither was I!! At this point, it is all pure assumption, I'm not on the investigative team and you are not as well. Whatever you or anyone else that claims, these are the facts is just a laughable joke. I'll believe and listen when the Feds make their statement and it will be after Brown's funeral for sure. Then based on that, I will make a decision, but anyone that puts there eggs in one basket is in total denial.

    The Sunday New York Times had a great article on the timeline that had Michael Brown's body left laying out in the hot sun for over four hours.

    Which is normal? It's a crime scene. Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson were on the ground for hours as well, it would be VERY UNUSUAL to just pick up the body right away, that's just hogwash.

    Police chiefs from St. Louis and other districts weighed in on how improper -- and how indecent and disrespectful -- that was.

    Strange it is usually protocol, but each division has there on way of dealing with the deceased, but usually, the body is not touched or moved, would you have felt better if they would have put a tarp over him?

    None of them could fathom how that could happen, and it's another reason that demonstrates how poorly served African-American communities are by the police, and why they should have so little trust in them.

    Sorry, but this is NOT a constant day to day and event where cops are giddy just to get Black folks. But Yabits, if you would show the same outrage and passion you do with Black on Black crimes and the way out of control Black children that are born out of wedlock and understand, the main culprit and killer of Blacks are other Blacks. I wish you had the same fortitude to speak out about the gangs, drugs, high drop out rate of Black kids in school. People like Kevin Jackson, Ben Carson, Allen West and Bill Cosby are just some of the Black strong men that are real leaders and that advocate independence p, financial freedom from the government teat and overall personal accountability and responsibility for all Blacks.

  • -2

    Frungy

    bass4funkAug. 25, 2014 - 10:14PM JST Again, NOT ALL reports say that, it depends on what you read, the media did a horrible job at fire feeding this story. also, how many times have you said the same thing, Yabits? You DON'T KNOW YOU WEREN'T THERE, neither was I!! At this point, it is all pure assumption, I'm not on the investigative team and you are not as well. Whatever you or anyone else that claims, these are the facts is just a laughable joke. I'll believe and listen when the Feds make their statement and it will be after Brown's funeral for sure. Then based on that, I will make a decision, but anyone that puts there eggs in one basket is in total denial.

    We have the doctor's autopsy report, hard evidence, that backs up the 10 yards distance at the time of the shooting. Denying that fact right now is pretty much impossible.

  • -2

    yabits

    Again, NOT ALL reports say that [Brown was 30-35 feet from the car when he was fatally shot], it depends on what you read...

    You claim that "NOT ALL" reports say Brown was at that distance, but you fail to provide a single example. NOT ONE. Providing an example would back up your claim and help you to look a bit more rational.

    The police have reported that Brown's body was approximately 35 feet from the officer's vehicle. They were at the crime scene and they measured the distance. They do have measuring devices, you know. So wouldn't their's be the definitive metric? He was laying there for hours and so they had plenty of time to double and triple-check their measurements.

    the media did a horrible job at fire feeding this story

    Why blame the media? When Police Chief Belmar came out in public and cited the distance as approximately 35 feet, the media was not supposed to report it?

    If Brown, an unarmed man, got 35 feet from the car, common sense and logic would dictate that he moved to that distance of his own accord, using his own feet, and that it was his intention to move away from the car. If there is another reason how or why he could get himself to that distance, no one has provided it.

    Also, common sense and logic would dictate that Brown was not running backwards. It would dictate that Brown's back was to the vehicle while the 35-feet was being covered. Once that common sense and logic starts to kick in, it tends to undermine any claim that the police officer was in any immediate danger of his life by the unarmed man running away from him.

  • 0

    bass4funk

    @frungy

    We have the doctor's autopsy report, hard evidence, that backs up the 10 yards distance at the time of the shooting. Denying that fact right now is pretty much impossible.

    So what? That doesn't confirm, nor deny anything but the distance, again, have you ever been in a situation when you had to use a gun. You are looking at it from a one-sided POV. We weren't there, so NO reasonable, logical and if you ARE a fair person can honestly and unequivocally say, this happened for sure.

    @ybaits

    You claim that "NOT ALL" reports say Brown was at that distance, but you fail to provide a single example. NOT ONE. Providing an example would back up your claim and help you to look a bit more rational

    I don't need to, just like you I read the paper and different sources. I just don't feel it's necessary, he said, she said.. What Dr. Baden said, yes! What everyone else says, doesn't matter, when the TRUE facts come out, then I will make my honest opinion known, until then, we just don't know the full truth. MY credibility is NOT on the line, I shoot NO ONE and I am NOT the one investigating, I'll leave that to the men and women that have their degrees in criminology. Whether I prove to you or you to me doesn't matter, we are outsiders, the Feds don't care what we think, it's irrelevant.

    He was laying there for hours and so they had plenty of time to double and triple-check their measurements.

    Who are you to determine what time and what the officers should have or should not have done?! It's NOT your call, you are NOT on the force and you don't know why they did what he did. Either way, Brown didn't care, he was dead, so a few more hours sitting in the sun wouldn't have harmed his corpse.

    Why blame the media?

    As a person that works for the media, I know some of the players in this and some of these journalists ARE indeed! stoking the flames of racism and as I said! the number one thing that many of them care about, especially in the evening time slot of prime time, ratings is everything and CNN ran with it, just the same way they did with the Malaysian plane that went missing-complete overkill! This is a ratings business and both CNN and Msnbc are struggling for the number 2 spot. And anything that can bump up their ratings is a God send blessing. Demonize officer Wilson when we didn't even hear his side of the story. Disgusting and distasteful, that is not impartial reporting.

    When Police Chief Belmar came out in public and cited the distance as approximately 35 feet, the media was not supposed to report it?

    Of course they were, that's their job. I'm talking about some of the race hating hosts on many of the shows panel.

    If Brown, an unarmed man, got 35 feet from the car, common sense and logic would dictate that he moved to that distance of his own accord, using his own feet, and that it was his intention to move away from the car. If there is another reason how or why he could get himself to that distance, no one has provided it.

    So now you are a ballistic expert, Yabits. :-) ROFL ok

    Also, common sense and logic would dictate that Brown was not running backwards. It would dictate that Brown's back was to the vehicle while the 35-feet was being covered. Once that common sense and logic starts to kick in, it tends to undermine any claim that the police officer was in any immediate danger of his life by the unarmed man running away from him.

    Yabits, that is a complete lie.

    Dr. Michael Baden, renowned Forensic Pathologist, has issued a preliminary autopsy report on the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. He was asked to do the autopsy by Brown’s family. His findings were reported by the New York Times late last night, and it shows Brown was shot six times – ALL from the FRONT. That directly contradicts one of the most quoted “witnesses” who has claimed police officer Darren Wilson shot Brown in the back:

    NY TIMES ARTICLE

    NEW YORK TIMES Michael Brown, the unarmed black teenager who was killed by a police officer, sparking protests around the nation, was shot at least six times, including twice in the head, a preliminary private autopsy performed on Sunday found. One of the bullets entered the top of Mr. Brown’s skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when it struck him and caused a fatal injury, according to Dr. Michael M. Baden, the former chief medical examiner for the City of New York, who flew to Missouri on Sunday at the family’s request to conduct the separate autopsy. It was likely the last of bullets to hit him, he said. Mr. Brown, 18, was also shot four times in the right arm, he said, adding that all the bullets were fired into his front. The bullets did not appear to have been shot from very close range because no gunpowder was present on his body. **However, that determination could change if it turns out that there is gunshot residue on Mr. Brown’s clothing, to which Dr. Baden did not have access. . . . Dr. Baden provided a diagram of the entry wounds, and noted that the six shots produced numerous wounds. Some of the bullets entered and exited several times, including one that left at least five different wounds. “This one here looks like his head was bent downward,” he said, indicating the wound at the very top of Mr. Brown’s head. “It can be because he’s giving up, or because he’s charging forward at the officer.” He stressed that his information does not assign blame or justify the shooting. “We need more information; for example, the police should be examining the automobile to see if there is gunshot residue in the police car,” he said. . . . . One of the bullets shattered Mr. Brown’s right eye, traveled through his face, exited his jaw and re-entered his collarbone. The last two shots in the head would have stopped him in his tracks and were likely the last fired. . . . . Mr. Johnson said that he hid behind a parked car and that Mr. Brown was struck by a bullet in his back as he ran away, an account that Dr. Baden’s autopsy appears to contradict. . . . Read More

    “People have been asking: How many times was he shot? This information could have been released on Day 1,” Dr. Baden said in an interview after performing the autopsy. “They don’t do that, even as feelings built up among the citizenry that there was a cover-up. We are hoping to alleviate that.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1

    Those are NOT my words, but words from Dr. Baden or do you want to say, he doesn't know what he's doing? Now that we know, he wasn't running, we can scratch that one off the list and hopefully, soon find out what really happened? As he said, we need more information.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    Frungy: We have the doctor's autopsy report, hard evidence, that backs up the 10 yards distance at the time of the shooting. Denying that fact right now is pretty much impossible.

    http://www.gazettetimes.com/news/did-michael-brown-have-his-hands-up-when-killed-by/article_740948a7-3f5e-5ddb-898f-41f2d2945d8e.html

    Baden said given what he knows, the shots could have been fired from at least 1 or 2 feet away or much farther.

    “It could be 30 feet away,” he told reporters Monday.

  • -2

    yabits

    If Brown, an unarmed man, got 35 feet from the car, common sense and logic would dictate that he moved to that distance of his own accord, using his own feet, and that it was his intention to move away from the car. If there is another reason how or why he could get himself to that distance, no one has provided it.

    So now you are a ballistic expert, Yabits. :-) ROFL ok

    It has nothing to do with ballistics. Reading is fundamental. Brown moved 35 feet away from the car, according to the police. He moved that distance using his own two feet and he was not running backwards.

    Yabits, that is a complete lie.

    Brown was not running backwards. Your "article" about Dr. Baden leaves out one piece of critical information:

    "Shawn Parcells, a forensic pathologist who assisted Dr Baden, used an anatomical diagram to explain each of the six shots they found.... It is believed that five of the shots hit Brown on the front of his body....However Parcells said that the gunshot wound to Brown's forearm appeared to be consistent with someone walking away or putting their arms up in a surrender or defensive manner before adding, 'but we don't know' "

    So, the forensic pathologist who worked with Baden affirms that one bullet could have come from behind Brown. At their public press conference, Dr. Baden agrees with Parcells about the one wound which could have come from behind. If it came from behind, it would lend additional credence to eyewitnesses who have Brown putting distance from the police officer (true), and jerking suddenly as though he'd been hit. From 35 feet, he then turned around and the office kept shooting.

    Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2727568/Autopsy-reveals-Michael-Brown-shot-SIX-times-confrontation-police-officer.html

    At a distance of 35 feet, an unarmed man in the act of surrendering did not represent a lethal threat to the officer -- who kept putting bullets into him, until Brown fell forward and received two bullets to the head. It was murder.

  • -1

    bass4funk

    If Brown, an unarmed man, got 35 feet from the car, common sense and logic would dictate that he moved to that distance of his own accord, using his own feet, and that it was his intention to move away from the car. If there is another reason how or why he could get himself to that distance, no one has provided it.

    That doesn't mean they won't. You just have to wait and see for the Feds to conclude their investigation in order to find out.

    It has nothing to do with ballistics. Reading is fundamental. Brown moved 35 feet away from the car, according to the police. He moved that distance using his own two feet and he was not running backwards.

    Yes, it does. It has everything to do with bullet projectile ballistics. If you come on JT and put up these theoretical assessments of probable accounts, then that means, you are challenging ( which is actually ludicrous ) the cops report and NONE of us have any access to the crime scene, therefore, to speculate as to what could have, might have possibly happened is pure conjecture.

    So, the forensic pathologist who worked with Baden affirms that one bullet could have come from behind Brown. At their public press conference, Dr. Baden agrees with Parcells about the one wound which could have come from behind. If it came from behind, it would lend additional credence to eyewitnesses who have Brown putting distance from the police officer (true), and jerking suddenly as though he'd been hit. From 35 feet, he then turned around and the office kept shooting.

    OH, NO YOU DON'T! First you come on here claiming that Dr. Baden is one of THE best Pathologists in the world and his assessment of How Brown died is indisputable from the way you were telling everyone and now all of a sudden, I showed you IN HIS OWN words that there is NO WAY that Brown was shot in the back OR was running, now you are trying to dig a hole (again) and claim that he made a big mistake??? Give it up! Baden was on FOX the other day on Hannity saying the EXACT same thing as he did to the NY Times. His credibility is on the line, he's NOT going to jeopardize his career, NO WAY! Brwon was NOT shot in the back and there is NO other evidence that can prove that so far, which could possibly mean as to my original point that there is a good possibility that Brown was charging the officer, but Baden also said, we don't know if he had his hands up or if he were chagrin the officer, an autopsy cannot establish that fact.

    You can skate all you want, you can get angry all you want, but whatever you say to demonize the officer will not help, because NO ONE Has the right to convict anyone until they are proven guilty in a court of law. Like I said, if you have the same passion to speak about how so many Blacks are murdering other Blacks at an alarming rate, I would say, you really care about the inequality of Black on Black crime. But because the officer is white, it doesn't seem to bother you to call him every name is his book and brand him a racist bent on made ring someone is much easier to do than Blaming Black people.

  • -2

    yabits

    That doesn't mean they won't.

    You are suggesting that the feds will find an alternate way for a human being to distance himself around 35 feet from a vehicle in a few seconds without using his legs to run the distance. In either case, it shows Brown -- who originally was in a tussle with the officer at the vehicle -- soon got to a distance of 35 feet away. More than four independent eyewitnesses say he ran. Unless someone can come up with a reasonable alternative of how Brown achieved that distance, I think that one can be safely put to bed.

    I showed you IN HIS OWN words that there is NO WAY that Brown was shot in the back OR was running,

    The simple fact is that Dr. Baden said no such things. At the very press conference where Dr. Baden and Professor Parcells present the autopsy data, Parcells clearly indicates one of the shots could have come from the back. (at the 0:45 mark of the link) Parcells stands with his back to where the shot could have come from. Two of the wounds are graze wounds, which means there is no entry or exit, and could have come from either direction. Anyone can read the NYTimes article and look at the video and agree that the Times omitted a key detail.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZ-fKmATWTA

    "While the shot could have come from the back." -- Those are the words of the forensic team.

    At about the 5:10 mark of the linked video below, Parcells shows the diagram of the rear of anatomical figure of Brown -- with a wound shown in red from that angle. From the rear of Brown. Parcells uses the words: "Dr. Baden and I ...." meaning it is a joint conclusion. At the 5:30 mark, Professor Parcells openly states that the wound is consistent with eyewitness statements about Brown being hit with a bullet as he's moving away from the vehicle.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oS2YxBd1uOo

    You seem very adamant that you are right when the forensic team is claiming just the opposite.

  • -3

    bass4funk

    You are suggesting that the feds will find an alternate way for a human being to distance himself around 35 feet from a vehicle in a few seconds without using his legs to run the distance. In either case, it shows Brown -- who originally was in a tussle with the officer at the vehicle -- soon got to a distance of 35 feet away. More than four independent eyewitnesses say he ran. Unless someone can come up with a reasonable alternative of how Brown achieved that distance, I think that one can be safely put to bed.

    More nonsense that you're trying to squeeze in. I'm not suggesting Anything other than what was said by Dr. Baden, his wounds were all in the front and do NOT indicate anything other than he was shot in the FRONT.

    The simple fact is that Dr. Baden said no such things.

    So the NYT is outright lying and therefore, they need to do a retraction, also when he said the EXACT same thing on FOX the other day, he technically misspoke? That's what you're saying?

    At the very press conference where Dr. Baden and Professor Parcells present the autopsy data,

    Yabits, I'm talking about what Dr. Baden said, 4 days ago! Again, you are implying when he was asked the exact same question by Sean Hannity he made a gaffe, that is what you are saying, so Dr. Baden doesn't know what he was talking about, right?

    Anyone can read the NYTimes article and look at the video and agree that the Times omitted a key detail.

    so one of the largest paper in the country and the most famous and read in the world has some of the dumbest editors and writers that they would purposely engage in omitting those critical key points in your opinion! that's what you're saying?

    You seem very adamant that you are right when the forensic team is claiming just the opposite

    Not at all, because, I will just wait and see. I believe in facts, by the people that are assignment to the case, NOT you or one-sided facts. We don't know what happened. That's a fact. I could be right and you could be wrong or vice versa. Yabits, buddy...I can gather EVERY post of yours in the past week and you are the one that vehemently wants to try to prove that you are right, everyone is wrong, there is NO way that the police is innocent of any wrongdoing, he is a racist, all White cops are racists, Blacks can get a pass for anything, the video of the forensics show that Baden was wrong and that Brown was running so we need to believe the video, but when Brown STEALS the cigars, that video should be discredited.

    Yabits, you are seriously the funniest person to debate with on JT. Because you say these things happened in your opinion, therefore, it has to be factual, there is NO opposing viewpoint or other possible scenarios, then why do I need to ever read, watch the news again? I'll just go to you to get accurate information, especially when it comes to judicial laws. :-)

  • -2

    Frungy

    Oh my goodness people. Do they teach nothing about "weasel words" and editorializing in US schools? Reading the articles people reference the forensics people are QUOTED (their words) as saying the range was 30 feet. The reporters then editorialize or say "maybe" it was closer because (with correct scientific caution) the forensics experts say they can't be 100% sure... this sort of statement could equally be manipulated into the reporter saying that maybe Brown was hit by a ricochet from the grassy knoll.

    The absence of powder burns and powder in the wounds confine the 10yard finding. It is as close to proven as it is possible for anything to be.

    The cop shot an unarmed kid 10 yards away. The cop lied that the kid was standing over him assaulting him. The cop is a lying murderer. End of story.

  • 1

    cleo

    We don't know what happened.

    We do know that a police officer shot and killed an unarmed youth. You've said yourself more than once that this was 'a crime scene'. So what crime do you think was committed here? If the officer was justified in shooting and killing an unarmed member of the public, doesn't that mean there was no crime? What crime do you think was committed?

  • -1

    bass4funk

    We do know that a police officer shot and killed an unarmed youth. You've said yourself more than once that this was 'a crime scene'. So what crime do you think was committed here?

    The crime of getting emotional and not allowing the facts to come out in a court of law. The officer is still presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. He has that right and his side of the story should be heard before a Grand Jury. We don't know in detail as to ebb and flow of the altercation and what was said EXACTLY. We don't know all the details, and to guess or speculate is totally irresponsible.

    If the officer was justified in shooting and killing an unarmed member of the public, doesn't that mean there was no crime? What crime do you think was committed?

    The crime was committed when Brown went into the store and stole the cigars, that was the catalyst of all this. If the officers life was indeed in danger and felt that his life was in serious jeopardy and the officer felt the need to use his firearm in order to save his life, then the shooting was justified.

  • 0

    yabits

    The crime of getting emotional and not allowing the facts to come out in a court of law.

    Inventing crimes now, are we? So the yellow tape that the police used to mark off the scene was because of people not allowing facts to come out in court.

    He has that right and his side of the story should be heard before a Grand Jury.

    Yes, and he has every reason to lie. And we have every reason not to take his story at face value. Eyewitness testimony and, more importantly, the physical evidence has to match up.

    We don't know all the details, and to guess or speculate is totally irresponsible.

    Some things are beyond speculation. An unarmed person who is increasing his distance from a police officer -- remember that Brown was at least 30 to 35 feet away from the car -- means that they are less and less a direct threat to that officer. What is speculation is to pretend that he was when simple common sense dictates otherwise.

    If the officers life was indeed in danger and felt that his life was in serious jeopardy and the officer felt the need to use his firearm in order to save his life, then the shooting was justified.

    You are contradicting yourself in the same sentence. There can be a very wide gap between "indeed in danger" and "feeling that his life was in serious jeopardy." It is a fact that Brown was increasing his distance from Wilson and his vehicle -- meaning with each foot of separation, the less the armed officer could be said to be in jeopardy from the man that he was pursuing. Wilson got out of the car and pursued the unarmed man. All of the eyewitnesses assert that.

    The crime that was committed was an emotion: a crime of rage. Brown smacked Wilson in the face in order to get away from him, and Wilson became enraged at the humiliation, and left his car to pursue, shoot, and murder Brown.

  • 1

    Strangerland

    The crime was committed when Brown went into the store and stole the cigars, that was the catalyst of all this.

    No it wasn't. The officer did not know of the cigars when stopping Brown. Therefore the theft of the cigars is not (and cannot be) the catalyst. The catalyst was the officer stopping Brown.

  • 2

    cleo

    The crime was committed when Brown went into the store and stole the cigars

    That would make the store the crime scene, surely. Not the street with a dead body on it.

    If the officers life was indeed in danger

    If the unarmed youth was indeed several yards or more away from the police officer, it's hard to imagine that the police officer was in any danger of getting his hair ruffled, never mind his life being in danger.

    and felt that his life was in serious jeopardy and the officer felt the need to use his firearm in order to save his life, then the shooting was justified

    So....any twitchy, paranoid cop that sees a monster in any and every youth of greater than average build with perhaps a sassy mouth and, who knows, maybe a shoplifting habit, is justified in shooting to kill any and every well-built young person who gives them a bit of lip? Any cop who gets jumpy around what s/he sees as the lower classes has no business being a cop.

    There can be a very wide gap between "indeed in danger" and "feeling that his life was in serious jeopardy."

    It's the same reasoning that got Yoshi Hattori killed in Louisiana. The same reasoning that gets far too many young people legally killed in Florida by adults who 'feel' threatened. The difference is that a cop is supposedly trained to deal with such situations with greater maturity and responsibility. To protect and serve, not to panic, aim and fire.

  • -2

    bass4funk

    Yabits

    Inventing crimes now, are we? So the yellow tape that the police used to mark off the scene was because of people not allowing facts to come out in court.

    No need to invent anything. Again, you don't know what will or what will NOT be presented as evidence. You are not the defense lawyer or the prosecutor. They would never tell the public that.

    Yes, and he has every reason to lie.

    OR every reason NOT to lie.

    And we have every reason not to take his story at face value. Eyewitness testimony and, more importantly, the physical evidence has to match up.

    And there were witnesses that counter the opposite. Again, Wilson has his witnesses, either way, we don't know.

    Some things are beyond speculation.

    This is why we have professionals that are trained in this field and know what they are doing. You and I are not in the legal law enforcement and we are NOT both lawyers, so for us to speculate has NO impact on the case.

    An unarmed person who is increasing his distance from a police officer -- remember that Brown was at least 30 to 35 feet away from the car -- means that they are less and less a direct threat to that officer. What is speculation is to pretend that he was when simple common sense dictates otherwise.

    And let's NOT forget he's a thief and criminal, you forgot to add that part.

    You are contradicting yourself in the same sentence.

    Yabits, don't try it, please, it's not going to work.

    There can be a very wide gap between "indeed in danger" and "feeling that his life was in serious jeopardy."

    We don't know! But from officer Wilson's and some of the evidence so far points to Wilson's felt his life was indeed in danger, meaning, if he doesn't use his firearm, he's DEAD. No Gap!

    It is a fact that Brown was increasing his distance from Wilson and his vehicle -- meaning with each foot of separation, the less the armed officer could be said to be in jeopardy from the man that he was pursuing. Wilson got out of the car and pursued the unarmed man. All of the eyewitnesses assert that.

    As I said, we don't know for sure, all that will come out in the trial.

    The crime that was committed was an emotion:

    Brown's robbery, I agree, as well as the rioters. It was all based on pure emotion, which solved nothing, but made these people look bad.

    a crime of rage. Brown smacked Wilson in the face in order to get away from him,

    Which was his THIRD problem after robbing the store and standing in the middle of the street.

    and Wilson became enraged at the humiliation, and left his car to pursue, shoot, and murder Brown.

    Or after he shoved the officer back into his car beat him and taunted him and bum-rushed him and making the officer feel that his life was endanger, which resulted in Wilson pulling out his firearm and needed to use deadly force.

    @stranger

    No it wasn't.

    Yes, it was, once he stole those boxes of cigars, his whole life turned for the worst.

    The officer did not know of the cigars when stopping Brown.

    He did hear over the radio dispatch that there was a robbery, saw Brown in the street and saw the box and put two and two together.

    Therefore the theft of the cigars is not (and cannot be) the catalyst. The catalyst was the officer stopping Brown.

    No, correction, theft is EVERY reason for a cop to stop you and arrest you and if you put your hands on him, walk up in his face and use bodily harm and feels his life is in danger, he has every right to neutralize that threat.

    That would make the store the crime scene, surely. Not the street with a dead body on it.

    @cleo

    No one was killed in the store, but as protocol the police will go in ask questions, get information and depending what was stolen get fingerprints if needed.

    If the unarmed youth was indeed several yards or more away from the police officer, it's hard to imagine that the police officer was in any danger of getting his hair ruffled, never mind his life being in danger.

    But we don't know that. There are conflicting reports on both sides, that's why there is an investigation and once that has been completed, we will know more. So before I weigh in, I won't say anything. I'm just saying, the officer is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

    So....any twitchy, paranoid cop that sees a monster in any and every youth of greater than average build with perhaps a sassy mouth and, who knows, maybe a shoplifting habit, is justified in shooting to kill any and every well-built young person who gives them a bit of lip? Any cop who gets jumpy around what s/he sees as the lower classes has no business being a cop.

    My brother is a cop, I have been on many ride alongs reporting on gangs, you have no idea of what you are talking about and the dangers that cops face everyday on the streets. I really understand they have a very difficult job and it's not easy and 98% cops are good people! but like with every profession you have some bad apples.

    It's the same reasoning that got Yoshi Hattori killed in Louisiana.

    That is not an once dent that happens on a daily basis. There are many cases in the world where people were killed by police officers even without a firearm.

    The same reasoning that gets far too many young people legally killed in Florida by adults who 'feel' threatened.

    Sorry, cleo, but the main cause of death for Black teens is other Blacks and cops killing people is not out of control as you might think? Have you seen the stats on how many cops are assaulted? Probably not! Before you say something, try and go out and do what a cop does and see what they see and let's try again. It's easy to criticize cops when you are looking from the outside.

    The difference is that a cop is supposedly trained to deal with such situations with greater maturity and responsibility. To protect and serve, not to panic, aim and fire.

    Which they are. I too, am trained in the usage of firearms, I totally understand the power of a gun. And that's what most cops do, they are very well trained to protect and serve. so we are in agreement.

  • 2

    Strangerland

    He did hear over the radio dispatch that there was a robbery, saw Brown in the street and saw the box and put two and two together.

    You know you can't just make stuff up right? The police themselves said that the officer was not aware of the theft of cigars when pulling over Brown.

    And therefore, the theft cannot be the catalyst.

  • 4

    zichi

    bass4funk

    you have a very bad habit of trying to reply to several posters in a single comment and you'll probably state it because you can only publish a single comment at a time but it makes your comments unreadable or hard to read which surely defeats the reason to even post a comment in the first place. may I suggest you are more selective on which comments you feel the feel to reply to instead of trying to cover the whole spectrum?

  • 0

    cleo

    No one was killed in the store

    Don't try to be cute, bass. You have said more than once that the street on which Brown's body was left lying for hours was a 'crime scene'. So, what crime was committed there?

    There are conflicting reports on both sides

    Sorry, but I cannot find any links to all these eyewitness reports that say Brown was rushing the officer, or that the officer appeared to be in any kind of danger. Would you like to point me in the right direction? If not, I can assume it's because there are no such eyewitnesses? All I can find is 'evidence' from someone who played sports with Wilson and wasn't at the scene, and some woman who phoned a local radio show and wouldn't give her full name.

    My brother is a cop, I have been on many ride alongs reporting on gangs

    American cops are allowed to take relatives out with them when they're working?? Wow. How totally unprofessional.

    like with every profession you have some bad apples

    Like the ones who shoot young people dead who are some distance away and unarmed.

    Sorry, cleo, but the main cause of death for Black teens is other Blacks

    I really do not care what colour skin any person, cop or member of the public, might have. It's just not the way I see the world, sorry. We're all just people. What I see is Americans killing Americans. If you see things differently (and I understand lots of Americans do) ... well then, so much for the myth of the 'melting pot'.

    cops killing people is not out of control as you might think

    This one appears to have been.

    Before you say something, try and go out and do what a cop does and see what they see and let's try again.

    My daughter and her husband are both cops here in Japan. Granted, different culture altogether, but they are both appalled at the idea of drawing a gun on an unarmed member of the public standing at a distance.

    I too, am trained in the usage of firearms, I totally understand the power of a gun.

    The relevance of that statement being ....? As far as I'm aware you are not in the frame for shooting Brown or any other young person, either legitimately in order to safe your own life or the life of a member of the public, or in panic.

  • -4

    bass4funk

    You know you can't just make stuff up right? The police themselves said that the officer was not aware of the theft of cigars when pulling over Brown.

    Sorry, but there are reports and a police report that Officer Wilson DID receive calls by the dispatch that the cigars were stolen, but the initial reasoning for pulling him over was for being in the middle of the street.

    And therefore, the theft cannot be the catalyst.

    Let's take that argument to task, say you are correct. It is still a crime to steal, which is theft, which makes you a criminal.

    @zichi

    So if people cannot read through the oodles of comments, is that my fault? Of course not, then if people have a problem, they should cut and paste, I do that to with some of you guys, also, I Do have a job and I enjoy making money which means, I need to work and I go back periodically when I get a break.

  • 1

    zichi

    bass4funk

    So if people cannot read through the oodles of comments, is that my fault? Of course not, then if people have a problem, they should cut and paste, I do that to with some of you guys, also, I Do have a job and I enjoy making money which means, I need to work and I go back periodically when I get a break.

    so you are someone who don't listen to others?

  • 1

    Strangerland

    Sorry, but there are reports and a police report that Officer Wilson DID receive calls by the dispatch that the cigars were stolen, but the initial reasoning for pulling him over was for being in the middle of the street.

    Are there now? Because all the police said was that the officer did not know about the theft. Let's see these so called reports.

    Let's take that argument to task, say you are correct. It is still a crime to steal, which is theft, which makes you a criminal.

    Which has no relevance to the topic at hand if the officer did not know about the theft. And it's also totally irrelevant to the fact that I was pointing out that you were incorrect about the theft of the cigars being the catalyst.

  • -2

    bass4funk

    @cleo

    Don't try to be cute, bass.

    You'd be surprised, I'm VERY good-looking for the record.

    You have said more than once that the street on which Brown's body was left lying for hours was a 'crime scene'. So, what crime was committed there?

    Now who is being cute? Meaning that the shooting itself is a crime scene. The crime: stealing cigars. That is what you would call it once the police tape everything off.

    Sorry, but I cannot find any links to all these eyewitness reports that say Brown was rushing the officer, or that the officer appeared to be in any kind of danger.

    Then please look harder, it's out there, cleo.

    Would you like to point me in the right direction? If not, I can assume it's because there are no such eyewitnesses?

    You can assume whatever you like, there are two sides, NOT my sides or theory. I wasn't there, so I cannot say, except for the reports that I have read. But as a journalist, I have a bit more access to information.

    All I can find is 'evidence' from someone who played sports with Wilson and wasn't at the scene, and some woman who phoned a local radio show and wouldn't give her full name.

    This is true, because of the death threats she's received from the mob and why should she if she is in fear for her life, she shouldn't have to go underground and worry about possible reprisals.

    American cops are allowed to take relatives out with them when they're working?? Wow. How totally unprofessional.

    That is your opinion. I wasn't joy riding, I was working, so YES, it was professional.

    Like the ones who shoot young people dead who are some distance away and unarmed.

    I am not talking about a very tiny minuscule minority.

    I really do not care what colour skin any person, cop or member of the public, might have. It's just not the way I see the world, sorry.

    Me as well, but that is not the reality of how the world sees color.

    We're all just people. What I see is Americans killing Americans. If you see things differently (and I understand lots of Americans do) ... well then, so much for the myth of the 'melting pot'.

    Oh, please! Europe is a great blend of melting pot?? I don't think so, not even close, but I will say that I do agree with you that the killing is sad, but the problem is deeper than that. There is a problem that NO ONE wants to talk about socially and even many of the libs here on JT and that is the gang culture and the high out of control single Black family homes and births out of wedlock and the killings of Black on Black crime.

    This one appears to have been.

    And it could possibly be OR NOT, we just don't have all the facts in yet.

    My daughter and her husband are both cops here in Japan. Granted, different culture altogether, but they are both appalled at the idea of drawing a gun on an unarmed member of the public standing at a distance.

    Like you said, different culture, you should see what the cops do in Brazil and South Africa, but again, different culture.

    The relevance of that statement being ....? As far as I'm aware you are not in the frame for shooting Brown or any other young person, either legitimately in order to safe your own life or the life of a member of the public, or in panic.

    I have a license to carry a concealed weapon and if a big guy like that were to attack me and there was no other way out...

    @zichi

    so you are someone who don't listen to others?

    Since when do most of you libs to other opposing views, without dismissing them, honestly now.

  • 1

    yabits

    This is why we have professionals that are trained in this field and know what they are doing. You and I are not in the legal law enforcement and we are NOT both lawyers, so for us to speculate has NO impact on the case.

    I have worked with and have trained law enforcement in the area of technology forensics -- the recovery of data from computers, smart phones, etc. to be used as evidence in trials. (I actually ceased working with one major organization because they were only interested in data that would convict, and would not consider data that might prove innocence. In my view, an unbiased investigation means looking at all the data and considering it from both sides. So I know how some police departments and prosecutors heavily bias themselves in this area.)

    If the Ferguson police are professionals, they should have had an incident report out long before now. The public -- the ones who pay their salaries -- has been kept waiting, which should not be excused. I believe the cops are now waiting for some miracle to happen -- like the Twinkie defense -- that would enable them to defend their officer and department in light of the obvious physical evidence. And the evidence is obvious. Once the officer left his car to pursue the unarmed jaywalker, he was not in any immediate or reasonable danger of losing his life. He kept firing for some other reason -- probably anger. If an officer is in real danger, their first response is to get on the radio and signal for help -- not to leave the car in pursuit.

    From reading what is available, Wilson didn't radio in to report the shooting for quite a long time after it happened. From the looks of things, he lost his mind. And so the reason for not putting out any incident report is that it would be too self-incriminating. There's just no logical way to explain the officer's actions in light of so many witnesses.

    Pretending or speculating that some special professionals are going to come up with an explanation of events that runs contrary to what the eyewitnesses report is rather infantile and pathetic. Most ordinary citizens have the expertise needed to evaluate basic evidence. It's why we have juries. The police delaying the incident report only makes their case worse -- and provides ample reason why the public should not trust this particular group.

    Wilson's first two years were on a police force that was so awful in its relations with a majority black community that it had to be completely disbanded. Wilson lost his job there before hiring on with the Ferguson police.

  • 2

    Strangerland

    From reading what is available, Wilson didn't radio in to report the shooting for quite a long time after it happened. From the looks of things, he lost his mind.

    Or maybe he was just in shock at having shot and killed someone.

  • 0

    cleo

    Meaning that the shooting itself is a crime scene. The crime: stealing cigars

    The crime of stealing cigars did not happen in the street. I'm amazed that you say you work in journalism, your use of language is less than sterling. The shooting is an incident, possibly a crime. It is not a crime scene. The crime scene is the street, and the crime that occurred there is the killing of an unarmed youth.

    please look harder, it's out there, cleo.

    ... as a journalist, I have a bit more access to information.

    Come on, which is it? The information is out there for anyone who looks, or I have to be a journalist with a 'bit more access' to information?

    This is true, because of the death threats she's received from the mob and why should she if she is in fear for her life, she shouldn't have to go underground and worry about possible reprisals.

    If she were a kosher eyewitness I'd expect her to go to the police, not to call in anonymously to some radio show. Anyone can make a phone call and claim to have seen something. Zero credibility.

    Oh, please! Europe is a great blend of melting pot?? I don't think so, not even close

    No one is claiming Europe is a melting pot, and it isn't any more relevant to this topic than Japan or Asia or South America or Antarctica is. We're talking about America. Do try to stay on topic.

    There is a problem that NO ONE wants to talk about socially and even many of the libs here on JT and that is the gang culture and the high out of control single Black family homes and births out of wedlock and the killings of Black on Black crime.

    Was Brown engaged in gang activity when he was shot? No. So gang activity would seen to be irrelevant to this particular incident. Was Brown from a single-parent home? I don't know, but he took his father's name and his father appears to have been around, so again, irrelevant. Was this a black-on-black crime? No it wasn't, so again, irrelevant.

    Are you sure you're in journalism? Because you seem unable to stick to the topic at hand. You're all over the place.

    you should see what the cops do in Brazil and South Africa, but again...

    irrelevant.

    if a big guy like that were to attack me and there was no other way out...

    There is no evidence at all that there was 'no other way out' for the officer who shot Brown. Far from it. But we get it, you're a tuff guy.

    When you have a gun.

  • -3

    turbotsat

    Frungy: Reading the articles people reference the forensics people are QUOTED (their words) as saying the range was 30 feet.

    I wouldn't trust a quote from Prof. Shawn Parcells because his credentials have been under discussion since 2013, predating this incident. As for Baden ...

    turbotsat (for the 3rd time!):

    http://www.gazettetimes.com/news/did-michael-brown-have-his-hands-up-when-killed-by/article_740948a7-3f5e-5ddb-898f-41f2d2945d8e.html

    Baden said given what he knows, the shots could have been fired from at least 1 or 2 feet away or much farther.

    "It could be 30 feet away," he told reporters Monday.

  • 1

    Frungy

    turbotsat - Note the difference between the two lines, one is the reporter's words, with no supporting quotation or context, the second simply lacks context, but is at least Baden's own words. Also elsewhere in the article you find Baden stating that there was no gunshot residue in the wounds - none of the six shots, so that lends support to the fact that the reporter is pulling the 1 or 2 feet away thing straight out of his posterior.

    As for your doubts about someone who's a Professor, well, given that you're unable to read an single article and notice the inconsistencies in style, the evidence against the 1 or 2 feet theory, and the generally poor quality of reporting... I don't think you're really in much of a position to be questioning anyone's opinion.

  • -1

    Shanique Smith

    Let's take a closer look at the Ferguson police department.

    Justin Cosma, was transferred to Ferguson after hog-tying and injuring a twelve-year-old child who was in his driveway checking the mailbox; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/24/justin-cosma-ferguson-police_n_5705409.html

    Dan Page was transferred to Ferguson after he publicly declared his hatred for Blacks, among other groups;

    Eddie Boyd III faced allegations of hitting children. There was sufficient evidence to support the allegation that he struck a 12-year-old girl in the head with a pistol. The St. Louis police chose to** demote him**. He was transferred to Ferguson under questionable circumstances.

    Then we have officer Wilson who joined the Ferguson police after the city council in nearby Jennings disbanded the police department and brought in new officers over three years ago because of the poor relationship between cops and residents.

    What are the implications here? Mostly whacko cops are placed at Ferguson police department.

    This will tear at your heart. Watch at your own risk.

    http://www.ocregister.com/video/v/1628003509001/crime-fullerton-government

    This will open your eyes:

    http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/highlight/father-whose-unarmed-son-shot-by-police-10-years-ago-reflects-on-ferguson/53f261c078c90abf87000550?cn=tbla

  • -1

    yabits

    Dan Page was transferred to Ferguson after he publicly declared his hatred for Blacks, among other groups;

    His now-controversial Facebook video was left up for many months. Nobody seemed to see any problems with it -- until the killing of Michael Brown, that is.

    Meanwhile, the mayor of Ferguson completely denied that there was any racial tensions or divide in his city. (Naturally, as long as whites ran everything.)

  • -3

    bass4funk

    I have worked with and have trained law enforcement in the area of technology forensics -- the recovery of data from computers, smart phones, etc. to be used as evidence in trials. (I actually ceased working with one major organization because they were only interested in data that would convict, and would not consider data that might prove innocence. In my view, an unbiased investigation means looking at all the data and considering it from both sides. So I know how some police departments and prosecutors heavily bias themselves in this area.)

    Then if that is the case, then you also know that most are honorable. Most of my friends are cops, I grew up in a family that majored mostly in criminal justice and the vast majority are good people. Again, every profession has a few bad apples.

    If the Ferguson police are professionals, they should have had an incident report out long before now. The public -- the ones who pay their salaries -- has been kept waiting, which should not be excused. I believe the cops are now waiting for some miracle to happen -- like the Twinkie defense -- that would enable them to defend their officer and department in light of the obvious physical evidence. And the evidence is obvious. Once the officer left his car to pursue the unarmed jaywalker, he was not in any immediate or reasonable danger of losing his life. He kept firing for some other reason -- probably anger. If an officer is in real danger, their first response is to get on the radio and signal for help -- not to leave the car in pursuit.

    I never said, every department works like a greased wheel. I too, think in many areas they bungled in many areas, again, mistakes happen.

    Also, you want to make Wilson a racist now? But if that is true, then he is NO different from Sharpton/

  • 0

    turbotsat

    Frungy: turbotsat - Note the difference between the two lines, one is the reporter's words, with no supporting quotation or context, the second simply lacks context, but is at least Baden's own words. Also elsewhere in the article you find Baden stating that there was no gunshot residue in the wounds - none of the six shots, so that lends support to the fact that the reporter is pulling the 1 or 2 feet away thing straight out of his posterior.

    As for your doubts about someone who's a Professor, well, given that you're unable to read an single article and notice the inconsistencies in style, the evidence against the 1 or 2 feet theory, and the generally poor quality of reporting... I don't think you're really in much of a position to be questioning anyone's opinion.

    Multiple articles and multiple sources have the same quote from Baden, not just "the reporter" you think is "pulling the 1 or 2 feet away thing straight out of his posterior." And Baden is shown on YOUTUBE with the EXACT QUOTE.

    Multiple articles also have Baden saying he does not have access to the clothes Brown was wearing and that therefore cannot say that there WASN'T gunshot residue on Brown's clothes. Google it yourself if you want.

    Multiple articles have exposed Prof. Parcells lack of qualifications vs his claims.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrDif5NYLdM

    Baden on youtube with the EXACT QUOTE

    https://www.google.com/#q=baden+%221+to+2+feet+away%22

    google: baden "1 to 2 feet away"

    https://www.google.com/#q=%22shawn+parcells%22

    google: "shawn parcells"

    http://pathologyblawg.com/pathology-news/pathology-law/forensic-pathology/shawn-parcells-makes-national-news-michael-brown-autopsy/

    After Mr. Parcells described himself as a "forensic pathologist assistant and medical investigator", Dr. Mitchell says: "... He has none of the qualifications that are required. He has experience as a morgue technician, somebody who would move bodies around, clean up after an autopsy ..."

    To his credit, Mr. Parcells admitted he is not certified as a pathologist assistant, but rather he is qualified due to his experience working under Dr. Young.

    To this Dr. Young responded:

    "Shawn hung out at the Jackson County Medical Examiner's office but was not trained by me."…. "He has been representing himself in a way that is not appropriate by giving forensic pathology opinions when he is not qualified to do so."

  • -1

    yabits

    Multiple articles have exposed Prof. Parcells lack of qualifications vs his claims.

    Irrelevant. Dr. Baden was in charge of this one. The two were a team. Prior to the press conference where they presented their findings, they marked all of the gunshot wounds on the anatomical diagram. There was one wound visible on the rear side -- highlighted in RED. This is not something that any assistant, no matter how qualified or not, would have been able to do if Dr. Baden didn't concur with the finding.

    Then if that is the case, then you also know that most are honorable.

    All are human, wield power, and are therefore corruptible, especially when it comes to protecting their own. I might consider a guy like Serpico to be honorable in that he was willing to testify against his fellow officers -- who were corrupt. Anyone who wants to see just how dishonorable they can get should watch the documentaries on the West Memphis Three and The Thin Blue Line (by Errol Morris).

  • -3

    bass4funk

    Irrelevant.

    Why, because you refuse to hear an opposing point of view?

    Dr. Baden was in charge of this one. The two were a team. Prior to the press conference where they presented their findings, they marked all of the gunshot wounds on the anatomical diagram. There was one wound visible on the rear side -- highlighted in RED. This is not something that any assistant, no matter how qualified or not, would have been able to do if Dr. Baden didn't concur with the finding.

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/3744589731001/a-look-at-the-rush-to-judgment-in-the-michael-brown-case/?playlist_id=930909813001#sp=show-clips

    Wound does NOT indicate an enter/exit, it could also indicated bruising. So basically, all rounds were to the front of the body.

    All are human, wield power, and are therefore corruptible, especially when it comes to protecting their own.

    The same goes for the thugs and homies that run around in the streets. They will ALWAYS protect their own.

    I might consider a guy like Serpico to be honorable in that he was willing to testify against his fellow officers -- who were corrupt.

    That was a totally different era. At that time, almost 80% of the police force in NYC were totally corrupt. Frank Serpico was one of the few honest cops at THAT particular time.

  • -2

    Frungy

    turbotsatAug. 27, 2014 - 01:37AM JST Multiple articles and multiple sources have the same quote from Baden, not just "the reporter" you think is "pulling the 1 or 2 feet away thing straight out of his posterior."

    Listen to the video. "At least" Did you miss those two words? He's establishing the minimum possible distance at which there would be no gunshot residue. He is NOT saying that the shooting took place at that distance. What you're looking at there is an expert attempting to explain to laypeople ONE factor in his calculations.

    There's also the lack of through-and-throughs, the spacing of the bullets, the amount they deviated, etc.

    I am absolutely stunned that anyone could take that recording and say, "Ah hah! So he was shot at 1 to 2 feet!!". It is an expert explaining the minimum distance required for there to be no powder residue. It is completely irrelevant on its own... apart from establishing that you are mistaken.

  • 0

    yabits

    Listen to the video. "At least" Did you miss those two words?

    Exactly. From 2 feet to infinity. It couldn't have been much closer than that. Some folks are dense.

    The same goes for the thugs and homies that run around in the streets.

    Yeah, and it's a shame we can't hold cops to a higher standard.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    @Frungy

    I've never said Baden meant "he was shot at 1 to 2 feet!!", or that he didn't say "30 feet".

    Until this last post, Aug. 27, 2014 - 04:16AM JST, mark the calendar, you haven't admitted the "1 to 2 feet" and you've been stuck on 'it HAS to be 30 feet', and even stated "reporter is pulling the 1 or 2 feet away thing straight out of his posterior", or "Reading the articles people reference the forensics people are QUOTED (their words) as saying the range was 30 feet." The problem is apparently you've been reading abbreviated quotes or abbreviating the quotes yourself in your head and came up with the 'reporter made up the 1-2 feet thing' AND that 'the forensics people said 30 feet'.

    The problem being that Baden's words on the video clip, transcribed below by me (and you are free to contribute your own transcription), make it clear he is estimating a range that could be a) LESS THAN 1 to 2 feet if gunpowder residue is found on Brown's shirt, b) STARTING AT 1 to 2 feet IF residue is NOT found on his shirt, and, c) just as an EXAMPLE of a number GREATER THAN "1 to 2 feet", but NOT his estimate for the actual distance, "It could have been 30 feet away ah it would be the same thing." It's clear that "30 feet" is his example of ANY number above 1-2 feet, NOT the actual distance.

    NOT what you've been saying he said, which are variations on that the actual distance HAS to be "about 10 meters / 30 feet, possibly more but not much less", and that the forensic pathologists say so.

    BADEN'S OWN WORDS at the youtube clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrDif5NYLdM: "Yeah, the question was, 'how far away?', yes, we can tell certain distance, we can tell the distance from the muzzle of the gun to the body, or and the body's clothing. Uh, if there's the close to the weapon is to the body the more powder residue there'll be on the body and the skin and the clothing. In this instance there's no gunshot residues on the skin's surface uh so that the muzzle of the gun was at least 1 to 2 feet away the muzzle at the time of discharge. It could have been 30 feet away ah it would be the same thing. But in order to be firm about that we also have to look at the clothing which we haven't had the opportunity to look at because sometimes the clothing can filter out gunshot residues."

    Frungy Aug. 27, 2014 - 04:16AM JST : "At least" Did you miss those two words? He's establishing the minimum possible distance at which there would be no gunshot residue. He is NOT saying that the shooting took place at that distance.

    Frungy Aug. 26, 2014 - 06:14PM JST : Also elsewhere in the article you find Baden stating that there was no gunshot residue in the wounds - none of the six shots, so that lends support to the fact that the reporter is pulling the 1 or 2 feet away thing straight out of his posterior. I am absolutely stunned that anyone could take that recording and say, "Ah hah! So he was shot at 1 to 2 feet!!". It is an expert explaining the minimum distance required for there to be no powder residue.

    Frungy Aug. 26, 2014 - 09:32AM JST : Oh my goodness people. Do they teach nothing about "weasel words" and editorializing in US schools? Reading the articles people reference the forensics people are QUOTED (their words) as saying the range was 30 feet. The reporters then editorialize or say "maybe" it was closer because (with correct scientific caution) the forensics experts say they can't be 100% sure... The cop shot an unarmed kid 10 yards away. ...

    Frungy Aug. 25, 2014 - 11:40PM JST : ... We have the doctor's autopsy report, hard evidence, that backs up the 10 yards distance at the time of the shooting. Denying that fact right now is pretty much impossible.

    FrungyAug. 24, 2014 - 10:17PM JST : ... You know is who reliable? The doctor who did the autopsy. Looking at the wound pattern confirms certain aspects of the witness accounts, namely the distance (about 10 meters / 30 feet, possibly more but not much less)

  • -2

    bass4funk

    Yeah, and it's a shame we can't hold cops to a higher standard.

    I think it's equally shameful that these thugs think they have the right to disobey ANY law they want, whenever they want.

  • -2

    yabits

    I think it's equally shameful that these thugs think they have the right to disobey ANY law they want, whenever they want.

    Imagine the audacity of walking down the middle of their own residential street. Send in a white cop who lives nowhere near and is known by no one to harass, disrespect and physically abuse them, just to show them who's boss.

    And murder them if they oppose such treatment.

  • -3

    bass4funk

    From reading what is available, Wilson didn't radio in to report the shooting for quite a long time after it happened. From the looks of things, he lost his mind.

    Now you're trying to Psychoanalyze me?? You don't know that. Personally, I believe Brown lost his mind to even think of putting his hands on a cop and bitch slappin' him. That was his biggest and dumbest mistake and it was also his last.

    And so the reason for not putting out any incident report is that it would be too self-incriminating. There's just no logical way to explain the officer's actions in light of so many witnesses.

    Again, we don't know what they know or what evidence he has or given! but I think for some odd reason! Wilson might walk! because the evidence seems quite shaky from the looks of it, but don't quote me. I'm just saying from the optics of it, I don't think he will be indicted.

    Pretending or speculating that some special professionals are going to come up with an explanation of events that runs contrary to what the eyewitnesses report is rather infantile and pathetic.

    That is your personal opinion, Yabits.

    Most ordinary citizens have the expertise needed to evaluate basic evidence. It's why we have juries.

    But you need to be chosen to be on the jury! NONE of the eye witnesses will serve on the jury.

    The police delaying the incident report only makes their case worse -- and provides ample reason why the public should not trust this particular group.

    Again, you don't know what they are don't behind closed doors or what the conversation between them and Holder is. I personally think they are examining every single angle and evidence in order to make and come to the proper conclusion.

    Wilson's first two years were on a police force that was so awful in its relations with a majority black community that it had to be completely disbanded. Wilson lost his job there before hiring on with the Ferguson police.

    And here we go with more lies and garbage about the White man who's a cop and just basically took the job to stalk Blacks in order to kill them! ROFL! It'll be interesting to see what kind of background Brown had. He was already a thuggin' criminal in the making. We already know he was a thief. I'm sure there is more to come on the kid.

    Imagine the audacity of walking down the middle of their own residential street. Send in a white cop who lives nowhere near and is known by no one to harass, disrespect and physically abuse them, just to show them who's boss.

    You talk a lot about race. How about a Black cop that lives nowhere near and is known by no one to harass, disrespect and physically abuse them, just to show them who's boss. What would you call that kind of person? Uncle Tom?

    And murder them if they oppose such treatment.

    If they assault a peace officer, then whatever comes that assailants way, is their fault for creating that situation.

    @cleo

    The crime of stealing cigars did not happen in the street. I'm amazed that you say you work in journalism, your use of language is less than sterling.

    Oh, really? Again, with the ad Homs, Cleo? Come on....

    The shooting is an incident, possibly a crime. It is not a crime scene.

    The street where his body was laying and the liquor store-both crime scenes. Yes, we both agree.

    The crime scene is the street, and the crime that occurred there is the killing of an unarmed youth. 6 Foot 4 inches and almost 300 pounds is NOT unarmed, NOT at all!

    Come on, which is it? The information is out there for anyone who looks, or I have to be a journalist with a 'bit more access' to information?

    It's out there and please go look for yourself. It's out there for the public. I get mine a little different way than you and most people here.

    If she were a kosher eyewitness I'd expect her to go to the police, not to call in anonymously to some radio show. Anyone can make a phone call and claim to have seen something. Zero credibility.

    It's pretty much all conjecture at this point. I'm NOT ruling anything or believing anything until the investigation is complete. Fact is, one kid is dead because of his actions and one officer MAY be either vindicated or could possibly get indicted, stand trial and if found guilty, will probably spend the rest of his life in jail, but personally, I do not believe the charges will stick, but I could be wrong. If he does walk, I guarantee you officer Wilson will be sued and taken to a civil court. This is exactly Rodney King part 2 all over again.

    No one is claiming Europe is a melting pot, and it isn't any more relevant to this topic than Japan or Asia or South America or Antarctica is. We're talking about America. Do try to stay on topic.

    My daughter and her husband are both cops here in Japan. But it's perfectly ok for you to veer off the topic, I guess as if Japan policing has anything to do with American policing.

    Was Brown engaged in gang activity when he was shot? No.

    You are right, but he did steal a box of cigars, which was bad enough.

    So gang activity would seen to be irrelevant to this particular incident. Was Brown from a single-parent home? I don't know, but he took his father's name and his father appears to have been around, so again, irrelevant. Was this a black-on-black crime? No it wasn't, so again, irrelevant.

    No, it's all relevant. I am afraid you don't understand the complexity of the Black/White conundrum in this country. It has everything to do with it. Yes, Brown had both parents, came from a decent home, but the fact is, there is a huge problem in the Black community here in the states. Blacks want to blame Whites and everything else, but themselves. They don't want to take personal responsibility and accountability for their actions, nor do they want to or EVER really address the high murder rate and Black on Black crimes, the high incarceration rate, the gang culture, school drop out rate, single mothers and kids born out of wedlock. These are the REAL problems that most Blacks and the race hustlers like Sharpton and Jackson NEVER want to seriously address or talk about. These are guys are total Charlatans! Pointing the finger at other people (in this case Whites) is far easier to do as opposed to pointing the finger at yourself and looking at your own mistakes before shoving the blame to others.

    Are you sure you're in journalism? Because you seem unable to stick to the topic at hand. You're all over the place.

    Yes, I am and I can do that. It's called a debate.

    There is no evidence at all that there was 'no other way out' for the officer who shot Brown. Far from it.

    Again, we don't know that, we didn't hear Officer Wilson's side of the story.

    But we get it, you're a tuff guy.

    That's right, with or without! ;-)

    When you have a gun.

    Even more so!

  • 0

    cleo

    The street where his body was laying and the liquor store-both crime scenes.

    The crime committed in the store was shoplifting/theft. So what crime was committed in the street?

    6 Foot 4 inches and almost 300 pounds is NOT unarmed, NOT at all!

    Against a gun? I beg to differ.

    I'm NOT ruling anything or believing anything until the investigation is complete.

    That's good to hear. Or at least it would be if you didn't immediately contradict yourself: one kid is dead because of his actions .... personally, I do not believe the charges will stick

    Like I said, all over the place.

    And what charges are these that you don't believe will stick? What charges have been made?

    the fact is, there is a huge problem in the Black community here in the states.

    And that makes it OK for any random cop to shoot dead any random teenager, simply because of the colour of his skin? Because he might be in a gang? Because he might come from a single-parent home? Because he might drop out of school? Because he might make an out-of-wedlock baby? I think your statement would make as much sense - more, perhaps - if you omitted the 'in the Black community'.

    It's called a debate

    No, a debate is when you argue about a particular topic. What you do is drag in all kinds of unrelated stuff, claim people have said things they haven't said and veer off at unexplainable tangents. And your sarcasm radar is permanently switched off.

    People who need a gun to be a tuff guy aren't all that tuff.

  • -4

    bass4funk

    The crime committed in the store was shoplifting/theft. So what crime was committed in the street?

    When the police officer confronted Brown for being in the middle of the street and second for noticing the cigars in his hand that he had stolen.

    Against a gun? I beg to differ.

    You may, but I have seen individuals THAT stupid, YES, that stupid to go up against a gun.

    That's good to hear. Or at least it would be if you didn't immediately contradict yourself: one kid is dead because of his actions .... personally, I do not believe the charges will stick.

    Exactly, it is sad that a kids life was taken, but that was because of his own actions that turned fate against him and yes, I DO believe the officer will NOT be charged. There is NO contradiction, just the facts. It doesn't mean, I agree or disagree, it just means I doubt he will be charged, but I could be wrong.

    And what charges are these that you don't believe will stick? What charges have been made?

    That the officer will be charged with murder or even negligent homicide. The Grand Jury might come back concluding the officer used "justifiable force", but this is speculation, nothing is concrete or set in stone.

    And that makes it OK for any random cop to shoot dead any random teenager, simply because of the colour of his skin?

    I seriously don't believe he was shot because of his skin color that is NOT KNOWN nor is that a FACT. Just like we don't know the state of mind Brown was in, if he was acting the way he was to the cop because he was White.

    Because he might be in a gang? Because he might come from a single-parent home? Because he might drop out of school? Because he might make an out-of-wedlock baby? I think your statement would make as much sense - more, perhaps - if you omitted the 'in the Black community'.

    I don't need to, most Americans understand the meaning.

    No, a debate is when you argue about a particular topic.

    No, it doesn't have to necessarily be assigned to one specific topic.

    What you do is drag in all kinds of unrelated stuff, claim people have said things they haven't said and veer off at unexplainable tangents. And your sarcasm radar is permanently switched off.

    Just like the majority of people on JT. I agree.

    People who need a gun to be a tuff guy aren't all that tuff.

    Tell that to the guy that tries to mess with a person holding the gun. ;-)

  • 0

    Frungy

    turbotsatAug. 27, 2014 - 05:18AM JST I've never said Baden meant "he was shot at 1 to 2 feet!!", or that he didn't say "30 feet".

    No, what you're doing is taking a couple of minutes out of the whole interview, a point where Baden is taking about the significance of ONE factor in his calculations, namely powder residue, and trying to pretend that it is everything that Baden said, and that this snippet, where Baden is clearly just talking about powder residue, represents Baden's conclusions. It doesn't.

    Baden said a lot of other stuff too, like that there was no evidence of an assault, disproving the officer's statement.

    But trying to misrepresent Baden talking about the powder residue as if it represents Baden's only factor in calculating shooting distance? That is just ridiculous.

    It seems to be fairly typical of what reporting in the U.S. though, like that clip of the little boy being interviewed after a gang shooting, which was edited to show the little African-American boy saying he wanted a gun, implying that he wanted to be a gangster... and they edited out that he wanted a gun because he was going to be a police officer.

  • -4

    bass4funk

    Baden said a lot of other stuff too, like that there was no evidence of an assault, disproving the officer's statement.

    Very true.

  • 1

    turbotsat

    Frungy

    So you harp "30 feet", "30 feet", "30 feet", til a full quote surrounding the "30 feet" shows Baden's not saying what you said he was, now you don't want it anymore?

    I know from experience it's no use discussing things with you unless full quotes are available, we'd get multiple instances of dodging the answer and claiming some little fragment says something the full quote doesn't. So since you seem to have Baden's autopsy report or press conference transcript or something available, how about you provide us that, instead of just interpreting it and telling us your interpretation.

    For example, here is Baden on an another interview, this time with Greta van Susteren. He's again very clear on the range being 1 to 35 feet. Nowhere does he say it IS AND ONLY IS 35 feet. He says THE RANGE is 1 to 35 feet.

    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/2014/08/19/inside-private-autopsy-michael-brown

    VAN SUSTEREN: How close, based on the fact -- and I realize you don't have the clothes that would be very helpful in looking for gunshot residue. But from what you said is that it was more than a foot away but you can't say whether it was two feet, three feet, four feet or six feet, right? So it could be as close as a --

    BADEN: That's right.

    VAN SUSTEREN: It would be as close as a foot, but no closer?

    BADEN: The muzzle could be -- but no closer, right. And he could be as far away as 35 feet. And after a foot, it would be the same two feet to 35 feet would be -- would look the same. No powder would get on the body.

  • 0

    cleo

    According to Mr Belmar (St Louis County Police Chief), there was a distance of 35ft between Mr Wilson and Mr Brown when he was shot.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-28841715

  • -1

    yabits

    The investigation will determine if any of Brown's DNA or fingerprints appear on the officer's weapon. If there's none, it makes it harder to claim that Brown was actually going for it.

    Also, the location of shell casings will be important to determine where the shots were fired, especially if Wilson was chasing Brown. The weapon used by Wilson can fire up to 13 rounds, and only six have been identified to have hit Brown.

  • 0

    Strangerland

    When the police officer confronted Brown for being in the middle of the street and second for noticing the cigars in his hand that he had stolen.

    I haven't seen this claim anywhere, in anything I've read. Please provide supporting links.

  • -3

    bass4funk

    I haven't seen this claim anywhere, in anything I've read. Please provide supporting links.

    Watch the video, the cigars was in his hands. Also there are enough witnesses that said, Brown was in the middle of the street.

  • -3

    Frungy

    turbotsatAug. 27, 2014 - 11:41AM JST So you harp "30 feet", "30 feet", "30 feet", til a full quote surrounding the "30 feet" shows Baden's not saying what you said he was, now you don't want it anymore?

    Scroll back through this discussion since clearly your memory is playing up. I offered concrete reasons why it was not a close-range shooting. Baden backed this up in his interpretation of the autopsy. I speculated that it was about 30 feet (10 meters), which Baden agrees is possible.

    YOUR theory was that it was a close-range shooting during an assault, which Baden categorically denies.

    So here's the score turbotsat, since you're clearly not paying attention. My theory has multiple points of agreement from the expert, your theory has been blown out of the water.

  • 0

    Strangerland

    Watch the video, the cigars was in his hands. Also there are enough witnesses that said, Brown was in the middle of the street.

    What video? There is no video of Brown walking down the street. Yet you are making claims - claims no one else has ever made anywhere with any shred of evidence - that the officer saw him holding these cigars. You can't just make stuff up. Didn't you say you are a journalist?

  • -5

    bass4funk

    What video? There is no video of Brown walking down the street.

    No, but there are witnesses and a police report that said, he was in the street.

    Yet you are making claims - claims no one else has ever made anywhere with any shred of evidence -

    No one has any hard evidence either except for the approx. guess of the distance where Brown was shot. that he stole the cigars, that there WAS some sort of confrontation and that the officer fired his weapon and killed Brown, everything and in between, we don't know for sure. What the mindset of the officer was, if he killed Brown on purpose or if Brown started some kind of altercation. Those ARE the undisputed facts!

    that the officer saw him holding these cigars. You can't just make stuff up.

    I didn't.

    Didn't you say you are a journalist?

    Yes, sir. Doesn't mean, I am either right all the time and I can be wrong sometimes.

  • 0

    Strangerland

    No one has any hard evidence either except for the approx. guess of the distance where Brown was shot. that he stole the cigars, that there WAS some sort of confrontation and that the officer fired his weapon and killed Brown, everything and in between, we don't know for sure. What the mindset of the officer was, if he killed Brown on purpose or if Brown started some kind of altercation. Those ARE the undisputed facts!

    Then why are you claiming the officer saw him holding the cigars here:

    When the police officer confronted Brown for being in the middle of the street and second for noticing the cigars in his hand that he had stolen.

    You are making claims that the officer saw him holding the stolen cigars. But the police themselves have stated that the officer didn't know about the cigar store incident, and no one other than you has claimed that the officer saw him holding the cigars (which he wouldn't have know anything about anyways, according to the police).

    Stick to the facts. Making stuff up doesn't help your case.

  • 2

    zichi

    You don't need to be black to have no faith in the justice system.

    According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), 2,266,800 adults were incarcerated in U.S. federal and state prisons, and county jails at year-end 2011 – about 0.7% of adults in the U.S. resident population. Additionally, 4,814,200 adults at year-end 2011 were on probation or on parole.

  • -4

    bass4funk

    @stranger

    Then why are you claiming the officer saw him holding the cigars here:

    Not claiming, watch the video, also from the police report, Wilson said, he saw the cigars in his hand.

    You are making claims that the officer saw him holding the stolen cigars.

    Not me, that's what I read. But the police themselves have stated that the officer didn't know about the cigar store incident, and no one other than you has claimed that the officer saw him holding the cigars (which he wouldn't have know anything about anyways, according to the police).

    But there were other police reports that said, he did hear over the radio that Brown did steal and he had it on his possession. But at any rate, it doesn't matter, there is so much clutter and confusion, allow all the facts to come out in trial and then we WILL know the truth.

    Stick to the facts. Making stuff up doesn't help your case.

    Sorry, I don't make stuff up, just like everyone else. We are all speculating and going by what we read or seen on TV, you don't know more, I don't know more and everyone else on JT and in Ferguson doesn't know. The only people that DO know are the people investigating this incident. Trying to argue to prove a point won't solve or gain anyone anything, because we weren't there. Guessing and claiming we have the facts when we don't, doesn't help anyone's case. I'll wait until the press conference to find out, the real truth.

  • -1

    yabits

    The only people that DO know are the people investigating this incident.

    Wrong. They don't know. The best they can come up with are reasonable assumptions. For example, there's little doubt that the results of DNA and fingerprint testing on the officer's gun have come in. IF there's no trace of Brown's DNA on the weapon, would that cause people to know that Brown never touched it? Based on that, would it not give no basis to anyone making the claim that Brown was going for the weapon?

    Thanks to the Brown case, a new event has come to light from New Iberia, Louisiana. Another African-American young man, Victor White III, was searched twice and taken into custody by police with his hands hand-cuffed behind him. (On March 2 of this year.) While in the car or at the station, he was killed with a bullet wound to the front of his chest. The police and coroner labeled it a "suicide."

    Logical questions: 1) After being searched twice, where did the gun come from? 2) With hands handcuffed behind a person, how can they shoot themselves in the front of the chest? 3) Why was there no report of gunpowder/residue on the man's hands -- ie, evidence that he fired a weapon? 4) His family was initially told by police that he shot himself in the back; yet, when they were called in to identify the body, they were not allowed to remove the cover below the chin. Why?

    This is how our police departments "do dirt" on the poor and members of minority communities. And the vast majority of the white community either look the other way or praise the officers. Looks like Reverend Sharpton should be making plans to visit Louisiana.

  • -2

    bass4funk

    Wrong. They don't know. The best they can come up with are reasonable assumptions. For example, there's little doubt that the results of DNA and fingerprint testing on the officer's gun have come in. IF there's no trace of Brown's DNA on the weapon, would that cause people to know that Brown never touched it? Based on that, would it not give no basis to anyone making the claim that Brown was going for the weapon?

    Which is primarily called an investigation, then you do agree with me.

    This is how our police departments "do dirt" on the poor and members of minority communities. And the vast majority of the white community either look the other way or praise the officers. Looks like Reverend Sharpton should be making plans to visit Louisiana.

    You mean, a very, very small percentage of officers. As for Sharpton, he is as fake as a $7 bill. And has the credibility of OJ Simpson. As I said before, as the Charlatan in chief, Sharpton would NEVER ever address the real problems that are plaguing the Black community, he just won't say it, it's other Blacks and once he can come to grips with that and takes REAL responsibility and speaks out against the out of control murder rate between Blacks instead of trying to look for someone to blame, namely a White person or where I'm from, we call it a scapegoat.

  • -2

    yabits

    then you do agree with me.

    I am not so sure you even agree with yourself from post to post.

    You mean, a very, very small percentage of officers.

    I believe that a very high percentage officers will lie (or keep silent rather than produce evidence) to protect another officer from prosecution. I would rate Sharpton higher on the ethical scale.

    Brought up as an example was a case from early March in New Iberia, Louisiana. A young African-American man, having been searched by police and hands cuffed at the rear, somehow got a gun and committed "suicide" by shooting himself from the front. The important point is not only the event, but the fact that many months have gone by and still no justice has been done in the case. Justice delayed is justice denied, as Reverend Sharpton would correctly point out.

    As I said before, as the Charlatan in chief, Sharpton would NEVER ever address the real problems that are plaguing the Black community, he just won't say it

    What makes you or any white supremacist think you know what the problems of a community are? Have you done a thorough investigation? All you ever present are cheap talking points from Faux News. As for the incidents in Ferguson and New Iberia, they have nothing to do with "other Blacks." Each of the two men were murdered by white police officers. A white justice system tried lying to the parents in the New Iberia case, and will continue to drag on for months until the Feds get involved and start to light some fires where they need to be lit.

    As for Ferguson, the police department needs to release an Incident Report. That is normal procedure. The longer they keep delaying it, the less ethical they are.

  • -4

    bass4funk

    The truth about white privilege http://video.foxnews.com/v/3750477992001/the-truth-about-white-privilege-/?playlist_id=930909812001

    I am not so sure you even agree with yourself from post to post.

    Oh, you know full well what I was referring to, please don't try and play hardball.

    I believe that a very high percentage officers will lie (or keep silent rather than produce evidence) to protect another officer from prosecution. I would rate Sharpton higher on the ethical scale.

    So then, you are saying they are NO different than the thugs that live by the street cod of No snitchin'! I would rate Sharpton lower than a snakes belly.

    What makes you or any white supremacist think you know what the problems of a community are?

    Trust me when I tell you, I am NOT White Supremist! And Yes, I do know the community very well.

    Have you done a thorough investigation?

    No and neither have you. We all don't know more than the Feds, police, prosecutors and The FBI agents that are assigned to this case. Once all the facts come in, we should know more until then, it's anyone's guess. No one knows the answer meaning, us the outside public.

    All you ever present are cheap talking points from Faux News.

    Well, as a matter of fact, since you brought it up. This came out today. Total Bullseye.

    The truth about white privilege http://video.foxnews.com/v/3750477992001/the-truth-about-white-privilege-/?playlist_id=930909812001

    As for the incidents in Ferguson and New Iberia, they have nothing to do with "other Blacks." Each of the two men were murdered by white police officers. A white justice system tried lying to the parents in the New Iberia case, and will continue to drag on for months until the Feds get involved and start to light some fires where they need to be lit.

    Ok, so you want to ignore hard facts and keep the focus on attacking Whites and going on that the Blacks are victims and the Whites are holding them back from any form of prosperity. You are essentially saying that officer Wilson shouldn't receive a fair trial, his side and rights shouldn't matter whatsoever, vigilantism is the real order and we don't need to listen to another persons POV. We the public find him guilty, therefore, we should either throw him in jail or execute him without a trial. Yeah, Yabits, facts are important ONLY if they fall in your favor, otherwise facts don't mean anything.

    As for Ferguson, the police department needs to release an Incident Report. That is normal procedure. The longer they keep delaying it, the less ethical they are.

    I have no problem with that. My, we are agreeing on something again. See how easy that can be.

  • -4

    yabits

    So then, you are saying they are NO different than the thugs that live by the street cod

    People are people, and everyone lives by some code. I can look at what some might call a "street thug" and perceive a human being of great decency and promise. I can also look at what some might call a "pillar of the community" and spot the thug in them. As most of us learned when we were kids, "Never judge a book by its cover."

    Ok, so you want to ignore hard facts and keep the focus on attacking Whites and going on that the Blacks are victims and the Whites are holding them back from any form of prosperity.

    You are utterly missing the point and heading off-topic. Micheal Brown, Victor White, Trayvon Martin, Jordan Davis, Eric Garner, Victor White, Oscar Grant and many others are victims -- all at the hands of people who thought they could kill them and get away with it. In most cases, the system enabled their killers to get away with it. So we take a person like Michael Brown and observe that he was not able to walk down the street in his own neighborhood without getting harassed, abused, and then killed when he fought back. Just walking down the street. And yet, a person who murders a human being in broad daylight -- the one who was delivering the abuse and harassment -- is being held up as someone who should be allowed to be given every benefit of the same system that took Brown's life.

    I would like to know why Fox News was not on the story of Victor White in New Iberia. Why it takes independent, liberal and progressive journalists to bring such stories to our attention. Why would any moral person accept it that a man handcuffed behind his back in a police car after being searched, somehow produces a gun and shoots himself in the chest with it? And what about a system that presents that as the final word? (A system that initially lied by claiming he shot himself in the back.) I think you are incapable of comprehending the tremendous evil in that.

  • 0

    Strangerland

    Not claiming, watch the video, also from the police report, Wilson said, he saw the cigars in his hand.

    We're going in circles. My last response to your saying 'watch the video' was this:

    What video? There is no video of Brown walking down the street. Yet you are making claims - claims no one else has ever made anywhere with any shred of evidence - that the officer saw him holding these cigars.

    To which you replied this:

    No, but there are witnesses and a police report that said, he was in the street.

    No one has any hard evidence either except for the approx. guess of the distance where Brown was shot. that he stole the cigars, that there WAS some sort of confrontation and that the officer fired his weapon and killed Brown, everything and in between, we don't know for sure. What the mindset of the officer was, if he killed Brown on purpose or if Brown started some kind of altercation. Those ARE the undisputed facts!

    To which I said:

    You are making claims that the officer saw him holding the stolen cigars. But the police themselves have stated that the officer didn't know about the cigar store incident, and no one other than you has claimed that the officer saw him holding the cigars (which he wouldn't have know anything about anyways, according to the police).

    Which brings us back to the reply at the top of this post.

    Let me be clear, no one has claimed that the officer saw him holding cigars, and if he had seen him holding cigars, it still wouldn't matter, because the officer didn't know about the cigar store robbery. So it's unclear why you are making up the fact that the officer saw him carrying cigars, when you yourself have admitted that it's not one of the known facts, and it has no relevance anyways.

  • -2

    bass4funk

    People are people, and everyone lives by some code. I can look at what some might call a "street thug" and perceive a human being of great decency and promise. I can also look at what some might call a "pillar of the community" and spot the thug in them. As most of us learned when we were kids, "Never judge a book by its cover."

    I never judge a book by its cover, meaning, I am careful, but I will give anyone a chance. I judge a person by their actions and history and If I see the person is shady OR if I feel that the person could possibly be dangerous then as a natural self-preservation, mechanism we all have built in our DNA, I will be more cautious. If you want to call that profiling, then so be it. But your environment, upbringing and living conditions will determine your overall outlook of people around you. Brown, may have been a nice kid, but his conduct in the store and towards authority and to the store clerk and cop didn't show that. Thuggin' his way through the store and acting the way he did in that category of how sadly many people perceive Blacks to be, that is how people will associate that kind of behavior.

    When you don't know how the use the English language properly and have your pants sagging, showing your underwear, bucking the system, listening to vile lyrics, taking a bad attitude towards women and using profanity like it's a normal to talk on an everyday basis, dropping out of school, getting girls pregnant, having kids everywhere and then not willing to take care of them, all fits into the narrative that Blacks don't care.

    Unemployment rate

    Blacks 11.4%

    Whites 5.3%

    Asians 4.5%

    Median Household Income

    Blacks $33.000

    Whites $57.000

    Asians $69.000

    High School Graduation Rate

    Blacks 69%

    Whites 86%

    Asians 88%

    Children in Single Parent Homes

    Blacks 55%

    Whites 21%

    Asians 13%

    These are the latest facts and stats and that is the REAL problem affecting Blacks, it's NOT a race issue, but people like Sharpton stir the pot and fuel the flames that Whites are evil, they took everything away from you and therefore, you have to blame them and as O'Reilly said, everyone needs to take personal responsibility for their actions, recently in the states, we are seeing more and more Indian immigrants coming into the US, they are buying up everything and becoming some of the fastest small business owners. They are smart, educated and put very high emphasis on education, strong family units, have a father in the home, increases your chances for success. That is the real problem with Blacks in America, even if everyone were prejudiced, in our society, if you have the skills and education, you can overcome everything. Many Asians come to America, can't speak the language, but even excel out perform Whites in school and in employment, so why can they succeed and Blacks can't? It's NOT because of the color of their skin. When you have Blacks thinking the White man owes me or that you are constantly a victim, you will never get too far in life and have little success. Many Blacks have NOT learned this. The Black grievance industry NEVER talks about it, they want to go on that Whites robbed them of everything, in the past, you could make that argument and there is still small pockets of racism, but bucking the system and thinking screw them, "I do what I want," you will lose every time. Blacks have to rise up above that and listening to idiots like Sharpton isn't helping their cause. If Sharpton would give these states and on his little show talk about the plight of Blacks and the high crime rate and all the other problems in their society, I'd give him some props, but he knows there is no money in that. The man is pathetic!

    This answers you second point. We don't know what happened and why, we will soon, but the thing you keep veering off topic is, if Blacks like Brown didn't have this F*** the system type attitude and thinking he can do and get away with anything, he might surely still be alive. The cops often in many big cities go by the perception that Blacks are always getting into trouble, it's not their fault for feeling like that, but put yourself in their shows like Chicago, night after night after night, someone gets shot or killed. Black on Black, why won't Sharpton talk about these disturbing problems. I am not saying it is right, but that's how people will see you, they see the same thing on TV and see how many Blacks have a defiant attitude towards the system and thinking that attitude will change the system and it won't, NOT like that. IF you want change, you need dialogue and personal responsibility.

    I would like to know why Fox News was not on the story of Victor White in New Iberia. Why it takes independent, liberal and progressive journalists to bring such stories to our attention. Why would any moral person accept it that a man handcuffed behind his back in a police car after being searched, somehow produces a gun and shoots himself in the chest with it? And what about a system that presents that as the final word? (A system that initially lied by claiming he shot himself in the back.)

    I think you are incapable of comprehending the tremendous evil in that.

    Trust me, I really do.

    One news network cannot tell just one story, some other networks perhaps or in the print media. They have to pick and choose the topics that will bring in the high ratings. Since the news business is a ratings business, they need to focus on the biggest topics or concentrate on topic that needs special attention, especially in the prime time slot. I know the story and I did hear it on FOX, but if you cover these stories all the time and there are just too many of them, there would be no room for anything else. So the Ferguson story is the biggest now, you have to be selective, I agree that is a big thing, but in the bigger picture of competitive journalism, it probably isn't big enough to pull in high ratings, at least not yet, who knows.

  • 1

    zichi

    So a white guy, who dominates these posts states that non whites don't have any major issues with racism? I guess you would need to have direct experience to able to even attempt to answer that question.

    According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, between 1999-2011, 2151 whites were shot dead by cops, and 1130 blacks. Since the white population is about 63% of the national population and blacks 12%, therefore per capita! more blacks are killed by cops than whites. For more whites it would have to be more than 5,000 deaths to be more than blacks.

    More blacks than whites are stopped or pulled over by cops than whites. More blacks, per capita are in prisons than whites.

    I guess if you use Faux News for facts you'll be wrong with them.

  • 2

    cleo

    When you don't know how the use the English language properly

    Have you heard any audio of Brown talking? (and coming from you, insistence on proper use of the English language is quite funny)

    and have your pants sagging, showing your underwear

    From the store video, it seems Brown was wearing tshirt and shorts, not exceptional on a hot summer's day. No sign of his underwear as far as I can see.

    bucking the system, listening to vile lyrics, taking a bad attitude towards women

    Walking down the street, yes that was Bad. No mention I can find of him listening to any kind of lyrics vile or otherwise, and no women in range for him to take any kind of attitude towards.

    and using profanity like it's a normal to talk on an everyday basis,

    I understand it was the cop who came along effing and blinding from the start.

    dropping out of school,

    Brown had graduated just days before.

    getting girls pregnant, having kids everywhere and then not willing to take care of them,

    How many kids did Brown leave?

    all fits into the narrative that Blacks don't care.

    No, what it all fits into is the narrative that when you see some people, you don't see individuals you see some Black people. In that little tirade you tell us much more about yourself than you tell us about Michael Brown or the section of American society that calls itself African-American. Shame on you.

  • -3

    bass4funk

    @stranger

    We're going in circles. My last response to your saying 'watch the video'

    You didn't watch the video of Brown pushing the store clerk and taking the box of cigars? Please watch again.

    Let me be clear, no one has claimed that the officer saw him holding cigars,

    Publicly, perhaps, but you don't know what info and evidence the police have. Let me be clear on that.

    and if he had seen him holding cigars, it still wouldn't matter,

    Yes, it does, because he committed a crime.

    because the officer didn't know about the CIGAR store robbery.

    We all don't know that. At this point, it is pure speculation.

    So it's unclear why you are making up the fact that the officer saw him carrying cigars,

    Because that is what I read on a few reports just like you read the opposite. Now we heard opposite reports, who is right, that has not been entirely established yet, so arguing this point will solve nothing. You believe one thing and I believe another. I am not saying I am right or you are wrong, this is what I choose to believe until I get the full report and I want to hear Wilson's side. He has that right as an American citizen to bring forth his side of the story as to what happened on that day.

    when you yourself have admitted that it's not one of the known facts, and it has no relevance anyways.

    None of it does, really, so we don't need to belabor that point.

    @zichi

    So a white guy, who dominates these posts states that non whites don't have any major issues with racism? I guess you would need to have direct experience to able to even attempt to answer that question.

    I sincerely do.

    According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, between 1999-2011, 2151 whites were shot dead by cops, and 1130 blacks. Since the white population is about 63% of the national population and blacks 12%, therefore per capita! more blacks are killed by cops than whites. For more whites it would have to be more than 5,000 deaths to be more than blacks.

    More Blacks commit crimes and more are incarcerated. Every stat shows that.

    More blacks than whites are stopped or pulled over by cops than whites. More blacks, per capita are in prisons than whites.

    As I have outlined the reason as to why that is. It's NOT because of color. Again, you are doing exactly the same thing as to what I was eluding to in my last post. Libs like you never want to point the finger at the crux of the problem and that is why Blacks will never get out of this conundrum. You make it seem like Americans hate Blacks and there is just NO way that Blacks can ever make it because there is no hope and there is no way that Blacks can ever achieve or amount to anything in the US.

    I guess if you use Faux News for facts you'll be wrong with them.

    No, It's more like when people want to keep their head in the sand, you'll always be in the dark and wrong and Blacks can't point the finger at anyone but themselves. Asians come and make money all the time and they don't complain or make excuses. Has nothing to do with Fox, but hey...everyone needs a scapegoat.

  • 0

    Strangerland

    You didn't watch the video of Brown pushing the store clerk and taking the box of cigars? Please watch again.

    What does the video in the store have to do with it? We're going in circles again. You claimed the officer saw brown with the cigars in his hand. The officer saw him on the street. You claimed the officer saw him with the cigars in his hand on the street. There is has been no video released of the incident in the street. Therefore you were making it up that the officer saw him holding the cigars on the street. Here are your words saying so (second quote):

    The crime committed in the store was shoplifting/theft. So what crime was committed in the street?

    When the police officer confronted Brown for being in the middle of the street and second for noticing the cigars in his hand that he had stolen.

    So I say it again, you are not doing your case any favors by making things up.

  • -3

    bass4funk

    @stranger

    What does the video in the store have to do with it?

    You don't get it? It has everything to do with it. Brown in doing so, stole the cigars and that sealed his fate. Brown could have done the right thing and walked out, if he didn't have the cash, he chose to steal the cigars and thus sealed his fate. You reap what you sow.

    We're going in circles again. You claimed the officer saw brown with the CIGARS in his hand.

    Yes, from some of the reports I read.

    The officer saw him on the street. You claimed the officer saw him with the CIGARS in his hand on the street. There is has been no video released of the incident in the street.

    I never said there was a video. I said, watch the video of Brow stealing the cigars

    Therefore you were making it up that the officer saw him holding the cigars on the street.

    Sorry, I am not making anything up. You and I are seeing different testimonies and statements, neither of which are 100% accurate or confirmed and allowed in a court of evidence and until then, we are just guessing. Hope that clears the confusion.

    So I say it again, you are not doing your case any favors by making things up.

    Well, sorry, but that's not the case, but I will say, you are not doing yourself any favors by overlooking the obvious facts and one in particular that we just don't have all the answers.

  • 1

    Strangerland

    What does the video in the store have to do with it?

    You don't get it? It has everything to do with it. Brown in doing so, stole the cigars and that sealed his fate.

    I honestly wonder if you are being dense on purpose or not. I have been talking about your claim that the officer saw Brown holding the cigars in his hand on the street. "What does the video in the store have to do with it" refers to your claim that the officer saw him holding the cigars on the street. As the video was in the store, and your claim was about what happened on the street, the video has nothing to do with that.

    Sorry, I am not making anything up.

    Then provide some supporting evidence that the officer saw Brown holding the cigars on the street as you claim. Because it seems that no one else anywhere who knows anything has made this claim.

  • 1

    zichi

    bass4funk

    @zichi

    So a white guy, who dominates these posts states that non whites don't have any major issues with racism? I guess you would need to have direct experience to able to even attempt to answer that question.

    I sincerely do.

    I seriously doubt that unless you are black yourself. It would be the same if you said you knew what female sexism is like or what its like to be a rape victim. Back in the UK I have many black friends for many many years and I also have two black daughters so I know the racism they experience every single day of their lives. But in the morning when I look into the mirror I'm a white male so I also know my day will be different than my black friends and my daughters.

    According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, between 1999-2011, 2151 whites were shot dead by cops, and 1130 blacks. Since the white population is about 63% of the national population and blacks 12%, therefore per capita! more blacks are killed by cops than whites. For more whites it would have to be more than 5,000 deaths to be more than blacks.

    More Blacks commit crimes and more are incarcerated. Every stat shows that.

    Your generalizing is in fact incorrect. Like many white people, you probably believe whites commit crimes but blacks are criminals.

    More blacks than whites are stopped or pulled over by cops than whites. More blacks, per capita are in prisons than whites.

    As I have outlined the reason as to why that is. It's NOT because of color.

    More blacks than whites are given prison sentences for the same crimes committed by both races.

    You make it seem like Americans hate Blacks and there is just NO way that Blacks can ever make it because there is no hope and there is no way that Blacks can ever achieve or amount to anything in the US.

    That's just more of your conjecture because I have never stated that but you are fond of saying people said stuff when they didn't? For your reference in America I know several doctors, lawyers and professors at uni's and one who is even a Jesuit priest and astronomer.

    Asians come and make money all the time and they don't complain or make excuses. Has nothing to do with Fox, but hey...everyone needs a scapegoat.

    I know several American Asians and even more back in the UK, they wouldn't agree with your opinion.

  • -1

    bass4funk

    @stranger

    Relax, dude. It's not that serious. You don't understand because You DON'T want to to understand. People have been saying things back and forth about Brown did this or that, the same goes for officer Wilson, I am reading different reports just like you. I am interested in the officers side because I think he has a right to a fair hearing and people don't have a right to condemn, or prosecute the man without a trial or a jury or without hard evidence presented to a court of law. I want fairness on both sides, so that's where I am coming from. Second, the video shows Brown stealing the cigars, the store video, that is a fact. Third, Brown sealed his fate by stealing those cigars, everything else is irrelevant. Because had he NOT done that, he would still be here. Bottom line!

    Then provide some supporting evidence that the officer saw Brown holding the cigars on the street as you claim. Because it seems that no one else anywhere who knows anything has made this claim.

    Now who is the one going around in circles? I said, I read from various sources that, that is what was in the officers report. I cannot deny nor confirm, just like no one can deny nor confirm the exact events that unfolded the day Brown was shot.

  • 1

    Strangerland

    Relax, dude. It's not that serious.

    Well actually, it is. If you are making things up in support of your argument, it calls into question pretty much everything you say. If you are willing to not tell the truth, then how can we believe anything you say, without requiring supporting information?

    People have been saying things back and forth about Brown did this or that, the same goes for officer Wilson, I am reading different reports just like you.

    Fair enough, which is why I have asked for anything to support your claim that the officer saw Brown carrying the cigars in the streets.

    Second, the video shows Brown stealing the cigars, the store video, that is a fact. Third, Brown sealed his fate by stealing those cigars, everything else is irrelevant.

    Again, this is absolutely irrelevant to your claim that the officer saw Brown carrying the cigars in the streets.

    Now who is the one going around in circles? I said, I read from various sources that, that is what was in the officers report. I cannot deny nor confirm

    And yet you claimed it as fact.

    So to review one more time:

    Your claim - the officer saw Brown carrying the cigars in the street

    My challenge - back this up with supporting information that shows that someone has claimed this. Because right now it appears that you just made it up.

  • -2

    yabits

    I read from various sources that, that is what was in the officers report.

    There is no officer's report. The initial details that the Chief of Police gave out in a press conference specifically stated that the stolen cigars played no part in why Wilson confronted the two. They were walking in the road.

    just like no one can deny nor confirm the exact events

    That is stupid. We know exactly the type of handgun that Officer Wilson carried and how many shots it can fire. We know for certain that bullets from that gun killed Brown. We know for certain that Brown did not have a weapon. Thanks to the police, we know that Brown's body was more than 30 feet from the car -- 30 feet from the original point of confrontation. It would be obtuse in the extreme to pretend that some other reason exists than Brown moving to that distance by his own volition.

    With 30 or more feet between Brown and the vehicle -- with Brown and Johnson having run away from the vehicle; and with multiple eyewitnesses confirming that the two were running away -- how would any officer's life be in any immanent danger?

    Cleo's post is superlative in that she caught you in the act of ascribing all these things to African Americans, of which there is no evidence as to which, if any, applied to Michael Brown. He never got into any problems with the law; he has no record. He finished school and was advancing his education in a trade school. He didn't leave any children behind him, etc. And if they don't apply to Brown, why bring them up? I suppose in the eyes of some whites, all Black people have to bear the perceived defects of a stereotype. Not speaking the language correctly can get a black person abused and killed for a trivial crime like walking on a residential street.

  • 3

    cleo

    Brown sealed his fate by stealing those cigars, everything else is irrelevant. Because had he NOT done that, he would still be here. Bottom line!

    I'm shaking my head at the obtuseness on display here.

    1) The police say Wilson did not know about the robbery.

    2) There is no evidence that Wilson 'saw the cigars in Brown's hand'. He pulled the youths over (and swore at them) for walking in the middle of the street.

    3) There is no evidence that the altercation at the police car had anything to do with the cigars.

    4) Not even in America does the law say that the penalty for stealing a box of cigars is summary execution.

  • -2

    bass4funk

    @zichi

    So a white guy, who dominates these posts states that non whites don't have any major issues with racism? I guess you would need to have direct experience to able to even attempt to answer that question.

    Zichi, you don't anything about me and you haven't walked in my shoes and you don't know about my life experiences, so for you to make that kind of comment is laughable, to say the least.

    I seriously doubt that unless you are black yourself.

    What I am is a person, I don't care about color!

    It would be the same if you said you knew what female sexism is like or what its like to be a rape victim. Back in the UK I have many black friends for many many years and I also have two black daughters so I know the racism they experience every single day of their lives. But in the morning when I look into the mirror I'm a white male so I also know my day will be different than my black friends and my daughters.

    Well, I cannot comment on racial stats in the UK, I just don't know and won't make any comments, but I do know how it is in the states and for the record, I am sure you're daughters must be very beautiful and sorry, to hear about hardships that they might be going through.

    Your generalizing is in fact incorrect. Like many white people, you probably believe whites commit crimes but blacks are criminals.

    No, I am saying that in the US most Blacks are murdered by other Blacks, that is a fact. Of course you have criminals in every color, but to entertain the notion that Blacks are being hunted down by racist Whites and in particular White cops and killed intentionally is complete ludicrous!

    More blacks than whites are stopped or pulled over by cops than whites. More blacks, per capita are in prisons than whites.

    And why is that? The police are arresting Blacks at a high rate because they are racists and just want to get Blacks off the streets and out of the public eye???

    That's just more of your conjecture because I have never stated that but you are fond of saying people said stuff when they didn't?

    You libs have a habit of doing that all the time and if a conservative does it, you guys lose your top? Besides, you guys only focus on what YOU guys think is relevant and if you find the argument is NOT to your liking or how you want it to conclude, you call it conjecture? Come on....lol

    For your reference in America I know several doctors, lawyers and professors at uni's and one who is even a Jesuit priest and astronomer.

    Good to hear that.

    I know several American Asians and even more back in the UK, they wouldn't agree with your opinion.

    I never said, EVERY Asian, but the majority do. All you need to do is drive to every large major Asian dominated city in California and do a comparison. With the exception of Baldwin Heights (one of the largest Black community in Los Angeles, the majority of them are totally run down. You go to virtually any Asian neighborhood, Alhambra, Irvine, Garden Grove, Torrance, they are all clean, lawns well kept, very little safety issue problems, quite the opposite when you go to the majority of Black neighborhoods, Compton, Watts, Pomona, Inglewood trash, graffiti, dogs running lose everywhere. It has nothing to do if the people are nice or not, but everything with optics and the Black neighborhoods have a very bad and negative reputation and with good reason, the Asians, do not. Most of Asians do very well, live very well, drive nice cars, you will see more doctors, lawyers and in the higher professions. You don't see as many Black in these professions. You see more youths on the streets, gangs everywhere, you see many of them working in security, nothing wrong with that, but you see them in more lower paying jobs compared to White or Asians. It's bad tasting medicine, but it's the truth. If Blacks want to move up, they need to get off this victimization of the White man is keeping me down.

    Again, I cannot comment on the UK as how Asians are treated or how prosperous they are compared to Blacks. That is not my call.

  • 1

    Strangerland

    So, Bass, I assume that we can take your ignoring my last post, and lack of any supporting evidence to show that anyone other than you has claimed the officer saw Brown holding the gun to be an admission that you just made that up.

    I suppose that puts you right about the level of the journalistic integrity shown by faux-news.

  • 0

    bass4funk

    So, Bass, I assume that we can take your ignoring my last post, and lack of any supporting evidence to show that anyone other than you has claimed the officer saw Brown holding the gun to be an admission that you just made that up.

    I really love how libs like you just the narrative. I never said, "I know for a fact." Stranger, just give up. It doesn't help your case to throw accusations claiming of I said something, when I really didn't. Just as equally, you cannot say for certain, Brown was in the process of giving himself up or if he had his hands up. Again, we just don't know. Unlike the rest of you guys, I all wait for the facts to come out when they announce it.

    I suppose that puts you right about the level of the journalistic integrity shown by faux-news.

    The number one rated news network, nawwww. I wish though. ;-)

    @Yabits

    There is no officer's report. The initial details that the Chief of Police gave out in a press conference specifically stated that the stolen cigars played no part in why Wilson confronted the two. They were walking in the road.

    Yabits, you don't know that, if you did, EVERY media outlet would be breaking down your door for an interview. Come on, dude....

    That is stupid. We know exactly the type of handgun that Officer Wilson carried and how many shots it can fire. We know for certain that bullets from that gun killed Brown. We know for certain that Brown did not have a weapon. Thanks to the police, we know that Brown's body was more than 30 feet from the car -- 30 feet from the original point of confrontation. It would be obtuse in the extreme to pretend that some other reason exists than Brown moving to that distance by his own volition.

    I am not going to even entertain the distance of where he was shot, you already did that yesterday, Frungy already made some valid points and also if you believe Dr. Baden.

    Cleo's post is superlative in that she caught you in the act of ascribing all these things to African Americans, of which there is no evidence as to which, if any, applied to Michael Brown.

    With all due respect to Cleo, she doesn't know or understand the dynamics of the Black community in the states and history of what Blacks have gone through.

    He never got into any problems with the law; he has no record.

    That we don't know of, but I would assume, he has now after the theft and even though the assailant is now deceased.

    He finished school and was advancing his education in a TRADE SCHOOL. He didn't leave any children behind him, etc. And if they don't apply to Brown, why bring them up?

    Yabits, you constantly bring up stuff that is unrelated to Brown directly, but indirectly, Ok, I get it, but if someone else does it, you complain that they are side-stepping. Seriously!!!!

    I suppose in the eyes of some whites, all Black people have to bear the perceived defects of a stereotype. Not speaking the language correctly can get a black person abused and killed for a trivial crime like walking on a residential street

    Perception is everything. Show me your friends and I will tell you who you are. If you go to a high paying job and you want to be taken seriously, looking like "Lil Wayne" will not help your image. Not being able to speak properly and to use jargon and acting like a thug, sagging pants, gold in your mouth, too much bling, tats, dreads will not reflect too well on the Black community. That is not a stereotype. It is not a reason to kill anyone and that is NOT the reason why Brown was killed. Brown was killed because of Brown. So when will you come on JT and passionately talk about the Black on Black murder and out of control crime rate?

    @cleo

    I'm shaking my head at the obtuseness on display here.

    Me too, and I didn't even have lunch yet!

    1) The police say Wilson did not know about the robbery.

    Again, that is one report, but we don't know, none of us were there, FACT.

    2) There is no evidence that Wilson 'saw the CIGARS in Brown's hand'. He pulled the youths over (and swore at them) for walking in the middle of the street.

    True, but there are various papers and news sources that say something different, I take both sides with a grain of salt, because we don't know and we haven't yet heard Officer Wilson's side.

    3) There is no evidence that the altercation at the police car had anything to do with the CIGARS.

    I never said, that. I believe the altercation can be attributed to a couple of things, one mostly because Brown thought whatever the officer said that he could disobey an order and go up to the cop and push him around, the officer was smaller and Brown felt that he could control the situation and do as he pleases. Now is it a fact, I do not know, but so far, that is what it looks like, viewing it as an outsider.

    4) Not even in America does the law say that the penalty for stealing a box of CIGARS is summary execution.

    No, but stealing doesn't help and confronting an officer that has a license to kill will not help you in any way.

    Look it's very simple and for some reason young kids don't get this. If you don't want ANY problems with the cops do the following.

    1) When the officer tells you to stop, you stop.

    2) Don't argue, even if you know the cop is totally wrong, shut up, let him speak and at another day or time, get his name, badge number and file a complaint. Confrontation with a cop won't help, believe me.

    3) Don't walk up to a cop, touch or grab the cop and threaten the cop, again, you will NOT win.

    4) Don't make any excuses, own up to what you did, particularly if the cop has caught you red-handed in the act of wrongdoing.

    5) Don't have a bad attitude. Even if the cop has a bad attitude, don't stoop dow to their level, again, just shut your move, let the cop say what he/she will say and later politely talk back to the officer.

    6) Don't look like a threat or impose or act like you want to do something to the officer.

    If you do all that, you should be out of there within a few min. I have dealt with the police a lot, a lot, most of it good and a few that had me pissed off, but I took other action. I never made myself look like a threat or talked back to a cop and I was able to leave, but many young kids try to challenge police authority and they never win, never. So attitude, appearance and how you talk to a cop and the outcome depends on you and not color, the race agitators would want you to believe that. The problem is, these race hustlers like Sharpton always play the victimization card and that every problem for the Black man in society is the White man, which is a bunch of crap!

    • Moderator

      Readers, please stop bickering.

  • 1

    Strangerland

    I really love how libs like you just the narrative. I never said, "I know for a fact." Stranger, just give up. It doesn't help your case to throw accusations claiming of I said something, when I really didn't. You made the claim. If you were claiming something reported by the media, I could understand, but you just made something up out of your head to further your argument. Now we have to call into question everything you say.

    Just as equally, you cannot say for certain, Brown was in the process of giving himself up or if he had his hands up.

    I've never claimed either of those things. I stick to the facts. Not all liberals are the same.

  • -1

    bass4funk

    If that is true, then the best thing is to wait and see what the Grand Jury says, this back and forth he said, she said, this happened or not is just pure conjecture and the prosecutor will not show his hand and everyone is keeping their cards close to their chests. But we will all soon find out the REAL story as to what happened on that day.

  • -2

    cleo

    an officer that has a license to kill

    We're talking about a plod in a backwater, not 007.

  • -4

    bass4funk

    We're talking about a plod in a backwater, not 007.

    What do you think that gun is for? A Fashion statement? Of course, they have a license to kill. Basically meaning that if there is danger to the officer or to others where every action fails to stop an individual, the officer within reason is allowed to use deadly force until the threat is neutralized. Most cops never have to use their guns, but there are times when an officer has to make that critical decision. My brother has been on the force for 19 years, he never had to use his gun. He used his taser several times, but thankfully, he never had to use it to defend, protect or take someone's life.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    I don't think 007'd be up for that kind of work.

  • 0

    MrGeee

    GWAug. 24, 2014 - 12:43PM JST The US has done a piss poor job in dealing with the after math of slavery, yeah sure its getter better for black people over time, BUT at a damned slow pace, this should have been over & done with ages ago. Whenever I visit the states I can almost immediately feel the tension on the air, the US is a great place but its done a terrible job wrt to black people, the US can & should do better, PERIOD!

    i BEG TO differ, the US has been great for post slavery African Americans. We have a tiered social-econ system here. You have been in the wrong neighborhoods ! LOL In Cairo, London, Spain, Israel any where in the world, POOR people have tension in the air ! Ghetto's anywhere are the same ! America affords everyone the opportunity to be successful., ASK Obama ! Color and Race isn't the demeaning issue in America for Black people or any other minority group. Intelligence, education, and the competitive spirit is the what we do ! I do appreciate your views thanks

  • 0

    sfjp330

    bass4funk Aug. 28, 2014 - 01:48PM JST Black neighborhoods have a very bad and negative reputation and with good reason, the Asians, do not. Most of Asians do very well, live very well, drive nice cars, you will see more doctors, lawyers and in the higher professions. You don't see as many Black in these professions. You see more youths on the streets, gangs everywhere, you see many of them working in security, nothing wrong with that, but you see them in more lower paying jobs compared to White or Asians. It's bad tasting medicine, but it's the truth. If Blacks want to move up, they need to get off this victimization of the White man is keeping me down.

    Sure, there are inner city problems, but if you rank blacks in the U.S. as a country, they rank 15th in GDP. There are many hard working blacks in the U.S. and have overcome many sterotype of blacks. Remeber, civil rights for blacks is less than 50 years old and they come a long way. Blacks deserve alot of credit for chanes in civil rights. The Japanese-Americans and other Asians will continue to bow, and had very little to do with the civil rights. Asians just don't want conflicts and they are a sorry bunch of group for civil rights issues.

  • -1

    kurisupisu

    Brown got 2 shots to the head-isn't the 'double-tap' method taught as a sure fire way to put your opponent down for good?

  • 0

    turbotsat

    Brown got 2 shots to the head-isn't the 'double-tap' method taught as a sure fire way to put your opponent down for good?

    Yes but that's allowed and even encouraged.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleeing_felon_rule

  • 0

    CraigHicks

    It's a moral crime that this incident could occur without recording it on camera, as the technology is there, affordable, and already in use by several police departments in at least the US and UK.

  • 1

    yabits

    Why African-Americans should put little trust in the law enforcement system in Amerika. Reason 839:

    A black man goes to jail for sitting on a public bench. Note: Under Minnesota law, a citizen is not required to show identification to law enforcement unless accused of being in violation of a law.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWH578nAasM

    Unbelievable. No white person would stand for it.

  • 0

    Strangerland

    America, becoming more and more of a police state daily.

  • -1

    turbotsat

    Bench not public. Saturday Night Live skits aside, a white guy could have been treated the same.

    You could have browsed through the comments and looked for counterpoints to your claim, too.

    Try to find some real examples of racism. Ida Delaney, Bryan Gilliam. Like that.

    yabits: Reason 839: A black man goes to jail for sitting on a public bench. Note: Under Minnesota law, a citizen is not required to show identification to law enforcement unless accused of being in violation of a law. (para) (link) (para) Unbelievable. No white person would stand for it.

    ... in comments at your link ...

    Baud Wolf 1 day ago : He was in a private employee only area, and refused to identity himself when they tried to find out if he was allowed back there. He insisted that because he didn't see a sign, it was therefore a public area, and he was only being harassed "because black": "According to a report released this afternoon by the St. Paul Police Department, private security guards called officers to investigate a man who was trespassing in a private "employee only" lounge area of the building. The security guards told the officers that the man refused to leave after they told him he couldn't be there."

    http://www.mprnews.org/story/2014/08/28/st-paul-arrest-video-response

  • 1

    yabits

    Bench not public. Saturday Night Live skits aside, a white guy could have been treated the same.

    If it was private, how did Lollie obtain access to the area? Lollie claimed there was nothing in any way designating the area as private. Was every other (read: "white") person checked to verify they were permitted to be in that area? No, which indicates racial profiling.

    Once Lollie left the area, why physically assault him? (Because of his race; no other reason.)

    He was in a private employee only area

    What designated that area as private? How did Lollie even know there was such an area? He had ten minutes to spend before picking up his kids. What harm was he doing -- outside of the affront of a black man sitting on a bench in an area where a white person thought he shouldn't be sitting?

    America, becoming more and more of a police state daily

    Some states are making it illegal to record the activities of the police without their consent -- even if they are on your property. The crime is felony eavesdropping -- equal to rape. There was a guy in Illinois who was threatened with 75 years -- life in prison -- for filming the police when they came to his home.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmndxtajee4

  • 1

    CraigHicks

    @turbostat... "Bench not public."

    Why would anyone suppose that a bench in a shopping mall could not be used to sit and rest tired feet? Regardless of whether the bench was private or not, if it is put in a mall as courtesy for people with tired feet, then it's rather rude to tell some people on a case by case according to their appearance that they can't use it - he was sitting on it right? Not lying down on it not even eating or drinking on it. Please note the court has acquitted the man Christopher Lollie of any of the charges, including trespassing, with which he was charged. The law coincided with common sense civil behavior in this case.

    http://www.twincities.com/crime/ci_26433870/st-paul-skyway-arrest-should-be-probed-by

    http://www.twincities.com/crime/ci_26426299/st-paul-police-defend-skyway-arrest-charges-dismissed

    Lollie was also tasered in the course of his unwarranted and unnecessary arrest after he had left the bench area; tasering is an unnatural act which can cause long term damage, e.g. neck or back pain, and has resulted in death at least once in the US.

    Dave Titus, St. Paul Police Federation president, said Thursday, "These three cops in the skyway, you couldn't get nicer individuals. This guy was acting like a jerk."

    I understand that I can't make Mr. Titus not think Mr. Lollie is a jerk. People are free to choose who they think to be a jerk. But Mr. Titus and his colleagues are obliged to follow the law in how they exercise their power - not use it to persecute those they personally think are jerks. Hopefully there will be some feedback from this case that will help them learn - best of all would be if they were self motivated to eschew mean and needless conflict. Here's hoping.

  • 0

    yabits

    I understand that I can't make Mr. Titus not think Mr. Lollie is a jerk. People are free to choose who they think to be a jerk. But Mr. Titus and his colleagues are obliged to follow the law in how they exercise their power - not use it to persecute those they personally think are jerks.

    And a black person acting like a jerk could well find his or herself summarily executed on the street depending upon any number of twists based upon what Khalil Muhammed terms the condemnation of blackness.

    http://billmoyers.com/2013/07/19/moyers-moment-2012-the-condemnation-of-blackness/

    If i white guy in a business suit had been sitting on that bench, it would not have been a matter of concern.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    Police report (link below) indicates: Lollie was in the bank building, from description in report/other-web-pages/other-web-photos in a foyer area between the security, NOT in the skyway mall, that another person was also asked to leave and did leave, that security guard "asked LOLLIE if he had any business in the building as they routinely ask that of people sitting in those chairs", and "that if he did not have any business in the building he would have to move on", that Lollie was asked to leave two or three times over a 25 minute period, that police encountered Lollie in skyway on his way out, asked him to stop to talk to them about the trespassing complaint, he refused, tried to shove past the police, was arguing and wouldn't let them talk, started to tense his fist and arm, at that point they started to arrest him which he resisted so they tased him.

    <www.mprnews.org/story/2014/08/28/st-paul-arrest-video-response>

    http://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/238041348?extension=pdf&from=embed&source=embed

  • 0

    CraigHicks

    @yabits ... "Some states are making it illegal to record the activities of the police without their consent -- even if they are on your property."

    To quote from the link that you yourself gave: "As another report concerning the Allison case documents, in every other example where people have been arrested for recording police officers, the charges have been dropped and the case thrown out of court. Despite this fact, the state is so desperate to make an example out of Allison that an assistant from the Attorney General's Office was recently sent to speak against him during a hearing."

    So if I take the information in your provided link at face value, a law preventing the filming of police does not now exist either as civil or common law. Instead it says a coordinated effort is being made by multiple agencies to establish it as common law that filming police counts as federal eavesdropping. In the case centered on in the link, Allison was offered a plea deal which he refused. If he had taken the plea deal, it would established a beachhead in common law so that others could be prosecuted more easily next text.

    I cannot vouch for the information itself; I am merely explaining what was written in the link which you provided.

  • 0

    Strangerland

    If i white guy in a business suit had been sitting on that bench, it would not have been a matter of concern.

    While I am in full agreement that black people face ridiculous racism regularly in the US, speculation like this is purely speculation, and does not help the cause at all. If you can show that a white guy in a suit isn't harassed from sitting on that bench, then the actual comparison helps the cause lots. But simply speculating that you think a white guy sitting on the bench wouldn't face the same harassment, it just shows a bias against whites, which is alienating.

    So try to keep away from the rhetoric, and stick with the facts. You'll have more people on your side.

  • 1

    turbotsat

    Security guard in a bank would want to stay within policy to avoid hassle for himself.

    It's mostly an almost-minimum-wage job, few dollars more if commissioned to carry a firearm and firearms required at that particular jobsite, more for off-duty cops but no one's mentioned that he was an off-duty cop. Maybe banks pay more, though.

    Policy, even verbal-only policy, is not likely to be 'don't let any black people hang around the lobby, especially if they got dreadlocks, but white people, they're OK'.

    Giving the guy three chances to leave over 25+ minutes seems like more than enough warning. Maybe a three-warning rule was in place.

  • 0

    yabits

    Policy, even verbal-only policy, is not likely to be 'don't let any black people hang around the lobby, especially if they got dreadlocks, but white people, they're OK'.

    The policy is likely to be one of seeing someone there for a noticeably long time. How long "noticeably long" is would depend upon how the person looks to the security people.

    Laws and rules generally fall into one of two categories: 1) Those needed to maintain proper safety and order and 2) those that are there to keep people in their places. (Tazing the man in front of his kids and sending him to jail when had not broken any laws was a way of reinforcing what happens when one doesn't know or accept one's place.) There was no one being put out or hurt by a man sitting on a bench waiting to pick up his kids from the nearby school. If the area around the bench was supposed to be restricted, then the problem lies with allowing the public to have access to the bench.

    The other thing was how quickly the man was tazed once the male officer showed up on the scene. "I'm not your brother," indeed.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    Some other links contest that the kids were on the scene.

    The police asking (according to police report) if he needs someone to be sent to the daycare to pick up his kids and him saying to them 'no, didn't have to because they're not out of school yet' also indicates the kids weren't at the scene. Daycare was two buildings away, not exactly nearby: http://goo.gl/maps/MlWMy

    As for rest, from photos the area obviously belongs to the bank, not the public areas of the skywalks. The bank has a right to ask him to leave. Him refusing for 25+ minutes is just causing trouble. Then he tried to leave, and the police stopped him, as they should have. They're allowed to find out what's going on when called out on a criminal complaint.

    Here's a photo, evidently taken from the security desk end of the hallway because the skywalk is in the background. There's even a foyer area and hallways between the chair area and the skywalk.

    http://publicradio1.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/newscut/files/2014/08/fnb_chairs.jpg

    There's from the other direction (towards security desk):

    http://hga.com/work/first-national-bank-building-renovation#/first-national-bank-renovation-int-des-1&overview

  • 0

    yabits

    Here's a photo, evidently taken from the security desk end of the hallway because the skywalk is in the background.

    And there is (was?) a photo of the very spot on the bank's Facebook page, with a caption inviting the public to come in from the walkway to rest for a spell. (Unless, as is now apparent, they don't like your looks for any reason.) It's now obvious that the bank created the area with seats and the artwork as type of goodwill advertising to the public.

    So the notion (from above) that Lollie was in some "private employee" area is completely false. But that's what people do when it comes to situations like this: purposely put out misinformation. ("He was going for the gun." "His eye socket was broken.")

    Also, Lollie claims he was there more like 10 minutes, rather than 25. But if he was there longer, it could mean they were asking him to leave soon after he first sat down. It's fortunate the police didn't allow the situation to spiral further out of control than it did, as if being tazed and sent to jail isn't bad enough.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    CCTV to be expected in the lobby area. Lollie apparently going for lawsuit. Attorneys and maybe judge and maybe jury'll go over all of it and let us know.

    All that private employee area / eye socket broken / we were minding our own business / etc. stuff is third or fourth or moreth hand so far.

    Ad on Facebook does not constitute a contract with the public, also the ad says take 5 not 25. It's a post made probably by a PR person with admin control of the bank's FB account.

    Not (was?), it's still up: https://www.facebook.com/161905830198/photos/pb.161905830198.-2207520000.1409592151./165363885198

    Need a quick five? Enjoy a seat on the skyway.

  • 0

    yabits

    All that private employee area / eye socket broken / we were minding our own business / etc. stuff is third or fourth or moreth hand so far.

    Third or moreth, and brought "for-eth" by those who despise the thought of a black person freely sitting in a quasi-public area for more than five minutes.

    Ad on Facebook does not constitute a contract with the public

    Wooohooo! LOL! That's a good one. Only someone with inferior reasoning ability would claim it implied a contract. But it did imply and signal the intent of what the space was for. "C'mon in from the skyway folks, and rest your tired legs." But if you're black or poor, watch out.

    also the ad says take 5 not 25.

    LOL! Wow. And where was the sign that said "5" was the limit? Are you looking for justification to assault a black person and send him to jail? Going a few minutes over? Five could mean: "We don't want you there all day." But physically assault a person and worse for taking 20 (alleged) extra minutes? Only in white supremacist Amerika.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    The FB photo was from 2009, five years ago, probably put up to publicize the remodel. Bank can change its status without notice or having to go back to FB and update a policy that isn't a policy but just PR blurb put up on FB.

    Looking at photos, obviously it is bank lobby area not public skymall area, and doesn't need sign telling people customers.

    It's typical for security guards to warn off people without business on the premises, in just the way the guard did it, and to call police on people who refuse to leave. Lollie got enough warning. You've no evidence there's a whites-only policy or you'd have provided it.

    Are you looking for justification to assault a black person and send him to jail? Going a few minutes over?

    That wasn't what he was assaulted for, are really you saying it was? It was on Lollie not to get tazed. He made multiple decisions that got him to that point.

  • 0

    yabits

    The FB photo was from 2009, five years ago, probably put up to publicize the remodel. Bank can change its status without notice or having to go back to FB and update a policy that isn't a policy but just PR blurb put up on FB.

    Regarding trespass, there is a concept under law called "implied consent." To the extent that any members of the public have been invited in and have used the area, its owners have given consent. If any citizen can come forward and claim they have used that area for more than five minutes, then implied consent extends to what a jury of citizens would agree on what a "reasonable time" means.

    You've no evidence there's a whites-only policy or you'd have provided it.

    As long as any citizen can come forward and relate an experience where they used the area for greater than five minutes, and no one said anything to them about it, the question would then become, "what made Lollie different?"

    Lollie was assaulted for knowing and standing up for his rights as a citizen of the state of Minnesota. Implied consent granted him the right to sit in the area for a reasonable time. As such, he committed no crime and he was within his rights not to identify himself to law enforcement unless they brought a charge against him -- which they did not.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    Really? Lollie gets to decide how long he stays in the bank, not the bank?

    "Implied consent" applies after you've been told to leave even once by authorized personnel?

    You wouldn't think the "consent" idea went out the window at that point?

    I can see how people might use that to justify being in an area prior to being told to leave. But after such consent was expressly withdrawn ...

  • 0

    yabits

    Really? Lollie gets to decide how long he stays in the bank, not the bank?

    If the bank decides an individual has been in "too long," they file a complaint citing trespass. That important legal formality was not done in Lollie's case. Meaning he wasn't trespassing, just making the bank feel "uncomfortable" while SWB -- "sitting while black." (Once a formal complaint is filed, Lollie would have to identify himself to law enforcement.)

    You wouldn't think the "consent" idea went out the window at that point?

    Only if we know the person denying permission to sit was truly acting to carry out the intent of the owners of the property, and not out of personal prejudice directed at an individual or group. The more it looks like the local decision of a petty tyrant, implied consent still rules the day. Would the owner of the building begrudge the average man waiting to pick up his kids 30 minutes? Most reasonable people would not think so -- to the extent that open seats were still available to others.

    Most business want the appearance of traffic and lively activity -- in contrast to an empty mausoleum. Somebody local to the scene did not like Lollie's looks for some reason. I believe most know what that reason is.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    It says "Primary offense: DISTURBANCE - TRESPASSING" on the police report I provide you the link to, at the top of all 22 pages in the PDF file.

  • 0

    yabits

    It says "Primary offense: DISTURBANCE - TRESPASSING" on the police report

    That was typed up later. During the video we never hear the female officer use the word "trespass," nor do we hear it from the male officers.

    Lollie gets to decide how long he stays in the bank, not the bank?

    Returning to that question, experts are now pointing out the regulations and city ordinances regarding easement to businesses located on St. Paul's skyway system. Apparently there are agreements in place to allow the public use of easements connecting to the skyways. Any furniture placed in the easements would be also available for public use so long as they did not disrupt the flow of traffic through the easement or skyway.

    http://www.stpaul.gov/DocumentCenter/home/view/3136

    I suggest you examine Section G very carefully, and use of the term "reasonable."

    Secondly, it has come to light that several people who work in nearby buildings have provided affidavits to the police stating that they have frequently gone to eat lunch (or otherwise spent time) in the same space that Mr. Lollie used without ever being challenged or told to leave. So more evidence of abusive treatment met out selectively to a person that fits the description of Mr. Lollie.

  • 0

    turbotsat

    @Frungy Can you tell the difference now?

    It's your

    Oh my goodness people. ... the forensics people are QUOTED (their words) as saying the range was 30 feet ... The absence of powder burns and powder in the wounds confine the 10yard finding. It is as close to proven as it is possible for anything to be. ...

    vs Baden's

    ... muzzle of the gun was at least 1 to 2 feet away the muzzle at the time of discharge. It could have been 30 feet away ah it would be the same thing.

    Again, Frungy's interpretation of Baden's words, in context:

    Frungy Aug. 26, 2014 - 09:32AM JST

    Oh my goodness people. Do they teach nothing about "weasel words" and editorializing in US schools? Reading the articles people reference the forensics people are QUOTED (their words) as saying the range was 30 feet. The reporters then editorialize or say "maybe" it was closer because (with correct scientific caution) the forensics experts say they can't be 100% sure... this sort of statement could equally be manipulated into the reporter saying that maybe Brown was hit by a ricochet from the grassy knoll.

    The absence of powder burns and powder in the wounds confine the 10yard finding. It is as close to proven as it is possible for anything to be.

    And BADEN'S OWN WORDS at the youtube clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrDif5NYLdM:

    Yeah, the question was, 'how far away?', yes, we can tell certain distance, we can tell the distance from the muzzle of the gun to the body, or and the body's clothing. Uh, if there's the close to the weapon is to the body the more powder residue there'll be on the body and the skin and the clothing. In this instance there's no gunshot residues on the skin's surface uh so that the muzzle of the gun was at least 1 to 2 feet away the muzzle at the time of discharge. It could have been 30 feet away ah it would be the same thing. But in order to be firm about that we also have to look at the clothing which we haven't had the opportunity to look at because sometimes the clothing can filter out gunshot residues.

  • -1

    yabits

    Affirmed that the easements to buildings, and any furnishings in them, are part of public spaces on the St. Paul skyway system. Building owners may take necessary steps to keep the easements maintained while still keeping them accessible by the public.

Login to leave a comment

OR
  •  Burmese Sales Staff

    Burmese Sales Staff
    Autocom Japan (オートコムジャパン株式会社)、Kanagawa
    Salary: ¥350,000 ~ ¥1.0M / Month Commission Based
  • Mongolian Sales Staff

    Mongolian Sales Staff
    Autocom Japan (オートコムジャパン株式会社)、Kanagawa
    Salary: ¥350,000 ~ ¥1.0M / Month Commission Based
  • GooglePlay Partner Operations Manager <English-Japanese Bilingual>

    GooglePlay Partner Operations Manager
    Link Marketing Inc. - 株式会社リンク・マーケティング、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥250,000 ~ ¥350,000 / Month
  • GooglePlay Partner Operations Manager <English-Thai Bilingual>

    GooglePlay Partner Operations Manager
    Link Marketing Inc. - 株式会社リンク・マーケティング、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥250,000 ~ ¥350,000 / Month
  • Technical Support Engineer

    Technical Support Engineer
    株式会社 日本イントリピッド・コントロール・システムズ、Kanagawa
    Salary: ¥3.5M ~ ¥4.5M / Year Negotiable

More in Opinions

View all

View all