quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

That should read
You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job improperly in this case right?

The Washington Post had a long article today reconstructing all the events of the encounter between Wilson and Brown. It seems established that there was an altercation at the police car. The specifics are a little murky (did brown go for the gun or try to prevent Wilson from drawing it, did Brown hit Wilson (not clear), and YES shots were fired in the vehicle.

This event triggered Wilson's lawful right to defend himself and use force to subdue / arrest Brown.

The next issue is whether or not Brown posed a threat to the community so that his escape was something that had to be stopped by force.

After that is whether or not Brown surrendered before being shot or after he was hit after stopping and turning around.

Witness accounts are mixed about the surrender and / or the hands being up.

Even if the prosecutor had gotten an indictment, it seems unlikely any charges would stick in CT b/c once a citizen challenges or threatens a police officer -- all the legal protections pretty much swing to the officer. He's also allowed to make mistakes in the heat of the moment and jurors would believe the moment was quite heated.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/in-three-minutes-two-lives-collide-and-a-nation-divides-over-ferguson-shooting/2014/12/06/b78b878e-7983-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html

That story relies heavily upon Wilson's testimony and not upon the physical evidence of the scene which directly contradicts his testimony. I'll stick to the physical evidence.

You mean like Browns blood and DNA being on Wilson's firearm and proof of it being fired inside the car?

You do realize that you are now including The Washington Post in the vast right wing conspiracy?

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Keep in mind that's just my reading of the story -- but it was compiled by analyzing all the witness testimony. There were also graphics of the scene of the incident as well as quotes from forensic experts.

The scene at the car was witnessed by several people -- no one having a particularly clear view -- and the forensics (DNA on Wilson's gun, shots fired in the vehicle, etc.) confirm that something happened there.

My procedural takeaway is that anyone who resists arrest is triggering the legal use of substantial force by a police officer.

I don't think Wilson engaged in good policing here, and I think he overreacted and could be lying / distorting what happened, but a jury would believe he felt threatened and was entitled to defend himself. Soon as there is an altercation at the car -- all the legal protections shift to the police officer. It did not help him or the Ferguson police that the locals view the Police as a kind of occupying force. Rumors that Brown had his hands up were spread quickly by people who had not seen the incident. According the post article and the eye witness testimony at the Grand Jury --- it's not clear if his hands were up or not or if he was surrendering.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Keep in mind that's just my reading of the story -- but it was compiled by analyzing all the witness testimony. There were also graphics of the scene of the incident as well as quotes from forensic experts.

The scene at the car was witnessed by several people -- no one having a particularly clear view -- and the forensics (DNA on Wilson's gun, shots fired in the vehicle, etc.) confirm that something happened there.

My procedural takeaway is that anyone who resists arrest is triggering the legal use of substantial force by a police officer.

I don't think Wilson engaged in good policing here, and I think he overreacted and could be lying / distorting what happened, but a jury would believe he felt threatened and was entitled to defend himself. Soon as there is an altercation at the car -- all the legal protections shift to the police officer. It did not help him or the Ferguson police that the locals view the Police as a kind of occupying force. Rumors that Brown had his hands up were spread quickly by people who had not seen the incident. According the post article and the eye witness testimony at the Grand Jury --- it's not clear if his hands were up or not or if he was surrendering.

You do not understand.

An LEO can use lethal force in exactly 2 circumstances.
1) To prevent a dangerous felon from fleeing. We know Brown was not fleeing so it does not apply.
2) If his or another's life is in imminent danger. We know from the scene that this was not so as well. It doesn't matter if Brown's hands were up or not. The simple fact is that Wilson fired at Brown from well over 100 feet away not the less than 10 feet that he claimed. Brown was simply not a threat to Wilson at that distance no matter what kind of pants pissing coward Wilson turned out to be.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Bullshit,Brown had already been hit ,by Wilsons own testimony and the forensic evidence that is not in dispute.
How than are we expected to believe that Wilson had a reasonable belief that this ,already injured/shot,unarmed man was a mortal threat to officer Wilson.
It's not like Wilson was absent other means (less lethal means) to subdue Brown......at the least Wilson should have been indicted as should the officer in Staten Island.
Officer Wilson is,at worst,a murderer ,at best a fucking coward who needs to find a more sedate line of work....one that doesn't include carrying a loaded firearm....or a license to hunt scary black men that he can shoot.

quote:

Officer Wilson is,at worst,a murderer ,at best a fucking coward

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I call it a big kid/man charging...now to me taking the legs out would have been the thing to do... Just because he was unarmed means nothing... This kid was enraged and if he had gotten his hands on the cop he may have taken his gun and shot him... Things happen quick and there is not time to say... will I could run from him... or...I weakened him and I can take him in another way....maybe a club or traser. This all happened too damn fast. You and I think we would have handled it differently and I'm damn sure the cop wishes he did... but he didn't.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I call it a big kid/man charging...now to me taking the legs out would have been the thing to do... Just because he was unarmed means nothing... This kid was enraged and if he had gotten his hands on the cop he may have taken his gun and shot him... Things happen quick and there is not time to say... will I could run from him... or...I weakened him and I can take him in another way....maybe a club or traser. This all happened too damn fast. You and I think we would have handled it differently and I'm damn sure the cop wishes he did... but he didn't.

Butch

Leg shots are harder than you seem to think. he wasn't trained to even try for them and there was no time to switch to a different (less lethal) weapon.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin



PS out west rare, back east common as dirt!

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Keep in mind that's just my reading of the story -- but it was compiled by analyzing all the witness testimony. There were also graphics of the scene of the incident as well as quotes from forensic experts.

The scene at the car was witnessed by several people -- no one having a particularly clear view -- and the forensics (DNA on Wilson's gun, shots fired in the vehicle, etc.) confirm that something happened there.

My procedural takeaway is that anyone who resists arrest is triggering the legal use of substantial force by a police officer.

I don't think Wilson engaged in good policing here, and I think he overreacted and could be lying / distorting what happened, but a jury would believe he felt threatened and was entitled to defend himself. Soon as there is an altercation at the car -- all the legal protections shift to the police officer. It did not help him or the Ferguson police that the locals view the Police as a kind of occupying force. Rumors that Brown had his hands up were spread quickly by people who had not seen the incident. According the post article and the eye witness testimony at the Grand Jury --- it's not clear if his hands were up or not or if he was surrendering.

You do not understand.

An LEO can use lethal force in exactly 2 circumstances.
1) To prevent a dangerous felon from fleeing. We know Brown was not fleeing so it does not apply.
2) If his or another's life is in imminent danger. We know from the scene that this was not so as well. It doesn't matter if Brown's hands were up or not. The simple fact is that Wilson fired at Brown from well over 100 feet away not the less than 10 feet that he claimed. Brown was simply not a threat to Wilson at that distance no matter what kind of pants pissing coward Wilson turned out to be.

Your fantasy, not the rest of the worlds.

Again you are at odds with the Washington Post which clearly states that the physical evidence SUPPORTS WILSON'S VERSION OF EVENTS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin



PS out west rare, back east common as dirt!

A: I'm in the east.

B: You still didn't address the "Brick Veneer over wood frame that is a vast majority of so-called 'brick homes' in the EAST"

Bottom line, you fucked up with your claim...........deal with it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

So the take away from all of this: If a black person wants to beat you up or does not want to be arrested or told to stop breaking the law, we should all just walk away and allow it?

Because that it what it sounds like to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


Keep in mind that's just my reading of the story -- but it was compiled by analyzing all the witness testimony. There were also graphics of the scene of the incident as well as quotes from forensic experts.

The scene at the car was witnessed by several people -- no one having a particularly clear view -- and the forensics (DNA on Wilson's gun, shots fired in the vehicle, etc.) confirm that something happened there.

My procedural takeaway is that anyone who resists arrest is triggering the legal use of substantial force by a police officer.

I don't think Wilson engaged in good policing here, and I think he overreacted and could be lying / distorting what happened, but a jury would believe he felt threatened and was entitled to defend himself. Soon as there is an altercation at the car -- all the legal protections shift to the police officer. It did not help him or the Ferguson police that the locals view the Police as a kind of occupying force. Rumors that Brown had his hands up were spread quickly by people who had not seen the incident. According the post article and the eye witness testimony at the Grand Jury --- it's not clear if his hands were up or not or if he was surrendering.

You do not understand.

An LEO can use lethal force in exactly 2 circumstances.
1) To prevent a dangerous felon from fleeing. We know Brown was not fleeing so it does not apply.
2) If his or another's life is in imminent danger. We know from the scene that this was not so as well. It doesn't matter if Brown's hands were up or not. The simple fact is that Wilson fired at Brown from well over 100 feet away not the less than 10 feet that he claimed. Brown was simply not a threat to Wilson at that distance no matter what kind of pants pissing coward Wilson turned out to be.

Your fantasy, not the rest of the worlds.

Again you are at odds with the Washington Post which clearly states that the physical evidence SUPPORTS WILSON'S VERSION OF EVENTS.

The fact is that Wilson claimed he started shooting when Brown was 30 feet away and fired the fatal shot when Brown was around 10 feet away however the facts on the ground show that he fired the fatal shot from around 100 feet. He simply was not in danger when he fired and that makes the killing illegal.

quote:

Grand Jury System is still rigged to protect the Police.

• Most states give officers wide discretion to use whatever force they reasonably believe is necessary to make an arrest or to protect themselves, a standard that hinges on the officer's perceptions of danger during the encounter, legal scholars and criminologists say.

• "The whole process is really reluctant to criminalize police behavior," said Eugene O'Donnell, a former prosecutor who teaches at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan. "The grand jurors are, the jurors are, the judges are, the appellate courts are."

• Rarely do deaths lead to murder or manslaughter charges. Research by Philip M. Stinson, a criminologist at Bowling Green State University, reports that 41 officers were charged with either murder or manslaughter in shootings while on duty over a seven-year period ending in 2011. Over that same period, police departments reported 2,600 justifiable homicides to the F.B.I. (Charges are only brought in 1.5% of all reported cases.)

• Geoffrey P. Alpert, a criminologist at the University of South Carolina who studies the use of force, said police officers are rarely indicted when they express remorse to jurors, admit they made a mistake, and stress that they were following their training, as Officer Pantaleo had. In shooting cases, officers often testify that they perceived a deadly threat and acted in self-defense. This stance can inoculate them even if the threat later turns out to be false.

Here's an exception in the case of murdered black man:

>>Officer Kerrick was the first Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer charged in a fatal shooting in more than 30 years. He was one of several officers who responded to a 911 call, placed by a woman who was alarmed by a stranger knocking at her door at 2:30 a.m.

Moments earlier, Mr. Ferrell, a former safety for Florida A&M University, had gotten into a car accident, and his vehicle had crashed into the trees. He had walked a half-mile or so to seek help. Instead, Mr. Ferrell, who was black, was mistaken for a burglar.

Officers arrived 11 minutes after the call and approached Mr. Ferrell. Police officials said Mr. Ferrell ran toward the officers, who fired a Taser but missed. When he continued to press forward, Officer Kerrick fired 12 bullets, 10 of which struck Mr. Ferrell.

Charles G. Monnett III, a lawyer for Mr. Ferrell's parents, said the indictment would not have come had the state prosecutor not taken the case over from the Mecklenburg County district attorney. "The district attorney's office works way too closely with the local police department and individual officers to be able to objectively look at these cases," he said.<<

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/nyregion/grand-juries-seldom-charge-police-officers-in-fatal-actions.html?ref=us&_r=0