I posted and ran. I suck. I admit I haven't really followed this case since the initial week and I've only skimmed through the articles recently but didn't the autopsy prove he was fighting for Wilson's weapon in the cop car and that from the trajectory of the bullets it was a myth he was surrendering with his hands up? Based on that it wouldn't be surprising he was acquitted no?
He wasn't aquitted. You have to be charged to be aquitted. This was grand jury and they were deciding whether there was enough evidence to charge Wilson and bring him to trial at all.
And from what I read it wasn't that the trajectory of bullets proved that he wasn't surrendering. I don't remember exactly what it proved, but I believe it proved, among other things, that he wasn't running away and that he was over 35 feet from Wilson.
Post by amynumbers on Nov 25, 2014 16:36:27 GMT -5
I just get really icky about this -- bunch of white women with white sons don't get to judge how a community reacts to what is not just the event, but a history of injustice.
I don't get to tell some young black guys how to rage -- I don't know that rage and never will. I may not like it, I may see it is counterproductive, but also odds are a cop will never shoot me or my kid, so yeah. I can't tell people how to rage about a worry I will never have.
And it's not a scorned communitity's responsible to fix a system that fails then.
I posted and ran. I suck. I admit I haven't really followed this case since the initial week and I've only skimmed through the articles recently but didn't the autopsy prove he was fighting for Wilson's weapon in the cop car and that from the trajectory of the bullets it was a myth he was surrendering with his hands up? Based on that it wouldn't be surprising he was acquitted no?
He wasn't aquitted. You have to be charged to be aquitted. This was grand jury and they were deciding whether there was enough evidence to charge Wilson and bring him to trial at all.
And from what I read it wasn't that the trajectory of bullets proved that he wasn't surrendering. I don't remember exactly what it proved, but I believe it proved, among other things, that he wasn't running away and that he was over 35 feet from Wilson.
Err not indicted I meant. Words are hard. If they had a scuffle in the car and he had injuries from shots fired at close range how could he also have shots from that far a distance if he wasn't running away? I need to google apparently but hoping someone could sum it up. At this point I'm just confused.
I posted and ran. I suck. I admit I haven't really followed this case since the initial week and I've only skimmed through the articles recently but didn't the autopsy prove he was fighting for Wilson's weapon in the cop car and that from the trajectory of the bullets it was a myth he was surrendering with his hands up? Based on that it wouldn't be surprising he was acquitted no?
How could an autopsy prove he was fighting for his weapon in the car?
I posted and ran. I suck. I admit I haven't really followed this case since the initial week and I've only skimmed through the articles recently but didn't the autopsy prove he was fighting for Wilson's weapon in the cop car and that from the trajectory of the bullets it was a myth he was surrendering with his hands up? Based on that it wouldn't be surprising he was acquitted no?
How could an autopsy prove he was fighting for his weapon in the car?
He had a shot through his hand at close range like his hand was on the weapon, no? I admit I skimmed the articles but I thought the autopsy was a smoking gun that he wouldn't be indicted because it supported Wilson's report of events, not brown's.
I posted and ran. I suck. I admit I haven't really followed this case since the initial week and I've only skimmed through the articles recently but didn't the autopsy prove he was fighting for Wilson's weapon in the cop car and that from the trajectory of the bullets it was a myth he was surrendering with his hands up? Based on that it wouldn't be surprising he was acquitted no?
How could an autopsy prove he was fighting for his weapon in the car?
CNN reports that crime scene pictures and measurements were not taken like they should have been (I think by the medical examiner). I'm looking for a link to the article I read earlier.
I just get really icky about this -- bunch of white women with white sons don't get to judge how a community reacts to what is not just the event, but a history of injustice.
I don't get to tell some young black guys how to rage -- I don't know that rage and never will. I may not like it, I may see it is counterproductive, but also odds are a cop will never shoot me or my kid, so yeah. I can't tell people how to rage about a worry I will never have.
And it's not a scorned communitity's responsible to fix a system that fails then.
I disagree with the first part. Burning your hometown down because you're (rightfully) upset is completely reprehensible. Sorry. AT LEAST 13 businesses were completely torched (I may be personally biased because we watched H's company lose a branch on live television). Imagine the financial loss there. I read a story about a woman whose cupcake shop was burned down, she lost every thing. But it's totes okay because some pissed off citizen was making a point. Nope.
Post by amynumbers on Nov 25, 2014 17:28:26 GMT -5
I don't think anyone thinks rioting is ok. I do think lots of people don't pretend to understand the rage of a community they are not a part of, and personally I think being so angry about rioting is just misplaced anger awithin a much larger systematic issue.
Correction: Natalie DuBose (cake shop owner mentioned above) lost HALF of her store. Not all of it. Not that it makes it any better/worse, just wanted to be accurate.
Has anyone actually read DW's testimony? I just spent 45 minutes and read almost to the end. Yes, I know he was probably coached by his attorney on what to say. But his testimony is pretty damning. And the autopsy backs up what he says.
Has anyone actually read DW's testimony? I just spent 45 minutes and read almost to the end. Yes, I know he was probably coached by his attorney on what to say. But his testimony is pretty damning. And the autopsy backs up what he says.
Well we don't have michael brown's testimony so...,
Has anyone actually read DW's testimony? I just spent 45 minutes and read almost to the end. Yes, I know he was probably coached by his attorney on what to say. But his testimony is pretty damning. And the autopsy backs up what he says.
Well we don't have michael brown's testimony so...,
Soooo??? What? Most of the eyewitness accounts were disproved because they lied. The evidence and autopsy backs up DW account. A grand jury heard/saw all the evidence and decided not to indict him. Like I said before, as the initial reports came out I was pissed at DW too. But now the evidence is showing that MB was in the wrong.
Well we don't have michael brown's testimony so...,
Soooo??? What? Most of the eyewitness accounts were disproved because they lied. The evidence and autopsy backs up DW account. A grand jury heard/saw all the evidence and decided not to indict him. Like I said before, as the initial reports came out I was pissed at DW too. But now the evidence is showing that MB was in the wrong.
Has anyone actually read DW's testimony? I just spent 45 minutes and read almost to the end. Yes, I know he was probably coached by his attorney on what to say. But his testimony is pretty damning. And the autopsy backs up what he says.
Can you tell me what parts stood out to you?
Sure.
Of course it was a lot to read. One thing that stood out was when DW pulled his gun, MB said "you're too much of a pussy to shoot me." DW said that MB grabbed his gun and was trying to pull the trigger as it was pressed up against him (DW). This was inside the car.
And then when they were out of the car, MB was running and then suddenly turned around and reached his right hand up underneath his shirt.
I'm just saying from reading the testimony, coupled with the fact that MB was a criminal-- I can understand how DW felt threatened for his life.
I truly hope I am not being offensive. If I am being dense--then someone tell me. But I feel like, just like we can't assume all black men are thugs, you can't assume all cops are racist and that DW shot him because he was black.
I wish they had indicted so this could go to trial, and whatever the verdict, at least the legal process was exhausted.
As to why MB was shot 6x... it is pretty standard police practice from what I understand from my law enforcement friends that a) you shoot to kill if you feel your life is being threatened, and b) you always empty your weapon.
On the flip side, I'm a bit perplexed why this case has received as much press as it did, when the innocent, unarmed black man who was shot by an NYPD officer last week has received very little attention.
Also, I've defriended several people on FB in the last 24 hours on both side of the fence for their ignorant/idiotic comments.
Soooo??? What? Most of the eyewitness accounts were disproved because they lied. The evidence and autopsy backs up DW account. A grand jury heard/saw all the evidence and decided not to indict him. Like I said before, as the initial reports came out I was pissed at DW too. But now the evidence is showing that MB was in the wrong.
Not true.
Really if I am missing something, please point me in the direction. But that is what I have gathered from the research I have done.
I posted and ran. I suck. I admit I haven't really followed this case since the initial week and I've only skimmed through the articles recently but didn't the autopsy prove he was fighting for Wilson's weapon in the cop car and that from the trajectory of the bullets it was a myth he was surrendering with his hands up? Based on that it wouldn't be surprising he was acquitted no?
How could an autopsy prove he was fighting for his weapon in the car?
NPR reported all 3 autopsies showed MB was not shot in the back as previously reported, and that there was gunshot residue/powder burns on several of the shots, indicating close contact when the shots were fired.
Of course it was a lot to read. One thing that stood out was when DW pulled his gun, MB said "you're too much of a pussy to shoot me." DW said that MB grabbed his gun and was trying to pull the trigger as it was pressed up against him (DW). This was inside the car.
And then when they were out of the car, MB was running and then suddenly turned around and reached his right hand up underneath his shirt.
I'm just saying from reading the testimony, coupled with the fact that MB was a criminal-- I can understand how DW felt threatened for his life.
I truly hope I am not being offensive. If I am being dense--then someone tell me. But I feel like, just like we can't assume all black men are thugs, you can't assume all cops are racist and that DW shot him because he was black.
That's DW's account of what he said/did. How do we know he's telling the truth? We don't have Michael Brown's side of the story. And even if he did that.,,he deserved to DIE for it?
And this is a random anecdote but I feel like telling it.
H is a good man. He's done everything "right" in life: graduated HS, attended college, has a great career. He has basically done all the things you are told to do to be successful and get your piece of the American Dream.
H is also only 5'7 like 160 pounds....so not huge and/or intimidating to most folks.
He also was required to wear a suit with tie to work every day and be clean cut.
I give you all this background to say I can't tell you how many times he would come home after work and tell me about the little old white lady that grab her purse close to her body when he walked by. How he routinely gets followed around varies stores to make sure he isn't stealing. It's enough to make you cry. It's not something you understand until you live it. It's not enough to do everything "right", wear the "right" clothes, "speak well". You just can't understand.
So some of you think black people are the problem. If they would just pull their pants up and get an education they would be treated like humans. I say fuck that. I live it. I know it's not enough.
No I can't understand that, and that really sucks and that is really sad. I KNOW I have white privilege. I see racism everyday. I don't live it, but I see it. And it fucking sucks and I can't imagine how scared you feel for your husband and your son. And I can't imagine the things your whole family goes through on a daily basis. I think that needs to change.
Of course it was a lot to read. One thing that stood out was when DW pulled his gun, MB said "you're too much of a pussy to shoot me." DW said that MB grabbed his gun and was trying to pull the trigger as it was pressed up against him (DW). This was inside the car.
And then when they were out of the car, MB was running and then suddenly turned around and reached his right hand up underneath his shirt.
I'm just saying from reading the testimony, coupled with the fact that MB was a criminal-- I can understand how DW felt threatened for his life.
I truly hope I am not being offensive. If I am being dense--then someone tell me. But I feel like, just like we can't assume all black men are thugs, you can't assume all cops are racist and that DW shot him because he was black.
That's DW's account of what he said/did. How do we know he's telling the truth? We don't have Michael Brown's side of the story. And even if he did that.,,he deserved to DIE for it?
So, basically, you're using your emotions to draw a conclusion. Cool.
We know he's telling the truth (or at least, a comparable version of the truth) because his testimony aligns with the autopsy. MB's blood was in the cop car. MB had gun shot residue on his hands and clothes which meant he was in extremely close proximity when the gun was shot.
No, he didn't deserve to die for it. But after reading the testimony, I can see how DW felt threatened. And I can see how that situation would have been much different if MB would have actually overtaken DW and gained control of the fun. Probably DW would have been dead. No one deserve to die, but the situation escalated.
But peaceful protesting got them nowhere. What else are they supposed to do?
So burning shops and looting businesses owned by their neighbors, people who had nothing to do with the events that happened, destroying, or at least significantly damaging their livelihoods is okay? The hell not.
What do they do? Keep protesting peacefully. MB's family files a wrongful death suit against DW. The people of the community rally TOGETHER to get a civilian review board in place, get an anti-bias task force started. Work to change the face of their local government so it better reflects the demographics and needs of the community. Work to repeal the state law that gives POs very wide discretion in which it is okay to use deadly force.
There's a ton they could be doing, albeit most of it will take a long time, other than rioting, looting and burning the place down.
I won't even pretend to understand how the people of Ferguson feel, and I certainly wasn't putting anything on anyone. I was simply pointing out that there is an opportunity to say that's not right and it needs to change.
I can provide you with an example of a community taking it upon themselves to perpetuate change in a corrupt police department and achieving that change. It was not race related but did involve unnecessary shootings and cover ups by the AG. I was hesitant to post this but thought the outcome and the course to that outcome was pretty effective.
Has anyone actually read DW's testimony? I just spent 45 minutes and read almost to the end. Yes, I know he was probably coached by his attorney on what to say. But his testimony is pretty damning. And the autopsy backs up what he says.
But why wasn't he cross examined? As I understand it that's normal procedure in GJ proceedings.
I realize, especially given MO laws (like the one that allows officers to shoot a fleeting suspect if they're suspected of a felony), a conviction would be unlikely but it's blatantly obvious that this case should have gone to trial. Unfortunately everything was set up in such a way that guaranteed that wouldn't happen, including the sloppy investigation by the FPD. This video was linked in the CE&P thread and I think it does a good job of explaining the issues with the GJ proceedings in this case.
Post by keeptruckin on Nov 25, 2014 19:03:25 GMT -5
I just simply do not agree there wasn't even evidence to go to trial. Man, the AG fucked up there. I do have some insight on account of my family. My dad is from Missouri. He had black father and white mother. He was given away to family to raise outside of Missouri as there was not a single black person in his town. Plus my grandmother just couldn't deal with a black kid. My Dad looks like he could be middle eastern or many different backgrounds. Most people would not guess I have African heritage, my mom is from Ireland. My brother has a different mother and identifies strongly as a black man. He is also a cop. My heart is broken for him. All he has said really is there are a lot of cops who are cowards. Please understand, I respect law enforcement and my brother is very proud of being a cop. The small towns in eastern Texas where he has mostly been though, well you mostly don't need to go through much to be a cop. The same racist small time goons who teased him in high school are now deputies with him. These kind of men don't go out and say they want to rough up or kill a black teen. But these are not tv cops, brave men and women who did extensive schooling, training, and volunteer work to become cops. These are, excuse me, rednecks who worked at whattaburger before joining the academy. You give them power and a gun and these things happen. Again, not all cops, but a small number that gets larger in these dust bowl towns. I don't know what type of man this particular cop was. But I do know any decent person would feel remorse, even in a 100 percent justified shooting. And he doesn't seem so far to have any remorse.
quesyrah - you say the peaceful protests didn't get them anywhere, but neither have the riots, right?
I think it's sickening, this entire situation, and the constant occurrences of this exact situation are ridiculous, and I wish I knew the answer.
LEgally, if the evidence really was so sporadically provable, and what not, I'm glad they didn't indict. The case can continue to be examined, and perhaps looked at again.
I do think the media played a big part in fucking this up.
I just simply do not agree there wasn't even evidence to go to trial. Man, the AG fucked up there.
To be fair, he did exactly what he set out to do, which was to not have this go to trial. But that's why I firmly believe that it should have been taken to a GJ by a separate prosecutor, one without any ties to the police force that appears to be rife with corruption and racism.
Also, while I think the rioting is horrible and I fear for people's safety, I think we need to get some perspective here. Why is it only decried so vociferously when it's mainly black people involved? Why no big uproar over these other riots, why no National Guard called in preemptively?