quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

Was he actually walking "in the middle" of the street, or was it just a matter of not being on the sidewalk? Was the officer genuinely concerned with Brown's safety? Was it even a busy street?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

Yes, but this appears to be the root of the whole problem. This cop just had to establish "dominance," as part of the ego trip that all those with badges get whenever their "authority" is challenged. So, rather than just let it go, the cop chose to escalate the situation and kept pushing it until it ended up with the confrontation. Can't let anyone ignore a cop's orders on the street, otherwise that will just breed disrespect for law enforcement. That's the conventional wisdom of police departments, yet it hasn't worked out too well for them, has it?

Of course! It's so clear to me now. That's the root of the whole problem, cops with power trips exerting their authority. It has nothing to do with entitled assholes who think they can do whatever they want and get away with it because of their ethnicity. That stupid police officer. Didn't he know that if you're almost to where you were going, and you're black, that you're allowed to walk down the middle of the street? Sidewalks are for chumps. How dare he expect those two to get the fuck out of the middle of the street just because he'd told them to. Trying to make them walk on the sidewalk, he was disrespecting them. He deserved to get punched in the face. And when they wanted his weapon? Hell, he should have just given it up!

I don't always agree with my Father, but he gave me some good advice growing-up that seems pertinent to this discussion. If you're dealing with the police, even if you think they're wrong (maybe especially if you think they're wrong), be polite, do what they tell you, and if there's really a problem it can be resolved later. You can always file a complaint later or hire an attorney. What you can't do is get un-shot. Or un-ass-kicked. Or get un-arrested if you piss one off enough to start looking for reasons to charge you with something.

Isn't it against the law to fail to comply with an lawful command given by a police officer? If you're breaking the law by walking down the middle of the street, and you don't get on the sidewalk when told to do so, that's breaking the law. That was enough to get Brown arrested. When the officer tried to exit his vehicle and Brown shoved him back in (according to His buddy Johnson), that's assault on a police officer, that was enough to get him arrested. So no, I don't think you have it right that the officer's "dominance" was the root of the problem. I think it was a big guy, thinking that one cop wouldn't try to arrest him and his buddy. That if he raised a big enough stink, the cop would back down.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


~ FR ~

A St. Louis Post Dispatch reporter says that Ferguson, Missouri, police confirm that more than a dozen witnesses to the shooting of teenager Michael Brown have backed up the account of the incident offered by the officer who killed the teenager.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Christine Byers tweeted Monday that police told her that an account of the shooting by a woman named "Josie" who called into a syndicated radio program last Friday matches the account given by Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Brown. ~Source

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom

You're probably not a lawyer or you would have referred to the "exculpatory 'he needed killing'" utterance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


~ FR ~

A St. Louis Post Dispatch reporter says that Ferguson, Missouri, police confirm that more than a dozen witnesses to the shooting of teenager Michael Brown have backed up the account of the incident offered by the officer who killed the teenager.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Christine Byers tweeted Monday that police told her that an account of the shooting by a woman named "Josie" who called into a syndicated radio program last Friday matches the account given by Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Brown. ~Source

K.

I read this earlier on CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/18/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html)

I don't know if "Josie" is a credible witness. She admits to being a friend of Wilson's , and it sounds as if she's recounting what Wilson told her, not what she saw. But if the police are saying that there are a dozen witnesses backing up Wilson's story, that's a big difference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

This cop just had to establish "dominance," as part of the ego trip that all those with badges get whenever their "authority" is challenged. So, rather than just let it go, the cop chose to escalate the situation and kept pushing it until it ended up with the confrontation.

Good grief, that's got to be the most twisted analysis of obeying a police officer I've ever seen. Seriously, dude, just move along. It ain't like he's telling you to bend over.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
There are some people in this world who just don't like to be told what to do, even if they're told by a police officer. Go figure. That's what seems to be the crux of the whole argument here, even if we assume the police version of events is the truth, which is far from certain at this point. The 18-year-old was "wrong" because he didn't obey the officer in the first place, which led to the confrontation and his death. The police officer was "right" because he was only doing his lawful duty. That's essentially it, isn't it?

But something still seems to have been mismanaged here, considering the results of what has happened. It seems that there must have already been a somewhat rocky relationship between the community and the police department/local government for such a confrontation to have occurred and the chain of events which followed. Riots don't just happen out of the blue due to a single event. A single event like this may provide a catalyst, but there must have already been tensions bubbling underneath the surface.

If a community doesn't view the police as "Officer Friendly," then Officer Friendly should work on sprucing up their image and relating better to the community. That might be a good way to minimize those "fuck you" moments which can quickly lead to a deadly confrontation, as we now know.

And no one is saying that Brown was an angel, either. His actions should also come into question, but we don't fully know what might have motivated his actions that day. But whatever may have led him down that path which ended as it did, is neither here nor there. People are questioning the actions of their government and the law enforcement agencies duly sworn to the Constitution, to uphold the law, and to protect and serve the community. From the events of this past week, it would seem clear that they have failed in this duty. So, even if the officer was "right" and law and order should win out every time, one might well wonder if it's really worth the price society has to pay.

It's not just about Brown, as this is not the only time this sort of thing has happened. Learning from past mistakes is not something our society has been very good at lately. Maybe it is a "twisted analysis," as you call it, but I don't think this is a situation which can be neatly wrapped up into nice little packages.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

Yes, but this appears to be the root of the whole problem. This cop just had to establish "dominance," as part of the ego trip that all those with badges get whenever their "authority" is challenged. So, rather than just let it go, the cop chose to escalate the situation and kept pushing it until it ended up with the confrontation. Can't let anyone ignore a cop's orders on the street, otherwise that will just breed disrespect for law enforcement. That's the conventional wisdom of police departments, yet it hasn't worked out too well for them, has it?

Of course! It's so clear to me now. That's the root of the whole problem, cops with power trips exerting their authority. It has nothing to do with entitled assholes who think they can do whatever they want and get away with it because of their ethnicity. That stupid police officer. Didn't he know that if you're almost to where you were going, and you're black, that you're allowed to walk down the middle of the street? Sidewalks are for chumps. How dare he expect those two to get the fuck out of the middle of the street just because he'd told them to. Trying to make them walk on the sidewalk, he was disrespecting them. He deserved to get punched in the face. And when they wanted his weapon? Hell, he should have just given it up!

I don't always agree with my Father, but he gave me some good advice growing-up that seems pertinent to this discussion. If you're dealing with the police, even if you think they're wrong (maybe especially if you think they're wrong), be polite, do what they tell you, and if there's really a problem it can be resolved later. You can always file a complaint later or hire an attorney. What you can't do is get un-shot. Or un-ass-kicked. Or get un-arrested if you piss one off enough to start looking for reasons to charge you with something.

Isn't it against the law to fail to comply with an lawful command given by a police officer? If you're breaking the law by walking down the middle of the street, and you don't get on the sidewalk when told to do so, that's breaking the law. That was enough to get Brown arrested. When the officer tried to exit his vehicle and Brown shoved him back in (according to His buddy Johnson), that's assault on a police officer, that was enough to get him arrested. So no, I don't think you have it right that the officer's "dominance" was the root of the problem. I think it was a big guy, thinking that one cop wouldn't try to arrest him and his buddy. That if he raised a big enough stink, the cop would back down.

Yes, it's a different rule now. No longer are blacks relegated to the back of the bus. Whites are relegated to the sidewalk. Blacks can apparently walk wherever they damn well please, just as whites were able to sit wherever they damn well pleased in the bus or in an establishment governed by Jim Crow laws.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

Yes, but this appears to be the root of the whole problem. This cop just had to establish "dominance," as part of the ego trip that all those with badges get whenever their "authority" is challenged. So, rather than just let it go, the cop chose to escalate the situation and kept pushing it until it ended up with the confrontation. Can't let anyone ignore a cop's orders on the street, otherwise that will just breed disrespect for law enforcement. That's the conventional wisdom of police departments, yet it hasn't worked out too well for them, has it?

Of course! It's so clear to me now. That's the root of the whole problem, cops with power trips exerting their authority. It has nothing to do with entitled assholes who think they can do whatever they want and get away with it because of their ethnicity. That stupid police officer. Didn't he know that if you're almost to where you were going, and you're black, that you're allowed to walk down the middle of the street? Sidewalks are for chumps. How dare he expect those two to get the fuck out of the middle of the street just because he'd told them to. Trying to make them walk on the sidewalk, he was disrespecting them. He deserved to get punched in the face. And when they wanted his weapon? Hell, he should have just given it up!

I don't always agree with my Father, but he gave me some good advice growing-up that seems pertinent to this discussion. If you're dealing with the police, even if you think they're wrong (maybe especially if you think they're wrong), be polite, do what they tell you, and if there's really a problem it can be resolved later. You can always file a complaint later or hire an attorney. What you can't do is get un-shot. Or un-ass-kicked. Or get un-arrested if you piss one off enough to start looking for reasons to charge you with something.

Isn't it against the law to fail to comply with an lawful command given by a police officer? If you're breaking the law by walking down the middle of the street, and you don't get on the sidewalk when told to do so, that's breaking the law. That was enough to get Brown arrested. When the officer tried to exit his vehicle and Brown shoved him back in (according to His buddy Johnson), that's assault on a police officer, that was enough to get him arrested. So no, I don't think you have it right that the officer's "dominance" was the root of the problem. I think it was a big guy, thinking that one cop wouldn't try to arrest him and his buddy. That if he raised a big enough stink, the cop would back down.

Yes, it's a different rule now. No longer are blacks relegated to the back of the bus. Whites are relegated to the sidewalk. Blacks can apparently walk wherever they damn well please, just as whites were able to sit wherever they damn well pleased in the bus or in an establishment governed by Jim Crow laws.

Just for the record, I have not mentioned race or ethnicity. I have not accused anyone of racism. Others in this thread have done so, but I will not. Are you two suggesting that Brown and his accomplice were walking down the middle of the road because they felt entitled to do so due to their race?

And TWW, you ask that I should give the police the benefit of the doubt, but shouldn't that also work both ways? I understand the function of the police and the necessity to maintain law and order, but there also has to be a certain give and take between the government and the community its supposed to serve. I think you guys are missing the forest through the trees.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gauge

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

No. It is a homicide and always will remain so. The question will it be ruled a justifiable one. Maybe you should know what you are talking about before pontificating.

You know, it is kind of funny that all you can point out is that I left out an implied word surrounding a debate as to whether or not the act was criminal or not. If all you have in your arsenal is critiquing my grammar, that is fairly weak.

No. The point was made by correcting that.

It was criminal. Killing another human being is always a criminal act. It will be up to the cop to justify his actions. I don't think he can because the law only gives him 3 reasons to use deadly force and none apply.

Killing another human being is not always a criminal act. Otherwise all self-defense is a criminal act. Justifiable homicide and criminal homicide have no mathematical points of intersection.

No. Homicide is a crime. There may be circumstances that excuse it but a crime was still committed. That's why when you plead self defense you are found "not guilty by reason of self defense" instead of strictly "not guilty." The crime still occurred and you admitted doing it but you argued that there was sufficient mitigating circumstances that the law excuses your act.

Dude, that is wrong. Check a dictionary. And I say dude because you must be smoking something to believe that.

Why a dictionary? We're talking the law.

How about a LEGAL Dictionary. Will Cornell University's satisfy you? http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/homicide

Homicide is when one human being causes the death of another. Not all homicide is murder, as some killings are manslaughter, and some are lawful, such as when justified by an affirmative defense, like insanity or self-defense.

**Note the phrase "some are lawful"**

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

It is the difference between liberals who believe in this country and conservatives who wish to destroy it.

==================================================

Ken, I can always count on you to get everything backwards.
Remember it is the libs who want to "fundamentally change" American as per fearless leader you can't do that and claim to love the country.

Notice who is supporting militarized police? Which side in this thread has jumped to nasty conclusions about the dead man? Calling him a thug and worse that had to be deleted? Which side is trying to protect a killer?

Which side of the lines do you think Jefferson would be on?

Democratic administration gave the police all that stuff and Sen Paul is leading the fight against it so your batting 0
I am not trying to protect a killer I just don't want Wilson railroaded without the facts. I have never once said I was sure he was innocent. All you needed to know was that he was white and Brown was black.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko

It's amazing how color struck some people are in this country, especially considering the diversity here. To be honest, it's bewildering for people who are foreign. YEARS before Obama was elected president (wow, so amazing?), Ireland had a Nigerian mayor. At the end of the day, you are all Americans, this is how the entire world sees you.You're not Irish American or Italian American or African American unless you were actally born in those countries and not here. Trying to paint oneself as better than a counterpart because of dark skin or blue eyes is sort of pointless and the occurrences of race related crimes doesn't pan out to being politically and judicially mature.
Sorry if my comments are rude, I just didn't know if you guys were aware of how you LOOK to the rest of the world when things like this make you this riled. They kind of smile and nod and nudge each other while refraining to laugh. I think there should be some introspection in how these issues are handled perhaps.

I was struck by this today:

>>There we have the familiar narrative: another unarmed black man unjustly killed. Brown thus joins a long, sad list — Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, etc. — that seems to have no end.

This story line is unassailable. Anyone who thinks race is not a factor in these fatal encounters should have to cite examples of unarmed, young, white men being killed by trigger-happy police or self-appointed vigilantes. Names and dates, please.<<

Unassailable? Really. Do you feel that examples of unarmed, young and old white men and women, and pregnant women being killed by punch- and violence-happy black thugs or self-appointed "ofay" haters (ain't no "o" word, is there?) are somehow not part of the discussion? Because almost every "knockout game" attack has been black-on-white, many filled with "cracker" and other epithets.

As far a black cop killing an unarmed white man sitting on the hood of his car, yes (the white man did use racial slurs, but as far as I know, only Eric Holder would view that as deserving of the death penalty): http://www.texasconservativerepublicannews.com/2011/07/police-officers-say-orange-tx-cop.html. The black cop had a history of violence, too.

Looks like you got way less than half the story. The cop won in arbitration and should have gotten his job back. IOW he acted in self defense.
http://www.12newsnow.com/story/22945856/family-of-veteran-killed-by-off-duty-police-officer-still-hopes-for-justice

The right wing sites are pushing a racist story because that fits the prejudices of their readers. If you had bothered to investigate you would have seen that it wasn't anything at all like what you claimed.

I'm sorry, but are you fucking kidding me? Are you honestly saying that you have no problem with THIS shooting and the officer should have gotten his job back? He shot a man who was sitting in his car. He has a history of violence issues. He was so afraid of this man that he left his daughter in the store with him while he went out to his car. But this police officer you're supporting?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


~ FR ~

A St. Louis Post Dispatch reporter says that Ferguson, Missouri, police confirm that more than a dozen witnesses to the shooting of teenager Michael Brown have backed up the account of the incident offered by the officer who killed the teenager.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Christine Byers tweeted Monday that police told her that an account of the shooting by a woman named "Josie" who called into a syndicated radio program last Friday matches the account given by Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Brown. ~Source

K.

I read this earlier on CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/18/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html)

I don't know if "Josie" is a credible witness. She admits to being a friend of Wilson's , and it sounds as if she's recounting what Wilson told her, not what she saw. But if the police are saying that there are a dozen witnesses backing up Wilson's story, that's a big difference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko

It's amazing how color struck some people are in this country, especially considering the diversity here. To be honest, it's bewildering for people who are foreign. YEARS before Obama was elected president (wow, so amazing?), Ireland had a Nigerian mayor. At the end of the day, you are all Americans, this is how the entire world sees you.You're not Irish American or Italian American or African American unless you were actally born in those countries and not here. Trying to paint oneself as better than a counterpart because of dark skin or blue eyes is sort of pointless and the occurrences of race related crimes doesn't pan out to being politically and judicially mature.
Sorry if my comments are rude, I just didn't know if you guys were aware of how you LOOK to the rest of the world when things like this make you this riled. They kind of smile and nod and nudge each other while refraining to laugh. I think there should be some introspection in how these issues are handled perhaps.

I was struck by this today:

>>There we have the familiar narrative: another unarmed black man unjustly killed. Brown thus joins a long, sad list — Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, etc. — that seems to have no end.

This story line is unassailable. Anyone who thinks race is not a factor in these fatal encounters should have to cite examples of unarmed, young, white men being killed by trigger-happy police or self-appointed vigilantes. Names and dates, please.<<

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi



Of course it's about race. Do you honestly think anyone would care if it had been another black man who had shot him? Detroit just had a 5 year old and a 8 year old, both unarmed, who were killed because the shooter was mad at the parents. No one is rioting over it and the rest of the country could give a rats ass.