Mike Brown: Trayvon Part 2

[AUChizad]

Watch the video:

http://fox2now.com/2014/08/09/man-shot-killed-in-ferguson-apartment-complex/

What we know so far:
-Witnesses claim Brown was walking in the middle of the street unarmed. Yelled at him to "get the fuck on the sidewalk", and then shot at him twice from the police car, got out and shot him multiple more times from outside the vehicle.
-The police have changed their story multiple times so far. First they said they were pursuing him for stealing from a store. At one time they said he was armed. Later they had a press conference that made no mention of any stealing from any store, and they mentioned he was unarmed. They said that Brown attacked the officer in his vehicle, there was a struggle inside the vehicle, and the officer overpowered Brown and shot and killed him.

Right now it's pretty difficult to tell exactly what went down, but that won't stop both sides of the political argument.

From what we know NOW it sounds like the police are lying and definitely did not act appropriately. How much was provoked remains to be seen. Even if the officer was provoked, it hardly seems that lethal force was warranted.

I'm sure we'll find out lots more about this in the coming news cycles.

[Token]

This doesn't really seem like the Trayvon case to me. An assault led to that shooting, that was never in question.   This is a different animal. If the friend and at least 1 witness is telling the truth, the police officer is a cold blooded murderer who apparently just shot the shit out of a kid for not walking on the sidewalk.  If the officer and at least 1 other witness is telling the truth, the kid was being arrested, or at least placed in the back seat of a vehicle, when a struggle ensued and the kid was shot.

This will be a tough investigation because the truth will be almost impossible to get. The best possible solution for this case will be the video, if the officer was recording. I sure hope he was in that type of situation. 

[AUChizad]

This doesn't really seem like the Trayvon case to me. An assault led to that shooting, that was never in question.   This is a different animal. If the friend and at least 1 witness is telling the truth, the police officer is a cold blooded murderer who apparently just shot the shit out of a kid for not walking on the sidewalk.  If the officer and at least 1 other witness is telling the truth, the kid was being arrested, or at least placed in the back seat of a vehicle, when a struggle ensued and the kid was shot.

This will be a tough investigation because the truth will be almost impossible to get. The best possible solution for this case will be the video, if the officer was recording. I sure hope he was in that type of situation.

In your opinion, would lack of video imply guilt on the police officer's part? That they're trying to cover something up?

[The Prowler]

They've been rioting and burning stores in Ferguson, MO.

[bgreene]

In your opinion, would lack of video imply guilt on the police officer's part? That they're trying to cover something up?

No. There is an investigation into the shooting.  Physical evidence along with witness statements will be collected.  All of this will be presented to a grand jury, and they will decide to charge the officer or not.
Having video will definetly help into the justification of the shooting.  If there are other officers involved, then maybe one of them had a camera on.

Watch the video:

http://fox2now.com/2014/08/09/man-shot-killed-in-ferguson-apartment-complex/

What we know so far:
-Witnesses claim Brown was walking in the middle of the street unarmed. Yelled at him to "get the fuck on the sidewalk", and then shot at him twice from the police car, got out and shot him multiple more times from outside the vehicle.
-The police have changed their story multiple times so far. First they said they were pursuing him for stealing from a store. At one time they said he was armed. Later they had a press conference that made no mention of any stealing from any store, and they mentioned he was unarmed. They said that Brown attacked the officer in his vehicle, there was a struggle inside the vehicle, and the officer overpowered Brown and shot and killed him.

Right now it's pretty difficult to tell exactly what went down, but that won't stop both sides of the political argument.

From what we know NOW it sounds like the police are lying and definitely did not act appropriately. How much was provoked remains to be seen. Even if the officer was provoked, it hardly seems that lethal force was warranted.

I'm sure we'll find out lots more about this in the coming news cycles.

Just a guess here, but maybe the first statement was off of the cuff before al facts were gathered.  I'm not sayong that they are just outright lying.  What I am saying is that in a high stress situation such as a fatal shooting, the officer should not give a final statement until after two sleep cycles.

[GH2001]

They've been rioting and burning stores in Ferguson, MO.

Of course. Never let a good tragedy go to waste.

Its sad that even in cases like this one where the cop WAS probably in the wrong, someone on that side of the argument is gonna take full advantage of the situation to benefit themselves. Riot, looting, demanding free shit, demanding millions yadda yadda. Like Chizad said, this thing will be full blown on both sides of the aisle for all the wrong reasons. 

[AUChizad]

[bgreene]

All I got out of that was "bro".

[Token]

In your opinion, would lack of video imply guilt on the police officer's part? That they're trying to cover something up?

Not necessarily.  Most cars have cameras, but they generally only come on when lights initiate.  Even then, the standard patrol camera would only record the front of the vehicle....they are basically set up for traffic stops. 

Most agencies are moving into the direction of body cameras though.  If I were that officer and was involved in that situation, I would hope I had a body camera that would have recorded the entire incident.  But it isn't mandated that all LEO wear body cameras....yet. 

End of the day, a different agency is now investigating the shooting.  And they have no dog in the fight.  If the officer honestly just pulled up and shot an unarmed kid for not getting out of the road, then he should be in prison.  I'm biased, but even as a reasonable thinking person, that story just doesn't sound believable.  But, unless I read this wrong, this happened at 2:36pm.  Plenty of daylight.  Officer better have a damn good reason for shooting an unarmed person.   

   

[WiregrassTiger]

Not necessarily.  Most cars have cameras, but they generally only come on when lights initiate.  Even then, the standard patrol camera would only record the front of the vehicle....they are basically set up for traffic stops. 

Most agencies are moving into the direction of body cameras though.  If I were that officer and was involved in that situation, I would hope I had a body camera that would have recorded the entire incident.  But it isn't mandated that all LEO wear body cameras....yet. 

End of the day, a different agency is now investigating the shooting.  And they have no dog in the fight.  If the officer honestly just pulled up and shot an unarmed kid for not getting out of the road, then he should be in prison.  I'm biased, but even as a reasonable thinking person, that story just doesn't sound believable.  But, unless I read this wrong, this happened at 2:36pm.  Plenty of daylight.  Officer better have a damn good reason for shooting an unarmed person.   

   

Let me remind you that wearing a body camera could hinder your receiving doughnut and sexual act bribes.

[AUChizad]

If the officer honestly just pulled up and shot an unarmed kid for not getting out of the road, then he should be in prison.  I'm biased, but even as a reasonable thinking person, that story just doesn't sound believable.  But, unless I read this wrong, this happened at 2:36pm.  Plenty of daylight.  Officer better have a damn good reason for shooting an unarmed person.

This is kind of where I'm at. I could be wrong, there are certainly sick fucks in this world. But I find it hard to default to it being logical that a cop shot a kid with plenty of witnesses in broad daylight for no other reason than he wanted to kill a black kid. Cops can certainly be corrupt dicks, and even racists, but I just can't perceive a cop being that evil and the issue being that black & white (pardon the pun).

On the other hand, I don't like the idea that there are that many eyewitnesses claiming they saw what they saw, and then on the other side of it we just have this cop and I guess his partner. Clearly neither of them are going to say "Yeah, I shot this kid in cold blood cause I didn't like his skin color," so that pretty much rules them out. Until at least one eyewitness says "Yeah, I saw what went down and Brown attacked the officer and reached for his gun" or whatever, I find it hard to purely take the police's word on this as well. As with most things, I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle. I doubt he was as innocent an angel as is being portrayed. But I also doubt he deserved to die for whatever went down.

As mentioned though, the rioting and shit is inexcusable. Mike Brown's family has condemned it. It's disgusting that people will respond that irrationally to the situation, but it really doesn't have anything to do with the incident itself.

[WiregrassTiger]

As mentioned though, the rioting and shoot is inexcusable. Mike Brown's family has condemned it. It's disgusting that people will respond that irrationally to the situation, but it really doesn't have anything to do with the incident itself.

What you really want to say is that you do not want blacks to have a voice.

[AUChizad]

What you really want to say is that you do not want blacks to have a voice.

Starting with one WiregrassTiger.

[CCTAU]

I got nothing to say...yet.

[AUJarhead]

I got nothing to say...yet.

I do.  Don't try to fight a cop.  You will lose.

[CCTAU]

I do.  Don't try to fight a cop.  You will lose.

I don't know. Was he on the phone with his girlfriend? Was the cop acting like a "creepy old cracker"?

Were ant Skittles or iced tea spilled?

Die he have his hoodie pulled up?

These are things we must know in order to hang the cop in public BEFORE any real evidence come to light.

Oh. And we must go burn somebody else's shit so they wil know we fo reals!

[Token]

This is kind of where I'm at. I could be wrong, there are certainly sick fucks in this world. But I find it hard to default to it being logical that a cop shot a kid with plenty of witnesses in broad daylight for no other reason than he wanted to kill a black kid. Cops can certainly be corrupt dicks, and even racists, but I just can't perceive a cop being that evil and the issue being that black & white (pardon the pun).

On the other hand, I don't like the idea that there are that many eyewitnesses claiming they saw what they saw, and then on the other side of it we just have this cop and I guess his partner. Clearly neither of them are going to say "Yeah, I shot this kid in cold blood cause I didn't like his skin color," so that pretty much rules them out. Until at least one eyewitness says "Yeah, I saw what went down and Brown attacked the officer and reached for his gun" or whatever, I find it hard to purely take the police's word on this as well. As with most things, I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle. I doubt he was as innocent an angel as is being portrayed. But I also doubt he deserved to die for whatever went down.

As mentioned though, the rioting and shit is inexcusable. Mike Brown's family has condemned it. It's disgusting that people will respond that irrationally to the situation, but it really doesn't have anything to do with the incident itself.

I agree with all of this, with one exception.  IF he tried to take the officer's gun, I think he deserved to die.  There is only one reason to take a police officer's gun, and that is to kill him with it.  BUT, with that said, if he reached for the gun and didn't get it, and the officer was able to gain a position of power over him afterwards (cause him to surrender), I don't believe he should have shot him anyway.  Once a person is no longer a threat, in broad daylight, in front of witnesses, shooting him is no longer an option. 

When I was almost killed in a car wreck by an idiot who drove into my lane at 80 mph and struck me head on as I was waiting at a traffic light, after I was able to climb out of my vehicle, I wanted to shoot him in the face.  I saw the look on his face as he drove straight into my vehicle, nobody will ever convince me that he wasn't trying to kill me.  But in front of witnesses, in daylight, when he was no longer a threat to my life, stomping his ass and/or killing him was no longer an option. 

Again, I really really hope there is a video of this entire ordeal.  That's the only way a peaceful resolution will come out of this.   

[AUChizad]

I agree with all of this, with one exception.  IF he tried to take the officer's gun, I think he deserved to die.  There is only one reason to take a police officer's gun, and that is to kill him with it.  BUT, with that said, if he reached for the gun and didn't get it, and the officer was able to gain a position of power over him afterwards (cause him to surrender), I don't believe he should have shot him anyway.  Once a person is no longer a threat, in broad daylight, in front of witnesses, shooting him is no longer an option. 

When I was almost killed in a car wreck by an idiot who drove into my lane at 80 mph and struck me head on as I was waiting at a traffic light, after I was able to climb out of my vehicle, I wanted to shoot him in the face.  I saw the look on his face as he drove straight into my vehicle, nobody will ever convince me that he wasn't trying to kill me.  But in front of witnesses, in daylight, when he was no longer a threat to my life, stomping his ass and/or killing him was no longer an option. 

Again, I really really hope there is a video of this entire ordeal.  That's the only way a peaceful resolution will come out of this.   

I agree with all of that as well.

IF Brown reached for the cop's gun.

Just seems convenient that the one conceivable justification to shoot an unarmed kid is what this cop is claiming. After he changed his story from stealing candy & cigarettes from that store that looters have since burned to the ground. And also convenient that there is no dash cam available. Even if it didn't get video of inside the car, you'd think it would at least be running in front of the car to possibly capture audio of the alleged struggle in the back OR Brown allegedly running from the cops. The lack of video kind of sounds like Lois Lerner "losing" her emails to me...

[AUJarhead]

And also convenient that there is no dash cam available.

That's because the city of Ferguson doesn't have dash cams on it's police cars.

[RWS]

That's because the city of Ferguson doesn't have dash cams on it's police cars.

The department that I work for doesn't either.  However, we have body worn cameras.  Depending on the situation, that can be even better than a dash cam.  Not everything happens squarely at the front of a police car.  It would be great to have both.