Michael Brown Shooting and Aftermath

[Derec]

That's true. Even something as serious as assaulting a police officer can be downgraded to a misdemeanor offense in a plea bargain. However, even someone who has pled guilty to assaulting a police officer is presumed innocent if/when charged with another assault. So we are supposed to presume Michael Brown is innocent even if he was once arrested for felony assault. Or aren't we? I forget the rules on how all this presumption of innocence stuff applies to scary black men.

You are confusing categories. If Brown survived and was arrested he'd of course enjoy presumption of innocence for any crime he is charged with. Since he is dead, he doesn't enjoy presumption of innocence since he will, being dead, not face trial.

- - - Updated - - -

Just wanted to say that so far, I haven't heard anyone suggest that Brown was guilty of any capital offense. Not even Derec or Loren.

As even you admitted, nobody is claiming he was. A rather blatant strawman.

Except for the being black part.

And another.

- - - Updated - - -

And Brown didn't deserve to die for either a record of infraction or some

Nobody is saying he "deserved" to die. Just that he contributed to his death by engaging in a crime and then (probably) attacking a police officer.

cheap cigars.

Cheap indeed, once five finger discount is applied.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

You are confusing categories. If Brown survived and was arrested he'd of course enjoy presumption of innocence for any crime he is charged with.

yeah, right. If he had gone to the emergency room and not the morgue, you would be in here protecting the good name and the presumption of innocence of Michael Brown.

Since he is dead,

he's an easy target.

he doesn't enjoy presumption of innocence since he will, being dead, not face trial.

that and he was the VICTIM NOT THE PERPETRATOR of the shooting.

- - - Updated - - -

Just wanted to say that so far, I haven't heard anyone suggest that Brown was guilty of any capital offense. Not even Derec or Loren.

As even you admitted, nobody is claiming he was. A rather blatant strawman.

Except for the being black part.

And another.

- - - Updated - - -

And Brown didn't deserve to die for either a record of infraction or some

Nobody is saying he "deserved" to die. Just that he contributed to his death by engaging in a crime and then (probably) attacking a police officer.

cheap cigars.

Cheap indeed, once five finger discount is applied.

 

[Toni]

You are confusing categories. If Brown survived and was arrested he'd of course enjoy presumption of innocence for any crime he is charged with. Since he is dead, he doesn't enjoy presumption of innocence since he will, being dead, not face trial.

- - - Updated - - -

Just wanted to say that so far, I haven't heard anyone suggest that Brown was guilty of any capital offense. Not even Derec or Loren.

As even you admitted, nobody is claiming he was. A rather blatant strawman.

Except for the being black part.

And another.

- - - Updated - - -

And Brown didn't deserve to die for either a record of infraction or some

Nobody is saying he "deserved" to die. Just that he contributed to his death by engaging in a crime and then (probably) attacking a police officer.

cheap cigars.

Cheap indeed, once five finger discount is applied.

And yet, Brown is dead. A messy arrest, investigation, trial, and of course, that very messy presumption of innocence is now avoided.

So convenient.

Please point out why anything I said is a strawman. I'd love to believe that I was incorrect in my assessment of you.

 

[thebeave]

A black what, Loren? Is it so hard to say PERSON when talking about black people?

is shot you can pretty much count on black witnesses who say he was not a threat no matter what the facts are.

because all us black folk are liars? Is that it Loren?

I didn't say all.

Just watch the news--if a black is shot with witnesses some will say he was no threat. Witnesses or not some will say he wouldn't have hurt anyone.

I think a better, more general way of getting your point across is that people will tend to side and cheer for their own kind, and twist the story as needed to support their ideology and beliefs. You see it on this board a lot, whether we're talking race or gender, political affiliation, etc. The guilt of OJ Simpson is a good example of this phenomena:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/08/oj-simpson-trial_n_5468851.html

Most people still believe that the black football legend killed his white ex-wife and her friend, polls show. But for many African-Americans, his likely guilt remains overwhelmed by a potent mix: the racism of the lead detective and the history of black mistreatment by the justice system.

For these people, Simpson's acquittal is a powerful rebuke to what they see as America's racial crimes. Others simply see a murderer who played the race card to get away with it. Across the board, emotions remain vivid.

"It was very tense at work," recalls Carlos Carter, who at the time was one of the few black people working in the trust department of a Pittsburgh bank. "The whites felt like OJ was guilty, they were rooting for their team. We thought he was innocent, that he was kind of framed, so we were on the black team."

He adds: "We were consumed with it. Like Sugar Ray Robinson fighting the great white hope. It was like a match. It represented something bigger than the case, the battle between good and evil, the battle between the white man and the black man. It was at that level."

This sentiment, widespread in the black community, was confusing to Shannon Spicker, a white woman who was working her way through college in Ohio at the time.

"Most of us didn't understand why it was racially charged," she says. "We didn't understand how people could defend him just because he was black, is what it felt like. We knew he was guilty but they defended him because he was black. It was weird."

http://www.cnn.com/US/OJ/daily/9510/10-06/poll_race/oj_poll_txt.html

Differences in opinions about the facts in the Simpson trial itself continue to divide whites and blacks. Regardless of the verdict, most whites believe Simpson was guilty of murder; most African-Americans say he was innocent. Two-thirds of all African-Americans think that there was a conspiracy to frame Simpson for the murders; six in 10 whites don't believe in such a conspiracy. And both groups suspect that racial issues continue to tint the other group's view of the case. Sixty percent of all whites believe that blacks who think Simpson is innocent hold that view mostly because of Simpson's race. Among African-Americans, 58 percent think that whites who maintain Simpson is guilty feel that way mostly based on Simpson's race.

 

[Derec]

And yet, Brown is dead. A messy arrest, investigation, trial, and of course, that very messy presumption of innocence is now avoided.
So convenient.

Yeah, very convenient. Riots, looting, arson, police officer facing likely state and federal charges, city likely sued for millions. Real convenient indeed.
Do you really think Wilson preferred to have Brown dead rather than arrested? So, yes I do think this is yet another strawman.

 

[Derec]

yeah, right. If he had gone to the emergency room and not the morgue, you would be in here protecting the good name and the presumption of innocence of Michael Brown.

No I would not be. Because it wouldn't have been discussed on here. A young man arrested for robbing a store is hardly national news.
That said, if he were on trial he'd enjoy presumption of innocence but that is not the same as "protecting his good name". Evidence against him, including any criminal history, would still be relevant, just not newsworthy.

Since he is dead,

he's an easy target.

Hardly, given how many apologists for him there are.

that and he was the VICTIM NOT THE PERPETRATOR of the shooting.

And he was the PERPETRATOR of a robbery and very likely of assault on a police officer. Both felonies by the way, and no juvenile protections to hide behind any more.

Glad you enjoyed it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You guys really don't like unpleasant truths, do you?

I'm not saying all blacks are racists or dishonest. I'm saying enough are that we see the bogus witnesses and character witnesses show up.

So you're saying that any "black" that does say that a "black" that gets shot was not a threat is a racist and/or dishonest. Gotcha, Archie. No black character witnesses allowed! They're all bogus! Tell the Judge!

No, I'm not.

I'm saying that there always are some. Just watch the news.

We had a case locally--a bunch of people were pointing out the kid (16) had no rap sheet. Never mind that he was driving a stolen car (what drew the cop's interest in the first place) and pointed a realistic fake gun at the cop.

 

[Toni]

So you're saying that any "black" that does say that a "black" that gets shot was not a threat is a racist and/or dishonest. Gotcha, Archie. No black character witnesses allowed! They're all bogus! Tell the Judge!

No, I'm not.

I'm saying that there always are some. Just watch the news.

We had a case locally--a bunch of people were pointing out the kid (16) had no rap sheet. Never mind that he was driving a stolen car (what drew the cop's interest in the first place) and pointed a realistic fake gun at the cop.

Thank heavens that white people don't look at young black people and automatically think: thug or criminal or drug dealer or anything like that! Or shoot them for making a junk food run or picking up a bb gun in a store that sells bb guns.

 

[Sabine Grant]

I do not think Derec is grasping the nuance at play here : was Michael Brown a threat to Officer Wilson at the time Officer Wilson shot him several times to include 2 shots to the head one being fatal. The most recent video footage I linked to this a.m relates the spontaneous and immediate remarks made by 2 eyewitnesses to the shooting, within a short delay following the shooting. What one of the contractors exclaimed leaves NO room to interpret it any differently than his having witnessed Brown with his "hands up".

What derec is not getting is that no matter which criminal background Brown may have had, if he indeed indicated surrender by putting his hands up, Officer Wilson was to acknowledge it as such and NOT pursue to discharge his weapon on Brown to the culminating point of a fatal shot and resulting fatal wound to Brown's head.

Except when a black is shot you can pretty much count on black witnesses who say he was not a threat no matter what the facts are.

Are you implying that this most recent video footage of the spontaneous reaction of 2 eye witnesses to the shooting should be invalidated because both witnesses would be of Black ethnicity? That if they were of any other ethnicity, the footage would be validated as indeed 2 eyewitnesses's reaction captured after the shooting, one of them distinctively raising his arms up as well as the audio of his exclaiming ""He had his f**n hands up"?

If and when pieces of evidence such as testimonies were to be invalidated based on the ethnicity of the witnesses, it would leave no doubt that law enforcement and the judiciary system are racially prejudiced against persons of the said ethnicity.

Fortunately, the quoted remark I replied to is only the product of Internet musing.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Well, some guy on page one insisted that he should be able to shoot black people. But it wasn't Loren.

The "some guy" in question used what is very well known and observed on this board(to have included FRDB) a parody style of communication. Parody style which most of us can easily identify especially since he uses quote tags as in pretending to be or think as... It appears you have great difficulties recognizing the difference between a remark made in jesting/parody style and one intended to be taken seriously.

Conclusion : the "some guy" in question was NOT insisting "that he should be able to shoot black people". Further rehashing of the same claim that someone in this thread "insisted that he should be able to kill black people" will be identified as intentional flaming.

The above said for the benefit of newcomers (as well as guests) and folks who joined the thread after page 1.

 

[ksen]

So you're saying that any "black" that does say that a "black" that gets shot was not a threat is a racist and/or dishonest. Gotcha, Archie. No black character witnesses allowed! They're all bogus! Tell the Judge!

No, I'm not.

I'm saying that there always are some. Just watch the news.

We had a case locally--a bunch of people were pointing out the kid (16) had no rap sheet. Never mind that he was driving a stolen car (what drew the cop's interest in the first place) and pointed a realistic fake gun at the cop.

So the preponderance of evidence says the black won't make a good witness, eh?

 

[Mumbles]

No, I'm not.

I'm saying that there always are some. Just watch the news.

We had a case locally--a bunch of people were pointing out the kid (16) had no rap sheet. Never mind that he was driving a stolen car (what drew the cop's interest in the first place) and pointed a realistic fake gun at the cop.

So the preponderance of evidence says the black won't make a good witness, eh?

I'm not really sure what that example had to do with the facts at hand anyway...

Here's what I find interesting, though. Um, no offense to white board members, but...white Americans have a notably poor history of observing behaviors of black people. We're weak, then we're strong, we're lazy, then we're violent, we refuse jobs, then we take up all the jobs through affirmative Action, black women are Mammies and Jezebels...I'm wondering what exact quality it is, that makes white people's observations more reasonable than black peoples'...you know, when it comes to these interracial matters

XD

 

[Sabine Grant]

So the preponderance of evidence says the black won't make a good witness, eh?

I'm not really sure what that example had to do with the facts at hand anyway...

Here's what I find interesting, though. Um, no offense to white board members, but...white Americans have a notably poor history of observing behaviors of black people. We're weak, then we're strong, we're lazy, then we're violent, we refuse jobs, then we take up all the jobs through affirmative Action, black women are Mammies and Jezebels...I'm wondering what exact quality it is, that makes white people's observations more reasonable than black peoples'...you know, when it comes to these interracial matters

XD

There is no quality to it, Mumbles. There is a culturally ingrained mentality among those White Americans.

 

[Arctish]

So the preponderance of evidence says the black won't make a good witness, eh?

I'm not really sure what that example had to do with the facts at hand anyway...

Here's what I find interesting, though. Um, no offense to white board members, but...white Americans have a notably poor history of observing behaviors of black people. We're weak, then we're strong, we're lazy, then we're violent, we refuse jobs, then we take up all the jobs through affirmative Action, black women are Mammies and Jezebels...I'm wondering what exact quality it is, that makes white people's observations more reasonable than black peoples'...you know, when it comes to these interracial matters

XD

I think it has to do with you guys being really good at sports (except swimming). You can do it all (almost)!

 

[RavenSky]

No, they only confirmed he didn't have any "serious felonies". And of course there is a possibility of felony crimes being downgraded to misdemeanors, especially if there was a plea bargain. I.e. a robbery could be downgraded to a theft.

something which seven year old children commit everyday
serious, dangerous, so fucking dangerous that seven year olds can do it...

Key point (that Derec ignores in his continuing quest to defame dead black victims) is that officials have already confirmed that Michael Brown had no felony convictions.

Bigger key point (that Derec ignores in his continuing quest to defame dead black victims) is that Michael Brown's history does not matter because Michael Brown already had his hands up in surrender when he was shot multiple times, including the killing shot to the head.

This demand for Michael Brown's criminal history - IF any such history even exists - is purely and only to defame Michael Brown.

 

[RavenSky]

Well, some guy on page one insisted that he should be able to shoot black people. But it wasn't Loren.

Why don't you put "some guy" on ignore, and stop subjecting the rest of us to your obsession with him.

 

[Toni]

And yet, Brown is dead. A messy arrest, investigation, trial, and of course, that very messy presumption of innocence is now avoided.
So convenient.

Yeah, very convenient. Riots, looting, arson, police officer facing likely state and federal charges, city likely sued for millions. Real convenient indeed.
Do you really think Wilson preferred to have Brown dead rather than arrested? So, yes I do think this is yet another strawman.

I don't think that Wilson thought that far ahead.

 

[none]

And Brown didn't deserve to die for either a record of infraction or some

Nobody is saying he "deserved" to die. Just that he contributed to his death by engaging in a crime and then (probably) attacking a police officer.

cheap cigars.

Cheap indeed, once five finger discount is applied.

ok, the scene where there was supposedly activity between Brown and the officer was near the police cruiser, the scene where Brown was shot to death is at least 35 feet away and seperated by a duration of time, enough time for the officer to pull his weapon outside of the vehicle.
From what I remember it is apparent from the accounts of at least five witnesses that brown had his hands up, was surrendered.
There is no evidence at this time to counter the account that Wilson suffered a swollen face because of the door to the cruiser bouncing open and then closed from the officer trying to exit the vehicle, and the door hitting him in the head/face and causing the swollen head/face.
So it appears the officer was hasty to shoot as evidenced by the wild exit from the police cruiser and the shooting of an unarmed man in surrender with his hands up.

 

[Rhea]

You are confusing categories. If Brown survived and was arrested he'd of course enjoy presumption of innocence for any crime he is charged with. Since he is dead, he doesn't enjoy presumption of innocence since he will, being dead, not face trial.

He was _supposed_ to enjoy presumption of innocence from the Cop, Wilson.
It is wrong that Wilson did not provide it.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

No I would not be.

Oh I know you wouldn't be. That statement was sarcasm.

Because it wouldn't have been discussed on here.

again, yeah, right.

A young man arrested for robbing a store is hardly national news.

He wasn't stopped for robbing a store. He was stopped for walking in the street.

That said, if he were on trial he'd enjoy presumption of innocence but that is not the same as "protecting his good name". Evidence against him, including any criminal history, would still be relevant, just not newsworthy.

are you suggesting that national news has never covered survivors of police actions?

Since he is dead,

he's an easy target.

Hardly, given how many apologists for him there are.

the man has be killed, just what is there for him to apologize?

that and he was the VICTIM NOT THE PERPETRATOR of the shooting.

And he was the PERPETRATOR of a robbery

Of which Wilson was unaware and the store had not reported. And until convicted or confessed, Brown would not have been a perpetrator but a suspect, and he wasn't even that because the officer had to knowledge of what had happened at the store..

and very likely of assault on a police officer. Both felonies by the way, and no juvenile protections to hide behind any more.

Well if you are so sure of these felonies, why the obsession with the juvie record? If what you say is correct, you don't need his juvie record.

Glad you enjoyed it.