Ferguson, MO

[StealthMode]

My computer froze and my entire post got deleted.

TL;DR--What makes you feel #4? I'm incredibly surprised to see that comment because every single person I've encountered and comment I've read indicates people feel Wilson should have used a non-lethal way to stop Brown so I can't imagine where that comes from. Care to elaborate?

[Phrozen Sands]

Originally Posted by StealthMode

If my GC memory serves me correctly, yes. Max has been banned many more times than "dude."

That is the problem that has been highlighted over and over in the news reports today. Not once have I heard an explanation of what happened to make Wilson feel it was necessary to shoot to kill. The first two shots were at close range--what merited use of a gun instead of a taser? After that, why not shoot for the leg or wherever else--why were kill shots to the head necessary? He was large and aggressive and threatening so you had to kill him before he...bumrushed you with no weapon?

Lmao @ "dude". He said that a lot.

In response to the other part of your post, I agree. According to the testimony, Brown ran, Wilson pursued him, Brown stopped, Wilson stopped, Brown turned around and came towards Wilson, more shots were fired. It's just funny how black men are shot and killed by police officers 21 more times than white men are. Things that make me go hmmm.

Not to be negative, but there WILL be another Ferguson incident. That's just how this country values black lives. They don't.

[Low D Flat]

I feel like people think the only way this should have turned out was Brown getting Wilsons gun then using it to kill Wilson.

Is that a reasonable fear? Does this chain of events ever happen? And if Brown really was going after Wilson's gun, shouldn't that have been a clue that he didn't have a gun himself?

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands

In response to the other part of your post, I agree. According to the testimony, Brown ran, Wilson pursued him, Brown stopped, Wilson stopped, Brown turned around and came towards Wilson, more shots were fired. It's just funny how black men are shot and killed by police officers 21 more times than white men are. Things that make me go hmmm.

I think some more information is warranted here:

http://www.propublica.org/article/de...lack-and-white

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

1. Wilson didn't have a taser.
2. Police arent trained to shoot at legs, or shoot guns out of people's hands, or shoot car tires or any other Hollywood TV stuff that you see.

Exactly.

Trust, there would be more criticisms of law enforcement if they were trained to do the things depicted by Hollywood. More people would accuse them of unlawful and unnecessary use of force and firearms if they could shoot people in the leg. Instead, we want officers to remain well-trained and selective in their use of a firearm; and we want that use of a firearm to be precisely for its intended purpose.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by KDCat

Dorian Johnson's testimony to the grand jury. He was the guy with Mike Brown at the store.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/248126858/...the-Grand-Jury

Darren Wilson speaks about the events of that day:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-p...ry?id=27186946

It's really difficult for me to take one side over another in this case. Their stories completely contradict each other.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by StealthMode

My computer froze and my entire post got deleted.

TL;DR--What makes you feel #4? I'm incredibly surprised to see that comment because every single person I've encountered and comment I've read indicates people feel Wilson should have used a non-lethal way to stop Brown so I can't imagine where that comes from. Care to elaborate?

This is where the problem is, because people assume that in a high adrenalin situation where you've just been attacked and the person who attacked you tried to take your gun and is now charging toward you, you're going to stop and think "I'm going to shoot him in the knee". I think survival instinct causes anybody to just shoot and stop that person in any way possible. Shooting a moving target is also not going to result in shooting them in one specific body part. Brown was almost twice the weight of Wilson and significantly taller. There's no way Wilson would win a physical fight. Once Wilson was unconscious, Brown would have his gun and would then be armed.

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

Darren Wilson speaks about the events of that day:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-p...ry?id=27186946

It's really difficult for me to take one side over another in this case. Their stories completely contradict each other.

The eye witness accounts of most incidents contradict each other and the statements of the suspect and police officer in any arrest are going to typically contradict each other. That's why you have to focus on physical evidence. The physical evidence showed pretty clearly that Brown tried to grab Wilson's gun in the car and Wilson shot him in the hand. Brown ran and then turned around and started moving back toward Wilson (blood trails show that). Brown was shot in the front, discrediting accounts that he was walking away. The physical evidence is pretty clear and, from what I've read, there was previous precedent from other court cases.

I don't dispute that there is racism resulting in unfair treatment of suspects by police. I'm not convinced this particular incident is the best example to use to demonstrate it.

[KDCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

So the Grand Jury apparently believed that lying liars lie.

When I read the testimony, it came off as very coached.

(This is super-long, so please excuse me. I am venting.)

When I read Darren Wilson's testimony, it just seems weird to me.

When I read this guy, I believe him. I do think he was prepared. His attorney is Freeman Bosley, who is very active in the AA community in St. Louis and a politician, as well as an attorney. I still believe him. Witness prep is typical, not unusual, if you practice litigation. My clients are always prepped before any testimony under oath.

Here's why I believe him:
He comes off as a typical guy that you might find in that neighborhood. I believe that he had just moved to a better neighborhood from some crappy neighborhood. (Ferguson isn't the hood. It's a working class neighborhood. I went to college with kids from Ferguson. It's not far from where I grew up.) Lots of AA people move from East. St. Louis and North St. Louis to the working class suburbs like Ferguson. There is less crime and better schools.

I know from experience and from living here most of my life that St. Louis cops can be aggressive assholes. They also lie on the stand. It's practically part of their job description. We had a terrible experience in my home town with some drunk St. Louis cops harassing bar patrons and then pulling a gun on them. It ended up with one of our cops shooting one of the St. Louis cops dead. http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/i...9bb30f31a.html

I also know that Mike Brown's autopsy said he was positive for marijuana. It's possible and even likely that he was high when he went to the store and stole those cigars. I knew guys in college who did similar things under the influence (1 stole a bottle of vodka after the clerk said he couldn't sell alcohol after 1 am. 1 stole an ice scraper from a gas station. 1 stole a movie poster from the front of a theater. They were idiots, but they didn't end up dead.)

So what happened? I think that Mike Brown was high and acting like an idiot. (Johnson testified that Mike Brown didn't usually act like this.) The cop reacts overly aggressively. He is cowboying the situation. Mike Brown struggles and runs away. The cop kills him because he is pissed off.

I never fully bought the story about Brown charging the cop. Who runs and then turns on a cop? Suspects run or suspects fight. They don't typically run and then turn around and fight. Who turns on a cop that is firing a gun at him under any circumstance? Nobody does that. It's a weird story.

I do believe that Brown might try to run away and then stop and act confused after getting shot. I do believe that a guy who was shot and confused could turn around and face the cop in his confusion. I do believe that a confused person who was just shot might say " I don't have a gun."

I also never bought the story about Darren Wilson being terrified of Mike Brown. They are almost the same height. Wilson has a badge and a gun. He's been a cop for some time. He is trained.

After reading Johnson's testimony and Wilson's testimony, I think Johnson's story is more likely to be true. Wilson executed that kid for struggling and running away.

[TonyB06]

Originally Posted by AGDee

This is where the problem is, because people assume that in a high adrenalin situation where you've just been attacked and the person who attacked you tried to take your gun and is now charging toward you, you're going to stop and think "I'm going to shoot him in the knee". I think survival instinct causes anybody to just shoot and stop that person in any way possible. Shooting a moving target is also not going to result in shooting them in one specific body part. Brown was almost twice the weight of Wilson and significantly taller. There's no way Wilson would win a physical fight. Once Wilson was unconscious, Brown would have his gun and would then be armed.

And this is where I have a problem. From what I've read and the legal analysis of those I've seen, Wilson was hardly challenged in his GJ testimony. Just seemed like he was allowed to present his version pretty much without challenge.

We've seen the Wilson hospital pictures ands have seen slight discloring on his right cheek -- odd enough for having been hit in the driver's seat of a car (where you'd expect a left cheek strike). As KDCat said, does it make sense to, after running, stop, and then charge the guy that just shot you and has drawn down on you?

Brown was not "twice the weight" of Wilson, nor was he "significantly taller." Both men are and were 6'4". Brown did outweigh Wilson by 70-80 pounds.

At the end of the day, we'll likely never really know what went down out there. It's time for mandatory police body cameras. Period. That way nobody has to take anybody's word for anything anymore.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by KDCat

(This is super-long, so please excuse me. I am venting.)

When I read Darren Wilson's testimony, it just seems weird to me.

When I read this guy, I believe him. I do think he was prepared. His attorney is Freeman Bosley, who is very active in the AA community in St. Louis and a politician, as well as an attorney. I still believe him. Witness prep is typical, not unusual, if you practice litigation. My clients are always prepped before any testimony under oath.

Here's why I believe him:
He comes off as a typical guy that you might find in that neighborhood. I believe that he had just moved to a better neighborhood from some crappy neighborhood. (Ferguson isn't the hood. It's a working class neighborhood. I went to college with kids from Ferguson. It's not far from where I grew up.) Lots of AA people move from East. St. Louis and North St. Louis to the working class suburbs like Ferguson. There is less crime and better schools.

I know from experience and from living here most of my life that St. Louis cops can be aggressive assholes. They also lie on the stand. It's practically part of their job description. We had a terrible experience in my home town with some drunk St. Louis cops harassing bar patrons and then pulling a gun on them. It ended up with one of our cops shooting one of the St. Louis cops dead. http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/i...9bb30f31a.html

I also know that Mike Brown's autopsy said he was positive for marijuana. It's possible and even likely that he was high when he went to the store and stole those cigars. I knew guys in college who did similar things under the influence (1 stole a bottle of vodka after the clerk said he couldn't sell alcohol after 1 am. 1 stole an ice scraper from a gas station. 1 stole a movie poster from the front of a theater. They were idiots, but they didn't end up dead.)

So what happened? I think that Mike Brown was high and acting like an idiot. (Johnson testified that Mike Brown didn't usually act like this.) The cop reacts overly aggressively. He is cowboying the situation. Mike Brown struggles and runs away. The cop kills him because he is pissed off.

I never fully bought the story about Brown charging the cop. Who runs and then turns on a cop? Suspects run or suspects fight. They don't typically run and then turn around and fight. Who turns on a cop that is firing a gun at him under any circumstance? Nobody does that. It's a weird story.

I do believe that Brown might try to run away and then stop and act confused after getting shot. I do believe that a guy who was shot and confused could turn around and face the cop in his confusion. I do believe that a confused person who was just shot might say " I don't have a gun."

I also never bought the story about Darren Wilson being terrified of Mike Brown. They are almost the same height. Wilson has a badge and a gun. He's been a cop for some time. He is trained.

After reading Johnson's testimony and Wilson's testimony, I think Johnson's story is more likely to be true. Wilson executed that kid for struggling and running away.

Is it wise to come to a conclusion based off of one (out of many) testimony when this case was marred with so many conflicting accounts? Yes, his may have been different but there were other testimonies that corroborated Officer Wilsons account.

We can all sit here and give our opinions based off of emotions and biases on whether he was guilty or innocent but unless you are privy to all 70 hours of testimonies and physical evidence shown to the Grand Jury than you really can't make an accurate judgment.

[ASTalumna06]

AGDee, I should have elaborated: it's difficult to determine what happened and who is telling the truth in rgard to what occurred leading up to the point where there was physical evidence (i.e. who said what and when, and what caused the situation to escalate to the point of physical violence).

Originally Posted by KDCat

I also know that Mike Brown's autopsy said he was positive for marijuana. It's possible and even likely that he was high when he went to the store and stole those cigars. I knew guys in college who did similar things under the influence (1 stole a bottle of vodka after the clerk said he couldn't sell alcohol after 1 am. 1 stole an ice scraper from a gas station. 1 stole a movie poster from the front of a theater. They were idiots, but they didn't end up dead.)

So what happened? I think that Mike Brown was high and acting like an idiot. (Johnson testified that Mike Brown didn't usually act like this.) The cop reacts overly aggressively. He is cowboying the situation. Mike Brown struggles and runs away. The cop kills him because he is pissed off.

I never fuly bought the story about Brown charging the cop. Who runs and then turns on a cop? Suspects run or suspects fight. They don't typically run and then turn around and fight. Who turns on a cop that is firing a gun at him under any circumstance? Nobody does that. It's a weird story.

Maybe you already answered your own question?

[DrPhil]

After watching The View, some of the biggest things to come from this:

1. Police need cameras and recorders on uniforms to protect themselves and the public at all times.

2. The public needs to know more about law enforcement training and the policies regarding use of "force", use of "deadly force", and firearm use. Most states have this information available online. This also highlights why officers cannot shoot to warn or injure, as depicted on shows like Criminal Minds.

3. Not all officers have tasers and not all members of the public agree with the use of tasers. We can't have it both ways. Either pepper spray, taser, baton(?), or gun. Some police departments carry multiple methods. That doesn't mean they will have access to every method during a physical altercation. I don't want an officer dying because the officer couldn't access the taser during an altercation and was afraid to use the police gun.

[KDCat]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

Is it wise to come to a conclusion based off of one (out of many) testimony when this case was marred with so many conflicting accounts? Yes, his may have been different but there were other testimonies that corroborated Officer Wilsons account.

We can all sit here and give our opinions based off of emotions and biases on whether he was guilty or innocent but unless you are privy to all 70 hours of testimonies and physical evidence shown to the Grand Jury than you really can't make an accurate judgment.

Darion Johnson and Darren Wilson are the only two people who saw the whole thing.

The other witnesses corroborate both of their stories. They are all over the place. It's not an either/or.

This is really a swearing contest between Wilson and Johnson.

[KDCat]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

AGDee, I should have elaborated: it's difficult to determine what happened and who is telling the truth in rgard to what occurred leading up to the point where there was physical evidence (i.e. who said what and when, and what caused the situation to escalate to the point of physical violence).



Maybe you already answered your own question?

Pot doesn't make people charge cops with their head down.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by KDCat

Pot doesn't make people charge cops with their head down.

It also doesn't prevent people from doing so.

To highlight how race and gender shape experiences and interactions:
There are members of the Black community who discuss (usually mainly with other Black people) the hetero-masculine demeanor of many Black men; and how this demeanor can sometimes come across as cocky and overly confident when dealing with authority figures including law enforcement. Some Black men have difficulty balancing this with what many Black men are taught about law enforcement--to stay away from law enforcement as much as possible but in an interaction to not say too much, be respectful, watch body language, etc.

It is therefore not shocking if some interactions with law enforcement turn hostile and physical for particular groups of people. I have seen certain hostilities myself and it is by the grace of God these interactions did not escalate.