Slashdot Mirror
Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting
An anonymous reader writes: A grand jury in Missouri has decided there is no probable cause to charge police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown. "A grand jury of nine whites and three blacks had been meeting weekly since Aug. 20 to consider evidence. At least nine votes would have been required to indict Wilson. The Justice Department is conducting an investigation into possible civil rights violations that could result in federal charges." Government officials and Brown's family are urging calm in Ferguson after the contentious protests that followed Brown's death.
The "protesters" in Ferguson right now are burning cars, breaking into stores, in general being asshats.
They're not interested in any kind of justice. They're only interested in revenge.
Love sees no species.
It's OK to try and harm someone just because they are wearing a badge and talking to you?
Equally disgusting...
Because that's what the physical evidence, and now a grand jury who had ALL the facts, said.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I take it you've never been involved in a criminal trial. The jury will only know the facts that are presented at trial. This is almost always a subset, sometimes a substantial one, of "all the facts".
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
If it went to trial, we *would* know all the facts.
No, no you wouldn't. You would only know what the prosecution and defense could find and present. Nothing more, nothing less.
As it so happens, the DA promised to release all the evidence they have to the public shortly. When, how, and in what format I do not know, but nonetheless, that's what they intend to do according to their statement.
A grand jury doesn't determine guilt or innocence, it only decides whether a trial should happen.
Agreed. The reason for having one in the first place is to determine whether there is enough credible evidence and testimony to be worth a trial.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
When a white guy beats up a black guy, it's racist. When a black guy beats up a white guy, it's social justice... Your morality stinks.
/sung to the tune of "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers"/
Social Justice Warriors! Deciding the truth based on progressive stack!
Social Justice Warriors! If you don't think like us we bring the attack!
Doesn't matter if you kill or steal, you aren't white so you're "keepin it real", and if you have a vag you can do no wrong, just believe like us and you can sing this song!
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
As far as I know, the American police used to use a lot more blunt force -- flashlights, billy clubs, night sticks, beavertail saps, sap gloves -- to subdue people.
Over the past few decades, and especially since Rodney King's beating, blunt force seems to be off the menu. It has been somewhat replaced by the Taser, but their cost and the increasing awareness of the risk of death seems to have blunted (sorry) its use.
I wonder if the elimination of blunt force from the police toolkit has somehow led to a situation where "if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" kind of a situation, where the police have come to see many situations that may have in the past been responded to with blunt force instead getting treated as a situation to shoot.
Physical confrontations without the use of an alternate weapon often boil down to wrestling matches which can quickly become a pulled gun or a struggle for an officer's gun, and many times a physical struggle is justified as a reason to shoot.
None of this to say that people weren't beaten for unjust reasons, but they also weren't killed, either.
When cops carried blunt force weapons they also knew how to use them in a way to inflict pain in a way that gained submission but also in a way that avoided major injury, since major injury didn't necessarily work in their favor. They seemed to have a spectrum of force available instead of a binary choice of shooting or not shooting.
Especially batshit irrelevant, as the cop had no idea there was a reported robbery
Why are you lying about this? What's your agenda that you are deliberately spreading false information?
Wilson was on another call nearby (helping with a baby that was having trouble breathing). He heard over his radio that there was a local retail store that had just had the strong-arm robbery we saw on video. After a minute or two more on the local situation, he left, and started in his cruiser down the road. He saw two guys walking down the middle of the street and as he passed, told them to get over to the sidewalk. When he got close, he noted that the 270-pound guy was a perfect match, right down to the red hat and yellow socks, for the description he had just heard on the radio. Before he confronted Brown, he got on the radio and said he had eyes on two individuals, and that he needed backup.
He pulled his cruiser backwards at an angle to cut off their jaunty stroll down the middle of the street and to block other traffic, and went to get out of his cruiser. Brown slammed the cruiser door shut, twice, and punched Wilson in the face, through the window. Before he got hit a third time, Wilson went for his weapon in order to get that huge guy to back off. Brown tried to grab it (his DNA is on the gun), and the gun went off in the car. Twice. One of those shots grazed Brown's thumb, leaving up-close powder marks. He (Brown) started to back off and walk away, and Wilson got out to stop him. Multiple witnesses (including half a dozen African Americans who came forward on their own to the police, and weren't interested in media attention) corroborated all of this, including what happened next (Brown turns around and moves at Wilson, who fires a few times, winging Brown - Wilson STOPS shooting and again tells Brown to stop - Brown then charges at Wilson who shoots again until Brown stops). There's blood on the street that shows Brown covered significant distance TOWARDS Wilson, just as described by those same witnesses.
Wilson was exactly aware that there had been a robbery, saw matching perps, and called it in. You know this, everyone knows this, and the people who are deliberately skipping over that simple fact (there are recordings!) are deliberately lying. Like you are, right now.
Prosecutors can 'indict a ham sandwich' with a grand jury.
Prosecutors can't do a damn thing unless they present that grand jury with compelling evidence and the GRAND JURY decides there's probable cause to bring charges. Grand juries routinely opt not to indict people, despite the fervent wishes of prosecutors. Another thing that you know is true, but about which you are lying for some reason. Not quite sure what your actual purpose is in doing so. It's strange.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.