Michael Brown verdict discussion policy

by Simon 254 Replies latest forum announcements

• 

  TheSilence

  I live six miles from this. Local news has portrayed a much fairer picture than national news. The concept that the national media doesn't want to upset the populace is laughable. They have blown the whole situation well beyond what it is.

  As far as your argument that he should not have shot multiple times... If a guy that big is coming after you and shooting once doesn't stop him and he continues to come after you then you continue to shoot until he stops. The officers version is that that is what happened and if the evidence supports that then multiple shots are absolutely justified. If Michael kept coming after him the officer probably thought he either missed or hit an area that did not convince Michael to stop. Unless the evidence says Michael was lying prone on the ground and then shot several times I'm not certain what anyone expects. Would you fire one shot and when the huge guy charging you doesn't stop just shrug your shoulders and say 'oh well, I tried. Guess since the first shot didn't work I'll just let him have my gun to do what he will with it.'?

  As to your last question, if in the hand to hand scuffle you go for the officers gun and then you come at him and are quite large enough to physically overpower him and take said gun by force then, yes, I think it does justify you being shot.
• 

  Simon

  Since, it has not been legally established that MB did in fact commit the related crime, his "frame of mind" in connection with the alleged report cannot be legally determined either. Since it cannot be legally established that MB commited a crime prior to his encounter with the police, his frame of mind in connection with that alleged crime cannot be used to justify the police killing him.

  Do you honestly expect a prosecution of a dead man to prove that he robbed the store? The world has seen it on CCTV. It can be an established fact without there being a conviction because, well, he was being apprehended and he faught back.

  Those looking for a guilty officer whatever the circumstances will see nothing that will convince them otherwise. Most reasonable people would think that the crime just committed prior to someone being stopped by the police would actually have a bearing in their encounter.

  Do you honestly believe that someone potentially guilty of a felony is going to behave exactly the same as someone who is a perfectly law abiding citizen if they are stopped by an officer?

  How many minutes or seconds have to have elapsed before something is or isn't relevent to the previous event?
• 

  Simon

  The most damaging particulars for the cop is that he shot a someone multiply times in an attempt to kill the person, even though he wasn't armed.

  Bzzzz - if you are allowed to decide what the officers intentions and thoughts were then can others decide what MBs motivations were?

  Couldn't he have been shooting to stop MB from attacking / charging at him and stopped firing only when he had?

  I've now let you post some blatant supposition that is based on zero evidence but apparently driven by a dislike for the police (?). This is exactly the sort of thing I warned about so please chose your words more carefully in future - we want to keep the discussion civil and sensible and not resort to outlandish claims.
• 

  AlphaMan

  Does getting into a hand to hand scuffle with a police officer justify a gun being pulled and killing the aggressive perpetrator ?

  .

  LOL....is this a serious question? Michael Brown was 6-4 292 pounds. Officer Wilson was 5-7 170 pounds. Officer Wilson doesn't know the age, background of the person, or what weapons Michael Brown might have on him. All he knows is a huge man is suddenly attacking him, beating the hell out of him, and going for his service revolver. After 2 shots are fired in his car during the struggle Officer Wilson gains control of his gun. Hell yeah....if you survive being overpowered from this felonious assult attempted murder of an officer you shoot to kill that attacking SOB every time for personal survival.
• 

  Finkelstein

  I've now let you post some blatant supposition that is based on zero evidence but apparently driven by a dislike for the police

  .

  Simon I'm not against the cop inherently, I'm just positing possibilities trying to be open mined and equally fair from both aspects,

  quite frankly I haven't obtained a lot information on the case.

  Just drawing conclusions from what I've heard, not intensionally trying to stir the pot.

  You have to admit its pretty hard to draw a conclusion when the evidence is so vague .
• 

  Finkelstein

  After 2 shots are fired in his car during the struggle Officer Wilson gains control of his gun.

  Well that adds a different perspective.
• 

  nonjwspouse

  The jury hears the perspective, the facts. The people insisting on a riot if the jurys findings are to acquit the mob violence is criminal. Reducing to mob rule which is not based on reality, but on pre concieved beliefs. Mob rule caused lynchings of innocent people in history.

  Remember, two wrongs never make a right. It just makes a deeper and more insidious wrong.
• 

  Simon

  I'm just positing possibilities trying to be open mined and equally fair from both aspects, quite frankly I haven't obtained a lot information on the case.

  Just drawing conclusions from what I've heard, not intensionally trying to stir the pot.

  It's important to find out the objective facts, not the sensationalist / hyped propaganda from a biased source. I don't know where you heard what you did but it sounds like something that is very pro MB / anti police.

  What we don't want is what happened last time - something gets invented and said and then repeated over and over in an attempt to make it accepted.

  If something is untrue or unprovable then we don't want it to be part of the discussion.

  Saying what MB or the officer were thinking would class as unprovable.
• 

  JeffT

  I have to admit there is a certain entertainment value in reading comments about this from people who have never been in real fight and probably have never fired a gun. Pistols are notoriusly inaccurate and have low "stopping power." I'm not at all surprised when I hear about it taking multiple shots to bring some one or some thing down. And when your pumped up on adrenaline it is easy to keep shooting until you run out of ammo.

  And no, I have not ever shot a person. I have done a lot of hunting.
• 

  GLTirebiter

  Let's not confuse a grand jury with a trial. Only the state's case has been examined, not the defense. The prosecutor must demostrate to the grand jury that there are legal grounds to have file charges and conduct an actual trial. If there is no indictment, that does not prove innocence--only that the prosecution has not yet justified taking the case to trial (they may be able to produce new or better evidence at a later date). If there is an indictment, that does not prove guilt--only that the prosecutor will have a chance to present their case to a judge and jury. This is only the first step in what may become a very long legal process.