Police Power and Racial Tensions in Ferguson, Missouri

[Gameface]

I can't tell if you're patronizing me or not. I guess I deserve the uncertainty due to the manner in which I made several posts over the course of the last year.

I was being serious.

 

[TroutBum]

This is moot. The chief had ZERO to do with Brown's death. Repeat, ZERO. Sucks that a guy who worked his whole life to earn such a position has it snatched away from him because some **** head decided to rob a store, threaten a cop, charge the cop, and then take a bullet in the face.

Clearly the chiefs fault, and he should have stepped down months ago. That racist pig.

 

[One Brow]

This is moot. The chief had ZERO to do with Brown's death. Repeat, ZERO.

The chief is in the best position to set and change the culture of a department. If you think Wilson was some rogue cop, your position makes sense. If you think Wilson was perhaps on the slightly extreme end of a police culture that was more about domination than service, then the chief bears some responsibility. Seeing how the police behaved when the protests started, I'm going with the latter.

 

[HighlandHomie]

This is moot. The chief had ZERO to do with Brown's death. Repeat, ZERO. Sucks that a guy who worked his whole life to earn such a position has it snatched away from him because some **** head decided to rob a store, threaten a cop, charge the cop, and then take a bullet in the face.

Clearly the chiefs fault, and he should have stepped down months ago. That racist pig.

Cops had no problem apprehending this white woman who charged them with knife: https://vine.co/v/OmWerMBUuue yet Wilson had to shoot unarmed Brown 10 times to his death. Wilson belonged to a force with documented history of abusive powers and the way they handled the protests exposed them for what they were for the whole world to see. Obviously the world took notice.

Luckily, backwards racist POS' like yourself are going the way of dinosaurs. Unfortunately, though, society will have to wait another generation to be totally rid of you folk as I'm sure you and your ilk have already begun indoctrinating your tainted spawn with your racist and prejudice filth. Society is too progressive nowadays for them to be as misguided as you, so they'll probably just end up as 'closeted racists' due to being brainwashed at an early age.

 

[LogGrad98]

But everyone loves Grandmama. Or was it Madea?

 

[TroutBum]

The chief is in the best position to set and change the culture of a department. If you think Wilson was some rogue cop, your position makes sense. If you think Wilson was perhaps on the slightly extreme end of a police culture that was more about domination than service, then the chief bears some responsibility. Seeing how the police behaved when the protests started, I'm going with the latter.

No, he wasn't a rogue cop. He did what he had to do. The chief is nothing more than a scapegoat in this story to keep the mindless buffoons like HighlandHomie feeling like they're winning. Nothing will change in Furguson just because they fired the chief. Repeat, nothing.

Cops had no problem apprehending this white woman who charged them with knife: https://vine.co/v/OmWerMBUuue

There are a few things that stand out here, that obviously, you missed. Let me be your path to reason and intellectual honesty.

1) From the link you posted, we have no idea what the circumstances of that video are. Therefore, comparing the two, or in your case, using it as some sort of "see, I told you I was right" really makes you look stupider than usual; an enormous feat.

2) For the sake of argument though, let's just assume the situation is similar to the Brown case.
2b) Brown is a giant man.
2c) She is a small woman.

3) The officer was alone in the Brown case.
3b) There were multiple officers in your video.

4) Again, not knowing the facts about the video you posted leaves a lot to be contemplated: where in the country did it happen? Did they know that lady just robbed a convenience store? Was she walking down the middle of the road, taunting the officers before this happened? So on, so forth, etc., amen.

yet Wilson had to shoot unarmed Brown 10 times to his death. Wilson belonged to a force with documented history of abusive powers and the way they handled the protests exposed them for what they were for the whole world to see. Obviously the world took notice.

Every time someone says "unarmed" regarding this story, a fairy dies. This "unarmed" man successfully robbed a convenience store with nothing but his looks, size, arms and hands. Forget the fact that he takes dumps bigger than most people are tall, but he is/was bigger than 98% of the people you'll ever meet. Size matters.

Luckily, backwards racist POS' like yourself are going the way of dinosaurs.

Struck by a meteorite, resulting in a slow, steady decline of species, thus altering weather patterns, growing cycles, and life as we know it?

Unfortunately, though, society will have to wait another generation to be totally rid of you folk as I'm sure you and your ilk have already begun indoctrinating your tainted spawn with your racist and prejudice filth. Society is too progressive nowadays for them to be as misguided as you, so they'll probably just end up as 'closeted racists' due to being brainwashed at an early age.

Says the guy who does nothing but regurgitate whatever scare tactic the media is buffeting on this week. Feel free to have an original thought one of these days, bro, it's invigorating.

 

[HighlandHomie]

No, he wasn't a rogue cop. He did what he had to do. The chief is nothing more than a scapegoat in this story to keep the mindless buffoons like HighlandHomie feeling like they're winning. Nothing will change in Furguson just because they fired the chief. Repeat, nothing.



There are a few things that stand out here, that obviously, you missed. Let me be your path to reason and intellectual honesty.

1) From the link you posted, we have no idea what the circumstances of that video are. Therefore, comparing the two, or in your case, using it as some sort of "see, I told you I was right" really makes you look stupider than usual; an enormous feat.

2) For the sake of argument though, let's just assume the situation is similar to the Brown case.
2b) Brown is a giant man.
2c) She is a small woman.

3) The officer was alone in the Brown case.
3b) There were multiple officers in your video.

4) Again, not knowing the facts about the video you posted leaves a lot to be contemplated: where in the country did it happen? Did they know that lady just robbed a convenience store? Was she walking down the middle of the road, taunting the officers before this happened? So on, so forth, etc., amen.



Every time someone says "unarmed" regarding this story, a fairy dies. This "unarmed" man successfully robbed a convenience store with nothing but his looks, size, arms and hands. Forget the fact that he takes dumps bigger than most people are tall, but he is/was bigger than 98% of the people you'll ever meet. Size matters.



Struck by a meteorite, resulting in a slow, steady decline of species, thus altering weather patterns, growing cycles, and life as we know it?



Says the guy who does nothing but regurgitate whatever scare tactic the media is buffeting on this week. Feel free to have an original thought one of these days, bro, it's invigorating.

 

[One Brow]

No, he wasn't a rogue cop. He did what he had to do.

A police officer never has to shoot an unarmed man who is standing with his hands over his head.

Nothing will change in Furguson just because they fired the chief. Repeat, nothing.

That would be very sad, indeed.

4) Again, not knowing the facts about the video you posted leaves a lot to be contemplated: where in the country did it happen? Did they know that lady just robbed a convenience store? Was she walking down the middle of the road, taunting the officers before this happened? So on, so forth, etc., amen.

Which of these justifies shooting a person, and if none of them do, why is this relevant?

Size matters.

Agreed. Surrender matters, also.

 

[TroutBum]

Not quite a white flag, but I'll accept it.

A police officer never has to shoot an unarmed man who is standing with his hands over his head.

*dead fairy*

That would be very sad, indeed.

It would be. I'm not saying that I want nothing to change, btw, just in case I'm not clear. Will you agree that the firing of the chief was largely because they had to do "something"?

Which of these justifies shooting a person, and if none of them do, why is this relevant?

If you read the back and forth between dickless and me, you'll see that I'm not claiming any justification for any shooting, and that in the context of our discussion, what I wrote is relevant.

Agreed. Surrender matters, also.

Just as long as that is really what happened, which of course in this case, didn't.

 

[One Brow]

It would be. I'm not saying that I want nothing to change, btw, just in case I'm not clear. Will you agree that the firing of the chief was largely because they had to do "something"?

The chief hasn't been fired yet. There is currently talk of disbanding the force entirely, as well, but that's not official, either. Something similar happened in Jennings, MO (another city in St. Louis County) in 2011 due to corruption.

If you read the back and forth between dickless and me, you'll see that I'm not claiming any justification for any shooting, and that in the context of our discussion, what I wrote is relevant.

It read to me like you were explaining why Brown was shot and the woman wasn't, and using those circumstances to explain it. What was your purpose.

Just as long as that is really what happened, which of course in this case, didn't.

Hypothetically, how many witnesses would need to say that Brown surrendered before you actually believe it happened?

 

[HighlandHomie]

Hypothetically, how many witnesses would need to say that Brown surrendered before you actually believe it happened?

He's brainwashed in his own warped principles based on his own personal identity and insecurity issues. You are far greater than me to be able to engage in civil discourse with someone like EJ Wells. His war on the word 'unarmed' must've been picked up by him in some redneck conservative message board where they get all their talking points. The nuts and bolts of the issue is that Wilson could have done 1,000 different things professionally that could've ended in Brown's arrest but not death - the main one being calling for backup as he followed Brown if he saw his size and didn't think he could handle a potential violent offender by himself.

 

[HighlandHomie]

t would be. I'm not saying that I want nothing to change, btw, just in case I'm not clear. Will you agree that the firing of the chief was largely because they had to do "something"?

BS!!! That's exactly what you want. You want nothing to change. You'd still be in favor for slaves and segregation. I also liked that your most-likely [EDITED] response posts.

 

[Stoked]

BS!!! That's exactly what you want. You want nothing to change. [EDITED - SEE ABOVE]

Sad to see that you had a good post about the need for changes in the police force (as you weve given credit for my GF) then follow it up with this crap.

 

[One Brow]

He's brainwashed in ...

While it's kind of you to offer, I don't need you to explain other posters to me, and particularly not those I have interacted with for several years, thank you.

 

[LogGrad98]

Hypothetically, how many witnesses would need to say that Brown surrendered before you actually believe it happened?

Maybe some that are consistent with the autopsy report.

But a forensics expert says Brown’s official county autopsy suggests the teenager may not have had his hands raised after all when he was slain on Aug. 9, according to a story in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco who reviewed the autopsy for the Post-Dispatch, told the paper that one of the officer’s shots hit Brown’s forearm and traveled from the back of the arm to the inner arm, which means Brown’s palms could not have been facing Wilson, as some witnesses have said. That trajectory shows Brown probably was not taking a standard surrender position with arms above the shoulders and palms out when he was shot outside the officer’s car, she said.

Neither the St. Louis County medical examiner or her assistant, who conducted the autopsy, was reached for comment by the paper.

Melinek also told the newspaper another bullet struck Brown at close range — and may at that point have been reaching for Wilson’s weapon. The autopsy found material “consistent with products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm” in a wound on Brown’s thumb. Melinek said this “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...l-brown-may-have-gone-for-darren-wilsons-gun/


edit: I just clicked on the first one I saw on google, there are others like it.

 

[One Brow]

Maybe some that are consistent with the autopsy report.

You mean, this particular expert's interpretation of that report, and the path of one of the bullets? That alone means the witnesses are lying, how?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...athologist-questions-leaked-autopsy/18154107/

Baden echoed Melinek and said both autopsies show Brown's right forearm was in an upward position and the teen's back was to the officer when he was shot. Brown was also shot several times while facing the officer.

Apparently, it means they are not lying at all.

 

[LogGrad98]

You mean, this particular expert's interpretation of that report, and the path of one of the bullets? That alone means the witnesses are lying, how?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...athologist-questions-leaked-autopsy/18154107/



Apparently, it means they are not lying at all.

Or it could mean that people who were watching an emotionally charged event unfold were unsure what they were seeing, and that it happened so fast some of them were mistaken. Wrong is different than lying, and perspectives differ, making it hard to piece together what really happened.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/us/shooting-accounts-differ-as-holder-schedules-visit.html?_r=0

But on the crucial moments that followed, the accounts differ sharply, officials say. Some witnesses say that Mr. Brown, 18, moved toward Officer Wilson, possibly in a threatening manner, when the officer shot him dead. But others say that Mr. Brown was not moving and may even have had his hands up when he was killed.

So which witnesses were lying and which telling the truth? Or, maybe better put, which were wrong and which were right?

https://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/10/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-close-range-shot.html

Some of the physical evidence — including blood spatter analysis, shell casings and ballistics tests — also supports Wilson’s account of the shooting, the Post sources said, which cast Brown as an aggressor who threatened the officer’s life.

Who is right and who is wrong?

 

[TroutBum]

Or it could mean that people who were watching an emotionally charged event unfold were unsure what they were seeing, and that it happened so fast some of them were mistaken. Wrong is different than lying, and perspectives differ, making it hard to piece together what really happened.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/us/shooting-accounts-differ-as-holder-schedules-visit.html?_r=0



So which witnesses were lying and which telling the truth? Or, maybe better put, which were wrong and which were right?

https://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/10/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-close-range-shot.html



Who is right and who is wrong?

I think it's clear who was right and wrong, judging by the silence from those who were so fast -- and vocal -- to paint the cop as a racist, murdering pig.


Also, OB's comment to HH made me giggle a little inside.

 

[One Brow]

Who is right and who is wrong?

Again, go back to the autopsy. One bullet that went through the arm is consistent with being shot from behind or while the gun was being grabbed in the car, but there are three other shots to that same arm, all consistent with the arm being raised.

Which is believable: that a witness was mistook the stopping and turning for a reverse movement, or that Brown was running with two arms over his head?

 

[LogGrad98]

Again, go back to the autopsy. One bullet that went through the arm is consistent with being shot from behind or while the gun was being grabbed in the car, but there are three other shots to that same arm, all consistent with the arm being raised.

Which is believable: that a witness was mistook the stopping and turning for a reverse movement, or that Brown was running with two arms over his head?

So what you're saying is that the accounts that are consistent with your opinion are right and the evidence, expert analysis, and witness accounts that are not consistent with your opinion are wrong. Exactly what I expected tbh.