Riots in Missouri - Part 1

[DarthSkywalker]

While he didnt get away with it the fact some cops behave this way is an issue. These meathead powertripping morons need to be screened out. I applaud St. Anne for suspending the man, but he made a death threat. Death threats are a crime. He should be charged for the death threats or at the very least be given mandatory anger management classes.

He shouldn't be a cop anymore. How can someone so willing to threaten people's lives be allowed to be a police officer?

 

[SuperJediHero]

Police officers are trained. If they can't deal with a little heated arguing, they shouldn't be cops.

But arguing is for the court, not someone who may judged you in the middle of a busy traffic, and nothing else you argue may change his mind! It's not worth it to argue, cops are very judgmental and think they are most times right when they judge you.

Police judge you to summon you to the court, where you will argue if you don't agree with the stop, then the judge/juries judge if you are innocent and the cop is wrong, it's what the court is for! And, hope for a fair judge/jury!

But a lot of times, if say something nice like "I am so sorry, I know your job is difficult and I won't do it again" they will respect you and throw out the ticket and let you GO!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/u...er-as-holder-schedules-visit.html?ref=us&_r=1

Witness - “The officer was about six or seven feet away from him.”

As far as how much of a threat Brown was, that's a huge difference from the narrative of 30 - 32 ft. being told.
Especially if he'd already grabbed for the gun once.

Don't know how far bullet casings jump, but showing where they landed may corroborate or overturn this.

I am sorry, but I can't get past this.

Some of the accounts seem to agree on how the fatal altercation initially unfolded: with a struggle between the officer, Darren Wilson, and the teenager, Michael Brown. Officer Wilson was inside his patrol car at the time, while Mr. Brown, who was unarmed, was leaning in through an open window.

Many witnesses also agreed on what happened next: Officer Wilson’s firearm went off inside the car, Mr. Brown ran away, the officer got out of his car and began firing toward Mr. Brown, and then Mr. Brown stopped, turned around and faced the officer.

What the hell? If many of the witnesses agree on this, that is insane. He got out of the car and started shooting at Brown while Brown ran away? That tells me all I need to know. The officer decided to use deadly force while Brown was running away. That means he made the decision not to go for his nonlethal weapons.

At the very least, Wilson should never be an officer again.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

But arguing is for the court, not someone who may judged you in the middle of a busy traffic, and nothing else you argue may change his mind!

Police judge you to summon you to the court, where you will argue if you don't agree with the stop, then the judge/juries judge if you are innocent and the cop is wrong, it's what the court is for!

Two things.

First, this gives a cop an unholy amount of power. If you are doing nothing wrong, and a cop tells you you have to do something, you have to do it because the cop said so? We do not live in a police state. You do not have to obey the cops if you are not doing anything wrong.

Second, court does not always handle these situations, just like how police stations do not always take down and follow up reports of police misconduct. If you get pass the bias for the officer, you have to somehow prove it. And when you do bring up out a camera to record police misconduct, the cops lose their crap. The concept of trumped up charges exist for a reason.

 

[SuperJediHero]

Isn't it the due process of American justice system, actually? It's not police state at all, it's the how the justice system in America works!

Arguing or pleading the innocence has always been for the court, except you hire a lawyer speak for you, so you don't yell at the judge for him to judge you to be disrespectful!

 

[Breogan]

That means he made the decision not to go for his nonlethal weapons.

I guess you just ignore the next part.

Some witnesses say that Mr. Brown, 18, moved toward Officer Wilson, possibly in a threatening manner,

When he turned back, how far, and when the shooting actually began are all being determined.

 

[SuperJediHero]

To clarify, I am not saying what happening in Ferguson isn't police state. But that usually during a stop, police have judged you guilty, and issue you a court summons to argue and defend process.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Isn't it the due process of American justice system, actually?

Arguing or pleading the innocence has always been for the court, except you hire a lawyer speak for you, so you don't yell at the judge for him to judge you to be disrespectful!

Anyone has the right to represent themselves. Secondly, you are clearly avoiding the point. The cops can do what they like out in the wild? That is what you are suggesting. A cop has the right to tell you you can't stand there, and you can't argue it.

That right there is the point. Cops don't want to be monitored. Why? Because they don't want the public seeing the illegal things they do.
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/apr/07/local/la-me-lapd-tamper-20140408

Los Angeles police officers tampered with voice recording equipment in dozens of patrol cars in an effort to avoid being monitored while on duty, according to records and interviews.

An inspection by Los Angeles Police Department investigators found about half of the estimated 80 cars in one South L.A. patrol division were missing antennas, which help capture what officers say in the field. The antennas in at least 10 more cars in nearby divisions had also been removed.

LAPD Chief Charlie Beck and other top officials learned of the problem last summer but chose not to investigate which officers were responsible. Rather, the officials issued warnings against continued meddling and put checks in place to account for antennas at the start and end of each patrol shift.

Members of the Police Commission, which oversees the department, were not briefed about the problem until months later. In interviews with The Times, some commissioners said they were alarmed by the officers' attempts to conceal what occurred in the field, as well as the failure of department officials to come forward when the problem first came to light.

"On an issue like this, we need to be brought in right away," commission President Steve Soboroff said. "This equipment is for the protection of the public and of the officers. To have people who don't like the rules to take it upon themselves to do something like this is very troubling."

Beck said there was no deliberate attempt to keep the commission in the dark, saying the failure to alert the board was "unintentional."

"The department did not try to hide this issue," Beck said, emphasizing that he has been a vocal advocate for the in-car video cameras that rely on the antennas.

Commissioner Robert Saltzman said he plans to ask department officials to answer questions publicly about how they handled the issue at a meeting this month.

The cameras, which turn on automatically whenever an officer activates the car's emergency lights and sirens or can be activated manually, are used to record traffic stops and other encounters that occur in front of the vehicle. Officers also wear small transmitters on their belts that relay their voices back to the antennas in the patrol car. Regardless of whether they are in front of the camera, officers' voices can be recorded hundreds of yards away from the car, said Sgt. Dan Gomez, a department expert on the recording devices.

The distance an officer can roam and still be recorded depends on what buildings and other objects are interfering with the signal. Removing an antenna does not render the voice recorder useless but cuts its range by as much as a third, Gomez said, citing information from the manufacturer.

Most of the antennas were removed from cars in the Southeast Division, which covers Watts, Jordan Downs and Nickerson Gardens, where relations between police and minority communities have historically been marred by mistrust and claims of officer abuse. The in-car video cameras have been touted as a powerful deterrent to police misconduct and a tool for defending officers against false accusations.

A federal judge last year formally ended more than a decade of close monitoring of the LAPD by the U.S. Department of Justice. The judge agreed to lift the oversight, in part, after city and police leaders made assurances that the LAPD had adequate safeguards, such as the cameras, in place to monitor itself.

The first sign of a problem came in early July when a Southeast supervisor noticed the cameras in a few patrol cars were missing antennas, said Cmdr. Andrew Smith, a spokesman for Beck. Vehicles are equipped with two small antennas, one for each of the officers assigned to the car.

After the supervisor's discovery, a check of the entire fleet of cars in Southeast and the other divisions in the department's South Bureau was done. With a total of about 160 antennas installed in Southeast Division vehicles, 72 had been removed, Smith said. Twenty antennas from cars in other divisions were missing as well.

Because cars in the Southeast Division had been equipped with cameras since 2010 and different shifts of officers use the same car each day, officials decided an investigation into the missing antennas would have been futile, according to Smith and Capt. Phil Tingirides, the commanding officer of the Southeast Division.

Instead, warnings went out at roll-call meetings throughout South Bureau, and new rules were put in place requiring officers to document that both antennas were in place at the beginning and end of each shift. To guard against officers removing the antennas during their shifts, Tingirides said he requires patrol supervisors to make unannounced checks on cars.

"We took the situation very seriously. But because the chances of determining who was responsible was so low we elected to … move on," Smith said, adding that it cost the department about $1,500 to replace all the antennas.

Since the new protocols went into place, only one antenna has been found missing, Smith said.

Soboroff said Beck briefed him on the problem in September and assured him it had been resolved. Around the same time, the commission's inspector general, Alex Bustamante, learned of the antennas and opened an investigation, commission records show.

The department has not identified any cases in which poor audio quality left officials unable to judge whether an officer had acted appropriately, Smith said. It is impossible, however, to know if conversations were not recorded at all because of missing antennas.

Poor recordings during a shooting investigation drew the attention of commission members in February. They were puzzled why several cameras in cars at the scene had poor audio quality, while another had good, clear recordings. Even though the recorded conversations did not seem germane to the incident, the commissioners asked for answers about the problem.

Last month, the department conducted a follow-up audit and found that dozens of the transmitters worn by officers in Southeast Division were missing or damaged.

This time, department officials opted to open a formal investigation into whether officers broke or lost the devices intentionally, Smith said.

Half the cars were missing their monitoring equipment. Half. That isn't a couple of crooked cops. And guess what, no one was punished. Why? Because guess who gets to make that call? A cop.

Who watches the watchmen? Cops get away with murder because they are too often allowed to monitor themselves. In that article it shows that they were being monitored by the DoJ, but as soon as that ended, they started doing crap like this.

 

[SuperJediHero]

Don't argue with cops, instead file police abuse complaint to his supervisor if that happens.

Most times, arguing with cops is completely pointless. As I said, they are very judgmental, and once they judged you, even wrongfully, it will be like moving mountains to convince them wrong!

 

[Breogan]

Also surprise, to me at least since coverage suggested otherwise.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/u...er-as-holder-schedules-visit.html?ref=us&_r=1

it was around the time that Officer Wilson started talking to the two that he realized they fit the description of the suspects in the convenience store robbery.

That means officer did know about and suspect them of being the same strong-arm robbers from a few minutes ago.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I guess you just ignore the next part.



When he turned back, how far, and when the shooting actually began are all being determined.

Did you read the part I highlighted? It says under "many agree" that Wilson started shooting at Brown while Brown was running away. If so, that shows the officer started using force. The bit you are talking about is where accounts differ, apparently widely. But the part I wrote seems to have some sort of consensus.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/us...ml?ref=us&_r=1

Some of the accounts seem to agree on how the fatal altercation initially unfolded: with a struggle between the officer, Darren Wilson, and the teenager, Michael Brown. Officer Wilson was inside his patrol car at the time, while Mr. Brown, who was unarmed, was leaning in through an open window.

Many witnesses also agreed on what happened next: Officer Wilson’s firearm went off inside the car, Mr. Brown ran away, the officer got out of his car and began firing toward Mr. Brown, and then Mr. Brown stopped, turned around and faced the officer.

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.

Do you see the difference?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Also surprise, to me at least since coverage suggested otherwise.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/u...er-as-holder-schedules-visit.html?ref=us&_r=1


That means officer did know about and suspect them of being the same strong-arm robbers from a few minutes ago.

In which case, I am calling complete bullcrap. The chief of police said he did not know it and made no indication that ever played into his decision making. That is what we call covering things up or simply changing your story.

 

[SuperJediHero]

Ah GREAT article!!!

http://www.wikihow.com/Deal-With-Difficult-Police


It seems the Very most common cause for police to give you a hard time when you are innocent is when you 'ARGUE'!

 

[Breogan]

This is new also

Mr. Brady, 32, a janitor.- “It was something strange,” said Mr. Brady, 32, a janitor. “Something was not right. It was some kind of altercation. I can’t say whether he was punching the officer or whatever. But something was going on in that window, and it didn’t look right.”

And pretty damning

Mr. Brady did not hear a gunshot or know what caused them to run. But he said he did see a police officer get out of the patrol car and start walking briskly while firing on Mr. Brown as he fled.

The next thing surprised me, Officer is recognizing at one point his arms were up! If he had "lowered" them.

Officer Wilson said that Mr. Brown had lowered his arms and moved toward him, law enforcement officials said. Fearing that the teenager was going to attack him, the officer decided to use deadly force.

Then they seem to suggest that is when the shooting started.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I really think Michael Brown is the wrong champion for all of this.

I'm not saying the militarization of the police, and racial discrimination by the police aren't huge issues, but do not make this guy your poster child / martyr.

 

[SuperJediHero]

I really think Michael Brown is the wrong champion for all of this.

I'm not saying the militarization of the police, and racial discrimination by the police aren't huge issues, but do not make this guy your poster child / martyr.

Yes, EVERYTIME these angry protest happened, it was not for exactly a 100% innocent/GOOD teen! Thus, I can not fully sympathize!

They aren't that innocent, that's the problem!


Show me a murder of a 100% innocent/good teen that's not even close to look like a troublemaker , I will immediately join the protest MYSELF!!

 

[Marvolo]

Petty theft doesnt warrant being gunned down. I stole a cigar and some cigs when I was a teen. Should I have been gunned downed by a police officer? No one is 100% without fault. That doesnt mean cops have the right to murder people or that we shouldnt protest when a cop does murder someone.

 

[mkilban2]

Not directly related to Ferguson, but a video of the shooting that happened in St Louis a few dayd ago was released. (Found it on YouTube from Twitter, not going to post it here as it shows a dude dying) but the story the cops gave doesn't seem to match up with the actual proof filmed by a bystander.

@ryangrim is the account I saw the video posted from.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Petty theft doesnt warrant being gunned down. I stole a cigar and some cigs when I was a teen. Should I have been gunned downed by a police officer? No one is 100% without fault. That doesnt mean cops have the right to murder people or that we shouldnt protest when a cop does murder someone.

And that is the point, and why so many have been annoyed at what some have called the attempted character assassination. Strong armed robbery does not mean you should be murdered in the street.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

So apparently the grand jury is going to take 2 months? Laughable.

Yes, EVERYTIME these angry protest happened, it was not for exactly a 100% innocent/GOOD teen! Thus, I can not fully sympathize!

They aren't that innocent, that's the problem!


Show me a murder of a 100% innocent/good teen that's not even close to look like a troublemaker , I will immediately join the protest MYSELF!!

Yeah, because this doesn't read extreme at all. Since when did being a "troublemaker" equal being shot to death?

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I don't see that as being wrong at all. How you dress and present yourself to the world is your choice, but people are going to make judgements about it. I would like law enforcement to check up on suspicious activity, I don't know if there is a way to do that without profiling in some fashion. If someone is talking to themselves and dressed shabby I would like cops to take a second look at it even if it turns out to be just some guy who was coming back from a camping trip and talking on a blue tooth.

Literally millions of youth wear urban clothes because it's what's in fashion.

Most of them aren't hardened criminals, they just wear what they see is popular.

It would be like treating everyone in a three-piece suit like a criminal because of white collar crime on Wall Street.

It's that illogical and counter-productive.

 

[floreairfoot]

We still don't know exactly what happened, but that doesn't stop charlatans like Al Sharpton from taking advantage of the situation.. that man honestly makes me sick to my stomach.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I really think Michael Brown is the wrong champion for all of this.

I'm not saying the militarization of the police, and racial discrimination by the police aren't huge issues, but do not make this guy your poster child / martyr.

Actually if he was a perfect student and people rally around his death the message could be seen as black gifted children deserve mercy from the police but everyone else can be gunned down like dogs.

It might be better to have an imperfect poster child.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Petty theft doesnt warrant being gunned down. I stole a cigar and some cigs when I was a teen. Should I have been gunned downed by a police officer? No one is 100% without fault. That doesnt mean cops have the right to murder people or that we shouldnt protest when a cop does murder someone.

I'm not saying it does. But he was painted as an innocent victim just walking to his grandmother's house. The original account of the police gunning him down comes from his friend, and accomplice.

Did you shove the store owner when he tried to stop you?

In light of all these revelations, him having a fight with police, and going for a gun sounds a lot more plausible.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Actually if he was a perfect student and people rally around his death the message could be seen as black gifted children deserve mercy from the police but everyone else can be gunned down like dogs.

It might be better to have an imperfect poster child.

Not perfect, just not someone who just robbed a convenience store. I think there's a pretty broad spectrum between those two.