Riots in Missouri

[Thundercrack85]

No, but it does totally change the narrative.

 

[Howlett]

First, you can hardly make out what that dude was saying. Second, his account of the confrontation ISNT in line with what the cop says happened. That witness says that Michael Brown was INSIDE of the cops car when he suddenly gets out of the car and runs. Either that guy is imagining things or hes not saying what you think he's saying on that video. Also, if you watch the beginning of the video, you'll hear another guy stating that Michael Brown had his hands in the air and the cop still shot him. Which IS in line with the 3 other witness statements made so far.

Witness statements have been all over the place. A majority of the witnesses, including his friend who was with him said that Brown was shot in the back. Others have said the cop was standing over him and shot him in the back of the head execution style. Neither of those scenarios are possible according to the autopsy so far since all shots hit him from the front and from a distance

Makes sense for a guy to get aggressive with an unarmed old man. Doesnt make sense to run at a cop pointing a gun at you.
Youre wrong. Also, there are at least 3 witnesses who say otherwise. And if were to believe this cop, then trying to grab a gun thats currently inside of a holster is a hell of a lot different than when its being pointed at your face.
Its absurd to believe that Michael Brown would run away after the cop's gun goes off but then have a change of heart and then decide, "**** it, Ill run at the guy pointing a loaded gun at me and see what happens."

So, Michael Brown is so afraid of going to jail for robbing a store and assaulting a police officer, that hes going to double back and take his chances rushing at a cop leveling a loaded weapon at him instead of running away? This makes sense to you?

No, none of it makes much sense right now. A cop with a clear record of no complaints at all in a six year career executing a kid for no reason doesn't make sense to me either. Once ALL of the evidence is released maybe, hopefully, we'll have a better idea of what happened. Right now it seems like they're just releasing little nuggets of information little by little to appease people so St. Louis doesn't get burned to the ground.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Which is why they released it the way they did. But, it doesn't change the moral of the story for me, though. Which is avoid the police.

And they were going to change the narrative no matter what. It happened with Trayvon Martin, which somehow got turned into this scary, shadowy, creature of the night that suddenly, without reason, attacked George Zimmerman. These things happen, and when it's a police officer, it happens even earlier during the aftermath.

I was was also thinking if looking at the autopsy, the fact that he was unarmed and if you consider the eye witnesses...isn't there supposed to be enough probable cause for atleast an arrest? I'm not saying if it's all enough for a conviction, or enough to convince a jury. But, there does seem to be enough.

There does seem to be preferential treatment, but that does seem to happen to officers involved in these types of shootings. Most ordinary Americans would have been in bracelets this time last week. If I, an ordinary New Yorker, had choked a ****ing guy to death on the streets, they wouldn't even need the cellphone videos showing me doing it, to toss me into jail.

 

[Howlett]

Yeah, except you'd think the anxiety would make him more defensive rather than offensive. More likely to bail and haul ass rather than try and fight and take down a police officer. I can see what he would hope to accomplish by taking down a cop

Except even favorable witnesses report that he pushed the cop's car door and smashed him into the car and was involved in a scuffle in, or around the car.

...and what, killing him? If he had used a gun to rob the store, then I'd be more inclined to believe it. But, a box of cigarellos doesn't seem enough time (he probably wouldn't really do any real time) to go that next step and take out a cop. And his friend ran, instead of both of them charging towards the cop.

And really...stealing cigars to smoke weed doesn't make him this really dangerous guy. It makes him a dick, but I think it's unfair to say it makes him this violent offender.

The weed thing is BS and should be completely irrelevant, but unfortunately it won't be since some people have no idea about the effects of marijuana.

The strong arming robbery is troubling though, because it shows that this "gentle giant," can be not so gentle. And he was a huge guy. 6'4 and 295 is not as easily stoppable as some people are trying to claim this officer could have done.

 

[Thundercrack85]

If that is Brown in the video who stole, and manhandled that store owner, I think comparing him to Trayvon Martin is an insult to Trayvon Martin.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

If that is Brown in the video who stole, and manhandled that store owner, I think comparing him to Trayvon Martin is an insult to Trayvon Martin.

Well, I wasn't comparing them. Just how changing the narrative is always a factor in the defense, even in light of something that is seemingly indefensible.

If they pulled that off with Martin, then what should people expect here with Brown?

 

[Howlett]

If that is Brown in the video who stole, and manhandled that store owner, I think comparing him to Trayvon Martin is an insult to Trayvon Martin.

It's him. His friend who was with him when he did it, and his parents have also confirmed it.

The only thing that is similar to the Trayvon Martin case and this one is that a black teen was shot and killed. That's it. They are so completely different.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Right but that doesn't change the fact that he does seem to be a violent *******.

After seeing that, I am a lot more likely to listen to the police officer. Though his department screwed that up by being overly secretive, and using excessive force.

 

[newbrando]

Though they also don't usually rob cigar stores.

Granted, the Ferguson PD is probably playing it up, but Brown doesn't come off as some good kid walking home anymore.

Obviously, Brown would have been very anxious right after robbing a store, and seeing a police car.

It appears that the store owner and Brown may have known each other. It's too bad the surveillance doesn't have audio because the situation at the store seems complicated. The shop owner didn't call the police. He wasn't going to call the police. After the police heard about the robbery/shoplifting, they went to the store owner and asked to see his tapes. The store owner refused, so they got a warrant for the hard drive of surveillance video. Of course, this is not what the police put in the police report. The store owner now has a lawyer and says he does not want to work with the police. So yeah, even the "victims" in this case don't want to work with this police department.
http://fox2now.com/2014/08/15/store-owners-talk-about-surveillance-released/

I thought it was strange that Brown would burglarize a store... for cigars. Who does that? Many shop owners have guns. How did he know that the owner wouldn't pull a gun. It makes more sense now that Brown and the store owner knew each other and may not have had animosity against each other like it appears in the video.

What's more telling is that Ferguson police released that surveillance tape knowing that it paints an incomplete picture of what was going on there. Also this was after the FBI told them that it would only aggravate the situation. They released it knowing that it would have no bearing on the case if it ever goes to trial. It shows their character and the lengths they will go to in order to protect their own rather than get an fair understanding a the death of an 18 year old kid. Yet people keep complaining about Brown's character?

 

[Thundercrack85]

It appears that the store owner and Brown may have known each other. It's too bad the surveillance doesn't have audio because the situation at the store seems complicated. The shop owner didn't call the police. He wasn't going to call the police. After the police heard about the robbery/shoplifting, they went to the store owner and asked to see his tapes. The store owner refused, so they got a warrant for the hard drive of surveillance video. Of course, this is not what the police put in the police report. The store owner now has a lawyer and says he does not want to work with the police. So yeah, even the "victims" in this case don't want to work with this police department.
http://fox2now.com/2014/08/15/store-owners-talk-about-surveillance-released/

I thought it was strange that Brown would burglarize a store... for cigars. Who does that? Many shop owners have guns. How did he know that the owner wouldn't pull a gun. It makes more sense now that Brown and the store owner knew each other and may not have had animosity against each other like it appears in the video.

What's more telling is that Ferguson police released that surveillance tape knowing that it paints an incomplete picture of what was going on there. Also this was after the FBI told them that it would only aggravate the situation. They released it knowing that it would have no bearing on the case if it ever goes to trial. It shows their character and the lengths they will go to in order to protect their own rather than get an fair understanding a the death of an 18 year old kid. Yet people keep complaining about Brown's character?

I'm sorry but unless shoving someone has become the new way people greet each other in Missouri, I sense some animosity there.

The owner not wanting to work with the police could mean anything. He may just not want the negative attention.

People grabbing items from convenience stores happens all the time (happened in places where I have worked). I've heard of owners responding with everything from calling the police, to pulling out a gun, to not letting those people back in.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It appears that the store owner and Brown may have known each other. It's too bad the surveillance doesn't have audio because the situation at the store seems complicated. The shop owner didn't call the police. He wasn't going to call the police. After the police heard about the robbery/shoplifting, they went to the store owner and asked to see his tapes. The store owner refused, so they got a warrant for the hard drive of surveillance video. Of course, this is not what the police put in the police report. The store owner now has a lawyer and says he does not want to work with the police. So yeah, even the "victims" in this case don't want to work with this police department.
http://fox2now.com/2014/08/15/store-owners-talk-about-surveillance-released/

I thought it was strange that Brown would burglarize a store... for cigars. Who does that? Many shop owners have guns. How did he know that the owner wouldn't pull a gun. It makes more sense now that Brown and the store owner knew each other and may not have had animosity against each other like it appears in the video.

What's more telling is that Ferguson police released that surveillance tape knowing that it paints an incomplete picture of what was going on there. Also this was after the FBI told them that it would only aggravate the situation. They released it knowing that it would have no bearing on the case if it ever goes to trial. It shows their character and the lengths they will go to in order to protect their own rather than get an fair understanding a the death of an 18 year old kid. Yet people keep complaining about Brown's character?

Is this for real? If so, the cops are digging for a defense.

 

[Howlett]

I'm sorry but unless shoving someone has become the new way people greet each other in Missouri, I sense some animosity there.

The owner not wanting to work with the police could mean anything. He may just not want the negative attention.

Yup. He is running a business in a town where they are burning buildings to the ground. Of course he wants nothing to do with this.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think it depends on if the owner knew the kid.

 

[Howlett]

I think it depends on if the owner knew the kid.

Even if he did, that doesn't look like playful banter. And even if there was audio, it was obviously dangerous enough looking for a random bystander to call the police.

 

[Breogan]

It appears that the store owner and Brown may have known each other. It's too bad the surveillance doesn't have audio because the situation at the store seems complicated. The shop owner didn't call the police. He wasn't going to call the police. After the police heard about the robbery/shoplifting, they went to the store owner and asked to see his tapes. The store owner refused, so they got a warrant for the hard drive of surveillance video. Of course, this is not what the police put in the police report. The store owner now has a lawyer and says he does not want to work with the police. So yeah, even the "victims" in this case don't want to work with this police department.
http://fox2now.com/2014/08/15/store-owners-talk-about-surveillance-released/

That is some magical spin you are doing , if you are going by that article you linked.

It appears that the store owner and Brown may have known each other

Where does it say that!?
It says:

this market has been in the community for a long time

Not that they knew each-other.

-

The store owner refused,

Where does it say that!?

during the course of Ferguson’s investigation they came to the store and asked to review the tape. But it wasn’t until Friday that St. Louis County investigators issued a warrant

It just says the warrant came Friday.

-

he does not want to work with the police.

Where does it say that!?
It says

the owners do not wish to be wrapped up in the middle of this.

, No kidding, they don't want to be blamed, but they are complying.

 

[newbrando]

The store owner is now in a tense situation, but that does not explain why he didn't call the police in the first place. Also there is miles between "annoying kid who gets pushy with the bodega owner" and "thug." The situation is not black and white.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Even if he did, that doesn't look like playful banter. And even if there was audio, it was obviously dangerous enough looking for a random bystander to call the police.

It doesn't have to be playful banter, and most certainly doesn't look it. Many have been in physical confrontations with friends and family. That doesn't mean people are always going to call the police on people they know.

 

[newbrando]

double post...

 

[DarthSkywalker]

From the article: they came to the store and asked to review the tape. But it wasn’t until Friday that St. Louis County investigators issued a warrant for the video.

First they came in and asked for the tape but the shop owner said no, so they came back last Friday with a warrant.

Also, I'm sure the shop owner may be weary of retaliation, but lawyering up says something totally different. Lawyers don't protect you from neighborhood aggression. This seems like he is protecting his rights.

Well he might be asserting his rights to avoid getting involved, to avoid retaliation. Makes plenty of sense.

 

[newbrando]

Where does it say that!?

From the article:

they came to the store and asked to review the tape. But it wasn’t until Friday that St. Louis County investigators issued a warrant for the video.

First they came in and asked for the tape but the shop owner said no, so they came back last Friday with a warrant.

Also, I'm sure the shop owner may be weary of retaliation, but lawyering up says something totally different. Lawyers don't protect you from neighborhood aggression. This seems like he is protecting his rights.

 

[X Knight]

the store owner's lawyer was on tv and said his client didn't know Brown and hadn't seen him prior to that weekend.

 

[Breogan]

From the article:

First they came in and asked for the tape but the shop owner said no,

No, not from the article, you just made it up that they said "no".

They may have gladly shown the tape to the cops that day, you don't know either way. The cops need warrants to collect it as evidence though, all you know is the official warrant came Friday.

You made up the store owner saying "no", like you made up that they knew each-other.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

the store owner's lawyer was on tv and said his client didn't know Brown and hadn't seen him prior to that weekend.

Thank you for the info. That clears that up.

 

[X Knight]

Thank you for the info. That clears that up.

sure. I just wanted to clear that up, cuz I was watching the tv interview about an hour ago, and I remembered that Greta asked the lawyer if the store owner knew or met Brown before, and the lawyer said no.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

sure. I just wanted to clear that up, cuz I was watching the tv interview about an hour ago, and I remembered that Greta asked the lawyer if the store owner knew or met Brown before, and the lawyer said no.

Good question from Greta and good looking out by you.