How does vandalism and looting accomplish anything???

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Ferguson is going to be in turmoil for awhile, because while the protesters claim to want "justice", what they want is revenge.

I agree. But again--I wanted Casey Anthony to spend life in prison. I didn't go burn up her neigborhood though when that didn't happen.

I find it interesting when someone pointed out they are now saying he was just walking in the street am when witness concurred early on that there was a struggle at the car.

 

[pooh4evr]

there seem to be 2 groups coming out at night or at least last night- #1 is the peaceful protesters who were doing just that assembling peacefully at the quiktrip, very good "vibe" music, dancing, families, people trying to take back their city streets.
#2 - looters- just a few blocks away 6 stores were being looted, the residents and police were trying to protect the stores, but were called to leave, and let the looters have the stores. - news crews were filming as person after person went in and out of the stores taking liquor, beauty supplies, cash registers, ATMs , 911 calls from the owners were ignored and police cars just drove by.

Now we have store owners vowing to protect their businesses by any means necessary- guns, dogs ...how long until we have an owner shoot a looter and the whole city blows.

If interested- a person called in to a radio show yesterday who is friends with he police officer and gave his version of what happened, I think the show has put out the audio, I dont know how to link it or whatever but it is The Dana Show (Dana Loesch) it is also on facebook, the page is also called The Dana Show.

 

[OurBigTrip]

I agree. But again--I wanted Casey Anthony to spend life in prison. I didn't go burn up her neigborhood though when that didn't happen.

Same here.

 

[OurBigTrip]

Now we have store owners vowing to protect their businesses by any means necessary- guns, dogs ...how long until we have an owner shoot a looter and the whole city blows.

The city police should do nothing - the governor called in Capt. Feelgood to make things all better; turned security of the city over to the state troopers, so let them deal with it.

If the troopers choose to do nothing, then I would support the owners 100% in protecting their property.

 

[Suger Mag]

There was no reason to release the video... anyone with a whits worth of sense would have told the police chief that it would make things worse... evidence is not tabloid fodder, OF COURSE it should be part of the investigation. But lets be honest about motivation...the video release was done specifically to sway public opinion about the background of the victim... public release was not a critical part of the investigation. The character assassination of the victim is in my opinion, not that disimilar to the "**** shaming" (rymes with "glut shaming") that occurs with victims of sexual assault: "Did you see what was she wearing... she was only a stripper and really was asking for it... did you know she was dating half the school".

Of course I do not agree with looting and rioting, but I understand why it is happening... it is an expression of rage that has been fueled by the actions of the police chief. I feel he has mishandled this situation from the start, and the release of the video had no other purpose than to inflame the situation... it is his job on the line. Coincidence that after his replacement (State Trooper Johnson) comes on the mob job and there is a night of calm, then the local police chief decides lets release the video? I would be willing to bet that the decision to release the video was not discussed with State Trooper Johnson. Local police generally hate it when outside entities... State Troopers, FBI etc... start messing with THEIR jurisdiction.

 

[sunshinehighway]

CNN has an article about last night's events. In it there's something I find somewhat confusing.

. But Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson later said Dorian Johnson neither committed nor was complicit in any crime.

That doesn't match the description of the robbery or the information out that his attorney has said Johnson admitted the robbery to police and the FBI.
Here's a link to the article.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/16/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html?c=homepage-t&page=1

 

[OurBigTrip]

There was no reason to release the video... anyone with a whits worth of sense would have told the police chief that it would make things worse... evidence is not tabloid fodder, OF COURSE it should be part of the investigation. But lets be honest about motivation...the video release was done specifically to sway public opinion about the background of the victim... public release was not a critical part of the investigation. The character assination the victim is in my opinion, not that disimilar to the "**** shaming" that occurs with victims of sexual assault: "Did you see what was she wearing... she was only a stripper and really was asking for it... did you know she was dating half the school".

I do not agree with looting and rioting, but I understand why it is happening... it is an expression of rage that has been fueled by the actions of the police chief. I feel he has mishandled this situation from the start, and the release of the video had no other purpose than to inflame the situation... it is his job on the line. Coincidence that after his replacement (State Trooper Johnson) comes on the mob job and there is a night of calm, then the local police chief decides lets release the video? I would be willing to bet that the decision to release the video was not discussed with State Trooper Johnson. Local police generally hate it when outside entities... State Troopers, FBI etc... start messing with THEIR jurisdiction.

The police chief was absolutely right to release the video - Michael Brown was being depicted as a "gentle giant" that wouldn't harm a fly who was shot down in the street like a dog, with no provocation.

Robbing the store doesn't mean that he should have been shot (I'll wait for the facts to find out what actually happened in that street), but it certainly shows that he wasn't Little Red Riding Hood, innocently heading to Grandma's house for cookies and milk.

 

[OurBigTrip]

CNN has an article about last night's events. In it there's something I find somewhat confusing.



That doesn't match the description of the robbery or the information out that his attorney has said Johnson admitted the robbery to police and the FBI.
Here's a link to the article.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/16/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html?c=homepage-t&page=1

I saw that and was as well.

 

[Suger Mag]

The police chief was absolutely right to release the video - Michael Brown was being depicted as a "gentle giant" that wouldn't harm a fly who was shot down in the street like a dog, with no provocation.

Robbing the store doesn't mean that he should have been shot (I'll wait for the facts to find out what actually happened in that street), but it certainly shows that he wasn't Little Red Riding Hood, innocently heading to Grandma's house for cookies and milk.

I call BS... releasing the video was not a necessary or required part of the investigation. It was done out of vindictivness, and anyone with any background in psych could have predicted the response of the mob. It is high time that police investigations stopped being conducted on the front page of the local newspaper or on the news at 6pm so a bunch of armchair investigators (myself included) on the DIS can pass their expert judgement on the situation. Let the evidence be gathered, witnesses be interviewed and the investigation be conducted and enough with the retaliation.

 

[OurBigTrip]

I call BS... releasing the video was not a necessary or required part of the investigation. It was done out of vindictivness, and anyone with any background in psych could have predicted the response of the mob. It is high time that police investigations stopped being conducted on the front page of the local newspaper or on the news at 6pm so a bunch of armchair investigators on the DIS can pass their expert judgement on the situation.

I take it that you're including yourself in the list of armchair investigators?

And I also call BS - the officer in question has had his motives and character called into question ever since this happened.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Don't want to have video of you robbing a store broadcast all over the world? Don't rob a store.

 

[Suger Mag]

I take it that you're including yourself in the list of armchair investigators?

And I also call BS - the officer in question has had his motives and character called into question ever since this happened.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

yup, while you were so quck to jump on my hypocrisy, I was editing my post to include myself in the armchair pack... well actually rolling chair at my desk group... aas I do not have an armchair.

I do not know all the facts, I have not come to any conclusion about who is bad or who is at fault bwtween Mr Wilson and the Officer. I do not expect that information to come from the media or the DIS.

I simply said :

1)The public release of the video was motivated at making things worse and was not a necessary part of the investigation.

2) the police chief has mishandled the situation

 

[sunshinehighway]

There was no reason to release the video... anyone with a whits worth of sense would have told the police chief that it would make things worse... evidence is not tabloid fodder, OF COURSE it should be part of the investigation. But lets be honest about motivation...the video release was done specifically to sway public opinion about the background of the victim... public release was not a critical part of the investigation. The character assassination of the victim is in my opinion, not that disimilar to the "**** shaming" (rymes with "glut shaming") that occurs with victims of sexual assault: "Did you see what was she wearing... she was only a stripper and really was asking for it... did you know she was dating half the school".

Of course I do not agree with looting and rioting, but I understand why it is happening... it is an expression of rage that has been fueled by the actions of the police chief. I feel he has mishandled this situation from the start, and the release of the video had no other purpose than to inflame the situation... it is his job on the line. Coincidence that after his replacement (State Trooper Johnson) comes on the mob job and there is a night of calm, then the local police chief decides lets release the video? I would be willing to bet that the decision to release the video was not discussed with State Trooper Johnson. Local police generally hate it when outside entities... State Troopers, FBI etc... start messing with THEIR jurisdiction.

The video release was a bone head move. It's be one thing if it was done to explain why they were supposed. To release it and give that impression (which it certainly did if you read the initial posts about it) and then turn around later and say it wasn't why he was stopped, makes no sense.

As far as posters saying law enforcement should just let Ferguson burn, come on. You are lumping the good people there who are not involved in the looting and rioting with the bad. According to the CNN article, the first incident of looting involved about 2 dozen people. After that other protestors came out to stop/block the looters. Likely those looters are just using all of this as an excuse to steal. Its wrong to lump all the people of Ferguson in with the looters.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

CNN has an article about last night's events. In it there's something I find somewhat confusing.



That doesn't match the description of the robbery or the information out that his attorney has said Johnson admitted the robbery to police and the FBI.
Here's a link to the article.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/16/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html?c=homepage-t&page=1

For lack of a better term, they are splitting hairs.


Yes, Michael Brown (allegedly) stole cigars. BUT at the physical time police engaged him in the street, he wasn't doing anything illegal. And THAT is what they are focusing on. The police were in the wrong to engage at all--because at that moment (even if it was close in timestamp to the robbery), he wasn't.


It is an illogical connection--because IF police had seen they matched the description of the suspects while Michael Brown was walking an old lady across the steet like a Boy Scout--it doesn't change the fact that he was a suspect for something that happened moments prior. ( disregarding for a moment the story that the cop was unaware of the robbery.)

And putting aside this specific incident, this isn't white or black--this is how guilty people behave. They commit an infraction and then proceed as though nothing happened.


In my old neighborhood--we had a cops moment. This guy pulled into the driveway across the street and ran to the door and started banging. He was hollering to his buddy to tell the cops he was there the whole time. Too bad he didn't go fast enough as the police were following him and apprehended him while he was still knocking on the door. Not a sound alibi--but it didn't stop the guy from trying. (He was a white male in case anyone was wondering and the tenant was a druggie and his mom, who owned the house, finally had the good sense to evict him, spruce the place up and sell the house. New owners found lots of needles in the back yard.)

In any case--all that matters to the community is what Mike Brown was doing the millisecond before the cops stopped him. What happened 5, 10, or 30 minutes before is irrelevant even if it was breaking the law.


Think of busting your own kid in your house. "Whatcha doing?" "Nothing." "Doesn't look like nothing." "Oh, I thought you meant right NOW. That was before."

 

[penn19]

The video release was a bone head move. It's be one thing if it was done to explain why they were supposed. To release it and give that impression (which it certainly did if you read the initial posts about it) and then turn around later and say it wasn't why he was stopped, makes no sense.

As far as posters saying law enforcement should just let Ferguson burn, come on. You are lumping the good people there who are not involved in the looting and rioting with the bad. According to the CNN article, the first incident of looting involved about 2 dozen people. After that other protestors came out to stop/block the looters. Likely those looters are just using all of this as an excuse to steal. Its wrong to lump all the people of Ferguson in with the looters.

Yea, its kind of like saying ALL cops are bad.

 

[Airship Ariadne]

I call BS... releasing the video was not a necessary or required part of the investigation. It was done out of vindictivness, and anyone with any background in psych could have predicted the response of the mob. It is high time that police investigations stopped being conducted on the front page of the local newspaper or on the news at 6pm so a bunch of armchair investigators (myself included) on the DIS can pass their expert judgement on the situation. Let the evidence be gathered, witnesses be interviewed and the investigation be conducted and enough with the retaliation.

Very true...since the chief later admitted that the shooter was not aware of the theft, it had no relevance, he was simply trying to create an image of Michael Brown. Since Brown was killed, he can't be charged, since he can't be charged, he is not guilty...period, that's how our system works...sometimes it sucks, like when Ken Lay died before being sentenced and his family got to keep the millions of dollars he stole as the head of Enron...releasing the video was a petty act of evil...would be the same if Anonymous released the shooter's porn browsing history from the night before...only serves to taint the character of the person.

It is clear from the department history (such as the 2009 case of beating an innocent man then charging him for bleeding on their uniforms) that the Feds need to sweep through the Ferguson Police Department like Sherman marching to the Sea...but with less restraint.

 

[OurBigTrip]

The video release was a bone head move.

Are you saying that the police chief should have let the narrative that Michael Brown was a big teddy bear on the way to Grandma's stand in the face of the facts that he was actually a thief?

And I want to reiterate that this doesn't mean he should have been shot, but this kid was no Boy Scout, and IMO, there was no reason to have let that narrative continue unanswered.

 

[OurBigTrip]

For lack of a better term, they are splitting hairs.


Yes, Michael Brown (allegedly) stole cigars. BUT at the physical time police engaged him in the street, he wasn't doing anything illegal. And THAT is what they are focusing on. The police were in the wrong to engage at all--because at that moment (even if it was close in timestamp to the robbery), he wasn't.

I think when we have the video showing him stealing the cigars and assaulting a clerk in the process, we can drop the term "allegedly", but JMO.

And he was doing something illegal when they stopped him - he was walking down the middle of the street, blocking traffic, at least according to the police chief.

 

[Airship Ariadne]

Are you saying that the police chief should have let the narrative that Michael Brown was a big teddy bear on the way to Grandma's stand in the face of the facts that he was actually a thief?

you have a typo..."alleged" is not spelled "actually"...sorry, but in America, we have a system that we follow...it is in the Constitution, and while some people still won't accept it, its rights also apply to people like Michael Brown.

 

[OurBigTrip]

Very true...since the chief later admitted that the shooter was not aware of the theft, it had no relevance, he was simply trying to create an image of Michael Brown. Since Brown was killed, he can't be charged, since he can't be charged, he is not guilty...period, that's how our system works...sometimes it sucks, like when Ken Lay died before being sentenced and his family got to keep the millions of dollars he stole as the head of Enron...releasing the video was a petty act of evil...would be the same if Anonymous released the shooter's porn browsing history from the night before...only serves to taint the character of the person.

It is clear from the department history (such as the 2009 case of beating an innocent man then charging him for bleeding on their uniforms) that the Feds need to sweep through the Ferguson Police Department like Sherman marching to the Sea...but with less restraint.

So it's OK to assassinate the character of the police officer involved, but it's no OK to show video proving that Michael Brown was a thief.

True, he's legally not guilty, but anyone that saw that video would be hard pressed to say he's innocent.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Would there have been a more acceptable time to release said video?

And his friend who was with him validated the accusation, btw. So he was indeed guilty.

Ken Lay was found guilty, was he not? Or do we sentence people before trial now? Not sure he legal reasons the family got to keep millions. But it didn't make the man less guilty because his death preceded the opportunity for jail time.

Very true...since the chief later admitted that the shooter was not aware of the theft, it had no relevance, he was simply trying to create an image of Michael Brown. Since Brown was killed, he can't be charged, since he can't be charged, he is not guilty...period, that's how our system works...sometimes it sucks, like when Ken Lay died before being sentenced and his family got to keep the millions of dollars he stole as the head of Enron...releasing the video was a petty act of evil...would be the same if Anonymous released the shooter's porn browsing history from the night before...only serves to taint the character of the person.

It is clear from the department history (such as the 2009 case of beating an innocent man then charging him for bleeding on their uniforms) that the Feds need to sweep through the Ferguson Police Department like Sherman marching to the Sea...but with less restraint.