How does vandalism and looting accomplish anything???

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Where are the facts? What's news?

Fox cites an unnamed source. Then goes on to say named sources would not provide information. Still need to wait for people to testify under oath or provide records. No leaks from the medical professionals treating. No police higher up saying for attribution that he took him to the hospital and the doc reported x,y or z injuries.

We just need to keep waiting.

Yes we do.

But the reason for no official verification of anything is that the dept isn't ready to release an official statement for whatever reason.

Anon/unnamed sources are such for a reason. Either someone is leaking without permission, someone thinks they are linking a fact but it isn't as it seems, or someone does know for certain it isn't a fact but decides to get it to a journalist to give the public information for whatever reason before the dept is even ready to release it.

Whistleblowers are a good example of why someone would leak something anonymously. This source doesn't fit that--but it is a good example of a sitar job of why someone would leak something anonymously.

We can speculate any of these things and the reasons for them--

But waiting for something official is much better.

 

[sunshinehighway]

If - as I speculated - Wilson was injured by being bashed with the car door rather than being punched, there would be little evidence of a struggle on Brown's body.

Of course if he was beaten nearly unconscious with a car door, you'd have to think at least one witness would have mentioned that by now.

 

[sunshinehighway]

Yes we do.

But the reason for no official verification of anything is that the dept isn't ready to release an official statement for whatever reason.

Anon/unnamed sources are such for a reason. Either someone is leaking without permission, someone thinks they are linking a fact but it isn't as it seems, or someone does know for certain it isn't a fact but decides to get it to a journalist to give the public information for whatever reason before the dept is even ready to release it.

Whistleblowers are a good example of why someone would leak something anonymously. This source doesn't fit that--but it is a good example of a sitar job of why someone would leak something anonymously.

We can speculate any of these things and the reasons for them--

But waiting for something official is much better.

I can agree with you on that. I think some posters are taking these things as official.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

Early on this thread got heated and many posters recieved infractions, myself included. Since it is looking like the time of ciivil discussion is ending again.. I will leave. Have a great night everyone, it has been fun to talk about this with many of you.

I for one hope you'll return. I've enjoyed reading this thread very much.

ETA -and I've read every word on this thread.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Of course if he was beaten nearly unconscious with a car door, you'd have to think at least one witness would have mentioned that by now.

I really have no idea if he was "nearly unconscious", nor if he suffered a fracture, but I do believe he was injured in an altercation at the car.


That said, there could very well be many stories (from both sides) that have been told to authorities, but not to us.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I can agree with you on that. I think some posters are taking these things as official.

Yep.

Doesn't mean it isn't true. But until stated otherwise, it is essentially just a tip/lead that requires official confirmation.

 

[sunshinehighway]

I really have no idea if he was "nearly unconscious", nor if he suffered a fracture, but I do believe he was injured in an altercation at the car.


That said, there could very well be many stories (from both sides) that have been told to authorities, but not to us.

The nearly unconscious thing is in the fox article linked recently. That is what my post which you quoted was responding to. The anonymous source says Officer Wilson had an orbital fracture and was beaten nearly unconscious.

I have no idea if he was either. The post you quoted was me responding to someone who seems to think this article and anonymous source is accurate.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I really have no idea if he was "nearly unconscious", nor if he suffered a fracture, but I do believe he was injured in an altercation at the car.


That said, there could very well be many stories (from both sides) that have been told to authorities, but not to us.

I watched the video where the supposed screen shots of Offices Wilson came from. Needs to be confirmed, but the witness seemed believable in that she said it was the officer she saw shoot Mike Brown.

So at the time immediately following the shooting, it doesn't seem he was nearly unconscious from a beating. But on the flip side, it is not indicative that he didn't sustain a serious injury that maybe took time to manifest.

My only far fetched comparison is Natasha Richardson. She had a simple fall that was enough to kill her. But other than feeling the effects of a simple bump on the head, she appeared fine and certainly didn't give any presentation tag she would be unconscious and die.

Clearly that is NOT the case here. But just to say that it is possible or the Officer to have sustained a serious injury (but clearly not lethal) even though he may have been standing around appearing uninjured.

Then there is his guy....just because..wow! Cannot find a video and be was in a lot of pain, so I don't know if he had any visual clues of injury. But he was surprised to have the split time he did. Adrenaline is amazing.
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/aug/09/london-2012-usa-relay-broken-leg

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

The nearly unconscious thing is in the fox article linked recently. That is what my post which you quoted was responding to. The anonymous source says Officer Wilson had an orbital fracture and was beaten nearly unconscious.

I have no idea if he was either. The post you quoted was me responding to someone who seems to think this article and anonymous source is accurate.

The video posted earlier, if confirmed, indicates he was not beaten to the point of nearly unconscious. Perhaps he felt (physically) bad later or his emotions took over. But immediately following a supposed beating--it does not appear he was near unconsciousness.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

The nearly unconscious thing is in the fox article linked recently. That is what my post which you quoted was responding to. The anonymous source says Officer Wilson had an orbital fracture and was beaten nearly unconscious.

I have no idea if he was either. The post you quoted was me responding to someone who seems to think this article and anonymous source is accurate.

Sorry, I should have clarified. I did see your previous comments, but I was taking the opportunity to expand on my position.

 

[Viva Las Disney]

I'll comment on it.
The video linked above shows Officer Wilson moments after the shooting. There is nothing about his demeanor to suggest he has a fracture and was nearly beaten unconscious. The autopsy released states there is no evidence on Brown's body of a struggle or fight (can't remember the exact wording). If he nearly beat Wilson unconsious there'd likely be some evidence of that.

The following quote was taken from the fox linked article. Until something more than an anonymous source comes out, it's all nothing more than a rumor.

I was enjoying the back and forth on this thread until CNN announced it may take until October for all the evidence to get to the grand jury and now I'm just annoyed with this case, at this point everything is still 100% speculation and 0% fact. I've read so many different reports I can't even keep track what was from an eyewitness, what was rumor, what was from an anonymous source, and what was simply our own speculation. I know it takes time to investigate but I can't believe after 10 days we still know nothing and it looks like that may be true for a few more months.

We have several eyewitnesses but their stories vary greatly and even when the eyewitness accounts seem to all agree (struggle at the car) the physical evidence released so far doesn't back it up. The one thing that all (or nearly all) the eyewitnesses seem to agree on is it started with a struggle at the car, many saying the officer was choking or pulling Michael into the car, but the autopsy showed no signs of him being choked or a struggle. I thought the autopsy would at least rule out a few eyewitnesses since one side was saying he was shot in the back and the other side in the front but even that is inconclusive because of the shots to the arm.

10 days later and we really don't know any more than we knew on day 1.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

I was enjoying the back and forth on this thread until CNN announced it may take until October for all the evidence to get to the grand jury and now I'm just annoyed with this case, at this point everything is still 100% speculation and 0% fact. I've read so many different reports I can't even keep track what was from an eyewitness, what was rumor, what was from an anonymous source, and what was simply our own speculation. I know it takes time to investigate but I can't believe after 10 days we still know nothing and it looks like that may be true for a few more months.

We have several eyewitnesses but their stories vary greatly and even when the eyewitness accounts seem to all agree (struggle at the car) the physical evidence released so far doesn't back it up. The one thing that all (or nearly all) the eyewitnesses seem to agree on is it started with a struggle at the car, many saying the officer was choking or pulling Michael into the car, but the autopsy showed no signs of him being choked or a struggle. I thought the autopsy would at least rule out a few eyewitnesses since one side was saying he was shot in the back and the other side in the front but even that is inconclusive because of the shots to the arm.

10 days later and we really don't know any more than we knew on day 1.

Saw an interesting blog on the topic. Don't have the link, but the basic gist of it is that none of really know. Not the people supporting Brown, not those supporting the officer, and certainly none of us who aren't sure what to think. A great point (in 2 parts) he made was:

Why would a kid with no record & only a petty theft suspicion "bum rush" an armed officer who had his weapon drawn and was threatening to shoot? It makes zero sense that someone would do that.

Why would a 6-year veteran officer with no complaints on his record throw away his career - if not his life - by gunning down an unarmed kid who was peacefully surrendering in broad daylight in front of dozens of witnesses? It makes zero sense that someone would do that.




And maybe that's what has everyone so captivated - be they commenters on a discussion board, protesters marching in Ferguson, or whomever. We're all trying to make some sense of something that just doesn't make sense, no matter HOW you look at it. I hope one day we'll all know the "how" & the "what". I doubt we'll ever fully comprehend the "why".

 

[JoeA]

I was enjoying the back and forth on this thread until CNN announced it may take until October for all the evidence to get to the grand jury and now I'm just annoyed with this case, at this point everything is still 100% speculation and 0% fact. I've read so many different reports I can't even keep track what was from an eyewitness, what was rumor, what was from an anonymous source, and what was simply our own speculation. I know it takes time to investigate but I can't believe after 10 days we still know nothing and it looks like that may be true for a few more months. We have several eyewitnesses but their stories vary greatly and even when the eyewitness accounts seem to all agree (struggle at the car) the physical evidence released so far doesn't back it up. The one thing that all (or nearly all) the eyewitnesses seem to agree on is it started with a struggle at the car, many saying the officer was choking or pulling Michael into the car, but the autopsy showed no signs of him being choked or a struggle. I thought the autopsy would at least rule out a few eyewitnesses since one side was saying he was shot in the back and the other side in the front but even that is inconclusive because of the shots to the arm. 10 days later and we really don't know any more than we knew on day 1.

I seem to recall the "kid" being > 6 feet tall and 220 or so...quite the feat for the officer,from a sitting position inside a limited space, to choke and pull him into the car, wouldn't you think?

But when the gov himself says be damned with facts (vigorous prosecution!) then facts be damned!

We really know nothing and too many people are reckless with "news" these days.

 

[Colleen27]

I won't argue with the more likely to be stopped but the more likely to be arrested and charged..makes not a damn bit of sense. Charged and arrested with what? The remark about youthful mistakes in white kids are life changing matters for black youth. Again makes not a damn bit of sense. Sorry but this is (to me) reading like a poster on page 3 that said nothing has changed since 1619. Enough of the excuses and tales of oh whoa is me in a culture/community. The problem begins and ends at home. That is what needs to be changed.

They're more likely to be stopped. They're more likely to be searched following a stop. That makes them more likely to face legal consequences for common criminal behaviours like drug possession and underage drinking. And statistics indicate the consequences are likely to be more severe than they are for white kids charged with the same crimes. None of this should be earth shattering news - it is a fairly well documented pattern in the American justice system.

This if from a review of CA pot enforcement specifically:
Compared to Non-blacks, California’s African-American population are 4 times more likely to
be arrested for marijuana, 12 times more likely to be imprisoned for a marijuana felony arrest,
and 3 times more likely to be imprisoned per marijuana possession arrest. Overall, as Figure 3
illustrates, these disparities accumulate to 10 times’ greater odds of an African-American being
imprisoned for marijuana than other racial/ethnic groups.

http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/Misdemeanor_marijuana_arrests.pdf

This one is from the Washington Post:

and

This isn't a problem that begins and ends at home, unless the solution is that young blacks should be more responsible than their white peers in order to comply with the higher standard of scrutiny they'll be held to by law enforcement and a certain percentage of the general public.

 

[Luvchefmic]

They're more likely to be stopped. They're more likely to be searched following a stop. That makes them more likely to face legal consequences for common criminal behaviours like drug possession and underage drinking. And statistics indicate the consequences are likely to be more severe than they are for white kids charged with the same crimes. None of this should be earth shattering news - it is a fairly well documented pattern in the American justice system.

This if from a review of CA pot enforcement specifically:
Compared to Non-blacks, California’s African-American population are 4 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana, 12 times more likely to be imprisoned for a marijuana felony arrest, and 3 times more likely to be imprisoned per marijuana possession arrest. Overall, as Figure 3
illustrates, these disparities accumulate to 10 times’ greater odds of an African-American being
imprisoned for marijuana than other racial/ethnic groups.

http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/Misdemeanor_marijuana_arrests.pdf

This one is from the Washington Post:

and

This isn't a problem that begins and ends at home, unless the solution is that young blacks should be more responsible than their white peers in order to comply with the higher standard of scrutiny they'll be held to by law enforcement and a certain percentage of the general public.

I'm really trying to keep an open mind here but don't understand " And statistics indicate the consequences are more likely to be more severe than they are for white kids charged with the same crimes. None of this should be earth shattering news".

News to me: so you're saying 2 kids one white one black both age 17 no priors same economic class caught breaking the law, same crime ( whatever crime you want to go with ) both found guilty in a court of law, white kid gets off easier than the black kid ?

As far as the charts you can interpret as 4 times more likely to be in possession of marijuana, 12 times more likely to have committed the offense and has been found guilty, and so on.

Again just my opinion but it all sounds like excuses. If I believed all this and I was black I would feel like this is how my family my children my loved ones are perceived in this country..damn we will prove them wrong. Just like Italians had to prove they weren't the stereotypical mobster, gangster. Just like the Irish no one wanted to hire and they were all labeled drunks. Every culture had to fight hard odds to make it.

 

[Geoff_M]

I seem to recall the "kid" being > 6 feet tall and 220 or so...quite the feat for the officer,from a sitting position inside a limited space, to choke and pull him into the car, wouldn't you think?

The doctor that the family hired for their autopsy said he was 6' 4" and weighed 292 lbs.

 

[Geoff_M]

A great point (in 2 parts) he made was:

Why would a kid with no record & only a petty theft suspicion "bum rush" an armed officer who had his weapon drawn and was threatening to shoot? It makes zero sense that someone would do that.

Why would a 6-year veteran officer with no complaints on his record throw away his career - if not his life - by gunning down an unarmed kid who was peacefully surrendering in broad daylight in front of dozens of witnesses? It makes zero sense that someone would do that.

Here's one of the biggest problems with the act of the speculating what happened in this incident. People tend to assume that the persons involved would behave in a manner similar to what we think we'd do in those same circumstances. They want to project themselves into the situation. The problem is that there are a heck of a lot of people in this world that don't think/act/react like WE do. What makes "sense" to do to me, I cannot assume would be true for you or others. It "doesn't make sense" to use Heroin. It "doesn't make sense" to gamble your paycheck away. It "doesn't make sense" to cheat on your spouse.

Just because one can't envision themselves reacting to the "fight" response instead of "flight" during the adrenalin after being shot once, doesn't mean others wouldn't do the opposite. Ditto for a the case when we think about if a cop, after a physical assault where we think the person tried to get our gun, might over react and use unnecessary force after the person decided to try and leave the scene.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

They're more likely to be stopped. They're more likely to be searched following a stop. That makes them more likely to face legal consequences for common criminal behaviours like drug possession and underage drinking. And statistics indicate the consequences are likely to be more severe than they are for white kids charged with the same crimes. None of this should be earth shattering news - it is a fairly well documented pattern in the American justice system.

This if from a review of CA pot enforcement specifically:
Compared to Non-blacks, California’s African-American population are 4 times more likely to
be arrested for marijuana, 12 times more likely to be imprisoned for a marijuana felony arrest,
and 3 times more likely to be imprisoned per marijuana possession arrest. Overall, as Figure 3
illustrates, these disparities accumulate to 10 times’ greater odds of an African-American being
imprisoned for marijuana than other racial/ethnic groups.

http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/Misdemeanor_marijuana_arrests.pdf

This one is from the Washington Post:

and

This isn't a problem that begins and ends at home, unless the solution is that young blacks should be more responsible than their white peers in order to comply with the higher standard of scrutiny they'll be held to by law enforcement and a certain percentage of the general public.

The problem I've seen and I could be way off is the interaction after being stopped. From those I've witnessed being stopped it seems when a white kid is stopped the majority(not all) of these are genuinly apologetic and answer questions with "yes sir" or "no sir". While the opposite for blacks, a majority(again not all) seem to right off the bat give an officer an attitude with "what you stopping me for" or "I haven't done anything" just go back in this thread and you'll see the differences of how many react to being stopped. I'll question an officer but Respectfully. I was always told you can't point a finger at everyone else without four of them pointing back at you.

 

[Jedana]

The problem I've seen and I could be way off is the interaction after being stopped. From those I've witnessed being stopped it seems when a white kid is stopped the majority(not all) of these are genuinly apologetic and answer questions with "yes sir" or "no sir". While the opposite for blacks, a majority(again not all) seem to right off the bat give an officer an attitude with "what you stopping me for" or "I haven't done anything" just go back in this thread and you'll see the differences of how many react to being stopped. I'll question an officer but Respectfully. I was always told you can't point a finger at everyone else without four of them pointing back at you.

I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. My next-door neighbor and I were talking a few days ago, and in our conversation, he made the comment that he taught his kids that officers are not trustworthy. (This is a local businessman, wears a suit and tie to work everyday, lives in a nice suburban area--even if our city is known as meth central, our area isn't--and speaks like a southern gentleman. He's also African American. I am white.)

I asked him what he taught his kids to do if they were ever stopped by the police, and he responded "I told them to say I didn't do it, and to not give the officer their name or any help." Not even to show their id upon request? "No." What if they are out past curfew and are told to go home? "No, they can tell the officers to leave them alone and walk away."

We've taught our kids that if they are stopped by an officer, they are to be polite and use yes sir and no ma'am to answer questions. We've also taught them that if the officer wants to see your id, you show it to them. If the officer wants to ask questions that they feel might take a bad turn for them or take them away from the situation--be it a traffic stop or a drug raid, they need to tell the officer "I'm under 18. You need to call my mom or dad, sir." We've taught them to wait until the officer releases them, or until we arrive to help handle the situation, but that if they feel the situation is unsafe, they need to request the officer send for someone else, preferably higher in the food chain.

Two different ways that people handle this issue.

DH doesn't trust or like the police. He feels that because of the "bad cops" and the fact the "good cops" don't police their own often enough, that all police are inherently bad. But that doesn't stop him from being polite and calm when he's had to have interactions with them. (BTW, he's 6'4" and currently 250 lbs. Shaved head. Huge shoulders and arms.)

He's been arrested by those small town Georgia sheriffs (the ones that wear the mirrored sunglasses with the mirrors on the inside), in his youth. He says "those are the scary officers. Not the big town guys, in SWAT with the big guns. It's the small town guys, the ones who know the judge and where the bodies are buried that you have to watch out for. They know that if they do something wrong, the judge is going to say 'too bad son' to you."

 

[pat fan]

(the ones that wear the mirrored sunglasses with the mirrors on the inside)

I thought my DH was the only one who said that!!

I agree that how you interact with the police is a big factor in how you are treated. I KNOW there are bad cops. My dad will tell you HIS dad was one of them. Very bad cop, father, grandfather...all around POS. BUT, I do not taint all police with his stink. I know they are there, but I think the good guys outweigh the bad. However, side not, I don't agree with the military gear given to the police. Did you see Boston after the bombing? YIKES! My DH was having a fit about that. I think if you give these departments this wowza gear, they need to find a way to use it. Unfortunately, that means they have to use it on us and that's not good.