Riots in Ferguson MO. USA

[Sitamun]

No one has made that claim.
But have you ever heard of a police officer stopping someone for a traffic infraction, and because the person being stopped was guilty of something, their behavior led the police to further investigate what was causing the person to act in a nervous or suspicious manner?



What do you think the reaction of the law abiding citizens would be if the police did arrest Dorian, even if he was seen on camera robbing a store, the backlash would be out of proportion.

All I have said, is what official channels have related. I'm not denying that IF he was responsible for the theft if may have altered his reaction. As to the officer "further investigating" there was absolutely no time for that. I'm just sharing information I have read, taking it at face value until a time comes when we may have more information. To be honest, IF Dorian was guilty of the robbery, I could see the police using that to strengthen what could be seen as "their side". Like I said, I'm just relaying what I have read.

 

[IMJerusha]

What do you think the reaction of the law abiding citizens would be if the police did arrest Dorian, even if he was seen on camera robbing a store, the backlash would be out of proportion.

My thoughts as well. Perhaps this is why Dorian is still at large. Time will prove the truth. That young man seems so arrogant, I think he believes the black community will defend him for the entire statute of limitation. The film is in Police possession. I would say it's not like he's going anywhere but he just may high tail it out of there. That would be as telling as the video.

 

[This Charming Manc]

So you have one side of the story...

not the truth.

It may be the truth but it needs to be tested in a court of law.

I cant comment on the people you know but in the UK we have had numbers of people serve long prison sentences based on policemen lying to cover there incompetence and corruption.

The truth needs to come out and your policeman friends making claims is not necessarily the truth.

One of the officers that we had dinner with last night told us that the Ferguson Chief used to be a St. Louis County Tac officer and was a very good professional policeman. Here is what a friend of mine posted who knows Darren Wilson (shooter) personally:



"Darren is a good man and he shot and killed Michael in self defense. After he told the young adults to get out of the street, they refused and there was a heated verbal exchange, Darren rolled ahead and pulled over and watched the two. He noticed they fit the description of two people involved in a strong armed robbery nearby that had just been called in and also looked like they may have had the stolen merchandise on them. He reversed his vehicle back to where they where to question them. When he tried to get out of his car, Michael slammed the car door back closed with his body. Upon attempting to exit his vehicle, Darren was bum rushed by Michael Brown, shoved back into the front seat of his car, punched in his face a few times and then had to fight Michael over posession of his gun. The gun was literally turned against Darren's body for a moment. During the struggle, his gun went off and then the 280 pound, 6'3" "child" took off with his friend. When the officer got out of his car and drew his gun and yelled freeze you're under arrest, Michael turned, taunting him, yelling from about 35 feet away, "what, you gonna shoot me?" and then abruptly charged the officer again. The officer unloaded on the huge YOUNG adult as he continued storming towards him until finally, he was able to stop him by shooting him in the head right when he was almost to him and his weapon. Imagine the adrenaline pumping after almost being shot in his police car and then this same large guy is sprinting at you. He thought that Michael must have been on something the way he just kept coming despite being shot many times. Hopefully, toxicology will confirm this suspicion. These are the facts-but if nothing else I beg that you at least consider these as the other side of the story. I've heard several witnesses that must keep quiet in case they are needed in court have confirmed this story and had the SAME version of events. All other "witnesses" stories have all been inconsistent with one another, some claiming he was down on his knees, others that he was running away. The truth above is the only consistent story there has been because of course, there can be only one version of the truth. I believe in my heart for it to be factually true because I know someone very well who was there. Please spread the truth. I am begging you to at least put this out as a possibility since we have ONLY heard the other's side. It explains all of the questions and it's what I was told on Sunday morning, before everyone was silenced. Please pray for Darren who was only doing his job and trying to stay alive. Or at least, please consider this as a possibility...even just a theory. I'm telling you, eventually it will all come out. This is the truth. Spread it!"


We will know if this story is true based on the entrance wounds in Michael Brown's body, and the powder burns on his clothes and skin. The physical evidence will tell us who is really telling the truth, and the truth will come out.

 

[zoo22]

9 pages into this discussion and I didn't see the real issue, was the police action one that was without cause?
Did the police officer randomly approach Mike 'gentle giant' Brown? or was there a reason...such as...Mike and his buddy stole from a convenience store earlier that day?
The whole discussion relies on the premise that the confrontation was random, just another BMW (black man walking) when if truth be told this guy was suspected of criminal activity.

"The whole discussion hinges on the premise that the confrontation being random?" No. It hinges on whether he was armed or not, or whether there was a legitimate reason to believe he was armed when the police shot and killed him.

Are you, or is anyone here aware of any indication that there was a legitimate reason for the police to believe that he was armed?

 

[THall]

Now you're defending them? Oh brother!

It is obvious to everyone
that you are not smart enough
to tell the difference between
making a false generalization
about all policemen,
and defending or criticizing a
particular policeman and his
specific actions.

Critical thinking has never
been your strong point,
in fact, "thinking" has never
been your strong point.

 

[THall]

"The whole discussion hinges on the premise that the confrontation being random?" No. It hinges on whether he was armed or not, or whether there was a legitimate reason to believe he was armed when the police shot and killed him.

Are you, or is anyone here aware of any indication that there was a legitimate reason for the police to believe that he was armed?

You could not be more wrong.
The whole thing hinges on
whether a jury believes that
officer Wilson could reasonably
conclude that he was in danger
of receiving great bodily harm or
death from Brown.

You reason as an adolescent,
and are ignorant of the
applicable Missouri law.

 

[Sitamun]

What are you going on about? What did I say anything about the police? Seriously. Show us. You make things up in your mind that didn't happen. That's one of the reasons I don't believe much of a word you say. So show us what I'd said about the police. I'm detached from reality and need help? You're a freak.

Come on, you know CW just loves the cops, except for when they inconvenience HER.

Right now, all I am focusing on is official statements, and press reports from credible outlets. Hopefully time will tell. Personally, I have seen/read nothing that warrants the actions that were taken. That may change, I'm not sure.

 

[THall]

. When the officer got out of his car and drew his gun and yelled freeze you're under arrest, Michael turned, taunting him, yelling from about 35 feet away, "what, you gonna shoot me?" and then abruptly charged the officer again. The officer unloaded on the huge YOUNG adult as he continued storming towards him until finally, he was able to stop him by shooting him in the head right when he was almost to him and his weapon.

If the forensic analysis
shows multiple bullet strikes,
and the area around those strikes
shows more powder residue
around the head wound and less
around the body wounds (clothing),
then this is consistent with
both Wilson's story and
consistent with the way we
train policemen to fire at the
body until you have a failure to stop
and then go to the head.

If there is an entry wound in
the back of Brown then this is
consistent with the witnesses
story, and Wilson is in a lot of
trouble for shooting an unarmed
fleeing petty thief.

I will wait until the
terminal ballistics report
of the autopsy is released
as it will tell the tale.

 

[zoo22]

You could not be more wrong.
The whole thing hinges on
whether a jury believes that
officer Wilson could reasonably
conclude that he was in danger
of receiving great bodily harm or
death from Brown.

Yes, of course if he had a reasonable reason to conclude he was in danger of great bodily harm or death, there'd be a legitimate reason to have shot a suspect. Maybe that happened in the car. Running away down the street, unless Brown was armed, explain to us how there would be a perceived threat to Wilson's life.

Maybe. I don't know. I sure haven't seen anything that would indicate that. Have you? It's been a week now.

You reason as an adolescent,
and are ignorant of the
applicable Missouri law.

No, I don't reason as an adolescent. And I don't purport to be an expert on Missouri law. Get over yourself.

 

[THall]

Come on, you know CW just loves the cops, except for when they inconvenience HER.

Your "credible outlets" are
a joke.

You are just like the other
retard who can't discern
between an unconstitutional
act, and an act that may or
may not be criminal depending
on the facts that have not come
out yet, and will not come from
any of your "credible outlets"
which really are not credible at
all.

 

[THall]

No, I don't reason as an adolescent.

Yes, you do.
Do you need your mommy?

 

[Sitamun]

Your "credible outlets" are
a joke.

You are just like the other
retard who can't discern
between an unconstitutional
act, and an act that may or
may not be criminal depending
on the facts that have not come
out yet, and will not come from
any of your "credible outlets"
which really are not credible at
all.

The AP isn't credible? How do you define credible? Sites the confirm what you want to believe?

 

[zoo22]

Reposting because aCW must have missed this:

Just another excuse for the jb's to loot liquor stores.

What are "jb's?"

 

[IMJerusha]

It is obvious to everyone
that you are not smart enough
to tell the difference between
making a false generalization
about all policemen,
and defending or criticizing a
particular policeman and his
specific actions.

Critical thinking has never
been your strong point,
in fact, "thinking" has never
been your strong point.

You stab Police Officers in the back while puffing yourself up about how you train them. You don't have a problem with citizens pointing their guns at Police Officers. Now that an Officer may be guilty of an unrighteous shoot, something which places Police training in question, you're going to defend for all you're worth? Give it a rest! Hey, do you train officers to call people retard and other derogatory names? Someone who encourages lawlessness on one hand and supports law enforcement on the other hand is either messed up in the head or working an ugly agenda. Sort of like people who call SWAT to a group of reporters and cameramen falsely claiming they're under attack and media reporting against the officers who showed up to defend them.

 

[Town Heretic]

...No, I don't reason as an adolescent.

Yes, you do.
Do you need your mommy?

No, he doesn't. Do you need an argument? Or just a time out?

What Missouri law, exactly, is it you believe alters or contradicts what zoo is noting? A Code citation in support would be a start.

 

[GFR7]

Reposting because aCW must have missed this:



What are "jb's?"

Jungle Bunnies.
Just as he calls people fags -
he is a hate speech dinosaur.

What a bigot. :madmad:

Many of the blacks in Ferguson are protecting the stores from looters.
They can police themselves.

 

[THall]

No, he doesn't. Do you need an argument? Or just a time out?

What Missouri law, exactly, is it you believe alters or contradicts what zoo is noting? A Code citation in support would be a start.

You are the lawyer, look it up.

It won't matter, because every
time you are proven to be a liar
you just change the subject.

Start with Missouri Revised Statutes 563.046. 1

it references 563.031. 1., 563.031. 2, 563.031. 1.3 and so on.

You will need to study them all
to have a clue. And then hit the
case law.

And thanks for being
zoo22's mommy, do
you have any other pets?

 

[THall]

The AP isn't credible? How do you define credible?

Really, AP
that is your source?

No name, no author,
no signed document?

Do you even know what
constitutes a legit source?

 

[Town Heretic]

You are the lawyer, look it up.

That's what I thought you'd say.

It won't matter, because every
time I get mad I make absurd charges and immediately turn to personal insult being nearly bereft of any semblance of rational thought or impulse control...

Fixed that for you.

Start with Missouri Revised Statutes 563.046. 1

it references 563.031. 1., 563.031. 2, 563.031. 1.3 and so on.

Done. Sounds like all we need now are the facts to plug in and see if the officer's apprehension and actions were reasonable and in accord. The officer had a lot of latitude, which tends to be the case.

The rest is review. I'm pretty sure that's what zoo was getting at too.

You will need to study them all
to have a clue. And then hit the
case law.

You'd be surprised how uniform most of this is in any number of jurisdictions. I didn't need the cite. I was mostly curious as to whether you knew it.

And thanks for being
zoo22's mommy,

It wasn't zoo I thought needed help.

do you have any other pets?

It's interesting that's how you think of friends. And by interesting I mean, of course, typical and telling.

 

[Sitamun]

Really, AP
that is your source?

No name, no author,
no signed document?

Do you even know what
constitutes a legit source?

I'm sure there were names, but I was looking at numerous stories and only remember it was from the AP. Signed document? really?