Chit Chat
Options

Ferguson

1246711

Re: Ferguson

  • Options
    "Oh right the "but some of my best friends are black" defense."

    Nope.  In 1966, Memphis was completely segregated.  I had never met a black teenager.  Most of them hadn't met a white one, either.  That is how it was, and it had to change.  I'm sorry that all the sacrifices people in my generation made to promote racial equality aren't good enough for you.
    Do we have racial equality?  No, but we are trying the best we know how.
    httpiimgurcomTCCjW0wjpg
  • Options
    kat1114kat1114 member
    First Answer First Comment 5 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited November 2014
    CMGragain said:



    jdluvr06 said:



    CMGragain said:

    Why not just wait to read about the evidence?

    I will read about it when it's released, with great interest. But it's natural to have an opinion based on what we know so far. And considering there were several eye witnesses and public autopsy reports released, we know quite a lot. Of course things could change when we see the rest of the evidence. But honestly I think if there was something in there really great for the officer, the police department would have made it public already.




    I could be wrong, I haven't closely followed this case, but I thought there were conflicting autopsy reports?

    No.  According to the prosecuting attorney, all three autopsy reports showed that the bullets came from the front.  There were no shots to Mr. Brown's back.  They were not able to determine which shots were fired in what order, but there was a shot to the head that was probably the cause of death.
    Mr. Brown's blood was inside the police car, probably from the first shot which wounded his hand..This was the only shot that was at close distance.
    Again, this is what the prosecuting attorney said tonight.

    PS.  There were several witnesses who came forward but stayed out of the media and wanted their identities kept secret until the hearing was over.  There were also several witnesses who were prominent in the media who changed their stories, or even admitted that they didn't really see what happened, they just heard about it.

    --------------------
    As to your last statement, under the federal rules of evidence, hearsay statements are admissible in grand jury proceedings, so it really isn't an issue that people made statements about things they only heard about. I know this was a state court, but the rules are often the same or similar.
  • Options
    kat1114 said:

    jdluvr06 said:
    Why not just wait to read about the evidence?
    I will read about it when it's released, with great interest. But it's natural to have an opinion based on what we know so far. And considering there were several eye witnesses and public autopsy reports released, we know quite a lot. Of course things could change when we see the rest of the evidence. But honestly I think if there was something in there really great for the officer, the police department would have made it public already.

    I could be wrong, I haven't closely followed this case, but I thought there were conflicting autopsy reports?
    No.  According to the prosecuting attorney, all three autopsy reports showed that the bullets came from the front.  There were no shots to Mr. Brown's back.  They were not able to determine which shots were fired in what order, but there was a shot to the head that was probably the cause of death.
    Mr. Brown's blood was inside the police car, probably from the first shot which wounded his hand..This was the only shot that was at close distance.
    Again, this is what the prosecuting attorney said tonight.

    PS.  There were several witnesses who came forward but stayed out of the media and wanted their identities kept secret until the hearing was over.  There were also several witnesses who were prominent in the media who changed their stories, or even admitted that they didn't really see what happened, they just heard about it.
    -------------------- As to your last statement, under the federal rules of evidence, hearsay statements are admissible in grand jury proceedings, so it really isn't an issue that people made statements about things they only heard about. I know this was a state court, but the rules are often the same or similar.
    Right. Grand jury indictments are SO easy to get. The prosecutor just has to want it and argue effectively for it.  There is no burden of proof.  There just has to be a tiny bit of evidence or information that might cause any rational person to consider that there MIGHT be a crime.  

    This prosecutor held what has basically amounted to a secret trial.  He should have been charged and gone through a public jury trial.  You get bet your ass that if Michael Brown would have been the one that was on the shooting end, he would have been charged.  



  • Options
    CMGragain said:
    I can see that you are very angry.  I hope that by tomorrow you will calm down.  Did you actually listen to the prosecuting attorney's entire presentation on CNN, or did you just get angry and blow up, like you are venting on me?
    It's OK.  I'm not taking it personally.
    Dude, not cool.  You're showing your ass.



  • Options
    I just really can't believe that anyone thinks our "justice system" and the shit we are fed by "the prosecuting attorney" or cops, or judges or anyone in positions of power like this isn't just telling us exactly what they want us hear/believe.  

    If you aren't questioning your government after all of the shit, and lies, and cover-ups that have been outted over the decades, you are making a conscious choice that you just don't want to think for yourself, or see things change.


  • Options
    I just really can't believe that anyone thinks our "justice system" and the shit we are fed by "the prosecuting attorney" or cops, or judges or anyone in positions of power like this isn't just telling us exactly what they want us hear/believe.  

    If you aren't questioning your government after all of the shit, and lies, and cover-ups that have been outted over the decades, you are making a conscious choice that you just don't want to think for yourself, or see things change.


    It's not just the government, the media certainly has a hand in it, too. I don't know enough to have an informed opinion on what the officer should have been charged with and whether he's guilty, but there absolutely should have been a trial.
    Wedding Countdown Ticker



  • Options
    As I tried to fall asleep last night, I wondered how I would react if the situation were different.  I live in a predominately white suburb of Houston.  My husband has fair skin, blonde hair, and blue eyes, as does my dad.

    What if instead of blacks being the ones at the center of this ... what if it was the fair-skinned man?  How would I feel if I had grown up watching my dad persecuted for the color of his skin?  What if I had witnessed people judge him based on the color of his skin?  Then, the same prejudice continued with my husband.  Both of these men are college-educated (and my dad is addressed as Doctor) and would never hurt a flea.  How would I feel if a man we trusted to protect us shot my husband as he was unarmed?  Then, a panel of my "peers" decided that there was not enough evidence for charges to be filed and the man who shot him could continue to walk free.  And not only would he walk free - he would be armed with a gun and still be tasked with "protecting" us.

    I would be pretty stinking pissed, too.
  • Options
    CMGragain said:
    Why not just wait to read about the evidence?
    You mean the evidence that was collected by Ferguson PD?
  • Options
    fwtx5815fwtx5815 member
    First Anniversary First Answer 5 Love Its First Comment
    edited November 2014
    @kat1114 speaking of not understanding things- perhaps you've never heard of tasers being ineffective on suspects with a lot of adrenaline coursing through them? It's not a stretch to guess that he would have, after the events that led up to that point.

    And if I'm an officer, facing imminent danger, I cant say for sure that I'd use a taser first and just cross my fingers that it works.

    Etf spelling

    ----


     fka dallasbetch 


    image


    Lilypie Maternity tickers

  • Options
    @kat1114 speaking of not understanding things- perhaps you've never heard of tasers being ineffective on suspects with a lot of adrenaline coursing through them? It's not a stretch to guess that he would have, after the events that led up to that point. And if I'm an officer, facing imminent danger, I cant say for sure that I'd use a taser first and just cross my fingers that it works. Etf spelling
    QFT. I think this is an often overlooked element of this case. A police officer was facing imminent danger. We have had months to go over all the facts of this case. He had seconds to decide what to do.

    Nobody knows how they will react.
    image
  • Options
    JCbride... Still... What purpose does it serve??? Lets steal things to show we are made. Lets break the law. Lets make people scared to leave their homes. It's stupid.
    You try being oppressed for generations and see what "purpose" you think your anger serves.
    Them doing this... Doesn't make them look smart. They should do as someone else stated... Make their city better. Go to the police academy and be the kind of police officer they want. But that would mean they would have to follow the law... Hmmmmmm
    Just stop talking. You are a racist ignorant fool. And we wonder why things like Ferguson continue to happen in 2014? 
  • Options
    edited November 2014
    sarahufl said:
    very clearly an unpopular opinion here....

    It is no doubt tragic that Michael Brown lost his life. Nobody is disputing that.

    I am not a police officer, I was not on the grand jury, and, full disclosure: I grew up fairly privileged. I am also white. I, thankfully, have never had to deal with this type of discrimination in my life and I hope my future children will not either.

    Michael Brown was breaking the law and assaulting a police officer. I think the media coverage really focused so much on the race issue that the real circumstances of the case were kind of glossed over. Witnesses openly admitted they LIED to the police about what happened, but physical evidence matched the police testimony. Did he deserve to get killed? Absolutely not. Did the officer need to shoot him 12 times? Probably not. But I do think it is important to remember that there were a few people in the wrong here and the grand jury was asked to determine if they thought there was intent to kill. And they determined there was not.

    Over A DOZEN businesses were burned to the ground last night in protests. What did those shop owners do to deserve that? These are people who were not remotely involved in the case at all. They are honest, hard-working people. Who now, 2 days before Thanksgiving, lost everything. What will that accomplish?

    I think this case is incredibly complicated and probably far from the grasp of all the internet message boards that are undoubtedly blowing up about it.


    I agree with this. Some of you have said that the riots are working by drawing attention to the problem, but I don't know that in the grand scheme of things, this is working on actually solving the problem. My newfeed today is full of racism on both sides, people saying horrible things about entire cultures because they are either unhappy about the grand jury decision, or they're unhappy about the aftermath. I know that my newsfeed doesn't represent the entire country, but at least from where I'm sitting the problem of racism is slightly worse today. And I don't know what will fix things. I can understand being so so angry and feeling like you can't trust others to take care of you and give you justice, but hurting other people is only going to make others turn against you. "Hate has caused a lot of problems in this world, but it's hasn't solved one"

     

    CMGragain when she said that nobody wins in this situation. Ultimately, we all lose.

     

    ETA: Again, I don't know what will ultimately help fix or solve this problem, because the grand jury isn't going to see the riots and change their mind. I'm not trying to be cruel, I just feel like as an entire country, we're going about this the wrong way.

    Anniversary



  • Options

    I also have the very unpopular opinion in this case. I won't go into it.

     

    I agree with @sarahufl--the fact that Michael Brown lost his life that day is tragic. Loss of life is always a tragedy IMO.

     

    I grew up in a community where I, a white person, was the minority and have been on the opposite end of racism. It is a terrible feeling and I hate racism across the board.

     

    My family is a family of law enforcement. DH is in law enforcement. The outpouring of "cop hate" has been making me really sick to my stomach over the last several months. I can't even go onto my facebook this morning because it is just flooded. I think people have the right to be angry. I do not think people have the right to loot and hurt their community. All this hate (across all spectrums) really gets to me and hurts my heart.

     

    Ok, that is all I am going to say about this.

    I agree with this.  I have a friend who is an NYPD officer.  He's quite tall (I think at least 6'5"), muscular, and white.  He is one of the gentlest men I know.  I can only imagine the crap that he is getting in light of these events.
  • Options
    CMGragain said:
    "Oh right the "but some of my best friends are black" defense."

    Nope.  In 1966, Memphis was completely segregated.  I had never met a black teenager.  Most of them hadn't met a white one, either.  That is how it was, and it had to change.  I'm sorry that all the sacrifices people in my generation made to promote racial equality aren't good enough for you.
    Do we have racial equality?  No, but we are trying the best we know how.
    WHAT? Name a sacrifice YOU made? Let me guess, you had to sit next to a black person once. You are a fool, and I am still laughing at the thought of you "working your way through college" by being a state police officer.  
  • Options
    kat1114kat1114 member
    First Answer First Comment 5 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited November 2014
    @kat1114 speaking of not understanding things- perhaps you've never heard of tasers being ineffective on suspects with a lot of adrenaline coursing through them? It's not a stretch to guess that he would have, after the events that led up to that point. And if I'm an officer, facing imminent danger, I cant say for sure that I'd use a taser first and just cross my fingers that it works. Etf spelling
    I used to work for the company that manufacturers tasers. I've read hundreds of cases involving taser use. I even said in my response that it's not guaranteed to be effective. So yes, I understand how sometimes they don't work because of adrenaline, drug use, etc. But thanks for the lecture.

    ETA: As an officer, you're supposed to follow your use of force guidelines. Like I said, I'm not sure what the FPD guidelines call for in that situation, but it's not 100% up to the cop to choose what use of force method to use without the possibility of discipline later if they don't follow guidelines.
  • Options
    firebabe6519firebabe6519 member
    First Comment First Anniversary 5 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited November 2014


    sarahufl said:



    @kat1114 speaking of not understanding things- perhaps you've never heard of tasers being ineffective on suspects with a lot of adrenaline coursing through them? It's not a stretch to guess that he would have, after the events that led up to that point. And if I'm an officer, facing imminent danger, I cant say for sure that I'd use a taser first and just cross my fingers that it works. Etf spelling
    QFT. I think this is an often overlooked element of this case. A police officer was facing imminent danger. We have had months to go over all the facts of this case. He had seconds to decide what to do.

    Nobody knows how they will react.

    To me that's the whole problem- shouldn't we know how our police officers would act? We aren't talking about me or you off the street- we are talking about police officers. Like I said earlier, from what I have read so far (it may change) I think that the grand jury decision was right in this case- but it doesn't mean we don't have a serious, serious problem with police officers killing unarmed black men (and children). And I think the question really was- how imminent was that danger? The problem here isn't this one case (but the case is very problematic). But if this was the first time this had happened, everyone would be calling this a tragic accident. What we are approaching is an epidemic and we HAVE to start asking the question about why police officer are more "scared" when facing certain suspects and what we can do to stop that.

     

    Also honestly I really don't want to hear about your poor police officer friend in NYC and what he may be going through. Let's focus a little more on what the Browns are going through. And all families who have lost someone to any kind of violence.


    ----_---------_-----------

    ETA: TK ate my boxes

    I really do not appreciate that comment about cops killing "unarmed black men and children." That is such bullshit! So it is ok then to shoot unarmed Asians... Or whites... Or Indians... Or Native Americans... Or Latinos...

    It is a terrible thing for any human being to be shot while unarmed. Race has nothing to do with the level of trajedy or the seriousness of the issue.

    If a black officer shot an unarmed white boy, the media would bat an eyelash. But Godforbid a white cop shot a black boy... The double standards disgust me!
  • Options
    kat1114 said:
    @kat1114 speaking of not understanding things- perhaps you've never heard of tasers being ineffective on suspects with a lot of adrenaline coursing through them? It's not a stretch to guess that he would have, after the events that led up to that point. And if I'm an officer, facing imminent danger, I cant say for sure that I'd use a taser first and just cross my fingers that it works. Etf spelling
    I used to work for the company that manufacturers tasers. I've read hundreds of cases involving taser use. I even said in my response that it's not guaranteed to be effective. So yes, I understand how sometimes they don't work because of adrenaline, drug use, etc. But thanks for the lecture.

    ETA: As an officer, you're supposed to follow your use of force guidelines. Like I said, I'm not sure what the FPD guidelines call for in that situation, but it's not 100% up to the cop to choose what use of force method to use without the possibility of discipline later if they don't follow guidelines.
    On the topic of tasers... I read in one report that he didn't have a taser on him so this wouldn't even be an option. 
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards