Michael Brown

[Jarhead6541]

I tend to agree with Panzercat, who posted this on The Truth About Guns comment section;


"Oh look, a real life and amazingly relevant example of life threatening injury due to a single punch. Synopsis: Unconscious for 3hrs, eye socket fracture, fractured jaw and emergency surgery to save his life. The ref would later go on to permanently lose sight in that eye– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQy9VXSUHRw

So yeah, Tex. I’d say joe officer is perfectly justified to deploy his firearm after receiving a beatdown from another 300lb+ 6ft human being.

Oh, wait. Are we still playing the “if that’s what really happened” game? Because, you know. If that’s what really happened."



Not to mention that Brown had allegedly gone for the officers weapon once already in this confrontation.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Yeah but with all due respect... what the hell is wrong with her? She couldn't possibly think that would turn-out OK.

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2qpl35ZvW1qcx3szo1_500.png

 

[jg1967]

Are we still arguing about who did what in a fight we didn't see ourselves?

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Apparently.

 

[S&W645]

Just like in the Trayvon case, the media has tried to portray the victim as a harmless child. @285# and 6'4" I'd say he would be far from harmless if he attacked someone my size or shape. We don't know the whole story yet but here is what we do know.
Victim is dead.
Officer has injuries that could have caused death.
Victim was shot from front according to autopsy.
Victim was far from a small child.
Victim had committed a strong arm robbery just prior.
Rioters are mostly from outside the area.
Store owners lost property to looters.

After Andrew, there were many signs put up here that said; "You loot, we shoot." Crime went down real quickly in most areas because the looters knew that they would lose. And as few had phone service, the practice was to shoot first and call the police or stop them as soon as you got a chance to get to them.

 

[Stengun]

Howdy jg1967,

Are we still arguing about who did what in a fight we didn't see ourselves?

I agree totally.

We have two "stories" or POVs to look at with this incident.

One has numerous eyewitnesses who have been named and appeared to TV with some type of video to prove they were there when it happened and another side of the story that has repeated a second hand story or call into a radio talk show unanimously and "claimed" they were there but without any evidence to prove they were there with a totally different POV to what happened.

I wasn't there so all I can do is look at all the evidence and make a WAG as to what really happened.

Just my $.02 and your mileage MAY vary.

Paul

 

[BC1]

Officer has injuries that could have caused death.

Doesn't even need to be that bad. Avoiding a beating of such nature that significant or permanent injury may occur is grounds for use of deadly force. What would the hood have him do, retreat?

 

[BluesStringer]

Is it not a start that they are showing people- that they are making changes to where changes are necessary? They suspend this guy immediately.

What do you imagine would've happened to Albers (the rifle-wielding Lieutenant) if his brandishing and threats to kill a reporter hadn't been caught on video? I can tell you with no doubt in my mind that nothing would've happened to him. Capt. Johnson seems like a well-intentioned guy. I don't question that he is sincere in wanting to bring change to how those kinds of neighborhoods are policed, but if that video hadn't gone viral, that cop with leadership authorities both in Ferguson and St. Ann would still be the threat to society that he has always been. And my bet is that he will continue to be that threat to society after some short psychological evaluations and "sensitivity training" takes place. Oh look, here's confirmation of that prediction:

St. Ann officer removed after pointing gun, threatening Ferguson protesters

A St. Ann police lieutenant has been suspended after pointing a semi-automatic assault rifle at a protester in Ferguson late Tuesday night, police said.

....In a phone interview, Jimenez said Albers' had been suspended without pay and would undergo a psychological evaluation and sensitivity training.

.....Jimenez said Albers drew his gun after seeing what may have been a BB gun in the crowd. The officer asked a member of the media to move, he said. "The media person refused to cooperate, and in an attempt to keep the public safe, my officer used profanity with the public and told the media person that he was going to kill him if he didn't move," Jimenez said in an email. "We certainly do not condone the verbiage that was used and the officer will be counseled on his choice of words. The St. Ann Police Department regrets this unfortunate situation and hopes for a peaceful resolution in Ferguson."

.....He condemned Albers' threatening language, but added, "I stand by him if he felt like his life was in danger, if he thought someone raised a gun, which wasn't captured" in the video.
​

​

Any doubt in your mind that this psycho will be back on the streets within a couple of months, if not just a couple of weeks?

As I said, his suspension is meaningless.

They release the video and chief talks about the Tuesday- police involved fatal shooting- right away.

Absolutely zero connection with the Michael Brown shooting/killing. The video totally exonerates the officers who shot Kajieme Powell. He was armed and advanced well inside the 21' foot rule that anyone who's had even one basic course in defensive handgun knows the specifics of. If the video tended to call into question any significant discrepancies in the cops' story, you can bet it would not have been released until they were forced by court order to release it.

Officer Wilson is on paid leave bc it has not been determined if he was involved in a good or bad shooting.

Standard fare. Unless there is solid evidence like in the Powell shooting that the shooting was 100% justifiable, nearly all officers involved in shootings are put on some form of administrative leave or desk duty. It is most likely standard fare even in cases like with Powell.

Like I said in the post you replied to, quite obviously it is a screening and hiring problem with most cop-shops. Albers somehow made Lieutenant even though according to the link above, he has at least three black marks on his record for inappropriate language and/or actions, the latest one happening just last year, and the earliest one in '96, so he's been a psychological time-bomb for the last 18 years and still he's advanced through the ranks and his Chief "stands by him."

He should be getting his sensitivity training and psychological evaluations in prison, as that tape clearly shows a terroristic threat under color of law being made. That video is clear evidence of a crime being committed, and you call his suspension a "start" towards positive change? Do you honestly even believe that?

Blues

 

[BluesStringer]

Just like in the Trayvon case, the media has tried to portray the victim as a harmless child. @285# and 6'4" I'd say he would be far from harmless if he attacked someone my size or shape. We don't know the whole story yet but here is what we do know.
Victim is dead.

Check.

Officer has injuries that could have caused death.

You "know" that how? Every single story that is claiming an orbital "blow out" has as its source the Gateway Pundit story, which is based on leaks from inside the prosecutor's office that the Prosecutor has said publicly could not have originated from his office. It may or may not turn out to be true, but we sure don't "know" it yet.

Victim was shot from front according to autopsy.

Baden specifically said that at least one grazing wound (inside forearm) could have been sustained while Brown's back was to the officer. He also said it could have been sustained while Brown's hands were raised, as no less than three eye-witnesses have said they saw him in such a position while the officer either re-started or continued firing.

Victim was far from a small child.

Irrelevant if officer was firing as he was running away or as he tried to surrender.

Victim had committed a strong arm robbery just prior.

So....who's the victim of this "strong arm robbery?" The so-called victim has made it clear that he never reported either a theft or violence perpetrated against him. And who put hands on whom first in the security video? That would be the non-reporting, non-victim.

Rioters are mostly from outside the area.
Store owners lost property to looters.

Whatever happened after the shooting is 100% irrelevant to whether or not the shooting was justified. As you say, we don't know the whole story on that score, but we also don't know most of what you say we do know, and/or if we do know it, it's irrelevant to the shooting.

After Andrew, there were many signs put up here that said; "You loot, we shoot."

So you're saying that an armed store-keep who was prepared to defend himself and his store against a strong-arm robbery could've stopped all this before it started? I agree. But if that same store-keep won't even report that he's a victim of even petty theft, then the robbery is a bogus factoid to use to justify the shooting that happened shortly thereafter. You can say whatever you want about how it might relate to Brown's state of mind when confronted by the cop, but three out of four eye-witnesses describe Brown as trying to escape the cop's grasp, and the fourth, and most recent one, just says he saw a "tussle" and couldn't discern anything more than that from his vantage point.

Any victims of looters and arsonists would have been well-advised to arm themselves and utilize self-help in defending their properties. Counting on cops to protect them got them a very predictable result. None of that has anything whatsoever to do with whether or not Wilson was justified in shooting Michael Brown though.

Blues

 

[Deanimator]

Officer has injuries that could have caused death.

Actually, we don't KNOW that.

It might be true, but as of this morning it was still just a possibly true story... as was the claim of Brown being shot in the back... until it was disproved by multiple autopsies.

I trust neither side in this case to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I'll believe it when actual proof comes out.

In the meantime, the Brown camp is winning the BS narrative steeplechase so far.

 

[S&W645]

Check.



You "know" that how? Every single story that is claiming an orbital "blow out" has as its source the Gateway Pundit story, which is based on leaks from inside the prosecutor's office that the Prosecutor has said publicly could not have originated from his office. It may or may not turn out to be true, but we sure don't "know" it yet.



Baden specifically said that at least one grazing wound (inside forearm) could have been sustained while Brown's back was to the officer. He also said it could have been sustained while Brown's hands were raised, as no less than three eye-witnesses have said they saw him in such a position while the officer either re-started or continued firing.



Irrelevant if officer was firing as he was running away or as he tried to surrender.



So....who's the victim of this "strong arm robbery?" The so-called victim has made it clear that he never reported either a theft or violence perpetrated against him. And who put hands on whom first in the security video? That would be the non-reporting, non-victim.



Whatever happened after the shooting is 100% irrelevant to whether or not the shooting was justified. As you say, we don't know the whole story on that score, but we also don't know most of what you say we do know, and/or if we do know it, it's irrelevant to the shooting.



So you're saying that an armed store-keep who was prepared to defend himself and his store against a strong-arm robbery could've stopped all this before it started? I agree. But if that same store-keep won't even report that he's a victim of even petty theft, then the robbery is a bogus factoid to use to justify the shooting that happened shortly thereafter. You can say whatever you want about how it might relate to Brown's state of mind when confronted by the cop, but three out of four eye-witnesses describe Brown as trying to escape the cop's grasp, and the fourth, and most recent one, just says he saw a "tussle" and couldn't discern anything more than that from his vantage point.

Any victims of looters and arsonists would have been well-advised to arm themselves and utilize self-help in defending their properties. Counting on cops to protect them got them a very predictable result. None of that has anything whatsoever to do with whether or not Wilson was justified in shooting Michael Brown though.

Blues

Report about Wilson backed up by

“The Assistant [Police] Chief took [Wilson] to the hospital, his face all swollen on one side,” Fox News’ source said. “He was beaten very severely,” the source added, claiming that Wilson was almost knocked unconscious.

Read more: Claim: Darren Wilson Suffered Fractured Eye Socket | The Daily Caller

Also in the ABC story that it was a severe injury. Ferguson Cop Had 'Serious Facial Injury,' Source Tells ABC News - ABC News
There was also the X-ray. ABC also plays the tape where the person states that Brown turned and ran ( bumrushed ) Wilson.

Baden quote.

Mr. Brown, 18, was also shot four times in the right arm, he said, adding that all the bullets were fired into his front.

That from the NYT.


I'm only using the store video to say that Brown was not an innocent child. Stealing the cigarillos is not justification for shooting him. But it does lend credence to mindset.

And I agree, we don't have the full story yet but it sure doesn't look like Brown was an innocent child who got shot as portrayed by the media at first.

 

[aacx22]

Actually, we don't KNOW that.

It might be true, but as of this morning it was still just a possibly true story... as was the claim of Brown being shot in the back... until it was disproved by multiple autopsies.

I trust neither side in this case to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I'll believe it when actual proof comes out.

In the meantime, the Brown camp is winning the BS narrative steeplechase so far.

Agreed. The police did a very poor PR job on this one. If they had shown transparency and released all the info they had at the start, they might have avoided the riots or at least substantially lessened them.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

Link Removed

 

[whodat2710]

Any of my fellow Caucasians want to go to Salt Lake City and protest? I thought not.

Unarmed White Man Killed By Black Cop; How The Media Reacts | The Federalist Papers

Edited to add - This was sarcasm. I cannot understand why anyone outside of the St Louis are would care about the Brown case. It is local news, just like the link I posted. The only reason it made national news is that it fit the progressive liberal agenda to stir up racial (or any other) divisiveness in our country. Just like the losers occupying Wall St. trying to make the middle to lower classes hate the rich people. Justified shoot or not, if Michael Brown had been a white kid, or if his shooter had been a black cop, we would have never heard about it. THINK ABOUT THAT and blame the media.

 

[aacx22]

If I were to take a wild stab at it, it would be because white cop on black man incidents happen at least 100x more often. That's unsubstantiated... just my initial thought on it. Also the black community has guys like Sharpton and Jackson running around riling people up as their profession, which certainly doesn't help.

 

[vernsimpson]

Though many of us are [or should be] against the over-militarization of American civilian police forces, along with the reckless & violent tactics against our citizens for even the smallest infractions, the killing of Michael Brown seems of late, to be playing out as a justified shooting as more information becomes available.


Fox news;

"According to the well-placed source, Wilson was coming off another case in the neighborhood on Aug. 9 when he ordered Michael Brown and his friend Dorain Johnson to stop walking in the middle of the road because they were obstructing traffic. However, the confrontation quickly escalated into physical violence, the source said.

“They ignored him and the officer started to get out of the car to tell them to move," the source said. "They shoved him right back in, that’s when Michael Brown leans in and starts beating Officer Wilson in the head and the face."

The source claims that there is "solid proof" that there was a struggle between Brown and Wilson for the policeman’s firearm, resulting in the gun going off – although it still remains unclear at this stage who pulled the trigger. Brown started to walk away according to the account, prompting Wilson to draw his gun and order him to freeze. Brown, the source said, raised his hands in the air, and turned around saying, "What, you're going to shoot me?"

At that point, the source told FoxNews.com, the 6-foot-4, 292-pound Brown charged Wilson, prompting the officer to fire at least six shots at him, including the fatal bullet that penetrated the top of Brown's skull, according to an independent autopsy conducted at the request of Brown's family."


Missouri cop was badly beaten before shooting Michael Brown, says source | Fox News

That is what I have understood what happened also. Some may say that the LEO should have let it go and let the "gentle giant" simply walk away. But the fact is that striking a police officer is a crime. The LEO was doing his duty at that point by ordering Brown to halt. Brown made his last mistake by charging the LEO.

What the idiot protesters are angry about now is that the lie that was told by most if not all of the media is being exposed. I have gotten to the point where when something happens I tune it out for a few days. Then when I tune back in the whole story has changed and is nothing like what the MSM hyped it up to be.

 

[BluesStringer]

Report about Wilson backed up by Also in the ABC story that it was a severe injury. Ferguson Cop Had 'Serious Facial Injury,' Source Tells ABC News - ABC News
There was also the X-ray.

Just broke on CNN about five minutes ago: No eye socket injury to Darren Wilson according to a "source close to the investigation." Their source cites the X-rays at the ER too. Said it was "definitive" that there was no facial broken bones at all.

I haven't voluntarily turned on CNN in years, but FOX started reporting that Gateway Pundit story the night of the day it was published (like two or three days ago? not sure, but anyway) and they even credited Gateway Pundit with the story, so I knew that it wasn't ready for prime time yet because I'd just read about it. It was based on a leak from the Prosecutor's office which the Prosecutor himself has denied that it "could have" leaked from his office, meaning to me that it's a firm denial because no such information exists within his office. So I flipped over to CNN and they weren't reporting the GP story. Now CNN's source confirms that the GP was bunk. It's so fresh that I can't find even a blurb on it yet, but it will be out, hopefully with an attributed source, rather soon I would imagine.

ABC also plays the tape where the person states that Brown turned and ran ( bumrushed ) Wilson.

Nobody has come forward to say, "That was me talking." If/when they do, I will consider their testimony, or if they're already in the Prosecutor's pipeline and being protected and/or prevented from making any public statements, I'll consider what they had to say to the Grand Jury or any subsequent trial that may ensue. For the time being though, all we have is a disembodied voice on a tape. Maybe it's a cop, maybe it's a relative of a cop, maybe he got his "he's" and "him's" confused while he was talking, or maybe he saw something that is diametrically opposed to the other three witnesses who saw the entire thing from Brown running away from the car and Wilson coming out guns a'blazing in chase until Brown lay dead in the street. Whatever, it's going to take a real person for that audio to be any part of a trial, and it will for it to be any part of my evaluations also.

Baden quote. That from the NYT.

That quote came from the presser that Baden participated in to reveal his and Prof. Shane Parcell's findings. I was mistaken above in describing the wound that I was referring to as a "grazing" wound. It was an entry wound as you will see and hear if you go to about 18:20 and through until Parcell finishes talking about that wound. He clearly describes that it could've entered the arm with Brown's back turned to Wilson. It also could've entered his arm when Brown was facing Wilson with his arm either up or across his chest in a defensive blocking position. The presser lasted more than half an hour. That one quote from the NYT is inadequate to convey all that Baden and Parcell said about shots coming from the front or back. Here ya go:

I'm only using the store video to say that Brown was not an innocent child. Stealing the cigarillos is not justification for shooting him. But it does lend credence to mindset.

It seems to me that when sussing out whether a shooting was justifiable or not, only the shooter's mindset is relevant. And again, the store-keep initiated the contact anyway. Even if Brown's mindset was to commit a petty theft, his shove was no more violent than the store-keep's attempt to physically stop him from leaving both with his hand and by trying to block his path.

And I agree, we don't have the full story yet but it sure doesn't look like Brown was an innocent child who got shot as portrayed by the media at first.

Michael Brown could've had a mile-long record of thefts, truancy, vandalism or even some minor violent offenses, but if Wilson shot him while he was running away or with his hands in the air trying to surrender, it was at least Manslaughter or Murder 2, and I would contend it should be Murder 1.

I've never argued that Brown was innocent at all, child-like or otherwise. I've only argued that he was a citizen who, as far as the cop knew, was only guilty of jaywalking before he, the "highly-trained" authority figure and public servant allowed a jaywalking detainment to escalate into a shooting with a kill-shot to the top of the citizen's head, 100% consistent with the (at least) three eye-witnesses who saw the shooting from the point at which Wilson exited the car until Brown was dead.

Blues

 

[BluesStringer]

Here's the CNN report about the debunked eye socket injury referenced above.

 

[BC1]

It seems to me that when sussing out whether a shooting was justifiable or not, only the shooter's mindset is relevant.

Therein lies the standard of the reasonable person. What would the average person have done faced with the same situation? The problem is the grand jury can never really feel what he felt or see what he saw. They get to determine if his actions are within reason from the safety of a comfy chair in the grand jury room. Such is the problem with the system. The jury has the benefit of hindsight. I wonder how many grand juries could make the decision under the heat of the Tueller drill. Jurors, you have 1.5 seconds to decide. Shoot or no shoot.

 

[vernsimpson]

Here's the CNN report about the debunked eye socket injury referenced above.

I had a blow out fracture of the right orbit when I was it the service. A blow out fracture occurs when pressure is applied to the eye-ball. The bone around the eye socket is very thin and opens up. In my case a piece of the muscle for the eye got pinched when the bone closed up when the pressure was no longer being applied.

So "in a way" CNN is right when they say that no facial bones were broken. It took a LOT of x-rays to determine why I had double vision because the bone had closed up. The same could be said for Wilson.

Last, I would not believe ANYTHING CNN says about anything. They are desperate for their lie to be true!