Michael Brown
- Thread starter Courtney.cj.chen
- Start date
AndeyHall
Active member
I was simply updating you with more tyrannical police officer news. I'm on your side man. I'm tired of police officers locking up these criminals and shooting them and hurting them! They have a right to commit their crimes without prejudice damn it, and I'm sick and tired of seeing them being shot and beaten up and harrassed for no reason! I mean, I wouldn't want people coming to where I work and shooting at me and trying to fight me for no reason! Oh wait, they already do. Never mind.
AndeyHall
Active member
I was talking specifically about rioters. Pretty sure I said in my post that protests are fine. Constitutional right. Violent protesters, the "pants up, don't loot" crowd if you will, were what I was referring to. The ones who use any excuse to cause destruction to local businesses and attack innocent people. Those people.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
Those people blend in with the protestors. I wouldn't put it past the cops to just open fire into the crowd to mow them all down as you put it. All ready, the cops involved can't see a difference with their physical attacks on news crews and verbal threats on the protesters.
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
whodat2710
New member
Really Blues? read it again without your thug colored glasses.
The race bating fool is trying to fill the shoes of his new position and saying what he thinks the new head of the CBC should say. He cares nothing about justice unless it fits his profile of a racist white cop gunning down a poor defenseless little black boy. If the grand jury, based on evidence provided, decides not to indict, it's racism not justice.
-
You really think that a member of the House from NC has the low-down on the happenings inside a grand jury proceeding in MO? You're smarter than that. I really don't think you believe the stuff you just posted.
Similarity - Black community enraged about an incident, and the whites are guilty until proven innocent (and if that happens it's racism). Remember that with Rodney King, there was video available that showed what happened prior to the police brutality and, while excessive at the end, Rodney did deserve to be restrained. and resistance to that provoked the initial attempt to subdue him. They sought too high of a charge against the cops, (due to pressure from the media and the black community) and that was the reason for the "not guilty".
-
The black community that is enraged does not have all the facts and does not really care. They have made up their mind, and no evidence to the contrary will be good enough. The media spurred the protests and the rioting from day one when there was nothing but "eyewitness" testimony, mucht of which has since been proved questionable or blatantly biased.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Blues said:
What Butterfield said describes exactly how I feel about it. I too hope the GJ indicts based on there being enough evidence to conclude that a crime was probably committed. I mean really, "probable cause" is just another way of saying what he used his own words to say. He also said another thing that I've said over and over; "To lay out that crime and to let a jury of twelve in Missouri decide the guilt or innocence of the police officer." The GJ's job is to base their decision on either the existence or non-existence of probable cause. They aren't empaneled to decide the case. That's a trial jury's job.
There's nothing he said that even approaches issuing a "warning" to the GJ, which is what your link alleges his words amounted to. And what he said was nothing like being akin to what your video said either. He talked of a constitutionally-compliant trial. He said let a jury of 12 citizens decide the guilt or innocence of Wilson. I don't like leftists or Democrats either, but you're just looking for something in that guy's words that isn't there.
He may well think that way, I don't know, but I do know that he's right that there's more than enough probable cause to bring a charge and to try both sides of the case in public, not in a secret proceeding where the people deciding can never be held accountable for their decision.
And I also think there's probable cause to believe that the prosecutor is biased beyond his ability to be objective, and he's the only public servant allowed in the secret proceedings. First he made the political decision to refer the case to the GJ when he has the autonomous authority to charge someone who he believes has committed a crime. He didn't want the political backlash from the cops he has to count on in making his career....er....umm....making his cases stick, so he threw the case to a bunch of anonymous people who will never have to explain why they ignored six eye-witnesses if they fail to indict.
Next he announced that he was going to show the GJ all of the evidence, meaning he's presenting at least part of Wilson's defense rather than presenting only what his job is as a prosecutor - presenting evidence that tends to show a crime was committed. If the GJ were to indict in such circumstances, then how credible would the same guy who stood up for Wilson's side in those proceedings be at trial as the "tough-on-crime" prosecutor only arguing the people's of Ferguson side of the case? So he threw the case to a bunch of anonymous people who will never have to explain why they ignored six eye-witnesses if they fail to indict and then set about the task of giving them reasons not to indict! What a country, huh?
As to the bolded sentences, no I don't, and yes, I absolutely do, in that order. As to the first bolded sentence, I think that's part of his rationale for being worried. I think as a former judge he knows what constitutes probable cause and believes that what's in the public record thus far establishes it in spades (no pun intended). But he's also likely heard the prosecutor talking about presenting both sides of the arguments to the GJ and is worried that that adds up to shenanigans, just like I do.
I don't like the guy's politics, but you're not going to convince me that he said anything even slightly controversial or racial in the article you linked to. He expressed legitimate concerns based on a ton of evidence from citizen witnesses, statements by the prosecutor, leaks from the GJ and on and on.
The reason I said there's nothing comparable to the King riots is because the cops were charged and a trial was conducted. At least the pretense of "justice" was accomplished, which gave no legitimacy to anyone who rioted after the verdicts were read on live TV. The riots started at Florence and Normandie less than a half hour later. There were zero peaceful protests preceding the riots, so there were no law-abiding protestors mixed in with criminal rioters. And the most glaring mistake you're making is in thinking it was only blacks engaging in the riots. It was free stuff for everybody who lacked the moral character to resist the temptation to go get 'em some.
The black community in Ferguson has no less than six people who all say Brown was trying to surrender or was not threatening Wilson in any way when the last volley of shots were fired. They believe those witnesses and they don't trust cops or the justice system. Is that really a surprise to you? Or are you in possession of evidence that nobody has reported on that suggests the cop-shops, prosecutors and courts are above paragons of virtue for which no criticism, skepticism or cynicism is justified by the people who live there and have to deal with them on a daily basis? Love to hear it if you've got it, but until I'm shown evidence to the contrary, I have no reason to completely disregard the accounts of eye-witnesses who are as consistent between themselves as any group of witnesses I can ever remember hearing from.
Blues
BC1
,
FINALLY SOMEONE TELLS BLACK LEADERS THE TRUTH
.
Gotta love Rudy. Anyone see Guiliani's comments this weekend?
.
Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani caused a firestorm of controversy Sunday when he questioned why people protest the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown but not black-on-black crime.
.
The heated argument arose on NBC’s “Meet the Press” during a discussion of why some police forces do not reflect the communities of color they patrol — as is the case in Ferguson, Mo., where protesters and authorities anxiously await a grand jury decision on whether to indict Officer Darren Wilson for shooting Brown.
.
'Why don’t you cut it down so so many white police officers don’t have to be in black areas?' Giuliani shouted during the Sunday morning talk show. 'The white police officers wouldn’t be there if you weren’t killing each other. I find it very disappointing that you’re not talking about the fact that 93% of blacks in America are killed by other blacks,” Giuliani added.
.
“What about the poor black child that was killed by another black child?” Giuliani asked. “Why aren’t you protesting that?… Why don’t you cut it down so that so many white police officers don’t have to be in black areas?”
.
Gotta love Rudy. Anyone see Guiliani's comments this weekend?
.
Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani caused a firestorm of controversy Sunday when he questioned why people protest the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown but not black-on-black crime.
.
The heated argument arose on NBC’s “Meet the Press” during a discussion of why some police forces do not reflect the communities of color they patrol — as is the case in Ferguson, Mo., where protesters and authorities anxiously await a grand jury decision on whether to indict Officer Darren Wilson for shooting Brown.
.
'Why don’t you cut it down so so many white police officers don’t have to be in black areas?' Giuliani shouted during the Sunday morning talk show. 'The white police officers wouldn’t be there if you weren’t killing each other. I find it very disappointing that you’re not talking about the fact that 93% of blacks in America are killed by other blacks,” Giuliani added.
.
“What about the poor black child that was killed by another black child?” Giuliani asked. “Why aren’t you protesting that?… Why don’t you cut it down so that so many white police officers don’t have to be in black areas?”
BluesStringer
Les Brers
There are statistics out there to validate any black person's concerns over the way "justice" is meted out in Ferguson, MO. As I said way back 470 posts ago in this thread, and as all those standing firmly on Wilson's side have either forgotten, ignored, or just missed when it was first brought to light, in 2013 three warrants were issued on average for every household in Ferguson. Of those warrants, 1.5 cases were brought per household in Ferguson.
Now I don't know about anybody else, but if those statistics were present in the jurisdiction where I live, I would stand with anybody willing to rise against it. I don't care about the race of the people being abused by the state. If the state can get away with targeting every single household (on average) every single year in a town that's 67% black, it can get away with targeting every single household in the most white-bread town in 'Murica, and oppression and corruption and abuse should trigger uprisings when they exist as pervasively and as unquestionably as such statistics prove they do in Ferguson, MO.
None of that excuses Brown's actions before or during the incident, or necessarily indicts Wilson personally, but it damn sure does explain the angry, distrustful and sometimes violent reactions of the residents who live under such state-imposed tyranny.
Perhaps some of the "Wilsonites" in this thread should read the post I linked to again, and maybe there's newcomers who missed it, but here it is in any case:
Some interesting statistics about how residents of the town of Ferguson, MO are treated by the "justice" system have just come to light:
2014-08-19 14:03 by Karl Denninger
Gee, did Mr. Brown get *****ed off at being confronted by a cop because he had a handful of stolen cigars in his hand or did he do so because on a historical basis walking or driving while black is the reason people get -- at least financially -- attacked in Ferguson on a literal daily basis?
Really?
Oh, it gets better:
So the court (intentionally) starts hearing cases before your appearance time and if you're not there before the time you were summoned you're at risk of having a second charge added for failure to appear. Then on top of that if you're as little as five minutes late the door to the building is locked, so you can't even plead your case that they called you before the time on the citation -- quite reasonably so, especially if you took public transit to get there. Now you wind up with a second charge against you, and no opportunity to contest it since, of course, there's no proof you were there as you can't get in.
Can anyone reasonably claim a rigged system like this generates 3 legitimate arrest warrants per household in a year?
REALLY?
Growing up with that all around you on a daily basis doesn't give you a perfectly-good reason to believe that a cop who stops short and exits his car because you're walking in the street, an "offense" that at worst should generate a jaywalking citation and on a residential street, which this was, it shouldn't generate anything at all except perhaps a rolled down window and a polite inquiry as to the fact that you're running the risk of getting hit by a car, might be an excellent indication of bad faith on the part of the officer?
THREE WARRANTS PER HOUSEHOLD folks and over $2.6 million in fines and fees last year, or to put a number on it about $130 per man, woman and child in the town? Over $500 per family of four on average?
This is legitimate rather than outright theft and extortion?
Riiiiiiight.
And on the question of how it might go if Wilson is ever prosecuted for civil rights violations or murder, consider this:
The state is woefully ill-equipped to meet its burden of proof that the state is guilty of a crime. A state prosecutor being run by a state-employed judge making his/her case against a state employee is the very definition of a stacked deck against the state's victims. It is the same frustration that led to the Bundy Siege that is driving the legitimate protesters (as opposed to the criminals) in Ferguson. The state cannot be trusted to police itself. It has been proved time after time after time. We, The People failed We, The People when neglecting to include severe penalties for any offense against the public trust when the Constitution was written and ratified. So, it's fair to just say, "That's the system, get over it," but the truth is at the bottom line that government can still not be trusted to police itself.
Blues
Now I don't know about anybody else, but if those statistics were present in the jurisdiction where I live, I would stand with anybody willing to rise against it. I don't care about the race of the people being abused by the state. If the state can get away with targeting every single household (on average) every single year in a town that's 67% black, it can get away with targeting every single household in the most white-bread town in 'Murica, and oppression and corruption and abuse should trigger uprisings when they exist as pervasively and as unquestionably as such statistics prove they do in Ferguson, MO.
None of that excuses Brown's actions before or during the incident, or necessarily indicts Wilson personally, but it damn sure does explain the angry, distrustful and sometimes violent reactions of the residents who live under such state-imposed tyranny.
Perhaps some of the "Wilsonites" in this thread should read the post I linked to again, and maybe there's newcomers who missed it, but here it is in any case:
Some interesting statistics about how residents of the town of Ferguson, MO are treated by the "justice" system have just come to light:
2014-08-19 14:03 by Karl Denninger
Gee, did Mr. Brown get *****ed off at being confronted by a cop because he had a handful of stolen cigars in his hand or did he do so because on a historical basis walking or driving while black is the reason people get -- at least financially -- attacked in Ferguson on a literal daily basis?
Really?
Oh, it gets better:
So the court (intentionally) starts hearing cases before your appearance time and if you're not there before the time you were summoned you're at risk of having a second charge added for failure to appear. Then on top of that if you're as little as five minutes late the door to the building is locked, so you can't even plead your case that they called you before the time on the citation -- quite reasonably so, especially if you took public transit to get there. Now you wind up with a second charge against you, and no opportunity to contest it since, of course, there's no proof you were there as you can't get in.
Can anyone reasonably claim a rigged system like this generates 3 legitimate arrest warrants per household in a year?
REALLY?
Growing up with that all around you on a daily basis doesn't give you a perfectly-good reason to believe that a cop who stops short and exits his car because you're walking in the street, an "offense" that at worst should generate a jaywalking citation and on a residential street, which this was, it shouldn't generate anything at all except perhaps a rolled down window and a polite inquiry as to the fact that you're running the risk of getting hit by a car, might be an excellent indication of bad faith on the part of the officer?
THREE WARRANTS PER HOUSEHOLD folks and over $2.6 million in fines and fees last year, or to put a number on it about $130 per man, woman and child in the town? Over $500 per family of four on average?
This is legitimate rather than outright theft and extortion?
Riiiiiiight.
Indeed experience hath shewn exactly that.
PS: What do you do when the MO of your city, on the numbers, is "Armed robbery by the police"?
PS: What do you do when the MO of your city, on the numbers, is "Armed robbery by the police"?
And on the question of how it might go if Wilson is ever prosecuted for civil rights violations or murder, consider this:
The state is woefully ill-equipped to meet its burden of proof that the state is guilty of a crime. A state prosecutor being run by a state-employed judge making his/her case against a state employee is the very definition of a stacked deck against the state's victims. It is the same frustration that led to the Bundy Siege that is driving the legitimate protesters (as opposed to the criminals) in Ferguson. The state cannot be trusted to police itself. It has been proved time after time after time. We, The People failed We, The People when neglecting to include severe penalties for any offense against the public trust when the Constitution was written and ratified. So, it's fair to just say, "That's the system, get over it," but the truth is at the bottom line that government can still not be trusted to police itself.
Blues
Courtney.cj.chen
Courtney
Verdict reached. Announcement coming soon.
http://fox2now.com/2014/11/24/grand-jury-reaches-decision-in-michael-brown-case/
http://fox2now.com/2014/11/24/grand-jury-reaches-decision-in-michael-brown-case/
r1derbike
New member
That's all we need. Another Kent State squared, or worse. One shot, and open the flood gates.
Nick Burkhardt
New member
Officer Darren Wilson marries Ferguson officer girlfriend | FOX2now.com
I wonder if he took her last name?
I wonder if he took her last name?
Courtney.cj.chen
Courtney
Announcement at 8 central. http://fox2now.com/2014/11/24/grand-jury-reaches-decision-in-michael-brown-case/
whodat2710
New member
This is what I mean by "thug-fluffing". Are you saying that all those warrants were bogus? What I see, both from those numbers and then seeing the community response to the whole MB thing, is a lawless community that gives your average officer even more of a reason to be suspicious of ANY person he comes in contact with. It would also give an officer every reason to believe that if he doesn't dispatch a criminal with evil intent quickly and efficiently, he may be facing more than one adversary in short order (since 150% of the population are criminals).
Nightmare45
NRA LIFE MEMBER
My rules of engagement is you attempt to harm myself or a member of my family, attempt to loot my business or attempt to burn home or business you will be shot dead, that's pretty clear, so all you moms of good boys make sure they stay good.
whodat2710
New member
I have to type something here so I can post it, but I've said all I intended to above.
Courtney.cj.chen
Courtney
Several witnesses talked to media immediately following the event. Several other witnesses chose not to talk to media and spoke with law enforcement directly. Hmm. I wonder why?
E
ezkl2230
Guest
No charges to be filed. No evidence to substantiate any charges - state OR FEDERAL.
Let the riots again.
Let the riots again.
New Threads
-
Recent TX Appeals Court declaration that ATF arm brace rule is unconstitutional
- Started by lw07
- Replies: 0
-
Hunter Constantine or Phlster Enigma, for running?
- Started by sigsag1
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
Members online
No members online now.