Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
On Saturday, Michael Brown, 18, was shot by a police officer in Ferguson, a suburb of St. Louis. The Ferguson Police Department has asserted that Brown assaulted the officer, whose name has not yet been released. Eyewitnesses, however, have disputed that claim and said Brown was killed while attempting to surrender or flee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Funny thing is that if the police account is true, then the cop who shot him is a hero and why wouldn't they release his name? After all he did attack a police officer with his bare hands, in a moving vehicle with an armed officer of the "law."

Shot him multiple times, and even shot him in the back, according to witness accounts.


SGG

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Ut oh...

'more than a dozen people have backed up Ferguson officer's story'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2728772/Second-friend-cop-shot
-dead-Michael-Brown-comes-defense-say-s-quiet-respectful-guy.html


Hey NOBC !!! Does this count ?

I know it's not exactly what I was posting , but the fact that the story is being backed up by MULTIPLE witnesses leads credence to my prior post.

Brown was the aggressor, and the cop acted in self defense.

That's not ME saying that, but the story from many who claim they saw it, and the story ( allegedly ) that the cop himself has given.

---

Quote:

---

St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter who tweeted on Monday that 'more than a dozen witnesses corroborated cop's story' later admitted she was on leave and her post was 'personal'

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Yeah OK you are confusing things NOBC. Are you going to respond to what I have been posting today as apposed to just criticizing my spelling.

---

Quote:

---

One of the stranger subcultures of the #Ferguson moment is the spontaneous support group that's collected to support Officer Darren Wilson. Gideon Resnick reports on the most prominent GoFundMe page and T-shirt campaign and Facebook group of the movement, and got a few comments from organizers. (I've requested some comments, too, because I am absolutely terrible at book leave.) They say what you might expect: They wish this situation weren't racialized. "Al and Jesse would never come out from cowardly hiding if it were a black cop and white offender," says one organizer, very un-racist-ly.

I say this is strange because Wilson has not been arrested. The GoFundMe page, which has raised more than $21,000 (and was started in St. Charles, the conservative county outside St. Louis), explains that "all proceeds will be sent directly to Darren Wilson and his family for any financial needs they may have including legal fees." The legal fees, currently, would pay for nothing. That's sort of why protesters keep taking over the streets. (By contrast, the George Zimmerman defense fund only started going after Zimmerman was arrested.)

Who would be so moved by Wilson's legal non-plight to organize for him? We Support Officer Darren Wilson, the Facebook group, greets visitors with this message: "We do NOT SUPPORT RACISM OF ANY KIND. HATRED, RACISM AND NEGGATIVE COMMENTS OR POSTS WILL RESULT IN YOUR REMOVAL OF THE GROUP." One of the group admins is Ryder Wingrath, who on Aug. 16 changed his Facebook avatar to a meme of solidarity. The change was celebrated on his Facebook wall.

---

Quote:

---

Bernie Blair: I think the cop is a hero. One down, many more to go. August 16 at 3:56 PM

---

Quote:

---

…NOBC
I love that line with the ALL CAPS. Hey, Thug, did you write it? Or is it just somebody who can't spell any better than you can? And misbehavior will result in REMOVAL OF THE GROUP... Huh? THey're all gonna go away and leave you alone? or maybe they mean "from" the group? But ya can see the importance of proper spelling and of proper word usage.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:

Well, haven't looked at your link, so I can't say what's in it, BUT, yep it backs his story. Almost exactly as much as the bunch of witnesses that back Mike Brown's side, the ones that YOU keep rejecting.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Autopsey out. Brown not shot in the back.

---

ANd only shot 6 ties, not 10 as FREM suggested. 'Course one of those 6 was in the top of the head, and one went in near the right eye, came out the jaw, and went in near the collarbone. And none of them were close enough to leave powder burns.

" Now, tell me , Dr. Quincy, what does that suggest, forensically, about the positions and actions of the police officer and the deceased at the moment of the shooting?"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

..., and then the revelations that the cop had a busted eye socket

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
On Saturday, Michael Brown, 18, was shot by a police officer in Ferguson, a suburb of St. Louis. The Ferguson Police Department has asserted that Brown assaulted the officer, whose name has not yet been released. Eyewitnesses, however, have disputed that claim and said Brown was killed while attempting to surrender or flee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Funny thing is that if the police account is true, then the cop who shot him is a hero and why wouldn't they release his name? After all he did attack a police officer with his bare hands, in a moving vehicle with an armed officer of the "law."

Shot him multiple times, and even shot him in the back, according to witness accounts.


SGG

---

Maybe getting over the 300 post hump made me have to at least click on this link....

It's very sad. I do believe that Rappy is right and an autopsy will make the right conclusions if it's all done properly.... and I hope to God that given how prevalent this case seems to be to the public that it is all done by the book for everyone involved.

I'm really hoping that the answer lies somewhere in the fringes and that either the Cops were right and the kid was a Murderous Leech on society or that the local police station there conspired to kill this kid hoping that their shields would.... well... shield them from any blowback....

Chances are, the truth lies somwhere in the middle and this story, no matter how sad it is, is just another one that I wish I never knew about...

That's my vote. Cops are dicks. The dead kid was a dick. Case closed.

I know one of these days there will be a REAL Batman and even the dirty cops will cower in fear.

In the mean time... whatever.....

Sorry black teen's Mother. Even if he was the biggest asshole in the world, and I'm not even suggesting he was since I know nothing about the story, you never stopped loving him.

I really hope he wasn't a bad guy and that those responsible for his death are made to pay.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
When being charged, assaulted, battered by thugs, once shooting commences there are not too many rules about stopping the shots, at least until the assailant stops. Many places have "no warning shots" rules - once a shot has been fired, it is to be fatal shots attempted. When Angel Dust thugs attack, they do not stop after an entire clip is unloded into them - and the cop has no way of knowing if a non-compliant assailant is in that state or not.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

I know the belief of many is that the cops should not have released the video of Brown robbing the store. The cop did not know it at the time so it was irrelevant. It does go to show Browns mood just moments before he was approached by the cop. Also Brown had no way of knowing the cop did not know.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
I am going to let this go for a while. My thing is more about why this keeps happening and what are the root causes. We really need a fix for this but I do not see that happening.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Well 6SJ,

Here's how I look at it.

It doesn't matter what the kid did, or if he was an asshole or not. Crossing against the light, shoplifting cigars, jaywalking, what have you.

Fact: He was unarmed

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Normally, to attack, you need to be upright. The doctor stated that the fatal shots were the ones to the head. Those were definitely fired on a downward angle. Unless the officer got up on a ladder................

SGG

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
When being charged, assaulted, battered by thugs, once shooting commences there are not too many rules about stopping the shots, at least until the assailant stops. Many places have "no warning shots" rules - once a shot has been fired, it is to be fatal shots attempted. When Angel Dust thugs attack, they do not stop after an entire clip is unloded into them - and the cop has no way of knowing if a non-compliant assailant is in that state or not.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
officer recognized stolen items after stopping the kid.

---

saw The Rap mention that one.

Haven't seen that item ANYWHERE ELSE, and I've been looking for it. I'd REALLY like to verify that. Don't suppose you have a source for that item of "anecdotal evidence? And how does that square with the PD Chief himself saying that the officer did not know about the reported crime at the liquor store?

Did this cop just get an ESP flash--"Hey, those cigars look just like the ones in the crime report I'm gonna get in a few minutes." Temporal telekinesis, a new police tool...?

---

Not sure if your logic and curiosity have been satisfied since this post, or not.

I think I heard this on one of the following radio shows: Mark Levin or Dennis Miller (the previous evening) or Sean Hannity Show just prior to posting that reply. Sean has a website and a show on FNC as well, I think.

What I had understood was this:
The cop did not connect the black thug with the store theft at first, possibly because the shoplifting, having just taken place, had not been broadcast yet.
At some point during the incident, the cop either realized the thug had expensive cigars, or heard the broadcast of the recent shoplifting in the neighborhood, and noted the connection with the cigars in the hands of the thug.... er, um, unarmed teenage thug.

The Chief or whomever, stated the first part of the above, specifically in reference to a FOI request, which is usually handled (at the direction of some lawyer, like a Prosecuting Attorney) in the most non-effusive way, so as not to reveal too much of the case. The part about the non-connection was accurate AT THE BEGINNING of the interaction, but the Chief did not elaborate about the ensuing developments.

I'm not trying to confuse anything, but that was the way I recall what I had heard. Does that make sense to you?

---

Glad to know that you get your news from Sean Hannity, Dennis Miller, and Mark Levin, ( all EXTREMELY reliable, totally objective journalists-- NOT!.)by listening to it on the radio, rather than by READING it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Normally, to attack, you need to be upright. The doctor stated that the fatal shots were the ones to the head. Those were definitely fired on a downward angle. Unless the officer got up on a ladder................

SGG

---

Are you clueless? Have you never, ever, heard to "keep your shoulders down" when charging an opponent? Any athlete chargin an opponent without their helmet and shoulders down will be beaten "at the line of scrimmage" in our popular sport, and will be taken off the starting roster. Why would somebody charge another running with upright posture, like a girl? Do you think he ran upright at the patrol car and attacked it with his knees? Even if the kid is a criminal, are you suggesting he was stupid to the point of retardation that would prompt him to attack a car with his knees? If not, then he likely had his shoulders down when he hit the car.
Come on, use a little sense.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
When being charged, assaulted, battered by thugs, once shooting commences there are not too many rules about stopping the shots, at least until the assailant stops. Many places have "no warning shots" rules - once a shot has been fired, it is to be fatal shots attempted. When Angel Dust thugs attack, they do not stop after an entire clip is unloded into them - and the cop has no way of knowing if a non-compliant assailant is in that state or not.

---

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Well 6SJ,

Here's how I look at it.

It doesn't matter what the kid did, or if he was an asshole or not. Crossing against the light, shoplifting cigars, jaywalking, what have you.

Fact: He was unarmed

---

Many states recognize hands as lethal weapons. How many reasonable people would truly consider a 6'4" 300 pound criminal high on angel dust or whatever he was on to be unarmed? And the point of being compliant in the presense of and armed officer is to allow them to verify that you are NOT in possession of a weapon - if you don't comply, they must assume you are armed, and put you down.

Quote:

---

Fact: He was shot 6 times

Fact: The police are hired to keep the peace, arrest lawbreakers and bring them to justice.

---

Surely this is a reasonable argument - society needs police (this is in America, not some backwater theocracy) to arrest criminals, and those criminals who choose to commit more crimes by resisting arrest so they can continue to commit more crimes should be stopped at all costs.
I recall the times serial killers have been stopped amidst their sprees when officers did not adhere to commands to cease pursuit, only to find that the reason for fleeing was the corpse of the 26th victim was wrapped in carpet in the truck bed - would not have been stopped if we would just let all those criminals carry on if they don't feel like pulling over amidst the commission of a crime.
Good plan.

Quote:

---

Not to be judge, jury and executioner.

---

OOoops. Spoke too soon, poster went off the rails. Accidentally swerved into sensible thinking above, but now has returned to the quicksand of libtardity.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
1. Unarmed. Must I spell it out for you?

2. I made a clear enough statement. Cops arrest people, they are not "charged" with executing them at will. We are a nation of laws, unless you come from a "backwater theocracy" where you make up the rules as you go along.

The rest of your comments, I swat away like I would a gnat.
But, of course, you will continue to try and provoke.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
I am going to let this go for a while. My thing is more about why this keeps happening and what are the root causes. We really need a fix for this but I do not see that happening.

---

Stats say it doesn't happen all that much. Black males are FAR more in danger from other black males.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
This is the REAL WORLD. . . .
More info needs to come out, but as of now, there's at least reasonable doubt, in my mind, that the cop MAY have acted correctly.

---

Quote:

---

The Ferguson police said Brown was the suspect in the robbery of some cigars at a store, and released a grainy security video to prove it. Then they said Officer Wilson did not know Brown was a suspect. Then they said he did know. Then they said, for reasons passing understanding, that Brown had marijuana in his system. Then it came to light that Brown, in fact, paid for his cigars. Meanwhile, with every story switch by the police, the protesters in the street got hotter and angrier and louder. The arrests began, sweeping up journalists along with protesters, along with local citizens just trying to go about their business...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
1. Unarmed. Must I spell it out for you?

2. I made a clear enough statement. Cops arrest people, they are not "charged" with executing them at will. We are a nation of laws, unless you come from a "backwater theocracy" where you make up the rules as you go along.

The rest of your comments, I swat away like I would a gnat.
But, of course, you will continue to try and provoke.

Here's a scenario:

I'm a cop and I see you walking toward me. I pull my service revolver and blow your head off. According to your weak statements, I would be justified in the shooting because you were coming at me in a threatening manner. My shoot would be justified, merely because you assumed the "attack position"

That would be my story. According to you, I would walk away scott free.
That's about right, isn't it?
Law and Order!


SGG

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Well 6SJ,

Here's how I look at it.

It doesn't matter what the kid did, or if he was an asshole or not. Crossing against the light, shoplifting cigars, jaywalking, what have you.

Fact: He was unarmed

---

Many states recognize hands as lethal weapons. How many reasonable people would truly consider a 6'4" 300 pound criminal high on angel dust or whatever he was on to be unarmed? And the point of being compliant in the presense of and armed officer is to allow them to verify that you are NOT in possession of a weapon - if you don't comply, they must assume you are armed, and put you down.

Quote:

---

Fact: He was shot 6 times

Fact: The police are hired to keep the peace, arrest lawbreakers and bring them to justice.

---

Surely this is a reasonable argument - society needs police (this is in America, not some backwater theocracy) to arrest criminals, and those criminals who choose to commit more crimes by resisting arrest so they can continue to commit more crimes should be stopped at all costs.
I recall the times serial killers have been stopped amidst their sprees when officers did not adhere to commands to cease pursuit, only to find that the reason for fleeing was the corpse of the 26th victim was wrapped in carpet in the truck bed - would not have been stopped if we would just let all those criminals carry on if they don't feel like pulling over amidst the commission of a crime.
Good plan.

Quote:

---

Not to be judge, jury and executioner.

---

OOoops. Spoke too soon, poster went off the rails. Accidentally swerved into sensible thinking above, but now has returned to the quicksand of libtardity.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

My rush to dishonesty here is staggering.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
OH, CRAPPY DOES THAT ALL THE TIME. I WAS JUST RETURNING IT BACK TO HIM. YOU'RE OK WHEN CRAPPY DOES IT, THOUGH. YOU ONLY TAKE ISSUE WITH PEOPLE WHO CHALLENGE YOUR 'FACTS'. YOU HAVE MENTAL PROBLEMS.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
1. Unarmed. Must I spell it out for you?

2. I made a clear enough statement. Cops arrest people, they are not "charged" with executing them at will. We are a nation of laws, unless you come from a "backwater theocracy" where you make up the rules as you go along.

The rest of your comments, I swat away like I would a gnat.
But, of course, you will continue to try and provoke.

---

Anyone know why a cop carries a gun? It's not to protect the public, but to protect THEMSELVES.

Armed or unarmed, it doesn't matter. If a cop is being attacked ( in this case, by a 6'4" 300lb male ) and suffers a broken socket from the conflict, things have just gotten real.

There was no ' execution at will ' here. There was a scuffle, a physical altercation, leading up to the shooting.

Those are the facts. Did the cop justifiably use his weapon ? Don't know yet. IS there any scenario where a cop could have used his weapon, vs an unarmed assailant ? Not in the best case scenario, but guess what ? This is the REAL WORLD. So the answer to that is, yes, there are times where use of such force is justifiable. Ignoring all the myths and hysteria that's been fabricated about this case, the hard cold truth is, sometimes a cop is allowed to defend himself.

More info needs to come out, but as of now, there's at least reasonable doubt, in my mind, that the cop MAY have acted correctly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
So, let's total up the disinformation

cigars - paid for
officer - no broken eye socket
Brown - not a suspect
Brown - not killed in a close-quarters struggle

- meanwhile the Ferguson town council and PD look worse and worse -

---