• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Happy Jack

Ferguson teen robbed a store moments before being shot dead?

Recommended Posts

Michael Brown is a suspect in a strongarm (no weapon) robbery of a convenience store and assault moments before being stopped and shot. The officer was responding to the 911 call when he confronted Brown.

 

Brown's companion, also a suspect in the robbery and the prime witness in the shooting, said the officer just wanted them to move out of the street. That story now seen suspect in light of the security photos from the robbery and the fact that the officer was responding to a 911 call and looking for a large back man and his companion.

 

Seeing two individuals that fit the description it is unlikely the offerer just wanted them to use the sidewalk.

 

zxnn6g.jpg

 

 

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/08/15/state-troopers-walk-side-by-side-with-thousands-of-protesters-in-ferguson/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am guessing that as more information comes out it will look better and better for the police officer.

 

Why was this information so slow coming out? If the initial reports had been "Robbery and Assault suspect shot by police" maybe the riot would have been avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I am guessing that as more information comes out it will look better and better for the police officer.

Why was this information so slow coming out? If the initial reports had been "Robbery and Assault suspect shot by police" maybe the riot would have been avoided.

I think 'cuz his parents had only five days to find a pic of their son on Santa's lap....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I can remember back in the olden days when they just arrested you for robbery, now they flat out execute you. Compare to ISIS who just hacks your arms off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea, it would seem that information about the robbery would have been helpful. But I will say that I had heard he had stolen something. But the security footage changes things quite a bit. It shows that he wasn't some gentle giant. It also changes the dynamic when the officer first showed up to talk to Mr. Brown and his friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I can remember back in the olden days when they just arrested you for robbery, now they flat out execute you. Compare to ISIS who just hacks your arms off.

 

Oh well, at least the community gene pool has one less chunk of feces floating in it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could still end up being an unjustified shooting. Obviously just because someone committed the crime the Mr. Brown did doesn't mean they need to be shot. All this does is lend credit to the officers story.

 

It also hurts the credibility of the first witness to come forward. He was the accomplice in the robbery and stated that they hadn't done anything wrong and that the officer was just telling them to get out of the street. So it hurts his story to some extent.

 

Now I will say as I said at the beginning of this post. We still don't know what happened at the scene. All this does is help us figure out why the officer was there making contact with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could still end up being an unjustified shooting. Obviously just because someone committed the crime the Mr. Brown did doesn't mean they need to be shot. All this does is lend credit to the officers story.

 

It also hurts the credibility of the first witness to come forward. He was the accomplice in the robbery and stated that they hadn't done anything wrong and that the officer was just telling them to get out of the street. So it hurts his story to some extent.

 

Now I will say as I said at the beginning of this post. We still don't know what happened at the scene. All this does is help us figure out why the officer was there making contact with them.

 

The 911 call and the instructions given the officer all play into it too. Did the officer know it was a strong arm robbery and there was no weapon used?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy the recordings are out there I believe. But if it had come out as an armed robbery with a weapon I doubt the officer would have driven up to the suspects. I know I wouldn't have, if I believed they had a gun they would have been given orders from a long ways off with my rifle pointed at them. At least far enough that if a gunfight starts I would have an advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can an officer shoot a suspect fleeing a violent crime even if there is no immediate threat to the officer? For instance. Suspect knocks armored car courier to ground takes money and tries to take the courier's gun but fails and then he and an accomplice jump in their car and start to drive off. The currier still on the ground and no longer being threatened by the robbers, draws his gun and shoots one of the robbers through the door of his fleeing car

 

 

Is the courier guilty of attempted murder? Suspect was only wounded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy the recordings are out there I believe. But if it had come out as an armed robbery with a weapon I doubt the officer would have driven up to the suspects. I know I wouldn't have, if I believed they had a gun they would have been given orders from a long ways off with my rifle pointed at them. At least far enough that if a gunfight starts I would have an advantage.

 

That would also depend on the geometry of the scene. The forensics will play a huge role in the final determination. More so than the Eye witness accounts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will come down to forensics. Entrance wounds and range will be key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be pretty borderline. In that particular incident as the officer you could articulate that they were a continued threat to the public or other officers.

 

Tennessee Vs. Garner states that we can't shoot a fleeing felon unless we believe that they still pose a threat to the public or other officers in the area.



But in the shooting in Ferguson it will all come down to the forensics, Mr. Brown was unarmed. But I fully believe that he might have attempted to take the officers gun. Just a matter of time before the results of the investigation come out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be pretty borderline. In that particular incident as the officer you could articulate that they were a continued threat to the public or other officers.

 

Tennessee Vs. Garner states that we can't shoot a fleeing felon unless we believe that they still pose a threat to the public or other officers in the area.

 

But in the shooting in Ferguson it will all come down to the forensics, Mr. Brown was unarmed. But I fully believe that he might have attempted to take the officers gun. Just a matter of time before the results of the investigation come out.

 

As far as I could find out the courier was not charged. It is a stretch but he could argue that once he calls in the robbery the robbers become a threat to the police that would converge on the area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be pretty borderline. In that particular incident as the officer you could articulate that they were a continued threat to the public or other officers.

 

Tennessee Vs. Garner states that we can't shoot a fleeing felon unless we believe that they still pose a threat to the public or other officers in the area.

 

But in the shooting in Ferguson it will all come down to the forensics, Mr. Brown was unarmed. But I fully believe that he might have attempted to take the officers gun. Just a matter of time before the results of the investigation come out.

 

 

Do we know if the patrol car had a dash cam? If it did then the audio of the initial confrontation and struggle will be on it. That would go a long way toward corroborating one story or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it would be pretty easy to argue that if the had just robbed him at gunpoint they might not be afraid to do the same to someone else. If he had reacted differently and gone for his gun he likely would have been shot.

 

I will say... that man shouldn't be an officer. No one that physically out of shape should be. I don't want him showing up to back me up. What if I need him to run to back me up..... that isn't going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, there is no video from the police departments side of things.

 

Several witnesses have stated they had video but none have been turned in as of yet. The ones that have been turned in start when Mr. Brown is laying in the street already.

 

That would be pretty borderline. In that particular incident as the officer you could articulate that they were a continued threat to the public or other officers.

 

Tennessee Vs. Garner states that we can't shoot a fleeing felon unless we believe that they still pose a threat to the public or other officers in the area.



But in the shooting in Ferguson it will all come down to the forensics, Mr. Brown was unarmed. But I fully believe that he might have attempted to take the officers gun. Just a matter of time before the results of the investigation come out.

 

 

Do we know if the patrol car had a dash cam? If it did then the audio of the initial confrontation and struggle will be on it. That would go a long way toward corroborating one story or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it would be pretty easy to argue that if the had just robbed him at gunpoint they might not be afraid to do the same to someone else. If he had reacted differently and gone for his gun he likely would have been shot.

 

I will say... that man shouldn't be an officer. No one that physically out of shape should be. I don't want him showing up to back me up. What if I need him to run to back me up..... that isn't going to happen.

 

On the other hand, that rocker gut brought him back on target quicker than a skinny guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it would be pretty easy to argue that if the had just robbed him at gunpoint they might not be afraid to do the same to someone else. If he had reacted differently and gone for his gun he likely would have been shot.

 

I will say... that man shouldn't be an officer. No one that physically out of shape should be. I don't want him showing up to back me up. What if I need him to run to back me up..... that isn't going to happen.

 

Guess that is why he drives a Brinks truck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No, there is no video from the police departments side of things.

 

Several witnesses have stated they had video but none have been turned in as of yet. The ones that have been turned in start when Mr. Brown is laying in the street already.

 

That would be pretty borderline. In that particular incident as the officer you could articulate that they were a continued threat to the public or other officers.

 

Tennessee Vs. Garner states that we can't shoot a fleeing felon unless we believe that they still pose a threat to the public or other officers in the area.

 

But in the shooting in Ferguson it will all come down to the forensics, Mr. Brown was unarmed. But I fully believe that he might have attempted to take the officers gun. Just a matter of time before the results of the investigation come out.

 

 

Do we know if the patrol car had a dash cam? If it did then the audio of the initial confrontation and struggle will be on it. That would go a long way toward corroborating one story or the other.

 

No video obviously since typical dash cams look forward but what about audio?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry happy I should have been more clear. It is my understanding that the Ferguson Police Department doesn't have cameras or audio in any of it's cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I am guessing that as more information comes out it will look better and better for the police officer.

Why was this information so slow coming out? If the initial reports had been "Robbery and Assault suspect shot by police" maybe the riot would have been avoided.

I think 'cuz his parents had only five days to find a pic of their son on Santa's lap....

 

You pegged that right ... The first family photo surfaced

 

I'm coining the verb "to Trayvonize" To use younger and innocent looking photos to dupe you into having sympathy for someone older and much less lovable.

 

 

24dhvte.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be pretty borderline. In that particular incident as the officer you could articulate that they were a continued threat to the public or other officers.

 

Tennessee Vs. Garner states that we can't shoot a fleeing felon unless we believe that they still pose a threat to the public or other officers in the area.

 

But in the shooting in Ferguson it will all come down to the forensics, Mr. Brown was unarmed. But I fully believe that he might have attempted to take the officers gun. Just a matter of time before the results of the investigation come out.

 

 

Jack is asking about a private guard, not a government employee.

 

That guard has a duty to protect the money and a right to protect himself, no general duty to protect the public by killing fleeing felons, nor any authorization to do so.

 

I'd convict him of attempted murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I am guessing that as more information comes out it will look better and better for the police officer.

Why was this information so slow coming out? If the initial reports had been "Robbery and Assault suspect shot by police" maybe the riot would have been avoided.

I think 'cuz his parents had only five days to find a pic of their son on Santa's lap....

 

You pegged that right ... The first family photo surfaced

 

I'm coining the verb "to Trayvonize" To use younger and innocent looking photos to dupe you into having sympathy for someone older and much less lovable.

 

 

24dhvte.jpg

OMG...he's just a child!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That would be pretty borderline. In that particular incident as the officer you could articulate that they were a continued threat to the public or other officers.

 

Tennessee Vs. Garner states that we can't shoot a fleeing felon unless we believe that they still pose a threat to the public or other officers in the area.

 

But in the shooting in Ferguson it will all come down to the forensics, Mr. Brown was unarmed. But I fully believe that he might have attempted to take the officers gun. Just a matter of time before the results of the investigation come out.

 

 

Jack is asking about a private guard, not a government employee.

 

That guard has a duty to protect the money and a right to protect himself, no general duty to protect the public by killing fleeing felons, nor any authorization to do so.

 

I'd convict him of attempted murder.

 

Actually I'm curious about both cases and what the case law actually says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just heard that the robbery had nothing at all to do with the stop. The officer did not know about Brown's robbery at the time he stopped him.

 

Another example of why waiting for the facts and details is prudent in situations like this..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just heard that the robbery had nothing at all to do with the stop. The officer did not know about Brown's robbery at the time he stopped him.

 

Another example of why waiting for the facts and details is prudent in situations like this..

. Yep. On one hand cop didn't know on the other hand the two suspected thieves did. How they reacted to a cop pulling up right after the robbery went down could also be key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regatta Dog, I had heard that also. If you read the police report you will see that the they attached the radio transmission log to the report. In that log the description of the robbery suspect was given over the radio. Then the officer made contact with him 3 minutes later just around the corner. I doubt that it wasn't in relation. But I don't know for sure.

 

There's a lot we don't know for sure, and some of us are more unsure than others.

 

In the press conference, the police chief was asked why the police released the video of the robbery if not to suggest it played a roll in the incident. The chief said they did so because it was part of the report and that the press had asked for it.

 

We'll see how all this gets spun on the evening news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just heard that the robbery had nothing at all to do with the stop. The officer did not know about Brown's robbery at the time he stopped him.

 

Another example of why waiting for the facts and details is prudent in situations like this..

 

If Brown knew about it. It might explain his haste to leave the area and the reported use of force at the police car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Regatta Dog,

I read the article after I had posted that and edited it to acknowledge that I was mistaken.

 

That is something I fear as an officer, pull up to talk to someone and they have just committed a crime and you have no idea. They are already in fight or flight mode while you are still in Officer friendly mode.

 

Regatta Dog, I had heard that also. If you read the police report you will see that the they attached the radio transmission log to the report. In that log the description of the robbery suspect was given over the radio. Then the officer made contact with him 3 minutes later just around the corner. I doubt that it wasn't in relation. But I don't know for sure.

 

There's a lot we don't know for sure, and some of us are more unsure than others.

 

In the press conference, the police chief was asked why the police released the video of the robbery if not to suggest it played a roll in the incident. The chief said they did so because it was part of the report and that the press had asked for it.

 

We'll see how all this gets spun on the evening news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Regatta Dog, I had heard that also. If you read the police report you will see that the they attached the radio transmission log to the report. In that log the description of the robbery suspect was given over the radio. Then the officer made contact with him 3 minutes later just around the corner. I doubt that it wasn't in relation. But I don't know for sure.

There's a lot we don't know for sure, and some of us are more unsure than others.

 

In the press conference, the police chief was asked why the police released the video of the robbery if not to suggest it played a roll in the incident. The chief said they did so because it was part of the report and that the press had asked for it.

 

We'll see how all this gets spun on the evening news.

 

 

Whoever asked the chief that question needs a kick in the pussy.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

I am guessing that as more information comes out it will look better and better for the police officer.

Why was this information so slow coming out? If the initial reports had been "Robbery and Assault suspect shot by police" maybe the riot would have been avoided.

I think 'cuz his parents had only five days to find a pic of their son on Santa's lap....

 

You pegged that right ... The first family photo surfaced

 

I'm coining the verb "to Trayvonize" To use younger and innocent looking photos to dupe you into having sympathy for someone older and much less lovable.

 

 

24dhvte.jpg

OMG...he's just a child!

Sooo innocent......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just heard that the robbery had nothing at all to do with the stop. The officer did not know about Brown's robbery at the time he stopped him.

 

Another example of why waiting for the facts and details is prudent in situations like this..

 

According to CBS NEWS...

 

"Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson said Friday morning that Officer Darren Wilson fatally shot the unarmed African-American teen last Saturday following a convenience store robbery call. Wilson has been with the Ferguson Police Department for the past six years and previously had no disciplinary action taken against him.Jackson said Wilson, along with other officers, was called to the area after a 911 call reporting a “strong-arm robbery” at a nearby convenience store."

 

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/08/15/state-troopers-walk-side-by-side-with-thousands-of-protesters-in-ferguson/

 

 

What is the source you heard from dog?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinda points out the arrogance of youth. You just robbed a store and rather than comply with a cop to stay under the radar you decide to basically tell the cop to fuck off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_289563/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=vJ0wbso5

 

"Police Chief Thomas Jackson said the officer did not know the teen was a robbery suspect at the time of the shooting and stopped Michael Brown and a companion "because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic"

 

Exact opposite of the CBS report. One is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_289563/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=vJ0wbso5

 

"Police Chief Thomas Jackson said the officer did not know the teen was a robbery suspect at the time of the shooting and stopped Michael Brown and a companion "because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic"

 

 

There were two press conferences - Jack posted the morning one and Sean the afternoon. I'd go with the latter.

 

I can understand exploiting advantages and confusion in the heat of battle, but this shouldn't be a battle. Those who make assumptions without pertinent information are simply fueling the flames of unrest.

 

It is irresponsible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_289563/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=vJ0wbso5

 

"Police Chief Thomas Jackson said the officer did not know the teen was a robbery suspect at the time of the shooting and stopped Michael Brown and a companion "because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic"

 

 

There were two press conferences - Jack posted the morning one and Sean the afternoon. I'd go with the latter.

 

I can understand exploiting advantages and confusion in the heat of battle, but this shouldn't be a battle. Those who make assumptions without pertinent information are simply fueling the flames of unrest.

 

It is irresponsible.

 

So lets review. I post what CBS news reports and that's irresponsible and exploitive.

 

Then you post a contradictory source exactly as I did and the makes you what?

 

edit : I see you say " I'd go with the latter." ... well when I posted it was the latest.

 

Tell me something. have things changed or are robbery reports broadcast to all the units in an area and those that are available and nearest, radio that they are responding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack don't take it personal. I heard both press conferences. The later one really was the chief confirming that the officer was not responding to the 911 call. That does not mean he didn't hear the call over the radio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack don't take it personal. I heard both press conferences. The later one really was the chief confirming that the officer was not responding to the 911 call. That does not mean he didn't hear the call over the radio.

 

Dog is a hypocrite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

That would be pretty borderline. In that particular incident as the officer you could articulate that they were a continued threat to the public or other officers.

 

Tennessee Vs. Garner states that we can't shoot a fleeing felon unless we believe that they still pose a threat to the public or other officers in the area.

 

 

But in the shooting in Ferguson it will all come down to the forensics, Mr. Brown was unarmed. But I fully believe that he might have attempted to take the officers gun. Just a matter of time before the results of the investigation come out.

 

Jack is asking about a private guard, not a government employee.

 

That guard has a duty to protect the money and a right to protect himself, no general duty to protect the public by killing fleeing felons, nor any authorization to do so.

 

I'd convict him of attempted murder.

Actually I'm curious about both cases and what the case law actually says.

I doubt the rules governing security guards are any different from those governing CWP holders. We can defend ourselves and others against imminent threats, but can't shoot someone to stop them from getting away. Even if they seem dangerous, if they are not an imminent threat to one or more identifiable individuals, deadly force can't be used.

 

The rules are different for Missouri cops...

 

http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/15/missouris-standard-for-use-of-deadly-for

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_289563/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=vJ0wbso5

 

"Police Chief Thomas Jackson said the officer did not know the teen was a robbery suspect at the time of the shooting and stopped Michael Brown and a companion "because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic"

 

 

There were two press conferences - Jack posted the morning one and Sean the afternoon. I'd go with the latter.

 

I can understand exploiting advantages and confusion in the heat of battle, but this shouldn't be a battle. Those who make assumptions without pertinent information are simply fueling the flames of unrest.

 

It is irresponsible.

 

So lets review. I post what CBS news reports and that's irresponsible and exploitive.

 

Then you post a contradictory source exactly as I did and the makes you what?

 

edit : I see you say " I'd go with the latter." ... well when I posted it was the latest.

 

Tell me something. have things changed or are robbery reports broadcast to all the units in an area and those that are available and nearest, radio that they are responding.

 

You don't get it. I posted a source of information without drawing any conclusions other than wait for all the facts and details or STFU.

 

See the difference?

 

As to your last question - why don't you and Ed have an Internet slap fight over it until the facts prove one of you wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Jack don't take it personal. I heard both press conferences. The later one really was the chief confirming that the officer was not responding to the 911 call. That does not mean he didn't hear the call over the radio.

 

Dog is a hypocrite.

 

Please point out how I am a hypocrite, and please stop referring to me by the moniker of my esteemed colleague Dog. I am Regatta Dog or RD.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I can remember back in the olden days when they just arrested you for robbery, now they flat out execute you. Compare to ISIS who just hacks your arms off.

I do think the ISIS comparison helps.

 

Clearly though, if an unarmed man puts his hands in the air and the officer keeps shooting then it's an execution. There is no other way to look at it. Doesn't matter what crime he committed an hour ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_289563/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=vJ0wbso5

 

"Police Chief Thomas Jackson said the officer did not know the teen was a robbery suspect at the time of the shooting and stopped Michael Brown and a companion "because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic"

 

 

There were two press conferences - Jack posted the morning one and Sean the afternoon. I'd go with the latter.

 

I can understand exploiting advantages and confusion in the heat of battle, but this shouldn't be a battle. Those who make assumptions without pertinent information are simply fueling the flames of unrest.

 

It is irresponsible.

 

So lets review. I post what CBS news reports and that's irresponsible and exploitive.

 

Then you post a contradictory source exactly as I did and the makes you what?

 

edit : I see you say " I'd go with the latter." ... well when I posted it was the latest.

 

Tell me something. have things changed or are robbery reports broadcast to all the units in an area and those that are available and nearest, radio that they are responding.

 

You don't get it. I posted a source of information without drawing any conclusions other than wait for all the facts and details or STFU.

 

See the difference?

 

As to your last question - why don't you and Ed have an Internet slap fight over it until the facts prove one of you wrong.

 

 

BS. You drew the conclusion that the Officer was not aware of the robbery. Go back and read my posts and point out the Sweeping Conclusions I drew. All I see is saying that the police chief's pronouncement calls the witness's story into question.

 

I offered up no grand conclusion. Only Walter gets to say "and that's the way it is".

 

My follow on posts ask questions; asking what is known. They contain zero conclusions.

 

You are a bad reader. A hypocrite and a "Hey I'm a conservative but look at me I dump on Happy too." but if giving hand jobs to the "Progressives" is your thing be my guest. Your high horse is up to its nostrils in mud and manure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Jack don't take it personal. I heard both press conferences. The later one really was the chief confirming that the officer was not responding to the 911 call. That does not mean he didn't hear the call over the radio.

 

Dog is a hypocrite.

 

Please point out how I am a hypocrite, and please stop referring to me by the moniker of my esteemed colleague Dog. I am Regatta Dog or RD.

 

Thanks.

 

Sorry, RD then

 

I pointed out a credible news report that said the officer was called to the scene. I said that would call into question the witness's statement (that he and his attorney) have given in interviews. You point to a report that claims the officer was not called to the scene and accuse me of "exploiting some kind of advantage" without all the facts; presumably to attack the left. All the while you using your news report to attack me.

 

Hypocrite Mr Regatta Dog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can an officer shoot a suspect fleeing a violent crime even if there is no immediate threat to the officer? For instance. Suspect knocks armored car courier to ground takes money and tries to take the courier's gun but fails and then he and an accomplice jump in their car and start to drive off. The currier still on the ground and no longer being threatened by the robbers, draws his gun and shoots one of the robbers through the door of his fleeing car

 

 

Is the courier guilty of attempted murder? Suspect was only wounded.

He can if he's shooting at a black man. I think it's OK if he is a Jew too !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless, it does appear he was shot in the back..

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Wt8yEGacIs

 

Based on? Not saying he wasn't just wondering why that is your assumption. Beware that Regatta Dog aka RD is policing these forums for "Premature Exploitive Ejaculation" better known a PEE

 

 

Can an officer shoot a suspect fleeing a violent crime even if there is no immediate threat to the officer? For instance. Suspect knocks armored car courier to ground takes money and tries to take the courier's gun but fails and then he and an accomplice jump in their car and start to drive off. The currier still on the ground and no longer being threatened by the robbers, draws his gun and shoots one of the robbers through the door of his fleeing car

 

 

Is the courier guilty of attempted murder? Suspect was only wounded.

He can if he's shooting at a black man. I think it's OK if he is a Jew too !

 

Why thank you for your thoughtful insight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pro from Dover is actually right, at least in Missouri. Of course, the person doesn't have to be black, Jewish, nor even male.

 

They can shoot if it's the only way to effect an arrest according to the article I posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, this is a serious mess,

 

Sad too see a person gunned down in the street like that, even worse to see the same person previously, use his physical size, to help himself too what ever he wanted at the store... and then push the clerk out of the way, on his exit... This wont end well. Sure doesn't look like a "gentle giant" to me, in the store..

 

 

Unfortunately, the media will continue to drive this wedge, for weeks..

 


Yes, we do need police with video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pro from Dover is actually right, at least in Missouri. Of course, the person doesn't have to be black, Jewish, nor even male.

 

They can shoot if it's the only way to effect an arrest according to the article I posted.

 

I found these which seem to indicate that at least some places you can shoot a fleeing suspect

 

2czpn39.jpg

 

2iw0up1.png

 

http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3737&context=jclc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember Jack's in-depth analysis of the Zimmerman pursuit path, complete with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one was?

 

Does this explain why the cop murdered an unarmed teenager in the middle of the street while the kid had his hands in the air?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Jack don't take it personal. I heard both press conferences. The later one really was the chief confirming that the officer was not responding to the 911 call. That does not mean he didn't hear the call over the radio.

Dog is a hypocrite.

Please point out how I am a hypocrite, and please stop referring to me by the moniker of my esteemed colleague Dog. I am Regatta Dog or RD.

 

Thanks.

Sorry, RD then

 

I pointed out a credible news report that said the officer was called to the scene. I said that would call into question the witness's statement (that he and his attorney) have given in interviews. You point to a report that claims the officer was not called to the scene and accuse me of "exploiting some kind of advantage" without all the facts; presumably to attack the left. All the while you using your news report to attack me.

 

Hypocrite Mr Regatta Dog

You really are a paranoid little shit. How anyone person can be so fucking insecure is beyond me. Do not bother tiring to "explain" your thought process I'm sure it would be long, detailed and pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wow, I can remember back in the olden days when they just arrested you for robbery, now they flat out execute you. Compare to ISIS who just hacks your arms off.

I do think the ISIS comparison helps.

 

Clearly though, if an unarmed man puts his hands in the air and the officer keeps shooting then it's an execution. There is no other way to look at it. Doesn't matter what crime he committed an hour ago.

 

When you consider it wasn't robbery, but shoplifting, I believe the whole event becomes all that more dramatic. There may be a reason for shooting a robber, but there is no reason to shoot a shoplifter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ferguson Police have the answer to America's high incarceration rate and the backlog in the courts. Just kill the perps on the street and both problems are solved. BRILLIANT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Wow, I can remember back in the olden days when they just arrested you for robbery, now they flat out execute you. Compare to ISIS who just hacks your arms off.

I do think the ISIS comparison helps.

 

Clearly though, if an unarmed man puts his hands in the air and the officer keeps shooting then it's an execution. There is no other way to look at it. Doesn't matter what crime he committed an hour ago.

When you consider it wasn't robbery, but shoplifting, I believe the whole event becomes all that more dramatic. There may be a reason for shooting a robber, but there is no reason to shoot a shoplifter.

Definition of to rob: to take something from (someone) by unlawful force or threat of violence; steal from.

 

The cam clips from the store verify force. Robbery was what happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Wow, I can remember back in the olden days when they just arrested you for robbery, now they flat out execute you. Compare to ISIS who just hacks your arms off.

I do think the ISIS comparison helps.

 

Clearly though, if an unarmed man puts his hands in the air and the officer keeps shooting then it's an execution. There is no other way to look at it. Doesn't matter what crime he committed an hour ago.

When you consider it wasn't robbery, but shoplifting, I believe the whole event becomes all that more dramatic. There may be a reason for shooting a robber, but there is no reason to shoot a shoplifter.

Definition of to rob: to take something from (someone) by unlawful force or threat of violence; steal from.

 

The cam clips from the store verify force. Robbery was what happened.

 

I think that if you gently explain to the shopkeep that you're taking the merchandise, it's just shoplifting. The surveillance video appears to show a gentle giant explaining the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There can not be a "reason" for shooting a robber if the shooter is unaware that the shootee was a robber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There can not be a "reason" for shooting a robber if the shooter is unaware that the shootee was a robber.

 

Sure there can. Fighting with a police officer might get you shot, even if he doesn't know you're a robber.

 

I said in the other thread that I have little trust in the Ferguson police, but I don't know whether the shooting of Brown was justified or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There can not be a "reason" for shooting a robber if the shooter is unaware that the shootee was a robber.

Sure there can. Fighting with a police officer might get you shot, even if he doesn't know you're a robber.

 

I said in the other thread that I have little trust in the Ferguson police, but I don't know whether the shooting of Brown was justified or not.

I'm sure you know what I meant Tom, but just in case, let me rephrase that for you -

 

There can not be a "reason" for shooting a robber because he is a robber if the shooter is unaware that the shootee was a robber.

Better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Wow, I can remember back in the olden days when they just arrested you for robbery, now they flat out execute you. Compare to ISIS who just hacks your arms off.

I do think the ISIS comparison helps.

 

Clearly though, if an unarmed man puts his hands in the air and the officer keeps shooting then it's an execution. There is no other way to look at it. Doesn't matter what crime he committed an hour ago.

 

When you consider it wasn't robbery, but shoplifting, I believe the whole event becomes all that more dramatic. There may be a reason for shooting a robber, but there is no reason to shoot a shoplifter.

 

It isn't shoplifting when you are caught and push the clerk around because you are such a bigass badass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There can not be a "reason" for shooting a robber if the shooter is unaware that the shootee was a robber.

Sure there can. Fighting with a police officer might get you shot, even if he doesn't know you're a robber.

 

I said in the other thread that I have little trust in the Ferguson police, but I don't know whether the shooting of Brown was justified or not.

I'm sure you know what I meant Tom, but just in case, let me rephrase that for you -

 

There can not be a "reason" for shooting a robber because he is a robber if the shooter is unaware that the shootee was a robber.

Better?

 

If he didn't know he was a robber then that's not why he shot him, eh?

 

But, the robber would know he was a robber and might not want to be caught.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There can not be a "reason" for shooting a robber if the shooter is unaware that the shootee was a robber.

If the "robber" attacked the cop and went for the cop's gun, perhaps the shooting was justified whether the cop knew of the robbery or not.

 

We were not there.

 

But it seems there could be circumstances suggesting the boy had a tendency towards physical altercation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Onion got it just about right.

 

Tips For Being An Unarmed Black Teen

With riots raging in Ferguson, MO following the shooting death by police of an unarmed African-American youth, the nation has turned its eyes toward social injustice and the continuing crisis of race relations. Here are The Onions tips for being an unarmed black teen in America:

 

Shy away from dangerous, heavily policed areas.

Avoid swaggering or any other confident behavior that suggests you are not completely subjugated.

Be sure not to pick up any object that could be perceived by a police officer as a firearm, such as a cell phone, a food item, or nothing.

Explain in clear and logical terms that you do not enjoy being shot, and would prefer that it not happen.

Dont let society stereotype you as a petty criminal. Remember that you can be seen as so much more, from an armed robbery suspect, to a rape suspect, to a murder suspect.

Try to see it from a police officers point of view: You may be unarmed, but youre also black.

Avoid wearing clothing associated with the gang lifestyle, such as shirts and pants.

Revel in the fact that by simply existing, you exert a threatening presence over the nations police force.

Be as polite and straightforward as possible when police officers are kicking the shit out of you.

 

http://www.theonion.com/articles/tips-for-being-an-unarmed-black-teen,36697/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A cop with a 6 yr clean record sworn to protect and serve the jurisdiction, and trained to do so is easily condemned with scanty information...

 

while a kid who just forcibly robbed a store moments before is assumed randomly executed by the cop for no apparent reason...

 

Maybe. But seems unlikely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much for the removing police presense would keep things calm. I'm sure the owners and now unemployed citizens are happy this morning.

 

 

http://altondailynews.com/news/details.cfm?clientid=17&id=139795#.U-9clcu9KK0

 

After an evening of peaceful protests, riots and looting broke out again in Ferguson, Missouri in the wake of Michael Brown's death. Authorities say crowds began to gather around midnight. Police confirm that a Domino's Pizza was looted and burned and a number of other businesses were also vandalized overnight in the north St. Louis County suburb.

 

 

At the height of tension overnight, about 200 demonstrators clashed with law enforcement outside of the Ferguson Market & Liquor store on West Florissant Avenue. Those protesters disregarded orders to stand down and looted the convenience store. Authorities report that at least one person was arrested and that one person was taken to a St. Louis area hospital with a suspected gunshot wound.

 

The violence follows the release of surveillance video that authorities allege shows 18-year old Michael Brown committing a strong-armed robbery at Ferguson Market just hours before he was shot and killed by Ferguson Police officer Darren Wilson. That investigation continues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites