FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[JonInMiddleGA]

Once again, a jury renders a rational verdict in spite of malicious prosecution and media campaigning.

[RainMaker]

NRA usually jumps to the defense of legal concealed carry owners. Wonder what's different here.

Does Cam still post here?

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

NRA usually jumps to the defense of legal concealed carry owners. Wonder what's different here.

Does Cam still post here?

Different narrative than most?

[digamma]

The dashcam video in the Philando Castile shooting was released today. You can find it at many news sites. It's really troubling and sad.

I don't know if the officer's behavior was criminal, and that may be the most troubling thing about it. He clearly panicked and shot too quickly, but it's almost impossible to tell if he reasonably felt his life was being threatened. What is clear is that Castile was cooperating. And I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that if Castile wasn't black the incident would have had a different ending. That's not to say the officer was racist--but I think he prejudged Castile and made assumptions based on his race and appearance, different from racism and even more unfair.

Rest in power Philando Castile.

[RainMaker]

I don't know the legal ramifications but it looks like incompetence at best. I mean a 4-year old was in the backseat and was lucky not to have been killed either.

Again, NRA is silent. I remember Cam briefly mentioned it when it first happened but looks like Daddy told him to keep his mouth shut.

[molson]

And Minnesota, unlike a lot of states, only requires negligence in its manslaughter statute. In my state, even involuntary manslaughter requires an an intentional illegal act that accidentally results in death. So this case likely wouldn't have been taken to trial in my state (and we had a high profile police shooting case last year that went nowhere because the facts were murky and the victim was drunk and armed), though I thought the prosecution had a good chance in Minnesota because of the way the statute was written. But, even if he was convicted, I think people would have been disappointed with the sentence. There's not a lot of people, police or otherwise, with no priors doing hard time for negligent manslaughter-type crimes.

I still think state legislatures should draft separate statutes that address police shootings. Shift the burden a bit in favor the state. Manslaughter and self-defense statutes, and appellate law that interprets those statutes, were all written with private conflicts between citizens in mind. The concept of criminal accountability for police in these scenarios is still relatively new. Sure, some juries will nullify or just impose their own moral judgment on evidence presented to them, but I believe most try to follow the law.

Edit: I don't think new statutes like that should turn incidents like this into murder charges or anything, more like how certain state employees have mandatory reporting requirements that aren't imposed on private citizens. Even if it was just a high-level misdemeanor for police negligence resulting in death or serious bodily injury. Without something like that, most police fuckups of this magnitude are basically the legal equivalent of doctor fuckups that result in death (except that doctors, in theory, should be easier to convict because there's no self-defense arguments.)

[cuervo72]

Well, here's another one to sort through.

dejuan guillory - Google Search

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Well, here's another one to sort through.

dejuan guillory - Google Search

If that narrative is true I don't see how there is anyway that officer will not be charged. I will be interested to see how the police department rebuts that.

[Ragone]

Mandatory body camera's for police solve 90% of these problems..

Kansas city would rather spend money on a light rail system that only goes halfway into and out of downtown rather then something to protect itself(abd cops they employ)from future lawsuits

[RainMaker]

Edit: Wrong thread

[NobodyHere]

Ummmmm, wrong thread?

[digamma]

http://www.startribune.com/woman-kil...s/434782213/#1

So this happened in my neighborhood, three blocks from where I live. So far, no information from police other than body cameras were not activated. There are so many layers as to why this could be a really difficult one. And I'm waiting for more to the story.

[Butter]

WTF on that one? How on earth did she end up shot?

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by Butter

WTF on that one? How on earth did she end up shot?

+1, and why the hell would the officers gun even have been drawn at that point?

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Butter

WTF on that one? How on earth did she end up shot?

Well, when a gun is pointed at you and somebody pulls the trigger...

[bhlloy]

Oh those forgetful police officers, always accidentally leaving their body cameras off

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by digamma

Sources: Woman was fatally shot through door of police car - StarTribune.com

So this happened in my neighborhood, three blocks from where I live. So far, no information from police other than body cameras were not activated. There are so many layers as to why this could be a really difficult one. And I'm waiting for more to the story.

Looks like another tough one in Minnesota. Looks bad but I'll wait to see if more comes out.

The story doesn't make sense. Was she drunk, high, or belligerent? Did she assault the driver? Shooting through the driver side window from the passenger seat doesn't seem like a safe move for an officer to make. Could have easily killed the other cop too.

[Groundhog]

As you might imagine, this has been all over the news over here. If only there was some technical way to prevent officers from turning off their body cameras, or having them "always on" but only archive footage if a gunshot is fired... Kind of like the CCTV software I used to manage 10 years ago. Alas, science fiction.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

As you might imagine, this has been all over the news over here. If only there was some technical way to prevent officers from turning off their body cameras, or having them "always on" but only archive footage if a gunshot is fired... Kind of like the CCTV software I used to manage 10 years ago. Alas, science fiction.

You can fire officers who don't have them on. Run random tests. Right now there is no punishment for leaving them off so why would they care?

All the talk about police and other issues glares over this one. It's one of the few jobs in the country that it doesn't matter how bad you are at your job.

[Groundhog]

You can fire or fine them, sure. But you shouldn't be able to "not" have them on. Let police switch on the active recording, but have them recording a 30 second buffer of footage that is archived only if it registers a gunshot. This is how CCTV works with motion or sound.

[jeff061]

All the talk about police and other issues glares over this one. It's one of the few jobs in the country that it doesn't matter how bad you are at your job.

And where all the competent employees go to extreme and often illegal lengths to cover for the incompetent onces dragging them down.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

You can fire or fine them, sure. But you shouldn't be able to "not" have them on. Let police switch on the active recording, but have them recording a 30 second buffer of footage that is archived only if it registers a gunshot. This is how CCTV works with motion or sound.

Then they'll take them off and throw them in the glove compartment (Chicago police did this with dashcams). Or purposely break them (again something Chicago Police did).

[cuervo72]

Make them pay for them then.

[CraigSca]

Interesting too, how the cop responsible is not cooperating with investigators, nor is he compelled to (crazy). Oh, and the officer shot from the passenger side through the driver's side window.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by CraigSca

Interesting too, how the cop responsible is not cooperating with investigators, nor is he compelled to (crazy). Oh, and the officer shot from the passenger side through the driver's side window.

It boggles my mind too, though I get the application of the law. Still, his partner said he was startled by a loud noise right before Noor shot through the open window. In what world do you A) have your gun drawn in that scenario (Talking to a woman in PJ's) and B) fire across your partner at said woman.

Three very high profile, sketchy/bad shootings in the last year+ in this state, one wonders what the hell is going on with their training. On top of that, why would you have someone who is basically a rookie still assigned a partner with barely 2 years experience and three complaints against him this year. You would think both these guys should be with more seasoned partners.

I still believe in and support police, but for anyone to deny departments across the country need to take a deep and prolonged look at the culture they operate in is fooling themselves.

[panerd]

From everything I have read there is no plausible explanation for the shooting. Not to make light of it but it's almost like a shooting on a tv drama where the woman is going to out the cops or something. So bizarre.

[RainMaker]

Firing across the body of your partner seems insane. If that bullet hits the window/door frame it can ricochet right into him. Plus you're not likely going to have the best aim in that position.

The whole story is bizarre. I'm seeing that maybe he got spooked by fireworks going off but most cops know the difference in fireworks and gunfire. And from what I remember about Minnesota, this wasn't a bad neighborhood where you'd be constantly in fear of an ambush or something.

[jeff061]

Dude heard a startling noise, shit his pants, panicked and fired a gun. Not much to read into. Let's see if charges are brought and what happens from there.

Thankfully it's not as easy for Cops to murder civilians without consequences as it was when this thread was started.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by jeff061

Thankfully it's not as easy for Cops to murder civilians without consequences as it was when this thread was started.

Or plant drugs apparently

Cop suspended; defense lawyers say video shows drugs planted - Houston Chronicle

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by CraigSca

Interesting too, how the cop responsible is not cooperating with investigators, nor is he compelled to (crazy). Oh, and the officer shot from the passenger side through the driver's side window.

I get the Fifth Amendment, but you know what? That's with regard to criminal prosecution. You can have your license suspended for refusing a BAC test in MN; the police department should be able to legally suspend without pay any officer who refuses to cooperate with Internal Affairs.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I get the Fifth Amendment, but you know what? That's with regard to criminal prosecution. You can have your license suspended for refusing a BAC test in MN; the police department should be able to legally suspend without pay any officer who refuses to cooperate with Internal Affairs.

It kind of blurs the line though when your employer is also the government.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Or plant drugs apparently

Cop suspended; defense lawyers say video shows drugs planted - Houston Chronicle

"They might have been recreating the discovery of the drugs to document on their bodycams."

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I get the Fifth Amendment, but you know what? That's with regard to criminal prosecution. You can have your license suspended for refusing a BAC test in MN; the police department should be able to legally suspend without pay any officer who refuses to cooperate with Internal Affairs.

They can do more than suspend. An officer can refuse to cooperate with the criminal investigation, but they are required under threat of termination to answer IA's questions truthfully. However, since it's a compelled statement, it can't be used in the criminal investigation.

Anytime there's a shooting or potentially criminal use of force, there are 2 investigations. Criminal and internal. Typically, they'll do the criminal side first and then focus on the internal. Also, at least around here, IA does the internal side and the homicide unit supervisor leads the criminal.

[cuervo72]

NAACP issues first-ever travel advisory for a state: Missouri - Chicago Tribune

[panerd]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

NAACP issues first-ever travel advisory for a state: Missouri - Chicago Tribune

"Sanders had left his Nashville home on May 4 to go for a drive but got lost and mistakenly drove into Missouri, where he ran out of gas."

Yeah just got lost on my way home from the Cardinals game and ended up 5 hours away in Nashville. The whole story is hokey. Anyways my point is that cops do go over the line and deserve to be called on their bullshit way more often than they are but when people choose to hold Michael Brown up as their shining star or use this incident to issue a travel advisory it understandably just creates more division.

[SackAttack]

I don't give a shit if it "creates more division."

If law enforcement are supposed to be the best among us, hold them to a higher fucking standard. Make sure that those who wear a badge and gun ARE the best among us.

Nobody who goes through police academy is unaware that they're putting themselves between chaos and civilization - they are aware that they may someday be called upon to make that ultimate sacrifice to protect civilization.

"I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six" is fundamentally incompatible with that duty to protect and serve.

Fetishizing the police state to the point where "I was afraid for my life" is carte blanche to kill an unarmed citizen creates WAY more fucking division than a civil rights group saying "you know what? Maybe don't travel to a place that has a history of this shit until they get their shit together."

[molson]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I don't give a shit if it "creates more division."

If law enforcement are supposed to be the best among us, hold them to a higher fucking standard. Make sure that those who wear a badge and gun ARE the best among us.

It's getting harder and harder to recruit police officers. The pickings are getting slimmer and slimmer in my state. There's lots of talk of making the application process simpler and disqualifying fewer applicants. There is a downside to a growing anti-cop culture. Who applies for these jobs in 2017? A lot of people who have no other job prospects, and some people who are so committed to public service that they'll overlook the backlash. But when we insist on grouping police together as collectively evil, there's a lot fewer of the latter and a lot more of the former. The police academies do their best to figure out who belongs to each group, but it's not like there's this huge pool of people to draw from, and there's only so much you can do to predict how someone will act in a stressful situation. People would surprised how little training is actually available for your random rural police officer in the U.S. In my state they learn on the job and have real-world experience before they even get to the basic state academy law training. I'm still in awe of the people who take on this responsibility and do it well though. It's those people I think about when I get defensive about the blanket criticisms of police as a whole. It's a hard job and the people who excel at it are, I think, pretty amazing.

So how do you get "the best among us" - let's say for starters, college educated people without criminal records - to be police officers? If we've decided that the current active police officers aren't good enough, how do we get people who currently are not police officers to take their place and do a better job? We do fire a lot of officers in my state, but it's not like there's all these qualified people sitting on the sidelines who desperately wanted to become officers but didn't make the cut.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I don't give a shit if it "creates more division."

If law enforcement are supposed to be the best among us, hold them to a higher fucking standard. Make sure that those who wear a badge and gun ARE the best among us.

Mike Brown was guilty and three separate forensic investigations supported the officer's account of the situation. Maybe we start with holding accountable the ambulance chasing race baiters like Jackson and Sharpton, and then extend that to both the people who lie on camera about things they admit they didn't even see when it comes time to testify as well as holding the media legally accountable for how they report cases where they have no verifiable information. Then we can talk about the still tiny % of cops who are ever even brought under investigation for anything at all.

[digamma]

Man, Eric Stratton would be proud of that speech!

[panerd]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Fetishizing the police state to the point where "I was afraid for my life" is carte blanche to kill an unarmed citizen creates WAY more fucking division than a civil rights group saying "you know what? Maybe don't travel to a place that has a history of this shit until they get their shit together."

1. I'm probably a step further than most on the police state thing. I mean the war on drugs is about as racist a program as there is out there. I also can remember a thread where I commented that the Boston ticker tape parade with all the militarized police vechicles may have been heading our country in the wrong direction and was blasted by all but about 2 board members. Then Ferguson happened and all of a sudden people started wondering about when police became militarized. That's the thing I think bad cops need to be dealt with. A lot of the shootings/incidents in the news have no plausible explanation except for misconduct. I just don't think Michael Brown and a few others were the places to make that point and just create more L/R Black/White Rich/Poor division.

2. As for the travel advisory... lol. Pure race baiting and division creating. So a state that has a consistant top 5 most dangerous city in the country consisting of mostly black on black murder suddenly gets the NAACP "watch out" warning when a mentally ill person dies in a rural white county's prison. Bravo NAACP sweep those other 200+ murders a year under the rug they don't fit the narrative!

St. Louis tops list of, ’25 Most Dangerous Cities in America’ | FOX2now.com

[stevew]

Stay safe in STL this weekend

Anticipation grows ahead of verdict in Jason Stockley murder trial; lawyers highlight evidence | Law and order | stltoday.com

Aka the one where the cop shot a fleeing suspect at point blank range with an AK47 and then planted a gun in his car.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by stevew

Stay safe in STL this weekend

Anticipation grows ahead of verdict in Jason Stockley murder trial; lawyers highlight evidence | Law and order | stltoday.com

Aka the one where the cop shot a fleeing suspect at point blank range with an AK47 and then planted a gun in his car.

aka The one where both state and federal prosecutors found there wasn't enough evidence to warrant a first degree murder charge but 4 years later a circuit attorney (with political ambitions) re-charged the case knowing that she has a win/win on her hands. Guilty verdict: She is a hero. Not guilty: racism to blame, city burns, but she is still a hero.

And he didn't fire an AK47 at the criminal. He fired his service revolver but don't let facts get into the way of your narrative.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by panerd

aka The one where both state and federal prosecutors found there wasn't enough evidence to warrant a first degree murder charge but 4 years later a circuit attorney (with political ambitions) re-charged the case knowing that she has a win/win on her hands. Guilty verdict: She is a hero. Not guilty: racism to blame, city burns, but she is still a hero.

And he didn't fire an AK47 at the criminal. He fired his service revolver but don't let facts get into the way of your narrative.

Ah. I must misread that part about the AK

[panerd]

Originally Posted by stevew

Ah. I must misread that part about the AK

Listen I've said in this thread at least 25 times I am of the thinking that cops are often over-zealous. I think a lot of guys get into the profession to "bust heads" especially those that would be considered mentally unbalanced in other walks of life.

I just hate stuff like this particular case and the Michael Brown case because it leads to one thing... anger, rioting in my city, and more division. In both cases the Feds came in and found that the charge wasn't warranted. Doesn't mean neither this officer or Darren Wilson were NOT guilty it means even the Feds (Obama's administration who would be big on civil rights) knew it wasn't going to happen with the evidence. So instead of manslaughter etc the locals charge him up to Murder 1 knowing full well he will be acquitted. Then a city burns and they shrug their shoulders.

[panerd]

As I said a few weeks back this guy is probably not going to be convicted in St. Louis. Not because he isn't guilty of something but they overcharged him. I don't like seeing cops walk on crimes and definitely don't see a lot of support behind him but as always once the nonsense starts I'm sure we will be back to division again.

However at least this time we have a governor who isn't fucking around. He wasn't some lame duck appease rioters governor. There are a lot of plans in place and he actually is trying to meet with both sides before the verdict comes out. (Instead of our previous POS governor who was the only person in the state shocked by the aftermath of Ferguson) I'm sure CNN, Fox, etc will be there to exploit the hell out it but I hope for my city's sake we actually do something like a 10 PM curfew around the courthouse. What exactly good happens at 1 AM? Protest all you want in the day time I notice the mass fires and looting never seem to happen in the afternoon.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by panerd

I notice the mass fires and looting never seem to happen in the afternoon.

They did in Baltimore

[panerd]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

They did in Baltimore

True. From what I remember though it was really poor preparing by Baltimore as well on that one right?

[NobodyHere]

Rioting and poor preparation kind of go hand in hand.

But from what I can recall is that the mayor wanted to give the people a space to protest and the rioters took advantage of that.

[tarcone]

The judge has leeway to convict him of 2nd degree murder or manslaughter.
This guy is going down. Maybe not murder 1. But he will go down.
What I don t like is the mayor not going hard line to prevent violence. She is weak and demonstrating thos to get re-elected.
There will be protests. There will be violence. Because the professionals are here to do those things.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The judge has leeway to convict him of 2nd degree murder or manslaughter.
This guy is going down. Maybe not murder 1. But he will go down.
What I don t like is the mayor not going hard line to prevent violence. She is weak and demonstrating thos to get re-elected.
There will be protests. There will be violence. Because the professionals are here to do those things.

Yeah I never understood the constituents of St. Louis and their representatives. Want to talk about racism look at these leaders. They pander to the lowest denominator rioters and looters who neither vote nor represent the interests of any of the majority of law abiding citizens both black and white. Yet somehow they get reelected and cause those who actually look out for the best interests of the citizens to not get elected.