Utah is one of the safest states in the USA with regard to gun violence...so it's not really as scary as it sounds.

It's in most of the articles I've seen about the case. About halfway down on this one.

Prosecutors: Man lunged with sword before he was shot - CNN.com

I'm also not defending the police in this case. I just think people are too quick to jump on the bandwagon of whatever the cause du jour is. The autopsy results are coming from the family who had one commissioned themselves. It's not the official state one from what I understand. Almost everything that is coming out is coming from the family, not the police.

And while I understand the family is upset, I don't like the assertion that it was racism without any proof. There are aggressive cops who do stuff just because they are aggressive cops. There is no proof they singled out the black guy. That the cops had a history of racial issues. Now maybe they were racists and singled out the black guy in broad daylight to murder, or maybe they are just overly aggressive cops who would have shot anyone doing what that guy did.

I'd also add that running away is an odd action to take. Usually when a cop points a gun at you you put your hands up and drop your weapon. Even if their actions are wrong.

I guess I think people should wait a little bit before making a judgement on these particular cases. Lets see what the official autopsy finds, toxicology reports, his history, surveillance footage, etc before deciding that some white cops decided to spend their afternoon executing a black guy for no reason.

It is kind of scary on the surface. But then you realize that the guys carrying guns legally are usually not the guys committing the illegal acts. At least here in Chicago that's the case.

I'd still be uncomfortable seeing a guy at Walmart with a rifle strapped to his body.

It's not scary in that I think the guy is going to go on a rampage. It's the mindset that is scary - that someone either thinks they need to carry a semi-automatic rifle for safety, or that they just want to show off their big ass gun. Both are as scary as each other.

Only thing protecting you from a bad guy with a sword is a good guy with a sword.

Except one does not ever bring a sword to a gunfight.

This is an easy one. Ban Walmarts.

This is what is getting me. Unless he is absolutely nutty, he's not going to attack two cops armed with guns with a toy sword. Or even a real one. In the pic, he looks almost happy, not someone looking for a ninja battle.

So my question is, what happened between when that picture was taken and he was shot, and what actions on his part would lead to him not being shot? I'm assuming there was something, but it seems to me his options were considerably narrower than they should be.

Oh, and for the record - this nutbag in PA? In his case, I think I'm ok with shoot on sight.

I'll leave this right here:

@ShaunKing exposes Ferguson PD lie about distance from SUV (with images, tweets) · VeryWhiteGuy · Storify

How prophetic (or maybe you were referring to this?)...yeah, someone was uncomfortable and look what happened.

The Wal-Mart Shooting in Beavercreek, OH (from Aug. 5) - Front Office Football Central

Perhaps in certain other police forces or with certain cops, Ballenger would have had six bullets in him?

Police officer shot in Ferguson?

Edit - almost certainly unrelated to Brown/protests.

Milwaukee police fire officer who shot man in park - Yahoo News

This is specifically why I have a problem with police departments:


What the fuck? He shot a guy 13 times after instigating a fight with known mentally ill man and you think he shouldn't go to jail? If anything, cops should be more accountable than private citizens, not less accountable.


The thin blue line fucks the citizens of this country because bad cops - or cops who commit bad actions - are protected by the rest. I've often said that 4 out of 5 cops are generally pretty good people. But when they try to protect the guys who aren't, they all become bad cops by being complicit and enabling future incidents that harm the general public.

I don't understand why cops don't have to abide by the same laws we do. If they commit murder they should be charged with that. If they commit assault, they should be charged with that. This shouldn't be that difficult.

Article discussing the evidence and grand jury testimony surrounding the incident.....

The New York Times

But they are charged when they commit murder.

If cops are going to fear for their lives every time somebody attacks them, maybe we shouldn't have cops.

For those of you wanting more camera's mounted on police.



The folks clamoring for this should be happy.


Well that could cause other problems, I suppose.


And then, of course, we have the ACLU who's primary mission is to be employed apparently. They are ready to pounce no matter what.

Forensic tests have found the blood of Michael Brown on the gun, uniform and police cruiser belonging to Officer Darren Wilson, who fatally shot the unarmed teen two months ago in Ferguson, Missouri, The New York Times reported.

Michael Brown's blood found in officer's car, on gun - CNN.com

I dunno, I think the ACLU piece is a interesting read

Police Body-Mounted Cameras: With Right Policies in Place, a Win For All | American Civil Liberties Union

ETA: The date on the article is last year, so well before the Michael Brown shooting.

I think any policy for body cameras on govt officials would be a privacy nightmare. I understand the benefit, but I don't need cops rolling up to my house and looking in my windows with camera's rolling. Talk about a big brother nightmare. And what was the justification for that? Oh yeah....racism....no thanks.

Really?

Absolutely.

It's really not about racism. It's about accountability. Something police officers lack in this country. From what I've read about the cameras, it forces cops to be nicer to the public as well because they are on camera. And it'll reduce bogus police brutality complaints by people looking to sue for a quick buck. I think it's a win-win.

The big issue will be cost.


Cops are rarely charged with crimes and rarely terminated.

Fair.

Counter point though, we really need to consider the long-term ramifications. Technology is going to be amazing pretty soon and asking state police to (one-day) have real-time feeds of citizens movements seems pretty scary to me...and it's got the potential to be more harmful than good.

I think homeowners who wind up beaten up, raped, or shot would be fine with the cameras.

I agree.

Apparently Michael Brown actually paid for the cigars and the Ferguson police release the tape to make it seem like he was robbing the place. Also it's been found out that the police didn't even go looking for the tape until Michael Brown had been killed.

Ferguson Cops Busted? New Video Seems to Show Brown Paying for Cigarillos (Video) | Americans Against the Tea Party

Wondering - is Fox News (or any other media outlet) saying much about the thugs* up in Keene?

* that is to say, white college students and out-of-towners tipping over cars, throwing bottles, setting fires, threatening police, etc.

The culture of white violence is shocking. I'm waiting for white leaders to denounce it.

It's no wonder whites stay poor - they have no respect or regard for property.

That video doesn't show anything. And why would he shove the store clerk and why would the store clerk lie and say he was robbed?

Why would the cop lie and say Michael Brown was rushign towards him when he shot him? People lie to save face.

It was all over Good Morning America yesterday.

Of course, the police response was also considered justified, rather than raked over the coals. Thugs got out of hand, police moved in with rubber bullets and tear gas, order was restored, and everyone moved on.

If the cop lied, it would be to save himself from going to jail. What is in this for the store clerk? Why would he say he was robber and why would he confront a shopper like that in the store who had just paid for an item?

Official autopsy was released:
Official autopsy shows Michael Brown had close-range wound to his hand, marijuana in system : News

I don't see how they can say that because a shot was fired inside the car, it proves he was reaching for the gun. All it proves is that he was very close to the gun when the shot was fired.

They didn't say that. They said there's "gunpowder particulate matter" in a thumb wound, which is consistent with someone reaching for the gun when it goes off.

Jesus, how many fucking autopsies can you do on a body?

FTA:

I agree. This is getting a little crazy. Three autopsies seems over the top. The problem is with the agendas with each camp (defense, city, feds) - who knows what conclusions are correct. The first from the defense said there was no way a shot could have been fired from up close, the second said it was nearly guaranteed to have happened.

I just hope there is closure at some point, but it seems like that is very unlikely. The pro Brown camp will think anything is rigged that shows the officer didn't gun him down in cold blood and the pro Wilson camp will try to throw everything out that doesn't go with the idea of a struggle that results in self defense. I feel bad for the residents of Ferguson and even St. Louis at this point.

My question is still the same - did the officer initiate the confrontation (almost certainly yes), why, and how did he act at the beginning of the confrontation (everything points to over the top aggressive, but those witnesses haven't proved to be the most reliable).

I'm pretty much on board the "Brown deserved to get shot and arrested once he reached into the car" side, and I'm not sure I could hold Wilson criminally liable for anything after that given the adrenaline, but I'm still guessing the guy was a jackass about the confrontation and shouldn't have a badge and authority.

FWIW:

Expert: My Michael Brown Autopsy Analysis Was Taken 'Out Of Context'

AP Exclusive: Ferguson no-fly zone aimed at media



This is my shocked face. :|

So, it sounds like we're about to hear that the grand jury won't indict Wilson, possibly over this weekend so as to keep traffic to a minimum and to take advantage of the polar vortex blowing its way through the upper Midwest. And it also sounds like the feds won't make any civil rights charges.

At least that's what the media is reporting right now.

It also sounds like the protesters feel very strongly that people will come into the area from all over the country and riot. And violence is possible elsewhere - Atlanta is preparing.

Violence aside, and I assume nobody here wants to go to St. Louis and hurt innocent people there, if the rumors are true, can we accept the concept that Wilson may have reacted in a manner consistent with his training?

Now, this is not a judgment on whether Wilson initiated the situation - we can assume he confronted Brown in some manner, and I don't think we'll ever know if he said something or did something to provoke Brown unfairly.

But do we have confidence that with both a grand jury and the federal civil rights division declining to prosecute (if, indeed, these rumors are true), that the evidence and a good number of witness accounts support Wilson's story?

If so, since they played a big role in the initial media furor, should our president and attorney general hold a press conference this weekend endorsing the decision and urging peace?

I don't know myself. Like many, I grew up with the impression that police were bad-ass and if you made the wrong choices, they'd beat the crap out of you. And we accepted that because we grew up in a culture where these choices were hard to make and our parents didn't feel that they could be singled out if they didn't do anything wrong.

But many African-Americans have a very different perspective because there are quite a few police out there who act in a racist manner. Not all, maybe not all that many. Certainly fewer today than 50 years ago. But enough that the perception is prevalent in many communities. In those communities, often faced with high crime rates, the people who serve and protect simply aren't trusted to do so in a fair manner. This becomes a cycle that makes conditions worse. I don't think we have any idea how much anger is out there because of this cycle. We're seeing this bubble over in Ferguson. I'm not sure this has ever been about Brown and Wilson personally. Either that, or the media has done a really good job creating a narrative.

What would you do if you lived in Ferguson? Would you want to protest the verdict? If you felt riots were going to ensue, would you hold off on protesting for your own safety, or would you essentially shield the rioters by asking that the police back off from your non-violent protest? What does protest mean to you? Can it be controlled and still be effective? If the president endorsed the lack of prosecution, would you still want to protest?

I think there's no way the Ferguson folks won't recognize the screw-job they've gotten. That'll blow up now or in some future incident. The number of crooked things the local authorities got away with here is ridiculous. At the very least, there should be a number of obstruction charges for all the clearly intentional instances of failing to file reports and to proceed in an efficient manner with the investigation.

If none of the people empowered to investigate does so in a timely fashion, there's no way that a suspect/defendant with resources at his disposal is going to fail get off.

Nope.

A federal civil rights case has a higher burden of proof than the state-level charges would. The feds would have to prove that Wilson intended to violate Brown's civil rights. That's...hard.

The grand jury declining to prosecute is...you've got racial tensions in the area anyway. Black protestors convinced that this is another case of whites doing harm to their community and getting away with it, and whites rallying around Wilson because they think he's the real victim in all of this.

You've got a grand jury of 9 whites and 3 blacks contemplating these charges. If they decline to charge him, that could mean that the evidence doesn't support the charges. It could also mean shenanigans.

The federal Justice Department is also investigating, separate from the grand jury and Civil Rights Division. If all three groups decline to indict/prosecute, then it's probably fair to say that either there isn't enough evidence one way or the other, or that the evidence supports Wilson.

But given the reported history of police activity in Ferguson, the way the racial battle lines have been drawn between 'us' and 'them' by both groups, and the high standard for civil rights charges, I don't think the grand jury declining to indict or the CRD declining to prosecute are necessarily strong indicators of innocence.

The most suspect outfit for "shenanigans" would be the current administration & the Justice Department.

If they can't conjure up something to charge a white officer with then there's simply zero there to be charged for.

Whew, it's a good thing we don't all have to live by those rigid standards.

Meanwhile...

Fuck evidence, burn Wilson at the stake.

The point is, he can be guilty of a crime and still not be guilty of something the Civil Rights Division can prosecute.

The standards for a conviction there are that you have to be able to prove not just that he committed a particular act, but that he intended for the action to have the outcome it had, with the specific intent of violating his civil rights.

As for the Justice Department, Jon, they can trump up whatever they want. But here's the thing: why would they? To pacify the protestors? Okay. Let's run with that.

If they don't charge him, the protestors riot. If they charge him but they can't make the charges stick...any guesses what happens? There is no reason for the feds to go after him unless they're sure they can get SOMETHING to stick. Those are the outcomes. Don't file charges, deal with riots. File charges, justified or otherwise, and get a conviction? Pacification achieved. File charges and lose? Spend money prosecuting a loser case AND deal with riots.

There is literally no good reason for them to prosecute Wilson unless either they think the evidence supports the charges, or they have confidence in their ability to railroad him to a jury's satisfaction.

You're missing the obvious. The DoJ is out to get whitey, ergo they'll trump up charges against any white guy whenever possible.

Yeah, I completely forgot all those bankers DoJ railroaded after the bailouts.

With apologies to Ms. Trainor ... You know it's all about that base, about that base.

My point is that it only pacifies them if it WORKS. If they don't get the conviction, it's not like "that base" is going to shrug their shoulders and say "they tried."

So if they aren't confident they can make charges stick, what's the point?

Not the RICH whiteys. Get it straight.

Depends upon how long you can drag things out.

And I think you're overestimating that base tbh (and it's more than just a single-race base I'm referring to). If the prosecution fails then it's easy to blame whitey/ the man / juries / anything & everything you can fling at the wall.

The policing policies and procedures aren't fair from community to community. The strategies in play in African American communities aren't similar at all to what you get in the white suburbs.

I've never been ticketed for standing on the sidewalk talking to friends. I've never been arrested because I "fit the description." I've never been pulled over time after time because I looked suspicious by driving too nice a car in a white neighborhood.

Strategies that treat everyone like criminals and force them to prove their innocence may help to get petty criminals off the street in poor neighborhoods, but they are heavy handed, violate civil liberties and don't do a damn thing for criminals in predominantly white, more well off neighborhoods.

You can't foster a feeling of serve and protect if you are working against the community. It's not about individual officers acting in a racist manner it's the prescribed manner in which the departments themselves go about the business of law enforcement.

Passed a convoy of at least 7 Homeland Security SUVs on the way to work this morning. Of course there is plenty of things this could be and I'm not even sure how they would be involved but Friday would seem like a day they would announce an inditement. On the other hand it just be some middle eastern guys door getting kicked in.

Hiding the ebola dead?

This may have been pointed out before but I just realized that peaceful protesters - the peaceful ones, not the jackasses - have spent more time in jail than the cop that straight up murdered a dude.

+1

It's November in Ferguson, and they've already started twice-a-day practices. I'm sure there's a union grievance to be filed here somewhere.

Organizers have a non-violent vision, hold training for potential Ferguson protesters : News

They should wait till it gets colder. Take a cue from the Occupy protesters. Once the temperature drops, everyone goes home.

Anonymous goes after KKK after they announce they are going after Ferguson protestors with lethal force and downplaying any attempt by Anonymous to take over their twitter feed:

Anonymous seizes Ku Klux Klan Twitter account over Ferguson threats | ZDNet

Unbelievable.

#Ferguson Protest Group Releases List of Targets, Including: Anheuser Busch, Boeing, Emerson Electric, Airport | The Gateway Pundit

I wonder if Twitter will take steps to beef up security,

assuming this wasn't entirely social engineering.

Eh, believable.

It was like the protesting at the Ram's game. Many of the protesters are determined to disrupt other peoples' lives until action is taken to fix their grievances. Plus with any protest groups you're going to people who want to give shout outs to their own causes.

I wonder how many of them actually voted this election.

This is the inside info I got. The announcement is going to come on the Sunday after Thanksgiving. The city of Clayton will be shut down the week following the announcement. Firefighters in the area have been issued flak jackets.

The busiest airport travel day of the year?

Clayton? Why? So what happens to people who have court cases pending? Seems unlikely.

Well the Misery...er Missouri governor has declared a state of emergency so that probably means we'll be hearing from the grand jury fairly soon.

These are the same people who will complain there are no jobs and no businesses in their community.

Unbelievable that you'd trust a guy that's been proven to have lied about other "facts" regarding this case. Hoft is about the least trustworthy guy available.

Presumably this snippet from AP today explains that

The list looks like a cross of all the major tourist attractions, businesses, and politicians in the city.

SI

The map looks like some sort of filters have been applied. It's just a Google map.

Sad.

12-year-old killed in officer-involved shooting at Cleveland rec - 19 Action News|Cleveland, OH|News, Weather, Sports

Well the Grand Jury has reached a verdict, result to be announced later today.

Grand jury reaches decision in case of Ferguson officer

How ironic!

That's either a Darwin award winner or one hell of a brilliant cover up for murder

Smart move to wait until it's nearly dark to announce it.

Probably should have waited until a snow or ice storm.

Tonight. I think they wanted everyone at home. Lots of schools have canceled evening activities.

What we need is one of those government-type conspiracies out of Hollywood. Someone to play the role of Wilson, a fake trial, the whole nine yards. Too many moving parts, of course. But Wilson has become a symbol for decades of frustration and anger toward law enforcement. Whether Michael Brown attacked him and went for his gun has become completely irrelevant.

Wag the Dog.

I have to think this points toward either an indictment of some sort OR one of the most poorly conceived timing plans ever.

Or a mixed message verdict.

8 pm CST is when it goes down.

And the news is reporting on the news crews. Oh boy. I think my local Fox affiliate is not going to shopw Gotham tonight.

I don't understand why you'd release it after dark? Wouldn't it be easier to control the crowds in the daylight when you can see?

In he gets off they are gonna riot no matter what time of day. At least at night most innocent people will be off the street and not at work, doing errands, kids in school, etc

I guess I can see that.

ugh, just saw a guy in the crowd holding a 4-5 year old kid. What a moron.

USA Today is claiming they've been told by the Brown family attorney that no charges will be filed.

here we go

So are going to get to watch a riot live?

Is West Virginia playing tonight?

;)

Pretty sure that's the hope of the networks.