FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[weegeebored]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

What in the world does OJ have to do with this?

That's what you got from my post? You can't read between the lines? Seriously?

[GrantDawg]

Your post was nonsense. So, yeah that what he got out of it.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Brian Swartz]

It was pretty evident to me what he meant. OJ specifically wasn't the point. I also fully agree with JPhillips' counterpoint, but it wasn't a nonsense post.

[CrimsonFox]

Haaven;t there been police charged and convicted before? I thought there was.

[Brian Swartz]

Yes. It's also true that juries are overall clearly hesitant to convict police officers on the aggregate, because even in cases with clear evidence supporting the charges they are often not convicted or not even indicted. The aggregate picture, not this individual case or that individual case, is the relevant factor here.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

This time sure. But if anyone thought that he wouldn't be found guilty in today's political climate is clueless, regardless of the facts or video evidence. If you want to call it justice, ok. And what about the justice for victims like Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman? People cheered for that "justice"; I just wanted to puke.

You also realize that this incident is a big contributor to this political climate.

O.J Simpson got away with murder and thankfully there was video or Chauvin likely would have too.

[ISiddiqui]

Uhhh...

https://twitter.com/Raiders/status/1...672939521?s=19

This ain't it, Raiders

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Ghost Econ]

Alright guys, put the zero back on the banner.

https://mobile.twitter.com/LaceyCris...55872522178560

[GrantDawg]

The girl called them for help. They shot her. I just can't.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Three white officers say, "blue lives matter" to a group of black residents at the scene where police shot and killed a 15-year-old girl. pic.twitter.com/TGkejEiaho

— scott keeler (@_WhatRiot) April 21, 2021

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

That's what you got from my post? You can't read between the lines? Seriously?

A 30-year old murder involving private citizens and a recent murder by an agent of the state in broad daylight doesnt seem terribly connected.

[weegeebored]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

So why have so many other officers gotten off over the past few years under the exact same political climate?

Let's change political climate to "social awareness". That changed last year, and anything previous to Floyd's death and subsequent reactions is not the same climate.

I won't bother to address the other posts because there is no point. I used to think FOFC had some cool folks with some interesting perspectives. I have now learned that many are just lemmings, following whatever the trendy topic is without thinking it all the way through. That's fine, but be careful what you wish for.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

A 30-year old murder involving private citizens and a recent murder by an agent of the state in broad daylight doesnt seem terribly connected.

I didn't see the connection either. Guess I am a lemming.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

Let's change political climate to "social awareness". That changed last year, and anything previous to Floyd's death and subsequent reactions is not the same climate.

I won't bother to address the other posts because there is no point. I used to think FOFC had some cool folks with some interesting perspectives. I have now learned that many are just lemmings, following whatever the trendy topic is without thinking it all the way through. That's fine, but be careful what you wish for.

Yes, we should put our focus on a murder trial from 3 decades ago. That is what is important.

[weegeebored]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Yes, we should put our focus on a murder trial from 3 decades ago. That is what is important.

Simple minds draw simple conclusions. The references to those murders and others like them were to show that justice is not some fixed object in time but rather something more dynamic that changes depending on many factors including political and social climates and people's cultures. Does anyone really think that Chauvin was not going to be found guilty regardless of the evidence? A not guilty verdict would have made last year's riots...sorry..."protests"...look like a church service.

Again, no point to discuss any more. Take care everyone. Stay safe.

[JPhillips]

Just over the last year a number of police officers have gotten off. It's very rare for a police officer to face any consequences.

Pretty convenient that this trial just happened to find 12 jurors that wouldn't follow the law but were instead intimidated by BLM.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

Simple minds draw simple conclusions. The references to those murders and others like them were to show that justice is not some fixed object in time but rather something more dynamic that changes depending on many factors including political and social climates and people's cultures. Does anyone really think that Chauvin was not going to be found guilty regardless of the evidence? A not guilty verdict would have made last year's riots...sorry..."protests"...look like a church service.

Again, no point to discuss any more. Take care everyone. Stay safe.

I think he was found guilty because there was a video of him murdering someone. It was not exactly a difficult case and the only reason he didn't plead out was because racists donated a ton to his defense fund and cops get preferential treatment in courts.

Also most Americans believe justice was not served in the OJ trial. Again, not sure what that has to do with this outside of you thinking a white guy should be allowed to murder a black guy because a black guy got away with it 30 years ago.

But you're right, why focus on something trendy when we can be discussing the miscarriage of justice that let Harry Thaw walk free.

[Lathum]

The Lindbergh kidnapping was an inside job!!

[RainMaker]

Is the dumb argument that there was pressure on the jury and thus it can't be considered justice? That's common in all high profile cases. Jurors in the Dylan Roof and John Allen Muhammed trial were likely under pressure and I don't think it was some miscarriage of justice because they were found guilty with an overwhelming amount of evidence just like Chauvin.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

Let's change political climate to "social awareness". That changed last year, and anything previous to Floyd's death and subsequent reactions is not the same climate.

I won't bother to address the other posts because there is no point. I used to think FOFC had some cool folks with some interesting perspectives. I have now learned that many are just lemmings, following whatever the trendy topic is without thinking it all the way through. That's fine, but be careful what you wish for.

I used to think you weren't an idiot, but here we are.

If you want to try a different analogy that isn't completely ridiculous, please do

[larrymcg421]

I mean, I'd have thought the connection to the OJ trial is one of major reasons he got off was because the LAPD tolerated cops like Mark Fuhrman for far too long.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Jurors in the Dylan Roof and John Allen Muhammed trial were likely under pressure and I don't think it was some miscarriage of justice because they were found guilty with an overwhelming amount of evidence just like Chauvin.

With all due respect, Dylann Roof pled guilty, thus the jurors didn't have to worry about their hometown being burned to the ground if they returned the wrong verdict. I don't think the jurors in the Muhammed trial had any worries about that either.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I mean, I'd have thought the connection to the OJ trial is one of major reasons he got off was because the LAPD tolerated cops like Mark Fuhrman for far too long.

He got off because Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden did a horrible job of prosecuting him. Darden's decision to have OJ try on the glove was especially egregious. They also botched the situation with Fuhrman, opening up the opportunity for Cochran to deflect the jury's attention from the facts of the murder to Fuhrman being a racist.

Interestingly, the LA cops were pals with OJ before the murders went down, and in fact they had always looked the other way on the prior domestic violence incidents. He lived a life of luxury and privilege, and shunned African American causes until after the trial, where they rallied by his side.

Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of the case was the jurors buying into the ludicrous allegations that OJ was framed and the evidence was planted. So we're to believe that law enforcement officers from three separate jurisdictions, many of whom had never even met each other before that fateful night, planted hundreds of pieces of evidence and risked their careers and potential prison time to frame a guy they had always liked.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

With all due respect, Dylann Roof pled guilty, thus the jurors didn't have to worry about their hometown being burned to the ground if they returned the wrong verdict. I don't think the jurors in the Muhammed trial had any worries about that either.

He didn't plead guilty in the federal trial. A jury convicted him and sentenced him to death. The state trial is where he pled guilty.

[weegeebored]

Originally Posted by Butter

I used to think you weren't an idiot, but here we are.

If you want to try a different analogy that isn't completely ridiculous, please do

Oh, the name calling. It hurts so much. Do you think that I give two shits about what you think? Who the fk are you? I won't reply in kind except to say that the naivete in this thread is mind boggling. Flame away. I am done. Life's too short.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

He got off because Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden did a horrible job of prosecuting him. Darden's decision to have OJ try on the glove was especially egregious. They also botched the situation with Fuhrman, opening up the opportunity for Cochran to deflect the jury's attention from the facts of the murder to Fuhrman being a racist.

Interestingly, the LA cops were pals with OJ before the murders went down, and in fact they had always looked the other way on the prior domestic violence incidents. He lived a life of luxury and privilege, and shunned African American causes until after the trial, where they rallied by his side.

Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of the case was the jurors buying into the ludicrous allegations that OJ was framed and the evidence was planted. So we're to believe that law enforcement officers from three separate jurisdictions, many of whom had never even met each other before that fateful night, planted hundreds of pieces of evidence and risked their careers and potential prison time to frame a guy they had always liked.

You're right about the prosecution messing it up and OJ's wealth and celebrity providing benefits others are not offered. But the mistrust in police played a role in the verdict. The jury even said so.

It was a case of whether you believed the police or OJ. To many OJ had been seen as nothing but a lovable guy. The police had decades of criminal activity, planting evidence, and lying to the public. It was a miscarriage of justice, but that's what happens when people don't trust law enforcement in a community.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It was a miscarriage of justice, but that's what happens when people don't trust law enforcement in a community.

Perhaps, but it was more a case of the District Attorney's office dropping the ball that ultimately cost them a guilty verdict. I recall former LA County District Attorney Vincent Bugliosi (who prosecuted the Charles Manson clan) being livid at Clark and Darden in what he said should have been a slam dunk case. He cited numerous examples of tactical errors and evidence that they never entered which would have successfully won the case.

This was a particularly bad run for the LA County District Attorney's Office, having also recently lost several other highly publicized cases including the McMartin Preschool molestation trial, the "Twilight Zone" film accident trial, and the Rodney King trial.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Ghost Econ

Alright guys, put the zero back on the banner.

https://mobile.twitter.com/LaceyCris...55872522178560

They just released the body cam and it looks justified. The girl who was shot was trying to stab someone else.

You know when a body cam gets released quick, it is usually a justified use of force.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Lathum

The Lindbergh kidnapping was an inside job!!

It was Amelia Airheart! And she's got Jon-BEnet Ramsey!

[Edward64]

Odds were high there would be "rioting" if it came back not guilty.

Also true if there wasn't video evidence that odds increased in Chauvin's favor (but not absolute).

I generally trust the justice system and think the jury did the best they could, with the evidence presented, and the rules they had to work with (e.g. definitions of 2nd and 3rd degrees) etc. It may have occurred to the jury that violence could erupt but don't think that was a factor (nor should it have been) in their decision making.

An argument can be made for using force to stop someone from resisting or being a danger to someone else. But it was obvious that at a certain point he stopped resisting, he was cuffed, there were additional cops to assist if needed etc. There other methods to control Floyd then.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

The girl called them for help. They shot her. I just can't.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

I haven't watched the video, but they are saying the girl was attacking another person. The police shot her to protect someone else. Still, a heartbreaking thing to have happen. I feel for the officers involved.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

Oh, the name calling. It hurts so much. Do you think that I give two shits about what you think? Who the fk are you? I won't reply in kind except to say that the naivete in this thread is mind boggling. Flame away. I am done. Life's too short.

Buh bye.

[Ksyrup]

I keep hearing how this is a turning point and things are going to change. I think that's awfully naive, but more importantly, I think it simply ignores the unique aspects of this particular crime. Not only was it middle of the day, and not only was it filmed from multiple angles, but it basically happened in slow motion. In murder trials involving strangulation, a very effective device is to demonstrate how long it takes to strangle someone. It's not like in the movies/TV - it takes several minutes to choke the life out of someone. You basically had the same thing here.

This was not a pursuit, it wasn't dark, it didn't involve a split-second decision to use a gun, etc. This was a guy kneeling on a neck for 9 minutes as everyone watched a man slowly expire. The circumstances and the technology to capture what happened convicted Chauvin, not "social pressure." Cops will continue to get the benefit of the doubt in other circumstances, I'm certain of it.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I keep hearing how this is a turning point and things are going to change. I think that's awfully naive, but more importantly, I think it simply ignores the unique aspects of this particular crime. Not only was it middle of the day, and not only was it filmed from multiple angles, but it basically happened in slow motion. In murder trials involving strangulation, a very effective device is to demonstrate how long it takes to strangle someone. It's not like in the movies/TV - it takes several minutes to choke the life out of someone. You basically had the same thing here.

This was not a pursuit, it wasn't dark, it didn't involve a split-second decision to use a gun, etc. This was a guy kneeling on a neck for 9 minutes as everyone watched a man slowly expire. The circumstances and the technology to capture what happened convicted Chauvin, not "social pressure." Cops will continue to get the benefit of the doubt in other circumstances, I'm certain of it.

yeah that's why i was wondering allowed...haven't we been through this before? Weren't there cops charged with murder before?

[Kodos]

Yeah, this doesn't mean cops are going to be held accountable going forward. The victims will still need overwhelming evidence to get guilty verdicts against police officers.

[CrimsonFox]

6 minutes in

[Noop]

I see we have a lot of trolls on this site now.

If you are anti-black just say that.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Odds were high there would be "rioting" if it came back not guilty.

Also true if there wasn't video evidence that odds increased in Chauvin's favor (but not absolute).

I generally trust the justice system and think the jury did the best they could, with the evidence presented, and the rules they had to work with (e.g. definitions of 2nd and 3rd degrees) etc. It may have occurred to the jury that violence could erupt but don't think that was a factor (nor should it have been) in their decision making.

An argument can be made for using force to stop someone from resisting or being a danger to someone else. But it was obvious that at a certain point he stopped resisting, he was cuffed, there were additional cops to assist if needed etc. There other methods to control Floyd then.

If there's no video, there's almost no chance of a guilty verdict. Not absolute but it went from like 5% guilty to 80% guilty.

EDIT: Cynically, I suspect it's also a reason why body cameras "malfunction" so darn often when it looks really suspicious for the cops but whenever they have some justification, that footage is released immediately 99.9% of the time

SI

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

If there's no video, there's almost no chance of a guilty verdict. Not absolute but it went from like 5% guilty to 80% guilty.

EDIT: Cynically, I suspect it's also a reason why body cameras "malfunction" so darn often when it looks really suspicious for the cops but whenever they have some justification, that footage is released immediately 99.9% of the time

SI

Absolutely.

Minneapolis Police Department's Original Statement on George Floyd's Death and White Privilege

Hell, I'd better quote the whole thing:

Man Dies After Medical Incident During Police Interaction

May 25, 2020 (MINNEAPOLIS) On Monday evening, shortly after 800 pm, officers from the Minneapolis Police Department responded to teh 3700 block of Chicago Avenue South on a report of a forgery in progress. Officers were advised that the suspect was sitting on top of a blue car and appeared to be under the influence.

Two officers arrived and located the suspect, a male believed to be in his 40s, in his car. He was ordered to step from his car. Afer he got out, he physically resisted officers. Officers were able to get the suspect into handcuffs and noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress. Officers called for an ambulance. He was transported to Hennepin County Medical center by ambulance where he died a short time later.

At no time were weapons of any type used by anyone involved in this incident.

The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension has been called in to investigate this incident at the request of the Minneapolis Police Department.

No officers were injured in the incident.

Body worn cameras were on and activated during this incident.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

Oh, the name calling. It hurts so much. Do you think that I give two shits about what you think? Who the fk are you? I won't reply in kind except to say that the naivete in this thread is mind boggling. Flame away. I am done. Life's too short.

Your shit analogy hurts too. We will all miss being told what naive fools we are, but we'll manage

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

If there's no video, there's almost no chance of a guilty verdict. Not absolute but it went from like 5% guilty to 80% guilty.

EDIT: Cynically, I suspect it's also a reason why body cameras "malfunction" so darn often when it looks really suspicious for the cops but whenever they have some justification, that footage is released immediately 99.9% of the time

SI

I'd typically use the 80-20 rule, or in this case 20-80 rule. But I get your point and agree it went up quite a bit.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Cynically, I suspect it's also a reason why body cameras "malfunction" so darn often when it looks really suspicious for the cops but whenever they have some justification, that footage is released immediately 99.9% of the time

Yep. Not that high a % but I'm very much with this overall. It's actually pretty remarkable how often the body cam footage backs up what the officers did, and in those cases the story simply goes away. Having them on and mandatory at all times will protect the officers just as much as it protects the public.

[Thomkal]

So I haven't followed the post-verdict protests/riots too much today-MTG was blathering on Twitter about how quiet DC was last night, and a lot of law enforcement in riot gear, which several reporters who live in DC quickly disputed. So in all serious was their rioting in Minny or anywhere else in the US last night after the verdict? Any unlawful protests?

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

So I haven't followed the post-verdict protests/riots too much today-MTG was blathering on Twitter about how quiet DC was last night, and a lot of law enforcement in riot gear, which several reporters who live in DC quickly disputed. So in all serious was their rioting in Minny or anywhere else in the US last night after the verdict? Any unlawful protests?

Magic the Gathering said what?

[JPhillips]

In an admitted failure of my imagination, I didn't anticipate that the Chauvin verdict would lead to so many conservatives going publicly full-Stormfront.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

So I haven't followed the post-verdict protests/riots too much today-MTG was blathering on Twitter about how quiet DC was last night, and a lot of law enforcement in riot gear, which several reporters who live in DC quickly disputed. So in all serious was their rioting in Minny or anywhere else in the US last night after the verdict? Any unlawful protests?

There was riot in Portland. But then again riots seems too be a nightly event in that town.

There were also protests in Ohio after that teenage girl got shot while trying to stab another girl with a knife.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

There was riot in Portland. But then again riots seems too be a nightly event in that town.

That was at least partially compounded by another local police murder a couple days ago FWIW:

Portland police: Man shot, killed by officer had replica handgun | kgw.com

[Ghost Econ]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

If there's no video, there's almost no chance of a guilty verdict. Not absolute but it went from like 5% guilty to 80% guilty.

EDIT: Cynically, I suspect it's also a reason why body cameras "malfunction" so darn often when it looks really suspicious for the cops but whenever they have some justification, that footage is released immediately 99.9% of the time

SI

I'd say you're being optimistic at 80%.

Shooting of Daniel Shaver - Wikipedia

(Body cam footage is linked at wikipedia)

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

There was riot in Portland. But then again riots seems too be a nightly event in that town.

There were also protests in Ohio after that teenage girl got shot while trying to stab another girl with a knife.

The business I co-own is headquartered in Portland and I am there a lot. This is blatantly false.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

Magic the Gathering said what?

they said you should check out their new game-Magic:Legends