Cop Lives don't matter though, right?

8/15/2014 1:42:26 PM

There should be almost as much outrage about the cops actually releasing robbery video as if it somehow sentences brown to death because thathats what it just did to the white jury. The robbery is completely irrelevant ro the murder and should have bbeen a closed case since the suspect is dead.

They always do this. Putting the victim on trial.

8/15/2014 1:44:13 PM

^^Where the fuck are you getting that from? Jesus.

8/15/2014 1:49:32 PM

Quote :

"Cop Lives don't matter though, right?"

Again, what are you basing that on? Did somebody say something like that?

8/15/2014 1:52:19 PM

Nice strawman page topper eleusis

8/15/2014 1:57:53 PM

^^he seems to be responding to dtownral's post at the bottom of the last page, which makes his response even more idiotic because dtownral highlighted words to emphasize the fact that all human's lives matter

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 1:58 PM. Reason : $$$]

8/15/2014 1:58:27 PM

So the unarmed team robbed a store and intimidated the owner before he was shot.

http://www.cnn.com/

8/15/2014 2:06:41 PM

^ Big, if true.

8/15/2014 2:11:05 PM

so you mean to tell me that there was looting before the shooting?

8/15/2014 2:12:10 PM

^^^ that was posted on the last page...i think the idea is that he shoplifted, not that he engaged in armed robbery.

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 2:20 PM. Reason : V inorite?]

8/15/2014 2:18:33 PM

And that in no way justifies his killing. At least if the killing went down in the way it seems to have gone down.

8/15/2014 2:19:58 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/15/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/08/15/340585038/theyre-talking-to-people-tensions-ease-in-ferguson-as-police-change-tactics

8/15/2014 2:21:06 PM

It raises doubt about everything. I don't like the way the police handle the protest. I don't like that police can kill people unjustly.

However, if he was a suspect and was being detained and then struggled for the gun, that changes things dramatically. Did the cop shoot him in the back while he was trying to flee? I think that is the real question now and can probably be determined.

8/15/2014 2:25:05 PM

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/8/14/ferguson-media-iftheygunnedmedown.html

This article hits the nail on the head....

8/15/2014 2:27:07 PM

while the alleged robbery doesn't justify the kids death it does shred the whole premise that the mean racist poopoo was harassing the poor black folk for jay-walking.....

8/15/2014 2:31:29 PM

Which was never actually a thing...

8/15/2014 2:33:37 PM

how come this sort of thing never happens to middle class americans (of any race)?

8/15/2014 2:33:57 PM

^^^I never really saw that as the real issue.

As with many issues, it seems that different people frame it differently in their hed.

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 2:39 PM. Reason : and you're saying that like police never racially profile. and racism doesn't exist.]

8/15/2014 2:34:32 PM

so many jerked knees in here

8/15/2014 2:41:00 PM

Because there is no middle class

8/15/2014 2:42:57 PM

Quote :

"and you're saying that like police never racially profile. and racism doesn't exis"

I'm not saying that at all. My only assertion is that whenever there is a black on white crime/incident it is always treated by the media and African American community to be racially motivated until proven otherwise.

8/15/2014 2:43:45 PM

Quote :

"that was posted on the last page...i think the idea is that he shoplifted, not that he engaged in armed robbery."

Wrong. This is what annoys me about all these cases, including ones like Trayvon. People flip out and act like its an open and shut case of racism murder before the facts come out. The cop may very well have used excessive force here, but why not wait until all of the facts come out?

According to the video that was released, he committed strong armed robbery (meaning without a weapon), but is a felony. Its very clear in the video he assaulted the clerk. The clerk called and reported the robbery, along with the description, and the officer approached. The rest is unclear, and I will personally wait until the FBI concludes their investigation.

But I do know the officer was treated for injuries (its unclear how bad). And according to attorneys, if the officer approached them knowing they fit description of robbery suspects, and they assaulted the officer and ran, he is well within the law to shoot a fleeing felon. This has been heard and upheld by the Supreme Court. Disagree with it if you like, but that is the law.

8/15/2014 2:44:12 PM

they could vote in a way that might affect the laws but

1) they dont vote

2) our democracy is broken man

3) easier to just hate cops and watch jersey shore

8/15/2014 2:45:52 PM

He wouldn't be a felon unless he was convicted, right? Or did he have priors?

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 2:48 PM. Reason : ^wat?]

8/15/2014 2:47:29 PM

Quote :

"he is well within the law to shoot a fleeing felon. This has been heard and upheld by the Supreme Court. Disagree with it if you like, but that is the law."

WRONG

Tennessee v. Garner (1984) says he can only shoot him if he is a danger to the community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 2:50 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 2:51 PM. Reason : ..]

8/15/2014 2:48:50 PM

If it is him in the video that shows he is fully capable of getting in to a tussle while doing something illegal. It does not mean the cop is telling the truth about the encounter, but it sure makes the cops version of what happened more believable.

8/15/2014 2:51:36 PM

Poor teddy bear...not capable of hurting a soul.

8/15/2014 2:54:05 PM

^^^

yes, however, you may have missed the following negative treatment of Garner in Vaughan

The first step in reviewing an excessive force claim is to determine whether the plaintiff was subject to the “intentional acquisition of physical control” by a government actor. Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593, 596, 109 S.Ct. 1378, 1381, 103 L.Ed.2d 628 (1989). It is clear that “apprehension by the use of deadly *1033 force is a seizure....” Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 7, 105 S.Ct. 1694, 1699, 85 L.Ed.2d 1 (1985). It is also apparent that Vaughan could have been “seized” for Fourth Amendment purposes even though he was not taken into custody immediately following the shooting. As the Supreme Court has noted, “the application of physical force to restrain movement, even when it is ultimately unsuccessful” is sufficient to constitute a seizure. California v. Hodari D, 499 U.S. 621, 626, 111 S.Ct. 1547, 1550, 113 L.Ed.2d 690 (1991). Undeniably, Cox's firing of his weapon was an application of force with the design to restrain movement. It is therefore irrelevant that Vaughan was not actually taken into custody until after the lengthy chase. However, the Supreme Court has held that a seizure occurs “only when there is a governmental termination of freedom of movement through means intentionally applied.” Brower, 489 U.S. at 597, 109 S.Ct. at 1381 (emphasis in original).

Vaughan v. Cox, 264 F.3d 1027, 1032-33 (11th Cir. 2001) cert. granted, judgment vacated, 536 U.S. 953 (2002) and vacated, 343 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir. 2003)

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 2:56 PM. Reason : ]

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 2:56 PM. Reason : ]

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 2:57 PM. Reason : I think BlackSheep should stay away from the law books and stick to Wikipedia]

8/15/2014 2:55:46 PM

Yeah while we all can agree being a robbery suspect does not justify being killed by police, it does call into question at least the account of witnesses. If true he obviously wasnt just some gentle giant and being approached by police for a crime you just committed versus just because you were walking down the street can be taken much differently.

Have they said whether the other person in the video was the guys friend who has been on the news giving his story as being the main eye witness?

8/15/2014 2:58:46 PM

Quote :

" WRONG Tennessee v. Garner (1984) says he can only shoot him if he is a danger to the community. "

HA. So committing a strong armed robbery and allegedly assaulting a police officer is not a danger to the community?

8/15/2014 2:59:25 PM

Do you think the media will have an outcry about demilitarizing the military like they had an outcry about gun control after zimmerman?

8/15/2014 2:59:28 PM

Quote :

"whole premise that the mean racist poopoo was harassing the poor black folk for jay-walking....."

the only people who thought this was the issue are maybe people like Smath, eleusis, and y0willy0 who all have, and continue to, miss the fucking point


also,

guys, he wasn't a felon you fucking retards. he was a suspect who matched a description. If you think that in any way justifies shooting someone you need to immediately proceed to the dullest knife you can find and remove your genitalia and never reproduce.

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 3:02 PM. Reason : .]

8/15/2014 2:59:40 PM

Quote :

"HA. So committing a strong armed robbery and allegedly assaulting a police officer is not a danger to the community?"

I think what they decided was that a suspect would have to be suspected of a capitol offense like rape or murder in order to be shot while fleeing.

8/15/2014 3:02:32 PM

we need to not gloss over this, you guys actually think that its okay to shoot someone who is running away who matches a description. can you not see all the many ways that is dumb and wrong? seriously?

did you guys watch Judge Dredd and think it was a documentary? what the fuck is wrong with you, how can anyone be that dumb and psychopathic?

8/15/2014 3:04:42 PM

Everyone here is concerned about civil rights and the fourth amendment.

I strongly recommend that everyone ITT apply to law school and join the welcoming community of lawyers who will pat you on the back and welcome your opening a practice to compete with theirs.

Currently, the lawyering community is undermanned, and America needs more lawyers.

Your ideas expressed in this discussion are unique and special, much like the snowflakes that fall from the winter sky.

8/15/2014 3:05:26 PM

^^nobody is saying that stupid

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 3:05 PM. Reason : -]

8/15/2014 3:05:29 PM

Quote :

"Wrong. This is what annoys me about all these cases, including ones like Trayvon. People flip out and act like its an open and shut case of racism murder before the facts come out. "

Uhhhhh, my post that you quoted had nothing to do with racism.

Quote :

"he is well within the law to shoot a fleeing felon."

What the fuck are you smoking?

Quote :

"He wouldn't be a felon unless he was convicted, right? Or did he have priors?"

That too. If he was a felon, we would know by now.

Quote :

"we need to not gloss over this, you guys actually think that its okay to shoot someone who is running away who matches a description. can you not see all the many ways that is dumb and wrong? seriously? did you guys watch Judge Dredd and think it was a documentary? what the fuck is wrong with you, how can anyone be that dumb and psychopathic? "

+1



[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 3:32 PM. Reason : V you do know what the word allegedly means right?]

8/15/2014 3:05:35 PM

no, he wasnt an existing felon by record, but he matched the description perfectly of some who just committed a felony, and then assaulted a cop, which is also a felony, which under the law gives the cop a right to shoot. Not that hard to understand "you fucking retard"

And fwiw, in my opinion the cop certainly did not need to shoot the kid after he took off running based on what evidence is public. But under the law, he had a right to. Just because you disagree with the law, doesnt change that it exists

8/15/2014 3:06:16 PM

Quote :

"^^nobody is saying that stupid"

this guy did:

Quote :

" if the officer approached them knowing they fit description of robbery suspects, and they assaulted the officer and ran, he is well within the law to shoot a fleeing felon. This has been heard and upheld by the Supreme Court. Disagree with it if you like, but that is the law."

then someone seemed to agree with him

do you not get tired of being so dumb?

8/15/2014 3:07:22 PM

Quote :

"which under the law gives the cop a right to shoot."

false

god damn, you motherfuckers are stupid as shit

8/15/2014 3:07:55 PM

lol

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 3:08 PM. Reason : tell us how you really feel]

8/15/2014 3:08:06 PM

Quote :

"existing felon by record"

If a felon exists in the woods, but nobody hears it, does it exist?

8/15/2014 3:09:30 PM

I heard the cop heard the description and did a drive by on him

8/15/2014 3:10:18 PM

Quote :

"Did the cop shoot him in the back while he was trying to flee? I think that is the real question now and can probably be determined."

it's not definitive, but there doesn't appear to be any blood stains on the back of his shirt in the pictures of Brown lying in the street. The stream of blood seems to be coming from his torso.

8/15/2014 3:10:41 PM

and what conclusions should we draw from that, Dexter?

8/15/2014 3:11:16 PM

I think all of you guys need to fight for your right






to paaaartayyy

http://youtu.be/eBShN8qT4lk


[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 3:13 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on August 15, 2014 at 3:14 PM. Reason : didn't work]

8/15/2014 3:12:26 PM

Quote :

"Have they said whether the other person in the video was the guys friend who has been on the news giving his story as being the main eye witness?"

it's been confirmed by both the kid's lawyer and the police officer assigned to the robbery case.

8/15/2014 3:14:46 PM

To answer the question on priors the answer is no. Michael Brown had no criminal record going into this.

8/15/2014 3:16:00 PM

A lot of the posters trying to be funny in this thread aren't being funny.

8/15/2014 3:17:20 PM

Well we have gone from he is just a big teddy bear trying to go to college!!!

To a robbery suspect who assaulted a storeowner. Is it wildly out of question, if he can assault a store owner he would assault a police officer? Like others have said, let the facts come out, but this is a game changer.

Why aren't the protestors at work?

8/15/2014 3:18:10 PM