Michael Brown was Murdered

[Auburn85 432]

 

[AU64 10,122]

Re-writing history after only five years...   guess it is impossible to over-estimate the intelligence of the typical American voter if they expect people to forget the real story so quickly.     Blatantly dishonest....and just further dividing us. 

[aubearcat 2,136]

Yeah, whatever. The posts by Harris and Warren are garbage. 

[aubiefifty 16,746]

what are they rewriting? i am serious. him being shot six times?

[aubearcat 2,136]

12 hours ago, aubiefifty said:

what are they rewriting? i am serious. him being shot six times?

The shooting was investigated by local and federal authorities. Wilson was cleared of any wrong-doings. Departmental practices were scrutinized by the DOJ but the same DOJ found nothing wrong in Wilson’s actions. 

[alexava 6,973]

More like suicide, but at least she didn’t call it a hoax.

[jj3jordan 2,049]

Let's see. Knocked over a convenience store, assaulted the owner, got stoned, walked down the middle of a street, and attacked a cop.

[alexava 6,973]

4 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

Let's see. Knocked over a convenience store, assaulted the owner, got stoned, walked down the middle of a street, and attacked a cop.

I think he was stoned before all that. 

[aubiefifty 16,746]

54 minutes ago, alexava said:

I think he was stoned before all that. 

i understand he fought with the cop and tried to grab his gun. but he walked away and was shot six times when he was unarmed. also witnesses claim he threw his hands up to surrender and was still shot once or twice after that. that is what the  dust up is about.

[alexava 6,973]

3 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

i understand he fought with the cop and tried to grab his gun. but he walked away and was shot six times when he was unarmed. also witnesses claim he threw his hands up to surrender and was still shot once or twice after that. that is what the  dust up is about.

Witnesses on both sides lied. The number of shots was excessive but dead is dead. Like your first sentence hints at... if you reach into a police car and struggle for his gun causing it to fire twice.... you lose any benefits of doubt. 

There are other battles to be had but this one is not worthy. 

[aubearcat 2,136]

11 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

 also witnesses claim he threw his hands up to surrender and was still shot once or twice after that

That was debunked. The “witness” that claimed that was the guy with him when he robbed the convenience store. This is not the case to base police brutality on. There are, unfortunately, cases that can be used for over policing and brutality but this ain’t it. 

[aubearcat 2,136]

6 minutes ago, alexava said:

Witnesses on both sides lied. The number of shots was excessive but dead is dead. Like your first sentence hints at... if you reach into a police car and struggle for his gun causing it to fire twice.... you lose any benefits of doubt. 

There are other battles to be had but this one is not worthy. 

Spot on. As a side, police are trained to fire until the threat is immobilized. One might say “that’s excessive”. However, if it’s a truly justified deadly force scenario, I say the officer is completely justified to keep firing until he reasonably believes he’s safe. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

He wasn't murdered.  And a read of the FBI and Eric Holder-led DOJ investigation will tell anyone who is open to facts over emotion and symbolism can see it.  The findings said that the forensic evidence supported Ofc. Wilson's account of things, the witnesses who backed Wilson's version of events were deemed credible and numerous witnesses who contradicted his account were deemed not credible, changed their stories, or turned out not to have been in position to view what happened.  

Talk to me about Eric Garner, Sandra Bland, Philando Castille, Tamir Rice, Trayvon Martin, and I'm totally with you on protesting unjust killings.  But Michael Brown doesn't belong in that discussion.  He shot off his mouth to a police officer and refused to obey an order, then got into a physical confrontation with the officer trying to take his weapon, and then rather than obeying an order to stop and surrender to the police, tried to charge the officer and got himself shot and killed.

[aubearcat 2,136]

58 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Trayvon Martin

To prevent any conflict, wasn’t killed by law enforcement. Also, Bland died while in jail and that was investigated. There’s never been any evidence that has been discovered that disputes she committed suicide. There maybe some consternation about why she was arrested but no evidence of foul play concerning her death. Also, recently, Garner’s death was ruled it was a medical death based on his health (or lack there of). With Garner, as I said in the thread started by fifty, the biggest mistake by NYPD officers on scene was not calling for medical help sooner. The others you mentioned I don’t really disagree with you.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

4 minutes ago, aubearcat said:

To prevent any conflict, wasn’t killed by law enforcement. Also, Bland’s died while in jail and was investigated. There’s never been any evidence that has been discovered that disputes she committed suicide.

If LE handles that traffic stop properly, it never escalates to an arrest, much less a suicide in a jail cell.

 

4 minutes ago, aubearcat said:

Also, recently, Garner’s death was ruled it was a medical death based on his health (or lack there of). With Garner, as I said in the thread started by fifty, the biggest mistake by NYPD officers on scene was not calling for medical help sooner.

The biggest mistake was blowing the entire thing out of proportion.  And the chokehold was not only not needed, but a violation of department policy on engagement with a suspect.  Paired with not calling for medical help it was an unjust killing.

 

 

[alexava 6,973]

11 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

If LE handles that traffic stop properly, it never escalates to an arrest, much less a suicide in a jail cell.

 

The biggest mistake was blowing the entire thing out of proportion.  And the chokehold was not only not needed, but a violation of department policy on engagement with a suspect.  Paired with not calling for medical help it was an unjust killing.

 

 

It was only blown out of proportion by Garner himself. The rest I agree. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

1 minute ago, alexava said:

It was only blown out of proportion by Garner himself. The rest I agree. 

I disagree.  Selling cigarettes, even illegally, doesn't warrant the kind of police presence and response.  It was like seeing a  cockroach in the kitchen and grabbing a sledgehammer to kill it.

[aubearcat 2,136]

33 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

If LE handles that traffic stop properly, it never escalates to an arrest, much less a suicide in a jail cell.

I stated there maybe disagreement about the arrest. However Police and Corrections are different divisions. It’d be like saying that because someone died in Holman prison, the police were at fault because of the arrest.

The biggest mistake was blowing the entire thing out of proportion.  And the chokehold was not only not needed, but a violation of department policy on engagement with a suspect.  Paired with not calling for medical help it was an unjust killing.

The hold did NOT kill him. The Coroner ruled it was a MEDICAL death. Again, the police were there because of complaints from local business owners and at the direction of supervisors. Had Garner handled in it court and not become overly exerted, he probably wouldn’t have died at that time. Had the police called for medical help sooner he may not of died. However, police were not the direct cause of his death.

 

 

[alexava 6,973]

17 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I disagree.  Selling cigarettes, even illegally, doesn't warrant the kind of police presence and response.  It was like seeing a  cockroach in the kitchen and grabbing a sledgehammer to kill it.

8 or 9 times in a couple months time he was cited for the same thing. This time he was going to jail and blatantly refused. The first officer could have taken him easily and without incident had he not required the response. Having back up is not a bad thing. It allows you to overpower the suspect instead of a fight that would require a taser, flashlight or gun. Every thing you blame on police was not their choice. The choke hold was the straw that broke the camels back. But this damn camel had a very weak back. 

We can disagree but facts are facts. He was a repeat offender and brought everything on himself. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

2 hours ago, aubearcat said:

The hold did NOT kill him. The Coroner ruled it was a MEDICAL death. Again, the police were there because of complaints from local business owners and at the direction of supervisors. Had Garner handled in it court and not become overly exerted, he probably wouldn’t have died at that time. Had the police called for medical help sooner he may not of died. However, police were not the direct cause of his death.

Actually, the medical examiner ruled Garner's death a homicide (meaning simply, that his death resulted from the actions of another, not that it was a criminal act necessarily). Specifically, an autopsy indicated that Garner's death resulted from "[compression] of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police".  Asthma, heart disease, and obesity were cited as contributing factors.

http://nyti.ms/1ohkg8A

And this conclusion was backed by a second, independent autopsy:  https://www.apnews.com/42443fdeee364997ac4a298063f67eaf

 

[bigbird 60,461]

11 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

I disagree.  Selling cigarettes, even illegally, doesn't warrant the kind of police presence and response.  It was like seeing a  cockroach in the kitchen and grabbing a sledgehammer to kill it.

Have you seen the ones in Texas? They'll fight you for the sledgehammer

[aubearcat 2,136]

12 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Actually, the medical examiner ruled Garner's death a homicide (meaning simply, that his death resulted from the actions of another, not that it was a criminal act necessarily). Specifically, an autopsy indicated that Garner's death resulted from "[compression] of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police".  Asthma, heart disease, and obesity were cited as contributing factors.

http://nyti.ms/1ohkg8A

And this conclusion was backed by a second, independent autopsy:  https://www.apnews.com/42443fdeee364997ac4a298063f67eaf

 

Ok, my apologies. I misunderstood some of the articles I had read and I thought it was ruled a complete medical incident. However, the DOJ also investigated this case and ruled that no charges should be filed. 

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/16/742186042/nypd-officer-wont-face-federal-criminal-charges-in-eric-garner-s-death-sources-s

I’ll also add that there’s a difference between homicide and murder. Murder requires intent and is always illegal . A homicide can, of course, be legal depending on the circumstances. I don’t believe a line can be drawn from Pantaleo’s actions to Garner’s death that shows he had intent to kill Garner. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

1 hour ago, aubearcat said:

Ok, my apologies. I misunderstood some of the articles I had read and I thought it was ruled a complete medical incident. However, the DOJ also investigated this case and ruled that no charges should be filed. 

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/16/742186042/nypd-officer-wont-face-federal-criminal-charges-in-eric-garner-s-death-sources-s

I’ll also add that there’s a difference between homicide and murder. Murder requires intent and is always illegal . A homicide can, of course, be legal depending on the circumstances. I don’t believe a line can be drawn from Pantaleo’s actions to Garner’s death that shows he had intent to kill Garner. 

I mentioned the distinction in homicide and murder.  But the killing was caused by actions the police took - actions that violate department policy and that I believe got the officer involved fired.  Not to mention, at the time they confronted Garner, it's not even clear he was doing anything wrong.  He wasn't selling cigarettes, he was actually breaking up a fight.  

On top of that, the officer who caused his death initially exaggerated his claims about Garner's alleged crimes that he was confronting him about in the first place and exaggerated how close he was to Garner when he claims he saw him selling "loosies."  He said he was about 200 ft from Garner.  In actuality, he was almost the length of a football field from him (328 ft).  

I think both of these exaggerations/fabrications, combined with his violation of PD policy on apprehending people, not listening to Garner when he clearly told him he couldn't breathe (11 times!), and then delaying medical help make this an unjust killing regardless of whether there was enough evidence to elevate it to a murder charge.

[aubearcat 2,136]

7 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I mentioned the distinction in homicide and murder.  But the killing was caused by actions the police took - actions that violate department policy and that I believe got the officer involved fired.  Not to mention, at the time they confronted Garner, it's not even clear he was doing anything wrong.  He wasn't selling cigarettes, he was actually breaking up a fight.  

On top of that, the officer who caused his death initially exaggerated his claims about Garner's alleged crimes that he was confronting him about in the first place and exaggerated how close he was to Garner when he claims he saw him selling "loosies."  He said he was about 200 ft from Garner.  In actuality, he was almost the length of a football field from him (328 ft).  

I think both of these exaggerations/fabrications, combined with his violation of PD policy on apprehending people, not listening to Garner when he clearly told him he couldn't breathe (11 times!), and then delaying medical help make this an unjust killing regardless of whether there was enough evidence to elevate it to a murder charge.

The violation of departmental policy certainly opens him up to punishment or even termination, which as of the last DNC hadn’t happened because DeBlasio was questioned why Panteleo hadn’t been fired (a judge recommended it but he was still on desk duty). As far as the exaggerations made by Panteleo, I can only speculate those were taken into account during the investigation by the DOJ that eventually determined not to charge him with a crime. I, for the limited amount of information that I have, also agree that there wasn’t a felony crime committed. The Castile, Rice, and the case from South Carolina are far better examples of possibilities of crimes than Garner and certainly Brown. Even Sterling is more questionable than these two in my opinion. 

[japantiger 4,051]

On 8/11/2019 at 1:07 PM, aubearcat said:

Spot on. As a side, police are trained to fire until the threat is immobilized. One might say “that’s excessive”. However, if it’s a truly justified deadly force scenario, I say the officer is completely justified to keep firing until he reasonably believes he’s safe. 

How do we judge how many shots are excessive?