Milkman delivers

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 01:45 AM) That's true, but like he pointed out, there had to be a mistake made if an unarmed guy is shot that many times. Now if the kid tried to get the cop's gun, the cop knows he's unarmed. I guess if the kid went for the gun, he deserves to be shot and possibly die. But if he shot him should he blast him five more times? And why would they let the body just rot in the street after the kid was killed? I think mistakes were made in any scenario. And this is assuming the kid tried to get the cop's gun? If this is a fact not an opinion, then the kid deserved to die, I guess. Will this ever be proven to be the real scenario? No, in a shooting situation, you're almost always going to have multiple shots fired. And if some of the stories are to be believed, Brown kept charging after being hit multiple times, making the shots necessary.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 12:15 AM) BMags had a great line in this thread when he said: "But how good of a cop could you be if a jaywalking arrest turns into a dead kid? Surely there was some slip up along the way even if the kid was aggressively behaving." I agree wholeheartedly. Greg, I don't normally even bother to argue with you as you're like arguing with a brick wall, but I have to tell you you're wrong. It's like saying "how good of a driver could ____ be?" after they get hit by another driver. You can be amazing at something, but you can't account entirely for other people.

I know there are statements from witnesses that support both sides and this also won't be received well, but many times witnesses have no idea what their rights are or what actions justify certain responses. When witnesses say "they murdered him", it certainly sounds like it's basically an execution. But, their statements are often shown to be outright lies or simply very misinformed upon more questioning. In this situation, a person may watch Brown charge an officer. Brown has no weapon on him, and the officer opens fire. Many people watching this may believe that this is an unjustified shooting. Some will think or reason that "he was only running at him, he didn't even have a weapon, the cop murdered him without cause". And there's definitely something to that, but it can still be completely justifiable. Many of the statements are their interpretation of what happened, not what actually happened.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 07:27 PM) Here is video of the aftermath from one of the initial witnesses. http://www.ibtimes.com/new-video-mike-brow...led-him-1661840 That doesn't really add anything either way.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 07:25 PM) Yes. Gotcha. I referred to that earlier in the thread, so no need to reopen that door.

What part of the story was inconsistent with the earlier statements, though? That he was aware of the robbery?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 07:03 PM) Was the cops story via his friend inconsistent with previous police statements? (Yes) Fair enough, but there's a big difference there. The friend is relating a story someone else told, like the old telephone line game. Pieces of that story can change over time. The witnesses are relating what they saw themselves. And if they said he was shot in the back (which you'll counter by saying they said he was only shot "at" with his back turned) and forensics show he wasn't, then their whole account is now in question.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 06:58 PM) He's not arrested he's dead. Yup. But it may have been his own doing. And if so, you can't blame the cop. I get what you're saying, believe me. But it's sort of a circular argument.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 06:40 PM) Are these the same witnesses that had Mike getting shot in the back as well. +1

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 06:37 PM) they also don't show any signs of a previous struggle. My only thoughts are this probably all happened very fast. For some reason Brown turned around in a way that witnesses thought it was by force. Something that traumatizing is hard for the brain to process. He ran, may have been shot at from behind, turned around, started running, shot. I find it hard to believe he "made an obscene gesture" or whatever the wording was, then started bullrushing. And kept going. And at all points, where does the hands up come from? That was an added detail, that was from the first witnesses around the scene on twitter on saturday the 9th. I was following when it happened. Everyone said he was executed. There's more there. The accounts that say there was a scuffle seem to say that Brown was the one pushing the officer into the car and overpowering him. So he wouldn't have many signs of a struggle.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 06:34 PM) I think anyone that tries to disarm a police officer, or try and shoot anyone, may be brought down with force to protect others. But that's kind of the point. I can't remember the last time one of these happened where the unarmed person didn't either have some sort of object that police believed was a gun, or tried to grab the gun. I'm sure in some cases it happened, but every single time? It's a very intoxicating turn of events from someone trying to prove their innocence. Moreso when the other person can't off their own intent. I have to say, that friends account sounds rather incredible. More rabid animal than teenager. Almost every action paints the officer in the best light (he not only charges, but keeps charging even after shot, so intent on ... bull rushing the officer) But how good of a cop could you be if a jaywalking arrest turns into a dead kid? Surely there was some slip up along the way even if the kid was aggressively behaving. You can be the best cop in the world. You can't change someone's mind if they have already decided they aren't being arrested today.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 06:31 PM) The forensics say nothing about the likelihood of Brown's movements. The bullet into the top of the head. But, I guess you could say that was from him falling forward after being shot the 5 other times.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 06:24 PM) Surely we're always going to wonder if this incident would have happened without a police force that was 94.3% white patrolling a heavily minority area (at least 70%+ African American). I'm willing to admit Brown probably had some culpability, it might even be 60-70% if SOME of the accounts are too believed. It's also possible the officer got shook up or panicked because he SUPPOSEDLY almost was disarmed by this huge guy and the flight response isn't possible for a police officer, so the FIGHT response kicked in, as well as his target range training, assuming this is the first time he's fired his gun while on duty. The officer surely has to be thinking of different ways he could have handled this situation without ending up in the loss of human life...just like Tony Stewart's sitting at home having to live with his actions and his contribution to a tragedy. Perhaps he's not going to be held criminally negligent or responsible, but you can be sure the civil trial will go forward no matter what, and a not guilty verdict's going to be as hard to stomach for the local residents as the Trayvon Martin or Rodney King/Simi Valley cases. Fruitvale Station this isn't...but it's one in a long line of seemingly similar incidents that show we still have a LONG ways to go in terms of trust and communication not only between the police and their communities, but also between black and white people specifically. Not only that, but black people distrusting others "representing them" or trying to appease them (Uncle Tom's/sell outs) or make a name for themselves coming from the outside to exploit the situation to their own benefit. The forensics are already showing support that Brown was both facing and likely moving towards the officer. And then you have the background conversation claiming there was a scuffle and that Brown charged him. I don't care what the racial makeup of the department is, if those things end up being true, it's 100% on Brown.

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 06:15 PM) Right, phew. Glad the officer cleared that up for us. I get what you're saying, but how else would you suggest he handle the situation if Brown actually did attempt to disarm him?

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 06:04 PM) You are right about that. Nobody in AMERICA will believe it either. The officer is going to have to "take one for the team" on this one and go to jail for 30 years. The people probably won't think that's enough and riot some more if it happens. I like caufield's posts. The last 4-5 posts anyway. Nice job. Amen brother. Haha, he should just go to jail because people will want him to, even if he did nothing wrong?

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 05:52 PM) Yes, we have a lot of retrospectives from this cop apparently. What's Mike Brown's side of the story? If he tried to disarm an officer, his side of the story doesn't really make a difference.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 05:48 PM) And you sound so gung-ho to go into Ferguson and bring some good 'ol fashioned law and order...at least I presented some evidence that MIGHT exonerate the officer, if it was actually truthful. You aren't giving ANY benefit of the doubt, at all... The last place I wanna be is Ferguson, believe me. And you're insinuating that I wanna go beat some protesters because I'm telling you it's incredibly dumb to expect someone to make even tougher shots when his or her life is in danger? No, I'm simply telling you how it is.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 05:39 PM) Who just so happened to be doing some kind of victory dance or celebration in the middle of the street with their $49 worth of stolen cigars. Because obviously no one else in the city would have the right to holding/carrying cigars in their hands, so it was very convenient that the officer just so happened four hours later to find those two still carrying around the cigars instead of smoking them, handing them out to friends, etc. Again, whether or not he was aware of the robbery is moot. They were walking in the street, which is illegal and already justifies the stop.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 05:34 PM) So the solution is for EVERYONE to have a gun. Because, if, no matter what, an officer can presume you have a gun, then unless there's some type of video/cam, it's always going to be his word against the victim's. Therefore, since officers will shoot assuming you have a gun anyway, why not just let everyone have a gun? P.S. I'm sure trained professionals can hit a 300 pound guy from 35 feet away at least once or twice at waist level or below if he's taking 6-8 shots. Are we supposed to believe this guy's moving as quick as William The Refrigerator Perry down the street like an enraged bull? You sound so freaking dumb on this subject. Just give it up.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 05:36 PM) Oh absolutely but that story from the officer's friend says something about them being robbery suspects. I get it, but like I said, it's almost irrelevant if everything that he said occurred after is true. And there's also the possibility that he stopped them for walking in the street and found out about the robbery during the stop, or that he heard about it earlier and it dawned on him that they could be the same people once he initiated the stop.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 04:57 PM) It's a pretty interesting case though if what this story says actually happened. You've got a huge dude that just tried to steal your gun and beat you up. You, as the police, successfully fended him off. He runs, you pursue as is your duty. And when you say freeze, instead of freezing, he runs at you with the clear intent of trying to hurt you. Again, assuming this is true for the sake of the argument, what was the officers alternative other than to shoot? Hop into his car and drive away? Do we want them to do that? Wouldn't that just invite more attacks on police? A baton won't help. A taser might, but I don't think he had one on him. Mace? Maybe, that's not fool proof and you have to be somewhat accurate for it to work. I'm not sure what the answer is there. Back to reality, do we know where the officer was when he fired? Was he still at the car? Did he try and pursue for a little bit? I think that's a very important fact here. 35 feet away really discredits your fear of being killed/seriously hurt. If he had taken 5-10 steps after Brown, and was within 10-15 feet, that's a much more "acceptable" use of deadly force. Then you're at least seconds away from being attacked again. As wite said, you can close a 35-foot gap very quickly. And let me talk about the taser for a minute. Obviously it's a non-issue in this case, as he didn't have one. But tasers are not this magical instrument people seem to think they are. Both prongs have to make a connection for it to even work. Clothing often causes a disconnect. And at a distance, there is even more separation between the two prongs. At 35 feet, which is longer than a ton of tasers, if one prong connects, the other is more than likely hitting the cement or going through or to the side of the legs. Hitting a moving target with a taser is also incredibly difficult. And the "mace", while painful, is routinely powered through by angry people.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 04:05 PM) Didn't the police chief already say that the officer wasn't aware of the robbery? Even if he weren't aware of the robbery, he could still legally stop them for walking in the street. It's clearly less of a crime, but it's still a crime.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 12:56 PM) Any of the multiple lawyers here have any knowledge of deadly force laws? Would the hypothetical scenario of Brown starting to run back towards the police officer from 35+ feet away even justify the use of deadly force? He could probably justify it based solely on size difference and charging at him alone. When you add in the possibility that he previously attempted to disarm the officer, it's a slam freaking dunk.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 18, 2014 -> 11:45 AM) Once again, why is the officer using deadly force if Brown isn't armed....? You're telling me that you don't shoot him in the leg or knee or at least try before he gets closer? It's not like this guy is going to be "quick" or be able to fly at an officer at that size. And six shots or more? Unless he was crazed on meth or some type of drug, then it's going to be very difficult to explain this one. It's not difficult to explain at all, and you sound like a f***ing idiot.

I gotta imagine that they didn't cover up the body for fear of contaminating the crime scene.