Ferguson Riots

[StrangeSox]

We would know what happened if the officer's car had a basic dashboard cam.

dash cams at a minimum, ideally body cams for all police.

[Jenksismyhero]

Right... I get that. I also get that both sides of this issue are extremely on edge.

 

Your earlier post, however, seems to say that because of a single incident where a police office was shot at, the actions of police can now not be criticized. Further, your post is written is a way to make it seem like it's a battleground with police under constant fire. I have seen one incident of shots fired at officers (which is one too many, but also shouldn't rise to the level of no criticizing police).

 

Again, I understand why the police are on edge, but the police arresting and threatening the media is almost always worthy of criticism.

 

I don't think it's been once incident, certainly not with the molotov cocktails. And I don't think it "almost always" deserves criticism. Media members test boundaries all the time to get the scoop, the shot, the interview, whatever. They disregard instructions constantly.

 

I'm not excusing poor police work, false arrests, etc. But to me the Gawker post is more about piling on than reporting useful information. The last 3-4 days if you read twitter and blogs, it's a constant stream of "omg! the police yelled at me!" type quotes from media members. OF COURSE media members are going to be upset because that just gets them more attention.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

We would know what happened if the officer's car had a basic dashboard cam.

 

What was the basic layout here? I always assumed, and I guess i'm not sure why, that the police vehicle was facing one way, and the shooting and everything happened behind it. Is that totally wrong? Or do we even know at this point?

[Swingandalongonetoleft]

Given that cops are being shot at down there (with real bullets), it would seem reasonable to be pissed that media members aren't turning off gigantic flood lights in the area.

 

I'm not sure that threatening to shoot someone because you're pissed that they're there and they have a camera is a reasonable response. It didn't go over well with anyone when Separatists sang that song to media and investigators trying to get to the MH17 crash site, and I don't even think they went as far as actually saying it- rather, just hinting at it by being armed to the teeth like a bunch of Russki Ted Nugents .

[Jenksismyhero]

If he didn't make an effort to pat him down, that's going to come out.

 

The old "made a motion like he was pulling out a gun" could be used as a mitigating factor in every shooting...is there anyone who can corroborate this besides the officer himself?

 

Mini-cameras on the shoulders/collars of the officers are going to be the only solution. It's doubtful at this point any officer or "community witness" is either going to provide honest/truthful evidence. How would either side trust the other?

 

Going back to this....this is why you don't f*** with cops. This is why you follow their instructions. At the end of the day, they will almost always have the "justified" argument on their side, whether it's right or wrong. I know that sucks for people who think the police are out to get them, and for people who are actual victims of police abuse, but you gotta win that battle in the civil courts, not by fighting the cops in the streets.

 

I'm guessing the shoulder cameras are too costly at this point. And I wonder if the various municipalities will even want them when they become more affordable. Yes, it might save them from a lawsuit like this one, but how many more is it going to start?

[CrimsonWeltall]

What was the basic layout here? I always assumed, and I guess i'm not sure why, that the police vehicle was facing one way, and the shooting and everything happened behind it. Is that totally wrong? Or do we even know at this point?

 

Here's a video taken shortly after the shooting (WARNING: contains dead body).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdL9dqkyjhM

 

All statements indicate that Brown was facing toward the cop when he was shot, so based on his body in that video, I'd say the cop was to the left in the video. The police report said his body was 35 feet from the vehicle, so that's gotta be that first police SUV on the left. I doubt the officer moved his car after the shooting. That SUV's dash cam, if it had one, would have been pointing at where Brown died.

[caulfield12]

I don't think it's been once incident, certainly not with the molotov cocktails. And I don't think it "almost always" deserves criticism. Media members test boundaries all the time to get the scoop, the shot, the interview, whatever. They disregard instructions constantly.

 

I'm not excusing poor police work, false arrests, etc. But to me the Gawker post is more about piling on than reporting useful information. The last 3-4 days if you read twitter and blogs, it's a constant stream of "omg! the police yelled at me!" type quotes from media members. OF COURSE media members are going to be upset because that just gets them more attention.

 

 

Wouldn't there be a vested interest on the part of all the conservative newspapers, Fox News, etc., to get the opposite story...so they can turn around and say they were right all along, which is basically that the big black kid "had it coming to him" and the police officer was simply doing his job and has been unfairly vilified???

 

Doesn't that get BETTER ratings?

 

Which was the better story, the original Duke Lacrosse rape story, or the follow-up one?

[LittleHurt05]

Going back to this....this is why you don't f*** with cops. This is why you follow their instructions. At the end of the day, they will almost always have the "justified" argument on their side, whether it's right or wrong. I know that sucks for people who think the police are out to get them, and for people who are actual victims of police abuse, but you gotta win that battle in the civil courts, not by fighting the cops in the streets.

 

I'm guessing the shoulder cameras are too costly at this point. And I wonder if the various municipalities will even want them when they become more affordable. Yes, it might save them from a lawsuit like this one, but how many more is it going to start?

 

Actually I think they found it would lower the amount of lawsuits. People are less likely to make false accusations of police brutality if everything is filmed.

[caulfield12]

Going back to this....this is why you don't f*** with cops. This is why you follow their instructions. At the end of the day, they will almost always have the "justified" argument on their side, whether it's right or wrong. I know that sucks for people who think the police are out to get them, and for people who are actual victims of police abuse, but you gotta win that battle in the civil courts, not by fighting the cops in the streets.

 

I'm guessing the shoulder cameras are too costly at this point. And I wonder if the various municipalities will even want them when they become more affordable. Yes, it might save them from a lawsuit like this one, but how many more is it going to start?

 

 

I would simply counter that when a majority of the country feels strongly that the cameras would make them feel safer, then it will happen, regardless of the cost.

 

Would you put your 3 year old son or daughter in a daycare center that had 6 cameras taking constant footage or would you save $50-100 per month for a center without any cameras?

[caulfield12]

Actually I think they found it would lower the amount of lawsuits. People are less likely to make false accusations of police brutality if everything is filmed.

 

 

We have the opposite in China.

 

Many are buying cameras for their own cars to record people who dive or jump out in front of their cars, pretend to be hurt or injured...back their car into you at a stoplight, motorcyles or bicycles that deliberately fall over near or against your car and then you have to argue with that person in the street.

 

Insurance companies are even providing a subsidy because it prevents frivolous lawsuits.

Edited August 18, 2014 by caulfield12

[StrangeSox]

fwiw it seems to be the organizations that have the worst track records of abuse that are the most intransigent when it comes to installing dash cams.

[RockRaines]

That's why I asked if he had been patted down (and thus the officer knew before shooting whether he was armed or not). For all we know Brown ran away, turned around, and then made a motion like he was pulling out a gun.

 

A cop probably SHOULD aim to disarm/kill, and maybe he did that since there are numerous shots to the right hand/arm/shoulder. But in a split second if you really believe your life is in danger I don't think you can process that decision so quickly.

The cnn doctor thought it appeared the shots were aimed at midsection and the head shot could have occurred when he fell while advancing. That would be why there is a shot directly down through the top of the skull.

[Jenksismyhero]

I would simply counter that when a majority of the country feels strongly that the cameras would make them feel safer, then it will happen, regardless of the cost.

 

Would you put your 3 year old son or daughter in a daycare center that had 6 cameras taking constant footage or would you save $50-100 per month for a center without any cameras?

 

I'd have to see some data that those cameras would keep people "safer." If anything the major impact is being able to see what happened after the fact. That's beneficial, sure, but I dunno that it's worth the cost, both short-term and long-term.

 

And no, I probably would not pay more for it. Mine now doesn't have one. Most don't. 99% never have. And yet the world moves on. Our society sucks these days because we overreact to extremely rare crimes/events.

[Jenksismyhero]

fwiw it seems to be the organizations that have the worst track records of abuse that are the most intransigent when it comes to installing dash cams.

 

Could be, but it's still a roadblock to getting them installed. I doubt Cook County or Chicago will be doing it anytime soon.

[StrangeSox]

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?

[StrangeSox]

also fwiw, a customer at the convenience store called the police, but the owners and the employees didn't. Maybe didn't think it was worth the hassle to report a $20 (or however much some gas stations cigars would be) theft.

[Jenksismyhero]

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?

 

 

(720 ILCS 5/7-5) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-5)

Sec. 7-5. Peace officer's use of force in making arrest.

 

(a) A peace officer, or any person whom he has summoned or directed to assist him, need not retreat or desist from efforts to make a lawful arrest because of resistance or threatened resistance to the arrest. He is justified in the use of any force which he reasonably believes to be necessary to effect the arrest and of any force which he reasonably believes to be necessary to defend himself or another from bodily harm while making the arrest. However, he is justified in using force likely to cause death or great bodily harm only when he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or such other person, or when he reasonably believes both that:

 

(1) Such force is necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by resistance or escape; and

(2) The person to be arrested has committed or attempted a forcible felony which involves the infliction or threatened infliction of great bodily harm or is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon, or otherwise indicates that he will endanger human life or inflict great bodily harm unless arrested without delay.

 

(b) A peace officer making an arrest pursuant to an invalid warrant is justified in the use of any force which he would be justified in using if the warrant were valid, unless he knows that the warrant is invalid.

(Source: P.A. 84-1426.)

 

It's based on an "objective reasonableness" looking at the totality of the circumstances.

 

edit: that's Illinois statutory law. A seminal US Supreme Court case echoed the "great bodily harm or death" standard.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Jenksismybitch

[CrimsonWeltall]

also fwiw, a customer at the convenience store called the police, but the owners and the employees didn't. Maybe didn't think it was worth the hassle to report a $20 (or however much some gas stations cigars would be) theft.

 

Would help if we knew more about the nature of the scuffle in/at the vehicle. If Brown was physically violent at that point, and then started coming at the cop again after the short chase, I think he has a reasonable need to use force.

[StrangeSox]

Would help if we knew more about the nature of the scuffle in/at the vehicle. If Brown was physically violent at that point, and then started coming at the cop again after the short chase, I think he has a reasonable need to use force.

 

Force, sure, but there's a force continuum. Punching a cop in the face doesn't entitle them to shoot you.

[Jenksismyhero]

Would help if we knew more about the nature of the scuffle in/at the vehicle. If Brown was physically violent at that point, and then started coming at the cop again after the short chase, I think he has a reasonable need to use force.

 

The problem is that doesn't extend into the future indefinitely. They had a skirmish, maybe for the gun or not, but I think it's evident that Brown did get away and the officer was no longer in danger. Even if he ran at him...I dunno, that to me doesn't seem like enough. But I guess he was a big dude and he didn't have much fear of fighting a cop the first time.

 

 

[southsideirish71]

Would help if we knew more about the nature of the scuffle in/at the vehicle. If Brown was physically violent at that point, and then started coming at the cop again after the short chase, I think he has a reasonable need to use force.

 

He was what 6'3 300 pounds. So basically a lineman on the bears is getting violent with you. Unless you are another large individual a physical altercation is going to not end well for the recipient of that encounter.

[EvilMonkey]

also fwiw, a customer at the convenience store called the police, but the owners and the employees didn't. Maybe didn't think it was worth the hassle to report a $20 (or however much some gas stations cigars would be) theft.

More like he didn't want people revisiting him for being a snitch. There was a story somewhere where he came out and wanted people to know that he didn't call the police or give them the security tape, they just took it.

[Jenksismyhero]

Force, sure, but there's a force continuum. Punching a cop in the face doesn't entitle them to shoot you.

 

I think it depends if you're going to keep punching or if you punch the cop and then run away.

[southsideirish71]

Force, sure, but there's a force continuum. Punching a cop in the face doesn't entitle them to shoot you.

 

A lineman on the bears decides to beat you down. Is that a bit different than a guy 5'8 175 pounds duking it out with you at the bar. The size does matter.

 

 

[CrimsonWeltall]

Force, sure, but there's a force continuum. Punching a cop in the face doesn't entitle them to shoot you.

 

If he doesn't have a non-lethal device like a taser, and if Brown is charging him, what other options does he have?