Michael Brown killing: State police take over riot-hit US town

[Johpa]

That audio is so pretty, so fine. Alas, it tells us relatively little, only that shots were fired and that some neighbor was involved in a rather interesting online conversation with someone else at the same time.

[Publicus]

The people who automatically see problems and issues when black cops kill white guys are on the far out extreme and are devotees of the ultra-right and well financed ideological media that have a marginal and reactionary boutique agenda.

Which is not the vast broad and deep majority of Americans.

The issues of the whacko right have nothing to do with the lives or ordinary everyday Americans.

We're not deaf, we're just ignoring you.

We have real concerns.

Have a good day.

Who said anything about black police officers killing white guys? I have never seen a perdominatly white community rioting, and burning business's down over a black police officer killing a white person. Police, no matter what race they may be, are not running around looking for people to shoot. One person on this site even referred to police as "pigs." Anyone who would refer to police as "pigs" has to be either very immature or are unfortunate enough to have an extremely low cognitive ability.

It's a violation of TVF Rules to modify another's post (your use of bold face font in quoting my post).

There are infinitesimally few if any Dirty Harry black cops in the U.S.

Likewise there are few if any Dirty Harry predominantly black staffed or run police departments in the U.S.

(If it can be said life imitates art, then even the Dirty Harry movie presented an almost all white department.)

The vast majority of law enforcement officials at all levels and regions of the United States are legitimate, honest, professional in a tough and demanding role, dedicated, exemplary and seriously committed and involved to identify and eliminate Dirty Harry cops and Dirty Harry police forces.

[NeverSure]

Until the audio tape reflecting the 10 gun shots is verified by the authorities it is not relevant.

One could record the same thing at any shooting range.

All this proves is some shots were fired, somewhere in the world at some point in time.

It could even be a take-off on politics learned in Chicago. You know...misdirect the sheeple.

The audio tape was made at the scene of the police homicide, at the precise time of the homicide, by happenstance, by a resident of the immediate neighborhood who is described as credible and who is being questioned by the police, examined by the FBI and who would have to present himself to the court as a witness subject to cross examination.

I'd go with that rather than accept a FPD or SLPD Incident Report that makes no mention, account, description of the incident. The FPD would have us believe the "incident" of homicide was fictitious and imaginary.

The audio tape tells us 100 times more than the FPD has said or will say.

If the FBI which is examining the tape says it's a no go than that would be it, wouldn't it.

The tape however gives every indication of being the real thing.

Each day you guys lose more ground when you had very little ground to begin with.

Please tell me again what significance any audio tape would have real or not? Why are you hung up on the number of shots fired, the sequence, any slight delays, or anything else?

An officer shot a man. He did his job by continuing to fire until the suspect was neutralized.

IT'S IRRELEVANT as to how many shots it took to neutralize the suspect, or how many hit, where they hit, or if some missed.

IT'S IRRELEVANT if there were momentary lapses. The office will stop firing if he believes the suspect is all finished, and start again if he decides he isn't finished.

You weren't there. You don't know what happened. But your ill informed and unteachable rants coming from a preconceived group of notions and prejudices aren't making you look very intelligent.

You made up your mind what went down on day 1, and haven't learned anything since despite the laws and the evidence we do know about. The topic has progressed, but you haven't.

I really, honestly thought you were much smarter than this, but you're like talking to a wall on this subject.

[Publicus]

Until the audio tape reflecting the 10 gun shots is verified by the authorities it is not relevant.

One could record the same thing at any shooting range.

All this proves is some shots were fired, somewhere in the world at some point in time.

It could even be a take-off on politics learned in Chicago. You know...misdirect the sheeple.

The audio tape was made at the scene of the police homicide, at the precise time of the homicide, by happenstance, by a resident of the immediate neighborhood who is described as credible and who is being questioned by the police, examined by the FBI and who would have to present himself to the court as a witness subject to cross examination.

I'd go with that rather than accept a FPD or SLPD Incident Report that makes no mention, account, description of the incident. The FPD would have us believe the "incident" of homicide was fictitious and imaginary.

The audio tape tells us 100 times more than the FPD has said or will say.

If the FBI which is examining the tape says it's a no go than that would be it, wouldn't it.

The tape however gives every indication of being the real thing.

Each day you guys lose more ground when you had very little ground to begin with.

Please tell me again what significance any audio tape would have real or not? Why are you hung up on the number of shots fired, the sequence, any slight delays, or anything else?

An officer shot a man. He did his job by continuing to fire until the suspect was neutralized.

IT'S IRRELEVANT as to how many shots it took to neutralize the suspect, or how many hit, where they hit, or if some missed.

IT'S IRRELEVANT if there were momentary lapses. The office will stop firing if he believes the suspect is all finished, and start again if he decides he isn't finished.

You weren't there. You don't know what happened. But your ill informed and unteachable rants coming from a preconceived group of notions and prejudices aren't making you look very intelligent.

You made up your mind what went down on day 1, and haven't learned anything since despite the laws and the evidence we do know about. The topic has progressed, but you haven't.

I really, honestly thought you were much smarter than this, but you're like talking to a wall on this subject.

Are the police in the United States subject to any kind of review, critique, criticism, or does each department make rules for itself and that's the end of it? We must accept it absolutely, immediately and go home?

The FPD Incident Report has no incident recorded, described, reported. There's nothing questionable, suspicious or problematic about that? When a FPD officer who just committed a homicide is being examined by the public, is that okay? Or must the public absolutely accept a PD use of deadly force any time, every time, no matter what, simply because there Is a state law and the PD has its own firearm rules and practices?

I have many many more questions for you in these respects but I'll let these specific questions stand to represent the kind of questions I and many others have about the officer and the department.

I see problems in this case involving an unarmed black teenager, a Dirty Harry cop and a Dirty Harry police department in Ferguson and in St Louis county, just as there was a problem in nearby Jenkins city Missouri that was long term enough and serious enough to cause the elected city council to fire the whole PD, replace it, start over again top to bottom with police officers who are dedicated, legitimate, honest, professional - officers that are a dying breed in the contemporary U.S., by which I mean that are officers of the peace. Peace officers, not militarized right wing gestapo at war with its citizens.

You are uncritical, absolute, totally severe, intolerant of any review of the police in this case so I am astounded by that.

That brown shirt seems to fit you well.

[NeverSure]

Are the police in the United States subject to any kind of review, critique, criticism, or does each department make rules for itself and that's the end of it? We must accept it absolutely, immediately and go home?

Of course they are. Right down to answering to the criminal and civil courts. You can bet that's ahead, and that's where the truth will come out.

The FPD Incident Report has no incident recorded, described, reported. There's nothing questionable, suspicious or problematic about that? When a FPD officer who just committed a homicide is being examined by the public, is that okay? Or must the public absolutely accept a PD use of deadly force any time, every time, no matter what, simply because there Is a state law and the PD has its own firearm rules and practices?

You're making too big of a deal out of the incident report. That's an internal report which one can't expect the officer to complete for the same reason that any good attorney would tell him - remain silent. You can bet the prosecuting attorney is looking at the entire case

HERE'S part of what you're missing. If it's true that a white cop shot a black person without just provocation, then that's a Federal violation of civil rights and this cop will wind up being indicted by the Feds. Don't forget that in the case of George Zimmerman, the governor of the state appointed a special prosecutor and Zimmerman was indicted into State Court, not the normal County Circuit Court which would be the norm. The governor significantly escalated the case.

I have many many more questions for you in these respects but I'll let these specific questions stand to represent the kind of questions I and many others have about the officer and the department.

I see problems in this case involving an unarmed black teenager, a Dirty Harry cop and a Dirty Harry police department in Ferguson and in St Louis county, just as there was a problem in nearby Jenkins city Missouri that was long term enough and serious enough to cause the elected city council to fire the whole PD, replace it, start over again top to bottom with police officers who are dedicated, legitimate, honest, professional - officers that are a dying breed in the contemporary U.S., by which I mean that are officers of the peace. Peace officers, not militarized right wing gestapo at war with its citizens.

Unarmed and black are irrelevant and immaterial but you won't let got of it. How many times do I need to say that if a guy is big enough to cause serious bodily harm, and evidences a willingness to do so, that the shooting is justified as self defense - totally and legally. This strong-arm store robbing criminal was huge.

So please knock off the unarmed part. This guy's huge size was his weapon.

Dirty Harry comes only from you and started on day one before you had any facts. It's outrageous.

What can you possibly mean by "militarized right wing gestapo at war with its citizens?" This was a lone cop with a handgun and you can go from there to all that? Wow. And how do you know that this cop isn't a Democrat tree hugger? This talk is crazy.

You are uncritical, absolute, totally severe, intolerant of any review of the police in this case so I am astounded by that.

That brown shirt seems to fit you well.

I'm intolerant and critical? Friend, you have gone off on countless rants from day one here calling the police any name in the book and accusing police in general of things they aren't, and in general just been out of control. You aren't open to any new ideas, information, or evidence. You've already hung the cop from a Dirty Harry rope and no new information can get past your firewall.

It's actually surreal.

Edited August 27, 2014 by NeverSure

[CMNightRider]

Until the audio tape reflecting the 10 gun shots is verified by the authorities it is not relevant.

One could record the same thing at any shooting range.

All this proves is some shots were fired, somewhere in the world at some point in time.

It could even be a take-off on politics learned in Chicago. You know...misdirect the sheeple.

The audio tape was made at the scene of the police homicide, at the precise time of the homicide, by happenstance, by a resident of the immediate neighborhood who is described as credible and who is being questioned by the police, examined by the FBI and who would have to present himself to the court as a witness subject to cross examination.

I'd go with that rather than accept a FPD or SLPD Incident Report that makes no mention, account, description of the incident. The FPD would have us believe the "incident" of homicide was fictitious and imaginary.

The audio tape tells us 100 times more than the FPD has said or will say.

If the FBI which is examining the tape says it's a no go than that would be it, wouldn't it.

The tape however gives every indication of being the real thing.

Each day you guys lose more ground when you had very little ground to begin with.

Please tell me again what significance any audio tape would have real or not? Why are you hung up on the number of shots fired, the sequence, any slight delays, or anything else?

An officer shot a man. He did his job by continuing to fire until the suspect was neutralized.

IT'S IRRELEVANT as to how many shots it took to neutralize the suspect, or how many hit, where they hit, or if some missed.

IT'S IRRELEVANT if there were momentary lapses. The office will stop firing if he believes the suspect is all finished, and start again if he decides he isn't finished.

You weren't there. You don't know what happened. But your ill informed and unteachable rants coming from a preconceived group of notions and prejudices aren't making you look very intelligent.

You made up your mind what went down on day 1, and haven't learned anything since despite the laws and the evidence we do know about. The topic has progressed, but you haven't.

I really, honestly thought you were much smarter than this, but you're like talking to a wall on this subject.

Are the police in the United States subject to any kind of review, critique, criticism, or does each department make rules for itself and that's the end of it? We must accept it absolutely, immediately and go home?

The FPD Incident Report has no incident recorded, described, reported. There's nothing questionable, suspicious or problematic about that? When a FPD officer who just committed a homicide is being examined by the public, is that okay? Or must the public absolutely accept a PD use of deadly force any time, every time, no matter what, simply because there Is a state law and the PD has its own firearm rules and practices?

I have many many more questions for you in these respects but I'll let these specific questions stand to represent the kind of questions I and many others have about the officer and the department.

I see problems in this case involving an unarmed black teenager, a Dirty Harry cop and a Dirty Harry police department in Ferguson and in St Louis county, just as there was a problem in nearby Jenkins city Missouri that was long term enough and serious enough to cause the elected city council to fire the whole PD, replace it, start over again top to bottom with police officers who are dedicated, legitimate, honest, professional - officers that are a dying breed in the contemporary U.S., by which I mean that are officers of the peace. Peace officers, not militarized right wing gestapo at war with its citizens.

You are uncritical, absolute, totally severe, intolerant of any review of the police in this case so I am astounded by that.

That brown shirt seems to fit you well.

You keep referring to "right wing gestapo and Dirty Harry police." Where are you getting this from? I suspect you are either watching too much MSNBC or too many cop movies. Rub those sleepy little eyes and view that video of Brown robbing a store, and roughing up a store clerk minutes before his encounter with the police. I guess instead of referring to Brown as a thug, we could say he was an undocumented shopper.

I find it interesting liberals are silent about the blacks rioting, and looting over a street gang member being killed while attacking a police officer. I think once the dust settles and the grand jury goes over all the evidence of this case, the police officer will be cleared of any wrong doing. However, if the officer did something wrong then he should be held accountable. Personally, I would like to see the looters and arsinist identified and held accountable.

[Publicus]

Are the police in the United States subject to any kind of review, critique, criticism, or does each department make rules for itself and that's the end of it? We must accept it absolutely, immediately and go home?

Of course they are. Right down to answering to the criminal and civil courts. You can bet that's ahead, and that's where the truth will come out.

The FPD Incident Report has no incident recorded, described, reported. There's nothing questionable, suspicious or problematic about that? When a FPD officer who just committed a homicide is being examined by the public, is that okay? Or must the public absolutely accept a PD use of deadly force any time, every time, no matter what, simply because there Is a state law and the PD has its own firearm rules and practices?

You're making too big of a deal out of the incident report. That's an internal report which one can't expect the officer to complete for the same reason that any good attorney would tell him - remain silent. You can bet the prosecuting attorney is looking at the entire case

HERE'S part of what you're missing. If it's true that a white cop shot a black person without just provocation, then that's a Federal violation of civil rights and this cop will wind up being indicted by the Feds. Don't forget that in the case of George Zimmerman, the governor of the state appointed a special prosecutor and Zimmerman was indicted into State Court, not the normal County Circuit Court which would be the norm. The governor significantly escalated the case.

I have many many more questions for you in these respects but I'll let these specific questions stand to represent the kind of questions I and many others have about the officer and the department.

I see problems in this case involving an unarmed black teenager, a Dirty Harry cop and a Dirty Harry police department in Ferguson and in St Louis county, just as there was a problem in nearby Jenkins city Missouri that was long term enough and serious enough to cause the elected city council to fire the whole PD, replace it, start over again top to bottom with police officers who are dedicated, legitimate, honest, professional - officers that are a dying breed in the contemporary U.S., by which I mean that are officers of the peace. Peace officers, not militarized right wing gestapo at war with its citizens.

Unarmed and black are irrelevant and immaterial but you won't let got of it. How many times do I need to say that if a guy is big enough to cause serious bodily harm, and evidences a willingness to do so, that the shooting is justified as self defense - totally and legally. This strong-arm store robbing criminal was huge.

So please knock off the unarmed part. This guy's huge size was his weapon.

Dirty Harry comes only from you and started on day one before you had any facts. It's outrageous.

What can you possibly mean by "militarized right wing gestapo at war with its citizens?" This was a lone cop with a handgun and you can go from there to all that? Wow. And how do you know that this cop isn't a Democrat tree hugger? This talk is crazy.

You are uncritical, absolute, totally severe, intolerant of any review of the police in this case so I am astounded by that.

That brown shirt seems to fit you well.

I'm intolerant and critical? Friend, you have gone off on countless rants from day one here calling the police any name in the book and accusing police in general of things they aren't, and in general just been out of control. You aren't open to any new ideas, information, or evidence. You've already hung the cop from a Dirty Harry rope and no new information can get past your firewall.

It's actually surreal.

My god.

Dismiss or ignore that Michael Brown was unarmed? That Brown had no firearm, no actual gun, no rifle, no bazooka, no armored vehicle? That Brown had no backup of an entire department armed to the teeth with military weapons, vehicles, protective equipment and the like?

Brush off and brush aside that Brown was unarmed and Wilson had a firearm and was able to write his own law and ticket?

Someone here is working hard to create his own facts and his own set of facts, his own setting and circumstances, his own reality.

Michael Brown declined to play football because it was too rough, too tough, too much of a tumble of a sport, yet some would have us believe he was a mortal threat against a trained and armed police officer who at every moment had the backup of an entire police force at his disposal.

Unbelievable

We're supposed to nevermind that Michael Brown did not have a weapon, a firearm..

Surreal.

Imagine if you were the county prosecutor, or the judge that will preside over the trial, or a member of the jury.

Imagine......

[Publicus]

Please tell me again what significance any audio tape would have real or not? Why are you hung up on the number of shots fired, the sequence, any slight delays, or anything else?

An officer shot a man. He did his job by continuing to fire until the suspect was neutralized.

IT'S IRRELEVANT as to how many shots it took to neutralize the suspect, or how many hit, where they hit, or if some missed.

IT'S IRRELEVANT if there were momentary lapses. The office will stop firing if he believes the suspect is all finished, and start again if he decides he isn't finished.

You weren't there. You don't know what happened. But your ill informed and unteachable rants coming from a preconceived group of notions and prejudices aren't making you look very intelligent.

You made up your mind what went down on day 1, and haven't learned anything since despite the laws and the evidence we do know about. The topic has progressed, but you haven't.

I really, honestly thought you were much smarter than this, but you're like talking to a wall on this subject.

Are the police in the United States subject to any kind of review, critique, criticism, or does each department make rules for itself and that's the end of it? We must accept it absolutely, immediately and go home?

The FPD Incident Report has no incident recorded, described, reported. There's nothing questionable, suspicious or problematic about that? When a FPD officer who just committed a homicide is being examined by the public, is that okay? Or must the public absolutely accept a PD use of deadly force any time, every time, no matter what, simply because there Is a state law and the PD has its own firearm rules and practices?

I have many many more questions for you in these respects but I'll let these specific questions stand to represent the kind of questions I and many others have about the officer and the department.

I see problems in this case involving an unarmed black teenager, a Dirty Harry cop and a Dirty Harry police department in Ferguson and in St Louis county, just as there was a problem in nearby Jenkins city Missouri that was long term enough and serious enough to cause the elected city council to fire the whole PD, replace it, start over again top to bottom with police officers who are dedicated, legitimate, honest, professional - officers that are a dying breed in the contemporary U.S., by which I mean that are officers of the peace. Peace officers, not militarized right wing gestapo at war with its citizens.

You are uncritical, absolute, totally severe, intolerant of any review of the police in this case so I am astounded by that.

That brown shirt seems to fit you well.

You keep referring to "right wing gestapo and Dirty Harry police." Where are you getting this from? I suspect you are either watching too much MSNBC or too many cop movies. Rub those sleepy little eyes and view that video of Brown robbing a store, and roughing up a store clerk minutes before his encounter with the police. I guess instead of referring to Brown as a thug, we could say he was an undocumented shopper.

I find it interesting liberals are silent about the blacks rioting, and looting over a street gang member being killed while attacking a police officer. I think once the dust settles and the grand jury goes over all the evidence of this case, the police officer will be cleared of any wrong doing. However, if the officer did something wrong then he should be held accountable. Personally, I would like to see the looters and arsinist identified and held accountable.

And here's another one making his own reality, his own facts and fact pattern, creating his own world of sleepy eyed liberals who ignore looters, arsonists, black rioters while defending a felony "thug."

I among others have spoken out against looters and rioters to include police rioters armed as if they were attacking Fallujah.

I support the vast majority of police, police department commanders, formal police public interest organizations that are working seriously and systematically to root out Dirty Harry cops and Dirty Harry police departments wherever they exist in the country, such as in Ferguson and in St Louis county.

You guys yourselves ought to give it a go. You might like it and be on the side of the angels besides.

[chuckd]

My guess is Brown didn't play football because his team mates and opponents wouldn't be cowered by his size and bullying and not because he was such a gentle soul.

Being on the side of the angels?

[NeverSure]

My god.

Dismiss or ignore that Michael Brown was unarmed? That Brown had no firearm, no actual gun, no rifle, no bazooka, no armored vehicle? That Brown had no backup of an entire department armed to the teeth with military weapons, vehicles, protective equipment and the like?

Brush off and brush aside that Brown was unarmed and Wilson had a firearm and was able to write his own law and ticket?

Someone here is working hard to create his own facts and his own set of facts, his own setting and circumstances, his own reality.

Michael Brown declined to play football because it was too rough, too tough, too much of a tumble of a sport, yet some would have us believe he was a mortal threat against a trained and armed police officer who at every moment had the backup of an entire police force at his disposal.

Unbelievable

We're supposed to nevermind that Michael Brown did not have a weapon, a firearm..

Surreal.

Imagine if you were the county prosecutor, or the judge that will preside over the trial, or a member of the jury.

Imagine......

You are never going to get off the unarmed part, are you. It just can't get through to you.

If the officer had a reasonable belief that the perp was able to cause him bodily injury due only to his size, the shoot was justified. End of.

The officer has no expectation that he will take a beating and can use deadly force to assure it doesn't happen.

That's the last time I'll write that because you've either read it many times or ignored it.

You keep coming off the wall with this military stuff. It wasn't used in this case and the references are ridiculous. You refer to backup. This happened in seconds and there wasn't time for backup. If backup had arrived and this guy had turned on them they would have shot him.

You really are over the top and absolutely are blinded to any truth here.

You are the poster child for undue repetition. We're just covering the same ground over and over and it's falling on your deaf ears.

[H1w4yR1da]

reactionary boutique agenda.

"reactionary boutique agenda" !!!

Who on Earth talks like this? Outside of the NPRK and Chairman Mao's Red Guards?

'Boutique'?? What, a clothes shop? What the <deleted> are you yakking about, you prancing, pseudo-intellectual, liberal?

[Publicus]

My god.

Dismiss or ignore that Michael Brown was unarmed? That Brown had no firearm, no actual gun, no rifle, no bazooka, no armored vehicle? That Brown had no backup of an entire department armed to the teeth with military weapons, vehicles, protective equipment and the like?

Brush off and brush aside that Brown was unarmed and Wilson had a firearm and was able to write his own law and ticket?

Someone here is working hard to create his own facts and his own set of facts, his own setting and circumstances, his own reality.

Michael Brown declined to play football because it was too rough, too tough, too much of a tumble of a sport, yet some would have us believe he was a mortal threat against a trained and armed police officer who at every moment had the backup of an entire police force at his disposal.

Unbelievable

We're supposed to nevermind that Michael Brown did not have a weapon, a firearm..

Surreal.

Imagine if you were the county prosecutor, or the judge that will preside over the trial, or a member of the jury.

Imagine......

You are never going to get off the unarmed part, are you. It just can't get through to you.

If the officer had a reasonable belief that the perp was able to cause him bodily injury due only to his size, the shoot was justified. End of.

The officer has no expectation that he will take a beating and can use deadly force to assure it doesn't happen.

That's the last time I'll write that because you've either read it many times or ignored it.

You keep coming off the wall with this military stuff. It wasn't used in this case and the references are ridiculous. You refer to backup. This happened in seconds and there wasn't time for backup. If backup had arrived and this guy had turned on them they would have shot him.

You really are over the top and absolutely are blinded to any truth here.

You are the poster child for undue repetition. We're just covering the same ground over and over and it's falling on your deaf ears.

For sure you and I are covering the same same ground repeatedly which is not my doing.

I'm responding to your incredulous and bold insistence that the facts of the case be fundamentally altered to be completely opposite the reality of it.

Fundamentally altered by you to suit your liking, purposes, intents to excuse the officer Wilson and the FPD.

You want to re-create the facts of the case by saying let's forget that Brown was unarmed.

You want to ignore the fact Michael Brown didn't have a gun, a firearm, or any weapon.

You want to take reality and change it into your convenient fantasy.

You want to create a world of fantasy, make believe, illusion, and that is both bold and outrageous.

Incredible.

Just incredible.

You need to accept that you need to argue the true and real facts, that's all. Is that really so beyond you?

[Publicus]

reactionary boutique agenda.

"reactionary boutique agenda" !!!

Who on Earth talks like this? Outside of the NPRK and Chairman Mao's Red Guards?

'Boutique'?? What, a clothes shop? What the <deleted> are you yakking about, you prancing, pseudo-intellectual, liberal?

I do this for you because as a "prancing, pseudo-intellectual liberal" I love you and I love all humanity to include white right wing jihadist Ferguson cops with guns.

Question – What is the difference between a liberal and a puppy?

Answer - A puppy stops whining after it grows up.

Question – Who was the first liberal Democrat?

Answer - Christopher Columbus. He left not knowing where he was going,got there not knowing where he was,left there not knowing where he’d been and did it all on borrowed money.

[CMNightRider]

Please tell me again what significance any audio tape would have real or not? Why are you hung up on the number of shots fired, the sequence, any slight delays, or anything else?

An officer shot a man. He did his job by continuing to fire until the suspect was neutralized.

IT'S IRRELEVANT as to how many shots it took to neutralize the suspect, or how many hit, where they hit, or if some missed.

IT'S IRRELEVANT if there were momentary lapses. The office will stop firing if he believes the suspect is all finished, and start again if he decides he isn't finished.

You weren't there. You don't know what happened. But your ill informed and unteachable rants coming from a preconceived group of notions and prejudices aren't making you look very intelligent.

You made up your mind what went down on day 1, and haven't learned anything since despite the laws and the evidence we do know about. The topic has progressed, but you haven't.

I really, honestly thought you were much smarter than this, but you're like talking to a wall on this subject.

Are the police in the United States subject to any kind of review, critique, criticism, or does each department make rules for itself and that's the end of it? We must accept it absolutely, immediately and go home?

The FPD Incident Report has no incident recorded, described, reported. There's nothing questionable, suspicious or problematic about that? When a FPD officer who just committed a homicide is being examined by the public, is that okay? Or must the public absolutely accept a PD use of deadly force any time, every time, no matter what, simply because there Is a state law and the PD has its own firearm rules and practices?

I have many many more questions for you in these respects but I'll let these specific questions stand to represent the kind of questions I and many others have about the officer and the department.

I see problems in this case involving an unarmed black teenager, a Dirty Harry cop and a Dirty Harry police department in Ferguson and in St Louis county, just as there was a problem in nearby Jenkins city Missouri that was long term enough and serious enough to cause the elected city council to fire the whole PD, replace it, start over again top to bottom with police officers who are dedicated, legitimate, honest, professional - officers that are a dying breed in the contemporary U.S., by which I mean that are officers of the peace. Peace officers, not militarized right wing gestapo at war with its citizens.

You are uncritical, absolute, totally severe, intolerant of any review of the police in this case so I am astounded by that.

That brown shirt seems to fit you well.

You keep referring to "right wing gestapo and Dirty Harry police." Where are you getting this from? I suspect you are either watching too much MSNBC or too many cop movies. Rub those sleepy little eyes and view that video of Brown robbing a store, and roughing up a store clerk minutes before his encounter with the police. I guess instead of referring to Brown as a thug, we could say he was an undocumented shopper.

I find it interesting liberals are silent about the blacks rioting, and looting over a street gang member being killed while attacking a police officer. I think once the dust settles and the grand jury goes over all the evidence of this case, the police officer will be cleared of any wrong doing. However, if the officer did something wrong then he should be held accountable. Personally, I would like to see the looters and arsinist identified and held accountable.

And here's another one making his own reality, his own facts and fact pattern, creating his own world of sleepy eyed liberals who ignore looters, arsonists, black rioters while defending a felony "thug."

I among others have spoken out against looters and rioters to include police rioters armed as if they were attacking Fallujah.

I support the vast majority of police, police department commanders, formal police public interest organizations that are working seriously and systematically to root out Dirty Harry cops and Dirty Harry police departments wherever they exist in the country, such as in Ferguson and in St Louis county.

You guys yourselves ought to give it a go. You might like it and be on the side of the angels besides.

"Dirty Harry" was a movie. There is no such thing as a "Dirty Harry" police department. Police rioters???

[thaibeachlovers]

I disagree with many things Publicus writes, but on this particular issue I can't possibly see how you can justifiably accuse him of ranting and raving.

Even though I am not American, I am eagerly waiting (as I'm sure the rest of the world is) with anticipation as to why a trained police officer needed to discharge six bullets without any apparent care about where he was aiming merely to restrain an unarmed person. alt=huh.png>

In fact I still can't even understand why a less lethal form of weapon was used such as a taser.

<why a trained police officer needed to discharge six bullets>

You've probably been watching too many crime movies. In real life people don't always fall down at the first bullet. The first 5 obviously didn't stop Brown and it took a head shot to bring him down.

< without any apparent care about where he was aiming merely to restrain an unarmed person>

How do you know that he didn't care where he was aiming?

Apparently he didn't have a taser with him.

Michael Brown didn't play football because it was too rough a sport yet you want everyone to believe Brown charged Wilson across 25 - 30 feet of open road straight into the barrel of Wilson's police firearm which Wilson was firing multiple times and directly into Brown..

That's a whopper that is flat out incredulous. Monty Python couldn't conjure up a funnier one than that.

Wilson almost assuredly was firing as he'd been taught and trained to fire, which is to fire up, i.e., aim for the level of the stomach, then the chest, then the face. Based on the audio, Wilson fired 10 shots so 'firing up' is very likely to have happened. Recall Brown was unarmed and his body apparently fell forward, dead, some 25-30 feet away from Wilson.

That's an execution by the cop.

Who tries using a taser, alone, on a violent 6 foot 5 inch suspect who has already attacked them, if they have a choice?

You can't use a taser on a guy who is 25-30 feet away from you. A guy 25-30 feet away from you can't harm you even if he threw a rock because you'd have plenty of time to step away from the rock hitting anything, you in particular.

Firing 10 shots at an unarmed guy 25-30 feet away from you is target practice. Wilson executed Brown, plain and simple, clear as a bell.

If you were running away from me and unarmed and I started shooting at you from 25-30 feet away you'd probably stop, turn around, put your hands in the air to surrender. If I were a Dirty Harry cop, which Wilson is, I'd fill you full of hot lead missiles. Then you'd be face down dead.

Dirty Harry Wilson is a part of the Dirty Harry Ferguson police force that legitimate and honest law enforcement chiefs, officers, departments, their families, citizens and citizen groups are trying to deal with in the United States. Sticking up for Dirty Harry Wilson puts you on the wrong side of the law and of society.;b++){var>

<turn around, put your hands in the air to surrender>

Given that the three bullets hit Brown in the front of his arm, how did they do that if he had his arm in the air facing the cop? Were they magic bullets that turned arounfd in mid air?

Reply deleted to allow posting.

[thaibeachlovers]

Until the audio tape reflecting the 10 gun shots is verified by the authorities it is not relevant.

One could record the same thing at any shooting range.

All this proves is some shots were fired, somewhere in the world at some point in time.

It could even be a take-off on politics learned in Chicago. You know...misdirect the sheeple.

The audio tape was made at the scene of the police homicide, at the precise time of the homicide, by happenstance, by a resident of the immediate neighborhood who is described as credible and who is being questioned by the police, examined by the FBI and who would have to present himself to the court as a witness subject to cross examination.

I'd go with that rather than accept a FPD or SLPD Incident Report that makes no mention, account, description of the incident. The FPD would have us believe the "incident" of homicide was fictitious and imaginary.

The audio tape tells us 100 times more than the FPD has said or will say.

If the FBI which is examining the tape says it's a no go than that would be it, wouldn't it.

The tape however gives every indication of being the real thing.

Each day you guys lose more ground when you had very little ground to begin with.

Hearing 10 shots being fired means nothing without reliable witnesses.

[Publicus]

Are the police in the United States subject to any kind of review, critique, criticism, or does each department make rules for itself and that's the end of it? We must accept it absolutely, immediately and go home?

The FPD Incident Report has no incident recorded, described, reported. There's nothing questionable, suspicious or problematic about that? When a FPD officer who just committed a homicide is being examined by the public, is that okay? Or must the public absolutely accept a PD use of deadly force any time, every time, no matter what, simply because there Is a state law and the PD has its own firearm rules and practices?

I have many many more questions for you in these respects but I'll let these specific questions stand to represent the kind of questions I and many others have about the officer and the department.

I see problems in this case involving an unarmed black teenager, a Dirty Harry cop and a Dirty Harry police department in Ferguson and in St Louis county, just as there was a problem in nearby Jenkins city Missouri that was long term enough and serious enough to cause the elected city council to fire the whole PD, replace it, start over again top to bottom with police officers who are dedicated, legitimate, honest, professional - officers that are a dying breed in the contemporary U.S., by which I mean that are officers of the peace. Peace officers, not militarized right wing gestapo at war with its citizens.

You are uncritical, absolute, totally severe, intolerant of any review of the police in this case so I am astounded by that.

That brown shirt seems to fit you well.

You keep referring to "right wing gestapo and Dirty Harry police." Where are you getting this from? I suspect you are either watching too much MSNBC or too many cop movies. Rub those sleepy little eyes and view that video of Brown robbing a store, and roughing up a store clerk minutes before his encounter with the police. I guess instead of referring to Brown as a thug, we could say he was an undocumented shopper.

I find it interesting liberals are silent about the blacks rioting, and looting over a street gang member being killed while attacking a police officer. I think once the dust settles and the grand jury goes over all the evidence of this case, the police officer will be cleared of any wrong doing. However, if the officer did something wrong then he should be held accountable. Personally, I would like to see the looters and arsinist identified and held accountable.

And here's another one making his own reality, his own facts and fact pattern, creating his own world of sleepy eyed liberals who ignore looters, arsonists, black rioters while defending a felony "thug."

I among others have spoken out against looters and rioters to include police rioters armed as if they were attacking Fallujah.

I support the vast majority of police, police department commanders, formal police public interest organizations that are working seriously and systematically to root out Dirty Harry cops and Dirty Harry police departments wherever they exist in the country, such as in Ferguson and in St Louis county.

You guys yourselves ought to give it a go. You might like it and be on the side of the angels besides.

"Dirty Harry" was a movie. There is no such thing as a "Dirty Harry" police department. Police rioters???

You're in denial and suffering delusions to try to assert that the Dirty Harry Syndrome / Problem among police forces in the U.S. is not a real and true issue among serious law enforcement commanders, elected or appointed public officials responsible for public safety, academics, or real people living their everyday lives in their own occupied communities.

Read and learn.

The first by Dr. Carl Klockars is the original and definitive presentation and analysis of the Dirty Harry Syndrome.

The Dirty Harry Problem From: Carl Klockars’ (1980),“The Dirty Harry Problem.”

Policemen lose their sense of moral proportion, fail to care, turn cynical or allow their passionate caring to lead them to employ dirty means too crudely or too readily.

If dealing with guilty people, why not see dirty acts as rightful punishment and therefore rightful in and of itself.

If one sees people as guilty there is justice when they are punished.

Carl B. Klockars is a Professor of Criminal Justice and Sociology at the University of Delaware. A criminologist of more than thirty years experience, Dr Klockars with colleagues recently completed a study with police agencies in Charleston, S.C., Charlotte-Mecklenburg, N.C., and St. Petersburg, FL that seeks to create organizational environments that enhance and encourage integrity.

http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~cjreg/ethnoblecause.htm

Dirty Harry: Nothing Wrong with Shooting the Right People

"Being that this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and can blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question. You're asking yourself did I fire 5 rounds or 6. Well Punk do you feel lucky?"

Dirty Harry was a truly revolutionary film because of its plain depiction of moral ambiguity.

The narrative of this movie boils down to a brutal confrontation between two sadistic killers. However, one of them, Dirty Harry, happens to have a San Francisco Police Department badge.

http://www.popmatters.com/feature/66375-dirty-harry-nothing-wrong-with-shooting-the-right-people-1/

Michael Dunn and Our ‘Dirty Harry’ Epidemic

The narratives of Dunn and Zimmerman reflect a cultural near-consensus on the idea of the threatening black criminal — and the white man who has no choice but to stop him

In Michael Dunn’s mind, Jordan Davis wasn’t a teenager, goofing with his friends — he was a threat. It’s why, after his confrontation over loud music, he was prepared to shoot. “I’m looking out of the window and I said ‘You’re not going to kill me you son of a bitch,’ ” Dunn testified during his trial, “And then I shot him.”

Bob Mack / Florida Times-Union / Pool / Reuters

Michael Dunn raises his hands in disbelief as he looks toward his parents after the verdicts were announced in his trial in Jacksonville, Florida Feb. 15, 2014. REUTERS/Bob Mack/Florida Times-

Of course, as we know from witnesses and evidence from the crime scene, there was no gun, and Davis wasn’t a threat. But when you see yourself as another William Foster standing up against the “thugs” of your imagination, those facts fall by the wayside.

http://ideas.time.com/2014/02/16/michael-dunn-and-our-dirty-harry-epidemic/

Beyond Trayvon: Black and Unarmed

Remember that it's nothing new for a black man without a weapon to be killed.

http://www.theroot.com/photos/2013/06/unarmed_black_men_shot_by_police_20_sad_stories.html

[thaibeachlovers]

You keep referring to "right wing gestapo and Dirty Harry police." Where are you getting this from? I suspect you are either watching too much MSNBC or too many cop movies. Rub those sleepy little eyes and view that video of Brown robbing a store, and roughing up a store clerk minutes before his encounter with the police. I guess instead of referring to Brown as a thug, we could say he was an undocumented shopper.

I find it interesting liberals are silent about the blacks rioting, and looting over a street gang member being killed while attacking a police officer. I think once the dust settles and the grand jury goes over all the evidence of this case, the police officer will be cleared of any wrong doing. However, if the officer did something wrong then he should be held accountable. Personally, I would like to see the looters and arsinist identified and held accountable.

And here's another one making his own reality, his own facts and fact pattern, creating his own world of sleepy eyed liberals who ignore looters, arsonists, black rioters while defending a felony "thug."

I among others have spoken out against looters and rioters to include police rioters armed as if they were attacking Fallujah.

I support the vast majority of police, police department commanders, formal police public interest organizations that are working seriously and systematically to root out Dirty Harry cops and Dirty Harry police departments wherever they exist in the country, such as in Ferguson and in St Louis county.

You guys yourselves ought to give it a go. You might like it and be on the side of the angels besides.

"Dirty Harry" was a movie. There is no such thing as a "Dirty Harry" police department. Police rioters???

You're in denial and suffering delusions to try to assert that the Dirty Harry Syndrome / Problem among police forces in the U.S. is not a real and true issue among serious law enforcement commanders, elected or appointed public officials responsible for public safety, academics, or real people living their everyday lives in their own occupied communities.

Read and learn.

The first by Dr. Carl Klockars is the original and definitive presentation and analysis of the Dirty Harry Syndrome.

The Dirty Harry Problem From: Carl Klockars’ (1980),“The Dirty Harry Problem.”

Policemen lose their sense of moral proportion, fail to care, turn cynical or allow their passionate caring to lead them to employ dirty means too crudely or too readily.

If dealing with guilty people, why not see dirty acts as rightful punishment and therefore rightful in and of itself.

If one sees people as guilty there is justice when they are punished.

Carl B. Klockars is a Professor of Criminal Justice and Sociology at the University of Delaware. A criminologist of more than thirty years experience, Dr Klockars with colleagues recently completed a study with police agencies in Charleston, S.C., Charlotte-Mecklenburg, N.C., and St. Petersburg, FL that seeks to create organizational environments that enhance and encourage integrity.

http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~cjreg/ethnoblecause.htm

Dirty Harry: Nothing Wrong with Shooting the Right People

"Being that this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and can blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question. You're asking yourself did I fire 5 rounds or 6. Well Punk do you feel lucky?"

Dirty Harry was a truly revolutionary film because of its plain depiction of moral ambiguity.

The narrative of this movie boils down to a brutal confrontation between two sadistic killers. However, one of them, Dirty Harry, happens to have a San Francisco Police Department badge.

http://www.popmatters.com/feature/66375-dirty-harry-nothing-wrong-with-shooting-the-right-people-1/

Michael Dunn and Our ‘Dirty Harry’ Epidemic

The narratives of Dunn and Zimmerman reflect a cultural near-consensus on the idea of the threatening black criminal — and the white man who has no choice but to stop him

In Michael Dunn’s mind, Jordan Davis wasn’t a teenager, goofing with his friends — he was a threat. It’s why, after his confrontation over loud music, he was prepared to shoot. “I’m looking out of the window and I said ‘You’re not going to kill me you son of a bitch,’ ” Dunn testified during his trial, “And then I shot him.”

Bob Mack / Florida Times-Union / Pool / Reuters

Michael Dunn raises his hands in disbelief as he looks toward his parents after the verdicts were announced in his trial in Jacksonville, Florida Feb. 15, 2014. REUTERS/Bob Mack/Florida Times-

Of course, as we know from witnesses and evidence from the crime scene, there was no gun, and Davis wasn’t a threat. But when you see yourself as another William Foster standing up against the “thugs” of your imagination, those facts fall by the wayside.

http://ideas.time.com/2014/02/16/michael-dunn-and-our-dirty-harry-epidemic/

Beyond Trayvon: Black and Unarmed

Remember that it's nothing new for a black man without a weapon to be killed.

http://www.theroot.com/photos/2013/06/unarmed_black_men_shot_by_police_20_sad_stories.html

The Martin killing only gained media attention because they thought the shooter was white, when in fact he was Latino. By the time they realised the truth, it was too late to back out.

Hundreds of unarmed blacks are killed by other blacks and no media covers it at all. Isn't THAT racist?

Reply deleted to allow posting.

Edited August 28, 2014 by thaibeachlovers

[Publicus]

My feelings exactly

Who's using the word "racist?"

The word racist has hardly appeared in this thread.

The very few times it has appeared it's mostly in posts by right wingnuts wrongly and falsely accusing others of calling them racists for questioning the justifications of Dirty Harry Wilson fatally shooting the unarmed teenager Michael Brown.

The people using the word racist or racism at this thread are the right wingers who are reciting their rote lines wrongfully accusing opponents.

The wingnuts are so used to shouting "racism" at opponents that they scream it even when no opponents have made the allegation against them or are using the word racist or racism at all much less against the wingnut posters.

Your post is a rote recitation that has nothing to do with the reality or facts of the thread..

The reality is that the word racist or racism has hardly appeared or been used at this tread.

[H1w4yR1da]

The Lady doth protest too much methinks.

[Publicus]

You keep referring to "right wing gestapo and Dirty Harry police." Where are you getting this from? I suspect you are either watching too much MSNBC or too many cop movies. Rub those sleepy little eyes and view that video of Brown robbing a store, and roughing up a store clerk minutes before his encounter with the police. I guess instead of referring to Brown as a thug, we could say he was an undocumented shopper.

I find it interesting liberals are silent about the blacks rioting, and looting over a street gang member being killed while attacking a police officer. I think once the dust settles and the grand jury goes over all the evidence of this case, the police officer will be cleared of any wrong doing. However, if the officer did something wrong then he should be held accountable. Personally, I would like to see the looters and arsinist identified and held accountable.

"Dirty Harry" was a movie. There is no such thing as a "Dirty Harry" police department. Police rioters???

You're in denial and suffering delusions to try to assert that the Dirty Harry Syndrome / Problem among police forces in the U.S. is not a real and true issue among serious law enforcement commanders, elected or appointed public officials responsible for public safety, academics, or real people living their everyday lives in their own occupied communities.

Read and learn.

The first by Dr. Carl Klockars is the original and definitive presentation and analysis of the Dirty Harry Syndrome.

The Dirty Harry Problem From: Carl Klockars’ (1980),“The Dirty Harry Problem.”

Policemen lose their sense of moral proportion, fail to care, turn cynical or allow their passionate caring to lead them to employ dirty means too crudely or too readily.

If dealing with guilty people, why not see dirty acts as rightful punishment and therefore rightful in and of itself.

If one sees people as guilty there is justice when they are punished.

Carl B. Klockars is a Professor of Criminal Justice and Sociology at the University of Delaware. A criminologist of more than thirty years experience, Dr Klockars with colleagues recently completed a study with police agencies in Charleston, S.C., Charlotte-Mecklenburg, N.C., and St. Petersburg, FL that seeks to create organizational environments that enhance and encourage integrity.

http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~cjreg/ethnoblecause.htm

Dirty Harry: Nothing Wrong with Shooting the Right People

"Being that this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and can blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question. You're asking yourself did I fire 5 rounds or 6. Well Punk do you feel lucky?"

Dirty Harry was a truly revolutionary film because of its plain depiction of moral ambiguity.

The narrative of this movie boils down to a brutal confrontation between two sadistic killers. However, one of them, Dirty Harry, happens to have a San Francisco Police Department badge.

http://www.popmatters.com/feature/66375-dirty-harry-nothing-wrong-with-shooting-the-right-people-1/

Michael Dunn and Our ‘Dirty Harry’ Epidemic

The narratives of Dunn and Zimmerman reflect a cultural near-consensus on the idea of the threatening black criminal — and the white man who has no choice but to stop him

In Michael Dunn’s mind, Jordan Davis wasn’t a teenager, goofing with his friends — he was a threat. It’s why, after his confrontation over loud music, he was prepared to shoot. “I’m looking out of the window and I said ‘You’re not going to kill me you son of a bitch,’ ” Dunn testified during his trial, “And then I shot him.”

Bob Mack / Florida Times-Union / Pool / Reuters

Michael Dunn raises his hands in disbelief as he looks toward his parents after the verdicts were announced in his trial in Jacksonville, Florida Feb. 15, 2014. REUTERS/Bob Mack/Florida Times-

Of course, as we know from witnesses and evidence from the crime scene, there was no gun, and Davis wasn’t a threat. But when you see yourself as another William Foster standing up against the “thugs” of your imagination, those facts fall by the wayside.

http://ideas.time.com/2014/02/16/michael-dunn-and-our-dirty-harry-epidemic/

Beyond Trayvon: Black and Unarmed

Remember that it's nothing new for a black man without a weapon to be killed.

http://www.theroot.com/photos/2013/06/unarmed_black_men_shot_by_police_20_sad_stories.html

The Martin killing only gained media attention because they thought the shooter was white, when in fact he was Latino. By the time they realised the truth, it was too late to back out.

Hundreds of unarmed blacks are killed by other blacks and no media covers it at all. Isn't THAT racist?

Reply deleted to allow posting.

You want to discuss black on black violence, homicide in particular, you've spoken to the right guy so sit down if you're not already sitting and either way listen up for a change.

I appreciate the occasion to present the realities of the obsession by ultra-right wing dogmatists of black on black violence and your guys' banal and repeated references in thread after thread, glib post after mundane post, to a matter you do not comprehend much less understand.

The article below speaks directly to you and is entirely about you. You are the "they" and the "these people" of this penetrating piece.

Can you take the heat? Can you go to the link? Or do you only dish it out???

This also is one of the very few mentions of the word "racism" at this thread.

OK, fine. Let's talk about 'black-on-black' violence.

These people are the ones who don't think racism has anything to do with the targeted policing, crime-ridden neighborhoods, terrible schools, and abject poverty experienced by many black Americans, because racism is so ingrained in the fabric of America that they can't even see it.

They are the ones who have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to an as-yet-unnecessary legal fund for Wilson, a man whose only claim to fame is that he killed a black kid under what can most generously be described as suspicious circumstances.

They're the ones for whom the death of an unarmed black person at the hands of a white person sparks cognitive dissonance of such magnitude that all they can do is sputter, "But what about black-on-black crime?"

http://www.vox.com/2014/8/25/6061449/black-on-black-crime-ferguson-murder-rate

Edited by Publicus to provide link

Edited August 28, 2014 by Publicus

[Publicus]

The Lady doth protest too much methinks.

Document your assertions.

If you are going to make the assertions and to persist in your claims, you need to start trawling through the posts to see the word racist and to find out who might be using racist or racism.

You'd find what I say to be fact, i.e., the word racism or racist hardly appear in this thread.

When it does appear its almost always the right wingers rote recitation accusing others of accusing them when the wingnuts attack and try to slander Michael Brown. The right wingnuts use the word (wrongly) in the few uses it's had at the thread.

So prove your rote recitations and bogus assertions.

[H1w4yR1da]

Nothing you say bears the slightest resemblance to fact. Its just become background noise to be tuned out. I don't even read your bs anymore. Get a life!

[thaibeachlovers]

My feelings exactly

Who's using the word "racist?"

The word racist has hardly appeared in this thread.

The very few times it has appeared it's mostly in posts by right wingnuts wrongly and falsely accusing others of calling them racists for questioning the justifications of Dirty Harry Wilson fatally shooting the unarmed teenager Michael Brown.

The people using the word racist or racism at this thread are the right wingers who are reciting their rote lines wrongfully accusing opponents.

The wingnuts are so used to shouting "racism" at opponents that they scream it even when no opponents have made the allegation against them or are using the word racist or racism at all much less against the wingnut posters.

Your post is a rote recitation that has nothing to do with the reality or facts of the thread..

The reality is that the word racist or racism has hardly appeared or been used at this tread.

My point was that when blacks murder unarmed other blacks it garners ZERO media attention. You can address my point, or you can try and divert attention to racism.

BTW, when a black President and a black AG get personally involved in a shooting such as happens all the time just because it's a white on black situation, yet completely ignore what's going on in Chicago, and certainly wouldn't turn up if it was a black on white shooting- that IS racist, IMO.

Edited August 28, 2014 by thaibeachlovers

[H1w4yR1da]

Trying to explain to this guy is like trying to reason with a religious fanatic suicide bomber. Don't even attempt it. Their minds are closed.

[Publicus]

My feelings exactly

<img alt="new yorker cover" src="//cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/-o6G7YilcXRm2cssrGREN0WPwkY=/cdn2.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/666688/CVS_TNY_09_01_14RGB2-690-942.0.jpg">

(The New Yorker)

"Hands up" has become a defining gesture of the Ferguson protests, a symbol of surrender turned into one of defiance. See photographs of the "hands up" gesture throughout the Ferguson protests here.

[Publicus]

Trying to explain to this guy is like trying to reason with a religious fanatic suicide bomber. Don't even attempt it. Their minds are closed.

I see you are not reading the links I provide.

Can't take the heat eh?

Don't want to be confused by the facts either

I'm certainly not trying to convert any of the mass mob of posters here on the ultra-right political cultural extreme end of the spectrum.

I speak to the readers, most of whom don't post or rarely post, who are undecided or open minded and who come to the thread for those reasons.

You guys on the far out radical right are impenetrable and programmed to reject any and all information that doesn't comport with your prejudices.

I know I accomplish nothing with you wingnuts except perhaps to keep you reasonably honest in your fiction writing.

It's the readers that I speak to, always, in every thread. Some readers are on your side, but not all or most of 'em.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Publicus

[Publicus]

Wilson's homicide against Michael Brown has blown open the Dirty Harry Syndrome / Problem cops and their foul and corrupt police departments, prosecutors, other lawyers, politicians and the like.

This case vividly reminds us that everyone has rights or no one has rights.

Cheers to the nearby to Ferguson Jenkins Missouri city council that discovered it had a rogue Dirty Harry police department loaded with brutal and corrupt Dirty Harry criminals in police uniforms so consequently voted 6-1 to fire the whole criminal gang in blue to start all over again with genuine police officers, officers of the peace.

Bravo to President Obama, Attorney General Holder, the Rev Al Sharpton, the Rev Jesse Jackson and to MSM such as MSNBC for the superb approach they have taken to respond to this crisis of law enforcement in Missouri and in the United States.

[chuckd]

An interesting read follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eric Holder will face high hurdles in prosecution of police officer

WASHINGTON (AP) — As the Justice Department probes the police shooting of an unarmed 18-year-old in Missouri, history suggests there's no guarantee of a criminal prosecution, let alone a conviction.

Federal authorities investigating possible civil rights violations in the Aug. 9 death of Michael Brown in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson must meet a difficult standard of proof, a challenge that has complicated the path to prosecution in past police shootings.

To build a case, they would need to establish that the police officer, Darren Wilson, not only acted with excessive force but also willfully violated Brown's constitutional rights. Though the Justice Department has a long history of targeting police misconduct, including after the 1991 beating of Rodney King, the high bar means that many high-profile police shootings that have raised public alarm never wound up in federal court.

Entire article here: http://www.gopusa.com/news/2014/08/28/eric-holder-will-face-high-hurdles-in-prosecution-of-police-officer/?subscriber=1

[Publicus]

An interesting read follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eric Holder will face high hurdles in prosecution of police officer

WASHINGTON (AP) — As the Justice Department probes the police shooting of an unarmed 18-year-old in Missouri, history suggests there's no guarantee of a criminal prosecution, let alone a conviction.

Federal authorities investigating possible civil rights violations in the Aug. 9 death of Michael Brown in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson must meet a difficult standard of proof, a challenge that has complicated the path to prosecution in past police shootings.

To build a case, they would need to establish that the police officer, Darren Wilson, not only acted with excessive force but also willfully violated Brown's constitutional rights. Though the Justice Department has a long history of targeting police misconduct, including after the 1991 beating of Rodney King, the high bar means that many high-profile police shootings that have raised public alarm never wound up in federal court.

Entire article here: http://www.gopusa.com/news/2014/08/28/eric-holder-will-face-high-hurdles-in-prosecution-of-police-officer/?subscriber=1

It's not news the DoJ has limited options or possibilities of pursing a case much less win a conviction of Dirty Harry Wilson in a court of law. If anything, that's the good news to the brazen supporters of Dirty Harry cops and Dirty Harry police departments.

It's well known however 40 FBI agents descended on Ferguson and that the FBI took back to Washington lots of different physical evidence to analyze and to draw conclusions about.

The FBI also has lots of witnesses it has declared federal witnesses whose statements will always be a matter of public record available to MSM and the public interest and civic groups and organizations, such as the NAACP among many others. Dorian Johnson who was with Brown at the store and when Dirty Harry Wilson initiated the confrontation is for instance a federal witness.

The bad news to the bad guys however is that - and I have no doubt - the FBI will report its findings to the public once it has completed interviews, examination of physical evidence and Dirty Harry FPD procedures in its own sham investigation, that DoJ lawyers will be commenting on the contents of the report that will issue. The conduct of the prosecutor will also be subjected to scrutiny within the law.

The FPD, the prosecutor and the whole rotten bunch in power in Ferguson and St Louis county will be under the public microscope as the FBI and DoJ continue to observe every aspect of the case, in detail, throughout.

The local and county authorities will not be able to hold up in the face of this, over the long haul especially. Don't think they don't know that.

Ferguson case reopens lingering wounds from previous police shootings

Tyrus Murray was 13 years old when her father, Earl Murray, and his friend Ronald Beasley died in a hail of gunfire during a drug bust gone awry.Both men were black, and neither was armed. Their shooters were white law enforcement officers, and neither was indicted.

That was 14 years ago, but the case and others like it help explain the anger in this St. Louis suburb, where a white police officer's shooting of an unarmed black man this month fueled angry protests and demands that the officer, Darren Wilson, be charged in the death of Michael Brown, 18.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ferguson-murray-shooting-20140825-story.html#page=1

Edited August 28, 2014 by Publicus