No evidence or investigation could be presented or conducted that would change the minds of most of you on here, of whom had made up their mind at the first glance of a headline that had the words white, cop, black, unarmed and teenager in them. From that moment on there is no search for truth, there is no waiting for an investigation, there is no weighing of physical evidence against the conflicting and contradictory eyewitness accounts. The narrative is white authority, once again, exploits black victim. And once established this narrative never ends. Victimhood is perpetuated. Truth and honesty are out the door. So blinded, one cannot let go of it no matter what the evidence says.
Now I could go on and give a detailed explanation as to how the court system works and why it is setup the way it is and the long history of jurisprudential thought. But I won't because the ones that this is directed to won't read it, or if they do, cannot comprehend it. These are the people for which logic and reason are possibly some words they came across in high school, and are now lead by emotions.
Or I could distill all the testimony and evidence in a few paragraphs, but again I won't. Because you won't read it. Your mind was already made up from the beginning. Speculation is enough for you. To reason with you would be like trying to explain how the internal combustion engine works to a cat, a complete waste of time.
Besides it can all be found online if you would bother to look. You can't be completely blamed though, because the racist media helps to perpetuate this narrative and keep the flame lit under racial animus. How, you say?
I'm going to flip it on all of you who think this was about race. Let me be clear first that there is without a doubt a tension between the police and the black community stretching back a long time. We all know that. How to address and change it is for another post. But that's not what's going on in this case.
Where is your outrage for Dillon Taylor? Who you say? That's right, the racist media doesn't report stories that don't fit their narrative. Two days after Michael Brown was shot, a black police officer shot and killed an unarmed white teenager. But wait, where is the outrage and the national press coverage? But wait, did the grand jury indict this police officer? Nope, unlike Ferguson, there was no grand jury. Because, unlike Ferguson, the district attorney didn't even bring charges. The prosecutors office declined to pursue it at all. But wait, it gets even more damning: this police officer was wearing a body cam!! And the good folks at the Salt Lake City Tribune even uploaded it to youtube for all the world to see.
I URGE you to simply google the following, Dillon Taylor body cam. Watch it for yourself, then come back on here and express your outrage. And if you don't then you will expose yourselves as the TRUE racists. No cars were burned or businesses looted because of this. You don't help yourselves or change peoples minds when you react this way. How should you react? Oh I don't know, how about simply demanding that every police department in the country be required to issue body cams to every officer. That's what reasonable people do. But you won't. Your more along the lines of MB's stepdad, and I quote, "Burn this bitch down!!"
No evidence or investigation could be presented or conducted that would change the minds of most of you on here, of whom had made up their mind at the first glance of a headline that had the words white, cop, black, unarmed and teenager in them. From that moment on there is no search for truth, there is no waiting for an investigation, there is no weighing of physical evidence against the conflicting and contradictory eyewitness accounts. The narrative is white authority, once again, exploits black victim. And once established this narrative never ends. Victimhood is perpetuated. Truth and honesty are out the door. So blinded, one cannot let go of it no matter what the evidence says.
Now I could go on and give a detailed explanation as to how the court system works and why it is setup the way it is and the long history of jurisprudential thought. But I won't because the ones that this is directed to won't read it, or if they do, cannot comprehend it. These are the people for which logic and reason are possibly some words they came across in high school, and are now lead by emotions.
Or I could distill all the testimony and evidence in a few paragraphs, but again I won't. Because you won't read it. Your mind was already made up from the beginning. Speculation is enough for you. To reason with you would be like trying to explain how the internal combustion engine works to a cat, a complete waste of time.
Besides it can all be found online if you would bother to look. You can't be completely blamed though, because the racist media helps to perpetuate this narrative and keep the flame lit under racial animus. How, you say?
I'm going to flip it on all of you who think this was about race. Let me be clear first that there is without a doubt a tension between the police and the black community stretching back a long time. We all know that. How to address and change it is for another post. But that's not what's going on in this case.
Where is your outrage for Dillon Taylor? Who you say? That's right, the racist media doesn't report stories that don't fit their narrative. Two days after Michael Brown was shot, a black police officer shot and killed an unarmed white teenager. But wait, where is the outrage and the national press coverage? But wait, did the grand jury indict this police officer? Nope, unlike Ferguson, there was no grand jury. Because, unlike Ferguson, the district attorney didn't even bring charges. The prosecutors office declined to pursue it at all. But wait, it gets even more damning: this police officer was wearing a body cam!! And the good folks at the Salt Lake City Tribune even uploaded it to youtube for all the world to see.
I URGE you to simply google the following, Dillon Taylor body cam. Watch it for yourself, then come back on here and express your outrage. And if you don't then you will expose yourselves as the TRUE racists. No cars were burned or businesses looted because of this. You don't help yourselves or change peoples minds when you react this way. How should you react? Oh I don't know, how about simply demanding that every police department in the country be required to issue body cams to every officer. That's what reasonable people do. But you won't. Your more along the lines of MB's stepdad, and I quote, "Burn this bitch down!!"
The surest sign that a douchebag is a right-wing douchebag is when it changes the channel to another incident and bellows about, "Where is the outrage?"
Of course the right-wing douchebags aren't "outraged" about any actual injustice. They save that for douchebags like Cliven Bundy, who never suffered any genuine injustice but hates him some n*gg*rs and, well, you know.
" But I won't because the ones that this is directed to won't read it, or if they do, cannot comprehend it. These are the people for which logic and reason are possibly some words they came across in high school, and are now lead by emotions."
you condescending despicable fucking right wing racist cunt
" But I won't because the ones that this is directed to won't read it, or if they do, cannot comprehend it. These are the people for which logic and reason are possibly some words they came across in high school, and are now lead by emotions."
you condescending despicable fucking right wing racist cunt
Don't hold back Kala, I think you should tell him how you really feel.
b/w
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
BallzDeep said:
Guzzo said:
the idea of personal responsibility for ones actions.
Not a very popular idea 'round here
It's not the job of police to execute criminals. And anyone saying Michael Brown deserved to die...and there are a ton of people actually stooping such low brow darkness...is a POS who needs to reevaluate their own life.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
LaserWolf said:
I believe that Michael Brown has taken full responsibility for his actions.
The ultimate responsibility.
Why should Darren Wilson not have to take responsibility for his?
Exactly.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Fred_Garvin said:
LaserWolf said:
According to Wilson's testimony he was able to receive radio calls, but was unable to send them because he was on the wrong frequency.
Apparently as a good an officer as he was, he did not know how to use his is radio.
He was not able to access his his pepper spray, flash light or baton.
He was not able to roll up his window or wait in his vehicle for back up.
But he is exceedingly polite.
And let's not forget that despite being roughly the size of an NBA point guard and in presumably good physical shape, having police training (including hand-to-hand combat) and an array of weaponry, he was somehow completely helpless against the ferocity of a large adolescent, who at one point had him (again, a person trained to handle exactly these kinds of situations) subdued through a car window with one hand, according to the testimony... because black kids are super angry karate magic death machines (who can kill a man with one punch).
My 6-year-old makes up more believable stories than this.
Still no answers to:
-Why he didn't call the incident in at the time;
-Why no ambulance was called;
-Why his vehicle left the scene prior to a report being filed;
-Why a report wasn't filed until long after the incident occurred
Hold up, let me pause for a moment while beating you through a window with one hand, because I'm gonna need to pass this box of stolen cigarillos over to my friend. Alright, done. Back to smobbing on you.
I believe that Michael Brown has taken full responsibility for his actions.
The ultimate responsibility.
Why should Darren Wilson not have to take responsibility for his?
Exactly.
It's interesting how black and white (no pun intended) the outlook is. It seems the accepted views are The cop did it because Michael Brown was black, everyone knows it and thats why he got off" or "The cop followed everything correctly and was left with no other options"
It seems as if everyone has either deified or demonized Michael Brown and Darren Wilson. Has this case not raised any other thoughts?
No evidence or investigation could be presented or conducted that would change the minds of most of you on here, of whom had made up their mind at the first glance of a headline that had the words white, cop, black, unarmed and teenager in them. From that moment on there is no search for truth, there is no waiting for an investigation, there is no weighing of physical evidence against the conflicting and contradictory eyewitness accounts. The narrative is white authority, once again, exploits black victim. And once established this narrative never ends. Victimhood is perpetuated. Truth and honesty are out the door. So blinded, one cannot let go of it no matter what the evidence says.
Now I could go on and give a detailed explanation as to how the court system works and why it is setup the way it is and the long history of jurisprudential thought. But I won't because the ones that this is directed to won't read it, or if they do, cannot comprehend it. These are the people for which logic and reason are possibly some words they came across in high school, and are now lead by emotions.
Or I could distill all the testimony and evidence in a few paragraphs, but again I won't. Because you won't read it. Your mind was already made up from the beginning. Speculation is enough for you. To reason with you would be like trying to explain how the internal combustion engine works to a cat, a complete waste of time.
Besides it can all be found online if you would bother to look. You can't be completely blamed though, because the racist media helps to perpetuate this narrative and keep the flame lit under racial animus. How, you say?
I'm going to flip it on all of you who think this was about race. Let me be clear first that there is without a doubt a tension between the police and the black community stretching back a long time. We all know that. How to address and change it is for another post. But that's not what's going on in this case.
Where is your outrage for Dillon Taylor? Who you say? That's right, the racist media doesn't report stories that don't fit their narrative. Two days after Michael Brown was shot, a black police officer shot and killed an unarmed white teenager. But wait, where is the outrage and the national press coverage? But wait, did the grand jury indict this police officer? Nope, unlike Ferguson, there was no grand jury. Because, unlike Ferguson, the district attorney didn't even bring charges. The prosecutors office declined to pursue it at all. But wait, it gets even more damning: this police officer was wearing a body cam!! And the good folks at the Salt Lake City Tribune even uploaded it to youtube for all the world to see.
I URGE you to simply google the following, Dillon Taylor body cam. Watch it for yourself, then come back on here and express your outrage. And if you don't then you will expose yourselves as the TRUE racists. No cars were burned or businesses looted because of this. You don't help yourselves or change peoples minds when you react this way. How should you react? Oh I don't know, how about simply demanding that every police department in the country be required to issue body cams to every officer. That's what reasonable people do. But you won't. Your more along the lines of MB's stepdad, and I quote, "Burn this bitch down!!"
Do you even listen to soul?
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Guzzo said:
HarveyCanal said:
LaserWolf said:
I believe that Michael Brown has taken full responsibility for his actions.
The ultimate responsibility.
Why should Darren Wilson not have to take responsibility for his?
Exactly.
It's interesting how black and white (no pun intended) the outlook is. It seems the accepted views are The cop did it because Michael Brown was black, everyone knows it and thats why he got off" or "The cop followed everything correctly and was left with no other options"
It seems as if everyone has either deified or demonized Michael Brown and Darren Wilson. Has this case not raised any other thoughts?
Dude. Try harder.
There is all sorts of gray area and the main issue has become: Should the police really be in charge of policing themselves? And the answer to that via Mr. Dipshit prosecutor, buddy of the police and Darren Wilson specifically is a resounding HELL NO!!! At least let that shit go to trial rather than ram-rodding the pro-police perspective without any cross examination nor rebuttal. Whole shit is a sham. And it's been a sham in cities all over the country for decades on end. But hey, let's not fix it. Let's pile on a dead teenager and call anyone supporting his cause an unemployed animal who only loots for peanuts. Yeah, that'll really get us somewhere.
"There are productive ways of responding. And expressing those frustrations and there are destructive ways of responding. Burning buildings, torching cars, destroying property, putting people at risk, that's destructive and there's no excuse for it. Those are criminal acts. People should be prosecuted if they engage in criminal acts"
I believe that Michael Brown has taken full responsibility for his actions.
The ultimate responsibility.
Why should Darren Wilson not have to take responsibility for his?
Exactly.
It's interesting how black and white (no pun intended) the outlook is. It seems the accepted views are The cop did it because Michael Brown was black, everyone knows it and thats why he got off" or "The cop followed everything correctly and was left with no other options"
It seems as if everyone has either deified or demonized Michael Brown and Darren Wilson. Has this case not raised any other thoughts?
Sweeping generalizations about perceived sweeping generalizations :post_modern:
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Rockadelic said:
"There are productive ways of responding. And expressing those frustrations and there are destructive ways of responding. Burning buildings, torching cars, destroying property, putting people at risk, that's destructive and there's no excuse for it. Those are criminal acts. People should be prosecuted if they engage in criminal acts"
There's no excuse for rioting...even though it happens like clockwork all over the world over next to anything serious or just anything whimsical. Get over it. People build stuff. Then, people break stuff. It's just stuff and aside from the normal keeping the rioting from getting too far out of control, it shouldn't be a distraction from the real issues at hand.
Seriously, is a crusade against rioting going to do one bit of good stopping any rioting going on in the world ever? Of course not. Evidently, it's merely a facet of human nature.
But yes, people, just keep going on about it as if you were just born yesterday.
There is all sorts of gray area and the main issue has become: Should the police really be in charge of policing themselves?
I don't think thats the main issue with most, I think the main issue is race. From my TV viewing, NPR listening ears & eyes it comes down to a black man was shot by a white cop. there is little I've gathered about the character of either in news reports. Media hypes the race issue, which I get but I'm disgusted by (News should not be done for ratings).
At least let that shit go to trial rather than ram-rodding the pro-police perspective without any cross examination nor rebuttal.
I agree, if only so people would be privy to more info. the report makes it feel as if people were not supposed to know anything until an official let them know.
Let's pile on a dead teenager and call anyone supporting his cause an unemployed animal who only loots for peanuts. Yeah, that'll really get us somewhere.
I think thats part of the problem is boiling down these people to either cop, crooked cop, racist cop, innocent teen, black teen, or criminal teen (or unemployed animal, I guess).
People and situations are a little more complicated than that.
I mean, the cop used to be part of a department that was disbanded in part because it struggled to police a minority population with an overwhelmingly white force. It's not exactly far-fetched to say that race at least colored the way he operated in Ferguson. Some of the people that I know personally who hold the most deep-seeded racist beliefs are white folks that faced steep economic challenges themselves; Wilson seems like a prime candidate for that, knowing a little about his own troubled upbringing and how his mom died. I'd love to read more about some interactions that Wilson had with everyday residents of Ferguson before that fateful day, if he was an officer that used tools of kindness and understanding to cajole people to abide by the law or clean up their act.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Well yes, those (and there are sooooo many) playing the lowest common denominator game are frustrating the hell out of me too. But I refuse to believe that those are the people actually driving the real conversation going on between grown folks. We're going to start seeing more body cams on police, which is a small step in the right direction. Whether these departments are going to ever be able to see themselves as systematically racist, let alone correcting those tendencies, is a bigger fish to fry. But that one starts with independent investigations and front-street rather than back-alley court proceedings. We gotta stop this "brotherhood" from being able to internally absolve itself, period. That's the bottom line.
someone with actual knowledge of the american legal system explain to me how a grand jury could possibly conclude that there wasn't enough evidence to even begin a trial. doesn't that equally damn the possibility of wilson proving his innocence (not likely) as much as it would allow him to be convicted (more likely)?
I believe that Michael Brown has taken full responsibility for his actions.
The ultimate responsibility.
Why should Darren Wilson not have to take responsibility for his?
Exactly.
It's interesting how black and white (no pun intended) the outlook is. It seems the accepted views are The cop did it because Michael Brown was black, everyone knows it and thats why he got off" or "The cop followed everything correctly and was left with no other options"
It seems as if everyone has either deified or demonized Michael Brown and Darren Wilson. Has this case not raised any other thoughts?
Guzzo I agree with you that the victim was not a god and that the perpetrator was not a devil.
Michael Brown was acting like a typical teenager who disrespects authority and believes they are immortal.
Darren Wilson was acting like many a police officer, with full knowledge that he may bring lethal force any time he feels threatened.
On another day Michael Brown may have been respectful and Darren Wilson may have used restraint.
No doubt they were perfectly pleasant people most of the time.
There is nothing surprising or different about this case from dozens of other police shootings of unarmed civilians.
In most all police shootings their is no serious consequence for the shooter.
In most all police shootings the victim is poor.
Way to often the victim is a member of a minority.
The anger over this shooting isn't that Michael Brown was an angel or Darren Wilson a devil.
This incident is a stand in for a history of unpunished police shootings.
This shooting is a stand in for the police targeting of minority communities.
What you are seeing is anger over what has been called the New Jim Crow. The demonizing and jailing of young African American men. Laws being passed specifically to target this demographic.
Which is why Soul Zilla is correct when he says:
"No evidence or investigation could be presented or conducted that would change the minds of most of you on here, of whom had made up their mind at the first glance of a headline that had the words white, cop, black, unarmed and teenager in them."
someone with actual knowledge of the american legal system explain to me how a grand jury could possibly conclude that there wasn't enough evidence to even begin a trial. doesn't that equally damn the possibility of wilson proving his innocence (not likely) as much as it would allow him to be convicted (more likely)?
The grand jury, over 99.9% of the time, brings the indictment the prosecutor asks for.
Which is what happened in this case.
I am still reading the GJ transcript, but the first thing the prosecutor does is give the GJ the rules on when an officer can use deadly force.
I have not seen where the prosecutor gives the GJ instructions on any other charges, such as manslaughter.
The prosecutor also asks Wilson leading questions so that the testimony matches the rules. (I can't remember exactly but something along the lines of "So that is when you felt threatened?")
The truth is a criminal trial might have resulted in an innocent finding because our laws allow a police officer to fire to kill any time they feel threatened.
someone with actual knowledge of the american legal system explain to me how a grand jury could possibly conclude that there wasn't enough evidence to even begin a trial. doesn't that equally damn the possibility of wilson proving his innocence (not likely) as much as it would allow him to be convicted (more likely)?
The way a lawyer friend explained it to me is that they also need to determine if they have a good enough case to have even a slight chance to win. If, as the prosecutor claimed, their investigation found that some of the witnesses had lied that would make their case very tough.
This Prosecutor is a Democrat and probably killed any political aspirations he has by not indicting Wilson.
I'm curious if people here feel that a mere indictment would have been "justice" or only a guilty verdict and harsh punishment would have acheived that?
It's interesting how black and white (no pun intended) the outlook is. It seems the accepted views are The cop did it because Michael Brown was black, everyone knows it and thats why he got off" or "The cop followed everything correctly and was left with no other options"
It seems as if everyone has either deified or demonized Michael Brown and Darren Wilson. Has this case not raised any other thoughts?
Yes, plenty of them, some of which have been expressed here. Why not offer some up yourself?
And of course your conclusion that "we" think Wilson killed Brown for being black is overly simplistic and insulting. I think Wilson gunned down Brown in a moment of pure chickenshit panic bred in part by his tribal dread of "the other" - the "demon" he thought possessed superhuman strength. He's in the wrong profession.
Suppose he'd shot the son of the police chief instead. Think the outcome would have been the same? Think the investigation would have proceeded in the same way? From the outset Wilson's fellow cops and the cop-smooching DA steered the case towards an irrevocable conclusion. Some say that implies a conspiracy, but it was all done right out in the open. It's just the way it is.
When Darren Wilson appeared before the Grand Jury he was treated with respect and tossed softball after softball. No one questioned him as to why a 6' 4" cop felt so unmanned by the physicality of a 6' 4" fat teenager. No one asked him why he fired shots at the kid while he was running away.
But witnesses who contradicted Wilson were interrogated as though their stories were clear fabrications, even though there was a remarkable similarity among those stories. That wasn't an accident. The "prosecution" got the result it wanted.
someone with actual knowledge of the american legal system explain to me how a grand jury could possibly conclude that there wasn't enough evidence to even begin a trial. doesn't that equally damn the possibility of wilson proving his innocence (not likely) as much as it would allow him to be convicted (more likely)?
The way a lawyer friend explained it to me is that they also need to determine if they have a good enough case to have even a slight chance to win. If, as the prosecutor claimed, their investigation found that some of the witnesses had lied that would make their case very tough.
This Prosecutor is a Democrat and probably killed any political aspirations he has by not indicting Wilson.
I'm curious if people here feel that a mere indictment would have been "justice" or only a guilty verdict and harsh punishment would have acheived that?
Really good points.
The prosecutor almost certainly did not want to bring this case to the GJ.
Prosecutors only bring cases to GJ that they want to go to trial.
And they only want cases they think they can win to go to trial.
They also work with the police everyday, and want to keep a good working relationship.
As I have said from the start, IMO this is about America's way of policing. Which I believe has to change before we can have Justice. Until then we will only get "justice".
someone with actual knowledge of the american legal system explain to me how a grand jury could possibly conclude that there wasn't enough evidence to even begin a trial. doesn't that equally damn the possibility of wilson proving his innocence (not likely) as much as it would allow him to be convicted (more likely)?
The grand jury, over 99.9% of the time, brings the indictment the prosecutor asks for.
Which is what happened in this case.
This is incorrect. The prosecutor didn't ask for an indictment. He simply threw the whole mess into the hands of the jury.
That's highly unusual and is a good way to avoid getting an indictment while pretending that you tried.
I'm curious if people here feel that a mere indictment would have been "justice" or only a guilty verdict and harsh punishment would have acheived that?
Neither. An indictment + a trial that was perceived by uninterested expert observers to be fair (whatever the outcome) would be justice to me.
someone with actual knowledge of the american legal system explain to me how a grand jury could possibly conclude that there wasn't enough evidence to even begin a trial. doesn't that equally damn the possibility of wilson proving his innocence (not likely) as much as it would allow him to be convicted (more likely)?
The grand jury, over 99.9% of the time, brings the indictment the prosecutor asks for.
Which is what happened in this case.
This is incorrect. The prosecutor didn't ask for an indictment. He simply threw the whole mess into the hands of the jury.
That's highly unusual and is a good way to avoid getting an indictment while pretending that you tried.
Correct. The Prosecutor made no recommendation as to which charge should be brought, if any.
He overloaded the GJ with a mountain of evidence, then picked apart any testimony that could have led to a PC determination.
Perhaps LW meant the Prosecutor got the charge he asked for, which was none.
I'm curious if people here feel that a mere indictment would have been "justice" or only a guilty verdict and harsh punishment would have acheived that?
Neither. An indictment + a trial that was perceived by uninterested expert observers to be fair (whatever the outcome) would be justice to me.
Do you feel there was justice in the George Zimmerman outcome?
Comments
Now I could go on and give a detailed explanation as to how the court system works and why it is setup the way it is and the long history of jurisprudential thought. But I won't because the ones that this is directed to won't read it, or if they do, cannot comprehend it. These are the people for which logic and reason are possibly some words they came across in high school, and are now lead by emotions.
Or I could distill all the testimony and evidence in a few paragraphs, but again I won't. Because you won't read it. Your mind was already made up from the beginning. Speculation is enough for you. To reason with you would be like trying to explain how the internal combustion engine works to a cat, a complete waste of time.
Besides it can all be found online if you would bother to look. You can't be completely blamed though, because the racist media helps to perpetuate this narrative and keep the flame lit under racial animus. How, you say?
I'm going to flip it on all of you who think this was about race. Let me be clear first that there is without a doubt a tension between the police and the black community stretching back a long time. We all know that. How to address and change it is for another post. But that's not what's going on in this case.
Where is your outrage for Dillon Taylor? Who you say? That's right, the racist media doesn't report stories that don't fit their narrative. Two days after Michael Brown was shot, a black police officer shot and killed an unarmed white teenager. But wait, where is the outrage and the national press coverage? But wait, did the grand jury indict this police officer? Nope, unlike Ferguson, there was no grand jury. Because, unlike Ferguson, the district attorney didn't even bring charges. The prosecutors office declined to pursue it at all. But wait, it gets even more damning: this police officer was wearing a body cam!! And the good folks at the Salt Lake City Tribune even uploaded it to youtube for all the world to see.
I URGE you to simply google the following, Dillon Taylor body cam. Watch it for yourself, then come back on here and express your outrage. And if you don't then you will expose yourselves as the TRUE racists. No cars were burned or businesses looted because of this. You don't help yourselves or change peoples minds when you react this way. How should you react? Oh I don't know, how about simply demanding that every police department in the country be required to issue body cams to every officer. That's what reasonable people do. But you won't. Your more along the lines of MB's stepdad, and I quote, "Burn this bitch down!!"
One of the problems with your kind is that none of you are bright enough to extrapolate a little.
(Long pause while you look up "extrapolate.")
But the root problem is that you're all stupid, selfish, weak little bastards.
Now turn your head to the left and cough.
The surest sign that a douchebag is a right-wing douchebag is when it changes the channel to another incident and bellows about, "Where is the outrage?"
Of course the right-wing douchebags aren't "outraged" about any actual injustice. They save that for douchebags like Cliven Bundy, who never suffered any genuine injustice but hates him some n*gg*rs and, well, you know.
you condescending despicable fucking right wing racist cunt
Some of you appear to have very little emotional control.
Don't hold back Kala, I think you should tell him how you really feel.
b/w
It's not the job of police to execute criminals. And anyone saying Michael Brown deserved to die...and there are a ton of people actually stooping such low brow darkness...is a POS who needs to reevaluate their own life.
Exactly.
Hold up, let me pause for a moment while beating you through a window with one hand, because I'm gonna need to pass this box of stolen cigarillos over to my friend. Alright, done. Back to smobbing on you.
Sure it happened like that.
It's interesting how black and white (no pun intended) the outlook is. It seems the accepted views are The cop did it because Michael Brown was black, everyone knows it and thats why he got off" or "The cop followed everything correctly and was left with no other options"
It seems as if everyone has either deified or demonized Michael Brown and Darren Wilson. Has this case not raised any other thoughts?
Do you even listen to soul?
Dude. Try harder.
There is all sorts of gray area and the main issue has become: Should the police really be in charge of policing themselves? And the answer to that via Mr. Dipshit prosecutor, buddy of the police and Darren Wilson specifically is a resounding HELL NO!!! At least let that shit go to trial rather than ram-rodding the pro-police perspective without any cross examination nor rebuttal. Whole shit is a sham. And it's been a sham in cities all over the country for decades on end. But hey, let's not fix it. Let's pile on a dead teenager and call anyone supporting his cause an unemployed animal who only loots for peanuts. Yeah, that'll really get us somewhere.
America. Try harder.
Sweeping generalizations about perceived sweeping generalizations :post_modern:
There's no excuse for rioting...even though it happens like clockwork all over the world over next to anything serious or just anything whimsical. Get over it. People build stuff. Then, people break stuff. It's just stuff and aside from the normal keeping the rioting from getting too far out of control, it shouldn't be a distraction from the real issues at hand.
Seriously, is a crusade against rioting going to do one bit of good stopping any rioting going on in the world ever? Of course not. Evidently, it's merely a facet of human nature.
But yes, people, just keep going on about it as if you were just born yesterday.
I don't think thats the main issue with most, I think the main issue is race. From my TV viewing, NPR listening ears & eyes it comes down to a black man was shot by a white cop. there is little I've gathered about the character of either in news reports. Media hypes the race issue, which I get but I'm disgusted by (News should not be done for ratings).
I agree, if only so people would be privy to more info. the report makes it feel as if people were not supposed to know anything until an official let them know.
I think thats part of the problem is boiling down these people to either cop, crooked cop, racist cop, innocent teen, black teen, or criminal teen (or unemployed animal, I guess).
People and situations are a little more complicated than that.
Guzzo I agree with you that the victim was not a god and that the perpetrator was not a devil.
Michael Brown was acting like a typical teenager who disrespects authority and believes they are immortal.
Darren Wilson was acting like many a police officer, with full knowledge that he may bring lethal force any time he feels threatened.
On another day Michael Brown may have been respectful and Darren Wilson may have used restraint.
No doubt they were perfectly pleasant people most of the time.
There is nothing surprising or different about this case from dozens of other police shootings of unarmed civilians.
In most all police shootings their is no serious consequence for the shooter.
In most all police shootings the victim is poor.
Way to often the victim is a member of a minority.
The anger over this shooting isn't that Michael Brown was an angel or Darren Wilson a devil.
This incident is a stand in for a history of unpunished police shootings.
This shooting is a stand in for the police targeting of minority communities.
What you are seeing is anger over what has been called the New Jim Crow. The demonizing and jailing of young African American men. Laws being passed specifically to target this demographic.
Which is why Soul Zilla is correct when he says:
"No evidence or investigation could be presented or conducted that would change the minds of most of you on here, of whom had made up their mind at the first glance of a headline that had the words white, cop, black, unarmed and teenager in them."
The grand jury, over 99.9% of the time, brings the indictment the prosecutor asks for.
Which is what happened in this case.
I am still reading the GJ transcript, but the first thing the prosecutor does is give the GJ the rules on when an officer can use deadly force.
I have not seen where the prosecutor gives the GJ instructions on any other charges, such as manslaughter.
The prosecutor also asks Wilson leading questions so that the testimony matches the rules. (I can't remember exactly but something along the lines of "So that is when you felt threatened?")
The truth is a criminal trial might have resulted in an innocent finding because our laws allow a police officer to fire to kill any time they feel threatened.
The way a lawyer friend explained it to me is that they also need to determine if they have a good enough case to have even a slight chance to win. If, as the prosecutor claimed, their investigation found that some of the witnesses had lied that would make their case very tough.
This Prosecutor is a Democrat and probably killed any political aspirations he has by not indicting Wilson.
I'm curious if people here feel that a mere indictment would have been "justice" or only a guilty verdict and harsh punishment would have acheived that?
Including the police?
Yes, plenty of them, some of which have been expressed here. Why not offer some up yourself?
And of course your conclusion that "we" think Wilson killed Brown for being black is overly simplistic and insulting. I think Wilson gunned down Brown in a moment of pure chickenshit panic bred in part by his tribal dread of "the other" - the "demon" he thought possessed superhuman strength. He's in the wrong profession.
Suppose he'd shot the son of the police chief instead. Think the outcome would have been the same? Think the investigation would have proceeded in the same way? From the outset Wilson's fellow cops and the cop-smooching DA steered the case towards an irrevocable conclusion. Some say that implies a conspiracy, but it was all done right out in the open. It's just the way it is.
When Darren Wilson appeared before the Grand Jury he was treated with respect and tossed softball after softball. No one questioned him as to why a 6' 4" cop felt so unmanned by the physicality of a 6' 4" fat teenager. No one asked him why he fired shots at the kid while he was running away.
But witnesses who contradicted Wilson were interrogated as though their stories were clear fabrications, even though there was a remarkable similarity among those stories. That wasn't an accident. The "prosecution" got the result it wanted.
Absolutely, 100% of the time
Really good points.
The prosecutor almost certainly did not want to bring this case to the GJ.
Prosecutors only bring cases to GJ that they want to go to trial.
And they only want cases they think they can win to go to trial.
They also work with the police everyday, and want to keep a good working relationship.
As I have said from the start, IMO this is about America's way of policing. Which I believe has to change before we can have Justice. Until then we will only get "justice".
This is incorrect. The prosecutor didn't ask for an indictment. He simply threw the whole mess into the hands of the jury.
That's highly unusual and is a good way to avoid getting an indictment while pretending that you tried.
Neither. An indictment + a trial that was perceived by uninterested expert observers to be fair (whatever the outcome) would be justice to me.
Correct. The Prosecutor made no recommendation as to which charge should be brought, if any.
He overloaded the GJ with a mountain of evidence, then picked apart any testimony that could have led to a PC determination.
Perhaps LW meant the Prosecutor got the charge he asked for, which was none.
Either way, it's scandalous, IMO.
Do you feel there was justice in the George Zimmerman outcome?