Brown's stepfather....did he instigate the burning in Ferguson?

[Asclepias]

Bottom line..... Don't rob stores, and don't assault a cop and try to take his gun. MB got what he deserved. Too many are trying to blame the cop for simply protecting his own life as well as the lives of law respecting people of the community.

The parents of MB are in a state of denial. They believe that "justice" will only be served if Wilson is tried and convicted of murder. The way I see it, MB is the one most responsible for his own demise with perhaps his parents being next in line for not raising him to respect the law. MB's parents will continue to believe the first accounts of MB being executed by Wilson even though it was MB's partner in crime that started those stories which have been discredited by hard evidence.

Had MB's parents accepted the turth that Wilson acted appropriately many riots could have been avoided.

You sound like you are trying to convince yourself or you accidentally posted this in the wrong thread.

 

[Derideo_Te]

You have to weigh the words along with the time they were said.

But you don't weigh the state the mind of a grieving father?

How come only your conditions are pertinent but none of the mitigating conditions are valid?

 

[BullKurtz]

One of you whimpering airheads might want to Google what inciting to riot actually is. You'll never find a clearer example of it than what Brown's dirtbag ex-con stepfather did. The "Chicago Seven" were tried after the convention riots with much less evidence.....the Ferguson grand jury has a lot of work yet to do.

 

[Pop23]

Bottom line..... Don't rob stores, and don't assault a cop and try to take his gun. MB got what he deserved. Too many are trying to blame the cop for simply protecting his own life as well as the lives of law respecting people of the community.

The parents of MB are in a state of denial. They believe that "justice" will only be served if Wilson is tried and convicted of murder. The way I see it, MB is the one most responsible for his own demise with perhaps his parents being next in line for not raising him to respect the law. MB's parents will continue to believe the first accounts of MB being executed by Wilson even though it was MB's partner in crime that started those stories which have been discredited by hard evidence.

Had MB's parents accepted the turth that Wilson acted appropriately many riots could have been avoided.

You sound like you are trying to convince yourself or you accidentally posted this in the wrong thread.

I read online that, in the state of California, a riot does not have to actually happen to be guilty of inciting a riot. One simply has to encourage a riot to be guilty. Never researched the Missouri law.

Here:

California Penal Code Section 404.6 PC Inciting A Riot

 

[Asclepias]

Bottom line..... Don't rob stores, and don't assault a cop and try to take his gun. MB got what he deserved. Too many are trying to blame the cop for simply protecting his own life as well as the lives of law respecting people of the community.

The parents of MB are in a state of denial. They believe that "justice" will only be served if Wilson is tried and convicted of murder. The way I see it, MB is the one most responsible for his own demise with perhaps his parents being next in line for not raising him to respect the law. MB's parents will continue to believe the first accounts of MB being executed by Wilson even though it was MB's partner in crime that started those stories which have been discredited by hard evidence.

Had MB's parents accepted the turth that Wilson acted appropriately many riots could have been avoided.

You sound like you are trying to convince yourself or you accidentally posted this in the wrong thread.

I read online that, in the state of California, a riot does not have to actually happen to be guilty of inciting a riot. One simply has to encourage a riot to be guilty. Never researched the Missouri law.

Its probably the same thing in all states or something similar. The problem comes in when you determine the state of mind. I have never heard of anyone being charged with inciting a riot because they were grieving. A defense attorney would have a field day with this.

 

[Asclepias]

One of you whimpering airheads might want to Google what inciting to riot actually is. You'll never find a clearer example of it than what Brown's dirtbag ex-con stepfather did. The "Chicago Seven" were tried after the convention riots with much less evidence.....the Ferguson grand jury has a lot of work yet to do.

Are you always this dumb?

Chicago Seven - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

"The eight defendants were charged under the anti-riot provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1968[4] which made it a federal crime to cross state lines with the intent to incite a riot."

He didnt cross state lines and there is no proof he intended to start a riot.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

This whole incident is sad.

Lliberals are so retarded. The cop is a murderer for defending himself , but this guy isn't guilty of a crime cuz he was sad when he committed the crime.

I'm done with the entire topic. You idiots are morons.

 

[Pop23]

Bottom line..... Don't rob stores, and don't assault a cop and try to take his gun. MB got what he deserved. Too many are trying to blame the cop for simply protecting his own life as well as the lives of law respecting people of the community.

The parents of MB are in a state of denial. They believe that "justice" will only be served if Wilson is tried and convicted of murder. The way I see it, MB is the one most responsible for his own demise with perhaps his parents being next in line for not raising him to respect the law. MB's parents will continue to believe the first accounts of MB being executed by Wilson even though it was MB's partner in crime that started those stories which have been discredited by hard evidence.

Had MB's parents accepted the turth that Wilson acted appropriately many riots could have been avoided.

You sound like you are trying to convince yourself or you accidentally posted this in the wrong thread.

I read online that, in the state of California, a riot does not have to actually happen to be guilty of inciting a riot. One simply has to encourage a riot to be guilty. Never researched the Missouri law.

Its probably the same thing in all states or something similar. The problem comes in when you determine the state of mind. I have never heard of anyone being charged with inciting a riot because they were grieving. A defense attorney would have a field day with this.

I think not. Millions of dollars in damage was done, both Mom and Dad had adequate time to seek the help they needed to get through the grieving period. The even had the ear of Eric Holder.

He was a convicted felon, with an attorney to advise him.

Nope, this one looks easy. Will it happen, prolly not. The politics aren't there. Should it happen? Ask the folks who's lives have been shattered by this idiot.

 

[Asclepias]

This whole incident is sad.

Lliberals are so retarded. The cop is a murderer for defending himself , but this guy isn't guilty of a crime cuz he was sad when he committed the crime.

I'm done with the entire topic. You idiots are morons.

We knew you run away when you were debunked soundly enough. You never answered my post either. Why did you lie and say you werent talking about reactions to grief?

 

[Ravi]

Search 18 U.S.C. § 2101 : US Code - Section 2101: Riots

(a) Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent - (1) to incite a riot; or (2) to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot; or (3) to commit any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or (4) to aid or abet any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; and who either during the course of any such travel or use or thereafter performs or attempts to perform any other overt act for any purpose specified in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of this paragraph - (!1) Shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (b) In any prosecution under this section, proof that a defendant engaged or attempted to engage in one or more of the overt acts described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) (!2) and (1) has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce, or (2) has use of or used any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including but not limited to, mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, to communicate with or broadcast to any person or group of persons prior to such overt acts, such travel or use shall be admissible proof to establish that such defendant traveled in or used such facility of interstate or foreign commerce. (c) A judgment of conviction or acquittal on the merits under the laws of any State shall be a bar to any prosecution hereunder for the same act or acts. (d) Whenever, in the opinion of the Attorney General or of the appropriate officer of the Department of Justice charged by law or under the instructions of the Attorney General with authority to act, any person shall have violated this chapter, the Department shall proceed as speedily as possible with a prosecution of such person hereunder and with any appeal which may lie from any decision adverse to the Government resulting from such prosecution. (e) Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to make it unlawful for any person to travel in, or use any facility of, interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of pursuing the legitimate objectives of organized labor, through orderly and lawful means. (f) Nothing in this section shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of Congress to prevent any State, any possession or Commonwealth of the United States, or the District of Columbia, from exercising jurisdiction over any offense over which it would have jurisdiction in the absence of this section; nor shall anything in this section be construed as depriving State and local law enforcement authorities of responsibility for prosecuting acts that may be violations of this section and that are violations of State and local law.

- See more at: 18 U.S.C. 2101 US Code - Section 2101 Riots

This is the federal law. He incited riot by use of television, and the crime is punishable by up to five years in federal prison.

What about the woman that said fuck the police?

 

[Asclepias]

Bottom line..... Don't rob stores, and don't assault a cop and try to take his gun. MB got what he deserved. Too many are trying to blame the cop for simply protecting his own life as well as the lives of law respecting people of the community.

The parents of MB are in a state of denial. They believe that "justice" will only be served if Wilson is tried and convicted of murder. The way I see it, MB is the one most responsible for his own demise with perhaps his parents being next in line for not raising him to respect the law. MB's parents will continue to believe the first accounts of MB being executed by Wilson even though it was MB's partner in crime that started those stories which have been discredited by hard evidence.

Had MB's parents accepted the turth that Wilson acted appropriately many riots could have been avoided.

You sound like you are trying to convince yourself or you accidentally posted this in the wrong thread.

I read online that, in the state of California, a riot does not have to actually happen to be guilty of inciting a riot. One simply has to encourage a riot to be guilty. Never researched the Missouri law.

Its probably the same thing in all states or something similar. The problem comes in when you determine the state of mind. I have never heard of anyone being charged with inciting a riot because they were grieving. A defense attorney would have a field day with this.

I think not. Millions of dollars in damage was done, both Mom and Dad had adequate time to seek the help they needed to get through the grieving period. The even had the ear of Eric Holder.

He was a convicted felon, with an attorney to advise him.

Nope, this one looks easy. Will it happen, prolly not. The politics aren't there. Should it happen? Ask the folks who's lives have been shattered by this idiot.

The words came shortly after the announcement that Wilson would not be indicted. How is that adequate time? Was Holder in the crowd and is he a therapist?

 

[Pop23]

Search 18 U.S.C. § 2101 : US Code - Section 2101: Riots

(a) Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent - (1) to incite a riot; or (2) to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot; or (3) to commit any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or (4) to aid or abet any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; and who either during the course of any such travel or use or thereafter performs or attempts to perform any other overt act for any purpose specified in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of this paragraph - (!1) Shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (b) In any prosecution under this section, proof that a defendant engaged or attempted to engage in one or more of the overt acts described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) (!2) and (1) has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce, or (2) has use of or used any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including but not limited to, mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, to communicate with or broadcast to any person or group of persons prior to such overt acts, such travel or use shall be admissible proof to establish that such defendant traveled in or used such facility of interstate or foreign commerce. (c) A judgment of conviction or acquittal on the merits under the laws of any State shall be a bar to any prosecution hereunder for the same act or acts. (d) Whenever, in the opinion of the Attorney General or of the appropriate officer of the Department of Justice charged by law or under the instructions of the Attorney General with authority to act, any person shall have violated this chapter, the Department shall proceed as speedily as possible with a prosecution of such person hereunder and with any appeal which may lie from any decision adverse to the Government resulting from such prosecution. (e) Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to make it unlawful for any person to travel in, or use any facility of, interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of pursuing the legitimate objectives of organized labor, through orderly and lawful means. (f) Nothing in this section shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of Congress to prevent any State, any possession or Commonwealth of the United States, or the District of Columbia, from exercising jurisdiction over any offense over which it would have jurisdiction in the absence of this section; nor shall anything in this section be construed as depriving State and local law enforcement authorities of responsibility for prosecuting acts that may be violations of this section and that are violations of State and local law.

- See more at: 18 U.S.C. 2101 US Code - Section 2101 Riots

This is the federal law. He incited riot by use of television, and the crime is punishable by up to five years in federal prison.

What about the woman that said fuck the police?

Guilty of inciting intercourse!!!!

 

[BullKurtz]

Are you always this dumb?

Chicago Seven - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

"The eight defendants were charged under the anti-riot provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1968[4] which made it a federal crime to cross state lines with the intent to incite a riot."

He didnt cross state lines and there is no proof he intended to start a riot.

Does anybody understand why this anal-retentive fake negro spends so much time here...signing off and then back on after every stupid comment? The Chicago Seven reference is about the SPEECHES the Yippies gave to an already edgy crowd, not who brought the charges, state or federal.

 

[Pop23]

Bottom line..... Don't rob stores, and don't assault a cop and try to take his gun. MB got what he deserved. Too many are trying to blame the cop for simply protecting his own life as well as the lives of law respecting people of the community.

The parents of MB are in a state of denial. They believe that "justice" will only be served if Wilson is tried and convicted of murder. The way I see it, MB is the one most responsible for his own demise with perhaps his parents being next in line for not raising him to respect the law. MB's parents will continue to believe the first accounts of MB being executed by Wilson even though it was MB's partner in crime that started those stories which have been discredited by hard evidence.

Had MB's parents accepted the turth that Wilson acted appropriately many riots could have been avoided.

You sound like you are trying to convince yourself or you accidentally posted this in the wrong thread.

I read online that, in the state of California, a riot does not have to actually happen to be guilty of inciting a riot. One simply has to encourage a riot to be guilty. Never researched the Missouri law.

Its probably the same thing in all states or something similar. The problem comes in when you determine the state of mind. I have never heard of anyone being charged with inciting a riot because they were grieving. A defense attorney would have a field day with this.

I think not. Millions of dollars in damage was done, both Mom and Dad had adequate time to seek the help they needed to get through the grieving period. The even had the ear of Eric Holder.

He was a convicted felon, with an attorney to advise him.

Nope, this one looks easy. Will it happen, prolly not. The politics aren't there. Should it happen? Ask the folks who's lives have been shattered by this idiot.

The words came shortly after the announcement that Wilson would not be indicted. How is that adequate time? Was Holder in the crowd and is he a therapist?

Nice!

They worked though the grieving process of a court decision?

And nothing could have prepared them for that?

OMG

 

[DigitalDrifter]

That footage of her falling apart, him holding her and then finally screaming out his rage and pain -

I'm sorry that RWs are so et up with their racist hate but no one can say they would not have lost control in that moment. Those people have been pushed to edge and more.

Try a little compassion.

Or, you could just keep on yammering your mindless hate while pretending to be good christians.

'tis the season, right?

Thats a horseshit excuse. I can understand the pain and anger. However to encourage people to bun the down down shows the mindset of this individual. There is a big difference between having compassion for a family that has lost a loved one and excusing an idiot who encourages vandalism and property destruction

People say a lot of things in anger that they would never say if they weren't in that state of mind.

We have masses of video of TP'ers saying stupid stuff in anger over the ACA.

People say stupid things when they are in the grip of strong emotions.

If we charged everyone who did that then your taxes for the prison population would exceed that of the defense budget in all likelihood.

You have to weigh the words along with the time they were said.

Yelling "Burn this bitch down !" by one of the protest leaders, over and over to a crowd already on the edge of rioting, moments after hearing the news the officer was not to be charged, was the height of irresponsibility.
His words delivered in the fashion that they were, likely led or added to the nights mass destruction.

He should be held responsible.

Who told you he was a protest leader? I havent heard that one.

As I mentioned earlier, as Michael Brown's stepfather, he was by default one of the protest leaders whether he wanted to be or not.
The protesters would have viewed the family in a special light, and would have taken the family's words much more seriously than others.
Because of that, he needed to choose his words much more carefully than other protesters.

 

[Asclepias]

You sound like you are trying to convince yourself or you accidentally posted this in the wrong thread.

I read online that, in the state of California, a riot does not have to actually happen to be guilty of inciting a riot. One simply has to encourage a riot to be guilty. Never researched the Missouri law.

Its probably the same thing in all states or something similar. The problem comes in when you determine the state of mind. I have never heard of anyone being charged with inciting a riot because they were grieving. A defense attorney would have a field day with this.

I think not. Millions of dollars in damage was done, both Mom and Dad had adequate time to seek the help they needed to get through the grieving period. The even had the ear of Eric Holder.

He was a convicted felon, with an attorney to advise him.

Nope, this one looks easy. Will it happen, prolly not. The politics aren't there. Should it happen? Ask the folks who's lives have been shattered by this idiot.

The words came shortly after the announcement that Wilson would not be indicted. How is that adequate time? Was Holder in the crowd and is he a therapist?

Nice!

They worked though the grieving process of a court decision?

And nothing could have prepared them for that?

OMG

Not really getting your post. They expected their sons killer to be brought to trial. The moment the decision was announced starts the clock.

 

[Asclepias]

That footage of her falling apart, him holding her and then finally screaming out his rage and pain -

I'm sorry that RWs are so et up with their racist hate but no one can say they would not have lost control in that moment. Those people have been pushed to edge and more.

Try a little compassion.

Or, you could just keep on yammering your mindless hate while pretending to be good christians.

'tis the season, right?

Thats a horseshit excuse. I can understand the pain and anger. However to encourage people to bun the down down shows the mindset of this individual. There is a big difference between having compassion for a family that has lost a loved one and excusing an idiot who encourages vandalism and property destruction

People say a lot of things in anger that they would never say if they weren't in that state of mind.

We have masses of video of TP'ers saying stupid stuff in anger over the ACA.

People say stupid things when they are in the grip of strong emotions.

If we charged everyone who did that then your taxes for the prison population would exceed that of the defense budget in all likelihood.

You have to weigh the words along with the time they were said.

Yelling "Burn this bitch down !" by one of the protest leaders, over and over to a crowd already on the edge of rioting, moments after hearing the news the officer was not to be charged, was the height of irresponsibility.
His words delivered in the fashion that they were, likely led or added to the nights mass destruction.

He should be held responsible.

Who told you he was a protest leader? I havent heard that one.

As I mentioned earlier, as Michael Brown's stepfather, he was by default one of the protest leaders whether he wanted to be or not.
The protesters would have viewed the family in a special light, and would have taken the family's words much more seriously than others.
Because of that, he needed to choose his words much more carefully than other protesters.

You dont have the authority to make your opinion fact. Who told you that by default he was one of the protest leaders?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

You have to weigh the words along with the time they were said.

But you don't weigh the state the mind of a grieving father?

How come only your conditions are pertinent but none of the mitigating conditions are valid?

I understand that, I know what it's like to be a grieving father, but what he said goes beyond grief. His words were spoken with vengeance and meant to be taken seriously.

 

[ricechickie]

That footage of her falling apart, him holding her and then finally screaming out his rage and pain -

I'm sorry that RWs are so et up with their racist hate but no one can say they would not have lost control in that moment. Those people have been pushed to edge and more.

Try a little compassion.

Or, you could just keep on yammering your mindless hate while pretending to be good christians.

'tis the season, right?

Thats a horseshit excuse. I can understand the pain and anger. However to encourage people to bun the down down shows the mindset of this individual. There is a big difference between having compassion for a family that has lost a loved one and excusing an idiot who encourages vandalism and property destruction

People say a lot of things in anger that they would never say if they weren't in that state of mind.

We have masses of video of TP'ers saying stupid stuff in anger over the ACA.

People say stupid things when they are in the grip of strong emotions.

If we charged everyone who did that then your taxes for the prison population would exceed that of the defense budget in all likelihood.

You have to weigh the words along with the time they were said.

Yelling "Burn this bitch down !" by one of the protest leaders, over and over to a crowd already on the edge of rioting, moments after hearing the news the officer was not to be charged, was the height of irresponsibility.
His words delivered in the fashion that they were, likely led or added to the nights mass destruction.

He should be held responsible.

Who told you he was a protest leader? I havent heard that one.

As I mentioned earlier, as Michael Brown's stepfather, he was by default one of the protest leaders whether he wanted to be or not.
The protesters would have viewed the family in a special light, and would have taken the family's words much more seriously than others.
Because of that, he needed to choose his words much more carefully than other protesters.

I don't know if how others see you makes you legally responsible for how they act.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Thats a horseshit excuse. I can understand the pain and anger. However to encourage people to bun the down down shows the mindset of this individual. There is a big difference between having compassion for a family that has lost a loved one and excusing an idiot who encourages vandalism and property destruction

People say a lot of things in anger that they would never say if they weren't in that state of mind.

We have masses of video of TP'ers saying stupid stuff in anger over the ACA.

People say stupid things when they are in the grip of strong emotions.

If we charged everyone who did that then your taxes for the prison population would exceed that of the defense budget in all likelihood.

You have to weigh the words along with the time they were said.

Yelling "Burn this bitch down !" by one of the protest leaders, over and over to a crowd already on the edge of rioting, moments after hearing the news the officer was not to be charged, was the height of irresponsibility.
His words delivered in the fashion that they were, likely led or added to the nights mass destruction.

He should be held responsible.

Who told you he was a protest leader? I havent heard that one.

As I mentioned earlier, as Michael Brown's stepfather, he was by default one of the protest leaders whether he wanted to be or not.
The protesters would have viewed the family in a special light, and would have taken the family's words much more seriously than others.
Because of that, he needed to choose his words much more carefully than other protesters.

You dont have the authority to make your opinion fact. Who told you that by default he was one of the protest leaders?

As the stepfather it would have been the natural thing for other protesters to look to him and other family members for guidance in the protest.