Ferguson officer-involved shooting is as-described

[Delta4Embassy]

Watching coverage yesterday, on CNN they had alledged eye-witnesses to events from the first shots onward. Sitting beside what I assumed was her lawyer, a young woman described what she saw. I noticed that while her interpretation of what she saw is open to cross-examination (are you sure you saw what you saw?) what isn't in dispute is the subject who got shot was inside the officer's vehicle struggling with the officer. That would seem to corroborate the officer's description of being assaulted and the subject going for his weapon.

The eye-witnesses' description confirms the officer and subject had some sort of physical altercation at the vehicle. What she goes on to describe is the actual shooting. But whether what she was seeing was a racist officer murdering a subject or responding to the subject's assault and grab for his weapon she couldn't know. Understandably the actual shooting will be most prominent in her recollection.

I'm believing the officer's account more and more with her testimony.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Watching coverage yesterday, on CNN they had alledged eye-witnesses to events from the first shots onward. Sitting beside what I assumed was her lawyer, a young woman described what she saw. I noticed that while her interpretation of what she saw is open to cross-examination (are you sure you saw what you saw?) what isn't in dispute is the subject who got shot was inside the officer's vehicle struggling with the officer. That would seem to corroborate the officer's description of being assaulted and the subject going for his weapon.

The eye-witnesses' description confirms the officer and subject had some sort of physical altercation at the vehicle. What she goes on to describe is the actual shooting. But whether what she was seeing was a racist officer murdering a subject or responding to the subject's assault and grab for his weapon she couldn't know. Understandably the actual shooting will be most prominent in her recollection.

I'm believing the officer's account more and more with her testimony.

Bro, at this point it wouldn't even matter if the cop was right or wrong. Journalists were savagely assaulted by the police, whatever the cause of the riots and protests is now irrelevant.

If anything, this event proved that a little rioting is necessary for public officials to give a damn at all. The Boston Tea Party was a riot, and it accomplished A LOT.

 

[Geaux4it]

Eventually society will win the war of attrition

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

Ferguson, Bundy Ranch, & 'Dancing The Night Away' With The Obamas

The events in Ferguson, Missouri went from what could have been just another all too common and tragic incident in which an unarmed black man is killed by an overly aggressive and unprofessional police force, to what may be a historically significant event in American history. So how did this transformation occur and what does it mean going forward? Those are the two questions I intend to address in this post.

There are two primary factors that have collided to create the current out of control situation in a suburb roughly 15 miles northwest of St. Louis, which before this past weekend, almost no one had ever heard of. The first factor is the underlying tension in American society that I have been writing about for several years now. Nowhere is this tension more apparent than in the minority majority inner cities or their outskirts. Being a privileged person, I have thankfully never experienced the dehumanization and oppression felt by so many in these disenfranchised communities, but I can still understand the fact that these neighborhoods are ground zero in the civil unrest that is likely to continue into the foreseeable future.

Ferguson, Bundy Ranch, & 'Dancing The Night Away' With The Obamas | Zero Hedge

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Watching coverage yesterday, on CNN they had alledged eye-witnesses to events from the first shots onward. Sitting beside what I assumed was her lawyer, a young woman described what she saw. I noticed that while her interpretation of what she saw is open to cross-examination (are you sure you saw what you saw?) what isn't in dispute is the subject who got shot was inside the officer's vehicle struggling with the officer. That would seem to corroborate the officer's description of being assaulted and the subject going for his weapon.

The eye-witnesses' description confirms the officer and subject had some sort of physical altercation at the vehicle. What she goes on to describe is the actual shooting. But whether what she was seeing was a racist officer murdering a subject or responding to the subject's assault and grab for his weapon she couldn't know. Understandably the actual shooting will be most prominent in her recollection.

I'm believing the officer's account more and more with her testimony.

Bro, at this point it wouldn't even matter if the cop was right or wrong. Journalists were savagely assaulted by the police, whatever the cause of the riots and protests is now irrelevant.

If anything, this event proved that a little rioting is necessary for public officials to give a damn at all. The Boston Tea Party was a riot, and it accomplished A LOT.

Journalists were not savagely assaulted by police. In a riot situation if you're amongst the rioters you're not members of the press anymore, you're participants in the riot. From distance, who's press and who's not is impossible to determine and you're not focusing on individuals. If a journalist gets caught up in things, well, that's in their job description and why old men and women aren't out there with cameras. It's a physical job and you can't hack it, don't do that line of work.

Don't get me started on the Boston tea party, by modern standards using terms we'd use today that was a bunch of militia members having an insurrection.

 

[Jackson]

The more witnesses, the better. Delta 4 is correct. News crews are often in the wrong places at the wrong time. It's part of their job. "Savagedly assualted..." lol. They were not targeted at all. The police had their hands full. Do you really think they got together and made a conscious effort to go after journalists when they were facing all of the looters and angry mobs of kids? Think about it!

 

[Mr. H.]

Good luck seating a local jury.

 

[KissMy]

Watching coverage yesterday, on CNN they had alledged eye-witnesses to events from the first shots onward. Sitting beside what I assumed was her lawyer, a young woman described what she saw. I noticed that while her interpretation of what she saw is open to cross-examination (are you sure you saw what you saw?) what isn't in dispute is the subject who got shot was inside the officer's vehicle struggling with the officer. That would seem to corroborate the officer's description of being assaulted and the subject going for his weapon.

The eye-witnesses' description confirms the officer and subject had some sort of physical altercation at the vehicle. What she goes on to describe is the actual shooting. But whether what she was seeing was a racist officer murdering a subject or responding to the subject's assault and grab for his weapon she couldn't know. Understandably the actual shooting will be most prominent in her recollection.

I'm believing the officer's account more and more with her testimony.

The key is that all 3 witness say both of Michael Browns hands were outside the vehicle when the first shot was fired. Plus Brown was executed with both hands in the air.

 

[KissMy]

Withholding the officers name is the correct procedure until all witness statements have been taken & they can pick him out of a line-up to validate their credibility without being influenced by media pictures.

 

[Peach]

Withholding the officers name is the correct procedure until all witness statements have been taken & they can pick him out of a line-up to validate their credibility without being influenced by media pictures.

Yes, the attempt to release information on the officerinvolved is another act to incite MORE rage; what "testimony* one believes seems to depend on which "side" one is on. Let the investigations continue, and arrest looters and those not engaged in PEACEFUL protests.

*None of the statements are testimony actually.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Watching coverage yesterday, on CNN they had alledged eye-witnesses to events from the first shots onward. Sitting beside what I assumed was her lawyer, a young woman described what she saw. I noticed that while her interpretation of what she saw is open to cross-examination (are you sure you saw what you saw?) what isn't in dispute is the subject who got shot was inside the officer's vehicle struggling with the officer. That would seem to corroborate the officer's description of being assaulted and the subject going for his weapon.

The eye-witnesses' description confirms the officer and subject had some sort of physical altercation at the vehicle. What she goes on to describe is the actual shooting. But whether what she was seeing was a racist officer murdering a subject or responding to the subject's assault and grab for his weapon she couldn't know. Understandably the actual shooting will be most prominent in her recollection.

I'm believing the officer's account more and more with her testimony.

The key is that all 3 witness say both of Michael Browns hands were outside the vehicle when the first shot was fired. Plus Brown was executed with both hands in the air.

That doesn't enter into it procedurally, or legally. Once lethal force is justified and the decision you have to fire is made that's it. Doesn't matter if they try getting away or seem to be surrendering, they're a life-threatening threat to both the officer and the public. If not face down on the ground pretty darn quick we put you on the ground with our sidearms.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Good luck seating a local jury.

A little too early for a jury. First there needs to be an indictment and then an arrest. Or are you just throwing out the judicial process because it makes you feel good?

 

[rightwinger]

Watching coverage yesterday, on CNN they had alledged eye-witnesses to events from the first shots onward. Sitting beside what I assumed was her lawyer, a young woman described what she saw. I noticed that while her interpretation of what she saw is open to cross-examination (are you sure you saw what you saw?) what isn't in dispute is the subject who got shot was inside the officer's vehicle struggling with the officer. That would seem to corroborate the officer's description of being assaulted and the subject going for his weapon.

The eye-witnesses' description confirms the officer and subject had some sort of physical altercation at the vehicle. What she goes on to describe is the actual shooting. But whether what she was seeing was a racist officer murdering a subject or responding to the subject's assault and grab for his weapon she couldn't know. Understandably the actual shooting will be most prominent in her recollection.

I'm believing the officer's account more and more with her testimony.

I think a major problem in Ferguson was that they hid the officer. We never hear his side of the story and the impression to the community was that he was getting away with murder

Let the officer answer serious questions about why those two young men were being stopped in the first place, why he got into an altercation with Brown, why Brown ended up in his car and why he fired on Brown when he had his hands up

Once the facts are out....let the chips fall where they may

 

[Ravi]

Watching coverage yesterday, on CNN they had alledged eye-witnesses to events from the first shots onward. Sitting beside what I assumed was her lawyer, a young woman described what she saw. I noticed that while her interpretation of what she saw is open to cross-examination (are you sure you saw what you saw?) what isn't in dispute is the subject who got shot was inside the officer's vehicle struggling with the officer. That would seem to corroborate the officer's description of being assaulted and the subject going for his weapon.

The eye-witnesses' description confirms the officer and subject had some sort of physical altercation at the vehicle. What she goes on to describe is the actual shooting. But whether what she was seeing was a racist officer murdering a subject or responding to the subject's assault and grab for his weapon she couldn't know. Understandably the actual shooting will be most prominent in her recollection.

I'm believing the officer's account more and more with her testimony.

If you are talking about Tiffany Mitchell, she didn't say the kid was in the vehicle.

Here's her interview.

Another witness to Brown shooting comes forward; video shows graphic scene | KMOV.com St. Louis

 

[rightwinger]

Watching coverage yesterday, on CNN they had alledged eye-witnesses to events from the first shots onward. Sitting beside what I assumed was her lawyer, a young woman described what she saw. I noticed that while her interpretation of what she saw is open to cross-examination (are you sure you saw what you saw?) what isn't in dispute is the subject who got shot was inside the officer's vehicle struggling with the officer. That would seem to corroborate the officer's description of being assaulted and the subject going for his weapon.

The eye-witnesses' description confirms the officer and subject had some sort of physical altercation at the vehicle. What she goes on to describe is the actual shooting. But whether what she was seeing was a racist officer murdering a subject or responding to the subject's assault and grab for his weapon she couldn't know. Understandably the actual shooting will be most prominent in her recollection.

I'm believing the officer's account more and more with her testimony.

If you are talking about Tiffany Mitchell, she didn't say the kid was in the vehicle.

Here's her interview.

Another witness to Brown shooting comes forward; video shows graphic scene | KMOV.com St. Louis

As I was coming around, I heard the tires squeaking on the truck, and as I get closer, I see them tussling through the window. The kid was pulling off and the cop was pulling in,” Mitchell said

 

[Ravi]

Watching coverage yesterday, on CNN they had alledged eye-witnesses to events from the first shots onward. Sitting beside what I assumed was her lawyer, a young woman described what she saw. I noticed that while her interpretation of what she saw is open to cross-examination (are you sure you saw what you saw?) what isn't in dispute is the subject who got shot was inside the officer's vehicle struggling with the officer. That would seem to corroborate the officer's description of being assaulted and the subject going for his weapon.

The eye-witnesses' description confirms the officer and subject had some sort of physical altercation at the vehicle. What she goes on to describe is the actual shooting. But whether what she was seeing was a racist officer murdering a subject or responding to the subject's assault and grab for his weapon she couldn't know. Understandably the actual shooting will be most prominent in her recollection.

I'm believing the officer's account more and more with her testimony.

If you are talking about Tiffany Mitchell, she didn't say the kid was in the vehicle.

Here's her interview.

Another witness to Brown shooting comes forward; video shows graphic scene | KMOV.com St. Louis

As I was coming around, I heard the tires squeaking on the truck, and as I get closer, I see them tussling through the window. The kid was pulling off and the cop was pulling in,” Mitchell said

I took it to mean that the cop was inside, the kid was outside, and they were tussling through the window. That agrees with other witness statements.

 

[rightwinger]

If you are talking about Tiffany Mitchell, she didn't say the kid was in the vehicle.

Here's her interview.

Another witness to Brown shooting comes forward; video shows graphic scene | KMOV.com St. Louis

As I was coming around, I heard the tires squeaking on the truck, and as I get closer, I see them tussling through the window. The kid was pulling off and the cop was pulling in,” Mitchell said

I took it to mean that the cop was inside, the kid was outside, and they were tussling through the window. That agrees with other witness statements.

It seems to support the other witness saying Brown was trying to get out and the officer was pulling him back in

 

[Ravi]

As I was coming around, I heard the tires squeaking on the truck, and as I get closer, I see them tussling through the window. The kid was pulling off and the cop was pulling in,” Mitchell said

I took it to mean that the cop was inside, the kid was outside, and they were tussling through the window. That agrees with other witness statements.

It seems to support the other witness saying Brown was trying to get out and the officer was pulling him back in

Dorian Johnson:

Without saying anything further, Johnson states that the officer drove forward, only to abruptly back up, positioning his vehicle crossways in their path, almost hitting the two men. Said Johnson, "We were so close, almost inches away, that when he tried to open his door aggressively, the door ricocheted both off me and Big Mike's body and closed back on the officer."

At that point, the officer, still in his car, grabbed Brown through the open window around the neck. Brown tried to pull away, but the officer continued to pull Brown toward him.

Piaget Crenshaw:

Another witness, Piaget Crenshaw, said that from her vantage point, it appeared that the police officer and Brown were arm wrestling before the officer initially shot Brown from within his vehicle.

^those are from wikipedia

Sounds to me that all the interaction before the shooting was through the window of the vehicle.

 

[Ravi]

I've got to rethink my life. TinyDuncer just possed me!!!

 

[tinydancer]

I've read that the officer continued firing at the young man as he was running away? Can anyone verify this?

And that he was shot with his hands in the air?