Some truly unfortunate raw stats on police violence

[Meathead]

Bingo Joey, I'll save you the research:

"Police sayAmari Brownwas celebrating July 4 at his father’s home on Chicago’s West Side when someone opened fire. Police Chief Garry McCarthy says the shot that killed the boy was intended for his father, a “ranking gang member.”

Forty-eight people were hurt by gunfire in Chicago over the holiday weekend. Seven died.

http://wgntv.com/2015/07/11/hundreds-mourn-7-year-old-boy-killed-in-chicago-gunfire/

 

[JoeB131]

In CPDs long history....how many confessions have been falsely beaten out of people? I'm interested now.

Quite a few. And they are not alone.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicago-the-false-confession-capital/

 

[JoeB131]

Both are untrue. You obviously haven't read facts of this case.

Let's start with this one. CNN. Darren Wilson quit. Wasn't fired.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/29/us/ferguson-protests/

Yeah, that's the official story. Reality. They knew he fucked up and they let him resign before being fired, because they could never put this POS out on the street again.

And oddly, no one is answering his resumes for some reason.

 

[bucs90]

Both are untrue. You obviously haven't read facts of this case.

Let's start with this one. CNN. Darren Wilson quit. Wasn't fired.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/29/us/ferguson-protests/

Yeah, that's the official story. Reality. They knew he fucked up and they let him resign before being fired, because they could never put this POS out on the street again.

And oddly, no one is answering his resumes for some reason.

Are you really this dumb!!?? Resignation or termination paperwork....is public record.

He resigned to set up a lawsuit.

He can't be employed....because black militants have put a bounty on him and no department can put him on the street knowing the risk it would cause other officers. HE isn't the problem. The black thugs hunting him are the problem.

 

[JoeB131]

Are you really this dumb!!?? Resignation or termination paperwork....is public record.

He resigned to set up a lawsuit.

He can't be employed....because black militants have put a bounty on him and no department can put him on the street knowing the risk it would cause other officers. HE isn't the problem. The black thugs hunting him are the problem.

Anyone who told this fool he had grounds for a lawsuit should have his license revoked for malpractice.

No, he really is the problem because he shot an unarmed kid.

 

[bucs90]

In CPDs long history....how many confessions have been falsely beaten out of people? I'm interested now.

Quite a few. And they are not alone.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicago-the-false-confession-capital/

Link didn't work for me. You mean this guy:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/19/chicago-police-richard-zuley-abuse-innocent-man

That one detective? Yeah he's a criminal. He should be jailed himself. Bad apples work in every profession. Wonder why the US military is allowing a guy like this to work at GITMO now?

 

[bucs90]

Are you really this dumb!!?? Resignation or termination paperwork....is public record.

He resigned to set up a lawsuit.

He can't be employed....because black militants have put a bounty on him and no department can put him on the street knowing the risk it would cause other officers. HE isn't the problem. The black thugs hunting him are the problem.

Anyone who told this fool he had grounds for a lawsuit should have his license revoked for malpractice.

No, he really is the problem because he shot an unarmed kid.

People win suits for hot coffee. He'll win at least a million.

A KID? Brown was bigger than every starting defensive lineman for the University of Missouri that year. A 6'4 300 pound robber is not a "child". You lefties are such morons.


*****I notice you edited... you initially called Brown a "child" and changed it to "kid". Idiot.

 

[Brain357]

So somebody dies in a car accident because the idiot was walking in the middle of the road. You are ok with that?

Wildly? If that were the case somebody other than the criminal would have been shot. You ignore facts.

Please, they weren't handing out tickets for traffic control. This was a systematic policy of the white police department harrassing the black residents. This is something that DOJ study you like so much concluded.

He was committing crimes, they were right to stop him.

 

[JoeB131]

Link didn't work for me. You mean this guy:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/19/chicago-police-richard-zuley-abuse-innocent-man

That one detective? Yeah he's a criminal. He should be jailed himself. Bad apples work in every profession. Wonder why the US military is allowing a guy like this to work at GITMO now?

You know what, there's are bad apples and their are bad cultures. For instance, when your hero shot the guy in the back and then tried to plant a taser on him, I remember the one thing from the film is when some other cops arrived, and one of them - a black officer - rolled his eyes like he knew this was bullshit but the department would cover it up.

Which it would have had that guy not been there with a cell phone recording.

 

[JoeB131]

He was committing crimes, they were right to stop him.

And it that was all they did, I wouldn't have an issue.

It was the "shooting 8 times when he had his hands up (probably)" that I have a problem with.

 

[Brain357]

He was committing crimes, they were right to stop him.

And it that was all they did, I wouldn't have an issue.

It was the "shooting 8 times when he had his hands up (probably)" that I have a problem with.

Had he ever raised his hands he wouldn't have been shot. There is however evidence he attacked the officer. You have a problem with facts, you choose to ignore them.

 

[JoeB131]

Had he ever raised his hands he wouldn't have been shot. There is however evidence he attacked the officer. You have a problem with facts, you choose to ignore them.

A bunch of witnesses said he did have his hands up.

Frankly, a TRIAL would have been a great place to sort out the facts. But you had a prosecutor who hid any facts that incriminated the officer.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Had he ever raised his hands he wouldn't have been shot. There is however evidence he attacked the officer. You have a problem with facts, you choose to ignore them.

A bunch of witnesses said he did have his hands up.

Frankly, a TRIAL would have been a great place to sort out the facts. But you had a prosecutor who hid any facts that incriminated the officer.

Link!

 

[Brain357]

Had he ever raised his hands he wouldn't have been shot. There is however evidence he attacked the officer. You have a problem with facts, you choose to ignore them.

A bunch of witnesses said he did have his hands up.

Frankly, a TRIAL would have been a great place to sort out the facts. But you had a prosecutor who hid any facts that incriminated the officer.

And the autopsy evidence proved that wrong. The witnesses were proven to not be reliable. You really have no facts to back you up. You should stick to cases where the cop is actually wrong.

 

[JoeB131]

And the autopsy evidence proved that wrong. The witnesses were proven to not be reliable. You really have no facts to back you up. You should stick to cases where the cop is actually wrong.

This is a case where the cop was wrong. Sorry.

The Autopsy didn't prove anything other than he was shot.

The witnesses were rejected by the DA (whose father was a cop killed by a black suspect and should have recused himself on the basis of that alone) does not mean they weren't reliable.

Again- the place to sort the facts out would have been a trial. Instead you had a cover up. Which is why you still have protests about this a year later.

 

[Brain357]

And the autopsy evidence proved that wrong. The witnesses were proven to not be reliable. You really have no facts to back you up. You should stick to cases where the cop is actually wrong.

This is a case where the cop was wrong. Sorry.

The Autopsy didn't prove anything other than he was shot.

The witnesses were rejected by the DA (whose father was a cop killed by a black suspect and should have recused himself on the basis of that alone) does not mean they weren't reliable.

Again- the place to sort the facts out would have been a trial. Instead you had a cover up. Which is why you still have protests about this a year later.

Based on where he was shot they know his arms weren't up. In fact it was clear he was charging the officer.

 

[FA_Q2]

And the autopsy evidence proved that wrong. The witnesses were proven to not be reliable. You really have no facts to back you up. You should stick to cases where the cop is actually wrong.

This is a case where the cop was wrong. Sorry.

The Autopsy didn't prove anything other than he was shot.

The witnesses were rejected by the DA (whose father was a cop killed by a black suspect and should have recused himself on the basis of that alone) does not mean they weren't reliable.

Again- the place to sort the facts out would have been a trial. Instead you had a cover up. Which is why you still have protests about this a year later.

Based on where he was shot they know his arms weren't up. In fact it was clear he was charging the officer.

It is pointless. Joe has already rejected not only the 'official' story but also all forensic evidence (and evidence in general) that disagrees with the preconceived notion already established before any actual information was known.

This is how hyper partisans work - reality is irrelevant. Only the message matters and this message happens to be racist cops. There is an entire moment based on a lie and they know it. Still they persist. Reality is irrelevant to those people, that is the only answer that actually makes sense.

 

[JoeB131]

A bunch of witnesses said he did have his hands up.

Frankly, a TRIAL would have been a great place to sort out the facts. But you had a prosecutor who hid any facts that incriminated the officer.

Link!

Here you go buddy..

Missouri AG confirms Michael Brown grand jury misled by St. Louis DA

Subsequent to a previous report from Lawrence O'Donnell, the Missouri Attorney General has confirmed with "Last Word" that instructions given the Michael Brown grand jury describing the police "use of force" laws was incorrect and misleading.

The background of this situation: Lawrence O'Donnell reported that after reviewing the transcripts of the grand jury, his analyst discovered that the assistant district attorneys working for Bob McCulloch gave the jurors an outdated copy of Missouri law, which stated all that was required for an officer to use deadly force is their "reasonable belief" that there was a threat.

In 1985, in Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court ruled that this law had to include a "probable cause" requirement. The jurors weren't informed of this until three months later, just before their deliberations. Even at that time the difference and relevance of this was not explained to them clearly.

and there's more!

http://www.newsweek.com/2014/09/12/...llochs-long-history-siding-police-267357.html

 

[Papageorgio]

Forensics proved that Brown didn't have his hands up. Forensics prove Brown was charging. Forensics prove that Joey B is lying out his ass once again.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh, wait, here's the capper....

http://newsone.com/3078354/fergson-prosecutor-admits-witness-40-lied/

The most egregious liar, initially known as Witness #40, and later identified by The Smoking Gun as Sandy McElroy, apparently lied over 200 times to the FBI, and twice before the grand jury with no consequence (to her, anyway; one could consider the fact that Darren Wilson, the Ferguson, Mo. police officer who shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown Jr. will face no charges in Brown’s death to be a consequence).

To KTRS, McCulloch referred to a woman who “clearly wasn’t present when this occurred” whose description aligns with McElroy’s. McElroy, who it turns out has a history of mental illness, racist rants on social media, and no possible way of being anywhere NEAR the scene of the confrontation between Brown and Wilson, was thoroughly discredited by the FBI at least a month before her testimony before Ferguson grand jury, according to Shaun King in the Daily Kos: