Ferguson unrest

Smallc · November 25, 2014

For starters, I want the cops to stop killing people when they don't need to.

The Grand Jury thinks there's a very good possibility he needed to.

Boges · November 25, 2014

Or a kid was shot several times in close quarters on a street car, despite having a knife and being even more of a threat than Brown.

Well that's complete BS.

Sammy Yatim posed no threat to the cops outside. Plus there were several of them. If you want to talk about executed, Yatim was executed. And even here in Canada there's doubt whether the man who shot him will face a single day in jail for what he did.

Yatim was a skinny kid that was obviously having some sort of mental breakdown. He was shot at 3 times then a further 6 times after about a 10 second pause. There's no excuse for what happened to him.

bush_cheney2004 · November 25, 2014

I hope this nonsense doesn't inhibit police officers from protecting themselves and others in the line of duty. It's not hard to get through the day without getting shot by the police.

Black Dog · November 25, 2014

That's what we know happened given the process involved. Prove otherwise.

Well, for starters, you don;'t seem tio understand how grand juries work. You said:

Both sides had the opportunity to present their cases.

That is incorrect. The prosecution presents evidence and witnesses to the members of the GJ. There's no defense, no adversarial back and forth.

Justice was served.

Fallacious assumption that suggests every court decision is the right one by virtue of product of the process.

The system works.

Tautology. Why did the system "work" and what does that mean?

Black Dog · November 25, 2014

I'm sure the police department with the long history of racism and corruption did an exemplary job of investigating one of their own.

I wonder, is it SOP after a shooting for the officer responsible to go to hospital by himself and to get a chance to wash up afterwards without anyone taking any swabs?

Hal 9000 · November 25, 2014

The honest testimony from black witnesses were a major contributor to the "acquittal" of Officer Wilson, I think that's a positive step.

eyeball · November 25, 2014

I think the civil right's movement coalescing around this case could make for some fairly interesting politics going into Obama's legacy years.

While the issue of white cop on black male especially young black violence in America is probably the more pressing one that needs addressing this case also highlights the growing public distrust in public institutions and a need for far greater and more deeply penetrating transparency to restore that trust. The calls for making wearable cameras mandatory for police and using special prosecutors in grand jury processes that hear cases involving indictments against police are just the tip of an iceberg of growing mistrust and discontent with authority across a broad spectrum.

Hopefully Big Brother is feeling the heat. It's about time.

bush_cheney2004 · November 25, 2014

Great idea...need to make all gang bangers wear body cameras too. 95% of "young black" homicides are from other "young blacks".

eyeball · November 25, 2014

Wearing a camera for self-protection definitely makes sense in this day and age.

Boges · November 25, 2014

Wearing a camera for self-protection definitely makes sense in this day and age.

Indeed. Of course Police Unions whine that those funds should be devoted to "training".

bush_cheney2004 · November 25, 2014

Don't smartphones count...most have cameras...some have two !

Wilber · November 25, 2014

Well, for starters, you don;'t seem tio understand how grand juries work. You said:

That is incorrect. The prosecution presents evidence and witnesses to the members of the GJ. There's no defense, no adversarial back and forth.

Fallacious assumption that suggests every court decision is the right one by virtue of product of the process.

Tautology. Why did the system "work" and what does that mean?

People who have already made up their minds don't need or want a system, unless of course it agrees with what they have already decided.

In every system, someone is tasked with deciding whether charges are laid. In our case, Crown prosecutors, in this case, a Grand Jury. Neither is perfect but both are rooted in the law. So show us a better way because it sure isn't burning down a neighbourhood and destroying the livelihoods of innocent people.

Hal 9000 · November 25, 2014

I'm sure the police department with the long history of racism and corruption did an exemplary job of investigating one of their own.

This was a completely justified shooting and everything since, all the lives that are ruined, the riots, the millions of dollars spent, looting and burned out businesses are all based on a lie perpetrated by Michael Browns accomplice.

bush_cheney2004 · November 25, 2014

Officer Wilson is trained and licensed to use deadly force to protect himself and others. A grand jury has reviewed his actions and the testimony of witnesses. The family is free to pursue a civil action against Wilson and the city. Good luck with that.....

eyeball · November 25, 2014

This was a completely justified shooting and everything since, all the lives that are ruined, the riots, the millions of dollars spent, looting and burned out businesses are all based on a lie perpetrated by Michael Browns accomplice.

Police probably need to protect themselves with cameras more than anyone.

Smallc · November 25, 2014

Well, for starters, you don;'t seem tio understand how grand juries work. You said:

That is incorrect. The prosecution presents evidence and witnesses to the members of the GJ. There's no defense, no adversarial back and forth.

Fallacious assumption that suggests every court decision is the right one by virtue of product of the process.

Tautology. Why did the system "work" and what does that mean?

I misspoke. All available evidence was presented. If you have proof otherwise, please share it.

Shady · November 25, 2014

Speaking of facts, how about the fact that Brown was 150 feet away from Wilson when the fatal shots were fired, not 30 feet as the cops originally stated? Or how about the photos of Wilson after the fact which show almost no physical injuries? Or the claim that Wilson "never stood over Brown's body" despite photos of him doing just that? Pretty clear when you say "facts matter" you mean "selected facts that support my chosen racist narratives."

Why do you keep pretending that you're privy to evidence that the grand jury was not? The grand jury heard ALL the evidence, and came to a decision consistent with the majority of the evidence regarding both party's actions. I'm sorry that you don't like the outcome, but you're going to have to come to grips with that.

Shady · November 25, 2014

I misspoke. All available evidence was presented. If you have proof otherwise, please share it.

He has no proof. He's just a broken record, repeating the same nonsensical thing over and over.

eyeball · November 25, 2014

Officer Wilson is trained and licensed to use deadly force to protect himself and others. A grand jury has reviewed his actions and the testimony of witnesses.

Yes well, that's why the whole approach police use is what's coming into question. Training and licencing will be subject to change. Nothing stays the same forever.

The family is free to pursue a civil action against Wilson and the city.

And tens if not hundreds of millions are free to pursue greater civil rights.

Good luck with that.....

Happens all the time.

eyeball · November 25, 2014

Indeed. Of course Police Unions whine that those funds should be devoted to "training".

Police should pass a motion at their general union meetings banning in-camera meetings when their union reps meet behind closed doors, especially when discussing issues surrounding greater transparency.

cybercoma · November 25, 2014

The Grand Jury thinks there's a very good possibility he needed to.

The Grand Jury process is not like a proper trial. It's entirely controlled by the prosecutor, who is often buddy-buddy with the police department since they work so closely. He's not required to present and exculpatory evidence and can bring hearsay evidence to the table. It seems like you're under the mistaken assumption that a Grand Jury is like a public trial when it's not. There should have been enough evidence here for this case to at least go to trial for manslaughter. Then the facts could have been scrutinized in court by the lawyers and heard by a jury. The fact that this didn't even go to trial is obscene. Edited November 25, 2014 by cybercoma

Smallc · November 25, 2014

Ahhh, a conspiracy theory. That along with excuses and a total lack of proof really helps your position.

cybercoma · November 25, 2014

Well that's complete BS.

Sammy Yatim posed no threat to the cops outside. Plus there were several of them. If you want to talk about executed, Yatim was executed. And even here in Canada there's doubt whether the man who shot him will face a single day in jail for what he did.

Yatim was a skinny kid that was obviously having some sort of mental breakdown. He was shot at 3 times then a further 6 times after about a 10 second pause. There's no excuse for what happened to him.

Too bad Michael Brown wasn't a skinny kid.