Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You have a bunch of eye witnesses to the event --why discount what the witnesses are saying? It's not like what a person says is only valid if it's stated to the grand jury. If one argues that witnesses are looking for monetary gain, a witness who claimed he or she saw Brown charging Wilson would be able to gain the most coverage at all. Why haven't any witnesses like that come forward?
No, it really is "like what a person says is only valid if it's stated to the grand jury". Or more specifically, under oath.
Given how CNN has covered this story, a witness with a claim that Brown charged Wilson would be less likely to get the $10k+ licensing fee from CNN. Notice how CNN has never aired the "how did he get over there" video while other news outlets have. They were also the ones that leased out and fenced off an entire block on west florisant during the rioting to lock out other outlets from getting prime coverage shots -and- to try to force protesters off adjacent land and into the streets.
But most importantly, a witness who came public with a claim that Brown charged Wilson would "get stitches". $10k is a lot of money, but it is not enough money to pack up and move away for good.
Meanwhile, the FBI is offering witness protection locally, and people are taking it. Why would you take witness protection in this situation, especially when that witness protection is under the supervision of St Louis County Police, the very department being accused of brutality?
At this point, everyone has a side, one way or another.
I'm on the side of there's too much unknown to have a 'side.' Also the 'side' of you don't indict people based on what witnesses tell the media. What 'side' are you on ?
Since 2009, according to city records, Albuquerque Police Department officers have been involved in 47 shootings, 32 of which resulted in deaths — a body count that Police Chief Gorden Eden said has called attention to a "systemic failure in our ability to track employee misconduct.''
Civil lawsuits have cost the city millions of dollars. More than that, a Justice Department review of at least 20 of those civilian killings concluded earlier this year that a "majority ... were unconstitutional.''
Though municipal officials have acknowledged deep-rooted, institutional problems, Eden bluntly warned that a fix will not be easy.
"I believe there are people on the force who shouldn't be on the force,'' the chief told USA TODAY. How many officers, and the depths of their alleged transgressions, Eden would not say. But more problematic, because of the difficulties of enforcing retroactive discipline within bounds of a union contract, the chief said the city may simply be unable to remove problem officers, even with the Justice Department's intervention.
And all of their officers wear body cameras. There has been a constant stream of stories locally about Rialto and Albuquerque. Two huge differences are that these departments have budgets orders of magnitude larger than Ferguson's....
and this is Ferguson's first officer involved shooting that anyone can find. The story here is much more one of there being 43 municipalities in a 9 square mile area, and the breakdown this has created.
(Incidentally, Missouri bans public sector unions. You can join a "professional organization", but not unionize.)
No, it really is "like what a person says is only valid if it's stated to the grand jury". Or more specifically, under oath.
Given how CNN has covered this story, a witness with a claim that Brown charged Wilson would be less likely to get the $10k+ licensing fee from CNN. Notice how CNN has never aired the "how did he get over there" video while other news outlets have. They were also the ones that leased out and fenced off an entire block on west florisant during the rioting to lock out other outlets from getting prime coverage shots -and- to try to force protesters off adjacent land and into the streets.
But most importantly, a witness who came public with a claim that Brown charged Wilson would "get stitches". $10k is a lot of money, but it is not enough money to pack up and move away for good.
Meanwhile, the FBI is offering witness protection locally, and people are taking it. Why would you take witness protection in this situation, especially when that witness protection is under the supervision of St Louis County Police, the very department being accused of brutality?
If that's the case why are you even posting here? If there's no more "evidence" coming out about the case, and your not going to take into account anything BUT what comes from the GJ, then what are you doing here??
You don't BELIEVE the witnesses. That is the reality. You think all of these unrelated people would risk their reputation to indict a innocent officer.
Let's also be clear about "evidence." Evidence doesn't have to be vetted by the GJ. If there was a trial, the judge would have to approve what 'evidence' is allowed in court, but her decision does not determine what is or is not evidence, moreso what 'evidence' is permissable in court and relevant to the case.
If there are any attorneys out there please correct me if I'm wrong.
Let's also be clear about "evidence." Evidence doesn't have to be vetted by the GJ. If there was a trial, the judge would have to approve what 'evidence' is allowed in court, but her decision does not determine what is or is not evidence, moreso what 'evidence' is permissable in court and relevant to the case.
If there are any attorneys out there please correct me if I'm wrong.
If that's the case why are you even posting here? If there's no more "evidence" coming out about the case, and your not going to take into account anything BUT what comes from the GJ, then what are you doing here??
You don't BELIEVE the witnesses. That is the reality. You think all of these unrelated people would risk their reputation to indict a innocent officer.
I am countering people like you who have jumped to seriously wrong conclusions about what is St Louis and Ferguson thanks to media manipulation for ratings and profit. This is what Ferguson is really about: http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/.../ferguson5.jpg
(And feel free to read more here Embarrassed to Photograph Ferguson)
That is what residents actually saw, rather than the mass protesting and rioting in the streets that has been presented. Most nights, there are less than 20 protesters. Even in the peak of the nighttime rioting, there was rarely more than 50, and 90%+ were from outside Ferguson and ~50% from outside Missouri later on.
And yes, I absolutely do believe this small handful of people, out of the much larger number who witnessed the event, would "risk their reputation" for a payday as long as it did not result in jail time for them. I think that 1 in 5 to 1 in 10 would do exactly that; and considering the length of the FBI witness list, that is what is happening.
Also realize, that you are getting only the bits of their story the news wants you to hear. I've been interview by the news a half dozen times. Every time, the story I tell is edited down into a new story that is more controversial and better to get viewers, no matter how boring the original story. How much coverage have you seen of this portion of Piaget Crenshaw's interview with Anderson Cooper?
CNN.com - Transcripts
COOPER: You say his arms were up. There's an account from this woman who called into the radio show who claims that the officer is saying Michael Brown was rushing the police officer. Is that what you saw?
CRENSHAW: No. At no time did I see him move towards that police officer. He may have taken one centimenter of a step forward before he was gunned down.
COOPER: You say his hands were up. Do you remember in what way they were up?
CRENSHAW: They were just slowly going up. They probably didn't even get a chance to get all the way up there before he was struck.
Not much, right? Because after the original airing it was pulled from the air and subsequent replays edited that part out. This was Piaget's last public interview after she said that. Why? How many news outlets yesterday reported that I-70 was shut down by protesters? It wasn't, nearby Hanley Rd was shutdown and I-70 never was stopped by police or protesters.
There's a lot of money being made off Mike Brown, and that money is not going to Ferguson.
I am countering people like you who have jumped to seriously wrong conclusions about what is St Louis and Ferguson thanks to media manipulation for ratings and profit. This is what Ferguson is really about: http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/.../ferguson5.jpg
(And feel free to read more here Embarrassed to Photograph Ferguson)
That is what residents actually saw, rather than the mass protesting and rioting in the streets that has been presented. Most nights, there are less than 20 protesters. Even in the peak of the nighttime rioting, there was rarely more than 50, and 90%+ were from outside Ferguson and ~50% from outside Missouri later on.
And yes, I absolutely do believe this small handful of people, out of the much larger number who witnessed the event, would "risk their reputation" for a payday as long as it did not result in jail time for them. I think that 1 in 5 to 1 in 10 would do exactly that; and considering the length of the FBI witness list, that is what is happening.
Also realize, that you are getting only the bits of their story the news wants you to hear. I've been interview by the news a half dozen times. Every time, the story I tell is edited down into a new story that is more controversial and better to get viewers, no matter how boring the original story. How much coverage have you seen of this portion of Piaget Crenshaw's interview with Anderson Cooper?
CNN.com - Transcripts
COOPER: You say his arms were up. There's an account from this woman who called into the radio show who claims that the officer is saying Michael Brown was rushing the police officer. Is that what you saw?
CRENSHAW: No. At no time did I see him move towards that police officer. He may have taken one centimenter of a step forward before he was gunned down.
COOPER: You say his hands were up. Do you remember in what way they were up?
CRENSHAW: They were just slowly going up. They probably didn't even get a chance to get all the way up there before he was struck.
Not much, right? Because after the original airing it was pulled from the air and subsequent replays edited that part out. This was Piaget's last public interview after she said that. Why? How many news outlets yesterday reported that I-70 was shut down by protesters? It wasn't, nearby Hanley Rd was shutdown and I-70 never was stopped by police or protesters.
There's a lot of money being made off Mike Brown, and that money is not going to Ferguson.
I probably sound like a broken record, but I totally appreciate every one of your posts.
The "Embarrassed" link is enlightening ... unfortunately.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
