No, I meant is that enough for you to accept that as what took place without any doubt? The blood spatter and the witness account.
Riots in Ferguson, St Louis
- Thread starter PhilipB
- Start date
To which Wilson could claim he couldn't verify whether or not Brown was armed or not, but that his prior actions of striking Wilson were enough to convince him he was dangerous and could well be armed. The retrospective that Brown wasn't armed is less relevant than Wilson's perception that he may have been - at least that's what they will probably say.
IANAL either but I think it has to be an ongoing threat. Which would mean someone walking away or lying on the ground wouldn't qualify.
Its a tough call, but I would probably side with whoever's testimony corroborated all the available physical evidence. There would still be doubt of course.
Ok, a more extreme example. Someone is waving a gun around in an agitated manner. That person is clearly a danger to the community. Cops arrive, shout at them to drop the weapon and put their hands behind their head and they duly comply. Cop walks up to them and shoots them in the head, as they were a danger to the community. Surely the fact that a point has been reached where the immediate dangers has been averted changes everything?
In this shooting, the kid may have tried to grab the gun but once he was a distance away from the cop and no longer posing any kind of meaningful threat how can he justify continuing to shoot at him?
Obviously, different story entirely if the kid was carrying a gun and presented a threat from distance. I also think if he'd been killed by that first shot, while standing beside the car, then there would be far less concerns about what happened.
I would hope the cop gets prosecuted for something like that.
Another is the Kajieme Powell case. Wielding a knife and screaming at the cops to shoot him, once he got within a ~15 foot radius they did.
No worries, I'm still not fully clued up on the case either mate.
As for the theft=assault thing, definitely I agree - but surely you'd also agree that there's an spectrum between "terrible person" and "innocent baby angel" (the latter being how I distinctly remember Brown being described in the immediate aftermath of the shooting), and that evidence that he was perfectly capable of committing low-level street thuggery on a whim is suggestive (NOT definitive, of course) that he would also be perfectly capable of assaulting a police officer who had offended him?
Brown and his family - couple posts back, I was commenting (even more tenuously, I'd be the first to admit) on the incendiary, irresponsible behaviour of his family members on hearing of the verdict.
Lastly, I'm happy to use Johnson's account as proof of Brown's past behaviour simply because he has no reason to fabricate it. It goes against the agenda he's pushing (he's pretty clearly pushing for Wilson's arrest and conviction). In contrast, he has ample reason to amplify or outright fabricate Wilson's "bad" behaviour because that fits the agenda he's pushing.
I don't think anyone believes for a moment that when Wilson rolled up to Johnson and Brown he was all Dudley Do-Right on them and they attacked him out of nowhere, for no reason. But I also think - based purely on what I know thus far, i.e. very little - that it is perfectly conceivable that Brown threw the first punch and made a grab for Wilson's gun. I'd go so far as to say that right now, I believe that to be the truth.
Last edited:
Indeed. Which is why details about exactly how many shots were fired, from what distance and what was the body language of the guy who got shot - when he got shot - are all really important. Surely the best way to elucidate all these facts is a proper trial with cross-examination of all the key witnesses?
I think the big picture is this: I think just about every right-thinking person is in agreement that Ferguson PD appears to be run jointly by a combination of G.I. Joe and Charlie Chaplin, and is tremendously sympathetic to the black community's struggles and frustration in Ferguson and elsewhere, and the pro-Brown, #blacklivesmatter crowd, both here and elsewhere. I was part of it until around 5pm yesterday.
But if you say that you want justice, then the first place to start is by not shoehorning Wilson's behaviours into a narrative which the facts don't really appear to fit. If "black lives matter", then white lives must do too - and right now this has all the signs of a lynch mob wanting Wilson's head on a spike for something he just hasn't done.
But if you say that you want justice, then the first place to start is by not shoehorning Wilson's behaviours into a narrative which the facts don't really appear to fit. If "black lives matter", then white lives must do too - and right now this has all the signs of a lynch mob wanting Wilson's head on a spike for something he just hasn't done.
In order to justify a trial, the prosecutor has to have evidence supporting him to move in that direction. In this case, the prosecutor tried to punt it by handing it over to a grand jury, who in turn decided there was not sufficient grounds to move forward. For better or worse, that's the system playing out. If that's an unacceptable outcome for some, then the focus needs to be on changing the system so that similar cases (and there will be many in the future) are dealt with differently.
Don't mean to jump into this, I haven't kept up with this thread but this is the first post I saw and this line jumped out to me.
This is something I see quite often when it comes to racial debates.
Being pro black doesn't mean being anti white, and the whole reason why the black & other ethnic communities feel so enraged on such matters is because they're trying to get to the point where they are viewed from the same perspective as white people.
Ultimately - there's a reason why black men are 20x more likely to be shot by police officers in America than white men of the same age.
I don't condone the lynch mob behaviour, I have no sympathy for the looters and rioters - but equally I recognise that this is the minority who are reacting in such a manner and by no means is a reflection of the majority view from the black community.
But the media will pick and choose to report what they want.
He is on camera assaulting the smaller man in the convenience store! Have you seen the video?
Reread my post, please and spare me the drama. Nobody here is saying we should give up anything as you know, I just think there are smarter, better ways of doing things. If not, you'll be treading water for the foreseeable future.
I'm not being a drama queen. This stuff happens all the time, whether you are aware of it or not. You live a comfortable life and your privilege allows you to enjoy confidence that you won't be unfairly treated by police. That's fine, it's great that you and I don't have a history of being pulled over for no reason or putting up with stop and frisk or have sentencing laws that disproportionately hurt our communities. It's totally understandable for you to develop a world view based on your own experiences. But when you make statements as broad as the ones you've made in this thread, you need to consider that not everyone has those same experiences. The fact that you don't seem willing to consider that is discouraging.
No, I definitely didn't mean to make a white/black distinction (I'm not even white myself) - the point I was, quite inarticulately, trying to make was that in the frenzy to get back at Ferguson's objectively horrific police department, there was a real risk of destroying PO Wilson (who is white)'s life when he had not committed any crime. Wilson's life had to matter as much as Brown's, we had to treat them with the same degree of care.
Definitely not the other thing - sorry if I came across that way.
Yeah that's fair enough - I only glanced at it while I was at work and half dazed so i'll take some blame for taking it out of context too.
Anybody seen the London protests in relation to this?
I have said my piece, but as for being priviledged I guess it is all relative. I am almost sixty and have been working since I was 14. I thank God I had nice parents who gave a shit about me but beyond that I earned what you might call privildge.
Go to school, get a job, raise a family , come home. Pretty simple.
Eboue, you need to reread my post before you pull any more generalizations out of your backside.
Just wait for the civil proceedings unless you are i too big a hurry.
I'd be interested to know if anyone has on stats on whether the US is a more dangerous place for cops in general (i.e. in terms of being shot at and mortality rates) which might go into explaining their seemingly trigger-happy mentality? Gun culture though, very scary.
Compared to where? I think it would probably be quite low compared to some South American and Middle Eastern countries. Maybe some African countries? I don't know, i'm guessing.
I was going to say that America is a more civilised nation and can't really be compared to third world or war torn countries where everyone has guns and can get them easily but.........................................
I'm not sure if this has been covered - but when he refers to privilege, he's referring to white privilege.
That's not anything to do with monetary income, class, status or anything similar.
It's the unspoken privileges that people from a non ethnic background enjoy, most of the time without realising these things.
So examples like he said - being stopped and searched, frisked, being pulled over etc.
It's pretty much being able to live your life without having to worry about how the colour of your skin may affect the people around you in any given situation.
I've been raised throughout my life that I have to be more aware and more cautious in certain situations simply because of the colour of my skin, people will have a preconceived idea about what kind of character I am.
If i'm out shopping, I always make sure that anything I pick up I keep in plain sight of both cameras and the view of employees so it doesn't look like i'm stealing - otherwise I risk being followed by security.
My brother was raised not to wear certain items of clothing incase he looked like a "criminal" or "thuggish"
Whenever I've been in formal situations I don't wear my hair in it's natural state incase it makes people uncomfortable, or it looks "ragged"
I could go on.
It sounds ridiculous to explain if you haven't had to live your life with these 'rules' if you will. But equally that just demonstrates the power of white privilege even more.
I can't say I understand what you mean because I haven't had those problems, but I do understand, if that makes sense. Your post is just really sad. It saddens me that you have to think and act like that because I personally, don't or wouldn't look at you and judge you like that, certainly not unless you game me good reason to. But I know plenty of people who would and do. Sad. Just very sad.
Yeah lol I can understand how it's a weird concept to wrap your head around - and i'm sure most white people would have never heard of it.
It's sad but my life and when I have kids, their lives will be affected by this. It's important that they know that there are certain things you should avoid doing as a person of colour in order to help yourself in social situations.
You're not understanding me. I don't doubt your work ethic or your good intentions. By privilege I mean not being subject to dwb, stop and frisk, red lining etc. I am privileged in these same ways by virtue of being part of the majority in a country built on racism.
I think an awful lot of white people understand perfectly, it's just the bigoted and frightened and emotionally uneducated that don't. Many of us have witnessed it or seen friends experience it and go through it. It's all bollocks and I despise it and have tried my hardest to make sure my kids understand the same.
I just hope your kids experience a more socially educated and accepting world.
Ya I was told for an interview to be clean shaven and have a short amount of hair to not be confused for an ISIS member. With that said, this country is worth fighting for having traveled to different countries. At least people will care to have a dialogue about these things here.
Last edited:
Shame on you Raul for using that RT clip, you of all people should know it's all Russian propaganda.
I do think through mediums like twitter for example everyone is connected to everyone else, and therefore we're exposed to more cultures than ever before which *should* make us more tolerant to others.
That's the dream anyway
Ah yeah definitely think England is very tolerant of races, other countries will openly call you the N-word or equivalent just because you're in the wrong neighbourhood for example, it's just not like that over here. While racism still happens, it's more ingrained in culture and more subtle - so like you said they may judge you for your appearance, but it's not much more than that.
To be completely honest, I'm not fully certain I agree with this. I actually fairly often do get the perception I'm being treated differently here because of my skin colour, and in general I'd say I'm pretty slow to take offence to these things - oddly enough, more so in "posh"-er and more cosmopolitan places in London and the south rather than in the north. It's little things like how service staff talk to you, etc. My extremely brief experience of America (couple of weeks in Washington D.C. and New York) was completely without incident like that - either that, or everyone was uniformly rude to everyone, so I didn't notice!
I suppose they could be more blatant about it, that's true, but it's not a whole lot of comfort.
They're rude to everyone unless they're on commission!
Yeah, that's been pretty striking to me ever since I came to England!Just thank god you're in Durham instead of somewhere in the south, it's grim down there! Obviously nothing will compare to how nice American service is, but then for a lot of serving staff over there tips are as important as your actual wages so its understandable.
I think we're pretty much saying the same thing here - what I meant by it's more subtle and ingrained is exactly that.
It's small things like moving across the other side of the street when you're approaching them, clutching their bag and moving it away when you sit next to them on the train/bus small things which are only really noticeable to you because you can feel the vibe.
In contrast I know quite a large amount of people who live all over America and their experience with racism is different, they're exposed to racism that is much more in your face for example to where people pull up to them when they're walking in the road and tell them they're a lazy N-word and to get out of their neighbourhood etc.
Yep. Funny thing about Durham, service staff here are really friendly and genuinely do seem to be enjoying their jobs - the guy at the Chinese takeaway, Wok Next, is a top bloke everytime I drop by, for instance. 15 minute train ride north to Newcastle and it's noticeably different, though still better than London - seems to be an urban/rural divide, perhaps, the city drives people crazy.
Ah - fair enough, sorry.
Aye we're a good bunch, I think for various reasons there's a bit more of a community feeling in Durham than in a lot of other places which accounts for people generally being a bit nicer to each other. I'll have to pop into Wok Next, not been since it changed its name (used to be Wokssup and that place was mint). I'd agree that Newcastle is a whole different story. Its more friendly than the other northern cities I've spent a lot of time in (Sheffield, Leeds, Manchester) but like you say, big cities do tend to suck the goodwill out of people in general.
Completely off topic though! It sucks that you get treated differently anywhere because of your skin colour. I think those experiences are something that white people generally haven't thought about and thus they tend to get ignored or denied when debates on race/ethnicity etc. crop up.
Even RT couldn't screw this one up.
I figured that's what he was on about and being white and am in no position to disagree. My whole trip is to do the best with what you have. You keep the color you are a birth and your road may be tougher than others but it is what it is. Nobody is going to pave an easy road for you so dig in and do the best you can.
Treat all people equally regardles of sex, race, sexual persuasion, whatever.
I am done on this topic but my whole point is be patient and wait for the civil trials and see what comes out there. Rioting, looting, walking on to the interstate do nothing for the cause of racial equality.
I hope at the end of it all that everyone feels that justice has been served but that is doubtful, too many people have already made up their minds onboth sides of the fence.
A lawyer has come out with some points on the case on twitter questioning the Grand Jury decision based on a reading of the transcript. Says that Wilson was given as easy ride and his testimony wasn't cross-examined despite clashing with physical evidence.
For example Wilson's hospital record reports "no bleeding, no laceration, no ecchymosis [bruises]", contradicting Wilson's account and the police department's statements.
Tweets quoted in this article
For example Wilson's hospital record reports "no bleeding, no laceration, no ecchymosis [bruises]", contradicting Wilson's account and the police department's statements.
Tweets quoted in this article
She's a well known TV pundit. Unfortunately, even if those items were deemed not to have happened, it wouldn't have cancelled out the shots where Wilson's face was clearly struck. Unless he secretly, violently slapped himself in the face shortly before the shots were taken.
Based on my experience watching cop shows on TV this seems entirely plausible.
In my view those photos never really corroborated his story anyway (seems very little bruising for an attack as powerful as the one he describes), but obviously as I'm not a medical professional I'm not qualified to judge. I am, however, happy to trust the guys who are qualified to judge, and they're saying that when he went to hospital there were no bruises or lacerations.
Anyway, the more important point that she's making is that within the process that led to the Grand Jury decision there were significant lines of questioning that weren't pursued as they should have been. The implication is that there's a question mark over the decision, and also question marks over the competence or impartiality of the process.