AfTer Ferguson: Stop deferrring to the cops

[nota bene]

Some people's minds were made up before the evidence was made public. And their opinions didn't change once it was. That's troubling.

 

[eohrnberger]

I would agree.

Black Americans are precious little flowers that deserve special protections due to their unique place in American culture. It's been working well for them ever since reconstruction.

Dunno about that. Yeah, I know you were being sarcastic, but the reality is that the present issues are probably due, at least in part, to the special protections that have been in place.

 

[Fletch]

I stated that "A lot of White people ... accept Darren Wilson's story without question." This is what I believe. If you think that I am denying this or that I believe something other than what I have stated, then I'm sorry that you've misunderstood me and I guess I'll just have to live with your poor opinion of me.

Despite the lefts endless efforts to make this case about skin color, it has nothing to do with skin color. I never accepted Wilsons story without question and I don't know anyone who did. What I didn't believe from the outset was that Brown had his hands up and was surrendering and this evil white cop shot him anyway. This isn't 1954, its 2014. Time for the race peddling left to join the rest of the world in the 21st century.

 

[eohrnberger]

From the Walter Williams article I cited on the preceding page:

Coupled with the dramatic breakdown in the black family structure has been an astonishing growth in the rate of illegitimacy. The black illegitimacy rate in 1940 was about 14 percent; black illegitimacy today is over 70 percent, and in some cities, it is over 80 percent.

The point of bringing up these historical facts is to ask this question, with a bit of sarcasm: Is the reason the black family was far healthier in the late 1800s and 1900s that back then there was far less racial discrimination and there were greater opportunities? Or did what experts call the "legacy of slavery" wait several generations to victimize today's blacks?

The Census Bureau pegs the poverty rate among blacks at 28.1 percent. A statistic that one never hears about is that the poverty rate among intact married black families has been in the single digits for more than two decades, currently at 8.4 percent. Weak family structures not only spell poverty and dependency but also contribute to the social pathology seen in many black communities -- for example, violence and predatory sex. Each year, roughly 7,000 blacks are murdered. Ninety-four percent of the time, the murderer is another black person. Though blacks are 13 percent of the nation's population, they account for more than 50 percent of homicide victims. Nationally, the black homicide victimization rate is six times that of whites, and in some cities, it's 22 times that of whites. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, between 1976 and 2011, there were 279,384 black murder victims. Coupled with being most of the nation's homicide victims, blacks are also major victims of violent personal crimes, such as assault, rape and robbery.

To put this violence in perspective, black fatalities during the Korean War (3,075), Vietnam War (7,243) and all wars since 1980 (about 8,200) come to about 18,500, a number that pales in comparison with black loss of life at home. Young black males had a greater chance of reaching maturity on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan than on the streets of Philadelphia, Chicago, Detroit, Oakland, Newark and other cities.

Indeed. And until the leaders in the black communities face these problems and do something that reduces these problems and the their flock's attitudes and values, things aren't going to get significantly better in those communities.

 

[Fletch]

Some people's minds were made up before the evidence was made public. And their opinions didn't change once it was. That's troubling.

Exactly. The whole 'hands up, don't shoot' was discredited by the evidence and the credible witnesses to the event. That doesn't prevent the liberal race hustlers from continuing to peddle the lie though. But then again, nothing prevents liberals from continuing to peddle lies.

 

[eohrnberger]

WE do indeed no exactly what happened. Every second of the encounter was documented through witnesses and evidence.

Well, less so from the witness statements, which contradicted the physical evidence, each other, and often the statement from one witness contradicted itself depending on which time frame the statements were taken.

Really, I think it was the hard physical evidence that made the GJ decision, more so than the witness statements.

 

[ocean515]

I don't get the impression that "the evidence" means nothing or has been rejected. For me, the issue is that the evidence was never given a chance to be evaluated in a trial and my impression is that this is the issue most critics of the events in Ferguson have. I also don't get the impression that most of those critics believe that there is a conspiracy against black Americans.

The Grand Jury process has been a fixture in the legal process for a very long time. The secrecy afforded witnesses, who in this case certainly had reason to believe their welfare was at stake, made it an appropriate venue to consider what should happen next.

What I find remarkable is what I questioned in my previous post. With death threats the norm, how could justice be served in a public trial, when honest sworn testimony could result in harm or worse to those who would be forced to testify?

The complete testimony and the evidence has been made available, assuming one is to believe that is true. Yet, the bulk of those who disagree with the decision of the Grand Jury appear to reject what is to be found in it. I remain curious why that is so.

 

[Declan]

Some people's minds were made up before the evidence was made public. And their opinions didn't change once it was. That's troubling.

My problem is that if this were not a police officer but a regular citizen, the prosecutors would not have been offering mitigating/exculpatory evidence to the grand jury--just the incriminating evidence to get the true bill as to let a jury decide in a public venue. You cannot ever convince me that the members of the GJ read, digested, and discussed 15,000 pages of evidence in the time in which they deliberated.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I stated that "A lot of White people ... accept Darren Wilson's story without question." This is what I believe. If you think that I am denying this or that I believe something other than what I have stated, then I'm sorry that you've misunderstood me and I guess I'll just have to live with your poor opinion of me.

You said far more than that. You also asserted (implied?) that Brown did nothing wrong to get that police attention. The idea that Brown was shot for walking down the middle the road or standing still with his hands raised is pure BS put forth to fire up the "oppressed" with nonsense. I can almost understand some outrage (due to selective press "leaks") before the GJ decision, since the "cover-up" BS was at least a possibility, but after the JG examined the facts it was no longer remotely possible to say that the justice system did not act on the matter. We cannot allow emotion and rumors to be used to lock up anyone "just in case" they may be racists any more than we can let poor (black?) teenagers beat up folks just because they feel cheated in life or let mobs riot, loot or burn because of "historic" examples of other police misconduct.

I certainly do not deny that racism exists or that some police are racist but choosing Wilson and Brown as examples of it was a HUGE mistake. Brown was a moronic thug that thought might makes right and Wilson was simply his last intended victim. Where is that "historic" evidence that Brown was a law abiding citizen or that Wilson was a racist?

 

[bubbabgone]

The case of Michael Brown shows that America is far too protective of those who have been entrusted to enforce order.

Read the article here: After Ferguson: Stop deferring to the cops - The Week

None of us were on the scene when Officer Wilson killed Michael Brown so we don't know exactly what happened.

But we do know that there is a huge problem in the USA between white law enforcement officers and young black males.

Until that problem is sorted out there will be more situations like Ferguson.

Who wants that?

Here's a thought ... don't rob a store or walk in the middle of the street ... should be universal agreement on that ... and if you want to drill down deeper, don't let a screwball stepfather help raise your kid.
There you go ... one problem solved and after all, life is a series of single problems looking to be solved.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Despite the lefts endless efforts to make this case about skin color, it has nothing to do with skin color. I never accepted Wilsons story without question and I don't know anyone who did. What I didn't believe from the outset was that Brown had his hands up and was surrendering and this evil white cop shot him anyway. This isn't 1954, its 2014. Time for the race peddling left to join the rest of the world in the 21st century.

The fact that's 2014 makes the racial element of this all the more sad. I don't respect your take on this case, but I accept it. I don't expect everyone to see Michael Brown's death through the same lens that I do.

 

[Lutherf]

Dunno about that. Yeah, I know you were being sarcastic, but the reality is that the present issues are probably due, at least in part, to the special protections that have been in place.

Yessir!! That was pretty much exactly my point!

BTW, Happy Thanksgiving!

 

[ThePlayDrive]

You said far more than that. You also asserted (implied?) that Brown did nothing wrong to get that police attention. The idea that Brown was shot for walking down the middle the road or standing still with his hands raised is pure BS put forth to fire up the "oppressed" with nonsense. I can almost understand some outrage (due to selective press "leaks") before the GJ decision, since the "cover-up" BS was at least a possibility, but after the JG examined the facts it was no longer remotely possible to say that the justice system did not act on the matter. We cannot allow emotion and rumors to be used to lock up anyone "just in case" they may be racists any more than we can let poor (black?) teenagers beat up folks just because they feel cheated in life or let mobs riot, loot or burn because of "historic" examples of other police misconduct.

I certainly do not deny that racism exists or that some police are racist but choosing Wilson and Brown as examples of it was a HUGE mistake. Brown was a moronic thug that thought might makes right and Wilson was simply his last intended victim. Where is that "historic" evidence that Brown was a law abiding citizen or that Wilson was a racist?

Your putting words in my mouth and making inferences that are inaccurate. Beyond that, it is my impression that your point of view is not only affecting how you are reading my posts, but that it also lacks enough common ground with mine that fruitful conversation between us is not possible. Like I said, I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, but I'll live.

 

[bubbabgone]

This whole desperate conspiratorial focus on the grand jury, the prosecutor, the evidence, and the no-true-bill is bizarre.
A prosecutor doesn't have to bring an incident before the grand jury if there's not enough evidence to indict.
Sure looks like this prosecutor did anyway simply to let the community know the facts and, as an additional benefit, to let them know they had gotten worked up by a bunch of liars in their midst.

 

[eohrnberger]

Yessir!! That was pretty much exactly my point!

BTW, Happy Thanksgiving!

And a Happy Thanksgiving to you as well. Enjoy your precious time with you family, as it is indeed precious.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

The Grand Jury process has been a fixture in the legal process for a very long time. The secrecy afforded witnesses, who in this case certainly had reason to believe their welfare was at stake, made it an appropriate venue to consider what should happen next.

What I find remarkable is what I questioned in my previous post. With death threats the norm, how could justice be served in a public trial, when honest sworn testimony could result in harm or worse to those who would be forced to testify?

The complete testimony and the evidence has been made available, assuming one is to believe that is true. Yet, the bulk of those who disagree with the decision of the Grand Jury appear to reject what is to be found in it. I remain curious why that is so.

I don't issue with the Grand Jury process so much as I take issue with how the Prosecutor handled the process in this particular case. In regards to your question of how justice could be served in a public trial, I would point out that many high profile trials have been held in the public eye. It is possible. It has been done before. I will say, however, that I do think that the police and others involved in the justice system should take the safety of witnesses more seriously than they already do.

In regards to why people who disagree with the Grand Jury decision reject what is found in the testimonies and evidence released, I would respond that it has not been my impression that people are rejecting what has been found. Instead, I would argue that people have not found what you have - they have found something different. Perhaps you believe that the conclusions they've drawn from the information released is erroneous, but I disagree and I don't know that we will ever share the same perspective.

 

[CanadaJohn]

The case of Michael Brown shows that America is far too protective of those who have been entrusted to enforce order.

Read the article here: After Ferguson: Stop deferring to the cops - The Week

None of us were on the scene when Officer Wilson killed Michael Brown so we don't know exactly what happened.

But we do know that there is a huge problem in the USA between white law enforcement officers and young black males.

Until that problem is sorted out there will be more situations like Ferguson.

Who wants that?

The truth is:

* police officers are predominantly white males, even in racially diverse and predominantly homogeneously black communities in America

* crimes against people and property are disproportionately committed by black youths, particularly in American cities.

As a result, white male police officers are going to continue to come into contact with criminal black youth. Until such time as black families demand and black youth accept the property and personal rights of their fellow citizens, America is going to continue to have Ferguson type incidents. In my view, it's miraculous that such incidents aren't more widespread or perhaps they're simply not reported upon.

 

[CanadaJohn]

A lot of White people don't understand that the police treat Black (and Hispanic) Americans differently. From their point of view, the main or only reason police would use force on someone is if that person did something wrong. That's the lens that they view cases like Michael Brown through. That's why they accept Darren Wilson's story without question. That's why they don't consider that Michael Brown, if he were alive, might tell a completely different story worth listening to. They are deeply invested in their just-world narrative of the fair police officer because that is the sort of relationship that they, as White people, have had with police historically.

Now, there are many White people who reject this just-world narrative of cops. They are critical enough to see that treatment is not equitable. These are the people who will be on the "right side" of history because these are the people who were able recognize and reject injustice towards a group that they do not belong to.

I mean no disrespect, but it sure sounds to me like you're the one with the deeply invested world narrative.

 

[polgara]

This whole desperate conspiratorial focus on the grand jury, the prosecutor, the evidence, and the no-true-bill is bizarre.
A prosecutor doesn't have to bring an incident before the grand jury if there's not enough evidence to indict.
Sure looks like this prosecutor did anyway simply to let the community know the facts and, as an additional benefit, to let them know they had gotten worked up by a bunch of liars in their midst.

Good morning, bubba. :2wave:

Some things never change! Sad....

Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours from my house! :2dance: Are you cooking, or going elsewhere? I'm going to my D-I-L's house, laden with pies! :lol:

 

[bubbabgone]

I don't issue with the Grand Jury process so much as I take issue with how the Prosecutor handled the process in this particular case. In regards to your question of how justice could be served in a public trial, I would point out that many high profile trials have been held in the public eye. It is possible. It has been done before. I will say, however, that I do think that the police and others involved in the justice system should take the safety of witnesses more seriously than they already do.

In regards to why people who disagree with the Grand Jury decision reject what is found in the testimonies and evidence released, I would respond that it has not been my impression that people are rejecting what has been found. Instead, I would argue that people have not found what you have - they have found something different. Perhaps you believe that the conclusions they've drawn from the information released is erroneous, but I disagree and I don't know that we will ever share the same perspective.

That was certainly vague.
Exactly what have YOU found?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I am no big fan of cops. Its been my experience that some of them are just total dicks with an inferiority complex. That said, the police are not to blame for Michael Brown's death. Racism is not to blame for Michael Brown's death. If you want to blame someone for Michael Brown's death, blame his family for raising a criminal that was a danger to society. If you do things like commit strong armed robbery and then act like a thug with the police, culminating in getting violent with them, then white, brown, black, young, old, or what, you might just get yourself shot.

This is Michael Brown's family in action:

Police Continue Probing Brown Family Brawl | The Smoking Gun

Michael Brown's stepfather: 'Burn this bitch down!' - CNN.com

If you want to blame someone, blame the trash that raised him, not the cop that had to deal with the results of their ****ty parenting.

 

[Fletch]

The fact that's 2014 makes the racial element of this all the more sad. I don't respect your take on this case, but I accept it. I don't expect everyone to see Michael Brown's death through the same lens that I do.

What lens do you see it through? A racial lens? There is nothing to respect about a position like that. Look, you had a guy assault a police office and struggle for control of that officers gun. I don't care what color you are, if you act the way Brown acted you are almost 100% likely to be shot. That you want this to be a racial issue is just evidence that you are motivated by something other than facts and reality.

 

[SMTA]

I don't issue with the Grand Jury process so much as I take issue with how the Prosecutor handled the process in this particular case. In regards to your question of how justice could be served in a public trial, I would point out that many high profile trials have been held in the public eye. It is possible. It has been done before. I will say, however, that I do think that the police and others involved in the justice system should take the safety of witnesses more seriously than they already do.

In regards to why people who disagree with the Grand Jury decision reject what is found in the testimonies and evidence released, I would respond that it has not been my impression that people are rejecting what has been found. Instead, I would argue that people have not found what you have - they have found something different. Perhaps you believe that the conclusions they've drawn from the information released is erroneous, but I disagree and I don't know that we will ever share the same perspective.

And what details do you have about exactly how the prosecutor handled the evidence?

I'll wager nothing other than the fact that you don't like the result.

60+ witnesses and 24 volumes of information ain't just chicken feed.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

I mean no disrespect, but it sure sounds to me like you're the one with the deeply invested world narrative.

My worldview is deeply believed, not deeply invested. When I use the phrase "investment", I am not referring to worldview's that are deeply believed, I am referring to worldview's that are so important for people to maintain that they shut themselves from the possibility of integrating new information into their perception. I have not shut myself off from that and, in fact, started a thread on DP with the specific purpose of hearing from other perspectives, some of which have caused me to alter my attitudes towards the subject at hand. That said, you may still be convinced that I am "deeply invested in a world narrative" and, as I have said to others in separate contexts, I guess I'll just have to live with that.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

That was certainly vague.
Exactly what have YOU found?

How would me sharing what I have found benefit me? From what I sense to be your tone, I can't imagine that I would receive any benefit from sharing that.