Where did the "gentle giant" motif come from anyway?
You don't mind speculating by questioning the victim's alleged suspect status making him guilty in his own death..... right.
Whether Brown was truly a robbery suspect or this is just more police misinformation we will soon find out.
What is more disturbing is the police reaction to the protests, they forcefully went after many people and arrested quite a few including a few journalists on false pretenses. There ought to be a follow up on that and any cop acting above and beyond their mandates ought to be fired.
How do you know they did?
If your going to make claims like this, you should at least back it up with some evidence.
Um, logic 101: the burden of proof rests on those making an accusation.
Or else, how do we know it wasn't you?
Anyone mention yet that last night the liquor store Mike Brown had allegedly robed was looted. Why? The owner was robbed by Brown so now he deserves to have his business destroyed? Something wrong with people.
That story does not pass the smell test. If he were truly a robbery suspect, then why didn't the officer detain him the first time he stopped him, instead of telling him to get out of the middle of the road? If Brown had actually committed a robbery, then why did he talk to the officer the first time he was stopped, telling the officer that he was only a minute away from his destination, instead of running? Add to that the fact that the kid had never been in trouble with the police, has a clean record, has been described by everybody as shy and soft spoken, and was about to be a college student, then this smacks of a police department cover up. Something smells in Ferguson, Missouri, and it ain't the toilets.
His attorney is a week-kneed kook.
One easy giveaway that is that Dorian Johnson wasn't charged w/anything by the police. Normally, anyone who robs a store w/video to prove it is arrested and convicted after the store owners' press charges but the cops are letting him walk free.
Most likely, it's because the cops coerced him into saying that he robbed the store or else they would charge him w/something else (i. e. some minor drug possession charge of which he was actually guilty) and jail him for that, and his week-kneed attorney agreed to the deal.
Until now, I've stayed clear of this thread topic waiting instead for more details/evidence to come out. I think folks need to take a step back on both sides.
Those who are saying wait until the details come out are correct. We really don't know why the Ferguson police stopped Michael Brown and his friend/associate. However, danarhea makes some good points. For example, people have jumped on this "Michael Brown robbed a store before being shot" storyline but there's no proof of that as this video would indicate. Ferguson police didn't even know about the store incident before they approached him. So, why stop the guy?
If you watch the alleged robbery video, it doesn't appear that Michael Brown had a weapon. To me it looks his hands were filled with merchandise he intended to buy. The footage shows him (or a man who looks like him) approach the counter and it appears he laid his stuff down. The next cut shows the altercation between Brown and the store clerk, but again you don't see a weapon. All you see is Brown grab the man by his shirt collar, still with merchandise in hand, as attempts to leaves the store. And then he stalks out. That's it. (Sidenote: Furthermore, it doesn't look like cigars he's carrying. It looks more like he has fists full of snack cakes or Slim Jims - too bulking and too long to be cigars. But if such were found on him, at this point I'd be hard pressed to support the claim that he stole them. After all, empty Cigarillos shells are often used to smoke marijuana. He may have already had those beforehand.
Now, is it possible that the police were made aware of a robbery after they'd already stopped Michael Brown and his friend and one of them panicked? OR that Michael and his friend both refused to go quietly because they believed they were right to walk the streets without harming anyone? Is it possible the cops acted wrong or had the wrong men? Again, from the video it doesn't appear that Michael had cigars in his hands and you don't see a weapon. Of course, the news report never says "armed robbery". Think about that for a moment...
You see, folks who are laying blame on those who they claim are "jumping to conclusions" about the police shooting a robbery suspect who many say was a good kid are also being quick to judge the kid as a criminal similar to how Treyvon Martin was portrayed when word go out about his troubles in school. Is it possible that Michael Brown was, in fact, a good kid who believed he was being cheated at checkout and pushed the store clerk simply because he was frustrated? We don't see whether money was placed on the counter any more than we see Michael draw a weapon. So, we really don't know if the kid entered the store with criminal intent. But, I would agree on principle that if you walk out of a store without paying for merchandise it is theft. But robbery in this case? Looks like a stretch to me.
Nonetheless, Michael Brown was obviously a big 18 yr old Black male when compared with the store clerk. Is it possible that the Ferguson police officer jumped the gun here? Again, could he have received word of a recent robbery, believed that Michael Brown and his friend fit the description given, panicked when they heard the word "robbery suspects" (assuming that's how they were described) and then upon seeing how big this kid was acted hastily?
Regardless of what one believes happened here, one thing is clear: You DON'T shoot an unarmed man with his hands up.
I'm still listening attentively to the news reports and such, but I'd have to agree with danarhea here. Something just isn't right about this.
His attorney is a week-kneed kook.
One easy giveaway that is that Dorian Johnson wasn't charged w/anything by the police. Normally, anyone who robs a store w/video to prove it is arrested and convicted after the store owners' press charges but the cops are letting him walk free.
Most likely, it's because the cops coerced him into saying that he robbed the store or else they would charge him w/something else (i. e. some minor drug possession charge of which he was actually guilty) and jail him for that, and his week-kneed attorney agreed to the deal.
:shock: :doh :lamo
Or, the video proved Dorian didn't carry out the violent strong-arm robbery Brown did, and under the circumstances it didn't make sense to pursue the case.
Nope, doesn't make sense. Aiding/abetting robbery is also a crime. Try again.
:shock: :doh :lamo
Or, the video proved Dorian didn't carry out the violent strong-arm robbery Brown did, and under the circumstances it didn't make sense to pursue the case.
[The lawyer] would not tell Lemon whether Dorian Johnson was able to make a deal with the FBI for immunity for telling them what happened, and possibly pinning the “robbery” on Michael Brown.
I don't think that's the case. You see, although Dorian Johnson's attorney confirmed it was Michael Brown in the video, he:
Attorney Confirms That Is His Client and Michael Brown in Surveillance Video | Mediaite
So, was Michael Brown a thief, a thug, a low-life punk kid or is he being blamed for a crime he didn't commit? Stay tuned.
You know, you got a point. Brown may have just been trying to straighten the shopkeepers collar and forgot to pay for the cigars when the shopkeeper reigned praise on him for his thoughtful gesture.
I just gave you examples. Less babies, innocent people, and by-standards don't count as "innocent" in your book.
My statement was that being around cops increases your probability of being shot, and that's not 100% determined by one's own behavior. You disagreed to that. That was the statement, and I have demonstrated for my hypothesis.
Try again.
:lamoYes, let's: The police said he was a suspect in a robbery that an officer had not stopped them for. You do know what suspect means? Yes?
...
You do know what alleged means, yes?
Yes. Are you blind? Besides already being confirmed it was him - Same everything.Really? Hm:And the video and images show it is him wearing the same damn thing, accompanied by the same witness who gave a contrived account.
Officer who shot Michael Brown didn't know he was a robbery suspect - LA Times
As for the witness:
Ferguson residents on CNN: That’s not Michael Brown in the surveillance video « Hot Air
We must be looking at different witnesses. Even the people who saw it say it's not the same people.
No, that isn't what the Police have done, and what you are doing is ignoring reality. That is all.I don't cast doubt on it. I dismiss its relevance... which is exactly what the Fergusson Police Dept is doing. Actually, here is what the people who released the video had to say on the matter:
Wow. Look at you ignoring reality and what is already known.Michael Brown shooting: Officer stopped teen for blocking street, 'that was it' - World - CBC News
"[The robbery] had nothing to do with the stop," Ferguson, Mo., police Chief Thomas Jackson told reporters.
So... any more smearing you'd like to do today? Or what are we discussing here? How he deserved to be shot for being a nameless suspect in a robbery that the police officer had no clue about? Or are we discussing the fact that the police who supposedly have both Brown and Johnson in the video in the video won't consider Johnson an accomplice? Or are discussing the fact that the police themselves say the shooting has nothing to do with the stop or the shooting? Keep smearing Excon.
Hmmm? Let's see.
The police say it is the same person and even revealed that the Officer saw that same person with the box of stolen cigars.
The family's lawyer says it is him in the video.
And the video and images show it is him wearing the same damn thing, accompanied by the same witness who gave a contrived account.
And yet here you are after the fact of the above trying to cast doubt? :doh
Odd to say the least is right, except that it applies to your position.
:lamo
:applaud:yt:agree:dito::applaudThis is what gets me about these bleeding hearts... They act as if this POlice officer went out of his way to shoot some black kid that day? Like he was planning on it, that nothing would stop him from getting him some bad arse looking black kid. They convince themselves that this could be the only thing that happened, and that the story of the blacks at the scene would be wholesome testimonies to the integrity of the loving son that got shot down in the street. It boggles my mind how incredibly gullible people are. It's like they've never been to the hood or seen ghetto culture up close, and to think that wearing your pants down to your knees, dreads and Tat's up the neck, and unable to form a coherent sentence in English would remind us all that it's really nothing to be concerned or evaluated, no, we only need to condemn the cop that undergoes periodic psychological testing, intense training, and situational awareness because he's the evil PIGS..
Jesus Christ almighty.. Granted, no rush to condemn the kid, but hell, utilizing a modicum of common sense one cannot possibly rush to condemn the cop either, if anything, this would be the last person to blame.
Tim-
You speak as if I'm defending the kid. I'm not. I'm just saying there's a lot going on with this situation that we don't know about. I've merely stated some things that are obvious:
- The store video doesn't show Michael Brown present a weapon of any sort, but it clearly shows him grabbing the store clerk by his collar and then leaving the store with merchandise in hand.
- We see Michael Brown at the counter with said merchandise, but we don't see if he actually paid for said merchandise. The assumption then, rightfully so, is he walked out of the without paying for the merchandise after assaulting the store clerk = theft (or robbery).
- The police who stopped Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson didn't know they'd allegedly robbed a convenient store before stopping them. So, the question that really should be asked at this point is what was the probably cause for stopping them? Jaywalking? We'll get to that in a second...
- We don't know why these two young adult males got into an altercation with the police any more than we know why they were stopped other than the fact that they were walking down the street presumably blocking traffic. But if that were the case, why didn't the police simply flash their police lights, get on their PA system and tell them to clear they way? Makes perfect sense to me.
- We don't know why the police fought with Dorian Johnson or how/why shots were fired inside the police car.
I could presume that Michael Brown began to run because of the incident at the store, but it's also very possible he ran because he heard gun shots coming from the direction of the police car where his friend and the police where wrestling about with each other.
In the end, Michael Brown did halt w/his hands up and was shot. The question people rightfully are asking is "Why?".
If you watch the alleged robbery video, it doesn't appear that Michael Brown had a weapon. To me it looks his hands were filled with merchandise he intended to buy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?