Lethal force should be the absolute last option for a cop encountering a suspect. Lethal force should be used to counter a deadly threat to the officer or others. Lethal force should not be used on people running AWAY, on people who are UNARMED, on people who have their HANDS UP, or in a situation where a deadly threat to the officer has subsided. Officers should NOT be excited to use their guns while on patrol.
Note that use of lethal force has nothing to do with what crime the suspect may or may not have recently committed.
A cop who reaches for his gun before his taser or using his own two feet to chase a suspect is a poorly trained, dangerous cop.
It was about $50 or so, and the lawyer for the two kids has stated that it was them.
Doesn't change the fact that a police officer ran down and shot an unarmed 18 year-old multiple times and left him to die in the street. All it does is muddy the waters, which was obviously the intention.
The alleged robbery may be pertinent to determine what initiated the initial police intervention (asking Brown to step off the street) but is entirely irrelevant if he was killed in the manner reported by witnesses.
Summary execution is not a suitable punishment for robbery.
Doesn't help that this is the standard police story for when they shoot unarmed black men.
Agreed, which takes us back to "Even if this specific killing was justified, they happen far too often and the victims are far too disproportionately black."
I've seen one story where the lawyer for Dorian Johnson (the friend with Michael Brown) stated that either Brown or Johnson did take cigarillos from the store, but I can't find much else stating that?
And that's exactly why small-town police departments like to take their time releasing information. Because the information that comes out immediately is frequently inaccurate.
The alleged robbery may be pertinent to determine what initiated the initial police intervention (asking Brown to step off the street) but is entirely irrelevant if he was killed in the manner reported by witnesses.
Summary execution is not a suitable punishment for robbery.
Absolutely agreed.
But that's a big "if." The reports of eyewitnesses, especially interested eyewitnesses, are completely unreliable. Short of video, the only way to really determine what happened would be the kind of long, slow investigation that a) would never have been undertaken if the police were left to their own devices and not subject to outside scrutiny but b) nobody is willing to wait for because we've all already picked sides and are just yelling "scoreboard!" each time a new piece of information comes out.
I've seen one story where the lawyer for Dorian Johnson (the friend with Michael Brown) stated that either Brown or Johnson did take cigarillos from the store, but I can't find much else stating that?
... his lawyer publicly stated that his client committed a crime he hasn't even been detained for?
I've seen one story where the lawyer for Dorian Johnson (the friend with Michael Brown) stated that either Brown or Johnson did take cigarillos from the store, but I can't find much else stating that?
... his lawyer publicly stated that his client committed a crime he hasn't even been detained for?
Yeah I'd like to see more sources of this statement, I could only find a half-quote in one story.
I've seen one story where the lawyer for Dorian Johnson (the friend with Michael Brown) stated that either Brown or Johnson did take cigarillos from the store, but I can't find much else stating that?
... his lawyer publicly stated that his client committed a crime he hasn't even been detained for?
Yeah I'd like to see more sources of this statement, I could only find a half-quote in one story.
“We see that there’s tape, that they claim they got a tape that shows there was some sort of strong-armed robbery,” said Freeman Bosley, Johnson’s attorney. “We need to see that tape, my client did tell us and told the FBI that they went into the store. He told FBI that [Brown] did take cigarillos. He told that to the DOJ and the St. Louis County Police.”
Brown's family has a different lawyer than Dorian Johnson.
Anyway here's more details:
In an interview with msnbc shortly after the report was released, Johnson’s lawyer confirmed that Brown had taken cigars from the store.
“We see that there’s tape, that they claim they got a tape that shows there was some sort of strong-armed robbery,” said Freeman Bosley, Johnson’s attorney. “We need to see that tape, my client did tell us and told the FBI that they went into the store. He told FBI that [Brown] did take cigarillos. He told that to the DOJ and the St. Louis County Police.”
In an interview earlier this week, Johnson described the events of the shooting but did not mention that he and Brown had been in a convenience store just before, or that Brown had stolen anything.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
That legal theory would be 100% ridiculous. It has to happen during the commission of the felony. The cop shot Brown after they were walking down the street later. It's is an incredible stretch if you want to try to say they were still "committing" a felony.
Eh, it's a little bit conspiracy theoristy. "There's slight confusion in the official story, so obviously it's all a big coverup!"
"Why would/did Brown reach into the vehicle to grab a gun as the police allege?"
Maybe he didn't and the cop made it up to justify losing his temper and committing a murder? Maybe he was trying to win the fight with the cop?
"Why did the officer fire after Brown was already down and bleeding out?"
IANAexpert, but I believe police officers are trained to essentially empty their guns once the determination to use deadly force has been made. There's no "shooting to get him down and then stopping."
"And why did the Ferguson PD not signal that there was a convenience store robbery and that Brown was a suspect before today?"
Because small-town police departments suck at handling getting information to the public. That's why they like to take their time.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
I wonder how the public in Ferguson would respond if Johnson were found guilty of and sentenced to death for the murder of Brown.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
That legal theory would be 100% ridiculous. It has to happen during the commission of the felony. The cop shot Brown after they were walking down the street later. It's is an incredible stretch if you want to try to say they were still "committing" a felony.
Uh, isn't $50 way below the limit of felony robbery?
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
That legal theory would be 100% ridiculous. It has to happen during the commission of the felony. The cop shot Brown after they were walking down the street later. It's is an incredible stretch if you want to try to say they were still "committing" a felony.
Let me back off on this a little, since Missouri law includes "flight from" the felony:
Second degree murder, penalty.
565.021. 1. A person commits the crime of murder in the second degree if he:
(1) Knowingly causes the death of another person or, with the purpose of causing serious physical injury to another person, causes the death of another person; or
(2) Commits or attempts to commit any felony, and, in the perpetration or the attempted perpetration of such felony or in the flight from the perpetration or attempted perpetration of such felony, another person is killed as a result of the perpetration or attempted perpetration of such felony or immediate flight from the perpetration of such felony or attempted perpetration of such felony.
However, it's still an incredible legal stretch to say Brown or Johnson CAUSED the homicide, i.e. that the homicide was a RESULT OF the perpetration of a felony. Because they didn't cause it. The cop did.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
That legal theory would be 100% ridiculous. It has to happen during the commission of the felony. The cop shot Brown after they were walking down the street later. It's is an incredible stretch if you want to try to say they were still "committing" a felony.
Uh, isn't $50 way below the limit of felony robbery?
Or does the use of intimidation bump it up?
It's because he pushed the lady. If he hadn't then it would have been a lesser crime.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
That legal theory would be 100% ridiculous. It has to happen during the commission of the felony. The cop shot Brown after they were walking down the street later. It's is an incredible stretch if you want to try to say they were still "committing" a felony.
Uh, isn't $50 way below the limit of felony robbery?
Or does the use of intimidation bump it up?
yeah, the use of force to take the cigars could possibly bump it up to felony robbery
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
Why would/did Brown reach into the vehicle to grab a gun as the police allege?
Why did the officer fire after Brown was already down and bleeding out?
Is the second point known? I feel like I need to know a lot more about the actual shooting details (or at least have some expert opinions on bullet trajectories, number of shots, etc.) before I can even begin to say that either the officer or the witnesses have credible accounts.
It doesn't matter anymore anyway. The seed of "he deserved it" has been planted, and if the cop is even charged I'll be surprised. He'll never be convicted.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
That legal theory would be 100% ridiculous. It has to happen during the commission of the felony. The cop shot Brown after they were walking down the street later. It's is an incredible stretch if you want to try to say they were still "committing" a felony.
Uh, isn't $50 way below the limit of felony robbery?
Or does the use of intimidation bump it up?
Usually a theft with force becomes a felony. From the video "strongarm robbery" doesn't seem an apt description.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
If Brown handled the cop's gun and it went off(like in struggle) wouldn't he have gun powder residue on his hands?
He would have to have his hands on or incredibly near the gun when it fired for that to happen.
0
Options
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
So, like I said in the SE++ thread.
This is pretty much going to come down to how Mike Brown was killed. Because his use of force in that video will make it easy enough for the cop to say force was used in their encounter.
In Missouri law, if someone dies while a felony is being committed, the suspect can be charged with murder. So it's entirely possible that the Ferguson PD is attempting to lay the groundwork to hold Johnson and Brown liable for Brown's murder.
Posts
The whole story smacks of bullshit.
Note that use of lethal force has nothing to do with what crime the suspect may or may not have recently committed.
A cop who reaches for his gun before his taser or using his own two feet to chase a suspect is a poorly trained, dangerous cop.
Doesn't change the fact that a police officer ran down and shot an unarmed 18 year-old multiple times and left him to die in the street. All it does is muddy the waters, which was obviously the intention.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Summary execution is not a suitable punishment for robbery.
Agreed, which takes us back to "Even if this specific killing was justified, they happen far too often and the victims are far too disproportionately black."
And that's exactly why small-town police departments like to take their time releasing information. Because the information that comes out immediately is frequently inaccurate.
Absolutely agreed.
But that's a big "if." The reports of eyewitnesses, especially interested eyewitnesses, are completely unreliable. Short of video, the only way to really determine what happened would be the kind of long, slow investigation that a) would never have been undertaken if the police were left to their own devices and not subject to outside scrutiny but b) nobody is willing to wait for because we've all already picked sides and are just yelling "scoreboard!" each time a new piece of information comes out.
... his lawyer publicly stated that his client committed a crime he hasn't even been detained for?
Yeah I'd like to see more sources of this statement, I could only find a half-quote in one story.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/43728_Acts_Omissions_and_What_We_Actually_Know_About_the_Ferguson_PD_and_Mike_Brown_Case
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ferguson-police-name-michael-brown
“We see that there’s tape, that they claim they got a tape that shows there was some sort of strong-armed robbery,” said Freeman Bosley, Johnson’s attorney. “We need to see that tape, my client did tell us and told the FBI that they went into the store. He told FBI that [Brown] did take cigarillos. He told that to the DOJ and the St. Louis County Police.”
Anyway here's more details:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ferguson-police-name-michael-brown
http://www.cnn.com/video/api/embed.html#/video/bestoftv/2014/08/15/sot-nr-quiktrip-robbery-video-michael-brown-shooting.cnn
That legal theory would be 100% ridiculous. It has to happen during the commission of the felony. The cop shot Brown after they were walking down the street later. It's is an incredible stretch if you want to try to say they were still "committing" a felony.
Eh, it's a little bit conspiracy theoristy. "There's slight confusion in the official story, so obviously it's all a big coverup!"
"Why would/did Brown reach into the vehicle to grab a gun as the police allege?"
Maybe he didn't and the cop made it up to justify losing his temper and committing a murder? Maybe he was trying to win the fight with the cop?
"Why did the officer fire after Brown was already down and bleeding out?"
IANAexpert, but I believe police officers are trained to essentially empty their guns once the determination to use deadly force has been made. There's no "shooting to get him down and then stopping."
"And why did the Ferguson PD not signal that there was a convenience store robbery and that Brown was a suspect before today?"
Because small-town police departments suck at handling getting information to the public. That's why they like to take their time.
I wonder how the public in Ferguson would respond if Johnson were found guilty of and sentenced to death for the murder of Brown.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Uh, isn't $50 way below the limit of felony robbery?
Or does the use of intimidation bump it up?
Let me back off on this a little, since Missouri law includes "flight from" the felony:
Second degree murder, penalty.
565.021. 1. A person commits the crime of murder in the second degree if he:
(1) Knowingly causes the death of another person or, with the purpose of causing serious physical injury to another person, causes the death of another person; or
(2) Commits or attempts to commit any felony, and, in the perpetration or the attempted perpetration of such felony or in the flight from the perpetration or attempted perpetration of such felony, another person is killed as a result of the perpetration or attempted perpetration of such felony or immediate flight from the perpetration of such felony or attempted perpetration of such felony.
However, it's still an incredible legal stretch to say Brown or Johnson CAUSED the homicide, i.e. that the homicide was a RESULT OF the perpetration of a felony. Because they didn't cause it. The cop did.
yeah, the use of force to take the cigars could possibly bump it up to felony robbery
That's unlikely, to say the least.
Why would/did Brown reach into the vehicle to grab a gun as the police allege?
Why did the officer fire after Brown was already down and bleeding out?
Is the second point known? I feel like I need to know a lot more about the actual shooting details (or at least have some expert opinions on bullet trajectories, number of shots, etc.) before I can even begin to say that either the officer or the witnesses have credible accounts.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Pretty hard to hide shit like that from good forensic techs.
here are the relevant MO statutes
first degree robbery
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5690000020.HTM (section 3 - dangerous instrument could be your fists/arms)
second degree murder
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5650000021.HTM (section 2)
Usually a theft with force becomes a felony. From the video "strongarm robbery" doesn't seem an apt description.
Robbery in Missouri is defined here: http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c569.htm
They've successfully covered their asses now.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
I doubt that would hold up as a first degree robbery. Sounds like second degree to me.
That's not what's being claimed AFAIK, at least not that the gun went off during a struggle.
In astruggle over a gun there would likely be gunpowder residue on him yeah
Still a class B felony, which could lead to a second degree murder charge.
He would have to have his hands on or incredibly near the gun when it fired for that to happen.
This is pretty much going to come down to how Mike Brown was killed. Because his use of force in that video will make it easy enough for the cop to say force was used in their encounter.
The second degree murder charge is the stretchiest of stretches