<p>The Ferguson police have now arrested and released two journalists for not leaving a McDonalds “fast enough”, an Alderman who has been protesting (no reason given, except of course he’s black) and tear gassed a reporter and cameraman from Al Jazeera. </p>
<p>It’s a scary time to be a male teenager, (especially so for a minority) a journalist or an activist in this country. My brother in law is a recently retired police lieutenant who is often scrutinized and pulled over because he’s black. </p>
<p>A good friend of mine, whose police officer husband was killed in the line of duty, made the observation that there are two kinds of people who become police officers. There are those who truly want to help the community and there are those who are on a power trip and want to control everything always. It is the latter who are the source of these kinds of stories- Brown, Belle’s story, etc. MOST of the time, I’ve encountered the first kind, but I’ve definitely encountered the other kind too. They are the scary ones. </p>
<p>They are close to behaving as police in the Jim Crow south did…and unfortunately many other areas during the '50s and '60s. </p>
<p>Exhibited police attitudes here are also not too far from those of the Imperial Japanese army personnel before/during WWII who were known to physically assault and even kill anyone they felt weren’t sufficiently deferential to them…or “too slow” in being deferential. </p>
<p>US military occupation troops in Japan after WWII sometimes found themselves in the ironic position of having to protect former Imperial Japanese military personnel…especially former officers from being physically assaulted or even killed by some groups of angry Japanese civilians seeking revenge for years of militarist oppression in the late '40s and early '50s.</p>
<p>Local PD just disclosed the name of the officer who fired the shots that killed Michael Brown. But now the case gets more complicated because they also disclosed video footage depicting Brown and his buddy shoplifting (they are calling it a “strong-arm robbery” at a convenience store shortly before the confrontation with the police officer. OK, so they are hell bent to demonstrate that Brown wasn’t an angel. Understood. But since when is execution the penalty for shoplifting? What I also need to know now is…did Police Officer Darren Wilson have knowledge of the shoplifting. Seems like he didn’t, since he allegedly confronted Brown for walking in the street rather than on the sidewalk.</p>
<p>Now that more details are out, it doesnt excuse the behavior of the officer. If a suspect is running away, UNARMED, he does not deserve to be shot in the back. If he then turns and puts his hands up, you shouldnt continue shooting. </p>
<p>Seems like the police are releasing details that tend to blacken Brown’s name (he strong-armed a convenience store employee to steal cigars) but nothing about the officer other than his name. We don’t know the autopsy results, so we don’t know whether Brown was shot in the back, in the chest, when he was already down; we don’t know what the dispatcher said, so we don’t know whether Officer Wilson was looking for a suspect in the convenience store robbery, or whether he was just hassling two kids and didn’t know about the robbery.</p>
<p>Everything about the way the local police have handled this case is incompetent. And if it turns out that it was legal for the officer to have shot a fleeing suspect in a violent crime, then the law should be changed. The penalty for stealing $50 worth of cigars by manhandling a store clerk should not be execution by cop. We can get an idea about how the police view the public by noticing that they pointed sniper rifles at nonviolent people singing. This is not a police force that is on the side of the black community.</p>
<p>Don’t forget the officer was injured. Basically, punched in the face and treated at a hospital. The initial story was bogus. But, now people are suggesting the robbery photos may have been altered. So, it’s another case of hopeless distrust. Facts don’t matter.</p>
<p>When the officer’s name was released, it was also stated that the officer had no history of disciplinary issues.</p>
<p>Bloomberg and CNBC are now saying that the officer was responding to the robbery at the convenience store and Mr. Brown and friend matched the description of the alleged perpetrators.</p>
<p>This new information about Mr. Brown allegedly being the major culprit in the strong armed robbery has changed the story.</p>
<p>I don’t trust the police in this case. The officer may have been punched in the face, and Michael Brown was a big guy so his punch could pack a lot of power. But the police are clearly releasing only information they think will be favorable to them. And they’re incompetent.</p>
<p>It is certainly not earned when said police force(s) attempt to impose an effective news blackout by attempting to ban journalists from the area and thus, preventing them from covering an event of national interest. That and arresting two journalists for not obeying quickly enough and firing tear gas at other journalists. </p>
<p>Makes it seem like they have something to hide.</p>
<p>Generally, a police officer can only shoot a fleeing felony suspect if he reasonably believes the individual poses a serious risk of harm to the officer or to others. That would almost certainly not apply in this case. But the facts are still murky here–there’s no question that the police department handled it poorly. But if it turns out that Brown did commit a robbery, that the police officer knew about that when he stopped Brown, and that Brown was shot during a struggle and not while fleeing, the whole case is completely different. At this point, though, many people won’t believe it if that turns out to be the police department’s version of the facts.</p>
<p>But I also have to say: if Brown really did rough up a store clerk in order to steal some cigars, it causes me to lose interest in the fact that he was about to go to college, and his family’s claims that he didn’t cause problems, etc., etc.</p>