<p>We don’t let people off without a trial when they kill people in suspicious or ambiguous circumstances, either. Except when the killer is a cop. </p>
<p>Every single damn time when a cop kills a black guy, there’s always some excuse: He was holding a toy gun. He was big and scary. He was holding a wallet that looked like a gun. He was selling loose cigarettes. He was reaching for a gun his wallet. He was reaching for a gun his car registration because the cop had just asked him to show his license and registration. He was a mentally ill guy holding a knife. He sassed the cop. He was armed.</p>
<p>And every time, we know that the subtext is… and he was black. He was a child holding a toy gun and he was black. He was mentally ill and he was black. He was reaching for his wallet and he was black. He sassed the cop and he was black. He was armed and he was black. He was a big guy who was scary because he was black.</p>
<p>“I take it you missed this part of the poster’s point:”</p>
<p>She certainly did. </p>
<p>I am sure almost all of us on the thread, at one time or another, has been stopped by a cop for some driving infraction and asked to get our our driver’s license and registration. I bet none of us have been shot for reaching into our glove compartments. I bet none of us would think twice about reaching over to do that either or think for a second that action could get us shot by the cop! </p>
<p>I also bet that when we are pulled over the cops treat us with respect, too. </p>
That is your opinion (and there are plenty of suspicious or ambiguous deaths that aren’t prosecuted for all sorts of reasons), but the legal system has its requirements and penalties. It’s not American Idol or a tin pot dictatorship. We don’t do show trials here for public consumption. And thank God we don’t. The Justice Department has conducted a simultaneous investigation with the local authorities. Its decision has not been released yet and may involve charges at the federal level. That is also appropriate, and there is no local taint to that investigation. We should wait and see, and if no charges are brought by the Justice Department, then a crime wasn’t committed. If federal charges are brought, then a trial will be held and a decision will be made.</p>
<p>And look for a personal interpretation of fact which supports our story, and proceed to dismiss the rest by bracketing the word facts with those little " x" That is why permits anyone to dispute facts revealed in the investigation and cling to the real facts such as bogus witnesses and twisted timelines. </p>
<p>Fwiw, it is rather unique to hear that a grand jury proceeding was adverse to the victims. For some reason, I always heard that prosecutors could indict a ham sandwich as the only evidence presented is adverse to the potential indicted. Must be an old fisherman tale. </p>
<p>Lastly, I wonder what might have happened if the decision was an indictment? Would the conservatives have opined that this was a travesty of justice based on flimsy evidence, and that our government forces in Washington “forced” this decision, considering their … race? </p>
<p>We have a prosecutor who has had a documented history of being exceedingly favorable and lenient on LEOs when trying past cases, decrying Federal and State involvement into investigating the case, blaming the media for merely covering a story of national/international interest, etc. Did I mention he insisted on trying the case despite being criticized for such a dubious record and numerous calls for him to recuse himself from the case because of said record?</p>
<p>We have a police department and local governments(Feguson/St Louis area) with a long documented history of racial discriminatory laws in its recent past which still has carry-over effects such as the makeup of the local police/governments, low voter registration, prior history of police abuses and covering them up, etc. </p>
<p>In many ways, the local governments in Ferguson and St Louis county and their police departments seem to increasingly fit bad stereotypes of corrupt small towns where there’s an “old boys network” in the local governments/police departments and if you’re not part of it or part of a group favored by them, they’ll screw you every which way. </p>
<p>We have many irregularities with the grand jury investigation because, you guessed it, the very prosecutor with such a dubious record is involved. And posters like marie are wondering why many Black Ferguson residents along with many more discerning people nationally and internationally are viewing this as a “bag job” on the part of the prosecutor/local authorities. </p>
<p>In such a context, it seems more of a shock that some are pollyannish despite the presence of a dark cloud of doubt over the grand jury investigation as it was led by a prosecutor with such a dubious record. </p>
<p>So which is more powerful, a weight advantage or a loaded gun? I don’t get how some people want to have it both ways. Remember after Newtown, “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”? So what’s the point of people arming themselves if they are no match for a large, out-of-shape teenager who happens to be black and acting immaturely? </p>
<p>Did you read the hideous cases in Texas of the women being, umm, assaulted/examined (use your imagination). Yes it happens, there are plenty of examples. Which goes back to the issue of police culture, about which I don’t disagree. I just don’t think it is true to say that only black men face such abuse. Different abuse, but, again, it still speaks to the culture when women are abused by men in positions of power.</p>
<p>No, I am just highlighting how absurd it is to reach the conclusion that poster did based on evidence that leads just as much in the other direction as it does in the direction the poster perceives it. The guy’s only personal experience is being treated respectfully by the police. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am sure I always think twice before going into the glove compartment. </p>
<p>None of the cases I read about are those who are/can pass for upper/upper-middle class White. Too risky in the perceptions of the corrupt cops in terms of being found out and punished by TPTB. </p>
<p>Most are racial minorities and/or from lower SES which the cops involved think don’t have the social standing or influence to be believable. In short, corrupt cops tend to pick “easy targets” which they perceive will have so little influence/social standing that their victims will be less believable than cops like themselves. </p>
<p>“I am sure I always think twice before going into the glove compartment.”</p>
<p>^^^ Don’t want to get into this thread, but I just wanted to comment on this one point - I have been stopped, and I asked (and will do so in the future) before reaching for anything (glove compartment, purse, anything). I don’t want to alarm the police officer - they really don’t know what you might have. When I was stopped, and he asked for my license, I asked him if it was OK if I reached for my purse in the back seat.</p>
<p>I don’t get your point. People are saying that the officer should not have discharged his weapon and instead should have dealt with it some other way, perhaps wrestling him to the ground when Brown charged him. Regardless of whether the police officer knows that the guy had a weapon, the weight advantage was one reason why he needed to use force. </p>
<p>“For some reason, I always heard that prosecutors could indict a ham sandwich as the only evidence presented is adverse to the potential indicted. Must be an old fisherman tale.”</p>
<p>It is not a tale. </p>
<p>“According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them.” </p>
<p>The exception are cases where the shooting was done by a cop for a variety of reasons which are cited in the article. </p>
<p>“The guy’s only personal experience is being treated respectfully by the police.”</p>
<p>As are most of our experiences with the police. </p>
<p>Has anyone in this thread been mistreated/rudely treated/treated as if you were a criminal when stopped by the police for a traffic violation? </p>
<p>I only know I have never asked if it’s ok to get my registration out of the glove compartment. Where else would it be? I think if a cop asks you to present it he knows you are going to reach over to your glove compartment. If he doesn’t he is an idiot and too stupid to be a police officer. </p>
<p>collegealum, people are saying (as they did in the Trayvon Martin case) that the young man was a threat because of his size advantage and alleged aggression. But we are told repeatedly that firearms can give even little old ladies an advantage in threatening situations. Here we are supposed to believe that Michael Brown charged an armed officer from 30 feet away as he was shooting at him, and that this well-trained law enforcement officer was so in fear for his life that he couldn’t just wound the young man to defuse the situation. He had to KILL him. Sorry but none of it adds up. </p>
I have never been pulled over for a traffic violation, but I have been treated in a very rude and aggressive manner by police in the normal course of working in Times Square, once when I was the victim of a small crime. We all do have different experiences. I’ve never been shot (thankfully), but i do believe there is a culture in some police organizations by some members that they can do what they want. I think that can be true of many different organizations/professions that are predominantly male and do physical or dangerous work. Flame me now. that’s fine. I come from a military family with many members in the jobs I’m talking about (a multi-racial family) and I believe it to be true. It is not true of everyone, of course, but different groups have different cultures (and I mean affinity groups/professional groups, not racial groups).</p>
<p>My understanding is that there is nothing in police procedure about shooting to wound (or at least shooting until the guy stops coming at them). They either shoot-to-kill or don’t shoot at all.</p>
<p>I guess in your scenario you should wound the guy and then try to overcome him with physical force?</p>