To Serve And Protect

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion and Philosophy -(FORUM CLOSED)-' started by Barnstable, Nov 25, 2014.

  1. Barnstable

    Barnstable Supreme Fuzzler of Lakersball.com Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,096
    Likes Received:
    17,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Offline
    The racist element I feel exists in these cases is not the stereotypical KKK, "all white people are racist" line you would hear from Sharpton or some of those morons. I'm going to try to explain as succinctly as I can.

    Growing up in the US, we are around other ethnicities all the time, but we categorize rather than seeing the individual. That IMO leads to acting off of stereotypes. Asians in the US do not have a stereotype of being dangerous or criminals, so they as a group are treated as such.

    When a black person is killed so easily, I think it's because the police are just categorizing them as black, and black= dangerous. That assumption is stronger than the actual circumstances of the encounter and evaluating the individual.

    This isn't a white thing either. Everyone does it, but killings like in Ferguson gets a lot more complicated because of the history of this country and the history of black/white relations, digging up old wounds etc...
     
  2. davriver209

    davriver209 - Rookie -

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    655
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Occupation:
    Police Officer
    Location:
    Stockton, CA
    Offline
    The law is the law. If the Officer has probable cause to discharge his weapon, than he has every right to do so. What about that is not reasonable?

    Wilson is going to be crucified for the rest of his life for following protocol and the law. I don't understand what more he could've done to please people.
     
  3. John3:16

    John3:16 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    6,590
    Likes Received:
    15,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    CEO - Big Baller Brand
    Offline
    Agree with everything you said, but I need clarification on the bold part. Are you saying blacks aren't as dangerous as the assumption made by the police? Or am I missing your point.

    If that is your point, I agree with you, but I'm not a police officer in those high poverty / high crime areas. I'm sure many become burned out and I'm not just talking about white cops in black areas. I think any cop (of any race) could in any low income / high crime area.
     
    Barnstable likes this.
  4. Barnstable

    Barnstable Supreme Fuzzler of Lakersball.com Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,096
    Likes Received:
    17,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Offline
    What I mean is that black is the first and foremost of the evaluations made about the person.

    An example I use to encounter a lot when I was younger: I can't tell you the number of times I've been wearing a 3 piece suit and still followed around a store the same as I would be if I was wearing a hoodie, as if I still look like a thief. They weren't evaluating anything about me other than categorizing me as black and blacks steal in their mind. The fact that thieves don't generally dress in 3 piece suits was of no consequence.
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2014
    John3:16 likes this.
  5. Barnstable

    Barnstable Supreme Fuzzler of Lakersball.com Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,096
    Likes Received:
    17,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Offline
    We don't know if he followed protocol. There was no court case.

    So Wilson says his story of what happened, Brown can't give his side, but some witnesses are giving conflicting accounts of what happened. There needs to be a trial for all killings IMO. This isn't a small thing.
     
  6. davriver209

    davriver209 - Rookie -

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    655
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Occupation:
    Police Officer
    Location:
    Stockton, CA
    Offline
    There would be 100's of cops in court all the time. Instead of resources going to patrolling streets and what not, it'd be going to attorneys and others fees that are involved in the court proceeding. That's why there was an external agency involved in the investigation of the shooting, there was physical evidence that helped support Wilson's account, that's what the preliminary hearing is
    For. To determine if a crime has been committed. There was not. That's why there's no trial. Had the evidence suggested brown was indeed shot in the back like the "witnesses" claimed, he would be indicted right now. Why can't people who trust the system to find people guilty, continue to trust them when they find people inoccent?
     
  7. Barnstable

    Barnstable Supreme Fuzzler of Lakersball.com Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,096
    Likes Received:
    17,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Offline
    A preliminary trial is not the same as a criminal case and this one was shady at best. It's extremely extremely rare for a jury in an indictment case not to indict. I'm talking out of 162,000 federal criminal cases in 2010, the jury only chose not to indict 11 of them in federal cases for example. Getting an indictment to go to trial is damn near automatic. All the prosecutor has to do is want a full trial because they present all the evidence, both defensive and prosecutorial. But this prosecutor has a bunch of cops in his immediate family, his father was killed by a black person, and on top of all that, as it says in the article above, cops almost never go to trial. I know you're going through police training yourself right now, but come on, you think it's ok that cops almost never go to trial to investigate a killing?

    And there's this. The assistant DA handed the jurors a statute that was deemed unconstitutional to use as the measure of whether to indict:

    'http://player.theplatform.com/p/7wvmTC/MSNBCEmbeddedOffSite?guid=n_lw_Eremis_141126_397271'

    Regarding police officers having to go through the hassle of going to court, how can you trivialize taking a life like that? What is more important than killing a person? What else is more deserving of a trial to make sure the killing was warranted? A regular person kills someone they might be locked up for life or put to death themselves as a result, but it's not worth a police officer even having to explain it in court?
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2014
    John3:16 likes this.
  8. John3:16

    John3:16 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    6,590
    Likes Received:
    15,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    CEO - Big Baller Brand
    Offline
    I agree with Barns, in that we'd get a lot of questions answered if it went to trial.

    Very rarely does a police on-duty shooting go to trial.

    Militarized state. Just how the powers that be want it.

    Shut up. Be happy. -- ice T. 25 years ago
     
  9. davriver209

    davriver209 - Rookie -

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    655
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Occupation:
    Police Officer
    Location:
    Stockton, CA
    Offline
    You are correct, the preliminary hearing is indeed not the same as a trial proceeding. The entire point is to determine if a crime has been committed. It has to meet certain crime elements, (look into law about homicide) if it doesn't, why would we waste a ton of resources to go to trial when we've established that no crime has been committed?

    What you're suggesting is that the preliminary hearing wasn't enough for you. It's basically a mini trial. They heard testimony, they got physical evidence, they've heard from a lot of people (witnesses). You've also mentioned the prosecutor's association to the police. You can't hold that against them... Lots of people that are in law have connections, associations; family, friends, loved ones on someway shape or form involved with law Enforcement.

    And I don't think I explained myself clearly in my last post, forgive me. Officers going through the hassle of court is not what I was referring to. What I meant was why go through the trouble, financial stress on the city, state or peoples to go through a criminal trial, when the preliminary hearing discovered no crime? None. Zero. When cops kill people, the media, the agency, and even citizens don't turn around and let it be. It is investigated thoroughly. It's never been a matter that was swept under the rug immediately.

    This was a 3 month investigation. How is that not a reasonable amount of time to gather evidence, testimony and the facts? What I could say though, I don't like how the agency handled the whole thing. They should've been transparent from the get go. They should've had Wilson talk to media outlets and such (with protection) to tell his story. Instead they hid him.
     
  10. davriver209

    davriver209 - Rookie -

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    655
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Occupation:
    Police Officer
    Location:
    Stockton, CA
    Offline
    Could it be cause a lot of the shootings were justified?
     
  11. John3:16

    John3:16 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    6,590
    Likes Received:
    15,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    CEO - Big Baller Brand
    Offline
    It could. I believe this one was. Once Browns hand went for the gun, game over.

    I'm just saying very few, including me, have read the grand jury report (couple thousand pages). So obviously, many have questions. I have a couple.

    Why did he shoot when Brown ran, stopped, and came back charging? Why not taser him or use a Billy club?

    Why was his body left in the street for 4 hours?

    Maybe this has been answered, but I've never heard the answers.

    It would come up in trial.
     
    Barnstable likes this.
  12. Barnstable

    Barnstable Supreme Fuzzler of Lakersball.com Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,096
    Likes Received:
    17,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Offline
    It's not that I just don't like the outcome as if it was fair, it's that the outcome was predicated on the prosecutors telling the jury to judge the case using a state law that were deemed unconstitutional in 1985. The law she sited allowed an officer to shoot a fleeing suspect in the back if they were fleeing. That hasn't been true at any point during the Assistant DA's tenure as Assistant DA. Are we supposed to believe this was a mistake? Was this the Assistant DA's first time trying a case?

    The background of the prosecutor I gave earlier is just a suggestion as to why they might do something like this.
     
    John3:16 likes this.
  13. John3:16

    John3:16 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    6,590
    Likes Received:
    15,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    CEO - Big Baller Brand
    Offline
    He wasn't shot in the back. The first autopsy, Holder's directed autopsy, and the families autopsy all concluded the same thing. Every shot entered the front of his body.
     
  14. davriver209

    davriver209 - Rookie -

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    655
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Occupation:
    Police Officer
    Location:
    Stockton, CA
    Offline
    I suppose this whole thing could've been avoided had Wilson called for back up, or just got out his car instead of yelling at Brown from the death pit that is called the driver seat. Hindsight is always easy though.
     
  15. Barnstable

    Barnstable Supreme Fuzzler of Lakersball.com Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,096
    Likes Received:
    17,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Offline
    But it's cause for an indictment if he shot at Brown while he was running away, because that's against the law.
     
  16. Barnstable

    Barnstable Supreme Fuzzler of Lakersball.com Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,096
    Likes Received:
    17,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Offline
  17. davriver209

    davriver209 - Rookie -

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    655
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Occupation:
    Police Officer
    Location:
    Stockton, CA
    Offline
    Media perpetuating the violence. Nonsense like that is what's going to continue the riots and stupidity amongst the people who are involved in all this. An upward trajectory means Brown was above Wilson... And the following bullets follow a path where it leads me to reasonably believe that while he fell Wilson fired more shots.

    The thing about that, is we don't shoot to injure. We shoot to stop the threat. Idk if you guys know, but a person fueled with adrenaline will not be stopped by a single bullet, this is how we are trained. We are trained to fire multiple shots in a quick fashion. It's not overkill, it's a method that ensures that the threat will not continue being a threat. So Wilson fired multiple shots quickly, and they hit Brown. These "analyst" I'm sure will do quite a bit to stir the pot to make a name for themselves. Don't rely on CNN or Foxnews or whatever. Go look up the legal documents for the case.

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/25/us/evidence-released-in-michael-brown-case.html?_r=0

    Witness 10 is interesting. Brown charged Wilson, and that's when Wilson fired the rest of his shots. I say, reasonable. He reached for your gun, he's larger than you, you have a reasonable fear that if Brown was to reach you again, he could potentially grab your gun. I see nothing wrong here. Justified shooting.
     
  18. John3:16

    John3:16 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    6,590
    Likes Received:
    15,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    CEO - Big Baller Brand
    Offline
    I agree. If he did that. A lot of people claim a lot of things (shot in the back, hands up, etc), but when the witnesses testified in front of Grand Jury, they didn't say that stuff. This is common. Talk up the story to the media, but when read rights and next to a judge, people change their stories.
     
  19. Barnstable

    Barnstable Supreme Fuzzler of Lakersball.com Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,096
    Likes Received:
    17,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Offline
    The prosecutors giving the jury a law that was made unconstitutional in 85 removed the possibility that the jury would even consider it. Again, this wasn't a trial to see if Wilson deserved to be punished, all that had to be proven here is that there was enough questions to warrant an indictment, and there were.
     
  20. John3:16

    John3:16 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    6,590
    Likes Received:
    15,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    CEO - Big Baller Brand
    Offline
    I agree.

    Do you think Mike Browns step-dad should be charged with inciting a mob? He instructed them to "burn it down" and then led them away to do just that.
     

Share This Page