Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-12-2014, 06:22 PM
Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/...-indicted/

I can't understand it. Video evidence is not enough? What the hell happened that the grand jury can't indict this officer for at least negligent manslaughter???

There was also a link in the comment section of that article to a forum with apparently a bunch of dumbass police officers. It was saddening and gave me cancer. http://theerant.yuku.com/topic/71813/Cop...H-W6erOphE

Weeping
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2014, 07:05 PM
RE: Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
Everyone who supported Wilson who shot and killed Brown argued "You were not there, there was no video, the grand jury spoke". Now we have a case even with video where you cant get an indictment.

Why do I bring up Wilson in relationship to this case?

Because people do not understand that prosecutors who argue in front of grand juries are also in constant close relationships with the cops who serve under them. It seems absurd to allow the same group of people to act as oversight over themselves with no independent review.

In the Brown case, there only one key witness the prosecutor relied on in the grand jury that was given the most softball questions, where as the witnesses who said Brown put his hands up, were put under more scrutiny on cross. When the police interviewed that guy he said he was 100 yards away, and was "unsure" of Brown's body "gesture" when he turned around. Somehow that testimony changed at the trial when it magically went to 50-75 yards and was still "not sure" about the "full rush".

On top of this that grand jury was given an antiquated law about firing upon a fleeing suspect that was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional decades ago. Not to mention that prosecutor never removed himself prior to the trial even though he had personal relations with a cop who was murdered.

Wilson was never cross examined like a prosecutor does in a regular trial. He was never grilled about while he said he was afraid, why he would pull up in close proximity which is not in dispute, and attempt to physically confront Brown at a seated position in a tactical disadvantage if he was in fear for his life. If he got lip from Brown, wouldn't that indicate non compliance alone? If you are so afraid why would you attempt to open that door after you knew someone wasn't doing what you wanted? Is there any training manual that tells a cop to confront someone they think is dangerous in a seated position?

The point in comparing the two is to demonstrate a lack of trust in the system. We are basically turning our police force into James bond with a licence to kill. This is more than these two cases. That police have a different standard of accountability. And on top of that our justice system treats blacks ON AVERAGE more harshly by cops and by our courts.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Brian37's post
03-12-2014, 08:11 PM
RE: Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
(03-12-2014 07:05 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  Because people do not understand that prosecutors who argue in front of grand juries are also in constant close relationships with the cops who serve under them. It seems absurd to allow the same group of people to act as oversight over themselves with no independent review.

Yup. I'd go so far as to call it prosecutorial misconduct. They can be selective about which evidence gets presented to the Grand Jury and can withhold any exculpatory evidence until trial. If they want an indictment they're gonna get it. But these dudes gotta work closely with the popo daily so they don't want no bad blood. That's why we have Special Prosecutors. The ones who really fucked up were the ones in a position to call for a Special Prosecutor and didn't.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2014, 08:24 PM
RE: Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
(03-12-2014 08:11 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-12-2014 07:05 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  Because people do not understand that prosecutors who argue in front of grand juries are also in constant close relationships with the cops who serve under them. It seems absurd to allow the same group of people to act as oversight over themselves with no independent review.

Yup. I'd go so far as to call it prosecutorial misconduct. They can be selective about which evidence gets presented to the Grand Jury and can withhold any exculpatory evidence until trial. If they want an indictment they're gonna get it. But these dudes gotta work closely with the popo daily so they don't want no bad blood. That's why we have Special Prosecutors. The ones who really fucked up were the ones in a position to call for a Special Prosecutor and didn't.

Well with Wilson, it isnt that they hid what they did. It was that they lead the narrative from the start and improperly instructed the jury, treated some witnesses differently than others.

I would not call it a cover up as much as circling the wagons. It is the same type of logic that causes theists to attempt to retrofit history or science to their book of myth after the fact. If you create the narrative after the fact, much easier to lead people where you want them to go.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2014, 09:01 PM (This post was last modified: 03-12-2014 09:04 PM by Kaepora Gaebora.)
RE: Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
(03-12-2014 07:05 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  Everyone who supported Wilson who shot and killed Brown argued "You were not there, there was no video, the grand jury spoke". Now we have a case even with video where you cant get an indictment.

Why do I bring up Wilson in relationship to this case?

Because people do not understand that prosecutors who argue in front of grand juries are also in constant close relationships with the cops who serve under them. It seems absurd to allow the same group of people to act as oversight over themselves with no independent review.

In the Brown case, there only one key witness the prosecutor relied on in the grand jury that was given the most softball questions, where as the witnesses who said Brown put his hands up, were put under more scrutiny on cross. When the police interviewed that guy he said he was 100 yards away, and was "unsure" of Brown's body "gesture" when he turned around. Somehow that testimony changed at the trial when it magically went to 50-75 yards and was still "not sure" about the "full rush".

On top of this that grand jury was given an antiquated law about firing upon a fleeing suspect that was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional decades ago. Not to mention that prosecutor never removed himself prior to the trial even though he had personal relations with a cop who was murdered.

Wilson was never cross examined like a prosecutor does in a regular trial. He was never grilled about while he said he was afraid, why he would pull up in close proximity which is not in dispute, and attempt to physically confront Brown at a seated position in a tactical disadvantage if he was in fear for his life. If he got lip from Brown, wouldn't that indicate non compliance alone? If you are so afraid why would you attempt to open that door after you knew someone wasn't doing what you wanted? Is there any training manual that tells a cop to confront someone they think is dangerous in a seated position?

The point in comparing the two is to demonstrate a lack of trust in the system. We are basically turning our police force into James bond with a licence to kill. This is more than these two cases. That police have a different standard of accountability. And on top of that our justice system treats blacks ON AVERAGE more harshly by cops and by our courts.

I do want to point out that the body of Brown was a few feet from where Wilson was according to bullet casings, not 75-100 yards. The reason he wasn't grilled as much as some witnesses were was because other witnesses had stories completely different that contradicted each other, changed, or did not match with physical evidence. For example, one woman testified initially that she saw Brown reaching into the car and acting like he was beating up Wilson, which matched. But then, when she testified on another day, she said she was suffering from mental disorders, racist views, and could not distinguish the truth with things online. Wut? However, Wilson's testimony didn't really contradict the evidence present.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/078c82ad4...sistencies

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volok...e-officer/

Additionally, a grand jury is not a trial; there are no charges and no cross-examination. It is rare even for a lawyer to be present. It is a special process to determine if there is enough evidence to indict a person with criminal charges. In this case, there was a lack of evidence and also mostly witness testimony, which is usually not held to a high value in the court of law nowadays as it is largely unreliable and circumstantial. On top of that, the physical evidence (what little there was) supports Wilson's side of the story more that he was firing in self defense towards a charging Michael Brown, but it's not likely to know for certain.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2014, 09:04 PM
RE: Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
(03-12-2014 09:01 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote:  I do want to point out that the body of Brown was a few feet from Wilson.

According to who? Wilson? There weren't any other officers present at the time.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2014, 09:06 PM
RE: Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
(03-12-2014 09:04 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-12-2014 09:01 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote:  I do want to point out that the body of Brown was a few feet from Wilson.

According to who? Wilson? There weren't any other officers present at the time.

I edited my post. In the WaPo article for physical evidence, shell casings from Wilson's gun were found a few feet away from where Brown's body lay. This collaborated with Wilson's story.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2014, 09:25 PM (This post was last modified: 03-12-2014 09:30 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
(03-12-2014 09:06 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote:  
(03-12-2014 09:04 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  According to who? Wilson? There weren't any other officers present at the time.

I edited my post. In the WaPo article for physical evidence, shell casings from Wilson's gun were found a few feet away from where Brown's body lay. This collaborated with Wilson's story.

That would certainly jibe with Wilson's version but the WaPo graphic shows a shitload of shell casings (dude obviously ain't no marksman) but doesn't show the location of Brown's body. Is 19 or 20 the location of Brown's body? And given that Wilson apparently can't hit the broad sign of a barn, the evidence is also consistent with Wilson pursuing Brown until he got close enough where he could actually hit him.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2014, 09:47 PM
RE: Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
(03-12-2014 09:25 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-12-2014 09:06 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote:  I edited my post. In the WaPo article for physical evidence, shell casings from Wilson's gun were found a few feet away from where Brown's body lay. This collaborated with Wilson's story.

That would certainly jibe with Wilson's version but the WaPo graphic shows a shitload of shell casings (dude obviously ain't no marksman) but doesn't show the location of Brown's body. Is 19 or 20 the location of Brown's body? And given that Wilson apparently can't hit the broad sign of a barn, the evidence is also consistent with Wilson pursuing Brown until he got close enough where he could actually hit him.

Mmm, no. The blood spatter shows Brown was moving towards Wilson. And he was not hit in the back by a bullet, so unless you want to say he was running backwards and then fell on the ground face first, he wasn't running away from Wilson while shots were fired.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2014, 09:52 PM
RE: Cop who strangled person to death for cigarettes not indicted
Also, it's pretty damn hard to accurately fire a gun at a target more than a few yards, much less so if you're panicked, but his accuracy is not really relevant.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: