- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Michael Brown: Officer involved sustained facial injuries.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 6:16 pm to the808bass
Posted on 8/13/14 at 6:16 pm to the808bass
Heckuva job, Brownie.
(IDGAF if that joke is Germans, I'm not reading 5 pages to find out.)
(IDGAF if that joke is Germans, I'm not reading 5 pages to find out.)
0
Posted on 8/13/14 at 6:16 pm to Jarlaxle
Interesting. 
Posted on 8/13/14 at 6:27 pm to Porky
quote:
Interesting.
St Louis County Police is a separate entity form the Ferguson/Florissant police.
Its not really interesting unless you dont understand that dynamic. Folks without knowledge of said dynamic looking for something that isnt there.
Now if folks got the actual ferguson dispatch audio, then that might be interesting. Listening to a neighboring police dispatch with one way audio while they were being called in for help by the Ferguson police isnt really interesting at all. I suspect the EMS calls etc came out of Ferguson and the St Louis County Dispatch was just reacting to the calls for assistance from Ferguson.
This post was edited on 8/13/14 at 6:37 pm
Posted on 8/13/14 at 6:47 pm to kilo
quote:
Now if folks got the actual ferguson dispatch audio, then that might be interesting.
Yea...I figured that out while listening. I'm guessing the audio from Ferguson is probably not available due to the investigation.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 6:54 pm to Porky
quote:
Yea...I figured that out while listening. I'm guessing the audio from Ferguson is probably not available due to the investigation.
Its amazing the amount of dumbasses that are using that tweet and audio to drum up more trouble. I followed that hashtag for a while, good grief are there some idiots living among us.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 6:58 pm to kilo
Don't know how many people actually saw the second witness statement, but it lines up with what I was saying was the likely scenario of events...
LINK
quote:
I see them tussling through the window. The kid was pulling off and the cop was pulling in,” Mitchell said.
Mitchell told News 4 she saw a door close on a police car. An officer was inside and Brown, Jr. was on the outsideShe said the two were arm wrestling through the car window. Mitchell said she then tried to pull out her phone to record. Shots then rang out.
“It just didn’t look right for them to be arm wrestling,” Mitchell said. “The first gun shot came from the window, so I just started getting out of the way.”
According to Mitchell, Brown, Jr, began to run away after the first shot was fired.
“After the shot, the kid just breaks away. The cop follows him, kept shooting, the kid’s body jerked as if he was hit. After his body jerked he turns around, puts his hands up, and the cop continues to walk up on him and continues to shoot until he goes all the way down,” Mitchell said.
LINK
Posted on 8/13/14 at 7:06 pm to Lsut81
quote:
Lsut81
Yea. Sure sounds like there was a tussle and then he was shot. What they were tussling over is going to be a critical part of the case.
I found this interesting: “It just didn’t look right for them to be arm wrestling,” Mitchell said. “The first gun shot came from the window, so I just started getting out of the way.”
I wonder how much she actually had seen after the initial shot. Looked like a second story window.
I hope justice is served. Which ever side ends up being the right one.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 7:09 pm to kilo
quote:
Sure sounds like there was a tussle and then he was shot
Yup, whether that is justified or not, who knows....
The issue comes in if Brown took off running and the officer followed him and fired another 5-7 shots while he was in no danger.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 7:15 pm to Lsut81
quote:
The issue comes in if Brown took off running and the officer followed him and fired another 5-7 shots while he was in no danger.
Agree. After things started coming out today I suspected that this was going to be the discussion. Did he use proper and reasonable force? I think folks are going to have to come to terms that there was an altercation between the two and if it was over his sidearm then this is going to be a long drawn out murky process.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 7:54 pm to kilo
One thing I don't like about this is that you have witness accounts being provided to the public while the investigation is ongoing.
As an investigator, I want statements that have not been tainted by leaked info.
As an investigator, I want statements that have not been tainted by leaked info.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 7:56 pm to the808bass
quote:
I find it interesting that the one piece of info the police feels comfortable leaking makes their case look good. And by interesting, I mean predictable and boring.
So on his knees with hands up was not predictable and boring?
Posted on 8/13/14 at 8:02 pm to kilo
There are always two sides to every story.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 8:11 pm to kilo
quote:That's not the point at all. IMO, the point is: if it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander. If any other shooting suspect's name would have been released by this time, then the officer's name should be released. On principle alone. Regardless of what it would or would not have prevented.
This isnt a normal circumstance though. Can we stop pretending like its a run of the mill investigation. I can guarantee that releasing the identity would not have prevented any of the looting and other various felonies that have occurred in relation to this situation.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 8:16 pm to Patrick_Bateman
quote:
That's not the point at all. IMO, the point is: if it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander. If any other shooting suspect's name would have been released by this time, then the officer's name should be released. On principle alone. Regardless of what it would or would not have prevented.
Its EXACTLY the point. If the investigation leads to findings of wrong doing and a grand jury indictment then the info will be released.
If you dont want to see this is a different situation thats on you. You are free to feel all the indignation you want, the reality is that its an ongoing investigation in an officer related shooting and isnt close to the "goose and gander" analogy you made.
This post was edited on 8/13/14 at 8:17 pm
Posted on 8/13/14 at 8:32 pm to kilo
quote:
If you dont want to see this is a different situation thats on you. You are free to feel all the indignation you want, the reality is that its an ongoing investigation in an officer related shooting and isnt close to the "goose and gander" analogy you made.
It's not really different. If he's cleared some will always think he's guilty. Just like when police release the name of a person of interest or a suspect. It's a reality check for the police as to how much power their words have. They enjoy it when they get to use that power, not when they're the object of that power.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 9:10 pm to the808bass
quote:
It's not really different.
Its very different. Im not sure how some of you cant see this. He is a police officer who hasnt been charged with a crime. The investigation is ongoing as to whether that force he used was justified or not.
Its just different. Its actually plainly obvious. If they find wrong doing and he is charged and fail to release his name thats another story completely.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 9:22 pm to kilo
quote:
alleged altercation
'Alleged' altercations do not lead to facial injuries, do they?
Posted on 8/13/14 at 9:24 pm to kilo
quote:
Its very different. Im not sure how some of you cant see this. He is a police officer who hasnt been charged with a crime. The investigation is ongoing as to whether that force he used was justified or not.
So police don't release suspects' names during an investigation.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 9:24 pm to FightinTigersDammit
quote:
'Alleged' altercations do not lead to facial injuries, do they?
Alleged altercations do lead to alleged facial injuries.
Posted on 8/13/14 at 9:31 pm to the808bass
quote:
So police don't release suspects' names during an investigation.
IS he a suspect in a crime or is he being investigated for a shooting that took place in the function of his duties as a police officer?
This isnt a criminal investigation at this point. You can keep bringing the same argument from different angles and with different verbage but it doesnt change that underlying fact.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News