# Ferguson, MO **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 12, 2014, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354 "2014-08-12T04:51:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 185
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2014, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3681 "2014-12-06T01:46:17Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > I thought we were discussing how we have come to where we are, rather than trying to find reasons to blame the police. Not really. You (and others) specifically raised deaths on duty as one of the reasons for increasing militarization and violence; it’s a perfectly reasonable response to note that deaths in custody have not increased during the same time period that militarization and violence have increased, and nor have increasing militarization and violence seemed to decrease deaths in the line of duty. My point was also precisely that the police themselves are to blame in some of the other areas that you cite, such as the War on Drugs, and the number of former military in the police forces. You seemed to be suggesting that these factors somehow mitigate police responsibility for militarization and violence. I concede that police don’t write the laws regarding drug policy, but they choose how to enforce them, and police departments themselves are also responsible for who they let into the force in the first place. > [@Hamlet](#): > > Does this logic work against non-police officers too? Should we blameprotesters for not doing enough to stop rioters? Or the good people who are in horrible situations in urban environments? Is this a real question? Do you truly not understand the difference between institutional responsibility in an organization like the police force, on the one hand, and personal responsibility of individuals in the overall society, on the other? A general principle of our society, with limited exceptions, is that one individual is not responsible for the actions of another. The non-looters in society are not responsible for the behavior of looters. Those who do not commit acts of violence are not responsible for those who do. If people actively excuse violence, or protect those who commit violence, i’m happy to criticize those people, but i don’t hold individuals responsible for the actions of others. Police officers are part of an institution, and work together within the constraints and the protections of that institution. They have responsibilities within that institution that exceed their responsibilities as individual citizens. They are supposed to uphold the law, as part of their job, and if they know of or see other officers violate the law, they have an active moral and legal duty that citizens do not have to do something about it. Moreover, my comment about good officers protecting bad was not simply about the lack of active intervention; it was about active lying, cover-ups, refusal to testify, and pressure on leadership and politicians not to hold police accountable for their actions. While police unions and individual officers do everything in their power to prevent accountability, and to support and retain and even actively hire officers who have been found derelict in the past, they all have to accept the burden of what the shittiest officers do. The cop who shot the 12-year-old kid in Cleveland recently had been found unfit for duty by a different department, and that department was in the process of firing him when he resigned. Yet he ended up with another police job. In another case, currently under discussion in the omnibus “Controversial encounters” thread, two cops in Jasper, Texas, were fired after beating the crap out of a civilian and costing their town $75,000 in a civil judgment. The Jasper police department, after a vote by the city council, did the right thing, and yet one of those cops is now working for the Jasper County Sheriff. It’s sort of like the Roman Catholic Church paying off victims and moving all those child molesters around to other parishes. In a better world, the police in that department would say, “We don’t want a violent bully on our force.” They all bear some responsibility for every violation of citizens’ rights committed by that man while he’s employed by their force. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2014, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3682 "2014-12-06T02:30:57Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > Not really. You (and others) specifically raised deaths on duty as one of the reasons for increasing militarization and violence; it’s a perfectly reasonable response to note that deaths in custody have not increased during the same time period that militarization and violence have increased, and nor have increasing militarization and violence seemed to decrease deaths in the line of duty. > > My point was also precisely that the police themselves are to blame in some of the other areas that you cite, such as the War on Drugs, and the number of former military in the police forces. You seemed to be suggesting that these factors somehow mitigate police responsibility for militarization and violence. I concede that police don’t write the laws regarding drug policy, but they choose how to enforce them, and police departments themselves are also responsible for who they let into the force in the first place. Yep. It’s blame the police. Alrighty then. I actually thought we were capable of getting somewhere, but apparently everything is all the police’s fault, and their sole responsibility to solve. Got it. > [@mhendo](#): > > Is this a real question? Of course not. It was a question meant to make you think deeper about the logic you were using and to try and emphasize that as grand as it is to make generalization about “the police”, they are, in the end, just people too. I think we’ve hit our impasse. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2014, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3683 "2014-12-06T02:42:27Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Yep. It’s blame the police. Alrighty then. I actually thought we were capable of getting somewhere, but apparently everything is all the police’s fault, and their sole responsibility to solve. Got it. That’s not my position. Misrepresent my position if you like, but just know that this is what you’re doing. I never said it was all the police’s fault. I simply believe that, right now, the most significant difficulties arise out of police culture and practice, and that the best way to approach this issue at the moment is to ask what changes we as a society can make in police practice and police culture in order to begin fixing the problems. Changing the police themselves is not merely the responsibility of the police departments; it is the responsibility of society as a whole. We can try to change the public culture as well, and we should encourage people to adjust their own attitudes about and responses to the police, but i think that this will work best if we change the problematic practices of law enforcement. It is far easier to focus on coherent groups of specific individuals, operating within particular institutions, than to change broad, rather amorphous collections of social groups. > [@Hamlet](#): > > Of course not. It was a question meant to make you think deeper about the logic you were using and to try and emphasize that as grand as it is to make generalization about “the police”, they are, in the end, just people too. > > I think we’ve hit our impasse. OMG! Police are people too? Really? Do go on! I thought that guy who married my mother, and all the other people at the wedding, were caricatures! Of course they’re people, but they are people who we, as a society, provide with power and authority that is not provided to regular citizens. As such, they should be held to higher standards. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2014, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3684 "2014-12-06T02:56:18Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > That’s not my position. Misrepresent my position if you like, but just know that this is what you’re doing. > > I never said it was all the police’s fault. I simply believe that, right now, the most significant difficulties arise out of police culture and practice, and that the best way to approach this issue at the moment is to ask what changes we as a society can make in police practice and police culture in order to begin fixing the problems. Changing the police themselves is not merely the responsibility of the police departments; it is the responsibility of society as a whole. Great. My point was that some of the reasons why “police culture” is the way it is is because, in part, of society as a whole. It would be wonderful if “the police” led the way into changing American culture to be less violent, more respectful, and less aggressive, kinda like military and desegregation. On that we can agree. > [@mhendo](#): > > We can try to change the public culture as well, and we should encourage people to adjust their own attitudes about and responses to the police, but i think that this will work best if we change the problematic practices of law enforcement. It is far easier to focus on coherent groups of specific individuals, operating within particular institutions, than to change broad, rather amorphous collections of social groups. See, we agree that the police should change. We agree that society should change. We likely also agree that it would be much easier for the police to change it’s practices. But, and it’s kinda a big but, I think it will be much more difficult for the police to change, unless certain communities come with it. > [@mhendo](#): > > OMG! Police are people too? Really? Do go on! I thought that guy who married my mother, and all the other people at the wedding, were caricatures! Then you realize the problem with spouting rhetoric like “institutional responsibility” and “they shouldn’t complain too much that they are all lumped in” doesn’t help make your point in the least. > [@mhendo](#): > > Of course they’re people, but they are people who we, as a society, provide with power and authority that is not provided to regular citizens. As such, they should be held to higher standards. And be responsible for changing. Seriously, I get it. We both want things to change, and the easiest, most relevant target to effectuate that change is the police. But that change isn’t going to happen by blaming the police for everything, pretending that they aren’t affected by the communities they serve, and expecting them to do it overnight. I think our issue is one of inflammatory rhetoric and defensiveness rather than substance. As such, I think I’m done. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3685 "2014-12-19T18:24:57Z")
Funny how nobody who thought the Grand Jury wasn’t a kangaroo court revived this thread to talk about Witness #40, the star witness for the… prosecution? Defense? I get so confused when it comes to a Grand Jury that was as full of shit as this one was. Anyway, Witness #40 was not really a witness: > [@](#): > > No eyewitness testimony [was more consistent with Darren Wilson’s personal story of events](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/12/1351303/-Hannity-s-favorite-witness-for-Darren-Wilson-is-a-self-admitted-racist-with-severe-memory-loss) the day he shot and killed Mike Brown than that of Witness #40—who [we now know as white supremacist Sandy McElroy](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/16/1352210/-How-Sandy-McElroy-and-Prosecutor-Bob-McCulloch-colluded-to-destroy-the-case-against-Darren-Wilson). > > Not only did Sandy McElroy testify before the grand jury twice, she was allowed to show what she claimed was her journal from the day Mike Brown was killed. In the journal she said she decided to [travel to a black neighborhood so she could learn to no longer “call blacks niggers.”](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/12/1351303/-Hannity-s-favorite-witness-for-Darren-Wilson-is-a-self-admitted-racist-with-severe-memory-loss) In the transcript of her testimony, in her back and forth with members of the grand jury, members are recorded as actually stating that they believe she’s telling the truth. > > What’s clear now, and what was actually clear to the FBI and the prosecutors before she ever testified, is that Sandy McElroy wasn’t anywhere near Canfield Drive the day Mike Brown was killed and made her entire story up. Not only that, but Sandy McElroy was on record with the St. Louis police as having lied and concocted fanciful stories in other murder cases in which she falsely claimed to be a witness. > > Her inclusion in the grand jury pool of witnesses poisoned the well and her testimony is the most quoted testimony of conservative pundits; Sean Hannity alone has > [quoted her at least 21 times in various broadcasts] > ([How Fox News Ran With Bogus Testimony Given to the Ferguson Grand Jury – Mother Jones](http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/12/ferguson-grand-jury-witness-40-fox-news)). In addition to her [calling African Americans “apes” and saying police should “kill the niggers”](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/12/1351303/-Hannity-s-favorite-witness-for-Darren-Wilson-is-a-self-admitted-racist-with-severe-memory-loss) in the aftermath of Mike Brown’s death, she regularly posted comments on various social networks showing her affection for Darren Wilson weeks and weeks before she ever claimed to be a witness. > > The FBI, in their interrogation of Sandy McElroy, completely tore apart her story and proved that she never drove onto Canfield Drive, never drove off of Canfield Drive, was never seen on Canfield Drive, and couldn’t find one person or photo or message before or after the event to confirm that she was ever there. She claimed she told her ex-husband all about what she saw, but he swore she didn’t and he has problems remembering things. > > [Daily Kos](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/18/1352704/-4-things-that-should-happen-now-that-we-know-the-truth-about-witness-40-a-white-supremacist?detail=facebook#) I’m sure that the powers that be in Ferguson will be rectifying this at any time now. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3686 "2014-12-19T18:29:53Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > Funny how nobody who thought the Grand Jury wasn’t a kangaroo court revived this thread to talk about Witness #40, the star witness for the… prosecution? Defense? I get so confused when it comes to a Grand Jury that was as full of shit as this one was. > > Anyway, Witness #40 was not really a witness: > > I’m sure that the powers that be in Ferguson will be rectifying this at any time now. As I mentioned in the other thread, according to the documents released, the grand jury was quite aware of both the unreliability and the racism of this witness, and questioned her about both. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3687 "2014-12-19T18:36:38Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > As I mentioned in the other thread, according to the documents released, the grand jury was quite aware of both the unreliability and the racism of this witness, and questioned her about both. Yet, she was still presented as if she actually witnessed something! Funny. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3688 "2014-12-19T18:39:09Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > Funny how nobody who thought the Grand Jury wasn’t a kangaroo court revived this thread to talk about Witness #40, the star witness for the… prosecution? Defense? I get so confused when it comes to a Grand Jury that was as full of shit as this one was. > > Anyway, Witness #40 was not really a witness: > > I’m sure that the powers that be in Ferguson will be rectifying this at any time now. Which “powers that be”? The looters and arsonists? The mayor? The store owners who were repeatedly burn out? Witness #40 seems unstable. Has anyone defended witness #40’s version of events? People have quoted witness #40 but that’s not the same as agreeing with her. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3689 "2014-12-19T18:43:39Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Which “powers that be”? The looters and arsonists? The mayor? The store owners who were repeatedly burn out? You suck at cause and effect. > [@](#): > > Witness #40 seems unstable. Has anyone defended witness #40’s version of events? People have quoted witness #40 but that’s not the same as agreeing with her. Priceless! They quoted her out of disagreement with her! Hilarious! ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3690 "2014-12-19T18:49:25Z")
Missed our meds this morning, did we? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3691 "2014-12-19T18:55:14Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > You suck at cause and effect. You were not clear in your previous post. I was hoping you could let others know who, exactly, you were referring to. Or not. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3692 "2014-12-19T19:04:16Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > I’m sure that the powers that be in Ferguson will be rectifying this at any time now. One good thing about not having taking this case to trial is that, in the event that evidence that _could_ convict Wilson surfaces, the powers that be could, in fact, use it. Something that couldn’t have happened if they’d gone to trial with only the evidence presented to the Grand Jury. But removing this woman’s testimony doesn’t magically create such evidence, so there’s no need to rectify anything as yet. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3693 "2014-12-19T19:52:14Z")
I’m thinking that her testimony was included as a means to remind the grand jury of the unreliability of eyewitness testimony, as well as a means to demonstrate the prosecutor’s lack of bias. A prudent caution, given the number of witnesses who were on hand to accuse Officer Wilson. In the interests of strict neutrality, it would be prudent to remind the jurors of that. So that justice be served, you understand. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3694 "2014-12-19T19:57:50Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I’m thinking that her testimony was included as a means to remind the grand jury of the unreliability of eyewitness testimony, as well as a means to demonstrate the prosecutor’s lack of bias. A prudent caution, given the number of witnesses who were on hand to accuse Officer Wilson. In the interests of strict neutrality, it would be prudent to remind the jurors of that. So that justice be served, you understand. Certainly, if the jurors were thinking of believing eyewitness reports that are contradicted by physical evidence, it would be a worthwhile reminder. There were plenty of worthless witnesses for Brown’s side, as well. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3695 "2014-12-19T20:08:01Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > As I mentioned in the other thread, according to the documents released, the grand jury was quite aware of both the unreliability and the racism of this witness, and questioned her about both. Given that the grand jury trial was largely about appearances, and given that there’s now a raft of misunderstanding about how the grand jury interacted with Sandy McElroy, a witness who was known at the time of her testimony not to have witnessed anything, do you still want to defend the prosecution’s (moronic) decision to allow her to testify? ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3696 "2014-12-19T20:09:17Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Certainly, if the jurors were thinking of believing eyewitness reports that are contradicted by physical evidence, it would be a worthwhile reminder. There were plenty of worthless witnesses for Brown’s side, as well. Plenty? I’d have to go back through my notes, but by my count it’s two. And the prosecution was moronic for allowing them to testify as well. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3697 "2014-12-19T20:17:11Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Plenty? I’d have to go back through my notes, but by my count it’s two. And the prosecution was moronic for allowing them to testify as well. Well, that’s more than enough to counteract one bad defence witness. I’m convinced that, if any “witnesses” had been prevented from testifying, there would have been at least as much outcry as there is about her testifying. Not that that makes it right, of course, the only right course of action based on the evidence and nothing else would have been for the prosecutor to dismiss the case. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3698 "2014-12-19T20:25:05Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Well, that’s more than enough to counteract one bad defence witness. I’m convinced that, if any “witnesses” had been prevented from testifying, there would have been at least as much outcry as there is about her testifying. I’m sure there _were_ “witnesses” who didn’t testify. This notion that the prosecutors put every human being involved in the case or interviewed by police on the stand is patently false. There was most certainly some level of prosecutorial discretion involved in how the available evidence was presented to the grand jury. Furthermore, I think the public is smart enough to understand and accept that certain witnesses who didn’t actually witness anything be barred from testifying. > [@Steophan](#): > > Not that that makes it right, of course, the only right course of action based on the evidence and nothing else would have been for the prosecutor to dismiss the case. Right, sure. So we have a prosecutor who lacked the courage to do the right thing, and who made the egregious mistake of appointing two attorneys who put 3 witnesses on the stand who no reasonable person would agree actually witnessed anything. And people are supposed to have _faith_ in this guy? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3699 "2014-12-19T20:42:58Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Given that the grand jury trial was largely about appearances, and given that there’s now a raft of misunderstanding about how the grand jury interacted with Sandy McElroy, a witness who was known at the time of her testimony not to have witnessed anything, do you still want to defend the prosecution’s (moronic) decision to allow her to testify? Again, as I said in the other thread, the prosecutor promised to present all the evidence to the Grand Jury. _All_. He kept the promise. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2014, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/3700 "2014-12-19T21:04:49Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Again, as I said in the other thread, the prosecutor promised to present all the evidence to the Grand Jury. _All_. He kept the promise. He kept his promise so well he presented all the evidence _and then some!_ What a stand up guy. A) Do you believe that Sandy McElroy was a witness to the events in Ferguson? B) Do you think a reasonable person, given the transcript from her interview with the FBI, would believe that Sandy McElroy was a witness to the events in Ferguson? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354.md?page=184) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354.md?page=186)