In these situations, most people always fall back to their respective side. Damn the facts, it’s all about their side coming out on top.
Not surprising (although of course depressing) to see comments like “thanks for taking out the trash”.
However, I also disagree with the following quote on the other side, from PookleBlinky:
Providing a legal defense for someone ACCUSED of murder is very very far from “rewarding a man for murder”.
The less information that comes out before a potential trial, the better. Unless for some reason you don’t want him to get a fair trial. I can’t imagine that…
Neither you nor anyone else has a right to know the details of an ongoing investigation.
The Saint Louis County Police Department Incident Report 14-43984 - Original has been released. There are reports from other police departments, as well as the FBI, that haven’t been released yet.
I assume other reports will be released pending permission from the SA’s/DA’s office. The grand jury is still hearing evidence.
Yeah, his backing off wasn’t exactly impressive.
But his original point was good. Those GOP ‘job’ bills, by and large, had about as much to do with creating jobs as a program of walking from one’s seat in front of the TV to either the fridge or the restroom during each commercial break while watching football resembles an exercise program. No question, that walk constitutes ‘exercise’ but not enough to make a dent in one’s lack of fitness.
And what PolitEquate (Motto: “Both Sides Do It”) has to say isn’t worth paying attention to. They’re better than WorldNetDaily as a cite, but that’s about it.
IANAL but battery on a police officer I am about 95% sure is a felony. Under the assumption that some kind of physical altercation took place between brown and the officer, 1 definitely and possibly 2 criteria are met.
Notice that you only need 1 met. That’s why I posted it. According to MO statutes, the police officer was fully justified in using deadly force to arrest Brown, even if Brown was running away at the time. Yet, apparently, there are SC decisions that say otherwise. Thing is, the MO statute is the one in force in MO, and was not changed due to the SC decision. So - is the MO statute the one in force or not?
Ah, good, so it was legal to gun him down. We are much reassured.
That is a really good question.
My best guess is that the Missouri statute would be read in compliance with Garner.
But I really don’t know the answer. Garner concluded that a law that allowed shooting fleeing felons violated the Fourth Amendment. But it did so by way of deciding a civil suit against the police.
Now we have a criminal law, and a notional suspect who could point at the law and say that it allowed his actions, and criminal laws must be construed strictly against the state.
I haven’t researched the issue, and frankly I have no certainty about how that argument would play out. My sense is that Garner would control; the statute authorizing the shooting of a felon would be read harmoniously with Garner’s limits, and the officer could not rely upon it for a defense.
But that’s a guess.
But here’s the thing: the law may violate the Fourth Amendment, but it is the law - until it is changed. It hasn’t been changed. It may be changed now, but not retroactively. The officer (stipulate for the sake of argument) was complying with current MO law. How can he be convicted of a crime?
Seems like this whole line of argument is moot on either side. Brown wasn’t gunned down fleeing. Either he was killed from a standing position or, if you want to believe Wilson’s implausible story, charging at him. Whichever you pick, the Garner decision is irrelevant.
I don’t think Wilson’s story is implausible, but even if you accept it, it is still pretty clear that Wilson made at least one shot, maybe two, at Brown as he was running away. That is against the law per Garner, but fully lawful per MO statutes.
Still irrelevant to this case. None of the shots Wilson allegedly fired from behind seems to have landed. Keep in kind, Wilson’s unofficial story is that he actually DIDN’T fire at Brown from behind. So you ARE kinda calling his story implausible, if you’re saying he did.
I was answering Terr’s question, one in which he explicitly said that the facts were stipulated for the sake of argument.
I would imagine MO has far more developed history/precedents WRT officer involved shootings over the years…im just not much of a legal researcher.
I want to apologize to everyone if I suggested that any of the Ferguson police were racist or incompetent. In fact, we learn that one 20±year veteran of the St. Louis police is an expert in evolving constitutional law, and supports diversity.
Read a News story about Dan Page, or watch a News video. He is also distinguished scholar, who gives insights about the troubles facing America. Twenty-plus years on the St. Louis Police force! They must be proud of him.
With such fine men serving in the St. Louis police, I think we can put to rest the idea that they could somehow be to blame for this crisis. But wouldn’t you know? Almost one-third of the comments on the YouTubes condemn Dan Page rather than support him. :smack: And to top it off, the Police just placed him on leave, after two decades of outstanding service, due to pressure from the real bigots. 
Shut up you fucking troll.
Regards,
Shodan
Are you addressing septimus, or the racist nutcase cop he’s referring to?
Or you’ll…
Who said I was going to do anything? He’s a fucking troll (and liar) and should shut up.
Regards,
Shodan