It wasn’t double normal walking speed. YMMV.
I just watched the exclusive interview on ABC news with Wilson, and you know what? FUCK Michael Brown, that piece of shit got exactly what he had coming to him.
Uh, of course you’d think that, given who was being interviewed. It’s not exactly like anyone else’s point of view was presented… Even if it could.
One thing that seems to be left out of your analysis is that the movement was likely to not be smooth, especially with him (6’4")falling forward at the end. I thin it is safe to assume that the end of his progress was slower then the rest, so it seems likely that he could have started out with something resembling a charge.
On review, Fotheringay makes an equally good point about the movement not being consistent.
Possibly, but not definitively. I was simply disputing Terr’s assertion that the forensic evidence definitively determined that Brown charged that last 25 feet.
According to Stephanopoulos, Wilson answered every question that was asked. And after watching the interview, there was nothing indicating to me that Wilson was fabricating anything about how the events went down.
If he claimed that it did so “definitively”, I think that goes to far. But given what we do know, it seems like that is the most likely scenario? Do you agree? If not, what pushes you away from that opinion?
I used to largely agree with what seems like a common sense argument. While still early there’s some experimental research being done at Washington State that seems to contradict that reasoning. I’lllink the Washington State press release about it instead of the pdf of one of the papers. It’s still early and certainly could use much more study both experimentally and in actual cases. The initial findings tend to show a bias against whites in use of force. Officers delay longer before shooting when the subject is black. Officers tend to shoot unarmed white suspects in error at a higher rate. Officers in the tests tend to fail to use force against armed suspects when the should at a higher rate when the subject is black. They did look at the alpha wave suppression with civilians tested (as opposed to testing with officers and military) which showed heightened fear responses to black subjects. That fits with the subconscious higher threat model but the response to heightened fear doesn’t seem to produce. Even that data doesn’t show a correlation between perceived threat and inappropriate response.
The only evidence I’ve seen related to courts seems to fit your assumptions of juries at the experimental level. I’ve never really gone out of my way to look at that much though.
Aside from possible issues with the assumptions about shooting above that doesn’t mean those assumptions are necessary to reach the raw disparities in the data. Fitting the data is not simply enough. Race is correlated with violent crime rates and violent crime rates are understandably linked to being shot by police justifiably. Poverty also tends to lead to less effective legal representation which may control for some of the sentencing/wrongful conviction disparity. Strict racial bias may play a part or be the major part. In the absence of good data the typical media and social argument can be summarized as correlation equals causation. That’s a pretty horrible argument. It’s made worse when some of the underlying assumptions are at least showing hints of being invalid.
In the absence of clear causation I don’t mind socially choosing to pay attention to possible racial bias issues while we gather more information. We should also look at the other correlated and possibly causal factors. I do mind when the proposal is to treat one possible cause as the only cause. We accept risk by ignoring what might be the actual causes. We stop seeking more knowledge if we believe the answer is known. Overemphasizing race makes the cost to interracial relations on other issues more problematic. It’s pretty clear to me that we are overemphasizing race in the typical social and political discourse,
I don’t doubt that cops in Washington State hesitate longer, but it’s … Washington State. (But how much longer? is it a matter of .4 seconds?)
I’m not sure. Given the testimony I’ve read, and other evidence like the 21 feet and the ~3 seconds between groups of gunshots, both “Brown charged” and “Brown turned and tried to surrender with a misguided approach back towards Wilson” fit the facts (and much of the testimony, though from different witnesses). Both involve a very poor decision by Brown. I’m not sure which is more likely… a likely wounded Brown turns while being fired at to charge and fight, or a likely wounded Brown turns while being fired at to awkwardly approach hands up. Both are weird, but one of them probably happened.
I’m not sure if this means the Grand Jury should have indicted or not.
This is interesting, but it’s hard to be convinced by a test that, due to the fact that it’s a test and the participants know it’s a test, doesn’t actually involve any real danger or real fear of harm.
Fair enough. Though I don’t see why you’d be reluctant to say why you think one scenario would be the most likely or not.
That aside, are you swayed at all that all of the witnesses were black, and likely, from the neighborhood. And due to that, likely to share what appears to be a general mistrust of the policing of that community?
Because I’m unsure. Both are weird actions, and it’s hard to imagine why Brown would have done either. As an optimist of human nature, I suppose it’s a little easier to believe that he tried to surrender, but that’s not enough for me to say one way or the other.
No. There’s no way to know (without video, or something like that) if a given person is being entirely honest or not.
I guess that’s a reasonable doubt. But what makes you find the notion plausible that many cops are “just a little more likely to pull the trigger” with black suspects then? On what do you base this?
Because of things like the fact that young black men are 21 times more likely to be killed by police then young white men, despite a disparity in violent crime that’s only about 6 to 9 times. There aren’t a whole lot of statistics out there on police shootings by race – police departments don’t seem particularly eager to look into this – but what numbers out there suggest that cops do in fact shoot young black men way more than young white men, at a disparity that is far greater than the crime disparity between young black men and young white men.
My notion is just the most reasonable explanation, in my view.
And because one cannot KNOW, you, of course can’t opine on a message board?
Let me ask it this way. Does that fact that all the witnesses were black—and therefore the testimony that argued to not indict Wilson came from black people, who were probably locals—give you less confidence or more confidence that the decision to not indict Wilson was the right one.
That’s what I’m doing!
This fact does not affect my level of confidence. I don’t trust witnesses more or less based on where they call home.
But you don’t deny that it’s easier to accept one side’s version of events when that side is all you hear, yes?
And I’m sure that at least a few people watched it and thought that his version was lies at worst and self serving at best. So?
ahem
Don’t roll up on a cop and assault him (a crime, by the way) if you don’t want to face repercussions. The fact that this gets lost in the conversation is mind numbing.
What also gets lost is that many people simply do not accept the police’s word that an assault even took place. The fact that one side starts out with the assumption that such an event took place as a given is where a lot of this comes from to begin with.