Precisely why I included this part:
“2. Everyone agrees that the cop executed the guy, even when he had turned around, with his hands up.”
Really? The family’s own pathologist (Dr. Baden) says he was shot from the front. So either you posted before Baden released his report or are woefully uninformed. I assume its the former which only goes to prove how what everybody agrees on is often later proved wrong.
In most jurisdictions deadly force is justified if there an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury. Not an immediate threat but an imminent threat. If you don’t know the difference, look it up. The officer’s belief that there is an imminent danger must be reasonable and he must be able to articulate why he had that belief. He can’t just say “I was in fear for my life” as Toofs says. Read Graham v Connor for some insight on what the law is.
What actually happened in Ferguson remains to be determined. I’ll repeat what I stated in another post. If the officer’s version of events is correct, he may well have been justified in using deadly force. If someone (a much bigger someone) who I believed had just committed a strong arm robbery, then assaulted me and tried take my gun with a shot being fired during the struggle and, after beginning to flee/walk away, turned and ran at me in an aggressive manner my only conclusion would be that he intended to do me serious harm. At that point all bets are off and I am firing until the threat has stopped. And that may mean multiple shots. Including head shots. Including a shot to the top of the head. It takes time (maybe a second or two or more) to realize the threat has been stopped. In that amount of time it is easy to get off two or three more shots. They may impact politically incorrect spots like the back or top of the head. It happens but its not an execution.
That Brown’s left arm seemed to have been raised doesn’t necessarily mean it was raised in surrender. It could be raised in an attack position.
As to the original post - I think someone who has been shown to be a law breaker in inherently less trustworthy than someone who has not. I have rarely, if ever, heard of a thief/burglar/drug dealer/rapist/you name it that didn’t deny it when first accused. That makes them a liar. If they lie about that why should I believe anything they say?
njtt - what is a “known robber”? Does he have to have been convicted at trial to get that title? Sure, there could be another person fitting that exact description carrying the exact items that were reported to have been stolen. If I’m a cop I know that’s my man. It appears that Brown was a legitimate suspect in a robbery that just happened.
Surely, the forensics team can tell from the wounds whether he was shot from in front or behind. If the cop claims that Brown was running towards him at the time, and the evidence shows that Brown was shot from behind, then it’s going to be pretty easy to find the cop guilty. If, on the other hand, the forensic evidence shows that all the shots were from the front, then clearly any witnesses who claimed otherwise were mistaken.
I believe policemen are trained that it someone has to be shot, that you shoot tehm until they go down.
The forensics say he was shot from the front. They do not say he was only shot from the front, because some wounds are not on the torso.
Either you misunderstand what you quoted or I’m misunderstanding you.
Shooting someone from the front = Execution
What is the difference between “execution” and “being in fear of your life”?
Unless he’s an android, he acted in a way that humans do. That’s not trivial; we need to remember that plenty of totally understandable actions are, for excellent reasons, felonies. The question isn’t whether he acted in a human fashion (Pol Pot acted in a human fashion, being human and all); the question is whether he used unreasonable force.
Execution = Killing someone who is in your charge
Being in fear for your life = Being in fear for your life
I don’t understand the point of your question.
You surely do, you just want to make a point. I don’t think the kid was executed, I think the cop was in fear of his life. Whether what he did was justifiable, I do believe a jury should decide.
Ah. Well, I guess we’ll see what the toxicology report comes back with. It’s not impossible that the officer’s story that the two of them were acting like a pair of rampaging gorillas is true, but that contradicts the statements of Piaget Crenshaw and Tiffany Mitchell. Both witnesses say that Michael and Dorian were making a bee line out of there, once Officer Wilson started shooting. Neither one noticed Michael and Dorian until the fight broke out, which you would expect if there were two crazy young, hopped up men wandering about. The video of the robbery makes Michael out to look like a belligerent a-hole, but otherwise rationally minded and sober. He does drop some stuff, but otherwise he looks to be standing tall, and to be walking straight and true. And if the testimony that Dorian gave, which paints the two of them like a pair of angels, was made anytime immediately following the shooting, it seems unlikely that he was out of his wits.
Brown may well have been an angry, belligerent dude. But I don’t know that a lot of right-minded guys turn around to rush someone who has already shot them four times.
Does anyone know if the officer had a stun gun? I think that, that would be the usual way that they would be trained to deal with a physical confrontation with someone with no weapon.
Who said he was already shot four times when he turned around. Did you read the account posted? We;ll see if that’s the same as the testimony the officer will offer before the grand jury.
It does seem really stupid for Brown to try and rush an officer whose weapon is drawn, but stranger things have happened. In something like this that happens rather quickly, eyewitness testimony often varies. One or two witnesses claiming Brown was surrendering when shot will not offset other testimony of people saying he was approaching the officer rather than getting down on the ground.
If the officer shot an unarmed surrendering man that would be execution, but we don’t know that happened.
So I am guessing, since I haven’t heard a peep about it, that there was no dashboard camera in the police cruiser?
If that’s your paraphrase of what’s being discussed, then I think it is baffling you. There’s a pretty wide tract of land in there between “worthy of your complete trust” and “no longer a problem to shoot him until he stops moving.” Crazy people or not, it’s obviously not the case that what people are objecting to is the idea that the dead kid might have had negative personality traits.
The wikipedia page says Brown was shot six times, with at least two from the front. It doesn’t specify the others. For my point, the exact number wasn’t really salient, but if you think it matters, I’m happy to hear why it is.
Sage Rat - You are right. I mis-read what you said. I took it to mean turned around “away” from the officer. Clearly, that’s not what you meant. On the other hand, your use of execution has me a little confused. That implies that Brown was non-threatening/defenseless. It has yet to be determined that he was either one of those. It seems to me you, like so many others, have already decided the cop is guilty. Without having one word of testimony. Pretty scary to have someone like that on a jury.
Carnal K - no dash cam
I see no reason to expect that the eye witnesses would give different testimony in court than they’ve already given publically.
OTOH a transcript of testimony given under oath, and subject to cross-examination, does not always come out the same as what a reporter will say when under deadline to produce a dramatic story.
Regards,
Shodan
You, Sir, have obviously not heard my Ex Wife in divorce court.
I’m easy. I think that either way, the officer will be exonerated. If they’re able to convince the jury that Brown was running him down, then he’ll be safely given a “not guilty”. If they’re not able to show that and it still looks like Wilson executed Brown, there will be sufficient doubt as to that fact and he’ll be able to say that he was scared for his life at one point during the interaction and was not fully in control of his actions after that point.