If Darren Wilson isn't charged with murder, we will have normalized legal police murder.

[rhett o rick]

I believe that the witnesses provide enough probably cause to charge him with murder. If his lawyer can justify his behavior as just routine police business, let him do it in court. He clearly is a danger to the public. Those that allowed him to escape should be charged with aiding and abetting. A crime was committed.

It's happening all across our nation and the only way to stop it is to start prosecutions.

[Hoyt]

1. I believe he will be charged with something when eyewitness accounts are corroborated by autopsy.

At that point, he really doesn't have much defense. I think today's revelation might make it a bit easier to mount a defense built around Michael Brown resisting arrest or trying to push the police. But, there is nothing I can see to justify shooting him, even the first time, and certainly not after he raised his hands and/or was down.

I don't really think the policeman has "escaped." I suspect someone, even if it's the FBI, knows exactly where he is.

Whatever, there needs to be a house cleaning in that police department.

[el_bryanto]

2. Murder or Manslaughter?

I don't think Murder is very likely.

Bryant

[HooptieWagon]

10. Sounds like murder2 to me.

The eye witnesses stories agree. It's hard to tell what the PD's story is, as it keeps changing.

[rhett o rick]

13. I think it was second degree murder. He pointed the gun and intentionally murdered him.

Shot him until he was dead. They might plea for manslaughter.

[WinkyDink]

39. How is that not First-Degree? Second-degree means with intent only to harm, not kill.

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070529183940AALPRIN

[Travis_0004]

77. Dont get legal advise from Yahoo

First degree usually requires premediatation or murder while commiting another felony.

[WinkyDink]

89. "Premeditation" doesn't take long, especially when one chooses to shoot multiple times.

And do take into account the "or."

[PoliticAverse]

78. In Missouri, 'first degree murder' requires 'deliberation upon the matter'...

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5650000020.htm

565.020. 1. A person commits the crime of murder in the first degree if he knowingly causes the death of another person after deliberation upon the matter.

Second degree murder doesn't mean 'with intent only to harm':

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5650000021.htm

565.021. 1. A person commits the crime of murder in the second degree if he:

(1) Knowingly causes the death of another person or, with the purpose of causing serious physical injury to another person, causes the death of another person; or

[rock]

82. A legal analyst on msnbc (I don't remember who)

stated that 'deliberation' can take no more than a second or two given the right circumstances and in this case he expects murder 1.

[PoliticAverse]

84. State v. Miller, Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District (2007)...

http://law.justia.com/cases/missouri/court-of-appeals/2007/wd65893-2.html

"A person commits the crime of murder in the first degree if he knowingly causes the death of another person after deliberation upon the matter." § 565.020.1. "Deliberation" required for conviction for murder in the first degree is defined as "cool reflection for any length of time no matter how brief." § 565.002(3). "The deliberation necessary to support a conviction of first-degree murder need only be momentary; it is only necessary that the evidence show that the defendant considered taking another's life in a deliberate state of mind." State v. Jones, 955 S.W.2d 5, 12 (Mo.App. W.D.1997). "A deliberate act is a free act of the will done in furtherance of a formed design to gratify a feeling of revenge or to accomplish some other unlawful purpose and while not under the influence of violent passion suddenly aroused by some provocation." Id. "Deliberation may be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the murder." Id.

[WinkyDink]

88. "no matter how brief." Exactly. The cop DELIBERATED when he shot more than once.

[WinkyDink]

87. "Deliberation" can be defined as a second or two.

[Nye Bevan]

125. Oh please. I wish DUers would stop with the "First Degree Murder" nonsense.

Yes, what happened was obscene. But people who pretend that it was "First Degree Murder" are just beclowning themselves.

[BklnDem75]

133. It's murder

Shooting and hitting someone 6 times, two in the head, is clearly with malice. There's nothing involuntary about Michael's death.

[FiveGoodMen]

3. OMG, look at the comments here:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/darren-wilson-officer-police-killed-michael-brown/story?id=25000942

[0rganism]

5. holy shit, some real winners there

i'm amazed that some of these racist twats are smart enough to turn on a computer, let alone to use an online forum.

[FiveGoodMen]

6. It shows you what we're up against

How many 'merkins feel that way?

Do even half of us believe in equal justice?

Do even half of us oppose militarized police forces?

Maybe this country's fascism just reflects the NAZI tendencies of it's (utterly worthless) people.

[0rganism]

8. looks like about a 50/50 split to me

you wouldn't know it from reading those comments though.

from what i've seen, newspaper and broadcast news websites tend to have a rarefied audience which over-represents assholes.

[rhett o rick]

14. And the newspapers are free to post which ever responses they wish to promote their agenda. nm

[jen63]

32. As long as it's an African American,

all the "patriots" are on the side of the increasingly militarized police. They care not one whit about the trampling of our Constitution. Now the Bundy Ranch is a different story, they are the "true patriots", sighting their weapons on our Federal Agencies. This is how the 1% wants it. While we fight amongst ourselves, they're laughing all the way to the bank. Some people hate so much, that they don't see that it's the haves against the have nots and our voices would be that much stronger if we could find a way to come together sans hate!

Believe me, it's just a matter of time before these jackbooted thugs invade white neighborhoods as well. Maybe then, they'll sing a different toon.

[WinkyDink]

40. ALAIAAA. (But FTR: Rand Paul deplores the militarization of police.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/08/14/sen-rand-paul-de-militarize-the-police/

[JEB]

7. That is some sick shit people are saying.

No wonder this country is fucked up. I feel literally sick after reading some of the comments.

[Takket]

12. i used to argue with people in the commetns section but...

it seems pretty obvious that every teenager/20 something that is a bagger does nothing but air their racism for shock value in comment sections. they don't represent the majority though by reading the comment section you would probably believe 90% of the country is right wing racists.

[AgingAmerican]

50. The comments on the live feed last night

...were even worse

[0rganism]

4. i think an indictment is likely

unfortunately, so is an acquittal

[exboyfil]

29. The change of venue request will be huge

That was a contributing factor in the Rodney King Simi Valley jury. Is there an urban pool in Kansas City that would approximate the demographics of Ferguson? Even with such strikes and jury participating rates by race might lead an all white or nearly all white jury - that would be a disaster.

[JEB]

9. I am afraid to say Rick,

that it has been legal and normal for some time now. But if that cop gets off, it will only make things worse. It will empower the police, good, bad or indifferent, to know they can kill with impunity.

[VanGoghRocks]

83. God had better bless America if cops start thinking they can kill

ANYONE with impunity. Because anyone who was already justifiably afraid of the police before this will now feel like their lives are at risk for even routine traffic stops. There is no way that is a good thing. No way.

Try to surrender: Get shot
Try to resist: Get shot

IOW, death squads.

I wonder what someone who knows Game Theory would predict that mindset might lead to in the minds of people subject to rogue cops (or even cops they only suspect might be rogue).

[WillyT]

11. K & R !!!

[JimDandy]

15. True, although I'm sure Darren Wilson's whereabouts are known. n/t

[rhett o rick]

19. Of course, but why doesn't he get arrested? Why do they allow him to flee?

Citizens don't have those privileges. He killed someone because he was mad. That's murder.

[randome]

16. Hyperbole doesn't help. Neither does Jesse Jackson saying this was a 'state execution'.

There is nothing to justify what happened, at least so far as we know. I seriously doubt there will be a murder charge but right now I don't see how the shooter can escape serving time.

He's about as low-risk a fugitive as anyone can be since the FBI is involved.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[rhett o rick]

17. You call it "hyperbole" but I call it outrage and it's about time for a little.

This is going on across the country with little public push-back. My fear is that it's becoming normalized. It appears that there is plenty of evidence to charge this police officer with murder. The courts should decide on his guilt or innocence.

Interesting that you admit he most likely be serving time and that he is a fugitive. For those to be true means that it appears he committed a crime. Why wasn't he arrested for committing a crime?

[ancianita]

21. Internally, the police are working out Wilson's exculpatory narrative, probably. A common practice,

and normalized within police ranks.

Internal department investigations, coroner's report, etc., do delay a uniformed officer's arrest. Arrests don't go through the same processes for police as they do for civilians, since there's a level of 'just cause' and 'in the line of duty' immunity that causes delays.

An elected civilian review board could change these normalized processes.

[rhett o rick]

23. Yes I am aware. I am objecting to the fact that police-persons can go free pending investigations

of their crimes.

[ancianita]

24. Well, what other legal remedy is there? He's out of sight to anyone. What more can be done?

[MohRokTah]

31. Lock him up unless he posts bail.

Just like anybody else has to.

[ancianita]

34. That sweeps aside current treatment practices of those 'in the line of duty.' You want something

that hasn't happened and won't happen. Someone working in security forces doesn't get civilian treatment under the law. Notice that neither the FBI nor the ACLU have even come close to calling for such an action.

I think we need a lawyer around here to explain this.

[MohRokTah]

35. Because all cops are gods.

[ancianita]

36. Not the prevailing interpretation of current practices, nor mine.

[ancianita]

38. A practicing New York lawyer friend of mine just told me...

"I have absolutely no idea what happened on the street that day and neither do the investigators.

Getting statements from the the witnesses, looking over other available evidence and making strategic (often political) decisions about charging all take time.

I am sure that Ferguson is overwhelmed by this and they were not equipped to deal with an event this large."

Looks as if we're going to have to be patient.

[randome]

43. Most police agencies -most communities- are unprepared for something like this.

It's understandable -at least to me- that the Ferguson police department reaction has been anything but smooth.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect them to have this kind of thing in mind all the time.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[ancianita]

47. Exactly why my lawyer friend says that he's likely on "modified assignment."

He says that in this case, there are three police agencies along with the Feds investigating. He assures me that the situation is a "goat rope," whatever that means. His take is that the police will want to protect the officer and his family, and that he's sure Wilson is getting death threats. So the department cannot allow him or his family to be harmed.

[rhett o rick]

59. I think you're missing the irony here: "the police will want to protect the officer and his family,"

Isn't that sweet. If only they protected CITIZENS that well. Not only didn't they protect the young man, THEY KILLED HIM. And bytheway, the officer would be well protected IN JAIL, like regular citizens.

[rhett o rick]

57. Oh plez! If a citizen had done the exact same thing, they would be arrested immediately and

in jail while the investigators worked things out. If someone is suspected of a crime they go to jail.

[randome]

91. Or they get out on bail.

In the case of a police officer shooting, there has been a different process in place for a long time. Wilson isn't going anywhere, especially now that the FBI is involved.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[ancianita]

99. Yes, that's the difference. Police have one process, citizens have another because they're different

If you refuse to see their different processes before the law, try to make a citizen's arrest the next time you suspect an officer of a crime.

[rhett o rick]

56. "Someone working in security forces doesn't get civilian treatment under the law."

Agree, and that's the problem. Police are allowed to kill with impunity. He killed an unarmed boy that had his hands up. He should be arrested on suspicion of murder. Let the courts settle this and not some kangaroo police dept. inquiry.

[ancianita]

80. I'm aware, too. But your objection is against decades of civilian acceptance of policy, too.

There is a difference about how to adjudicate civilian crime, and how to adjudicate the different level of alleged police crime. Though you want them to be the same, history privileges adjudicating the protectors' mistakes from those whom they 'protect.' Those are differences in legal standing that we were born into, and not saying you're wrong.

What you want is a total restructuring of police/civilian legal stance under the law. Neither the ACLU nor the FBI is fighting your fight. They're working within the legal structures of immunity and legal standing that we were all born into. Thus your frustration with a reality that I've pretty much accepted. Don't make it an issue of character.

[rhett o rick]

97. Things have changed over the last 30 years. I've seen it first hand. I want them to change back. nm

[ancianita]

100. Really? Not in my lifetime. But good luck with your wanting.

[rhett o rick]

105. Really? Not in your lifetime? You either are young or naive, or both.

The militarization of the local police is a very recent happening. The wide spread acceptance of police murder is fairly recent also. I would hope you'd have a little more empathy for the victims and their families.

[ancianita]

107. What?? At no point were you talking militarization with me. You were talking about the 'irony' I

missed over the unfair difference in processing the shooting by a civilian compared to the same act by police. THAT is what you were saying has changed over 30 years and you want it to change back. Now suddenly you say you were talking about militarization.

Of course I've seen the militarization of police everywhere. I myself have been arrested, strip searched and spent time in jail over parking tickets(!). Police have pushed and shoved me around in protests. You're not discussing this with some naif.

What, are you kidding? I've been very upset by all of the hatred, the murderous cop, the racism that Ferguson's black folk have had to endure. I've worked for black families teaching their kids my entire working life. I'm familiar with the black community's long suffering. I am totally empathetic with this victim, and not just because I mistakenly suppose I've "been there." I've never had to live in the misery of Ferguson's black citizens, and I've been pretty damned poor in my life.

Man, you are way too quick to pull the righteous anger trigger. I'm not part of the problem. Got that?

[ancianita]

110. AND I've actually recommended changes to prevent such police behavior in the future, IF you've read

any of my past posts elsewhere; namely,

1. The ELECTION of civilian review boards, most of which are, at the moment, political rubber stamps for police chiefs and mayors;
2. The implementing by such boards of immediate suspension without pay any police who use 'undue force' with civilians;
3. The immediate forced resignations of mayors and police chiefs who fail to adhere to the above civilian board policies;
4. Special elections to replace them.

These are ideas I haven't read from anyone else. At local levels, they are doable, and they're not naive actions the public can take to re-assert their command over police departments across the country. I get no response from anyone about them, either, not even negative nelly cynicism.

Look. I've been describing-- not prescribing -- the legal procedures for police 'in the line of duty' that are ongoing across the country when police commit what would otherwise be seen as crimes by civilians. All I get back is how unfair those procedures are. Beyond venting, everyone here can tell that to the FBI, police department internal investigators, the ACLU and The National Lawyers Guild. But all this echo chamber carping is unproductive, otherwise.

[rhett o rick]

112. I apologize. I must have completely misunderstood you.

[ancianita]

113. Accepted. And for the record I enjoy reading most of your posts and understand how these events

bother you. No one with a heart could not be moved by all this horror.

[rhett o rick]

114. Dang, now you're just mocking me.

I m kidding.

[Calista241]

63. Those are the rules agreed to with the Police Unions.

[Rex]

58. The apologists for the cop that killed that kid are sad people.

Notice how they continue to diminish the threat this cop is to the public, it is as if they might as well be a public service message.

Totally pathetic, but expected around here.

[rhett o rick]

62. If a citizen is S U S P E C T E D of a crime they go to jail. Not him. Not the "all-mighty" police

that are beating people, killing people, killing people's pets, with impunity, every day across this country.

I do not understand the apologists.

[Rex]

64. Well the apologists stayed zipped lipped when the reporters were arrested.

Nothing they could disrupt the thread over on that one...they are like gun humpers imo...always willing to fall on their swords for something idiotic that the rest of us know is BS.

[rhett o rick]

66. Authoritarians come in all forms. Some even call themselves Democrats. nm

[Rex]

67. Yeah I think they believe they are, but their words sure do betray them.

Why anyone is even pretending this was not a civil rights crime or a hate crime...well we know why really. Sadly I bet this cop will get off scott free. Wish us normal people could have such privilege with the law. If we did anything of the sort, the COPS would have us all rounded up for helping a fugitive flee the law.

[ancianita]

111. Oh, good grief.

Don't conflate descriptions of policy and practice with apologies for anything cops do. Don't then make your interpretations of what others mean an occasion to blanketly impugn their character. You're seeing apologists here where there are none. I have not read one -- not one -- post on any DU thread this past week that in any way tries to "diminish the threat this cop is to the public."

If you find any, post them. Quote them. Ask them what they mean, but don't interpret these posters to the rest of us.

[Rex]

116. Well you are free to ignore my post, but I will keep on pointing it out even

if you disagree...thanks.

[ancianita]

117. That's my point. You have not once pointed out any "apologist" language. Not once.

So it's not a matter of disagreement. It's a matter of verifiable fact.

You subvert the common cause to claim such things without quoting. It's known as poisoning the well of opinion.

Come on. There are no police apologists here. I would know them if I saw them.

I never put anyone on Ignore. That would defeat the purpose of DU, really.

Have a good day.

[Rex]

119. No I don't have to prove anything to you, you just need to actually look

and not pretend to be playing devils advocate. So now go try and censor someone else, it didn't work on me...but keep trying I am sure you will find a sucker that will fall for your weaksauce.

Have a great day.

[ancianita]

121. Hm. I looked. Disagreement isn't attempted censoring. Thought you could enlighten me. Nice talk.

[Savannahmann]

22. A few thoughts if I may.

First. State Executioner isn't too far from the truth. It may be a slight, and I say slight seriously exaggeration, but I don't think it qualifies as Hyperbole. Second, lets be realistic about his being available shall we?

If it was me, and I had shot someone unarmed. I'd be charged with a crime right away. At a minimum assault with a deadly weapon just based upon the witnesses while they investigated. I could be out and about, but on bail. I'd have to turn over my passport, and my name would be given to the airports to make sure I didn't depart town. In other words, I'd have to remain available for the police.

This officer is "out of town" and while we can pretend that the authorities know where he is, chances are they have a cell phone number for him. Just because the FBI is involved does not mean that the suspect will not flee, successfully I might add, and avoid capture for years. http://www.fbi.gov/wanted

Now, we can pretend that he will show up, and he might if he is indicted. But the truth is he might, and he might not. Even now he could be headed for the Border where he hopes to flee justice. Less than two days of driving and he's in Mexico. It's already been a week, how far could he be now?

Do you remember why the police were so adamant that Christopher Dorner was such a threat? He was trained to be a cop. He knew what they would do to find him. In other words, they were very frightened that one with the same training was out there hunting them. Now, imagine how hard it will be to find someone who has six years experience and knows what the cops are looking for. Dorner had less than two years of experience.

The truth is this. No matter what Michael Brown is accused of. No matter what crime the police say he did. Even if you argue that the tussle through the window justified the use of deadly force. From the point he turned around with his hands up, that changed the use of force from anything approaching justified, to murder. At that moment, Micheal Brown was surrendering. At that moment, Michael Brown had given up. That moment would be murder if it was a Military man behind the gun. It would be murder if it was a little old lady behind the gun. The officer kept shooting as Michael went down, dying, and then dead.

That was the take no prisoners mentality of the police. Rapid fire, keep shooting until they don't move. That isn't hyperbole, that is a reasonable conclusion based upon all the video that is available and all the cases in which gunfire is used.

[ancianita]

26. Thanks.Relevant context here when mulling practical street consequences of inequality under the law

Last edited Sun Aug 17, 2014, 02:00 PM - Edit history (1)

which are getting clearer every day that we see unaccountable crimes of security and political leaders.

It's sickening.

I, as one conscious American, am wearying of this. I hope there's enough fight left in the rest of us to put a stop to this totalitarian system of injustice.

[FarPoint]

33. Well said...

You should post this in your local newspaper as an editorial.

[randome]

45. I sure as hell am not excusing anything.

But the process needs to unfold before we can decide exactly what happened. Wilson isn't getting away without a trial, I think that much is certain.

But as has been pointed out, it's 'standard' practice to give officers in the line of duty a slightly different process than for the rest of us.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[bobduca]

54. "a slightly different process"

Justice for some, a "slightly different process" for others.

[WinkyDink]

41. Please point out what you consider "hyperbole."

[randome]

46. "State execution". The State had nothing to do with this.

Maybe Wilson snapped or something but it will come out during his trial. I don't see how he gets away with, at a minimum, voluntary manslaughter.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[MohRokTah]

48. Wilson acted under color of state authority. eom

[randome]

52. So did the shooters at Kent State. The soldiers at My Lai.

My point is that this was not a state-sanctioned killing. To imply that it was does a disservice to the event.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[rhett o rick]

65. The OP doesn't say a thing about "state execution". Where did you get that out

of the OP?

[randome]

92. I mentioned Jesse Jackson's use of the phrase.

And this isn't 'murder' until we know some facts. Right now, it sure as hell doesn't look good for Wilson.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[Savannahmann]

73. Wilson's authority is derived from the State.

To become a Police Officer in Missouri, one must meet the POST standardized training requirements.

http://dps.mo.gov/dir/programs/post/

These requirements are set by the State of Missouri. When he places someone under arrest. The authority to do so is derived from his position by State Law. When he speaks, it is with the voice of State Authority. If he is beating a suspect, no civilian has the authority under law to step in and say I think he's had enough. To do so is interfering with a police officer in the performance of his duty.

That is State authority. When you the citizen have no authority to take any action in preventing him from doing anything. Your "citizens arrest" power is a moral extension. You saw something wrong, and took action to hold the suspect until the POLICE arrived. Your Citizens arrest authority if you tried to exercise it on a police officer beating a suspect would get you tossed in jail, if you were lucky.

When the Police Officer testifies at a trial, his words carry the weight of the State Authority. He is a duly licensed police officer, registered and empowered by the state licensing bureau. When a cop is fired from one department, they almost always find employment at another department within days. After all, here is a person who does not need to go through the academy and get his state license to be a cop, he's got it already.

When the cop is serving a warrant, he is exercising the authority of the State. When he shoots someone, it is in the performance of his duty to the State. So State Execution is a bit exaggerated as I said above, but certainly not hyperbole. Because as we see already, the rest of the State authority has moved to protect him. First releasing the stills of the 'strong arm robbery' in an effort to create some justification in the minds of the citizens in the shooting.

You said in another post you can't imagine it not going to trial. I can, because these cases rarely do see a trial. If the Grand Jury returns a decision not to indict, then what? How they decide that depends to a large part on the presentation of the DA. How expertly that is done, will be a big factor in the determination.

If he is not charged by the Grand Jury, then the term State Execution stops being an exaggeration, and becomes an accurate description. I figure the chances of Wilson being charged by the Grand Jury to be roughly even. A coin toss in other words. Because as we see in the first press conference, they are already focusing on the Michael Brown was a criminal aspect. How long do you think it will take to communicate that without words to the panel on the Grand Jury? He was a bad boy who got what he deserved.

When that happens, Ferguson will burn to the ground. The knowledge that it is a real powder keg is the only reason I give it even odds. Otherwise I'd put the odds at 7 to 3 against. A decorated officer who was recognized a few months ago for his exceptional dedication to duty shooting a robbery suspect is how it will be played out. It's already going that way, surely you see it.

[randome]

93. Those are all FACTS, though. Like other facts, they need to stand or fall on their own.

Yes, Wilson was decorated a few months ago. Yes, the victim stole something from a convenience store. But there are more facts to come.

Forensics evidence will be paramount in this, I would think.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[Savannahmann]

94. So far we have three eyewitness testimonies.

All three start at various points of the confrontation. The most damaging is the woman in my opinion, but there are three people who are not related, and did not know each other.

http://fox2now.com/2014/08/14/witnesses-to-michael-browns-shooting-detail-his-last-minutes/

Three people who tell in essence the same story.

As I have posted before. No matter what Michael Brown is now accused of, no matter what happened in the window of the car. Here is the most vital undeniable fact. All three witnesses say he turned around and held his hands up after the second shot. That is the fact, he was surrendering. Now, an argument could be made that the force was justified right up until that point. If Officer Darren Wilson had ceased fire at that point and taken Michael Brown into custody, we would not be seeing the protests, the anger, the fury.

Darren Wilson did not stop there. He fired again, and again, and again. He rapid fired his pistol until Micheal Brown lay dead in the street.

From the point in which Michael Brown raised his hands, the use of deadly force was no longer justified by any stretch of imagination. That is the instinctive signal of surrender. That is the international symbol of surrender. Michael Brown was unarmed, and surrendering.

Under International law, that is murder. By the laws of war described in international treaties, that is murder. By the laws of every civilized nation, that is murder. Those are the facts. The investigation by police of police often comes up with conclusions that boggle the imagination. That is the power of police, and why it is always a bad idea to have them investigate themselves. If the Grand Jury does not vote to indict Darren Wilson, it is because the Prosecutor spent more time about Michael Brown being a bad guy than Darren Wilson.

We may not know all the fine points of detail that are needed before the case is closed. But we know this. We know it because three witnesses have told their stories to us and all three are unanimous on that one vital fact. Michael Brown was killed while holding his hands up. That my friend, means that there can be no claim of justified force. A person surrendering is not supposed to be shot. We have laws about that, now is the time to find out if those laws apply to all of our men, or just those who are not blessed to wear the badge of immunity from responsibility.

[randome]

98. We don't 'know' anything until testimony is given and evidence gathered.

But I agree that's exactly how it looks now.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Sometimes it seems like the only purpose in life is to keep your car from touching another's.[/center][/font][hr]

[rhett o rick]

106. Are you saying we don't know who pulled the trigger? How many times the victim was shot?

If the victim had a weapon? There is enough evidence to arrest the officer.

[randome]

132. I agree. In addition, Wilson could be a danger to himself or his family...

...depending on his state of mind. If for no other reason than that, he needs to be in custody. I don't know what they're waiting for.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[99Forever]

18. Legalized police murder has been the norm...

.. for quite some time. This just reopens the wound in public again.

Personally, I distrust all LEO, even the ones that aren't dirty cover for the ones that are. Most are brutes and bullies that should be locked away from decent people.

[ancianita]

20. I've read elsewhere that the coroner's report won't be for a few weeks. Quite a delay.

A lot of case building rests on that. Police and states attorneys often work closely, so there could be a case made for lack of objectivity or even conflict of interest.

When racist whites who run a town are exposed, I wouldn't put it past them to circle the wagons. Glad the feds are there.

[marmar]

25. K/R

[WCLinolVir]

27. They already have, or DW would not feel that he can get away with this sh@#.

[Mike Nelson]

28. I don't think the officer "escaped" or...

...is a danger, presently. His whereabouts is known and he's being watched carefully.

[rhett o rick]

30. I understand but if a citizen did what he did, they'd be arrested while the

investigation proceeded. And how do we know how dangerous he is. When he shot the boy, he certainly wasn't acting appropriately.

[davidn3600]

53. George Zimmerman wasn't immediately arrested

It took at least a few weeks if I remember correctly... The police didn't arrest Zimm because they thought the shooting was justified self-defense. They only arrested him when the state attorney decided to file charges.

Police don't always arrest someone immediately. Sometimes they will collect the information and submit it to the prosecutor and wait for the prosecutor to make a determination.

[rhett o rick]

70. I don't think Zimmy was a good example. If he'd been black and the victim was white, he'd

most likely gotten roughed up and thrown in jail.

[Mike Nelson]

69. Not always... the officer will have his/her version of the shooting...

...and they would have to investigate, first. It does seem, to me, that the police officer was acting inappropriately; that's also just my impression, given what I've seen reported.

[Savannahmann]

37. Really?

What proof do you have? I'm just curious because you say he's being watched carefully. By whom? Every cop in the state not needed for other duties was in Ferguson. Remember, the police are trusted by other police. Two cops who have never seen each other before will automatically trust one another in a dangerous situation. It is the us versus them mentality in practice. Look at Ferguson again. Cops from all over, all over the county, and from neighboring communities came together and immediately formed a cohesive unit. They were all armed almost exactly the same, equipped the same, and wore the same combat trousers and boots.

There was no problems with integration of forces, because everyone was trained exactly alike. There was no difficulty because while everyone did not know everyone else, that would be impossible, they all knew that these were other cops, they were the "us" and the disorganized rabble out there was the "them".

I find it unlikely to say the least that anyone is "watching" Darren Wilson. I think they have his cell number, and a statement like "I'm going to my Brother's house" as a location. When they want to talk to him, they call his phone. He meets at the local police station, and goes over his statement with them again. Or perhaps they go to the Brother's house. That isn't being watched carefully. That is someone being where they said they would be. They are, right up until they aren't.

[ancianita]

44. A lawyer friend of mine says that common department practice is to put him on modified assignment.

That they are protecting him and his family. That he's likely receiving death threats. I'm paraphrasing here.

[Mike Nelson]

68. Proof? Is there "proof" he escaped? I was only offering...

...my impression. In my opinion, he has not "escaped" and there will be no problem finding him, when they need to... Again, it's only my opinion. Sorry to have confused anyone.

Also, I have been wrong many times in my life and it's possible he has escaped - maybe even left the country. That's not what I would bet on, but it is certainly possible.

[WinkyDink]

42. I think you are confusing "being watched carefully" with "being arrested." Will we get another

"white Bronco chase"?

[Mike Nelson]

71. My opinion is no attempt to take flight...

...they have likely discussed an arrest and how it will be made. I'm guessing the officer wants to be released - and not go to jail. OJ Simpson probably thought it was over except for the penalty, but the lawyers changed his opinion.

[WinkyDink]

90. I think your opinion here is correct, but that doesn't make it a sound judgment by the dept.

[Lee-Lee]

49. I am still waiting on dash cam footage NT

[merrily]

51. I think we've had police murder without consequences for a long time.

Especially if the victim is a person of color.

I would not go so far as to say it's the norm. I will say that when it does happen, the blue line closes ranks; and, if there is a trial, juries for some reason watch a video showing shocking circumstances and acquit anyway.

I really don't get the juries in those instances. Does the prosecution do its best to get a conviction or not? I don't know. I just know the deck seems stacked somehow.

[johnlucas]

55. Um you're a little late for that

Amadou Diallo ring a bell?
What was the 1939 song 'Strange Fruit' about?
You're 238 years too late with that call. Hahahahaha!

John Lucas

[Rex]

60. Years too late, been going on a long time...the difference is that his own group allowed

him to flee the crime scene. Which makes them accomplices in my book. Don't let the authoritarians on this site get you down, their ONLY goal is to make Big Brother look good and diminish any critical discussions with apologist crap.

[FiveGoodMen]

74. What gets ME down is that this site goes along with authoritarians

Which side are we on?

[Savannahmann]

75. I'm on the side that is right.

I'm opposed to war especially when we don't have a plan to win, we are just fighting to keep from losing. In that case, I am opposed to the authoritarians.

I am opposed to environmental destruction. I don't believe that individual property rights supersede the need of the public at large to have safe air and water. I am with the authoritarians who act to prevent this from happening.

I could go on, but you see, speaking for myself, and I'm sure a few others. There are times and circumstances in which we are the opposition to the authoritarians, and times in which we support them.

It depends on the goals, and the actions. We may herald a soldier who shows bravery and saves his mates from certain death by killing those who are trying to kill the troops. the majority here would almost certainly demand that soldier be tried and convicted if he tortured people for information.

We are not automatically for, or against the authorities. We tend to work pretty hard to get them elected. We are on a case by case basis the foundation, or the people protesting.

I support and defend the President when he's right. I blast the President when I think he's wrong.

Same President, different issues, and my responses were different. When I believe he is acting properly, doing what I believe needs to be done, then he has my full throated support without reservation. When President Obama is doing somthing I disagree with, then he has my full throated opposition. I always respect the President. I always will. I will not be a boot licking lackey that walks around behind someone going "Oh how right and wise you are sir".

I think most of the folks on this board feel the same way.

[Rex]

76. True it can get depressing at times.

Big Tent. That is how I keep it from driving me crazy. Plus I realized if I myself wanted to see them all gone, I would be no better than those that makes lists of people to be purged.

I tend to only talk to people that like to engage their critical thinking skills.

[ancianita]

81. Most people are describing frustrated civilians, not prescribing authoritarianism.

I still endorse elected civilian review boards, which are too few and far between.

[avebury]

61. Unfortunately it has police murder has been normalized

for quite some time.

[lonestarnot]

72. War is normal when one is militarized isn't it.

[LibDemAlways]

79. It's already normalized. The officers who killed

homeless Kelly Thomas in Fullerton, Calif. in 2011 were found not guilty. Juries are hesitant to convict cops.

[VanGoghRocks]

86. As lame as this probably sounds, Kelly Thomas' death was what first got me to tune in to

this issue. To me that case seemed an open-and-shut case of excessive use of force resulting in homicide, and yet the two cops charged walked (although each was fired from the Fullerton PD). I still can't quite believe it, but the Kelly Thomas case transformed me, much as I imagine people who might have been only mildly anti-slavery in the 1840s became full-throated abolitionists after Dred Scott and related developments in the 1850s.

As sad as Kelly Thomas' death was, in some ways this Mike Brown case has gotten to me even more intensely. I'm at a loss to explain why exactly, save that Mr. Brown was so young, his life still so full of potential that he will never get to explore or realize.

[damnedifIknow]

109. That's what sent me over the top also

What kept people from the streets on a mass scale especially after the verdict is beyond me.

[rhett o rick]

115. I agree that the Kelly Thomas case was horrible, but this case is a perfect example of a police

officer getting pissed and deliberately killing someone.

Another case that got to me was the killing of John Williams in Seattle. John was Native American and a well known, harmless, street person that liked to carve. He was crossing the street and a police-officer saw him and ordered him to drop his knife. When John didn't comply quickly enough, he was shot dead. Most likely John didn't understand the officer.

[MrMickeysMom]

85. K&R, for justice...

[TorchTheWitch]

95. more of this crap

Yeah, charge him with murder before any investigation is completed. What the fuck is this shit??? Noooo, nobody needs to know the facts of the matter other than the officer was white and the dead man was black. We don't need no stinkin' laws, is that it? How ironic all the calls for "justice" concerning this matter yet nobody wants to actually go through the justice system.

And now you're claiming he was "allowed to escape"?? Are you fucking kidding me? The people that need to know where he and his family are know, and only a crazy person would keep their family and themselves at home after all the death threats never mind the rioting, looting and the people in this town after a week of tearing up their own community are still more interested in ironically protesting for "justice" by throwing the justice system out the window. It isn't anyone else's damn business where he is, and anyone with a molecule of human decency would be GLAD that he and his family are out of town and thus out of danger.

Piss on this "a crime was committed" bullshit. The investigation isn't done yet, so nobody knows if a crime was committed or not and if one was what crime. Or have you and so many other people here just mysteriously forgotten we have a justice system in this country? One that's based on facts and evidence, not bias and misplaced emotion? That justice doesn't mean just pointing your finger at someone and screaming "murderer!"?

Seriously, do you even hear what you're saying?

[rhett o rick]

96. If it appears that a crime has been committed, the police will put citizens directly in jail and

then investigate. If a citizen is seen robbing a convenience store, the police will throw him in the back of their squad car and take him to jail. However, if a policeman commits a crime in front of witnesses, apparently he isn't subject to the same treatment as a citizen.

You mention justice. That's exactly what I want, but I am afraid the special treatment he is getting is a good indication that we won't see justice in this case. Letting this policeman hide during the investigation is a double standard. Other people being investigated for killing someone don't get that privilege. If it appears he committed a crime, he should be held to the same standard as other citizens.

I appreciate your passion, but a little confused why you think you should take it out on me. I want justice, not the double standard we see across the country, that is encouraging police-persons to kill with impunity.

[TorchTheWitch]

118. probable cause

There has to be probable cause, and there isn't any. We also don't know what the police know about this case, so we can't pretend there is probable cause. There are two very different stories of what occurred here, and for all we know whatever was found at the scene already points to one of those stories being more correct than the other. For one thing, the officer had injuries consistent with his version of events. We also don't know what witnesses may have told the police that are also consistent with that version of events and those people are staying quiet because of the atmosphere in the community. There may be other evidence a the scene that is more consistent with the officer's version of events, like where the cruiser was in relation to the body, and who knows what.

That's the point. NOBODY KNOWS what really happened in this case, and those that know more than the public aren't talking. Police investigations aren't done publicly and for good reason... doing so may compromise the investigation.

My passion has to do with REAL justice. There's no getting away from the fact that in the community and here on DU this officer was immediately labeled a murderer with only only one version of events - that of the other person involved, Dorian Johnson - was believed, hook, line and sinker. Hell, even BEFORE he said a word the officer was labeled a murder. And your OP called for the same kind of "justice"... no investigation necessary, lock him up because he's white and a cop or you're just upset that someone died. You even insinuated that the officer is trying to escape justice by leaving town and that anyone that allowed it should be arrested. Where the hell is there justice in that? He hasn't escaped anything. At this point there is no probable cause to arrest him, and because he's free to go where ever the hell he wants to no one is an "accomplice" in allowing him to leave town. Even you knows why he left town and that he did so for very legitimate reasons and totally legally, yet here you are demanding unlawful arrests.

If you really want justice than you wouldn't have said anything that you did. REAL justice requires an investigation with arrest only at such point as there is probable cause that the prosecutor believes is sufficient even though most prosecutors won't call for arrest without an abundance of evidence. Justice is not believing one story of events over another because of bias which there is no secret is utterly rampant here as it is in the community.

I have no idea what occurred in this case, and neither do you or anyone else that wasn't there or part of the investigation. And because of that choosing one side or the other is because of bias in some form whether it's because of the belief that the police unfairly get away with killing people or an unfathomable hatred of all police or a racial thing or some other bias. It's a disgrace that I seem to be the only one here that sees this rampant bias and calls for "justice" that ironically have nothing to do with actual justice that requires probable cause and a thorough investigation before arresting anyone.

There is no special treatment going on. Even civilians aren't arrested without probable cause. For a very long time I've had a keen interest in criminal cases delving into crimes in the news and watching episodes of Dateline, 48 Hours and 20/20 about criminal cases because they interest me. Not a one of those cases were suspects arrested before an investigation was completed even when there WAS probable cause. Many of those cases didn't get to a point of arrest until DECADES later because prosecutors don't like trying cases where they aren't virtually guaranteed of a win even when there IS sufficient evidence - they don't tend to think it's enough.

I don't doubt that there are such cases where the police have gotten away with a crime and such cases where cover ups have occurred whether by the department, the prosecutor's office or the local government. However, far MORE cases come down to the average citizen not being arrested because the prosecutor doesn't like the odds and doesn't think there's sufficient evidence or a bungled investigation or laziness or SOMETHING, and a trove of cold case files exist in every police department to prove it. The average person gets away with all kinds of crimes every day of the week all over the country far far more than police officers have.

And I'm also aware of the bias that BELIEVES an officer has gotten away with a crime because people just decide they don't like the legal steps that cleared them even when it's a grand jury of average citizens that did. Police officers are in a different position than the average citizen because of the nature of their jobs that require them to apprehend suspects and put themselves in harms way that the average citizen doesn't and doesn't have to do. Yet every single case of a police officer having possibly done something wrong goes forward where so many of the average citizen don't even get past the investigation stage and land in the cold case files.

How is anyone to believe that you really want real justice when you say that this officer has "escaped" and that everyone that "allowed it" should be arrested? Why is it that you don't want an investigation first to determine if the officer is guilty of anything in the first place? And when you don't know what occurred in the incident anymore than anyone else does yet because there hasn't been an investigation yet? That's totally contrary to how our justice system works even if it worked perfectly. Anyone that really wants actual justice would at least first wait until the facts of the matter are discovered. Anything less is NOT justice by any stretch of the imagination, and there's no way to argue that.

What a disgrace that you and so many other people here are so passionate for all the wrong reasons demanding "justice" by tossing the justice system out the window. That's mob rule, not actual justice based on a justice system that requires the finding of fact in order to make an arrest not arresting someone whether a police officer or average citizen just because you're upset that someone died or just hate the police or because the officer is white or whatever. Believing in justice means believing that EVERYONE is entitled to at LEAST finding out whether or not anything criminal has even been done.

I don't want to live in a world where anyone can be arrested because of emotion based mob rule, and believe it or not neither does anyone else here including you. You should be embarrassed for writing this OP demanding arrests of people even beyond that of the officer in question when you threw out the window anything even remotely in the same universe as actual justice.

[rhett o rick]

120. I don't want mob rule. I want justice. Once again, if a citizen shot someone they'd be arrested

while the investigation proceeded.

All across our country the police are killing people, literally with impunity. One case comes to mind, the police broke into the wrong house with out warrant, and confronted a man that was on drugs, and shot him dead. Claimed he made a move toward his hip. The man was not armed. In Seattle a Native American street person that was a well know wood carver was shoot dead when he didn't drop his knife fast enough for the police. In one case a police officer shot a mentally handicapped man because he wouldn't come down out of a tree. Fortunately he didn't die.

Police all across this country are choking people to death, and beating them to death, shooting pets that bark, and rarely held accountable.

In this case I believe there is probable cause and I disappointed you think that I don't have a right to say so.

[Kvectk]

126. So are you suggesting any time a cop fires a gun, he/she must be arrested?

Cops carry loaded firearms. LOADED, because they need to shoot to kill if such a situation arises. Are you suggesting, any time a cop uses his firearm and kills a suspect, he/she must be thrown in jail? That seems to be what you are saying. You don't know more about this case than I do.

[rhett o rick]

130. Since we are guessing what the other is "suggesting", are you suggesting that

we allow police to kill indiscriminately? That seems to be what you are saying. Now it's your turn.

[Kvectk]

134. No that is not what I'm saying.

There are multiple reports Michael Brown charged at the officer. If that's true, and it probably is, he had every right to shoot him.

[rhett o rick]

136. I would love to see the "multiple reports". Do you count Sean Hannity as one? nm

[sub.theory]

122. Agreed; Let's Find Out What Happened First

Agreed. This mob justice on here is getting out of control. This is hardly a cut and dry situation where the officer's guilt is certain, despite the fact that many here have already convicted him.

There is far too much that doesn't add up in this situation and people (either the officer or the witnesses or both) are clearly lying. I'm concerned that the police have been so guarded with information which does smell of a coverup, but I'm also concerned that the eye witnesses are giving contradictory and changing accounts. It just doesn't add up. This is not going to be an easy investigation, unfortunately. I'm glad that the FBI is coming in - I think a neutral party is needed here.

Let's find out what actually happened before making inflammatory accusations. This situation is already explosive and it doesn't need to be fed any further.

[rhett o rick]

123. You are accusing some of "mob justice" when most just want justice.

I want the police to be held accountable to the same laws as the rest of us. If a citizen shot someone in cold blood, they'd get taken to jail until charged or not charged. Investigate all you want, I am for a fair investigation. I believe there is probable cause to arrest him. Across the country we are normalizing police violence. I am not ok with that and some want to disparage me for it.

[sub.theory]

124. Then why accuse the officer of murder?

If you want justice done, then why accuse the officer of murder? We don't know that yet. That's why there is an ongoing investigation. With the FBI and DoJ involved now, this won't be able to be covered up by the locals. If probable cause is indeed found, I'm confident the officer will be charged.

[rhett o rick]

127. Why does he get to be free during the investigation? If I shot someone that was unarmed, I'd be

arrested and held during the investigation if not charged. And it wouldn't take a couple of weeks either.

All across our nation police are getting away with murder, yet you have confidence in the system. Are you satisfied with the status quo?

[Adam051188]

101. o0o0o00o0....."prosecutions".......

"sir....you better explain with a great deal of pretend remorse as to why you are remorseful about your misjudgment of threat from the young individual"

"yes sir, i'm so sorry sir, his hand just looked like a gun sir. i thought he had a gun. i thought he had a gun, sir"

"alright this is clearly a tragic error in judgement, let's not allow another life to be ruined over this tragedy."

[ladjf]

102. I predict that Wilson will not be prosecuted. Most likely, he won't even be

reprimanded. The police brutality is getting very scary. But, so is everything else about our Government , the economy and the environment.

[Adam051188]

104. the american public has been mentally and emotionally neutered.

things will get worse, not better.

[ladjf]

108. I agree. nt

[still_one]

103. now that this has gone to the justice department it will also involve violation of civil rights

[yeoman6987]

135. I thought they would with

Zimmerman too, but that went nowhere. Not sure what will ultimately happen.

[villager]

128. You mean if we don't deal with murdering cops like we dealt with war criminals & election-stealers?

What has been "normalized" now in America is already, I think, fatal to its ongoing survival as an intact, dare-we-say-nurturing, somewhat "free" political entity...

[rhett o rick]

129. Cut to the chase ..... we're toast.

[villager]

131. well, the smaller, regional entities coming after climate shifts cause the Empire to break up...

...may have a chance to re-boot.