The Shooting of Michael Brown

[kennethcadwell]

First of all I did not make a judgment call.

I said if this is the evidence or truth that comes out then this is what should happen.

Second, him being unarmed and running away when shot is collaborated by eye witnesses.

Third, in the state of Missouri where I live and officer is not to draw his weapon unless one is visible.

Fourth, use of a deadly weapon on an unarmed individual is illegal use of force.

Fifth, prison is the place for murders.......the system having tax payers to pay for their housing is to blame, not an excuse to make it ok to murder them in return.


What did Jesus say about eye for an eye.....He said no....

What did Jesus say about those who do wrong.....He said to forgive, and minister to them.


Last of all if the officer was being assaulted, then he has the right to fight back and restrain the suspect.
However that still does not give the right to use deadly force, if the suspect is unarmed and not using deadly force on him.

Most eye witnesses say, that the boy was trying to struggle to get away from the officer while the officer was still in the car.
Then when he broke free was running away, not still fighting/struggling with the officer when he was shot down and killed.

 

[JimJimmers]

Third, in the state of Missouri where I live and officer is not to draw his weapon unless one is visible.

Fourth, use of a deadly weapon on an unarmed individual is illegal use of force.

This appears to be incorrect. Section 563-031 Use of force in defense of persons.

 

[kennethcadwell]

This appears to be incorrect. Section 563-031 Use of force in defense of persons.

Notice though on all these they have exclusions, and those exclusion are only if deadly force is being used on him.

To protect his life, if the suspect has with drawn or is not using deadly force then the officer does not have the right to use it in return.

Nowhere does it say in these you given that the officer has the right to draw his gun, before use of violence or aggression is used on him. An officer can not draw his weapon just because some one is yelling at him.

Now if the suspect walked over and got into his face, he still has no right to draw unless he believes his life is in danger.

Now the issue is did the struggle over the gun come because the officer drew it, and turned it on the suspect.
Or if the suspect started attacking him first, and went after the gun.

If the suspect attacked the officer, and went after the gun then the first shot that happened in the struggle was justified.
But once the suspect withdrawn and started to run away the use of deadly force is unlawful.

 

[Atwood]

We really must suspend judgment until the facts & evidence are in. Here is a version of what happened:

Transcript via Gateway Pundit:“He pulled up ahead of them. And then he got a call-in that there was a strong-arm robbery. And, they gave a description. And, he’s looking at them and they got something in their hands and it looks like it could be what, you know those cigars or whatever. So he goes in reverse back to them. Tries to get out of his car. They slam his door shut violently. I think he said Michael did. And, then he opened the car again. He tried to get out. He stands up.
And then Michael just bum-rushes him and shoves him back into his car. Punches him in the face and them Darren grabs for his gun. Michael grabbed for the gun. At one point he got the gun entirely turned against his hip. And he shoves it away. And the gun goes off.
Well, then Michael takes off and gets to be about 35 feet away. And, Darren’s first protocol is to pursue. So, he stands up and yells, “Freeze!” Michael and his friend turn around. And Michael taunts him… And then all the sudden he just started bumrushing him. He just started coming at him full speed. And, so he just started shooting. And, he just kept coming."

Read more at EXPOSED, REVERSAL OF ALLEGED FACTS!!!: Officer Darren Wilson DID KNOW About Robbery, Started To Arrest Michael Brown, So BROWN TRIED TO MURDER HIM

I think someone made a cell phone video; so I suppose time will tell,.

 

[Atwood]

This appears to be incorrect. Section 563-031 Use of force in defense of persons.

Thanks for the reference. Of course it does not give the police protocols or rules of engagement.

Your section starts out:

563.031. 1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subsection 2 of this section, use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such force to be necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful force by such other person, . . .

I can't believe that an officer of the law is not justified in drawing his gun whenever he reasonably feels that he may need it drawn to protect himself against an assault from a 292 pound, 6 foot 4 inch, 18 year old young man. Obviously if in fact the young man had attacked the officer and then was moving away, it would still be justified for him to draw his gun. For if the attacker did decide to rush him, he would need the gun.

Of course we do not know what happened yet. However, it just seems hard to believe that an officer would just gun down a man in the street as it has been claimed by some people. Still, people do do evil & irrational things. Probably the truth will come out.

Meanwhile, the officer should be deemed innocent until proven guilty, and it is very unloving to bad-mouth him at this point -- I mean is that loving neighbor as self? Would you like to have people jump at the conclusions of your guilt before evidence is in?

 

[JimJimmers]

Now if the suspect walked over and got into his face, he still has no right to draw unless he believes his life is in danger.

Exactly. You can believe your life is in danger even if the other person isn't displaying a weapon. Unless you can find where the law in the state of Missouri states that an officer must see a weapon before he is allowed to draw his, I believe your previous statements to be incorrect.

 

[SonInMe]

A 6'4'' 290 pound male that engages in strongarm robberies is no boy

 

[Stephen63]

Seems to me all we need is the ballistic report that say whether he was shot in the back or the chest.

 

[SonInMe]

The cops face was bruised....

musta been when he tried to take his KKK hood off before he shot the black kid

 

[JimJimmers]

I did some further digging. In the state of Missouri, a police officer may legally shoot dead fleeing suspects for a number of non-weapon-possessing reasons. Section 563-046 Law enforcement officer's use of force

If you physically assault an officer (thereby committing a felony), and the officer reasonably believes that deadly force is needed to effect an arrest EVEN IF YOU ARE FLEEING, you may legally be shot dead.

I am not here to argue the fairness of that law, but facts are facts.

 

[SonInMe]

I did some further digging. In the state of Missouri, a police officer may legally shoot dead fleeing suspects for a number of non-weapon-possessing reasons. Section 563-046 Law enforcement officer's use of force

If you physically assault an officer (thereby committing a felony), and the officer reasonably believes that deadly force is needed to effect an arrest EVEN IF YOU ARE FLEEING, you may legally be shot dead.

I am not here to argue the fairness of that law, but facts are facts.

There ya go. Interjecting facts into a perfectly good crisis to diffuse its use as propaganda

 

[kennethcadwell]

A 6'4'' 290 pound male that engages in strongarm robberies is no boy

I understand your point. However the chief of police said during a statement the officer did not know they were robbery suspects, and that they did not know if he was even the one involved in the robbery.

So to keep pinning the robbery on him has not been established.

Next most of the reports that have been given so far say that the cop yelled at them for walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic. And that the cop started to dive away when they smarted back at the cop. He then came and yelled at them at what they said.

The argument then started, the officer tried getting out of the car by slamming it open, which hit Brown and Brown slammed it back at the officer. That is when the struggle started between the officer and Brown. They do not say how or when exactly the gun was drawn yet, just that there was a struggle for it.

Brown and his friend then ran, and the officer yelled for him to stop. Brown stopped put his hands up, but the officer shot him and killed him any way.

Now this is where conflicting stories come again, most say Brown stopped and had his hands up, and a couple others say Brown tried to rush at the officer.

Now they have not released any video's yet, or to much evidence on the case besides what we all have heard.

My point was the officer in one way or another was wrong.

If he drew the weapon first during an argument he would be wrong, if during the physical conflict then no.

When Brown took off running, the cop should have used that time to call in back up instead of getting out of the car and threating to fire if he didn't stop.

Then when Brown stopped and put his hands up, shoot to kill is off the table.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Seems to me all we need is the ballistic report that say whether he was shot in the back or the chest.

This would not matter either.

If you are standing there facing the officer with your hands in the air. He does not have the right to shoot you.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest.

563.046. 1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.

2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful.

3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only

(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested
(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or
(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.
4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.

^ Good looking out JimJimmers. The officer didn't need to be aware of the robbery. He was observing the suspect breaking the law and told the suspect to get out of the street and onto the sidewalk and the suspect refused to comply forcing the officer to initiate an arrest.

I did some further digging. In the state of Missouri, a police officer may legally shoot dead fleeing suspects for a number of non-weapon-possessing reasons. Section 563-046 Law enforcement officer's use of force

If you physically assault an officer (thereby committing a felony), and the officer reasonably believes that deadly force is needed to effect an arrest EVEN IF YOU ARE FLEEING, you may legally be shot dead.

I am not here to argue the fairness of that law, but facts are facts.

 

[jahsoul]

musta been when he tried to take his KKK hood off before he shot the black kid

I don't think that's the case, but I believe some on CC got their hood tucked away nicely somewhere.

But anywho, I'm keeping my thoughts to myself regarding this until all facts have been presented. I won't just rush to judgement because as seen, most who rush to judgement regarding this use nothing but emotion.

 

[JimJimmers]

I don't think that's the case, but I believe some on CC got their hood tucked away nicely somewhere.

But anywho, I'm keeping my thoughts to myself regarding this until all facts have been presented. I won't just rush to judgement because as seen, most who rush to judgement regarding this use nothing but emotion.

I respect that. There are many ways it could have gone. I can easily see one scenario in which the officer is blameless, one where he is totally wrong, and one where it's complicated. Thank God for His final, perfect justice.

 

[PennEd]

I don't think that's the case, but I believe some on CC got their hood tucked away nicely somewhere.

But anywho, I'm keeping my thoughts to myself regarding this until all facts have been presented. I won't just rush to judgement because as seen, most who rush to judgement regarding this use nothing but emotion.

Ugly tidbit you threw in there with what seems like a reasonable post. Especially since EVEN most blacks consider themselves the MOST racist group.

Poll Finds Black Americans More Likely to Be Seen as Racist - US News

 

[dcontroversal]

Well it seems you have swallowed hook, line and sinker what the AL Sharpton's and Jesse Jackson's have spread....

What are you like 9500 miles away..........I live like 60 miles from St Louis and they are showing a video of the dude slapping a store owner around and stealing like 5 minutes before he went for the cops gun...ACCORDING TO THE NEWS AND COPS.....SO I would for sure believe what the GANG BANGER who was with him said...next time he speaks notice the two tear drops (signs of murder) and the gang banger tats on his neck.......I bet he tells the truth all the time.....

Not to mention the fact that studies show and prove that you can have 50 witnesses and they will all say something different!

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

"Black respondents ranked their own demographic as more likely to be racist. Thirty-one percent of African-Americans said most blacks are racist, according to the polling organization, while only 24 percent of those respondents said most whites are racist."

It's interesting that more blacks think blacks are racist. I'm not even going to try to interpret that... lol.

But I do agree with JimJimmers. Like he said, there are various scenarios in play here. I am gravitating toward one of them obviously but admit we don't have enough information yet to make a final determination. We must wait and see for that.

Ugly tidbit you threw in there with what seems like a reasonable post. Especially since EVEN most blacks consider themselves the MOST racist group.

Poll Finds Black Americans More Likely to Be Seen as Racist - US News

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Which they certainly are in this case.

Not to mention the fact that studies show and prove that you can have 50 witnesses and they will all say something different!