Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,924
Michael Brown shooting II
- Thread starter Distracted1
- Start date
- Status
HenryLee
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2014
- Messages
- 753
What witness exactly would that be?
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,924
Dorian Johnson.
I'm capable of not dismissing his entire account just because he was likely to downplay certain aspects of the account. Keep in mind he refused to participate with Brown's robbery. Dorian put the stolen item Brown gave him back on the counter.
Of course if one is bigoted, sorry but it's what I think, one can dismiss everything he said instead of considering how truthful he would have been.
Now you tell me, why should we think Wilson gave an honest account?
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,924
Now you tell me, why should we think Wilson gave an honest account?
HenryLee
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2014
- Messages
- 753
Because his account matches the evidence.
But to be clear, only a "bigot" would think this...
But what do they know? They only looked at all the evidence and interviewed the witnesses(and "witnesses"). They don't know the correct method is feelings.
But to be clear, only a "bigot" would think this...
But what do they know? They only looked at all the evidence and interviewed the witnesses(and "witnesses"). They don't know the correct method is feelings.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
A tactical jacket is not riot gear.
Face it, Mumbles assertion that the cops in riot mode preceded the looting and burning is nothing but his fevered imagination at work.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
They are sold as such.
Why should anyone believe you? Mumbles and, now, I have supported supported his claim that riot gear and military vehicles were used as early as 6:25 PM on August 9. I haven't found any evidence of burning and looting, if you want to continue to play the semantic game, until the evening of August 10th. This is well after large groups of police (I've read both 50 and 150) showed up in full riot gear. If this is the work of Mumble's fevered imagination, his imagination at least brought along a camera and time stamped documentation. What have you got?
Now, please, explain to me why you believe the things that you do. Do you have some scrap of evidence that supports your belief or is it simply faith in a narrative? You may very well be correct, but you are not demonstrating it. You have merely claiming it over and over. Is there anything, anything at all, that shows burning and looting in Ferguson between Brown being shot and 6:25 PM on August 9?
And if there isn't, why do you keep insisting that it happened?
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
The event itself, unfortunately, is not all that remarkable.
What is remarkable is that it brought the problem of local systemic racism in the justice system to the world stage. When you boil it all down, that's the problem we're discussing here and it is far from resolved.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Report it to a mod to be moved if you think it's a problem. Threads drift. It happens.
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Re
Drift? This thread has gone out to sea.
There aren't enough laughing dogs in the Universe to cover that one.
Last edited:
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
As are light sticks and blankets... I guess you'll next claim shoes are riot gear too since all the cops wear them.
It's really not my burden to prove Mumbles' unsupported claim. It's up to Mumbles to prove it, and you too since you've decided to carry his water for him. Especially since Mumbles has established a rep here of making wild claims and never supporting them with any evidence.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Yeah, the "systemic racism" evidence is 3 emails sent by the city clerk 3-6 years before the shooting. The rest is just typical "town using the police for revenue" stuff pretty much every city does.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
You have made a competing claim to Mumbles' claim. You claim the burning and looting occurred first. Mumbles claims that the riot gear and military vehicles came first.
Clearly, Mumbles has provided evidence to support his claim of riot gear and military vehicles appearing at 6:25 PM on August 9. If you don't believe a tactical jacket counts, there is evidence of more police showing up in full riot gear during the day on August 10.
Thus far, I have only seen evidence for burning and looting on the evening of August 10, after the appearance of military vehicles and various forms of riot gear.
No one can prove the negative claim that there was no burning and looting prior to 6:25 PM on August 9 or during the day of August 10 (depending on how strictly you care to play your little semantic game). The burden of proof is therefore on you to support your claim that there was burning and looting prior to those point(s) in time.
So far, you have continually declined to do so. Again, I question what makes you think your claim is correct.
Last edited:
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Toontown
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
- Messages
- 6,595
I don't see anything remarkable about the the world poring over the US news every day, searching for anything it can fixate on to get it's daily shot of US-bashing, and then staying fixated for weeks, months, and sometimes years.
Happens all day every day. Same old song and dance. Some days they don't find much. Then they dig up some old bone they've previously gnawed on for weeks.
Last edited:
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
That jacket is not riot gear, and none of the other cops in that picture have riot gear on.
Riot gear is padding, helmets, etc... not a tactical jacket.
And it's Mumbles claim, and now yours, so you provide evidence. I cannot prove a negative after all.
None of which you've provided any evidence for. Unless you calling a tactical jacket "riot gear" (and frankly it looks like the bulletproof vest they wear every day) counts somehow.
By 8:30 attacks on police begin.
This prompted a call for St. Louis County tactical units. At 10pm a call for even more police was issued as the looting and burning began in earnest.
Cause: "peaceful protesters" attacking police.
Effect: More police called, these in riot gear.
Not the other way around, as you and Mumbles claim and have provided no evidence.
I don't take my cues from RedState.com, I can think for myself. There's nothing particularly unusual in that report, you'd find the same crap in just about every police department including the St. Louis city police department you think should take over Ferguson.
This is the wrong thread for that, but it is not "merely" the sending of those emails (which would be gross misconduct at the least at the company I work for).
'b. Direct Evidence of Racial Bias
Our investigation uncovered direct evidence of racial bias in the communications of influential Ferguson decision makers. In email messages and during interviews, several court and law enforcement personnel expressed discriminatory views and intolerance with regard to race, religion, and national origin. The content of these communications is unequivocally derogatory, dehumanizing, and demonstrative of impermissible bias.
We have discovered evidence of racial bias in emails sent by Ferguson officials, all of whom are current employees, almost without exception through their official City of Ferguson email accounts, and apparently sent during work hours. These email exchanges involved several police and court supervisors, including FPD supervisors and commanders. The following emails are illustrative:
A November 2008 email stated that President Barack Obama would not be President for very long because “what black man holds a steady job for four years.”
A March 2010 email mocked African Americans through speech and familial stereotypes, using a story involving child support. One line from the email read: “I be so glad that dis be my last child support payment! Month after month, year after year, all dose payments!”
An April 2011 email depicted President Barack Obama as a chimpanzee.
A May 2011 email stated: “An African-American woman in New Orleans was admitted into the hospital for a pregnancy termination. Two weeks later she received a check for $5,000. She phoned the hospital to ask who it was from. The hospital said, ‘Crimestoppers.’”
A June 2011 email described a man seeking to obtain “welfare” for his dogs because they are “mixed in color, unemployed, lazy, can’t speak English and have no frigging clue who their Daddies are.”
An October 2011 email included a photo of a bare-chested group of dancing women, apparently in Africa, with the caption, “Michelle Obama’s High School Reunion.”
A December 2011 email included jokes that are based on offensive stereotypes about Muslims.
Our review of documents revealed many additional email communications that exhibited racial or ethnic bias, as well as other forms of bias. Our investigation has not revealed any indication that any officer or court clerk engaged in these communications was ever disciplined. Nor did we see a single instance in which a police or court recipient of such an email asked that the sender refrain from sending such emails, or any indication that these emails were reported as inappropriate. Instead, the emails were usually forwarded along to others.49
Critically, each of these email exchanges involved supervisors of FPD's patrol and court operations.50 FPD patrol supervisors are responsible for holding officers accountable to governing laws, including the Constitution, and helping to ensure that officers treat all people equally under the law, regardless of race or any other protected characteristic. The racial animus and stereotypes expressed by these supervisors suggest that they are unlikely to hold an officer accountable for discriminatory conduct or to take any steps to discourage the development or perpetuation of racial stereotypes among officers.
Similarly, court supervisors have significant influence and discretion in managing the court’s operations and in processing individual cases. As discussed in Parts I and III.B of this report, our investigation has found that a number of court rules and procedures are interpreted and applied entirely at the discretion of the court clerks. These include: whether to require a court appearance for certain offenses; whether to grant continuances or other procedural requests; whether to accept partial payment of an owed fine; whether to cancel a warrant without a bond payment; and whether to provide individuals with documentation enabling them to have a suspended driver’s license reinstated before the full fine owed has been paid off. Court clerks are also largely responsible for setting bond amounts. The evidence we found thus shows not only racial bias, but racial bias by those with considerable influence over the outcome of any given court case.
This documentary evidence of explicit racial bias is consistent with reports from community members indicating that some FPD officers use racial epithets in dealing with members of the public. We spoke with one African-American man who, in August 2014, had an argument in his apartment to which FPD officers responded, and was immediately pulled out of the apartment by force. After telling the officer, “you don’t have a reason to lock me up,” he claims the officer responded: “N*****, I can find something to lock you up on.” When the man responded, “good luck with that,” the officer slammed his face into the wall, and after the man fell to the floor, the officer said, “don’t pass out motherf****r because I’m not carrying you to my car.” Another young man described walking with friends in July 2014 past a group of FPD officers who shouted racial epithets at them as they passed.
Courts have widely acknowledged that direct statements exhibiting racial bias are exceedingly rare, and that such statements are not necessary for establishing the existence of discriminatory purpose. See, e.g., Hayden v. Paterson, 594 F.3d 150, 163 (2d Cir. 2010) (noting that “discriminatory intent is rarely susceptible to direct proof”)
49 We did find one instance in 2012 in which the City Manager forwarded an email that played upon stereotypes of Latinos, but within minutes of sending it, sent another email to the recipient in which he stated he had not seen the offensive part of the email and apologized for the “inappropriate and offensive” message. Police and court staff took no such corrective action, and indeed in many instances expressed amusement at the offensive correspondence 50 We were able to review far more emails from FPD supervisors than patrol officers. City officials informed us that, while many FPD supervisors have their email accounts on hard drives in the police department, most patrol officers use a form of webmail that does not retain messages once they are deleted.
'
Our investigation uncovered direct evidence of racial bias in the communications of influential Ferguson decision makers. In email messages and during interviews, several court and law enforcement personnel expressed discriminatory views and intolerance with regard to race, religion, and national origin. The content of these communications is unequivocally derogatory, dehumanizing, and demonstrative of impermissible bias.
We have discovered evidence of racial bias in emails sent by Ferguson officials, all of whom are current employees, almost without exception through their official City of Ferguson email accounts, and apparently sent during work hours. These email exchanges involved several police and court supervisors, including FPD supervisors and commanders. The following emails are illustrative:
A November 2008 email stated that President Barack Obama would not be President for very long because “what black man holds a steady job for four years.”
A March 2010 email mocked African Americans through speech and familial stereotypes, using a story involving child support. One line from the email read: “I be so glad that dis be my last child support payment! Month after month, year after year, all dose payments!”
An April 2011 email depicted President Barack Obama as a chimpanzee.
A May 2011 email stated: “An African-American woman in New Orleans was admitted into the hospital for a pregnancy termination. Two weeks later she received a check for $5,000. She phoned the hospital to ask who it was from. The hospital said, ‘Crimestoppers.’”
A June 2011 email described a man seeking to obtain “welfare” for his dogs because they are “mixed in color, unemployed, lazy, can’t speak English and have no frigging clue who their Daddies are.”
An October 2011 email included a photo of a bare-chested group of dancing women, apparently in Africa, with the caption, “Michelle Obama’s High School Reunion.”
A December 2011 email included jokes that are based on offensive stereotypes about Muslims.
Our review of documents revealed many additional email communications that exhibited racial or ethnic bias, as well as other forms of bias. Our investigation has not revealed any indication that any officer or court clerk engaged in these communications was ever disciplined. Nor did we see a single instance in which a police or court recipient of such an email asked that the sender refrain from sending such emails, or any indication that these emails were reported as inappropriate. Instead, the emails were usually forwarded along to others.49
Critically, each of these email exchanges involved supervisors of FPD's patrol and court operations.50 FPD patrol supervisors are responsible for holding officers accountable to governing laws, including the Constitution, and helping to ensure that officers treat all people equally under the law, regardless of race or any other protected characteristic. The racial animus and stereotypes expressed by these supervisors suggest that they are unlikely to hold an officer accountable for discriminatory conduct or to take any steps to discourage the development or perpetuation of racial stereotypes among officers.
Similarly, court supervisors have significant influence and discretion in managing the court’s operations and in processing individual cases. As discussed in Parts I and III.B of this report, our investigation has found that a number of court rules and procedures are interpreted and applied entirely at the discretion of the court clerks. These include: whether to require a court appearance for certain offenses; whether to grant continuances or other procedural requests; whether to accept partial payment of an owed fine; whether to cancel a warrant without a bond payment; and whether to provide individuals with documentation enabling them to have a suspended driver’s license reinstated before the full fine owed has been paid off. Court clerks are also largely responsible for setting bond amounts. The evidence we found thus shows not only racial bias, but racial bias by those with considerable influence over the outcome of any given court case.
This documentary evidence of explicit racial bias is consistent with reports from community members indicating that some FPD officers use racial epithets in dealing with members of the public. We spoke with one African-American man who, in August 2014, had an argument in his apartment to which FPD officers responded, and was immediately pulled out of the apartment by force. After telling the officer, “you don’t have a reason to lock me up,” he claims the officer responded: “N*****, I can find something to lock you up on.” When the man responded, “good luck with that,” the officer slammed his face into the wall, and after the man fell to the floor, the officer said, “don’t pass out motherf****r because I’m not carrying you to my car.” Another young man described walking with friends in July 2014 past a group of FPD officers who shouted racial epithets at them as they passed.
Courts have widely acknowledged that direct statements exhibiting racial bias are exceedingly rare, and that such statements are not necessary for establishing the existence of discriminatory purpose. See, e.g., Hayden v. Paterson, 594 F.3d 150, 163 (2d Cir. 2010) (noting that “discriminatory intent is rarely susceptible to direct proof”)
49 We did find one instance in 2012 in which the City Manager forwarded an email that played upon stereotypes of Latinos, but within minutes of sending it, sent another email to the recipient in which he stated he had not seen the offensive part of the email and apologized for the “inappropriate and offensive” message. Police and court staff took no such corrective action, and indeed in many instances expressed amusement at the offensive correspondence 50 We were able to review far more emails from FPD supervisors than patrol officers. City officials informed us that, while many FPD supervisors have their email accounts on hard drives in the police department, most patrol officers use a form of webmail that does not retain messages once they are deleted.
'
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
So you say, but you've made a lot of unsupported claims. It is sold under the heading of "riot gear".
And, honestly, the truck should have been enough on it's own. It clearly came on the scene way before any burning and looting.
Finally. It is like pulling teeth to get you to actually support anything you claim.
That article is referring to 8:30 PM on August 10th. Far later than the appearance of the military vehicle and the guy in the tactical jacket the day before or even this guy in police camos with the dog. (direct link to the image)
Why is there even camo for police?
Once again conflating protestors with rioters and looters. Pretty dishonest of you at this point, frankly. There have been plenty of very peaceful protests since August that were completely non-violent.
I've never claimed that the military vehicles and riot gear caused the riots. I would attribute it more to the decades of systemic racism in the justice system. Of course, the reports of a police car running over the make-shift memorial for Brown or letting a police dog to urinate on it on the 9th probably did nothing to de-escalate the situation.
I only pointed out the RedState review as an easy summary.
What are you even arguing? That there is no systemic racism in the justice system because systemic racism is common?
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,924
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,924
double post
Last edited:
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Oh sorry, 7 emails with the last being in 2011, involving the city clerk and 2 cops. That's some damning stuff there.
Frankly I don't believe the reports of people who claimed to have been called racial epithets by cops. I've had people make that up out of whole cloth about me. Once a black woman hit my car by turning right from the left lane, we both got out and surveyed the damage. Police were called, a black cop shows up and the first thing she does is claim I threatened her and called her a ******. I was just flabbergasted at the flat-out lie, and that wasn't the only time something like that happened.
To the cop's credit he didn't appear to believe her. I wish cell phone cameras and dash cams existed then!
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
I show you a timeline, you sow pics of cops not in riot gear that you claim is riot gear because it's sold as "tactical" or is camo.
Such is the state of this critical thinking forum these days!
But a city clerk sends 7 racist emails to 2 cops from 2008-2011 and suddenly the entire police force is a bunch of racists. But "peaceful" protesters out demonstrating late into the night giving cover to burners and looters is painting them unfairly...
Mumbles has said that repeatedly, and you decided to argue for him since he never provides any evidence at all for his random ramblings and conspiracy theories.
Should have shoved it to the side of the road and not let them have a memorial in a traffic lane to begin with. That this was even allowed shows they were trying to keep things calm, but the "peaceful" protesters weren't going to have any of that.
No, you pointed to it as an appeal to authority, as if I'll just accept whatever they say because you think I'm a "red state" kind of person.
I'm arguing that this is 100% political. Unable to find evidence to accuse Wilson of so much as spitting on the sidewalk this dog and pony show was trotted out. "Small town uses police force to generate revenue", OMG how shocking, I never knew that went on before! And then the massaging of statistics in a way the very same DoJ acknowledged was a misuse of statistics just a few years ago. But this is about politics, not justice. And that's all it takes for most people, "skeptics" included apparently.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Darren Wilson's testimony is supported by physical evidence. Dorian Johnson's testimony is contradicted by Dorian Johnson's testimony and the physical evidence.
You didn't read a single sentence of the GJ testimony, did you?
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2008
- Messages
- 18,095
But a city clerk sends 7 racist emails to 2 cops from 2008-2011 and suddenly the entire police force is a bunch of racists. But "peaceful" protesters out demonstrating late into the night giving cover to burners and looters is painting them unfairly...
Please go read the DoJ report and take the discussion to that thread, where if you allow it, you will be fully informed of the robustness of the analysis.
What you are doing here is no better than what Skeptic Ginger is doing, just on a different aspect of this debacle.
Context is important.
Here are 14-pages of the emails
Twitty sent the photo of Regan feeding a chimp and saying it was him babysitting Barack Obama in 1962.
She also sent many of the other racist emails - I don't think even she's denying that this was racist; her defence now is that it was funny...
If you are working in the justice system, you have to be seen to be impartial. Twitty failed on that.
She was the person who sent the email about a black woman getting a cheque from crimestoppers for having an abortion. Hilarious, and entirely suitable for someone in her position.
Her actions, and (probably unconscious* double standards) show that she was far from impartial in her job, voiding tickets for friends and colleagues.
As well as the emails, the DoJ interviewed people in the department and they espoused racist views in these as well. The DoJ didn't give names for these.
*She doesn't strike me as the sharpest tool in the box, but that isn't an excuse.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Can someone bring me up to speed? What are we saying--Wilson shot Brown because Wilson is a racist?
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,924
What part of rigged trial do you not understand?
Monketi Ghost
Confusion Reactor
- Joined
- May 21, 2003
- Messages
- 25,141
I *think* it's an attempt to establish the proposition that since a subset is racist, it's perfectly cromulent to conclude that every police action can be seen as racist.
There's something faulty with the reasoning that the actions of a few can be applied to the whole. Can't put my finger on it...
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,924
Wrong, the image of Bush was Alfred E Neuman.
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2008
- Messages
- 18,095
I do believe that is part of Skeptic Ginger's argument, but it isn't part of mine.
I don't know if Wilson is racist or not. The only evidence there is circumstantial, so I'm inclined not to call him one. However, it also doesn't actually make a difference if he is. The shooting was still shown to be justified by two separate investigations, both rather thorough.
The DoJ investigation into the the PD and justice system there did show wide ranging and systemic racism and injustice however. That is a huge problem, but doesn't make the shooting either justified or unjustified, and doesn't show Wilson to be a racist. There is no reason to pretend the Ferguson justice system wasn't shown to be unjust and biased.
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,924
All I've done is consider the effect of only cross examining witnesses against Brown, not having anyone cross examine Wilson, and giving Wilson the benefit of fitting his story to the evidence well ahead of time, never seriously questioning him until many days after the event.
The witnesses' testimony who saw Brown going down, for whatever reason, falling or surrendering, did fit the physical evidence, and saying because they also said they thought Brown was hit in the back while fleeing didn't impeach their testimony Brown was not bull rushing Wilson.
People in this very forum who claimed Johnson was lying about Brown being hit by a bullet shot at the vehicle didn't exactly fall all over themselves to reverse that opinion when it turned out Brown had indeed been shot first at the car.
Because I've considered the above, to say I'm not looking at the evidence is simply wrong.
Last edited:
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2008
- Messages
- 18,095
All you've done is cherry pick and remove context. It's as it ever is, you're looking at only some things that happened and ignoring how and why so you can insert that.
The physical evidence doesn't just fit his account, it disproves the other accounts. That's just a small part of things you fail to consider. At any rate others are doing a good job of engaging you on this, so I don't want to gang up on you.
This is my view. With the addendum that US police protocols seem too prone to lethal force so I am not sure it is consistent with worldwide best practice for dealing with large, unarmed violent people.
ETA: I think it is actually ironic, that the event that sparked off the investigation probably was justified in its context.
- Status