Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Q. Why did you shoot him six times?
A. I ran out of ammunition.
A. I ran out of ammunition.
Police/public relationship in the U.S.
- Thread starter blueovalz
- Start date
Terry Oxandale
Skinny Man
I agree completely, and that is what scares me. A frustrated man with authority to use deadly force, who wakes up on the wrong side of the bed, and has a supporting infrastructure that lacks accountability.
Reliable and believeable witness will be hard to find. It appears that the officer had a struggle with Brown where Brown attempted to take the weapon and one round was discharged and the officer punched in the face. Brown began taunting the officer and "bum rushed" him. This "innocent kid" had marijuana in his system and the video of the convience store robery showed his "tactic" of using his 6 foot four inch, 300 pound frame to intimidate. The officer likely shot as he was being charged by Brown.
The autopsy diagram (IMO) is consistant with rapid fire and muzzle bounce from recoil. The issue weapon had either a 10 or 15 round magazine. The officer continued to fire until his perceived threat was stopped. Maybe we'll never know the real story as our illustrious AG will be there tomorrow to make it "right". The entire situation is just wrong on so many counts.
The autopsy diagram (IMO) is consistant with rapid fire and muzzle bounce from recoil. The issue weapon had either a 10 or 15 round magazine. The officer continued to fire until his perceived threat was stopped. Maybe we'll never know the real story as our illustrious AG will be there tomorrow to make it "right". The entire situation is just wrong on so many counts.
Pat
Supporter
Perhaps the police officer wrongfully executed young Mr. Brown as some of you have concluded as your reference with the fact that there were six shots fired. Some of you speculated this was driven by the police officer's poor training, anger, fatigue, or the police blatant and calloused disregard for any "collateral damage" inflicted upon members of the community. Activists and certain pundits have speculated that the officer murdered Mr. Brown because of his own racism and the systematic racism of white law enforcement throughout the United States.
Perhaps Mr. Brown, after one violent confrontation with the officer, knowing he had just committed a felony strong arm robbery and fearing incarceration, fled the officer and then returned and charged at the officer. Fearing for his life, the officer fired, wounding Mr. Brown in the arm. Mr. Brown, who according to an uncle, stood 6'4" and weighed 300 pounds. In his adrenalin and cannabis fueled state he was not slowed down by his initial wounds and in his continued charge, the officer fired twice more. The latter being fatal shots to the head.
I have no idea if either of these scenarios, or one that has yet to be bantered in the media are what happened.
But I would invite all of you to check your biases. None of you know what happened and this kind of speculation consciously or unconsciously spreads bias among others. Perhaps some of you aren't familiar with the U.S. justice or law enforcement system, others apparently have a stereotypical view from perhaps seeing to much media hype and race mongering. Perhaps not. One thing is certain, none of you know what truly happened.
At some point there will be a grand jury, perhaps a criminal jury, weighing the evidence in the prosecution of the officer involved. It will be made of ordinary people such as ourselves. The state of Missouri has the death penalty.
Given the posts here, I can only speculate as to how fair minded some of you would be.
So you can reserve judgment or join the lynch mob.
Perhaps Mr. Brown, after one violent confrontation with the officer, knowing he had just committed a felony strong arm robbery and fearing incarceration, fled the officer and then returned and charged at the officer. Fearing for his life, the officer fired, wounding Mr. Brown in the arm. Mr. Brown, who according to an uncle, stood 6'4" and weighed 300 pounds. In his adrenalin and cannabis fueled state he was not slowed down by his initial wounds and in his continued charge, the officer fired twice more. The latter being fatal shots to the head.
I have no idea if either of these scenarios, or one that has yet to be bantered in the media are what happened.
But I would invite all of you to check your biases. None of you know what happened and this kind of speculation consciously or unconsciously spreads bias among others. Perhaps some of you aren't familiar with the U.S. justice or law enforcement system, others apparently have a stereotypical view from perhaps seeing to much media hype and race mongering. Perhaps not. One thing is certain, none of you know what truly happened.
At some point there will be a grand jury, perhaps a criminal jury, weighing the evidence in the prosecution of the officer involved. It will be made of ordinary people such as ourselves. The state of Missouri has the death penalty.
Given the posts here, I can only speculate as to how fair minded some of you would be.
So you can reserve judgment or join the lynch mob.
Ultimately we are the judges and the "lynch mob", its the likes of us that will be the jurors at the trial. If the officer told the jury he feared for his life as the deceased charged at him they would believe him.
Bob
I've been pretty specific about what I feel happened...but I don't share your confidence that we'll ever find out the truth. That police officer has good reason to "...fear for his life..." given the aftermath of what happened...I believe that there WILL be cover-ups and efforts made to hide some of the truth.
Having said that, I must remind not only myself but others that in our criminal system there is a presumption of innocence unless the prosecution proves its case. That's the basis of our criminal justice system. I am somewhat ashamed to admit that if I were in the jury pool for a criminal trial for that officer I would find it hard to be impartial. That's one of the negative aspects of our "...age of information..." that the internet and journalist organizations have promoted...we get information early enough to have "colored" (no racial pun intended, I assure you) our judgement...that's the definition of PREjudice. Getting an impartial jury in that town will be very difficult. I foresee a change of venue being pursued...and rightfully so.
Regards!
Doug
That in fact is a scenario recounted by some woman in a report aired yesterday. 'Wasn't clear to me if she was an actual witness or she was repeating hearsay. I didn't see the beginning of the piece, so I don't know what the deal was with her.
Anyway, looking at the autopsy sketches, the wound pattern appears to support what both Pat and Molleur suggest above...namely, Brown was charging the LEO...'was hit by 3-4-5 rounds...and received the fatal head wound as he fell forward from the effects of the previous rounds. Coincidentally, the woman's account mentioned above also mirrors this same scenario.
Interestingly, according to news reports, NEITHER of the 2 med. examiners had access to Brown's CLOTHES(!!!) during either autopsy! The 'Fergy' P.D. had/HAS custody of them! Now, how the gallopin' clang is a med. exam. going to be able to determine the distance from which any given shot was fired w/o being able to examine the clothes for GSR. etc.???
I just don't 'get' any of this...
Last edited:
Larry, it's MHO that is exactly what the local police want...there is information being withheld, I can assure you, in an effort to keep the public "...in the dark..." More so than any other civic organization, the local police departments have the authority to withhold information under the guise of "...an ongoing investigation..." and IMHO many of the local law enforcement agencies use this ploy to hold off public criticism until the issue cools down...at which point the local law enforcement agency MAY make it public, but most often does not as they still want to keep the public uninformed in any case where possible police abuse of power has been alleged. They want to protect their peers from any form of criticism, reasonable or not. It's just what they do...and have for who knows how long? It's just another of the "...military style..." approaches law enforcement has adopted...don't let the "enemy" know what you are up to, except that in this case the "enemy" is the very people that law enforcement is suppose to "...serve and protect."
Regards!
Doug
Oh, I dunno...mebbe 'cause he's 6'-4", weighs 300 lbs, 'already has smacked me around, and is now charging at me 'full-bore'? (And maybe he's now yelling "I'm gunna KILL you!" as he's charging?)
Now, I'll grant you I would like to believe my own strategy in that scenario would hopefully be to shoot the guy's legs out from under him. But, in today's litigious society, I have my doubts about the wisdom of going that route. :squint:
'Not gunna disagree with that at all, Doug...except to point out that L-A-W-Y-E-R-S might be able make some kind of 'legal hay' out of any early release of this-or-that info previously given to the public when in court later on.
Last edited:
Doug FFS it is a murder inquiry, the media/public cant be privy to this information in the same way as when Clinton was having his beef smoked.
Bob
Try telling that to Cliff Richard....
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
That's why you don't have many riots in the U.K.:lipsrsealed:
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
How could the officer know he was unarmed? He had just committed a robbery.
Officers are trained to shoot at the body mass, the shots to the arm were probably misses.
There is a massive difference between shooting at a target on the range and facing a charging guy intent on doing you harm. Shooting to wound aiming at the legs etc, is O.K. For Hollywood but will get you dead in real life.
The officer would continue to fire until the guy dropped. The fact that he did not empty his clip shows restraint.
Similar threads
