CNN includes a quote from Antonio French, "a St. Louis city alderman who lives near Ferguson":
"I think you have a lot of people who will be disappointed if this does turn out to be the case. The community and the family wanted a day in court, an opportunity to see all the evidence laid out, cross-examined.... And it looks like that's not going to happen. I hope we don't have any violence as a result of this.... People have a right to protest. We will probably continue to see that. That's a good thing. But we want to keep them peaceful, nonviolent...."
Posts
66 comments:
I want Antonio French charged with sexual violence and corruption. We know Democrats lie, cheat, rape, murder, and make Jesus cry, so let's get our day in court so we can nail his ass.
NAIL it.
When the system doesn't give me what I demand, the system will soon start to see the power God have giveth me. Be a shame if that included violence...
Even white cops have a natural and unalienable right to self-defense. Imagine that!
They figured that their made-up stuff was too easy to refute.
Wouldn't it be cool if we learned from this to stop jumping on the bandwagon of outrage in situations where we can't know what happened.
Wouldn't it be cool if we learned from this to stop jumping on the bandwagon of outrage in situations where we can't know what happened.
If the media would just do that, it would be a big improvement. They're the ones who got this going.
A federal investigation has not found enough evidence to charge Darren Wilson with the federal crime of depriving Michael Brown of his civil rights...
Did they not find enough evidence, or did they find plenty of evidence, but the evidence did not point to Wilson committing a crime?
I hate the way the CNN presumes that Wilson is guilty and the only question is whether or not we can find the evidence.
No apologies to Officer Wilson, or to the shop owners who had their businesses burned. Not from Holder, or, Soros. Only pawns in their game.
It would be "Burn this bitch down" time again but sadly there is nothing left to burn.
"The community and the family wanted a day in court"
Sounds like a very good idea. "The family" for inciting a riot. "The community" for looting and arson.
I would hope that the Department of Justice would come out and say, "Officer Wilson didn't commit a crime. But, hey, look at this persistent pattern of abuse conducted by the Ferguson police department with their ticketing and petty crime enforcement."
Report: George Soros Spent $33,000,000 to Bankroll Ferguson Protests
"George Soros, the liberal[sic] billionaire, has donated $33 million to social-justice organizations to help move Ferguson, Mo., into the national spotlight."
"Build this bitch up!"
Hmmm. Doesn't have quite the same poetry, you know?
I really wish people would learn that criminal charges aren't the only tool in the box. If someone with standing REALLY believes a wrong has been done, why not file a civil suit and have fun poring over the discovery and conducting depositions?
If they find something criminal, charges can always come later. Stop expecting the government to do everything for you (and isn't there some quote about a government that can give you everything you want being able to take it all away, too?).
Curious George said...
"The family" for inciting a riot. "The community" for looting and arson.
They are such a sweet family.
REPORT: Michael Brown’s Mother Punched & Robbed His Granny for Selling T-Shirts & Swag #Ferguson …Update: Copy of Report
The "evidence," with videos, photographs, field measurements, and testimonies, has been on the internet from day one as it became available.
I don't think Holder needs to apologize to Wilson, regardless of his meddling. That would be an admission he suspected the officer and harnessed the Justice department to bring him down.
Holder should make a statement, if he had the courage, to put some closure and credit the grand jury for their work.
Restitution would be nice. Those who destroyed property be made to pay and those who enflamed the situation charged with obstruction.
I'm sure Swaggy will discuss this today with Glozell.
"Hands up, Don't Shoot"
I voted for Johnny Mac.
Fernandinande said...
Thanks for the link about the Open Air Society.
It almost had to be something like that, didn't it? All of these protests have Benjamin Crump, Rev Al, a ready group of people with time to protest, and often pre-printed signs.
Obviously organized and PRed and packaged for the networks.
Ignorance is Bliss said:
"A federal investigation has not found enough evidence to charge Darren Wilson with the federal crime of depriving Michael Brown of his civil rights...
Did they not find enough evidence, or did they find plenty of evidence, but the evidence did not point to Wilson committing a crime?
I hate the way the CNN presumes that Wilson is guilty and the only question is whether or not we can find the evidence.
1/22/15, 8:57 AM"
^^^^This. For people supposedly trained in practical epistemology --what is a fact, how is it challenged and established, who is the least untrustworthy source-- the media seem not only incompetent but actively grinding an ax.
As for Antonio French's complaint about wanting to see the evidence, has he already forgotten the voluminous record developed as the grand jury deliberated whether there was probable cause to indict Darren Wilson? And concluded there was not?
"The community and the family wanted a day in court, an opportunity to see all the evidence laid out, cross-examined...."
Yet another rabble-rouser, like Obama, using trigger-phrases in an illogical context.
"evidence laid out", "cross-examined" but with the release of the grand jury proceedings, the evidence was laid out. And in a criminal trial, the cross examination is by the Defense, not the community or family.
On the other hand, these phrases are being used to incite emotion in the unthinking, reality need not apply.
It is interesting how the activists have keyed in on these phrases which imply some miscarriage of justice but in context only apply to the accused.
#BlackLiesMatter!
Grand juries don't meet in court anymore?
The family can file a civil lawsuit against the officer. The town would probably pay to make them go away.
Michael Brown did not have a civil right to strong-arm rob a convenience store.
Michael Brown did not have a civil right to parade down the middle of the street.
Michael Brown did not have a civil right to refuse a lawful order to get out of the street and up on the sidewalk.
Michael Brown did not have a civil right to disorderly conduct (cussing at the police officer, in response to his lawful order).
Michael Brown did not have a civil right to commit battery to a police officer, a felony.
Dorian Johnson did not have a civil right to be an accomplice in these crimes.
Dorian Johnson did not have a civil right to file a false police report.
The mob did not have a civil right to "burn the bitch down."
Why can't they have their day in court? Surely they are entitled to file a civil action alleging a plethora of claims not least of which under 42 USC 1983.
To be clear, I don't think they'd win. The point is, they have potential legal reedies available.
We want to "keep" them nonviolent?
Don't they have to be there to begin with to "keep" them there?
I love seeing activists (and politicians who are little more than activists) convinced that a jury trial will give them "justice" when an investigation and grand jury say that there is nothing there in the first place.
I had no idea the Obama Justice Department was so racist.
/sarc
Time to charge certain media figures, as well as Al Sharpton with incitement to riot?
Or just the "burn this bitch down!" dad?
Bill, Republic of Texas said...
#BlackLiesMatter!
Ha!
Well, a Section 1983 claim is possible and the family could hire a lawyer (or Soros could) and go to it.
But that won't happen, because it doesn't seem like such a suit could survive due to forensic evidence which appears to show that at the time of the fatal shooting, the officer was moving back and Brown was moving forward, and that Brown was reaching inside the car earlier). A judge would probably be forced to throw it out and certainly the case would not succeed.
Instead, what we see is something being manipulated by the media to help the Democrats, and a court case would only be harmful to that effort.
In the meantime, actual police violations of civil rights are occurring, but they aren't getting national media coverage or public outrage. Latest example is the shooting in NJ, which appears to be very, very illegal from the video.
http://www.nj.com/cumberland/index.ssf/2015/01/your_comments_on_the_fatal_bridgeton_police_shooti.html
So where's the outrage? Where's the money? Where are the civil rights activists?
Call me cynical, but I think this is a three-ring circus funded by a lot of money with a highly political focus, and a scared black cop (there was reason for the fright) losing it and shooting a scared black man just doesn't serve the same political narrative.
Which betrays us all, in the end.
First the Oscar snubs. Now this.
It's hard to see from the media accounts that Wilson should have been charged with anything, and nice to see the Justice Department isn't trying to railroad him. And if the Eric Holder DOJ says there's nothing to convict him on here, that should settle it.
In the meantime, actual police violations of civil rights are occurring, but they aren't getting national media coverage or public outrage. Latest example is the shooting in NJ, which appears to be very, very illegal from the video.
http://www.nj.com/cumberland/index.ssf/2015/01/your_comments_on_the_fatal_bridgeton_police_shooti.html
So where's the outrage? Where's the money? Where are the civil rights activists?
Call me cynical, but I think this is a three-ring circus funded by a lot of money with a highly political focus, and a scared black cop (there was reason for the fright) losing it and shooting a scared black man just doesn't serve the same political narrative.
Which betrays us all, in the end.
Exactly.
There is a real problem, and then there is a narrative being pushed.
And the latter doesn't serve the former. So who does it serve?
Antonio French is an idiot or thinks his constituents are because ALL THE EVIDENCE was disclosed at the conclusion of the grand jury! Nothing else to "lay out" in court!
Oh right. they are idiots. the democrat base.
"Nice little town you have there, Ferguson. It would be a shame if something else happened to it."
"The point is, they have potential legal reedies available."
They had them before they burned down the town. It's called "The Vote."
Of course, that assumes they are literate and able to tell the crooks from the honest politicians, assuming there are some in Missouri.
It would be "Burn this bitch down" time again but sadly there is nothing left to burn.
1/22/15, 9:08 AM
How bout the justice Dept.
Go get em bitches. See how that works out.
If someone with standing REALLY believes a wrong has been done, why not file a civil suit and have fun poring over the discovery and conducting depositions?
The evidence isn't there, apparently, since if it were, Obama and the righteous Eric Holder would never let the crisis go to waste.
Why doesn't Soros loan money to the family to pursue a civil suit? Maybe he will; if he doesn't, maybe he also knows that Brown was not the gentle giant who might ignite the revolution he wants, but only a loser thug.
I clicked through to read the CNN report. I also clicked through to the sidebars. They were more interesting. Particularly "Who was Michael Brown?" from last August.
Written in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, it's all Michael trying to make something of himself - the voice of reason in school - wouldn't hurt a fly - gentle giant stuff. Oh what a difference a convenience store's security camera makes!
In light of subsequent information and all the other CNN Ferguson stories that they could have as sidebars, why is this one still up there?
At this point the only thing I feel is disgust. The media ultimately has a lot of blame for how this went, from misplaying the race relations issue to extreme bias on the political front.
The outrage has run its course. Even the movie Selma is a victim of the bullshit umbrage. Black fatigue.
Meanwhile, the "symbolic" act of "hands up don't shoot" has brainwashed a generation of young blacks too immature to understand the "symbolic" part.
Shame rains down on them all.
How about some lawsuits against Soros, Sharpton, et al? Possibility?
But that won't happen, because it doesn't seem like such a suit could survive due to forensic evidence which appears to show that at the time of the fatal shooting, the officer was moving back and Brown was moving forward, and that Brown was reaching inside the car earlier).
I think that it was worse than that. It is highly likely, given the forensic evidence, that Brown struck Wilson probably several times while the latter was still in his vehicle. His gun was discharged twice at that time, one time wounding Brown on his right hand. The only testimony of what happened at that time is Wilson's, and he claims that Brown grabbed his gun, forced it into his hip, and tried to get his finger into the trigger guard. This is, of course, completely consistent with the forensic evidence, esp. of Brown's DNA on the gun.
What that means is that Brown committed one or more violent felonies in the presence of (and to) officer Wilson. We have potentially assault on a police officer, aggravated assault, and potentially attempted murder. All Class B felonies under MO law.
What that means is first that Wilson may have been entitled to shoot Brown in the back to prevent him from escaping. MO law allows that, but SCOTUS precedent essentially limits such except for situations where the officer is protecting the public against a violent felon. Still, by the evidence, Brown was advancing when shot, and continued to advance after being shot, while Wilson retreated to keep his distance. That means that the relevant legal question is self-defense, and the attack that Brown made on Wilson in his SUV, and the felonies he committed as a result are directly relevant as to the reasonable fear that Wilson felt for his life or of sustaining great bodily injury.
So, where would Wilson have deprived Brown of his civil rights? When he requested that Brown and Johnson get out of the middle of the road? If then, it would have been de minimis. When Brown reached into the Tahoe, punched Wilson, and tried to get his gun? When he turned around and started advancing on Wilson, and continued to do so even after being shot? At least until Holder became AG, no one had the civil right to punch cops, take their gun away, or charge them, regardless of race. The fact that this was, essentially, a self-defense case, and there was never enough evidence to overcome Wilson's self-defense claim, makes a civil rights prosecution even more problematic - all that Wilson would have to do is what he would have done in a state criminal case - claim self-defense. And, if there was reasonable doubt about his state liability (there obviously was), there would have been that, plus the absence of evidence of contemporaneous racial animus, in a federal civil rights case.
Which is a long way of saying that the potential for federal criminal prosecution was always political. It was held out there to appease Blacks, Holder's and Obama's strongest supporters. Nothing more.
saw an interview last week with an African American mother whose son was on trial for murder committed during robbery. He didn't do it, she says -- he's a robber, not a murderer.
Parents should not be involved in political protests on principle. If there is a serious issue, a parents grief and emotional connection should be honored by leaving it to them and their loved ones.
#AllLivesMatter. No.
#BlackLivesMatter. No.
#SelectiveLivesMatter. Pro-choice!
The outrage about all of this is that there are two inarguable points: 1) some cops will be abusive, even murderous, and it is very difficult to hold them accountable, which means we should still try to hold them accountable but for many good reasons it's not easy to do, and 2) citizens need to understand that when dealing with the cops you never know what is going on inside their head and your safest option is to make clear you are not a threat.
Notice I didn't mention race--that's because both of those truths apply regardless of the race of the cop or the citizen. Maybe some cops will take race and age and gender into account, but even if they don't your best bet is to make sure you don't appear a threat (hands where they can see them, no sudden movements, no fighting even if they're being rough or unfair to you).
If you believe "black lives matter" then you'll accept these facts, impart them to your children, and try to prevent some tragic incidents because as we know blacks are disproportionately likely to have run-ins with cops.
Of course, Al Sharpton and Co. never cared about black lives except as pawns for their own hustling.
mccullough said...
The family can file a civil lawsuit against the officer. The town would probably pay to make them go away."
True and the town can counter sue them for the damages and the discovery would be most interesting as the town could probably add a number of additional parties to sue as well, some of them with real money.
As for the Browns, exactly what damages can they be seeking? Loss of future income from criminal activity? pain and suffering from losing a loved one who died in the commision of a felony? I suppose the charging instructions for such a jury would be rather interesting.
Brando - maybe a corollary - if you attack a police officer, you may die. And, esp. if you attack them with what appears to be deadly force. This isn't a black/white thing, but rather a blue/civilian thing.
Society has given the police an extended right and tools to protect themselves and others, in trade for their willingness to step into harms way, when needed. We really need this for a safe, ordered, society. They are the thin blue line that protects us from anarchy.
I don't deny that there is police corruption. And, that in order to protect their lives better, we have allowed them to become, in some cases, militarized, and to treat many situations as essentially military operations that in a previous day would have been handled a lot less violently. And, that police are invariably government employees, and that they therefore often capture the government that they represent (as do other government employees, such as teachers).
But, by the evidence, that most likely isn't what happened that afternoon in Ferguson. What we had was apparently a very large young adult male violently, and without legal provocation, attack a police officer (and probably try to shoot the officer with his gun), and die as a result. Which gets me back to my point - if you violently attack a police officer, expect to die. Most often, you won't. But it is much more likely than if you don't engage in such an attack.
"The community and the family wanted a day in court"
Ah yes, the fundamental legal principle that everyone is entitled to a show trial.
"maybe a corollary - if you attack a police officer, you may die."
That should be obvious, and I'd say it fits into the "don't act threateningly" rule, as clearly attacking a cop is far more than "acting" threatening. Of course, the Sharptons are always assuming the cops were never being "attacked" at all.
The Brown case by all indications (and I wasn't in the Grand Jury so can only opine on what I saw in the news) it is far more likely that Brown did attack Wilson, or at least gave Wilson reasonable belief he was in danger. Brown behaved violently only minutes prior to the stop, was behaving irrationally (walking in the road like an idiot with stolen cigarillos), and evidence points to him leaning into Wilson's car and facing Wilson (by some accounts, charging at him) when he was shot. Maybe it's not beyond reasonable doubt that Brown attacked Wilson, but that's not the standard here--there needs to be no reasonable doubt that Wilson is guilty of murder, and the evidence is nowhere near CLOSE to that.
Picking this weak case was particularly stupid, because if anything it showed thinking Americans (i.e., not Sharpton's fans) that sometimes a citizen commits dumbassery that gets him Darwinned. There's an argument to be made for citizens to not act stupidly with cops, and an argument that maybe police procedures in dealing with citizens could be improved to deescalate such instances, but the Brown case has nothing to do with that.
Brando - I agree 100% with your last paragraph.
BTW - the reason that I qualified my endorsement, was that the news stories were often quite biased. The grand jury evidence is out there and available on the Internet, and I think that it is a bit less gray than you suggest, if you take that evidence, and esp. the extrinsic evidence, into account.
Virtually all of Mr. Brown's family members will soon be having their days in court, albeit as criminal defendants. Their wishes are granted.
CWJ said...
I clicked through to read the CNN report. I also clicked through to the sidebars. They were more interesting. Particularly "Who was Michael Brown?" from last August.
Written in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, it's all Michael trying to make something of himself - the voice of reason in school - wouldn't hurt a fly - gentle giant stuff.
They forgot the part about 'aspiring rap artist'!
"The community and the family wanted a day in court, an opportunity to see all the evidence laid out, cross-examined..."
Utterly disingenuous. We have an adversarial system: the all-powerful State would have tried to put Wilson in prison. There would have been no "day in court" to "look at all the evidence."
The community wanted to see Officer Wilson hauled through court regardless of what the evidence said. After all, the evidence failed to convince a grand jury and Federal prosecutors to make a single charge against him. So, no, they weren't really interested in justice.
They were interested in punishing Officer Wilson for having the temerity to shoot a black man who had just committed a strong-arm robbery and battery and who had assaulted a police officer once and was about to do it again. Because none of those things are more important than the fact that Wilson is white and the criminal was black.
Meanwhile, a cop is on trial in the Chicago area for shooting a man and killing him. The cop shot the man 5 times with a shotgun holding beanbag rounds from a range of about 10 feet. The man was 95 years old and holding himself up with his walker while waving a knife. The cop was one of 5 present. The place was in the man's nursing home room.
The men were of two different races. So why didn't you hear about this from Rev. Al Sharpton? Why haven't there been riots? It's actually simple. The cop is black, and the man was white. It took him 3 days to die.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-wrana-beanbag-shooting-trial-met-0117-20150116-story.html
"The grand jury evidence is out there and available on the Internet, and I think that it is a bit less gray than you suggest, if you take that evidence, and esp. the extrinsic evidence, into account."
I don't doubt that, I just personally haven't seen everything so I'm limiting my own conclusions on the matter. I'm sure the grand jury saw more than I did regarding that case.
"The community wanted to see Officer Wilson hauled through court regardless of what the evidence said. After all, the evidence failed to convince a grand jury and Federal prosecutors to make a single charge against him. So, no, they weren't really interested in justice."
Absolutely they wanted him found guilty, period. Otherwise what we would have heard is "we want an investigation" and once it was clear an investigation was being carried out we would have heard "okay, we're awaiting the results of the investigation" and once the grand jury was convened we would have heard "okay, we're awaiting the grand jury decision" and once the grand jury decided not to indict we would have heard "okay, let's see the evidence the grand jury looked at and find out if there was anything fishy here, but if not, then we got what we asked for and those are the laws that protect all of us."
But as you said, race was what animated bigots like Sharpton. Anyone marching with him may as well have marched with George Wallace. At least we could say Wallace was a product of a different, less enlightened time.
The WaPo had this up on their website briefly last night, but it seems to have disappeared.
Well, the Brown family can take comfort in knowing that Wilson has lost his job and has to worry that someday some sociopath will come out of the blue and kill him......Not every psyche can survive such relentless demonizing. Perhaps Zimmerman had some deficits before he became the universally acclaimed international symbol of racist bigotry, but it's a sure bet that all that attention was not therapeutic. I don't think Wilson's life has taken a sudden turn for the better. They've irrevocably screwed his life, and he's an innocent man.
they didn't find enough evidence because officer Wilson was most likely telling the truth. and the whole story about Brown being a gentle giant was just tall tales and legends.
---"George Soros, the liberal[sic] billionaire, has donated $33 million to social-justice organizations to help move Ferguson, Mo., into the national spotlight.”---
What if he had just used it to build a factory there? This was all about bringing down our polis (as in our governmental and societal relationships.
And 'liberal' is such a lie.
" I hope we don't have any violence as a result of this [wink,wink].... People have a right to protest."
Whom does Darren Wilson get to sue?
I find it very disturbing that George Soros was behind these protests. What is that guy up to and why?
Far too many locals, and the well-organized 'protesters' from sea to shining sea, still want a trial and a hanging, without much concern which comes first.
To recap, the social "justice" warriors are fighting for the right to:
Strong-arm rob convenience stores.
Parade down the middle of the street, blocking traffic.
Refuse a lawful order to get out of the street and up on the sidewalk.
Disorderly conduct (cussing at the police officer, in response to his lawful order).
Commit battery to a police officer.
Resist arrest.
File a false police report.
"Burn the bitch down."
Loot businesses.
Drag white people out of their cars, and beat them to death with hammers.
Post a Comment