Missouri Police Officer guns down unarmed 18 year old

Page 164 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

WackyDan

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
4,794
68
91
I would like to see ivwshane's answer to this question. :thumbsup:

Simple... It doesn't apply to him. In his view, it is perfectly fine to subvert the system in order to have a highly public trial, and torture a potentially innocent public servant... Not to mention the cost of the trial to the officer as well the public.

The grand jury exists for a reason. One that he obviously doesn't understand or rather he does, but prefers to keep trolling along.
 

Blanky

Platinum Member
Oct 18, 2014
2,457
12
46
Let me ask you this. You have been accused of having potentially committed a crime. As part of the system of legal protections we all enjoy you are not automatically subject to a ruinous trial but instead are given the right of a grand jury hearing to determine if there is sufficient basis for a trial. If the evidence warrants it then it goes to trial. If not then no. Now let's get rid of that process. I and another accuse you of rape. How deep are your pockets? I ask because you are "just going to trial" and there's no need to determine if the accusations have sufficient merit.

Shane has indicated he is okay with an indictment irrespective of guilt, just to appease a lynch mob. This is why we can't have nice things.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,315
1,215
126
Google justice for treyskittles idiot.

Make ready, be ready. Have a plan and be ready. Don't be a victim. Survive the hoarde with whatever weapon you have.

I can't fucking wait. Bring it on.

Thanx for that. It brought a smile to my lips and some chocolate milk to my nose.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Shane has indicated he is okay with an indictment irrespective of guilt, just to appease a lynch mob. This is why we can't have nice things.

To be fair, indictment does not mean guilt.

But to Hayabusa's point, trials are expensive, time consuming, and overall quite damaging to innocent people facing charges. That's why we don't have trials for every complaint out there, we have a procedure to determine if charges should go to trial or not.



To the larger grand jury situation, the thought just popped into my mind, the grand jury has until January to render a decision. It would be interesting if the media is helping diffuse the mob by suggesting a decision might be announced well ahead of the official schedule. Time is the enemy of crazed anger.
 

wetech

Senior member
Jul 16, 2002
871
6
81
Please let it be known regardless if this so called grand jury returns an indictment, it doesn't change this thug with a badge guilt. One way or another justice needs to be served, if not by a jury, then perhaps other means.

"Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests."
 

cabri

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2012
3,616
1
81
The agitators will still try to cause problems if there is no indictment, no matter when it is revealed. :thumbsdown:
 

cabri

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2012
3,616
1
81
Please let it be known regardless if this so called grand jury returns an indictment, it doesn't change this thug with a badge guilt. One way or another justice needs to be served, if not by a jury, then perhaps other means.

In other words, the rule of law should not apply according to you. :confused:

The only reason we won't see an indictment is if this so called grand jury is full of racist who support the murder of blacks.

so to heck with the evidence; a person is guilty because you want them to be.

You are the one that is being racist; convicting based on color alone
 
Last edited:

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
IMIO - The reason this is taking so long they are trying the case not having a probable cause hearing.

No way in hell it takes this long. I was recently a juror in a 2x murder trial. It took us 1 day shy of 4 weeks. Remember this was the actual trial.

The bar for grand jury to indict is much lower then the actual trial.
That plus allowing the governor time to get the Guard positioned and prepared.

Normally I'd agree, but it has been born out time and time again that people don't just do major "thuggish" crime out of the blue like how he did it.

By thuggish, the term of thug is a person that uses physical violence or threat thereof as coercion to get what they want.

Smoking some weed? That's small stuff. Had he simply tried to swipe something at the store when he thought no one was looking is small stuff too.

But he went in there intentionally to use physical violence to take those cigars by force. By rule, no one does that out of the blue. Here are the process steps that will cause a person to do something like that by rule.

1) They have worked up to that level of criminal action by a escalating pattern of criminal activity. Even pure sociopaths have an escalation pattern in testing how far they can push boundaries to see what they can get away with before pushing for more.

2) They are on some hard narcotics that have completely blown away their judgement and inhibition (weed doesn't do this)

3) They had a negative life altering event recently. A death of a loved one would be an example of this or the loss of a job the person had been doing for a long time and loved. Those aren't the only two examples though.

4) They had a psychotic break or snap. Again there would be a pattern leading up that event of psychotic episodes

5) Massive peer pressure where the person was forced by other worse criminals through some level of coercion to do the crime. The person committing the crime because they are forced to do so tends to show in their actions and voice at the time clues that it is something they don't really want to be doing.

That's all proven stuff. Micheal Brown doesn't fit the pattern for anything but number 1 based on the video and what was reported at the time of his robbery. It doesn't look like he's having a psychotic break, or under some the influence of some hard narcotics. He doesn't look to be pressured into doing what he is doing either, which if that was the case the ones pressuring him would have been waiting for him to exit the store. He wouldn't have gone off with just his friend to jaywalk for the hell of it down the middle of the street nearby.

He didn't have any major negative life altering events that would lead to this behavior.

By the video he looked comfortable in his actions and what he was doing. There was no hesitation in his actions. He did everything in full view of cameras as well as witnesses in broad daylight, and knew he was doing so. A person doesn't do those things unless they are confident they will get away with their actions. It wasn't a smash and grab either. He went in, grabbed what he wanted, and strode purposefully out of that store without hesitation nor remorse. That can all be plainly seen in his actions and demeanor.

Again, a person doesn't just do that out of the blue at all. His actions in that store bespoke of a thug that had done similar things before and gotten away with it.
I'd agree that is usually the case, but usually is not always. If Brown was sufficiently high, would he even be thinking in terms of right and wrong versus simple desire fulfillment?

I live/work in St. Louis.

Even some of the smartest, educated black people I know can't wrap their mind around Wilson NOT being indicted and get upset thinking about it.

I really worry that the protest culture taking the area is dead set on rampaging over this.
Hope you are armed and mobile dude. Best of luck if the protesters riot.

I did not know until today that Emerson Electric is headquartered in Ferguson. Really changes my perception of the town.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
The only reason we won't see an indictment is if this so called grand jury is full of racist who support the murder of blacks.

Problem with internet forums are we don't have much to go on to determine if you are being satirical, or if that's your actual beliefs.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Yup. I think that's why everyone thinks the decision will be released then. Until then though, they had only met once a week.

- Merg
Were I on that Grand jury, I'd be handing down my decision to acquit (assuming that's how it goes) from as far away from Missouri as I could get.

Everybody's giving bshole a hard time, but he has a ghost of a point here. There is a substantial part of our nation that believes one should be able to attack someone - even a cop - with relative impunity, at least to the extent of not facing retaliation with a more effective weapon. If you attack someone with your fists, they should be charged if they defend themselves with a knife or gun. If you attack someone with a knife, they should be charged if they defend themselves with a gun. It's completely inexplicable to me, but I see that echoed quite often.

I personally wouldn't call it "black people" who believe that since there are plenty of blacks who disagree and plenty of whites who agree but it's a well-represented outlook in America and from my limited perspective, probably world wide. It's simply a broadening of our belief of proportionality, that if someone steps on your toes you should not shoot her.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Problem with internet forums are we don't have much to go on to determine if you are being satirical, or if that's your actual beliefs.

He's displayed a consistent pattern of behavior which suggests he's in earnest. The irony is that even if we applied his standard of "justice" to him, he might never see the light of day. No evidence required.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,315
1,215
126
Were,

There have been scapegoats throughout history. Jesus was crucified even though Pilate openly acknowledged he was innocent. Pilate did it to keep the peace.

A bone of some kind must be thrown to the aggrieved parties in Ferguson or there is a very good chance of explosive, expensive and deadly violence. Hopefully I am exaggerating the threat (which I have a tendency to do) but I fear that I am not.

My thoughts are not so much controversial as pragmatic. Of course they could open a pandora's box of mob justice which would be awful as well. I am just glad I don't have to deal with this tar baby.
 
Last edited:

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,565
15,449
136
Let me ask you this. You have been accused of having potentially committed a crime. As part of the system of legal protections we all enjoy you are not automatically subject to a ruinous trial but instead are given the right of a grand jury hearing to determine if there is sufficient basis for a trial. If the evidence warrants it then it goes to trial. If not then no. Now let's get rid of that process. I and another accuse you of rape. How deep are your pockets? I ask because you are "just going to trial" and there's no need to determine if the accusations have sufficient merit.

You missed my point.

I don't think many would be against Wilson going to trial provided the evidence and witness testimony before a grand jury provided probable cause that a crime was committed. If not, they should return a "No Bill" decision and no trial would be required.

That was my point.
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,195
857
126
Google justice for treyskittles idiot.

Make ready, be ready. Have a plan and be ready. Don't be a victim. Survive the hoarde with whatever weapon you have.

I can't fucking wait. Bring it on.

Again with this skittles crap?

Perknose
Forum Director

I don't understand your or Perk's connotations. I googled and couldn't tell what you were talking about even after hiding personal Google search results. Google suggested that you mean "Trey Skittle" but that didn't change anything. We all know that Trayvon bought Skittles and Arizona Watermelon Fruit Punch and that those were two of the three ingredients he and his friends used to make "fire ass lean." Is that what you wanted us to be aware of? Is that what Perknose is being dismissive of? Did I miss some development that makes it something to dismiss? I don't know if you can elaborate after Perk's comment, but I would not mind a PM from either of you explaining this.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Were,

There have been scapegoats throughout history. Jesus was crucified even though Pilate openly acknowledged he was innocent. Pilate did it to keep the peace.

A bone of some kind must be thrown to the aggrieved parties in Ferguson or there is a very good chance of explosive, expensive and deadly violence. Hopefully I am exaggerating the threat (which I have a tendency to do) but I fear that I am not.

My thoughts are not so much controversial as pragmatic. Of course they could open a pandora's box of mob justice which would be awful as well. I am just glad I don't have to deal with this tar baby.
Two thoughts here. First, a person is not a bone and a person's life or freedom should never be sacrificed to appease others.

Second and more pragmatic, sacrificing Wilson would simply convince the protesters that they are right, in which case from their perspective they would be perfectly justified in demanding a similar sacrifice every time something like this happens.
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,195
857
126
You missed my point.



That was my point.

No, YOU missed something:
"I don't think many would be against Wilson going to trial provided the evidence and witness testimony before a grand jury provided probable cause that a crime was committed. If not, they should return a "No Bill" decision and no trial would be required."

I didn't which is why they are going to acquit. Saying that he should go to trial anyway and let the evidence decide there COMPLETELY IGNORES the part in bold.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
You missed my point.

That was my point.
Something springs to mind here regarding your point. The prosecutor presented all the evidence, including exculpatory evidence which is not normally done, rather than building his best case for indictment. On one hand this is good, as it represents a prosecutor not believing there is sufficient evidence to make a case but recognizing that his community has a significantly different position. On the other hand, by presenting exculpatory evidence (even including testimony) the prosecutor also made it more difficult for the Grand Jury to indict than is normal with cases presented to them. (Or at least, assuming the Ferguson grand jury system works the same way as ours.)
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,195
857
126
Were,

There have been scapegoats throughout history. Jesus was crucified even though Pilate openly acknowledged he was innocent. Pilate did it to keep the peace.

A bone of some kind must be thrown to the aggrieved parties in Ferguson or there is a very good chance of explosive, expensive and deadly violence. Hopefully I am exaggerating the threat (which I have a tendency to do) but I fear that I am not.

My thoughts are not so much controversial as pragmatic. Of course they could open a pandora's box of mob justice which would be awful as well. I am just glad I don't have to deal with this tar baby.

Except that kind of lynch-mobbing *IS* explosive, expensive, and deadly violence! Don't you get it?!

One thing leads to another. Next time they will crucify and innocent of hang them from a tree after burning a cross in the front yard or rail-road them through the courts for whistling at a woman. Mob justice is not justice and sets a DANGEROUS AND DEADLY precedent. If you are too stupid to see that, you should just shut up.