|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Ferguson and its implications
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Apart from a bit of short term cashing in, courtesy of 'the American way' he doesn't appear to have all that many options, Ah well, I suppose that's what happens when you get 'inconveniently' acquitted in the US.
Yes, what a shame it is he doesn't live in the UK where there are no injustices, ever.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
@ Croesos
Have Fox News actually offered Darren Wilson some kind of a job as a free lance talking head. Or are you just speculating that it's only a matter of time?
Just speculating. Given Fox's penchant for hiring right wing icons of dubious legal history (e.g. Oliver North), new millionaire Darren Wilson would seem exactly their cup of tea. If he decides to go that route I'd expect him to wait a couple years, just in case anything he said on air might be used in a civil law suit.
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Presumably the Brown family and the lawyers for the Browns and Darren Wilson are also receiving fees for TV appearances?
I doubt the Brown family is getting much, if anything, though I haven't seen anything one way or the other. One of the reasons new millionaire Darren Wilson was able to command such a high price is that he hasn't said anything publicly since the shooting. The Brown family, on the other hand, seem willing to talk very freely to a wide variety of media about their slain son. It's one of those supply and demand things.
I suspect the lawyers for both sides are uncompensated by media outlets. That kind of thing can produce the perception of a conflict of interest. Doubtless they billed their respective clients for time spent in media appearances, though.
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I think Darren Wilson is getting no financial settlement from the police force so perhaps cashing in short term on his unwanted 'fame' is all he's got, Presumably his lawyers have to be paid?
Financial settlement for what? The story is that Wilson resigned voluntarily, so while he's not receiving a severance package, most jobs don't give you severance if you quit. Unless you count the the three and half months of paid administrative leave new millionaire Wilson drew between the time of the shooting and his resignation.
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I wouldn't have thought Darren Wilson's prospects of living safely or getting a 'normal job' were very good.
Very few millionaires work what we consider a 'normal job'. As for his safety, it's been noted how often unarmed black men have been shot by American police. It's almost unheard of for any kind of direct personal reprisal to follow. For example, all of the four policemen who shot and killed Amadou Diallo seem to have been living safely for the decade and a half since the shooting. I'm not sure why new millionaire Darren Wilson should be an exception to this longstanding trend. Could you expand on this?
[ 01. December 2014, 03:38: Message edited by: Crœsos ]
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Re Wilson--
He just got married, with a baby on the way. So that may be a factor in doing paid interviews. I hope no one hurts his family.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Croesos
The press reports say that there have been threats against him and the police. Isn't vengeance in the air? He's been living at an undisclosed address since a day after the shooting. The historical statistics are interesting but I doubt whether he, his family or anyone else is complacent about either the short or the long term safety, purely on the strength of them. And protection costs lots of money.
So far as the money goes in general, neither you nor I know how much is already earmarked for lawyers or present extra costs of personal protection. He's in his twenties, out of work, but got a financial cushion worth, what, about 15 years typical police salary and no pension, after paying lawyers' and other current costs. (From press reports I'm reckoning a net $800K cushion, a typical salary of $60-70K based on published stats, and continuing low interest rates) Could be a lot less than that if there is more legal action against him. My figures are back of the envelope, just to get some kind of idea. So I reckon he needs a job.
The short term controversial fame and the dollars he gets from that are a goodish cushion. Plus he's got a life, which is more than can be said for Michael Brown. But in US or UK terms, he's hardly a fat cat yet, and probably won't be longer term either. I wouldn't want to change places with him.
[ 01. December 2014, 09:54: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Dave W.
Point taken again, and my apologies. I had no intention of stirring up a pond war. I'm happy to withdraw "in the US" and the implications from the offending post.
[edited; the original was posted in haste and a bit "telegraphese"]
[ 01. December 2014, 09:53: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I wouldn't have thought Darren Wilson's prospects of living safely or getting a 'normal job' were very good. And he doesn't qualify for anything like witness protection new life deals.
Someone has offered $5000 for information on the whereabouts of Wilson. The New York Times gave the location of the house he owns. (I presume he's not there now.)
quote:
Wonder how safe the grand jury members are?
AIUI the names of the grand jury members are not disclosed to the public.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
new millionaire Darren Wilson
new millionaire Darren Wilson
new millionaire Wilson
new millionaire Darren Wilson
Crœsos: you are, of course, entitled to whatever opinion the above represents, and it's true that young black men get shot far more often, get convicted and imprisoned at greater rates, are unemployed in much higher numbers, get far harsher sentences, and on and on than can be accounted for by their statistical presence in US demographics.
Can we also, however, keep in mind that young police officers, of any race, carry out fairly dangerous work in the midst of a pretty heavily-armed populace, and do so at risk to their lives at not necessarily-terrific wages?
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Just speculating. Given Fox's penchant for hiring right wing icons of dubious legal history new millionaire Darren Wilson would seem exactly their cup of tea.
I wouldn't describe Wilson as a "right wing icon." Oliver North was an educated Colonel with a proven "way with words," if you like that sort of macho military style. Wilson just talks that "just the facts," style that policeman must learn in school. I don't know any other group that consistently says, "individual," in place of man or woman. It's that flat affect, police style that earned him the "Cold as Ice," headlines. Not Fox News material.
--------------------------------------------
All I can find in the news about his money is that most of the online donations were intended for his court costs and that ABC offered him six figures but no evidence he took it. If he did take it, I don't really see what's wrong with that. Wilson sees himself as a man who lost his privacy and his chosen field for just doing his job, so why wouldn't he take money for his interviews?
I'll never feel sure about what happened until someone comes up with a video, but African American witnesses agree with Wilson's story as does forensic evidence of powder burns on Brown's hands (consistent with him reaching for the gun.) We also know that Wilson wasn't as trigger happy as some people like to paint him, since this was the first time he ever used his gun.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Can we also, however, keep in mind that young police officers, of any race, carry out fairly dangerous work in the midst of a pretty heavily-armed populace, and do so at risk to their lives at not necessarily-terrific wages?
Interestingly, despite the macho mystique of danger associated with law enforcement work, it's actually not even in the the top ten most dangerous jobs in the U.S. While it is riskier work than a typical job [PDF] it's a level of danger roughly comparable to that experienced by electricians or non-construction laborers, both of which earn even less terrific wages than police officers and neither of whom seem to get anywhere near the same amount of sympathy for their workplace risks.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Can we also, however, keep in mind that young police officers, of any race, carry out fairly dangerous work in the midst of a pretty heavily-armed populace, and do so at risk to their lives at not necessarily-terrific wages?
As noted, most police do not truly face much danger in their career. Most American police do not fire their weapons except at paper targets.
IIRC, the cost of police and fire can be the single biggest budgetary item for an American city. Most of that being wage and retirement. It is the perception of the danger faced, rather than the reality, which keeps those items protected.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
I've looked through the stats I could find on line which suggest that about 100 police officers die a year in the U.S. and about half of those deaths are directly related to some form of assault. Police officers in the US kill about 400 people a year, almost always by gunshot.
Those figures together represent a very small proportion of the annual number of homicides by gun in the U.S. (c. 30,000) Statistically, an American citizen is much more likely to be shot and killed by an armed civilian than an armed officer.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
The stats collected post-incident are only part of the risk, though.
Whenever an officer gets called to an accident, a domestic conflict, a crime-in-progress, s/he is at risk and must face the possibility of getting assaulted or possibly even shot.
An hour's drive from here, 4 officers in my state lost their lives trying to serve a warrant. The occupant, apparently in expectation of being served, booby-trapped his home and blew up the house, himself, the original two responding officers and two more who tried to rescue the first responders.
Yes, that's unusual. Yes, young black men get shot, assaulted, imprisoned far more often. But it's worth noting that when one's adrenalin is asked to pump up as often as a police officer's is, it probably affects one's perceptions and judgment on a permanent basis.
Small-town officers in my state, in places the size of Ferguson, make about $28-$30,000 a year if they work full time. Most towns this size in my state have only part-time officers -- no benefits, no paid leave -- and must have other employment in addition.
But they still face getting blown to shreds when some local "entrepreneur" starts running a meth lab in the woods behind his trailer.
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Let us assume for a moment that Wilson got $1m (which is more than a 6 figure sum). I don't know precisely about the US, but with the present low interest rates here, you would get around $30,000 pa before tax* on that, something around $24,000 nett, depending on his other income. To put it in perspective, the age pension here is around $22,000 pa, has no tax and comes with free medical care and a raft of other benefits.
I don't like any sort of chequebook journalism, but it does exist. If Wilson got some money, it would be very pleasant addition to the sort of salary figures quoted, but not a fortune.
*Income taxation here is entirely a federal matter, and I know that the US system is very different.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
The stats collected post-incident are only part of the risk, though.
Whenever an officer gets called to an accident, a domestic conflict, a crime-in-progress, s/he is at risk and must face the possibility of getting assaulted or possibly even shot.
An hour's drive from here, 4 officers in my state lost their lives trying to serve a warrant. The occupant, apparently in expectation of being served, booby-trapped his home and blew up the house, himself, the original two responding officers and two more who tried to rescue the first responders.
Yes, that's unusual.
Yes, it is. As mentioned earlier it's riskier than a typical job, but by no means at the extreme end of the risk scale. Yet you don't hear quite as many paeans to the psychological stresses of being a lumberjack or a commercial fisher or a coal miner, all professions with a hugely greater chance or injuring or killing workers on any given day.
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Small-town officers in my state, in places the size of Ferguson, make about $28-$30,000 a year if they work full time. Most towns this size in my state have only part-time officers -- no benefits, no paid leave -- and must have other employment in addition.
Interestingly that puts your local cops under the tenth percentile for police nationally ($32,670/year according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics). I know someone has to be at the bottom end of the scale when it comes to short-changing public workers, but that dubious honor is usually reserved for states like Mississippi or Alabama. The median annual income for police in the U.S. is $56,130. (For the record, the state of New Hampshire is fairly close to the national statistics in police salary according to the BLS, so I'm not sure what's going on with your local police pay.)
At any rate, the level of police pay is a lot higher than "Logging Workers" (annual median wage $34,070) or "Fishers and Related Fishing Workers" (annual median wage $35,270), workers with a much higher risk of on-the-job death or dismemberment than police officers.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I've looked through the stats I could find on line which suggest that about 100 police officers die a year in the U.S. and about half of those deaths are directly related to some form of assault. Police officers in the US kill about 400 people a year, almost always by gunshot.
Those figures together represent a very small proportion of the annual number of homicides by gun in the U.S. (c. 30,000) Statistically, an American citizen is much more likely to be shot and killed by an armed civilian than an armed officer.
But a cop is 8 times more likely to kill a civilian than be killed by one.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
IIRC, the cost of police and fire can be the single biggest budgetary item for an American city. Most of that being wage and retirement.
Well, sure - isn't that basically what cities do - provide police and fire services? The rest is zoning, permit and code enforcement, which is pretty cheap, and I suppose garbage collection, plus a few bucks for municipal parks and libraries.
Cities often provide utilities, but those are billed separately. School districts are separate bodies.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
IIRC, the cost of police and fire can be the single biggest budgetary item for an American city. Most of that being wage and retirement.
Well, sure - isn't that basically what cities do - provide police and fire services? The rest is zoning, permit and code enforcement, which is pretty cheap, and I suppose garbage collection, plus a few bucks for municipal parks and libraries.
Cities often provide utilities, but those are billed separately. School districts are separate bodies.
Economist Paul Krugman sometimes refers to the U.S. federal government as "an insurance company with an army" because, if you judge by expenditure, that's primarily what federal spending goes for: insurance (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid) and the military. In that sense most municipal governments are school systems with a water treatment plant and a police force.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
IIRC, the cost of police and fire can be the single biggest budgetary item for an American city. Most of that being wage and retirement.
Well, sure - isn't that basically what cities do - provide police and fire services? The rest is zoning, permit and code enforcement, which is pretty cheap, and I suppose garbage collection, plus a few bucks for municipal parks and libraries.
Cities often provide utilities, but those are billed separately. School districts are separate bodies.
In Boston, schools account for 36% of the city budget, just over twice the share spent on public safety.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
@ mousethief
I guess that approximate 8-1 ratio (which intrigued me too) might have several causes; e.g. increased exposure to risks since the job requires you to put yourself in harm's way, but counterbalanced by better training both in self defence and the use of firearms.
It looks like the sort of issue that might get studied by someone. Have there been any such studies? On general grounds I'd expect a better survival rate for the police in any violent conflicts.
There's probably a ratio in favour of the police in the U,K, as well, though our different gun culture and guidelines for arming the police make such conflicts much rarer than in the U.S. Death by gun is very rare in the UK.
An intriguing and potentially important issue within the U,S.? Might well be. Have you seen any studies, mousethief?
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
In Boston, schools account for 36% of the city budget, just over twice the share spent on public safety.
Schools take up much more of my taxes than public safety, too, but around here, schools are run by school districts, and not the city.
The same seems to be true of Ferguson, MO, where Ferguson-Florissant School District serves the majority (but not all) of the residents of the city of Ferguson. Which means that schools don't appear on the city budget.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
isn't that basically what cities do - provide police and fire services? The rest is zoning, permit and code enforcement, which is pretty cheap, and I suppose garbage collection, plus a few bucks for municipal parks and libraries.
Cities often provide utilities, but those are billed separately. School districts are separate bodies.
Find the nearest city and have a look at their budget.
But roads would be a large chunk you are missing. Roads in America are abysmal as no city has the funds to properly maintain them. Utilities in the US are a mixed lot, IIRC. Public, private and special district. But General Funds are also used for building new and expanding old facilities and other large projects.
But that is all irrelevant. Public Safety is a large portion of your bill to your city no matter how you split the other payments.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
An example of how deeply dysfunctional and self-defending the system can be. On a case-by-case basis, the real issue is whether it has been so dysfunctional in particular.
I think that's the issue, Doc. Dysfunction cannot be assumed, but it can certainly be suspected on the basis of track record. Power can always be abused. And all public services need to remember the "Caesar's wife" principle if they want to get and maintain public confidence.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
In Boston, schools account for 36% of the city budget, just over twice the share spent on public safety.
Schools take up much more of my taxes than public safety, too, but around here, schools are run by school districts, and not the city.
The same seems to be true of Ferguson, MO, where Ferguson-Florissant School District serves the majority (but not all) of the residents of the city of Ferguson. Which means that schools don't appear on the city budget.
Even without the schools, public safety would only be 28% of Boston's budget. Possibly it dominates Ferguson's budget, but it doesn't seem reasonable to just say that police and fire are "what cities do."
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
On the TICTH thread, Chastmastr posted a link to a good article on Ferguson, called "Joe Scarborough Has A Lecture For Black America".
It's an opinion piece, with links to corroborating info. Worth a read, IMHO.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Timothy
I appreciate the argument about normal use. From this side of the pond, the odd thing is the fact that the grand jury processes are normally used by the prosecutor to "indict a ham sandwich" if he wants to. Reading the 5th Amendment, the constitutional position appears to have been to prevent prosecutorial strong-arming a case before a jury unless there was "probable cause". The normal reading of "probable" hardly suggests "not obviously not guilty" but that seems to be the way it gets used.
On reflecting, I'm now pretty convinced that the prosecutor wanted to kick the case, not necessarily out of any pro-police bias but because of the evidence. You might argue a bit of both. But from what's out there now, reasonable doubt is a shoe in. So he used the process to share responsibility, for political reasons as well as legal ones.
For a start, all prosecutors have a pro-police bias--it goes with the job. Cops almost never get indicted for excessive force, even in cases that are much more clear-cut than this one. In McCulloch's case it's even more obvious, since he comes from a family of cops and has said he would have been a cop if he hadn't lost a leg to cancer.
The grand jury process in the US is a problem on many counts, and it is easily abused, usually to the detriment of potential defendants (a lot of the protections that apply in trials don't apply in grand jury proceedings--there's no judge and no lawyers other than the prosecutors). But in this case the bias was blatant. The grand jury received inaccurate instruction about the law (which was corrected at the last minute, after the damage had been done); Wilson got to tell his story at length, to a very friendly questioner who didn't challenge him at all (particularly about the change in his story about his knowledge of the alleged robbery). Significant evidence went uncollected (Wilson was allowed to keep his gun for several hours, and it was never tested for Brown's fingerprints). I find Wilson's account unbelievable on several points, though the other witnesses are equally incredible in various details. Not that I think he's lying, exactly--he was clearly in a state of utter panic, in his own mind being attacked by a black demon capable of "bulking up" like the Hulk--and so his perceptions were radically distorted. That's to be expected from any eyewitness in a high-stress situation. Though you would hope that a cop would keep his cool a little better.
One analysis of the some of the flaws in the process:
here
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Golden Key, Timothy the Obscure
Plenty of food for thought in those links. Have the results of the federal autopsy been released yet? In particular, I would have thought that Cyril Wecht's strong opinions of the forensic evidence he's seen would carry a fair bit of weight. He seems to have strengthened his views. The second video clip in the Dail Kos report (which I think predates the first) was pretty measured by comparison with the later first one. I wasn't entirely clear why.
If the Feds believe the forensics and the evidence given about them are sufficiently accurate, or do not support a "violation of civil rights" case, that would seem to end the matter legally.
I think a federal prosecution is still possible (Beeswax Altar opined that it was unlikely earlier in the thread) but if that third autopsy undermines the first and second, then the legal proceedings may not be over.
More later, possibly. I'm busy on RL stuff today.
[ 03. December 2014, 11:15: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I think a federal prosecution is still possible (Beeswax Altar opined that it was unlikely earlier in the thread) but if that third autopsy undermines the first and second, then the legal proceedings may not be over.
Without getting graphic, multiple autopsies are problematic.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493
|
Posted
With apologies to Barnabas62 & the other Purg hosts, this is another lengthy article which I found fascinating as providing a background to the unrest. Can anyone explain to me why Missouri has a system which allows the creation of municipalities too small to support themselves?
--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
@ lilBuddha
True.
After I looked at the comments in detail I realised that the real issue was not the findings of the autopsies (or the related ballistics and trajectory findings) but their significance in support (or contradiction) of testimonies.
I think that is what Cyril Wecht is getting at and he certainly got a few good punches in. Mind you, he got a few good punches in in his criticism of the Warren Commission findings re JFK (I thought I'd heard his name before). Not sure in this case whether he really landed anything approaching a knockout blow, but I think he did make a case that the shooting should have gone to trial, and probably would have if the grand jury had been given different and more rigorous expert opinion.
If the Feds become convinced that the prosecutor loaded the dice in favour of "no bill", and this can be deduced directly from the autopsy, then that might give them a basis to proceed. But I guess they would have to have evidence of deliberate acts of deception, even participation in some kind of cover-up conspiracy. That looks a very tough ask, given that most of the argument would be about reasonable interpretation, with conflicts of professional opinion on show.
@ Joanna P.
No problem. Reading lots comes with the territory. I'll let you all know if my brain begins to get fried!
[ 03. December 2014, 22:40: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by Barnabas62:
I think a federal prosecution is still possible (Beeswax Altar opined that it was unlikely earlier in the thread) but if that third autopsy undermines the first and second, then the legal proceedings may not be over.
I thought the results of all three autopsies were released. Doesn't really matter. I'd be shocked if federal charges were brought against Wilson. Let's take the most well known example of federal civil rights charges against police officers. A man recorded LA police officers severely beating Rodney King. Five of them were tried. Four of them were acquitted on all charges with a hung jury on one charge for the fifth. Federal prosecutors brought civil rights charges against four of the five. Only two of them were actually convicted. One of them was the police sergeant in command of the scene who never hit Rodney King at all. At the sentencing hearing, the judge ruled that only the last few strikes by one officer were illegal. So, in a beating lasting over a minute, only the final few seconds violated federal law. He gave them 30 months instead of the 70 months required by the federal sentencing guidelines. Supreme Court upheld that decision.
This is not the Rodney King case. There is no video. The grand jury did not even indict. There is no Republican president saying that he doesn't understand the verdict and that it doesn't fit what he saw on the tape. Physical evidence supports the police officer's story. Eyewitnesses support the police officer's story.
Talk all you want about Wilson not being cross examined. It doesn't matter. Wilson wouldn't even have to testify at a trial. How well does anybody think Dorian Johnson would hold up under cross examination? How about the witnesses who told conflicting stories? Wilson won't be represented by a public defender. He will be represented by a very good criminal defense attorney. This is how ambitious and talented defense attorneys become famous. From the moment that video of Brown robbing the store went public, every last one of them started salivating at the opportunity to win an acquittal for Wilson and become the next Mark O'Mara or even Johnny Cochran.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Beeswax Altar
I still agree with you that a federal case against ex-officer Wilson looks pretty unlikely. All I'm saying is the odds might be changed if the physical evidence doesn't really stack up the way the prosecution claimed it did; e.g. if Cyril Wecht's view is seen to have force in undermining expert witness testimony.
I'm not sure how US law stands on this, but because a grand jury doesn't not produce a finding on guilt or innocence, I'd have thought that fresh evidence and some kind of supplementary hearing wouldn't be any form of "double jeopardy". Oh sure, politically that doesn't seem at all likely in Missouri and I think the Governor may already have resisted it. That doesn't mean that a critical federal finding wouldn't put some further pressure on the possibility of a reopening.
But I'm sure you're a lot more aware of the possibilities in practice than I am.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
This is how ambitious and talented defense attorneys become famous.
By defending cops? Doesn't seem like much of a challenge.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Re Cyril Wecht:
I haven't yet read his opinions, but I looked him up on Wikipedia. He may be absolutely right about whatever he said. But he's very controversial--lots of associations with headline cases, and he wrote books about them. He disagreed with the Warren commission about JFK's death--and that alone makes him divisive. Some people absolutely go with the Warren report, some absolutely think there was a massive plot and/or cover-up, and a lot of us are somewhere in the middle. But people who strongly disagree with the official word on JFK are often judged to be kooks, rightly or wrongly.
So, whatever Wecht has to say, he may well be written off because of the above.
FWIW.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
This is how ambitious and talented defense attorneys become famous.
By defending cops? Doesn't seem like much of a challenge.
By winning high profile cases
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
This is how ambitious and talented defense attorneys become famous.
By defending cops? Doesn't seem like much of a challenge.
By winning high profile cases
But these are high profile cases because they seem to show that cops can kill with impunity; a "win" doesn't make the attorney look talented, it just confirms that suspicion. Nobody's going to get famous for showing he can shoot fish in a barrel.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Re Cyril Wecht:
I haven't yet read his opinions, but I looked him up on Wikipedia. He may be absolutely right about whatever he said. But he's very controversial--lots of associations with headline cases, and he wrote books about them. He disagreed with the Warren commission about JFK's death--and that alone makes him divisive. Some people absolutely go with the Warren report, some absolutely think there was a massive plot and/or cover-up, and a lot of us are somewhere in the middle. But people who strongly disagree with the official word on JFK are often judged to be kooks, rightly or wrongly.
So, whatever Wecht has to say, he may well be written off because of the above.
FWIW.
I'm sure he got asked to comment on TV precisely because he has a track record of speaking his mind, regardless of the established official view, on the basis of how he sees the facts of the matter.
My comment was based purely on his critical view of the evidence. I don't have the expertise to resolve it, but he seemed to make an arguable case that the parts of the physical evidence which were seen to support Wilson might not do that at all. And that did call into question some of the expert witness testimony. The issue is, do the Federal investigators agree with that on the basis of the evidence itself. They might.
For example, the Kos argument re witness statements (in the link provided) does not stand up if the physical evidence, as presented at the grand jury hearings, negates the statements of some of the witnesses. That shows the importance of the physical evidence and the way it was presented.
Of course it is a part of the ongoing assertion that the prosecutor stacked the odds by the way he and his assistants went about their business. But the physical evidence is open to exhaustive and independent scientific testing in a way that witness statements are not. That's the difference I see.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Resource: HuffPost's section on all things Ferguson.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Thanks for the link, Golden Key.
Professor Mitroff's article struck me as well argued. It's actually not clear to me that if you were on the grand jury and recognised the two incompatible stories issue that you would vote to indict, basically because of the Missouri State self-defence law (which the prosecutors eventually got right in their statements).
On the other hand, I did look at O'Reilly/Kelly from Fox and reached for the sick bowl. That sort of airy dismissiveness just adds fuel to the fire.
What the hell happened to serious consideration? The urge to polarise first seems to me to be both socially and personally destructive, regardless of one's first suspicions or reactions.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Something I've been wondering: if you're on a grand jury and realize that your vote might help trigger civil unrest, what should you do?
The Ferguson grand jury, IMHO, had reason to think there might be trouble. The grand jury in NYC (?) didn't indict another white cop who strangled a black man--knowing, unless they were sequestered, what happened in Ferguson. And *that* decision caused trouble.
Since these votes were just about indictments, and not deciding guilt in a trial, would it have been wrong for the grand jurors to say, "well, we don't want riots, so let's let a trial jury decide"?
Thoughts?
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
They will certainly have been instructed to do their duty without considering social effects, though that's easier said than done.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
This is how ambitious and talented defense attorneys become famous.
By defending cops? Doesn't seem like much of a challenge.
By winning high profile cases
But these are high profile cases because they seem to show that cops can kill with impunity; a "win" doesn't make the attorney look talented, it just confirms that suspicion. Nobody's going to get famous for showing he can shoot fish in a barrel.
Mark O'Mara represented George Zimmerman who wasn't a police officer. Johnny Cochran was famous for representing Michael Jackson and OJ Simpson who weren't police officers. Throw in Jerry Spence, Alan Dershowitz, and Vincent Bugliosi. One of the ways to becoming a famous celebrity attorney is by winning high profile cases and Wilson would have been a high profile case. Attorneys take high profile cases they think they can win. That's the point.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
The grand jury is an agent of the judiciary. Social policy and its consequences are a matter for the legislature and the executive and are only relevant in so far as they are enshrined in legislation which directly impinges on the crime they are considering.
That's the book, for sure. But I agree with Lamb Chopped. It must be pretty hard to put probable social consequences out of your mind.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Gwai
From the statistics, it seems that at least one American a day (c400 a year) is likely to be killed by a police officer, and at least one police officer a week dies violently in the course of duties.
Treating each case on its merits while looking at underlying causes and possible remedies separately looks like the only way those events can be handled.
I haven't had a look at the chokehold case in any detail.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
jbohn
Shipmate
# 8753
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
And now NYC is on the march for its own police-killed black man.
A bit of a different story from the Brown case, though.
In the NY case the officer is on video applying a hold that NYPD procedures apparently have forbidden since the 1990s, on a nonviolent subject (arrested, IIRC, for selling loose cigarettes, a tax violation) who is telling the officer he can't breathe, for an extended period of time. Much different from a split-second shoot/no-shoot decision by an officer who (rightly or wrongly) believes he's under attack.
[edited to fix bad speling]
[ 04. December 2014, 15:04: Message edited by: jbohn ]
--------------------
We are punished by our sins, not for them.
--Elbert Hubbard
Posts: 989 | From: East of Eden, west of St. Paul | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
Every case will differ in details of greater or lesser significance.
But for the rest of us great unwashed, it still looks like part of the overall pattern:
Cops can kill black civilians (including black petty criminals) with impunity.
According to a link posted upthread, it's by no means certain that Wilson was aware of the theft committed earlier by Brown.
The eyewitness testimony (however reliable or un-) for Brown's hands-up gesture outnumbers the eyewitness testimony to the contrary.
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
Barnabas, I completely agree about treating each case on its merits. I just don't think enough Americans/prosecutors/grand juries seem to be willing to actually do so. I think they get this scary black man attacked shining white knight mindset and then miss checking out whether that happens to be what actually happened. Apparently one relative commented on the case saying that anything a police officer does in the line of duty is automatically right.
Re police officer death, I am sorry that it is dangerous to be a police officer. That doesn't go far with me though because it is of course a choice, unlike say being a African-American. (Yes, I know, you aren't arguing against this. Just explaining my reasoning.)
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Gwai
From the statistics, it seems that at least one American a day (c400 a year) is likely to be killed by a police officer, and at least one police officer a week dies violently in the course of duties.
Treating each case on its merits while looking at underlying causes and possible remedies separately looks like the only way those events can be handled.
I haven't had a look at the chokehold case in any detail.
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
