|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Ferguson and its implications
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
... Cops can kill black civilians (including black petty criminals) with impunity. ...
That's only a really serious accusation if there's a general impression that cops can't kill white civilians and particularly, white petty criminals with impunity.
True, I'm thousands of miles away. I may be unfairly impugning a great nation with a noble vision. But one rather gets the impression from here that if US police are trigger happy, they kill people without discriminating much whether by race, colour or creed.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
It"s certain that Wilson was aware of the theft before he encountered Brown and Johnson. What's been disputed is only when the penny dropped for Wilson that the two of them may have committed the theft. Johnson confirms Brown was carrying the stolen cigarillos in his hands. Wilson says in his grand jury testimony that seeing the cigarillos in Brown's hands was the point at which he started to put two and two together. Johnson says in his testimony that Wilson drove away from them after the initial 'get on the sidewalk' encounter, then reversed back to stop them making progress.
What's not to understand about that sequence? Wilson said in his initial interview that he heard the police radio broadcast about the theft. He just didn't make clear in that interview when the penny dropped. On that point of clarification, Johnson's testimony actually gives some credence to Wilson's.
All of that is on the record. So far as the witness testimony is concerned, well that's where the physical evidence and any dispute over its meaning comes in.
Two stories in conflict again, Porridge. That Professor on the Huff Post link made a really good point re the fact that this isn't about "all lies on one side, all truth on the other". As usual the detail gives the lie to simple stereotyping.
--------------------
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
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
... Cops can kill black civilians (including black petty criminals) with impunity. ...
That's only a really serious accusation if there's a general impression that cops can't kill white civilians and particularly, white petty criminals with impunity.
Maybe I am biased, but as a white American that is exactly my impression, and it's the impression others on my fb feed seem to have too. For instance, I remember a couple dramatically violent cops in my city a few years ago who attacked (separately) a couple of (white) bartenders who cut them off. Either one or both of them went to jail despite lack of video, etc. Neither bartender died either. Yet the cops in Ferguson and NYC won't go to jail, and I bet the one who killed the boy in Michigan (IIRC, had a toy gun in a store, didn't brandish it, killed) doesn't either.
--------------------
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
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
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?
I'm assuming that jurors on a grand jury have to make some kind of promise to judge the case before them on the facts, without external influence and so on.
That's what you should do, and that is what you promised to do. I'm surprised you think there's even a question about this.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
... Cops can kill black civilians (including black petty criminals) with impunity. ...
That's only a really serious accusation if there's a general impression that cops can't kill white civilians and particularly, white petty criminals with impunity.
I've been to the US exactly once, and didn't get much further than the hotel at the end of the runway. But I have plenty of American friends, and friends who visit America, and yes, a couple of times, the shit has gone down and their skin colour (white) hasn't saved them from being treated abominably. At least they weren't shot, though.
Which, I have the impression, they'd be in distinct danger of if they'd been non-white.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
It"s certain that Wilson was aware of the theft before he encountered Brown and Johnson.
Actually that's not certain. It was claimed by new millionaire Darren Wilson during his grand jury testimony, but it contradicts the earliest statements on the matter made by his department shortly after they released the video of the robbery. Since this was several days after the shooting and the department had supposedly already questioned not-yet millionaire Wilson extensively about the incident, why they'd claim the exact opposite of what new millionaire Wilson supposedly told them is opaque. We have to entertain at least the possibility that this was an invented detail to deflect culpability.
[ 04. December 2014, 17:27: Message edited by: Crœsos ]
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ikkyu
Shipmate
# 15207
|
Posted
More information on the choke-hold case:
Another Shocker
But I expect people to claim there was no racism involved and that there is no pattern here.
I live in Arizona, police don't treat white and black people the same, they just don't. Any claim
to the contrary at this stage shows willful blindness.
I guess the 6 policemen in this case were afraid for their lives and under stress and he was a "tax evader".
Or as an elected republican representative says is his fault because he was overweight.
Not a Racist
Posts: 434 | From: Arizona | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
True, I'm thousands of miles away. I may be unfairly impugning a great nation with a noble vision. But one rather gets the impression from here that if US police are trigger happy, they kill people without discriminating much whether by race, colour or creed.
As an American I get the impression there are less consequences for a policeman who kills a white civilian but they are more likely to result in a court case.
Two cases come to mind which resulted in court cases. One was a friend of mine who was doing an AIDS protest at the Massacuhessets Legislature. The legislature police ( appointed by the Speaker ) stomped him and broke his arm. Unfortunately for them, a local tv station was running a television camera at the time.
I had another friend who ran a restaurant in a very dicey neighborhood. He came across someone who was trespassing and got into a fight. The trespasser turned out to be a police officer and he was charged with assaulting an officer. Fortunately the case was dropped when said officer died of a drug overdose.
Seattle, which is a fairly liberal city, is currently negotiating settlement of a federal case which describes the racially selective enforcement by the police. The usual evasion is to say that the City is helpless because of the negotiated contract with the Police Guild. But there's plenty examples where egregious cases have been sidetracked and the police allowed to continue in their jobs.
[ 04. December 2014, 17:58: Message edited by: Palimpsest ]
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
. . . and I bet the one who killed the boy in Michigan (IIRC, had a toy gun in a store, didn't brandish it, killed) doesn't either.
He was actually at a city park in Ohio. The black man shot in a store for holding a toy gun (one of the store's products) was a separate incident also in Ohio. And yes, the police shooter was also never charged in that case as well.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
More information on the choke-hold case:
Another Shocker [...]
There's a major factual error in that piece: "Though the medical examiner ruled the death a homicide, Donovan [the prosecutor] decided to go the grand jury route, rather than just charging Pantaleo."
In NY, grand juries are mandatory in felony cases, unless the defendant waives it. Sure, the officer could've been charged without one, but if so, a grand jury would've been convened within days, and we'd have the same result.
Turns out my posting up the NY grand jury handbook was more relevant than I ever could've guessed!
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
It"s certain that Wilson was aware of the theft before he encountered Brown and Johnson.
Actually that's not certain. It was claimed by new millionaire Darren Wilson during his grand jury testimony, but it contradicts the earliest statements on the matter made by his department shortly after they released the video of the robbery. Since this was several days after the shooting and the department had supposedly already questioned not-yet millionaire Wilson extensively about the incident, why they'd claim the exact opposite of what new millionaire Wilson supposedly told them is opaque. We have to entertain at least the possibility that this was an invented detail to deflect culpability.
Here's the 10th August interview
Top of page 4.
Here is the police chief's statement to the press and questioning.
There's no contradiction, Croesos. The police chief's statement is that Wilson's initial stop was because of jaywalking, which is what Johnson confirms.
The confusion is simply over when Wilson realised that the two might have been involved in the robbery, not when he knew there was a robbery. Has anyone disputed that there was a broadcast about the robbery on police radio?
It's the two scenarios again, Croesos. In scenario 1, Wilson's entire behaviour was based on anger against a couple of jaywalkers, and therefore his first statement about hearing about the robbery must have been fabricated. "As we can see from the fact the the police chief said he didn't know they were suspects when he stopped them."
Whereas the sequence of knowing about the robbery, stopping the two jaywalkers because they were jaywalking, then realising they might be connected with the robbery, doesn't actually contradict what anyone said.
If the detail (that he heard the broadcast about the robbery) was indeed invented, it was invented within the first 24 hours. But I'll give you that possibility. I just don't get the inconsistency argument. The August 10 interview simply doesn't clarify at what point Wilson's knowledge of the robbery turned into suspicion that the two he'd encountered for jaywalking might be involved. For a supposed invented detail, that's pretty sloppy invention.
[ 04. December 2014, 18:48: 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
|
|
Ikkyu
Shipmate
# 15207
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
More information on the choke-hold case:
Another Shocker [...]
There's a major factual error in that piece: "Though the medical examiner ruled the death a homicide, Donovan [the prosecutor] decided to go the grand jury route, rather than just charging Pantaleo."
In NY, grand juries are mandatory in felony cases, unless the defendant waives it. Sure, the officer could've been charged without one, but if so, a grand jury would've been convened within days, and we'd have the same result.
Turns out my posting up the NY grand jury handbook was more relevant than I ever could've guessed!
So that excuses the actions of the police?
Posts: 434 | From: Arizona | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
There's no contradiction, Croesos. The police chief's statement is that Wilson's initial stop was because of jaywalking, which is what Johnson confirms.
The confusion is simply over when Wilson realised that the two might have been involved in the robbery, not when he knew there was a robbery. Has anyone disputed that there was a broadcast about the robbery on police radio?
Which doesn't explain Chief Jackson's insistence that the only reason he had released the tape was because of a FOIA request. (A FOIA request which, to the best of my knowledge, has never been identified to date.) The clear implication, especially when combined with Jackson's other statements, is that the events depicted on the tape are not related to Wilson's encounter with Brown.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
But I expect people to claim there was no racism involved and that there is no pattern here.
And I expect people to treat individual cases as individual.
It's highly instructive that this thread, about the Ferguson shooting, is seen as an appropriate vehicle for discussing any death of a black male at the hands of a white police officer.
It's highly instructive that it's often assumed that one's view on any given case will be the same as one's view on every case. That if one thinks one white police officer was correctly not prosecuted, one must think that every white police officer was correctly not prosecuted.
THAT is racism just as much as everything else. Because even if there was no racism involved whatsoever, from time to time a white police officer would kill a black person just by virtue of there being some white police officers and some black people. The statistically 'normal' level of these events is not zero unless and until there are no lethal weapons available.
I'm not going to rejoin this conversation at any length because I simply don't believe that most people are interested in any kind of nuanced discussion about why it's perhaps correct in some cases that a police officer, whatever their skin colour, is innocent of any crime and why in other cases it's rather disturbing that no charges are brought. That's just too subtle for the kind of sweeping general position that fits within a media soundbite.
[ 04. December 2014, 19:57: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
... Cops can kill black civilians (including black petty criminals) with impunity. ...
That's only a really serious accusation if there's a general impression that cops can't kill white civilians and particularly, white petty criminals with impunity.
True, I'm thousands of miles away. I may be unfairly impugning a great nation with a noble vision. But one rather gets the impression from here that if US police are trigger happy, they kill people without discriminating much whether by race, colour or creed.
Actually, Black people are much more likely to be killed during an arrest. When I've got time I may drag out the statistics, but a bit of a summary can be found in the short video at the bottom of this page.
--------------------
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
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
But I expect people to claim there was no racism involved and that there is no pattern here.
And I expect people to treat individual cases as individual.
Which seems to take the position that there's no such thing as systematic or institutional racism, or at least such a thing doesn't exist to any degree that would be worthy of discussion.
[ 04. December 2014, 20:12: Message edited by: Crœsos ]
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
But I expect people to claim there was no racism involved and that there is no pattern here.
And I expect people to treat individual cases as individual.
Which seems to take the position that there's no such thing as systematic or institutional racism, or at least such a thing doesn't exist to any degree that would be worthy of discussion.
Not a bit. But you don't discuss systematic or institutional racism by picking apart an individual case and commenting on its evidence. Which is what most of the discussion here is doing.
You're not actually discussing institutional racism at all when you come up with complicated theories about why certain pieces of evidence should be disbelieved. You're assuming it and then fitting the facts of the individual case to your working theory.
[ 04. December 2014, 20:25: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Really, it is no different from the fallacious reasoning that because there is a very real problem with sexual assault of women, that every woman who reports a sexual assault must have been sexually assaulted.
Locally, there is currently a major investigation into the fact that a police officer spent 4 months in jail because his ex-girlfriend made malicious sexual assault claims as a tactic in a property dispute, aided by her new boyfriend.
And I anecdotally know of a case where a woman wrongly accused a coworker of sexual assault to distract from other issues, only to have it blow up in her face because the accused man was actually gay.
These women were relying on the meme that men habitually assault women to enhance their credibility. To suggest that because I take the view that these particular cases were wrongful accusations that I must therefore take the position that there is no such thing as a systemic problem with the sexual assault of women is just utterly fallacious reasoning.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
Wow. Can't discuss the details of an individual case because it doesn't address systematic racism, and can't discuss systematic racism because individual cases should be discussed individually. Is there anything that can be discussed, aside from the weather?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Wow. Can't discuss the details of an individual case because it doesn't address systematic racism, and can't discuss systematic racism because individual cases should be discussed individually.
That isn't what I said, but frankly I don't expect nuance from you. I'm done again. Bye.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
But I expect people to claim there was no racism involved and that there is no pattern here.
And I expect people to treat individual cases as individual.
It's highly instructive that this thread, about the Ferguson shooting, is seen as an appropriate vehicle for discussing any death of a black male at the hands of a white police officer.
It's highly instructive that it's often assumed that one's view on any given case will be the same as one's view on every case. That if one thinks one white police officer was correctly not prosecuted, one must think that every white police officer was correctly not prosecuted.
THAT is racism just as much as everything else. Because even if there was no racism involved whatsoever, from time to time a white police officer would kill a black person just by virtue of there being some white police officers and some black people. The statistically 'normal' level of these events is not zero unless and until there are no lethal weapons available.
I'm not going to rejoin this conversation at any length because I simply don't believe that most people are interested in any kind of nuanced discussion about why it's perhaps correct in some cases that a police officer, whatever their skin colour, is innocent of any crime and why in other cases it's rather disturbing that no charges are brought. That's just too subtle for the kind of sweeping general position that fits within a media soundbite.
The way to have a nuanced discussion is to have a nuanced discussion-- including engaging with people who disagree with you-- and listening to what other people are saying. Including the many posters who have pointed out that dealing with systemic problems requires a willingness to think beyond individual cases.
As noted already, if one is a judge or juror, one must, yes, treat each case individually, and determine the accused's guilt or innocence based on the evidence of this particular case alone.
However, any attempt to deal with systemic issues requires by definition moving beyond that. Not as judge or juror, but as members of society. To deal with systemic evils, we must talk about patterns and similarities between individual cases. We must look at overall statistics and outcomes, as has been done here, in order to find common threads. In the article by Soong-Chan Rah I cited above, he cites this insistence on treating all racism as "individual sins" only as the primary factor driving white privilege and enabling and equipping corporate racism. It's only by looking at the differential outcomes and asking why-- on a larger and more comprehensive scale-- that we'll get at any systemic problems. THAT is what a "nuanced" approach would entail.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ikkyu
Shipmate
# 15207
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
[qb] But I expect people to claim there was no racism involved and that there is no pattern here.
And I expect people to treat individual cases as individual.
It's highly instructive that this thread, about the Ferguson shooting, is seen as an appropriate vehicle for discussing any death of a black male at the hands of a white police officer.
It's highly instructive that it's often assumed that one's view on any given case will be the same as one's view on every case. That if one thinks one white police officer was correctly not prosecuted, one must think that every white police officer was correctly not prosecuted.
THAT is racism just as much as everything else. Because even if there was no racism involved whatsoever, from time to time a white police officer would kill a black person just by virtue of there being some white police officers and some black people. The statistically 'normal' level of these events is not zero unless and until there are no lethal weapons available.
I'm not going to rejoin this conversation at any length because I simply don't believe that most people are interested in any kind of nuanced discussion about why it's perhaps correct in some cases that a police officer, whatever their skin colour, is innocent of any crime and why in other cases it's rather disturbing that no charges are brought. That's just too subtle for the kind of sweeping general position that fits within a media soundbite.
Nobody said that you think that every white police officer was correctly not prosecuted. But a pattern of acquittals in a country with a long history of racism is not irrelevant to the particular case of Ferguson.
I did not say you were racist. But you seem not to have extended that same courtesy to me.
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
THAT is racism just as much as everything else.
Which is funny considering nobody said this and you have no idea about my race, and even funnier when "everything else" includes shooting unarmed people or 12 year olds kids with toy guns or strangling unarmed "tax evaders".
Posts: 434 | From: Arizona | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
So that excuses the actions of the police?
No, as it happens, I think the NY chokehold looks a lot worse than the Ferguson case. I'll accept the grand jury's decision, as they've reviewed all the evidence, and I haven't, but doesn't mean I have to like it.
I just wish reports would keep to the facts. Things are bad enough without them distorting things, whether deliberately, or recklessly.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Croesos, I don't get that argument. The video was relevant if at any time during the altercations. after the first jaywalk encounter, Wilson had grounds for belief that Brown and Johnson might have been involved in the theft. Which they were, of course. I've seen somewhere else some information about the request to release it and will check back.
The other point from Johnson's testimony is the suggestion that they were walking down the road as a kind of hiding in plain sight. That's not the thing you'd expect thieves leaving the scene of the theft to do. It's hardly surprising that Wilson didn't make an immediate connection. YMMV but that seems very plausible to me.
Finally, since you mentioned Johnson's other grand jury testimony. The whole lot is worth reading. I thought he rambled, corrected himself, was generally all over the place.
A lot has been made of possible inconsistencies in Wilson's testimony. So far as Johnson is concerned, based on how he told it to the grand jury, in any full trial I reckon any reasonable defence lawyer would have had him for lunch. YMMV there also.
--------------------
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
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Croesos, I don't get that argument. The video was relevant if at any time during the altercations. after the first jaywalk encounter, Wilson had grounds for belief that Brown and Johnson might have been involved in the theft. Which they were, of course. I've seen somewhere else some information about the request to release it and will check back.
Which begs the question of why Chief Jackson didn't say so when asked. He indicated there was no other reason for releasing the tape than a bunch of FOIA requests. It's in the video of your previous CNN link. This was a week after the shooting. Why the reason for the coy responses if Jackson was aware that Wilson had (eventually) recognized Brown as a robbery suspect?
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Finally, since you mentioned Johnson's other grand jury testimony. . . .
I did? Where?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Croesos
I rewatched the video. The Ferguson Chief simply responded to supplementaries. I didn't think he was coy. He also said he didn't know what Wilson said in detail in his interview. Looks like he was working from a brief.
On Johnson's testimony, you're right. I made a stupid mistake. I misread Jackson for Johnson in your earlier post. And feel pretty foolish about that. My apologies for misreading you.
My observations re Johnson's testimony before the grand jury still stand and have some relevance to Wilson's relative credibility, both in the initial interview and the grand jury testimony. But you didn't prompt them.
--------------------
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:
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.
Sure - that's your point. My point is that just getting a high-profile case isn't enough to win a defense lawyer fame. It has to look like he's achieved something hard, like your examples of successfully defending OJ or MJ, guys who people thought actually ran a serious risk of losing.
Getting a not-guilty verdict for a cop, on the other hand, doesn't look hard; it looks like a gimme.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
I had a long, thoughtful, well-reasoned post all ready to go, and then the Internet burped. So you get this one instead:
Like Lamb Chopped, I live in St. Louis. I thought I knew Ferguson pretty well; I've preached a number of times at St. Stephen's, the Episcopal parish there. It's a nice town.
I was not, however, acquainted with W. Florissant Road and environs (there are three different Florissant Roads; West F actually runs north-south) until one night in August. I accompanied an illustrator who'd decided to put up his easel on the sidewalk and paint under a street light. People stopped by to see what he was doing, and to chat.
I heard horrifying stories about their daily lives, the profiling, the false arrests, their fears for their children. The problem is not that Mike Brown was shot per se; the problem is systemic - and not just in Ferguson, or in St. Louis. I'd say that New York has an even bigger problem.
There is a lot of work to be done, on many different levels. Those of us who call ourselves Christians have even more responsibilities.
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
Nice to see you back, Rossweisse.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
Thank you, Miss Amanda.
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
It's highly instructive that this thread, about the Ferguson shooting, is seen as an appropriate vehicle for discussing any death of a black male at the hands of a white police officer.
There should be separate threads for every single one? We could dedicate a whole board just to threads discussing white cops shooting black men.
You're not reading this thread in the same context that Americans are. This case, the Eric Garner case, the Tamir Rice case, a police shooting in Phoenix on Tuesday, the results of a Justice Department investigation of the Cleveland police force -- attention these things are collectively receiving is leading to protests in cities all over the country. More people were arrested demonstrating in Los Angeles over the Ferguson grand jury decision than were arrested in Missouri. Civil rights activists are calling for a rally in Washington, DC on December 13 to ask for federal intervention in excessive force cases. I don't know if anything will happen in the end, but when the white mayor of New York is talking in a news conference about how much he worries about the safety of his mixed-race son, about how he and his wife had to teach their son how to behave when stopped by cops, it sure seems like things are different than they used to be.
quote:
It's highly instructive that it's often assumed that one's view on any given case will be the same as one's view on every case. That if one thinks one white police officer was correctly not prosecuted, one must think that every white police officer was correctly not prosecuted.
THAT is racism just as much as everything else. Because even if there was no racism involved whatsoever, from time to time a white police officer would kill a black person just by virtue of there being some white police officers and some black people. The statistically 'normal' level of these events is not zero unless and until there are no lethal weapons available.
It's not racism, it's just slopping thinking. And your hypothetical situation is very, very far from the real one we live in here in the US, where black people.
Oh, and nice ad hominem attack on Croesus.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Which doesn't explain Chief Jackson's insistence that the only reason he had released the tape was because of a FOIA request. ...
Chief Jackson took a lot of grief for releasing that tape at the same time that he identified Officer Wilson. My sense is that he's in over his head, but has not deliberately done stupid things. I think he's sincere, but that there's a reason he runs a small department in a small city instead of anything larger.
I can forgive him more readily than the chief of the County police, who made mistake after mistake, or, especially, than of the governor. I'm trying to think of one thing that Jay Nixon has done right in this whole thing. I am coming up blank.
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
Jim Wallis seems to think that the problem is endemic. As does "Conservative white Southern Baptist leader Russell Moore" quote:
“In the public arena, we ought to recognize that it is empirically true that African-American men are more likely, by virtually every measure, to be arrested, sentenced, executed, or murdered than their white peers. We cannot shrug that off with apathy.”
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Rossweisse, it is good to see you posting again and I appreciated the background. Plus your comments on the two Chiefs echoed my own 'from a distance' impressions.
I think you've underlined RuthW's point and Dave's Jim Wallis link does the same. Those of us from outside the U,S. are not likely to appreciate the background to this tragedy in the same way as U.S. citizens do. What we know, we know from a distance. We may not 'grok' things in the same way as you do.
As I commented earlier, I got involved in this thread largely as a result of the Host obligation to read links and particularly the grand jury information. So there is a lot of information in my head about the main characters. Plus a general impression that the tragedy illustrates some of the polarisations in U.S. political and social life only too well. But I readily acknowledge that I don't live with what you all live with. And that makes a difference.
--------------------
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
Barnabas--
Thanks for that acknowledgment.
--------------------
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
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Fania Davis (sister of Angela Davis, former Black Panther) is calling for a truth and reconciliation process. (Article in YES! magazine.) Click on the "Peace and Justice" link at the top for more Ferguson/NYC articles.
And Angela Davis wrote in The Guardian on "From Michael Brown to Assata Shakur, the racist state of America persists".
ETA: While poking around, I found two interesting stories--one that 2 men from the New Black Panthers allegedly were going to shoot someone (Wilson?) in Ferguson; and another that the former (?) head of NBP worked to protect the cops in Ferguson. I think, from his last name (Shabazz) that he's related to Malcolm X. (Don't want to overwhelm the H/As with links, but the stories are easy to find via search.)
[ 05. December 2014, 11:08: Message edited by: Golden Key ]
--------------------
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
On Croesos' point about who triggered freedom of information - plus the issue of what Wilson knew and when did he know it, the embedded video clip in an article dated 15 August gives the Chief's explanation of requests from the media, plus his understanding at that time of how it dawned on Wilson that Brown might have been involved in a robbery.
I had seen the article before, but it took me a bit of time to recall how to find it.
--------------------
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
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
In all this very long thread, talking about the intricacies of the various grand jury processes and individualities of each case, what gets lost sight of is the essential core issue -- THE essential, fundamental core issue.
Thank you Ikkyu for pointing out the 9000 pound mastodon in the room -- and a situation which most certainly not confined to Arizona.
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
I live in Arizona, police don't treat white and black people the same, they just don't. Any claim
to the contrary at this stage shows willful blindness.
(Italics in about quote added by me)
[ 05. December 2014, 14:22: Message edited by: malik3000 ]
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
You're not reading this thread in the same context that Americans are.
This. This, this, this.
In addition to Jim Wallis’s “arrested, convicted, sentenced, killed” list, there’s far more: black men almost invariably receive longer or harsher sentences than whites for the exact same crime.
US black male life expectancy.
Black unemployment
Education for young black US men
It's possible to go on and on. News stories of the overall terrible outcomes, by almost any measure you care to come up with, for black men in the US appear constantly in the US press; I imagine few of these stories cross international borders to help paint a true picture of the status of black American males. When Americans read news of another unarmed black man being shot (just before I started this post, I read of another killing in Arizona), we do so against this larger backdrop.
In fact, it’s hard for me to separate many of our current president’s difficulties in dealing with Congress and assorted domestic issues from precisely this same context. But that’s a different discussion.
--------------------
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
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
You're not reading this thread in the same context that Americans are.
This. This, this, this.
In addition to Jim Wallis’s “arrested, convicted, sentenced, killed” list, there’s far more: black men almost invariably receive longer or harsher sentences than whites for the exact same crime.
US black male life expectancy.
Black unemployment
Education for young black US men
It's possible to go on and on. News stories of the overall terrible outcomes, by almost any measure you care to come up with, for black men in the US appear constantly in the US press; I imagine few of these stories cross international borders to help paint a true picture of the status of black American males. When Americans read news of another unarmed black man being shot (just before I started this post, I read of another killing in Arizona), we do so against this larger backdrop.
In fact, it’s hard for me to separate many of our current president’s difficulties in dealing with Congress and assorted domestic issues from precisely this same context. But that’s a different discussion.
Exactly. And again, the repeated call to consider each case "individually" (outside of the courtroom) are exactly what allows this sort of systemic inequality to continue.
[ 05. December 2014, 14:48: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
On Croesos' point about who triggered freedom of information - plus the issue of what Wilson knew and when did he know it, the embedded video clip in an article dated 15 August gives the Chief's explanation of requests from the media, plus his understanding at that time of how it dawned on Wilson that Brown might have been involved in a robbery.
Which is still a huge distance from us being able to be "certain that Wilson was aware of the theft". As I mentioned earlier, new millionaire Wilson is a textbook example of a self-interested witness. Chief Jackson also has an interest in painting his department in the best possible light and, not to put too fine a point on it, seems to preside over a police department that specializes in running up fines on spurious or fraudulent charges against black citizens. Given the way "fits the description" is a fairly standard police go-to in situations like this, I don't know how you can claim to know what Wilson knew with absolute certainty. I can see believing it's plausible, possible, or even likely, but how do you get to "certain" in circumstances like this?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW to orfeo:
Oh, and nice ad hominem attack on Croesus.
Accusing someone of an ad hominem attack appears in and of itself to be a form of ad hominem attack and is making the hosts' heads hurt.
Orfeo appears to have left the thread, but please, all of you, help maintain our high Purgatory standards by ensuring the light on this thread outweighs the heat, or visit Hell and enjoy the company of the hosts there. Thank you for your cooperation.
/hosting
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I've kept away from this, but I read the Wiki article yesterday. Even if Wilson feared for his life as the result of impeccable policing INCLUDING if that the penny had just dropped as he drove away, in that Brown & Johnson were suspects in the store robbery of which he was aware, it's awful. Impeccable policing would involve him not saying "Get the fuck on the sidewalk.".
Would a highly trained - including morally - officer fire at least eight times at an unarmed man?
Tactically Wilson seemed incompetent from the moment he reversed the car and it escalated from there. That's assuming he wasn't aggressively profane. Otherwise it started then.
Wilson seemed to behave more like a half trained soldier in an insurgency.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Martin60: Wilson seemed to behave more like a half trained soldier in an insurgency.
This.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
I'm weary of this thread. All you who say judge by the individual case, watch this. WARNING it is a video of the NYPD killing Eric Garner.
They used an illegal choke hold against a man who was not threatening them for supposedly selling illegal cigarettes.
And they will not face a day in court, much less any time in prison.
Fuck the system.
--------------------
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
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
I was about to post the same video, lilBuddha.
I'll revise my post accordingly, but here goes:
The Staten Island grand jury’s decision not to indict a police officer for using a possibly illegal chokehold was, according to one police source, justified because Mr. Garner resisted arrest. This made me wonder what actions or behaviors can be categorized as “resisting arrest” to the point where physical intervention might be called for.
Here's one source on the subject.
Here’s a quote from the same source:
quote:
Under New York penal law, in order to convict a person of Resisting Arrest, it must be proven that the person:
1. Intentionally prevents or attempts to prevent
2. A police officer or peace officer
3. From effecting an authorized arrest.
Resisting arrest is a misdemeamor charge.
After watching the video posted above, I can’t help wondering about the “resistance” to arrest here. Assume for the moment that Garner was telling the truth, was not selling loosies, and had instead just broken up a fight. Are citizens required to cooperate with arresting officers even where the charges are spurious? Is it possible to resist arrest when officers have not yet at any point stated “You’re under arrest?” (I do note the small bulge in the left pocket of Garner’s shorts: a pack of cigarettes or maybe just his wallet?) Is it a misdemeanor to resist false arrest?
Whether or not the chokehold is legal, is physical attack the standard response to a suspect who has shown only verbal and no physical resistance?
Ramsey Orta has now been arrested on firearms charges. He has form, but also claims he’s now being set up by the police for having filmed the chokehold on Garner.
--------------------
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
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
We are the system.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mere Nick
Shipmate
# 11827
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
This made me wonder what actions or behaviors can be categorized as “resisting arrest”
Getting your ass whupped by cops.
--------------------
"Well that's it, boys. I've been redeemed. The preacher's done warshed away all my sins and transgressions. It's the straight and narrow from here on out, and heaven everlasting's my reward."
Delmar O'Donnell
Posts: 2797 | From: West Carolina | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
[...] After watching the video posted above, I can’t help wondering about the “resistance” to arrest here. Assume for the moment that Garner was telling the truth, was not selling loosies, and had instead just broken up a fight. Are citizens required to cooperate with arresting officers even where the charges are spurious? Is it possible to resist arrest when officers have not yet at any point stated “You’re under arrest?” (I do note the small bulge in the left pocket of Garner’s shorts: a pack of cigarettes or maybe just his wallet?) Is it a misdemeanor to resist false arrest? [...]
There's a common law right to resist an illegal arrest (since an illegal arrest is assault, battery, and trespass). Many states have abolished it, but it still exists in NY. (Link also details the NY resisting arrest statute.)
Actually doing it is a spectacularly bad idea, as Garner's tragic death shows. Fight charges in court, not the street. If he'd surrendered peacefully, he'd have been taken to central booking, arraigned, and out in around 24 hours, or earlier if they'd given him a desk ticket.
It's just not worth it.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mere Nick
Shipmate
# 11827
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Fight charges in court, not the street.
Yep. The cops WILL win a street confrontation.
--------------------
"Well that's it, boys. I've been redeemed. The preacher's done warshed away all my sins and transgressions. It's the straight and narrow from here on out, and heaven everlasting's my reward."
Delmar O'Donnell
Posts: 2797 | From: West Carolina | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
