Common Dreams reports
A new video that appears to show the immediate aftermath of Michael Brown's shooting death in Ferguson, Missouri on August 9 corroborates earlier witness statements that the unarmed black teenager was surrendering to Officer Darren Wilson when he was killed.
The footage, released by CNN on Thursday, shows two construction workers reacting to the shooting with shock and yelling out, "He had his fucking hands in the air!"
The men told CNN they were about 50 feet away from Wilson when he opened fire. "The cop didn't say get on the ground. He just kept shooting," one said, adding that he saw Brown "staggering" and putting his hands in the air, saying, "OK, OK, OK."
[...]
The video and the accounts from the men match earlier descriptions of the incident from other witnesses, as well as an audio recording of the gunshots, recently verified by the messaging service that captured it, that indicated Wilson fired much more than six times, as was initially reported.
Related:
Audio Reveals Pause in Gunfire When Michael Brown Was Shot
Family's Pathologists Have Examined Michael Brown's Corpse
Related Stories
AlterNet reports:
"Six bullets struck, and two may have re-entered" the 18-year-old's body, said forensic pathologist Michael Baden, tasked by Brown's family and lawyers to conduct an independent examination.
One of the bullets hit the top of Brown's head, another hit his eye, while others were located on his right arm, Baden told a press conference in the St Louis suburb of Ferguson.
"All of the gunshot wounds could have been survivable, except the one at the top of the head," he said, amid growing local demands that the police officer involved, Darren Wilson, be arrested.
Baden said he had found no evidence of an alleged struggle between Brown and the officer, who is said to have been hurt in the incident, but added that he had not examined Wilson.
The absence of gunpowder on Brown's body indicated that the muzzle of the gun was probably at least a foot or two -- or as much as 30 feet -- away, Baden added.
The respected former New York City chief medical examiner stressed his findings were preliminary and that he need to see X-rays taken by local coroners just before the bullets were removed.
KTLA reports via CNN Wire:
A man, who asked that his identity not be revealed, lives near the site of the shooting and was close enough to have heard the gunshots, his attorney said. He was speaking to a friend on a video chat service and happened to be recording the conversation at the same time Brown was shot.
In the recording, a quick series of shots can be heard, followed by a pause and then another quick succession of shots. Forensic audio expert Paul Ginsberg analyzed the recording and said he detected at least 10 gunshots -- a cluster of six, followed by four.
"I was very concerned about that pause ... because it's not just the number of gunshots, it's how they're fired," said the man's attorney. "And that has a huge relevance on how this case might finally end up."
Controversy has surrounded the shooting of Michael Brown from the moment it happened. SoylentNews did not escape this controversy. There was fierce debate early on, before all of the evidence had been thoroughly considered. Later on, after the grand jury's findings were presented, there was more volatile discussion.
Some of the earliest SoylentNews discussion about this controversial incident happened nearly six months ago. As we approach this important milestone, we must look back on this discussion, how it developed, and how it has shaped our community here at SoylentNews.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday September 14 2014, @11:11AM
Not exactly the Zapruder film of this shooting incident. It just adds more witnesses against Wilson. Was there a full video of the shooting somewhere that is being held as evidence? I read early on about an apartment security camera that supposedly got a good view, was that a rumor?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @01:03PM
I just want to say that the increase in political news, especially when there's basically no link to technology or science or anything like that, is one of the things that drove me away from Slashdot.
We can get this kind of purely political news anywhere. We can't get good technological or scientific news just anywhere, though. So I don't particularly like seeing it here at SoylentNews, especially if this site is trying to replicate the better Slashdot experience of years gone by, when the focus was more on topics directly related to science and technology.
I especially dislike the slanted reporting in the summary, and how it paints the thug who got shot as "innocent", and the police officer as "guilty". The actual truth is probably a mix of the two.
Did the thug who got shot engage in robbery and assault just prior to the police confrontation? Most likely, based on the video released earlier.
Was the thug who got shot walking down the middle of a street, disrupting normal traffic, leading to the confrontation with police? Most likely, given where and how the incident occurred.
Did the thug who got shot attack the police officer? Probably, given he'd likely just committed violence robbery and assault a few minutes earlier. It was very likely in his nature to engage in such behavior.
Did the police officer have to use deadly force? Perhaps not, but he likely was being physically attacked by a large, violent thug who had likely just engaged in a violent robbery of a convenience store. So it's not unreasonable that he had to resort to that level of force in order to defend himself.
Did the police officer overreact and shoot the thug too many times? Perhaps, but he was also likely being physically attacked by a large, violent thug who had likely just engaged in a violent robbery of a convenience store. It's reasonable that the officer had to defend himself.
Is the witness testimony actually corroborative? Probably not, because these different versions of events have been, well, each very different from the others.
Was race involved with this shooting? Probably not, as the thug who got shot had likely just engaged in very criminal behavior, was likely engaging in criminal or disruptive behavior when confronted, and had likely just chosen to physically attack an armed police officer. Stupidity, not race, is the matter at hand here.
Regardless of the exact details, the response of the black community in the area to this incident, which involved rioting, looting, assault, theft, robbery, and extreme property destruction, was not acceptable. This needs to be taken into account any time this story is discussed. We know for a fact what happened with respect to these incidents. The police were in no way responsible for making all of these other people act so criminally and harmfully, especially toward innocent business owners.
But this gets us back to the far more important question of them all, Should this sort of submission make it to the SoylentNews front page? I don't think it should.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by chewbacon on Sunday September 14 2014, @01:28PM
I agree with there's what the cop said, the victim's friend said (and other witnesses) and the truth. As much as I can also agree police are over militarized and that will lead to a violent police state, you shouldn't test the police. Why would you? None of us know what really happened, but I'd guess the cop may have lost it fearing for his life if Brown was reaching in his car. Does it make it right? No. Police departments should be less militarized and more involved with the people they protect and serve to build relationships and trust. Trust would have more people coming to the police, appreciating their presence instead of fearing and resenting it thereby lowing crime.
(Score: 2) by art guerrilla on Sunday September 14 2014, @05:29PM
right you are, chewbacon, do not under any circumstances assert your rights, and they will magically be enforced for you...
and decades later chewbacon will swear he knew nothing of the 're-education kamps' and what the foul-smelling smoke was...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @01:30PM
I just modded parent +1 insightful, even though I find this story interesting. Reason being:
Why is http://soylentnews.org/my/homepage [soylentnews.org] not fully operational yet? Shouldn't "Customize Stories on the Homepage" allow to configure the account to filter topic's I'm not interested in?
(q.kontinuum)
(Score: 5, Insightful) by mcgrew on Sunday September 14 2014, @02:06PM
I just want to say that the increase in political news, especially when there's basically no link to technology or science or anything like that, is one of the things that drove me away from Slashdot.
Nobody's making you click the link. Here's a hint, AC: we come for the comments, not the stories. Google News is the place to go if you're looking for news. What drove me away from slashdot is inane, offtopic comments like yours.
I especially dislike the slanted reporting in the summary, and how it paints the thug who got shot as "innocent", and the police officer as "guilty".
What's this "thug" bullshit? He had never been in trouble with the law, had just graduated high school and was enrolled in engineering school. You must think all young black men are thugs. Stupid racist.
Was the thug who got shot walking down the middle of a street
Walking in the street doesn't make you a thug. This young person was executed without trial for jaywalking.
I think it's really odd that every single witness account differs with the cop's account, yet you racists believe the cop and not the witnesses.
he likely was being physically attacked by a large, violent thug who had likely just engaged in a violent robbery of a convenience store.
The store was an unproven allegation that the cop did not know about.
Did the police officer overreact and shoot the thug too many times?
Considering Brown was unarmed, once is too many times. Sane cops use tasers on unarmed but combative citizens, not bullets.
Is the witness testimony actually corroborative? Probably not, because these different versions of events have been, well, each very different from the others.
Any cop will tell you that when two witnesses' stories match exactly, they're lying and got their story together before the cop showed up.
Was race involved with this shooting? Probably not, as the thug who got shot had likely just engaged in very criminal behavior
You keep repeating that. All the cop knew about brown was that there was a young black man walking in the street.
Regardless of the exact details, the response of the black community in the area to this incident, which involved rioting, looting, assault, theft, robbery, and extreme property destruction, was not acceptable.
The protests started out peacefully. Police response to those peaceful protests BEGGED for rioting. Ferguson must have the least professional police force in the country.
The police were in no way responsible for making all of these other people act so criminally and harmfully, especially toward innocent business owners.
Bullshit. Had the cops acted professionally and not attacked peaceful protesters with tear gas and rubber bullets, there likely would have been no riots. Note that when the Missouri State Police took over, it quieted down quickly. The reason? MSP were professionals, Ferguson cops were violent thugs. Stores were likely attacked because it was perceived that the cops were only there for white businesspeople and not the Ferguson citizenry.
And no, I'm not a young black man, I'm an old white man.
Should this sort of submission make it to the SoylentNews front page? I don't think it should.
Why should anybody care what an AC thinks, officer?
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Sunday September 14 2014, @03:40PM
And there's some [thecommonsenseshow.com]evidence [youtube.com] that agents provocateur (i.e. undercover cops) were sent in to start said rioting. In the end what really stopped the looting was not anything the police did, but groups of ordinary (and mostly black) people organized by local black churches who stood on street corners and in front of shops to catch anyone who was trying to turn a peaceful protest into a riot.
Sadly, they don't. One reason I suspect there has been so much effort to discredit the Ferguson protests and Michael Brown himself is that the Powers That Be know perfectly well that the Ferguson PD has the same attitude towards young black men as many urban and suburban police departments around the country, and they're worried that if the Ferguson protests get too effective the black community will stop putting up with that.
The reason this stuff isn't heavily publicized is that it turns the narrative upside-down: The story sold to white racists is that if society doesn't oppress black people, the black people will riot and destroy everything they have. But in fact, in Ferguson, it's mostly white police and white politicians and a few black undercover cops in the employ of white people who are causing the riots, and local black people who have been voices for using peaceful protest and the political process to force real changes.
Also, on a completely unrelated note, Al Sharpton is worse than useless for this kind of thing, because his goal (supported by the Obama administration) is not to help the black residents of Ferguson seek justice, but to turn that anger into more votes for Democrats at the national level. The local black leadership, which probably includes at least a few Civil Rights Movement veterans, know perfectly well how to organize peaceful and effective protest without your "help", and know that the problem isn't primarily with the federal government, but the local government.
(Another white guy)
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Whoever on Sunday September 14 2014, @05:37PM
The clearly fabricated claim that the Wilson was badly hurt shows a couple of things about the police:
1. They have no moral or ethical concerns that would prevent them from lying to protect a fellow officer.
2. Either they were so stupid to not realize that the lie would be quickly discovered, or, based on experience, they know that they can get away with blatant lies.
This crude lie tells you everything you need to know about who was to blame for Brown's death.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @08:59PM
Genuine curiosity here, what evidence is there that the injury was fake? I haven't followed this too closely, but I thought they released a picture of the officer that looked like he at least took one good swing to the face (although I didn't see it myself).
(Score: 2) by buswolley on Sunday September 14 2014, @09:53PM
A picture of another man was released by somebody as evidence, but it has been disbunked. If his face was beat they'd have officially released it.
subicular junctures
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @10:03PM
(1) No legit pictures have been released
(2) There is video of the cop walking around after the shooting, there is no close up of his face but nothing in the video indicates any level of pain in his face (or anywhere else in his body).
Here's a link, please excuse the fact that it is the Daily Heil, the stills and video are still legit no matter the rag's propensity for pro-racist sensationalism.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2728166/Video-shows-cop-shot-Michael-Brown-pacing-lifeless-body-immediately-firing-six-shots-teen.html [dailymail.co.uk]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @09:58PM
> The clearly fabricated claim that the Wilson was badly hurt shows a couple of things about the police:
The only source for the claim of an "orbital fracture" was a whackadoodle blogger [thegatewaypundit.com] - not just whack in this case but with a well-known history of being a loony tunes racist. [mediamatters.org]
You might argue plausible deniability and that the police used him with an off-the-record, you-didn't-heart-it-from-me "leak," but I am much more ready to believe the blogger wanted so badly for it to be true that he took some of the most remotely tangential circumstantial evidence and, in his mind turned it into hard fact which he then blogged. It would not be the first time, nor the thousandth time, that such a thing happened on the internet.
(Score: 1) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @07:47PM
in Ferguson, it's mostly white police and white politicians
I'll stop my blockquote there.
Ferguson is 67 percent black.
That's not just a majority; by any measure it's a supermajority.
Why then is the mayor and the city council and the school board all white?
That's because the black population doesn't suit up and show up when and where it counts (at the registrar's office and at the polls).
Will this change now in Ferguson?
Will other places learn the lesson and do likewise in their communities?
To the people who say "My vote doesn't count", I note that there are 3 kinds of people:
the ones who make things happen, the ones who watch things happen, and the ones who say "What happened?".
You have a choice which one you want to be. Seize the day.
-- gewg_
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @10:13PM
That's because the black population doesn't suit up and show up when and where it counts (at the registrar's office and at the polls).
Want to bet that the polls there are only open on week-days during working hours?
That they are under-staffed in the black neighborhoods?
That the cops "provide security" at the polls in black neighborhoods but make sure to let people know they won't hesitate to arrest anyone with an outstanding warrant? [motherjones.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Thexalon on Monday September 15 2014, @01:48PM
Some reasons it might still happen, even if the black population does try to vote in black leadership:
1. Approximately 1/3 of black men have criminal convictions (mostly possession of marijuana) that prevent them from voting. Assuming the black population of Ferguson is about average, that would mean that instead of a 67%-33% advantage, the black residents of Ferguson have about a 55%-45% advantage.
2. Given what we know about Ferguson police tactics, I wouldn't put it past them to hang around the polling places arresting or ticketing black people trying to vote for jaywalking and other minor offenses (whether or not they actually commit the crime in question - if it comes down to the word of a poor black person versus a cop, judges will favor the cop). This is technically legal, even though it's effectively a racially enforced poll tax, and could easily reduce the number of black people another 5-10%.
And poof, that overwhelming majority is gone.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday September 15 2014, @10:34PM
1. Approximately 1/3 of black men have criminal convictions (mostly possession of marijuana) that prevent them from voting. Assuming the black population of Ferguson is about average, that would mean that instead of a 67%-33% advantage, the black residents of Ferguson have about a 55%-45% advantage.
Check your facts. From the Missouri Secretary of State Voter Rights page [mo.gov]:
1. What are the qualifications to be a voter?
In order to register to vote, an individual must be:
A citizen of the United States;
A resident of the State of Missouri; and
17 years and 6 months of age (must be 18 by Election Day).
If an individual meets these requirements, they are entitled to register to vote. To be entitled to vote, a person:
Must be registered to vote in the jurisdiction of the person's domicile prior to the election;
Cannot be imprisoned;
Cannot be on probation or parole after conviction of a felony;
Cannot have been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor connected to voting; and
Cannot have been declared incapacitated.
Missouri Marijuana possession for personal use quantities is a misdemeanor.
So lets face it: You made that up.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 15 2014, @02:37PM
And there's some [thecommonsenseshow.com]evidence [youtube.com] that agents provocateur (i.e. undercover cops) were sent in to start said rioting.
I have to say that agents provocateur is the thing that make me the most nauseous about our government these days. We're so afraid of the people actually being heard that we have to fabricate evidence against them for exercising their constitutional rights? God damn.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday September 15 2014, @03:24PM
The use of agents provocateur basically started with the advent of television. Before that, the cops could beat up a group of protesters they didn't like and simply lie about why they did it. They also routinely arrested speakers like Emma Goldman and Eugene Debs for the content of their speeches, claiming they were inciting to riot. And since there was no actual record of what had happened, the cops (and often the Pinkertons in the hire of major companies) could generally get away with that.
Once there was TV, there was now evidence that the cops were beating up completely peaceful and innocent people. So now they needed to have an act of violence committed by somebody in the group of protesters who would provide a verifiable excuse for the police to move in batons (or in some cases bullets) flying. Hence the agents provocateur, who's job it is to create that excuse. J Edgar Hoover's FBI in particular did this with gusto.
My folks were involved in protest groups back in the 1960's, and there was a lot of effort that went into determining which of the new volunteers were actually FBI agents (general rule: anyone who was pushing vandalism or fighting the cops was immediately suspect). Smart protest organizers have people trained to look for people trying to start trouble and immediately kick them out of the protest group. If you're ever at a peaceful protest, and somebody is standing there holding a rock (or anything else that can be thrown at cops), tell them loudly to get rid of it or get lost and stop them if they try to throw it.
As to why they do it, the leaders of the US national security apparatus believe two critically important (and quite probably false) things about the 1960's:
1. The world would be a much better place if the US had won in Vietnam.
2. The reason the US didn't win in Vietnam was because it was "stabbed in the back" by protesters and voters.
They're determined to never have a repeat of that, and fundamentally believe that US foreign policy should not be in the control of voters or elected officials.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 15 2014, @04:12PM
2. The reason the US didn't win in Vietnam was because it was "stabbed in the back" by Jews and communists.
Hmmm...where have I heard that before...
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @04:25PM
> What's this "thug" bullshit?
It is proof that the guy's complaint about the story being on soylent is just a smokescreen.
That his problem isn't with this kind of story being here, his problem is that the content of the story challenges his biases and that makes him vewy, vewy angwy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @05:09PM
How is 'thug' not the correct term to use to describe somebody who was caught on tape physically abusing a shopkeeper and then stealing goods from that shop?
Race isn't the issue here, regardless of how much some people so badly want it to be.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday September 14 2014, @05:45PM
How is 'thug' not the correct term to use to describe somebody who was caught on tape physically abusing a shopkeeper and then stealing goods from that shop?
Partly because what you missed from that video discredits the 'thug' claim and partly because it's immaterial to how the cops treated him because they didn't know about it.
Race isn't the issue here, regardless of how much some people so badly want it to be.
It clearly is, regardless of how much some people badly don't want it to be. Sooner or later you're going to realize that this whole incident was going to get buddy-networked under the rug when it should have been properly investigated and brought to trial.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: -1) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @06:31PM
Bwahahahaha, ROFLMAO.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday September 14 2014, @07:09PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @07:18PM
Why do you keep ignoring the video of him robbing a store, and assaulting the cashier, shortly before his death?
Why do you have so much trouble admitting he was a thug?
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday September 14 2014, @07:25PM
Why do you keep ignoring the video of him robbing a store, and assaulting the cashier, shortly before his death?
A.) Because he didn't rob a store and B.) The shooting officer wasn't aware of it, so it's irrelevant.
Why do you have so much trouble admitting he was a thug?
Well, besides the evidence to the contrary, there's no justification for killing him.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 15 2014, @12:03AM
You are the idiot here. His buddy already admitted that they robbed the store.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Monday September 15 2014, @12:13AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 15 2014, @01:30AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @10:22PM
I come here for the news stories. I don't care much for the comments, to be honest. Too many of them are useless, like yours is.
An irrelevant, unimportant story like this one takes up front page space that could be used for a useful story about some scientific discovery, some feat of engineering, or maybe something about computer programming.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Sunday September 14 2014, @02:26PM
Your use of the term "thug" to characterize Michael Brown gives you away as a racist and instantly invalidates everything else you said. The cop shot him down in the street like a dog. Every witness says that. The pathology reports he had his hands up. We all can also view the video of the Ferguson police summarily executing another black man a scant few days later. The police department in that town needs to be dismantled and its murderers charged and sent to prison. I am a white guy and an American and my family has been here since before there was a United States of America, and these crimes make me exceedingly angry. If there is no equal justice under law, then there is no justice and we have failed in our common project to build a better society than those that suffer the caprice of potentates and dictators.
I joined Slashdot at the beginning and held a 3 digit UID. I moved to Soylent when Dice destroyed /. The ethos, though, remains the same: "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters." This stuff matters.
If that bothers you, AC, then mosey along to some other blog like Stormfront. You will find better kinship there, and our discourse here will not be impoverished through your "contributions."
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Informative) by PinkyGigglebrain on Sunday September 14 2014, @05:30PM
When you say
"We all can also view the video of the Ferguson police summarily executing another black man a scant few days later."
are you referring to this shooting?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/19/us/missouri-police-shooting/ [cnn.com]
First, it didn't happen in Ferguson but another town a few miles closer to St.Louis
Second, in the shooting shown in the link above the aggressor had a knife, brandished it at the police, refused to drop it and stand where he was when ordered to do so and then closed the distance to the officers. From the video you can clearly see that the police fired in defense, and all the witnesses corroborate the details. Which is why there haven't been any riots about it.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 2, Insightful) by evilviper on Sunday September 14 2014, @07:52PM
The term "thug" does not imply any specific skin color. The phrase "jack-booted thug" is overwhelmingly aimed at white people.
Several of the eye witness testimonies have been completely contradicted by the available video evidence. Even the CNN story quotes this new eye witness as saying Brown was shot in the back, while the pathology says that didn't happen.
I've got just as long of a history with /. and I say this tech-free flamebait does NOT belong here. I've been submitting tons of stories, lately, to give the editors more options, so they don't have to resort to this sort of low-brow inflammatory click-bait.
You can go elsewhere to read such law & order crap. Me, I prefer to ignore such unconfirmed early reports blogs like to shove down your throats, and wait until the evidence is in.
Remember George Zimmerman? The first reports made him out to be a cold-blooded murder, too. And NBC News even flagrantly edited his 911 call to make him sound racist. never apologized on the air. He may be an idiot, but he had the head injuries and audio to prove his side of the story, when the NAACP wanted to crucify him.
Or the Duke Lacrosse team? I'm boycotting CNN as long as Nancy Grace works there.
If you believe the crap news reports, and don't wait until the facts come in, it's no wonder you're "angry" think the justice system is falling apart. But the only problem here is actually your own inability to properly weigh the bias of the news media.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday September 14 2014, @08:40PM
The term "thug" does not imply any specific skin color.
The simplified term makes you fill in the blanks, usually with whatever stereotype is handy. And since the intention is to make you picture him doing something that would justify him getting murdered, it quickly devolves into assumptions that are racist. Never mind that the attempt to vilify him has its roots, not in relevance to the shooting, but in pushing an agenda... about racism.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Sunday September 14 2014, @09:11PM
To me it causes me to think of a devotee of Kali. The skin color, to the extent that that's significant, would be darkish brown. I will grant that that's an archaic usage, but that's what it makes me think of.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @11:29PM
Basically no one in the west knows about the kult of kalima.
I, however, married a beautiful girl from india who very much denies being a member.
But she has this wicked looking curvy knife.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 15 2014, @02:21AM
"Shot at while his back was turned" does not necessarily mean he was hit by that bullet. Do Mr. Brown's wounds account for all the rounds fired by officer Wilson?
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 15 2014, @02:44PM
Why would you need to account for all the rounds? Only getting shot in the back once is enough for me.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: -1) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @02:58PM
murder != politics
eat it.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by evilviper on Sunday September 14 2014, @08:07PM
Seconded. I've been submitting tons of stories lately to give SN editors lots of choices, so this isn't the only crap they have available. Even now, 19 submissions in the queue, and absolutely any one of them would be better than this flamebait crap. Editors have blamed lack of submissions many, many times before, but that's clearly not the problem, here.
If all my repeated pleas [soylentnews.org] for better story selection, and my dozens of (accepted) submissions of harder science and tech stories are still resulting in crap like this regularly making the front page, we all might as well pack it in and go look for another site with better editors.
It certainly wasn't just beta that made me jump-ship from /. Maybe I'll have to do it again.... How's pipedot coming along?
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @10:40PM
It isn't as active, but I am liking the submissions at Pipedot a lot more than what's being submitted here. At least every submission on its home page at this time is relevant. I don't see any that are overtly political in nature, and those that involve politics in some way do at least have a significant technical or scientific aspect to them.
What disappoints me the most, though, is the comment moderating here. I'm seeing a lot of reddit-style crap comments accusing others of "racism" just because these other people are taking a deep look at the facts of the case, rather than engaging in knee-jerk political correctness. These accusatory comments, most of them without any substance and without any ties to reality, should not be modded up, yet they have been.
If I have to browse at -1 to view the most insightful and informative comments posted by people who have looked at the facts, rather than just whining about "social justice" or making false allegations of "racism", then I might as well just go back to /.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Monday September 15 2014, @07:41PM
I'm seeing a lot of reddit-style crap comments accusing others of "racism" just because these other people are taking a deep look at the facts of the case, rather than engaging in knee-jerk political correctness.
If I have to browse at -1 to view the most insightful and informative comments posted by people who have looked at the facts, rather than just whining about "social justice" or making false allegations of "racism"...
Now maybe it wasn't you, but I did have an AC respond to one of my remarks, complaining of my 'reddit nonsense'. The problem with the 'deep looking at the facts' is that you lot that have been talking in here are doing anything but that. The anonymous non-PC comments you're referring to either try to paint a picture of him being some sort of stereotypical gang-banging thug, which is hypocritical in the context of the point you're making, or they're trying to bring up details about him that are irrelevent because a.) the officer didn't know about it when he fired his gun and b.) it turns out that all this 'deep looking of the facts' failed to uncover the WHOLE video that doesn't support the picture they're trying to paint.
So between not staying up to date on the details of the case, bringing up irrelevant details, acting like a violation of his rights was somehow warranted, and using stereotypes to paint this guy as somebody he wasn't, why are you suddenly so upset that the people who don't agree with you get annoyed and call you out on it? The knee-jerk people you're talking about are the ones that actually do have all the details of the case, shitting on that isn't going to get you the intelligent discussion you're claiming you want.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 1) by Darth Turbogeek on Sunday September 14 2014, @11:02PM
Calling Brown a thug means that you are a race baiter. THAT'S why I left Slashdot, to avoid morons like you.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Cognizant on Sunday September 14 2014, @11:22PM
You can't run around talking shit about the slanted reporting then call the boy a thug. I just flushed all your credibility down along with my after dinner shit.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 15 2014, @07:22AM
Nobody made you click this story. Scroll past and move on if you don't like it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 15 2014, @02:27PM
Do us all a favor and leave soylent news too.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 14 2014, @01:19PM
The Brown shooting has prompted Ferguson to require it's cops to wear body cameras. That's great news, IMHO.
When I first heard about this instance, I sympathized with Brown. Unarmed youth, apparently killed by a cop run amok.
Then - I watched the video of Brown committing a strong arm robbery, with his pal beside him. Johnson wasn't exactly backing Brown up, but he was there, part of the incident. Now, I sided with the cop - he had apparently collided with an out of control young adult who thought the world owed him something.
Now, we have various witnesses - some more credible than others, but most of them side with Brown. Wilson's story seems to be eroding with each "new witness".
Now, if only we had some video of the encounter, from beginning to end - we might make up our minds whose word to believe. A dash cam would have been good. A body cam would have been at least as good, and probably better. Don't forget the audio - I really want to know what words were exchanged between cop and "suspect".
And, NO ONE has adequately explained how Brown got half-way into the car with the cop. That just seems so preposterous. I can't understand why Brown would attack a man through the window, and I sure as HELL can't imagine a cop pulling a suspect in through the window.
I really, really, REALLY want the nonexistent video of the incident, from the moment Wilson first noticed Brown and Johnson walking in the street.
(Score: 2) by AlHunt on Sunday September 14 2014, @01:28PM
That's interesting because the first thing I heard was that a cop had shot a guy who had beaten the cop in the face, fracturing his eye socket. My gut reaction was that it was probably justifiable.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 14 2014, @01:52PM
I heard about the shooting at least two days before I read about the claim of a fractured eye socket.
Of course, there is a problem with the fractured eye socket - the images supplied with the story were NOT images of Wilson's eye socket. Those were stock images, belonging to an X-ray company, or some such thing. So far, there has been no real evidence that the policeman suffered any injury. PLEASE NOTE!! I am not saying that Wilson was, or was not, seriously injured. What I am saying is, there has been no real EVIDENCE that he was injured. I'm still waiting to see what is offered as evidence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @04:22PM
> What I am saying is, there has been no real EVIDENCE that he was injured.
There is evidence to the contrary. You can't prove a negative, but the video of the guy walking around the crime scene after the shooting without any apparent sign of distress suggests that whatever injury he may have had to his face was not particularly serious. The video isn't just him walking around in a daze either, it is after the other cops showed up and had started to clear the area.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Sunday September 14 2014, @02:03PM
What's particularly interesting about that, to me, is that the story of the fractured eye socket turned out to be completely fabricated [slate.com]. And the unedited convenience store video shows Michael Brown paying at the register [topinfopost.com].
That says a lot about whatever media sources you both trust, and about how propaganda works. It says nothing about the justification or lack thereof of the shooting.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Sunday September 14 2014, @05:06PM
This is the most disturbing thing about this whole affair. The police are in a unique position as our protectors, to have their word taken as being above that of suspects.
It is one thing police officers "being economical with the truth". But when it becomes apparent the desperation of the institutions to have the status quo maintained, involved the manipulation of evidence (what else is this video? ), we are all in serious trouble.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 15 2014, @12:09PM
The police are in a unique position as our protectors, to have their word taken as being above that of suspects.
that hasn't been true for a while now,
the police no longer see themselves as peace officers,
they see themselves as enforcement officers.
that's a fundamentally difference:
- a peace officer goes into a situation with the outlook of how to keep or restore the peace
- and enforcement officer goes into a sitiation with outlook of how to _enforce_ complicance
That enforcing outlook is now firmly and fundamentally embedded in their training and their culture,
consequently incidents like this are only growing more frequent
In the extreme this is andy griffith vs judge dredd, and the police now structurally aiming for judge dredd
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 15 2014, @01:04PM
when you give too much power to any government, it will always be abused
cops only behave like this because they have come to understand that they can get away with it
the problem with a lot of laws in the united states is that there are so many loopholes for government representatives to escape responsibility... in the name of 'national security', 'anti-terrorism', 'anti-drugs', 'anti-immigration'... when so many things are made to be illegal, it becomes harder and harder for regular honest citizens to keep up with and abide by all the laws, and it becomes easier for those with powers of enforcement to misinterpret or abuse laws.
eventually you aren't going to be able to go outside your home without the possibility of breaking some obscure and pointless law that could land you in jail or worse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 15 2014, @10:47PM
Do not forget it. All it takes is one crazy ass unverifiable statement and bam, your ass is behind bars. No charges. No arrest. Done. Been there. Done that. After a week they admitted that they have no reason to detain me. When in this situation: get a lawyer and quote human rights.
(Score: 2) by evilviper on Monday September 15 2014, @03:56AM
So he merely had "a swollen face", and not a fracture. That's an incorrect detail, not "completely fabricated" in my book. YMMV. It could well have been an honest mistake or misstatement, as often happens during the news media's feeding-frenzy of reporting unconfirmed rumors right after an incident.
On this, the 13th anniversary of 9/11, I highly recommend watching the unedited TV news coverage of the events, or listening to radio reports. Early reports were that a single-engine Cessna crashed into the WTC, later that a bomb had exploded at the Capitol Building, and many, many more. Getting it wrong, as long as it sounds exciting, seems to be the media's modus-operandi.
You can pay some cash, and still be shoplifting. The cashier was CLEARLY upset by something he did.
Furthermore, your source in that link... the attorney for the market, did NOT dispute that Michael Brown was shoplifting. Instead he simply drew a distinction that a customer called 911, not a store employee.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/18/1322560/-Ferguson-Store-Owner-Says-NO-ONE-From-His-Store-Called-Cops-To-Report-Cigar-Theft [dailykos.com]
While it doesn't explicitly say whether shoplifting was involved, or not, it wouldn't be surprising, at all, for a small business to decline to report a petty theft.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday September 16 2014, @02:46AM
Well, here's another question: did he pay for everything he took from the store? Did he grab something while he was between cameras?
And stores often don't report petty shoplifting, so you can't really go by that. It's hardly worth the hassle for items worth a few dollars.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @01:51PM
Reaction videos. I don't watch them, likely worthless and offer nothing but more conjecture.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @01:53PM
It may take some time, but I think resistance will develop against the use of these body cameras. And it won't be from the police, but rather from then black community.
Time and time again, these cameras will capture indisputable footage showing young blacks engaging in various types of crime, and even attacking police officers who are making perfectly legal and valid arrests. The cameras will show that the police are usually not acting unjustly, and that these black youth are in fact perpetrating harmful acts on a repeated basis.
With this current incident, the black community has the benefit of doubt on their side (although, the convenience store security footage and the subsequent rioting should probably render that doubt irrelevant in this particular case). They wouldn't have this advantage if there were footage of the youth attacking the police officer, which is most likely what actually happened.
The cameras will capture the truth, which I don't think is really good for the black youth in most cases, since they often have engaged in criminal behavior such as robbing convenience stores, assaulting store clerks, intentionally disrupting traffic, and physically attacking police officers.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday September 14 2014, @06:19PM
With this current incident, the black community has the benefit of doubt on their side...
The black community has the benefit of "not everybody bases everything on stereotypes the way you do" on their side.
(although, the convenience store security footage and the subsequent rioting should probably render that doubt irrelevant in this particular case)
And this little quip proves my point. First off, you're showing symptoms of soundbite-poisoning. You don't know what you're talking about. Second, even if your version played out exactly as you have fabricated, and just for fun let's pretend that the shooting officer had actually heard the story you're trying to perpetuate, there is no capital offense there. He was executed, without trial, for no justifiable reason. The cops have lied, hoping to sweep this under the rug. If these cameras were in place, Michael Brown would either be alive, or the shooting officer would be in jail awaiting trial right now facing charges of murder. If you knew any more about this particular case, you'd change your tune real quick.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 5, Insightful) by HiThere on Sunday September 14 2014, @09:22PM
As long as there aren't any "mysterious times of missing footage" or "sorry, my camera was off/broken at that time" I think you're wrong. Even when the police have been allowed to control the camera, bad idea as that is, it has reduced claims of police brutality...and my default belief is that this is because it has reduced police brutality.
OTOH, allowing the police any control over the camera is a very bad idea. The footage should be transmitted immediately to a write-only storage vault without editing, and should include sound coverage. And for a police officer with a non-functioning camera to abuse someone should be the same crime as if a non-police officer were to put on a uniform and badge and do the same thing. (Something like "assault under color of authority" or some such is the name of the crime I'm thinking of. Carl Chessman was charged with it for his actions as the "red light bandit".) This means the the officer, and anyone nearby, should be able to tell that the camera is not working...possibly because someone has covered its lens.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 15 2014, @03:59PM
*Caryl Chessman
And according to the Wikipedia article, he was executed on the grounds of kidnapping (for dragging two of the girls 20 feet to his car), not impersonating a police officer. I suppose it's quite possible they charged him with it, though.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday September 15 2014, @06:36PM
Yes, they did. They hit him with everything they could think of...not that he didn't deserve it.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @05:43PM
One less future murderer/rapist/thug/vandal/drug-dealer. Story over, move on.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday September 14 2014, @05:50PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: -1) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @06:14PM
Yeah right. You really believe this thug was going to college like the news reports? Probably cheated all tests to get there if he did. Next thing you know you'll see him nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. The guy was a thug, stop putting him on a pedestal. All this crap is to keep racism alive, see rev racist on MSNBC.
(Score: 2, Troll) by Tork on Sunday September 14 2014, @07:07PM
Ugh. Until today I had no idea there were Limbaugh fans on this site. Fact: Michael Brown did nothing in front of that officer that justified homicide. That is not an MSNBC invention. Sorry, this isn't actually a media conspiracy to keep democrats in office, Mr. Ditto Head.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @10:43PM
Your pathetic name-calling and your incorrect accusations of "racism" are really taking away from this site. I come here for intelligent discussion. I do not come here to read the sort of shit that you're posting. If I wanted to read nonsense like that, I'd be over at reddit.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Tork on Sunday September 14 2014, @10:54PM
Your pathetic name-calling and your incorrect accusations of "racism" are really taking away from this site.
Where does hypocrisy, parroting an inflammatory radio personality, and inability to hold your ground in a debate rank?
I come here for intelligent discussion. I do not come here to read the sort of shit that you're posting. If I wanted to read nonsense like that, I'd be over at reddit.
You got what you claim you want, the problem is you haven't approached this from an intelligent point of view.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @11:14PM
I'm not even the AC who posted comment #93100, just so you know.
Take your false accusations elsewhere, please. They have no place within the intelligent discussion the rest of us are trying to have here.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Tork on Sunday September 14 2014, @11:20PM
I'm not even the AC who posted comment #93100, just so you know. Take your false accusations...
If you aren't the guy, then how do you know the 'accusation' was false? He is parroting Limbaugh, btw, he's welcome to come by and claim that is coincidental.
...within the intelligent discussion the rest of us are trying to have here.
Funny that in your quest for intelligent discussion that you ignored the point I made.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 15 2014, @12:09AM
OK, lets see how far you get after slugging a cop in the eye and trying to take his gun away. Grow up, it's A.H.'s like you that keep playing the racist card thereby prolonging racism.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Tork on Monday September 15 2014, @01:00AM
OK, lets see how far you get after slugging a cop in the eye and trying to take his gun away.
Well if I was aggressive enough in trying to take an officer's weapon that he'd shoot to kill, there would have only been one round of shots fired and my body would have had powder-burns from being shot at close range. That is, of course, assuming I'd get a gun drawn on me for jaywalking in the first place.
Grow up, it's A.H.'s like you that keep playing the racist card thereby prolonging racism.
Playing the race card? Do you know what that phrase actually means? I think what you mean to say is that the racism in this case is invented. The problem with that statement is that you have a person who was unjustifiably murdered and his superiors were going to hand-wave it away. If racism isn't what actually motivated that, okay, fine, the way NOT to approach it is to vilify the victim. "It wasn't racism, he was just acting just like the stereotypes would suggest!" If you seriously do have an interest in not prolonging racism then stop contributing to it yourself.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @07:14PM
It's really absurd that you repeatedly claim he wasn't a thug, when there is clear security camera footage showing him rob a store. He's even wearing the same hat and clothing that are in photos of him lying on the ground dead! Sorry, he wasn't innocent like you mistakenly seem to believe.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @07:32PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @08:30PM
Jumping to conclusions before all the evidence is available is not a good idea no matter the situation.
You also should be careful of how things are portrayed because everyone seems to have an agenda. Did you watch the whole security video? If not, then could selective editing bias what it shows? Would a full video catch everything? Was there audio?
I'm very distrustful of authority (-2 for the cop) and have lived in a society that is biased against minorities (-1 for the dead guy). My bias adds up to me wanting the story to be: "Cop murders innocent baby for not following commands", but I know that my wants have no impact on reality in this case.
When faced with incomplete evidence, people tend to fill in the rest of the blanks with their biases. Be smart enough to realize that you will not learn what happened from the news.
Wait for the trial, so you can get an almost unbiased portrayal of the events.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 14 2014, @08:48PM