So you are in a position where you know more than the Ferguson police chief about what Wilson knew and when he knew it? Cool. So how does that work? You in charge of the investigation now? Or are you simply calling the chief a liar?
It's so obvious many in here have never listened to a police scanner, there's no doubt officer Wilson became aware of the robbery due to a police dispatch concerning such.
There's no way the officer did not hear the dispatch go out for the strong arm robbery that had recently occurred and the descriptions of the people involved.
Originally Posted by Londo_Jowo
There's no way the officer did not hear the dispatch go out for the strong arm robbery that had recently occurred and the descriptions of the people involved.
Unless there was no "strong" arm robbery.....
Yes. Cop-haters and other people like you who twist and distort whatever they hear to confirm their bias. If you that that had anything to do with race: I have no idea what race you are. You are doing it AGAIN if you are doing this to imply that I implied race.I'm sorry, "people like you"? Just what kind of "people" do you imagine me to be?
And again:
"Wilson, a six-year police veteran, stopped Brown and Johnson because the two were walking in the middle of the street and blocking traffic, Chief Jackson said. Wilson was unaware the pair were wanted in connection with the robbery; another officer was investigating the robbery at the time."
Bolded seem pretty darn straightforward to me.
And you are in a position to conclude that his statement applied to anything more than what that officer knew at that moment? As far as we know, Brown still had his back turned at that moment.So you are in a position where you know more than the Ferguson police chief about what Wilson knew and when he knew it? Cool. So how does that work? You in charge of the investigation now? Or are you simply calling the chief a liar?
And a partner in crime who confessed! FFS, people, there shouldn't even be a debate: he freaking stole the stuff and we all KNOW this. Stop beating around the bush and playing word games with what the chief said.LMAO!!!! There's video evidence of a strong arm robbery.
There's no way the officer did not hear the dispatch go out for the strong arm robbery that had recently occurred and the descriptions of the people involved.
No there is no video evidence....did you watch the video?LMAO!!!! There's video evidence of a strong arm robbery. <-- there is no evidence of a strong arm robbery!!
Yes. Cop-haters and other people like you who twist and distort whatever they hear to confirm their bias. If you that that had anything to do with race: I have no idea what race you are. You are doing it AGAIN if you are doing this to imply that I implied race.
Now, one of those words you bolded is pretty important. "...was..." It does not say that he did not become aware or suspect their involvement as events unfolded. It was specifically in response to how he handled the initial stop. At that MOMENT, he didn't know. I facepalmed when the chief said it because I knew idiots would ignore the extra dimension of TIME and TENSES to interpret that however they pleased.
And you are in a position to conclude that his statement applied to anything more than what that officer knew at that moment? As far as we know, Brown still had his back turned at that moment.
No there is no video evidence....did you watch the video?
http://aattp.org/ferguson-cops-busted-new-video-seems-to-show-brown-paying-for-cigarillos-video/ <-- video included
Ferguson police’s attempts to demonize Michael Brown, the unarmed African-American teen killed by Officer Darren Wilson, may have hit a small snag. The very video they released at the same time as they identified Wilson as the officer responsible for shooting Brown six times, including twice in the head, may show the opposite of what they intended.
Supposedly, the video shows Brown robbing the store, taking a box of cigars. However, the attorney for Ferguson Market says that it was not anyone from the store that called police to report a robbery. In fact, a customer called to report what he viewed as a robbery.
How, then, did police get the tape? According to St. Louis News, the attorney said, “‘during the course of Ferguson’s investigation, the police department from Ferguson, came to the store and asked for to review the tape.” In other words, the tape was not viewed by police until after Michael Brown was dead in the street.
In their fervent effort to cast Brown in a negative light, they missed that the video seems to show Brown paying for the Swisher Sweets.
While it is difficult to be 100% certain, the video appears to show Brown purchasing some cigars, but lacking the money for the amount he wished to buy. Brown seems to purchase some cigarillos, pay for them, attempt to buy more, then replace the ones he could not afford.
The confrontation between Brown and the clerk may have been because Brown impatiently reached across the counter. Perhaps it was wrong for Brown to shove the employee (it is impossible to know what words were exchanged) but this footage seems to exonerate him. It is important to note that Brown only shoved the clerk after he put his hands on him.
In any case, neither the employee nor the store owner called law enforcement–something that would surely happen if Brown committed a “strong-arm robbery.”
At this point, the police portrayal of the video and strategic release have had the desired effect. Right-wingers have labeled Brown a “thug.” Somehow, those who are determined to hate every African-American murdered by police (or anyone, for that matter) have managed to form an opinion that a simple theft is worthy of a death sentence if one’s skin is not light enough.
The Ku Klux Klan and a growing group of angry white people are raising reward money for the murder of “typical low-IQ Negro” Michael Brown. Wilson is already on course to make tens of thousands of dollars for his deed.
FOX News has jumped on the “thug” train, as well, suggesting that the “robbery” video justifies the murder of Michael Brown, and that he was shot in the head because “bullets go that way.”
We will never truly know the exact circumstances surrounding Brown’s death, as Ferguson police have not bothered to equip their cars with dashboard cameras, but we do know that an independent autopsy performed on Brown’s body has revealed not only that there was no sign of a struggle between Brown and Wilson, but that one bullet entered “back to front,” and the wounds were consistent with Brown having his arms raised in surrender.
Just like if I was your neighbor and say you and your spouse were being loud and disrespectful of other tenants.....so I call the police and say there is a nasty fight going on and I give your address. The Police are obligated to show up and check out what is going on...yet as your neighbor I was wrong in my assessment of the situation..opps too late, the Police arrived...That's a whole lot of supposition but there's one thing glaringly missing from all of that speculation. Any comment from the store owner that there was no theft. <-- because there was no theft!! Plain and simple!! Why would a black man be calmly walking down the middle of the street if he had just stolen some cigars? Now that makes no sense!
They've made numerous statements through their attorneys, made numerous comments of not wanting to be involved and saying they didn't report it. <-- again they did not report it because there was nothing to report. Is it that hard to understand?
They sound like people who were afraid of retaliation. Clearly they were correct in that assumption. <-- they sound like honest people who are not going to say something happened when it did not happen!
Why haven't they just said there was no crime? Where is the proof of the crime? It is no crime to try to buy more cigars and find you don`t have the money so you throw them back on the counter...
Your think that would be out there by now instead of all this twisting to try and steer people to that conclusion. <-- actually no...people need to vent and lie and twist and make up things......just a fact of life!
In the absence of that, it seems clear that what is being said took place in the store would be what took place. <-- what`s being said is quite a few differing accounts......look at the video......make up your own mind....
And none of that changes the fact that there police received a report if a robbery, <-- the p[olice received a report of a robbery from a citizen who did not know what was going on....only what it looked like....there is a huge difference!
issued a description of robbery suspects and were responding under the assumption there was a robbery. <-- again by a misinformed citizen...
That's a whole lot of supposition but there's one thing glaringly missing from all of that speculation. Any comment from the store owner that there was no theft. They've made numerous statements through their attorneys, made numerous comments of not wanting to be involved and saying they didn't report it. They sound like people who were afraid of retaliation. Clearly they were correct in that assumption.
Why haven't they just said there was no crime? Your think that would be out there by now instead of all this twisting to try and steer people to that conclusion.
In the absence of that, it seems clear that what is being said took place in the store would be what took place.
And none of that changes the fact that there police received a report if a robbery, issued a description of robbery suspects and were responding under the assumption there was a robbery.
That's a whole lot of supposition but there's one thing glaringly missing from all of that speculation. Any comment from the store owner that there was no theft. They've made numerous statements through their attorneys, made numerous comments of not wanting to be involved and saying they didn't report it. They sound like people who were afraid of retaliation. Clearly they were correct in that assumption.
.
The bolded is false. The third autopsy did NOT reveal that 'one bullet entered back to front, and the wounds were consistent with Brown having his arms raised in surrender'. The doctor said he could not rule out either, NOT that either or both actually happened. One of the grazes COULD have been from behind. I would assume that the hand graze could also have been from behind if he was running and pumping his arms, although there may be a technical reason for ruling that out, or just that hand and arm woulds are classic defense wounds so the assumption is that he is facing the shooter.SNIP
We will never truly know the exact circumstances surrounding Browns death, as Ferguson police have not bothered to equip their cars with dashboard cameras, but we do know that an independent autopsy performed on Browns body has revealed not only that there was no sign of a struggle between Brown and Wilson, but that one bullet entered back to front, and the wounds were consistent with Brown having his arms raised in surrender.
Yes, I agree it is factually wrong, I just disagree that it's egregiously so.Except that the title says that the POLICE didn't know and tries to say that the shop owners not calling is some kind of proof of that. He doesn't say that the officer/Wilson didn't know.
Also, it's very possible that Wilson DID know by the time shots were fired. The chief's comments were saying SPECIFICALLY that Wilson didn't know at the moment he made the initial stop gave the first instruction. There was no APB, but there was another officer dispatched to that "point" and it is very likely that Wilson made a connection between Brown's behavior and the nearby incident that had just happened.
Yes, I agree it is factually wrong, I just disagree that it's egregiously so.
I'm assuming two things here. First, I'm assuming that if at some point in the stop Wilson became aware that Brown had likely just committed a strong arm robbery, then the chief would have mentioned that. He's not throwing his guy to the wolves here, so he's not going to exclude evidence that tends to be exculpatory. Second, I'm assuming there probably was not an APB or similar announcement. This just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me. I'm guessing (and I may be completely wrong) that the other officer responded, took statements, took the security tapes (or made arrangements to do so), then left with the intention of finishing his patrol and then writing this up to be investigated. Again, I could well be wrong, but based on my own experience I'm doubting that Ferguson is such a peaceful place as to warrant an "All points bulletin, be on the lookout for a man who pushed a clerk and stole a $50 box of cheap cigars."
Yes, I agree it is factually wrong, I just disagree that it's egregiously so.
I'm assuming two things here. First, I'm assuming that if at some point in the stop Wilson became aware that Brown had likely just committed a strong arm robbery, then the chief would have mentioned that. He's not throwing his guy to the wolves here, so he's not going to exclude evidence that tends to be exculpatory. Second, I'm assuming there probably was not an APB or similar announcement. This just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me. I'm guessing (and I may be completely wrong) that the other officer responded, took statements, took the security tapes (or made arrangements to do so), then left with the intention of finishing his patrol and then writing this up to be investigated. Again, I could well be wrong, but based on my own experience I'm doubting that Ferguson is such a peaceful place as to warrant an "All points bulletin, be on the lookout for a man who pushed a clerk and stole a $50 box of cheap cigars."
Understood. I still think that if at some point Wilson became aware that Brown fit the profile of a robbery suspect, he would specifically mention that.He was asked a leading question SPECIFICALLY about the instruction Wilson gave to Brown and his accomplice with the implication that the officer must not have known to have only given them the instruction he gave. The chief agreed that Wilson did not know. The entire context was what Wilson knew at the moment he gave that instruction. It didn't matter to other people though. They latched onto "police chief says Officer Wilson didn't know!" and RAN with it without any consideration for context, tense, or time.
Thanks. Listening to that I'm hearing no APB or description that Wilson would have heard, and use of "larceny" seems to support my assumption that this would be a low priority. Correct?Look at my post above. St. Louis PD dispatch says "the original call was a larceny just occurred. Now there's a large group gathering there. She doesn't know any further."
There was no strong armed robbery!! You have not watched the video and you continue to blow smoke out your ass....LMAO!!!! There's video evidence of a strong arm robbery.
If a crime happened and Wilson knew I'd think he'd be more cautious and might have approached Brown with the idea that Brown and Johnson bore closer inspection if there was a description given. Hard to say for sure but in any event it's what happened after Wilson and Brown met that matters.Presumably Wilson heard the larceny call, so perhaps he would link two men walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic to that and be suspicious.
Stolen cigars + assaulting owner/clerk = strong arm robbery
Thanks. Listening to that I'm hearing no APB or description that Wilson would have heard, and use of "larceny" seems to support my assumption that this would be a low priority. Correct?
Seeing Brown's behavior on that tape certainly changed the way I think about him, but other than how it may have affected his behavior when confronted I don't think it's significant. I don't see any reason to assume that Wilson knew anything more than two men walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic - which in and of itself seems inexplicable to me.
I may be overthinking this. Presumably Wilson heard the larceny call, so perhaps he would link two men walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic to that and be suspicious.
There was no strong armed robbery!! You have not watched the video and you continue to blow smoke out your ass....