They are reporting that that gentle giant's burglary cohort has now admitted that Michael Brown attacked Officer Wilson and attempted to take his gun.
According to radio station in St. Louis - Dorian Johnson changes story
- Thread starter hunkgolden
- Start date
If this is true, sure will be interesting to see the spin. But I'm going to need more than a few right-wing blogs and a radio station's Facebook post to believe it.
Johnson's story is improbable in a few ways as it stands.
Johnson's story is improbable in a few ways as it stands.
Yes, it can be.
Three weeks ago, my wife, a friend of ours, and I were standing on a street corner in the Little Italy section of San Diego at about 9pm. It was quiet, a few people were out walking dogs and such. We heard a loud pop and then three girls screaming and running around the opposite corner, probably 40 feet away. We assumed it was kids setting of firecrackers and running away. It turned out one of the girls had been shot by a woman carrying a .38 in an attempted purse snatching.
Apparently this woman jumped in a white van driven by a bald Hispanic man, and they sped off.
The problem was, the only way out from where we are went directly past us. After the pop, we all looked, but none of us recalls seeing this van. The three girls directly involved in the shooting all said the van drove right past us. One other person who was down the street further away than us recalled a white van in the area as well. I suspect that since we were watching the girls and looking toward the shot, the van drove past us and we never noticed it - we weren't looking for a van.
So yes, eyewitness testimony, particularly in instances where you're not directly paying attention, can be very unreliable. The guy with the best view and most directly involved is Dorian Johnson, and his story - as I said - contains some serious improbabilities.
(The girl who was shot survived, and I don't think they've found the shooter. They suspect it was a gang initiation. Quite unnerving.)
I hope people still start to ask questions like why local police forces need to have tanks on standby.
Well its also improbable that someone would turn and charge someone after being shot at.
There are a lot of improbable versions out there but the things folks seem to have in common is that there was some altercation at the car the kid runs away the cop shoots and then the kid turns around.
I can believe it possible the kid hit the cop but I can also believe the cop got incensed and shot the kid while he had his hands up...they call it seeing red for a reason...I find it less possible that the kid grabbed the gun or that he charged him after being shot at.
But like I said there should be evidence for the purported version of the cop...DNA...fingerprints... Powder burns...damage to hands/face.
There are a lot of improbable versions out there but the things folks seem to have in common is that there was some altercation at the car the kid runs away the cop shoots and then the kid turns around.
I can believe it possible the kid hit the cop but I can also believe the cop got incensed and shot the kid while he had his hands up...they call it seeing red for a reason...I find it less possible that the kid grabbed the gun or that he charged him after being shot at.
But like I said there should be evidence for the purported version of the cop...DNA...fingerprints... Powder burns...damage to hands/face.
Even if the story falls apart, I hope that it leads to a meaningful discussion on the militarization of local police forces.
I'm uncomfortable knowing how easy it is for a local police force to start patrolling like they are in an active war zone.
I'm uncomfortable knowing how easy it is for a local police force to start patrolling like they are in an active war zone.
This is why I don't believe the "shot in the back, then turned around" part, because I agree that it is improbable that someone turns and charges after being shot at. It seems more plausible to me that the kid stopped running, turned and then came toward the officer, who started firing, and Brown just kept coming as often happens with high-intensity situations and small caliber firearms.
It also seems improbable to me that a cop conducts an execution-style killing based on "seeing red" or racial motives in the middle of the street with witnesses around.
As I've said before, it's entirely possible - likely even - that Wilson overreacted to a perceived threat. It's possible - even likely - that he feared for his life after being assaulted in some way, but that he had no real reason to do so. Without hearing his version, and without solid evidence (as yet), it's tough to try to judge what was right or wrong.
I talked to my wife a little bit about this last night. I see it as a micro-level example of what ground troops and ship COs face in hostile waters. "Enemy" actors take provocative actions, but we can't (and shouldn't) respond in kind or with escalating force because public perception is very important to our mission. As a ship CO, I can't go fire Tomahawk into Iran because some guy in a cigarette boat with an AK-47 popped off a few shots at me. I take action to subdue the immediate threat, and that's where it stops (assuming we're not at war). The same goes with police. Disciplined restraint has a definition for them as well, and I suspect that Wilson is (at least) guilty of violating that precept. That would make him liable for a wrongful death, and likely indictable (at least) for manslaughter or a lesser degree murder charge.
This post was edited on 8/21 11:04 AM by gr8indoorsman
well to me
that strikes me as bias towards the he must have charged because otherwise why would the cop shoot him.
I dont think this was an "execution." I think the cop was angry, scared, and surprised by the altercation, and he reacted poorly to it. I think he has this big guy, who's attacked him in some way, he starts running, and just like in any altercation when one person starts running, it gets your adrenaline up.
He shot at him, the kid turns around, and he shot some more. Heck, he may have as you said THOUGHT the kid was coming at him, or thought the kid was going to come at him, and the kid actually wasn't coming at him.
Why do we see cops pouring dozens of shots into people? Because we know that once that gun goes off once, everything changes, and people don't even realize how many shots they fired until it's all said and done.
that strikes me as bias towards the he must have charged because otherwise why would the cop shoot him.
I dont think this was an "execution." I think the cop was angry, scared, and surprised by the altercation, and he reacted poorly to it. I think he has this big guy, who's attacked him in some way, he starts running, and just like in any altercation when one person starts running, it gets your adrenaline up.
He shot at him, the kid turns around, and he shot some more. Heck, he may have as you said THOUGHT the kid was coming at him, or thought the kid was going to come at him, and the kid actually wasn't coming at him.
Why do we see cops pouring dozens of shots into people? Because we know that once that gun goes off once, everything changes, and people don't even realize how many shots they fired until it's all said and done.
Re: well to me
As I said in a post in an earlier thread, I am not ashamed to admit that I am giving more benefit of the doubt to the police officer with no record than I am the young man who had just demonstrated criminal behavior and had an intoxicating substance in his body. I don't think that's a poor judgment call on my part.
That doesn't mean the cop didn't wrongfully kill or even murder Brown, it's just what shapes what I believe and what I don't. I am absolutely not tied to either story, and if the cop shot Brown while he was fleeing, he should be tried for murder, IMO.
As I said in a post in an earlier thread, I am not ashamed to admit that I am giving more benefit of the doubt to the police officer with no record than I am the young man who had just demonstrated criminal behavior and had an intoxicating substance in his body. I don't think that's a poor judgment call on my part.
That doesn't mean the cop didn't wrongfully kill or even murder Brown, it's just what shapes what I believe and what I don't. I am absolutely not tied to either story, and if the cop shot Brown while he was fleeing, he should be tried for murder, IMO.
I'll just remind
that all we know is that at some point in the past, close enough to register on a test, he took marijuana.
We have no information he was actually remotely under the effects of marijuana at that time (and I suspect if he was, it would have been leaked). We don't know if he smoked regularly, once in a blue moon, etc.
From my POV marijuana is no different than alcohol. I don't partake of either as my main vice usually involves sugar, but I don't find it remotely meaningful from my POV.
that all we know is that at some point in the past, close enough to register on a test, he took marijuana.
We have no information he was actually remotely under the effects of marijuana at that time (and I suspect if he was, it would have been leaked). We don't know if he smoked regularly, once in a blue moon, etc.
From my POV marijuana is no different than alcohol. I don't partake of either as my main vice usually involves sugar, but I don't find it remotely meaningful from my POV.
Re: According to radio station in St. Louis - Dorian Johnson changes
It isn't about whether or not it makes you act violently, it is what it does to impair your judgment and lower inhibitions. Both substances absolutely, unequivocally, do both.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
Well, the involvement of alcohol or THC is absolutely relevant. We aren't going to agree on that. If you don't partake, I can see how you might not understand that, but as someone who has made more than his fair share of bad decisions because of alcohol, and has seen many bad situations arise from the use of both, I believe it is absolutely relevant.
It isn't about whether or not it makes you act violently, it is what it does to impair your judgment and lower inhibitions. Both substances absolutely, unequivocally, do both.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
Again
you are assuming that the THC detected on him was because of pot smoked weeks in advance, but you don't know that to be the case.
you are assuming that the THC detected on him was because of pot smoked weeks in advance, but you don't know that to be the case.
it would be pretty darn clear
from the levels of THC in his blood. This isn't rocket science. The science behind how long it takes marijuana to leave your system is pretty well known. How it deposits is pretty well known. You act like this is somehow unknowable. If he had a low nanogram level of metabolite in his system, then guess what, he wasn't high.
And if you are going to leak this, and again, this was a leak, not an official report, then you aren't going to leave out, oh by the way, he had a high level of THC.
from the levels of THC in his blood. This isn't rocket science. The science behind how long it takes marijuana to leave your system is pretty well known. How it deposits is pretty well known. You act like this is somehow unknowable. If he had a low nanogram level of metabolite in his system, then guess what, he wasn't high.
And if you are going to leak this, and again, this was a leak, not an official report, then you aren't going to leave out, oh by the way, he had a high level of THC.
Re: According to radio station in St. Louis - Dorian Johnson changes
Have you seen a level quoted? I haven't. But I forgot... You're "keeping options open."
By the way, I have never said he was high, just that the presence of an intoxicating substance erodes the credibility of the victim.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
Have you seen a level quoted? I haven't. But I forgot... You're "keeping options open."
By the way, I have never said he was high, just that the presence of an intoxicating substance erodes the credibility of the victim.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
Re: According to radio station in St. Louis - Dorian Johnson changes
Boy now we're splitting hairs. The guy broke a law by ingesting THC at some point in the previous month. So that's two...
Boy now we're splitting hairs. The guy broke a law by ingesting THC at some point in the previous month. So that's two...
I hear
he might have jaywalked at some point, so that's three.
A lot of people break the law. Everyone on here has sped. Most have not come to a complete stop at a red light.
And small user amounts of marijuana isnt illegal in many places nowadays, and in others it's treated just like speeding or a moving violation.
he might have jaywalked at some point, so that's three.
A lot of people break the law. Everyone on here has sped. Most have not come to a complete stop at a red light.
And small user amounts of marijuana isnt illegal in many places nowadays, and in others it's treated just like speeding or a moving violation.
Re: I hear
Wasn't he actively jaywalking at the time of the incident? Imagine that, seriously. Just walk on the sidewalk and none of this happens.
No shots in the back. Orbital bone broken in the officers face. A burglary has been committed with a description that fits Brown and is apparently Brown after the fact. The suspect has fallen face down or toward the officer. It now appears to be false about his hands were up. It is EASY in the excitement of the moment with adrenaline flowing to fire 6 rounds in maybe 3 seconds especially if you are threatened. I think my neutral stance of waiting for more information is ending on my opinion on who is right and who is wrong. None of us have all of the facts yet (never will). I wonder what the Most Reverend Jackson and Rev Sharpton will say now? Yes, there may have been a way to avoid the shooting, we shall see. Sad outcome either way.
This post was edited on 8/23 2:33 PM by threeeputtt
This post was edited on 8/23 2:33 PM by threeeputtt
Re: yes
well heck, if he'd spent the day inside playing PS4 none of this would have happened.
You know, I'd like to go just a little bit further down the causation train.
What caused him to get shot and killed has little to do with jaywalking, and a lot to do with the interaction between him and the cop after jaywalking.
well heck, if he'd spent the day inside playing PS4 none of this would have happened.
You know, I'd like to go just a little bit further down the causation train.
What caused him to get shot and killed has little to do with jaywalking, and a lot to do with the interaction between him and the cop after jaywalking.
Re: I hear
Brown doesn't rob the convenience store as Officer Wilson doesn't respond to the burglary call and end up driving by the two suspects.
Brown isn't walking in the middle of the street as apparently Officer Wilson initially told them to get on the sidewalk and had not realized at first they were the two that just robbed the store.
Brown doesn't smart off to Officer Wilson causing Officer Wilson to stop his car, put it in reverse and drive back to him.
Brown doesn't assault Officer Wilson while Officer Wilson was sitting in his car.
Brown doesn't reach for Officer Wilson's gun causing it to discharge (supposedly).
Michael Brown had many opportunities to alter the events of that day and each time he was confronted with a decision - he chose to continue to escalate the situation instead of diffuse it.
Here's something to ponder - what do you think the state of mind is of a person who is casually walking down the middle of a very busy street just moments after robbing a store? Two choices as I see it - someone who just doesn't give a f#ck if they get caught or someone who wants to dare the police to attempt to arrest him. The latter seems likely if the friend of Officer Wilson's story is accurate as Brown apparently yelled, "What are you going to do - shoot me" as Officer Wilson pointed his firearm at him.
Shots aren't fired by Office Wilson if:
Brown doesn't rob the convenience store as Officer Wilson doesn't respond to the burglary call and end up driving by the two suspects.
Brown isn't walking in the middle of the street as apparently Officer Wilson initially told them to get on the sidewalk and had not realized at first they were the two that just robbed the store.
Brown doesn't smart off to Officer Wilson causing Officer Wilson to stop his car, put it in reverse and drive back to him.
Brown doesn't assault Officer Wilson while Officer Wilson was sitting in his car.
Brown doesn't reach for Officer Wilson's gun causing it to discharge (supposedly).
Michael Brown had many opportunities to alter the events of that day and each time he was confronted with a decision - he chose to continue to escalate the situation instead of diffuse it.
Here's something to ponder - what do you think the state of mind is of a person who is casually walking down the middle of a very busy street just moments after robbing a store? Two choices as I see it - someone who just doesn't give a f#ck if they get caught or someone who wants to dare the police to attempt to arrest him. The latter seems likely if the friend of Officer Wilson's story is accurate as Brown apparently yelled, "What are you going to do - shoot me" as Officer Wilson pointed his firearm at him.
Re: yes
Wow, remind me to never make an offhand comment about how simple stuff can change the path people take. This wasn't supposed to be an inflammatory statement, but whenever you're involved, that's just not possible. It's the same line of thought that if my wife and I had been just walking on the other side of the street three weeks ago, one of us might've gotten shot by the purse snatcher instead of the two girls there. It was meant as something to reflect on, not a friggin' indictment of the kid for Christ's sake.
Latest posts
-
-
-
A Revolution of Common Sense - A Seminal Shift in Values- Latest: New Pal Boiler
-