Ferguson -- comments?

Remove all ads!

I'm surprised no one has opened a thread on this -- I've been gone a while, did I miss it?

I predict exoneration for the cop and mass riots that only end up in injured Blacks.

 

I don't think anyone will think that is a bold prediction.

From what is being reported the "story" of the policy shooting an unarmed man with his hands up appears to be a complete fabrication. It is starting to look more and more like the dead guy attacked the police officer.

 

Seems we've been down this road so many times that no matter what the facts are, all sides take the same stance. Until everyone in this country is ready to forget past hardships/perceived slights/provocations it will never change. It's rather sad...

 

Snook, what really happened is not cut and dry. I found the this Q&A to be balanced and informative, making how little we really know about the initial incident painfully clear.

 

I was surprised they chose not to indict on any charges. I do believe the police officer felt threatened but I also believe six shots is a bit excessive. As much as I agree that the police need to be able to defend themselves I also believe there should be repercussions for 'excessive' (IMO for this case) use of force ... or premature use of force.

Those prone to overreaction or on the skittish side should not be police officers.

 

I was not surprised as everything I have been seeing is that the police office acted in self defense. I believe that the grand jury was also swayed by the prosecutors not specifically asking for an indictment and instead basically saying "You figure it out". If they had asked for one I believe they would have gotten it.

 

The incident was unfortunate, but I think the real tragedy is the rioting and the overall poor mentality of people. It makes me lose faith in the society.

 

I'm always a little surprised at these people the media dig up to provide 'expertise' on TV. There has been a lot of ignorance and a lot of people pushing agendas on CNN, Fox, MSNBC, CBS, etc, over the last 4 months.

Not surprised by the result of the grand jury, or the resulting protests and riots. Frankly, maybe I'm a little surprised no one has been hurt worse or killed in the rioting. Looked like half of downtown Ferguson was on fire the night the grand jury results were announced.

 

Well, from my experience serving on a grand jury, the lack of an indictment means they really didn't have much of a case. Grand juries indict over 99 percent of the time. Unlike in a criminal trial, in a grand jury setting, everything is weighted in favor of the prosecution. You don't need unanimity among the jurors - just a majority, you only need "reasonable cause" as opposed to beyond reasonable doubt, and typically the defense doesn't get to present detailed evidence. The purpose of a grand jury is to prevent cases with little merit from clogging up the courts. If they couldn't get the indictment it means they really had little chance of ever getting a conviction

Not to be too picky (but why start now?) but I don't see why the prosecutors not specifically requesting an indictment would change anything. That's the only reason to bring it to the grand jury in the first place. That's the only thing they are being asked to decide - whether or not to indict

 

I'm actually more bothered by the lack of an indictment in the case of Eric Garner. Unlike in Fergeson, we have video evidence. Garner died shortly after being placed in a banned choke hold by Daniel Pantaleo, a member of the NYPD. The reason the choke hold is banned is because you can kill someone with it. The medical examiner ruled Garner's death a homicide.

But no indictment. The grand jury ruled it a reasonable use of force. I would like to think that the use of force was "excessive" by definition. The officer ended the argument with Garner by killing him with a banned method.

I don't think this is the same as Fergeson. There was no video in that case, and witnesses gave differing accounts as to what happened. It's plausible that Wilson was acting in self defense. I can't see that in this case.

 

Looks like the problem also becomes this... the Grand Jury just gave an override to department policy by allowing the chokehold to be ok. That's a bad precedent. Let the experts make the decision on what cops can use to subdue.