You may also like...

26 Responses

  1. Caryn LeMur says:

    I honestly do not know the laws concerning this type of shooting. In wartime, all that is required is to be ‘shown hostile intent’, and then, our troops can open fire, and extinguish a life.

    Thus, I am not certain Justice was the victim in this case. I simply do not know.

  2. Julie says:

    I am incredibly heartbroken over this whole case. Included in that heartbreak is how conservative evangelical family members have responded to me in my anger over the grand jury’s decision. My own father suggested that I must not have all the facts. Because of a blog post I shared, which was written by a pastor, that detailed how Christians should respond to the grand jury’s decision, my father said that I’m prejudiced against Christians and asked who peed in my lemonade.
    So that happened.

  3. Gary says:

    Officer Wilson was faced with one of the most difficult decisions a police officer is ever faced with. Frankly I am appalled at the outrage over the grand jury decision. They made the only choice they could have when presented with the clear evidence in the case. Yes I feel bad for this young man’s family. But let’s not forget the one inconvenient truth so many seem to want to pretend does not exist…he was a criminal in the active engagement of a violent crime both in the robbery and against officer Wilson. Officer Wilson’s job was to apprehend a violent criminal who unfortunately left him no choice but to use deadly force to defend himself. Was it a tragedy? Of course it was!!! But the race baiting being done in this case is both appalling and very counter productive to finding any real solution. The real victims here are the people of Ferguson and Officer Wilson who performed his duty with courage in the face of imminent danger, and now will likely resign unable to serve effectively because of an undeserved stigma on him.

  4. Julie says:

    I can’t speak for everyone, but one of the reasons I’m upset is because the evidence does not appear to be clear. Eyewitness testimony conflicts, for one. It may very well be that Officer Wilson’s actions ranged from justified to a tragic mistake to motivated by racial hatred. Without a trial, we really won’t know. I’m not going to argue about the facts of the case, as it seems everyone’s “facts” seem to suit their own opinion. But there are 4 things we know with certainty:
    1) The town of Ferguson has a history of racial disquiet.
    2) A young man is dead.
    3) An officer killed him.
    4) There won’t be a trial to determine whether or not excessive force or murder took place that day.

  5. Gary says:

    Of course you don’t want to argue the facts. They are very clear in this case. The forensic evidence discredits all of this “Eyewitness testimony” which is in conflict with the evidence. Those who want to see racial motivation do so regardless of the evidence. And all of the evidence that would have been presented in a trial was presented to the grand jury in a trial like format with one exception…there was no defense attorney to make a case for officer Wilson. And STIlL the grand jury concluded there was no evidence to support even the reasonable suspicion of a crime. To put an officer on trial without evidence, simply to satisfy the racist blood lust of those who seek to use this tragedy to further their own agendas would itself be a crime.

  6. Just curious. Of course I drew the cartoon as an expression of my frustration that I question whether justice was truly served. I’m far away from the incident both geographically and culturally, being a Canadian in Canada. However, can one fairly and justifiably say that racism is not present in Ferguson, not a factor in its policing, and that it has nothing to do with this case?

  7. Gary says:

    Oh and for the record…the “young man” who is dead happened to be a criminal actively engaged in criminal violence. This is a fact “we know for certain” that everyone seems to want to pretend does not exist. The tragedy of youth who resort to violence and destroy lives is a very real challenge we all face. And yes racism is real and needs to be confronted wherever it rears its ugly head. But for some reason when the thug is white…

  8. Gary says:

    Curious David…is the only requirement to make the charge of racism a black criminal and a white cop? Is not such an assumption in and of itself racist?

  9. Julie says:

    I’m not interested because no one was ever won over on the Internet. You don’t seem interested in listening or engaging in real conversation; you seem interested in trolling. So there’s really no point in arguing. Let’s just assume someone flamed out, called someone Hitler, and call it a day.

  10. You would be right Gary if I was making that assumption. I just question whether the incident is free of racism and disastrous consequences if it wasn’t. I certainly don’t know. I’m not a judge. But neither am I willing to trust what all judges say either. I’m unsettled by this tragedy. So I’m asking questions. Apparently I’m not alone.

  11. Gary says:

    So Julie if I understand you correctly. have an opinion different from yours means I am trolling? I have presented very rational statements. You can call it whatever the hell you want I guess. But don’t pretend to have some sort of moral or intellectual high ground if you choose to attack me as a troll for having a view.

  12. Gary says:

    I understand the need to ask the question David. In fact I think that is why the prosecutor spent so much time outlining all the evidence that the grand jury had to review. But when the forensic evidence does not support a racial motive and supports the account exactly as the officer related it, to continue to accuse him of a racial motive (as many are doing) is race baiting.

  13. So then, in your opinion (and I’m genuinely asking, wondering if this is an existing opinion), race has absolutely nothing to do with this case, and all the protests and arguments put by civil liberties people, journalists, etc., are race baiting?

  14. Caryn LeMur says:

    Hey Gary, please share the link where you got the list of evidence.

    I think that would help me follow your arguments.

    Thanks! Caryn

  15. David says:

    Shouldn’t Officer Darren Wilson be awarded a medal, as often happens when feats of courage are performed to protect the community? He described Brown as a “demon” and “the Incredible Hulk.” And Brown surely must have been superhuman as Wilson claims, because he shot 12 times, striking him 7 times. Wilson may have saved the whole city of Ferguson from this menace, else we could be reading by Christmas that the Michael Brown plague had forced everyone to flee to St. Louis.

    Osama bin Laden was shot twice, but let’s face it: he was human, not superhuman like Michael Brown. People of Ferguson, you should be celebrating instead of protesting, and Officer Wilson should soon be lecturing on college campuses around the USA.

  16. hannah says:

    What’s sad to me is there seems to be no balance in most people about this case. It is sad for me that cases like this seem to devide more than unite. I see black and white friends fighting with one another even on Facebook taking sides. Even my husband and I are debating it. As a biracial couple, we see each others view but differ in perspective because we’re coming from different cultures. Honestly, as a white woman married to a black man living in Tennessee, I have seen first hand the racist actions that go on constantly here. I’ve experienced racism just because I am married to him. Racism is a REAL and genuine problem here in the south. The Ferguson case in my opinion fails to prove the racial tensions but certainly fueled the fires.

  17. Caryn LeMur says:

    Hannah: thank you for your insight.

    In a sense, we are similar. I am a transsexual (formerly male, now female) still married to my wife of 39 years. Before I transitioned, I had minor insight into the prejudices experienced by the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals… and very little insight into the prejudice experienced by women… and then, I transitioned. Ah… then like you, I experienced ‘first hand’ the prejudiced actions (overt or subtle).

    To most people, our marriage is female to female, and we freely discuss our beliefs in Jesus, our kids, our garden, and our car in need of repair — whatever is appropriate to the situation… lol…. we are so very normal. Our love is love…. no different from any other person’s love. No better; no worse; no closer nor further from God. We are simply human.

    Thank you again for your post. Sincerely; Caryn

  18. Gary says:

    Honestly David, I believe it is race baiting to claim it was a racist shooting simply because the criminal attacker was black. when there is no evidence at all other than skin color to support such an allegation, yes I believe race accusations, which help to fuel the disgusting riots and destruction, is clearly race baiting. Of course no one can know what is in the heart of another individual. But the race baiters seem to be the ones claiming they CAN know, and the results of such bigotry (by the race baiters) in spite of all the evidence supporting the officer’s claims have been horribly destructive.

    And Caryn, I listened to the news conference where the prosecutor announced the grand jury decision and he was very detailed about exactly what evidence had been collected. I am sure a quick google search though would turn up a summary list of what they presented if someone wants to search it out.

  19. Dave says:

    Two terms that belong exclusively to white people 1. Race card and, 2. Race baiting

    I find them defensive… a last resort when self justification becomes most important.

  20. Gary says:

    To say that the terms “Race card” and “Race baiting” belong “exclusively to white people” is absolutely racist. To claim it is a last resort is profoundly insulting and disgustingly bigoted. So long as you identify ANY particular trait, behavior, or action specifically to a particular race you are part of the problem and not part of the solution!!

  21. Dave says:

    You can tell what kind of propaganda news one watches when they use those terms.

  22. Gary says:

    If that is all you are capable of Dave then kindly fuck off.

  23. Caryn LeMur says:

    Hi Gary:

    I did the research. Here are the best quotes I found,

    “Police under Missouri law may use deadly force if they “reasonably believe” themselves or others to be in imminent danger.”

    “[Prosecutor] McCulloch said more than one witness described Brown, who was being confronted by Wilson in a Ferguson street, as moving toward the officer when the fatal shots were fired. An important witness who said Brown was moving toward Wilson at “full charge” was African-American, McCulloch said.”

    “Moreover, a ProPublica report, using federal statistics on 1,217 fatal police shootings between 2010 and 2012, found that young black men are 21 times more likely than their white counterparts to be shot dead by police.”

    I found no forensic evidence being listed on the Internet. I did find that the medical experts’ testimonies would be amongst the information released at a later date for independent analysis.

    Your statement, “But let’s not forget the one inconvenient truth so many seem to want to pretend does not exist…he was a criminal in the active engagement of a violent crime both in the robbery and against officer Wilson. Officer Wilson’s job was to apprehend a violent criminal who unfortunately left him no choice but to use deadly force to defend himself”, appears to be technically incorrect.

    As best I can tell from the meager postings of Missouri state law, if Mr. Brown was a criminal, that is insufficient reason for shooting him. From the testimonies that were posted, Mr. Brown was walking down the street, and not in active engagement of a violent crime when the Officer initially approached him.

    All that appears to matter in this instance, by virtue of Missouri state law, is that the Officer believed he was reasonably in imminent danger each time he fired his weapon AND eye witnesses (other than the Officer) agreed that the Mr. Brown’s actions constituted ‘reasonable imminent danger’ to the Officer AND that the grand jury agreed with the Officer’s legal defense and the eye witness testimonies.

    On the other hand, perhaps we have an unjust law that gives to much ‘discretion’ to the Officers. We may also have a case where insufficient training is present, or an Office should have waited for backup, or alternative weapons should have been utilized. We may also have community perception issues, wherein X community has a negative view of the Y police staff, officers, and/or justice system.

    We also have, as a country, a very uncomfortable 21 to 1 statistic of young black men vs. young white men being shot dead by police.

    “Justice” in my opinion, is more than just a single case; Justice requires a systems-analysis approach.

  24. Dave says:

    In all calmness, where does one find such terms to enrich the vocabulary?

    Having spent time in minority communities and worshiping with such friends I can say that the terms are not their property.

    But 15 minutes of rightwing media will offer a smorgasbord.

  25. Gary says:

    Caryn, I have no idea how you can come to the conclusion that the kid was not a criminal engaged in a violent act considering the evidence. And eye witness testimony has proven to be pretty worthless in this case considering the emotionally charged falsification going on. Hell, there were even “eye witness” statements stating the kid was running away and was shot in the back. (3 independant autopsies have proven those statements to be a complete fabrication)

    Look, my beef is not with those who are concerned about racism and want to look for “systems analysis approach” to combat it. My beef is with those who believe an officer should be charged with a crime when all evidence supports him, simply because they can see no other possibility BUT racism. There is no justice in wrongful prosecution of officer Wilson no matter how much racism exists around him.

    Oh and Dave, I find AT LEAST as much bias in left wing media as I do in right wing media. The fact that you assume my views are simply the product of some media bias makes you completely irrelevant to me.