Michael Brown Case

[Eventhorizon]

I understand you're trying to come at it from my point of view, and I appreciate the effort, but the way you've phrased it comes across as condescending. Just as I think you and your opinions deserve my respect, I should hope my person and my opinions deserve yours.



Yes, I know and believe me, I did take all that into consideration. But you must understand that my issue is not that Officer Wilson did not have the right to protect himself or even that he drew his gun. My issue is that he did not give himself any other option because he had no other option. I elaborate on it below.



I'm glad you think all of that. I do as well.



Actually, there was no trial. There was only a grand jury. That is not the same thing as a trial. A grand jury is a lot less formal than even a preliminary hearing; it has no judge, no lawyers. There is only a prosecutor and the jury that is selected by a judge. All a grand jury does is decide whether or not there is enough probable evidence to issue an indictment. It's considered a strategy for prosecutors to shoo in a case to court for two reasons: a. it is held in private, unlike a preliminary hearing wherein they have to publicly prove to a judge that they have enough evidence to secure a conviction and thus also give the opposition a preview of their case while at it, and b. it is considered stupidly easy to secure an indictment because people who lack legal training usually don't know what to do with the evidence and simply follow the prosecutor’s lead. This is where the old joke comes from: 'a grand jury could indict a sandwich.'

Now, the reason why this whole thing is so controversial is that it is incredibly rare for a grand jury to decline an indictment, but not so rare for a jury to decline to indict a law enforcement official. The other thing that is making people twitch is the fact the prosecutor deviated from the norm in putting the defense on the stand and allowed him to speak without questioning his credibility for over four hours. This, coupled with the fact that this case has become something of a poster child for people's mistrust for the law enforcement and the belief that the system protects them, couldn't have made the no-indictment verdict any more unfortunate.

Many people see the way that this whole thing played out as unquestionable evidence that the system does indeed favour law enforcement officials. Many others look at the ratio of black to white jurors and the divide between black and white opinions in social media and see this whole scenario as proof that institutionalized racism exists. Because its seen as representing these issues, the no-indictment verdict feels like a slap in the face. That Michael Brown didn't even deserve the dignity of a proper trial. That they, by extension, don't deserve the dignity of a trial when going up against a white officer. No matter what, the white officer always wins.

But really, this whole case was handled terribly from the very beginning. There's a lot conflicting information spreading through social media like wild fire that has been further propagated by the efforts of mainstream media, lack of proper police procedure and the irregular 'leaks' of information that have all gotten lost in a mass vortex of social issues and personal feelings. It has very much become about race because people have made it about race and it continues to be sensationalized.

As far as my opinion goes on the subject and the people involved, I don’t think Michael Brown was innocent. I think that a lot of the responsibility for what happened does rest on his shoulders. Robbing a store. Talking back to a cop. Assaulting a cop in his car. Angrily turning back around to charge a cop. However, his guilt in those matters does not mean that we cannot look at what Darren Wilson could have done differently as a trained officer of the law. There is human life involved here. It does appall me that people dismiss it as ‘kid was a punk, attacked an officer, officer has gun and he must use it. The end.’ I think the case could be treated with a bit more respect and scrutiny (ie. a trial), even if a thorough investigation only proves that Darren Wilson did everything he could.

I know you and a lot of people will disagree with me, and that's fine, but I still maintain that police officers have the advantage of formal training and should at least have options available to them that will allow them to diffuse a tense situation, if need be, rather than immediately resorting to lethal force. Officer Darren Wilson stated that he has been trained to use a taser, but does not carry one on his person because they are ‘uncomfortable.’ The only means of self defense, then, is the gun in his holster. In my opinion, that immediately raises the stakes in any confrontation he might have when he goes out into the field. There is no non-lethal option because he’s taken it out of the equation altogether. He knows all he’s got is the gun.

The other thing that personally gets me is that I’ve compared Darren Wilson’s account of what happened with the photographs of the injuries he’s sustained and I cannot help but observe that these things don’t line up and seem vastly exaggerated. Furthermore, his comments about how Brown taunted him, called him ‘too pussy to shoot,’ and the way he recounted the whole scenario also sends my whiskers twitching. We don’t know what caused Brown to turn around and charge Wilson after walking away, but the circumstances and the violence of this situation gives me the impression that desperation to save his own life isn’t the only possible scenario here. The other possibility is that Darren Wilson might have called something out to provoke Brown. That perhaps what guided Wilson’s hand in this situation was not just pure desperation to save his own life, but anger and injured pride.

Obviously, no one is an expert here and there are likely things that you or I are not considering because we might not even know to look for them. However, this forensic pathologist’s opinion on the autopsy report on the gunshot wounds suggests that there are other possibilities, other ways to look at this. Indeed, the reactions across the country further underscore that this case isn’t as obviously open-and-shut as a lot of people in this thread are making it out to be.

All we have right now is Darren Wilson’s testimony of what has happened. But it is just a testimony. No one has cross-examined him or any of the witnesses in court and Michael Brown is, of course, dead.

If there is one thing that I hope most people will agree is that this case needs to go to trial.

Condescending? No. If thats the way you read it thats your issue not mine. I stopped reading after that comment.

 

[Stu]

Muir, I know that you strongly believe in the never ending depth of the rabbit hole and feel it is vital to point it out every thread, but it makes it very difficult to discuss the topics at hand when you stack other issues on top of it that are very much open to debate.

I think it is clear that the point of any thread that exists in the news and politics forum is to elucidate the impending violent take over of the western democracies by a group of zionist bankers led by reptilian overlords. Ignoring that fact is counter productive to any discussion be it alleged police brutality, racism, feminism, financial institutions, electoral finance reform, global warming, the endangered species act, creationism vs evolution, the history of genocide, whatever.

anyone taking issue with that is obviously either a gov paid troll or simply blind to the truth.

(is that a food riot over there?)

 

[Skarekrow]

I can see both sides and I dislike certain things about both.
What we really need to have is a discussion about huge groups of people feeling disenfranchised.
They feel that there is a tiered justice system where the impoverished and minorities get treated and punished one way…while white-middle and upper middle-class get treated and punished one way. And then we have our celebrities and elites who seemingly have no laws that they can’t circumnavigate with large sums of money.
I can admit that there are different sets of rules and that racism does indeed still exist, at least within the criminal justice system…how expansive and invasive it is, is hard to say too…there are certainly some bad apples maybe for every good one if things are really bad.
All I know is I wouldn’t want to be black and live in certain areas of the south in particular. Ask yourself that question.
If you were black, how would you be perceived…in most communities, I imagine you wouldn’t think of too many instances that would play out differently, but I won’t deny that there are times being black would be uncomfortable at best.
I don’t even think about that being Caucasian, but being stopped by a cop is one where I can say I would fear for my life if I were black, and certainly wouldn’t feel more safe having an officer there.
Statistically it’s frightening.
This short article I am putting up for it’s statistical value…it does however ask some needed questions.

Some things I have learned:
ProPublica recently did an in-depth analysis and found that black kids between ages 15-19 are 21 times more likely to be shot and killed by cops than white kids of the same age. That's an insane statistic.
That's per capita, not total.

If you are a black teenage boy, you have a 21x higher risk of being shot by police than a white teenage boy.
Also, in 2010, federal prosecutors took 162,000 cases to a grand jury.

You know how many DIDN'T go to trial?
Eleven.

Mike Brown's family will never get a state criminal trial to get justice for their son.
And the testimony that denied them that right technically doesn't make any sense.
Seriously, go read it.

Police have a hard job. What they do is something I couldn't ever do.
But you know what they rarely have?

Accountability. In this case, the prosecutor, Robert McCulloch, always gets indictments — unless it's a cop.
He's had five cop-involved killing cases and zero indictments.

Again, five cases against police haven't made it to trial at all.
He could get an indictment if he wanted one.
Don't believe me?

Ask a public defender.

Don't believe him?
Ask another lawyer.

Chris Sacca ✔ @sacca
My dad was a prosecutor. I'm an attorney.
I worked in the DA's office.
I've never seen a prosecutor work so hard to exonerate a killer.

The fact that this didn't at least get a trial infuriates me.
But my being upset isn't that interesting.
I'm white.

People will take me seriously because I don't have the "bias" of being black.
But actual black people, who live with this every day, are constantly second-guessed because they are somehow "biased."

As though not wanting to get shot by police at a 21x higher rate is a bias.
It's a daily reality of being black in America.

 

[sassafras]

I can see both sides and I dislike certain things about both.
What we really need to have is a discussion about huge groups of people feeling disenfranchised.
They feel that there is a tiered justice system where the impoverished and minorities get treated and punished one way…while white-middle and upper middle-class get treated and punished one way. And then we have our celebrities and elites who seemingly have no laws that they can’t circumnavigate with large sums of money.
I can admit that there are different sets of rules and that racism does indeed still exist, at least within the criminal justice system…how expansive and invasive it is, is hard to say too…there are certainly some bad apples maybe for every good one if things are really bad.
All I know is I wouldn’t want to be black and live in certain areas of the south in particular. Ask yourself that question.
If you were black, how would you be perceived…in most communities, I imagine you wouldn’t think of too many instances that would play out differently.
I don’t even think about that being Caucasian, but being stopped by a cop is one where I can say I would fear for my life if I were black, and certainly wouldn’t feel more safe having an officer there.
Statistically it’s frightening.
This short article I am putting up for it’s statistical value…it does however ask some needed questions.

The article you shared is excellent, Skarekrow. It echoes my attempt to explain the system in my post above.

Like you, I also see the good and bad in each side of the situation. I think the riots are a vast overreaction that is hurting the community and the people who are protesting in those communities more than anyone else. As we can see with the Michael Brown case, violence is never the answer; it doesn't solve any problems and the great irony here is that it is falling into the very stereotypes that these people are fighting against... and I fear that this situation is only going to call the wolf out of the woods and tighten up laws for police officers.

At the same time, though, it provides us with a very sharp image of the hurt and the anger and the feelings of powerlessness that are the undercurrent in these societies. The Michael Brown case and the riots that rose up in response to it are only the symptoms of a much bigger problem and they should not be dismissed. This case serves as a valuable microcosm for what is going on beneath the surface. As we can see when examining this case, the legal system has a lot of potential for abuse.

I think what really bothers me personally about this case is how (literally) black and white people are making it out to be. On one side, you have people painting Michael Brown as this sweet innocent boy trying to get his college education, with a bright future ahead of him, who needlessly lost his life because he was just minding his own business when this white devil of a police officer ascended upon him like an angel of death and if you don't see it that way, you're a racist asshole and probably white. Then on the other, you have people painting Michael Brown as a piece of shit kid who robbed a store today, could have murdered someone tomorrow and he deserved all he got for threatening a kindly police officer was following the rulebook to the 'T' and if you don't see it that way, you're a naive idealistic dumbass that needs to get the fuck off their soapbox because your opinions aren't worth anyone's time.

Truth doesn't huddle around one extreme or the other. It's usually somewhere in between.

I think nothing underscores this more than the two conflicting accounts of what happened, one from Officer Wilson and the other one from Johnson, the kid Michael Brown was with at the time of the incident. This article really offers a balanced consideration (don't let the title fool you): Michael Brown Spent His Last Day with his friend, Dorian Johnson. Here's what Johnson Saw.

 

[Solongo]

I find it ironic that such a thing occurs in this great nation under a black president.

 

[Skarekrow]

The article you shared is excellent, Skarekrow. It echoes my attempt to explain the system in my post above.

Like you, I also see the good and bad in each side of the situation. I think the riots are a vast overreaction that is hurting the community and the people who are protesting in those communities more than anyone else. As we can see with the Michael Brown case, violence is never the answer; it doesn't solve any problems and the great irony here is that it is falling into the very stereotypes that these people are fighting against... and I fear that this situation is only going to call the wolf out of the woods and tighten up laws for police officers.

At the same time, though, it provides us with a very sharp image of the hurt and the anger and the feelings of powerlessness that are the undercurrent in these societies. The Michael Brown case and the riots that rose up in response to it are only the symptoms of a much bigger problem and they should not be dismissed. This case serves as a valuable microcosm for what is going on beneath the surface. As we can see when examining this case, the legal system has a lot of potential for abuse.

I think what really bothers me personally about this case is how (literally) black and white people are making it out to be. On one side, you have people painting Michael Brown as this sweet innocent boy trying to get his college education, with a bright future ahead of him, who needlessly lost his life because he was just minding his own business when this white devil of a police officer ascended upon him like an angel of death and if you don't see it that way, you're a racist. Then on the other, you have people painting Michael Brown as a piece of shit kid who robbed a store today, could have murdered someone tomorrow and he deserved all he got for threatening a kindly police officer was following the rulebook to the 'T' and if you don't see it that way, you're a brainwashed idealistic dumbass that needs to get the fuck off their soapbox because your opinions aren't worth anyone's time.

Truth doesn't huddle around one extreme or the other. It's usually somewhere in between.

I think nothing underscores this more than the two conflicting accounts of what happened, one from Officer Wilson and the other one from Johnson, the kid Michael Brown was with at the time of the incident. This article really offers a balanced consideration (don't let the title fool you): Michael Brown Spent His Last Day with his friend, Dorian Johnson. Here's what Johnson Saw.

I agree.
I don’t think Mike Brown was necessarily a nice guy, I can’t even say for sure he didn’t provoke the officer that lead to him being shot.
But there is an underlying message that people are ignoring or are missing, and that is black teenage boys and young adults get treated differently by many aspects of our society…some areas are obviously worse than others…nonetheless, it happens…how they are perceived in public, by the police, the criminal justice system, private prison complex. There are areas of the US that are blatantly racist and to think that the cops are not is to bury your head in the sand.
Not all of them are…but it only takes one assclown on the department to represent the public perception.

I find it ironic that such a thing occurs in this great nation under a black president.

He’s half white as much as he is black.
He’s about as white as you can get while people still refer to you as “black”. lol
He calls for people to follow the rule of law…if you see your fellow African Americans getting mistreated, overly punished, guilty until proven innocent, then hearing the President call for people to follow the law is laughable I would imagine…especially when you feel that you are lacking empowerment.

 

[Skarekrow]

The REAL Looting Is Happening On Wall Street … Not In Ferguson

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/11/real-looting-happening-wall-street-ferguson-missouri.html

Who Are the Worst Looters?

The looting in Ferguson, Missouri is bad. The looters are giving the peaceful protesters against the shooting of Michael Brown a bad name, and provoking an armed (and over-militarized) response by the police.
But let’s put things in perspective …
Wall Street’s crimes and fraud have cost the economy tens of trillions of dollars.
The big banks are still engaged mind-blowing levels of manipulation and crime.
Nobel prize winning economist Joe Stiglitz and well-known economist Nouriel Roubini say that we’ve got to jail – or perhaps even hang – some bankers before they’ll stop looting the economy.
Nobel prize winning economist George Akerlof has demonstrated that failure to punish white collar criminals – and instead bailing them out- creates incentives for more economic crimes and further destruction of the economy in the future.
(Click the above link to read the full story)

​

 

[muir]

I think it is clear that the point of any thread that exists in the news and politics forum is to elucidate the impending violent take over of the western democracies by a group of zionist bankers led by reptilian overlords. Ignoring that fact is counter productive to any discussion be it alleged police brutality, racism, feminism, financial institutions, electoral finance reform, global warming, the endangered species act, creationism vs evolution, the history of genocide, whatever.

anyone taking issue with that is obviously either a gov paid troll or simply blind to the truth.

(is that a food riot over there?)

I think its clear that some people don;t want to discuss the issues but instead want to just harrass other forum members

 

[muir]

I agree.
I don’t think Mike Brown was necessarily a nice guy, I can’t even say for sure he didn’t provoke the officer that lead to him being shot.
But there is an underlying message that people are ignoring or are missing, and that is black teenage boys and young adults get treated differently by many aspects of our society…some areas are obviously worse than others…nonetheless, it happens…how they are perceived in public, by the police, the criminal justice system, private prison complex. There are areas of the US that are blatantly racist and to think that the cops are not is to bury your head in the sand.
Not all of them are…but it only takes one assclown on the department to represent the public perception.


He’s half white as much as he is black.
He’s about as white as you can get while people still refer to you as “black”. lol
He calls for people to follow the rule of law…if you see your fellow African Americans getting mistreated, overly punished, guilty until proven innocent, then hearing the President call for people to follow the law is laughable I would imagine…especially when you feel that you are lacking empowerment.

He got gunned down like a dog

He wasn't armed and was trying to make his escape

He was no threat to the cop but he got gunned down like a dog....and some people are cool with that

Their defence for their view? They say that people should show respect to authority!

History is full of oppressive authority and the US was formed when the colonialists decided to stand upto oppressive authority

How quickly people forget the lessons of history...

If i had to guess what happened i'd say the cop came in heavy handed and aggressively. I'd say that because the lads didn't show him instant respect he sought to up the aggression levels and to then dominate them both physically and verbally. The police are trained to use a 'command voice' when dealing with the public

I'd say this cop basically handled this wrong from the very start and then once he'd started abusing these lads and they didn't kow-tow he decided to become judge, jury and executioner and shoot someone who was presenting no threat

A lot of very short-sighted people don't realise the implications of this case which is that the system is saying that it can legally shoot you down if you try and stand up for yourself

What they're saying is: don't speak back to authority and if authority physically attacks you do not defend yourself and if you do you will be shot down like a dog

So if you catch a cop on a bad day where he has just had an argument with his wife or his boss and just given him a shitty assignment and he comes out onto the beat in a bad mood and starts abusing you for no reason even though you haven't done anything wrong so that he can meet his quotas and you stand up for your rights, you may be shot to death and there will be no justice for your family afterwards

It seems that for some people bullying is ok as long as the bully is wearing a badge/uniform

Aggressive power-tripping police trying to force innocent ex-army guy to lie down on the ground at gun point:

[video=youtube;RDc3q28gmSU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDc3q28gmSU[/video]

Police breaking the law regarding whether or not a citizen can film them in the UK:

[video]http://vimeo.com/fatratfilms/actofterror[/video]

 

[muir]

So in the Uk people who die whislt in police care are said to have ''fallen down the stairs'' because cops don't carry guns in the UK (it means they have been beaten to death or have been killed through incorrect restraint procedures)

But in the US the cop excuse for murder is: ''he went for my gun''

Watch this clip below of cops saying ''stop going for my gun'' to a guy who is clearly not going for anyones gun but is rather being mauled by cops

If cops are audioally recorded all they have to do is say ''don't go for my gun'' and then shoot you and then present the audio as 'evidence' that you had gone for their gun even if you hadn't

The best thing you can hope for is that some bystander is recording the truth otherwise cops can do whatever the fuck they like

[video=youtube;DkgGZV3t7kA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkgGZV3t7kA[/video]

 

[Skarekrow]

So in the Uk people who die whislt in police care are said to have ''fallen down the stairs'' because cops don't carry guns in the UK (it means they have been beaten to death or have been killed through incorrect restraint procedures)

But in the US the cop excuse for murder is: ''he went for my gun''

Watch this clip below of cops saying ''stop going for my gun'' to a guy who is clearly not going for anyones gun but is rather being mauled by cops

If cops are audioally recorded all they have to do is say ''don't go for my gun'' and then shoot you and then present the audio as 'evidence' that you had gone for their gun even if you hadn't

The best thing you can hope for is that some bystander is recording the truth otherwise cops can do whatever the fuck they like

[video=youtube;DkgGZV3t7kA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkgGZV3t7kA[/video]

That video is scary as all hell!
How can anyone say that racism, and racism within the police force and the court system don’t exist?
How much you wanna bet that a white guy wouldn’t have gotten almost shot like this poor guy?
That is why the button-hole cameras (without the capability to be shut off by the officer) are such a necessity IMO.

 

[muir]

That video is scary as all hell!
How can anyone say that racism, and racism within the police force and the court system don’t exist?
How much you wanna bet that a white guy wouldn’t have gotten almost shot like this poor guy?
That is why the button-hole cameras (without the capability to be shut off by the officer) are such a necessity IMO.

It is scary....and i see videos like that one all the time

I'm sure racism does exist not only in the police force but also in the public who don't question the actions of the police

But like i've said in this thread i think this issue goes far beyond racism

I think some of the younger posters don't remember how things were before 911 and how things have changed so much since then including the militarisation of the police

It's concerning that you mention militarisation of the polcie and some posters just shrug because they have never known any different, but they need to know this is not normal and is part of an unhealthy escalation of state powers

Concerning police cameras i actually would prefer it if they didn't have cameras because i see it as more state surveillance

I'd prefer it if the polcie just de-militarised and stopped with all the quota crap and i wish the police would stop allowing themselves to be so politicised. I'd prefer to see police calm down, de-militarise, stop harrasing the public and ease up a bit and start building community relations instead

It really boils down to what we think the function of the police is

Different people might give different answers to that. Some might say their job is to 'protect and serve' but peaceful occupy protestors who got a face full of pepper spray protesting against wall street could reasonably ask 'who it is the police serve and protect?'

In the UK for example the police do not swear loyalty to the public, they swear loyalty to the queen and the queen is the figurehead of the establishment and the establishment is made up of the royals, the aristocrats who populate the oxbridge universities, the intelligence agencies who recruit from the oxbridge universities, the military top brass, the politicians and the bankers of the city of london district

If people answer that the police exist to 'uphold the law' then a civil liberties activist could reasoanbly ask ''who creates the laws'' and ''whom do the laws serve?''

Because here in the UK the laws are created by the establishment to serve their interests; the police then act as an enforcer against the interests of the public (even though they are recruited from amongst the public)

I know its the same in the US

 

[Eventhorizon]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/2...icer-at-portland-ferguson-protest-goes-viral/

 

[Eventhorizon]

That video is scary as all hell!
How can anyone say that racism, and racism within the police force and the court system don’t exist?
How much you wanna bet that a white guy wouldn’t have gotten almost shot like this poor guy?
That is why the button-hole cameras (without the capability to be shut off by the officer) are such a necessity IMO.

Right. This proves their are bad cops out there. I hope there is serious effort made to get video on all cops. A few years ago no one would have ever imagined it was possible to wear a camera the size of a wallet and record for 16 hours a day.
Its important that note though, this isnt Michael Brown.

We as the public need to demand video recorders. If we do it together, we can make it happen. With social media we can make this real.

 

[muir]

Cameras are just going to be used by the government to spy on us

We don't need more cameras on our streets, we need less

What we need is for the police to be de-militarised; we need them to swear an oath to the public to protect the public

We need their training to be changed to focus on peace keeping instead of shoot to kill, stop and search and quota meeting aggressive bullshit

The polcie are being used as an attack-dog on the public...that's what needs to change

Cameras are being suggested to treat a symptom: police brutality but why not treat the core problem instead: police militarisation

Because cameras don't change whats going on in cops heads and bent cops will find ways around cameras

We need to see changes in police priorities, training, culture and policy and in an ideal world we need to see the police arresting the bankers and the corrupt politicians

http://rt.com/usa/209919-un-slams-us-torture/

UN panel slams US for police brutality, torture, botched executions

Published time: November 29, 2014 01:34
Edited time: November 29, 2014 12:33 Get short URL

A police officer holds a baseball bat taken from a detained protester, during a demonstration following the grand jury decision on Monday in the Ferguson, Missouri, shooting of Michael Brown, in Oakland, California, November 26, 2014. (Reuters/Stephen Lam)

A UN report has condemned the United States for violating the terms of an international anti-torture treaty. The panel took Washington to task for police brutality, military interrogations, and capital punishment protocols.
“The Committee is concerned about numerous reports of police brutality and excessive use of force by law enforcement officials,” the paper released by the UN Committee Against Torture says, adding that in particular this brutality is seen against persons belonging “to certain racial and ethnic groups, immigrants and LGBTI individuals.”


The document was released on Friday, just days after the contentious decision of a Missouri grand jury not to indict a white officer accused of shooting Michael Brown, an unarmed black teen. The decision triggered a wave of protests nationwide.
Although the report didn’t specifically mention the events in Ferguson, Mike Brown’s parents met with the committee to discuss their son’s case in Geneva earlier this month.
Follow RT’s LIVE UPDATES on Ferguson solidarity protests
The UN watchdog expressed “deep concern at the frequent and recurrent police shootings or fatal pursuits of unarmed black individuals.”
The 10-person panel, which periodically reviews the records of the 156 countries which ratified the Convention Against Torture – a non-binding international human rights treaty – cited mounting concerns over “racial profiling by police and immigration offices, and growing militarization of policing activities.”

This image reviewed by the US military shot through a one way mirror shows guards moving a detainee from his cell in Cell Block A of the "Camp Six" detention facility of the Joint Detention Group at the US Naval Station in Guantanamo Bay (AFP Photo)

The committee called on US authorities to “prosecute persons suspected of torture or ill-treatment and, if found guilty, ensure that they are punished in accordance with the gravity of their acts.”
“We recommend that all instances of police brutality and excessive use of force by law enforcement officers are investigated promptly, effectively and impartially by an independent mechanism,” said panel member, Alessio Bruni, at a news conference in Geneva.
Urging for tougher laws to define and ban torture, the committee called on Washington to reevaluate the treatment of detainees at the infamous Guantanamo Bay detention facility, which currently houses 148 prisoners.
“The Committee is particularly disturbed at reports describing a draconian system of secrecy surrounding high-value detainees that keeps their torture claims out of the public domain.”
READ MORE: ‘We crossed the line’: US mea culpa at UN panel on use of torture
In addition, the committee criticized the recent spate of botched executions, especially in Arizona, Oklahoma, and Ohio, citing reported cases “of excruciating pain and prolonged suffering that procedural irregularities have caused to condemned prisoners in the course of their execution.”
The UN body further highlighted “continued delays in recourse procedures which keep prisoners sentenced to death in a situation of anguish and incertitude for many years.”
“The Committee notes that in certain cases such a situation amounts to torture in so far as it corresponds to one of the forms of torture (i.e. the threat of imminent death) contained in the interpretative understanding made by the State party at the time of ratification of the Convention.”
The report urges US authorities to establish “a moratorium on executions with a view to abolish the death penalty” and “to commute the sentences of individuals currently on death row.”
US activists welcomed the findings as a call to action for the federal government.
“This report - along with the voices of Americans protesting around the country this week - is a wake-up call for police who think they can act with impunity,” said Jamil Dakwar of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), as quoted by Reuters.

More suppression of public dissent against corrupt authority:

[h=1]Missouri Journalist Silenced, Shot & Caged for Questioning 'Authorities'[/h]

[video=youtube;LfF-Nd1AFBk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfF-Nd1AFBk#t=22[/video]

 

[Skarekrow]

Right. This proves their are bad cops out there. I hope there is serious effort made to get video on all cops. A few years ago no o e would have ever imagined it was possible to wear a camera the size of a wallet and record for 16 hours a day.
Its important that note though, this isnt Michael Brown.

I agree.
I agree with the cameras for cops, and I agree this isn’t Mike Brown.
I think Mike Brown maybe could have done those things that the officer that shot him said he could have.

The problem is there is still enough of a problem with cops mistreating blacks or just racially profiling them at all (obviously if the suspect is a certain race it applies).
The public perception of cops in certain areas is not very good at all…especially in the african american communities…because the cops do harass them, they do mistreat them, they do get convicted of crimes they didn’t commit based on eye-witness testimony because they were black.
Racism is still rampant throughout the country…just look at the people freaking out about amnesty for Mexicans…good lord.

The cops are getting more violent.
I can post statistical information, though I don’t know if anyone reads it.
In almost every case there is no good reason why the local swat team needs two tanks.

This is where I find the disconnect between the Fox news crowd and the liberal view.
How come the right wing isn’t crying out about the militarization of the police? They WILL be the one’s who take your guns if anyone is going to do it…but too bad, because now they have a couple of tanks and are better armed than you are.
Where is the wailing?
lol

 

[muir]

I agree.
I agree with the cameras for cops, and I agree this isn’t Mike Brown.
I think Mike Brown maybe could have done those things that the officer that shot him said he could have.

The problem is there is still enough of a problem with cops mistreating blacks or just racially profiling them at all (obviously if the suspect is a certain race it applies).
The public perception of cops in certain areas is not very good at all…especially in the african american communities…because the cops do harass them, they do mistreat them, they do get convicted of crimes they didn’t commit based on eye-witness testimony because they were black.
Racism is still rampant throughout the country…just look at the people freaking out about amnesty for Mexicans…good lord.

The cops are getting more violent.
I can post statistical information, though I don’t know if anyone reads it.
In almost every case there is no good reason why the local swat team needs two tanks.

This is where I find the disconnect between the Fox news crowd and the liberal view.
How come the right wing isn’t crying out about the militarization of the police? They WILL be the one’s who take your guns if anyone is going to do it…but too bad, because now they have a couple of tanks and are better armed than you are.
Where is the wailing?
lol

Its not just shootings its beatings and illegal restraints

This case below is of a new york cop who used an illegal restraint on a guy who was already under control where he essentially choked him to death

Police believe he was selling individual cigarettes without declaring tax; are the police going to go and choke to death the big corporations who avoid paying tax?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-in-chokehold-is-to-face-charges-9892412.html

Eric Garner: Jury deciding whether NYPD officer who killed man in chokehold is to face charges

Eric Garner was held in a chokehold until he stopped breathing

Lamiat Sabin

Saturday 29 November 2014

The case of an unarmed man who died in July after being held in a chokehold by a policeman is now nearing a decision by a New York City grand jury on whether the officer will face charges.

Eric Garner, 43, is seen in an amateur YouTube video being restrained by four police officers on 17 July 2014 before one, named Daniel Pantaleo, wraps his arm around the man's neck in, what appears to be, a tight grip around his throat while the others handcuff him.
He is clearly heard to say "I can't breathe" while a plain-clothed policeman in a green T-shirt forcibly pushing the man's head against the pavement on Staten Island, New York, and Garner is said to have died in police custody a few hours later although it is also believed he passed away at the scene within a few minutes.
The man who was filming, Ramsey Orta, is told to move away from the scene before he says "all he did was break up a fight, and this is what happens for breaking up a fight. This s*** is crazy."


Police believe that Garner was selling single untaxed cigarettes out on the streets of Tompkinsville and apprehended him outside a beauty supply shop on Bay Street.

[video=youtube;g-xHqf1BVE4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-xHqf1BVE4[/video]

According to police, Eric Garner was stopped after they had seen him selling untaxed cigarettes The death was ruled as homicide on 4 August by a medical examiner. The day after the ruling, documenter Orta was charged with firearms possession soon after the footage gained global interest. However, he claims that police framed him in an act of revenge for filming the death of Garner, who is believed to be his friend. Orta said in a phone interview with reporters: "When they searched me, they didn't find nothing on me. And the same cop that searched me, he told me clearly himself, that karma's a b****, what goes around comes around."

"I had nothing to do with this. I would be stupid to walk around with a gun after me being in the spotlight," he added.


NYPD Union leader Patrick Lynch challenged the claim that Pantaleo used a chokehold on Garner although it was confirmed by medical examiners on 1 August that chokehold and chest compression were the primary causes of his death and the 160kg-heavy man's heart problems, obesity and asthma were additional factors.
Read more:
Eric Garner dies after police chokehold arrest
Examiner rules police 'chokehold' was the cause of Garner's death
Thousands march against police chokehold death in New York

As a result of the chokehold, which is force prohibited by the NYPD since 1993, four medical workers who responded to the incident were suspended without pay on 21 July and Pantaleo was placed on desk duty, with his gun and badge taken away.
The death of the married father-of-six is followed by the case of Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old black teenager shot dead by an officer on 9 August, which sparked protest across the world after policeman Darren Wilson was not charged for the shooting.
The incident in Ferguson, Missouri, led to impassioned protests across the US as well as in London.

US shoot-to-kill policy has continued to come under heavy criticism after 12-year-old Tamir Rice was also shot dead within seconds of a police officer noticing he was carrying a fake gun on 22 November this year.

 

[muir]

I want to point out that in all these clips i'm posting examples of there is no shortage of camera footage

Lack of camera footage is not the problem

The problem is cops being told to be aggressive with the public from above...from the top of the chain of command down and then when the cops kill people because of the aggressive policy the cops are not punished because they are doing what their superiors want them to do which is brutalise the public and get them used to living in a police state

Put cameras on them and they'll continue to kill civilians and the authorities will move the goal posts and continue to acquit police officers

This is a deep deep problem going right to the top of society...the corruption runs deep

A few chest cams is not going to solve it...there is no quick fix

 

[Eventhorizon]

I agree.
I agree with the cameras for cops, and I agree this isn’t Mike Brown.
I think Mike Brown maybe could have done those things that the officer that shot him said he could have.

The problem is there is still enough of a problem with cops mistreating blacks or just racially profiling them at all (obviously if there suspect is a certain race it applies).
The public perception of cops in certain areas is not very good at all…especially in the african american communities…because the cops do harass them, they do mistreat them, they do get convicted of crimes they didn’t commit based on eye-witness testimony because they were black.
Racism is still rampant throughout the country…just look at the people freaking out about amnesty for Mexicans…good lord.

The cops are getting more violent.
I can post statistical information, though I don’t know if anyone reads it.
In almost every case there is no good reason why the local swat team needs two tanks.

This is where I find the disconnect between the Fox news crowd and the liberal view.
How come the right wing isn’t crying out about the militarization of the police? They WILL be the one’s who take your guns if anyone is going to do it…but too bad, because now they have a couple of tanks and are better armed than you are.
Where is the wailing?
lol

Youd have to define what you mean by militarization. What I know is that gangs, organizazed crime etc almost always have better and more firepower than the police force. So if they need upgraded weapons to fight that type of crime im fine with it. Otherwise we find ourselves like Mexico very quickly. I wouldnt be happy with it if there was no reason for it.
We have to have police officer's. They are absolutely needed in society. Give them the tools they need to do their job but have things in place ao that if some of them go bad we get them out of a position that makes it easier to harm people than not. Its simply common sense.

As for the firepower they have? A cop can kill the average citizen as easily with a .22 caliber revolver as he can with a machine gun.

 

[muir]

Youd have to define what you mean by militarization. What I know is that gangs, organizazed crime etc almost always have better and more firepower than the police force. So if they need upgraded weapons to fight that type of crime im fine with it. Otherwise we find ourselves like Mexico very quickly. I wouldnt be happy with it if there was no reason for it.
We have to have police officer's. They are absolutely needed in society. Give them the tools they need to do their job but have things in place ao that if some of them go bad we get them out of a position that makes it easier to harm people than not. Its simply common sense.

Its the CIA that is providing all the guns to the gangs in mexico and its the CIA who is fuelling the crack cocaine industry in the US through drug deals with mexican drug gangs

The US is buying tanks and military body armour not to use against drug gangs, its to use aginst YOU

[video=youtube;r4snpdeJyyw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4snpdeJyyw[/video]