From Emmett Till to Trayvon Martin -- and now Mike Brown

November 24, 2014 8:33 PM

59 years after an all-white jury in Mississippi acquitted Emmett Till's murderers, a majority-white grand jury in Ferguson, Missouri, decided not to indict Darren Wilson, the man who killed Mike Brown.

FiveThirtyEight analyzes grand jury indictments, citing experts who say, "If the prosecutor wants an indictment and doesn’t get one, something has gone horribly wrong." That is, unless the case involves a police shooting.

This case brings back echoes of Trayvon Martin's murder two years ago in Florida: "The point is that justice was always going to elude Trayvon Martin, not because the system failed, but because it worked. Martin died and Zimmerman walked because our entire political and legal foundations were built on an ideology of settler colonialism -- an ideology in which the protection of white property rights was always sacrosanct; predators and threats to those privileges were almost always black, brown, and red; and where the very purpose of police power was to discipline, monitor, and contain populations rendered a threat to white property and privilege."

Less than an hour after the decision, President Obama addressed the nation, saying:

"We have made enormous progress in race relations over the course of the past several decades. I have witnessed that in my own life, and to deny that progress, I think is to deny America's capacity for change. But what is also true is that there are still problems — and communities of color aren't just making these problems up. Separating that from this particular decision, there are issues in which the law too often feels as if it is being applied in a discriminatory fashion."

NPR has a timeline of events in Ferguson.

And in case you have room for radical poetry in what might be a difficult night, I leave you with some Lorna Dee Cervantes: "These bullets bury deeper than logic. / Racism is not intellectual. / I can not reason these scars away."

posted by Ragini (1849 comments total)

I just have to say, it was a damned strange grand jury.

A prosecutor who wants to prosecute doesn't just present a case to a grand jury. S/he seeks an indictment from a grand jury. And, since they don't have to present the defense side of the case, unless they're a fool, they get it. Because what a grand jury is supposed to decide is just whether or not there's enough evidence to send it on to real trial.

A prosecutor who presents both sides of the case and leaves it to the grand jury to argue it out is a prosecutor who doesn't want to try the case, but wants cover for not doing so.
posted by tyllwin at 8:34 PM on November 24, 2014 [249 favorites]

So, that ham sandwich that you can indict. Let's talk about that.
posted by ryoshu at 8:35 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

“If you are silent about your pain, they’ll kill you and say you enjoyed it.” ― Zora Neale Hurston
posted by mynameisluka at 8:35 PM on November 24, 2014 [110 favorites]

From what I hear, the jury was 9:3 white to black, and nine votes was the minimum to either indict or not.

That's some talented voir dire right there.
posted by fifthrider at 8:36 PM on November 24, 2014 [45 favorites]

Well, shit.
posted by zardoz at 8:37 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

.
posted by spitefulcrow at 8:38 PM on November 24, 2014

I no longer wonder why things burn. I wonder why they're not burnt every day.
posted by phearlez at 8:38 PM on November 24, 2014 [167 favorites]

America is capable of such ugliness, at times.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 8:38 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Obama's statement was pathetic.
posted by rhizome at 8:40 PM on November 24, 2014 [24 favorites]

I have a Twitter list of activists and reporters on the ground in Ferguson. As you can imagine, it's pretty active right now.
posted by desjardins at 8:40 PM on November 24, 2014 [17 favorites]

You'd never have known from MuCulloch's press conference that the indictment was allegedly sought against Wilson, rather than Micheal Brown.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:41 PM on November 24, 2014 [77 favorites]

Talking to all my black friends and pretty much nothing is and should be a surprise here. We never expected Officer Darren Wilson to be indicted. The fact that the lives of us black people in this country doesn't mean much should not come as any real surprise to anyone who even pays a little attention. What I'm really interested in is seeing whether this galvanizes this generation of black kids. I really hope they wake up from the delusional haze of all tht MLK I have a dream stuff and smell the fresh coffee of reality, this is but a small taste of what it's like to be 3/5th. Get used to it.
posted by RedShrek at 8:42 PM on November 24, 2014 [42 favorites]

Photo from Reuters, like the villains in a holiday movie.
posted by nicebookrack at 8:42 PM on November 24, 2014 [19 favorites]

The Langston Hughes Twitter feed tonight is... well. It's relevant.
posted by WidgetAlley at 8:42 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

I am so very sad right now.
posted by dry white toast at 8:42 PM on November 24, 2014 [15 favorites]

I'd like to slightly revise the comment I posted after the first Michael Dunn verdict last year:

Really, I think it's getting to the point where a white person cop could murder a black person onstage during the Superbowl halftime show and be acquitted not charged with any crime.
posted by FelliniBlank at 8:42 PM on November 24, 2014

It makes me so fucking mad that they waited until nightfall to make this announcement. They knew exactly what they were doing, and exactly what a group of angry, angry teenagers would do. This is more than just a failure of policing, this is active PR to support that bullshit non-indictment.
posted by codacorolla at 8:43 PM on November 24, 2014 [184 favorites]

@desjardins

Great collection. Thanks!
posted by RedShrek at 8:44 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Plus, most people would be watching Dancing with the Stars instead of the news.
posted by desjardins at 8:45 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Not to mention the "preemptive state of emergency." It's disgraceful.
posted by mynameisluka at 8:45 PM on November 24, 2014 [18 favorites]

And right before Thanksgiving to boot.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 8:46 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

In Defense of the Ferguson Riots:

From the Boston Tea Party to Shays’ Rebellion, riots made America, for better or worse. In the past, white rioters have had access to institutional power, which allowed some of their grievances to be legitimized and politically resolved ... The key for the Ferguson uprising, as with any unsustainable political moment, is to transition outrage and disruption into constructive political organization. Easier said than done — but it’s a better reaction than dismissing the riots and only making it more difficult for the people to accomplish this herculean task.

Malcolm X reminds us that media is a key instrument of subjugation because it determines which acts are respectable and which are extreme and thus illegitimate. Instead of following that familiar script, let’s push back against narratives about rioters being devoid of politics. Let’s find ways to honestly observe and discuss their political needs, rather than simply criticize the nature of their response to social violence.
posted by airing nerdy laundry at 8:46 PM on November 24, 2014 [22 favorites]

Poetry via Twitter: "I never saw his futurefall. / But I have known this Boy." - Gwendolyn Brooks
posted by nicebookrack at 8:46 PM on November 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

You don't have voir dire for a grand jury, only a petit jury.
posted by raysmj at 8:46 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

If you have a strong stomach, start digging into the GJ documents. For instance, this was found by Jennifer Pagliaro of the Toronto Star. "Just 30 pages into #Ferguson grand jury testimony, the first witness, a medical legal examiner, on doing their job: "

It's a screen cap. Just go look.
posted by maudlin at 8:47 PM on November 24, 2014 [39 favorites]

Predictably, soon after this announcement the cops started teargassing the protestors in Ferguson. On Twitter, they flat out lied and claimed they were just smoke bombs, despite there being live streams and hordes of reporters going on record in real time that it was tear gas.

Motherfuckers.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 8:48 PM on November 24, 2014 [61 favorites]

Why It's Impossible To Indict A Cop - from The Nation, a look at how the laws work to favor police.
posted by mediareport at 8:48 PM on November 24, 2014 [10 favorites]

It makes me so fucking mad that they waited until nightfall to make this announcement. They knew exactly what they were doing, and exactly what a group of angry, angry teenagers would do. This is more than just a failure of policing, this is active PR to support that bullshit non-indictment.

You can tell what the official PR message is by the timing and who wanted the cameras in place ahead of time. "They're all thugs anyway, see?"
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:48 PM on November 24, 2014 [11 favorites]

Why Darren Wilson wasn't charged for killing Michael Brown
posted by homunculus at 8:48 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

Probably one of the best things any well-educated person who is not directly involved with protests can do here is to read through the grand jury documents themselves, and look for shenanigans. I'm on page 35 or so.
posted by zug at 8:49 PM on November 24, 2014 [8 favorites]

"Somebody shot somebody." Another dead black dude, everybody can go home early.
posted by nicebookrack at 8:50 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

Photo from Reuters, like the villains in a holiday movie.

There're several angles of another photo making the rounds of a man standing alone in front of a several police vehicles.
posted by audi alteram partem at 8:50 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Mod note: Couple comments removed, let's maybe try to not go straight into an argument here.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:51 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

That press conference was explicitly designed to provoke a riot. That was the most egregious thing I've ever seen.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:51 PM on November 24, 2014 [35 favorites]

Why was this decision announced at 9:00 PM rather than 9:00 AM or 4:00 PM or noon? The time was apparently chosen by the prosecutor. He should be charged with inciting a riot, because that is what he has done.
posted by alms at 8:51 PM on November 24, 2014 [135 favorites]

I can't imagine how black Americans feel right now. I can't. What are you supposed to do when you're so overwhelmed and angry and heartsick that all you can do is scream and cry? I'm lucky; I can turn the TV off.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 8:51 PM on November 24, 2014 [32 favorites]

This NBC story from August about McCulloch's family ties to the police turned up on my twitter feed.
posted by immlass at 8:52 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

FAA has instituted a no-fly zone over Ferguson.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:52 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

A wider angle of the photo.
posted by audi alteram partem at 8:52 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

Whoever runs the Library of Aleph Twitter account is normally content doing infrequent posts of the titles of interesting images from the Library of Congress' collection.

Tonight that account is on fire:

• [Unidentified male African American homicide victim, Mineola, N.Y.]
• [Martin Luther King, Jr., pulls up cross that was burned on lawn of his home, as his son stands next to him, Atlanta, Georgia]
• Mamie Bradley (mother of Emmett Till) meeting Till's casket in Chicago
• and many more

posted by metaquarry at 8:54 PM on November 24, 2014 [58 favorites]

Goddamnit. I knew this was coming but I'm still shocked. Fuck.
posted by rtha at 8:54 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

A wider angle of the photo.

Our Tiananmen Square, perhaps.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 8:55 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

I am so sad right now.
posted by agregoli at 8:56 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

This case was decided by some of the public before the vast majority of the evidence was made public.
posted by jsonic at 8:56 PM on November 24, 2014 [8 favorites]

About a half hour ago, a dozen police cars screamed east on 125th Street, and a chopper is hovering nearby. I have to wonder what's going on in Harlem tonight.
posted by computech_apolloniajames at 8:57 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

This case was decided by the police before Michael Brown's body went cold.
posted by nicebookrack at 8:57 PM on November 24, 2014 [111 favorites]

Between this shit and their ongoing anti-drone nonsense it is hard to see the FAA as anything but a willing tool of hiding truth from the citizenry. I'm not sure how you effectively deal with it. Those chopper pilots need their licenses to make their living, so violating the order to gather news potentially puts them out of work while they fight a probably ineffective battle against an administrative process.
posted by phearlez at 8:57 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

.


#blacklivesmatter is the hashtag I'm seeing going around Facebook. No one should have to die for being black, for stealing petty items, for being a black child in America.
posted by jetlagaddict at 8:57 PM on November 24, 2014 [8 favorites]

American apartheid.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 8:58 PM on November 24, 2014 [10 favorites]

Clearly, the big issue here is how people rush to judgment, not the killing of an armed black teen by the state.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 8:58 PM on November 24, 2014 [18 favorites]

What are you supposed to do when you're so overwhelmed and angry and heartsick that all you can do is scream and cry?

You scream and cry and rage, and then you fight. You organize. You seek solidarity. You commit your time and energy and money. You do the work, because no one else will.

But that is only my answer, and I am also not black.

I also ask that people ignore and disengage with incendiary comments, at least for tonight, but I know that that is not my call to make. Once you make a post, set it free, etc.
posted by Ragini at 8:59 PM on November 24, 2014 [8 favorites]

Government officials can either start seriously dealing with our deep-seated institutional and cultural racism or they can continue to stand by while that racism destroys lives.
posted by audi alteram partem at 8:59 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

I burst into tears when it was announced, which surprised both me and my kids. I guess some part of me was still hopeful.
posted by The corpse in the library at 9:00 PM on November 24, 2014 [16 favorites]

Government officials can either start seriously dealing with our deep-seated institutional and cultural racism or they can continue to stand by while that racism destroys lives.

They are going with option 3: Actively support and perpetuate the racism.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 9:00 PM on November 24, 2014 [24 favorites]

This isn't justice.
posted by Miko at 9:01 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

Clearly, the big issue here is how people rush to judgment, not the killing of an armed black teen by the state.

Determining what actually happened is actually a big issue. Rushing to judgement without the facts is detrimental to accomplishing this.
posted by jsonic at 9:01 PM on November 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

After Ferguson
posted by the man of twists and turns at 9:01 PM on November 24, 2014

No justice, no peace, no words.
posted by chicainthecity at 9:03 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Darren Wilson: Mike Brown "looked like a demon".
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:03 PM on November 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

ACAB. FIght back.
posted by thsmchnekllsfascists at 9:03 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

ugh.
posted by showbiz_liz at 9:04 PM on November 24, 2014

Rushing to judgement without the facts is detrimental to accomplishing this.

The difficulty here is that there is no way to find "the facts" or trust "the facts" in a racist system. This is a point I have had a very hard time getting across to the "wait and see" crowd. When we wait, we tend to see only one thing. That's because from the very moment this system grinds into motion with every new investigation, its structures, traditions, methods, and messages reproduce oppressive outcomes.
posted by Miko at 9:04 PM on November 24, 2014 [136 favorites]

Yet another failure of the american justice system. It is a farce and every time I think it can't get worse, it does. I am beyond disappointed. This happens over and over and over again. This should have gone to trial. Why do the police have zero accountability? Why do we let this happen again and again? This has become so common place that we expect a cop to be immediately exonerated. I want to scream.

Even IF the shooting was justified, the way that this was handled and all of the back peddling and lies negates any semblance of an attempt to get at the truth. I feel ill.
posted by futz at 9:04 PM on November 24, 2014 [10 favorites]

If only we had a system by which evidence about an incident could be weighed and presented by parties involved in order to arrive at a reasonably informed conclusion about what happened and the culpabilities involved.

Oh right, it's that thing that they decided not to go with tonight.
posted by Phire at 9:05 PM on November 24, 2014 [60 favorites]

Wilson admits that he shot at Brown from inside the police car, Brown ran away, and Wilson got out of the car and chased him.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:05 PM on November 24, 2014 [28 favorites]

When I turned on the TV to watch the (impotent, unsatisfying) Obama speech, this performance was playing on Classic Arts Showcase. Not a mistake, I'd reckon.
posted by mynameisluka at 9:06 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

It seems absolutely crazy that this would get a pass from grand jury. Grand Juries hear one side: the prosecution's. They exist to weed out completely meritless cases in which the prosecutor can't even produce enough evidence to convince the jury that there could be a case. I have no idea how this didn't meet that standard.
posted by the jam at 9:07 PM on November 24, 2014 [16 favorites]

The rarity of not indicting, visualized.

0.00603% of times.
posted by Lemurrhea at 9:07 PM on November 24, 2014 [33 favorites]

It doesn't even matter* anymore whether Darren Wilson murdered Mike Brown; the official handling of the case and everything around it afterward have been such blatant closing-ranks fear-mongering racist bullshit that it deserves to provoke rioting in its own right.

Did France need to prove Alfred Dreyfus was a spy or not for the Dreyfus Affair to still be important in exposing racist bullshit?


*except for the part where IT FUCKING MATTERS
posted by nicebookrack at 9:07 PM on November 24, 2014 [15 favorites]

I don't even live in the States anymore, and this makes me so goddamned angry.
posted by snwod at 9:07 PM on November 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

The Judge does not make the Law. It is the People that make the Law. Therefore if a Law is unjust, and if the Judge judges according to the Law, that is justice, even if it is not just.
It is the duty of the Judge to do justice, but it is only the People that can be just.

- Alan Paton, Cry, The Beloved Country
posted by the man of twists and turns at 9:08 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

WidgetAlley: The Langston Hughes Twitter feed tonight is... well. It's relevant.

I thought of this one.
posted by ob1quixote at 9:08 PM on November 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

Darren Wilson: Mike Brown "looked like a demon".

No, he said 'it looks like a demon'.

It. Not 'he'.

IT.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 9:09 PM on November 24, 2014 [72 favorites]

From somewhere
"Unfriendly reminder that in America its reasonable to say that an unarmed black kid deserved to be shot six times because he might have robbed a convenience store but a white kid shouldn't be kicked off the high school football team just because he violently raped a girl."
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:09 PM on November 24, 2014 [198 favorites]

Mod note: jsonic, seriously, read the room a little bit and cut it out.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:09 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

I am so very sad right now.

Yeah. And angry. I am so. Fucking. Angry. This is not right. This is not justice.

I want to wrap Lesley McSpadden up in my arms and hold her and cry with her. Jesus fuck.

I hope every one of those grand jurors spontaneously combusts.
posted by MissySedai at 9:10 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

The narrative of an unarmed teenager stealing cigars from a convenience store and ending up shot dead by police only makes sense if that teenager is not white.

I mean really, I dare you to imagine it otherwise.

This world this world this world.
posted by allthinky at 9:10 PM on November 24, 2014 [29 favorites]

It didn't meet the standard because the prosecutor didn't PROSECUTE. He just had all the evidence dumped on the grand jury, context-free, and left it up to them to decide. There was nobody advocating for an indictment, hell, the prosecutors had the defense present evidence! In a grand jury!

I am so angry I could spit.
posted by zug at 9:10 PM on November 24, 2014 [57 favorites]

jsonic: here is a link to the grand jury documents as they're being released. Read them and weep, literally. I know I did.
posted by KingEdRa at 9:12 PM on November 24, 2014 [8 favorites]

If you have a few drinks and then kill somebody with your car, it's possible that the drinking didn't contribute to that person's death. Maybe they were jaywalking and your brakes failed and you have an astonishing tolerance for alcohol and weren't really impaired.

Nevertheless, if you have a few drinks and then kill somebody with your car, at the very least you should expect to end up explaining yourself in court.

America has had a few drinks. We have massive problems with police powers and oversight and we have MASSIVE fucking problems with race. That means if you're a cop and you shoot and kill an unarmed black teenager, you should expect to end up explaining yourself in court.

Anything else--this, specifically--is indecent and disgraceful.
posted by Sing Or Swim at 9:13 PM on November 24, 2014 [66 favorites]

And this:

Wilson: "He comes back toward me with his hands up"...

Prosecutor: "Er, you, I mean, his hands were up, like a fist, right? A FIST?"

Wilson: "Oh, I don't even know. Whatevs. Hands up. Face like a demon. End of story."
posted by allthinky at 9:13 PM on November 24, 2014 [25 favorites]

Thank you for including that poem.
posted by jaguar at 9:14 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

Wilson: "Oh, I don't even know. Whatevs. Hands up. Face like a demon. End of story."

I shot that demon. I'm like a demon hunter. I do what I want. Whatevs.
posted by Joey Michaels at 9:16 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

There's always going to be someone willing to parse events and find a nuance, a principled stand to take, a common-sense just-the-"facts" view that just so happens to reinforce the dominance of the already dominant. There's always a pat reason why despite it seeming like justice wasn't served, we're to believe it really was. This is as unsurprising as it is heartbreaking. Will we ever overcome our tribalism? Days like today, one really wonders.
posted by feloniousmonk at 9:19 PM on November 24, 2014 [19 favorites]

I watched Obama's speech on MSNBC and for most of it they had a splitscreen with Ferguson coverage, complete with audio. Hearing him talk over that chatter was some serious history documentary stuff. Totally unreal.
posted by Small Dollar at 9:20 PM on November 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

My heart breaks for Mike Brown's family, of course, but I also feel sad for the low wage workers who won't be able to go to work tomorrow (or for awhile) due to the looting and burning. I hope people are able to help them too.
posted by desjardins at 9:22 PM on November 24, 2014 [12 favorites]

.
posted by Artw at 9:23 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Is that it for Darren Wilson, legally? He's 100% off the hook?
posted by The corpse in the library at 9:23 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

You gotta read Wilson's testimony. Starts on page 209. It's unreal - Wilson is claiming that Brown charged him and basically dared him to shoot. He makes it sound like Michael Brown is the Hulk on PCP.
posted by zug at 9:24 PM on November 24, 2014 [15 favorites]

I saw someone on twitter saying that it's tough to expect Obama to be too critical of a system he's the head of, and it made me think of how for years everyone's been saying "I can't wait til Obama doesn't have any elections left and really says what he thinks." Now I'm worried that for decades to come we'll get to hear him offer these weak speeches about race relations every time something awful like this happens while people say "I can't wait til he's a little older and really says what he thinks."
posted by DynamiteToast at 9:25 PM on November 24, 2014 [15 favorites]

I wish we could just disarm the police force entirely. It'd probably be safer for everyone. But, police are supposed to be brave and heroic and willing to risk their lives in the line of duty. So let them be a little more brave and risk a little more.

Generic patrolmen shouldn't be doing things that require guns, and people with guns shouldn't be doing generic police work.

It doesn't seem like a reachable goal from here, and it wouldn't help with what's happening now. But if we had it, maybe it would make a lot of things easier.

A police officer escaping legal consequences, that's not really surprising. It's a deeper problem. But the rest of what's going on is just so far beyond, so sharp and open -- how are we letting -- how is there any way we can stop -- this police force and the adjacent government, in the spotlight even, act like this, a hostile occupying force, against a community?
posted by solitary dancer at 9:25 PM on November 24, 2014 [13 favorites]

There will likely be a civil case, and the feds (as I understand it) could bring charges.
posted by desjardins at 9:25 PM on November 24, 2014 [8 favorites]

Have listened to Nina Simone "Mississippi God-Damn" three times now and counting.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:26 PM on November 24, 2014 [18 favorites]

Is that it for Darren Wilson, legally? He's 100% off the hook?

Better than that he punched his wingnut welfare ticket for a lifetime of speaking engagements.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:26 PM on November 24, 2014 [30 favorites]

I'm not holding my breath. TBH I wasn't holding my breath for this either - it's just a sad marker of the passage of time.
posted by Artw at 9:27 PM on November 24, 2014

Missouri compromised.
posted by clavdivs at 9:28 PM on November 24, 2014 [15 favorites]

There will likely be a civil case, and the feds (as I understand it) could bring charges.

Feds have pretty much said they've got nothing, unfortunately, and the fact that the grand jury came back without an indictment probably ends any hope for a miracle there.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:28 PM on November 24, 2014

(I know this is Missouri and not Mississippi. Talk to Nina Simone about not being clairvoyant.)

Also - on PBS they were showing a documentary on Muscle Shoals studio and had a clip of George McGovern's "segregation now, segregation tomorrow..." Speech, and I had the thought - dammit, did the segregationists win after all?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:28 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

There's always going to be someone willing to parse events and find a nuance, a principled stand to take, a common-sense just-the-"facts" view that just so happens to reinforce the dominance of the already dominant.

Of course, we all know that had Mike Brown been a white kid, the "principled stand" would be totally different. I just don't know what to say to these wait and see/justice has spoken/just the facts type of people. I'm at a loss.

This is a horrible and sad thing and even more fucking appalling that it wasn't a surprise to anyone. I mean my god.
posted by triggerfinger at 9:29 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

I bet the Darren Wilson media tour will be starting soon, now he doesn't have to worry about keeping his story straight/actually telling anyone his story.
posted by Artw at 9:31 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

A police officer escaping legal consequences, that's not really surprising.

That is the damn problem!
posted by futz at 9:31 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Sometimes I like to remember even South Africa had a Truth & Reconcilliation Commission. I mean for some value of like.
posted by dame at 9:31 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

I was flipping through Facebook on my phone during a commercial break and saw this. All I could say was "Fuck."

And now... protests in cities across the USA--sizeable ones, it seems from the pictures--stores in Ferguson are burning, and Darren Wilson walks away with what, half a million already? To say nothing of the inevitable book deal, wingnut welfare panel circuit, and probably a fucking reality show.

I wish the looting wasn't happening. I totally understand why it's happening--impotent rage tends to come out in not entirely constructive ways and I am not judging, plus any crowd is going to have opportunists in it--but it's just handing their own dismissal in the public eye over on a silver platter.

It's been instructive watching pictures of white kids destroying vehicles and setting things on fire come up on my Twitter feed and note the total lack of tear gas.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:32 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

538 has some sound analysis when it talks about how sometimes in these high profile police shootings, prosecutors don't have the kind of evidence they'd usually wait to be sure of, because the push to indict is a political one. Most prosecutors don't bring cases they don't think they can win - this is one of the problems with rape prosecutions for example.

But we need to stop making the trials of individuals a stand in for larger societal crimes. That kind of thing is exactly what keeps this cycle continuing.
posted by corb at 9:32 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

.
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 9:33 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

EmpressCallipygos, you meant George Wallace, and they totally did win, away back in 1877.
posted by allthinky at 9:33 PM on November 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

But what about when the patterns that victimized that individual are caused by larger societal crimes?

I mean, when are "larger societal crimes" ever held accountable, if not in trials of individuals?
posted by Miko at 9:34 PM on November 24, 2014 [13 favorites]

A letter from the forensic pathologist (who presented to the GJ) to the prosecution, noting that they haven't received a bunch of standard forensic information.
posted by Lemurrhea at 9:34 PM on November 24, 2014 [18 favorites]

Most prosecutors also don't allow the bloody defence to testify to the grand jury, FFS.

McCulloch punted this, hard, and used the GJ's verdict as cover.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:34 PM on November 24, 2014 [26 favorites]

But we need to stop making the trials of individuals a stand in for larger societal crimes. That kind of thing is exactly what keeps this cycle continuing.

Well, the problem could also be the law as it stands.
posted by ageispolis at 9:35 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

BREAKING: Thousands storm the streets of #Chicago in collective rage. pic.twitter.com/uCsEFTSWLu— Bipartisan Report (@Bipartisanism) November 25, 2014

posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:35 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Waiting until nightfall, opening the press conference with a condemnation of social media and every witness, bringing in police from all over the state... This was designed to provoke a riot. Mission accomplished!

Also, Obama talking about how one needs to accept the decision and just move along with a split screen of the police launching tear gas for no reason, it reminded me of the Iraqi information minister. "Everything's fine! Move along! Nothing to see here!"
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 9:35 PM on November 24, 2014 [37 favorites]

And once again, all over social media it is time for white people to explain how poorly people who live a reality they can't possibly conceive of deal with living in that reality.
posted by Senor Cardgage at 9:36 PM on November 24, 2014 [8 favorites]

We're in front of LAPD's Southwest Division where demonstrators have gathered. #FergusonVerdict #LosAngeles https://t.co/a25FYpNkXT— Ruben Vives (@LATvives) November 25, 2014

posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:36 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Every cop in America should be wearing a body cam full time, but let's not delude ourselves. Wilson wouldn't have been indicted even with that.
Well, sure, I mean those darn cameras are always cutting out at the strangest times...
posted by xedrik at 9:36 PM on November 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

McCulloch punted this, hard, and used the GJ's verdict as cover.

I find it difficult to think of a higher-level instance of circling the wagons.
posted by rhizome at 9:36 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

I'm not remotely surprised by the decision but there was still that tiny part of me, deep down, that wanted to believe there was hope. Alas, no.
posted by skycrashesdown at 9:39 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

#OAKLAND NOW: Protesters Blocking Traffic on 580 Freeway. #ferguson @dennisaprice pic.twitter.com/znDN4ENPD3— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) November 25, 2014

Some American cites standing with #Ferguson and #MikeBrown... pic.twitter.com/YTNYoBMsP7— Abbas Sarsour (@iFalasteen) November 25, 2014

...you get my point, I'll stop. Across the USA people are chanting "Hands Up Don't Shoot."

Well, sure, I mean those darn cameras are always cutting out at the strangest times...

In my ideal universe bodycams for cops would be like black boxes on airplanes--essentially unbreakable and un-tamper-withable. And if yours can't account for your full shift (and on forensic investigation it's not a tech error), you lose your badge, your benefits, your pension, everything.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:41 PM on November 24, 2014 [44 favorites]

But we need to stop making the trials of individuals a stand in for larger societal crimes. That kind of thing is exactly what keeps this cycle continuing.

The racial bias that exists within the larger society is what led Darren Wilson to believe that an unarmed black man posed a threat that needed to be addressed with a dozen bullets. At that point, the "larger societal crime" became an individual crime against a citizen that officer Wilson swore to serve and protect.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:41 PM on November 24, 2014 [36 favorites]

the push to indict is a political one.

So is the push not to indict.
posted by escabeche at 9:43 PM on November 24, 2014 [58 favorites]

Amazing. Who could have predicted that the grand jury would fail to indict? I mean, there wasn't even probable cause to try the case in front of a judge and jury. We're talking about an indictment, not a conviction, but nope, nothing to see here...
posted by RedOrGreen at 9:44 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Twitter is breaking my heart. Here's a pertinent one, from a picture of a protest sign:

"The system worked. That's the problem."
posted by Miko at 9:48 PM on November 24, 2014 [42 favorites]

Who could have predicted that the grand jury would fail to indict?

I called it. I called it as soon as the media circus started to be about the convenience store video and the "rioters." I knew for sure when they declared a state of emergency ahead of the announcement.

Probable cause is one hell of a low bar, yes, but finding probable cause against Darren Wilson would have required nine people to agree that a cop shooting an unarmed teenager is suspicious, when it's pretty much business as usual these days.
posted by fifthrider at 9:50 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

From the Vox link:

All along, legal experts have said that it was unlikely that Wilson would be charged with first-degree murder. That would have required evidence that he maliciously set out to kill Brown.

It was first degree murder the second Brown put his hands up and Wilson pulled the trigger.
posted by Talez at 9:51 PM on November 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

Just heartbreaking. Honestly? I've never been as disappointed to be white as I am tonight.

My friends on Facebook has also responded surprisingly racist/dismissive. I guess it's time to re-elevate my friends.
posted by dubious_dude at 9:52 PM on November 24, 2014 [8 favorites]

On Twitter is the great John Lewis, who says "You can't become lost in a sea of despair. You have to keep pushing and pulling, you have to keep moving forward." He's one who would know.
posted by Miko at 9:53 PM on November 24, 2014 [24 favorites]

But I think the truly worst part of this is the powerlessness I feel. Utterly powerless. What happened to the great America I grew up in, the America I knew would protect me, my rights, and that in the end, justice would prevail?
posted by dubious_dude at 9:56 PM on November 24, 2014

This grand jury evidence is pretty interesting and I'm glad they released it - Wilson's testimony is that he saw Brown reach towards his waist and had tunnel vision about what was going on - prosecutor speculates he could have bent in pain. If Wilson actually had injuries - I haven't gotten to the neck/face hospital photos yet, on a table - it might explain the tunnel vision.
posted by corb at 9:57 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

There is a bunch of shittiness on twitter, including this self-described "advocate for the oppressed" reporter and this Comic-Con board member (I mean, that's what they claim to do; for all I know they just sit around and spew on the internet). And that's just stuff I ran across. I didn't go looking.
posted by wintersweet at 9:59 PM on November 24, 2014

I haven't gotten to the neck/face hospital photos yet, on a table - it might explain the tunnel vision.

http://www.businessinsider.com/darren-wilson-injuries-grand-jury-2014-11
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:00 PM on November 24, 2014 [10 favorites]

What happened to the great America I grew up in, the America I knew would protect me, my rights, and that in the end, justice would prevail?

What year was that, exactly?
posted by Dip Flash at 10:01 PM on November 24, 2014 [33 favorites]

But I think the truly worst part of this is the powerlessness I feel. Utterly powerless. What happened to the great America I grew up in, the America I knew would protect me, my rights, and that in the end, justice would prevail?

I just posted this on Facebook, and it's relevant here:

Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.

(America never was America to me.)

- Langston Hughes, Let America Be America Again

posted by Ragini at 10:02 PM on November 24, 2014 [30 favorites]

What happened to the great America I grew up in

For me, one of the hard lessons of studying American history is that this never existed. Every great moral movement, every step toward progress, was opposed and attacked. Anything we have gained, we gained in the face of hatred and recalcitrance. We have moved forward toward justice in the long game, but not without painful and significant punishments for that boldness all along the way. The "great America" has always been a seductive narrative, an ideal we want to believe in - but it never existed in reality. All we have of America is what we make of America, today, in the past, and in the future. It is what we are - what we are willing to be and do in our own lives.
posted by Miko at 10:02 PM on November 24, 2014 [153 favorites]

Looks like I picked the wrong week decade to quit drinking.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 10:03 PM on November 24, 2014 [23 favorites]

Wilson's uncorroborated testimony. Also testimony that doesn't line up with the audio recording of the actual shooting.

Also racist white cop shot black kid please remember that part.

ps, protesters have shut down the Triboro bridge (I don't know NYC geography so I don't know if that's significant) in NYC.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:04 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

The press conference made me furious, and sick to my stomach. It was so clear that the decision had been made before the grand jury even convened, and that the prosecutor was dismissing anything that didn't fit with the "the cop was right" story. And I wish I was surprised by the decision not to press charges, but I'm not. Heartsick, but not surprised.
posted by sarcasticah at 10:04 PM on November 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

Skimming through the grand jury testimony transcripts (>2,000 pages!), I see that personal information has been redacted, as it probably should be. However, this is not just a matter of search-and-replacing names of witnesses. Things like addresses and even the number of years someone has lived somewhere are redacted (e.g.: page 8 from volume 10). This doesn't seem like a quick thing to me. Is this something that's done as a matter of course? Since grand jury testimony doesn't come out so often (because they almost always return an indictment), it's hard for me to know if this is just standard practice or if this was special preparation for the document dump when the grand jury inevitably returned no indictment.
posted by mhum at 10:09 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Police turning violent in NYC protests now
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:09 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

If Wilson actually had injuries - I haven't gotten to the neck/face hospital photos yet, on a table - it might explain the tunnel vision.

The pictures have been available for hours, why did you post this before looking at them?
posted by Snarl Furillo at 10:09 PM on November 24, 2014 [27 favorites]

I know that I am shouting into the wind by saying this but there should be no such thing as a "high profile police shooting". All police shootings (hell, all crimes) should be treated the same. There should be no situation in our legal system that grants any accused individual more or less lenience/scrutibility based upon their occupation, race, wealth, or political ties.

I know, i am a fool.
posted by futz at 10:10 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

What happened to the great America I grew up in?

The same thing that happened to Santa Claus, or God. You've realized it's a fiction we tell our children to help them sleep at night. It never existed.
posted by karst at 10:16 PM on November 24, 2014 [69 favorites]

Just watched a CNN reporter get hit in the head with an object (rock?) tossed at her pretty hard. About five minutes before that, some men were telling her how fiiine she is. I don't envy her that job. Good grief.
posted by heyho at 10:17 PM on November 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

To answer what year, etc. to my question about what happened to the America I knew, in a literal sense, the 90s (born 1986, was a 90s kid). I could have been sheltered, part of it being Deaf and not exactly aware of what's going on around me in the world, part of it growing up in a small town, but I always felt safe and from what I saw, everything seemed fair, police officers were nice people, I was continually told in school that the law was designed to benefit those who followed it.

Nowadays? All I see is bullshit. My personal experiences, what I see, what I see others going through, what I see entities doing (Social Security/the IRS/private companies being examples, screwing people over even if they're honest and did nothing wrong), last year with Ty, and now this. Those are only a few examples. Also, people lying, betraying you, backstabbing, etc.

I think part of what makes this hard is I didn't grow up being exposed to this. I grew up reading the Babysitters Club, Sweet Valley, somewhat sheltered, so I didn't see cruelty in the world. I question if things has always been this bad, this cruel, because I don't remember it being that way in the 90s. Can anyone see this happening in the 90s? But, I didn't see the USA/world from lens that were unobstructed. So, was the world I supposedly saw an illusion?
posted by dubious_dude at 10:18 PM on November 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

it's a fiction we tell our children to help them sleep at night

Well, for me, it's something I tell myself and we tell each other so as to advance toward greater human rights and justice. It's more than a comforting story, to me, it's an ideal. Getting reality to get closer to that ideal is tough. But I don't think there was a time in the past that we were closer, as far as racial justice or police violence goes.

In my youth, I don't think shootings like this made national news. I don't think suspicious deaths at the hands of police were widely watched events. But I don't kid myself they didn't happen.
posted by Miko at 10:22 PM on November 24, 2014 [11 favorites]

dubious_dude ... you don't remember Rodney King?
posted by allthinky at 10:23 PM on November 24, 2014 [17 favorites]

I just don't get how someone can be shot and killed and there isn't a hearing of some kind into the circumstances of the death.
posted by awfurby at 10:23 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

Can anyone see this happening in the 90s? But, I didn't see the USA/world from lens that were unobstructed. So, was the world I supposedly saw an illusion?

You might find this essay interesting: What Black Parents Tell Their Sons About the Police.
posted by girlmightlive at 10:23 PM on November 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

I told my wife tonight to be careful tomorrow; she's black and she gets misgendered. I sent out emails to my mostly black classes asking folks to be careful over the break; I'm terrified that one of my students is going to be on the 6:00 news. I shouldn't be telling any these folks to be careful; it's not their damned job to be careful. But I'm fucking terrified for them.
posted by joycehealy at 10:23 PM on November 24, 2014 [30 favorites]

Police now using pepper spray and flashbangs on protesters in Seattle.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:26 PM on November 24, 2014

dubious_dude, you made me realize that probably, part of why people so often buy into the "decline narrative" is that their own lives usually feel like a decline, as we leave childhood and enter the adult world. People go from order to chaos, from safety to uncertainty, from kindness and nurturing to realms in which they encounter ugliness and antagonism, from shelteredness to exposure. No wonder it seems like we're going downhill. When we're really just going up and out into the world.

And being in the adult world, understanding the serious complexities and pain of it, having to actually be the ones to take care of it, is a great responsibility.
posted by Miko at 10:26 PM on November 24, 2014 [94 favorites]

...and protesters lighting things on fire in the streets of Oakland.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:26 PM on November 24, 2014

Watching a live stream and the police keep announcing "THIS IS AN UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY. PLEASE DISPERSE." Like, what, it's unlawful because the cops decided so just then? What happened to the right to peaceably assemble? The stream I 'm watching has been nothing but peaceful for the past hour, and the cops keep making threatening advancements and repeating the UNLAWFUL/DISPERSE line. And they don't even care that it's all on camera. Just now, the camera operator was asking a cop, "One policeman is saying to clear the street, another is saying to disperse completely, which is it?" And despite repeating the question, the cop he's addressing refuses to answer.

Serve and protect whom?
posted by xedrik at 10:27 PM on November 24, 2014 [16 favorites]

allthinky: dubious_dude ... you don't remember Rodney King?

Rodney King and the LA riots were kind of an isolated thing, though. Of course there were other instances of police violence throughout the last few decades, but I think with social media and the 24 hour news cycle, we're getting a much more comprehensive view of what's really going on. I think it's probably a combination of seeing what was always there and a genuine trend toward more racial anxiety and suspicion on the part of the cops.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:28 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

So much depends on... so much. Folks said that the only thing isolated about the Rodney King case was that the beating was caught on tape.

Police have always killed people of color. Always.
posted by allthinky at 10:30 PM on November 24, 2014 [19 favorites]

Rodney King wasn't so isolated that we weren't having protests 400 miles north.
posted by small_ruminant at 10:30 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Part of it is having been sheltered from the daily injustice that occured - which is part of the deliberate design of how this country and its racial caste system operate - and part of it is the drastically different lens we have now - the way news is disseminated on social media now, the ubiquity of cameras, the way we have new insight into places that the country previously had no access/exposure to. We are witness to the bad stuff in a way that was never possible. The whole world is watching the whole world.
posted by naju at 10:30 PM on November 24, 2014 [7 favorites]

Can anyone see this happening in the 90s? But, I didn't see the USA/world from lens that were unobstructed. So, was the world I supposedly saw an illusion?

Basically? Yes.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:31 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

I'm wondering if Holder stepped down because he was involved in this, saw where it was going/not going, and finally had enough.
posted by localhuman at 10:32 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

The tweet that really got to me tonight: "My 7 year old son just said: "Don't worry mom. If we want to live, we just have to stay home". I'm turning off my tv. My heart just broke" Link
posted by wuwei at 10:34 PM on November 24, 2014 [21 favorites]

A few calls on Twitter to respond by funding the 11 Ferguson classrooms on DonorsChoose, and the Ferguson Public Library, which will be open and offering kids'programs tomorrow since schools are closed.
posted by Miko at 10:36 PM on November 24, 2014 [30 favorites]

As Lemurrhea already pointed out upthread, most GJ's indict by a huge margin. If the statistics i have read are accurate, this is a major anomaly.
posted by futz at 10:37 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

I have been predicting for years that an oppressed population in the United States would eventually decide they no longer gave a fuck and would essentially declare war on the police state.

I hope it is not the case because of this lack of indictment (I'd understand, I just seriously hope it isn't.)

Because even with all the military toys the police have, there are several hundred million guns in this country and more than several dozen million who want to extract their pound of flesh for decades of systemic injustice. For every unwarranted stop and frisk to every time an officer walked after raiding the wrong house, or killing a minority under questionable circumstances, the local law enforcement of this country has set a smoldering fire and been kicking kindling in. It's only a matter of time before it lights.

Even if the armed forces got involved, they'd be hard pressed to subdue people who were actively staging a hot war against law enforcement. America could be the new Afghanistan in this regard.

I sincerely hope this isn't that spark, but if things like this keep happening, that spark will eventually light, and a lot of lives will be lost and a lot will burn.

That the people in power don't seem to think this is an issue is a testament to their willful blindness, because eventually an oppressed group, lacking any other option, will turn to violence.
posted by quin at 10:39 PM on November 24, 2014 [18 favorites]

As Lemurrhea already pointed out upthread, most GJ's indict by a huge margin. If the statistics i have read are accurate, this is a major anomaly.

Yes and no.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 10:45 PM on November 24, 2014

dubious_dude ... you don't remember Rodney King?

Of course I do. I'm aware of what happened. I learned about that when I was in high school, IIRC. The point I was trying to make was that the world just seemed much more peaceful back then.

Others has made good points, though - social media has really helped to fuel the fire, so to speak, and makes otherwise ordinary events noticeable. We're exposed to a 24/7, ADD, "let me just tweet this real quick!" world, which we didn't have in the 90s.

The cruel comments I see, however, just bother and perturb me to no end. Makes me wonder if people were this cruel in the 90s, in terms of putting people down like that. An example from my oh-so-bright "friend" on Facebook, who commented on my status:

----
Uh, okay, ignore all the facts. Officer Wilson shouldn't have defended himself? He should have died instead? I really don't get you people, if you're being assaulted by someone else, just lay there and accept the beating because...?

----

...yeah, no. I smell an unfriend coming real quick. Completely irrelevant. It may be part of that above-mentioned "decline narrative", but more and more people don't seem to hold much empathy these days.

I guess in a way, tonight, I grew up a bit. I've been long aware the world is a cruel place, etc. I guess at the root of it all, I really had a little hope, a little optimism in me, that this would prevail, that our elected officials/lawmakers would see the crime and wrongness in this, and fix it. Nail the man. But, no.

It's definitely a sad feeling, and (excuse my language) a mindfuck. Obama's speech didn't exactly inspire confidence, either.

Gosh, I hate getting older sometimes.
posted by dubious_dude at 10:45 PM on November 24, 2014 [5 favorites]

We as a country are more integrated and have made more progress than nights like tonight would have you think, I doubt a race war is imminent.

The problem is that were not as integrated and have made much less progress than we tell ourselves, as nights like tonight prove, and the levels of equality vary wildly between relative utopias like NYC or Miami and apartheid shitholes like rural Mississippi and St. Louis.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:46 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

small_ruminant, I meant isolated chronologically, not geographically. Of course the LA riots spawned protests elsewhere, but I do maintain that there wasn't as much widespread knowledge of the scale of police brutality at that time, and the last couple of years really feels like an escalation.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:48 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

Bill Bratton, the head of the NYPD, was spattered with fake blood in Times Square.

Out here in Brooklyn, I can hear police helicopters passing overhead.

And here I am, at home, in an otherwise quiet neighborhood, wondering why I feel exhausted instead of enraged. Maybe it's because I didn't expect any better, either from the grand jury verdict, or from Obama's speech, or from the police on the streets tonight. Maybe it's because it's been less than a week since the last time my city's police gunned down an unarmed black man.

Relative utopia it ain't.

I wish I felt like there was something I could do, or like anything will change. I am so fucking tired.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 10:51 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Some of the breathtaking bigotry on Twitter today, curated by @YesYoureRacist
posted by anemone of the state at 10:54 PM on November 24, 2014 [11 favorites]

I yearn for the simpler times of the 1970's (when I was a child) and I shudder to think how cruel and inhumane the apartheid shitholes (excellent descriptor) had become by the 1990's (when I was in my 20's). My father yearned for the 1950's, the world had become so cruel by the 70's. My grandfather ...well he had a good time all along.

Our chidhood perceptions aren't a great measure of social progress. It's headed in the right direction, overall. Meaning, the world is getting less cruel, not more. It's just that it is still very, very cruel.
posted by The Noble Goofy Elk at 10:57 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

Wow, anemone of the state, I never ever want to see that again.

shudder
posted by ChrisR at 10:59 PM on November 24, 2014 [9 favorites]

I doubt a race war is imminent.

Me too. I don't think a race war has been realistic for the past twenty years. But a fight between people being systemically oppressed and the specific and visible hand of their oppressors? That's a fight I can see starting.
posted by quin at 11:00 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

the levels of equality vary wildly between relative utopias like NYC or Miami and apartheid shitholes like rural Mississippi and St. Louis

St. Louis is far more integrated than either New York or Miami. I think "integrated" is not quite the word you're looking for.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 11:00 PM on November 24, 2014 [11 favorites]

Some of the breathtaking bigotry on Twitter today, curated by @YesYoureRacist

These are just amazing. Several of the accounts called out are now either set to private or tweeting things like "Keep your heart on Jesus."
posted by mochapickle at 11:02 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Metafilter: the one and only real lawyers' hangout.
posted by bokononito at 11:04 PM on November 24, 2014

there wasn't as much widespread knowledge of the scale of police brutality at that time

You might be right, but I grew up very very aware of it. (And I'm white, but we were counter-culture, and "dirty hippies" got harassed/beat up/framed/etc all the time.)
posted by small_ruminant at 11:04 PM on November 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

Protests in front of SCOTUS.

Also it appears as though there's a burning car at a gas station (dangerous, eek) and several cars on fire at a car dealership, both in Ferguson.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:06 PM on November 24, 2014

Governor Nixon has ordered more National Guard units to Ferguson; tear gas used again, at a coffee shop described as a 'safe house' by @WesleyLowery.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:11 PM on November 24, 2014 [1 favorite]

(video of people affected by tear gas in the cafe)
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:13 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

For all his strengths and for all his weaknesses, Obama's--and by extension, his administration's-- reaction to the original incident and the resulting, ongoing illegal war against the United States citizens who live in Ferguson are, by far, the most disappointing incident of his tenure. I no longer believe the man is anything but an automaton.

Sigh. I still wouldn't want a Typical Republican Fuckwit as President (or a Blue Dog Democrat Fuckwit like the Governor of Missouri), but Obama's lack of action on this, his mealy-mouthed indifference, have told police throughout the country what they already knew: they are above the law, and there is fuck-all anyone can do about it.

Our society is fundamentally sexist, fundamentally racist, authoritarian, theocratic, unfair and corrupt. I don't even know how you begin to fix it.
posted by maxwelton at 11:17 PM on November 24, 2014 [16 favorites]

(the hashtag on twitter for the 'safe house' cafe that was tear-gassed is #Shaw)
posted by joseph conrad is fully awesome at 11:17 PM on November 24, 2014

dubious_dude ... you don't remember Rodney King?

Of course I do. I'm aware of what happened. I learned about that when I was in high school, IIRC. The point I was trying to make was that the world just seemed much more peaceful back then.

d_d, I lived in LA when that happened. I was in high school then, and I'm a high school history teacher (among other things) now. That perception of the world being more peaceful back then was largely fueled by a much more selective and controlled media. The 1950s were not the peaceful utopia many in this country would have you believe them to be, either.

The Rodney King beating was 23 years ago, and yet it wasn't that long ago at all.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 11:23 PM on November 24, 2014 [24 favorites]

I don't think a race war has been realistic for the past twenty years.

Are we really going to talk about the concept of "race war" as if it's a real thing that happens on the planet earth?

"Race war" is a made-up term used by the likes of Alex Jones and Charles Manson. There's a reason that you can't rattle off a list of The Great Race Wars of History: it is a fake idea peddled by paranoiacs, usually in the service of terrifying and recruiting white people for terrible causes.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 11:24 PM on November 24, 2014 [96 favorites]

Copied from a comment on Salon:

This is the one situation where right-wingers will celebrate a government employee escaping punishment for on-the-job misconduct because he belongs to a powerful public sector union.

Because the government employee shot a black person. Basically.
posted by PenDevil at 11:26 PM on November 24, 2014 [50 favorites]

Darren Wilson: Mike Brown "looked like a demon".

No, he said 'it looks like a demon'.

Wilson literally describes Michael Brown as some kind of Negro Sebastian Shaw, who gets stronger with every bullet.
posted by homunculus at 11:27 PM on November 24, 2014 [28 favorites]

The testimony is straight out of the "black brute" caricature playbook. As insane as the kind of shit that passed muster a century ago.
posted by naju at 11:36 PM on November 24, 2014 [17 favorites]

Ferguson Legal Defense Fund cofounded by Talib Kweli

Self-link: Dystopia USA: Ferguson
posted by divabat at 11:38 PM on November 24, 2014 [4 favorites]

Can we drop "race war" memes, please?

All the grand jury needed to do was indict and then the trial could drag on for years.
posted by bad grammar at 11:38 PM on November 24, 2014 [2 favorites]

Last week a couple of guys I know got married. This was not really feasible ten years ago. If that change can be made, couldn't the police also be reined in?

Because this is not the way a civil society should work.
posted by From Bklyn at 11:39 PM on November 24, 2014 [13 favorites]

To be fair (and uuurrrrgh I hate giving Wilson any benefit of the doubt), in context of the words spoken 'it' seems to refer to Brown's face: "...he looked up at me and had the most intense aggressive face. The only way I can describe it, it looks like a demon, that's how angry he looked." (p224-225, here)

(pls note I am not excusing anything here, and certainly not excusing the Big Scary Black Guy thing when Wilson is a not-exactly-Lilliputian 6'4")

Cops on the rampage in Ferguson.. people were trying to leave the cafe and the cops teargassed the back alley.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:39 PM on November 24, 2014 [15 favorites]

Some guy on Twitter responded to me sharing links to donate to the schools/library with "why should we donate? They have insurance, right?" GAAAAHHHHHHH WHITE PEOPLE HONESTLY
posted by divabat at 11:44 PM on November 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

My Twitter feed is filling up with photos of people from Seattle, LA... all sitting or kneeling in the streets with their hands up.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:47 PM on November 24, 2014

Last week a couple of guys I know got married. This was not really feasible ten years ago. If that change can be made, couldn't the police also be reined in?

The difference is that the police and justice system actively generate revenue with their treatment of African-Americans. Their profiling generates a huge percentage of the municipal budget in some towns. It's like the War on Terror, if soldiers were bringing loot home as well.

With so many dollars on the line, that's going to be a hard one.
posted by anemone of the state at 11:47 PM on November 24, 2014 [8 favorites]

Right now I'm thinking the Thanksgiving dinner conversations actually might be really necessary and important this time. Let's have it all out. Let's do the fights and meltdowns. It'll be ugly, but I can't help but feel like this timing has to be used for really getting this stuff out. Your racist family members will be there; it will be on the table for discussion, whether you like it or not. So prepare. White people: talk to your white people.
posted by naju at 11:48 PM on November 24, 2014 [73 favorites]

Ever since it became clear that Obama would not be the Great Progressive Hope for America, I've mostly tuned out all the Really Bad Events. Everything is so depressing. I figured I'd just wait it out and move to Denmark someday (or at least Canada or Australia).

I don't really know why, but this Really Bad Event feels different. I'm glued to twitter and feel like I can't just ignore it, watch the new episode of Bob's Burgers, and drift off to sleep.

This enormous, beautiful, wealthy, diverse nation of ours is rotting from within. It has yet to properly deal with problems that are centuries old. Other parts of the world are leaving us behind, and we remain fundamentally broken.

The most distressing part is that 50% of the country (maybe more than that) don't even see a problem.
posted by R.F.Simpson at 11:52 PM on November 24, 2014 [16 favorites]

The difference is that the police and justice system actively generate revenue with their treatment of African-Americans.

Call me ill-informed, but how?
posted by dubious_dude at 11:54 PM on November 24, 2014

The prison system is privatized in a lot of places, and they're basically paid by how many inmates there are. So that's one profit motive.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:55 PM on November 24, 2014 [6 favorites]

Ferguson and the Modern Debtor's Prison
posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:03 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

Attn: STLPD

You are gassing fucking Amnesty Int'l observers. How stupid are you?

And National Guard now arriving.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:03 AM on November 25, 2014

dubious_dude, Here's one part of your answer.

Fallout from the shooting of Mike Brown and the protests that followed have forced Ferguson to scale back this practice, but consider the implications of that: it took a high-profile police shooting and weeks of protests for such practices to get serious attention in the media, and only then has the practice been scaled back.

Sort of.

From the NYT article: Residents and experts said that while the actions were significant, the problems many drivers face across St. Louis County, where a patchwork of municipal courts enforce an array of ordinances, were so widespread that Ferguson alone could not fix them. Many African-Americans, who are pulled over at higher rates than whites, face traffic fines that, if not paid, can land them in jail.

This sort of thing is what I find really chilling. I've been through a small amount of police training. I tend to sympathize with the dangers of the job. From what I've read (no expert), I do not believe that Brown's death was a justified shooting, but even on the pathetically slim argument that it was, there's still so much more to be angry over that it's hard to even know where to begin.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 12:05 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

dubious_dude look up "civil asset forfeiture" for another troubling issue.
posted by Wretch729 at 12:05 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

Call me ill-informed, but how?

Racial profiling followed by fines, for starters. One town in a VICE video had 10x more outstanding warrants than they have citizens. The police just park roadside and wait for black people to drive by.

Civil forfeiture is a big one, too: "drug seizure funds" often means "Some kids were smoking pot so we stole and sold their parents' car". Replace with house when necessary.
posted by anemone of the state at 12:09 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

You're a fucking disgrace, America.
posted by steganographia at 12:09 AM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

The difference is that the police and justice system actively generate revenue with their treatment of African-Americans

In addition to the fines and forfeiture, there's also the matter of equipment. The Department of Defense's 1033 program, through which local police agencies can request all that free military equipment that's been showing up on city streets, requires police agencies to use said equipment within one year of receiving it. Otherwise they have to return it.

When that equipment is dragged out, it's often used in SWAT raids. And strangely enough, those dangerous raids tend to take place in minority neighbohoods.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 12:13 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

one would think that in a country founded on slavery and genocide there would be nowhere to go but up

you'd be wrong
posted by poffin boffin at 12:13 AM on November 25, 2014 [66 favorites]

Let's assume for a moment that his testimony was coached and scripted out the wazoo. I think that's a reasonable assumption to make. Given that, I kind of think that there are specific choices in there made for a reason--'demon' being one of them.

Unless I'm mistaken--please correct me if I'm wrong--church attendance is generally higher in the South, and is going to skew more under the evangelical/fundamentalist umbrella, where 'demon' is an extremely potent word. He says demon, and it's not unreasonable to think that for a percentage of the grand jury anyway, that's going to set up "He was just fighting Satan!" as a more or maybe less conscious thought. I think.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

> Prosecutor: "Er, you, I mean, his hands were up, like a fist, right? A FIST?"

Wait, what in the ever loving fuck?

Am I reading this right, the prosecutor, who is supposed to be *prosecuting* the case — that is, making a case *against* Wilson — is basically coaching Wilson to make an exculpatory statement?

And Wilson is like, "Whatever, fuck it, I am never going to trial."

Welp.
posted by Deathalicious at 12:23 AM on November 25, 2014 [63 favorites]

Yeah that was kind of totally transparent.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:24 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Apparently Arabs are tweeting under the hashtag "America is revolting" - #امريكا_تنتفض.

Let's hope so?
posted by naju at 12:29 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

I don't think it's easy to convey the probably hysterical terror that Wilson had, if his story is true. His gun, the thing that would keep him safe, first twisted so that there was a muzzling problem on his leg, then misfired, and then bullets not following the cinematic "person shot immediately falls down" narrative. I don't think you need to look to racism for someone to find something unholy in the face of someone who, if shot, was probably running on pure adrenaline.

At the same time, Wilson's fear seems total. He does not feel at all comfortable in the neighborhood he polices. He feels it's an environment hostile to police - and honestly, it'd be understandable if it were. What reason do the people of Ferguson have to love police?
posted by corb at 12:29 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

We need to eliminate that fear and the reasons for the fear, on a macro level.
posted by corb at 12:30 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

If this was in a film, it would be derided as too on-the-nose.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 12:31 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

I don't think it's easy to convey the probably hysterical terror that Wilson had, if his story is true.

What about Mike Brown's hysterical terror?
posted by dialetheia at 12:34 AM on November 25, 2014 [41 favorites]

I don't think it's easy to convey the probably hysterical terror that Wilson had, if his story is true.

I don't see how I could possibly get past the "if his story is true" part. Even on charitable read. How'd you manage?
posted by naju at 12:37 AM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

The medical investigator did not take photographs at the scene of Brown's killing because the camera battery had died
posted by rhizome at 12:37 AM on November 25, 2014 [40 favorites]

CNN: 29 people have been arrested near Ferguson so far.
posted by mochapickle at 12:40 AM on November 25, 2014

I don't think it's easy to convey the probably hysterical terror that Wilson had, if his story is true.

That's a really big if.

His gun, the thing that would keep him safe

No. It is his brain that would keep him safe.

What reason do the people of Ferguson have to love police?

None. Because racist laws enable racist cops to not only throw them in jail for bullshit traffic tickets, but also to shoot and kill them with impunity.

Darren Wilson operated in an environment of unadulterated racism. It seems implausible in the extreme that he's the one shining beacon of race relations here. His own testimony indicates racist thoughts and behaviours--go read it yourself.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:41 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

This is why Andy hid Barneys' bullets.



ليس ثورة #
posted by clavdivs at 12:46 AM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

VIDEO: Police fire tear gas and rubber bullets at group with injured woman begging for help. #Ferguson http://t.co/KLYJuCGJmO— Tim Pool (@Timcast) November 25, 2014

posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:55 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

A relevant book that user naju recommended in another thread, possibly the original Ferguson one IIRC:

The New Jim Crow
posted by Shouraku at 12:57 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Also, comment from a defence attorney making it really clear that McCulloch wasn't actually after an indictment at all. It's on reddit, sorry.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:58 AM on November 25, 2014 [19 favorites]

"America is revolting"

Really, either sense of the word "revolting" works here.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 12:59 AM on November 25, 2014 [26 favorites]

That was a really good link, fffm, even if it was on Reddit. Thanks for that.
posted by Shouraku at 1:03 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

A relevant book that user naju recommended in another thread, possibly the original Ferguson one IIRC:

The New Jim Crow

Full PDF
posted by naju at 1:03 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

Goddamn. Killer Mike's pre-show Ferguson Grand Jury speech.
posted by naju at 1:15 AM on November 25, 2014 [28 favorites]

I don't think it's easy to convey the probably hysterical terror that Wilson had, if his story is true.

Yes, the poor 6'4" 210 pound, uniformed, trained, armed police officer in a squad car.

He must have been so scared, with just his gun and his baton and his ability to radio for armed backup at any point, against that unarmed teenager.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 1:16 AM on November 25, 2014 [130 favorites]

The point I was trying to make was that the world just seemed much more peaceful back then.

This is the lens of history as written by the victors/oppressors. It was, if anything, a much less peaceful time. There just weren't so many people walking around with miniature wireless computer-cameras in their pockets to document it from all angles and tweet about it 24/7.

During the era that culminated in the Rodney King beating, lack of verdict and indictment and resulting riots LA was in the grips of an epidemic of crack cocaine and ongoing gang turf war, which it turns out was directly or partially fueled by the Iran/Contra "scandal" and the direct or indirect role of the CIA providing cocaine for sale to buy arms to give to anti-communist forces in Central America.

Did you actually learn about Iran/Contra in high school? That the CIA helped move/sell cocaine right here in the US to fight commies? That unleashing an economic class war and drug addiction epidemic was considered to be the right, American answer to encroaching Communism in Central America?

(No, really. I wish that this statement was actually tinfoil hat paranoid conspiracy, but this is now (whitewashed) public record.)

People of all colors were getting harassed, beaten and raided by LAPD for, well, decades at that point in time, particularly badly throughout the 80s and early 90s, particularly people of color.

The now infamous Rampart Division scandal was taking root and forming, as well, basically overtly gang-like activity within the LAPD itself and full on graft, corruption and shit that defied the fiction of even bad cop movies.

My personal experience with this era of the LAPD involved the very early rave/house/techno scene, where getting busted for an illicit or illegal party of kids dancing in abandoned warehouses involved police responses of hundreds of officers in full riot gear cracking skulls with batons, firing less-than-lethal rounds out of real guns and deploying tear gas like confetti at a circus parade.

None of this ever made the news. Ever. Well, at least not for almost a full decade, until LAPD started trying the same tactics at legit venues involving permitted events apparently over aesthetic and lifestyle differences.

At one early 90s party it was unprovable but common knowledge that the LAPD (possibly Rampart Division) straight up executed someone with gunshots to the back of a small time promoter's head outside one of these (admittedly illicitly used) warehouses, presumably due to failing to pay graft/bribes or something.

This is just one facet of what LA was like, then. My small viewpoint of a much larger problem.

As others have commented - the singularly remarkable thing about Rodney King is not only did it get caught on tape, but it was so un-ignorably violent and over the top that it actually made it to mainstream media and got airplay.

What you don't see in the lens of history is how the Rodney King riots actually started. At the Parker Center, LAPD's headquarters.

Where people of all ages and colors from all over LA protesting in complete anguish and sorrow at the verdict. That there were mothers and grandmothers there. Of all colors and races, not just black, not that it should even validate it more or less if the protests were all black. There were Koreans, and white Europeans, Latino, and Hispanic, and... well, everyone. There were kids and the elderly and everyone in between.

But most tellingly, most were probably poor or of lower economic classes, tired of being unable to fight back in a legal system too expensive to engage, while upper economic classes got away with literal murder, or drug possession charges, and so on.

The LAPDs violent response to these protests, their stonewalling and protecting their own with their own legal system combined with the lack of a convicting were the flames that lit the fuse on a powderkeg that had been slowly been being filled one heaping teaspoon of criminal abuse of a people at a time.

The Rodney King riots weren't ever about Rodney King. It was always about an oppressed economic class that was being actively, systemically abused.

This is why people rioted and looted. Because they no longer had anything to lose. Sure, there's videos of people stealing athletic shoes, TVs, electronics. There were also people looting food, and baby diapers, and formula.

Because LA had been stripped economically dry through colluding forces so improbably twisted and violent that even when presented with the facts as they read, on the official record, that they seem like fiction, like a bad exploitation movie.
posted by loquacious at 1:17 AM on November 25, 2014 [162 favorites]

As usual, I deeply appreciate the thoughtful and informed commentary and links here on MetaFilter about difficult, breaking news events and this thread is yet another example.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 1:44 AM on November 25, 2014 [31 favorites]

.

How I wish this surprised me.

Is that it for Darren Wilson, legally? He's 100% off the hook?

Better than that he punched his wingnut welfare ticket for a lifetime of speaking engagements.

Don't cry for Darren Wilson, for he has a bright future ahead of him as a Fox News contributor. And McCulloch was definitely auditioning for a Fox legal analyst position during his press conference.
posted by SisterHavana at 1:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Vox: Why Obama won’t give the Ferguson speech his supporters want.
America, you have unrealistic expectations of your presidents; doubly so in the present circumstances thanks to the psychotically toxic game played by republicans over these last 6 years. Best not to potentially ignite a hot civil war on your watch by going all ranty-angry in a speech when half the country believes you are largely responsible for the majority of political, economic and cultural divisions across the land.
posted by peacay at 1:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

What I find remarkable about these cases, where an unarmed person has been shot, is even in the narrative where we believe the person doing the shooting, they come across as a person who, at the very least, should never have access to a firearm ever again. If you are the sort of person who can be panicked into shooting someone who has no weapons of any kind, then you should not be allowed to have a gun.
posted by Cannon Fodder at 2:06 AM on November 25, 2014 [57 favorites]

I heard about this on the news this morning, and the first thing I thought was how sad and angry but unsurprised the US MeFites must be. There is little coverage of this in the UK, nothing I've heard about the rioting for example, so this is the place I find out about what's going on on the ground. I'm so sorry for Mike Brown's family and friends today, who have been told that his life didn't matter and his killing wasn't a crime. But I'm also sad for you guys, and how powerless it must feel to have to watch this happen again and again and again.
posted by billiebee at 2:13 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Not indicting wasn't surprising. Annoucning that decision in the evening was. That's just incredibly stupid or incredibly hostile.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:20 AM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

Or both!
posted by Elementary Penguin at 2:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

Reading the testimony, I' m still honestly staggered that - even if you take the fairly garbled testimony as sacrosanct, that shooting is at all defensible.

The contrast between the testimony - where a man described as large as Hulk Hogan is repeatedly wailing on and hitting a man in the face - a man so strong this 200 pound 6, 4" officer felt like a child holding his arm - and the fucking photos of his non-swollen, non-bruised face from the hands of this enraged behemoth, with the magical disappearing and reappearing cigarillos that never fell in the car or on the officer or on the ground during this sustained pounding, is jaw dropping.

I also loved the fact that he couldn't use the mace - it wouldn't have made a difference on the demon - whilst in the very next sentence he says he was also worried that the tiniest amount of mace landing on him would take him completely out of action.

FFS.
posted by smoke at 2:37 AM on November 25, 2014 [32 favorites]

These fools seem to actively enjoy maximizing violence. If they don't then there's not a one of them at any level that isn't massively incompetent.
posted by Artw at 2:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Here's something that I read about after I first Obama's race speech in 2008.

"We Charge Genocide: The Crime of Government Against the Negro People" is a document accusing the United States government of genocide according to the UN Genocide Convention. This document was created by the Civil Rights Congress (CRC) and presented to the United Nations in December 1951.

The document pointed out that the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide defined genocide as any acts committed with "intent to destroy" a group, "in whole or in part."[1] To build its case for black genocide the document cited many instances of lynching in the United States, as well as legal discrimination, a series of incidents of police brutality dating to the present, and systematic inequalities in health and quality of life. The central argument: the US government is both complicit with and responsible for a genocidal situation based on the UN's own definition of genocide.

Emphasis mine.
posted by the cydonian at 2:42 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

What sane world do people sit around when presented with this bald fact:

Unarmed teenager shot umpty times by cop

And think:

Well, odds are he had it coming to him.

Let's be honest: If you say "we need all the facts," or "I need to hear both sides," or "do you know how scary it is to be a cop?" that's just window dressing on the above statement, given just that single fact. There is literally no scenario where the killing an unarmed teen by a cop is a justifiable outcome. None. There is no other additional fact or facts which could come to light which would make it OK.

(If your world view allows a scenario where shooting unarmed kids by the people we specifically empower to protect them, you're a piece of shit. There is no sugar-coating it.)

Making that kind of weak sauce weaker is another fact:

Cops kill black kids at alarming rates, with no consequences and no conscience

Even if Mike Brown was an isolated incident, it would be awful and unconscionable. But context matters, and the context of cops and black people in America is that one murders the other at an alarming rate. It isn't the black folk killing the police.
posted by maxwelton at 2:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [70 favorites]

Is that it for Darren Wilson, legally? He's 100% off the hook?

no, another grand jury, or another prosecutor can always indict, although i wouldn't hold my breath for that

and seeing as there's no statute of limitations for murder, a case could be brought for as long as darren wilson lives
posted by pyramid termite at 2:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Ugh, the grand jury documents are in a terrible format, hopefully people are converting them to html or epub dormat.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:02 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Here is what the BBC is reporting:

Michael Brown killing - Darren Wilson's testimony

Mr Wilson says he tried to block Mr Brown and his friend with his police vehicle in connection with a robbery.

When he tried to open the car door, Mr Wilson says Mr Brown slammed it back shut. The officer says he then pushed Mr Brown with the door but was hit in the face by Mr Brown

When he drew his gun, he says, Mr Brown grabbed it and insulted him

A shot went through the police car window and Mr Brown stepped back, he says, but looked at him with the "most intense, aggressive face"

He fired two more shots in the car before Mr Brown ran off, he says

Mr Brown stopped, the officer says, and was told to get on the ground. Instead he advanced on Mr Wilson, putting his right hand under his shirt in the waistband of his trousers

Mr Wilson opened fire on Mr Brown.

Is that really what he said? I've been trying to verify it using the grand jury documents but they're very poorly formatted.
posted by Shouraku at 3:09 AM on November 25, 2014

Is that really what he said?

Yeah, that's an accurate summary. Wilson's testimony starts on page 197 of this part of the evidence, if that helps. Dorian Johnson's account starts on page 16 here.

I haven't made it through much of the other witness testimony, but there is this eye-popping journal entry. I guess it supports Wilson's account of what happened but jesus, I'd like to hear the background on that witness because it's hard to believe it's for real.
posted by torticat at 3:50 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

I haven't made it through much of the other witness testimony, but there is this eye-popping journal entry. I guess it supports Wilson's account of what happened but jesus, I'd like to hear the background on that witness because it's hard to believe it's for real.

Hey can you clarify who's journal entry that is? It's not immediately obvious when I started reading it.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:55 AM on November 25, 2014

Last nigh, police shot and killed a man 150m from my door while I was out at dinner. Today I know his age, that he was recently released from prison and his name. I know that police in my state have killed 4 people this year. I don't know what colour those people were, but - Australia is different - if they were indigenous, they would have been less likely to have been perceived as presenting deadly force. For Australian black people, the risk of death with law enforcement increases phenomenally after they are incarcerated, and very often, there is no reasonable explanation.

I started with that because I found myself inclined to accuse the US of living within the pages of "to kill a mockingbird". I thought, initially, that I could say that I could trust our justice system to examine the circumstances of this death. But I can't.

I have watched the Internet conversations about street harassment of women, and Bill Cosby. I don't know if I am surprised anymore, but I am still shocked, by the people who refuse to listen to stories many of us know so intimately. I am surprised and shocked that the world (not only the US justice system) continues to pretend that racism got off the bus with Rosa Parks. But I am also surprised and shocked that world leaders (particular my country's prime minister) deny the effects of climate change.

Has it always be like this? Am I smug and pompous in my assumed understanding that minorities get a raw deal, that women are second class citizens, that we are destroying our planet when there are viable energy alternatives? I feel so stupid that some things seem so incredibly in your face and obvious and yet, they keep happening, and there is a lot of people dedicated to seeing this is the result. How is this even a thing? Are the power brokers so corrupt?

My post is not entirely on topic, I'm sorry, and I don't pretend that my experiences as a woman are anything like the tragedy and injustice that this man, his family and friends, his community, and anyone with a skin colour that is not white faces. I just don't - how can this be? Are we not civilised?
posted by b33j at 3:55 AM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

Plus, most people would be watching Dancing with the Stars instead of the news.
posted by desjardins at 11:45 PM on November 24 [2 favorites +] [!]

The most awful part of last night was that there was a solid 90% of twitter devoted to the outrage of the events surrounding Ferguson and then 10% of my time-line was filled with people talking about Doctor Who or Dancing with the Stars or whatever. It felt jarring to see such normalcy alongside of such injustice.
posted by Fizz at 4:11 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

I do not know, BB! Like I said I haven't made it through everything & I'm looking for some other reference to "witness 40" besides that exhibit, but haven't seen anything. It's totally nuts, though. Some person just randomly decides to drive to Florissant that day on a mission to become less of a racist shithead, happens to see the whole Michael Brown shooting firsthand, then writes an account down in all that detail?
posted by torticat at 4:15 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

USA Today Accidentally Ran Article Announcing ‘No Indictment’ Well Before Verdict Was Announced

We've a post on the Akai Gurley killing btw. Appears we're might not see so much outrage over the Tamir Rice killing in Cleveland, not sure yet about the Tanesha Anderson killing.

Also : Killings by Utah police outpacing gang, drug, child-abuse homicides

Relevant EFF link : Cell Phone Guide For US Protesters, Updated 2014 Edition
posted by jeffburdges at 4:18 AM on November 25, 2014 [17 favorites]

It sucks to be so flippant, but police getting away with killing people is normality - and I say that as a non-American. I dread to think what it must be like to live with American police - particularly having the wrong skin colour.

The thing about this incident that horrifies me (with all sympathy to the victim and his family), is the obviously pre-prepared military-style crackdown on any protest. I'm astonished that there haven't been more martyrs at this point.
posted by pompomtom at 4:22 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Plus, most people would be watching Dancing with the Stars instead of the news.

Also this happened.
posted by winna at 4:28 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Unbelievable. They have released pictures of Wilson's 'injuries' from the incident and I shit you not, this is one of the photos...
posted by colie at 4:30 AM on November 25, 2014 [35 favorites]

There are several hundred million guns in this country and more than several dozen million who want to extract their pound of flesh for decades of systemic injustice.

While I wont quibble with the numbers, I think it's important to understand that most of those guns are in the hands of people who probably applauded this decision, and the "systemic injustice" they would take-up arms against pretty much revolves around there being a black man in the White House, and liberalism in general.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:37 AM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

USA Today Accidentally Ran Article Announcing ‘No Indictment’ Well Before Verdict Was Announced

I'm sure that "accidentally" is used in the same way the AP "predicts" election results.
posted by mikelieman at 4:41 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Americans of conscience need to choose one major Missouri-based business and boycott it on a national basis until it fails. Then another. And keep going. No favoritism, pick consumer-driven businesses that are important to the state's tax base. And just pick them off.

No justice, no money. It's a language the fuckers understand well.
posted by spitbull at 4:51 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

I just read that the Justice Dept. is still investigating the case, so maybe there might be federal charges down the line. I don't think Wilson is celebrating just yet.
posted by Renoroc at 4:51 AM on November 25, 2014

jeffburdges:"Killings by Utah police outpacing gang, drug, child-abuse homicides"

"In the past five years, more Utahns have been killed by police than by gang members.
Or drug dealers. Or from child abuse.
And so far this year, deadly force by police has claimed more lives — 13, including a Saturday shooting in South Jordan — than has violence between spouses and dating partners."

Wow. Just... wow. To serve and protect, no doubt.
posted by RedOrGreen at 4:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Hit the streets tonight, y'all!
posted by oceanjesse at 4:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

No justice, no money. It's a language the fuckers understand well.

No offence, and this whole thing makes me feel utterly ill, but this scheme seems like another way to inflict collateral damage. (Lovely expression!)

I suppose it worked in South Africa. I'll shut up and mourn now.

.
posted by Wolof at 5:11 AM on November 25, 2014

God.... Those pictures. My ten year old, eleven pound poodle mix leaves more visible damage on me when she does her good morning love and wrestle on my head everyday. Wow. This whole thing is so unbelievable. Is the majority of the country really buying this shit? I just can't.
posted by pearlybob at 5:11 AM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

This is coming from a community that put up a "Pants up, don't loot" signs.
Yeah, take the last words of a dead kid and mock the clothing of the young people in the community, that's really fuckin wise.
posted by angrycat at 5:27 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Why it's Impossible to Indict a Cop (The Nation). Briefer overview from the Boston Globe: There Will Be More Fegusons.

Related commentary: Ferguson Feeds Off the Poor: Three Warrants a Year Per Household (Daily Beast), All Eyes on Ferguson (Bitch Magazine), Police in Ferguson Committed Human Rights Abuses: Amnesty Report (Reuters).

(A couple of those links are from August or September.)
posted by eviemath at 5:35 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

I just read that the Justice Dept. is still investigating the case, so maybe there might be federal charges down the line.

It is unlikely that Wilson will see any criminal charges as a result of the DOJ investigation.

What's more likely, I think, is that DOJ investigations of St. Louis County and Ferguson Police Departments will result in the DOJ releasing letters of finding that outline systemic problems, and the police departments will enter into a court-enforced settlement intended to address those issues.

You can get a general idea of what the process and results look like based on this transcript from a speech describing the settlement agreement between the DOJ and Albuquerque Police Department.

Just to be clear, I don't think that these settlements are perfect fixes, but I do think that they can be very important improvements. The DOJ findings letter from a recent investigation into the Miami PD describes an earlier investigation of the same department begun in May 2002. Between December 2002 and September 2004, MPD officers shot at zero human beings. Not only did they not kill anyone, they didn't even shoot at anyone.

I believe that the pressure brought by that investigation saved lives. But because of the perceived progress, the investigation was closed without formal agreement in 2006. Over an 8-month period in 2010 and 2011, MPD fatally shot seven black men. The DOJ then opened a new investigation that resulted in the 2013 findings letter linked above.

In a better world, we would see successful criminal prosecutions for civil rights violations. In a much better world, there would be no such crimes to prosecute. In the world we have, we need to push for increased use of the life-saving tools that are already available to us. It shouldn't take a victim like Mike Brown to focus scrutiny on these police departments.

If you believe that your local law enforcement agencies have engaged in civil rights violations, write to every elected official who represents you. Cite example cases. Tell them that you want to see a fair and transparent DOJ investigation that results in prosecutions, or failing that, concrete and court-enforced changes. Tell your friends to write.

These investigations and settlements are not a perfect tool, and their availability should not distract us from the promise of better solutions. But they are available.
posted by compartment at 5:41 AM on November 25, 2014 [28 favorites]

For those in the Twin Cities with the time today, the Coalition for Critical Change, Communities United Against Police Brutality and other groups who work on related issues have organized a protest at 4:30 at Lake and Minnehaha in S Minneapolis. If you are coming from downtown, you can take the light rail to Lake.

There is a student demonstration at 3pm at the UMN outside of Coffman.

https://www.facebook.com/events/399508266871199/?ref=22

I would say that even if you can't get there on the nose at 4:30, it is likely to be relatively large and thus slower getting off the ground, so don't be afraid to show up a bit later. If you are driving, probably the easiest way to park is to park several blocks south of Lake (since N. of Lake is basically commercial stuff) and walk. If you have never been to a demonstration and are uncertain of the protocol or are nervous about showing up alone and not knowing anyone, you can memail me - I will, I hope, be there, although probably a little late due to work. I may not have access to memail after about 3pm though.

If you have not been to a lot of demos - dress warmly, carry a lightweight bag if possible and bring a bottle of water.
posted by Frowner at 5:44 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

That pic of the "injury".... Is that a shaving cut? Or a rash? I've injured myself more visibly by playing with a friendly cat.

It looks to me like ol' boy was savagely attacked by a pimple or an ingrown hair. Those fiends! How dare they assault our brave men in blue who keep us safe by shooting children.
posted by winna at 5:48 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

It's the most amazing photo. The area of the image that is in focus actually contains fewer incidences of anything remotely reddened than the area out of focus, and all of it simply shows a baseline normal level of skin abrasion that might be caused by a shirt collar or perhaps washing detergent.
posted by colie at 5:56 AM on November 25, 2014

I was watching Sleepy Hollow last night, when Fox News broke in with the event (as an aside, I've noticed Fox News bleeding over onto regular Fox TV more and more lately) and I could have sworn Shepherd Smith, in setting up the story, said "a white officer shot an armed black man". Now...he may have said unarmed, but I sure didn't hear it like that. Maybe he said it like "anunarmed"? I any case, it really jumped out at me.
posted by Thorzdad at 5:56 AM on November 25, 2014

Statement from Unitarian Universalist Service Committee

We know that racism wears many faces in today’s society, some of them subtle and some of them blatant. We know that whatever happened in Ferguson is but symptomatic of larger stresses that face all of our communities. And we know that good people of any race who are prepared to recognize the fragility of all life; the common woe of all injustice; and the need to reach out loving hands to all who suffer that good people like that can eventually change the world. As we react to the decision of the grand jury not to indict officer Darren Wilson, may we remember these eternal truths and stand in solidarity with our sisters and brothers in Ferguson and across this country who seek to dissolve the boundaries that divide our hearts.

posted by audi alteram partem at 5:56 AM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

BBC article, which seems slightly biased (see the annotations on the map). Warning: Contains hospital pic of Darren Wilson, and Mike "demonic" Brown.
posted by marienbad at 5:56 AM on November 25, 2014

It may be part of that above-mentioned "decline narrative", but more and more people don't seem to hold much empathy these days.

On this, I agree with you. I think people are more brittle, nastier, than at any time in my entire life. I have also heard my mom, who witnessed the schisms over civil rights, Vietnam, etc., from pretty close up, say the same. I have theories about this, but I think the most basic factor is that everyone is quite afraid. We have been manipulated politically, very adeptly, to channel our reasonable fears over the dim forecast for our personal security, the stagnation of income levels, the shrinking of the job market (which will only continue with further automation), and the nearly wholesale signover of our welfare to the whims of the marketplace into a self-centered set of philosophies that denies any obligation to one another and even the need to participate together with each other in social decisions. Combine this with the perceived threat of loss of status for previously privileged groups, and you get an epidemic of assholishness of massive proportions. I've been noting it for a while - the smug, sneering, shrugging response that seems alien to empathy. It's pretty poisonous. 'Look out for number one and fuck the other guy': the defensibleness of this as a public positon has definitely risen in my lifetime.

He does not feel at all comfortable in the neighborhood he polices. He feels it's an environment hostile to police - and honestly, it'd be understandable if it were.

Whether or not it is subjectively "understandable," Wilson's lack of "comfort" does not serve as any kind of mitigrating factor or excuse. It is the responsibility of police departments to develop good relationships with the people they serve. He failed and his department failed. For that they should be held accountable.
posted by Miko at 6:03 AM on November 25, 2014 [84 favorites]

The CNN frontpage right now is disgusting. 100% riot-porn, a buried admission somewhere in paragraph 5 that the demonstrators are "mostly peaceful" (so let's show that burning police car!!!) and nowhere, fucking nowhere, any sort of thought or prayer or reflection for a young, dead, unarmed black man.

The media (and the public??) truly does not give a shit how many black people die as long as they can still say "look, maybe a black person set that police car on fire, THAT'S SO WRONG! SHOW SOME RESPECT!"
posted by nakedmolerats at 6:04 AM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

We have been manipulated politically, very adeptly, to channel our reasonable fears over the dim forecast for our personal security, the stagnation of income levels, the shrinking of the job market (which will only continue with further automation), and the nearly wholesale signover of our welfare to the whims of the marketplace into a self-centered set of philosophies that denies any obligation to one another and even the need to participate together with each other in social decisions.

So...Mission Accomplished?
posted by Thorzdad at 6:10 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Even NPR. I'm about tired of hearing every story open with the lead line "Riots erupt in Ferguson last night...." instead of talking about the content of the grand jury, context, next steps in the investigation of the police department, civil charges, or, you know, the larger issue. This isn't coverage that educates and enlightens, Details of thrown rocks and broken windows are not going to help us figure out where we need to go next. I wrote to tell them so.
posted by Miko at 6:10 AM on November 25, 2014 [47 favorites]

I don't think it's easy to convey the probably hysterical terror that Wilson had, if his story is true.

I don't think it's easy to convey the probably hysterical terror that Wilson Jonathan Harker had, if his story is true.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 6:17 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

nakedmolerats: "The media (and the public??) truly does not give a shit how many black people die as long as they can still say "look, maybe a black person set that police car on fire, THAT'S SO WRONG! SHOW SOME RESPECT!""

There are awful people shitting their pants over pictures of protestors burning flags, too. Apparently even non-violent acts of protest are beyond the pale.
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 6:20 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

That was my thought on my, blessedly short, commute this morning. The leads are all wrong. The public has been horribly underserved by the press in this event. Context matters. Not page views. And not tweets. Spend a few minutes getting things right, and helping some people make sense of the world. Build something that lives longer than a homepage refresh.
posted by DigDoug at 6:25 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

I though burning the flag was always like the biggest big deal in America?
posted by colie at 6:28 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

"But what is also true is that there are still problems — and communities of color aren't just making these problems up. Separating that from this particular decision, there are issues in which the law too often feels as if it is being applied in a discriminatory fashion." -Barack OBAMA

Way to stoke the flames. I know his intent, but these words are not helping.
posted by Gungho at 6:28 AM on November 25, 2014

Maybe I'm just feeling extra cynical, but it seems to me the police leadership and judicial apparatus behind this failure to indict can plausibly be accused of terrorism. Is it not obvious that this incident and the related trends of profiling, police militarization, asset forfeiture, covert operations, and regulatory impotence amount to a perfect incubator for ISIL or something like it in the US?

It is beyond dispute that the best antidote against terrorism is civility. The consistent failure to deliver justice to ISIL's prime recruiting demographic—not just blacks, but generally those on the lower rungs of a contracting economic system—sure looks like treason to me.

But violence is the only major growth industry we have left, and it looks like we're going to feed it so we don't have to face up to some uncomfortable facts about our society's future. Sure wish I could be prouder of my nation.
posted by maniabug at 6:29 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Twin Citians: In addition to the info Frowner posted above, I also heard on the news this morning that there will be a demonstration at the MN Capitol tonight at (I think) 7pm. Trying to find a link or event page now.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:32 AM on November 25, 2014

While the mainstream media perpetuate racism, social media have been dynamic sites for both the transmission of information & for counter-narratives that expose and oppose racism, McCulloch's blaming social media notwithstanding.
posted by audi alteram partem at 6:34 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

In addition to bodycams, put 360-degree always-on cameras (w/ mics) on police car light-bars, and a car interior cam/mic. Cars should be able to carry enough storage for a month's worth of recordings.
posted by fings at 6:34 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

I would like to take those people upset about burning the flag and shove some empathy into their heads. Do we have that technology yet?
posted by angrycat at 6:35 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

I just feel sad. Sad, sad, sad. I can't even muster up anger. I used to live in St. Louis and I drove through that part of town every day. Sadness times a thousand.
posted by something something at 6:36 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

My FB feed is already full of pearl-clutching about "how these people could destroy their own neighborhoods." This is coming barely two days after a white, anti-government wing-nut in the neighborhood right next to ours (and across the street from a close friend's house) set his house on fire, ambushed the first responders, and started shooting randomly at people in the neighborhood.
posted by saulgoodman at 6:40 AM on November 25, 2014 [17 favorites]

From twitter, link to Ferguson Public Library. A donation to the community's library to commemerate Brown seems like a fine thing to do.
posted by angrycat at 6:42 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Mod note: Comment deleted. Corb, please do not start with the "what-if" scenarios in which it's okay to shoot an unarmed teen/person.
posted by taz (staff) at 6:45 AM on November 25, 2014 [53 favorites]

There's a reason that you can't rattle off a list of The Great Race Wars of History: it is a fake idea peddled by paranoiacs

Can I move to your planet? Mine appears to be grossly defective.
posted by roystgnr at 6:49 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

While the mainstream media perpetuate racism, social media have been dynamic sites for both the transmission of information & for counter-narratives that expose and oppose racism, McCulloch's blaming social media notwithstanding.

I rarely tweet, but I often re-tweet. After following and re-tweeting some of the major Ferguson twitter people over the past few months, I've noticed that people who follow me are more engaged in person and online on Ferguson. Exposure to other perspectives DOES make a difference.
posted by sallybrown at 6:50 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

My niece and her friends were targeted by police a few weeks ago for no other reason than because they were Aboriginal and out at night in suburbia. Four people in a car, one of whom was visiting his kids briefly and all of a sudden 12! police were there, questioning what they were doing. One 'wrong' word and whilst they most likely would not have been shot, this being Australia (although, as b33j mentioned above, such a thing is not completely off the cards) things could have escalated dreadfully. And for no other reason than because their ethnicity put them on the cards as suspicious. It's disgusting and it's happening everywhere. And everywhere you'll hear the same fuckwits blaming those in the firing line and not those doing the firing. Shame on bad cops everywhere.
posted by h00py at 6:51 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

I am stunned and angry and like so many other folks, I was hoping for an indictment despite it being unlikely. I won't say that I am disappointed in America because the America that is the land of the free and the home of the brave only ever existed for white people.

Just...fuck this racist bullshit and fuck cops who kill kids.
posted by Kitteh at 6:53 AM on November 25, 2014

Out of the countless unfolding tragedies of this, I think one of the saddest things was the expectation among the community that they were never going to receive justice through the legal system in the first place. A prosecutor who presents defense evidence and media that treats an indictment as if it were the trial itself is some Twilight Zone level madness that exists right before our very eyes.

If the "bikes and cars" metaphor doesn't work for you, the "sea of despair" extends well:
Many White people live in a land of despair, but when they grow weary, most of them can stop and rest. Black people live in a sea of despair. Even when they grow weary, they can't stop moving or they will surely drown. And they must accomplish miraculous feats to be noticed by those living on the land. And don't even get me started on the underwater breathing techniques Native Americans have to learn.
posted by Johann Georg Faust at 7:03 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

In addition to bodycams, put 360-degree always-on cameras (w/ mics) on police car light-bars, and a car interior cam/mic. Cars should be able to carry enough storage for a month's worth of recordings.

I'm sorry, but I can't even bring myself to believe that any of that will change things in any significant way.

The music will always be too loud, the candy and soda the ingredients for some super drug. They must have moved too quick and spooked the officer, otherwise they must not have moved fast enough. The drugs are always detectable by cops and vigilantes in ways that no actual human will ever be capable of. The cops will always be more "justifiably" terrified than the citizens. The victim will never show the proper amount of respect, of deference, of humility, of submission. They will always be too angry, too unreasonable, too wild, too uppity. They will be too big or dark or around too many people who look like them. There will always be something that looks like a weapon. They will always have the wrong kind of jacket, the wrong kind of shoes, and wear their pants the wrong way. They will always be resisting, no matter how restrained they may be. They will always be or about to be thugs, drug dealers, lowlifes. They will always be animals.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:08 AM on November 25, 2014 [55 favorites]

>Wilson admits that he shot at Brown from inside the police car, Brown ran away, and Wilson got out of the car and chased him.

Your use of the word "admits" implies that Wilson's actions above were unjustified or improper -- can you elaborate?
posted by BurntHombre at 7:08 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

It's revolting, but par for the course, that anyone would try to act as Darren Wilson's counsel in the court of public opinion after he was spared even the inconvenience of a trial in a court of law.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:10 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

Sarah Kenzior: Darren Wilson will never be on trial. Black St. Louis always was. "Letter from St. Louis" in politico.
posted by nangar at 7:10 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

I don't see how I could possibly get past the "if his story is true" part. Even on charitable read. How'd you manage?

I think of this situation as a tragedy of misunderstanding and fear. So the first thing to do is to try to look from each viewpoint and see: is it possible for both people involved to be acting from within their own worldview, understandably, but each tragically wrong about the other? If yes, then a charitable view requires us to at least briefly look at that world. I think in general, it's more likely that most people try to do what they think is right within their world view, rather than that they do what is wrong. From the beginning, the idea that Wilson just shot Brown "because he was black" was incomprehensible to me.

But the grand jury documents seem to show a world in which this is true. Where Brown, perhaps having experienced racism and prejudice in his life, perhaps having good reason to dislike the police in a neighborhood where it seems police have no reason to be loved, gives a smart ass profane answer to a cop - one that is common and normative in the society he sees. Wilson, living a quieter, more middle class white existence, is not culturally aware of normative dislike of the police. He thinks (and this is clear from the testimony) that people who are cursing at police or staring at them with hatred are abnormal, that there is something wrong, something criminal, about them. Wilson clearly believes that all law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear from the police - an ignorant belief, but not a malicious one.

From this point the tragic stage is set. Wilson thinks Brown is a criminal - if for nothing else, for assaulting a police officer - and those of us who protest know how thin that line needs to be. (If you even touch a police officer, much less touch his gun, as the GSR seems to suggest, you can be charged with assault). Brown likely thinks - as many here have thought - that Wilson is a racist and he just needs to get away to be safe. Wilson believes that only criminals run and he has been told about a "force triangle" where he is allowed to respond with one level of force above the force he is receiving. (That part is a real training thing, I have heard from cops elsewhere)

I think what's honestly needed is cultural competency classes, like soldiers have to do when they are deployed to a foreign country. What do these actions mean? What is normative in the territory you are assigned? What are actual signals of potential criminal activity, and what is just generic resentment being expressed?
posted by corb at 7:12 AM on November 25, 2014 [11 favorites]

What really pissed me off last night, watching the various live streams, is that the riot cops were laughing as they got back onto the buses. Like it was just one grand night out, where some of the lucky ones got to shoot rubber bullets and tear gas at a bunch of black people.
posted by xedrik at 7:13 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

Like, I think there are absolutely two or more Americas, and we don't do anyone any services by pretending they are the same, pretending that people from different communities all act as middle class white norms demand.
posted by corb at 7:15 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Even NPR. I'm about tired of hearing every story open with the lead line "Riots erupt in Ferguson last night...." instead of talking about the content of the grand jury, context, next steps in the investigation of the police department, civil charges, or, you know, the larger issue. This isn't coverage that educates and enlightens, Details of thrown rocks and broken windows are not going to help us figure out where we need to go next. I wrote to tell them so.

And this right here is exactly why they make the announcement in the dark at 8:30 last night. They knew what they were doing, and so did we. If you make that announcement in the morning there are 12 hours of peaceful protests throughout the city sparking nuanced discussion and criticism, with a chance for some violence and looting at night. If you make that announcement at night the rage bubbles over immediately and you get maybe 1 or 2 shots of pain and peaceful protest, but plenty of shots of fire to put on the papers the next day. And now that's the story.
posted by DynamiteToast at 7:15 AM on November 25, 2014 [34 favorites]

Corb, you're working surprisingly hard to create a relatable narrative for a racist murder by a racist murderer.
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 7:15 AM on November 25, 2014 [58 favorites]

Americans of conscience need to choose one major Missouri-based business and boycott it on a national basis until it fails. Then another. And keep going. No favoritism, pick consumer-driven businesses that are important to the state's tax base. And just pick them off.

May I propose McCormick Distilling Company as the first target? They're probably looking forward to a business bump from all the people planning holiday parties over the next couple weeks...
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:16 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Surprisingly?
posted by tonycpsu at 7:17 AM on November 25, 2014 [28 favorites]

Wilson, living a quieter, more middle class white existence, is not culturally aware of normative dislike of the police.

You'd only have to be a police officer for about an hour to pick up on this. You are reaching here, and it isn't working.
posted by Dip Flash at 7:17 AM on November 25, 2014 [40 favorites]

In most protests I've taken part in, people chant slogans that are in some way aspirational, hoping for something better. In that context, it's startlingly depressing to hear people chant: "Black lives matter." We live in a world where people still have to aspire to their lives having value.
posted by Kattullus at 7:17 AM on November 25, 2014 [44 favorites]

I really hate how the actions of a minority of fuckwits who turn to violence becomes the story that the media gloms on to, and the movement which is about bringing light to the fact that a young man was killed by a cop but because he was big and black his life meant nothing is diminished by that media spotlight which is only concerned with getting pictures of mayhem. It's not only bad cops, but bad journalists, who should be ashamed.
posted by h00py at 7:18 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

> Like, I think there are absolutely two or more Americas, and we don't do anyone any services by pretending they are the same, pretending that people from different communities all act as middle class white norms demand.

Despite the extended metaphor, there is only one America; the difference in communities being that only some of them are able or allowed to act as "middle class White norms" demand.

I was really saying that people on the land need to start pulling people out of the water.
posted by Johann Georg Faust at 7:19 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

You'd only have to be a police officer for about an hour to pick up on this.

To pick up on the dislike? Absolutely. To understand that the dislike itself is understandable and reasonable and rational? No, that's not normal at all and certainly does not occur your first hour on the force. It is really easy for us as humans to separate the world into enemies and non enemies. It has to be actively worked against. Understanding and empathizing with opposing viewpoints is sadly not something that comes naturally.
posted by corb at 7:20 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

This is what people are talking about when they deride the politics of respectability. Those in power can always move you from the respectable group to the other category, and nothing about you - not your age, not your background, not your personality, not your achievements, not the truth of what you did or how you behaved - will ever outweigh their thumb on the scale. You're respectable until you're shot, and once you're shot, they can explain how dangerous you were, how violent, how you frightened them. The illusory protections of being respectable vanish. "We won't kill you if you act right" is a lie, because it's those in power who determine the label you get. There is a lot of focus on whether or not Michael Brown was toeing the line of respectability or not - did he steal from a convenience store? Is he a pure enough victim? It's a red herring. There's always one more invisible line to cross or another unwritten rule to break that justifies the shooting. Now the protestors are not being respectable enough. It's every tone argument you've ever had. "We might take our boot off your neck if you ask nicely." You can never ask nicely enough.
posted by prefpara at 7:20 AM on November 25, 2014 [72 favorites]

Wilson, living a quieter, more middle class white existence, is not culturally aware of normative dislike of the police.

He's the son of a con artist. Are you kidding me?
posted by asockpuppet at 7:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

"Deadly force can be used against a suspect who is fleeing" is not an opposing viewpoint that can be justified with armchair psychoanalysis.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

Ferguson isn’t about black rage against cops. It’s white rage against progress. (washingtonpost.com)
posted by magstheaxe at 7:22 AM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

Mod note: Corb, if you cannot tell that this is not the time for you to be trying to drum up sympathy for Darren Wilson, and Taz's mod comment also didn't penetrate, I will use blunter terms: knock it off or it will be knocked for you. Thank you.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 7:24 AM on November 25, 2014 [68 favorites]

What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore—
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over—
like a syrupy sweet?

Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:26 AM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

re: "the facts" : the most basic facts about the crime scene, distances and locations of people and things, were lied about by the police to the media less than a day after the shooting. If the police are not collecting evidence, not interviewing witnesses, and propagandizing false evidence, then the official facts are worse than useless to 'wait for'to come out'.
posted by anthill at 7:26 AM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

I'm sorry, but I can't even bring myself to believe that any of that will change things in any significant way.

I don't know how bad the Rialto CA police were to start with. But they did a randomized controlled study there, sending some shifts out with body cameras and others without, and the ones with body cameras saw an 88% reduction in complaints from the public and a 60% reduction in use of force. Still a small study in a single area.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:28 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

I think what's honestly needed is cultural competency classes, like soldiers have to do when they are deployed to a foreign country.

Alternately, police forces across America are viciously racist, and view the type of cultural training you're talking about as a joke.

I'm not just hypothesizing here, though: Seattle (the city I know best) does something like the cultural training for police officers that you're talking about as part of the race and social justice initiative there, and the police show absolutely nothing but contempt for it, referring to it in their union newspaper (a journal with the complexly ironic name "The Guardian") as a socialist conspiracy / creeping communism.

It's not about exposing the police to education. They've been exposed. And they've decided they don't care.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 7:30 AM on November 25, 2014 [44 favorites]

> Why Obama won’t give the Ferguson speech his supporters want.

For a long time (but not forever!) there's always a Good Reason why the President cannot be effectual for the people, and there's always a Good Reason why the President "must" push his efforts toward the right.

But it's BS. Perhaps the President can't directly say, "This ruling was a miscarriage of justice." He certainly can say, "The people who waited to announce this until the evening, guaranteeing a riot, need to lose their jobs" - because that's true even if you agree with the ruling. He could announce a federal investigation; he could announce a Justice Department focus against the militarization of the police; he could say and do a ton of things that weren't vacuous.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 7:30 AM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

I actually do think police obviously need some kind of adrenaline inoculation. Like, they need to undergo repeated impact inoculation drills (a self-defense thing where a small group of people with boxing gloves on beat on you for a few minutes while you try to shield yourself but don't fight back) and have regular firefight drills with rubber bullets and minimal safety gear (face shields, maybe). It won't solve racism but it will make them less slaves to their glands and help remove the "but he was scared!" defense.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 7:31 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

Frustration at the grand jury decision is completely understandable. Looting the stores of innocent store owners is absolutely unacceptable.
posted by shivohum at 7:31 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

He thinks (and this is clear from the testimony) that people who are cursing at police or staring at them with hatred are abnormal, that there is something wrong, something criminal, about them.

It strains my credulity to imagine that an experienced police officer in that area would not understand that hatred of the cops is utterly common.

Wilson clearly believes that all law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear from the police - an ignorant belief, but not a malicious one.


This picture of Wilson as a babe in the woods does not seem to me to square with his grand jury testimony.

I can construct scenarios in which Wilson actually feared for his life, and should have been found not guilty (albeit unsuited to police work) at the trial he should have had. But such stunning naivete on his part isn't one of them.
posted by tyllwin at 7:32 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Corb's post was fine. Attempting to understand the psychology behind the shooting is not the same thing as trying to drum up sympathy. There are a lot of similarities with the Zimmerman case, outsized fear of young black men leading to panic. It wasn't cross burning racism, it's the subtle background racism that leads to a fist fight being seen as a life or death situation when it doesn't necessarily have to be.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:32 AM on November 25, 2014 [33 favorites]

OH BRAVE SOUL YOU STOOD UP TO THOSE LOOTERS!
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:33 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Looting the stores of innocent store owners is absolutely unacceptable.

The "tut tut" heard round the world.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 7:33 AM on November 25, 2014 [26 favorites]

Corb's post was fine.

Take it to the gray house down the street, droog.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:34 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

Here's a thought: if you think that looting is a more pressing concern than murdering unarmed black youths, then well fix your fucking priorities.

Also, if you denounce looting now but didn't every time a whole bunch of white people riot after a sports team wins/loses a game, then you are a racist.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:35 AM on November 25, 2014 [96 favorites]

I'm all for looking at the systemic problems in policing and the ways we need to force compliance with an attitude of protect & serve the public, but at this time Darren Wilson faces no significant consequences for his actions and Mike Brown continues to be dead. Vocalizing a narrative where two "sides" created this circumstance in equal measure is offensive, particularly considering that one of those sides has demonstrated reduced culpability and all the weapons and authority. You want to talk reality that's fine. Equal culpability here is not reality.
posted by phearlez at 7:37 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

Corb's post was fine. Attempting to understand the psychology behind the shooting is not the same thing as trying to drum up sympathy.

Her posts in these sorts of things are always way long on "things she thinks might be true" and way short on "evidence". Always couched in reasonable-sounding language, mind.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 7:37 AM on November 25, 2014 [34 favorites]

Langston Hughes is really good poetry to read right now. He was able to articulate rage in a way that was so simple and powerful.
posted by angrycat at 7:37 AM on November 25, 2014 [11 favorites]

I deplore violence, but social unrest like this and the police ambush in my backyard over the weekend are just going to get worse and become more and more frequent until our political leaders stop self-serving and start making serious progress on addressing the deeper social, political, and economic issues effecting people's daily lives in America today. It's horrible, but it isn't like people in the US don't "destroy their own neighborhoods" over dumber things. People rioted on behalf of Jerry Sandusky, FFS!

Frustration at the grand jury decision is completely understandable. Looting the stores of innocent store owners is absolutely unacceptable.

Unacceptable, sure, but also inevitable given human nature. All of this is unnecessary. All it would take to end it is for authorities to genuinely see the community they serve in Ferguson as people with a right to exercise some influence over how they are governed, as people with the ability to judge for themselves when they're being given a fair shake. It would be one thing if the Michael Brown incident were the first time we'd heard complaints of problems in the relationship between the Ferguson community and their police force. But this stuff goes back further than that.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:38 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Absolutely unacceptable.
posted by theodolite at 7:38 AM on November 25, 2014 [65 favorites]

Yes, let's talk about the looting. Looting looting looting. Looters! Looting looting! Looting! Thank god for the looting. What a relief. As long as those black people are doing something wrong, it's not clearly wrong to deny them their human and civil rights, to oppress them, to shoot them, to gas them, to insult them, to spit in their faces. Not clearly. We can just wait for the moment when they demonstrate perfect peace and submission and then we will definitely start helping right away and changing the system, definitely. Maybe the system still won't need to change, though? Because once those black people stop being so bad all the time, you know, then the violence and oppression will stop too? Because it's just happening in reaction to how badly black people are behaving. They're causing it. They're looting. Let's just wait for the looting to stop. Shh. I am watching the news, it's reporting that there is looting.
posted by prefpara at 7:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [171 favorites]

I think what's honestly needed is cultural competency classes, like soldiers have to do when they are deployed to a foreign country. What do these actions mean? What is normative in the territory you are assigned? What are actual signals of potential criminal activity, and what is just generic resentment being expressed?

I think at the point where we are training white police officers in black neighborhoods as if they were an occupying army in a conquered territory that we have bigger problems to solve than how to get them to stop murdering teenagers.
posted by empath at 7:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [52 favorites]

>...long on "things she thinks might be true" and way short on "evidence"

A good description of most of the passionate opinions I've heard on this topic, frankly.
posted by BurntHombre at 7:40 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

The idea that this was all just a cultural misunderstanding is especially bizarre given the history of brutality and investigations that Wilson, his fellow officers, and his superiors have faced in Ferguson and neighboring police forces. Wilson lost his first job when the force was disbanded due to racial discrimination.
posted by mbrubeck at 7:40 AM on November 25, 2014 [23 favorites]

>...long on "things she thinks might be true" and way short on "evidence"

A good description of most of the passionate opinions I've heard on this topic, frankly.

Yep. Corb is far from alone on that score.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:41 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Seems like what happened at the shooting, and what people think happened, are very different.
posted by stbalbach at 7:42 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Darren Wilson got almost half a million dollars in donations, got married while on paid leave, and was not indicted. Like Zimmerman, he's gotten the most definitive charitable reading of his actions possible, and I don't think he needs any benefit of the doubt from me (or anyone else).
posted by rtha at 7:44 AM on November 25, 2014 [83 favorites]

Here's a thought: if you think that looting is a more pressing concern than murdering unarmed black youths, then well fix your fucking priorities.

Is looting is going to prevent further killings of unarmed black youths? Or is widespread, nationally televised looting going to make them more likely?

A small set of opportunistic looters are taking advantage of the situation and obscuring and hurting the larger issue at stake.
posted by shivohum at 7:44 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

A small set of opportunistic looters are taking advantage of the situation and obscuring and hurting the larger issue at stake.

As is your focus on that small set of opportunistic looters.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:44 AM on November 25, 2014 [60 favorites]

An attorney friend of mine posted this on Facebook and I offer it here: The old saying in the law is that you can indict a ham sandwich. But apparently not if it's on white bread.
posted by Ber at 7:48 AM on November 25, 2014 [80 favorites]

A large set of opportunistic racists are taking advantage of the looting and obscuring and hurting the larger issue at stake.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 7:49 AM on November 25, 2014 [22 favorites]

help remove the "but he was scared!" defense.

Speaking of, why do we let so many cowards be part of our police force? Why can't we get rid of this cowardice?

(trick question, being scared of black people is actually called "racism" and we apparently have no interest in getting rid of that)
posted by MCMikeNamara at 7:51 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

Darren Wilson got almost half a million dollars in donations, got married while on paid leave, and was not indicted. Like Zimmerman, he's gotten the most definitive charitable reading of his actions possible, and I don't think he needs any benefit of the doubt from me (or anyone else).

Last night KSDK had this super weird segment afterward where a disguised member of his support group read a thank you letter from him and he's just totes chuffed about the support you guys.

Not a word of sympathy, apology, or any acknowledgement at all of the Brown family. Video is here. Looks like they aren't showing the supporter reading it though.
posted by asockpuppet at 7:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

They still can indict that ham sandwich, they just chose not to.

I'm not sure what part of this makes me most angry, but McCulloch's slimy indignation that he was forced to pretend to care about Michael Brown's life is very high on the list.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

Is looting is going to prevent further killings of unarmed black youths? Or is widespread, nationally televised looting going to make them more likely?

I am hard pressed to think of how they get more likely.

At this point I am perfectly comfortable with the culture thinking that shit is going to burn if cops shoot unarmed black kids. I'd rather they didn't shoot them because it's the right thing to do. But if "don't murder" isn't sufficient motivation and we have to get financial interests pushing government to keep law enforcement from shooting unarmed black kids because otherwise their shit is going to be burned down... I'll take that.

Killing citizens is an act against civil society. I completely understand why a group of people respond to being told "you don't get to benefit from a stable society" might decide that they shouldn't have to play by any rules either. "Hey, play by the rules, don't harm shit" is something you ask of your fellow citizens. The violence and the endless punitive fines have communicated very clearly to the people of Ferguson they're the property, not participants. What's the motivation to keep from harming the machine grinding them up?

All that said - there's a lot of good reason to believe a sizable portion of the bad actors out on the street aren't motivated locals but random opportunists who see a chance to raise hell. The person setting cop cars on fire was some white guy. But boo-hoo-property-crime is playing into the oppressive narrative and I, for one, am done with it.
posted by phearlez at 7:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [45 favorites]

A white man with a mask over his face sets fire to a car and no-one notices,* but all the news channels have pictures of the burning car five minutes later.

*except a lot of people on social media, but who cares about them?
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 7:57 AM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

I didn't find out about the verdict until this morning. I burst into tears, and then had to explain to my 11 year old why I was crying. He's been paying attention to the story too. His outrage was so much stronger than I thought it would be. He wanted to know if we could go to the protest. We're way too far away to travel to Ferguson to be there, but we are bundling up and going to our local protest. There may be one near you.

And speaking of cops who kill kids of color and get away with it: let's not forget 12 year old Tamir Rice, who was gunned down in a playground last week by a cop. A cop who hasn't even had to make a statement, much less worry about being prosecuted.
posted by dejah420 at 7:58 AM on November 25, 2014 [32 favorites]

Or, to put it more bluntly, rights aren't something you earn by being perfect. Michael Brown didn't lose his right to life when he (if he) said something rude to a cop. The citizens of Ferguson didn't lose their right to justice when members of a crowd engaged in looting. Those who want to talk about looting are contributing to a narrative where you make one wrong move and you are no longer entitled or protected. Only, it never seems to work that way when it comes to the rights that those in power claim for themselves. Do you lose your gun license by doing one thing wrong, for example? Not if you're white.

Stop talking about the wrong things black people have done. There is only one question. Are black Americans full citizens with all the same rights and liberties as white Americans? And the answer is, based on what I see in the world around me, no. So talk about that. Talk about whether the Constitution has moral authority, or the government legitimacy, as long as its paper promises are dust and ash in the mouths of our neighbors of color.
posted by prefpara at 7:59 AM on November 25, 2014 [146 favorites]

A large set of opportunistic racists are taking advantage of the looting and obscuring and hurting the larger issue at stake.

Yes, I'm hearing a lot of people complaining about "them burning down their city, then getting federal aid to rebuild it."
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:02 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

I think in general, it's more likely that most people try to do what they think is right within their world view, rather than that they do what is wrong.

A white police officer killing an unarmed black teenager in cold blood, describing him as "like a demon" in grand jury testimony, and getting off without a single criminal charge, and indeed becoming the heroic subject of triumphantly mocking billboards and posters and "I AM DARREN WILSON" T-shirts, followed by a press conference called at 8 at night by a smarmy, dismissive prosecutor whose condescension spills from his lips as he virtually indicts the victim in front of a nationwide audience, are not indicators of people, or a society, or a justice system, that has the remotest sight of the meaning of the difference between right and wrong anymore.
posted by blucevalo at 8:05 AM on November 25, 2014 [87 favorites]

I've been reading through the testimony of Dorian Johnson, the guy who was with Mike Brown through the whole day and was standing literally inches from the initial shot. As he is describing where everybody's hands are when the first shot goes off, one of the jurors steps in to say:

"I don't see that you can have as much vision as you say. I don't think that you are lying, I think that you don't have as much of a good vision as you say." (Page 110)

So as the key eyewitness is testifying, one the the jurors apparently felt the need to speak up and state for the record that what this person was saying could not possibly be true. I don't imagine a different decision ever had a chance of coming out of that courtroom.
posted by parallellines at 8:11 AM on November 25, 2014 [61 favorites]

The thing I'm finding most depressing this morning is Wilson's statement, through his lawyer, which basically just says "I did what I was supposed to do and everything turned out great for me." Can he not apologize to Michael Brown's parents for taking away their son's life, even if he genuinely believes he had no other choice than to do what he did? What kind of person doesn't feel remorse for killing an unarmed teenager? For killing someone's child?

I don't ever remember losing sleep over a news story like this. I lay in bed for a long time last night just feeling sad. There are a lot of things broken about the way America operates.
posted by something something at 8:12 AM on November 25, 2014 [22 favorites]

EmpressCallipygios: Can I ask why not Budweiser, instead, which is actually a St. Louis-based company (ok, well, technically Belgian now, but...), rather than McCormick, which is over here on the other end of the state, and (as far as I know) is not a terribly objectionable company, aside from the dubious quality of their alcohol?
posted by jferg at 8:12 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Can I ask why not Budweiser, instead, which is actually a St. Louis-based company (ok, well, technically Belgian now, but...), rather than McCormick, which is over here on the other end of the state, and (as far as I know) is not a terribly objectionable company, aside from the dubious quality of their alcohol?

I didn't know about Budweiser, and that is a much worthier candidate.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Maybe I misread Obama's speech as he was giving it because it was split-screen with the start of the violence (the cops shooting tear gas), but I thought his face and his tone belied his true feelings. He seemed so angry and disappointed, pissed-off, even. And he started strong, but it dragged on and then came the platitudes and it undercut that anger I thought I saw at the beginning of his address. Maybe he was pissed at what he was about to say and how much of a shortfall it was from what we all needed to hear.

Oh, and seconding the belief that McCulloch's speech was insidiously condescending. It's like he wrote it weeks ago, showed it to Gov. Nixon, and then Nixon was like oh shit we better get the troops mobilized.

We need a culture where black kids want to grow up to become cops, not be afraid of them from day one. I would love to see all the black protesters, young, old, whatever show up at the police station tomorrow and demand applications. That would truly scare the shit out of the police force.
posted by GrapeApiary at 8:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

parallellines: So as the key eyewitness is testifying, one the the jurors apparently felt the need to speak up and state for the record that what this person was saying could not possibly be true.

I don't have a problem in principle with people serving on grand juries asking questions that challenge each witness' version of events. The problem here is that the case was put to a grand jury in the first place where there was clearly probable cause, and that the prosecutor didn't instruct the jury to be equal opportunity interrogators.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Criminal defense lawyer Scott Greenfield has a good post, "The Ferguson Lie," up at the Simple Justice blog:

“All the evidence” is a phrase that applies to a trial. A trial is a procedure that happens in an open courtroom, where adversaries zealously present their case and challenge the other side’s case. It is transparent because we can watch it unfold, develop, happen before our eyes. We hear the questions and answers, the objections and rulings. We hear the request to admit evidence and the voir dire and challenge to its admission. We hear the opening arguments and summations.

McCulloch put on a play in Ferguson. His press conference announcing the foregone conclusion was remarkably in many ways, not the least of which was how he sold the argument for “no true bill” rather than the position he, as prosecutor, was duty-bound to champion. The man charged with prosecuting killers argued the case for not indicting Wilson.

McCulloch didn’t have to go to the grand jury at all. He could have prosecuted Wilson by fiat had he wanted to do so. He did not. He was not going to be the person who charged Wilson with any variation of homicide. But in deciding to take the case to the grand jury, the lie was born...

The grand jury transcript offers little comfort. Those who explain that it’s transparency are lying to you. It’s all part of the Ferguson Lie. While it tells us what was presented, it doesn’t tell us what was not. It’s unchallenged, unquestioned and unquestionable evidence. There is no adversary in the grand jury to roar against its one-sided presentation.

That it ended without the prosecutor asking the grand jury for an indictment is unheard of. By this omission, it ended with the prosecutor telling the grand jury that a close call goes to the defendant. It ended as it was meant to end, as the foregone conclusion demanded it end...l

Had the prosecution desired an indictment against Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson, the presentment would have taken an hour, maybe two, and there would have been a true bill by close of business the next day, well before Michael Brown had been laid to rest. The grand jury isn’t the venue to present “all the evidence.” That’s what trials are for. The grand jury serves a very limited function, to determine whether sufficient evidence exists so that there is probable cause to proceed to trial.

In Ferguson, the grand jury served a very different purpose. It was the mechanism by which the guardians of the status quo protect the American dream of an orderly society, where the appearance of challenge is preserved so that lazy and ignorant Americans can sleep well at night, secure in the belief that their officials and institutions are doing the job of protecting their comfort against the unsavory and the malcontents.
posted by mediareport at 8:15 AM on November 25, 2014 [129 favorites]

That would truly scare the shit out of the police force.

Why? A rubber stamp with "DENIED" isn't that expensive to produce and then replace.
posted by Talez at 8:15 AM on November 25, 2014

I wonder how this is going to inform the apparent ongoing power struggle between NYPD and the mayor's office.
posted by angrycat at 8:16 AM on November 25, 2014

There are awful people shitting their pants over pictures of protestors burning flags, too.

Oh, Lord, some Irish-American Center in Washington was tweeting "Never burn American flags, never on American soil" nonsense last night, and I wanted to tweet back HOW DARE YOU. The Irish have burned so many flags -- Union Jack, Tricolour -- that it might as well be the way they warm their houses in the winter. But no, some angry person of color in the US burns a flag in protest and suddenly NOTHING ELSE MATTERS.
posted by maxsparber at 8:16 AM on November 25, 2014 [27 favorites]

Yeah, those crazy Irish.
posted by clavdivs at 8:20 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

unlike black lives, they think a flag actually means something.
posted by poffin boffin at 8:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [23 favorites]

Speaking of, why do we let so many cowards be part of our police force? Why can't we get rid of this cowardice?

Or, to put it more bluntly, rights aren't something you earn by being perfect. Michael Brown didn't lose his right to life when he (if he) said something rude to a cop. The citizens of Ferguson didn't lose their right to justice when members of a crowd engaged in looting. Only, it never seems to work that way when it comes to the rights that those in power claim for themselves. Do you lose your gun license by doing one thing wrong, for example? Not if you're white.

This is a script that I absolutely agree should be COMPLETELY flipped. We are told ALL THE TIME about how deferential and cautious we should be around the police FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE POLICE. Like, when I was growing up, my parents taught me to cooperate ABSOLUTELY with the police, entirely. That if you get pulled over, you must do a b and c because traffic stops are unpredictable and frightening FOR COPS. And I'm white. I had no idea there was an entirely separate course for black people about deference to police (which doesn't work) that included what clothes you could wear and whether or not you could run in public (no, never).

Cops expect absolute deference and immediate compliance at all times and if they don't get it, they apparently shit themselves before killing people immediately. I had more stones as a waitress than cops apparently have. Why is this seen as totally normal and reasonable? Darren Wilson couldn't control a routine apprehension for misdemeanor shoplifting (charitably) for 90 seconds. I can hold my fucking breath for longer than that. Why is Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old boy, held to a higher standard of impulse control and civility than Darren Wilson, a paid peacekeeping professional? Why isn't the standard substantially higher for Wilson? Why is it acceptable for cops to have absolutely no distress tolerance in uncomfortable situations?
posted by Snarl Furillo at 8:23 AM on November 25, 2014 [151 favorites]

I didn't know about Budweiser, and that is a much worthier candidate.

Then again, I've technically been boycotting Budweiser for years, thanks to the easy and fairly cheap availability of higher-quality beer. So I don't know how I could possibly hurt them more than I already am. I suppose I could just double my Yuengling consumption, but my liver might start its own boycott of my digestive system.
posted by Strange Interlude at 8:25 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Ezra Klein: Officer Darren Wilson's story is unbelievable. Literally.

Why did Michael Brown, an 18-year-old kid headed to college, refuse to move from the middle of the street to the sidewalk? Why would he curse out a police officer? Why would he attack a police officer? Why would he dare a police officer to shoot him? Why would he charge a police officer holding a gun? Why would he put his hand in his waistband while charging, even though he was unarmed?

None of this fits with what we know of Michael Brown. Brown wasn't a hardened felon. He didn't have a death wish. And while he might have been stoned, this isn't how stoned people act. The toxicology report did not indicate he was on PCP or something that would've led to suicidal aggression.

Which doesn't mean Wilson is a liar. Unbelievable things happen every day. The fact that his story raises more questions than it answers doesn't mean it isn't true.

But the point of a trial would have been to try to answer these questions. We would have either found out if everything we thought we knew about Brown was wrong, or if Wilson's story was flawed in important ways. But now we're not going to get that chance. We're just left with Wilson's unbelievable story.

posted by zombieflanders at 8:25 AM on November 25, 2014 [44 favorites]

Yeah, those crazy Irish.

Aithníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile.
posted by maxsparber at 8:25 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

I guess the thing that depresses me the most about the whole Ferguson saga is that even if I were to take every word Officer Wilson has said as gospel, I would be unhappy with his actions and the outcome they led to. The values dissonance is that great for me.
So even if I ignored everything except a narrative that said a kid robbed a store, a cop responded, the kid started a fight, then ran, then turned and charged the officer, my assumption would be that the officer should have used the nonlethal measures available to him, backed off, and called for backup. Yes this would have made it much more likely that the "suspect" would have gotten away, but how is that a worse outcome than somebody being shot dead? That's the values dissonance that depresses me most. The racism and structural socioeconomic inequality is more abstract for me, but how do we bridge that fundamental gap where shooting a teenager is preferable to him potentially getting away with stealing some merchandise?
posted by Wretch729 at 8:26 AM on November 25, 2014 [37 favorites]

Because of the fast pace of muzzle velocity?
posted by clavdivs at 8:27 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Can he not apologize to Michael Brown's parents for taking away their son's life, even if he genuinely believes he had no other choice than to do what he did? What kind of person doesn't feel remorse for killing an unarmed teenager? For killing someone's child?

I bet it was Darren Wilson's lawyers who insisted that he not apologize publicly to the parents who have said they'll be filing a civil rights lawsuit against him. I agree he should have said *something* but I can see lawyers quickly vetoing that idea.
posted by mediareport at 8:27 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Why did Michael Brown, an 18-year-old kid headed to college, refuse to move from the middle of the street to the sidewalk? Why would he curse out a police officer? Why would he attack a police officer? Why would he dare a police officer to shoot him? Why would he charge a police officer holding a gun? Why would he put his hand in his waistband while charging, even though he was unarmed?

The "hand in the waistband" detail is the "fuck you" boilerplate icing on the rancid lie-cake. Every time a cop kills somebody, armed or unarmed, they were reaching for the waistband of their pants. Someday somebody's going to screw up and insert that into the account of his shooting of a woman wearing a dress, or a naked guy, and the courts still won't fucking care because cops are allowed to shoot people and lie about it.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:28 AM on November 25, 2014 [70 favorites]

yeah i was thinking about how unbelievable the account was too. this is not how stoners headed to college act, unless they've mistakenly smoked wets as opposed to regular weed. and the toxicology report says that he didn't, so -- not how a stoner would behave.
posted by angrycat at 8:29 AM on November 25, 2014

I bet it was Darren Wilson's lawyers who insisted that he not apologize publicly to the parents who have said they'll be filing a civil rights lawsuit against him.

Right, but at some point you need to show the strength of character to tell your lawyers to go shove it. Everything we know about Darren Wilson tells us that he has no such strength of character.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 8:29 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Someday somebody's going to screw up and insert that into the account of his shooting of a woman wearing a dress, or a naked guy, and the courts still won't fucking care because cops are allowed to shoot people and lie about it.

You don't even need to look for imagined scenarios to make it a ridiculous assertion, since plenty of openly, visibly, heavily armed white mass murderers are taken into police custody peacefully.
posted by poffin boffin at 8:30 AM on November 25, 2014 [49 favorites]

and I think only a white person would believe the account of Brown's behavior, a white person who, even if they've smoked weed, would not, statistically speaking, be likely to be busted for it.
posted by angrycat at 8:31 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

plenty of openly, visibly, heavily armed white mass murderers are taken into police custody peacefully.

But I bet they didn't look like "demons."
posted by tonycpsu at 8:32 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

The "hand in the waistband" detail is the "fuck you" boilerplate icing on the rancid lie-cake. Every time a cop kills somebody, armed or unarmed, they were reaching for the waistband of their pants.

“Man, that ain’t my fuckin’ knife,” the wounded man declared, then pointed to another switchblade a few feet away. “That’s my knife.”
posted by Snarl Furillo at 8:33 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

a thógáil sráidbhaile?
posted by clavdivs at 8:34 AM on November 25, 2014

"But at the same time, it is as necessary for me to be as vigorous in condemning the conditions which cause persons to feel that they must engage in riotous activities as it is for me to condemn riots. I think America must see that riots do not develop out of thin air. Certain conditions continue to exist in our society which must be condemned as vigorously as we condemn riots. But in the final analysis, a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it that America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the Negro poor has worsened over the last few years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice, equality, and humanity. And so in a real sense our nation's summers of riots are caused by our nation's winters of delay. And as long as America postpones justice, we stand in the position of having these recurrences of violence and riots over and over again. Social justice and progress are the absolute guarantors of riot prevention."

-Dr Martin Luther King, The Other America

Unfortunately, this seems as applicable as it was in 1967. Though I'm at risk of misrepresenting the speech in its entirety by pulling out that paragraph--the whole thing can be found here.
posted by geegollygosh at 8:35 AM on November 25, 2014 [23 favorites]

Yes this would have made it much more likely that the "suspect" would have gotten away, but how is that a worse outcome than somebody being shot dead?

Better that ten innocents are killed than one guilty man go free.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 8:35 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

But I bet they didn't look like "demons."

Yeah, not even the one who fucking dressed up as a comic book villain.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 8:36 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

mediareport: Why It's Impossible To Indict A Cop - from The Nation, a look at how the laws work to favor police.

Police shootings in America

First, the big picture. Last year, the FBI tallied 461 "justifiable homicides" committed by law enforcement—justifiable because the Bureau assumes so, and the nation's courts have not found otherwise. This is the highest number in two decades, even as the nation's overall homicide rate continues to drop. Homicides committed by on-duty law enforcement make up 3 percent of the 14,196 homicides committed in the United States in 2013. A USA Today analysis of the FBI database found an average of about ninety-six police homicides a year in which a white officer kills a black person.

audi alteram partem: Government officials can either start seriously dealing with our deep-seated institutional and cultural racism or they can continue to stand by while that racism destroys lives.

QFT. But it has to be more than The Government, because the feds come down on a local police force with a terrible track record of killing individuals, an excessive use of force (this is in New Mexico, FWIW - this issue is pretty wide-spread), but it's only window dressing if the police themselves don't internalize the fact that it's not an Us vs Them scenario every time.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:40 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Witness #40:

Well I’m gonna take my random drive to Florissant. Need to understand the Black race better so I stop calling Blacks Niggers and start calling them People. Like dad always said you cant fear or hate an entire race cause of what one man did 40 yrs ago.
...
The cop just stood there dang if that kid didnt start running right at the cop like a football player. Head down.

posted by tonycpsu at 8:40 AM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

The front page of reddit is basically stormfront today.
posted by empath at 8:41 AM on November 25, 2014 [32 favorites]

Invisible Green Time-Lapse Peloton: Just waiting for Wilson to team up with Zimmerman for a new Fox News panel show.

Except Zimmerman's celebrity status comes with some well-deserved paranoia, for him and his family.

Soon after George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin more than two years ago, George's loyal family learned that sharing his name meant sharing the blame. It also meant a surreal new life filled with constant paranoia, get- rich-quick schemes, and lots and lots of guns.

'Guns will get you into more trouble than they will ever get you out of' (previously on MetaFilter).
posted by filthy light thief at 8:42 AM on November 25, 2014

Steely-eyed Missile Man: Better that ten innocents are killed than one guilty man go free.

Yeah that sarcastic reversal is just making me more depressed, since Blackstone's formulation dates from the 1760s. It's been 250 years and we still can't seem to get it through our heads.
posted by Wretch729 at 8:43 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

"Nobody ever gave me nothin except for good schools, a stable home life, a safe neighborhood, and an environment perfectly calibrated to allow myself to imagine the world as a strict meritocracy.
And since I can't imagine a place that isn't like the one I grew up in and inhabit, everyone else must have been on the same playing field as I am and if I could do it why can't they?"
— A quote I just made up that I learned last night can be attributed to so. many. people.
Like
posted by Senor Cardgage at 8:43 AM on November 25, 2014 [30 favorites]

Greg Nog: I agree fully. Boycotts of corporations are an ineffective method of making a case for something like this. I suppose I should have been looking at the forest instead of the trees when I responded to EC. :-)
posted by jferg at 8:44 AM on November 25, 2014

So I'm reading the testimony Dorian Johnson gave to the grand jury. Johnson was the guy who was with MIke Brown when Officer Wilson stopped his car by them. This shit is fucking crazy. Why, you ask?

Johnson is describing how he and Mike was walking in the street when there was not traffic around and the Officer Wilson drives by and tells them to "get the fuck on the sidewalk". Johnson says, paraphrasing "ok ok, we're almost home, no biggie" and they keep walking. Jurors still questioning Johnson about why they didn't do as the Officer said. If that's their biggest problem with this exchange, then yeah, Wilson was never going to be indicted.

Seriously, there's repeated questions from the jurors about why weren't on the sidewalk in the first place and why they didn't just immediately follow the cop's orders. This jurors had their head so far up their ass, it's unfucking real.

Here's a link to Johnson's testimony, the exchange's I'm describing start on page 66
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:44 AM on November 25, 2014 [31 favorites]

Yes this would have made it much more likely that the "suspect" would have gotten away, but how is that a worse outcome than somebody being shot dead? That's the values dissonance that depresses me most.

Our society's movement towards excusing everyone - not just cops, but citizens WRT "stand your ground" - from needing to make an effort to de-escalate a situation is probably what I would consider the number one thing keeping us from reducing violence. Not that cop culture doesn't have a million other problems, but this attitude that they never have to back off and let a situation end isn't unique to them. It was taught to me a decade ago as "duty to retreat," and I don't know how we come back from this ego-driven attitude that it's better someone get dead than someone have to back away from a possible confrontation.

Continuing the discussion - it's yet another gross respectability politics item. "Hey young black men, don't get into a confrontation because someone scuffed your Pumas" was the comedy routine. But when someone driven by their racist perceptions comes after you and your skittles they have every right to keep escalating till you're dead.
posted by phearlez at 8:45 AM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

Obama could not have said more than he said without seriously jeopardizing a potential Federal civil rights prosecution. A federal indictment will need to withstand a motion to dismiss -- and federal judges are rightly skeptical of "re-prosecutions" of charges dismissed at the state level -- and the jury pool for a federal trial is going to be heavily exurban / rural and not very racially diverse. The perception that a civil rights indictment was the result of political pressure from the White House, not the professional judgment of the FBI agents and Assistant US Attorneys in St. Louis, would be a death blow to actually obtaining a conviction.

I think that the odds of a Federal indictment are reasonably high. In the case of police officer intentionally shooting a person he did not know to be armed, the federal civil rights statutes, and the precedents of their interpretation, do a fair job of shifting the burden of proof to the officer that his conduct did not violate that person's civil rights.
posted by MattD at 8:45 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

You don't even need to look for imagined scenarios to make it a ridiculous assertion, since plenty of openly, visibly, heavily armed white mass murderers are taken into police custody peacefully.

Oh, yeah, it's already ridiculous, both that it supposedly happened and that Wilson was scared for his life (as terrified as that Ohio cop was of a 12-year-old with a toy gun, or as fearful for his life as that other Ohio cop was of a man on his phone in Wal-Mart), but I'm perversely looking forward to a case where it's not just conceptually unbelievable but physically impossible and the cop still skates, because it would show that they don't just get the benefit of the doubt, but are fully exempted from any and all rules (other than the rules against arresting or snitching on cops).
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:46 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Speaking of, why do we let so many cowards be part of our police force? Why can't we get rid of this cowardice?

Trick question, I know, but it's still one of the things that's most troubling to me about this (obviously behind "white cops shooting black people is deemed totally fine").

There are dozens of jobs that are more dangerous than being a police officer, and yet all we ever hear from the police is how dangerous it is, and how scared they are. This is, frankly, bullshit. You can't have it both ways. You cannot simultaneously ask to be lauded as heroes who put their lives on the line for the good of the people, and yet also claim that you cannot be asked to even stop for a millisecond to consider a situation before you start firing.

Right now, we go much too far to try to protect cops, at the expense of our civil liberties. Being a cop should be dangerous -- not because I want cops to be hurt, but because it's a job that gives the authority to exert lethal force, and that authority should come with a concomitant expectation that police safety comes second to public safety and the rule of law.

More succinctly: fuck the "hero cop" narrative.
posted by tocts at 8:46 AM on November 25, 2014 [50 favorites]

This makes me so unbelievably sad. I realise how privileged I am because I just read about shit like this or watch it on television but I don't have to experience it. I can't even begin to imagine what it must be like to have to live with institutional racism as your everyday reality you can't just 'step out of'.
How anyone can be so capable of racism and hatred is beyond me.
posted by Vulpix91 at 8:47 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

solitary dancer: I wish we could just disarm the police force entirely. It'd probably be safer for everyone. But, police are supposed to be brave and heroic and willing to risk their lives in the line of duty. So let them be a little more brave and risk a little more.

Or teach them to learn their neighborhoods, and learn how to talk to people like people. Alaskan village public safety officers (VPSOs) work alone, without guns, and instead must rely on their words to talk people into coming with them, or calming down in tense situations. If things get rough, they have pepper spray and a Taser, but no gun. I've dropped the link before, but it's a really, really important idea to me now, especially after hearing NPR this morning, where they included comments from Wilson's testimony that his gun was the most comfortable, convenient tool he had (not quite in those words, but he had "reasons" for not using a taser or pepper spray).
posted by filthy light thief at 8:48 AM on November 25, 2014 [19 favorites]

Seriously, it's almost criminal how jurors keep asking about why they were walking in the middle of the street. Several openly call it an act of defiance, to look strong or tough. Yes, they defined what it meant, didn't ask Johnson to what it meant. Johnson didn't seem to think it was issue at all, just something people did when walking sometimes.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:55 AM on November 25, 2014 [17 favorites]

I think the reasons I'm going for a boycott are:

1. In these days where corporations have the same rights as people, it seems to be an effective weapon against the major corporations who are probably buying the politicians who then turn around and put people like Darren Wilson in office, and

2. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:59 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Johnson didn't seem to think it was issue at all, just something people did when walking sometimes.

I...sometimes walk in the middle of street, when there are no cars around. It's an interesting feeling, to be occupying this space that isn't really for you. I move when there are cars, though, just because I don't want to get hit.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:01 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO.

This is not a good reason to anything, except maybe masturbate.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:02 AM on November 25, 2014 [11 favorites]

People in my neighborhood walk in the street because the sidewalks are chewed up and covered with cars, and yards are full of dogs that lunge at you through the fences. The middle of the street is in better shape, is an actual thoroughfare (no parked cars) and you can see what's going on, because you're not in a corridor/maze of giant SUVs and trucks.
posted by small_ruminant at 9:05 AM on November 25, 2014 [17 favorites]

The National Bar Association responds. "The National Bar Association stands firm and will be calling on the U.S. Department of Justice to pursue federal charges against officer Darren Wilson... Over the last couple of months, the National Bar Association has hosted Town Hall meetings informing attendees of their Fourth Amendment (Search & Seizure) constitutional rights, whether it is legal to record police activity, and how citizens should behave/respond if and when they interface with police officers."
posted by showbiz_liz at 9:05 AM on November 25, 2014 [31 favorites]

Seriously, how is the Witness #40 document not faked? My only question right now is whether Darren did it himself or got a buddy to write it for him. How the HELL did that get into the evidence presented to the grand jury?
posted by sallybrown at 9:07 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

The National Bar Association responds.

The National Bar Association is not the American Bar association, btw.
posted by empath at 9:08 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

> a thógáil sráidbhaile

If you're making a joke by posting in a language other than the one the rest of the thread is in, this is an odd time to choose. If you're trying to communicate something, a translation would be helpful.
posted by The corpse in the library at 9:09 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Before the shooting, there was a 15-point gap between the attitudes of white and non-white Americans: 44 percent of whites agreed that blacks and other minorities receive equal treatment in the criminal-justice system, compared to 29 percent of non-whites. In six days of interviews conducted immediately after Brown's shooting (from August 10 to 15), the gap had doubled to 32 points, with 48 percent of whites, compared to just 16 percent of non-whites, agreeing that the criminal-justice systems treats blacks and other minorities fairly.

Self-Segregation: Why It's So Hard for Whites to Understand Ferguson
posted by tracicle at 9:09 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Still reading the Dorian Johnson testimony and the jurors want to know why Johnson didn't try to pay for the Cigarillos that Mike Brown stole. Then they still want to know why Johnson and Brown were so brazenly walking in the middle of the street if they had just committed a crime. The mindset of these jurors is completely clueless.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:11 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

Steely-eyed Missile Man: It's an interesting feeling, to be occupying this space that isn't really for you.

"Roads are for cars" is a modern invention, and bicycles are considered road-suitable vehicles. Cars are just bigger and faster, and most drivers incorrectly assume roads are for motorized vehicles alone.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:11 AM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

Brandon Blatcher: The mindset of these jurors is completely clueless.

Isn't it the role of the defense to field those questions, and bring the jurors back into reality?
posted by filthy light thief at 9:12 AM on November 25, 2014

Well, except that Mike Brown wasn't on trial. Theoretically at least this was an indictment of Darren Wilson, so the prosecution should have been correcting these misunderstandings, and in fact the defense (who would have been defending Wilson, not Brown) shouldn't have been a party to the proceedings at all, since it wasn't a trial.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 9:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [51 favorites]

prefpara:

Or, to put it more bluntly, rights aren't something you earn by being perfect. Michael Brown didn't lose his right to life when he (if he) said something rude to a cop. The citizens of Ferguson didn't lose their right to justice when members of a crowd engaged in looting. Those who want to talk about looting are contributing to a narrative where you make one wrong move and you are no longer entitled or protected. Only, it never seems to work that way when it comes to the rights that those in power claim for themselves. Do you lose your gun license by doing one thing wrong, for example? Not if you're white.

I wish I could favourite this more than once. Prefpara's comment perfectly articulates the kind of attitudes that are a reflection of and a method of perpetuating oppression. This idea that if you are a member of an oppressed group (people of colour, women) you must act perfectly or else you somehow get what's coming to you--it's the same thinking that drives people to immediately question women who report sexual assault. "Well did she go home with him? What was she wearing? Where was she walking?" And of course the reality is, it doesn't matter if you do act "perfectly"--those in power can do heinous things like shoot unarmed teenagers or drug and rape multiple women, and, as we have seen, get away with it with no consequence.
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 9:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [20 favorites]

Charles Pierce last night: Dead Of Night: The Ferguson Decision
posted by homunculus at 9:15 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

I don't think McCulloch presented, but Alizadeh (prosecution) does seem somewhat conflicted at the very least in her prosecutorial role. Per the Johnson testimony

(p86) Ms. Alizadeh: But it is clearly very much macho, I'm going to take these Cigarillos, I know he's not saying that, but that was kind of his demeanor, like what are you going to do, stop me? I'm taking them, right?

(p87) Ms. Alizadeh: And you see cop cars coming by oh my God, you know, but Big Mike doesn't really care, does he?

posted by corb at 9:17 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

I hate to ask, but do we know anything about which jurors voted not to indict?
posted by mmiddle at 9:17 AM on November 25, 2014

Isn't it the role of the defense to field those questions, and bring the jurors back into reality?

Why would they, when the prosecutor is doing a better job of it than they could possibly imagine?
posted by zombieflanders at 9:18 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

The really interesting part of the Johnson testimony so far is that just as he was getting to the part where Brown and Wilson had their hands on each other and were tugging at each other, the questions about walking in the middle of the street started up. So odd.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:18 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

This idea that if you are a member of an oppressed group (people of colour, women) you must act perfectly or else you somehow get what's coming to you--it's the same thinking that drives people to immediately question women who report sexual assault. "Well did she go home with him? What was she wearing? Where was she walking?" And of course the reality is, it doesn't matter if you do act "perfectly"--those in power can do heinous things like shoot unarmed teenagers or drug and rape multiple women, and, as we have seen, get away with it with no consequence.

And this is just fundamentally inhumane. Perfection is literally inhuman. It's the only thing that unites us, that we are imperfect. People can not act perfectly. It is impossible. Demanding that black Americans (or any oppressed groups, but specifically black Americans) behave perfectly is to deny them their humanity.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 9:19 AM on November 25, 2014 [29 favorites]

I think that the odds of a Federal indictment are reasonably high.

Against Officer Wilson? Chances are actually pretty low. The DOJ leaked that a bit ago. Now a prosecution of Ferguson for its discrimination against black individuals in terms of stops and arrests is far more likely. But probably not for a while.
posted by learnsome at 9:19 AM on November 25, 2014

I hate to ask, but do we know anything about which jurors voted not to indict?

They don't record a poll. According to McCulloch last night they just hand over the final decision.

Caveat 'According to McCulloch'...
posted by asockpuppet at 9:20 AM on November 25, 2014

I hate to ask, but do we know anything about which jurors voted not to indict?

At the press conference McCullough kept stressing that this was secret and would not be released to anyone outside the jury, so unless someone on the jury names names (which probably has some penalties associated with it), the closest we may be able to get is reading the stuff from the trial and divining which way they voted SCOTUS style.
posted by DynamiteToast at 9:20 AM on November 25, 2014

I don't think McCulloch presented, but Alizadeh (prosecution) does seem somewhat conflicted at the very least in her prosecutorial role. Per the Johnson testimony
(p86) Ms. Alizadeh: But it is clearly very much macho, I'm going to take these Cigarillos, I know he's not saying that, but that was kind of his demeanor, like what are you going to do, stop me? I'm taking them, right?

(p87) Ms. Alizadeh: And you see cop cars coming by oh my God, you know, but Big Mike doesn't really care, does he?

I'm not seeing the conflict here. What are you referring to?
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I hate to ask, but do we know anything about which jurors voted not to indict?

From reading the Johnson testimony and the questions by the juror, they felt Brown and Johnson were clearly guilty from the very beginning and that Wilson was in the right.

This idea that if you are a member of an oppressed group (people of colour, women) you must act perfectly or else you somehow get what's coming to you--it's the same thinking that drives people to immediately question women who report sexual assault.

Yep, this is exactly what I'm getting from the jury's questioning. Because Johnson and Brown were walking in the middle of the street, because Brown stole the Cigarillos and Johnson didn't even try to pay for them and they didn't immediately follow the cop's order to get on the sidewalk, Brown deserved what happened to him. Wilson's strong arm tactics and shitty police work in instigating the encounter just don't seem to matter at all.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:23 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

Not that this matters much, but Michael Brown wasn't headed to college, he was headed to Vatterott "College," a for-profit trade school to get a likely worthless HVAC certification and rack up some student debt.

You're incorrect - the exact nature of Michael Brown's educational aspirations doesn't matter AT ALL.

I know you didn't mean it this way, but by even bringing up the nature of his future plans it sounds like "oh, if he were heading to a real college it'd be an even bigger tragedy", and it's a tragedy no matter what.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:24 AM on November 25, 2014 [45 favorites]

I'm not seeing the conflict here. What are you referring to?

Maybe it's me, it just seems that Alizadeh is kind of framing things against Brown in a way that is very sympathetic to Wilson, which is not necessarily her job as prosecutor of Wilson. "It's very clearly very much macho" and "What are you going to do, stop me?" seems like something a defense attorney would say in an attempt to demonstrate mindset for the later confrontation with Wilson. Same with "Big Mike doesn't really care" - it seems to me at least like Alizadeh is trying to demonstrate that Brown is nonresponsive to police authority, fear, conscience, guilt, etc. I could be reading too much into her choice of words, but it just seems a curious way to frame things from a prosecuting attorney with a friendly witness.
posted by corb at 9:24 AM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

McCullough kept stressing that this was secret

At one point he said that it was against the law to even ask about the vote, which I'll attribute to a Freudian slip that further reveals his privileged, authoritarian mindset that can condemn people talking on social media and remain silent on racism.
posted by audi alteram partem at 9:25 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I don't understand why the last stand on this issue was with this case and this set of facts. The set of facts in this case indicated no indictment was going to lie.

(1) Missouri Law:

Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest.
563.046. 1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.

2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful.

3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only

(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or

(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested

(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or

(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or

(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.

4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.

(2) The facts:

At 11:45 a.m. CT on Aug. 9, Wilson responded to a call at an apartment complex about an infant who was having trouble breathing. At 11:53 a.m. CT, Wilson heard a police radio broadcast about a convenience store robbery in progress.

Wilson left the apartment complex around that time and heard a description of the suspect, who was Brown. As Wilson was driving down the street, he encountered Brown and his friend. Wilson slowed or stopped his car and told them to move to the sidewalk. "Words were exchanged," as McCulloch put it Monday, and Brown and his friend continued to walk down the street.

Wilson then radioed that he needed his assistance and backed up his car to block their path. An altercation then took place at the police car with Wilson seated inside and Brown standing outside the driver's side window. Two shots were fired during that initial part of the altercation. The altercation was described as a "tussle" or "tug-of-war" by witnesses. Some said that Brown had punched Wilson. Wilson had some swelling and redness to his face after the shooting, McCulloch said.

Brown ran and Wilson chased him. Brown then stopped and moved toward Wilson, several more shots were fired and Brown was fatally injured. What happened between the altercation and the fatal shots varied some depending on the witness, McCulloch said.

Some witnesses said that Wilson fired at Brown as he chased him. Others said that Wilson did not fire until Brown turned to face him and moved toward him. One witness said that Brown went at Wilson at "full charge." Most said that Wilson shot at Brown as Brown moved toward him.

So Brown committed two felonies. First he strong-arm robbed the convenience store, then assaulted a police officer. Under Missouri Revised Statutes 563.046.3(2)(a) that's enough.

There are giant problems with race and the law in this country. So why are we fighting this case, when there is undisputed video evidence Brown committed a strong arm felony robbery minutes before and then assaulted a police officer (there is no right to struggle with a police officer during arrest) before running at the officer and getting shot?

I've done 4 of these cases in my career. I had to look long and hard at this one for a media appearance when it first happened. The witnesses Brown's family were putting out there showed that Brown engaged the officer physically, either punching him or "wrestling" with him. The doctor the family hired to do the autopsy said all bullets went through the front.

I really do not see why this case was picked. It was bad. The decedent had (on video) robbed an convenience store moments before the shooting. Witnesses put forward by the family had him engaging the officer physically. The officer had heard a 911 call regarding the convenience store, called for backup and went to affect an arrest. Brown fought him. He was leaving the scene of a felony.

These facts make for a very poor case to start the national conversation because, frankly, the shooting was justified. There's not much there that says anything else. Even the family's preferred witnesses described a justified shooting.

It is a tragedy Mike Brown died. But this was a justified shooting.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:26 AM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

I've been on the other side of this from most other Mefites. From very early on, it looked like the facts just didn't support a prosecution (facts, not the statements of people who likely didn't even see what happened or who actually participated in the underlying struggle -- I'm looking at you, Dorian Johnson). Now that the evidence is out there, it seems pretty clear that I was right to ask folks to wait to learn what actually happened, rather than letting their priors fill in the blanks. So, yes, I feel gratified about that and believe justice was done.

BUT witness no. 40. Just wow. The press really needs to figure out who that was and how the heck that happened. Maybe it's harmless, but if I were on the other side of this issue, I would be screaming about this at the top of my lungs. And, for good reason.
posted by learnsome at 9:27 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Ironmouth, I agree with you on a lot of stuff and value your legal-minded input a lot of the time, but this:

when there is undisputed video evidence Brown committed a strong arm felony robbery minutes before and then assaulted a police officer (there is no right to struggle with a police officer during arrest) before running at the officer and getting shot?

is factually incorrect and really, really not-cool.
posted by joyceanmachine at 9:28 AM on November 25, 2014 [31 favorites]

So Brown committed two felonies. First he strong-arm robbed the convenience store, then assaulted a police officer. Under Missouri Revised Statutes 563.046.3(2)(a) that's enough.

It's enough if the witnesses are reliable. And Witness #40 is giving me doubts about the veracity of the others.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:29 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Not that this matters much, but Michael Brown wasn't headed to college, he was headed to Vatterott "College," a for-profit trade school to get a likely worthless HVAC certification and rack up some student debt.

You're incorrect - the exact nature of Michael Brown's educational aspirations doesn't matter AT ALL.

I know you didn't mean it this way, but by even bringing up the nature of his future plans it sounds like "oh, if he were heading to a real college it'd be an even bigger tragedy", and it's a tragedy no matter what.

It matters optically only if it wasn't true. And it wasn't. When I did a TV appearance on this issue months ago, the two African-American lawyers told me in the green room that Brown's lawyers should not have put that out there and one said he had gotten a case after a similar situation and the fact that the kid actually wasn't going to college hurt the case because it wasn't true. He was pretty dismissive of the attorneys the Browns had handling the matter for that very fact. Both were also appalled that Brown's lawyers had witnesses saying he was shot in the back, because a day later their own doctor said all of the shots came from the front.

there were a lot of problems in this case that people didn't see because they didn't look close enough.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:29 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

a very poor case to start the national conversation

This "conversation" was going on long before Mike Brown's death and will continue to go on so long as people insist on focusing on "facts" without reference to the racist context in which they occur and are interpreted.
posted by audi alteram partem at 9:30 AM on November 25, 2014 [27 favorites]

There is absolutely NOT "undisputed video evidence" that Brown was "running at the officer" before getting shot. There are numerous witnesses who say Brown was running away from the officer before getting shot with the bullet(s) that killed him. In other words, if Officer Wilson had ceased firing his weapon after Brown fled, Brown would be alive today.

There is also conflicting evidence about whether Office Wilson knew at the time of the incident that the theft even occurred, let alone whether Brown was connected to it.
posted by sallybrown at 9:30 AM on November 25, 2014 [31 favorites]

Not that this matters much, but Michael Brown wasn't headed to college, he was headed to Vatterott "College," a for-profit trade school to get a likely worthless HVAC certification and rack up some student debt.

You're incorrect - the exact nature of Michael Brown's educational aspirations doesn't matter AT ALL.

I know you didn't mean it this way, but by even bringing up the nature of his future plans it sounds like "oh, if he were heading to a real college it'd be an even bigger tragedy", and it's a tragedy no matter what.


I know. The original quote is from Ezra Klein. the Wesley Crusher of professional journalists.
posted by ennui.bz at 9:30 AM on November 25, 2014

I had to look long and hard at this one for a media appearance when it first happened.

Why do you always feel the need to mention your media appearances?
posted by futz at 9:31 AM on November 25, 2014 [25 favorites]

oh cool, the Staunch Establishment Democrat is here to show us why Staunch Establishment Democrats are never to be trusted
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 9:32 AM on November 25, 2014 [33 favorites]

Ironmouth, I agree with you on a lot of stuff and value your legal-minded input a lot of the time, but this:

when there is undisputed video evidence Brown committed a strong arm felony robbery minutes before and then assaulted a police officer (there is no right to struggle with a police officer during arrest) before running at the officer and getting shot?

is factually incorrect and really, really not-cool.

This is a video of Michael Brown robbing a convenience store moments before the shooting.

Its factually accurate. You can wish all you want that Brown did not do that but he did.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:33 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

There is also conflicting evidence about whether Office Wilson knew at the time of the incident that the theft even occurred, let alone whether Brown was connected to it.

Actually, no. There's no conflicting evidence on this score. There was an opinion offered by the chief of police early on (which was not based on personal knowledge). The only evidence we really have is the radio traffic and Officer Wilson's own testimony, both of which support his knowing that Mike and Dorian were possible suspects.
posted by learnsome at 9:33 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

This is a video of Michael Brown robbing a convenience store moments before the shooting.

Where is the video of Brown running at Officer Wilson? Even McCulloch denied last night that such evidence existed, so I'd be really interested to see it.
posted by sallybrown at 9:34 AM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

there were a lot of problems in this case that people didn't see because they didn't look close enough.

Speaking of not looking close enough, you must not have looked close enough at my comment, because I was speaking about the lack of difference between "he was going to a college" vs. "he was going to a trade school" and you were so busy bustling in with your boast about "well I was on TV about this" credentials you didn't even bother to address the point I was making.

There aren't any cameras here, Ironmouth, you don't have to try that hard.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:34 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

So why are we fighting this case, when there is undisputed video evidence Brown committed a strong arm felony robbery minutes before and then assaulted a police officer (there is no right to struggle with a police officer during arrest) before running at the officer and getting shot?

As a lawyer, you should really choose your words more carefully. The only video is of Brown stealing the Cigarillos.

Frankly, from everything I've read so far, Mike Brown was assaulted by a police officer and then he tried to pull away, he was shot.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:35 AM on November 25, 2014 [25 favorites]

Mod note: Folks, let's keep this away from personal attacks as much as possible here. Thanks.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 9:38 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think what Ironmouth is getting at is that as the law stands the shooting was "justified" and Wilson was not going to be indicted. Change the laws regarding when an officer can shoot an unarmed suspect and then we can talk. But like Florida with its "stand your ground" law, things are presently stacked in favour of non-black people who shoot black people.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 9:38 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

As a lawyer, you should really choose your words more carefully.

When Ironmouth says he tried several of these cases, lets be clear that he did it as a defense attorney for the police, not a prosecutor. And I can assure you, that he is choosing his words carefully. He just has different motivations than most of us.
posted by empath at 9:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [32 favorites]

there were a lot of problems in this case that people didn't see because they didn't look close enough.

But that's the thing about this grand jury. Anyone could see that there was little chance of Wilson being convicted on anything at trial. But, McCullogh was so afraid of getting on the wrong side of his police buddies and their friends that he had to turn the grand jury into a trial and have his prosecutors defend WIlson in front of the jurors.
posted by ennui.bz at 9:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

I had to look long and hard at this one for a media appearance when it first happened.

Why do you always feel the need to mention your media appearances?

other than this case, when have I mentioned a media appearance? Plus I got feedback there from other lawyers who were sympathetic to the Brown family. I thought their criticisms pretty prescient.

Listen, I do use of force cases from time to time. I'm the only one I'm aware of on the entire site who has. I do think that anotherpanacea has some experience as a CCRB investigator in NYC, but nobody else here has been at the scene of one of these shootings and represented a person involved. So I know a lot about them. I know the law, I've written appellate briefs in these cases, and done just about everything you can do regarding a shooting incident.

So I have some things to offer here that others do not. I have looked long and hard at this case. And from the first, I saw a justified shooting and when I looked at it, I had a copy of the statutes in hand and I read every article so I would not get embarrassed on TV. So I think I have a lot better view than the vast majority of the general public on this matter.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

"Corb, you're working surprisingly hard to create a relatable narrative for a racist murder by a racist murderer."

I think corb makes a good point, though, in that no one ever sees themselves as the villain. Understanding what drives some people who think they are in the right to commit villainous acts does more to help us figure out how to prevent such acts in the future than just writing someone off as evil does.
posted by Jacqueline at 9:40 AM on November 25, 2014 [17 favorites]

It's okay that the kid died he was only going to be an HVAC technician instead of a lawyer (who has APPEARED ON TV) like me

oh jesus. that's what shit-heels like Ezra Klein think, which is why he had to append the "going to college" to his shitty little clickbait stub, trying to be sympathetic.

whether Brown was going to college has nothing to do with whether WIlson's conduct was implausible for a cop just following procedure in questioning an unarmed teen-ager.
posted by ennui.bz at 9:42 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Maybe it's me, it just seems that Alizadeh is kind of framing things against Brown in a way that is very sympathetic to Wilson, which is not necessarily her job as prosecutor of Wilson.

Conflict: being a person who is supposed to be trying to convince a jury that Darren Wilson should be indicted, while simultaneously painting a picture where maybe Mike Brown did things that warranted being killed

Oof, my goodness. My view of these people is so skewed that I honestly didn't see her role as trying to get an indictment of Wilson at all. Holy crap.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:43 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

As a lawyer, you should really choose your words more carefully. The only video is of Brown stealing the Cigarillos.

Review this video. At 0:15 seconds, Brown puts his hand around the throat of the shop keeper attempting to stop the robbery and shoves him out of the way. That's a strong arm robbery. Its a felony.

Please do not ignore the facts of this case. They are what they are. Why do people deny the assault? Its on tape. You can't deny it.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:44 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Well, the good news is that you have exactly the same view of her job that she does!
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:44 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Also, I can't help but conflate this with the recent news that the US has killed over 1,000 bystanders in order to kill 40 targets with drones. Both seem to be cases of weighing the lives of "heroes" (be they cops or soldiers) as much more important than those of civilians. To me this is an inversion of how things should be, but who am I.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 9:44 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

I didn't know that robbery (which btw Wilson admits he didn't even know about) was grounds for summary execution thanks Mr. Lawyer
posted by showbiz_liz at 9:45 AM on November 25, 2014 [37 favorites]

Mod note: Keep in mind that conflating "moral" and "legal", especially while discussing things with lawyers, usually leads to confusion and anger all around. Please be really clear about what you're talking about, on both sides. Thanks.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 9:46 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

Please do not ignore the facts of this case. They are what they are. Why do people deny the assault? Its on tape. You can't deny it.

People are not quibbling with you about the robbery, but rather your conflation of the robbery and the encounter with Officer Wilson as as a series of events we have "video evidence" of. As I'm sure you learned in preparing for your media appearances, we do not have any video evidence of the confrontation between Wilson and Brown.
posted by sallybrown at 9:47 AM on November 25, 2014 [19 favorites]

I don't understand why you're ignoring your own quote.

4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.

The burden of raising an affirmative defense is appropriate for a situation where a defense is raised. Not at the grand jury, where there is no defense.

If Wilson's team wanted to request dismissal based on this they were free to do so but it's not a get-out-of-indictment free card. Further, the fact that the state law says it's all fair and good when attempting to arrest a felony suspect doesn't change the Supreme Court's decision that the inclusion of the word "felony" doesn't mean statute can let law enforcement off the hook for using deadly force.

You want to assert that a conviction was impossible, woo on you - plenty agree. Asserting that it would never fly to indict and let a trial sort out the facts is BS. Maybe you don't think it should be done, but the idea that it couldn't isn't true, doesn't reflect how every other non-cop citizen gets treated in society, and is widely disagreed with.
posted by phearlez at 9:47 AM on November 25, 2014 [11 favorites]

Apologists for police violence should be ashamed of themselves.
posted by RogerB at 9:48 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

I'm not sure why people are trying to argue with Ironmouth, it's not like he's actually confused about your point, just ignoring it.
posted by smackfu at 9:48 AM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

It's fucking UNreasonable to believe that the use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest of someone who stole some cigarillos. This isn't justified.


Yes it is justified. Brown choked the store owner while stealing the cigarillos and left, creating the felony arrest situation that Wilson encountered. Brown committed a second felony of assaulting an officer. Wilson called for back up. These facts are undisputed. Wilson then attempted to arrest Brown, again an undisputed fact put out there by witnesses Brown's attorneys were putting out there as sympathetic to the case. A second felony. And everyone said Brown was shot from the front, the witnesses, three medical examiners, the whole lot.

This is why I do not get this desire to make this particular case the last stand for this issue. Because the facts are terrible for that. The guy in New York a week earlier was a much better and more important case.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:48 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

I didn't know that robbery (which btw Wilson admits he didn't even know about) was grounds for summary execution thanks Mr. Lawyer

Technically, it's "not being a police officer" that's grounds for summary execution. Melanin is an exacerbating factor.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:50 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

This case became the face of the issue because it pushed the local community to the breaking point and led to months of protest.
posted by Drinky Die at 9:50 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

I didn't know that robbery (which btw Wilson admits he didn't even know about) was grounds for summary execution thanks Mr. Lawyer

Actually, no. Wilson testified before the grand jury that he did know about the hunt for suspects in the robbery and that Michael and Dorian fit the bill. The radio traffic supports his testimony (though it is not dispositive).

I understand the vitriol, but it would be nice if folks actually knew the facts before accusing others of such a vile belief.
posted by learnsome at 9:51 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Ironmouth: Please do not ignore the facts of this case. They are what they are. Why do people deny the assault? Its on tape. You can't deny it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, what with not being an American lawyer or even an American, but the case in question here was the possibility of an unlawful shooting by a police officer of an unarmed black teenager, and not anything to do with whether said teenager had prior to being killed been involved with committing a robbery.

You're a lawyer, and an American one at that. You know this. Which means you're dissembling for some reason. I'd be interested to know exactly why.

You're also very quick to assert that the facts are both all in and incontrovertible, for someone who is usually so keen on saying that in the absence of a trial in front of a jury we shouldn't be making any declarations on facts, what with that being the jury's job. Again, I'd be interested to know why.
posted by Len at 9:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [32 favorites]

creating the felony arrest situation that Wilson encountered.

What a weasel worded thing to do. Wilson had no idea that Brown was in any way connected to the incident at the convenience store.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

This is why I do not get this desire to make this particular case the last stand for this issue. Because the facts are terrible for that. The guy in New York a week earlier was a much better and more important case.

So to be clear, I'm not arguing to convince you, because you're not being an honest participant in the conversation, but the reason this became a flashpoint is not because of the specific circumstances of Michael Brown's execution, but because the people of Ferguson are essentially living under a police state governed by outsiders who fund their extortion racket via police fines.
posted by empath at 9:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [24 favorites]

You want to assert that a conviction was impossible, woo on you - plenty agree. Asserting that it would never fly to indict and let a trial sort out the facts is BS. Maybe you don't think it should be done, but the idea that it couldn't isn't true, doesn't reflect how every other non-cop citizen gets treated in society, and is widely disagreed with.

Citizens made this call. They viewed more evidence than any of us did. By far. But they're wrong, even though none of us have seen a 100th of what they've seen. They saw the witnesses testifying in front of them in person. They heard the 911 calls. They heard Wilson testify right in front of them, in person. The robbery was on tape. Literally video we can all see has the robbery taking place.

I don't get it. This is a justified shooting with a lot of media hype. The guy in NYC? That was police misconduct. Yet no one cares about that one and everyone cares about this one.

Look at the differences. In NYC the suspect is not committing a felony and not physically engaging the police officers. They engage him. The Brown family's own witnesses have him fighting or wrestling with a police officer attempting to arrest him. I simply do not see how this is anything other than a justified shooting.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Ironmouth, it would be helpful if you would differentiate between "legally justified" and "ethically justified," because this thread is not constrained to the legal contexts and continually saying the shooting was "justified" is really coming across as tone-deaf.
posted by jaguar at 9:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [46 favorites]

I do think this is bullshit and that citizens should have the right to self-defense against police officers, but the law very strongly disagrees. I have a friend that was being beaten up with a police baton and took the baton away from the police officer so he would stop being beaten up, and he was jailed and tried for assault. The law is really clear that between the police officer and the citizen, only one person has the right of self defense. I think this is morally wrong, and applaud the few states who are creating "right to self defense against cop" laws, but this is how it stands in most states.
posted by corb at 9:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Brown committed a second felony of assaulting an officer.

Evidence, please. So far we've got none backing up this one.

Unless you mean that photo of something smaller than a shaving nick on Wilson's chin.
posted by grubi at 9:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

Brown choked the store owner while stealing the cigarillos and left,

That is bullshit based on the four still frames illegally released in lieu of a bloody incident report. Which they never did release. OR even wrote up.
posted by Trochanter at 9:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

creating the felony arrest situation that Wilson encountered.

What a weasel worded thing to do. Wilson had no idea that Brown was in any way connected to the incident at the convenience store.

That's factually not true. In fact, Wilson was responding to the convenience store robbery. Brown had the cigarillos in his hand. Read the prosecutor's words from the link up there.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:54 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

>I didn't know that robbery (which btw Wilson admits he didn't even know about)...

Is that right? On page 8 of Wilson's testimony transcript, he says he heard the call about the convenience store robbery prior to the run-in with Brown.
posted by BurntHombre at 9:55 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

It is clear from last night that it has been months, if ever, since the prosecutors believed that they had a case against Wilson which could produce a conviction. The grand jury process was very misused here, more to shift political heat to 12 grand jurors to let Wilson off the hook than for the prosecutor to do it himself.
posted by MattD at 9:55 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

As a lawyer, you should really choose your words more carefully. The only video is of Brown stealing the Cigarillos.


Review this video. At 0:15 seconds, Brown puts his hand around the throat of the shop keeper attempting to stop the robbery and shoves him out of the way. That's a strong arm robbery. Its a felony.

Good lord. Do you honestly expect us to believe that you believe that Brandon Blatcher's statement meant that the video showed no other thing but Brown performing the single act of taking the cigarillos? In that context, replying that the video also shows other aspects of him stealing the cigarillos is no more informative or helpful than noting that the video doesn't just show him stealing the cigarillos, it also shows a car driving by in the background and you can totally see this bug on the counter.

I can't possibly believe that you honestly believe that that was Brandon Blatcher's intent. I really can't believe that any neurotypical native speaker of English could possibly fail to understand in that thread that Brandon Blatcher was noting that there was no video of the altercation with Wilson. At which point, why make replies that require you to hold utterly non-credible beliefs for them to be in good faith?
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:56 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

You're a lawyer, and an American one at that. You know this. Which means you're dissembling for some reason. I'd be interested to know exactly why.

Because he makes a living defending cops in excessive force cases. He's performing here, not having a conversation.
posted by empath at 9:56 AM on November 25, 2014 [42 favorites]

Wilson then attempted to arrest Brown,

Wait, what? I'm still trying to dig through the testimony and have yet to find where an arrest was attempted.
posted by asockpuppet at 9:56 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

That's factually not true. In fact, Wilson was responding to the convenience store robbery. Brown had the cigarillos in his hand. Read the prosecutor's words from the link up there.

Remember when the prosecutor and the FPD specifically said he wasn't doing that? Ah, those were the days.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:57 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

If Wilson was pursuing them as robbery suspects, and therefore justified in using force against them, why was he yelling out his car window at them about walking in the street, rather than attempting to arrest them for a supposed robbery that he supposedly knew about?
posted by hydropsyche at 9:57 AM on November 25, 2014 [51 favorites]

That's factually not true. In fact, Wilson was responding to the convenience store robbery. Brown had the cigarillos in his hand.

This does not demonstrate that Wilson knew that Brown had the cigarillos in his hand at the time he approached Brown. Try harder.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:58 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

This is why I do not get this desire to make this particular case the last stand for this issue. Because the facts are terrible for that. The guy in New York a week earlier was a much better and more important case.

Man, if only someone had made a media appearance and called for protests!
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 9:58 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Brown committed a second felony of assaulting an officer.

Evidence, please. So far we've got none backing up this one.

Unless you mean that photo of something smaller than a shaving nick on Wilson's chin.

Read the statement of the prosecutor. He summarized the witnesses.

But I will go deeper. (NYT LINK)

A witness, Tiffany Mitchell, said in an interview with MSNBC that she heard tires squeal, then saw Mr. Brown and Officer Wilson “wrestling” through the open car window. A shot went off from within the car, Mr. Johnson said, and the two began to run away from the officer.

posted by Ironmouth at 9:58 AM on November 25, 2014

If Wilson was pursuing them as robbery suspects, and therefore justified in using force against them, why was he yelling out his car window at them about walking in the street, rather than attempting to arrest them for a supposed robbery that he supposedly knew about?

He's a supercop! He can arrest people without leaving his car!
posted by grubi at 9:58 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Brown committed a second felony of assaulting an officer. Wilson called for back up. These facts are undisputed. Wilson then attempted to arrest Brown

so, uh, if WIlson was looking for a robbery suspect, why did he only attempt to arrest Brown *after* the supposed assault? and why did he try to block Brown with his car in the street? is this standard procedure for arrests? you tell me...
posted by ennui.bz at 9:59 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

So, they wrestled through the car window, Wilson shot Brown, Brown ran away, Wilson shot Brown some more, Brown ran at Wilson with his head down, and Wilson shot some more?

Is that *really* the fucking story? Because that doesn't pass a sniff test.
posted by grubi at 10:00 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Oof, my goodness. My view of these people is so skewed that I honestly didn't see her role as trying to get an indictment of Wilson at all. Holy crap.

Yeah, the lawyers in the Dorian Johnson grand jury testimony are framing everything as Mike Brown did something or some such. Even after Johnson tells of Brown being a big guy standing outside the police car and Wilson is inside sitting down, the lawyers asks why Brown didn't just pull away, since he had better leverage, which makes Johnson sound like a liar. Unbelievable. This happens repeatedly during Johnson's testimoney. Can't wait to read Wilson's and compare the two versions.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:00 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

> don't get it. This is a justified shooting with a lot of media hype. The guy in NYC? That was police misconduct. Yet no one cares about that one and everyone cares about this one.

Even giving you the benefit of the doubt, the fact that Brown was no angel is precisely why this case should have so much attention. You can continue to bury the fact that using deadly force means blowing brains out and such behind your facile legalese all you want, however.

Whether Brown was an angel or not is irrelevant. What is relevant in this case is the legal standards applied. The robbery created the legal authority to use deadly force.

Notice I'm the only one linking to actual reports.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:02 AM on November 25, 2014

A bit of dark levity.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:02 AM on November 25, 2014 [18 favorites]

Try harder.

He couldn't possibly. There's a massive front of popular protest currently happening all over the country, with palpable international solidarity, and public opinion both online and off are turning against the staid, out-of-touch bipartisan establishment calls for "peace" that means the continuation of a racist, violent status quo — and yet here we all are, in the space where that could be discussed and debated and organized, instead engaging with these ceaseless pettifogging disputes of the facts of the legal case. Mission accomplished!
posted by RogerB at 10:04 AM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

So, they wrestled through the car window, Wilson shot Brown, Brown ran away, Wilson shot Brown some more, Brown ran at Wilson with his head down, and Wilson shot some more?

Is that *really* the fucking story? Because that doesn't pass a sniff test.

that's not the testimony. Not at all. Read the linked statement in my first comment. Don't make it up.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:04 AM on November 25, 2014

This is why I do not get this desire to make this particular case the last stand for this issue.

Which issue? That a 90% white police force has been violently repressing a mostly black populace for decades? That's a local issue, and while I'm sure the locals would been keen to hear your opinions on the why it was good and just an unarmed teenager was shot and the police officer not prosecuted, they may not be entirely sympathetic to your analysis, or agree with you about what is in dispute or not. They may not want to wait a single day longer for some other cop in some other city to sit in the dock before letting their government know just how badly they have been failed, systematically.
posted by Slap*Happy at 10:04 AM on November 25, 2014 [21 favorites]

The robbery created the legal authority to use deadly force.

Well, then it's okay, I guess. Good thing actually murdering people doesn't do the same, right?
posted by grubi at 10:04 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Notice I'm the only one linking to actual reports.

That is factually incorrect.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 10:05 AM on November 25, 2014 [29 favorites]

Mod note: Ironmouth, you have presented your evidence for the legal side of it. If you're not interested in engaging with the rest of the conversation, please feel free to walk away now.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 10:05 AM on November 25, 2014 [18 favorites]

Read the linked statement in my first comment. Don't make it up.

I did read it. Did you?

A witness, Tiffany Mitchell, said in an interview with MSNBC that she heard tires squeal, then saw Mr. Brown and Officer Wilson “wrestling” through the open car window. A shot went off from within the car, Mr. Johnson said, and the two began to run away from the officer.

According to Ms. Mitchell, “The officer gets out of his vehicle,” she said, pursuing Mr. Brown, then continued to shoot.

Mr. Johnson said that he hid behind a parked car and that Mr. Brown was struck by a bullet in his back as he ran away, an account that Dr. Baden’s autopsy appears to contradict.

“Michael’s body jerks as if he was hit,” Ms. Mitchell said, “and then he put his hands up.” Mr. Brown turned, Mr. Johnson said, raised his hands, and said, “I don’t have a gun, stop shooting!”

Officer Wilson continued to fire and Mr. Brown crumpled to the ground, Mr. Johnson said. Within seconds, confusion and horror swept through Canfield Drive. On that Saturday afternoon, dozens of neighbors were at home and rushed out of their apartments when they heard gunshots.

Now add to that Witness #40 and tell me what exactly I got wrong in my summary.
posted by grubi at 10:05 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Whether Brown was an angel or not is irrelevant.

You're right. According to his killer's testimony, it mattered instead that he looked like a demon.

What is relevant in this case is the legal standards applied. The robbery created the legal authority to use deadly force.

At the bottom of all this ugly shit, you've found a legal standard to take solace in, but the twist ending you missed is the standard is just a turd if you're not with the police.
posted by dougmoon at 10:06 AM on November 25, 2014 [18 favorites]

At least SOMEONE here is not afraid to tell the truth: that everything's fine.
posted by Trochanter at 10:08 AM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

Isn't there a whole Supreme Court decision - Tennessee v. Garner - which says that a police officer can only use deadly force on a fleeing suspect if the cop has reason to believe that the fleeing suspect poses a substantial threat of death or serious injury to the cop or others? I know that there's a great deal of interpretation involved in applying that kind of decision, but the idea that if Mike Brown committed a robbery then the cop had legal justification in shooting him just like that....that doesn't seem to go with Tennessee v. Garner.

(Leaving out moral justification, of course.)
posted by Frowner at 10:08 AM on November 25, 2014 [23 favorites]

The robbery created the legal authority to use deadly force.

When I stole tobacco when I was a teenager a security guard yelled at me and I never stole again. He didn't even take back the cigarettes.

Apparently shooting me was a reasonable alternative.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:08 AM on November 25, 2014 [42 favorites]

The robbery created the legal authority to use deadly force.

You might want to reconsider that statement - it suggests theft is punishable by ...death?...
Personally I'm anti-death-penalty anyway but still
posted by From Bklyn at 10:08 AM on November 25, 2014 [17 favorites]

My outrage has left me ill-suited to comment responsibly about the prosecutor's actions, the grand jury's decision, and the state of justice as it now exists in America.

My thoughts are with Brown's family, the innocent people of Ferguson and the St. Louis area, and all the other victims of this travesty.
posted by The Confessor at 10:09 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

If Wilson was pursuing them as robbery suspects, and therefore justified in using force against them, why was he yelling out his car window at them about walking in the street, rather than attempting to arrest them for a supposed robbery that he supposedly knew about?

Ask CNN:

Wilson told the grand jury his original goal was to arrest Brown, after identifying him as a possible suspect in a shop theft.
"My main goal was to keep eyes on him and just to keep him contained until I had people coming there," he testified.
"I knew I had already called for backup and I knew they were already in the area for the stealing that was originally reported. So I thought if I can buy 30 seconds of time, that was my original goal when I tried to get him to come to the car. If I could buy 30 seconds of time, someone else will be here, we can make the arrest, nothing happens, we are all good. And it didn't happen that way."

posted by Ironmouth at 10:11 AM on November 25, 2014

The robbery created the legal authority to use deadly force.

When I stole tobacco when I was a teenager a security guard yelled at me and I never stole again. He didn't even take back the cigarettes.

Apparently shooting me was a reasonable alternative

Only if you're black! Or maybe just non-white.
posted by emjaybee at 10:11 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Okay, fine, I'll say this instead. There are many, many, many lawyers who disagree that this was a reasonable (or right) decision. You do not get to speak on behalf of the Law.
posted by likeatoaster at 10:12 AM on November 25, 2014 [62 favorites]

When the prosecutor gave his statement, I just kept waiting for him to talk about Wilson - this whole thing was a judgement call by Wilson. And then in answering questions after the statement, he made it seem like Wilson's views were an afterthought, because he's 'the one at issue'. No - that's the whole problem here - his judgement that Michael Brown was 90 feet tall and made of liquid metal that could form knives and stabbing weapons. If it was a black male officer who gunned down somebody that looked like sharon stone there's no way in hell there isn't at least a trial.

Also, if the officer's account could have come out within days of the shooting, it would have quelled a lot of this mess. I can't speak for all of us, but many in the black community want transparency and information. If something looks bad on its face, you need to explain why in detail that it is not that way. Even if it doesn't end up being a step by step account, give us a plausible scenario for what occurred. I think these guys feel like they can do what they want to do with the information and their authority is supposed to hold us over. Like the mere fact that they are law enforcement is enough - like we're supposed to just hang on their reputation, pun intended. No - share information, share it early, and treat the situation like it was your white mother who just got her face shot open.

After every one of these cases, I feel like I end up saying that same thing.
posted by cashman at 10:13 AM on November 25, 2014 [18 favorites]

If I could buy 30 seconds of time,

Or steal 60 years of life.
posted by grubi at 10:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

So, a witness sees Brown and Wilson "wrestling". That really doesn't provide evidence that Brown assaulted Wilson at all.

It does, but only in the shitty way that the law defines assault on a police officer. If you struggle, you're resisting arrest. If you touch the police officer at any time during said struggle, you're assaulting a police officer. It's wrong and crappy and awful, but it is generally the law in most places. The legal response you're supposed to have according to many locales to policemen grabbing you is simple compliance. (and sometimes, even going limp and letting them carry you can be called resisting arrest)

So multiple witnesses saying that they saw Brown and Wilson struggling or wrestling in any way, means that legally, Brown did assault Wilson. That may be a reason to change the law! Many people including myself do think people should have the right to defend themselves against police officers. But currently as it stands, we don't.
posted by corb at 10:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

Okay, fine, I'll say this instead. There are many, many, many lawyers who disagree that this was a reasonable (or right) decision. You do not get to speak on behalf of the Law.

Let's see their arguments. That's what I'd like to see. Why don't they step in?
posted by Ironmouth at 10:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I'm completely unbiased since I believe Darren Wilson and Mike Brown's testimony equally.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

So, Ironmouth, you still have no evidence of Brown assaulting Wilson. You responded to my call for evidence with an eyewitness interviewed — not by the grand jury, not by a prosecutor — by a television network. And that's in the face of the fact that eyewitness reports are unreliable.

So this evidence thing... you familiar with the term at all?
posted by grubi at 10:16 AM on November 25, 2014 [11 favorites]

Let's see their arguments. That's what I'd like to see. Why don't they step in?
posted by Ironmouth at 10:14 AM on November 25 [+][!]

We can't see their arguments becuase there will be no trial! That is the whole point!
posted by latkes at 10:18 AM on November 25, 2014 [29 favorites]

Let's see their arguments. That's what I'd like to see. Why don't they step in?

The National Bar Association is questioning how the Grand Jury, considering the evidence before them, could reach the conclusion that Darren Wilson should not be indicted and tried for the shooting death of Michael Brown. National Bar Association President Pamela J. Meanes expresses her sincere disappointment with the outcome of the Grand Jury’s decision but has made it abundantly clear that the National Bar Association stands firm and will be calling on the U.S. Department of Justice to pursue federal charges against officer Darren Wilson.
posted by theodolite at 10:20 AM on November 25, 2014 [42 favorites]

Greg Nog: " At this point, the crowd became less of an organized focused mass, more just wisps of groups spreading across the streets. This is apparently what the police wanted, since they had ordered dispersal at the corner of Grand and 44, calling the crowd an "unlawful assembly". "

Riot police are a sunk cost fallacy. We got all jacked up and ready to bash some heads, by golly, we'd best get some head crackin' in, else why put all the effort into getting dressed up?
posted by symbioid at 10:20 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Let's see their arguments. That's what I'd like to see. Why don't they step in?

Aside from the lawyers in this thread, here's an interview with an expert on constitutional law.
posted by likeatoaster at 10:20 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

Ironmouth, do you actually doubt there are lawyers who have a solid argument for believing this should have progressed to trial? You really can't see how that could be possible?
posted by sallybrown at 10:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

So I think I have a lot better view than the vast majority of the general public on this matter.

I think you're right. Legally, the shooting was justified. There was no way, assuming he was indicted, that a jury would convict. They almost never convict cops of anything. I don't think it's right, but is how things are.

The problem here is that there is a failure of process. When a cop has to kill a suspect - instead of arresting, charging and having a trial - it is a failure. The police have failed to keep their citizens - all of them, even the bad ones - safe.

We have here a spectacular failure on the part of the police in a number of ways. But no accountability at all.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 10:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

I think the thing that keeps getting lost in all this talk about whether or not the shooting was "legally justified," is whether or not events would have played out similarly had Mr. Brown been a white teenager.

Many, many white teenagers have made bad decisions, have picked fights with cops, have been arrested, have even been assaulted during those arrests. This black teenager ended up dead.

I mean, seriously. For those of you who are white and are shaking your heads at all the fuss the rest of us are kicking up. Picture your white sibling, cousin, friend -- some person in your life -- who did some stupid shit when they were young. Think of the stories they've told you about their run-ins with cops.

How many of those people are dead?

How many of those people never had the chance to get their lives sorted out, because a cop was so afraid of them that he shot them until they died?

Not until he was no longer threatened. Until they were dead.

I just really....I really want for people like Ironmouth to spend some time honestly thinking about that.
posted by Narrative Priorities at 10:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [67 favorites]

Isn't there a whole Supreme Court decision - Tennessee v. Garner - which says that a police officer can only use deadly force on a fleeing suspect if the cop has reason to believe that the fleeing suspect poses a substantial threat of death or serious injury to the cop or others? I know that there's a great deal of interpretation involved in applying that kind of decision, but the idea that if Mike Brown committed a robbery then the cop had legal justification in shooting him just like that....that doesn't seem to go with Tennessee v. Garner.

I'm having trouble finding relevent links, but I have heard at least one legal expert say that Missouri's laws are likely unconstitutional in this regard.
posted by jaguar at 10:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Can anyone see this happening in the 90s?

Starting a few years earlier to add context:
- Bernie Goetz
- Willie Horton
- Central Park jogger case
- Bensonhurst riot
- Mount Pleasant riot
- Crown Heights riot
- Rodney King riot
- St. Petersburg riot

So, yes.
posted by Lyme Drop at 10:23 AM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

jaguar: I'm having trouble finding relevent links, but I have heard at least one legal expert say that Missouri's laws are likely unconstitutional in this regard.

Colorado law professor Paul Campos:

On its face, Missouri law still follows the old common law rule that it’s lawful to shoot and kill a fleeing suspected felon, even if the suspect doesn’t pose an immediate danger to the police or the public. That rule was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court nearly 30 years ago, but Missouri hasn’t yet revised its statutes to reflect this.

Because of that Supreme Court ruling, the grand jury in this case was instructed that—under current Missouri law—Wilson could have legally shot and killed Brown only if Wilson “reasonably believed that [Brown] was attempting to escape by the use of a deadly weapon or would endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay, and [Wilson] reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was immediately necessary to effect the arrest of the offender,” to quote the standard jury instruction used in the state.

My question is: how the fuck can an unconstitutional law be on the books for thirty years?
posted by tonycpsu at 10:24 AM on November 25, 2014 [51 favorites]

I can't stop thinking about the millions of people all over the country who've already had to spend the duration of their child-rearing years precariously balancing the practice of letting kids be kids with the life-and-death urgency of getting those same kids to understand the fact that so many people, up to and including the American justice system, are going to see and treat them as though they are less than fully human for the rest of their lives.

The heft and weight of that psychological burden, the knowledge that your child will be held responsible for violent acts that are done to him or her because members of the dominant socioeconomic caste are so invested in clinging to and perpetuating a narrative that blames people of color for their own subjugation and victimization -- it's impossible to overstate and impossible to comprehend from the outside. From a blog post at Washington Monthly by Martin Longman, A Grave Injustice:

Officer Darren Wilson should have been given the opportunity to defend his actions in a court of law. He could well have won an acquittal. But what's clear is that the moment after he ended Michael Brown's life, the system went into overdrive to protect him and to justify what he had done. They made sure that killing Michael Brown was not a crime. It wasn't even maybe a crime. It was just what police officers do in America without having to worry that they might have to answer for it in court.

Americans can debate this all they want, but unless they know firsthand how this system feels to those who have to live their lives in terror, their opinions aren't worth much.

posted by divined by radio at 10:25 AM on November 25, 2014 [35 favorites]

I'm having trouble finding relevent links, but I have heard at least one legal expert say that Missouri's laws are likely unconstitutional in this regard.

See mediareport's comment upthread, linking to The Nation's article Why It's Impossible to Indict a Cop, specifically the section titled "SCOTUS and the license to kill"

The Graham analysis essentially prohibits any second-guessing of the officer's decision to use deadly force: no hindsight is permitted, and wide latitude is granted to the officer's account of the situation, even if scientific evidence proves it to be mistaken. Such was the case of Berkeley, Missouri, police officers Robert Piekutowski and Keith Kierzkowski, who in 2000 fatally shot Earl Murray and Ronald Beasley out of fear that the victims' car was rolling towards them. Forensic investigations established that the car had not in fact lurched towards the officers at the time of the shooting—but this was still not enough for the St. Louis County grand jury to indict the two cops of anything.

Police are held above all, because police cannot be asked to pause and question their actions in the heat of the moment.

solitary dancer: I wish we could just disarm the police force entirely. It'd probably be safer for everyone. But, police are supposed to be brave and heroic and willing to risk their lives in the line of duty. So let them be a little more brave and risk a little more.

I've been thinking about this and other examples of police being found to have acted within their right/duty in killing unarmed people, and I come back to the fact that the job of police is assumed to be a dangerous one, but it seems that the police presence escalates many situations, leading to circumstances where police feel endangered. It seems like the worst mix of macho warrior bullshit without any empathy that could help ratchet situations down.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:26 AM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

My question is: how the fuck can an unconstitutional law be on the books for thirty years?

From what I understand of the current process of removing unconstitutional laws, is that in order to have standing to sue to remove it, the person suing has to have been a victim of said law. Even if the law clearly contradicts a constitutional decision, they have to be removed bit by bit in this fashion. It's why we have so many bullshit, unconstitutional laws on the books.
posted by corb at 10:27 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

My argument is that the Supreme Court's interpretations of the Fourth Amendment overrule inconsistent Missouri statutory law regarding when lethal force can be used. There's no evidence that Brown was actually fleeing when the final, lethal shots were fired, so the felony allegedly committed at the convenience store cannot justify the use of lethal force under Tennessee v. Garner.

The only thing that could justify the lethal use of force at that stage is that the officer reasonably feared for his safety. And I think that that's a highly questionable proposition given the testimony that Brown was attempting to surrender before the lethal shots were fired. And since it's the defendant's burden to show that the shooting was justified, it was inappropriate to resolve that contested question in favor of the defendant at the grand jury stage.
posted by burden at 10:31 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

Vol 17th Oct 28th has an interview with a woman who states another woman filmed the shooting but the phone was confiscated by police.

Did this ever resurface?


Also, how can I copy/paste out of a PDF?
posted by asockpuppet at 10:31 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

the law is basically "A cop can start a fight with whoever, then kill the person, and it's justified".

Isn't it, though? ("it" being the law, not the justification) Isn't that the way it works?
posted by grubi at 10:32 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Read the statement of the prosecutor. He summarized the witnesses.

You mean the prosecutor that many have pointed out seemed to act more like Wilson's defense attorney?
posted by Gelatin at 10:32 AM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Also, how can I copy/paste out of a PDF?

sometimes it's just easier to post a screenshot.
posted by poffin boffin at 10:33 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Also, how can I copy/paste out of a PDF?

Are you looking at the stuff via the DocumentCloud website (as linked by CNN) or...? On the DocumentCloud website, you can click the "Text" tab at the top to get to the plain text version, which can then be copy/pasted.
posted by Jacqueline at 10:34 AM on November 25, 2014

Let's see their arguments. That's what I'd like to see. Why don't they step in?

Maybe if this had been allowed to go to, oh what's it called again, I think they call it a trial? Where all of this evidence could be presented to the public and weighed by some transparent process?

Seriously, can we all just ignore our resident cop apologist lawyer this time? I mean, this is literally how he makes his living, defending cops against brutality claims. He is absolutely not some objective observer here. It would be so much better to straight-up ignore him this time. God knows the police apologist viewpoint has already been fully represented by our completely fucked legal system.
posted by dialetheia at 10:34 AM on November 25, 2014 [52 favorites]

So multiple witnesses saying that they saw Brown and Wilson struggling or wrestling in any way, means that legally, Brown did assault Wilson.

For me, it comes back to the tools selected for the job (of restraining a person/responding to a threat).

In his testimony to the grand jury, Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson said he doesn't typically carry a Taser on him.

"We only have a select amount," Wilson testified. "Usually there is one available, but I usually elect not to carry one. It is not the most comfortable thing. They are very large; I don't have a lot of room in the front for it to be positioned."

Wilson said he's trained to use a Taser and believed he's used one before.

Yes, it's better to give all officers deadly weapons than make non-lethal equipment more available and comfortable. And really, are you complaining that you killed someone because the non-lethal weapon was uncomfortable to carry? I'm sorry, your comfort is nothing next to a dead body.


Also, how can I copy/paste out of a PDF?

You can copy/paste out of a PDF if it is selectable text, but if it is a collection of images, then you can take a screenshot or transcribe a section by hand.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:35 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

You can copy/paste out of a PDF if it is selectable text, but if it is a collection of images, then you can take a screenshot or transcribe a section by hand.

Yeah, that's a really terrible way to be posting this information online. I know courts are behind the times, but jesus. Learn some basic html!

Or maybe it's not in there interest to post easily readable and copyable documents.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Disarm the Police
posted by OHenryPacey at 10:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Ironmouth: "Ask CNN:

Wilson told the grand jury his original goal was to arrest Brown, after identifying him as a possible suspect in a shop theft.
"My main goal was to keep eyes on him and just to keep him contained until I had people coming there," he testified.
"I knew I had already called for backup and I knew they were already in the area for the stealing that was originally reported. So I thought if I can buy 30 seconds of time, that was my original goal when I tried to get him to come to the car. If I could buy 30 seconds of time, someone else will be here, we can make the arrest, nothing happens, we are all good. And it didn't happen that way."

All this really continues to reinforce we need to get actual community policing. If Darren Wilson could actually recognize "the perps" as kids in his community - if he knew them by name by recognizing them, instead of just some white guy driving around an area he doesn't know or live in...

He could have let it go - say - I've seen that kid before, I know he frequents X hangout, we can approach him later.

But nope - gotta do it in HOT PURSUIT! The other way just isn't as pumped full of adrenaline.
posted by symbioid at 10:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

R. McCulloch, responsible for indicting #DarrenWilson , was actively raising $$$ for him him #ferguson #MichaelBrown pic.twitter.com/d7OGMLSp8P— Bipartisan Report (@Bipartisanism) November 25, 2014

Evidence: the board of backstoppers.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:39 AM on November 25, 2014 [24 favorites]

More from the invaluable Charles Pierce.
posted by Gelatin at 10:45 AM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

Or maybe it's not in there interest to post easily readable and copyable documents.

Just click the Text tab at the top and copy to your heart's content. For example:

Case: State of Missouri v. Darren Wilson

Transcript of: Grand Jury Volume
Date: September 16, 2014

This transcript is printed on 100% recycled paper

I copy/pasted that from the first page using the Text tab.
posted by Jacqueline at 10:46 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Frowner - right. That whole Missouri statute is only partially pertinent given that the Supremes weighed in on a statute with the exact same sort of construct. It allows for use of force - not necessarily deadly force - given certain constraints. The Supremes further narrowed it, but there's even issues here that could have been raised in a trial.

Included in the constraints are the need for it to be an arrest the officer reasonably believes is lawful. So the whole question about whether Wilson has altered his testimony to include knowledge of this felony pursuit is pertinent. Something that could, say, be raised in a jury trial. Further, the statute demands this justification be raised by the defendant. Something that doesn't have to happen before a grand jury, and which a prosecutor could choose to attempt to discredit. You know, at trial.

So all of this is just a goalpost-shifting, really, because none of this relates to whether there was sufficient evidence to present to a grand jury (which could have been bypassed and Wilson simply charged) in order to pursue some truth. None of it demanded that there be this putzing around for an extended period of time allowing for the potential defendant to refine his story.

You want input from actual lawyers, I'm happy to share what I shared months ago, from my friend who has defended capital cases and who teaches law. Regarding the delay and grand jury process

It'd be nice if every person charged with murder had the benefit of thorough investigation by the police and the prosecutor before being charged. But our adversarial system doesn't give that benefit to citizens, even those who vehemently claim self-defense in their voluntary statements to the police. I know, I've represented those battered women who killed and were immediately charged, jailed, held, had to make bond, lost their jobs, only for the machinery to spit out a not guilty. If the system is a good one, it should work the same way for everyone.

regarding the level of investigation before deciding to pursue a trial

Unless police officers have a specific statutory privilege that entitles them to more investigation when their conduct (actus reus) demonstrates a provable murder case (with all the inferences which the govt. enjoys from the use of a deadly weapon in that prosecution), then the process is not playing out in a regular manner. Self-defense is an affirmative defense that must be raised by the defendant. The officer here is being treated differently from any other person who shot and killed someone. Put more bluntly, if you shot someone 6'2", 290 lbs., Linda you'd be charged with murder. (In which case, you should call me.) And I would raise your self-defense claim and the jury would assess these facts. You would not be given the benefit of the doubt in the charging and the investigation in my experience. The machinery of the executive would begin to work almost immediately to gather facts and evidence to prove your guilt. And we have an adversarial system, and that's a part of it. This officer is being treated like he's in the France, with an inquisitorial system. Both have strengths and weaknesses. If many of my clients had enjoyed the depth of objective, even suspect-oriented investigation that this officer is getting, I would have never been appointed, fewer tax dollars would have been spent, juries wouldn't have been in service for days, etc.

posted by phearlez at 10:48 AM on November 25, 2014 [19 favorites]

The National Bar Association has called for McCulloch to be indicted on federal charges.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:49 AM on November 25, 2014 [24 favorites]

Just click the Text tab at the top and copy to your heart's content.

Dammit, why didn't you say that earlier. Though that probably doesn't apply to the NYT separated transcripts.
posted by corb at 10:50 AM on November 25, 2014

Evidence: the board of backstoppers.

What am I missing with the support Wilson t-shirt and Backstoppers?

It looks like money for the t-shirts was split between Wilson's gofundme and Backstoppers, an organization that sends support to the families of fallen police officers, firefighters, paramedics, and EMTs. It does not look like money from Backstoppers was going to Wilson.

It's not a happy connection but I don't see how it is anything more.
posted by mountmccabe at 10:52 AM on November 25, 2014

It's certainly weird that the eyewitness accounts differ on this extremely significant point! That's why it's important that all charges be dropped and this case never goes to trial.
posted by theodolite at 10:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [18 favorites]

Molly Crabapple: How Ferguson showed us the truth about police
posted by homunculus at 10:54 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

>mountmccabe The prosecuting attorney is the president of Backstoppers. The org he is president of was actively fundraising for Wilson.
posted by waitingtoderail at 10:54 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

From what I understand of the current process of removing unconstitutional laws, is that in order to have standing to sue to remove it, the person suing has to have been a victim of said law.

That just makes the law unenforceable but leaves it on the books, which is to say still part of the text of the state's statutes. The only thing that removes an unconstitutional law's text from the statutes is, as it happens, a bill amending the state's statutes to remove the offending text. Oftentimes that seems to have to wait for the state to do one of their periodic wholesale overhauls of the statutes.

It wouldn't normally be a high priority even for well-meaning legislatures since the act of removing the text of an unenforceable and inoperative law has, by definition, no legal effect whatsoever.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:56 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Just to be clear: Was the gofundme t-shirt sale run by Backstoppers? Or were they just referenced by the gofundme campaign? It's not clear to me, as the gofundme campaign is no longer active.
posted by Saxon Kane at 10:57 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

feckless fecal fear mongering: The National Bar Association has called for McCulloch to be indicted on federal charges.

As mentioned by empath upthread, The National Bar Association (the oldest and largest national association of African-American attorneys and judges in the United States) is not the American Bar association (founded August 21, 1878, is a voluntary bar association of lawyers and law students, which is not specific to any jurisdiction in the United States), btw.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:57 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

My question is: how the fuck can an unconstitutional law be on the books for thirty years?

The law is not a recipe which is followed exactly as printed in the codes. It's interpreted, narrowed, amended - sometimes inline, sometimes via other sections - and declared unconstitutional. It's not remotely unusual for a statute that has been found unconstitutional to remain on the books. It typically requires an affirmative effort on the part of a legislature or council to excise it. Until that time it just sits there like a turd under glass, waiting for someone to clean it up or even to try to use it in a way they claim was not excised by judicial ruling.
posted by phearlez at 10:57 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

It's not a happy connection but I don't see how it is anything more.

See above. The president of Backstoppers was also the prosecuting attorney.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:58 AM on November 25, 2014

Missouri Police Use of Force Laws: A Turd Under Glass (tm)
posted by tonycpsu at 10:58 AM on November 25, 2014

See above. The president of Backstoppers was also the prosecuting attorney.

But BackStoppers was not running the fundraiser, they were just one of the beneficiaries.
posted by teraflop at 11:00 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Jurors still questioning Johnson about why they didn't do as the Officer said.

Because of the weird formatting with redacted names of jurors, I at first thought that there was counsel for Darren Wilson in the room. It took me a second to realize that it was the jurors. That's when I totally understood why there was no indictment. One of the jurors literally says (there is no question):

In my mind [it's] an act of defiance going down the middle of the street expecting cars to go around you and, you know, pay attention to you. If I see someone in the middle of the street I'd be concerned about hitting them and really slowing down or moving over... I would interpret that they are being defiant to show strength or something.

The Grand Jury spent just as much time chastising Johnson for walking in the street than they did asking about the actual shooting. Wilson's testimony, on the other, was basically his own uninterrupted account.
posted by Panjandrum at 11:01 AM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

Citizens made this call. They viewed more evidence than any of us did. By far. But they're wrong, even though none of us have seen a 100th of what they've seen.

They viewed exactly and only the evidence that the district attorney chose to show them. None of it tested by the adversary system or cross examination. How often, in your experience does a prosecutor show a grand jury more supposedly exculpatory evidence than incriminating evidence? How often does a prosecutor show a grand jury any supposedly exculpatory evidence at all?

Even if I were grant that a trail would have ended in a "not guilty" verdict -- which I do not -- that doesn't make it OK to go outside the norms of the system to avoid that trial. It's not enough that you get -- somehow -- to the same answer at the end. Justice also needs to be seen to be done.
posted by tyllwin at 11:02 AM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

The National Bar Association has called for McCulloch to be indicted on federal charges. But have they ever been on television?
posted by drezdn at 11:03 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

But BackStoppers was not running the fundraiser, they were just one of the beneficiaries.

You really don't see any problem with the prosecutor's organization raising money on shirts that say "I support Darren Wilson"?
posted by dialetheia at 11:03 AM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

They viewed exactly and only the evidence that the district attorney chose to show them. None of it tested by the adversary system or cross examination.

You do realize that in a trial, the jury would also get to see only the evidence the DA chose to present, PLUS the defense attorney, right?
posted by corb at 11:03 AM on November 25, 2014

I guess what I'm saying is that I can imagine the kind of person who would focus on jaywalking during a grand jury hearing where murder is on the table. And there is no way that person would send down an indictment against a white cop who shot a uppity defiant black kid.
posted by Panjandrum at 11:04 AM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

Why is the president of an organization set up expressly to assist police officers allowed to "prosecute" one?
posted by waitingtoderail at 11:04 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

The prosecutor's organization WASN'T raising money on those shirts. The shirt wasn't from Backstoppers.
posted by mountmccabe at 11:04 AM on November 25, 2014

You do realize that in a trial, the jury would also get to see only the evidence the DA chose to present, PLUS the defense attorney, right?

It's too bad that in this grand jury they seemed to be the same person.
posted by Gelatin at 11:04 AM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

But BackStoppers was not running the fundraiser, they were just one of the beneficiaries.

Good call. Looks like this is correct.
posted by saulgoodman at 11:05 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

They will always be or about to be thugs, drug dealers, lowlifes. They will always be animals.

"We're dealing with 4,000 animals in there, & you want to give me attitude?"
posted by homunculus at 11:06 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Good call. Looks like this is correct.

Doesn't matter much to me, this is still super fucked and he should have been aware of the optics of accepting money from an "I support Wilson" fundraiser. He's supposed to have been prosecuting Wilson, for chrissake.
posted by dialetheia at 11:07 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

You saw the press conference, right? If he cared about optics, he would have had an assistant deliver a dispassionate summary of the grand jury results instead of going on a 20-minute tirade against protesters, cable news networks, and social media.
posted by tonycpsu at 11:09 AM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Just to clarify something for myself:

If MucCulloch had allowed this to go to trial, presumably the strength of the prosecution's argument would still have been his responsibility. Could he not have tried Wilson with a weak argument, and still gotten the same innocent verdict without all the unseemliness? Or would the very act of bringing the indictment been too controversial to his police ties?
posted by Think_Long at 11:09 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

You do realize that in a trial, the jury would also get to see only the evidence the DA chose to present, PLUS the defense attorney, right?

Yes, I do. I also realize that if the grand jury indicts it's the prosecutor's job to actually attempt to prosecute it.

If your argument is that the DA's office in question is so corrupt that they could not be relied upon to carry out that duty either, I concede that may be a point.
posted by tyllwin at 11:10 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

Think_Long: no. A prosecutor grossly violates his ethical duties to bring a prosecution which he does not in good faith believe will result in a conviction.
posted by MattD at 11:12 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

To me, one of the worst parts of this situation outside of the killing itself is that the prosecutor, having taken a dive on the case to protect a police officer as his record suggested he would, went on national TV with the entire world watching and spiked the fucking ball without having a care in the world that it would come back to bite him. He knew he was untouchable, even after failing to recuse himself, and even after taking the unusual step of sending it to a grand jury.

I can't help but wonder if he's put himself on the Vice Presidential short list with that kind of unmitigated gall.
posted by tonycpsu at 11:14 AM on November 25, 2014 [18 favorites]

The silver lining here is the new grand jury system that has emerged. A system where the prosecution acts as an advocate for the defendant. Where all of the evidence is laid out for the grand jury and the prosecuter's office coaxes exculpatory evidence from conflicting testimony. It's amazing that we will have a system where the defendant is allowed to share her side of the story with the grand jury, allowing character testimony to influence the members of the jury. Not only will the prosecutor fail to bring charges against the defendant, they will not even ask for an indictment at the end of the process. Even the normally low bar of probable cause has been raised, and where conflict once demanded a true bill, now conflict grants the light of forgiveness, freeing the defendant from the harrowing process of a trial.

It is tragic that it took the death of Michael Brown to bring these reforms...wait, what? Every defendant isn't going to get this deference?

WTF?
posted by ryoshu at 11:15 AM on November 25, 2014 [41 favorites]

You really don't see any problem with the prosecutor's organization raising money on shirts that say "I support Darren Wilson"?

Please don't put words in my mouth. Did I say I don't see any problem with it?

I'm saying that "R. McCulloch, responsible for indicting #DarrenWilson , was actively raising $$$ for him him" is, apparently, false. He was not actively raising funds; funds were being donated by someone else to his organization.
posted by teraflop at 11:21 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

For people who are trotting out MLK, I have this quote from someone on twitter, h/t another Mefite:

"In these potentially violent times in Ferguson, I think it's important to look at the example MLK set. His quiet dignity. His restraint. How he was able to show compassion even under duress. How he got shot in the fucking face anyway."
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:25 AM on November 25, 2014 [84 favorites]

Ok, I've finished reading the Dorian Johnson testimony and there's a cold feeling in the pit of my stomach. Seriously. I don't recall ever feeling quite so fucking scared about things before.

It's one thing to have Mike Brown shot to death by an overzealous officer. It's quite another to see how utterly stacked the system is. Those repeated from the jurors, where Brown and Johnson were clearly wrong from the start, the leading questions by the attorney who were supposed to be seeking indictments of Officer WIlson. It's just all so fucked up and so blatantly out there, it's genuinely frightening.

Geeze.

Anyone have a link to Wilson's grand jury testimony?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:27 AM on November 25, 2014 [17 favorites]

Motion to be Given the Same Treatment and Protections as White Police Officers. A public defender requests their clients get the same Grand Jury treatment Wilson received.
posted by drezdn at 11:29 AM on November 25, 2014 [45 favorites]

Anyone have a link to Wilson's grand jury testimony?

Volume 5, starts on page 195.
posted by Jacqueline at 11:30 AM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Colorado Springs: A protest parade just marched by right outside my window! Maybe 200-300 people?
posted by mochapickle at 11:31 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

It's just all so fucked up and so blatantly out there, it's genuinely frightening.

Indeed.
posted by mikelieman at 11:34 AM on November 25, 2014

The National Bar Association responds to the Grand Jury's decision not to indict Police Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown.

...National Bar Association President Pamela J. Meanes expresses her sincere disappointment with the outcome of the Grand Jury’s decision but has made it abundantly clear that the National Bar Association stands firm and will be calling on the U.S. Department of Justice to pursue federal charges against officer Darren Wilson. “We will not rest until Michael Brown and his family has justice” states Pamela Meanes
posted by magstheaxe at 11:35 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

A meditation on a different but familiar historical moment, from C. Wright Mills' classic work of political sociology, The Power Elite:

"For the first time in American history, men in authority are talking about an 'emergency' without a foreseeable end... such men as these are crackpot realists: in the name of realism they have constructed a paranoid reality all their own."

This, I think, is a good way of describing this epistemic problem that is used to pretend that justice is being served in America, which we can see in this thread itself. Crackpot realism: the ostensibly hard-headed, reality-principle approach of Serious People which, for all its avowed pragmatism, seems to systematically ignore certain kinds of very pragmatic questions in favor of fatuous assumptions which inevitably privilege the right to domination, in light of crises that seem to come into existence whenever that domination is sought. Here, the "crisis" was the alleged assault of Darren Wilson, but it always gets manufactured one way or the other.

Enough of crackpot realism.
posted by clockzero at 11:37 AM on November 25, 2014 [23 favorites]

Not sure if this has been posted in this thread yet, but I found it very helpful: What's Different About The Grand Jury Process In The Darren Wilson Case?
posted by Jacqueline at 11:37 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

Interesting comment from the Q&A portion of Jacqueline's link:

Is McCulloch’s decision to present all of the evidence to the grand jury controversial?

Yes.

Richard Kuhns, an emeritus professor at Washington University Law School, questioned McCulloch’s approach. “Since he presumably doesn't do this with other cases, the not-so-hidden message must be ‘don't indict.’ One more reason why McCulloch should never have been in charge of the investigation.”

posted by Gelatin at 11:41 AM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

New York Times just updated its story. Yikes.
posted by bukvich at 11:42 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Comparing evidence between a grand jury and a trial is inherently flawed because the process and standards aren't the same. This is from the Federal rules of evidence but there's mention of Supremes weighing in so it relates.

(d) Exceptions. These rules — except for those on privilege — do not apply to the following:
(1) the court’s determination, under Rule 104(a), on a preliminary question of fact governing admissibility;
(2) grand-jury proceedings; and

from advisory committee notes:

(2) While some states have statutory requirements that indictments be based on “legal evidence,” and there is some case law to the effect that the rules of evidence apply to grand jury proceedings, 1 Wigmore §4(5), the Supreme Court has not accepted this view. In Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 76 S.Ct. 406, 100 L.Ed. 397 (1965), the Court refused to allow an indictment to be attacked, for either constitutional or policy reasons, on the ground that only hearsay evidence was presented.

“It would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution, in which laymen conduct their inquiries unfettered by technical rules. Neither justice nor the concept of a fair trial requires such a change.” Id. at 364. The rule as drafted does not deal with the evidence required to support an indictment.

So "it would be the same evidence" isn't true; the grand jury process allows for a lot more latitude for the GJ to hear things that could well be excluded at trial. Findlaw puts it more plainly as Under normal courtroom rules of evidence, exhibits and other testimony must adhere to strict rules before admission. However, a grand jury has broad power to see and hear almost anything they would like. - See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/how-does-a-grand-jury-work.html#sthash.gsi86FCV.dpuf

It also wouldn't normally be a big info dump. The latest article from Volkoh hand-waves this off as if it's irrelevant but again, if we're going to even pretend the fiction that this is the same system for everyone, the fact that a cop gets a radically different handling than Joe Schmoe - and a different treatment than when white folks get shot down - it's highly relevant.

If you want to see the rules for grand jury proceedings in MO they're here.
posted by phearlez at 11:43 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

I should mention the article Jacqueline cited was dated prior to the release of the grand jury's decision. Given that, it shows remarkable foresight.

Who decides whether to indict, the grand jurors, the prosecutor or the presiding judge?

The grand jury, but the prosecutor’s views are extremely influential.

posted by Gelatin at 11:45 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Richard Kuhns, an emeritus professor at Washington University Law School, questioned McCulloch’s approach. “Since he presumably doesn't do this with other cases, the not-so-hidden message must be ‘don't indict.’

And note that this was a grand jury held over, who had seen the typical presentation from prosecutors, so they were well primed to recognize a difference from tradition.
posted by phearlez at 11:49 AM on November 25, 2014 [11 favorites]

The law is really clear that between the police officer and the citizen, only one person has the right of self defense.

Your right to self-defense against unlawful force is not lessened at all by the fact that your attacker is a police officer. It's just that there's apparently a greater chance that you'll be killed and your attacker will lie and get away with it despite the law being on your side.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 11:49 AM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Wishlist for the Ferguson Public Library, with instructions for getting the books delivered.
posted by divabat at 11:52 AM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

"I can't help but wonder if he's put himself on the Vice Presidential short list with that kind of unmitigated gall."
posted by tonycpsu

He could go hunting with Dick Cheney and have an exploratory.
posted by clavdivs at 11:53 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

non-edit: looks like all the books on the wishlist have been purchased, but the librarian is still after "books with protagonists of color, and books on civil rights history, civic engagement, and emotional healing after trauma."
posted by divabat at 11:54 AM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

Which is shorthand for "we have enough Fifty Shades books already, thanks."
posted by delfin at 11:57 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

"We Are Not Beasts of Burden" is the only book left unfulfilled on this 2nd wishlist (I'd buy it, but it's a little out of my range)
posted by divabat at 11:58 AM on November 25, 2014

"In these potentially violent times in Ferguson, I think it's important to look at the example MLK set. His quiet dignity. His restraint. How he was able to show compassion even under duress. How he got shot in the fucking face anyway."

I found myself coming to the same conclusion, within seconds of pointing to MLK and MKG (Gandhi) in angry African timeline. Both came to the same violent end because of a gun.

This reminds me of a long conversation I had once with a former ANC Spear, now a church leader/reverend, who spoke eloquently on the pros and cons of using violence, and the path to their taking this decision even though they'd started out with Gandhian principles as voiced by Mandela.
posted by infini at 11:59 AM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Also, if you denounce looting now but didn't every time a whole bunch of white people riot after a sports team wins/loses a game, then you are a racist.

Some examples, if anyone needs something to post in response to idiot friends and family on Facebook.
posted by Jacqueline at 12:02 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Some more examples.
posted by Jacqueline at 12:03 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Since Wilson was not indicted, but therefore not acquitted, does the concept of double jeopardy apply? Could a future DA declare how obviously in the tank McCulloch was and either return the case to a grand jury or indict Wilson on his or her own directions? Not that any DA who wanted to remain on good terms with the local police establishment necessarily would, of course, but would it be legal?
posted by Gelatin at 12:04 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

If you want to help the Ferguson Public Library (aside from sending them books which it seems like they already have now!) there is a PayPal button on their site, thanks to Ferguson librarian Scott Bonner.
posted by Ragini at 12:06 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

"In these potentially violent times in Ferguson, I think it's important to look at the example MLK set. His quiet dignity. His restraint. How he was able to show compassion even under duress. How he got shot in the fucking face anyway."

This is great, and a fantastic comeback to all the condescending holier-than-thou white people who have no shame whatsoever lecturing black folks about "what MLK would have done" right now.

Another good tweet that illuminates the incredible amount of benefit of the doubt people would have to grant Wilson to find his justification credible:
David Cochrane @CochraneCBCNL: "The phrase "the final 10 shots" really stands out when only one person was armed."
posted by dialetheia at 12:10 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

clockzero: "Enough of crackpot realism."

Or as I like to call it ...
"Privilege"
posted by symbioid at 12:11 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

It's rather notable that, of Darren Wilson's self-nominated public defenders in this thread, nobody's even tried to mount a defense of the decision to punt the case to the grand jury in the first place. If you assume the legitimacy of the venue, and take the word of some witnesses and not others, you can probably make a valid legal argument that casts suspicion on reasonable doubt, but if that purportedly just process comes tacked on to the end of an unjust process, it doesn't remotely resemble equal justice under the law.
posted by tonycpsu at 12:13 PM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Richard Kuhns, an emeritus professor at Washington University Law School, questioned McCulloch’s approach. “Since he presumably doesn't do this with other cases, the not-so-hidden message must be ‘don't indict.’

I thought this was obvious and went without saying? If he wanted an indictment there would have been an indictment.

The whole sideshow he put forward was so he could be a mirror universe Pontius Pilate and wash his hands of the whole thing.
posted by Justinian at 12:14 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

The most recent issue of Today in Tabs is a must-read.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 12:16 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment does not attach in a grand jury proceeding, or bar a grand jury from returning an indictment when a prior grand jury has refused to do so
posted by empath at 12:18 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

In case folks missed it (or I did upthread) on August 15th there was a spate of articles in which the Ferguson police chief stated for the record that Darren Wilson did *not* know about the robbery when he first stopped Michael Brown.

That has now changed.

The lack of any kind of detailed incident reports completed at the time of the shooting may have something to do with the change of narrative. It certainly makes it hard to pin anything down about the initial descriptions of events.
posted by mediareport at 12:19 PM on November 25, 2014 [46 favorites]

I thought this was obvious and went without saying? If he wanted an indictment there would have been an indictment.

Some things are never obvious enough for the Respectability and Rule of Law Brigade.
posted by phearlez at 12:20 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

I think this case deserves one of those Cracked Magazine essays (if you haven't been on top of things, they often do excellent, enlightening pieces recently). The kind where: You are saying this, but other people are hearing this.

You are saying this: Michael Brown assaulted a convenience store owner in a robbery.

Others are hearing this: "An act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact" is a definition of assault. In other people's heads the word assault means bodily harm. You are using the term to justify a death sentence.

You are saying: Michael Brown was huge.

Others are hearing: Huge black men are WMD.

You are saying: The shooting was justified.

Others are hearing: Justified means you agree it was the right course of action. Justified means you agree with the crappy system.

To some extent, the above is an (argumentative) apology for the supporters of the verdict. Just to make it clear, I do not support the grand jury's decision. It should have been brought to trial and the evidence tested.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 12:21 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

You know, I'm usually a pretty reasonable 42-year-old father of two. I'm also a white guy who has benefited throughout his life from white privilege, from class privilege, the whole schmear.

There's something about this latest incident that has radicalized me like nothing so far in my life, and I am daily filled with a kind of nearly uncontrollable rage about the system I've been coopted into. Where police officers can shoot down innocent kids for walking while black, and not only walk away from it, but get rewarded for it.

I'm managing to mostly keep it under control for the sake of my family, but there's a small part of me that's growing louder and more unreasonable each day. And that part is screaming "THEY CAN'T KILL US ALL", and wants to see open warfare in the streets of America.

Because they can't kill us all. They can try like hell, and they'll get away with it for a while, but the motherfuckers can't kill us all. And maybe it's time for axes in heads. The 1% have built their army right in front of us, they're using it with impunity, and they transparently think that they're going to win.

And that little part of me that's going apeshit knows that none of my votes have mattered. None of my actions matter, because my rights have been coopted, my vote has been neutered, my economic influence is real. So I'm left with the very real question of, how can I best serve to change society?

And the answer is starting to seem more and more like "as a corpse". Fuck it: if the only way I can make change is by making the state kill me in public for saying that they're out of control, then the handwriting's more or less on the wall, isn't it?

I know this is all irrational, and that it's a kind of insane reaction to what's going on. And I am mostly able to keep myself calm and focused on not letting my rage drive my choices.

But if I'm feeling like this, and I'm one of the perpetual victors in life simply by dint of my race and my class, I can't even begin to fathom how a young man of color is feeling at this moment, when his entire existence has been deemed worthless at the moment of his birth.

A reckoning is coming. We all know it's coming. And we're past the point where it can be accomplished peacefully. We will all burn for this, and we deserve to.
posted by scrump at 12:21 PM on November 25, 2014 [56 favorites]

Respectability and Rule of Law Brigade.

The only law they are concerned about is "I am the law."
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:21 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

The lack of any kind of detailed incident reports completed at the time of the shooting may have something to do with the change of narrative. It certainly makes it hard to pin anything down about the initial descriptions of events.

One might almost think that's on purpose.

A reckoning is coming. We all know it's coming. And we're past the point where it can be accomplished peacefully. We will all burn for this, and we deserve to.

One of the vandals (who, I want to emphasize again, were obviously in the minority last night) apparently quoted The Hunger Games in some graffiti: "If we burn, you burn with us." Chilling, but impossible to ignore.

FYI, peaceful protests are shutting down streets in Ferguson right now. They've just started occupying a bridge after apparently faking out the cops so they ended up on the wrong side of the highway, where the protesters weren't.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:23 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

peaceful protesters getting pepper sprayed by cops in riot gear, a few minutes ago
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:26 PM on November 25, 2014

Things white people can do. a not unreasonable list of suggestions
posted by OHenryPacey at 12:27 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

peaceful protesters getting pepper sprayed by cops in riot gear, a few minutes ago

So when Governor Nixon was quoted by the NYT as saying “Violence like we saw last night cannot be repeated,” he obviously wasn't referring to police conduct.
posted by Gelatin at 12:28 PM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

The most recent issue of Today in Tabs is a must-read.

I had not seen that picture of Mike Brown standing in the snow before. Now I'm crying for a boy who will never see another snowfall, who will never play in the snow again.

There is no justice for any of us if there is no justice for all of us.
posted by winna at 12:29 PM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

What is Critical Race Theory?

Legal discourse says that the law is neutral and colorblind, however, CRT challenges this legal “truth” by examining liberalism and meritocracy as a vehicle for self-interest, power, and privilege. CRT also recognizes that liberalism and meritocracy are often stories heard from those with wealth, power, and privilege. These stories paint a false picture of meritocracy; everyone who works hard can attain wealth, power, and privilege while ignoring the systemic inequalities that institutional racism provides.

Critical Race Theory

One key focus of critical race theorists is a regime of white supremacy and privilege maintained despite the rule of law and the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the laws. Agreeing with critical theorists and many feminists that law itself is not a neutral tool but instead part of the problem, critical race scholars identify inadequacies of conventional civil rights litigation.

posted by audi alteram partem at 12:30 PM on November 25, 2014 [14 favorites]

>In case folks missed it (or I did upthread) on August 15th there was a spate of articles in which the Ferguson police chief stated for the record that Darren Wilson did *not* know about the robbery when he first stopped Michael Brown.

I opened a few of those links -- they don't quote the chief as saying that Wilson didn't know about the robbery, but that Wilson didn't know Brown was a suspect in the robbery when Wilson first interacted with Brown. Which is consistent with Wilson's account (see p.209 of Wilson's testimony to the grand jury).
posted by BurntHombre at 12:30 PM on November 25, 2014

If Wilson didn't know Brown was a suspect in that robbery, then Wilson's use of lethal force is (legally) not justified.

It's not morally justified anyway, and in any case 'stealing a pack of cigarettes' only turns into 'evil death monster Hulk demon who shoots laser beams out of his eyes' when the alleged thief is black.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:33 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Just in case people here aren't aware: to the best of my knowledge grand juries, no longer exist in other common law jurisdictions; they only survive in the USA. They are mandatory at a Federal level, but there's no reason they couldn't be eliminated in the US States that still retain them. As we have seen, they're basically a tool in the hands of prosecutors; they indict or dismiss prosecutions as desired.
posted by Joe in Australia at 12:34 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

If Wilson didn't know Brown was a suspect in that robbery, then Wilson's use of lethal force is (legally) not justified.

If Wilson did know Brown was a suspect in that robbery, then Wilson's accosting them on the grounds of walking in the middle of the street seems utterly bizarre and makes no sense at all.
posted by Gelatin at 12:36 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

>If Wilson didn't know Brown was a suspect in that robbery, then Wilson's use of lethal force is (legally) not justified.

Read p. 209 -- it covers Wilson's testimony as to when he realized Brown and his companion were the suspects in the robbery.
posted by BurntHombre at 12:36 PM on November 25, 2014

That "Witness 40" document really deserves its own hashtag on Twitter...

u guys I was totes there and brown was charging the cop with a sammerai sword no really #witness40
posted by uosuaq at 12:36 PM on November 25, 2014 [27 favorites]

mediareport: The lack of any kind of detailed incident reports completed at the time of the shooting may have something to do with the change of narrative. It certainly makes it hard to pin anything down about the initial descriptions of events.

As does the lack of photographs, due to the mysterious 'dead battery'. Because you definitely couldn't find another camera. Or a phone. Or buy some fresh batteries.

It's quite clear that from the start, the only interest the authorities in Ferguson had was in covering up the murder of Mike Brown.
posted by tavella at 12:37 PM on November 25, 2014 [21 favorites]

The so-called "facts" are not clear at all. That is why you have a trial, to establish the facts.

1. For months, the police chief has stated that Wilson was not aware of the robbery. Suddenly, that story has changed. Why? We will never know.

2. For months, the police chief has stated that Wilson stopped Brown for jaywalking. It had nothing to do with robbery suspects. That story has changed. Why? We will never know.

3. If Wilson believed they were robbery suspects, why did he just tell them to get out of the street. There was no attempt to detain them. Why? We will never know.

4. For months, the police chief has said that Wilson called for backup after the confrontation. Now we hear that he called before the confrontation. Or was it between shots in the confrontation. Why the discrepancies? We will never know.

5. The forensics person testified that they didn't take pictures of the crime scene because of a camera battery. They also testified they didn't take any crime scene measurements. Bloggers have reconstructed the scene from on site videos and goggle maps and determined that Brown died at least 120 feet from Wilson's car. How does that fit into Wilson's theory of eminent threat? We will never know.

6. There is conflicting testimony about the nature of the physical altercation. There will be no trial to test those witnesses.

7. There is conflicting testimony about whether Brown had his hands up or fists up. There will be no trial to test those witnesses.

8. There is conflicting testimony about whether Brown was surrendering or charging Wilson. There will be no trial to test those witnesses.

So with a such uncertainty about crucial elements of the crime, why no trial? The purpose of a trial is to establish the facts. What are claimed to be "facts" are not facts, because they haven't been subjected to trial.

A grand jury proceeding in which you simply dump all of these conflicting "facts" on a jury with no advocacy to test and distinguish them is a sham trial. The strategy of the prosecutor in this case was to simply generate reasonable doubt, which is not the prosecutor's job.
posted by JackFlash at 12:38 PM on November 25, 2014 [128 favorites]

I can't read it right now but is there actual recordings of police radio chatter to back this up or just wilson's word?
posted by futz at 12:39 PM on November 25, 2014

When white people riot, a handy Storify. I guess someone shopped out all the teargas.

Read p. 209 -- it covers Wilson's testimony as to when he realized Brown and his companion were the suspects in the robbery.

Wilson's testimony is fundamentally not credible. Maybe the part where he spelled out his name is accurate.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:39 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Nancy LeTourneau: “The Most Intense, Aggressive Face I’ve Ever Seen” (i.e., Black)

[Darren Wilson's testimony] sounds an awful lot like South Carolina State Trooper Sean Groubert’s initial testimony about why he started shooting at Levar Jones after pulling him over for a seat belt violation.

Before I could even get out of my car he jumped out, stared at me, and as I jumped out of my car and identified myself, as I approached him, he jumped head-first back into his car … he jumped out of the car. I saw something black in his hands.

The only problem for Groubert is that in that case, there was an actual video of what happened[...]In discussing the Groubert shooting, Leonard Pitts sums up what’s going on in all three of these situations…at minimum.

So let us accord him the benefit of the doubt because in situations like this, people always want to make it a question of character. And the shooter’s friends always feel obliged to defend him with the same tired words: “He is not a racist.”

He probably isn’t, at least not in the way they understand the term.

But what he is, is a citizen of a country where the fear of black men is downright viral. That doesn’t mean he burns crosses on the weekend. It means he’s watched television, seen a movie, used a computer, read a newspaper or magazine. It means he is alive and aware in a nation where one is taught from birth that thug equals black, suspect equals black, danger equals black…

The Groubert video offers an unusually stark image of that fear in action. Viewing it, it seems clear the trooper is not reacting to anything Jones does. In a very real sense, he doesn’t even see him. No, he is reacting to a primal fear of what Jones is, to outsized expectations of what Jones might do, to terrors buried so deep in his breast, he probably doesn’t even know they’re there.

When I read Darren Wilson’s words, it seemed obvious to me that he was also reacting to that primal fear buried deep in his breast. That’s what most racism looks like these days. And that’s why so many unarmed black boys are dying.

posted by zombieflanders at 12:39 PM on November 25, 2014 [47 favorites]

I know it's been pointed out, but worth mentioning again - the mere existence of reasonable people pointing out apparent holes and weird things all over the Wilson narrative - whether those are actually holes or not! - is proof positive that this should have gone to trial. That supports a finding of probable cause - a low bar to clear, a threshold for the real questions. That's what is so confounding about the decision - it shouldn't even have been a nail-biting debate, not at this stage in the process. There's a lot of lawyering going on to try to disguise that fact. That lawyering is a smokescreen. There are doubts merely present, regardless of how you feel about them - and there are lots of them - and those doubts should have been investigated further. That they weren't is a miscarriage of justice.
posted by naju at 12:43 PM on November 25, 2014 [59 favorites]

Cops in Ferguson have just put on gas masks--at a peaceful protest. Seattle protests are growing. Ferguson cops are carrying large blue canisters of pepper spray.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:43 PM on November 25, 2014

(@deray is in the Ferguson protests right now, so is @Nettaaaaaaaa)
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:44 PM on November 25, 2014

>Wilson's testimony is fundamentally not credible. Maybe the part where he spelled out his name is accurate.

I'm not sure how you can assert that, but, regardless of whether it's credible, it addresses the dilemma you posed.
posted by BurntHombre at 12:45 PM on November 25, 2014

Mod note: Another comment deleted. Seriously, folks, this is not the right place to wander in all wide-eyed and say "but what about [x] testimony?" We've had a large number of threads to hash that out, and it's most likely been covered in this very thread already. Please engage with the discussion at hand. Thanks.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 12:46 PM on November 25, 2014

Jack Flash, you only have a trial when the prosecutor believes that the facts suffice beyond a reasonable doubt for a conviction. You don't just say "person A and person B were involved in a bad thing and person B died, therefore put person A on trial to see whether it was his fault." The prosecutor couldn't have made more clear last night that I believed the facts were entirely the other way, and used the grand jury for political cover.

If the Governor or Attorney General of Missouri believes that the prosecutor plainly overlooked damning evidence (or over-relied upon exculpatory evidence) they may well have the right to appoint a special prosecutor to re-examine the evidence and file charges.
posted by MattD at 12:46 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Stephanopoulous got the first interview
posted by asockpuppet at 12:46 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Tonight at 8pm eastern the Black FreeThinkers online radio show will be on the topic: "Black Lives Matter - Standing in Solidarity with Ferguson Protestors"
posted by audi alteram partem at 12:47 PM on November 25, 2014

Naju -- my comment above covers your remark as well. Probable cause is what the grand jury or judge (in the absent of a grand jury) requires the prosecutor to prove to move forward; the prosecutor must himself believe the evidence supports conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. Which he plainly did not.
posted by MattD at 12:48 PM on November 25, 2014

You're not sure how I can assert that? Possibly the most disingenuous thing I've read today. How about 'like a demon' or that his testimony doesn't line up with audio recording or that for months we've heard he didn't know about the robbery or the lack of an incident report ever being filed or obviously being coached by attorneys or... shall I go on? That's exactly how I am quite comfortable asserting that Wilson's testimony isn't credible.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:49 PM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

If the Governor or Attorney General of Missouri believes that the prosecutor plainly overlooked damning evidence (or over-relied upon exculpatory evidence) they may well have the right to appoint a special prosecutor to re-examine the evidence and file charges.

The fact that the prosecutor presented exculpatory evidence before the grand jury at all makes a conclusion that justice was not served fairly obvious, but the Governor or Attorney General of Missouri need not only the right but the desire to act, and Governor Nixon, at the very least, has hardly seemed sympathetic to those angered by Brown's killing.
posted by Gelatin at 12:51 PM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

The prosecutor sabotaged the possibility of indictment, MattD. He didn't believe a conviction was possible so he very carefully made sure the grand jury didn't think one was possible.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:52 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Thanks for clarifying, feckless. Can you provide a link that shows someone claiming Wilson didn't know about the robbery? I'm not saying it didn't happen, but the links provided by mediareport above don't support it.
posted by BurntHombre at 12:53 PM on November 25, 2014

But grand juries aren't supposed to determine whether a conviction is possible, only whether there is probably cause to believe a crime was committed. It's clear that McCulloch did his best to ensure no indictment was returned, but does it necessarily follow it's because he didn't think he could obtain a conviction?
posted by Gelatin at 12:54 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

you only have a trial when the prosecutor believes that the facts suffice beyond a reasonable doubt for a conviction.

The prosecutor determines the likelihood of facts by doing serious investigation to determine which versions of the story are most likely. You don't just dump a truck load of conflicting information on the the grand jury and tell them to sort it out. They don't have the investigative power to sift through conflicting information. That is the prosecutor's job. In this case he didn't do that job because he just dumped everything in the grand jury's lap, no matter how outlandish. They had no choice but to return reasonable doubt, because the prosecutor's intent was to confuse them by not doing his job of investigation and qualifying the evidence.
posted by JackFlash at 12:55 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Is anyone posting a compendium of inconsistencies from the testimony documents somewhere?
posted by asockpuppet at 12:56 PM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

It's clear that McCulloch did his best to ensure no indictment was returned, but does it necessarily follow it's because he didn't think he could obtain a conviction?

Of course not. He plainly did not want even the shadow of a chance of a conviction.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 12:57 PM on November 25, 2014

BurntHombre, literally five seconds of google: 1, 2.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:57 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

MattD, I have no clue what you're on about. In this instance - with a grand jury standard of probable cause - a prosecutor need not believe the evidence supports conviction beyond a reasonable doubt in order to file charges. Reasonable doubt is simply not the standard here. It doesn't matter what the prosecutor believes, and the standard held to prosecutors in other situations is not relevant; the grand jury is at the helm of the decision here.
posted by naju at 12:57 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

It'd be pretty awful if the prosecutor could not only duck responsibility by passing it off to the grand jury and then overrule them anyway if they came back with an indictment.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:01 PM on November 25, 2014

Feckless, you're making the same error mediareport made. Those links say that Wilson didn't know Brown was a suspect in the robbery when he initially interacted with him, not that Wilson wasn't aware of the robbery. The former is consistent with Wilson's grand jury testimony.
posted by BurntHombre at 1:01 PM on November 25, 2014

Protests spreading to Philadelphia
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:02 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Wilson not knowing that Brown was a suspect in the robbery means Wilson had no justification to shoot, legally speaking. I'm not sure what is difficult to parse here.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:03 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Also, Wilson not knowing that Brown was a suspect in the robbery makes his statement to the grand jury that he stopped Brown because he matched the description of a suspect in the robbery....odd? Let's say odd.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:06 PM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

Wilson knew Brown was a suspect in the robbery prior to shooting him, but not prior to his first interaction with Brown.

You really, really should read Wilson's testimony. You don't have to believe it, but at least you'll understand the timeline as presented to the grand jury.
posted by BurntHombre at 1:06 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

.
posted by Cookiebastard at 1:07 PM on November 25, 2014

>...his statement to the grand jury that he stopped Brown because he matched the description of a suspect in the robbery...

I know it's tricky due to the PDFs, but can you point to where in Wilson's testimony he says that? I'm assuming it's somewhere around pp.209-210, but I'm not seeing it.
posted by BurntHombre at 1:08 PM on November 25, 2014

You really, really should read Wilson's testimony.

I have. It's not credible.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:10 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Top of page 209. He yells at the pair to walk on the sidewalk, but doesn't actually move to stop them until he sees cigarillos in Brown's hand and connects them to the report of a robbery.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:10 PM on November 25, 2014

I think what MattD is getting at is detailed in this reddit comment. (/r/law has a lot of people familiar with the legal system, and has had quite a few insightful comments on the matter). It seems to come down to the idea that the prosecutor has the ethical obligation to not aggressively pursue an indictment, if they believe that they are sending an innocent person to trial, in an attempt to convict as few innocent people as possible.

I think it's another argument entirely that McCulloch believed Wilson to be innocent before even reviewing the evidence, and was an unethical choice for prosecutor.
posted by Skephicles at 1:11 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I don't know if this will help clear things up at all, but if you look here at page 52, you will see testimony from the sergeant (Wilson's superior) who arrived at the scene shortly after the shooting. He says explicitly that Wilson did not know about the theft.

There was definitely confusion about this, early on, with public statements from the PD.

Wilson's claim is that he did not immediately recognize Brown as a suspect (when he stopped him for jaywalking) but quickly realized since Brown had cigarillos in his hand and was dressed as the robbery suspect had been described, he was likely the suspect; then he backed up his car and the serious confrontation started.
posted by torticat at 1:11 PM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

Chronology is everything.
posted by clavdivs at 1:12 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Darren Wilson says he has a clean conscience.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:13 PM on November 25, 2014

Thanks, torticat -- that's hugely helpful.
posted by BurntHombre at 1:14 PM on November 25, 2014

Nope. Not going to watch the Wilson interview. Not today.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:15 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

It seems to come down to the idea that the prosecutor has the ethical obligation to not aggressively pursue an indictment, if they believe that they are sending an innocent person to trial, in an attempt to convict as few innocent people as possible.

I think it's another argument entirely that McCulloch believed Wilson to be innocent before even reviewing the evidence, and was an unethical choice for prosecutor.

Any U.S. prosecutor who can claim with a straight face that they approach the job with this attitude as a matter of course, and not only when it's a member of a preferred class in the crosshairs, has a future in deadpan comedy if they ever get disbarred.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:20 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

It seems to come down to the idea that the prosecutor has the ethical obligation to not aggressively pursue an indictment, if they believe that they are sending an innocent person to trial, in an attempt to convict as few innocent people as possible.

Goodness, then it is surely peculiar that the odds of a grand jury not indicting are so low! in 2010 there were 162,000 federal grand jury prosecutions - the jury declined indictment only 11 times.
posted by winna at 1:21 PM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

Darren Wilson says he has a clean conscience.

Of course he does. Thousands of people have told him he's a hero and totally awesome and right. They can't all be wrong, can they? Those other folks? Oh, just tune them out. I have it on good authority that haters gonna hate, after all.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 1:22 PM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

Darren Wilson says he has a clean conscience.

Jesus Dude, can you wait a week or so before giving interviews.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:23 PM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

His conscience is so clean, he's at a secret location.
posted by cashman at 1:25 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Of course he has a clean conscience - to him, he didn't even kill a person, but an "it," a "demon." Fucking gross.
posted by agregoli at 1:25 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

It seems to come down to the idea that the prosecutor has the ethical obligation to not aggressively pursue an indictment, if they believe that they are sending an innocent person to trial, in an attempt to convict as few innocent people as possible.

Goodness, then it is surely peculiar that the odds of a grand jury not indicting are so low! in 2010 there were 162,000 federal grand jury prosecutions - the jury declined indictment only 11 times.

Oof, man, do I ever hate playing devil's advocate in this case, but it's likely that prosecutors generally decline to even bring charges to a grand jury in most cases where they think they won't secure a conviction, but in a case like this, that's not really an option, politically.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 1:26 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I don't get it. This is a justified shooting with a lot of media hype. The guy in NYC? That was police misconduct. Yet no one cares about that one and everyone cares about this one.

This begs so many questions that I don't know where to begin.

Brown's shooting didn't happen in a vacuum. People aren't merely reacting to the facts of the case, as you see them: the stolen cigarillos and the altercation between Wilson and Brown.

On a local level, people are reacting to the fact that their police department seems more interested in draining them of funds than protecting them. Or the fact that said department is overwhelmingly white—94%—even though the community it represents is mostly black.

People reacted to the the fact that Brown's body was left lying on the street outside their homes for four hours after he was shot. They reacted to a ridiculously outsize and extended police response to protests that turned their neighborhood into something out of a Michael Bay flick for days on end.

And people are reacting to Brown's murder not to the exclusion of other murders, but in light of them. Because in case after case, young black men have been killed, and their killers mistried or exonerated.

And as to Akai Gurley: it's rank bullshit to claim that "no one cares" about his murder, which, again, happened less than a week ago. (I mean, for fuck's sake, the man's body still isn't in the ground.) There will absolutely be people holding signs about his death at the protests in Union Square tonight, even though those gatherings were organized in light of the grand jury verdict.

And people will continue to be mad about Gurley's death, even though his body wasn't left lying in the street, and our medical examiner's office didn't drag its feet about declaring the death a homicide, and Gurley will probably get a full and thorough autopsy, and the NYPD won't have as much leeway to play GI Joe with teargas and MRAPs on the street. Even though crime in poor and urban areas is somehow taken as a given in this country, and New York City is viewed as less than wholly American.

It's not as if we only get to be mad about one murder at a time—as if each time an unarmed civilian is gunned down in the streets, we need to gather a conclave to decide if we should drop the thing we were infuriated about and switch to a new cause célèbre. What people are mad about is all of the murders. All of the injustices. The fact that this keeps fucking happening. The fact that there is a clear and pervasive pattern in which young black lives are not protected or valued and killers aren't held accountable for their actions.

There was some talk upthread about whether the 90s were a kinder or gentler time. I'm just a few years older than dubious_dude, but when I remember the 90s, I think not only of Rodney King, but Amadou Diallo and Abner Louima.

It seems to me that, whether or not Michael Brown's case was perfect, not much has changed.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 1:26 PM on November 25, 2014 [76 favorites]

@jrosenbaum: Head of Missouri Highway Patrol "Last night was a disaster." Says it was "disappointing" to see Unified Command's work "go up in flames."
posted by Golden Eternity at 1:30 PM on November 25, 2014

And as to Akai Gurley: it's rank bullshit to claim that "no one cares"

thank you.

It's not as if we only get to be mad about one murder at a time—as if each time an unarmed civilian is gunned down in the streets, we need to gather a conclave to decide if we should drop the thing we were infuriated about and switch to a new cause célèbre. What people are mad about is all of the murders. All of the injustices. The fact that this keeps fucking happening. The fact that there is a clear and pervasive pattern in which young black lives are not protected or valued and killers aren't held accountable for their actions.

and thank you.
posted by jammy at 1:31 PM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

Of course he has a clean conscience - to him, he didn't even kill a person, but an "it," a "demon." Fucking gross.

Hey um.. I'm no apologist for Wilson's racist murdering ways, but it's probably a good idea for those of us who are excoriating him to not leave ourselves open by providing other racists fuel to discredit us. As I pointed out above, if you look at what he said in context, it seems pretty clear that 'it' referred to the expression on Michael Brown's face. Wilson used 'he' both immediately before and immediately after that remark.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:31 PM on November 25, 2014 [23 favorites]

but in a case like this, that's not really an option, politically.

What I can't wrap my head around is why McCulloch thought it was an option politically to release such meticulous documentation that he was in the tank for a "no indictment" result, and then announce it with a press conference that seemed tantamount to incitement to riot into the bargain.
posted by Gelatin at 1:34 PM on November 25, 2014

Making Wilson into a racist caricature makes it too easy to discredit how fucked up everything else is.
posted by Think_Long at 1:34 PM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

thanks, I've been thinking media outlets had been leaving that out.
posted by agregoli at 1:34 PM on November 25, 2014

A public defender breaks down the reasons it looks like the DA punted the Grand Jury.
posted by drezdn at 1:36 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Making Wilson into a racist caricature makes it too easy to discredit how fucked up everything is.

He's not a racist caricature. He's an ordinary, everyday, friendly, neighborhood racist.

*That* is what is fucked up.
posted by jammy at 1:36 PM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

Storify: Lawyer and legal analyst Lisa Bloom on the sham indictment proceedings against Darren Wilson
posted by naju at 1:36 PM on November 25, 2014 [11 favorites]

Protests in Baltimore
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:38 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

*That* is what is fucked up.

Racism is not abnormal. It is not "outside of the norm".

Racism is a central tenet of US culture and most of us have been raised to be good racists.

Racism is the system. The system, here, worked. It worked exactly the way it was supposed to work.
posted by jammy at 1:41 PM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

It's clear that McCulloch did his best to ensure no indictment was returned, but does it necessarily follow it's because he didn't think he could obtain a conviction?

I think it's extremely likely they couldn't obtain a conviction. And if McCulloch had just come out and said "I can't get a conviction with these facts" at least I'd have respected his honesty. But that's not what he did; he didn't want to take the heat for such a decision so he played up this farce of a grand jury proceeding.
posted by Justinian at 1:42 PM on November 25, 2014 [11 favorites]

The "rioting" plays really, really well politically for the Right. It is damaging to local leaders like Antonio French and Brittney Packnett who so effectively limited violence earlier and explained the injustice experienced by the African American community. It is damaging to the growing movement to do something about police violence.

It also feeds the hysterical racist fear-firearms industry complex. The NRA and firearms industry are surely celebrating this. Gun sales are skyrocketing.
posted by Golden Eternity at 1:50 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

SCOTUS Blog weighs in on the unusual nature of the Grand Jury proceedings.
posted by Apoch at 1:52 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

They intentionally incited rioting so that supposedly liberal whites can tut-tut about blacks 'shooting themselves in the foot', so they don't have to actually do anything about their mild disapproval of the grand jury outcome.
posted by empath at 1:52 PM on November 25, 2014 [19 favorites]

“I'm all for looking at the systemic problems in policing and the ways we need to force compliance with an attitude of protect & serve the public, but at this time Darren Wilson faces no significant consequences for his actions and Mike Brown continues to be dead.”


From the other side of that equation, until a bit ago, Nicole Brown Simpson continued to be dead and O.J. remained free.
It's vital that we address the systemic problems, not only in policing, but in our socio-economic policies.
Until the systemic problems are addressed, any individual cases can be isolated, rationalized, marginalized, even ceded, so long as they’re not evidence of a larger pattern.

In O.J.’s case, you had a guilty man go free, because he was framed by the police. The Ferguson shooting is similar in that the system acted in a reflexive – and most importantly arbitrary – manner. The guilt or innocence of any given suspect on whatever side of the law is less relevant than the lack of accountability and impartiality in justice that keeps the scales tilted (in O.J.'s case it bit them ironically in the ass, but the idea that arbitrary, unaccountable police power subverts the entire objective of the justice system stands. There it was checked by the jury. And indeed, rightfully so even though he was probably guilty. Police aren't supposed to frame people, full stop.)

From divined by radio’s comment quoting the Martin Longman article:
“Officer Darren Wilson should have been given the opportunity to defend his actions in a court of law. He could well have won an acquittal. But what's clear is that the moment after he ended Michael Brown's life, the system went into overdrive to protect him and to justify what he had done.”

What was missed in Ferguson was an opportunity to at least give the appearance, if not enforce the actuality, of impartial justice.

I despise the violence and the riots in and of themselves, but I can’t fault anyone for it, even if Wilson’s story is entirely true and he’s completely in the right.
It would be ironic if this were the case that got some changes made if that were so, but no more than that, because regardless of the facts, the response by the system is the same as if there were a cover up and as if there were widespread racism and as if there were a lack of accountability built in to the process.

The prosecutor’s office exists as an entity separate from the police as a function of that accountability. Now that could have gone a number of different ways of course, but that’s on just this case – is Officer Wilson a racist? Doesn’t matter.

What matters is institutional racism where you can have someone who is not racist at all – a whole cadre of law enforcement and judiciary who are not racist at all – where policies (and laws) circumscribe certain methods or actions that have a racist effect.

Not just within the culture or community of law enforcement – although that is a facet and that’s why non-racist, by the book police officers have their sphere of action limited to what supports those policies – but all the apparatus of our system is subborned.

As a fr’instance – the mainstream press loves drama. It means sales. It means you don’t have to think much. Ooh, look, violence! Big pictures of masses of people, stuff burning, dramatic quotes, oooh!
That’s the nature of that beast. It in absolutely no way serves the function it should serve. That is, foster an understanding of current events. Understanding and having all the facts typically result in less violence, not more. Without context, all this is just infortainment. Stuff just happening on a screen.

And too it’s easy to make money reinforcing what people already think and presenting “two” “sides” of the “story.”

Well, there ain’t. There’s only one side, that the machine is broken. That’s what happened to Brown. He was killed by a machine. Him and many, many other people.

If the problem were “Officer(s) Wilson” we could just get rid of bad cops. But that’s the problem with seeing this as a dichotomy of “all cops bad” or “this particular case” a police officer can be a good cop and still be an instrument of arbitrary policy.
And any constituent is on the same hook for that. Whether they voted for someone or not. White privilege exists and whether one white guy or another supports it or thoroughly opposes it or not, it’s there and benefit thereby.

Although I don’t think there’s going to be any race explosion (and not because I’m not a fan of the Beatles’ White Album) or mass explosion of any kind.
Just a continuance of this slow-motion thing we’ve seen for decades. And of course, more bloodshed in a small scale, but constantly grinding way.


TLDR: All that to say, it’s the policy and the arbitrary nature of the legal apparatus that allows it that we have to go after. No matter how many cops get prosecuted, jailed, whatever, it won’t stop unless policies are changed. With broad, sweeping strokes.


And indeed, I’d argue the most of the news I’ve read from the big news outfits supports the status quo. Al Sharpton as one bit of evidence (although he seems to have lately got his message more on point. Perhaps Cornell West straightened him out). Framing everything in terms of property damage as another.

Not that they’re racist, but again, sales, the nature of popular media and drama, etc. the focus on the details here regardless of context – for example, myriad other shootings. The Oscar Grant thing off the top of my head at the BART station and the subsequent protests.
And so, this sort of thing is inevitable without sweeping policy change and attention to the root causes. Some black kid will be shot again – the facts of the shooting aside, the situation aside (the Sean Bell case went to trial in contrast to Ferguson) – and the setting and reactions, the whole pattern of the law enforcement response AND the community response will be the same.

But the violence inevitably resulting will be the fault of the systems failure to address the root causes and the cycle of mistrust that gets perpetuated by political factions with a variety of interests, the mainstream press, the same use of that violence as an excuse not to act, etc. etc. all the stuff we’ve seen before. Economic disparity will continue, the disparity in general will continue, unless we fix it.

And that means policy change, not hanging up one, or any number of goats. Legally or otherwise. And violence is a far more complex tool than it seems with solutions only under limited circumstances. It’s not a magic wand. It is, at best, fire. And fire can easily get out of control.

With that stated, even Ghandi said: “It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence.” And MLK said “A riot is the language of the unheard.”

But unless it’s used with the goal of producing the desired change and in a controlled method, it will delegitimize any movement that doesn’t then utilize more violence to quell dissent. Then more violence. And violence is inherently devisive. Again, not to be avoided at ALL costs as an absolute evil, but it can easily get out of control.
The Jacobins as an example.

And Pinochet too. He lost a national referendum. He stepped down. There were some riots yes. And the weight of those changed the mind of some of his support by the military. And too, there were assassination attempts. But those were targeted, not wonton (albeit failures, and those failures strengthened his conviction in his own invincibility). And people in Chile used strikes and slowdowns, days of protest, etc. And that made some headway, but things got violent and this discouraged support, divided the middle class (and some foreign powers) from supporting the movement and justified (ostensibly, in propaganda form) Pinochet’s repressive tactics.

Legitimacy of violence, not superior force is not the issue. Control and focus of that force in support of an ethical, just goal that drives actions (violent or peaceful), not vice versa.

So back to square one: policy change. Making the communities united, safer, etc. Tough to do if you initiate violence.


Michael Brown Sr. says it better than me: (before the grand jury decision): “My family and I are hurting, our whole region is hurting," Michael Brown Sr. said... "I thank you for lifting your voices to end racial profiling and police intimidation. But hurting others or destroying property is not the answer. No matter what the grand jury decides, I do not want my son's death to be in vain. I want it to lead to incredible change, positive change, change that makes the St. Louis region better for everyone… We live here together, this is our home, we are stronger united…Continue to lift your voices with us and let's work together to heal, to creating lasting change for all people regardless of race."


OHenryPacey's link is worth a repeat: Things white people can do

posted by Smedleyman at 1:52 PM on November 25, 2014 [27 favorites]

And as to Akai Gurley: it's rank bullshit to claim that "no one cares" about his murder, which, again, happened less than a week ago.

I think the original comment was referring to Eric Garner rather than the most recent case of murder by cop. But yes, grotesque bullshit either way.
posted by poffin boffin at 1:54 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

I think McCulloch's decision came down to appealing to two sides. One, the social outcry for justice, a fair trial, and (hopefully) a conviction. Two, and more importantly to him, is that he doesn't want Wilson convicted for anything, and an actual trial would be too far out of his hands, and put Wilson in danger of punishment.

So he instead presents a weak case against Wilson to a grand jury, where it's easy for a prosecutor to not get an indictment if they aren't looking for one. It's win-win for him, because on the surface, the public is meant to be appeased because Wilson got a "trial", but Wilson never really had a chance of being indicted.
posted by Skephicles at 1:57 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I still find Darren Wilson membership in the KKK interesting. I'd usually imagined the KKK as mostly defunct but perhaps it remains relatively prominent in law enforcement.

Related : Cop slams 22-yr-old girl’s head into concrete, shattering her teeth, after she crossed the street
posted by jeffburdges at 2:06 PM on November 25, 2014

I'm not exactly getting "reputable source" vibes from that Wilson/KKK piece.
posted by tonycpsu at 2:09 PM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

.
posted by fizzix at 2:11 PM on November 25, 2014

If nobody's posted this yet, from Mother Jones, an interactive graphic showing the impact of Ferguson on Twitter. Best is you can scroll around the world, note Africa.
posted by infini at 2:14 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

I think the original comment was referring to Eric Garner rather than the most recent case of murder by cop.

Sorry if I misinterpreted that, but even if Ironmouth was referring to Garner, my point stands.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 2:14 PM on November 25, 2014

"Remember that other unarmed black guy who was killed by the cops?"

"No, the one within the last few months."

"No, the one in NYC."

"No, the other one in NYC."

sigh.
posted by tonycpsu at 2:19 PM on November 25, 2014 [70 favorites]

Is it happening more now, or are people just reporting it more now? Because I can't remember it ever having seemed quite this dire.
posted by showbiz_liz at 2:24 PM on November 25, 2014

If the problem were “Officer(s) Wilson” we could just get rid of bad cops.

Excellent observations Smedleyman. I'd like to expand on this one point; It's not just the bad cops, those should, if it were a functioning system, get weeded out by internal affairs and prosecutions for gross misconduct when it happens.

It's the otherwise "good" cops who say nothing, or worse, actively defend the thin-blue-line code-of-silence bad-movie-title bullshit. They are the ones I hold most at fault, because their refusal to come forward and provide actual real justice, is what lets the bad cops continue to prowl the streets. That allows the machine to continue unabated.

Personally, I think the entire thing should be taken out of the hands of the police; when there is a question of misconduct, it should be investigated at the federal level by disinterested parties who have nothing invested in keeping a cop on the force. There, through bureaucratic indifference could a modicum of fairness be meted out.
posted by quin at 2:25 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Goddamn. Killer Mike's pre-show Ferguson Grand Jury speech

Worth another link.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 2:32 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

Any U.S. prosecutor who can claim with a straight face that they approach the job with this attitude as a matter of course, and not only when it's a member of a preferred class in the crosshairs, has a future in deadpan comedy if they ever get disbarred.

The idea that a prosecuting attorney will be called to task for misconduct borders on laughable.
posted by phearlez at 2:35 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

If nobody's posted this yet, from Mother Jones, an interactive graphic showing the impact of Ferguson on Twitter. Best is you can scroll around the world, note Africa.

This is amazing! So few people around me care, apparently, that I can actually discern individual tweets in Montana, a few of which are mine (I've gotten nothing but blank stares trying to discuss this with people today, ugh). Also, if you scroll way out, it looks like the entire US is being engulfed by a white-hot cloud of rage, which is about what should be happening so it's rather cathartic (even if half of those tweets are probably execrable).
posted by dialetheia at 2:40 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

the prosecutor must himself believe the evidence supports conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. [my emphasis]

MattD, you've said this a couple of times here, and it may be entirely correct in Missouri, but where are you getting this from? True, the prosecutor's office generally doesn't go forward unless they think there's a good chance for conviction because it would be a colossal waste of the state's time and money, and lower the conviction rate of the prosecutor. But I've never heard before that they are required by some statute or standard of conduct to refuse to go forward unless the existing evidence is, in their opinion, beyond a reasonable doubt.

And even if that were the case, they already broke the law by convening this grand jury in the first place. In for a penny, in for a pound. They should've pursued the indictment vigorously and then let the facts go before a judge or trial jury. For them to go forward with a cynically desultory effort which was bound to end in failure is making a mockery of the legal system, and is a disrespect to the People whom they are elected or appointed to serve.
posted by xigxag at 2:40 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Can we get an NFL team to draft Wilson?

As an NFL player, he would have a camera documenting his actions as a member of his team. Any time there was a questionable situation that involved the loss of something prized, or involved something that would change things notably, an instant review would be triggered. The video evidence would then be gone over by authorities moments aver the event, and the public would have full access to the same video the authorities were reviewing.

An hour or two after the events, it would be mandatory for him to face reporters and answer questions about the events, or be subject to hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.

The Rams could probably put him on the practice squad at least. Seems like that's about all he's good for anyway.
posted by cashman at 2:50 PM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

Form for submitting questions about the released evidence to the St. Louis Public Radio team reviewing the documents (@csmcdaniel & @brentajones).
posted by audi alteram partem at 2:53 PM on November 25, 2014 [4 favorites]

I think McCulloch's decision came down to appealing to two sides. One, the social outcry for justice, a fair trial, and (hopefully) a conviction. Two, and more importantly to him, is that he doesn't want Wilson convicted for anything, and an actual trial would be too far out of his hands, and put Wilson in danger of punishment.

There's also the issue that a trial requires Wilson to raise the defense of use of force Ironmouth quoted, and then deal with the painstaking parsing of it that a trial would involve. It's clear there's a lot of vested interested in law enforcement and the justice system who don't want to shine a lot of light on the amount of force cops are free to use. When it's all just media they can play the game to paint the dead as No Angel. Once it gets to the courts you have standards of evidence and cross examination, and maybe you end up with something that gets quoted over and over again like no duty to protect.
posted by phearlez at 3:00 PM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

American Ethical Union Calls for Change after Ferguson Decision

The decision to rely on the grand jury has renewed and deepened the dismay felt by a growing segment of the population that there is a tiered system of justice in the United States. This has aroused distrust, alienation, and rage over the disparities in the treatment of civilians, and especially people of color, compared to police officers, and especially those officers who are white. It has been maintained by government officials and law enforcement leadership that the disparities are due to the higher rates of criminality and violence in the neighborhoods where people of color reside but they fail to see how police actions contribute to problems experienced in those communities.

posted by audi alteram partem at 3:05 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

The Amadou Diallo case is when I learned how carefully crafted jury instructions can determine the verdict.
posted by mikelieman at 3:13 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Car plows through protesters during Ferguson rally in south Minneapolis

The video of this is absolutely horrible. I can't even believe this shit. What the hell is even going on anymore
posted by dialetheia at 3:38 PM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

WTF!
posted by Jacqueline at 3:43 PM on November 25, 2014

Jesus.
posted by brundlefly at 3:45 PM on November 25, 2014

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment does not attach in a grand jury proceeding, or bar a grand jury from returning an indictment when a prior grand jury has refused to do so

And McCulloch surely knows this, which throws even more shade on McCulloch's decision to release the results at night. The predictable reaction ensures that the riots make headlines everywhere, poisoning the jury pool for any subsequent grand jury.
posted by rhizome at 3:49 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

why are people doing shit like running over protestors
i mean just why
why not pour kerosene over the whole fucking thing
the guy beating the car with his fist -- i say i abhor violence, but i must be lyin', cause damn i wanted to punch that car too
posted by angrycat at 3:54 PM on November 25, 2014

I apologize if this is not the venue for this, but it's T minus 65 minutes till Dallas' protest and I've never been to a one that actually worried me before. Can any experienced Mefites please prep me? Help me know what degree of a thing I'm in for? I'm currently at a Walmart and can buy pretty much anything.
posted by jinjo at 3:55 PM on November 25, 2014

The people who prosecute cases against cops shouldn't be the people who work hand in hand with cops to prosecute other cases.
posted by Flunkie at 3:55 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

I'm currently at a Walmart and can buy pretty much anything.

Get some whole milk to pour in your eyes if you get pepper sprayed or tear gassed.
posted by Jacqueline at 3:58 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Car plows through protesters during Ferguson rally in south Minneapolis

Well, that looks like attempted murder to me - at the very least intent to severely injure.

"The driver, who is male, is cooperating with police and not currently under arrest, Elder said."

You don't say.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 3:59 PM on November 25, 2014 [39 favorites]

Car plows through protesters during Ferguson rally in south Minneapolis

The video of this is absolutely horrible. I can't even believe this shit. What the hell is even going on anymore
posted by dialetheia at 6:38 PM on November 25 [4 favorites +] [!]

The driver of that car is not under arrest. At first, when I read that, I was shocked and outraged. But then I remembered that the driver merely intentionally drove into several people with a car. It's not like he was walking in the middle of the street while black.
posted by prefpara at 3:59 PM on November 25, 2014 [52 favorites]

They're probably already working on a story that he was attacked by vicious brutes and had no choice but to pump on the gas. No problem.
posted by naju at 4:02 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I... could easily be wrong, but isn't it fairly common and noncontroversial for someone in police custody being questioned to not formally be "arrested" until some later point?
posted by Flunkie at 4:04 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

.


#blacklivesmatter
posted by Deoridhe at 4:04 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

I'm currently at a Walmart and can buy pretty much anything.

Get a few first aid kits. Hide them places for when the police take one from you; they have a solid history of taking field medics' kits from them.
posted by Deoridhe at 4:05 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

The driver observed the pedestrians walking in the middle of the street. He honked his horn at them, communicating a mutually understood request to use the sidewalk. The pedestrians failed to comply with his request.

After the failure to comply, the driver recalled a radio report that he had previously heard, but was not in mind of just moments earlier. He identified the pedestrians as possible participants in the protest over a lawful and justified killing.

At that point, one of the protestors may have reached for his vehicle, which can be used as a deadly weapon. The driver, fearing for his well-being, stepped on the gas until the victims no longer represented a threat.
posted by compartment at 4:06 PM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

I'm sure this isn't dispositive, but a quick googling revealed that in St. Louis, pedestrians do not have the right of way outside of a sidewalk or crosswalk.
posted by rhizome at 4:07 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I now see that the hit and run driver is in custody. I may have overreacted just now. Who knows why.
posted by prefpara at 4:09 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

rhizome, if you're talking about the awful "drive through the crowd" thing linked to a moment ago, it was in Minneapolis, not St. Louis. But in any case, "they didn't have the right of way" seems like a pretty weak defense to what happened there.
posted by Flunkie at 4:09 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

pedestrians do not have the right of way outside of a sidewalk or crosswalk.

Also, let's not forget - let's *not* forget, Dude - that keeping wildlife, an amphibious rodent, for uh, domestic, you know, within the city - that ain't legal either.
posted by dialetheia at 4:10 PM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

The driver also noted that the sun was in his eyes, his gas pedal got stuck, that a previous pedestrian seen that day had crossed a street despite a "NO WALK" signal, and that he did not see any pedestrians at all there during the incident.
posted by 0xFCAF at 4:10 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

From comments earlier in the thread: Alizadeh calling him "Big Mike" just drips with contempt. You don't even have to hear her tone of voice to feel it.
posted by orrnyereg at 4:10 PM on November 25, 2014

Self Segregation: Why It's So Hard for Whites to Understand Ferguson.
posted by ChuraChura at 4:12 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

The zombie pedestrians charging his car looked just like Hulk Hogan and other wrestlemania characters. The driver became hysterically frightened and hit the gas out of fear of his very life. He has no regrets and would have behaved exactly the same if he had it to do all over again.
posted by Golden Eternity at 4:18 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Mod note: probably best to end this derail about a weird/horrific hit-and-run in another state
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:22 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Those who wish to discuss it could do so at r/Minneapolis.
posted by mr. digits at 4:24 PM on November 25, 2014

We have been manipulated politically, very adeptly, to channel our reasonable fears over the dim forecast for our personal security, the stagnation of income levels, the shrinking of the job market (which will only continue with further automation), and the nearly wholesale signover of our welfare to the whims of the marketplace into a self-centered set of philosophies that denies any obligation to one another and even the need to participate together with each other in social decisions.


All of us are being manipulated by the media and politicians: conservative / liberal, white / black, gamer / feminist, Sunnis and Shiites, it doesn't matter. I know that voice in the back of your head says the good liberal thing to do is support team anti-racism. It's wonderful that the timing of the press conference gives us more opportunity to keep up the good fight!

Meanwhile, the Ferguson Police and thousands like it across the country will continue to receive additional federal funding to equip their "forces" with military weapons. While we watched this beautiful example of justice evolve, Missouri received additional DHS funding for police hardware.

There will be no race wars, or if there are, they will be spectacles of the highest caliber. Buying into that fantasy means we've already loss, because we've already bought into the us vs. them mindset.

So, while you sit at home with your family this Thanksgiving, tearing into your turkeys, just remember there's an armored personnel carrier idling in the dark somewhere across the country, diesel exhaust slowly filling out atmosphere, as the Earth continues to spin. As you give in to that incessant urge to argue with your relatives about why your team is better, know that that APC is looking longingly over the horizon, into your dining room. The temperature is rising, it won't be long now.
posted by formless at 4:26 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I was watching this prosecutor with my son last night. My kid is 16, not particularly savvy about the law, and maybe 45 seconds into watching, my kid turned to me and said, "Fuck. He's setting up all the reasons the cop is gonna go free."

It was THAT obvious and sickening.

On behalf of all grownups, I want to apologize but I don't have the words.
posted by kinetic at 4:26 PM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

so i've been away from the internet for a while. i was at the protests in seattle, and afterwards went and drank myself into a stupor and slept all day.

i'm am so fed up with stupid white kids eager to protest and "break shit" and "speak truth to power", this was my experiece:

I usually don't post stuff like this, but fuck seattle "anarchists" kids. Bunch of fucking white kids telling my brown mom "this isn't about you, no one cares what you think, shut up asshole" when she asked them to stop lighting off fireworks at the protest. And she said that on behalf of a group of black kids who were uncomfortable with their stupid ass antics, not just out of her own opinion. Fuck you and your condescending rant about self expression and her opinion not meaning shit. Fuck you, young ski masked girl for getting up in her face and trying to intimidate her and acting like you were even going to swing on her. Fuck your friend for coming up to be intimidating when you realized I was with her and would back her up. And fuck your friends little giddy moment a few minutes later about how "great and powerful" this was before you started lighting off smoke bomb.
The entire damn thing felt like an excuse for a few of a certain type of person to scream fuck the police in a cops face and be "disruptive". And that's just disrespectful and disgusting to me. If you disagree with anything I've said here, please just delete me or even block me.

If everyone reading this takes one thing away from it, I hope it's that if someone goes "hey dude, you're being an asshole" you stop and think about it at least for a second. Not smugly go "well what have YOU done?"

I wasn't the only one who had a shitty experience either. A friend of mine, whose a black lady, posted about smoking in front of a bar and having some of the same kind of stupid white anarchist babies come up and go "oh are you having fun? People are dying".

There's a lot more stupid i could post but just... ugh... fuck. A specific type of young white person seems to have latched on to this and tried to make it their own thing.
posted by emptythought at 4:27 PM on November 25, 2014 [49 favorites]

I'm sorry, but it is naive and the height of white privilege to dismiss this as a distraction for the larger (obviously more important) machinations to come, formless.
posted by ChuraChura at 4:29 PM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

I'm sorry, but it is naive and the height of white privilege to dismiss this as a distraction for the larger (obviously more important) machinations to come, formless.

Is that what that was about? I couldn't make head or tail of it.
posted by winna at 4:33 PM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

All of us are being manipulated by the media and politicians: conservative / liberal, white / black, gamer / feminist, Sunnis and Shiites, it doesn't matter. I know that voice in the back of your head says the good liberal thing to do is support team anti-racism.

it's funny - the voice in the back of my head says that it would be nice to live in a country where unarmed people aren't shot to death by police
posted by pyramid termite at 4:33 PM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

Yesterday's grand jury decision was not the least bit surprising to me. I never expected anything from the system and the system gave us nothing. I was pissed off though and crippled by the fact that we, black people, can't do a damn thing to stop anything like this. I went to bed, had 8+ hours of sleep and the anger is gone. Look, Mike Brown is dead and is never coming back. The foundation of this nation is littered with the blood and bones of us black people. Violence against our souls and bodies is as old as this nation and that violence will continue until the end of time so no use getting bent out of shape about it. This is the contract that we as black people have with this nation. We are its original sin, a nation burdened by our very existence. The question for us black folks should be what's next. We are incapable of protected our sons and daughters from this nation so what do we do next? We are not wanted and our lives hold less value than we would like to think so what's next? Marching in the streets and rioting will not change anything. The State has a near monopoly on violence sanctioned by its people so we can't even fight so what next? Mike Brown is dead but life goes on, there will be more black boys and girls, men and women killed at the hands of agents of the state so are we going to have these types of outbursts queued up? I don't know. I guess that's what out lives are in this country, one of many perplexing questions with no clear answers.
posted by RedShrek at 4:35 PM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

There's not really a monopoly. The non-state also has plenty of means to kill unarmed black teenagers without consequences.
posted by Golden Eternity at 4:40 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Difference being the state actor is empowered by the state through laws sanctioned by the people being served by said state whereas the non-state actor is not.
posted by RedShrek at 4:44 PM on November 25, 2014

So I thought if I can buy 30 seconds of time, that was my original goal when I tried to get him to come to the car.

I've read this alleged testimony from Wilson twice here and I think "man, I've got to catch up with the story because, the last I recall, Wilson told Brown to get off the street..."
posted by workerunit at 4:51 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

The dissembling rhetoric coming out of the racist side of this is effective enough that I'm not sure how many minds will be open to change even in the face of something as brazenly unjust as this, but at the same time, the way this grand jury decision was arrived at seems like a fairly unprecedented behind the scenes look at how modern institutions work. If the announcement of this decision is revelatory in any sense it is that it starkly reveals the bone-deep subversion of purpose that those in power have carried out in the name of personal pet crusades. Government by some people for some people.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:58 PM on November 25, 2014

I was wondering this morning if there might not be a tiny silver lining to the continuing injustice of the situation (that's me, Mr. Pollyanna).

What I mean is just that if Wilson had simply been convicted and sent to prison, people could spin it as "justice was done, the system works, movealongnothingtoseehere".

Whereas the handling of this has been so ridiculously bad from the beginning, through the speech by the alleged "prosecutor" last night, that it's like they're just handing us reams of material to dig into (literally, in the case of the grand jury transcripts). I hope we can look forward to years of incendiary Rolling Stone articles, documentaries, etc.

By which I'm not saying "everybody calm down, it'll work out fine", I'm saying "hey, look at this big heap of kindling".
posted by uosuaq at 5:00 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

There's already news articles about white kids killed by cops with the headlines "No riots for $whiteguy"
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:01 PM on November 25, 2014

Periodic reminder: fuck that slimy sack of shit Jay Nixon for his cowardly decision to not appoint a special prosecutor before all of this happened. The store owners on Florissant should send him the bill for their rebuilding costs.
posted by tonycpsu at 5:05 PM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

Does anyone know if donations to the Ferguson library are tax-deductible? I've seen random people claim it on, say, Twitter, but I haven't seen anything about it on the library's site itself, nor can I find them in the IRS's exempt organization database.
posted by Flunkie at 5:05 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

I mean unprecedented in terms of the view we got into it due to the level of coverage, of course, not unprecedented in the sense that it does not frequently transpire otherwise, because, yeah, obviously it does.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:15 PM on November 25, 2014

Flunkie, I am guessing not; according to the city budget it is tax-funded. I see they have a Friends organization which probably could take tax deductible donations as that's what "friends" groups are usually for, but no website or way to access that from here.

Maybe you could ask that on their Facebook page: they seem to be responsive. Or even just a phone call.
posted by Miko at 5:18 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

I am very worried about Ferguson protestors tonight.
posted by E. Whitehall at 5:18 PM on November 25, 2014

Not that I haven't been worried for months now, but the vines/pictures/reports are of serious, serious National Guard/military equipment/riot police presence, and every livestream I can find is offline -- I believe a couple of the main livestreamers were arrested last night, and most of the rest were badly teargassed. Others were maced earlier today.
posted by E. Whitehall at 5:20 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

seems like a fairly unprecedented behind the scenes look at how modern institutions work.

Yeah. It seems like, for a brief moment at least, the layers of fog are being peeled away on the various apparatuses at work that have rigged and/or exploited a deeply unjust racial infrastructure - police, prisons, legislators, courts, prosecutors, media. It's open for everyone to see, provided you want to see. Maybe overly glibly considering the tragedy, I mentioned earlier that this is a bit like watching the Wire: "last season was all about police militarization; this current season is all about the inner workings of the court system."
posted by naju at 5:21 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

I wonder what message will be heard in majority-white churches this Thanksgiving Sunday.
posted by Miko at 5:22 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

The other protests. The ones not really being reported.
posted by Miko at 5:23 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

> look up "civil asset forfeiture" for another troubling issue.

Civil forfeiture is a big one, too: "drug seizure funds" often means "Some kids were smoking pot so we stole and sold their parents' car". Replace with house when necessary.

And apparently the nominee for Attorney General is enthusiastic about civil forfeiture, so I wouldn't expect reform to come from the top.
posted by homunculus at 5:28 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

I wonder what message will be heard in majority-white churches this Thanksgiving Sunday.

I'm not religious, but I've been considering attending the almost-local UU service this Sunday just to connect with other local people who might care. Though now I'm thinking the Episcopal church might be worth looking at. But I am also completely aware that neither service may address Michael Brown's death, and that infuriates me.
posted by jaguar at 5:38 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

The UU groups have been putting out statements. Our UU minister sent around a message today that the sanctuary was going to be open this morning and he would be there to talk with people. I have a feeling more UU congregations than not will address it. The Christian Left and that universe of Facebook pages has been posting nonstop about it.

But when I mused about it above, I'm not looking to be cynical, I mean I sincerely wonder. I suspect Quakers, UCCs, UUs will have some mention of it. I'm not sure about everyone else. I wish I could somehow see a summary of who does talk about it, who doesn't, where, and what they will say.
posted by Miko at 5:46 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

I occasionally go to a predominantly white non-denominational Church in an affluent area on the east side of Seattle. Not a peep was spoken of Michael Brown and looking at the pastors blog posts, nothing about yesterdays decision either.
posted by RedShrek at 5:51 PM on November 25, 2014

Vincent Assington, member of the Humanist Ethical Society of St. Louis, wrote about his participation in a protest in October. He raises some hard questions about the, currently, mostly white Ethical Society and the tension with its more activist history:

I moved to St. Louis this September, so the city and the Ethical Society are fairly new to me. It has been very strange over the last several weeks to hear people questioning whether the Society should become active with the Ferguson protests while simultaneously wondering why the Society lacks racial diversity and how we can become more appealing to people of color. To me, it seems apparent that one of these questions answers the other. The Society is unappealing to people of color simply because it does not take an active role in advocating for many of the issues that matter to them.

I’m told this wasn’t always the case, and historically, Ethical Societies (including this one) have played important roles in activism for racial equality. I haven’t been around long enough to see this take place. I wasn’t here before the Society moved from a relatively diverse area in downtown St. Louis to the nearly entirely white-populated City of Clayton. We have a beautiful building there, and one to be proud of, but being proud of its location is difficult. While the Society does have a history of standing against racial oppression, I certainly hope we didn’t leave that behind in the move to a more affluent, white neighborhood.

The reverend at my UU Fellowship has discussed Ferguson continuously since August, but it's a very white population in a white area and Assington's concerns about reluctance to discuss institutional racism aren't exactly unfamiliar to my experience.
posted by audi alteram partem at 5:54 PM on November 25, 2014 [6 favorites]

I suspect Quakers, UCCs, UUs will have some mention of it.

Yesterday the UCC released a statement by United Church of Christ General Minister and President the Rev. Geoffrey A. Black

Our United Church of Christ Statement of Faith reminds us that God promises to all who trust in God “courage in the struggle for justice and peace.” In the wake of the grand jury decision not to indict Officer Wilson and the implication that Michael Brown’s death was justified, the people of Ferguson, of the St. Louis area, and of the nation at large are left with an open wound and no visible means to begin the healing process. Disappointment, frustration and anger abound. Any and all of these responses are understandable.

However, we are also reminded by our statement of faith that we are engaged in a “struggle for justice and peace.” These two concepts are appropriately joined. To engage in the struggle takes courage and a renewed commitment to advocacy and action, to deepening racial awareness by engaging in sacred conversation, and to truthfully examining – then dismantling - the systems of privilege set in place by racism. It requires building God’s beloved community beyond racial divides. That is where true peace abides.

Unfortunately, as I understand it, the mere fact of this statement couple with the color of the skin of Rev. Black resulted in a contentious debate on a UCC mailing list, not dissimilar to this thread. (Today, there was a further call for peaceful protests.)
posted by dhartung at 6:07 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

So I'm reading Officer Darren Wilson's testimony before the grand jury. It starts off the prosecutor asking him what his call was before coming across Mike Brown. It was dealing with a sick infant. After they establish that, they move to make it clear he was dressed an uniformed police offer in a clearly marked and obvious police vehicle. Geeze, are we sure this wasn't trial with defense lawyers? 'Cause that's exactly what it sounds like.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:09 PM on November 25, 2014 [10 favorites]

My local UU church had a special service following the shooting; tonight one of the UU ministers spoke at a vigil (not sure what churches the other ministers were affiliated with).
posted by bunderful at 6:15 PM on November 25, 2014

By which I'm not saying "everybody calm down, it'll work out fine", I'm saying "hey, look at this big heap of kindling".

I dunno about kindling. Now that their Justice Has Been Done the various kill apologists are going after folks who dared to imply that maybe Wilson was clearly wrong. The important target I most recently saw was Mary Engelbreit, who had the touching drawing I found via an earlier thread. The justice warrior, concerned for the put-upon officer who had to go through this lack of indictment, wanted to know whether Mary was now going to make something for the poor oppressed cops. Since she declined, they - and a number of other poor folks - will no longer support her.

So I dunno how fertile a ground these seeds have been planted in.
posted by phearlez at 6:17 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

So apparently the Manhattan Bridge is blocked and NYPD is threatening mass arrests?
posted by angrycat at 6:18 PM on November 25, 2014

Unsurprisingly the account of what happened differ between Officer Wilson and Dorian Johnson. Wilson paints a very benign picture, where he was just a cop politely asking two guys to quit walking in the middle of the street and get on the sidewalk. He was instantly met with hostility. Johnson says Wilson cussed at them and was aggressive and telling them what to do and cornering them.

Two different stories, a man is dead and the grand jury decides only one of those stories is true. Shouldn't a trial do that?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:21 PM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

Interesting, doing a Google search for "Darren Wilson injuries" shows photos of badly beaten man on a hospital bed who is not Darren Wilson. Only in one photo is there an obvious note that the photos are hoaxes.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:30 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Dorian was an unreliable witness. You need to read the testimony of the reliable witnesses like this guy:

"Well I am gonna take my random drive to Florisant [sic]," the witness wrote. "Need to understand the black race better so I stop calling Blacks Niggers and start calling them People."

posted by Golden Eternity at 6:32 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

My UU church has not been as vocal as I would like on this. We are mostly white, in a still very-segregated city. One of the things I want to do as a member is keep pushing for action; we do a lot with LGBTQ issues, some with feminist issues, but not nearly enough on race. One person in particular I had to ask the pastor to intervene with; he was posting stuff that was pretty racist about thugs and such on our church message board. Everyone else has just been eerily quiet, except for a few likes on FB posts I make. I think they're afraid, or baffled, or just can't deal. And it's not like there's no history of otherwise-liberal white people being distressingly racist.

I guess what I want is for attention not to go away. It's like, after the 60s all white people became afraid to talk about race again. UUs were abolitionists, were active in 60s civil rights, sitting on the sidelines now is inconsistent with our history and our identity. But there's a lot more timidity and indifference than I like in our local churches.
posted by emjaybee at 6:34 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

The racism and entrenched opinions on facebook. I can't. I think the shooting caught many people off guard last time around, and some people honestly engaged and debated. And some ever reevaluated their beliefs. Not this time around. They've had time to steel themselves. I just can't look at it anymore.
posted by [insert clever name here] at 6:45 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Wow, so after the shooting and other police arrive, Wilson is told to sit in his car. He says he can't because things are getting hostile and if he's singled out, it could get dangerous. So the on duty Sergeant tells him to take the Sergeant's cars and drive back to the station. Which Wilson does. Once there he notices he has blood on his hands and since they've been trained that blood can contain infections or what have you, he washes the blood off.

Then goes and finds another cop and starts stripping off his gear, while the other cop (who put on gloves) is putting everyone in evidence bags. EMS personnel and ask if he lost consciousness or needs help. Wilson says no. A few minutes later another high ranking cop comes by and tells Wilson he should go to the hospital, which he does and that's when the photos of Wilson were taken.

Isn't it odd to have evidence leave the crime scene like that? Weird.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:56 PM on November 25, 2014 [13 favorites]

You may be right, phearlez, I just think it's early days. But I was a bit hopeful about the grand jury verdict (I thought longer deliberation meant a greater chance of a real trial) and I've already been proven wrong on that score.
posted by uosuaq at 6:57 PM on November 25, 2014

It's also odd to have an investigator whose camera needs batteries, and for a body to sit there for four hours without anyone getting batteries. Or, you know, holding up a phone and taking a snapshot.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:08 PM on November 25, 2014 [26 favorites]

quin: I have been predicting for years that an oppressed population in the United States would eventually decide they no longer gave a fuck and would essentially declare war on the police state.

I hope it is not the case because of this lack of indictment (I'd understand, I just seriously hope it isn't.).

Oppressed populations have fought back. With guns and bombs. And it has always ended badly for them. See: most of Native American history, Black Panthers, Waco, southern slave-owning states*...

* I am not expressing sympathy for all on this list, but the list is full of people who believed themselves oppressed by their government and fought back.

It will never, ever threaten the establishment without near-country-wide organization - and even that failed when the agricultural half of the nation rebelled.

It really doesn't matter one whit how pissed off various minorities are, as long as they are mostly concerned with their problems. Hispanic people are focused on immigration, which isn't a rallying point for the African American community. Driving While Black is not nearly as big a problem for Hispanics. Stop and Frisk wasn't a tipping point for muslims. Etc.

"United States". "Divide and conquer".
posted by IAmBroom at 7:11 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

a thógáil sráidbhaile

If you're making a joke by posting in a language other than the one the rest of the thread is in, this is an odd time to choose. If you're trying to communicate something, a translation would be helpful.

Build a village.

It was a response to Aithníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile (One beetle recognises another).
posted by unliteral at 7:17 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

As for groups that demonstrated how pissed they were, one could also take a look at labor (and associated political movements) from the late nineteenth century through the Great Depression, but production may be what makes a difference...
posted by mr. digits at 7:18 PM on November 25, 2014

Actually I think it was a response to the Google Translate translation of "Aithníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile", which is "It takes another beetle".
posted by Flunkie at 7:19 PM on November 25, 2014

Speaking of incendiary Rolling Stone articles: "Unrest and revolt is 100 percent OK within the right kind of demographic, which is why white dudes can parade around government buildings with AR-15s on their backs in a display of political unrest as 'heritage,' while ACORN registering votes and preventing predatory lending constitutes organized crime. It's the same reason why midwesterners can look at blacks vandalizing police cars — symbols of oppression and murder from an unaccountable overclass — and condemn it while unironically celebrating the political vandalizing and looting of the Boston Tea Party."
posted by mr. digits at 7:33 PM on November 25, 2014 [29 favorites]

So is there an organized highway shutdown thing, because there's that thing in NYC and then here in Cincinnati they arrested a couple people for shutting down a local interstate.
posted by Small Dollar at 7:40 PM on November 25, 2014

Can anyone tell me if 95 in Providence is still shut down? I'm driving north right now can't find any official word.

Great job tho Protestors seriously. Shutting down highways is a badass statement. Just don't want to get caught in it!
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:42 PM on November 25, 2014

Small Dollar on twitter discussion seems to be going on under #shutitdown not sure whether it was just a great idea spread vitally a la Occupy or centrally organized a la Occupy.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:45 PM on November 25, 2014

So, what I'm fixated on is how Brown was apparently 153 feet, 9 inches feet away from Wilson's car when fatally shot. How on earth does that constitute a threat to Wilson? Ok, so maybe he's a "demon" who was ready to "charge." But he's also a pretty chunky kid who was wearing socks and flip-flops. It's not like he's gonna run a 40-yard dash in 4 seconds. The distance alone should have been enough for the Grand Jury to question Wilson's judgement.
posted by TwoStride at 7:47 PM on November 25, 2014 [15 favorites]

The hashtag #ShutItDown is really active, so I'm pretty sure the highway shutdowns are organized and coordinated.
posted by desjardins at 7:49 PM on November 25, 2014

New York is getting rowdy AF right now according to my feed.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:58 PM on November 25, 2014

+ A little more info on that Mary Engelbreit drawing, "In the USA":

As she watched the news of the police shooting in Ferguson, Mo., earlier this month, Engelbreit saw teenager Michael Brown’s mother trying to get to his body, left lying on a city street for more than four hours.

Brown’s mother “looked devastated,” Engelbreit told me. “It was just heartbreaking.”

And it reminded the St. Louis native of the death of her oldest son at 19 from a gunshot wound 14 years ago under still-murky circumstances.

“I started crying, and I don’t cry,” she said. So she did what she does when she’s upset to process events and emotions: She draws.

Facebook originally removed a follow-up post by Engelbreit as "offensive," but later restored it. All sales of the print are being donated to the Michael Brown Jr. Memorial Fund. If the August WaPo article is accurate, the print has already raised over $35,000.

I'm usually not much of an Engelbreit fan--I overdosed on her deeply twee calendars and haven't recovered--but damn if I don't respect her for the gesture. IMO Engelbreit isn't as skilled as Norman Rockwell, but the WaPo's comparison with "The Problem We All Live With" is apt.
posted by nicebookrack at 8:00 PM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

We're bumping this Public Enemy song in the car at the moment. (Don't worry I'm not drivin)
posted by Potomac Avenue at 8:01 PM on November 25, 2014

This one from Davon Magwood (@davonmagwood) has been bouncing around the internet:

Man if this country loved black people like they love black culture we'd all be set.

posted by filthy light thief at 8:03 PM on November 25, 2014 [25 favorites]

I am playing Hayden. Don't worry, I'm not conducting.
As far as I can tell, flint is very quiet. Perhaps because we like to bust dirty cops and there have been a few.

I suspect most of us are tired.
posted by clavdivs at 8:17 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Stay woke clavdivs
posted by Potomac Avenue at 8:18 PM on November 25, 2014

Slate round up on the protests shutting down highways right now.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 8:19 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Detroit protest with light display.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 8:23 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

That Engelbreit post enrages me, and this is the reason: I have reported I don't know how many hateful, ignorant, racist, frightening comments on that site to the admins and I always get the same message back - something like "we have reviewed your complaint but the post did not meet our standards for 'offensive' and it was not removed." And I mean some really ugly shit, shit from my xenophobic city's page with its I-hate-immigrants trolls, shit calling people of color horrid names, etc. But this? Mary Englebreit's sweet, kind piece of artwork? THAT qualifies as offensive?

Facebook is part of the problem. Not a small part of it, either.
posted by Miko at 8:30 PM on November 25, 2014 [28 favorites]

Tink’s “Tell the Children” Is a Haunting Song About Police Brutality
posted by nicebookrack at 8:32 PM on November 25, 2014

Protestors chant FUCK CNN on CNN. Easily the best thing to come out of these protests.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 8:40 PM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

Does anyone else find it really disturbing that ABC and George Stephanopoulos are looking to cash in with this interview with Darren Wilson tonight and tomorrow morning? I know the idea of a boycott got pooh-poohed up thread, but I would love to get a list of the sponsors for the interview broadcast and pass that around far and wide for a boycott. How disgusting that ABC seeks to profit off further spreading the narrative of this unrepentant, violent bigot. I really don't think this man deserves airtime for his views ever again. I feel like his incoherent, dissembling grand jury testimony should stand as the last I ever need to know about that man and his views.
posted by aiglet at 8:51 PM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

Does anyone else find it really disturbing that ABC and George Stephanopoulos are looking to cash in with this interview with Darren Wilson tonight and tomorrow morning?

Kinda, but then I get to thinking, the more TV interviews this guy does, the more chances there are for divine retribution to come in the form of a freak green room coffee pot accident.
posted by fifthrider at 8:54 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Or, more to the point, he might just slip up and say something on TV that forces even the Obama DOJ to sit up straight and take that civil rights investigation they've been waffling about more seriously.
posted by fifthrider at 8:56 PM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

Kinda, but then I get to thinking, the more TV interviews this guy does, the more chances there are for divine retribution to come in the form of a freak green room coffee pot accident.

Only if there is a just universe, and well, the Twins in the Tower didn't get to win either.

Anyway, I've been boycotting ABC since I got rid of my TV. What more can be done? The media exist to maintain the status quo. Been that way since MLK was a toddler, at least.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 8:57 PM on November 25, 2014

Well, I think part of what needs to be done now - for white people - is to have those difficult conversations at Thanksgiving. Tell your family why the media is biased and corrupt.
posted by desjardins at 9:00 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

Differences and similarities between Wilson's and Johnson's stories.

Shame there won't a trial to figure what really happened.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:03 PM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

Does anyone know where people are getting these fantastic letter signs? I think I've seen them in pictures from multiple cities spelling different things out so they must be fairly widely available. They're a huge improvement in protest imagery - that sign sends a united message, it looks polished and serious, and it makes for some great photos.
posted by dialetheia at 9:03 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

Does anyone know where people are getting these fantastic letter signs?

Overpass Light Brigade (Wikipedia)
Overpass Light Brigade (Facebook)
posted by andoatnp at 9:12 PM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

The organization and branding of these protests is totally amazing. Some very smart and dedicated people have been working behind the scenes planning for just this situation I bet. I wish I knew who they were so I could put them in charge of a political campaign.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:14 PM on November 25, 2014 [3 favorites]

dialetheia, that's a great question! I have been very pleased to see them in wide use, because they originated with Wisconsin's Overpass Light Brigade, a group of anti-Walker protesters in 2011, who would display them on pedestrian overpasses. Over time, they taught visitors how to build the letters and start their own sign brigades.
posted by dhartung at 9:15 PM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

Overpass Light Brigade

Oh wow that is so cool, thanks! Here are the DIY instructions from the artists, for anyone who wants to make their own. What a brilliant idea.
posted by dialetheia at 9:19 PM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

(from way upthread): We need a culture where black kids want to grow up to become cops, not be afraid of them from day one. I would love to see all the black protesters, young, old, whatever show up at the police station tomorrow and demand applications. That would truly scare the shit out of the police force.

The problem is that you have to pass a background check to be a cop, and black men are being systematically disenfranchised so that fewer of them qualify. I don't believe it's a coincidence.
posted by desjardins at 9:21 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Hundreds of people are marching on 125th Street, escorted by police. It is amazing to watch from here. The cops appear to be keeping a significant distance behind the end of the march. No riot gear on display, from what we can tell. Choppers are overhead. Dozens of marked and unmarked police vehicles at the back.
posted by computech_apolloniajames at 9:23 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Not so mobile but Google, under images, flint art project projection.

Saves me linking and boy o' there be some protest ideas in projection.
posted by clavdivs at 9:30 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

If you're looking for other places to donate in Ferguson, there are a bunch of teachers around Ferguson who have projects on Donors Choose.
posted by ChuraChura at 9:34 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Rule of Law is an interesting thing.

For many years (pre 9/11), legal experts around the world consistently pointed to the United States as an excellent example of the rule of law. Inside the United States, we like to talk about how we're a nation of laws and not men. In fact, we make a civil religion out of worshipping the constitution and legal process. In school, most of us learn about Brown v. The Board of Education. We learn that civil rights litigation played an integral part in achieving equal rights for all Americans. At the end of the '70s, as the various radical organizations imploded, the consensus on the mainstream Left came to embrace litigation, courts and prosecution as vital tools in advancing civil rights. We also have raised up police officers to hero status. Inside the courts and legislatures, the legal professional associations pushed for more and more standardization of laws and procedure. The legal academy has become more ethnically diverse. Standards are higher on bar exams, and many states have expanded the requirements for licensing, via additional testing, both mandatory and optional. On the civil side, contracts are more detailed and standardized than in years past -- the era of the handshake deal is over. Also on the civil side, we've created ways for people to seek recompense for violations of their civil rights, whether by employers, landlords or by the police.

Yet in the 40+ years since the 1968 Civil Rights Act, Americans have chosen to incarcerate more and more people (though budget cuts are reducing that some), and built a punitive legal system that strikes far harder than it did in the 1950s. We've also built a massive surveillance state that sucks down all kinds of data, from voice calls, to emails, to forum posts like this one. All of this, we're told, is part of the Rule of Law.

Sometimes I wonder, if in fact it's the Rule of Law that is the problem.
posted by wuwei at 9:37 PM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

The rule of law is not responsible for those things. Other nations happily embrace the rule of law without a massive surveillance state or for-profit penal institutions.

What you should blame is a country that has increasingly embraced a culture of fear - fear of the other, fear of government, fear of change.
posted by modernnomad at 9:59 PM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

I don't always unfriend people on facebook for political reasons but when I do it's because they said they were stuck in traffic because police weren't "controlling the animals" [read: protesters] to their satisfaction. /dosequismanmeme

I guess what I'm saying is that the racist dog whistle factor is strong with this issue/case. I can handle intelligent conversation about statues and interpretations of events, even if I think they're pretty much willfully blind, but I'm really saddened to see folks, of my generation even, spouting some blatantly fucked up shit because their politics has told them that's the thing to do.

It's just amazing to see the disconnect, or perhaps it was just really skillfully hidden, whereby an acquaintance I worked on projects in college with and never had an inkling of anything untoward in their manner, beyond perhaps a understated conservative bent, and that I know has/had interactions and perhaps even friendships with individuals of various colors goes full-on-racist in a facebook status.

What makes people flip from reasonable to radical? Was/Is it always there and just lying hidden below the surface as needed and demanded by societal norms? Does aging or [love of] money just make people more likely to jump to circling their wagons in the face of any possible chance of personal inconvenience because "FUCK YOU GOT MINE! WHAT WAS THAT? YOU DISAGREE WITH THE POWERS THAT BE AND FEEL MISTREATED? YOU WANT TO DEMONSTRATE? GET THE HELL OUT OF MY COUNTRY WITH THAT SHIT YOU UNGRATEFUL ANIMALS."?

Sigh, that's not what was said of course, but really it was obvious that was what was lying underneath the surface and I didn't think my faith in humanity could get any lower, whelp better start digging and drinking.

Anyone know the best way to find a local protest to show up to? The Memphis subreddit mentioned a small one that happened a few hours ago but if they're still going on when I get back into town from the holidays then I'd like to turn out if I can. Beyond that I don't know where too look, I'm pretty much twitter inept and we have few local info streams since we only moved here recently.
posted by RolandOfEld at 10:08 PM on November 25, 2014 [8 favorites]

I think I'm going through a grieving process. And I'm not sure what or how. The "Denial" was "Well of course they were gonna not indict..." Then I'm asking like... how worse is it gonna get. What hope is there, politically, for America, right now? Then I say - was there ever hope? Then I think - it's gotten better over the years in many ways. Then I think, it's still fucked up in so many ways. And I think sometimes the "better" is really only "better" for a certain select subset of people. Or "better" is only allowed within so much limits. Class, Race, Gender, Sexual Orientation. All these things oppressed, some more than others.

The hate, though. I just can't stand to think of the hate.

And the "Libertarians" who post all about their nifty anon/snowden/assange/piratebay/legalization/#gg bullshit (it's about ethics in police brutality - but only when it happens to white dudes who flaunt the law with a video camera). I'm not talking Reason/Radley Balko (problematic as he is - he does point out the racial issues involved, and I don't think it's just some attempt to get people of color on "his side")... I'm talking just dudes on the net. Who consider themselves "hip" and "with it" and "young"... Say they're against oppression, except when it comes to a dead black kid by one more whitey in blue. Then all I hear is the fucking chirping of crickets.

Maybe they're scared to face that reality? Maybe they don't want to confront their privilege? I dunno.

I really really really hope my parents say nothing about this during the holidays. I'm laying down the law if any of them speaks of it. "We are not talking about this. All of us will shut our mouths." Because I will get too goddamned angry at them and I don't want to be angry and their old and old-fashioned and I can't change their minds, and it's no use, so may as well play the get-along game to survive. Just like always do in this society. Chug along, smile, pretend, nothing's wrong... We don't want shit to explode. We don't want it to explode.
posted by symbioid at 10:20 PM on November 25, 2014 [7 favorites]

Did anyone else catch the 'legal analyst' on CNN tonight (between 7:30 and 8, Eastern)?

It was very weird to hear the same talking points raised above in the thread (e.g. "strongarm robbery") be repeated. The anchor looked like she was going to strangle the asshat.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:20 PM on November 25, 2014

What makes people flip from reasonable to radical? Was/Is it always there and just lying hidden below the surface as needed and demanded by societal norms? Does aging or [love of] money just make people more likely to jump to circling their wagons in the face of any possible chance of personal inconvenience because "FUCK YOU GOT MINE! WHAT WAS THAT? YOU DISAGREE WITH THE POWERS THAT BE AND FEEL MISTREATED? YOU WANT TO DEMONSTRATE? GET THE HELL OUT OF MY COUNTRY WITH THAT SHIT YOU UNGRATEFUL ANIMALS."?

If you ever figure this out, let me know.

This is going to seem like it's rambling at first, but I'm building to a point that ties into your question and the discussion at hand.

Part of the reason I've struggled with depression for so much of my life is that I've had the curse(?) of being a bitter lefty since my early teens. After lunch in high school in the early 1990s, I'd avoid recess and instead take refuge in the library, reading The Nation and Harper's (amazing to think they subscribed to it in that central Illinois shithole "Real America" town, but I'm so glad they did). Or I'd read books from the stacks, which didn't go past the mid-1970s, which must be when their funding got gutted to the point that they couldn't afford any books of substance. But the stuff from prior to that point — including lots of gems from the the 1960s — was still there.

Radio was always a hobby of mine, especially trying to pull in far-away stations ("DXing," as they called it in the trade), so I could get Pacifica and other far-left stations 200 miles away or so. This also turned out to be an invaluable source of alternate media/radicalization for me while living in a backwoods wilderness in the pre-(mainstreaming-of-the-)Internet era.

I say all that to say that I was aware of how shitty society could be, even as a teenager, when we should (supposedly) still be somewhat naive and optimistic. I was already jaded as hell. By the time I got to college, the stereotype of when young folk suddenly find their eyes opened, it was all old hat to me (but I learned lots of great vocabulary to express what I already knew — words like "hegemony" and phrases like "Washington Consensus" and the like).

I was a voracious journal-keeper back in those days (from 1990 to about 2006, to be exact), and I can recall a specific entry I was writing in my senior year of high school, circa spring 1992, about how nice and kind-hearted the people in my class seemed, even though we were all in this Honors class and they were upper-middle-class white kids who had everything handed to them, and we were in the South (by this time, we'd moved to Wilson, NC), and according to everything I'd seen in society as a whole, these were the perfect candidates to turn into right-wing jackoffs sooner than later. Yet, I knew them somewhat well and they seemed so sweet and kind, so . . . it was discomfiting to think this would change at some point. I felt as if I was sitting at some crucial point in time, just prior to the transformation, knowing it was inevitable, but having no idea how it would come about or how to stop it.

I didn't generally follow these people into the Facebook era, except for one I had a bit of a crush on back then. She even prided herself on being kind of a "90s flower child," dressing the part, always smelling of incense (and probably weed, but I had no idea what that smelled like back then, sheltered as I was), playing the Bob Marley, etc. Found her on Facebook a few years ago, and she's now every stereotype of a Fox News-addled zombie, posting constantly about how Obama is ruining The Real America™ and can't be trusted, blah blah blah.

So take this and multiply by . . . the population of America. I don't know what happens, but it does. Even after college, I started feeling like I was "softening" and becoming more moderate in my position. I made decent money in those days (working in NYC's late-1990s dot-com era bubble), which is probably part of it. Losing my last salaried job in 2001, then 9/11 a couple of months after that, were probably the two things that jerked me right back to the left again.

Not that this is a left/right issue — I think people on the right have valid points that are worth listening to when it comes to, say, fiscal responsibility or raising children to be self-sufficient, respectful, and well-mannered, for instance — but those people died in the 1980s (or are shouted down by what they thought was their own political party). I just think this society is sick from some sort of insidious cancer that it has no interest in fighting. It has no interest in ever addressing its original sin of racism, and that original sin is woven into the fabric of how this country was founded (the systematic genocide of Native Americans), on through slavery, Jim Crow, and on through today.

When those who perpetuate the racism accuse the targets of it of "playing the race card," and think they are now the victims of racism themselves, and are thoroughly unable to comprehend the concept of privilege (let alone acknowledge it), and are so thoroughly invested in NOT ever doing any of the real work involved in working through the tough shit and ultimately moving toward a real solution . . . well, there will never be a solution.

This experiment's over; bricks are going to fly through windows eventually, and the entire 200-year-old "democratic experiment" here in this land that has only five percent of the world's population, but acts like it holds 95%, will end.

I have a daughter due on January 27. I weep for the world she's going to inherit. (Perhaps "be dumped into" would be a better turn of phrase.) We're fucking done.
posted by CommonSense at 10:35 PM on November 25, 2014 [19 favorites]

I don't think we're done. We're finally able to see the mess, because of cell phone cameras and social media.

People honestly didn't know. Or didn't want to know. And now people do, and people know that it's not just them- it's systemic.

Idk- I'm not willing to throw my hands up in despair, whereas if I were living in 1963 I probably would have. Where we are doesn't feel like new territory to me. Things were not better in the 1930s, in the 1950s, in the 1970s, 1980s... we spiral and spiral and though things look the same, they're not exactly the same.

I mentioned way up thread that our counter culture demographic got stomped relatively regularly, with the drug war as the excuse. (marijuana!) You know what changed that the most? The invention of video cameras.

This time around the spiral we the people have it on record.
posted by small_ruminant at 11:04 PM on November 25, 2014 [16 favorites]

We're fucking done.
And yet, tomorrow, breakfast.
posted by valkane at 11:21 PM on November 25, 2014 [9 favorites]

But I've never heard before that they are required by some statute or standard of conduct to refuse to go forward unless the existing evidence is, in their opinion, beyond a reasonable doubt.

From the American Bar Association:

The prosecutor in a criminal case shall:

(a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause

posted by corb at 11:27 PM on November 25, 2014 [2 favorites]

Probable cause is defined, per at least random online legal dictionaries, as "sufficient reason based upon known facts to believe a crime has been committed or that certain property is connected with a crime."

So yeah - if the prosecutor believes that based on the facts, there is not enough reason to think a crime has been committed, it seems that they do actually have an ethical duty not to prosecute it.

That's where the political complications really throw this whole thing.
posted by corb at 11:28 PM on November 25, 2014 [1 favorite]

It's already been shown by multiple people--in this thread and out of it--that probable cause is an extremely low bar and the simple discrepancy between witnesses is enough to surmount it. McCulloch intentionally sabotaged this case so it wouldn't go to trial.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:29 PM on November 25, 2014 [12 favorites]

CommonSense,
I've seen something similar as well. My opinion is that it has a lot to do with how people find meaning in their lives. For many people, the way that is done is via white supremacy -- think about what it means , in many places, to be considered respectable. It usually means, whatever it is that white people do, as defined negatively by it's opposite -- what black people do.
posted by wuwei at 11:32 PM on November 25, 2014 [5 favorites]

Tonight, my normally pretty lefty boyfriend told me he "couldn't really blame the cop too much." He's white. I shut down and told him I couldn't process it, and I ended the phone call. I'm sure he thinks I'm being melodramatic. But I don't know -- I expected this from my family, who are liberal in some ways and conservative in others, but hearing it from someone who I consider a partner just shook me. I expect that we'll talk about it tomorrow, or the next day, and we'll debate it as we do, and we'll both learn something in the process. It's not a big deal, in the grand scheme of things, not when there are protestors being gassed, and civil rights being trampled, and kids being gunned down. But tonight? Tonight, I'm struggling hard. My heart goes out to everyone else who is struggling tonight too.
posted by Ragini at 11:54 PM on November 25, 2014 [18 favorites]

Listen here, CommonSense, my grandmother, who was a smart, educated, worldly woman went into near seclusion during the time of the installation of air raid sirens in our city and the Cuban Missile Crisis and the advice to keep fresh water in your car and in your home and stockpile food and how to do the best you could to protect your home from fallout and friends who were wealthier building bomb shelters in their back yards. We're done, she said.

My mother didn't speak to me for seven whole years because I had a child and the world was so bad it was cruel to bring a child into it. Seven damn years! And I had been married for two years when I had the baby. We're done, she said.

Then, 23 years later, when my daughter had a baby, my mother again stopped speaking to either of us for another seven years! Same reason - it was wrong, wrong, wrong to bring a child into this horrible world. The reasoon she stopped speaking to me at that time was because I was supposed to talk my daughter into an abortion and didn't. There's no hope for this country, she said - we're done.

You have a child on the way and you have a responsibility here - much bigger than just feeding and sheltering her - you have a responsibility to bring this child up to know that she can make it in this f'd up world because she comes from strong, smart people who are teaching her how to make it. Not one word about "We're fucking done," thank you.

When things like Ferguson happen, and they will, sadly, time after time - we have no choice except to stand up and stand tall against the injustice. The choice of crawling away into the dark night and keeping one's head down just doesn't work for anyone except cowards and weasels. As a father, you must show your children that there is right and there is wrong - that this is wrong, and you must do what you can to make it right.

Think about the lives people have in poorer countries around the globe right now - think about how they're living under such severe physical detriments and incredible oppression - but dammit, somehow they keep on going. Think about the way our ancestors lived, either as early settlers in this country or in their homes in other countries - lives of rugged and fearsome hazards - I was just reading about prairie fires in an old book about the settling of South Dakota last night and it was terrifying - but the bios of the families in that book showed the average number of children born to be over ten(!) and - I couldn't believe this - most of them lived to grow up and have at least six kids of their own! Prairie fires, blizzards, cholera and all.

This frickin' life we have will never, ever be right - and it will be "wronger" for some people than for others. The damn racists have resurfaced and seem to have been quietly breeding off in the dark someplace because we stupid white people thought we had them pretty well squelched 50 years ago and here they are again. Well, they need to be beaten back again, their white hats burned, their resources taken away, their positions of prestige eliminated, their hypocrisy and hidden crimes revealed and prosecuted - again - over and over again, if necessary. It would be nice if the next round would have people who paid more attention to what was happening over there in the bushes so they didn't get caught as off guard as we have this round. But - in Lincoln's day there was a huge war right here in this country, a large part of which was about racism - a war that killed more American men than all other wars this country has fought combined!

Bring up your children to know that racism is not okay, nor is any form of discrimination - not against rich people, poor people, fat people, disabled people, homosexual or trans people, women, men, Muslims, Christians, Jews - or ANY group! It's just plain wrong - it's not what any diety would stand still for - and neither will your little girl's Dad.

Bricks have flown through lots of windows before and they will be again. Police have been out of control before right here in this country and will be again - how do you think they got the name "pigs"? But their assumption of unlimited power must be curtailed WAY before the armbands come out. Like now.

Any ideas on how I can contribute to this in my scooter? I already have my camera charged up and ready to film any misbehavior I can find, but there must be something else I can do.
posted by aryma at 12:09 AM on November 26, 2014 [34 favorites]

Mod note: A couple of comments deleted. Let's not bring enraging ad propaganda stuff from elsewhere in here, please. If you really just want to know its origins or funding, that's maaaaybe an Ask Me question. Thanks.
posted by taz (staff) at 12:37 AM on November 26, 2014

empath: They intentionally incited rioting so that supposedly liberal whites can tut-tut about blacks 'shooting themselves in the foot', so they don't have to actually do anything about their mild disapproval of the grand jury outcome.

The more i reflect on this, the more it seems like the work of a deft PR team or something. It's one of the most brilliant divide and conquer strategies i've ever seen. Possibly even the most brilliant.

There's a lot of white folks who are ostensibly "good people" in the sense that they're not flagrant racists buying in to the rhino charging crazy negro story necessarily, but have just enough shithead in them that this will work.

Even if it gets them to a "both sides" point, they've been deradicalized and are no longer a threat. It's the final punch in an epic combo that started with the whole ~mysteriously~ released security cam footage, where people on here talked about the light going out of the eyes of their coworkers and friends who had previously been all Fuck The Police about this. The non-committed stragglers that weren't knocked off then, or at any of the intermediate stages, have now at least become serious fence sitters if not shifted straight to the foot-shooting crap mentioned here.
posted by emptythought at 2:41 AM on November 26, 2014 [8 favorites]

See how red tweeters and blue tweeters ignore each other on Ferguson
posted by Golden Eternity at 3:47 AM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

Danez Smith - "Not An Elegy for Mike Brown"
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:39 AM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

The Media Conveniently Focuses on Ferguson Looting Instead of Rampant Police State
posted by jeffburdges at 4:46 AM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

"The system wasn't made to protect us," said one of the protesters, 17-year-old Naesha Pierce, who stayed up until 3 a.m. watching television coverage from Ferguson. "To get justice, the people themselves have to be justice." #AmericanSpring
posted by Potomac Avenue at 4:51 AM on November 26, 2014 [10 favorites]

Well one good thing has come out of this so far. "Fuck CNN!" has gone viral.

I think it's time to bring back the "Kill your TV" meme too. The sheer propaganda torrent is hideous. And just so obviously concern trolling racist fuckery.

One way Americans really could vote with their wallets is to just stop watching fucking television.
posted by spitbull at 5:20 AM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

A gallery of white people rioting over stupid shit as a counterweight to the Ferguson imagery.
posted by Harald74 at 5:22 AM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

Well, I think part of what needs to be done now - for white people - is to have those difficult conversations at Thanksgiving. Tell your family why the media is biased and corrupt.

Does anyone have some good resources on how to do this without starting huge fights or just being dismissed as the Token Liberal in your family? I 100% agree that people need to do this, and I don't want to be a hypocrite, but when you travel for the holidays and don't have a car with you, I just imagine this ending in me storming off to a bedroom and everyone else just tsking that I "caused a scene". Is that useful? Is it better to cause the scene even if they dismiss you anyway?

(yes, I realize how grossly privileged it is for my "problem" to be being afraid of causing a blowup at the dinner table)
posted by nakedmolerats at 5:32 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Meanwhile...
posted by tracicle at 5:36 AM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

A black cop was jailed for striking someone on the hand with a baton. What.
posted by rtha at 5:39 AM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

I would love to see the Facebook internal graph on unfriendings over the entire network for the past 3 days.
posted by codacorolla at 5:49 AM on November 26, 2014 [31 favorites]

I just think this society is sick from some sort of insidious cancer that it has no interest in fighting.

Well, yes. The longer I live and watch, the more convinced I am that our divisions exist to serve the powerful. WE have all been very successfully distracted from the fact that our government and economy have been handed over to a process of conglomerate-government collusion that determines our reality, and they need us to keep not noticing, and also to decide that our problems are irreconcileable, that we can't listen to one another, and that the problem is the other guy's ideology. My dad just posted a Facebook macro that says "If you are more outraged about poor black folks in Missouri looting stores than rich whites on Wall Street looting your future, you have been duped." Setting aside the specificity of Wall Street and all that, this is a real analysis. An oligarchy remains in power only as long as peoplare are too paralyzed by infighting to take democratic action.

It's deeper than that, of course. The issue of race is part of this because it really pre-existed that economic trajectory, but it was there ripe and ready to be exploited - America's fundamental fear and guilt represented by those it has oppressed. Anger among whites over perceived loss of status underlies much of this discussion - they are desperate for a reason to dismiss blacks, so they take a violent protestor and make him stand in for millions of fellow citizens in order to dismiss all of them at once. I think it is not too crazy to think that we are still living under the most effective Southern Strategy imaginable - that that strategy never went away, just became adopted and so finely refined in the halls of government that it is now integrated into the system itself. In the wake of the Civil Rights movement, many white Americans have been swept up in a self-serving network of knowingly devised cultural messages that has indoctrinated them into the right-wing "mainstream" Americanism described above.

It's not an accident - people work very hard to plant these ideas in the heads of the population. They do it through the media, they do it in the political process, and before long they parrot it and do it for one another, on Facebook and Twitter and in personal conversations. It's like a virus. Something about the "downtrodden hardworking conservative whites vs. everyone else" narrative makes sense to them, explaining problems and patterns they have been unable to perceive or understand in any other way. Their lives aren't going as well as they'd like, they're aware of shakier status, they are looking at their economic ceiling, they feel alienated -and here is this very handy message: the problem is liberals, blacks, freeloaders, whiners, criminals, immigrants, welfare queens, etc., etc., etc. The narrative makes sense to them. It explains things to them. And it connects to things they experience as foundational to their identity, so to change their thinking is to change, or at least question, their entire sense of self and their peer network. This virus - which I think I like as a metaphor better than cancer, because it's infectious - has seated itself pretty deeply within our population. But it didn't arise by accident. It got cooked up in a lab. What's amazing is how freaking effective it is. I am still grieving the missteps of the Occupy movement, which was the only thing I have seen in my lifetime that, in its initally less ideological and more pragmatic approach, took some real steps toward breaking down the divisions proposed by our manipulators.

There's no quick answer. Like everyone, I want to DO something. "What can I DO?" everyone asks. Donating to the school and library are great, maybe donating to other anti-racism organizations, and so on. But I think the main thing we who care about it have to do is just commit to the long slog of a life working toward justice, in little ways and big. As much as anyone, I would love to be huddling in a smoke-filled war room somewhere cooking up new civil rights events with compatriots in the underground. But mostly, I think real change depends on the interpersonal, using our personal presence and example to get people to unplug from the master narrative of white supremacy and economic subjugation.

As far as the rioting narrative, I do see some hope. Hot riots eventually cool. What would be great would be to see that the non-violent protests only continue and swell. The NAACP is working on a long march in Missouri and looking for participants. I hear some more community forums being planned. I think more things need to be put on the calendar, that churches and community groups should pick a day on the agenda to devote to this over the next few months, that people need to book rooms in the local library and invite a public conversation on race and justice. We need to keep it up. If we can show America we are taking part in activism long after any violence has subsisded, we stand some chance of having the real conversation that the violence was carefully orchestrated to prevent. We have to maintain an attention span here - no small task for people today - we have to not go away, and not let the discussion go away.
posted by Miko at 6:14 AM on November 26, 2014 [42 favorites]

Artists paint over the boards covering windows smashed in the protest Tuesday night in South Grand, St. Louis.
posted by likeatoaster at 6:20 AM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

A black cop was jailed for striking someone on the hand with a baton. What.

How much you wanna bet the passenger he struck was white?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:27 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

nakedmolerats - well, first, I wouldn't approach it with the mindset of "causing a scene." If you are in actual danger, physical or emotional, then it's understandable that you just skip the discussion*. I am not advising that anyone puts themselves in a situation where they are risking abuse. If you can't remain calm and discuss this without yelling, I'd advise you not to bring it up or otherwise engage. If you can't do it without making it personal or patronizing, I'd advise you not to engage.

I don't think most people's minds will change over dinner; attitudes are too entrenched. I mean, they couldn't convince you that Obama is Satan or whatever. It's more about planting seeds and showing them that their opinion is not based on anything other than feeling. When they say something outlandish, you can say "hm, that doesn't make sense to me... could you tell me where you got that information... actually I read that ...."

I'm not guaranteeing it will work and I advise against going into it with the mindset that you will change them. But you will be doing something and you will feel better than silently seething. And I think it's valuable to open a door to discussing it further. Slamming the door by telling them they are wrong just makes them dig their heels deeper. They won't risk their ego by evaluating other points of view, and then you're stuck.

* I am privileged in that I know I can have a rational discussion about anything with my family [except for that one cousin] and that while we may have to agree to disagree, there won't be a scene.
posted by desjardins at 6:28 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Reading Wilson's testimony,

When I grabbed him, the only way I can describe it is I felt like a five-year-old holding onto Hulk Hogan....

And then after he did that, he looked up at me and had the most intense aggressive face. The only way I can describe it, it looks like a demon ...

At this point it looked like he was almost bulking up to run through the shots, like it was making him mad that I’m shooting at him. And the face he had was looking straight through me, like I wasn't even there, I wasn't even anything in his way....

It strikes me that, as usual, the brilliant Claudia Rankine is exactly right:

"Black men are dying because white men cannot police their imagination."
posted by AceRock at 6:40 AM on November 26, 2014 [37 favorites]

Rage Against the Minivan is a white mom with adopted black sons, speaking out against the way kids like hers are targeted. It shouldn't matter more that she's white, in terms of the pain any mother of a black son is feeling right now. But it will matter more to some people, just like it matters more to some people when men take up feminist causes and say things that women have been saying already.

Given that, I'm sharing her link on my FB, hoping a white woman speaking truths will reach some people who turn away from a non-white face saying the same things.
posted by emjaybee at 6:48 AM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

"Black men are dying because white men cannot police their imagination."

Brutal Imagination is the most brilliant thing I've ever read about this.
posted by nakedmolerats at 6:50 AM on November 26, 2014 [11 favorites]

I just think this society is sick from some sort of insidious cancer that it has no interest in fighting. It has no interest in ever addressing its original sin of racism, and that original sin is woven into the fabric of how this country was founded (the systematic genocide of Native Americans), on through slavery, Jim Crow, and on through today.

Society is made of people, and there is lots of evidence that many many people are fighting for change. It is hard, and uphill, but some victories have been won, and others could still be won.

I have days of thinking that way too, don't get me wrong. I look at my kiddo and wonder what to tell him. He has been moved to tears more than once when I've had to tell him about terrible things that were happening because he was asking about them. Because we raised him to care about others and that violence in unacceptable. So he literally can't understand why a person would do things like this. And so then we talk about the ways people become prejudiced, how they were raised, what they are afraid of.

It's a strange place you find yourself in, as a parent. Because on the one hand you know you need to raise your kid to be a good person. On the other hand, you wonder if that doesn't just make them more vulnerable. The place we have found ourselves in is to be able to say, yes, some people do bad things, or are just acting like jerks. You might find out the hard way that they are not to be trusted. They might change or they might not. The important thing is to be better than that yourself, and to seek out others who want to be better than that. It's ok to defend yourself. It's ok to be careful. It's ok to be the only one who thinks something, if that something is true.
posted by emjaybee at 7:00 AM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

To expand on my previous thought... I wish people would get out of the mindset that winning people over is hopeless and why bother. It's been demonstrated that people who are homophobic often change their minds when they know LGB people personally. You can't identify LGB people on sight like you (mostly) can people of color, so how did that happen? When LGB people spoke up and came out to friends and family. It's not ~*magic*~ that same-sex marriage is now legal in much of the country. It's because people have had difficult conversations, because people have taken risks and sometimes paid with their lives.

Race relations are awful but they are still better than they were because it's now socially unacceptable to openly spout racism. All those people complaining that they "can't" say the n-word? That wasn't achieved by ~*magic*~. So when you have the difficult conversations with your family, and they clam up and just don't talk about it around you, you are teaching them that their opinion is socially unacceptable. They may still talk that way around their peers, but over time that becomes a smaller and smaller group.

There are many, many problems to be solved, and many things we have no control over, but we can have the difficult conversations with people we know.
posted by desjardins at 7:02 AM on November 26, 2014 [13 favorites]

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel taught us that on three things the world is sustained: on truth, on justice and on peace. But today the streets have erupted in protest — in Ferguson, Missouri, and around the country — because a clear truth, that an unarmed black teenager named Michael Brown Jr., was shot and killed in broad daylight by a police officer, has not lead to justice. And so there is no peace on the streets, because once again, black and brown youth in the United States have been shown by the system of justice that is supposed to serve all of us that their lives do not matter.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:06 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Darren Wilson Reveals He And His Wife Are Expecting A Baby
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:11 AM on November 26, 2014

corb: So yeah - if the prosecutor believes that based on the facts, there is not enough reason to think a crime has been committed, it seems that they do actually have an ethical duty not to prosecute it.

corb, that's not a "so yeah." That's entirely different from what MattD claimed earlier, that "the prosecutor must himself believe the evidence supports conviction beyond a reasonable doubt."

From a legal standpoint, "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard is much stronger than "probable cause." Beyond a reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof in our legal system. It means, after having been presented with all the evidence, you feel certain that the defendant is guilty. Probable cause is the same legal standard for a cop to make an arrest and just requires at minimum a suspicion based upon factual evidence. It doesn't require certainty at the pre-grand jury stage, which would be ridiculous because the case hasn't even commenced yet; there's been no testimony and the evidence may be incomplete.

So bottom line, sure, if the prosecuting attorney's office really believes no crime took place, yes, they must decline to prosecute. Which means, not even presenting the case before the grand jury in the first place. The fact that they did present the case before the grand jury means, or should mean, they believed there was probable cause. And if so, they should have properly prosecuted the case and attempted to secure an indictment. You don't point a gun at someone unless you intend to shoot.
posted by xigxag at 7:19 AM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Ferguson: In Defense of Rioting: The violent protests in Ferguson, Mo., are part of the American experience. Peaceful protesting is a luxury only available to those safely in mainstream culture
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:32 AM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

So bottom line, sure, if the prosecuting attorney's office really believes no crime took place, yes, they must decline to prosecute. Which means, not even presenting the case before the grand jury in the first place. The fact that they did present the case before the grand jury means, or should mean, they believed there was probable cause.

It's also relevant that there was considerable pressure on Jay Nixon to appoint a special prosecutor, and on McCulloch to recuse himself, neither of which happened. If this was Actually About Ethics in Criminal Prosecutions, McCulloch would have stepped aside and let someone else handle it instead of taking a dive.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:37 AM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

desjardins: " I wish people would get out of the mindset that winning people over is hopeless and why bother."

I personally believe it's never hopeless to turn people toward the light--this high-school daily Limbaugh listener is now to the left of Bernie Sanders.
posted by notsnot at 7:45 AM on November 26, 2014 [23 favorites]

I think it's safe to say at this point that the rioting is pretty small compared to the protests. Is that accurate do you think?
posted by Potomac Avenue at 7:47 AM on November 26, 2014

Which means, not even presenting the case before the grand jury in the first place. The fact that they did present the case before the grand jury means, or should mean, they believed there was probable cause.

If this article from the Journal of the Missouri Bar from a few years back is accurate, commencing the prosecution of a felony occurs when the grand jury indicts or when the prosecutor files a complaint (that is, indicts without a grand jury, just on his own say-so). Simply presenting a case to the grand jury is not considered commencing a prosecution.

And that makes sense. The grand jury is supposed to determine if there is probable cause to prosecute. Now the prosecutor may stack the deck by essentially presenting only their side of the case, which they almost always do, but that's not necessarily how grand juries are always used.

From the SCOTUSblog link above:

For [Justice Stevens], the idea of the prosecutor withholding known exculpatory evidence was inconsistent with the grand jury’s historic role in preventing “hasty, malicious and oppressive persecution” and its “function in our society of standing between the accuser and the accused.”

So the prosecutor could have believed that the grand jury ought to have been used in this way, and could have presented the case to it even without himself believing there was probable cause, because, in part, from the National District Attorneys Association National Prosecution Standards:

A prosecutor is not a mere advocate and unlike other lawyers, a prosecutor does not represent individuals or entities, but society as a whole. In that capacity, a prosecutor must exercise independent judgment in reaching decisions while taking into account the interest of victims, witnesses, law enforcement officers, suspects, defendants and those members of society who have no direct interest in a particular case, but who are nonetheless affected by its outcome.

So what the prosecutor do if he does not believe there is probable cause, but that there is a societal value in an investigation anyway? He can't commence the prosecution himself because that would be unethical. Perhaps he feels it would be equally unethical to present a lopsidedly pro-prosecution case to a grand jury -- because he does not believe there is probable cause.

So he compromises and gives what he considers to be the entire set of facts to the grand jury, and lets them decide.
posted by shivohum at 7:50 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

So what the prosecutor do if he does not believe there is probable cause, but that there is a societal value in an investigation anyway? He can't commence the prosecution himself because that would be unethical. Perhaps he feels it would be equally unethical to present a lopsidedly pro-prosecution case to a grand jury -- because he does not believe there is probable cause.

So he compromises and gives what he considers to be the entire set of facts to the grand jury, and lets them decide.

This is precisely what a special prosecutor is for.
posted by Lemurrhea at 8:10 AM on November 26, 2014 [7 favorites]

And the "Libertarians" who post all about their nifty anon/snowden/assange/piratebay/legalization/#gg bullshit (it's about ethics in police brutality - but only when it happens to white dudes who flaunt the law with a video camera)

I guess it depends on where you look. The Cop Block folks, for all their flaws, have been very much on the side of the Brown family and vocal about this issue. They've been on the ground at Ferguson and they're not - at least not anywhere online or recorded - fomenting for violence or nonsense and are very vocal about the right to protest peacefully. Are they the most evolved on race issues? No. But they are by no means looking the other way.

Flex Your Rights took a lot of heat yesterday for calling the failure to indict unjust. I thought it was a very reasoned position but there were plenty of angry voices about it. So yes, there are those folks who are all for the liberty till it means you might say shooting a black kid is bad. But there are a lot of voices in that crowd on this.
posted by phearlez at 8:14 AM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

So what does the prosecutor do [...]?

Well, he probably shouldn't do stuff like this:

In 2001, McCulloch convened another grand jury after a pair of undercover drug officers shot and killed two men, a suspect and his passenger, outside a Jack in the Box in Berkeley, Mo. The officers told the jurors that they had fired only after the suspect tried to run them over with his car, and in his public statements about the secret proceedings, McCulloch himself repeatedly insisted that “every witness” had corroborated the officers’ version of events.

But a subsequent report by the Post-Dispatch revealed that McCulloch had lied. Only three of the 13 detectives who testified said the suspect's car had moved forward. Two of them were the shooters themselves; the third was "a detective who McCulloch later said he considered charging with perjury because his account was so at odds with the facts." According to the grand jury tapes, “four other detectives testified that they never saw the suspect’s car travel toward the officers.” A collision expert working for the Justice Department also determined that the suspect's car had remained in reverse throughout the incident. But McCulloch never brought any of this evidence before the grand jury — and, as a result, the jurors determined that the officers were right to fear for their safety. The case didn't go to trial.

When activists protested, McCulloch snapped back. “These guys were bums,” he said of the suspects. “The print media and self-anointed activists have been portraying the two gentlemen as folk heroes and have been vilifying the police. I think it is important for the public to know that these two and others like them for years have spread destruction in the community dealing crack cocaine and heroin.”
posted by winna at 8:16 AM on November 26, 2014 [52 favorites]

But, you know, if you ignore his history of reflexively siding with police, his decision not to recuse himself, and his virtually unprecedented move to throw the case to a grand jury without any instructions, you can piece together a version of events where he actually wasn't trying to cover his own ass!
posted by tonycpsu at 8:18 AM on November 26, 2014 [17 favorites]

For some reason I woke up this morning thinking of the Tzadikim Nistarim, the 36 righteous people who redeem humanity in the eyes of God and keep the world spinning in Jewish mystic tradition. It's my (very shoddy) lay understanding that they don't know how important they are, and they do not recognize one another: they simply appear in times of oppression and persecution to help those who need them, and then fade away again, returning to their lives as ordinary folk.

My first sleepy hope was that they were out there, somewhere, in the crowds at Ferguson, in Oakland and New York, in Hong Kong and Brazil and Mexico City. Then I thought about the rallies around the nation, the highway shutdowns, the students out in the streets who recognize that this is not a local problem, not a national problem, but a problem for every person who suffers injustice, no matter where they are. My third sleepy thought was no matter how this all turns out, we discovered we have many, many more than just 36 of the humble and righteous on earth.
posted by WidgetAlley at 8:20 AM on November 26, 2014 [26 favorites]

McCulloch is a racist and corrupt as fuck. This being the show trial of Mike Brown was entirely to be expect. What's surprising is the relish with which he twists the knife when delivering the guilty verdict - that kind of cruelty says political ambition.
posted by Artw at 8:22 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

When I grabbed him, the only way I can describe it is I felt like a five-year-old holding onto Hulk Hogan....

Five-year-old Wilson is 6-foot 4 and weighs 210 pounds.
posted by JackFlash at 8:24 AM on November 26, 2014 [26 favorites]

Libertarians are voting against the drug war every election while Democrats continue to vote in more drug warriors. The drug war is the biggest driving force behind the antagonistic relationship between police and citizens. The libertarian crickets aren't what I'm worried about. I'm worried that for all this rage nothing is going to be done to actually hold politicians accountable for creating the atmosphere that makes police the enemy.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:25 AM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

(1992) Justice Scalia Explains What Was Wrong With The Ferguson Grand Jury
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:32 AM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

One of the realities that fuels Al-Queda and ISIS is the number of young men(mostly) with no access to jobs (let alone meaningful/ adequately-paying work) who are angry about injustice. Every time I see a black man throw something through a window, light a fire, riot in the street, I see the expression of injustice. Don't hide it. I remember the race riots of the 60s. Yes, it was horrible that black neighborhoods were devastated, but it sure as hell got the attention of complacent Americans who didn't think race was an issue.

Black Americans living in poverty and injustice are rightfully furious. I recommend non-violent protest, civil disobedience, organizing. But just like the race riots of the 60s, I see this and don't flinch. The Civil Rights movement never ended. People still organize. But there's a concerted effort to keep blacks from voting. There's economic injustice, the courts are systematically unjust, and there's outright murder. Why would you not burn?
posted by theora55 at 8:33 AM on November 26, 2014 [7 favorites]

People have got to stop thinking so generally like idiots. Questions like "Do you support the police or the protestors?" are so broad and overly-general, they don't even make sense. I support good police officers (and they do exist) and good protestors (and they do exist). Hell, my own sheriff's department lost an officer over the weekend to an ambush staged by a right-wing nut. Our community supports them fully and has been grieving over the loss. Does that mean I "support the police"? I don't know: which police, where and why? Only idiots could seriously believe all police departments and all police officers are literally the same thing, with approval and criticism of one automatically applying to all.

But some people in our society really seem to want to insist that we have to operate on that level as idiots, yoking our personal fates and identities to every broad generalization that comes along without any regard for all those pesky particulars that really matter most.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:35 AM on November 26, 2014 [7 favorites]

Libertarians are voting against the drug war every election while Democrats continue to vote in more drug warriors.

Er, which libertarians are actually doing this versus talking about it? At least at the national level, the Democrats have a much better record on legislation to try to scale back drug laws.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:42 AM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

Why would you not burn?

Because destroying the businesses employing people in those communities hurts those communities more than the owners, it gives comfort to racists asshats who can then point to the destruction as backing for their racism, and it ends up undermining the goals that you are working toward. The only good thing about it, if I can use the word good, is that people pay attention when things burn. But there are other non-violent ways to get attention that don't so terribly penalize the people who are most intimately impacted by police racism and violence.
posted by longdaysjourney at 8:44 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

theora55: the realities that fuels Al-Queda and ISIS is the number of young men(mostly) with no access to jobs (let alone meaningful/ adequately-paying work) who are angry about injustice.

In an NPR interview with Steve Sullivan, a Ferguson-area resident who runs a network of counseling and crisis centers in the St. Louis area (dear gods, ignore the comments, unless you like to laugh bitterly about people trotting out the same tired tropes about gangsta rap and black-on-black violence), I learned about a few companies that are specifically looking to open facilities in Ferguson. St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran an article on one in September, and it sounds like there are a few more. Unfortunately, such stories of potential good are not as exciting as people burning businesses down, so the news covers the fires. #FuckCNN
posted by filthy light thief at 8:45 AM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

But there are other non-violent ways to get attention that don't so terribly penalize the people who are most intimately impacted by police racism and violence.

I am 100% in favor of the #shutitdown movement going on. Nothing gets people's attention like interrupting the constitutional rights of cars.
posted by desjardins at 8:58 AM on November 26, 2014 [22 favorites]

[I swiped a bit of that language from this tweet by Rembert Browne: "my fav anti-protest narrative, while not explicitly said, boils down to this idea that cars have the constitutional right to commute"]
posted by desjardins at 8:59 AM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

this idea that cars have the constitutional right to commute

Also known as the Rob Ford Postulate.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 9:01 AM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

Only idiots could seriously believe all police departments and all police officers are literally the same thing, with approval and criticism of one automatically applying to all.

I dunno. I feel a little idiotic then I guess. Not that I don't think there are well-intentioned cops, or plenty of cops that would never seriously oppress or harm citizens. But the sheer scale of the crappyness has gotten so large (or just better reported) that it's hard for me to credibly believe there's a cop on the beat who hasn't turned his or her gaze away from a fellow officer's misdeeds. And maybe that's an unfair judgment to level against people who are, after all, people and who have that tribal inclination. It's not as if that phenomenon doesn't appear in every other career path.

But groddammit I expect more from the people who are not only the arm of our government but who have been issued the tools and freedom to deploy deadly force. And all I hear are not only stories of misdeeds but of the few cops who stand up against them... and then get forced out of the job. It feels like there are no good cops - cops who not only don't 'sin' but who stand up against the sins of other cops - because they don't get to stay cops.

So when I see a cop I don't necessarily assume they're bad. But I assume that the best possible thing I could do is avoid interacting with them at all costs. Because there's almost no circumstance I can think of where that interaction doesn't have a greater possible downside than possible reward.

I don't think that skepticism makes me an idiot, I think it just makes me reasonable about the risk-reward tradeoff of any police interaction. And that's as a middle aged and class white guy. Maybe there's irony to the fact that I'm viewing the cops with the same suspicion and pre-judgment that we're criticizing the police for. But then again, I'm not the one operating under color of authority and always given the benefit of the doubt.
posted by phearlez at 9:25 AM on November 26, 2014 [18 favorites]

Er, which libertarians are actually doing this versus talking about it? At least at the national level, the Democrats have a much better record on legislation to try to scale back drug laws.

The progress at the state level has been driven mainly by popular initiative and the progress at the federal level has been woeful. If Libertarians won as many elections as Democrats do, the drug war would already be over.

(We would have a whole heap of bigger problems though!)
posted by Drinky Die at 9:30 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

(Just for mefites' own information about the Minneapolis car thing - it was not quite as bad as it looks on the video and as far as I know, the person who was hit was not injured badly. A friend of mine saw them lying down and waiting for the EMTs and they were resting calmly and fully conscious. We were very, very, very lucky. I don't like to think what would have happened if the car hadn't just run over her legs. It was extremely weird - I've been at protests where cars have sort of nosed through protesters, but I've never seen someone just charge through like that.

The protest as a whole was really big - there had to have been about 1000 people in the end, just judging from the size of the group that went up on the highway. Some students from South High (which had a walk-out, along with four other local high schools) spoke as did Chris Lollie, the guy who was harassed and arrested in the St. Paul skyway earlier this year.

What was most interesting was that the people who are usually very moderate at protests - professional community organizers, etc; the people whose jobs require them to present a moderate viewpoint in order to get stuff done - were urging people out into the street, and people who do not usually go out into the street on a demo were in the street. This means that people are angry, and that professional organizers think that the anger is sustained and widespread enough that it can be useful rather than dangerous. )
posted by Frowner at 9:32 AM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

I hope all of these organizers link up. It's time for another march on Washington.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:41 AM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Here's another lawyer critiquing the glaring inconsistencies of Wilson's testimony.
posted by TwoStride at 9:44 AM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

Next week's New Yorker cover.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:52 AM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

TwoStride, she is great: "Another cross-exam Q NOT asked of Wilson: how'd Mike Brown punch you w his right hand on right side of your face as you sat in drivers seat?"
posted by prefpara at 9:58 AM on November 26, 2014 [20 favorites]

oh Christ I didn't even twig to that.

Not even a travesty. What's worse than a travesty?
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:02 AM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

"Another cross-exam Q NOT asked of Wilson: how'd Mike Brown punch you w his right hand on right side of your face as you sat in drivers seat?"

Backfist? I don't see that as the reality-defying smoking gun many seem to on that Twitter feed. Also, Christ, Twitter is a terrible medium for that. Write a blog post or something.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 10:03 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Oh for heaven's sake:

Rep. Peter King Suggests Obama Invite Darren Wilson to the White House (WaPo link)

“I think it would be very helpful if President Obama went and met with the police officer or invited him to the White House and said, ‘You’ve gone through four months of smear and slander and the least we can do is tell you that it’s unfortunate that it happened and thank you for doing your job.’"

posted by mochapickle at 10:05 AM on November 26, 2014

But the sheer scale of the crappyness has gotten so large (or just better reported) that it's hard for me to credibly believe there's a cop on the beat who hasn't turned his or her gaze away from a fellow officer's misdeeds.

Really? In every small county police department around the world? Not a single one that on balance isn't doing things the right way more often than the wrong way? I can't believe that. True, knowing human nature, even model police forces will include some flawed individuals. But perfection isn't the goal. The goal should be to make things better, on balance, for most people and at least to do no harm. Some people think our legal system already achieves that result consistently, others think it never does, but the reality has to be more nuanced and complicated.

Nothing real is ever that simple. Only ideas are ever that simple.

Even if the problems in Ferguson are so widespread right now that it might be accurate to see them as pervasive, that doesn't mean there's no possible better future, or that the problems are literally universal. If you've already given up on even the possibility of better policing, then engaging with the problem at all is just setting yourself up to fight a battle without any possibility of victory.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:05 AM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Backfist? I don't see that as the reality-defying smoking gun many seem to on that Twitter feed.

It would require some pretty acrobatic contortions.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:07 AM on November 26, 2014

Barack Obama, Ferguson, and the Evidence of Things Unsaid by Ta-Nehisi Coates:

“Property damage and looting” is a fairly accurate description of the emancipation of black people in 1865, who only five years earlier constituted some $4 billion in property. The Civil Rights Bill of 1964 is inseparable from the threat of riots. The housing bill of 1968—the most proactive civil-rights legislation on the books—is a direct response to the riots that swept American cities after King was killed. Violence, lingering on the outside, often backed nonviolence during the civil-rights movement. “We could go into meetings and say, 'Well, either deal with us or you will have Malcolm X coming into here,'” said SNCC organizer Gloria Richardson. “They would get just hysterical. The police chief would say, 'Oh no!'”

posted by yaymukund at 10:08 AM on November 26, 2014 [19 favorites]

I was thinking a lot in class today about white privilege.

As a white person with two graduate degrees, I've learned to speak a certain language, to operate within the system. I know how to knock on doors and write letters.

I teach at a community college to students who are primarily people of color. This is a low-income area.

I'm not plugged into the K-12 school system, other than to see the end result. My non-expert opinion is that these students have been starved of educational opportunities. I have a student -- a student I know cares about his grade -- turn in a major paper that used as an intro a passage lifted completely from Wikipedia. It's not an isolated instance. Students come into the college classroom without the basics that I, a middle-class kid who went to school with a lot of rich kids, received.

I have students who meet their bad grades or a request to stop the talking with anger. At times it is hard, as a white person who has been trained to operate within a certain system, to understand this anger. It is also hard to know how to defuse it. I tell them: Being a good writer is important for academic career. Being a good writer opens doors. Let's work together to get you an A.

But there are other times where I need to tell a student that xyz is inappropriate. And I know that I come off as part of the white power structure. I wish I had a way of discarding the gap between my experience in education and that of my students. But the gap is there, and it is not the making of either me or my students.

TLDR: Sometimes I feel like a shitty white person.
posted by angrycat at 10:12 AM on November 26, 2014 [16 favorites]

If you've already given up on even the possibility of better policing, then engaging with the problem at all is just setting yourself up to fight a battle without any possibility of victory.

I don't know that I have given up on the possibility, but I have given up on that change happening without serious pressure from the outside of the police. Possibly even from outside the immediate justice system. I have given up on expecting to see it anytime soon. I have given up such that I expect to be teaching my 2 year old skepticism that will be useful to him past his teen years.

Are there small-town operations that are hunky-dory? Maybe, I guess? Are they possibly less likely to have problems because of community policing and personal accountability? Are the stakes lower? I don't know. As someone in a larger metropolitan area I'm not sure I much care anyway - I don't live there and if there's something intrinsic to small-town policing that avoids the problems in larger areas... that doesn't much do me any good unless it can be identified and translated here.

Even if the problems in Ferguson are so widespread right now that it might be accurate to see them as pervasive

Overall I don't like to have a discussion based on a single word but I think this is important - do you really mean "if" there, saul? Because I don't feel like there's any doubt in my mind that they are. If we differ on that I'm not sure there's really any discussion to be had.
posted by phearlez at 10:31 AM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

It's a little old now, but this piece from Cornel West seems extra relevant today: “The state of Black America in the age of Obama has been one of desperation, confusion and capitulation”

His argument in a nutshell:

The leading causes of the decline of the Black prophetic tradition are threefold. First, there is the shift of Black leadership from the voices of social movements to those of elected officials in the mainstream political system. This shift produces voices that are rarely if ever critical of this system. How could we expect the Black caretakers and gatekeepers of the system to be critical of it? This shift is part of a larger structural transformation in the history of mid-twentieth-century capitalism in which neoliberal elites marginalize social movements and prophetic voices in the name of consolidating a rising oligarchy at the top, leaving a devastated working class in the middle, and desperate poor people whose labor is no longer necessary for the system at the bottom.

Second, this neoliberal shift produces a culture of raw ambition and instant success that is seductive to most potential leaders and intellectuals, thereby incorporating them into the neoliberal regime. This culture of superficial spectacle and hyper-visible celebrities highlights the legitimacy of an unjust system that prides itself on upward mobility of the downtrodden. Yet, the truth is that we live in a country that has the least upward mobility of any other modern nation!

Third, the U.S. neoliberal regime contains a vicious repressive apparatus that targets those strong and sacrificial leaders, activists, and prophetic intellectuals who are easily discredited, delegitimated, or even assassinated, including through character assassination. Character assassination becomes systemic and chronic, and it is preferable to literal assassination because dead martyrs tend to command the attention of the sleepwalking masses and thereby elevate the threat to the status quo.

posted by dialetheia at 10:38 AM on November 26, 2014 [12 favorites]

Wilson is either a cowardly [word for coward] armed with a pistol, or he shot Brown because he wanted to shoot Brown

I'd say both.
posted by grubi at 10:42 AM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

I have no doubt that Wilson's testimony is a true and faithful accounting from his own memory. At the very least, he's retelling a retelling of a retelling, and by now it has occupied his memory. What I doubt is whether his memory could have been accurate. A story:

Some years ago, I was in the FATS trainer. It's basically a big FPS-on-rails, only instead of a gamepad or keyboard, you're holding a modified M4 and standing in front of a very large screen. The modifications to the carbine were electromagnetic actuation: trigger pull, bolt cycling, a little recoil. We had to physically change magazines to a 'fresh' one even. So there I was, paired up, and given a scenario. We were part of a patrol that was picking up a suspected militant at his home. While the 'team' went inside, my partner and I were on crowd control and guard duty outside.

Here's what I remember: Crowd gathers, muttering starts, some shouts. We run through use-of-force steps, shouting at them to get back in Arabic, weapons down. A man in a red keffiyeh strolls up through the crowd. He's got an AK. He waves it above his head, the crowd scatters, and he bolts down an alleyway. My parter and I follow, shouting for him to stop and drop the weapon. When he doesn't, we both shoot him as he's running away. 3 shots each, center mass. He dies.

The instructor got in my face. 'What was that!' 'A bad guy.' 'Why'd you shoot him?' 'He ... was a bad guy.' 'Did he fire at you?' 'I don't remember.' 'What do you mean, you don't remember! You just took a man's life, and you don't remember?!' 'It was the right decision!'

My partner and I agreed on the sequence of events. And my instructor relaxed. And here's what he played back for us:

Crowd gathers, muttering, some shouts. We run through use-of-force steps, shouting at them to get back in Arabic, weapons down. A man in a red keffiyeh walks briskly up, we both key on him after seeing he's carrying an AK. He fires at us from within the crowd, but we don't shoot him as the civilians scatter. He runs down an alleyway, and we follow, shouting at him to stop and drop the weapon. He turns, points the AK at us again, and we both shoot him, three shots each, center mass. He dies.

My memories of what I experienced are clear, to this day. They are completely at odds with what actually happened, as the other participants in the exercise, watching, agreed. We saw the same garbled memories and gaps with the rest of the group, in other scenarios.

And that was video game.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:43 AM on November 26, 2014 [19 favorites]

Yeah, and the worst part is that this veteran prosecutor used the fact that so many witnesses had different versions of events as a reason in and of itself to justify the no true bill outcome.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:47 AM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

I have no doubt that Wilson's testimony is a true and faithful accounting from his own memory.

Really? I mean, I can understand giving him some benefit of the doubt, I guess, but there is not a single shred of doubt in my mind that his entire testimony was coached. If they had interviewed him right after the incident (possibly for a police report that they should have filed and didn't because they cared so little? just an idea) I could see it, and I agree that your story is instructive in demonstrating how shoddy human memory is when we feel threatened. But given the circumstances and the changing stories, I don't doubt for a second that he was coached and his testimony was carefully planned out.

I didn't watch Wilson's horrible interview last night, but I've heard he's still sticking with their initial story that Brown died 35 feet from the car and not 150 feet, which is what the grand jury "evidence" shows (and which Shaun King had proved before the grand jury stuff was released). What the fuck? I guess this highlights how little anyone in power really cares about the "physical evidence" we heard so much about, but I'm still shocked that he isn't even bothering to adjust his bullshit story.

By the way, in case anyone was worried that there might be any justice in this terrible country at all, the Minneapolis protest hit and run guy not only isn't being charged, but he's being painted as a "victim" by the police: "Here’s the only information the MPD would offer, from a police report (emphasis ours): "The victim‘s vehicle was damaged by a large group of people. While he was attempting to flee from the mob, he struck a pedestrian." I don't care if didn't turn out to be as bad as it looked from the video, he still could have killed several people doing what he did. Reckless endangerment at the least, right? But no, he's the real victim here of course, because that "angry mob" was the real problem.
posted by dialetheia at 10:59 AM on November 26, 2014 [16 favorites]

Charles Pierce again: Darren Wilson Speaks
posted by homunculus at 10:59 AM on November 26, 2014

"The victim‘s vehicle was damaged by a large group of people. While he was attempting to flee from the mob, he struck a pedestrian."

Jesus. It doesn't stop, does it.
posted by naju at 11:04 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Wilson's target hit the pavement dead 152 feet from where he was firing.

No, Wilson pursued Brown on foot and shot him at close range. This is indicated by the proximity of the spent shell casings near Brown's body.

Here is a PDF that shows the scene. Brown and Johnson were proceeding from left to right. Wilson was driving in the opposite direction from right to left.

The initial confrontation presumably occurred somewhere to the left of the picture. Wilson told Brown and Johnson to get out of the street. They continued past the police car to the right in the picture, but according to accounts, Brown may have said something in passing that infuriated Wilson. So Wilson put the car in reverse and sped backwards to catch up with the two and turned to cut them off so they were again facing the driver's side of the car. That is why the car is parked sideways.

This is when the second confrontation occurred and the struggle in the window of the car. At some point Brown fled for his life, continuing in the direction of their original path towards home. Brown's hat, and two flip-flops were lost as he ran.

Wilson pursued on foot and caught up with Brown when he stopped and turned around. Wilson shot Brown at close range, about 150 feet from the original confrontation at the car. The spent shell casings indicate that Wilson shot Brown near where his body fell.

The whole situation could have been avoided if Wilson has simply driven on after he first spoke to Brown and Johnson about jaywalking. Instead, he backed up, cut them off with his car, and unnecessarily escalated the situation in reaction to something Brown said in passing.
posted by JackFlash at 11:08 AM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Here's another obvious instance of the McCulloch being a completely shameless fucking liar despite all the "physical evidence": "Darren Wilson never stood over Mike Brown's body" (via nadawi's retweet)
posted by dialetheia at 11:08 AM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

I just keep hearing over and over in my head, "were you lying then or are you lying now?"

Police chief, prosecutor, officer. Pick one.
posted by ryoshu at 11:13 AM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

"The victim‘s vehicle was damaged by a large group of people. While he was attempting to flee from the mob, he struck a pedestrian."

If you look at the video, too, this isn't even true. He hits the girl before people start pounding on the car. There was some confusion even among people who were right there (as I was) as to just what happened because it happened very fast. Even some people who were actually at the march did not realize that the pounding started afterward. People were certainly trying to block the street, which was perfectly reasonable and appropriate.

Honestly, I could see that it would be confusing and frustrating for a driver, but it isn't exactly rocket science or sophisticated morality not to drive into a crowd, even at rush hour on Lake Street. And he did absolutely drive into the crowd, that was all on him. Plenty of people didn't.

Also, it wasn't a mob, unless all large groups are mobs. I have been in a crowd I consider to have been a mob, maybe fifteen years ago now, in the wake of the Seattle protests, and I actually found it very scary even though it was technically "my" mob - it was very different from all the other large demos I have been to (including ones where there was actual violence) it only lasted a little while as part of a longer protest, but there was a feeling in the air that everyone had abrogated responsibility. It was very strange. Nothing bad happened, but I felt like something really could have.

I'm sure it was plenty scary to have people pounding on his car, but again, people weren't pounding on his car until he'd driven into the crowd and hit the girl.
posted by Frowner at 11:13 AM on November 26, 2014 [14 favorites]

On Being a Black Male, Six Feet Four Inches Tall, in America in 2014, W. Kamau Bell
posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:16 AM on November 26, 2014 [12 favorites]

By the way, in case anyone was worried that there might be any justice in this terrible country at all, the Minneapolis protest hit and run guy not only isn't being charged, but he's being painted as a "victim" by the police

Are you kidding me? This guy is the authority figure hard-on bifecta: honest citizen vs deadbeat hippie protesters AND car culture vigilante vs pedestrian (or cyclist). I predict he will be given the keys to the city.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 11:17 AM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

I mean, I can understand giving him some benefit of the doubt, I guess, but there is not a single shred of doubt in my mind that his entire testimony was coached.

You're using too narrow a definition of coached. Coached doesn't have to be - and mostly isn't - someone saying "no, this is what you say instead." It isn't even necessarily someone guiding someone's narrative towards a deliberately false retelling. You can look up all the research on people reinforcing their own biases in things as innocuous as job interviews. In the name of clarity or understanding they get steered.

"I was scared, so I pick up the stick-"
"The bat?"
"the bat, and I hit him."
"In the head?"
"Right."

It's sloppy, but not necessarily malicious. Pair it up with a bias and you're steering a dialog in a certain way. Have the discussion a few dozen times and by the end of it the witness believes what they're telling you, particularly if they're not being checked or challenged. If you do it without recording the variations along the way nobody would ever know.

Someone I know suggested the podcast Criminal based on enjoying Serial. Their second episode talks about all the ways we try to identify when someone is lying. They're talking about deliberate mistruths but I would imagine the things they talk about are related to people creating their own false memories, and I wonder whether it would apply well to this sort of testimony. It's a really interesting discussion of a reliable way to track these things and worth a listen.
posted by phearlez at 11:19 AM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

Also, it wasn't a mob, unless all large groups are mobs.

Given the casual use of the phrase "unlawful gathering" I think that is indeed the prevailing authority position, yes.
posted by phearlez at 11:21 AM on November 26, 2014

It's sloppy, but not necessarily malicious.

I see where you're coming from, but I still think that in this particular instance, that reading is too generous and it absolutely was malicious. There has been a police cover-up on this thing from the very beginning, starting with the startling lack of police report, crime scene measurements, and medical examiner pictures, and it would basically take an act of god to convince me otherwise at this point.
posted by dialetheia at 11:28 AM on November 26, 2014 [8 favorites]

dialethia, nadawi, just to be accurate, McCulloch said:

BEFORE THE RESULT OF AN AUTOPSY WAS RELEASED, WITNESSES CLAIM THEY SAW OFFICER WILSON STAND OVER MICHAEL BROWN AND FIRE MANY ROUNDS INTO HIS BACK.

The photo taken after the shooting that Jay posted doesn't contradict that.

McCulloch of course then went on to imply that witnesses were lying ("once the autopsy came out, no additional witnesses made such a claim"), but there's no proof of that either AFAIK.
posted by anthill at 11:33 AM on November 26, 2014

Oh, I unquestionably think the fix was in on multiple levels. But that isn't incompatible with the idea that Wilson is now completely convinced that the story he's telling is true. And we get into the question of how we define 'malice' too. You and I would certainly agree on it. But I would bet a lot of the people who perpetrated shenanigans in this case really believed, based on othering and us v them and the kind of "he was asking for it" horseshit that Gungho drops above - they surely thought they were protecting someone good, or at least at worst someone who was sloppy.

It's why it's so important that police shootings get examined with the level of skepticism - at bare minimum - that any other crime does. The number of chances for sympathetic folks to just slightly shift perception is tremendous even with what is just slightly sloppy bias.
posted by phearlez at 11:39 AM on November 26, 2014

I'm seeing a lot of people argue that Brown deserved what he got for stealing or not following directions, mostly on twitter but even in more civilized spaces. To be clear, the idea that anybody deserves to be shot for minor infractions like not moving off the sidewalk or stealing $5 of cigarillos is exactly the sentiment that supported lynchings throughout American history. "Mike Brown’s shooting and Jim Crow lynchings have too much in common. It’s time for America to own up"

This cartoon really puts a fine point on it.
posted by dialetheia at 11:45 AM on November 26, 2014 [13 favorites]

The video of the Tamir Rice shooting has been released. It's... hard to watch. (This is the 12-year-old boy playing with an airsoft gun who was shot by police.)
posted by naju at 11:49 AM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

I cannot personally bear to watch it, but appear entry there is video of the killing of the 12 year old and the police just pull up and shoot him. That's it - no talking, no attempt to determine if there is a threat, they just turn up and kill a kid.

They'll get medals, no doubt.
posted by Artw at 11:52 AM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Can someone explain to me if the Tamir Rice video is super sped up? The entire killing took less than 30 seconds?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:52 AM on November 26, 2014

My dad is a cop. Has been my entire life. He's also a white Southern cop, so if you think I am not going to go head to head with him about this come Christmas, you are mistaken. I mean, I love my dad as much as you can love someone who has never really been present in your life, but I made it clear a long time ago I do not tolerate racist foolishness. I feel I have very little to lose here. You either learn that your mode of thinking black people are only criminals or subservient is dated and sad and pathetic in 2014, or you learn you raised a woman who will eloquently and politely hand your ass to you if you come at her with your bullshit protecting white cops drivel.
posted by Kitteh at 11:53 AM on November 26, 2014 [17 favorites]

From that Guardian article: in the Jim Crow era, a black person was lynched once every four days, on average. Over the last seven years, a black person has been shot by a white police officer every three or four days, on average.

Can someone explain to me if the Tamir Rice video is super sped up? The entire killing took less than 30 seconds?

Doesn't look sped up to me - the kid is moving at normal speed before they show up and shoot him without even the barest minimum attempt at engagement. Jesus christ.
posted by dialetheia at 11:54 AM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Can someone explain to me if the Tamir Rice video is super sped up? The entire killing took less than 30 seconds?

Um, that is part and parcel with at least a couple of other recent police shootings, like that guy who got shot with a knife by a bus shelter in...wherever it was. They zoom in way too close, effectively putting themselves in harm's way (if there ever IS any harm to be in the way of) and fire within 10-15 seconds. Seems to be the new MO.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 11:55 AM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

Um, that is part and parcel with at least a couple of other recent police shootings, like that guy who got shot with a knife by a bus shelter in...wherever it was.

No, I know. I just... Goddamn.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:56 AM on November 26, 2014

State violence is always rendered invisible in a world where cops and soldiers are heroes, and what they do is always framed as “security,” protection, and self-defense. Police occupy the streets to protect and serve the citizenry from (Black) criminals out of control. This is why, in every instance, there is an effort to depict the victim as assailant – Trayvon Martin used the sidewalk as a weapon, Mike Brown used his big body. A lunge or a glare from a Black person can constitute an imminent threat. When the suburb of Ferguson blew up following Mike Brown’s killing on August 9, the media and mainstream leadership were more concerned with looting and keeping the “peace” than the fact that Darren Wilson was free on paid leave. Or that leaving Brown’s bullet-riddled, lifeless body, on the street for four and a half hours, bleeding, cold, stiff from rigor mortis, constituted a war crime in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. It was, after all, an act of collective punishment – the public display of the tortured corpse was intended to terrorize the entire community, to punish everyone into submission, to remind others of their fate if they step out of line. We used to call this “lynching.”

Robin D.G. Kelley: Why We Won't Wait
posted by RogerB at 11:58 AM on November 26, 2014 [17 favorites]

The video of the Tamir Rice shooting has been released. It's... hard to watch. (This is the 12-year-old boy playing with an airsoft gun who was shot by police.)

Jesus christ. This is just a textbook example of unnecessary escalation by the police.

I'm reminded of the video that came out of the earlier Ferguson threads, which showed yet another black man being shot and killed by the police (that one because he had a knife). One of the points that has been made repeatedly is that the police are (apparently) drilled constantly about thread radiuses, and how within certain distances they basically have no option but to shoot to kill.

Putting aside the fact that the radius mentioned for a person with a knife was ludicrous (I think it was basically "if you're less than 20 feet away they will kill you 100% of the time"), the fact is, police seem to take exactly the wrong lesson from this "information". Instead of saying "we believe that within a certain distance, we're forced to escalate to lethal force, therefore let's stop the car outside of that distance and close in on foot", they instead drive up right into that radius and jump out of the car shooting.

Instead of using the distance to a subject as a guideline to prevent escalation, they use it as justification for escalation by intentionally moving within it.

The whole police training apparatus in this country is irreparably broken.
posted by tocts at 11:59 AM on November 26, 2014 [18 favorites]

Waking up to the Washington Post op-eds (Wednesday's) made me angrier at the WP than I have been since the Iraq War. I thought of calling them to cancel my subscription, but newsprint is useful for some messy tasks around the house.

I'm proposing that we name all racist white fuckups who perpetrate violence against non-whites or other forms of racism "wilsons." It has a more satisfying ring than "zimmerman," which has too many syllables.
posted by bad grammar at 12:02 PM on November 26, 2014

You know what this grand jury resembles?

A kangaroo court.

The proceedings were secret.
One side has the lawyers available other doesn't.
The prosecutor is more interested in leading the "jury" to a point of view rather than doing his job.
The reputation of the victim is maligned without being challenged.
Cross-examination by only one side.
posted by TheLittlePrince at 12:04 PM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

These shootings are not new, though. As long as I have lived here in MPLS, there have been a couple every year. As I've said elsewhere here, I know two people who witnessed police shootings of mentally ill black men, one in front of his pleading family.

The other thing to understand is that cops hate even the most respectable anti-police-brutality activists and black community activists. Those people are stopped and hassled as much as the cops can get away with, even when they are well-off and connected although more often and more seriously when they are not. Particularly if they are black. That too is always ongoing.

The only difference now - and I don't know if it's my little internet bubble - is that unlike in the nineties, many white and/or well-off people actually believe you if you say it happens, whereas unless you were talking to a black or Hmong citizen of Minneapolis back in the nineties, it was like trying to convince people that the sky was chartreuse with lemon spots.
posted by Frowner at 12:06 PM on November 26, 2014 [12 favorites]

Kitteh, that is the best thing. I have a family member I'm not even on speaking terms with because of this stuff, simply because eventually it became better to let a 40-year relationship die than to try (again, patiently) to explain why his views (and the views he is teaching his children) are completely disgusting.

I am pulling for you.
posted by mochapickle at 12:07 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

One side has the lawyers available other doesn't. [...]

Yeah, the prosecution.

The prosecutor is more interested in leading the "jury" to a point of view rather than doing his job.

That is his job. It's just in this case his point of view was that there should not be an indictment. Which means he shouldn't have brought this before the grand jury in the first place, of course, but still...

Cross-examination by only one side.

Yeah, the prosecution.

You seem to be calling for the defense to have a lawyer present. But the defense here was Wilson, so an attorney would only have been even more pro-Wilson.
posted by Justinian at 12:15 PM on November 26, 2014

Waking up to the Washington Post op-eds (Wednesday's) made me angrier at the WP than I have been since the Iraq War. I thought of calling them to cancel my subscription, but newsprint is useful for some messy tasks around the house.

Wouldn't help anyway. A month or two ago they got tired of being unsuccessful at convincing me to switch my Sunday-only to daily and just started delivering it every day, unasked and with no additional payment. Just got a notice saying I can keep that for an extra $0.15 a week (WHO doesn't value news again?).

Maybe for $0.25 I can get them to stop.
posted by phearlez at 12:15 PM on November 26, 2014

[a defense] attorney would only have been even more pro-Wilson

Hard to imagine!
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 12:16 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah, the prosecution.

This would be a good point if the prosecution wasn't actually acting like Wilson's defense lawyers. McCulloch's speech was indistinguishable from the defense's closing arguments.
posted by dialetheia at 12:17 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

I think you'll find I've been rather anti-McCulloch. The solution is not to make grand juries even more pro-prosecution. Which is barely even possibly, really.
posted by Justinian at 12:19 PM on November 26, 2014

Overall I don't like to have a discussion based on a single word but I think this is important - do you really mean "if" there, saul? Because I don't feel like there's any doubt in my mind that they are.

Racial bias is pervasive not only in police departments but more generally--not universal, but pervasive. I don't doubt that. What I doubt is the idea that very general statements of very general ideas like "You support the police!" or "You don't support the police!" have enough concrete meaning in them to yield anything other than more confusion and disagreement when taken seriously as subjects of discussion. Abstraction is powerful stuff. It conveniently allows us to talk about a million different things as if they were all a single thing, when that's a useful thing to do. But we should never forget abstraction is also a form of lying by omission.

Maybe it's my background as a programmer speaking, but I know very well from experience that if you over generalize a problem or subject when you're thinking through it, you end up with nonsense and can get confused imagining things that don't exist as anything other than incidental products of the error of thinking at too general a level. I think we're choking on social and political rhetoric that's too vague and imprecise to yield discussions that aren't destined to generate more confusion.

One of the things you learn as a programmer is that abstraction is really just a form of "information hiding". When we abstract, we simplify things from what they are in reality to omit certain details that aren't relevant to the specific thing we're trying to do. Abstracting effectively and appropriately can be very useful for making it possible to work on and solve difficult problems that would otherwise be too complex to even think or talk about. But abstraction deliberately omits some part of the truth from consideration, and only the goals of abstraction determine what details really are irrelevant. That's how it works--that's why in computer science, abstraction is sometimes used synonymously with information hiding. Broad, overly-general claims or statements like "Police are good," "Looting is bad," etc., all hide a lot of information that might actually be important if your goals are different than whoever formulated the statement in that way. We don't generally do this abstraction stuff consciously, so people don't always realize they're thinking about a problem at the wrong level of abstraction. Einstein famously wrote that problems can only be solved by working at a different level of abstraction than the one that gave rise to the original problem. Many apparent problems in philosophy have been "solved" through the eventual realization that they were never really problems to begin with, but only appeared to be because people were asking the questions that seemed to reveal the problem at the wrong level of abstraction.

How is this relevant to Ferguson? When people generalize too much, kids like Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin end up dead in error, and public discussion of whether or not that's an acceptable outcome quickly degrades into people fighting imaginary battles over higher abstract principles and vague nonsense about order versus chaos.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:19 PM on November 26, 2014 [8 favorites]

The solution is not to make grand juries even more pro-prosecution.

No one is talking about "grand juries." It's disingenuous to act as if 1) this grand jury were a typical example of grand juries in general and 2) any criticisms of this grand jury are somehow applicable to all grand juries.
posted by prefpara at 12:22 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

"prosecution"

"cross-examination"

Both should be presented in scare quotes.
posted by naju at 12:27 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

Protests are being organized for Phoenix and Arizona State University in the next several weeks. Feel free to Memail if you want more info.
posted by WidgetAlley at 12:31 PM on November 26, 2014

You seem to be calling for the defense to have a lawyer present. But the defense here was Wilson, so an attorney would only have been even more pro-Wilson.

No, I think they were calling for a real trial, transparent to the public with appropriate representation. Which is what we should have gotten and what Mike Brown deserved, at the very least. This wasn't a normal grand jury, it was a sham trial conducted behind closed doors with one-sided representation. I'm not saying you're not anti-McCulloch at all, just that criticism of this particular grand jury does not constitute criticism of a normal grand jury used in appropriate circumstances (which this absolutely wasn't).
posted by dialetheia at 12:31 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

The drug war is the biggest driving force behind the antagonistic relationship between police and citizens. The libertarian crickets aren't what I'm worried about. I'm worried that for all this rage nothing is going to be done to actually hold politicians accountable for creating the atmosphere that makes police the enemy.

I'm about as anti-War on Drugs as it gets, but I'm pretty sure that the bigger contribution to the "atmosphere that makes police the enemy" is that they keep murdering unarmed black boys.
posted by kagredon at 12:33 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

The "guy with a knife shot by police" was Kajieme Powell. I'm not faulting anyone for not remembering; it's a sad state when there are so many we can't even remember their fucking names.
posted by desjardins at 12:34 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

“Reading Wilson's testimony,
When I grabbed him, the only way I can describe it is I felt like a five-year-old holding onto Hulk Hogan....”

I believe he meant that Brown ripped his shirt off, exposed his 24 inch pythons, and said “Let me tell you something, brother…”

More seriously, it’s interesting – apart from the spot on Claudia Rankine observation – from a conflict style assessment that he cast it in those terms. Not only competitive – staged-sport competitive. And looking at his age, somewhat infantilizing perspective of the fight.

Makes me wonder the last time he’d been in a physical conflict. Or trained for one. And in consideration of that, where’s his overwatch? That speaks volumes about how this came about. It’s as much as a set up as pro-wrasslin’ is.

Let’s get a department, give them no money, put people with little or no community socialization into a black community (not just white, but white on top of it), give him little training in verbal judo or y’know, real judo, and make the ROE such that he’s got no partner in the car (no money, yeah?) and no taser, hes sitting on his asp ... not sure why ... and the flashlight is out of reach (again I'm stymied, taking Wilson at his word, I'd have sacrificed the time to grab a non-lethal weapon, or barrel struck Brown with the Sig...ah, don't get me started... but Wilson is about my size, lighter, maybe he lost the keys to the gym too, but he's a big enough guy to trade with Brown) and pretty much only the gun as his escalation option.

Guy could have been Leo Buscalia and there would have been a shooting. (either guy, really).

I'll dodge the stopping power/shot placement/panic/firearms details derail I'm itchy for....but:

how'd Mike Brown punch you w his right hand on right side of your face as you sat in drivers seat?"

He's got injuries on both sides of his face, his chin, and the back of his neck.

That link (btw is pretty solidly on the cop side) has the transcript from the grand jury itself. The NYT has one. Probably better than twitter for information.

And too, like with most incidents the after-details are more indicative of the situation if not the actual event (e.g. Oswald steal JFK's brain too?).

Such as Brown lying there for four and a half hours. Even if the shoot was totally righteous, that's despicable.

But again, regardless of the details, Wilson and Brown were placed in a no-win situation by circumstances set up long before either of them got there. If it weren't those two, it'd be a cop and a black youth somewhere else. As has been countlessly detailed.

“It's the otherwise "good" cops who say nothing, or worse, actively defend the thin-blue-line code-of-silence bad-movie-title bullshit. They are the ones I hold most at fault, because their refusal to come forward and provide actual real justice”

Quin, I don’t disagree exactly. There is this. But that’s more of a straw vs. oar situation. What one guy, even a very good guy, can do is constrained by law.

Look at Serpico. He came out against police corruption. And, though he was harassed, most of the force backed him up. Most cops want to, y’know, be a cop. Do police work.
It wasn’t until the Knapp commission was appointed that anything got done. Serpico’s actions led to that, and systemized graft is treated as the despicable thing that it is. But that was corruption. An addendum. A parasitic system grafted on to the policing itself. Not the actual laws that police and oversight systems are ruled by. They’re not maintaining silence simply out of loyalty (there is that, but that’s not the dominant force); their role is proscribed from the outset, by definition.

It’s akin, in this sense, to a defense attorney being appointed to defend an accused child molester refusing to provide him a defense because the crime itself is so abhorrent. The defense attorney *has* to defend him. And too, police – or other unions – their role is to defend their cadre regardless of the case.

It’s been called out before that teachers unions defend accused molesters. Well, yeah they do. That’s the system. And it provides for civil liberties for all.
I mean, look, no cop can change how many white officers cover a certain neighborhood, no matter how black he is or how non-racist. And that alienation is by design. And so to is the antagonism, but in contrast to the public defender situation, there’s no systemic support for the opposed.

Were an honest cop, or even an entire department, to come forward and say “we want the system changed” that would threaten their own interests in much the same way the anti-due process arguments run now for prosecutors (e.g. certain individuals, office holders, or classes of people being immune to arrest). Or, say, if the teachers union said we want tenure revoked.

There’s no “other shoe” in that sense. No counterbalancing force that will come to the fore.
So, exactly what you’re saying – taking the matters of misconduct away from parties with compelling interests the way they stand now with (for example) prosecutors.
That wouldn’t automatically happen.

However that’d be the only move you’d really need. And I wholeheartedly agree with you that this is exactly one of, if not the, cornerstone in changing how we do law enforcement.
Even if only the best, most honorable officers were the sole representatives of the police force in the U.S., they could not change the way things stand now. No more than the best, most truthful reporters could alter the way monopolization and concentration of ownership of media outlets affects how the news is slanted. Or teachers change politicization of school funding.

It’s something they can’t reach from inside the system.

And I’m saying, that is by (political/economic collusive) design.

José Saramago (wrote “Blindness”, et.al) wrote: “There are always a few who manage to find a way out, humans are capable of the best as well as the worst, but you can’t change human destiny. We live in a dark age, when freedoms are diminishing, when there is no space for criticism, when totalitarianism — the totalitarianism of multinational corporations, of the marketplace — no longer even needs an ideology, and religious intolerance is on the rise. Orwell’s ‘1984’ is already here.”

That’s sort of the irony. The racism is, in that sense, not racist. It’s just structured totalitarianism. ( I mean, it doesn’t have to be racist. It is. But that’s what makes it all the worse. Kinda like a side dish or a cherry on top. “Yeah, this beating doesn’t have to be racially motivated ….ah, but what the hell: ‘fuck you N**er! Take that!’)

And in any totalitarian system, *someone* has to be the oppressor and someone has to be the oppressed. They may change roles. But they can’t escape them. The most enlightened oppressor, who says “I will not oppress” becomes the oppressed (again, Serpico, Bunny Greenhouse and other whistleblowers – although like him I like the phrase “Lamplighters”)

Even in a “win” situation. Greenhouse a few years back got just short of 1 million in a settlement for being fired (and scathed) for exposing U.S. govt. contractor collusion (because corruption is a whole other thing), and fraud, etc.
Halliburton made at least $1.8 billion, and that’s in the margins, not counting the contracts themselves (almost $3 billion). And were fined 7 and a half million as the result of Greenhouse’s actions. They made more overcharging the Iraqis on gas alone in ONE WEEK than they paid Greenhouse.

If it were a functioning system, that feedback capacity would be built in so officers, and officials themselves, could address the rules they’re governed by in addition to corruption of those rules.
Bit like ‘Nomic’ I suppose. It’s the difference between the substantive and the procedural. A good cop can effect change in the substantive, but not in the procedure. That requires political change, which requires the democratic process which, itself, has been subverted.

And of course, Thomas Jefferson has that: “(Transl) I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery… It prevents the degeneracy of government, and nourishes a general attention to the public affairs. I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.”

Quin, otherwise I’d like to explore balancing Federal oversight with local control. The community has to have some input on their own policing. How to keep that process balanced, I dunno. There’s always a way though.

Keeping people interested, volunteering, for the democratic process, that’s the tough part. Humans show a remarkable capacity to throw down in a pinch and risk a beating but not attend to a regularly meeting schedule where they might suffer verbally, but have access to coffee and free donuts.

I’ve often thought there should be a 90%+ / 10% ratio of women to men in government. Not because I think women are less violent (I’m not sure either way) but they apparently, at least according to studies I’ve seen, have the capacity to focus on long term things better and work on something meticulously over a longer period. e.g. why female munitions workers are better, gray vs. white matter, larger hippocampus, etc.

Whatever the case, I think multi-faceted, focused, broad based, and most importantly constant political pressure will lead to more lasting change than the explosive more narrow stuff which leads the press to either ignore, or play up the more salacious/destructive bits and divide support.

On that note, I think Obama has completely dropped the ball here.

I mean: “should we defeat every enemy, should we double our wealth and conquer the stars, and still be unequal to this issue, then we will have failed as a people and as a nation. For with a country as with a person, "What is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”
That’s LBJ.
Who used to make people watch him take a crap.

So, yeah. I’d like to see a bit more leadership from the President. At least addressing the scope and number of the protests. Violence is inevitable. If not now, than later. Even if no one particularly wants it on any side, the thing is built that way.

I could live with kicking over people’s tea wagon in the name of justice. I could even live with busting someone who’s looking for any excuse to trash a Starbucks. And I could lead either side into that fray - protecting the community from physical destruction or protecting it from destruction by injustice. There are, if not righteousness, at least consolations for those respective positions in any aftermath. I mean, the reality and the tragedy is that they’re actually on the *same* side. No one wins in a riot.

But sitting on the sidelines and letting it happen, knowing I could have done *something*, man, no way could I live with myself. Even if I screwed up, I could at least say I tried.
Calling for peaceful demonstration … I mean, damn Obama, at least drive an ambulance. What f’ing good is half-white, half-black president if he’s not the guy who can bridge that gap?

Same tired platitudes. A few bad apples among the cops. “A few thugs” on the protesters side. Did the speech in Chicago too. Like we need convincing. Hey, let’s tell the choir all about Jesus! Yeesh.

But perhaps I’m knee-jerk handing him this just because he’s ethnically mixed.

I mean, gee … If only he had some sort of experience in his background of organizing, say, communities or something.
Or knew about leading social efforts to bring attention to stuff.
Or had dealt with law enforcement accountability issues (oh, let’s just pull one out of my ass and say being in first state to mandate videotaping of homicide interrogations).
Or had some expertise in Constitutional rights.

Then, yeah, I’d say here’s a guy who’s tailor made for that job, beyond, y’know, being dead center of either side of the race issue in the U.S. FFS

Man, I get that he can’t raise hell. He’s gotta be “The President” but the goddamned cause is just crying out for a unifying symbol, someone who can unite both sides against the inherent injustice in the system, how the hell is he not that guy? (Is it cause his dad looks like the black Bob Dobbs?)

I dunno. Disappointed in him tho.
posted by Smedleyman at 12:41 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

Darrien Hunt, killed by Utah police while cosplaying, appeared to flee during encounter
posted by tonycpsu at 12:49 PM on November 26, 2014

Since we're mentioning other black men killed by police, back in April in Milwaukee (my city), a policeman murdered an unarmed black man who was peacefully sleeping in a park. Employees of a nearby Starbucks had called police for a welfare check since he appeared to be mentally ill; officers came by and saw that there was no problem with him. Another officer received the request via voicemail and was unaware that the welfare check had already happened. He went to the scene and woke up the victim. This escalated into a fight and the victim was shot and killed. The victim's name is Dontre Hamilton. It took six months for the police department to release the name of the officer - Christopher Manney.

The officer was fired for not following procedure (i.e. escalating the situation unnecessarily) but charges have not been brought. (The firing earned the chief a no-confidence vote from the union.) The DA is still reviewing the case. I do not believe the officer would have been fired were it not for public pressure. There have been regular protests at the park where Dontre was killed, and they have increased in frequency and size since Mike Brown's death. There were sit-ins at police headquarters and city hall, but there has been no violence. This constant pressure works and that's why I'm very supportive of #shutitdown.
posted by desjardins at 12:54 PM on November 26, 2014 [11 favorites]

Twelve years old. Two seconds.

.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:57 PM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

I'm proposing that we name all racist white fuckups who perpetrate violence against non-whites or other forms of racism "wilsons."

used in sentence: "That Santorum smear just Wilsoned the guy"
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 1:04 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

because anybody of any race would get shot if they pulled that shit, and probably before the end of my first sentence.

That is incorrect, and if you'd bothered to click any of a number of links in this thread to stories about white people doing stupid and/or violent shit who do not get shot for it then you would have known not to make such an incorrect comment.
posted by rtha at 1:05 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

PSA: there are some people with Arabic usernames posting under Ferguson hashtags... don't click Arabic hashtags unless you read Arabic... they are posting beheading photos. I won't be able to unsee that.
posted by desjardins at 1:05 PM on November 26, 2014

We need a lot more events like this: Boulder forum discusses racism in light of Ferguson case.

And not just for community members. People like Nixon and Knowles have to learn about racism, explain how they see racism operating, and explain what actions they are taking to redress its influence. The media and constituents need to hold them to account. Even getting them to say the damned word would be quite a change from the status quo.

There are still no results for the "racism" on the website of the governor, and there are only two returns for "racism" on the Ferguson city website, both in the meeting notes recording comment from citizens (both post-August).
posted by audi alteram partem at 1:07 PM on November 26, 2014

Smedleyman: "He's got injuries on both sides of his face, his chin, and the back of his neck."

Why believe Wilson's testimony that you linked? The hospital report in the Grand Jury evidence says that while he was brought in for an orbital fracture and broken jaw, a medical inspection found:

* No deformity
* No bleeding
* No laceration
* No bruising
* Minimal palpable pain in the jaw, none in the eye
* X-ray negative, with comment: "UNREMARKABLE STUDY"
posted by anthill at 1:07 PM on November 26, 2014 [13 favorites]

The "hand-up don't shoot" chant was the most stupid part of this whole thing. He was not told to put his hands up. He was told to get on the ground.

Nobody's saying he told to put his hands up. Putting your hands up is what people do, instinctively, when ordered to stop by the police, to show they don't pose a threat.
posted by xigxag at 1:08 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

How is this relevant to Ferguson? When people generalize too much, kids like Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin end up dead in error, and public discussion of whether or not that's an acceptable outcome quickly degrades into people fighting imaginary battles over higher abstract principles and vague nonsense about order versus chaos.

Loved your overall comment, but I think you're drawing the wrong conclusion. From day one, the left has tried to make the killing of Michael Brown some sort of cause celebre and an indictment of the larger criminal justice system. While I agree with them that we need a lot more scrutiny of police and incarceration practices, the effort to "abstract" the killing is all over this thread and every one on the Blue. I would love to see folks stick more to the actual facts (ones that were corroborated by physical evidence, rather than eyewitness testimony that is provably false, like Dorian Johnson's -- the latter being much of what is paraded on this thread). I should note that sticking to the facts still leaves A LOT of questions about the prosecution, the lack of an indictment and the future of Officer Wilson in the Ferguson police department, but it doesn't allow folks to offer their armchair opinions/vitriol about the racism or odiousness of people they've never even met. I would hope that would be enough.
posted by learnsome at 1:08 PM on November 26, 2014

From day one, the left has tried to make the killing of Michael Brown some sort of cause celebre and an indictment of the larger criminal justice system.

Fuck that. All people wanted was a fair trial of his murderer.
posted by dialetheia at 1:10 PM on November 26, 2014 [19 favorites]

rather than eyewitness testimony that is provably false, like Dorian Johnson's

Or Darren Wilson's. Funny that he's credible, but Johnson isn't.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:11 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

I would love to see folks stick more to the actual facts (ones that were corroborated by physical evidence, rather than eyewitness testimony that is provably false, like Dorian Johnson's -- the latter being much of what is paraded on this thread).

I question the assumption that there exist "facts" in this case that are not tainted by a racist, violent, and corrupt system. Facts in the abstract of course exist, but...you know, it's not totally unheard of for police officers, lawyers, and government officials to lie to protect themselves and their friends. It's interesting that the people in power (usually white men) are automatically credible, reliable witnesses, while the people who are not in power (black men and boys in this case, but also women of any color more generally speaking, not to mention trans* folk) don't get the same benefit of the doubt.

If only there were a fact machine that told us the unbiased truth. Barring that, we have to assume that "facts" gathered by people with an agenda are going to reflect that agenda, intentionally or unintentionally.
posted by Ragini at 1:17 PM on November 26, 2014 [8 favorites]

Or Darren Wilson's. Funny that he's credible, but Johnson isn't.

Well, Johnson is trying to make himself sound like he's a little bothered by a misdemeanor theft and shoving a clerk. He's got serious motivations to lie. All Wilson is trying to do is avoid being charged with murder.
posted by phearlez at 1:18 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

While I agree with them that we need a lot more scrutiny of police and incarceration practices, the effort to "abstract" the killing is all over this thread and every one on the Blue.

Besides, are you seriously trying to argue that this is some isolated killing? Have you seen the Tamir Rice footage? How about the Kajieme Powell shooting? How about the fact that a black person is killed by a white cop every 3-4 days in this country, on average?
posted by dialetheia at 1:18 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Or Darren Wilson's. Funny that he's credible, but Johnson isn't.

I don't personally rely on Wilson's testimony at all (unless it is consistent with the physical evidence). He is, after all, the target of the investigation. Dorian Johnson lied repeatedly (changed his story multiple times, alleged events that could not have occurred, given the physical evidence, etc.).
posted by learnsome at 1:19 PM on November 26, 2014

Michelle Alexander, author of The New Jim Crow, for NYT: Telling My Son About Ferguson.

My son wants me to reassure him, and tell him that of course Darren Wilson will go to jail. At 10 years old, he can feel deep in his bones how wrong it was for the police to kill Michael Brown. "There will be a trial, at least — right, Mom?" My son is asking me a simple question, and I know the answer.

As a civil rights lawyer, I know all too well that Officer Wilson will not be going to trial or to jail. The system is legally rigged so that poor people guilty of relatively minor crimes are regularly sentenced to decades behind bars while police officers who kill unarmed black men almost never get charged, much less serve time in prison.

I open my mouth to speak, look into my son's eyes, and hear myself begin to lie...

posted by divined by radio at 1:21 PM on November 26, 2014 [8 favorites]

From day one, the left has tried to make the killing of Michael Brown some sort of cause celebre and an indictment of the larger criminal justice system[...]I should note that sticking to the facts still leaves A LOT of questions about the prosecution, the lack of an indictment and the future of Officer Wilson in the Ferguson police department, but it doesn't allow folks to offer their armchair opinions/vitriol about the racism or odiousness of people they've never even met.

So you agree that this case is an indictment of the larger criminal justice system, but heaven forbid anyone mention racism.
posted by kagredon at 1:21 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

How about accounting for the fact that we are missing a lot of key "physical evidence" because the medical examiner's camera mysteriously ran out of batteries that day, or that Wilson was allowed to leave the scene without making a report, or that they didn't even bother measuring things because it was "self-explanatory" what happened?
posted by dialetheia at 1:22 PM on November 26, 2014 [14 favorites]

but it doesn't allow folks to offer their armchair opinions/vitriol about the racism or odiousness of people they've never even met.

There's really no more sure-fire indication that your position is weak than when it's predicated on assigning motive to the unknowable internal lives of other people.

I could give a shit whether the Ferguson brigade completely turfed every aspect of this post-incident because they're racist, stupid, circling the wagons around a coworker, or possessed by satan. I don't need to assign them motivations. I can point to a dozen ways they handled this poorly and with less stringent methods than if it had been a citizen-on-citizen crime. That's enough.
posted by phearlez at 1:26 PM on November 26, 2014 [13 favorites]

Mod note: fffm, learnsome dial down the back and forth bickering or take it to MeFi Mail please
posted by mathowie (staff) at 1:32 PM on November 26, 2014

The "hand-up don't shoot" chant was the most stupid part of this whole thing. He was not told to put his hands up. He was told to get on the ground.

Nobody's saying he told to put his hands up. Putting your hands up is what people do, instinctively, when ordered to stop by the police, to show they don't pose a threat.

Yes, it obviously is, but as I mentioned in the last thread, "hands up" in American idiom has never to my knowledge been anything but an imperative meaning "put your hands up," (and certainly almost universally in pop culture it is used this way by police) not a declarative meaning "my hands are up". It's all the more jarring because the second half of the chant is also an imperative.

I get that this is a dumb objection, but it still bothers me.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 1:34 PM on November 26, 2014

learnsome, what specific physical evidence are you using to decide credibility here? Is it the evidence that Wilson was allowed to handle without supervision? The measurements that the forensic examiner failed to take? Please, do enlighten us.
posted by kagredon at 1:34 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Re:

the effort to "abstract" the killing is all over this thread and every one on the Blue.

and

but it doesn't allow folks to offer their armchair opinions/vitriol about the racism or odiousness of people they've never even met.

Coates covered this in his piece today: "the events of Ferguson do not begin with Michael Brown lying dead in the street, but with policies set forth by government at every level."

Systemic and institutional racism exists. Its effects are attested to by both the people harmed by it and by extensive academic study.
posted by audi alteram partem at 1:35 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

Frowner: If you look at the video, too, this isn't even true. He hits the girl before people start pounding on the car.

This entire thing, and that retelling of it, make me irrationally monkey rage angry.

It's textbook road rage, of the most basal entitled tiresome type. And he's just going to walk on it?

I mean I get that this is a tiny sideshow to the main issue here, with a slightly bigger chorus in the middle of the cops disgustingly waving it on because they resent the protesters attacking "their team" or whatever, but I've been run over by a stupid road raging driver almost exactly how that video depicted before.

No one should ever get away with that "how DARE you block my car!" shit. It's like this entire situation has a special little interlude to piss off every person watching individually. And it's especially bad because it happened at a protest about this and... I don't know, I just can't even. That's such fucking bullshit. It's like the bullshit horseradish that came with the bullshit sandwich someone ordered at this big 12 top dinner.

And I feel kinda gross even getting mad with the rest of it going on, because it's such minor bullshit in comparison. But it just hits close to home.
posted by emptythought at 1:39 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

What about the provably false assertions from the police department and "prosecutor", like how they claimed for 100+ days that Brown died 35 feet from the car when it was actually 153 feet, which they eventually had to admit because it was an obvious lie? (not that Wilson could keep the story straight on TV last night apparently)

The people you're trusting with the "physical evidence" failed to collect half of the relevant evidence and provably lied about what they did collect.
posted by dialetheia at 1:40 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Riots and Reason

Representatives of the State, of a public that includes black people who are also a public, were defiant when they announced the grand jury results of Michael Brown’s murder in Ferguson this week. If I accept the argument of every person who thinks it was a good clean kill, there is still little to explain the anger of those who, by all accounts, won. Why are police advocates, prosecutors, white people in online comments, the white guy who yelled at me to get a job as I crossed the street last night so angry? They won.

Mike Brown was a pest, exterminated by the police.

The officer is uninjured, married, employed and un-charged.

People who believe that these things are right and just and proper won. Yet, I find they are still angry.

It stretches the bounds of reason.

Unless, of course, nothing about this is reasonable.

When the accusation is that looting and riots constitute unacceptable violence, the rest of the statement goes thusly: every life has a price and these lives are cheaper than any property damaged.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 1:42 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

learnsome, what specific physical evidence are you using to decide credibility here? Is it the evidence that Wilson was allowed to handle without supervision? The measurements that the forensic examiner failed to take? Please, do enlighten us.

You're right to point out that there were a lot of screwups in the investigation, but there are some pieces of physical evidence that served to disprove the grandiose claims of Johnson and others. For instance, the autopsies which proved no shots in the back. The blood on Wilson's clothing which disproved early claims that Brown never tussled with Wilson. Etc. I highly recommend reading the documents for yourself. While I'll say that there are a lot of new questions (Witness no. 40, I'm looking at you), a lot of the media narrative floats away.

Give it a few more days, the media will figure out that they were sold a bill of goods by some "eyewitnesses" (the construction workers being jaw-dropping in this regard) and move on. Unfortunately, they will not hold themselves accountable for fanning the flames with little to no regard for waiting for the facts to emerge.
posted by learnsome at 1:45 PM on November 26, 2014

Speaking of that New Professionalism, the new blog Use of Weapons has an extensive write-up about the Akai Gurley shooting (one of those that Ironmouth asserts "nobody" cares about) and it's worth a read for a good discussion of the systemic problems in an organization and how we assess and talk about cop actions.

Out of air crash investigations came a framework known as human factors analysis and classification (HFACS). Its objective is to identify where errors are made leading up to an event. The officer with gun is the “operator” in HFACS parlance and his errors can include decision errors, perceptual errors and skill-based errors which can include mistakes in the manner or technique a task is performed. This would include opening a door while holding a gun in the same hand. A perceptual error is the classic unarmed shooting where an officer erroneously believes a suspect is armed and blends in decision errors, for example mistakenly perceiving a suspect is threat and using lethal force when none was called for. HFACS, though, also looks at systemic failures and this is where the NYPD had better wake up.

posted by phearlez at 1:47 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

None of that exonerates Wilson from needlessly murdering an unarmed man. All of this disagreement among witnesses is just further evidence that we needed a full and fair public trial of Wilson.
posted by dialetheia at 1:48 PM on November 26, 2014 [12 favorites]

Give it a few more days, the media will figure out that they were sold a bill of goods by some "eyewitnesses" (the construction workers being jaw-dropping in this regard) and move on.

The grand jury was sold a bill of goods by the very person whose job it was to give them the information necessary to secure an indictment. This has been covered at length upthread. The place for credibility of competing claims to be tested is a courtroom in front of a judge and jury, not in front of a grand jury whose only job is to establish probable cause. As has been set out, at length, by both armchair and legal experts in this thread, all over the internet, and on TV, the facts are: Darren Wilson shot someone. There is ambiguity about what exactly happened when. This is probable cause.

McCulloch deliberately sabotaged the grand jury so no indictment would be returned. Analysis of his actions has been posted upthread--multiple analyses by multiple people--and I urge you to go read it, please.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:51 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

Roomthreeseventeen: Can someone explain to me if the Tamir Rice video is super sped up? The entire killing took less than 30 seconds?

Look up John T. Williams. Native guy shot in Seattle. First super fast police shooting like this i had heard of, and it was a friend of my moms. That's when I became aware of this new tactic.

I guess time is money, and those are taxpayer dollars so we can't be wasting them! Or something like that.

It is in no way sped up. They just show up and shoot as if it's crunch time. like fratboys getting to the beer store at 1:58 AM.

There's nothing to conclude but the fact that they arrived already knowing what they were going to do, and didn't want to waste any time getting it done. They seriously act like the fucking slave patrol.

That's the new paradigm. Or I guess, the old one coming home from a brief respite depending on how you look at it. Starting to think it never left, it's just more in the open now again for different reasons.
posted by emptythought at 1:53 PM on November 26, 2014 [7 favorites]

Tocts: Instead of using the distance to a subject as a guideline to prevent escalation, they use it as justification for escalation by intentionally moving within it.

The whole police training apparatus in this country is irreparably broken.

This may have been your point, but i don't think it's broken at all. It's broken in the way a carnival ring toss game is. It's working exactly as designed.

Cops are handed a guide that's broken, 3 laws of robotics style. The unspoken statement was "follow these rules and you can shoot anyone you want with impunity, as long as they're also an "undesirable""

This case seems to have proven that only the second part really matters, but the training apparatus was not broken before. Broken is the wrong word. It was meticulously designed to be unfair.
posted by emptythought at 1:59 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Darren Wilson shot someone. There is ambiguity about what exactly happened when. This is probable cause.

Um, no. That is not probable cause. It's been defined earlier in the thread, so I won't repeat it. Again, while I believe that there was no probable cause (based on the physical evidence and the testimony that's consistent with that evidence), I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that there was probable cause. But that probable cause needs more than ambiguity. It's a good thing that you're not a prosecutor, because there would be A LOT more prosecutions.
posted by learnsome at 2:01 PM on November 26, 2014

“Why believe Wilson's testimony that you linked?”

I believe the photos were not doctored. That'd take a conspiracy on the part of the medical examiner's office.
It’s my understanding that the fact there was a struggle is uncontested.

But I’m agnostic as far as his testimony. I couldn’t care less whether Wilson’s testimony is the unmitigated truth or a complete fabrication. Indeed, the way the prosecutor framed the evidence would be the more important element of any testimony to the grand jury.

But my position is that the substance of this particular event is not relevant to changing the ominpresent procedural circumstances that make police shooting young black men an inevitability.

Clear enough?
posted by Smedleyman at 2:02 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

I honestly don't understand what you're trying to accomplish here learnsome. I think you're showing some inconsistency here when you repeatedly shrug at Wilson's testimony by saying oh, you don't believe anything not corroborated by physical evidence but you have adjectives like grandiose for Johnson's testimony. But the drumbeat here, over and over across three threads now, has been lack of proper investigation and thoroughness in response.

So your original comment which seems to be your thesis here:

From day one, the left has tried to make the killing of Michael Brown some sort of cause celebre and an indictment of the larger criminal justice system. While I agree with them that we need a lot more scrutiny of police and incarceration practices, the effort to "abstract" the killing is all over this thread and every one on the Blue.

doesn't hold up against the repeated links above about other incidents where the same sort of shenanigans happen. Just the story of how an assault with a car was reported shows this sort of sloth and neglect. None of them seem to delve into the question of procedure that's allowing these killings of unarmed folks, whether it be triggered by Brown's contempt of cop or being in public with a toy gun or mentally ill and holding a knife and not in reach of anyone.

It's that very well supported abstraction of these neglectful issues across multiple incidents that allow for this non-issue of disputed assertions of Brown being shot in the back. The reason that could be a narrative at all was because of slipshod investigation. Rumors thrive in the absence of information, and the Ferguson authorities cultivated that absence. As have many other jurisdictions, over and over again.
posted by phearlez at 2:02 PM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

Here's an example of a different policing approach and outcome (hint: the perp does not appear to be black).
posted by TwoStride at 2:03 PM on November 26, 2014

It really bothers me to see people framing this as being about "the left" and "the media narrative" and dismissing it as a manufactured controversy. This is about black folks having to be afraid for their lives because of state-sponsored violence.

(based on the physical evidence and the testimony that's consistent with that evidence)

Is there some particular reason you refuse to acknowledge that the police failed to collect the "physical evidence" that might contradict their story? Or do you just want to handwave that away as "mistakes were made"?
posted by dialetheia at 2:04 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

BTW, for those who haven't read the underlying documents, the AP's promising a lengthy story about all the made up testimony later today. See here: http://www.neurope.eu/news/wire/bc-ap-news-coverage-advisory-114.
posted by learnsome at 2:05 PM on November 26, 2014

Is there some particular reason you refuse to acknowledge that the police failed to collect the "physical evidence" that might contradict their story? Or do you just want to handwave that away as "mistakes were made"?

I agreed with that upthread (and favorited that comment for that reason). They definitely did not do a good job here. It's a pretty incompetent PD.
posted by learnsome at 2:07 PM on November 26, 2014

It really bothers me to see people framing this as being about "the left" and "the media narrative" and dismissing it as a manufactured controversy.

People is plural. You mean person.
posted by phearlez at 2:07 PM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

I agreed with that upthread (and favorited that comment for that reason). They definitely did not do a good job here. It's a pretty incompetent PD.

And yet that doesn't influence your interpretation of their physical evidence?
posted by dialetheia at 2:09 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

It's a pretty incompetent PD.

Structural and Institutional Racism Exists Within Police Forces
posted by audi alteram partem at 2:10 PM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

I'm going to need a map to the current position of the goalposts before continuing here.
posted by phearlez at 2:10 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

Here's an example of a different policing approach and outcome (hint: the perp does not appear to be black).

/derail

Felony menacing with a banana?

We're doomed.

/
posted by ryoshu at 2:14 PM on November 26, 2014

Ta-Nehisi Coates
‏@tanehisicoates

Racism is an actual tool in American history. It serves real purposes. It is not just "white people being mean to black people."

posted by audi alteram partem at 2:14 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

Um, no. That is not probable cause. It's been defined earlier in the thread, so I won't repeat it.

I know it's been pointed out, but worth mentioning again - the mere existence of reasonable people pointing out apparent holes and weird things all over the Wilson narrative - whether those are actually holes or not! - is proof positive that this should have gone to trial. That supports a finding of probable cause

naju said that. There is absolutely, per many legal experts, probable cause for an indictment here. McCulloch didn't want one, and performed in a totally bizarre way for a prosecutor in front of a grand jury. The STL PD didn't want one, and failed to investigate--not 'mistakes were made,' because 'mistake' implies that it was accidental. They deliberately did not investigate this crime properly.

A grand jury is not the place for evidence to be tested. A grand jury is where a prosecutor stands up and says "I have this evidence supporting this possible range of charges, do you agree?" It is not a place for the prosecutor to present the accused as just doing his job. It is not a place for the prosecutor to plant seeds of doubt about eyewitnesses. It is not a place for arguing--it is to present one side of the story, only, and to ask whether that set of facts supports an indictment.

It is not, in other words, a place for every single thing for McCulloch to have done.

Again, while I believe that there was no probable cause (based on the physical evidence and the testimony that's consistent with that evidence)

The evidence that wasn't collected because the ME's camera's batteries were dead? The physical evidence that Wilson had sole control of when he drove back alone after killing Michael Brown? The evidence from the hospital that shows his injuries weren't noteworthy? The evidence that police officers on the scene didn't even bother collecting? What evidence, exactly, are you talking about?

the AP's promising a lengthy story about all the made up testimony later today

That should make for interesting reading.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 2:15 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

And yet that doesn't influence your interpretation of their physical evidence?

Sure, it gives me pause, but the evidence I'm referring to are things that are unlikely to be fabricated (or have been independently tested). The contra would be to say that they're all lying and it's all made up. I'm just not a conspiracy theorist, so I guess YMMV.
posted by learnsome at 2:15 PM on November 26, 2014

(learnsome: I definitely see the problem I'm trying to describe as one found on all sides of this and many other issues. It's not a tendency I think anyone's completely immune to, and I'd be lying if I said I wasn't guilty of doing it myself. But I do also think the tone and quality of public discourse/mass culture in America is especially well-tuned to exacerbate the problem right now, unfortunately.)
posted by saulgoodman at 2:17 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

The contra would be to say that they're all lying and it's all made up.

No, the contra would be to say that they failed to collect evidence that would contradict their story, which is perfectly reasonable considering that they didn't even bother to take pictures or measurements for extremely flimsy reasons.
posted by dialetheia at 2:18 PM on November 26, 2014 [14 favorites]

Disingenuous people being contradictory or playing the other side in some weird Devils advocate way for its own sake seem to be reaching extra hard with this one, damn.

If you applied whatever machinery it is that moves the goalposts that quickly to a rail system, you'd solve transportation and the energy crisis in one shot.
posted by emptythought at 2:19 PM on November 26, 2014 [8 favorites]

Disingenuous people being contradictory or playing the other side in some weird Devils advocate way for its own sake seem to be reaching extra hard with this one, damn.

Calling me disingenuous? Or the rest of that? How is that fair argument? I see this over and over on the Blue when folks are challenged, frankly in a reasonable way. It really needs to stop (as FFFM continues to do it in this thread, even though I've abided by the instruction to stop).

And, for the record, I believe everything I've said. I'm out for the common good, just like you. No reaching on this side of the aisle.
posted by learnsome at 2:30 PM on November 26, 2014

Makes me wonder the last time he’d been in a physical conflict. Or trained for one. And in consideration of that, where’s his overwatch? That speaks volumes about how this came about.

That's what I kept seeing in this whole thing. Really really terrible training (which we can assume is force-wide, I bet) plus an Us vs Them internal story that's really easy to do when your population is as segregated as Ferguson's is.

For how to handle things differently, look at where I live, Richmond, California. It went from gang war central to ... well, peaceful is a stretch, but a heck of a lot better.

Did they do it by singing kumbaya? Sort of, yes. The cops showed up at the gang leaders' houses with a mediator and asked them for their help in dialing back the violence. (sort of carrot and stick, the way I see it. We know where you live + we're listening to you)

They train the heck out of their officers. They practice at the shooting range regularly. Their drills are every 6 weeks instead of once or twice a year.

They have neighborhood officers so that people get to know each other. They seem to have a no-aggressive body language rule, because they always take their sunglasses off when they talk to you and they don't cross their arms across their chests. (It's amazing how much difference the no sunglasses thing makes!)

They work really hard to try to get a very diverse police force- different races, men and women both.

They have an "absolutely never chase" policy. You call it in, they cordon off the area and they go slowly, door by door, and find the suspect. The idea is that adrenalin on the part of either the cop or the suspect is dangerous for everyone.

Every time there's a police shooting anywhere in the country (or here at home) they go over it and over it to figure out how it could have been handled differently.

They have at least one mental health expert on duty at all times, to go out with the officers when something seems mental health related (pretty common).

And they try to be as transparent as they can when officer fatalities do happen. One happened 6 weeks ago (the first in years) and the police chief was on the police facebook account immediately to tell as much as he could.

There are still problems but it is nothing like the war zone it used to be, and they did it by de-escalating, not by arming themselves like an occupying force.

As icing on the cake, the police chief is an openly gay man, married to a civil servant of a city a couple of towns away.

I have spent my whole life afraid of the police. This is the first town that this isn't true for, and it's not because the people they're facing aren't armed- they are heavily armed. There is another way to police. I hope the rest of the country takes notice.

EDIT: The link I attached is about a community organization that offers stipends to the most violent people in order to get them to turn their lives away from violence. It's not attached to the police at all. So all this has been a community effort- not just the police.
posted by small_ruminant at 2:30 PM on November 26, 2014 [96 favorites]

I have spent my whole life afraid of the police. This is the first town that this isn't true for, and it's not because the people they're facing aren't armed- they are heavily armed. There is another way to police. I hope the rest of the country takes notice.

That sounds like an AWESOME PD. I too hope that approach spreads across the country.
posted by learnsome at 2:32 PM on November 26, 2014

I know. If you'd told me I'd EVER be a cheerleader for a police department, I'd've told you you were crazy.

They're not perfect, but they're the best I've run into.

Also, they all wear body cameras as of this year.
posted by small_ruminant at 2:42 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

They have an "absolutely never chase" policy. You call it in, they cordon off the area and they go slowly, door by door, and find the suspect. The idea is that adrenalin on the part of either the cop or the suspect is dangerous for everyone.

That sounds just incredibly smart. Like, evidence-based policing , maybe. I hope that becomes a model.
posted by Miko at 2:44 PM on November 26, 2014 [11 favorites]

Re: probable cause, many legal folks have weighed in on that and I think there's a clear consensus. For one example, Jeffrey Toobin, legal analyst for the New Yorker and CNN, writes: "By submitting all the evidence to the grand jury, [McCulloch] added to the perception that this process represented an independent evaluation of the evidence. But there is little doubt that he remained largely in control of the process; aggressive advocacy by prosecutors could have persuaded the grand jurors to vote for some kind of indictment. The standard for such charges—probable cause, or more probable than not—is generally a very easy hurdle. If McCulloch’s lawyers had simply pared down the evidence to that which incriminated Wilson, they would have easily obtained an indictment." (emphasis mine.)

A bit about probable cause from a law blog: "There’s a reason this blog was started with the name 'Probable Cause,' and the half-joking tagline 'The Legal Blog with the Really Low Standard of Review.' The reason was my disgust, upon going to law school, and particularly upon becoming engaged in the so-called 'criminal justice system' in my second year of law school, when I learned that 'probable cause' actually only meant 'possible reason.' There I learned that 'probable cause' was a 'standard of review' – an approach to evaluating some action – that was so low as to virtually guarantee that the result would be 'there is (nearly always) ‘probable cause’ to pursue the matter further.'... When I explain 'probable cause' to my clients in the context of what California refers to as a 'preliminary hearing,' I explain it to them like this: 'Probable cause' means that a crime might have been committed, and you might be the person who committed the crime. It doesn’t matter if there is also a possibility – even a strong possibility – that you are not guilty of any crime. 'Probable cause' just means you might have committed the crime. The judge will therefore say that we need to have a trial to find out whether, or not, you actually did commit the crime (or crimes) of which you are accused."

A commenter on a public defender blog notes: "In the hundreds of Missouri criminal cases I have handled, ANY evidence supporting each element of an offense was enough to meet the probable cause burden…If that same burden were applied to Wilson he would be sitting in the justice center right now."
posted by naju at 2:51 PM on November 26, 2014 [18 favorites]

So it turns out our awesome police chief is on the board that's doing the Ferguson civil rights probe. I had no idea.

Also, I can't use the word "probe" without my inner 12 year old cackling.
posted by small_ruminant at 2:53 PM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

It is despicable of McCulloch to take advantage of the fact that many people don't really understand the grand jury process or the probable cause standard in order to create the impression in people's minds that something vaguely like a trial, with attendant legitimacy and authority, took place. When what happened wasn't just unlike a typical or proper grand jury process, but was also a perfect example of everything that is not supposed to happen at trial because when it happens (when the presentation of evidence is one-sided, when there is no adversarial engagement, when there is no control over what evidence is considered and how, when roles are muddled) there is no legitimacy, no authority, and no truth at the end of the process.
posted by prefpara at 2:57 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Wow, small_ruminant. If I'd grown up around a PD like that, the idea of becoming a cop wouldn't so totally alien to me. Sounds awesome!
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 2:57 PM on November 26, 2014

Regarding the Tamir Rice shooting: In a recording immediately after the incident, a police officer is heard saying: "Shots fired, male down, black male, maybe 20."
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:59 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

I guess I wasn't done. Every single protection, rule, and process that we put in place to try to make trials more likely to result in justice and truth was absent from this grand jury process. There was no judge. There was no one advocating for the victim, or for the people. (The prosecutor speaks for, and represents, the people. Did McCulloch represent and speak for the people of Ferguson at this grand jury?) There was no measure taken to ensure that evidence was presented that was admissible, i.e. reliable, and presented with proper context and explication. Witness testimony was not tested. Improper questions were asked, including leading questions that suggested better answers to the witness. The grand jury was not given adequate instructions. There was no oversight or check. Nothing that happened was consistent with any of the norms or methods we have developed over centuries in our continuing quest to arrive at the truth and to mete out justice. No justice. No peace.
posted by prefpara at 3:01 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/078c82ad45ff4ec6aa1c7744dfa7df14/grand-jury-documents-rife-inconsistencies

Here's the AP story I promised earlier. It documents just a few of the outright fabrications of Johnson and others (that fueled the media narrative). It does so by actually reviewing the GJ documents, rather than relying on casual dismissals of the entire power structure. I know it's hard to get into the weeds, but these documents are eye-opening, if all you've heard is the media narrative.
posted by learnsome at 3:04 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

I always feel very uncomfortable repeating "no justice no peace" as a white person. The burden of "no peace" does not fall on me. I just want to acknowledge that there is no peace right now for the people of Ferguson or for black Americans. I mean, not in their hearts. But also, literally, no peace because they are being killed and oppressed and discriminated against. How can there be peace for them? "No justice no peace" typically means, to me, if there is no justice for the oppressed, there will be no peace for those in power. Right now it just seems that there is no justice for the people of Ferguson, and also no peace for them. But perhaps too much peace for those in power.
posted by prefpara at 3:04 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

I hope this renews interest ing the Tamir Rice case :
Video Released Proving Cops Didn’t Wait One Second Before Shooting 12-Year-Old Holding Toy Gun
posted by jeffburdges at 3:08 PM on November 26, 2014

What do the newly released witness statements tell us about the Michael Brown shooting?
posted by rhizome at 3:09 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Nation Doesn’t Know If It Can Take Another Bullshit Speech About Healing
posted by the man of twists and turns at 3:12 PM on November 26, 2014 [12 favorites]

[the media focus on the riots, grant respectful interviews to Darren Wilson, say Brown was no angel] for those of you deluded by the media narrative, here's a story from the Associated Press
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 3:15 PM on November 26, 2014 [11 favorites]

Tamir, 12 yrs old:

Black. Check
Male. Check
Cop adds 8 years to the black male child's age due to the imagined hulk sized demon that lurks within every white cop's psyche.

Result: all too predictable.

Up next: No accountability. Rinse and repeat.
posted by futz at 3:17 PM on November 26, 2014 [13 favorites]

Systemic racism is not a media narrative nor is it a "casual dismissal of the entire power structure." It is a detailed, evidence-based assessment of the way our society works.
posted by audi alteram partem at 3:18 PM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

I'm white and I always guess black folks to be younger than they are. Why does every black person I know have such great skin, even at age 50?
posted by small_ruminant at 3:20 PM on November 26, 2014

The PBS link from rhizome is a much more informative and unbiased presentation than the AP story. There's a wide amount of difference in the eyewitness testimony. What we and the jury needed, rather than a big evidence dump followed by prosecutors nudging the jury in one direction, is for competing lawyers in an adversarial process to spend time - months of hard work and additional crucial discovery - corralling this huge amount of conflicting data into narratives that make sense and are backed up by evidence. That's how it works. We were robbed of that.
posted by naju at 3:24 PM on November 26, 2014 [21 favorites]

In addition to the AP story linked above, there's going to be a big CNN story tonight about the fraud behind the private autopsy of Brown too. Anderson Cooper will have that one. Like I said, the media narrative is crumbling quickly.
posted by learnsome at 3:27 PM on November 26, 2014

The AP story doesn't exactly bury the lede, but it fails to highlight it:

An Associated Press review of thousands of pages of grand jury documents reveals numerous examples of statements made during the shooting investigation that were inconsistent, fabricated or provably wrong. Prosecutors exposed these inconsistencies before the jurors, which likely influenced their decision not to indict Wilson in Brown's death.

*Prosecutors* exposed these inconsistencies? Seems to me that if you actually *want* to prosecute, you'd throw out the testimony you already know is "fabricated or provably wrong" and show the jury the credible testimony that supports the case for the prosecution -- that is, the case for having an actual trial.
McCulloch was cynically maniupulating public opinion in his statement. People are meant to take away the idea "oh, well, a lot of witness statements were unreliable, so, not guilty". It's been working pretty well, too.

#witness40
posted by uosuaq at 3:28 PM on November 26, 2014 [10 favorites]

It's extremely disturbing to see that people can be more concerned about witness inconsistencies, which I imagine happen anytime you have forty people witness a terrifying event, than about an unarmed man being shot without even so much as a proper investigation.
posted by dialetheia at 3:29 PM on November 26, 2014 [19 favorites]

hooray, the police are good after all. now we can focus on the real problem: black people rioting for no reason
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 3:30 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah most of us lawyers, especially my crim defence friends, are not exactly surprised that a bunch of witnesses exaggerated or falsely remembered or whatever. It is a fact of psychology - people are super-bad at remembering, they get influenced by the story around them. Such is life. Eyewitness testimony is bullshit. It always has been, it always will be.

A prosecutor using that as exculpatory? That's weird.
posted by Lemurrhea at 3:33 PM on November 26, 2014 [15 favorites]

This is totally normal. No one is ever indicted (or convicted) on the basis of inconsistent testimony from shady witnesses testifying to get deals on their own criminal charges. Calm down everyone. Unrelated question, when is the next episode of Serial?
posted by prefpara at 3:37 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

*Prosecutors* exposed these inconsistencies?

Seriously, that's the most fucked up thing I've heard yet about this complete sham of a legal process. I thought he just sounded like he was playing Wilson's defense attorney, but no, apparently that's actually what he thought his role was here, and that's exactly how he approached the grand jury proceedings. Absolutely appalling.
posted by dialetheia at 3:42 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

A prosecutor using that as exculpatory? That's weird.

I think it's likely McCulloch and his staff are well aware of the 40+ years of scholarship on the topic. (Related) Given what I've read about prosecutors, I don't think it's beyond question that he would use unreliability when it suits his goals and dance around it when it doesn't.
posted by rhizome at 3:43 PM on November 26, 2014

I've mentioned previously that actuaries have some authority over this problem because police departments must buy insurance.

What if insurance rates for police departments skyrocketed when they got SWAT training, bought armored vehicles, etc. but remained low for good departments, departments with police body cameras that upload to the cloud, etc.

Ideally, we might force police departments to accept weapons that could not be fired until activated by remote legal personnel, like a prosecutor or a judge, with live visual via cameras. We should of course rebuild the legal theory around the Second Amendment, Posse Comitatus Act, etc. to say that police may not exercise force beyond what a normal person maybe use without authorization from remote legal personnel, but sans legal reform efforts financial efforts might work.

Anyways, there is an opportunity now to push the financial costs of running bad police force through the roof, making police departments like Ferguson untenable.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:50 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

I think it's likely McCulloch and his staff are well aware of the 40+ years of scholarship on the topic.

I figured they were just assholes, but who knows. Could be both.
posted by uosuaq at 3:52 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

What if insurance rates for police departments skyrocketed when they got SWAT training, bought armored vehicles, etc. but remained low for good departments, departments with police body cameras that upload to the cloud, etc.

Then a lot more dangerously unarmed actuaries would hulk out and give fine upstanding police officers no option but to shoot them a dozen times.
posted by Flunkie at 3:53 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Given what I've read about prosecutors, I don't think it's beyond question that he would use unreliability when it suits his goals and dance around it when it doesn't.

But he's the prosecutor! Why should his goal be to *not* prosecute? Why should he be in there making the argument that they *shouldn't* pursue this? My understanding is that if he doesn't believe he should make the case at all, he shouldn't have convened the grand jury in the first place. Once he did, it became his job to present the case for prosecution, right?

Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, morally speaking, you shouldn't need much of the witness testimony anyway to make the case for a trial - the facts speak for themselves. He shot an unarmed man SEVEN TIMES and fired 12 bullets. That alone should warrant a full investigation and transparent, public trial regardless of the circumstances.
posted by dialetheia at 3:57 PM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

I don't think it's beyond question that he would use unreliability when it suits his goals

But his goal is supposed to be to prosecute, not defend. The DA's office should be automatically recused from cases involving police. Police killings should be prosecuted and investigated by a third party. Maybe this needs to be under the Attorney General's office for a while considering the astounding number of people killed by police in the country.
posted by Golden Eternity at 4:00 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Protesters Shut Down New York Bridges Over Ferguson Decision

Londoners rally outside US embassy for 'justice for Mike Brown'

Cop Block Panel at Keenevention
posted by jeffburdges at 4:14 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

The Onion's Tips For Being An Unarmed Black Teen:
Shy away from dangerous, heavily policed areas.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 4:14 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

When I was much younger, I remember a conversation with my father in which he told me "the law, like Caesar's wife, must be above reproach." Not understanding his reference at the time, I asked him what he meant by that and his answer is something that I have remembered ever since and been thinking about recently.

It's not enough, he meant, for the system to operate and reach its results, whatever they may be. It is also vital that it be seen to do so in a matter that is open, consistent, and fairly applied because our system is intended to derive its authority from the consent of the governed. When that consent crumbles -- when people feel that the system is rigged, and that they have no recourse through the courts, they look to other solutions and generally the other alternatives are not good ones.

Whatever you think of the decision not to indict Officer Darren Wilson, can we at least all agree that in their actions the Ferguson Police Department, St. Louis County Sheriff's Department, and St. Louis County Prosecutor have utterly failed in their responsibility to conduct the investigation of the events surrounding the death of Michael Brown and the decision whether or not to press criminal charges against his killer in a manner that is publicly seen to be open, consistent, and fairly applied and that it is not any mystery why things like:

• failing to immediately and thoroughly investigate during the most critical period following the shooting
• not producing an incident report concerning a officer-involved killing,
• withholding any coherent explanation of events for weeks and only releasing incomplete and fragmentary information that inflamed public speculation,
• and most recently this, to say the least, unusual performance in front of the grand jury

have caused many in the community of Ferguson and across the nation to have serious doubts about the course of justice in this case?

I wasn't there and the evidence which would tell us what actually happened the night Michael Brown was killed was never collected and so I am not sure we will ever prove or disprove whether Darren Wilson's actions met the legal standard for justifiable use of deadly force by a police officer. Nearly every irregularity in the investigation can be interpreted as shielding Wilson, and so I have my suspicions, but am open to at least the possibility that I'm wrong and that a person of goodwill can hold a position on the matter with which I disagree.

But I'm 100% convinced that the "investigation" and "prosecution" of the incident were conducted with not even disregard but an actual sneering, bordering on malicious, contempt towards community confidence in the outcome, with 100% predictable results. If you don't at least think that something is very rotten in Ferguson, I have no idea how you can hold that opinion.
posted by Nerd of the North at 4:29 PM on November 26, 2014 [73 favorites]

I was wondering what was the reason for that snarled traffic on I-5 - thankfully there are some side routes.

The thing that really boggles my mind though, is - what's the point of shutting down the highways? If you have anger at the cops, why not try surrounding police stations? All shutting down the highways does is punish random citizens trying to get home to their families.
posted by corb at 4:37 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Just how dangerous is fuck, anyway?
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 4:38 PM on November 26, 2014

Mod note: A few comments removed, please don't start rehashing shit from upthread.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:39 PM on November 26, 2014

For a feel good moment I'm sure we could all use...a local Ferguson business owner and WOC whose bakery was smashed up in the rioting posted a gofundme looking for 20K to help repair the damage. It currently stands at 175K.
posted by corb at 4:43 PM on November 26, 2014 [10 favorites]

what's the point of shutting down the highways?

As I understand it, one of the reasons is to draw the attention of people who are otherwise so privileged that they could just ignore the whole thing. It's also to demonstrate that the people can still have some meaningful effect on the systems around them. It's an affirmation of societal power from people who feel otherwise powerless, to me.
posted by dialetheia at 4:43 PM on November 26, 2014 [32 favorites]

Maybe sometimes, to some people, it seems like all the cops do is punish random citizens trying to get home to their families?
posted by uosuaq at 4:43 PM on November 26, 2014 [19 favorites]

Also for those of you whose eyes are bleeding, PBS has compiled a quick chart of all the witness testimonies and what their commonalities are.
posted by corb at 4:47 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

All shutting down the highways does is punish random citizens trying to get home to their families.

1. There's no such thing as "random citizens" - just citizens with different levels of privilege.

2. Shutting down a highway turns it from "some brown people's problem" into "everyone's problem" - which is exactly what it should be.
posted by jammy at 4:52 PM on November 26, 2014 [17 favorites]

You know, even the coverage of these protests has completely followed the script where everything black people do is terrifying and threatening and violent, but violence by white people is hardly worthy of notice.

You've all heard a LOT about the looting and rioting, right? Well, how much have you heard about the fact that Michael Brown's family's church was burnt to the ground, probably by white supremacists? Or how about DeAndre Joshua, one of Dorian Johnson's friends, who was shot in the head Tuesday night in his car and his body was lit on fire with gasoline and burned mere yards from the site of Michael Brown's death? I find it extremely hard to believe that such a vicious murder would be a mere byproduct of rioting.

So we all wail and gnash our teeth about property damage to Walgreens, and "why are these people destroying their community," while people are being murdered and churches are being burned by racist assholes with hardly any notice at all. It's absolutely shameful.
posted by dialetheia at 5:01 PM on November 26, 2014 [46 favorites]

We shut down Brooklyn Bridge in the nineties when the Giuliani administration began to reveal itself as the breeding ground for all the welfare-dismantlement programs of the Clinton era. I fully support it. Then again, I'm not driving anywhere and I should feel more sympathetic to people who are waylaid by such protests. I should, but I don't
posted by angrycat at 5:04 PM on November 26, 2014

The thing that really boggles my mind though, is - what's the point of shutting down the highways? If you have anger at the cops, why not try surrounding police stations? All shutting down the highways does is punish random citizens trying to get home to their families.

Blocking roads has a long history in civil disobedience. The whole point is to disrupt the routine of people, particularly people who would have the privilege to ignore a "localized" protest, in order to demonstrate that turning a blind eye to [$thingbeingprotested] makes you complicit in its furtherance.

Or, as a wise man once said:

Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.

Corb, my understanding is that you have experience with organizing grassroots activism, so I'm a little surprised that you wouldn't know this.
posted by kagredon at 5:05 PM on November 26, 2014 [11 favorites]

Corb, my understanding is that you have experience with organizing grassroots activism, so I'm a little surprised that you wouldn't know this.

This is true, but we abandoned road-blocking in particular as counterproductive and having a higher impact on low-income people who can least afford to be late to work/miss work relatively early on. I mean, you can chant "whose streets? our streets" all day, but at the end of the day, you're still sitting with a sack full of nothing. People don't blame the cops for these shutdowns, they blame the protesters. That is always how it has been.
posted by corb at 5:12 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Can we skip this derail? You asked a question, it was answered, and it turns out you maybe just wanted an argument since you appear to know damn well what the point of blocking roads is. It would be great if we could just move on and skip the argument.
posted by dialetheia at 5:17 PM on November 26, 2014 [17 favorites]

The protests are inconveniencing people? My word.
posted by naju at 5:18 PM on November 26, 2014 [10 favorites]

CNN - "The new threat: 'Racism without racists'" (not really "new," but I'll take what I can get from CNN)

Even before the Ferguson grand jury's decision was announced, leaders were calling once again for a "national conversation on race." But here's why such conversations rarely go anywhere: Whites and racial minorities speak a different language when they talk about racism, scholars and psychologists say.

posted by audi alteram partem at 5:22 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

The PBS thing is a little mind-boggling for the questions it identifies as not being asked of Wilson, though they were asked of other witnesses during the same time period.

"Did DW fire gun repeatedly at MB while MB was down?"
NO RESPONSE OR NO QUESTION FOR THAT FACT

"Was MB running away from DW when fired upon?"
NO RESPONSE OR NO QUESTION FOR THAT FACT

Yet "Did MB face DW when fired upon?" WAS asked.

"Was MB kneeling when fired upon?"
NO RESPONSE OR NO QUESTION FOR THAT FACT

"Did MB put hands up when fired upon?"
NO RESPONSE OR NO QUESTION FOR THAT FACT

Why wouldn't you ask those questions as a prosecutor?
posted by phearlez at 5:25 PM on November 26, 2014 [17 favorites]

I think it is a warning shot to show what is to come if police and others continue to shoot down unarmed children with impunity. But if/when the civil disobedience gets real, there should be actual demands that are more coherent. Maybe federal investigation and prosecution of specific police killings, or a change in laws guiding police behavior, or something.
posted by Golden Eternity at 5:26 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

The whole "national conversation" thing always sounds a bit weird to me. Like we're all going to sit down around the same giant kitchen table and hash things out, instead of a bunch of talking heads yelling at each other on crappy "news" channels.
posted by uosuaq at 5:27 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

Yes, "national conversation" is just one of those pieces of bullshit people pretend is a real thing, not unlike "America's sweetheart".
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 5:31 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Well, yes, there's never going to be one "national conversation," but there are conversations, and as the research in the article shows, what's talked about by one set of people may not even register with another.

For better or worse, people are influenced by talking heads, by national and local politicians, by their friends and neighbors. Protest can raise awareness, persuasion & education can change minds and explain that these deep seated psychological biases exist and that our institutions are also tainted by racism.

But such conversations face a tremendous obstacle (which we see every time a racism-caused event gains the attention of the national media): racism evading frank discussion by outright refusal to talk about it, by thinking of racism only as personalized, conscious bad actors à la the KKK, and by insisting on a post-racial, colorblind culture that does not exist.
posted by audi alteram partem at 5:40 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

Ferguson Library raises $175,000 in two days. "The money donated so far adds up to almost half of the library's annual budget (about $400,000) and Bonner hopes it will allow him to hire another full-time librarian to work with children and programming. "
posted by desjardins at 5:48 PM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

instead of a bunch of talking heads yelling at each other on crappy "news" channels.

Which, for all intents and purposes, nobody watches.. All viewers over the age of 2 for all cable news networks: ~4M total day, 6.5M prime time. Of a nation of over 300M.
posted by phearlez at 5:50 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Which, for all intents and purposes, nobody watches.

I would love to know what proportion of those viewers are in Washington, D.C. Nobody really watches cable news, but it sure seems to have an outsized impact on our politics.
posted by dialetheia at 5:53 PM on November 26, 2014

Dammit WidgetAlley, you made me cry.
posted by emjaybee at 6:10 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

The whole police training apparatus in this country is irreparably broken.

Albuquerque police lieutenant advertises “Killology” classes
posted by homunculus at 6:29 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

homunculus: Albuquerque police lieutenant advertises “Killology” classes

So, the exact opposite of what they're doing in small_ruminant's town. Yeesh.
posted by ob1quixote at 6:50 PM on November 26, 2014

Sorry to go back farther into the thread, but, quoting from emptythought, upthread a ways:

Look up John T. Williams. Native guy shot in Seattle. First super fast police shooting like this i had heard of, and it was a friend of my moms. That's when I became aware of this new tactic.

I did just that, and . . . Wholly Fuck. There is ZERO ambiguity about this one. No wonder the city settled for $1.5M right away.

Of course, it's Seattle, not Ferguson, MO, so I imagine there's some semblance of decency there. Plenty of moral corruption there too, I'm sure, but it's all a matter of degree, and I would guess it's not quite as extreme in Seattle.
posted by CommonSense at 7:07 PM on November 26, 2014

The New Republic: St. Louis Prosecutor Bob McCulloch Abused the Grand Jury Process
posted by the man of twists and turns at 7:11 PM on November 26, 2014 [8 favorites]

Of course, it's Seattle, not Ferguson, MO, so I imagine there's some semblance of decency there.

Hahaha. Seattle is a disaster.
posted by phearlez at 7:14 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah, Seattleites reading this are just shaking their heads sadly...
posted by litlnemo at 7:19 PM on November 26, 2014

symbiod: "And the 'Libertarians' ... Say they're against oppression, except when it comes to a dead black kid by one more whitey in blue. Then all I hear is the fucking chirping of crickets."

I was curious as to whether this held true of my own subset of Libertarian friends, so I did a quick review of all my Facebook friends' Walls to see who had posted what.

9/29 (31%) of my Libertarian Party friends posted something about the topic.

4/9 (44%) of those LP friends were against the grand jury decision but had no comment on the response.

1/9 (11%) of those LP friends supported the grand jury decision and condemned the response.

4/9 (44%) of those LP friends didn't express a clear opinion about the grand jury decision, but 1 of those 4 condemned the response and 1 of those 4 was sympathetic to the response.

Looking just at what those LP friends thought of the response, 2/9 (22%) condemned the response, 1/9 (11%) was sympathetic to the response, and 6/9 (66%) said nothing about the response.

Meanwhile, of my non-LP friends, 26/160 (only 16%) posted something about the topic.

14/26 (54%) of those non-LP friends were against the grand jury decision. 9 of those were also sympathetic to the response and the other 5 said nothing about the response.

3/26 (12%) of those non-LP friends supported the grand jury decision. 2 of those also condemned the response.

9/26 (35%) of those non-LP friends didn't express a clear opinion about the grand jury decision, but 6 of those condemned the response and 1 was sympathetic to the response.

Looking just at what those non-LP friends thought of the response, 8/26 (31%) condemned the response, 9/26 (35%) were sympathetic to the response, and 8/26 (31%) said nothing about the response.

Given that Libertarians posted about the issue at twice the rate of non-Libertarians in my subset of friends, I don't think the accusation of "crickets" is fair. I am disappointed that a larger percentage of my Libertarian friends weren't more obviously outraged, but I know from experience how easy it is to succumb to outrage fatigue as a Libertarian.

Interestingly, almost all of my non-LP friends who were against the grand jury decision and also sympathetic to the response are people I met through the same science fiction / fantasy / comics / gaming group. I'd never realized before tonight what a hotbed of radical social justice activism that group was, given that political topics were explicitly banned from the group's online discussions.

In other news, I also discovered that most of my Facebook friends are really boring and a significant chunk of them appear to update their Walls less than once a month. :P
posted by Jacqueline at 7:22 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

Note: I did not count the Facebook profiles of pets and dead people (or dead pets!) while tallying my numbers, so the combined total is a few less than my Friend count.
posted by Jacqueline at 7:26 PM on November 26, 2014

Given that Libertarians posted about the issue at twice the rate of non-Libertarians in my subset of friends, I don't think the accusation of "crickets" is fair.

I appreciate your analysis and I see your point, but this isn't exactly a random sample - people you'd refer to as "my libertarian friends" are almost certainly going to be much more politically engaged than people you know from non-political pursuits. To do a fair comparison of how ideology affects the response (or intensity of response), you'd need samples with roughly equal levels of political engagement.

That New Republic piece the man of twists and turns posted is fantastic, by the way:

My own view is that St. Louis County prosecutor Bob McCulloch had two legitimate options following Wilson’s killing of Brown, neither of which he chose. The first would have been simply to decline to indict Wilson for the reasons McCulloch’s defenders posit—that the law would have made it very difficult to secure a conviction. The second legitimate option would have been to obtain an indictment against Wilson from the grand jury, which McCulloch almost certainly could have done had he sought one. But McCulloch chose a third option—using the grand jury process to establish Wilson’s innocence—which is deeply unfair.

Why? Because grand juries simply aren’t equipped to adjudicate guilt or innocence. As The New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin points out, prosecutors have enormous sway over grand juries. Typically, they cherry pick the evidence that establishes probable cause, helping them obtain indictments in almost every case. But in this case, McCulloch clearly didn’t believe an indictment was deserved. So he used his influence in the opposite direction—stacking the deck in favor of a non-indictment. Specifically, he inundated the grand jury with “every scrap of evidence [he] could find,” in Toobin’s words, at which point “the grand jury threw up its hands and said that a crime could not be proved.” [UPDATE: This New York Times story goes even further, showing how McCulloch's team essentially cherry-picked evidence establishing Wilson's innocence. It describes how they accepted Wilson's account at face value, even leading him toward exculpatory statements through their questioning, while going out of their way to point out flaws and contradictions in alternative accounts from other witnesses.]

In effect, McCulloch staged a pre-trial trial in order to vindicate his personal view of Wilson’s innocence.

posted by dialetheia at 7:31 PM on November 26, 2014 [13 favorites]

Hahaha. Seattle is a disaster.

Well, alright, fair enough. Our supposedly enlightened, so-deep-blue-it's-purple haven of Baltimore City, MD (not to be confused with only-pretty-blue Baltimore County, which surrounds us) in reliably blue-state MD (kindly look past the fact that we just elected a Republican governor; blue-state stalwarts such as California, New York, and Massachusetts have also made such mistakes), also has more than its fair share of police issues.

But surely we're better than Ferguson Freakin' Missouri, right?

(Admittedly, this is a pathetically low bar.)
posted by CommonSense at 7:32 PM on November 26, 2014

Has the Anderson Cooper interview/show/cnn version of clickbait aired yet? I am bracing myself against the riptide of truth that he is going to drop. I hear that as a result there will be media narrative crumbling, drunken Thanksgiving fights, and an unrepairable tear in the trousers of humanity.
posted by futz at 7:34 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

desjardins: "Ferguson Library raises $175,000 in two days. "The money donated so far adds up to almost half of the library's annual budget (about $400,000) and Bonner hopes it will allow him to hire another full-time librarian to work with children and programming. ""

Ha! They're gonna use it to save money in the city budget, or that extra money will divert to police department for more cops to kill people.
posted by symbioid at 7:45 PM on November 26, 2014

Riddle me this. Why, when black people get shot at all the time, whether they go to surrender or not. They get beaten, brutalized, stuck in a system that once you're in is very hard to get out of.

Why is their panic reaction when seeing a cop, running to survive and live, totally wrong thing to do.

When the cop, who is DOING HIS JOB as an agent of the state, which implies all the power that entails, and which entails a VERY strong sense of responsibility. When *he* panics and kills a black person it's 100% justified every single fucking time.

It's "gay panic" defense for pigs who brutalize and exploit the black populace of America. But blacks aren't allowed to be afraid of the police who shoot them, innocent or guilty alike.
posted by symbioid at 7:46 PM on November 26, 2014 [7 favorites]

The rude pundit: In Brief: Something Else That's Wrong with Darren Wilson's Story of the Shooting of Michael Brown
posted by gaspode at 7:50 PM on November 26, 2014 [15 favorites]

The trained evaluator in me would take 100% of data drawn from Facebook and throw it into the 100% trash. I don't care whose Facebook it is - it's not informative.First, it's all voluntarily contributed, which is an enormous bias out the gate. Depending on voluntary response renders the entire datapool crap. Second, there's no consistency as to the prompt, which makes the measurement invalid. Third,ther'es been no randomizing of the sample: the sample is "people I know." Fourth, you have no window into motivation. Obviously, I care a lot about Ferguson; at the same time, I have posted very little about it because I have a set of disciplines around the use of Facebook that make it impossible for anyone to read motivation from what I post or predict other action/incliination based upon it.

Just throw it all out. This sort of utterly subjective, totally unrationalized summary generates absolutely useless "data." It's the same reason America is suffering from the "everything thinks like I do!" disorder. It's GIGO.
posted by Miko at 7:57 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

i've hit what is an all-time record number of unfollows/unfriends just in the last 24 hours.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 8:05 PM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

Of course my Facebook friends list isn't representative of the population in general! My point is, if you're seeing a lack of commentary among *your* Libertarian friends, that probably has more to do with *your* social circles and *your* selective attention to who is saying what than it does with Libertarians in general since I'm seeing the opposite among *my* social circle. So please don't generalize all of us based on what the people you know personally are saying (or failing to say).

In related news, 4 out of 7 posts on the Libertarian Party's official Facebook page have been about Ferguson since the decision was announced Monday night.
posted by Jacqueline at 8:09 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

Has the Anderson Cooper interview/show/cnn version of clickbait aired yet?

This appears to be it? Odd but rather inconsequential derail, I think.
posted by naju at 8:16 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

The trained evaluator in me would take 100% of data drawn from Facebook and throw it into the 100% trash.

What does this mean? Don't engage on facebook? That's where people DO engage.
posted by small_ruminant at 8:19 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Mass arrests in Oakland, according to Twitter. LA protesters say they are boxed in, arrests imminent.
posted by desjardins at 8:22 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

it doesn't mean "don't engage on Facebook" - have at it, that's your community. Engage away.

It does mean "don't draw any conclusions about the broader society - or even any ideological group within the society - from your engagements on Facebook."

There's no statistically valid extrapolation from this dataset. Anecdotal observations from non-rigorous sampling methods are meaningless.
posted by Miko at 8:39 PM on November 26, 2014 [7 favorites]

There was a comment on one of the earlier threads about how racism plays out in these situations I was hoping someone could help me find. It went something like this: the problem with racism isn't so much the cops set out to be racist the day they shoot minorities, it's just they give whites the benefit of the doubt, that minor consideration is what keeps white people safe, maybe makes them second guess what they might otherwise do unthinkingly. Does anyone know where that comment is?
posted by [insert clever name here] at 8:41 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Let me freakin' tell you how surprised I am to say this, but some cops in my home state actually did the right thing today. Even let the protesters briefly shut down the highway instead of mass arresting people, because they recognized that arrests need to be made "one by one in a very careful manner".

What UP Nashville. Proud of Tennessee tonight.
posted by WidgetAlley at 8:58 PM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

I'm not really sure what "official" Libertarian Party page means. When I searched on Facebook, I got a lot of state parties, and this one that seems to at least claim to be the "official" group, as far as Liberatrian centralization goes.

In related news, 4 out of 7 posts on the Libertarian Party's official Facebook page have been about Ferguson since the decision was announced Monday night.

Just wanted to check on this. Tracking backward 14 posts (so I can get a factor of 7):

1- marijuana legalization
2- John Stossel(!) image macro about "people" getting "free stuff from the government"
3 - Reason.com article about how Darren Wilson "would certainly have been acquitted" had the case gone to trial
4 -Rand Paul and ISIS
5 - another reason.com article about "The Improbability of federal charges against Darren Wilson"
6 - Image macro supporting the right to assemble with hashtags #Ferguson, #DownsizeGovernment, #RepealGunLaws and #EndTheWarOnDrugs hashtags
7 - Image macro supporting the right to assemble
8 - Image macro by someone named Harry Browne about liberals taking away your liberty "in the name of children and fighting poverty"
9 - Nothing has damaged education more than government involvement
10 - Image macro of Frank Zappa holding a joint and and saying American laws are badly written and badly enforced.
[end of posts since announcement of Grand Jury outcome]
11 - "What matters to you" WE want to hear from YOU post
12 - "Got Liberty" macro featuring an oil pump prefaced with the query "Do you believe that government should not subsidize industries at the taxpayer's expense?"
13 - chart from a website about definitions of libertarianism
14 - Image macro about how the Libertarian party supports both "freedom to marry and freedom to carry"

So, you know, this is not saying a lot in favor of this party's serious engagement of the issue. The page has nothing to say about Ferguson for some time ( a long time!) . Then, since Monday when the finding is presented to the public , says something about marijuana, offers two utterly generic posts about the right to assemble, two posts about how Darren Wilson was in the right, and three posts about general Libertarian hobbyhorses that have nothing to do with Ferguson. In your "4 out of 7," Jacqueline, I see two self-serving "anyone who protests has the right to do so" and two "we're on Wilson's side." If I'm supposed to be impressed with their level of serious concern and fair, independent-minded, thoughtful treatment of the issue, I must report I am unmoved.
posted by Miko at 9:04 PM on November 26, 2014 [8 favorites]

So, watching this Wilson shot at Brown while he was in the SUV during the first encounter, chased him after that and shot at him again killed him. So, between the first shots and second shots he didn't think "wait what am I doing?" What was he thinking?
posted by PHINC at 9:04 PM on November 26, 2014

Mass arrests in LA
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:15 PM on November 26, 2014

#stoptheparade appears to be getting some traction. Hey, I might actually tune in this year.
posted by theraflu at 9:19 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

corb: If you have anger at the cops, why not try surrounding police stations?

As someone who lives in seattle, and has done this, it's because NO ONE CARES. And no one notices when they do. The cops set up barricades far away from them, that intentionally split people up in to two groups on different streets and/or just generally make the crowd seem smaller than it really is by making it long and narrow, split, whatever. Then they put MORE cops a block or two away that stop any traffic from getting near. Rarely does it get more than a photo or quick mention on the news or newspaper or anything.

Yelling at the system doesn't matter if the system is going to ignore you, and no one else getting streamrolled by it is going to even know you did.
posted by emptythought at 9:26 PM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

I wish someone would take what we know about the sequence of events, even as told my Wilson, and reconstruct it in CGI or something just to illustrate how ridiculous it is, even if you accept everything happened the way he said it did.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 9:26 PM on November 26, 2014 [5 favorites]

no one notices when they do

Can't speak to specific geographies here, but part of the trajectory of urban planning since the civil rights movement has been to move centers of police, judicial, and legisative power outside the urban core to the periphery where constituents are not frequently seen and there's very little regular-life traffic passing by. Police stations now are more often located outside visible areas, in featureless "judicial centers" and "municipal complexes" off highway exits and in industrial parks, comfortable away from places officers and administrators might have to mingle with the public they serve while going to and coming from work, getting lunch, and going about daily business.

Again - it's part of the problem. And not a coincidence.
posted by Miko at 9:33 PM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

Anecdotal observations from non-rigorous sampling methods are meaningless.

Anecdotally, way more of my lefty, social justice-y friends are a-ok with this grand jury than I ever expected. I'm finding it disappointing, to say the least.
posted by small_ruminant at 10:07 PM on November 26, 2014 [4 favorites]

Shocking mistake in Darren Wilson grand jury—The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell, 26 November 2014

In the Rewrite, Lawrence looks at a major correction the assistant prosecutors had to make to the grand jury in the Michael Brown case.

posted by ob1quixote at 10:12 PM on November 26, 2014 [7 favorites]

The US National Bar Association is calling for Federal charges against Wilson.

The National Bar Association is questioning how the Grand Jury, considering the evidence before them, could reach the conclusion that Darren Wilson should not be indicted and tried for the shooting death of Michael Brown. National Bar Association President Pamela J. Meanes expresses her sincere disappointment with the outcome of the Grand Jury’s decision but has made it abundantly clear that the National Bar Association stands firm and will be calling on the U.S. Department of Justice to pursue federal charges against officer Darren Wilson. “We will not rest until Michael Brown and his family has justice” states Pamela Meanes, President of the National Bar Association.

Here's the full statement.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 10:23 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Note: I thought that the National Bar association was a peak body for all lawyers in the US. I appear to have been mistaken; it bills itself as "the nation's oldest and largest national network of predominantly African-American attorneys and judges".
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 10:25 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Anecdotal stuff is important from a personal perspective. It's just not useful as a broad statement about reality For instance, I'd say your social-justice, lefty friends seem to be taking quite a different position than my lsocial-justice, lefty-friends. Even that statement is limited to data from Facebook. What does that mean? Not a whole lot.Setting aside the way Facebook is intentionally structured to be a hall of mirrors. this doesn't tell either of us much of anything about a wider reality of the range of American public opinion. On any particular opinion question, aggregates are more meaningful, valid samples are more meaningful. We take such a great risk extrapolating judgments about reality from our narrow view; that, in essence, is exactly the kind of thought-habit that creates Darren Wilsons.
posted by Miko at 10:27 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

The statement from the National Bar Association, and the contextualization about the National Bar ASsociation not being the American Bar Association, were covered twice upthread. A read of the thread will set that point aside.
posted by Miko at 10:29 PM on November 26, 2014 [2 favorites]

You were thinking of the ABA, HTWRT.

For the people of colour reading this: If (IF!) you feel like explaining to yet another idiot, what can us non-PoC folks do to assist? Not asking you to do Racism101, not asking you to justify anything. Only asking what we can do to be allies in this situation.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:29 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

An artist's reconstruction of the scene as described by Darren Wilson (by @JayBevier)
posted by dialetheia at 10:30 PM on November 26, 2014 [6 favorites]

12 Things White People Can Do Now Because Ferguson
posted by Miko at 10:40 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

I have a friend. In the air force. knew him years ago. he's a good guy. I don't really hang out with military types for obvious reasons. But since I knew him from before the military and he's a good guy, I accepted his friend request. We hung out last month for the first time in a decade. I thought it was good.

I had hoped that because he's a good guy, and I assumed on the side of "the underdogs" that maybe having more like him in the military is a good thing.

But then in my posts he goes and defends cops. Oh he says he's not. He's saying "see both sides". As if we're not told by society to see the side of the cop over and over and over. I showed a video of a guy who a cop pulled up on, ordered to show his ID, patted his pocket, realized he didn't have an ID, leaned into his truck to grab it, the cop screamed GET DOWN GET DOWN. No time to turn around or get down, shot shot shot.

Friend tried to defend the cop. I just said "I hope if there's a war you're on the right side..."
posted by symbioid at 10:43 PM on November 26, 2014

Symbioid, show him the video of the TWELVE YEAR OLD CHILD being gunned down by cops, and the two whole seconds it took them to murder him, and say "So, thoughts?" and walk away.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:48 PM on November 26, 2014

but part of the trajectory of urban planning since the civil rights movement has been to move centers of police, judicial, and legisative power outside the urban core to the periphery

Really, I see nothing that isn't explained by automobile-centric planning here, and while there's definitely a lot of entrenched sentiment for the mall-like suburban-style municipal structure, it's also led to a lot of towns saying, "Hey! Where did everyone go who used to come downtown?" This feels to me like the urban legends of the "riot-proof campus", which is really just an era of heavy sentiment favoring Brutalist construction amongst architects, contractors, and university boards.

It does, definitely, however, have the clear effect of presenting the government as welcoming and serving primarily those who don't have to take a bus to get there. If there's a bus at all. I won't argue there.

no one notices when they do

Getting back to this point, which was "Why don't you protest at police stations since that's who you're mad at?" The answer to that is that the police getting protests is not going to make much of an impression on the police, whereas disrupting businesses, commuters, and other people should in theory get them in favor of cops who are not institutionally prone to creating protests. To say that is more or less to say "Keep my privilege intact by never bugging me about these grievances of yours." It's a very sea-lion-y sort of objection to have and I hope, corb, that you understand your version of protest here is much more like writing a letter of complaint to the CEO of BP about that whole polluting the Gulf of Mexico thing. Either they didn't want to do it in the first place or they're impervious to criticism; the only thing that's going to change them is outside pressure, meaning regulation or legislation, which is of course that thing we have democracy for.

The thing is, as observed in prior threads and numerous articles and studies, is that Ferguson -- or especially its police -- are not run with the consent of the governed or policed. If they had been, this might not have happened at all. Until the mass of people -- and I mean both the complacent whites and middle-class blacks who vote, as well as the apathetic blacks who don't -- start participating as if what the FPD does matters to their own lives and livelihoods, nothing is likely to change.

that extra money will divert to police department for more cops to kill people.

I dunno, symbioid, because -- and this pertains to what I just said -- there's a very real chance that Ferguson will end up bankrupted by civil rights lawsuits. Not just any relating to Mike Brown, but for the response to protests. And sadly, although Gawker gave a sort of Freakonomics endorsement of rioting as an incentivizer, I think it really comes down to other munis seeing that one of their own went down because of a poorly-managed constabulary.
posted by dhartung at 10:56 PM on November 26, 2014 [20 favorites]

would that I had more favourites to give, mr hartung
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:01 PM on November 26, 2014 [1 favorite]

Some Oakland craziness going on live, right now. I'm not convinced it's protest related- looks like your basic sideshow out at the port, but there are 4 dozen (count 'em) cop cars and the cops all just riot-geared up and armed themselves and are walking into the cars they boxed in.

http://abc7news.com/live/7704/
posted by small_ruminant at 11:10 PM on November 26, 2014

They've been borrowing cops and highway patrol all evening.

(That way they can say the protests cost them $x million in overtime.)
posted by small_ruminant at 11:12 PM on November 26, 2014 [3 favorites]

The great Nina Simone, timeless as ever. Swap in Missouri for Mississippi, and it's the same goddamn thing.

There are so many beautiful versions, and it's so hard to pick a favorite. So just mainline 'em all.

Here she is in Holland.

The timeless Antibes performance.

A really nice version here — soft start, but it creeps up on you.

My second-favorite version, which is on several "Best of" compilations.

I think that this version is a good one for the collection as well. Performed a few years later, so the style's a touch different, but still carrying the same rage that fueled the original. Really nice toward the end.

. . . BUT. If we're talking desert island discs, then hands down, this one's my personal favorite version. Doesn't start off too obviously different, but stick with it. This is the one she debuted on an unsuspecting audience by surprise (and is therefore, arguably, one of — if not THE — first public performances of the song), who'd been lulled into a more Broadway-style, free-wheeling set of show tunes. (This is the one where she says "this is a show tune, but the show hasn't been written for it yet," as the audience nervously laughs. Later she follows up and says "Bet you thought I was kidding, didn't you?" and this time, the audience doesn't register a peep.) Might be all in my head, but of all the versions, this is the one I can most FEEL the frantic, nervous energy every single time I play this one, and I can NOT sit still when this one comes up in iTunes. (It could just be the higher sound quality and the fact that they give the rest of the players time to really establish the rollicking, repeating fervor of the melody. (God forbid I'm driving and this comes up on the iPod, because before I know it I'm flirting with 100mph.) This is the one I'll play on headphones and put up to wifey's tummy so that my to-be-born daughter hears it before she enters this sick world in January. Oh, just fucking PLAY IT already, and crank the speakers up. This was basically WRITTEN for Michael Brown, 20+ years before he was born. And sadly, for the future Michael Browns, yet to be born, because this shit ain't over. Unfortunately.

Last night I tried to encapsulate my pain and frustration in a rambling series of paragraphs. A few of you answered (and I thank you so much). But nobody will capture the pain and frustration like Miss Nina. If for no other reason than a moment of catharsis, please take a few moments to listen. Missouri Goddamn indeed.
posted by CommonSense at 11:17 PM on November 26, 2014 [9 favorites]

They've been borrowing cops and highway patrol all evening.

The TV news in the Sacramento area was doing a bit on holiday traffic this afternoon, and as they were filming on one of the highways they happened to catch a seemingly endless caravan of CHP vehicles heading towards the Bay Area.
posted by homunculus at 11:25 PM on November 26, 2014

Yeah. Apparently it's to break up a side show. I'm so annoyed they diverted 50 cop cars for a side show that so far as I could tell was no big deal, though there were lots of people.

A friend of ours was downtown and said people were trashing the post office and the medical marijuana dispensary, which are across the street from each other. Cops showed up en mass and hauled folks off from the post office and left the two dispensary security guards to fend for themselves. Interesting.

I really need to go to sleep but I'm glued to the live feed.

EDIT: Live feed just crashed. Maybe that's my cue. It's super dramatic- people are trying to drive their way through the port of Oakland fences and now there's a car that's on fire but no fire trucks- everything's blocked by spectators and police cars.
posted by small_ruminant at 11:31 PM on November 26, 2014

Way upthread someone asked how to deal with this at the Thanksgiving table. It's a question I've been asking myself, and my Thanksgiving table will be full of liberals and progressives.

Maybe the answers are all in this thread.
posted by goofyfoot at 12:31 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

Transcript of the "mistake" the prosecutors made during the grand jury. It's a doozy.

http://www.examiner.com/article/ferguson-da-s-office-gave-grand-jurors-outdated-unconstitutional-law-to-rely-on?cid=rss
posted by small_ruminant at 12:33 AM on November 27, 2014 [12 favorites]

Miko, the Quartz piece you linked to has been posted at least twice already in this thread.
posted by mlis at 12:41 AM on November 27, 2014

And?
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:45 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

Transcript of the "mistake" the prosecutors made during the grand jury. It's a doozy.

What. The everloving. FUCK?!

Here's the pertinant bit, emphasis mine:

Just before Darren Wilson testified to the grand jury investigating his killing of Michael Brown, the assistant district attorney, Ms. Alizadeh, handling the case, said this to the grand jurors, 'I'm going to pass out to you, you all are going to receive a copy of a statute. It is Section 543.046, and it is, it says law enforcement officers use of force in making an arrest. And it is the law on what is permissible, what force is permissible and when in making an arrest by a police officer.' The Assistant District Attorney, Alizadeh, then handed the grand jury a copy of a 1979 Missouri law that was ruled unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court in 1985. She was handing them something that had not been law in Missouri during her entire legal career... an old, unconstitutional law which said incorrectly that it is legal to shoot fleeing suspects simply because they are fleeing.

What the fuck. Do not argue to me that the prosecution was 'just doing its job'. I am a lawyer. This is not a mistake. A second year law student, let alone a senior litigator, could not do this by accident. We know to look up which laws are in force.

This prosecution deliberately manipulated a grand jury to not indict where there was obvious probable cause, up to and including lying to the grand jury about what the law was. This prosecution perverted the system to ensure that a man who executed an unarmed, surrendering teenager in broad daylight, in front of multiple witnesses, would never even have to be questioned about whether what he did was wrong.

Fuck this. Fuck all of this.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 1:06 AM on November 27, 2014 [62 favorites]

I mean, obviously the running of the grand jury proceedings was crooked. That was clear even before this 'mistake' came to light. I don't know why this one detail in particular so incenses me. Just the straw that shot the unarmed camel in the back, I suppose.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 1:10 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

FYI that video of Tamir will bring you to tears. He's just a kid hopping and playing and it looks like he goes down before the car has even stopped rolling. I had several realistic toy-guns I played with when I was a kid, all over my neighborhood, we all did. There's nothing strange about this kid kicking the snow and shooting bad guys at all. And then some asshole blows him away.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:15 AM on November 27, 2014 [7 favorites]

"I wish someone would take what we know about the sequence of events, even as told my Wilson, and reconstruct it in CGI or something just to illustrate how ridiculous..."
posted by Ray Walston

Chronology is everything. In the temporal sence which requires an absence of outrage and screed.
What is happening is an attempt to temporaize the chronology.
All sources are relevant.
This will uncover the sham sans justice in this tragedy.
Unless someone has pictures of what happened, chronology is the only way to find answers.
posted by clavdivs at 1:29 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

Is there any evidence of how far Wilson was from Brown when he shot him? It seems like such an important detail but I don't see any answers. My understanding is that it's not clear, since the medical examiner decided not to take any measurements because it was "pretty self-evident" what happened, but I certainly didn't read all of the grand jury documents so maybe I missed it. The other reason I assume it must be murky is that they could barely figure out how fare Brown was from Wilson's car, which seems like it should be pretty obvious from the "physical evidence" they're so fond of talking about. If they knew how far he was when he was shot, presumably it wouldn't be so difficult to figure out where the car was.

That stuff about presenting the wrong statute is absolutely appalling. When the assistant DA finally did correct the record, weeks later, she didn't even specify which part of the statute was unconstitutional! Jesus that's just unfathomably awful. Every time I think they've hit bottom for mishandling this, I'm surprised all over again.
posted by dialetheia at 1:38 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

Surely the laughably corrupt "mistake" by the prosecution linked above would be grounds for a second grand jury? Can you have a second grand jury if the first was shown to be so incompetent?
posted by fullerine at 1:55 AM on November 27, 2014 [8 favorites]

That stuff about the jury instruction is insane. It's not like she can be called to answer for it either - grand jury proceedings by their nature are about as informal as it gets. No doubt she was aware of this and took advantage of it. This is not a mild or easy mistake. It's enormous, deliberate, and was allowed to stand for weeks, marinating in the jurors' minds as they heard testimony, and then the correct standard was never properly articulated. What on earth.
posted by naju at 1:57 AM on November 27, 2014 [6 favorites]

I'm talking just dudes on the net. Who consider themselves "hip" and "with it" and "young"... Say they're against oppression, except when it comes to a dead black kid by one more whitey in blue. Then all I hear is the fucking chirping of crickets.

I haven't actually posted much directly related to the verdict itself, it just seems too...enormous. I also was pretty much in a literal basement all day on Monday and didn't catch up on the news until a few days later, at which point I felt like I had nothing to say that's not been said better elsewhere. So I wouldn't be too quick to judge on people who haven't posted anything at all.

I was actually mostly pleasantly surprised by Facebook, a lot of folks who I didn't think of as "political" in any particular direction posted very thoughtful comments and links.

BUT

There was a (vocally libertarian, which I only mention because it will actually be relevant) guy on my facebook feed who posted a status passive-aggressively saying that people who posted about the verdict were doing it for "social status" and complaining about traffic from protests in his city. I posted a (maybe kind of passive-aggressive, maybe kind of aggressive-aggressive) response saying that as a libertarian, maybe he should be more concerned about police and prosecutorial misconduct than about his personal inconvenience. He posted several lengthy replies made largely incoherent by an overuse of Less Wrong/Dark Enlightenment jargon, and concluded with a link to Givewell as a demonstration about how he really rationally cares about charitable causes that will efficiently use his dollars.

anyway I'm not sure whether to defriend him or keep on keeping on because it was kind of entertaining
posted by kagredon at 1:58 AM on November 27, 2014 [3 favorites]

Yes, you can have a second, third or a fourth grand jury, for any reason.
posted by empath at 5:03 AM on November 27, 2014

thank Cat I don't engage with my Facebook feed anymore My blood pressure is rising just reading about these interactions
posted by angrycat at 5:25 AM on November 27, 2014

Miko, the Quartz piece you linked to has been posted at least twice already in this thread.

I think I probably found it here. I popped it in in direct response to feckless fecal fear mongering's question about what white people should do.

dhartung, I know you are excellent on the topic of planning, but I think the broader topic of "auto-centric planning" is absolutely not unrelated to the larger patterns of disinvestment in the urban core after the dreams of urban renewal were largely unrealized, an increased need for auto-based policing directly due to racist housing policies that promoted suburbanization and facilitated white flight, and the switch to centralized, consolidated departments instead of local precincts and beat policing -- all of which are connected to the country's racial histories. It isn't an accident that policing, too, shifted both its focus of responsibility and its geographical locus, at a time whem most of white America did as well.
posted by Miko at 5:53 AM on November 27, 2014 [4 favorites]

thank Cat I don't engage with my Facebook feed anymore My blood pressure is rising just reading about these interactions

I've been having an interesting conversation off-list with a MeFite friend. I'm really starting to wonder whether Facebook can carry the burden of being an anti-racism tool. A lot of people are working earnestly to engage and make progress, but I feel as though the 'wins' are rare and the effort invested may be better placed elsewhere. Not sure, but it's something I'm giving a lot of thought to.
posted by Miko at 5:56 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

I'm really starting to wonder whether Facebook can carry the burden of being an anti-racism tool.

I know I'm not the only person who uses facebook as a low-key social tool to keep up with people's baby pictures and kitchen remodels; I proactively block people whose political postings rub me the wrong way (for example, I have a one strike and you are gone policy for racist posts about Obama) rather than argue with them. I don't see FB as a positive forum for engaging on these issues though obviously many people disagree.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:54 AM on November 27, 2014 [3 favorites]

On Tamir Rice: “This is not an effort to exonerate,” Deputy Chief Edward Tomba of the Cleveland Police Department said of the video at a news conference on Wednesday. “It’s not an effort to show the public that anybody did anything wrong. This is an obvious tragic event where a young member of our community lost their life. We’ve got two officers that were out there protecting the public that just had to, you know, do something that nobody wants to do.”
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:44 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

(And the officer who shot Tamir has been a police officer since March.)
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:44 AM on November 27, 2014

It is Section 543.046, and it is, it says law enforcement officers use of force in making an arrest. And it is the law on what is permissible, what force is permissible and when in making an arrest by a police officer.'

And as I commented on when it was raised earlier in this thread, clause 4 of that statute makes it clear that this is an affirmative defense to be raised by the officer charged. The umpteenth thing that a prosecution would not normally present at a grand jury.
posted by phearlez at 7:55 AM on November 27, 2014 [4 favorites]

It's kind of sad that this has so much in common with most "cops killed a black guy" press conferences.
posted by Talez at 8:29 AM on November 27, 2014

We’ve got two officers that were out there protecting the public that just had to, you know, do something that nobody wants to do.

Jesus Christ, this is how I talk about cleaning out the cat box, not murdering someone in two seconds flat.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 8:30 AM on November 27, 2014 [18 favorites]

The Darrien Hunt case hits particularly close to home.
Hunt was cosplaying at the time he was shot dead, and had what's described as a decorative samurai sword on him. He was 22 at the time.
About 20 years ago I was wandering around a park in my very well to do neighborhood (one known for having a racist PD) with my idiot friends Adam and Noah. We were all dumb teens and we were all white. I was 16 or 17, as were my friends.
Noah, at the time, really liked wandering around with a fully functional, sharp, katana.
Parks in our neighborhood closed at dusk. It must have been 10pm when we were there. I'm pretty sure none of us had been drinking, but we were trespassing, and one of us was obviously armed. I'm pretty sure that Adam and I were both carrying knives in our pockets, as well. We all liked knives.
(I'm gonna just mention at this point that, like a lot of people, I view my teen years with severe embarrassment.)
The cops showed up. I don't think anyone called them, they just saw us sitting in the closed park as they patrolled, since we were pretty close to the street.
And they couldn't have been nicer about the whole thing. They smirked at Noah's lecture that he had the legal right to carry a sword as long as he wasn't concealing it (hey, Noah, I'm standing here with a concealed blade and we're trespassing, shut up). They told us to leave the park, go home and not wander around with swords anymore, ok?
And that was it. And now I'm sitting at my brother's house in a suburb of Nashville watching Disney Jr. on repeat with my niece, about to enjoy Thanksgiving. And Darrien Hunt is dead.
posted by qnarf at 8:32 AM on November 27, 2014 [18 favorites]

One in three Americans get news through Facebook
posted by triggerfinger at 9:21 AM on November 27, 2014 [2 favorites]

What about Metafilter, 'cause...
posted by Trochanter at 9:26 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

I don't see FB as a positive forum for engaging on these issues though obviously many people disagree.

My view, and YMMV, is that anywhere a conversation can be had it desperately needs to happen.

Parks in our neighborhood closed at dusk.

This is a totally alien concept to me. How does a park close?
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:37 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

They put up a sign that says "Park closes at dusk."
posted by qnarf at 9:40 AM on November 27, 2014 [3 favorites]

It's the putting up of the sign in the first place that baffles me.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:43 AM on November 27, 2014

I wonder if there was any mental illness at play with Hunt. I mean, why run like that? I watched the videos, and he is just flat out running away for some time.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:43 AM on November 27, 2014

The answer to that is that the police getting protests is not going to make much of an impression on the police, whereas disrupting businesses, commuters, and other people should in theory get them in favor of cops who are not institutionally prone to creating protests.

I'm sorry, you may have misunderstood the level of activism I was talking about. I was emphatically not referring to people following the directions of police barricades and remaining several blocks away from the police station. I was saying that if you genuinely believe the police are murdering members of your community and protecting it, and you're ready to commit illegal actions to show it, then you should be swarming the police. Forcing yourself in the doors until they get afraid of the massing crowd and lock and bar them. Swarming outside until you are pressed so close around the building that not a single cop can enter or leave without pushing through you. Make them pull overtime shifts until they don't have enough cops left to police the area. Fill their jails until they can't jail you anymore because they have run out of jail room.
posted by corb at 9:49 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

you should be swarming the police

This is a good way to get injured or killed.
posted by Drinky Die at 9:54 AM on November 27, 2014 [3 favorites]

Yeah, but the blood of patriots...tree of liberty, all that
posted by Windopaene at 10:00 AM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

It's the putting up of the sign in the first place that baffles me.

The sign serves as official notice that you can be kicked out if the authorities run into you, much like a No Trespassing sign. It's also a minor deterrent to people wandering into what is presumably a high-risk area where they can get mugged, raped, or worse.

As someone who hung out in the Sheep Meadow in Central Park (after midnight! in the 80s, no less!) it is a bit amusing, but there is definitely a preference amongst city fathers to nominally close parks overnight even without signage (e.g. it may only be in ordinance or posted on a board somewhere).

I meant to post this earlier; got it via Twitter:
Black Boys Viewed as Older, Less Innocent Than Whites, Research Finds
Black boys as young as 10 may not be viewed in the same light of childhood innocence as their white peers, but are instead more likely to be mistaken as older, be perceived as guilty and face police violence if accused of a crime, according to new research published by the American Psychological Association.
posted by dhartung at 10:02 AM on November 27, 2014 [2 favorites]

Mod note: corb, please drop the extreme what if scenarios and let's just keep the discussion on things that actually happened in Ferguson
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:16 AM on November 27, 2014 [2 favorites]

small_ruminant, well said.

“Did they do it by singing kumbaya? Sort of, yes...”

I had an argument with someone who felt very strongly that we should be kicking asses, not just criminals but terrorists, etc. the “them” position. They said exactly: “We’re not going to be holding hands and singing Kumbaya” and I asked them: why not?
Couple sputters. “It won’t work.” Of course.
And I said, regardless of method (and despite, or rather perhaps because of, having an ass kicking background, “negotiating with terrorists” and just getting to know an oppositions perspective works wonders for successful resolutions of all kinds – so I disagree with ass kicking as a matter of course but that aside) – isn’t the ENTIRE POINT to create peace so we can all do exactly that? Sit together, hold hands, sing Kumbaya? (Metaphorically of course. No one wants me singing)

The goal is peace. Freedom. Harmony. Good will. All that cool stuff.
The hateful and those looking for eternal conflict are revealed by eschewing things that make that possible.

“Every time there's a police shooting anywhere in the country (or here at home) they go over it and over it to figure out how it could have been handled differently.”

Our own force is a “polite gestapo.” Oh, I’d never say that openly. But it’s how I think of them. In a very positive sense. They have an iron-bound discipline, they make sure they appear omnipresent, they all seem to know everyone’s name, they have pictures of people, teachers, etc. little cards of them and cards of their own they hand out, happy, smiling pictures of themselves on them – in police gear of course. The overall effect is a barely discernable assertion of authority almost drowned out by a good-natured cheerfulness and sense of real justice.

I’ve told this story here before I think, but… there was a small group of out of town (there’s a certain type of dress, comportment, etc, that says ‘downtown Chicago’ or ‘west side’ or ‘north’ or ‘south’ side, etc.) black folks waiting for a train at the station and they were drinking. You can drink on the train certain days, holidays I think, or at least you could then, but it was illegal outside at the station.

So the police show up and it’s a slow trickle of cops surrounding the men. Must have been 30 of them. I got the muscle memory and went and checked. Yup. Ambush. I was the only one who noticed though. They were discreet. So they said what must be the shortest cop I’ve ever seen to go talk to them.
“Pardon me gentlemen, do you know there’s no alcohol consumption at the station?” Verbatim. (Of course I was recording)
“There’s drinking on the train” One guy said.
“Not at the station. It’s posted.”
A younger guy said “There’s no sign!” and got a look from one of the older guys like ‘you are going to get us killed’
The cop said “It’s posted there” and pointed. Then he noticed there was no sign there. And he went over and looked.
“excuse me” the cop said and went and talked to the station manager. I didn’t hear what was said, but there was some shrugging.
The cop came back. “I’m sorry gentlemen. It should have been posted. Please don’t drink until you get on the train. Thank you.”

And he left. And the sense of presence just vanished.

And the guys standing there just looked at each other astonished as though they’d never heard a police officer apologize before (although downtown Chicago cops…yeah, uh…still some old schoolers there).

I think, if you’re well trained and well supported, it gives you the confidence to at least try to be polite and empathetic. And wow, yeah, does that have a great effect. Especially when being courteous and friendly is part of the training. And drives down the exchange of gunfire.
Win win.

And yah, re: gaspode’s rude pundit link above.

First thing I noticed about the photos wasn’t the cops face but the bulletholes around the neighborhood. I don’t know who their instructor is down their but I can think of no one who’s ever taught the four rules of firearm safety and ignored “Be sure of the target and what is in front of it and beyond it.”
He should be, at the very least, relieved of duty for that alone. And I wouldn’t let the man anywhere near a firearm anymore.

I mean, I know I'm a hard ass when it comes to firearm details, but this isn't some obscure factoid. It's taught to civilians. It's drilled into police officers. And God help you if you do anything to transgress it as a military shooter. It's the litany. It's one of the "ten commandments" analogs when it comes to firearms. And it's a big one."
posted by Smedleyman at 10:17 AM on November 27, 2014 [47 favorites]

Smedleyman, it is so very good to be reading your perspectives again.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:20 AM on November 27, 2014 [21 favorites]

Apparently there are NYPD officers on the ground in Ferguson now, following protest organizers around? Nothing even makes sense anymore.
posted by dialetheia at 10:47 AM on November 27, 2014 [2 favorites]

@Nettaaaaaaaa reported being followed around by plainclothes security at a mall in STL (the Galleria). Who claimed he wasn't security for the mall.. plus the thing from the STL Post Dispatch today. They're targeting peaceful protesters.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:00 AM on November 27, 2014 [3 favorites]

> Transcript of the "mistake" the prosecutors made during the grand jury. It's a doozy.

This prosecution deliberately manipulated a grand jury to not indict where there was obvious probable cause, up to and including lying to the grand jury about what the law was. This prosecution perverted the system to ensure that a man who executed an unarmed, surrendering teenager in broad daylight, in front of multiple witnesses, would never even have to be questioned about whether what he did was wrong.

Could this have legal repercussions for the the assistant district attorney? An ethical violation this extreme should have consequences. Could Alizadeh be disbarred or even prosecuted for this, at least in theory?
posted by homunculus at 11:11 AM on November 27, 2014 [4 favorites]

An ethical violation this extreme should have consequences.

put that on a banner and hang it over this whole damn story, man
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 11:33 AM on November 27, 2014 [16 favorites]

From the NYPD link: "have had them out there for over a week to help out in terms of intelligence we have on some of the professional agitators who are involved in these types of activity"

"Professional agitators" is quite a loaded word. What about "community demonstration consultant"? Aren't "professionals" a good thing? Is "agitators" closer to "lobbyist", "consultant", or "facilitator"?

Seriously though, this is quite depressing. The surveillance state is 100% in the process of mining cellphone data from Ferguson to identify community organizers for what-should-be-illegal domestic surveillance. COINTELPRO continued.
posted by anthill at 11:36 AM on November 27, 2014 [11 favorites]

One possible guide for uncomfortable Thanksgiving table conversations
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:11 PM on November 27, 2014 [2 favorites]

Professional agitators is apparently an NYPD term of art. Cannot imagine they are so dumb they think anybody makes a living agitating.
posted by bukvich at 12:39 PM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

Ferguson: Did prosecutors focus unduly on marijuana?
posted by homunculus at 12:52 PM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

!!! From homunculus' most recent link:

He told the grand jury that tests indicated Brown had smoked marijuana "within a couple of hours" of his death and it could have had hallucinogenic effects if taken in a high enough dose. ...

Could marijuana have affected Brown's reactions and behaviour once he was shot, assistant prosecutor Sheila Whirley asked.

"The amount of marijuana he has could cause abnormal behaviour, but usually doesn't," Mr Baden replied.

"Ninety-nine out of 100 people taking marijuana aren't going to get in a fight with a police officer," he said.

Lopez notes that Ms Whirley then questioned Mr Baden's credentials and one of the grand jurors expressed doubt that the expert could know that marijuana wasn't the reason why Brown fought with Wilson.

This is totally disgusting, what the hell could marijuana have had to do with anything unless Wilson was high when he shot Brown? Like smoking pot is like doing PCP or something. It's so transparently a BS argument to imply that pot could have actually turned Brown into the "hulked up demon" that Wilson claims to have perceived. Ugh. The more I read of the grand jury proceedings, the more it sounds like Mike Brown was really the one on trial.
posted by dialetheia at 1:09 PM on November 27, 2014 [13 favorites]

Given that it's the "prosecution" that so plainly screwed up the grand jury, I take it that there is no real avenue for appeal or a second grand jury? I'm assuming that under normal circumstances, it would be the prosecution that would make an appeal...
posted by knapah at 1:25 PM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

As usual, Jay Smooth delivers the goods.

Riots are a thing that human beings do because human beings have limits...

For the people of Ferguson, a lifetime of neglect and de facto segregation and incompetence and mistreatment by every level of government was not their limit.

When that maligned neglect set the stage for one of their children to be shot down and left in the street like a piece of trash, that was not their limit.

For the people of Ferguson, spending 100 days almost entirely peacefully protesting for some measure of justice for that child and having their desire for justice treated like a joke by every local authority was not their limit.

And then after those 100 days, when the so-called "prosecutor" waited until the dead of night to come out and twist that knife one last time, when he came out and confirmed once and for all that Michael Brown's life didn't matter, only then did the people of Ferguson reach their limit.

posted by AceRock at 2:00 PM on November 27, 2014 [31 favorites]

No Charges For Cop Who Killed Unarmed White Man Two Days After Mike Brown Shooting
posted by jeffburdges at 2:50 PM on November 27, 2014 [2 favorites]

Professional agitators is apparently an NYPD term of art. Cannot imagine they are so dumb they think anybody makes a living agitating.

Other than undercover law enforcement, I'm sure you mean.
posted by Nerd of the North at 2:53 PM on November 27, 2014 [7 favorites]

Cop opens fire on dad who was trying to save his child during asthma attack

UK cops viciously beat mentally ill man and throw his body into trashbin, they “did it for fun”
posted by jeffburdges at 2:55 PM on November 27, 2014 [4 favorites]

There is a solution to anyone complaining about their racist facebook feed :
- Subscribe to any relevant pages like CopBlock, FilmingCops, etc.
- Repost their posts that appear most relevant.
- Do not engage your friend who respond, but delete their obnoxious comments instead.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:29 PM on November 27, 2014

You'll shoot your eye out
The cops will kill you
posted by jeffburdges at 3:41 PM on November 27, 2014 [4 favorites]

FFS.
posted by homunculus at 4:03 PM on November 27, 2014 [6 favorites]

Guardian: The five leaders who failed Ferguson.
posted by immlass at 4:18 PM on November 27, 2014 [4 favorites]

I'm glad Jay Nixon was second on that list. He couldn't have disappeared more completely if he were wearing a Harry Potter Invisibility Cloak.
posted by Justinian at 4:23 PM on November 27, 2014 [5 favorites]

Thanks for posting that, immlass.
posted by nangar at 4:32 PM on November 27, 2014

I'd also like to quote the Guardian reporter Jon Swaine's tweet from yesterday that recently got retweeted:

Watching the Tamir Rice video was an unbearable end to a sad week, he thought, before noticing that it was Wednesday

posted by nangar at 5:10 PM on November 27, 2014 [2 favorites]

After looking through the evidence it seems more and more clear to me that Wilson was not going to be convicted of murdering Brown. That doesn't change the appalling behavior of many of the supposed authorities in this matter, up to and including the Governor (well, his behavior was more of the cowardly nature), but it's pretty obvious Wilson wouldn't be found guilty with these facts.

But if the DA wanted to bring charges there is obviously probable cause here to charge Wilson. That's an incredibly low standard. If McCulloch wanted charges there would have been charges. So he should have done his goddamn job and either charged Wilson based on that probable cause, saying that this is a matter for a jury to decide or come out directly and said he couldn't in good conscience prosecute a case he didn't believe could or should be won. A true servant of the public could justify either of those actions.

Most people in this thread obviously think only the former choice (charging Wilson) is justifiable. I want to agree with that because there are so many reasons it should be true but I also have a deep discomfort with a DA charging and trying someone when they do not believe the defendant is guilty of a crime and do not believe they can secure a conviction. Why a DA trying, much less convicting, someone he or she does not believe is guilty of a crime is a problem should be blatantly obvious.
posted by Justinian at 5:51 PM on November 27, 2014 [5 favorites]

Regardless of what happened afterwards, things would have been different if Wilson had not decided to exercise this police authority by hassling Brown and Johnson just for walking in the street. I walk and jog in the street all the time and nobody hassles me. They weren't causing a problem and they weren't blocking traffic. Wilson simply decided to be dick because he could. If he had just driven on by his life would be different now and Brown would still be alive. That decision to hassle a couple of young men for no good reason was the first chance to avoid what happened.

The second decision was to backup and confront the two a second time because he had been disrespected. Again, Wilson had the choice to just blow it off as kids stuff and go on. Instead he made the choice to escalate the confrontation by backing up and cutting off the two in order to demand the respect he felt he deserved. This second confrontation led to the struggle and first gun shots.

Wilson had two chances to avoid what happened. He made two bad choices and that resulted in Brown's death.
posted by JackFlash at 6:16 PM on November 27, 2014 [4 favorites]

Well no, I have difficulty understanding how any DA could thinkWilson shouldn't be put on trial. It literally doesn't make a bit of sense not to bring charges.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:17 PM on November 27, 2014 [3 favorites]

It makes perfect sense, you just don't agree with it. That's not the same thing. I have no trouble understanding the sense behind McCulloch's actions even when I don't think he's doing the right thing.
posted by Justinian at 6:47 PM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

Huh? You don't believe it's right to do what you think makes sense? Then what is the right thing? Nonsense?
posted by Golden Eternity at 6:58 PM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

I don't understand the disconnect here. You can understand someone's thought process and not think it nonsensical without agreeing with their actions and conclusions.
posted by Justinian at 7:09 PM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

Meh, this sounds like an unproductive splitting of hairs.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:09 PM on November 27, 2014

Metafilter: an unproductive splitting of hairs.

Nice.
posted by Justinian at 7:26 PM on November 27, 2014 [6 favorites]

jeffburdges: Cop opens fire on dad who was trying to save his child during asthma attack

UK cops viciously beat mentally ill man and throw his body into trashbin, they “did it for fun”

Jesus Christ. The related story on that that first link, My 2-yr-old baby is in there! Cops Ignore Mother’s Warning and Throw Grenade Into Bedroom, Burn Child’s Body Alive. The least, and I mean the very least that should happen is that every one of those guys should never be allowed to carry a gun again. Honestly, it sounds like a whole lot of people in Oxnard County should be stripped their their credentials and be washing dishes for a living instead of holding offices of public trust. They're not acting as peace officers. They're not even acting like "law enforcement" officers. They're the ones acting like a gang.

I mean, kick in the door, terrorize an entire family, point laser sights at the parents, manhandle the elementary school aged children, and stun grenade a toddler because they were "just checking" for a gang they heard might be in the neighborhood? And a judge gave them a warrant for that? That's why more cops should be charged even if the chances of conviction are low. They need that felony arrest to haunt them, and ensure they are never again employable in any position of authority.
posted by ob1quixote at 7:30 PM on November 27, 2014 [21 favorites]

I don't understand the disconnect here. You can understand someone's thought process and not think it nonsensical without agreeing with their actions and conclusions.

Can I ask for a clarification here? What is your understanding of that thought process?

To me, it looks like "Man, I better do everything I can to make sure that guilty cop doesn't go down for executing that unarmed black kid in the street for no reason", but I suspect you have an angle that makes McCulloch's actions seem less palpably evil.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 7:37 PM on November 27, 2014 [2 favorites]

Evil isn't (necessarily) nonsensical, is the point.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:50 PM on November 27, 2014

Justinian wrote: I also have a deep discomfort with a DA charging and trying someone when they do not believe the defendant is guilty of a crime and do not believe they can secure a conviction.

The bar for prosecution is much lower than the bar for conviction, and rightly so. The fact that the DA doesn't believe someone is guilty of a crime isn't actually relevant: a person has been killed under unclear circumstances that were possibly unlawful. This is probable cause; this is a reason to try the case. It takes a court to decide a defendant's guilt, not a prosecutor. The prosecutor's actions in this case shock the conscience: they sabotaged the process by turning the grand jury into a court.

As for the probability of conviction, most charges in the USA are settled via plea bargaining, and defendants plead guilty to lesser charges because they know that there's a chance they might be found guilty of more substantial crimes. A charge of murder might persuade him to plead guilty of manslaughter; a charge of manslaughter might persuade him to plead guilty to reckless endangerment of life, or whatever. Any conviction would make it harder for him to continue to serve as a police officer. That in itself would be something, at least.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:53 PM on November 27, 2014 [11 favorites]

The prosecutor's actions in this case shock the conscience: they sabotaged the process by turning the grand jury into a court.

Precisely. I don't know how someone who's intelligent enough to form coherent sentences on MetaFilter could fail to see the problem with a DA short-circuiting the justice system by artificially raising the bar beyond the applicable legal standard. I mean, this:

Why a DA trying, much less convicting, someone he or she does not believe is guilty of a crime is a problem should be blatantly obvious.

is complete nonsense. The prosecutor isn't there to judge guilt or innocence, they're there simply to make the determination of whether there is probable cause. They are empowered to file charges by themselves without the help of a grand jury, and in fact that's exactly what this prosecutor has done to perhaps hundreds of other criminal suspects who didn't have the good fortune of wearing a police badge at the time their alleged crimes occurred.

Prosecutors aren't clairvoyants that we go to when we want to determine beyond a shadow of a doubt what happened. Let's not pretend they are to try to make McCulloch's transparently self-serving and disgraceful actions look more honorable.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:35 PM on November 27, 2014 [5 favorites]

> The related story on that that first link, ""My 2-yr-old baby is in there!" Cops Ignore Mother’s Warning and Throw Grenade Into Bedroom, Burn Child’s Body Alive."

Holly fuck. When I saw that I assumed it was this case which I'd read about before, but apparently it's a completely different case of police wounding a toddler with a flash grenade. And in the other case too, a grand jury decided to not charge any of the officers involved:

“It breaks my heart”: How a SWAT team upended my baby’s life — and got away with it. A SWAT team blew a hole in my 2-year-old's chest -- and just got off scot-free. But here's why it gets even worse
posted by homunculus at 8:59 PM on November 27, 2014 [3 favorites]

Extraordinary:
Denver Police seize tablet, delete video of brutal arrest. But it had backed up to “the cloud”.

Incidentally, this is an Australian report on an incident on Denver, Colorado. This is what foreigners hear about police in the USA. Events like this inevitably harm the USA's image in the eyes of the world.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:05 PM on November 27, 2014 [13 favorites]

“It breaks my heart”: How a SWAT team upended my baby’s life — and got away with it. A SWAT team blew a hole in my 2-year-old's chest -- and just got off scot-free. But here's why it gets even worse

Well, that's appalling. The civil suit for that case is going to be a doozy. If the county doesn't settle at the first possible instance, they are going to be hung out to dry in court. At least, I hope so.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 9:11 PM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

“It breaks my heart”: How a SWAT team upended my baby’s life — and got away with it. A SWAT team blew a hole in my 2-year-old's chest -- and just got off scot-free. But here's why it gets even worse

Buzzfeed has done a pretty decent profile on that case.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 9:16 PM on November 27, 2014 [2 favorites]

There are few phrases in the American lexicon more bone chilling than "medical bills".
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:23 PM on November 27, 2014 [12 favorites]

And as I commented on when it was raised earlier in this thread, clause 4 of that statute makes it clear that this is an affirmative defense to be raised by the officer charged. The umpteenth thing that a prosecution would not normally present at a grand jury.

phearlez, I am curious about this and your earlier comment, do you know this for a fact from a legal perspective or are you speculating?

The reason I ask is that the prosecution in this grand jury didn't just mention this defense, they instructed the GJ that in order to indict they must find probable cause in three respects, one positive and two negative: 1) that Wilson committed the elements of the offense, 2) that he did not act in lawful self-defense, and 3) that he did not use lawful force in effecting an arrest (see p 140 here).

I know this is kind of getting into the legal weeds but am wondering if anyone here can explain. How DOES that square with the whole deal with affirmative defense--if the grand jury has to rule out that defense even before the case goes to trial?
posted by torticat at 10:42 PM on November 27, 2014 [1 favorite]

homunculus: Holly fuck. When I saw that I assumed it was this case which I'd read about before, but apparently it's a completely different case of police wounding a toddler with a flash grenade. And in the other case too, a grand jury decided to not charge any of the officers involved:

Yeah, the Baby Bou Bou case was local, and that's what I thought too. The county has since denied all responsibility because the Phonesavanh's were never taken into custody. Unsurprisingly the family decided not to stay in Georgia after all.

Furthermore, while the Mountain NCIS — who also killed a pastor in 2009 — has been disbanded, Bubba and Dick-Bob and the rest of those fucking yahoos in the mountains still have their county "special response teams." They're special alright.

In any event, if the DA in your locality is elected, as the DAs in Habersham and St. Louis counties are, find out if they suck and if they do, get moving on making sure they never hold office again. Goddamned Bob McCulloch ran unopposed!

In Georgia we elect judges too. (I know, I know.) Anybody have any idea where I can find out if they suck?
posted by ob1quixote at 10:53 PM on November 27, 2014 [6 favorites]

My view, and YMMV, is that anywhere a conversation can be had it desperately needs to happen.

I got so distracted by arguing about Ferguson in the World of Warcraft General chat channel tonight that I got killed by an Icehoof Bull... TWICE. D:
posted by Jacqueline at 12:15 AM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

How DOES that square with the whole deal with affirmative defense--if the grand jury has to rule out that defense even before the case goes to trial?

After posting I realized the obvious answer to this question, that the GJ doesn't "rule out" anything because the standard is still only probable cause on all three points.

Would still be interested in any comments on whether it would be uncommon for a prosecutor to mention this or whether they are in fact required to do so, as implied by the transcript in this case.

But just as a point of curiosity; there's no question in my mind this prosecution got the outcome it was looking for.
posted by torticat at 1:00 AM on November 28, 2014

Denver Police seize tablet, delete video of brutal arrest. But it had backed up to “the cloud”.

How can a cop so guilty of destruction of evidence still be a cop? If he ever testifies in court then a defense attorney should simply raise this incident of evidence tampering, and his testimony should either be thrown out by the judge or ignored by the jury.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:09 AM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

"If you're more outraged at blacks looting stores than whites looting your savings then you've been duped. It's a lot harder to catch white wall street bankers stealing your future on camera than it is a black kid stealing a TV" - Pete Dominick
posted by jeffburdges at 3:21 AM on November 28, 2014 [10 favorites]

New Reenactment Animates BOTH Stories In The Mike Brown Shooting
posted by jeffburdges at 3:33 AM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

"If you're more outraged at blacks looting stores than whites looting your savings then you've been duped. It's a lot harder to catch white wall street bankers stealing your future on camera than it is a black kid stealing a TV" - Pete Dominick

Not only that, but a lot of middle-class (or think they're middle class) white people aspire to be the dude stealing your savings ("fuck you, got mine"), but no one aspires to be the guy carting away the TV.

In our society, punishments are inversely proportional to the severity of the crime, to the point where it is literally impossible to be charged with a crime if it's large enough (and you're white, that's important), and yet you can can be put to death for being suspected* of shoplifting (and you're black).

* Being suspicious, as such, is a capital offense to many cops. And being brown is sufficient to cast you as suspicious.
posted by maxwelton at 3:51 AM on November 28, 2014 [10 favorites]

Is there any evidence of how far Wilson was from Brown when he shot him?

dialethia, This reconstruction of the crime scene by Shaun King says the SUV was 108 feet away. There might be enough info for you to figure out Wilson's distance?
posted by harriet vane at 4:53 AM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

Because this discussion has grown quite long, there are a whole lot of posts / time between IronMouth's initial weigh-in on the subject, which ended with the words "this was a justified shooting" and later posts (by others) that directly address the unconstitutionality of the very section of Missouri law that IronMouth quoted as the basis for his conclusion that "this was a justified shooting," (I'm writing this post in order to clarify those facts [Edit])

To be clear, in his first post on the subject, IronMouth linked to and quoted section 563.046 of the 2012 Missouri Revised Statutes.

A little later in the discussion, IronMouth made the following statement:
from the first, I saw a justified shooting and when I looked at it, I had a copy of the statutes in hand and I read every article so I would not get embarrassed on TV.

Some time after that, we learned from several independent sources (including direct quotes from one of the assistant prosecutors who presided over the Grand Jury hearing) that relevant parts of the very section of Missouri law quoted by IronMouth as the foundation of his declaration that "this was a justified shooting" were found to be unconstitutional by SCOTUS (in 1985, no less)!

MeFi's own self-proclaimed expert-in-residence on the legalities of police shootings seems to have shot himself squarely in the foot on this one.

I'd normally refrain from framing a post in such a way as to make it specifically about another poster. In this case, I think IronMouth's self-appointment as the site's legal expert on such matters (in this and previous discussions on related topics), coupled with his failure to address the clear implications suggested by the fact that parts of the section of law he quoted as the primary justification for his legal pronouncement on the subject have been declared unconstitutional by SCOTUS, excuses that framing, at least to some extent.
posted by syzygy at 6:10 AM on November 28, 2014 [30 favorites]

I talked to my uncle at Thanksgiving dinner about the grand jury process. He is a judge, and he used to be a prosecutor in Milwaukee County (most populous and highest percentage of non-whites in Wisconsin). He wasn't surprised at all that the prosecutor presented exculpatory evidence and had Wilson testify. He said that in Wisconsin, that is absolutely routine. He wasn't surprised that witnesses disagree, that happens all the time. I said, isn't that the reason the case should go to trial? He said no, the point of the grand jury is to determine whether the prosecutor has enough evidence to go to trial, and the prosecutor should not take the case to trial unless s/he truly believes there is enough evidence to convict. He thought it would be unethical for a prosecutor to take a case to trial if s/he had reasonable doubt, so, given that there was potentially exculpatory evidence, following this logic, the lack of indictment was the right choice.

Note #1: He was out of the country when the decision not to indict was announced, and he has not seen any of the transcripts. He had read a few news articles from both progressive and conservative sites. His remarks were less about this case per se but the process in general. I didn't have time to ask him about specific aspects of the case because dessert.

Note #2: I have no reason to disbelieve him or think he's biased; I've never heard him say anything racist in 40 years, and he has a very long history working for organizations that help the poor.
posted by desjardins at 6:12 AM on November 28, 2014 [3 favorites]

He thought it would be unethical for a prosecutor to take a case to trial if s/he had reasonable doubt, so, given that there was potentially exculpatory evidence, following this logic, the lack of indictment was the right choice.

Did your uncle get "prosecutor" confused with "judge and jury"?
posted by showbiz_liz at 6:59 AM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

desjardins: He thought it would be unethical for a prosecutor to take a case to trial if s/he had reasonable doubt

Your uncle's statement seems to be prima facie incorrect. Being convinced of the accused's guilt beyond a "reasonable doubt" is the (much tougher) standard that a juror (not grand juror) must reach before finding someone guilty of charges in a trial.

"Probable cause" is the (much less restrictive) standard that a prosecutor or grand jury much reach in order to indict.

If your uncle actually said "reasonable doubt" and not "probable cause", it would appear to me that his statement is simply incorrect.
posted by syzygy at 7:12 AM on November 28, 2014 [4 favorites]

Note: I mislinked some text in this comment. I've sent a request to the mods, asking them to correct the link.

To be clear, the text "IronMouth's initial weigh-in on the subject" should point to this comment, rather than to the one to which it's currently linked.

Apologies for any undue confusion...
posted by syzygy at 7:16 AM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

My lay knowledge of an affirmative defense is primarily by virtue of civil cases, so there is of course possibility of differences in criminal trials. But in civil cases regarding the statute of limitations - and my knowledge is focused on debt SoLs - there is nothing about that SoL preventing a case from being filed and in fact nothing preventing a judgment from being entered - usually because no defense is presented at all - despite the fact that a simple request for dismissal with prejudice would be granted because of that SoL.

In a criminal case regarding an expired SoL I imagine there'd be ethical considerations and sanctions for a prosecutor violating something that blatant, but this is not a cut and dried A/B situation - this is a set of factors for consideration and written with an explicit clause saying it has to be raised by the defendent.

Legislatures do not write statutes like this by accident. If they wanted to explicitly bar prosecution they can do so. You can easily find sections of state and federal law that say things "shall not be interpreted to" or not apply to certain conditions.

Might it impact ability to get a conviction? Of course. But there are defenses that a defendent might not raise in trial for reasons of their own. For the prosecutor to raise them presumptively as a reason not to get an indictment doesn't make a lot of sense in typical situations.
posted by phearlez at 7:45 AM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

I said, isn't that the reason the case should go to trial? He said no, the point of the grand jury is to determine whether the prosecutor has enough evidence to go to trial, and the prosecutor should not take the case to trial unless s/he truly believes there is enough evidence to convict. He thought it would be unethical for a prosecutor to take a case to trial if s/he had reasonable doubt, so, given that there was potentially exculpatory evidence, following this logic, the lack of indictment was the right choice.

I'm curious if some of this got lost in translation. I'm not a criminal lawyer so I defer to those who are. But my general understanding is that a prosecutor should not bring charges if there is not sufficient evidence for a conviction. That would be a waste of taxpayer resources, etc. Does sufficient evidence exist for a jury to convict beyond a reasonable doubt? I believe that's the standard articulated by your uncle. However, whether sufficient evidence exists is different from whether a prosecutor has a duty to only proceed with charges if he/she personally believes the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The ethical standard the ABA articulates and most states follow is that prosecutors shall "refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause."
posted by naju at 7:58 AM on November 28, 2014 [3 favorites]

Just why on earth didn't they get a special prosecutor. Why didn't they say, we're going to cross all the ts and dot all the Is on this one. It's like they decided that they wanted to do their own shitty thing -- and maybe hide the incompetence of the department (the absence of camera batteries, e.g.) and Wilson's probable fabrication of events.
posted by angrycat at 8:45 AM on November 28, 2014 [3 favorites]

Just why on earth didn't they get a special prosecutor.

Because they knew it ought to go to trial and they didn't want it to. This is not a mystery.
posted by showbiz_liz at 9:11 AM on November 28, 2014 [12 favorites]

America, 2014
posted by homunculus at 9:47 AM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

via Shaun King: Police refused to give Tamir Rice first aid. He was still alive. Minutes later FBI agent pulled up and did it himself
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:55 AM on November 28, 2014 [7 favorites]

Video of Cleveland police shooting of Tamir Rice raises disturbing questions: editorial
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:19 AM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

In our society, punishments are inversely proportional to the severity of the crime, to the point where it is literally impossible to be charged with a crime if it's large enough (and you're white, that's important)

One of the most extreme recent examples of this imo was when HSBC was let off the hook after getting caught laundering money for Mexican drug cartels. It turns out Loretta Lynch, the new Attorney General nominee, was instrumental in that decision. Meet the new boss...
posted by homunculus at 10:56 AM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

It takes some crazy mental gymnastics to take Wilson's account seriously. I can't read it without thinking "this man is lying through his teeth". We obviously don't have video of the "incident", but we do have video evidence of how both Michael Brown and of Darren Wilson handle confrontational situations.

Michael Brown in the convenience store, being confronted by the shopkeeper and Darren Wilson arresting a man recording him.

If we are to believe Wilson's testimony, why didn't Michael Brown go all HULK SMASH in the store? And can we really see the confrontational, inpatient, cocky man in the Wilson video being unfailingly polite and terrified as he says? It is just hard to buy.
posted by AceRock at 11:37 AM on November 28, 2014 [6 favorites]

Just why on earth didn't they get a special prosecutor. Why didn't they say, we're going to cross all the ts and dot all the Is on this one.

Because then Wilson might have been convicted.

The idea that it would be immoral to prosecute this case because a DA doesn't believe Wilson is guilty is dubious. Why would that be? It costs the tax payers money. But in this case it's well worth that cost to show a deeply wounded public that justice is being done to the letter of the law and in good faith. I think the other reason is that lawyers often don't trust juries to produce their desired verdict. Contrary to the notion that McCullough thought he couldn't get a conviction, I think he was afraid a jury might convict Wilson, and the sham Grand Jury was intended to prevent that possibility.

The Truth About Anonymous's Activism

On August 14, an Anonymous member posted a YouTube video calling for a "National Day of Rage" to protest the shooting. A computerized voice warbled over an ominous Carl Orff–ripoff score: "We call upon the citizens of the United States to collectively gather in support for those who are suffering in Ferguson." News sites heralded the heroic arrival of Anonymous. Initially, few of these reports noted that the exact time, date and locations of Anonymous's National Day of Rage corresponded with a previously planned protest, the National Moment of Silence, spearheaded by black feminist blogger Feminista Jones. Jones was dismayed by Anonymous's attempt to co-opt her peaceful demonstration and the media's eagerness to help. "I was bothered that they chose this moment to be destructive, but it showed people just how little they care about the safety and well-being of Black people," she later told the blog Visual AIDS.

Christ
posted by Golden Eternity at 11:38 AM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

In Ferguson, Officer Defused Eruptions as Crowds Grew Tense

Lieutenant Lohr, a Nashville-born former Texan and father of three with an Army-style buzz cut, is one of the commanders overseeing security at the Ferguson police station. He never wears riot gear, even when he wades into a group of protesters to answer questions, resolve disputes or listen to a stream of insults. Protesters at the gates ask for him by name, so they can make complaints, for example, about the use of tear gas or of officers being too aggressive in arresting a woman.

...Lieutenant Lohr, to many of the protesters, is evidence that law enforcement officials have improved community relations at a divisive time.

posted by Golden Eternity at 12:11 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think some people have been misled slightly by the issue over 563.046. The Constitutionality argument doesn't render the entire thing null and void and Missouri's law is still extremely friendly to the officer. Even in the face of the Supreme Court decision it would, according to Missouri law, still be legal and Constitutional for Wilson to have shot Brown if he had a reasonable belief that Brown was dangerous. Given his version of events includes a physical altercation at the window of his police cruiser it's clear that, in his accounting, he had such a belief.

I think that this is a bad law and is way too lenient on when you can use deadly force. But that's what the law is right now there in Ferguson even with the Supreme Court rulings.
posted by Justinian at 12:22 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

That would have been a great thing to go over in an adversarial trial, but unlike a vast majority of this prosecutor's other cases, he decided to pre-judge the outcome, a decision you seem to have no problem with.
posted by tonycpsu at 12:29 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

You seem to have a serious difficulty understanding the difference between "this is what I think the law is" and "this is what I think the law should be". I'm not going to pretend the law isn't what it appears to be because it's a crappy law. Denying reality doesn't make it unreal.
posted by Justinian at 12:35 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

I think some people have been misled slightly by the issue over 563.046. The Constitutionality argument doesn't render the entire thing null and void

That's not the big issue with the statute's role in these proceedings. The issue is that they gave a 1979 version of the statute to the grand jury, which included the unconstitutional clause about being allowed to shoot a fleeing suspect, and then never even said which part was unconstitutional when they (weeks later!) told them to not worry about that statute. When one of the jurors asked which part was at issue, the assistant DAs replied "As far as you need to know, just don't worry about that. ... We don't want to get into a law class."
posted by dialetheia at 12:36 PM on November 28, 2014 [12 favorites]

I think some people have been misled slightly by the issue over 563.046. The Constitutionality argument doesn't render the entire thing null and void and Missouri's law is still extremely friendly to the officer.

Be that as it may,

(1) Why is the prosecutor presenting information intended to be exculpatory?

(2) When later the prosecutor tries to walk back this information, why does she phrase the walkback in vague terms, and then when directly asked by a juror what part of the law was overruled, responds that they shouldn't worry about that?
posted by Flunkie at 12:36 PM on November 28, 2014 [6 favorites]

Because the prosecutor's office had no intention of bringing an indictment and the whole grand jury was a sham. As I've said repeatedly?
posted by Justinian at 12:44 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

Obviously, Justinian. Do you seriously think I was asking that?
posted by Flunkie at 12:47 PM on November 28, 2014

It was for other's benefit primarily, Flunkie, since (for example) tonycpsu appears to believe I think McCulloch's actions are perfectly great.
posted by Justinian at 12:54 PM on November 28, 2014

Racists Getting Fired (and Getting Racists Fired) (SLTumblr)
posted by box at 12:58 PM on November 28, 2014 [7 favorites]

I am not in favor of a society where employers fire their employees for political views expressed outside of work.
posted by tivalasvegas at 1:13 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

I am not in favor of a society where employers fire their employees for political views expressed outside of work.

Did you read their comments, though? The stuff expressed in those comments cannot be dismissed as simply "political views" - it's straight-up hate speech, much of it threatening or advocating actual violence and murder.
posted by dialetheia at 1:17 PM on November 28, 2014 [9 favorites]

fwiw, re: AG-nominee Loretta Lynch...

Loretta Lynch was a federal prosecutor in New York when she encountered an astonishing case of police brutality: the broomstick sodomy of a Haitian immigrant in a precinct bathroom. The 1997 assault on Abner Louima set off street protests, frayed race relations and led to one of the most important federal civil rights cases of the past two decades — with Lynch a key part of the team that prosecuted officers accused in the beating or of covering it up.

[...]

That figures to be an especially important signal to send as community members in Ferguson brace for the real prospect that state and federal investigations into the shooting death of Michael Brown will close without criminal charges, outcomes that could disillusion civil rights activists and community members. Holder has said he expects the federal investigation to conclude before he resigns, but Lynch still would inherit a civil rights probe into the practices of the entire Ferguson Police Department. That investigation is one of roughly 20 that the Justice Department has initiated into troubled police departments in the past five years, more than twice the number undertaken in the five years before that.

[...]

During the first trial in 1999, which ended with mixed verdicts, the prosecution team hammered the officers for hiding behind a "blue wall of silence."

"Don't let these defendants push us back to the day when police officers could beat people with impunity, and arrest people for no reason and lie about it to cover it up," she told jurors.

[...]

Lynch was U.S. attorney from 1999 to 2001, as the Louima case slogged through the courts on appeals and new trials. She left for private practice before being nominated in 2010, this time by Obama, to run the office again.

posted by kliuless at 1:19 PM on November 28, 2014 [4 favorites]

That tumblr doxxing shit is pretty gross.
posted by indubitable at 1:20 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

doxxing is pretty gross, but wow, "n***** deserved to die."? holy shit.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:33 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

Pregnant St. Louis Woman Loses an Eye After Police Shoot Her With a Bean Bag Round
posted by Golden Eternity at 1:35 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

Racists Getting Fired (and Getting Racists Fired) (SLTumblr)

I'd be worried about photoshop or other sorts of frame jobs on a site like that. Getting the wrong info is one of the biggest problems with doxxing beyond the potential for personal harassment.
posted by Drinky Die at 1:39 PM on November 28, 2014 [3 favorites]

Racism: It's the Law

If nothing else, such testimony shows the stark limits of our “who’s at fault?” legal system, which addresses every incident in pristine, absurd isolation and has no interest beyond establishing blame — that is to say, officially stamping the participants as either villains, heroes or victims. Certainly it has no interest in holistic understanding of social problems.

To Combat Racism in Law Enforcement, Start Young

Our children’s racial attitudes take shape based on their formal and informal exposures to race, including the adult conversations they overhear, dinnertime talk, schoolyard pronouncements, classroom discussions and nonverbal communications that express chagrin or disgust at news stories involving blacks. These entrenched images only deepen with time. Unchecked, individual racism becomes full-blown and deepens institutional racism.

Race, racism and law enforcement: A call to action (American Psychological Association)

We need an in-depth and honest conversation about the influence of race and racism in interactions between law enforcement and minority communities. We want to highlight psychologists and other social scientists working to understand problems and to develop solutions. We must include law enforcement in this conversation; they are essential partners in making positive change. We want to draw attention to good models of law enforcement that have improved the effectiveness of policing and interactions with minority communities. We want to identify legal and policy changes that could lead to common-sense solutions.

posted by audi alteram partem at 2:03 PM on November 28, 2014 [5 favorites]

Justinian: You seem to have a serious difficulty understanding the difference between "this is what I think the law is" and "this is what I think the law should be". I'm not going to pretend the law isn't what it appears to be because it's a crappy law. Denying reality doesn't make it unreal.
...
since (for example) tonycpsu appears to believe I think McCulloch's actions are perfectly great.

So we're supposed to take your (since debunked) legal argument seriously after your transparent attempt to create sympathy for McCulloch's actions by making it out to be some crisis of conscience where he must choose between doing his job and prosecuting someone he believes is innocent? You may not think his actions are "perfectly great", but you sure were trying to cast them as reasonable based on a completely misleading notion of what prosecutors are supposed to do.
posted by tonycpsu at 2:11 PM on November 28, 2014 [3 favorites]

The stuff expressed in those comments cannot be dismissed as simply "political views" - it's straight-up hate speech, much of it threatening or advocating actual violence and murder.

Speech that violates the law should be prosecuted by the legal authorities, not by employers. We don't (supposedly, at least) live in a feudal society.
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:30 PM on November 28, 2014

Speech that violates the law should be prosecuted by the legal authorities, not by employers.

Well, it is basically never prosecuted by legal authorities as far as I know. In the meantime, employers are supposed to continue employing e.g. people they know to be KKK supporters? I assume these cases are in at-will employment states, so employers have the right to fire anyone for basically any reason that isn't covered by anti-discrimination regulations. It sounds like you have a broader issue with at-will employment laws that would be a total derail to get into here.
posted by dialetheia at 2:39 PM on November 28, 2014 [3 favorites]

if conservatives were going through facebook pages looking for chic-fil-a and hobby lobby employees who donated to planned parenthood or a gay rights group, i wonder if people would think the doxxing of speakers they disagree with would still be a good thing
posted by pyramid termite at 2:40 PM on November 28, 2014 [4 favorites]

If I were a manager of a retail/foodservice establishment and I discovered that one of my frontline employees was a KKK supporter I would fire that person immediately. I would no longer trust them to render good service to all customers.
posted by wuwei at 2:41 PM on November 28, 2014 [4 favorites]

Meanwhile, "A man is facing a felony menacing charge, because two Colorado sheriff's deputies say they thought a banana he pointed at them was a gun... Bunch wrote in the affidavit that he has seen handguns in many shapes and colors."

Did it matter that Nathan Channing is white? Not to be cynical or anything...
posted by mr. digits at 2:48 PM on November 28, 2014

That is bananas.
posted by clavdivs at 2:52 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

he has seen handguns in many shapes and colors.

Meanwhile, the 12 year old with the toy gun deserved to die because his gun didn't have an orange tip which obviously would have immediately stopped the officers. Even though the tip was apparently in his waistband when they rolled up on him.

The system will ALWAYS find a way to justify itself. And some lawyers will always be willing to personally profit from going on TV to promote the justification of the day.
posted by Drinky Die at 3:04 PM on November 28, 2014 [5 favorites]

you have a broader issue with at-will employment laws that would be a total derail

I do, and you're right, that's a derail.

Aside from that, though, I would think it anti-productive to be getting people fired for their racist views, as that could lead to a doubling-down martyr complex. However, I noticed that several of the doxxed people did publicly apologize. While that very well may be them covering their asses and/or trying to save their endangered jobs, maybe some real-world consequences do make some people reconsider the asinine, hateful things they say online.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:12 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

Did it matter that Nathan Channing is white? Not to be cynical or anything...

Obiviously it did matter, since the cops in question thought he was pointing a gun at them, and they didn't immediately empty their sidearms into him. But oddly, they have no such hesitation when it comes to black teenagers or children, armed or not...
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 3:14 PM on November 28, 2014 [10 favorites]

Racists Getting Fired (and Getting Racists Fired) (SLTumblr)

One the one hand, I agree that one's personal behaviour in their own time has nothing to do with whether they are doing their jobs adequetely, and shouldn't be a valid cause for firing you. As others have said, this could easily be done to people who work for conservative-leaning organisations and who express support for gay marriage, for example

On the other hand, I love the delicious schadenfreude inherent in seeing bad things happen to racist assholes.

I am large. I contain multitudes.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 3:30 PM on November 28, 2014 [9 favorites]

So we're supposed to take your (since debunked) legal argument seriously after your transparent attempt to create sympathy for McCulloch's actions by making it out to be some crisis of conscience where he must choose between doing his job and prosecuting someone he believes is innocent? You may not think his actions are "perfectly great", but you sure were trying to cast them as reasonable based on a completely misleading notion of what prosecutors are supposed to do.

First, you appear to have confused me with somebody else; Ironmouth perhaps. The very first time I mentioned 563.046 was a couple hours ago here in this thread and it was purely to point out that some people are reading the unconstitutionality of it overbroadly. You should really try to keep what people have said straight if you're going to get up in their faces.

As to the second part; my words are right here in the thread; I said that this whole grand jury fiasco was a sham and that McCulloch should have either charged Wilson directly since there is obviously probable cause to do so, or he should have had the guts to come out and say he didn't believe Wilson had committed a crime, didn't believe he could get a conviction on these facts, and so was not going to indict. He didn't do either of those things. So I have absolutely no idea where you're getting the idea that I think his actions have been justified when I've been pointing out all the ways in which I do not think they are.

I have no idea if its just a matter of you getting other people's words confused with mine (since like I said I made no "debunked legal argument" earlier in this thread) or just have a general axe to grind but it's clearly not with something I've actually said.
posted by Justinian at 3:47 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

Christ (he said ironically), I called McCulloch a mirror universe Pontius Pilate in this very thread. I realize that we're all into the vulgar curses these days but as far as comparisons go pretty much only calling him a Judas could be worse than that. Maybe if I'd used more swearing.
posted by Justinian at 3:51 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

Mirror universe means good in the other universe if they are evil in ours. ;)
posted by Drinky Die at 3:58 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

if conservatives were going through facebook pages looking for chic-fil-a and hobby lobby employees who donated to planned parenthood or a gay rights group, i wonder if people would think the doxxing of speakers they disagree with would still be a good thing

I don't want to continue this derail but I can't even imagine how you could read the stuff the people on that site are saying and consider it even remotely comparable to something like donating to a gay rights group. Advocating for black people to be killed is NOT a "political opinion." If Hobby Lobby or whoever would fire someone for political donations, that's a totally different situation than a company firing someone for threatening people with violence, saying whole classes of people deserve to be murdered, and posting actual KKK propaganda. I'm not even trying to defend doxxing, but I think employers have every right to fire people who they suspect might want to murder some of their customers, and honestly I think the people whose murder is being advocated have the right to go to those employers and say "I am not going to shop at your place if you continue employing people who publicly advocate for my murder."
posted by dialetheia at 4:03 PM on November 28, 2014 [9 favorites]

Getting the wrong info is one of the biggest problems with doxxing beyond the potential for personal harassment.

Doxxing is not okay, period. Even if it's racist asshats being doxxed.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 4:06 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

Justinian: I think some people have been misled slightly by the issue over 563.046. The Constitutionality argument doesn't render the entire thing null and void and Missouri's law is still extremely friendly to the officer. Even in the face of the Supreme Court decision it would, according to Missouri law, still be legal and Constitutional for Wilson to have shot Brown if he had a reasonable belief that Brown was dangerous.

I'm not sure whom you think may "have been slightly misled by the issue over 563.046", but I'd just like to point out that the exact paragraph of the Missouri law [563.046.3(2)(a)] that IronMouth cites as justification for his conclusion that "this was a justified shooting" is the one that's negated by SCOTUS' decision in Tennessee vs. Garner.

IronMouth: So Brown committed two felonies. First he strong-arm robbed the convenience store, then assaulted a police officer. Under Missouri Revised Statutes 563.046.3(2)(a) that's enough.

St. Louis Public Radio: The problem is section (a). Contrary to Tennessee vs. Garner, that section authorizes the use of deadly force to stop an unarmed, non-dangerous fleeing felon from escaping.
posted by syzygy at 4:10 PM on November 28, 2014 [6 favorites]

First, you appear to have confused me with somebody else; Ironmouth perhaps.

No, I'm talking about this argument, debunked right here. You completely understated the degree to which the unconstitutional statute was involved in the grand jury proceedings.

So I have absolutely no idea where you're getting the idea that I think his actions have been justified when I've been pointing out all the ways in which I do not think they are.

I'm getting that idea from this comment. Now, I admit I don't have the capacity to remember everyone's previous comments in a thread that moves as fast as this one, but in that comment, you explicitly made an argument that McCulloch not charging Wilson was justifiable, and you did so based on the notion that it's somehow problematic to have DAs bring charges against someone they "do not believe the defendant is guilty." But of course they're not there for their ability to determine who's guilty, they're just there to make a very crude "if there's smoke, there might be fire" determination of probable cause, which you even say there clearly was in this case. Yet you conclude that it was justifiable for McCulloch to not bring charges because it would have been going against his own determination guilt which he is not qualified to offer?
posted by tonycpsu at 4:10 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

The Brown family’s pastor tries to make sense of the fire that gutted his church

posted by the man of twists and turns at 4:45 PM on November 28, 2014 [4 favorites]

I don't want to continue this derail but I can't even imagine how you could read the stuff the people on that site are saying and consider it even remotely comparable to something like donating to a gay rights group.

it's not the speech or action i'm comparing, it's the result - people getting fired for something that happened off their job

i'm with "his thoughts were red thoughts" - very mixed feelings

two thoughts - first, that business people tend to be more conservative - second, that getting someone fired from their job could easily backfire on a net that seems to be getting uglier all the time

i just think there's real dangers here

but that's probably enough of this derail
posted by pyramid termite at 4:48 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

One the one hand, I agree that one's personal behaviour in their own time has nothing to do with whether they are doing their jobs adequetely, and shouldn't be a valid cause for firing you.

Ugh. My tenses are all over the place. I apologise. I have no excuse, except that I wrote this before I had coffee this morning.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 4:49 PM on November 28, 2014

The Brown family’s pastor tries to make sense of the fire that gutted his church

I forgot the rule about never reading the comments and I'm despairing about the human race again.
posted by immlass at 5:06 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

i'm not sure this thread needs to be dominated by one tumbl blog that has doxxed about five people. It's inconsequential compared to the Ferguson story, and making it the thrust of the thread turns a dicussion about something that affects a lot of black people into a thread aout something that affects a very small number of white racists. I think we are aboe to prioritize better than that.
posted by maxsparber at 5:23 PM on November 28, 2014 [12 favorites]

Burning Ferguson: One street has boutiques. Another has dollar stores. Guess which one the police protected? Sarah Kendzior, politico.
posted by nangar at 5:26 PM on November 28, 2014 [3 favorites]

Mrs. Hoho and I inadvertently collided with the vortex that was the tail end of the Ferguson protest in Seattle the other night. By then it was a herd of mostly silly-ass white people throwing fireworks, screaming in each others' faces and gratuitously taunting the cops while ineffectively attempting to push back against the wall of uniforms wrangling them away from the downtown core.
The police were supernaturally reasonable when Mrs. Hoho explained we simply wished to get back to our car and return home to Issaquah. Imagine a large middle-age black woman instead of Alec Guinness: these aren't the droids you're looking for.... The cops parted and let us through. We trudged the rest of the way home through the weary, greenish streets without conversation.
When I shut the door behind us, Mrs. Hoho shucked off most of her clothes and announced she wanted a shower and a strong drink. "Straight up?", I enquired. "No," she answered from our tiny bathroom, "just strong."
I juiced the last three grapefruit into a pitcher, then strained the contents into our largest cocktail shaker; poured 100 proof vodka with only a whisper of space left to mix the contents...
posted by Pudhoho at 5:30 PM on November 28, 2014 [5 favorites]

All Ferguson-related livestreams on one page (including from other protests around the country)

I know some of you addressed me upthread since my last comment and I'm sorry but I don't have much to add. I'm kind of burned out on debating. I'm steeling myself for breakfast tomorrow with my ex-police captain stepfather. He's extremely liberal in many ways, but also reflexively pro-police/authority (he thinks Snowden is a traitor). I don't know how he reconciles the two.
posted by desjardins at 7:17 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

The more I learn about this case, the clearer it becomes that justice was in fact served here. Some clearer-cut case would serve as a much better symbol for racism in the criminal justice system. In a thread of this size, I see surprisingly little in-depth analysis of the case.

The most credible and objective evidence -- the convenience store theft video and the forensic evidence, as opposed to notoriously unreliable eyewitnesses -- seems to back up Wilson's story.

The surveillance video of course shows Brown aggressively shoving a clerk aside at the door after stealing from the store. That shows Brown's state of mind at the time, making Wilson's story that Brown punched him much more plausible. And the forensic evidence speaks as well: "a medical examination indicated that Officer Wilson had some swelling and redness on his face" -- consistent with being punched by Brown. And finally, for those who allege that Brown was shot while fleeing, "Mr. Brown’s body was about 153 feet east of Officer Wilson’s car. Mr. Brown’s blood was about 25 feet east of his body. This evidence supports statements that Mr. Brown continued to move closer to the officer after being hit by an initial string of bullets."

Brown's death was tragic, but indictment seems unreasonable when this much evidence supports a claim of self-defense, and the only other evidence consists of eyewitnesses contradicted by other eyewitnesses. I'm glad emotions and optics did not override the correct outcome.
posted by shivohum at 7:28 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

i'm not sure this thread needs to be dominated by one tumbl blog that has doxxed about five people.

You're probably right.

My thoughts, fwiw, were that I wanted to share the link, and that, as a standalone FPP, I figured it would've been deleted with a note that there's an existing Ferguson thread. I do think there's a good conversation to be had about doxxing, and that that thing could be a part of it, but this probably isn't the time or place.
posted by box at 7:43 PM on November 28, 2014

And the forensic evidence speaks as well: "a medical examination indicated that Officer Wilson had some swelling and redness on his face" -- consistent with being punched by Brown.

I think you must be joking, but the pictures and medical reports taken of Darren Wilson in no way reflect being beaten to the extent of the testimony. And, even if that WERE true, justice is never, ever served by gunning down a young man who is not armed.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:48 PM on November 28, 2014 [15 favorites]

More weirdness; one of the people hired to do Brown's additional autopsy by the family has turned out to have really dodgy credentials.

It's not clear (looking at this article from August) what effect if any that would have had on the autopsy findings.

I can't really find a good description of the official autopsy to be able to tell what the differences between the two were, and how that might have affected Brown's case. Other than causing confusion. Were the Browns taken advantage of by this guy? I can't make out the story well enough.
posted by emjaybee at 7:49 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

In a thread of this size, I see surprisingly little in-depth analysis of the case.

Yeah, you should talk to the guy who started a big derail about looters.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:56 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

Has this been posted? Real hero police chief asks FBI to investigate his own force. (Calexico, California)
posted by small_ruminant at 7:58 PM on November 28, 2014 [3 favorites]

The more I learn about this case, the clearer it becomes that justice was in fact served here

...

Some clearer-cut case would serve as a much better symbol for racism in the criminal justice system.

I'm trying to think of a way it could be more egregiously racist than it already is, and suddenly Tamir Rice's name pops into my head.

The most credible and objective evidence -- the convenience store theft video and the forensic evidence, as opposed to notoriously unreliable eyewitnesses -- seems to back up Wilson's story.

Does it not seem possible to you that Wilson's story has been massaged to fit the video?
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 8:02 PM on November 28, 2014 [5 favorites]

In a thread of this size, I see surprisingly little in-depth analysis of the case.

I don't agree with you at all. It is amazing (not really but...) that two people can read or see the same thing and come up with polar opposite conclusions. This is why we have a trial by jury in the US. The evidence or lack therof needs to be debated in the light of day in a court of law.
posted by futz at 8:03 PM on November 28, 2014 [7 favorites]

Police standoff with protesters at SF's Stockton Street preventing them from disrupting tree lighting
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:12 PM on November 28, 2014

The more I learn about this case, the clearer it becomes that justice was in fact served here

I feel literally exactly opposite to this, from McCulloch and the other prosecutors giving the jury wrong information about a law that was declared constitutionally invalid in 1985 (to say nothing of McCulloch's clear conflict of interest as a prosecutor), to the mishandling of evidence and lack of proper procedure by the Ferguson PD, to the fraudulence of the "professor" who performed one of the autopsies on Mike Brown. Remember, we're not talking about putting Darren Wilson behind bars, we're literally just talking about him having to justify himself in a court of law.

It always blows my mind that presumably right-thinking people can look at the same set of evidence and arrive at wildly conclusions, but then, multitudes etc.
posted by Phire at 8:26 PM on November 28, 2014 [17 favorites]

"As others have said, this could easily be done to people who work for conservative-leaning organisations and who express support for gay marriage, for example"

Why did you said "could easily be done" instead of "is"? This flat-up *is* being done to people who express support for gay rights in conservative areas, even if their employers don't care.

For example, my best local friend was instructed by her employer to stop posting pro-gay-rights stuff on her own personal Facebook because customers were coming in and complaining to him about it. Her boss said that while he was personally pro-equality too, because she was in a customer-facing position that she couldn't post stuff like that (even set as Friends Only) without hurting his business.
posted by Jacqueline at 8:32 PM on November 28, 2014 [5 favorites]

Why did you said "could easily be done" instead of "is"?

Because I didn't have a link to a specific example to support that assertion.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 8:39 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

Does it not seem possible to you that Wilson's story has been massaged to fit the video?

Actually, we have direct evidence that his story was fabricated to fit the video. For two months his official story was that he didn't know anything about the Ferguson Market robbery. But when Wilson testified to the jury, he said that the robbery was the reason for confronting Brown.

Now here is what Wilson's direct superior, a sergeant, testified to the jury:

Q: Did he know about it? Did he talk about knowing about the stealing?
A: He did not know anything about the stealing call.
Q: He told you he did not know anything about the stealing?
A: He did not know anything. He was out on another call in the apartment complex adjacent to Canfield Green.

Question by a GJ member

Q: Now, my question to you is this. Are you saying that because he told you he didn’t know about it or are you saying that because he didn’t mention It to you when you were talking to him?
A: He did not mention it to me again. I learned about it at a later time.
Q: Has he ever told you, yeah, I didn’t know anything about what happened up at the Ferguson Market?
A: Yes, he told me that in subsequent conversations.
Q: He told you he didn’t know about there being a stealing at the Ferguson Market?
A: Correct

Wilson's direct superior is relating what Wilson said contemporaneously, which is in direct contradiction to Wilson's self-serving testimony to the jury.

So if he is lying for one crucial factor, why believe anything he says?
posted by JackFlash at 8:42 PM on November 28, 2014 [32 favorites]

But guys, as long as you ignore the countless fuck-ups at the crime scene, Wilson's changing stories, the blatant shirking of responsibility by the prosecutor, the inclusion of an unconstitutional statute in the grand jury proceedings, and the fact that the prosecutor seemed to be acting as defense counsel for the suspect throughout the entire process, it's clea that Wilson shouldn't have been charged!
posted by tonycpsu at 8:53 PM on November 28, 2014 [14 favorites]

And finally, for those who allege that Brown was shot while fleeing, "Mr. Brown’s body was about 153 feet east of Officer Wilson’s car.

Hey, quick question: If Brown, unarmed, was attacking Wilson, who had a gun, and not fleeing from him, how did he get 153 feet east of Wilson's car? Thank's
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 9:01 PM on November 28, 2014 [4 favorites]

rustic etruscan it is a well known fact that demons possessing people can give them super speed powers
posted by kagredon at 9:03 PM on November 28, 2014 [9 favorites]

clearly he backed up 153 feet to get a running head start to charge Wilson, because he was all jacked up on... marijuana
posted by desjardins at 9:05 PM on November 28, 2014 [26 favorites]

Yet you conclude that it was justifiable for McCulloch to not bring charges because it would have been going against his own determination guilt which he is not qualified to offer?

What I said was that it is has deeply problematic implications for a DA to bring charges when he or she does not actually believe the charged party is guilty and does not believe a conviction can be obtained. If you don't see that you're blinded by rage. In any other instance that would be non-controversial. If I said it about the West Memphis Three DA it would get applause. And so on.

A DA should only bring cases he or she believes in. It's ridiculous to argue otherwise, and to believe a DA should bring cases when he or she does not believe in the guilt of the accused nor believe a conviction can be obtained is fundamentally inimical to a just system. The solution with a DA like McCulloch is to elect a different DA, one who isn't a spineless jerk who hides behind a sham process. It isn't to insist it's perfectly cool for a DA to prosecute people he or she thinks are innocent, which is a recipe for an even more unjust system than the current one.
posted by Justinian at 9:55 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

Rustic: I realize you were mostly just snarking at shivohum. But isn't it undisputed by this point that there was some sort of altercation at the car, then Wilson chased Brown for a bit and shot him after chasing him for those 153 feet? The important point of contention is whether Brown came back towards Wilson such that Wilson felt threatened, not whether he was chased 150 feet down the road first.

Does it make sense for an unarmed guy to charge at an officer who already pulled the trigger on him? No, no it doesn't. I'm not defending that account, only that it doesn't depend at all on not having chased Brown 150 or so feet.
posted by Justinian at 10:05 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

Justinian, just to clarify, am I correct in my interpretation that you both believe that (a) the evidence in this case was sufficient to support an indictment, but that (b) McCulloch's (incorrect, according to tenet (a)) belief that it was not sufficient justifies his doing an inadequate job of pressing the case? I don't think it's necessarily a bad argument--it's almost a version of the legal realism debate, applied to prosecutors rather than judges--but it does seem to me to be very strange to argue that a DA's insufficiently supported belief that a case is not prosecutable "justifies" them in not doing a competent job at prosecuting it.
posted by kagredon at 10:08 PM on November 28, 2014

Rustic: I realize you were mostly just snarking at shivohum. But isn't it undisputed by this point that there was some sort of altercation at the car, then Wilson chased Brown for a bit and shot him after chasing him for those 153 feet? The important point of contention is whether Brown came back towards Wilson such that Wilson felt threatened, not whether he was chased 150 feet down the road first.

The police claimed that Brown was shot 35 feet from the car for over 100 days. Nobody could say for sure because they declined to make any measurements (it was "self-explanatory" what happened), take any pictures ("camera out of batteries"), or even file a report. So no, how far Brown was from the car isn't "uncontroversial," because the police lied about how far he was from the beginning in an effort to present the narrative that Brown wasn't fleeing. Once it became clear that that he was shot several more times over 150 feet from the vehicle, which certainly suggests that he would have been fleeing after the initial altercation, then they added the story about Brown turning into a demon hulk and "bulking up from the bullets" in his utterly nonsensical supposed rush back at Wilson. How far Brown was from Wilson's car is so controversial, in fact, that Wilson even continued to tell the "35-40" feet story in his interview after the grand jury decision.
posted by dialetheia at 10:17 PM on November 28, 2014 [15 favorites]

If you don't see that you're blinded by rage. In any other instance that would be non-controversial. If I said it about the West Memphis Three DA it would get applause. And so on.

I understand that prosecutors won't charges in cases where they don't believe the accused is guilty, but if the operating standard is probable cause, they are not following that standard when they refuse to prosecute cases like this one in which there the probable cause standard is clearly met, yet they believe in their heart of hearts that the accused is innocent. They should not be factoring in their own impression of whether the accused is guilty. That's simply not their job.

And no, contra your hypothetical, if the West Memphis Three DA didn't think they were guilty, but felt the legal standard for filing charges was met, I still feel the DA had an obligation to charge them. The fact that they were later exonerated doesn't change what the prosecutor's role was and was not at the time that the evidence was presented to them, and that role is not to pre-judge an outcome.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:19 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

That's fair enough, Justinian. I don't think Wilson's testimony is credible. I don't think the Ferguson police department's evidence-gathering was up to snuff. I don't think the cigarrillos really matter. And that's leaving aside the police crackdown on protests, the official attempts to make a monster of Mike Brown, the massive wave of white racist support for poor Darren Wilson, and so on. I think shivohum's sunny assessment that justice has been served in this case is — and this is the charitable interpretation — idiotic.

On preview, dialetheia is right.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 10:25 PM on November 28, 2014 [6 favorites]

In fact, given how much the police had to adjust their initial claims to fit the "physical evidence" (how far Brown was from the car: from 35 feet to 153; how many punches Brown landed on Wilson: from 10 to 2), it's pretty amazing that they had the nerve to impugn every witness testimony whose story changed even a little bit when they heard the "physical evidence" - apparently that kind of narrative adjustment is only acceptable if you're the police.
posted by dialetheia at 10:26 PM on November 28, 2014 [17 favorites]

tonycpsu: I understand that prosecutors won't charges in cases where they don't believe the accused is guilty, but if the operating standard is probable cause, they are not following that standard when they refuse to prosecute cases like this one

But that's not the operating standard. A good faith belief that probable cause exists means the DA can bring charges ethically, not that he must bring charges to be ethical. See below:

kagredon: It's pretty straightforward. I think that evidence in the case was sufficient to support an indictment (though I think the odds of a conviction are very low) and I also believe that if McCulloch doesn't believe in Wilson's guilt and doesn't believe a conviction can be obtained (and he's probably right about the LATTER of those two things) he should have had the guts to say so and simply declined to indict himself rather than have the sham of a grand jury.

This isn't just my half-assed opinion. Here are the national prosecution standards from the National DA's Association. Section IV.1 deals with screening cases to proscute. The FIRST and SECOND criteria are: a. Doubt about the accused’s guilt and b. insufficiency of admissible evidence to support a conviction. Thats first and second out of 17 factors. I don't think the order is a coincidence.

So prosecutors cannot ethically prosecute someone they believe to be innocent and do not have the evidence to convict.

The solution is to vote someone who isn't a dumbass with a huge pro-police bias like McCulloch in to be DA. That's easier said than done. But the solution isn't to insist that there is something wrong with being uncomfortable with a DA prosecuting someone he or she believes to be innocent. Particularly when that is against their own professional standards.
posted by Justinian at 10:29 PM on November 28, 2014 [4 favorites]

if the West Memphis Three DA didn't think they were guilty, but felt the legal standard for filing charges was met, I still feel the DA had an obligation to charge them

Ok, that's clear. I think it's a scary and dangerous thing, but it's clear!
posted by Justinian at 10:30 PM on November 28, 2014

Kagredon: Just so we're clear since you said "to clarify", while the above is my longer answer, the short answer is that nothing justifies the DA's office's performance in that grand jury. It should never have happened.
posted by Justinian at 10:36 PM on November 28, 2014

Actually, we have direct evidence that his story was fabricated to fit the video. For two months his official story was that he didn't know anything about the Ferguson Market robbery.

This isn't accurate. Wilson said in his police interview the day after the shooting that he had heard the call on the robbery and noticed (after speaking with him) that Michael Brown matched the description. It's mentioned a couple times in that testimony, most clearly top of page 14 here.

It's definitely true that there was confusion at the police department about whether he knew, though, and you can see the GJ trying to get to the bottom of that when they talk to the sergeant who testified that Wilson told him he hadn't heard about the robbery.

The cop who interviewed Wilson a couple hours after the shooting testified that at that time Wilson said he heard the robbery call (p 99 here).

The sergeant's testimony conflicting with the others' definitely seems like something a competent prosecution would have followed up on, but it doesn't appear that they did (from what I've read).
posted by torticat at 10:40 PM on November 28, 2014 [3 favorites]

Justinian: Yeah, that makes sense. Thank you for your response. I do think part of the reason you're seeing the pushback that you are in this thread is that you're essentially arguing about something that didn't happen--McCulloch declining to prosecute on the merits of the case. I think that, more than any kind of political alignment of Mefites (c.f. the WM3 example) is why people are reacting in that way.
posted by kagredon at 10:42 PM on November 28, 2014

I think it's actually what did happen, he was just too cowardly to come out and say so.
posted by Justinian at 10:45 PM on November 28, 2014 [2 favorites]

(McCulloch was too cowardly, I mean. He didn't think this case merited an indictment so he made sure that didn't happen in an obvious sham of a grand jury proceeding.)
posted by Justinian at 10:47 PM on November 28, 2014 [1 favorite]

I do think part of the reason you're seeing the pushback that you are in this thread

I think some of it is also the appearance of finding one "contrarian" defensible spot and planting one's flag there in what is otherwise a sea of injustice.
posted by fleacircus at 11:00 PM on November 28, 2014 [10 favorites]

Apparently the Oathkeepers are "securing" Ferguson businesses?
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:59 AM on November 29, 2014

Kind of conflicted on my feelings about the oaths weepers. Feels too vigilant, yet as pointed out, the police were protecting boutiques and not the poorer areas. Can anyone confirm that's what the oath keepers are doing? It would be an odd alignment, especially when the cops, meant obstebsibly to protect the people of Ferguson are the aggressors.

My head hurts . . .
posted by [insert clever name here] at 7:00 AM on November 29, 2014

Justinian, I think part of the pushback you're receiving is also because you keep insisting that the DA truly believed Wilson to be innocent (and, secondarily, that it would thus be unethical for him to indict, which is a severe step beyond just saying it would be ethical for him not to indict), whereas it seems just as likely that the DA is a realist who understands that the testimony he's choosing to "believe" has been massaged to avoid indictment (reaching through the window and across his lap to go for the gun still in the far holster? really?), that such police testimony is regularly fabricated to avoid consequences, and that he has a part to play in making sure that status quo remains unaffected because of a (perverse) belief that police regularly need to overstep their bounds for the greater good. So buried in your insistence otherwise is an apparent belief of yours that the DA's mindset here is itself innocent and uncalculating (beyond the cowardice of going through the sham of a grand jury proceeding instead of directly choosing not to indict).
posted by nobody at 7:07 AM on November 29, 2014 [7 favorites]

The more I learn about this case, the clearer it becomes that justice was in fact served here

You could certainly defensibly say that, given how juries tend to decide, the evidence collected or not, and the laws that strongly favor the police, not charging Wilson was the right thing. I don't see how in a million years you say that Justice Was Served.

I think referring to it as the justice system rather than the legal system is wrong in general. It's hard to think of many situations where it's been more wrong than in this case.
posted by phearlez at 8:20 AM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

Justinian, I think part of the pushback you're receiving is also because you keep insisting that the DA truly believed Wilson to be innocent...

The DA who's dad was a cop killed by a black man, and who has multiple other familial cop connections and if not for health reasons would have been a cop himself? Yes, I'm sure he thought WIlson was innocent. The problem is that he's wrong.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:23 AM on November 29, 2014 [9 favorites]

But that's not the operating standard. A good faith belief that probable cause exists means the DA can bring charges ethically, not that he must bring charges to be ethical.

In the same section of the document that you pointed me to, we find this:

Factors that should not be considered in the screening decision include the following:
...
b. Personal advantages or disadvantages that a prosecution might bring to the prosecutor or others in the prosecutor's office;
c. Political advantages or disadvantages that a prosecution might bring to the prosecutor;

I think it's pretty clear that the prosecution factored personal and political disadvantages of prosecution into their decision to punt to the grand jury during the screening process. I also reject your notion that the order of the factors indicates their importance -- if that were true, the document, being written by a bunch of lawyers, would point that out explicitly.

It's also worth noting that later on in that document, in the section on grand jury proceedings, we find this:

d. A prosecutor should not take any action that could improperly influence the testimony of a grand jury witness;
...
h. A prosecutor should not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to the grand jury.

Now, I think it's pretty obvious from the grand jury proceedings that we have evidence of (d) being violated repeatedly, where the prosecution acted as Wilson's defense on a number of occasions. I also think that the way that the unconstitutional 563.046 statute was used, and the "don't worry your pretty little heads about the law" response when it was questioned, show strong evidence of (h). I might not be able to prove that the prosecution knowingly made false statements of facts or law, but it certainly appears that way.

So, you've pointed to several clauses of the NDAA's guidelines that would seem to justify McCulloch's decision, and I've pointed to several clauses that demonstrate ethical lapses on his part individually and on his office generally. Your citations assume that he made his decisions without regard to personal or political favor toward the accused, while my citations fit in with his documented pattern of favoring the police, and the general pattern of prosecutors in general being sympathetic toward law enforcement.

Really, I feel like all you've done is show that prosecutorial discretion exists, which we all knew already. The question here is was that discretion used in a fair and ethical manner, a question you can't resolve by pointing to clauses that prove that DAs can exercise discretion in who they investigate and ultimately charge.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:41 AM on November 29, 2014 [7 favorites]

tonycpsu, if you don't think that listing "doubt in the accused's guilt" first has any significance nor is the single most important factor in deciding whether or not it is appropriate to bring charges then we have a fundamental disconnect. I think it's obviously listed first for a reason and that there are no circumstances that justify going forward ethically if you don't believe in the defendant's guilt. Disagreeing with that is just weird to me.

That said, there was never any question as to whether McCulloch acted ethically in his actions in setting up or running the grand jury. Of course he didn't. Which is why I've repeatedly said that McCulloch should be voted out of office or otherwise removed. Don't know that it gets clearer than that.
posted by Justinian at 12:23 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

Really, I feel like all you've done is show that prosecutorial discretion exists, which we all knew already.

And I feel like all you've done is show that McCulloch doesn't deserve to be DA, which we all knew already. That has no bearing on whether a DA should ever bring charges against someone they believe not to be guilty.

But we're probably going to head in a circle at this point.
posted by Justinian at 12:29 PM on November 29, 2014

Is this actually a line of argument that people are entertaining? DAs shouldn't bring charges if they, personally, believe that someone is not guilty? As if that has ever mattered at all ever?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 1:26 PM on November 29, 2014 [2 favorites]

Ferguson Reexamined — Paul Craig Roberts
posted by telstar at 1:31 PM on November 29, 2014 [2 favorites]

Here's an excellent essay directed at "white allies" who show up at racial justice protests.

This is why I went to the White House after the announcement. I was hoping to be surrounded by my fellow Black people, to yell, to scream, to cheer, and to sing. I wanted to gather my people around me and boldly assert my humanity to the world. Yet that’s not what I found. What I found was a mostly white crowd of college-age liberals chanting, hugging, and taking selfies with their overly-dressed up roommates. There was energy, an excitement in the air that I couldn’t share. Being surrounded by a group of young white people alternating between hugging friends who had joined them and shouting angrily at the cops (many of whom were Black) was not validating my humanity.

posted by desjardins at 1:47 PM on November 29, 2014 [13 favorites]

I think it's obviously listed first for a reason and that there are no circumstances that justify going forward ethically if you don't believe in the defendant's guilt. Disagreeing with that is just weird to me.

The hill you've chosen to die on here is that items (a) and (b) in the 17-item "Factors to Consider" list must necessarily carry more weight than items (b) and (c) in the 5-item "Factors Not to Consider" list. This is an explicitly mathematical argument, and one that falls apart on a cursory examination.

For it to be true, you would have to first make a convincing argument that each item on both lists is more important than all of the items that follow it in that list. You would then have to justify a weighting of the lists themselves and/or the items in each list such that following 2/17 of the first list while violating 2/5 of the second list results in a positive ethical assessment of McCulloch's actions.

If you are not willing to make this case explicitly, then you're asking everyone else to view the prosecutor's own beliefs about innocence or possibility of conviction as trump cards that can be used to justify any decision not to press charges, something that isn't expressed or implied in the text of the NDAA guidelines. If that were the case, why bother listing the others alongside these special trump cards? Why wouldn't they be in a separate list entitled "Things That Must Be True"?
posted by tonycpsu at 1:54 PM on November 29, 2014

What I found was a mostly white crowd of college-age liberals chanting, hugging, and taking selfies with their overly-dressed up roommates.

white occupy groups coopted and took over the denver mike brown rally
posted by homunculus at 2:00 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think it's actually what did happen, he was just too cowardly to come out and say so.

What I mean is that seems bizarre to me to treat "declining to prosecute" and "doing a deliberately shitty job to avoid an indictment" as equivalent. Regardless of what he thought of the merits of the case, doing a blatantly shitty job at prosecuting it is misconduct. If anything, you seem to be arguing that he actually behaved improperly in two distinct ways: by arguing the case poorly, and by prosecuting a case that he did not think had merit.
posted by kagredon at 2:02 PM on November 29, 2014 [2 favorites]

Awkward Duck, Dr. Cornel Fresh and Deray have been addressing the "allies" thing on Twitter today. (I can't find @deray's - yesterday he was talking about a supposed ally calling him a "f*ggot," it's unclear to me if she was white.) Kalaya'an Mendoza (Amnesty Int'l observer) has been taking his fellow Asians to task when they hijack #BlackLivesMatter.
posted by desjardins at 2:19 PM on November 29, 2014

They effectively equivalent, since McCulloch has absolute immunity and a trial or judgement for misconduct is basically a mythical course of events in this day and age. Said another way, you have a hard row to hoe if you think that doing a shitty job as a way of declining to prosecute results in any repercussions for him.
posted by rhizome at 2:21 PM on November 29, 2014 [2 favorites]

Well sure, rhizome, but my issue is I don't understand why arguing that he could have declined to prosecute somehow is meant to justify his doing a shitty job.
posted by kagredon at 2:35 PM on November 29, 2014

The best line (for me) from Homunculus's last link: Our souls are nearly suffocating by the pressure of being a problem.

I've felt that way myself on occasion, and it sums up why sometimes you just want advocates to stand back.
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:50 PM on November 29, 2014

I am Ferguson Public Library Director in Ferguson, MO. AMA!
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:54 PM on November 29, 2014 [8 favorites]

The best line (for me) from Homunculus's last link:...

I hereby claim all of desjardins's links for myself and my heirs.
posted by homunculus at 3:15 PM on November 29, 2014

Christine Byers from the St Louis Post Dispatch is reporting that Darren Wilson has resigned from Ferguson PD.
posted by desjardins at 3:28 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

Next stop: Fox News commentator

Or maybe Republican Vice Presidential nominee
posted by Flunkie at 3:29 PM on November 29, 2014 [4 favorites]

The Secret Darkness of Grand Juries
posted by telstar at 4:03 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

Darren Wilson: Resigning Is the ‘Hardest Thing I’ve Ever Had to Do’

....
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:25 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

No, Homunculus, this time I checked! Your hegemonic aspirations shall not stand!
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:26 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

St Louis Post Dispatch is reporting that Darren Wilson has resigned from Ferguson PD.

@RepJackKimble: "Did Darren Wilson resign or retire now that he's made almost a million dollars by shooting #MichaelBrown"
posted by The corpse in the library at 4:27 PM on November 29, 2014 [6 favorites]

@editordirtygirl: "SO PROUD OF LONDON RIGHT NOW, HOME COUNTRY GOIN STRONG! #BlackLivesMatter"
posted by Golden Eternity at 4:33 PM on November 29, 2014

I don't know the source of that "almost a million," but the larger point stands.
posted by The corpse in the library at 4:48 PM on November 29, 2014

Half a mil from an early fundraiser, plus a rumored half a mil from ABC for the interview (which ABC denies).
posted by Snarl Furillo at 5:23 PM on November 29, 2014

Disgusting. Just flat out disgusting.
posted by cashman at 6:48 PM on November 29, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah, as far as I know there aren't any good sources for that ABC interview story.
posted by The corpse in the library at 6:51 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

Half a mil from the KKKickstarter or the StormFrontMe or whatever it was, and I'm willing to bet there's already a ghostwritten book deal inked, would be surprised if that were less than mid six figures. ABC flatly denies paying him for the story, and I'm inclined to believe them because if it ever came out (and it would) they would be screwed.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 6:54 PM on November 29, 2014 [3 favorites]

Ferguson must force us to face anti-blackness (please click through to the study linked therein, looking at the differences in reactions to 'black' and 'African-American, especially people who think that words don't matter)

My Vassar College faculty ID makes everything better

(wanted to post either or both as an FPP but figured mods would point here and say issues already under discussion)
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 7:27 PM on November 29, 2014 [7 favorites]

desjardins: "Ferguson Library raises $175,000 in two days. "The money donated so far adds up to almost half of the library's annual budget (about $400,000) and Bonner hopes it will allow him to hire another full-time librarian to work with children and programming. ""

symbioid: Ha! They're gonna use it to save money in the city budget, or that extra money will divert to police department for more cops to kill people.

Nope! This turned out to be asked and answered in the librarian's AMA:

moojostuff: What is the biggest challenge you face as a library director? Is the city government still able to keep you guys in the green with everything that is going on?

scottybonner: We are not part of the city. Separate taxing district, separate governance. We have a positive relationship, and help each other out when we can, but no one in the city answers to anyone at the library or vice-versa. The only official connection is that the mayor appoints our 9-member, volunteer Board. So, they do not keep us in the green. The citizens of Ferguson keep us in the green (we have a very small budget for a town this size, so I hesitate to say we are "in the green"), and donations. I met the mayor once, briefly, when we were in the same line at a taco truck. Biggest challenge is finding time and energy to do all the things we want to do. That and keeping track of all the threads of potential programs that people are suggesting to me. Both of these are the result of the current situation, and likely to improve over time.

I remember when my husband and I met Bonner after the America After Ferguson town hall—he spoke, but his portion didn't make it into the final televised version, I'm guessing because a lot of the things Gwen Ifill asked him at that point, his answer was, "Well, I just started in this job July 1. So..." I'm sooooo happy he's found an answer to the question of how best to help: Just be a librarian, and kick ass as a librarian. ...although reading further, yeah, he really should find time to read the Ender books.

In other news, I finally caught up and got to the end of this thread. I hope it doesn't end now... So much has happened in the past two weeks, I can't even begin to summarize it right now.
posted by limeonaire at 7:52 PM on November 29, 2014 [14 favorites]

I wouldn't worry too much about metafilter being done talking about something.
posted by sandswipe at 8:04 PM on November 29, 2014 [7 favorites]

That's very interesting about the funding. The nonprofit geek in me then wishes they'd make all of that clearer on their website! If it were easier to understand the difference contributed funds made (and if they provided info about tax deduction), it'd be better for fundraising.
posted by Miko at 8:06 PM on November 29, 2014 [2 favorites]

limeonaire I was so waiting for your views here!
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 8:17 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

I will Nth the comments about MF being incredibly valuable in picking apart current news events. CNN and Fox were the only media outlets available to me in the last week. Suffice to say, I learned just around zero about what was actually going on in Ferguson, etc. (I did, however, get to see plenty of Wilson's (incoherent) side of the story.) The first thing I did when I got access to a computer was gobble up this thread. Sometimes MF feels as essential as the air I breathe.

Seasons Greetings
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 9:25 PM on November 29, 2014 [4 favorites]

Deep South justice in Ferguson
posted by Golden Eternity at 9:31 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

Hands Up, Walk Out event in response to Ferguson planned for Monday, December 1st at 12:01pm CST across the US.
posted by krinklyfig at 9:37 PM on November 29, 2014

So white cop kills an unarmed black kid, is not indicted for the murder, gains half-a-million dollars in funding while still on paid leave, and will probably gain millions more in future interview fees.

Living the the American Dream:

"life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone whites, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement".

posted by urbanwhaleshark at 9:38 PM on November 29, 2014

ABC flatly denies paying him for the story, and I'm inclined to believe them because if it ever came out (and it would) they would be screwed.

Per an NBC source, the bidding was already at mid to high six figures when NBC dropped out. So they paid him big bucks. Oh, I'm sure there was some sort of procedural dance to avoid the letter of the policy -- he's probably been hired as an ABC 'consultant' or some such thing -- but he got a huge amount of money. So yes, murdering Michael Brown has been extremely profitable for him and no doubt will continue to be so.
posted by tavella at 10:00 PM on November 29, 2014 [2 favorites]

There are exactly two results from google saying that ABC paid for Wilson's interview, and neither is unimpeachable. Cui bono from ABC saying they didn't? ABC of course, but with the added bonus of being screwed utterly if they did and it came out.

Please provide a believable citation that ABC paid for Wilson's interview.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:05 PM on November 29, 2014

Fffm, this seems to have touched a nerve with you and I am not sure why. Big media pays for interviews all the time. ABC got the scoop. No way in hell are they going to admit paying for it until someone leaks the story. And it will be leaked. Such is the hubris of of institutions of this calibre.
posted by futz at 10:18 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

They got the scoop. They have unequivocally stated that they did not pay for said scoop. Is there a believable source which says they did?

This is coming from my--and you may not feel this--desire for fairness. Wilson is, obviously, an unapologetically racist asshat. But that very fact means that we on the left have to swallow our emotions and treat him fairly. Which means that unless and until there is credible evidence that he made money on the interview (we already know he made money off murdering an unarmed black kid), we need to disregard allegations saying he did.

ABC knows how likely such a leak is. That makes it more unbelievable that their denial is in bad faith unless you're going to start talking about some eleven-dimension chess.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:28 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

ABC announced that Diane Sawyer had secured the first-ever interview with Jaycee Lee Dugard, the young woman held captive for 18 years in California. ABC declared that it had not paid any fee for the interview, but last year, according to a longtime ABC News executive aware of the deal, the network paid a six-figure sum for rights to home movies of Ms. Dugard.
posted by Golden Eternity at 10:41 PM on November 29, 2014 [4 favorites]

The thing is, they already got in trouble a coupla years back for paying "newsmakers" for interviews (along with NBC). The precipitating event was their exclusive with Casey Anthony. After that, the news division banned the practice. So on the one hand, it's not without precedent, so we can believe it's possible, but on the other, they are on record as saying they won't be doing it -- although with the caveat that in extraordinary cases, with approval at the highest levels, they might still do it -- which leaves us back at square one.
posted by dhartung at 10:44 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

Okay. I'm not saying at all that they are categorically not duplicitous. I am saying that to me it seems likely that they are not, because of the backlash--and being burnt before supports my claim.

More importantly I am saying that if we are going to paint Wilson as evil (as I 100% agree he is), it behooves us to be very accurate because 1) people shouldn't be accused of things they haven't done, and 2) accusing people of things for which there is no proof gives ammunition to opponents.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:46 PM on November 29, 2014

Like I mentioned in my last comment: hubris. I am an irrevocable cynic and nothing would shock me when it comes to big media and advertising dollars. Same as it ever was...
posted by futz at 10:50 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

Personally, I'm with feckless here, in that I would rather hold Wilson to the fire for things he is known and proven to have done, rather than feed his imagined paranoia that he's some sort of scapegoat. It's pretty clear that his resignation -- and the tale that his lawyer advised it -- is tied inextricably to his viewpoint of blacks (and perhaps their allies) as demonic superbeings who will stop at nothing to destroy him.
posted by dhartung at 10:51 PM on November 29, 2014 [1 favorite]

Sorry futz, but who's showing the hubris here? Sure it's possible that ABC paid him and is hoping it'll never come out. But... they're on record saying they didn't, and there's nothing credible saying otherwise, and there are extremely good reasons why they wouldn't lie, meaning there'd need to be pretty damn good sources contradicting them to be believable.

No question that they got a whole lot of eyeballs for the interview--which just supports my assertion that they're telling the truth; they traded off paying racist asshat Wilson for his interview because they knew it'd bump ad revenue.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:56 PM on November 29, 2014

Protestors chant FUCK CNN on CNN. Easily the best thing to come out of these protests.

There've been a few incidents like that in the months since the Ferguson protests began. Not all of them involve cursing like that chant, or my personal favorite from August; usually a protestor would feel bold enough to go right up to a reporter and call them a liar (or something similar) while the reporter is broadcasting.

It's a bad sign of how many Americans no longer trust or respect the news media in general and CNN in particular. Anderson Cooper was wrong to dismiss those chanters as "playing for the cameras". If that was the only incident he might have be correct, but it's been an ongoing part of the Ferguson protests. That chant was more meaningful than a dude who makes goofy faces behind a local news reporter.

It used to be that if a group held a protest, they wanted the media to be there--the more the better--because if your protest didn't make the news, then it was a non-event. PETA does all their offensive stunts for the attention. But after Ferguson, we have protestors identifying the media as part of The Problem. The belief that the media serves state and corporate interests has been building and boiling for so very long that this is the result.

I would hope this will lead to some soul searching in newsrooms, CNN in particular, about how they gain the respect journalists are supposed to have in our ideal idea of America. Because the other thing that has happened multiple times since Ferguson is news crews being physically attacked. I am in no way am condoning violence against journalist, but the way things are going in this country (shitily), it is likely to get worse. And be a frequent occurrence in whatever next year's version of Ferguson will be.
posted by riruro at 11:09 PM on November 29, 2014 [5 favorites]

The only reason I'm still suspicious about the ABC thing is they actually haven't gone on the record denying it in this particular case, as far as I've been able to tell. I'd feel a lot better if they just came out and said they didn't pay him, but I haven't been able to find an official statement anywhere about Darren Wilson in particular.
posted by dialetheia at 11:19 PM on November 29, 2014

I thought I had read a direct statement from ABC denying payment, but so many recent pages in my history to go through re: Ferguson I am having difficulty.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:27 PM on November 29, 2014

Sure it's possible that ABC paid him and is hoping it'll never come out. But... they're on record saying they didn't, and there's nothing credible saying otherwise, and there are extremely good reasons why they wouldn't lie, meaning there'd need to be pretty damn good sources contradicting them to be believable.

There are also extremely good reasons why they would lie: they won't face any serious consequence for it. By the time it comes out that they may have paid for his testimony, the news cycle will have moved on, there may be some minor turbulence at best. They will have already reaped the rewards (advertising money, media cred, whatever).

However it pans out, I think it's a safe assumption to make that Wilson will personally profit from killing Brown, especially in the long term as rightwing volk hero.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 12:22 AM on November 30, 2014 [8 favorites]

ABC gave a statement denying payment to Brian Stelter, the host of CNN's Reliable sources. He tweeted it here and here and gave more info here. The only statements to the contrary I've seen seem to be sourced from a network that didn't get the interview. I think there is enough horribleness that we actually know about that I don't want to get distracted by something that I can't find any real evidence for. I do agree with everyone who is saying that he will eventually profit from this and obviously he has already profited from the fundraiser.
posted by colt45 at 12:33 AM on November 30, 2014 [4 favorites]

An odd little footnote: Wilson's lawyers released his resignation letter to the press, but they apparently forgot to send a copy to the Ferguson Police Department. (KSDK)
posted by nangar at 5:11 AM on November 30, 2014 [7 favorites]

The ten kinds of trolls you will encounter when talking about Mike Brown.
posted by triggerfinger at 9:04 AM on November 30, 2014 [2 favorites]

Pain Is Colorblind
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:47 AM on November 30, 2014 [1 favorite]

-"They tried to bury us. They didn't know we were seeds."
-"By many measures, young people are actually showing virtues their elders lacked."
-"US population remains majority white at every age group. Won't be true next census."
posted by kliuless at 10:24 AM on November 30, 2014 [5 favorites]

St. Louis Rams: Hands up, Don't Shoot.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:35 AM on November 30, 2014 [15 favorites]

OK, housekeeping for anyone who gets to this point and wants to take a look back...

Ferguson elsewhere on MeFi: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

And here's our old list of 21 questions from back in September. Anyone who's had time to start going through grand-jury material: Have we gotten any more answers?

As for why I haven't been present in these threads for a while: My job grew increasingly difficult—and two weeks ago, I got laid off. Did it have anything to do with my visibility and outspokenness about Ferguson? Peripherally, perhaps. But three days after that, I interviewed for and scored a new job at an amazing company (co-founded by a fellow MeFite) that I'd long wanted to work for anyway. I'm still getting up to speed, but that's my story!
posted by limeonaire at 10:47 AM on November 30, 2014 [27 favorites]

Would be nice to see other NFL teams to do the same.
posted by Windopaene at 11:23 AM on November 30, 2014 [1 favorite]

He tweeted it here and here and gave more info here.

I'm happy to let it drop but I still think it's weird that the best ABC can do is asking other reporters to tweet it for them. This issue has really blown up and the protesters are pretty furious about the interview profit, seems like the least ABC could do is actually release an unequivocal statement themselves.
posted by dialetheia at 12:04 PM on November 30, 2014

Doesn't take 100 days to decide if murder is a crime, it takes 100 days to figure out how to tell people it isn't. - Chris Rock
posted by jeffburdges at 12:09 PM on November 30, 2014 [13 favorites]

I just went to Facebook and saw this posted: SWAT police caught setting fires in Ferguson. Very interesting!
posted by limeonaire at 12:14 PM on November 30, 2014 [3 favorites]

Uhh, no.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:21 PM on November 30, 2014

My Vassar College faculty ID makes everything better

This piece is excellent, feckless fecal fear mongering.

Also, here's a longer version of that video of the Rams coming out with hands up.

Drinky Die, what's up?
posted by limeonaire at 12:35 PM on November 30, 2014 [2 favorites]

SLYT of community chat by young [African] Americans and others in the Diaspora on this topic. Heartrending.

not a self link, but I do know the founder of the community platform.
posted by infini at 12:59 PM on November 30, 2014 [1 favorite]

Here's an interesting story from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch about the Oathkeepers, who have now been kicked out and say they will return as protesters. More on these guys previously on MeFi.

Also, the NAACP has organized (and already begun) a weeklong march from Ferguson to Jefferson City called the "Journey for Justice." More here.
posted by brina at 1:28 PM on November 30, 2014

Drinky Die, what's up?

I can't see exactly what is going on in the video but it's always best to assume the Info Wars interpretation is incorrect.
posted by Drinky Die at 2:18 PM on November 30, 2014 [2 favorites]

Ah yeah. Heh. It's ambiguous what's happening, but it is fascinating nonetheless—whatever that group actually did, I'd love to know more and/or see whether anyone else caught a glimpse of these people in any of the livestreams.
posted by limeonaire at 2:20 PM on November 30, 2014 [1 favorite]

@davidfrum: "When does the open carry movement adopt Tamir Rice as a martyr to its cause?"
posted by Golden Eternity at 2:29 PM on November 30, 2014 [4 favorites]

The accusation was that he had been pointing the gun at people menacingly before the police arrived. I'm not saying open carry people don't sometimes do that, but it's not a behavior of someone they will hold up as a martyr.
posted by Drinky Die at 2:36 PM on November 30, 2014

limeonaire: It's ambiguous what's happening,

Stop right there. It's ambiguous. To leap to the conclusion that SWAT teams are committing arson, essentially in public under observation, based on a faraway video is conspiracy theory nonsense.

If you hear hoofbeats behind you, it's probably not zebras. No matter how much delicious schadenfreud zebras would give you.
posted by IAmBroom at 2:51 PM on November 30, 2014

You don't know how tricky zebras are.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:54 PM on November 30, 2014 [4 favorites]

Ah. I see what the deal is. So yeah...in my link text here, I was quoting the title of the video, as we've been doing in these threads for almost five months now. I didn't give it that name. Move on.

I posted the link because it was interesting, not because it's necessarily what it says on the tin. It's here for discussion.
posted by limeonaire at 3:22 PM on November 30, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think saying its paranoid conspiracy nonsense is discussion. I, unfortunately, watched the video. There are 10 minutes of my life I will never get back. If you set off a flashbang inside a car like that it would be (literally) blindingly obvious.
posted by Justinian at 5:51 PM on November 30, 2014

StL Police Officers Association condemns Rams display

The SLPOA is calling for the players involved to be disciplined and for the Rams and the NFL to deliver a very public apology.

So, yeah, St. Louis cops are appealing to The National Football League to administer justice properly.

*facepalm*
posted by tonycpsu at 8:25 PM on November 30, 2014 [17 favorites]

In addition to the wild spin all over the place, there are parts of the statement that downright sound like a threat: "I know that there are those that will say that these players are simply exercising their First Amendment rights. Well I've got news for people who think that way, cops have first amendment rights too, and we plan to exercise ours. I'd remind the NFL and their players that it is not the violent thugs burning down buildings that buy their advertiser's products. It's cops and the good people of St. Louis and other NFL towns that do. Somebody needs to throw a flag on this play. If it's not the NFL and the Rams, then it'll be cops and their supporters."

Translation: you better discipline these players. Or you better believe we're going to make their lives a living hell.

(The quotes in the statement, and probably the entire thing, are from the awful Jeff Roorda who we've discussed at length and is behind the Darren Wilson fundraising efforts. How anyone can still take him seriously is beyond me.)
posted by naju at 9:04 PM on November 30, 2014 [6 favorites]

Interesting point: Darren Wilson Denied Shooting at a Fleeing Suspect Yet Offered a Justification for Doing So
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:12 PM on November 30, 2014 [4 favorites]

Is this the place to spew my outrage that Darren Wilson received half a million dollars for that ABC interview? It is? Good.

I am OUTRAGED (yes, I went there) that Darren Wilson received half a million dollars for a fucking interview. A few hours' time and boom--more money than most people see in a lifetime. And apparently all you have to do is kill someone. Oh, and be a cop and be white.

Has there been no backlash against ABC for doing this? Unfuckingbelieveable.
posted by zardoz at 10:00 PM on November 30, 2014 [1 favorite]

Well, they denied it on the record.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:27 PM on November 30, 2014

Go ahead, Roorda, start your little butthurt-bullies' boycott. I bet there are more NFL fans with arrest records than there are fans who sympathize with the STLPOA.
posted by rhizome at 10:31 PM on November 30, 2014

From Joe in Australia's link above:

If someone arrives and sees him running, another officer and goes around the back half of the apartment complexes and tries to stop him, what would stop him from doing what he just did to me to him or worse, knowing he has already done it to one cop. And that was, he still posed a threat, not only to me, to anybody else that confronted him.

One evening last week in the town next to me, a local was attacked by a bear. They come down from the mountains this season and eat persimmons from the trees in people's yards. There have been a couple similar incidents recently and this time police successfully shot and killed the bear after the attack. Apparently Darren Wilson believes this is an acceptable practice for dealing with US citizens as well.
posted by p3t3 at 11:09 PM on November 30, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah, that's why that part of the statute is unconstitutional. Formerly, a number of jurisdictions held that deadly force against felons who were attempting to avoid arrest. Tennessee v. Garner is the US case that ruled otherwise: deadly force may not be used

unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.

Incidentally, I don't suppose you meant anything by this - but the rhetoric of rights in the USA seems to increasingly use the phrase "US citizens" rather than "people". Most rights recognised in the USA are those which belong to all people, whether they're citizens or not.
posted by Joe in Australia at 12:00 AM on December 1, 2014 [6 favorites]

Wilson would have argued, had it come to it, that he had probable cause to believe Brown was a threat to himself or others based on the physical altercation at the car and (possibly, depending on the story of the day) the incident with the cigarillos. I'm not saying it's true that Brown was a threat to others, only that this is what Wilson would have argued. And probably successfully given what we've seen in past cases.
posted by Justinian at 12:10 AM on December 1, 2014

How would the very light grazes that are visible in the photos provide probable cause to believe that Brown posed "a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others"? If that were the level required, then anyone who had ever been in a physical conflict would probably qualify.

The alleged theft¹ of the cigarillos might qualify (presuming it involved the "infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm" and presuming Pantsonfire Wilson actually knew about it) but that would be for a court to decide.

¹ Video, allegedly showing Michael Brown stealing cigarillos shortly before his death.
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:01 AM on December 1, 2014 [3 favorites]

It's more or less the same argument Zimmerman made in that case, and it worked. And he wasn't a cop just some wannabe punk assface.
posted by Justinian at 1:35 AM on December 1, 2014

(And before you point it out; yeah the situations were different. But juries unfortunately do tend to buy into the "scary black guy" defense in much of the USA.)
posted by Justinian at 1:40 AM on December 1, 2014

Yeah, I think even if indicted, he would have had precedent on his side. Not that the similar cases of the past really represent an exemplary pillar of moral justice.

But what has really kept me enraged at this whole mess (aside from the racists who have come out of the woodworks to troll all my daily news reads) is the conduct of the local and state officials: a complete lack of remorse or empathy for what the community is facing, a complete disrespect and disregard for the laws that we entrust them to enforce, and the conscious decisions at every step along the way to exacerbate rather than alleviate all the mess by cementing themselves firmly in their old racist ways.
posted by p3t3 at 3:20 AM on December 1, 2014 [9 favorites]

Well, they denied it on the record.

They didn't deny it - they told a reporter who tweeted it. That's a tenuous enough reporting process that I am personally confident that there's enough wiggle room in what they said and what was reported to be technically true while being wholly a lie.

first tweet:
TV nets sometimes find $$$ ways to "win" exclusive interviews. But not Darren Wilson: ABCer says "No payment, no licensing, no NOTHING."

second tweet:
Re: ABC's exclusive with Darren Wilson: folks on Twitter continue to speculate that the network paid for the interview, so......Here's an on-the-record denial from ABC News: "We do not pay for interviews, and there was no payment for this interview. Period." (2/2)

I'm sorry, someone who won't go on record with their identity telling a reporter with another network who doesn't have enough information to do anything but tweet it is not remotely enough for me. See above where they paid the Dugar woman for home videos, not the interview. That's a hell of a fig leaf.
posted by winna at 5:56 AM on December 1, 2014 [6 favorites]

It's not just juries, individual prosecutors or cops who make racist decisions. The effects of racism are systemic, from the ways our laws are written to how they are carried out and interpreted.

Any discussion of legalities without acknowledging racism and explicit consideration of how to address racism only reinforces racism, as Robert Koehler explains.
posted by audi alteram partem at 7:34 AM on December 1, 2014 [5 favorites]

WaPo: Tamir Rice and Michael Brown didn’t deserve to die: Even death provides no respite from society’s default negative judgment of young black men and boys. An injustice aided and abetted by their inability to tell their side of the story. They must have lived a life beyond reproach — one void of the bad choices and mistakes all teenagers make which teach life lessons and build character — for folks to not believe he or she deserved to die.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:41 AM on December 1, 2014 [4 favorites]

There are a lot of similarities with the Zimmerman case, outsized fear of young black men leading to panic.

Yep -- I was remarking to a friend of mine that both Zimmerman's and Wilson's testimony can be summed up in this manner:

"I was sitting in my vehicle thinking about how I can make the world a better place when I saw a black male who wasn't walking with his eyes cast down and who didn't reply "Suh?" when I addressed him. Like any reasonable concerned citizen, I became suspicious of him as a result of his uppity behavior.

"I was in the midst of politely asking this fellow some relatively benign questions when suddenly he attacked me.

"He was more animal than human, with thews and sinews of steel. Even his vocalizations were bestial and menacing. This young giant, inexhaustible in strength and stamina, wounded me so grievously that there was little medical personnel could do for me when they examined me after our struggle had ended. I was near unconsciousness -- surely seconds from death -- as he struck me repeatedly but through superhuman effort, I was able to retrieve my weapon and kill him.

This was regrettable but absolutely unavoidable. Yes, I assure you: there is no way in which things could have unfolded any differently. I ask that the courts of law and public opinion both ignore incidents from my past which paint me in an unfavorable light while doing everything they can to paint the person who attacked me as a murderously violent criminal who was old beyond his years."

And the similarities don't end there: the prosecutor spiking the ball and essentially taunting the slain kid's parents afterwards while claiming to have acted in the name of pure and holy justice, the utter lack of remorse on the killer's part, the fat bank account for the killer...and the weariness and heaviness on the shoulders of those of us who know that all of this will happen again.
posted by lord_wolf at 8:10 AM on December 1, 2014 [52 favorites]

Spokesman Who Attacked Rams' Ferguson Protest Was Fired From Police Job in 2001 for Misconduct
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:58 AM on December 1, 2014 [10 favorites]

Yet another out of control, power-hungry union boss trying to interfere with private enterprise.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:03 AM on December 1, 2014

Mod note: I always appreciate the late-breaking updates, but oh god please keep them to the specific topic and not "cop anywhere does something awful." Thanks.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 9:44 AM on December 1, 2014 [1 favorite]

[I always appreciate the late-breaking updates, but oh god please keep them to the specific topic and not "cop anywhere does something awful." Thanks. ]

Sorry, I thought it was relevant in light of the fact that it was that cop who condemned the Rams for the "Hands up" posture last night.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:54 AM on December 1, 2014 [2 favorites]

roomthreeseventeen, I believe r_n was talking about a couple of deleted comments that you may have missed.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:59 AM on December 1, 2014 [1 favorite]

but the rhetoric of rights in the USA seems to increasingly use the phrase "US citizens" rather than "people". Most rights recognised in the USA are those which belong to all people, whether they're citizens or not.

I concur in that feeling and one of the most maddening things that happened in my country, post-9/11, was this parsing of things that citizens should get versus people in general - including even basic habeas corpus. But when trying to get through to people I'm willing to modulate my language and I feel like "citizen" gets through to borderline cases wrapped up in their authoritarian deference. So it's a word I tend to use to try to remind people that police and the courts are supposed to serve the interest of these people they're stomping on, even though I think a moral system applies equally to human.

How would the very light grazes that are visible in the photos provide probable cause to believe that Brown posed "a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others"? If that were the level required, then anyone who had ever been in a physical conflict would probably qualify.

Only if they're a cop, always, or a white-looking dude facing down someone browner than him. And the standard isn't that they really faced that threat but that they believed they did. It's a hole wide enough to drive all your injustice through if you don't think about it remotely critically. I think a lot of us look at it and ask "how could someone in that job be such a chickenshit and unable to handle themselves such that they felt that threatened?" The answer in part is assuredly the Scary Black Monster Perception discussed above, as well as this astonishingly deferential attitude towards authority so many Americans possess.

I think this reasonable belief thing has a place in law for sure, but here it feels like we're getting the shortest end of the stick. Many states hang responsibility for a death on everyone committing a crime even if they didn't pull the trigger with an understanding that they were part of the chain of events that led to that. The converse doesn't seem to apply in the slightest where we ask what could authority have done differently and left this person alive. To me it seems like every citizen's human's death should demand the question "why couldn't you just let them go instead?""
posted by phearlez at 10:43 AM on December 1, 2014 [3 favorites]

MeTa
posted by tonycpsu at 10:49 AM on December 1, 2014 [1 favorite]

Did Darren Wilson resign or retire now that he's made almost a million dollars by shooting #MichaelBrown"

The money was for support of him during the prosecution, though, right? So he only gets to use it for lawyers/relocation fees?
posted by corb at 12:09 PM on December 1, 2014

The money was for support of him during the prosecution, though, right? So he only gets to use it for lawyers/relocation fees?

I haven't seen anything that says he can only use the money for lawyers or relocation fees.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:21 PM on December 1, 2014 [1 favorite]

FYI, from Time OUT Sports Bar & Grill
Due to the bone headed "hands up, don't shoot" act by the number of Rams players on the Sunday game the Time Out Bar & Grill will no longer support the St Louis Rams, so we will no longer have Happy hours for the Rams games and all signs and pictures will be off the walls... We have to stand up to thugs who destroy our community and burn down local businesses, and boycott the other thugs/organizations who support them...
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:26 PM on December 1, 2014 [1 favorite]

Uh, his union picks up the tab for defending him, right?
posted by tonycpsu at 12:27 PM on December 1, 2014 [3 favorites]

FYI, from Time OUT Sports Bar & Grill

So, is somebody working on compiling a 'Green Book' yet so that we can avoid establishments like this?
posted by fifthrider at 12:30 PM on December 1, 2014 [1 favorite]

Just look for the place that's empty on Sundays. (Even the cops will want to watch the game.)
posted by Drinky Die at 12:32 PM on December 1, 2014 [2 favorites]

Note they stopped short of saying they wouldn't air the game. Such courage, their willingness to not offer discounted drinks to customers in order to show those awful players.
posted by phearlez at 1:08 PM on December 1, 2014 [4 favorites]

well, now they're switching allegiance to the kansas city chiefs

yeah, that's really going to go over well
posted by pyramid termite at 1:20 PM on December 1, 2014

That appears to be something I'd have to have a Facebook account to understand read.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:44 PM on December 1, 2014

tonycpsu, I copy/pasted the entire thing. Except for the comments.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:47 PM on December 1, 2014

OK, thought there was more to it than that. Thanks.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:49 PM on December 1, 2014

Yeah, that was my understanding as well, and given that there don't seem to be any strings attached to the Support Officer Wilson money, the burden of proof is on those who say he's not benefiting from it personally.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:57 PM on December 1, 2014 [2 favorites]

The more I think about the statement from the St. Louis POA, the angrier I get about McCulloch's handling of this case. For him to go on national television and say what he said, such that others interpret "no true bill" as Wilson being exonerated, is even more irresponsible than his purposefully taking a dive on the prosecution in the first place.

Now this issue is characterized by the Usual Suspects on the right as, "You're either with the cops or you're with them, the blah people burning and looting." I note that, despite the constant characterization of the protests surrounding the killing of Mike Brown and the grand jury decision as "violent," I've seen zero national news reports about police officers being killed as a result. Even so, I fear that this incident will, instead of chastening the trigger-happy, panicky dimwits that appear to comprise our police, embolden the criminal enterprise that constitutes 21st century policed departments in America to even more horrific depths of wanton cruelty and abuse.
posted by ob1quixote at 2:34 PM on December 1, 2014 [11 favorites]

Man, if I ever read the word "thug" again it'll be too soon.
posted by brundlefly at 3:35 PM on December 1, 2014 [17 favorites]

Lots of good stuff, scroll down:
I Will Only Bleed Here
posted by Joe in Australia at 5:35 PM on December 1, 2014 [2 favorites]

And revisiting my much earlier post about me and my moms shitty experience at the seattle protest, there's now a stranger piece on the protests being coopted by bullshit white anarchists.

A great bit:

Men dressed in black, and wearing black bandanas, wanted to roll out the dumpster for use in confronting police, who were downhill from them at that point. Seeing what was about to happen, a woman of color yelled at them to stop, and kept on yelling. The men eventually did stop, but she and her friends soon left the protest in disgust, saying they didn't want to be blamed for stuff like this, that it would reflect badly on everyone.

Later on in the evening, after protesters had made their way down to Westlake despite the police lines, and after the Christmas tree lighting ceremony had been disrupted, a small group of protesters stood on the Westlake Mall balcony and chanted, "Anarchy! Anarchy!" From my vantage point, all the people shouting "Anarchy!" appeared to be white.

Fuck "all lives matter", and fuck all these white kids who just want attention. Seriously. Manbabies who try and smash anything they get told isn't for or about them.
posted by emptythought at 6:02 PM on December 1, 2014 [13 favorites]

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries shows solidarity.
posted by prefpara at 6:10 PM on December 1, 2014 [1 favorite]

brundlefly: Man, if I ever read the word "thug" again it'll be too soon.

Sorry:

MSNBC's "Morning Joe" panel started the day off on Monday with a segment slamming protestors in Ferguson, shaming the St. Louis Rams football team, and calling slain unarmed teenager Michael Brown a "thug."

That'd be the "liberal" MSNBC, of course.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:01 PM on December 1, 2014 [12 favorites]

St Louis County cops: Rams apologised to us.

Rams: No, we didn't.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 8:04 PM on December 1, 2014 [14 favorites]

lord_wolf good god man.
posted by cashman at 8:07 PM on December 1, 2014

St Louis County cops: Rams apologised to us.

Rams: No, we didn't.

Well, police certainly don't lie so I'm just gonna go ahead and believe them on this.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:44 PM on December 1, 2014 [4 favorites]

he did "express remorse for how those actions were construed," according to ESPN.

That's kind of exactly what I was expecting, actually, a "I'm sorry you felt offended." Sometimes it really is the right thing to say.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:46 PM on December 1, 2014 [2 favorites]

The St Louis County police went and posted a dictionary definition of the word "apology". No, they did. Well, sort of. They went and posted a definition of the word "apologies" from Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary, a "free site designed especially for learners and teachers of English".

So, points for their attempt at a Simpsons-esque "Websters defines apology as ...", but they lose those points for (a) using a dictionary designed for children and ESL students; (b) finding the wrong part of the definition; and (c) failing to notice that their cited definition makes no contextual sense.

In conclusion, stupidity is a land of contrasts.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:21 PM on December 1, 2014 [14 favorites]

how dare that football player have an opinion
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 9:25 PM on December 1, 2014 [3 favorites]

The Simpsons bit that comes to my mind when I think of the Ferguson PD is:

[Seeing a very tall man Chief Wiggum pulls out his gun and shoots him]
WIGGUM: Aw, they're not so tough.
LOU: Um...Chief, that wasn't a monster. That was the captain of the high school basketball team.
WIGGUM: Uh, yeah, well, he was turning into a monster, though.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:28 PM on December 1, 2014 [6 favorites]

small_ruminant: They have an "absolutely never chase" policy. You call it in, they cordon off the area and they go slowly, door by door, and find the suspect.

One of the things that impressed me about Darren Wilson's interview was the answer to "why did you chase Brown?" His answer was that I MUST chase him, and that is our training, because he is endangering me now and that means that if he escapes he will be off similarly endangering other innocent citizens unless I apprehend him NOW.

The police in the Darrien Hunt shooting made a similar point--they had to stop him HERE AND NOW because if they didn't he would "hack the first [random/innocent] person he saw".

So that is a point almost universally believed by police officers: Hot pursuit and immediate apprehension is absolutely vital, because if the person is attacking me now others are immediately at risk if he escapes.

But, that idea is just simply wrong.* The vast majority of the time, the police presence itself is what is inciting the person to violence. As small_ruminant points out, "adrenalin on the part of either the cop or the suspect is dangerous for everyone." Pretty much the very best thing you can do to diffuse the situation is to stop the chase and let the adrenalin disperse.

For a lot of people--almost everyone, when they are in the midst of a hot pursuit--this is the opposite of common sense. But if your goal is to save lives, simply disallowing hot pursuit by police officers is the only effective answer.

I first came across this idea after a friend of my was (needlessly) killed as the result of a police pursuit--the standard 'car chase'. See some info on that issue here:

• "Nationally, we say about one-third of our police pursuits conclude in a collision. You tell me another law enforcement activity where one-third of the time it goes bad and they continue to do it."
• 42% of injuries/fatalities as a result of police pursuit are innocent bystanders.
• Police injury/fatality rate is also high.
• Police kill more people (including suspects, police and innocent bystanders) via car chases than with their guns

Police departments across the nation are adopting very restrictive pursuit policies and sometimes even "no pursuit" policies because of the bad outcomes and the negative media attention the police pursuits draw.

A national push for "no chase" policies could follow a similar formula to the no pursuit policies.

*I'll try to avoid commenting on the incredible irony that Officer Wilson thought it was a great idea to 'protect' the citizens of a crowded apartment complex where Brown was fleeing, by firing about a dozen shots randomly around the area--a number ended up inside apartments etc. And the officers in the Darrien Hunt case thought it was a great idea to 'protect the public' by firing towards a busy street filled with auto traffic. These guys really need to have their firearms privileges revoked permanently.
posted by flug at 10:13 PM on December 1, 2014 [32 favorites]

Quick sanity break: A first grade teacher and a simple assignment.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 10:15 PM on December 1, 2014 [11 favorites]

In a previous comment I mentioned the shooting of an unarmed black man by Milwaukee police. The autopsy was released yesterday.

Half the bullets that hit Dontre Hamilton traveled in a downward direction and one hit him in the back, according to a portion of the autopsy released Monday by his family.

In addition, a toxicology test showed that Hamilton, who was killed by a Milwaukee police officer in Red Arrow Park, had no drugs in his system, the report says.

He was shot in the back.

"We felt it was important to get some of the information out about the physical injuries to (Hamilton's) head and face, as well as more information about the toxicology test," Safran said. "Some people have speculated that he must have been amped up on cocaine."

(emphasis mine) In a different article (emphasis also mine), the shooter perpetuates the "big scary black man" trope.

[Officer] Manney also described Hamilton as being “considerably younger than me, in much better shape than me, and much stronger and more muscular than me.”

But the autopsy results do not support Manney’s description. In the report, the medical examiner said that at the time of his death, Hamilton was a 169-pound, 5-foot-7 “well developed, overweight … adult-black male.”

posted by desjardins at 7:43 AM on December 2, 2014 [13 favorites]

Ugh, that Hamilton shooting is just horrible. "A confrontation ensued after Manney tried to pat down Hamilton, who resisted." Terry stop as inciting factor. You didn't quote the bit that mentioned that Hamilton had 15 wounds for 14 shots - likey one was through an arm as he tried to shield himself, given the large number of shots.
posted by phearlez at 7:57 AM on December 2, 2014

It's interesting that the St. Louis Police Officers Association, which is demanding an apology from the Rams, is a predominantly white organization. Black officers have their own organization called the St. Louis Ethical Society of Police which was called the St. Louis Black Police Officers Association up until 1975.

The head of the St. Louis Ethical Society of Police is, I kid you not, a different Darren R. Wilson, who said" Our motto is “We are the conscious of the St. Louis Police Department.” We did not come to this motto lightly. We believe that someone has to be willing to stand up and hold our Police Department to the oaths of service that we all have taken. In fact, our motto is almost like another type of oath. It is a promise---a promise to you that we will be working every day to be the conscious of the St. Louis Police Department.
posted by JackFlash at 8:37 AM on December 2, 2014 [8 favorites]

Officer down on Delmar and Taylor, repeat, officer feeling down... about the mean football players he saw on the TV. He is crying— St. Louis County PD (@stIcountypd) December 2, 2014

posted by desjardins at 9:22 AM on December 2, 2014 [7 favorites]

The Making of Ferguson - Public Policies at the Root of its Troubles
posted by Golden Eternity at 10:15 AM on December 2, 2014 [2 favorites]

Police investigating death of man whose body was found after protests in Ferguson last week
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:26 AM on December 2, 2014 [3 favorites]

Police investigating death of man whose body was found after protests in Ferguson last week

Which police?
posted by showbiz_liz at 10:34 AM on December 2, 2014

Build Trust: Outsource Shooting Investigations, by Walter Katz
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:42 AM on December 2, 2014

Former NBA star Charles Barkley called Ferguson looters 'scumbags' and said that 'key forensic evidence, and several black witnesses that supported Officer Darren Wilson’s story.'

“[W]e have to be really careful with the cops, because if it wasn’t for the cops we would be living in the Wild, Wild West in our neighborhoods," he said. "We can’t pick out certain incidentals that don’t go our way and act like the cops are all bad.... Do you know how bad some of these neighborhoods would be if it wasn't for the cops?”
posted by Drinky Die at 10:59 AM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

"Do you know how bad some of these neighborhoods would be if it wasn't for the cops?”

Well, we know they'd have a higher population.
posted by phearlez at 11:02 AM on December 2, 2014 [9 favorites]

McKean had been walking for just a few minutes, he said, when an Oakland County sheriff's deputy drove up, got out of the car and questioned him. McKean began filming with his phone.

"You were walking by … well you were making people nervous," the deputy says in the video McKean recorded, above. "They said you had your hands in your pockets."

"Wow, walking by having your hands in your pockets makes people nervous to call the police, when it's snowing outside?" McKean responds.

"They did," the deputy says. "I'm just checking on you."
posted by infini at 11:11 AM on December 2, 2014

Why you should always videotape cops [6:22, darkly humorous]
posted by desjardins at 11:47 AM on December 2, 2014 [3 favorites]

Police shut down mysterious "Oath Keepers" guarding rooftops in downtown Ferguson
posted by corb at 12:07 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

"They did," the deputy says. "I'm just checking on you."

"Maybe it'd be a better use of your time to check on them, because they're obviously insane."
posted by rhizome at 12:08 PM on December 2, 2014 [2 favorites]

Have rooftops been at an elevated risk in Ferguson? I can't recall seeing any stories of people climbing on top of buildings and poking holes or whatever.
posted by rhizome at 12:10 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

Who could have predicted?

Oh wait, a lot of people in this very thread.

Doxing: it's not good when the good guys do it, either.
posted by tonycpsu at 12:17 PM on December 2, 2014 [9 favorites]

BTW, folks: carrying the Police Tape app on your phone empowers you to videotape abuses should you ever happen upon them. You can specify to keep or upload the recordings to the ACLU-sponsored cloud, making them public to everyone. (Link for Android version; Apple version)
posted by IAmBroom at 12:56 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

I am underwhelmed by that ACLU app on the iPhone if the reviews are accurate; you absolutely need to have it continue recording when you lock the phone because otherwise you can't be assured they won't paw through your things. It also concerns me they haven't released a single update in two years.

I use Clear Record which has an option to start recording when opened. I've verified that it continues to record after locking and that it uses the phone mic even if you're bluetooth connected to your car stereo/speakerphone and it doesn't stop if you turn off the car and drop the bluetooth connection mid-recording.
posted by phearlez at 1:08 PM on December 2, 2014 [6 favorites]

Have rooftops been at an elevated risk in Ferguson? I can't recall seeing any stories of people climbing on top of buildings and poking holes or whatever.

They're armed with rifles - rifles work better from a distance from elevated positions than close and personal on the ground.
posted by corb at 1:31 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

Sorry, I was being facetious.
posted by rhizome at 1:32 PM on December 2, 2014

They're armed with rifles - rifles work better from a distance from elevated positions than close and personal on the ground.

What Ferguson really needs are more white guys shooting black guys.
posted by empath at 1:34 PM on December 2, 2014

What Ferguson really needs are more white guys shooting black guys.

I take them at their word that they're there to defend the protesters, but yeah, the protesters didn't want them there. More guns doesn't equal better outcomes, no matter who the guns are trained on.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:37 PM on December 2, 2014

Please note that Oathkeepers are a distinct form of nazi from the KKK.
posted by Artw at 1:37 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

I take them at their word that they're there to defend the protesters,

I sure don't.
posted by maxsparber at 1:48 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

We've looked at the facts, deliberated for a good long while, and decided that what this situation needs is more trigger-happy white men
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 1:57 PM on December 2, 2014 [5 favorites]

I sure don't.

Why not? We're talking about the same kind of ideology that drove Eric Frein to shoot a couple of state cops here in Pennsylvania, killing one of them. Whether they're there to put on a show of supporting the protestors or they actually do support them, the opportunity to point guns menacingly at law enforcement would certainly appeal to them.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:59 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

BTW, folks: carrying the Police Tape app on your phone empowers you to videotape abuses should you ever happen upon them.

The iOS version, at least, is audio-only.
posted by Lexica at 2:06 PM on December 2, 2014

Moving from the Gray since it doesn't belong there:

The question is if McCulloch could have gotten a new jury if he didn't like the first one.

If McCulloch hadn't requested that a judge extend the seating of the original grand jury after they participated in the investigation and he then seated a new one and started over it would have provoked outrage. People would claim he didn't like the look of the original grand jury and sent it home despite the fact that they were already involved in the case and starting over would delay any possibility of justice and that extending a grand jury if necessary is pretty routine and a judge would certainly have done so if asked.

McCulloch did a lot of crappy things. But in this one instance he's taking flak for something that is not remarkable and if he had done the opposite he'd be taking tons of flak for that. And I think anyone who reflects on things fairly would agree he would have been harshly criticized for doing so. It's a no-win situation, clearly. Of course McCulloch should never have brought this to the grand jury in the first place. He deserve approbation. Just not on this one specific point.
posted by Justinian at 2:15 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

Who could have predicted?

Oh wait, a lot of people in this very thread.

For my next prediction, the Eagles will win the Super Bowl!

(And a lot of white people might riot.)
posted by Drinky Die at 2:24 PM on December 2, 2014

Ashley Yates discusses being at the White House meeting Monday:

The body cameras? Once again, a step. But, cameras didn’t save Tamir Rice. Cameras didn’t save John Crawford. They didn’t make sure that John Crawford saw justice. So, we know that while that is a step towards ending this real problem, the real root of it has to be addressed. And the real root of it is racism in America. The anti-black sentiments that exist. And we have to have a cultural shift.

Professor James Peterson discusses President Obama's comments that some Americans don't feel as if they are treated fairly by the police:

I don’t want to minimize the affective nature of these things. It is about how people feel. That’s important, but that is not strong enough language, in my opinion, because the reality is, a young black person, as a teenager, is 21 times more likely to be murdered at the hands of police. And that is just from the data that we have. That is not a full accounting of the data, that’s just the data that we have access to. 21 times more likely to be murdered than his or her white counterparts. That’s not a feeling, those are actual facts. There is data.

We have all of these sort of cases that have risen to the level of international sort of media attention. Everything from Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, Eric Garner, we can go back into the years and look at other instances of this and see certain names bubble up to the surface. So, you have that sort of sensational data, but beneath the surface of that, there are hundreds if not thousands of these kinds of cases that don’t rise to that level of attention. So, that is actual data.

People are dying at the hands of law-enforcement, and that is not even taking into account the data that we know around stop-and-frisk, around police stops period, about police brutality and police harassment. It doesn’t take into account a full range of other unfortunate situations when we look at the contact between police forces and the communities with which they are charged to protect. So, there is real data here. This is not just about how people feel. That’s not to minimize people’s feelings about it, but, I think to just talk about the affect is not enough to get at the hard-core data that sort of underwrites all these issues and problems that we’re wrestling with.

posted by audi alteram partem at 2:29 PM on December 2, 2014 [8 favorites]

If McCulloch hadn't requested that a judge extend the seating of the original grand jury after they participated in the investigation and he then seated a new one and started over it would have provoked outrage. People would claim he didn't like the look of the original grand jury and sent it home despite the fact that they were already involved in the case and starting over would delay any possibility of justice and that extending a grand jury if necessary is pretty routine and a judge would certainly have done so if asked.

As far as I remember, no laypeople knew there was an existing GJ until after it had been extended for this case, and to the degree that your hypothetical came to pass it would have been (hypothetically) a pretty open and easy move for him to say that jurors are selected randomly and he wanted a new one because he already knew the old one. Or sympathies to that effect. Like (again), some notion of "hey, this might look weird."
posted by rhizome at 2:51 PM on December 2, 2014

if he had done the opposite he'd be taking tons of flak for that.

I'm quite sure that would not have bothered him in the slightest. I'd be willing to bet if he really didn't like the composition of the original jury he would not have asked for the extension; but this is a minor advantage compared to being allowed to read bogus jury instructions, present a defense instead of a prosecution, etc.
posted by Golden Eternity at 2:52 PM on December 2, 2014 [4 favorites]

Cop Fired for Beating a Non-violent, Handcuffed Man On Video, Gets Job Back AND Back Pay
posted by jeffburdges at 3:06 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

He must have been terrified he was going to be attacked by the thug in handcuffs. Such a lot of fearful cops.
posted by infini at 3:24 PM on December 2, 2014 [2 favorites]

I'd be willing to bet if he really didn't like the composition of the original jury he would not have asked for the extension; but this is a minor advantage compared to being allowed to read bogus jury instructions, present a defense instead of a prosecution, etc.

Well, yes, that's why the whole idea that he had to finesse the makeup of the grand jury is ludicrous. The entire system is already rigged to produce the result that the DA wants and so it is completely unnecessary for him to do what people are suggesting. It's like cheating at chess against your pet Golden Retriever. There's no reason to bother.
posted by Justinian at 3:44 PM on December 2, 2014 [2 favorites]

Such a lot of fearful cops.

Hey, you'd be too, if you had to spend all day around a bunch of cops.
posted by Atom Eyes at 3:54 PM on December 2, 2014 [3 favorites]

There's no reason to bother.

This is a little forest-for-the-trees. A big thing for me is that it looks like every possible angle was geared toward achieving the peace of mind of a rigged result, toward eliminating a risk of putting the officer in front of a jury. It's all these little nagging elements that speak to the larger injustice, so it's not fair to just say AH-HA BUT THAT'S BUILT-IN, because not only is it built-in, it's continually being built. In other words, it's not the "whole" idea, it's just one of many details in a larger idea.
posted by rhizome at 4:07 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

It's like cheating at chess against your pet Golden Retriever.

Oh, stock photography. Is there anything you can't do?
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 4:10 PM on December 2, 2014 [5 favorites]

FWIW, the grand jury in the Eric Garner case is expected on Staten Island tomorrow.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:15 PM on December 2, 2014

Police consider charges against Michael Brown's stepdad

OK, now they're just trolling.
posted by tonycpsu at 4:22 PM on December 2, 2014 [7 favorites]

"Incitement to riot" is one of the most offensive laws still on the books. Blame people for what they do, not for what other people do because they got excited because you said something.
posted by corb at 4:34 PM on December 2, 2014 [2 favorites]

I'm not necessarily against incitement to riot laws in principle but going after Michael Brown's stepdad at this point would be monumentally stupid.
posted by Justinian at 5:17 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

Incitement to riot is a real thing, just like criminal conspiracy and other crimes where the perpetrator isn't necessarily the person who carries out the physical act. Riots are bad things, and their victims are often the most vulnerable members of society. In this particular case, yes, going after the stepdad looks like yet another deliberately inflammatory move.
posted by Joe in Australia at 5:17 PM on December 2, 2014

Four Members of Congress Hold ‘Hands Up, Don’t Shoot’ Gesture on House Floor :)
posted by jeffburdges at 5:21 PM on December 2, 2014 [5 favorites]

I'm not necessarily against incitement to riot laws in principle but going after Michael Brown's stepdad at this point would be monumentally stupid.

Would not be shocking though considering the incredibly bizarre back and forth with the Rams. They don't just want this story to slip away, they want to demand some sort of recognized vindication for the local police to put all the critics in their place.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:22 PM on December 2, 2014

Who is "they" in this context?
posted by futz at 5:48 PM on December 2, 2014

Police leadership.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:50 PM on December 2, 2014

Thanks
posted by futz at 5:51 PM on December 2, 2014 [1 favorite]

Mother Jones: The Science of Why Cops Shoot Young Black Men - And how to reform our bigoted brains.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 6:16 PM on December 2, 2014 [4 favorites]

Matthew Yglesias:

If you know anything about the UK or Germany, you'll know that these are not even remotely societies who've eliminated the problem of racism. If anything, having struggled with it for less time than the United States, they're even worse than we are. Where they outperform us is in drastically reducing the civilian death toll without ending racism or entrenched poverty or any of the St. Louis area's other problems.

posted by kagredon at 6:34 PM on December 2, 2014 [4 favorites]

Interesting - apparently Wilson claims to have been hit on the left side of the jaw in his statement (p. 13), but his medical exam states that it was the right side of his jaw (p. 9)? (from this tweet by @amystephen)
posted by dialetheia at 7:03 PM on December 2, 2014 [6 favorites]

Heh:

@AmyStephen @kharyp to be fair it's really hard to remember where bullshit injuries are.

posted by tonycpsu at 7:19 PM on December 2, 2014 [6 favorites]

But, cameras didn’t save Tamir Rice. Cameras didn’t save John Crawford.

That's because the police in those cases didn't know they were being recorded. With body cams they know that everything they say and do will be subject to review.

For example, Rialto California, after cameras were introduced in February 2012, public complaints against officers plunged 88% compared with the previous 12 months. Officers' use of force fell by 60%.

It's amazing how behavior changes when police know that the film is rolling. It isn't a pancea. Cops will still lose their temper, but it certainly reduces that dramatically.
posted by JackFlash at 7:20 PM on December 2, 2014 [2 favorites]

USA Today: Ferguson a defining moment for race relations in USA
The Nation: Darren Wilson: America's ‘Model Policeman'
posted by the man of twists and turns at 7:24 PM on December 2, 2014 [4 favorites]

I think as long as we're trying to engineer police culture with cameras, we'd do well to consider changing our expectations.

Is is unreasonable to expect a police officer to -- like our soldiers -- volunteer to die for our country? If their choice is an innocent civilian or themselves, shouldn't they be willing to be make "The Ultimate Sacrifice" to *save* people? That puts the 'shoot first because I was in danger' thing in a very different light.
posted by mikelieman at 7:26 PM on December 2, 2014 [6 favorites]

That's because the police in those cases didn't know they were being recorded. With body cams they know that everything they say and do will be subject to review.

Which is why Yates agrees that cameras are a step in the process, but I agree with her that "the real root of it has to be addressed. And the real root of it is racism in America."

Hypothetically, Wilson's killing of Brown was subject to review but there were serious failures in evidence collection & analysis—failures that have to be assessed and dealt with in the context of institutional racism.
posted by audi alteram partem at 7:52 PM on December 2, 2014 [2 favorites]

VICE: Darren Wilson's Testimony and the Historically Racist 'Black Devil' Trope
Elle: What Ferguson Means For Black Women
WaPo: 15 of the Most Striking #Ferguson Cartoons so far…

Ghettoside: A True Story of Murder in America by Jill Leovy

But for many Americans, the point stood: Whites provoked by racial bias to kill black people is a non-issue when compared to the real problem of blacks killing other blacks.

This is the misguided racial zeitgeist into which veteran journalist Jill Leovy releases her powerful first book, Ghettoside, an in-depth account of a South Los Angeles murder and its subsequent investigation. Though she focuses on a single homicide in a small swath of the city, Leovy uses the narrative in Ghettoside to examine a host of larger questions about police conduct, violence, and racism in America. The result is a true-crime book that leaves the reader haunted not by its cast of criminals but by the society in which those criminals operate.

posted by the man of twists and turns at 7:54 PM on December 2, 2014 [8 favorites]

Is is unreasonable to expect a police officer to -- like our soldiers -- volunteer to die for our country? If their choice is an innocent civilian or themselves, shouldn't they be willing to be make "The Ultimate Sacrifice" to *save* people?

The problem is that I think that police officers, if asked, would say they would definitely make the choice to die for an innocent civilian. They just do not see a large portion of the citizens of this country as innocent civilians.
posted by corb at 7:59 PM on December 2, 2014 [10 favorites]

Is is unreasonable to expect a police officer to -- like our soldiers -- volunteer to die for our country?

But there's a big difference.

I think if you asked most military people what they were fighting for, pretty high up on the list would be 'freedom'. Now, whether or not you buy into that, I think most people would agree that freedom is a pretty fine concept, and one worth dying for.

Police, on the other hand, are primarily in the business of protecting property and maintaining order. And nobody in their right mind would ever volunteer to die for that. (To kill for it, on the other hand...)
posted by Atom Eyes at 8:29 PM on December 2, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah, which gets at a larger problem: it's not the duty of the cops to judge innocence. The cops aren't the fucking court system. They risk themselves to stop potentially dangerous situations, they investigate potentially dangerous people, and yes, necessarily that means that part of their job is risk assessment. But this fucking cowboy vision of policing that we have in America about STOP THE BAD GUYS is part of the problem.

In Wilson's own accounting of events, there were multiple points where he could've chosen to de-escalate the situation, and he didn't. How can anyone point to that (as a link upthread did) as "model policing"?
posted by kagredon at 8:31 PM on December 2, 2014 [5 favorites]

(I should clarify that I agree with the link that uses the phrasing, which has a similar critique of Wilson and how his actions have been interpreted, just wanted to be clear that I wasn't paraphrasing anyone in-thread.)
posted by kagredon at 8:48 PM on December 2, 2014

My idea is that the police are the nation's racial & socioeconomic border patrol.
posted by rhizome at 8:51 PM on December 2, 2014 [13 favorites]

Also note that in Wilson's interview with the police there, he first mentions seeing the Cigarillos of +1 Justification when he and Brown were grappling at the car window, while in his GJ testimony, that was apparently part of his rationale for backing up and stopping Brown and Johnson.
posted by kagredon at 9:16 PM on December 2, 2014 [11 favorites]

The Problem With Police, Charles P. Pierce, Esquire Politics Blog, 01 December 2014
posted by ob1quixote at 12:06 AM on December 3, 2014 [6 favorites]

I'd propose : No one may hold office in law enforcement, including cops, prosecutors, judges, and their staff, nor receive a full pension associated with pervious work in said capacity, if their actions have resulted in the death of another person. It's not actually an unreasonable restriction.
posted by jeffburdges at 1:26 AM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

Also note that in Wilson's interview with the police there, he first mentions seeing the Cigarillos of +1 Justification when he and Brown were grappling at the car window, while in his GJ testimony, that was apparently part of his rationale for backing up and stopping Brown and Johnson.

In the ABC interview, Wilson goes even further, saying that his whole purpose in accosting them (the second time, when he backed up towards them) was to delay the pair for a while, for a few seconds, while backup units arrived so that they could apprehend them.

It's been linked upthread already, but if you haven't read it, Vox's comparison of Wilson's & Johnson's stories about the incident is very revealing. You can pretty clearly see where the self-interest of each lies, and where each is likely on target and off target.

FWIW more than anything else about the incident, Wilson's own story convinces me, as I've believed from the very beginning, that whatever else this incident may have been, it was very definitely a terrible, completely incompetent piece of police work.

You're approaching two young men who are suspected of 'strong-arm robbery'. You are an experienced and trained officer of the law. Do you:

* Back your vehicle up wildly towards them? Uh, no.

* Use your vehicle to 'block their escape path'? Uh, maybe if they were also in a vehicle that you could actually block. Pedestrians will just walk, or maybe run, right around your vehicle.

* Position yourself very close to the suspects before accosting them? Uh, no. "We instruct recruits that distance is your friend and don’t get into the bad guy’s space."

* Position your vehicle door very near the suspects before deciding to throw the door open and leap out? Uh, no. Getting out of your vehicle is one of the moments you are vulnerable to attack. Even in a routine traffic stop you're going to position yourself and know the position of the other people so that they are not in a position to attack you as you exit your vehicle. Last thing you're going to do is position the door just a couple of feet from the suspects, then attempt to leap out (Wilson's version), or open the door to slam it into the suspects (Johnson's version).

* Have a chat with potentially dangerous potential 'strong-arm robbers' (Wilson's account) through your vehicle window? Johnson's account is that Wilson reached out the window to grab Brown; Wilson's account in the ABC interview is that he rolled up the second time to try to call them over to his window and engage/delay them for a few seconds until backup arrived, and then Brown (inexplicably!) reached through the window to attack him. Either way, your window is down as you roll up to accost 'strong-arm robbery' suspects and chat them up? Uh, yeah. That's like inviting someone to attack you while they completely have the upper hand in every way and you are trapped nearly immobilized, lower, and without any leverage or access to the basic tools you might need to subdue a suspect. "Sitting behind the wheel of your patrol car is just about the worst place to be if the person you have stopped decides to attack you."

* Dash off single-handedly in hot pursuit of two possibly armed (according to your account), possibly violent (according to your account) suspects when backup is just a few seconds away?

* Wildly shoot in several different directions while surrounded by a veritable crowd of witnesses in the middle of a high-density residential apartment complex? I've already expressed my amazement at this gross violation of basic firearms safety practices several times already(2, 3, 4), so I'll refrain from doing it again.

* In that context (people, vehicles, residential buildings all around) and knowing that backup is on the way and just a few seconds off, always choose to escalate rather than de-escalate?

There is a reason officers go through continual training and re-training about best practices for situations like traffic stops. It's to minimize danger to themselves and others. Relatively few people that officers stop are going to have any thought of attacking them, but officers are trained to follow best practices each and every time regardless--practices that Wilson clearly disregarded several times over in this situation.

If nothing else, Wilson's behavior here is a sterling example of completely shitty basic police work.

In that sense, he is completely responsible in that he could and should have completely prevented the whole situation from developing.

Honestly, I don't expect that level of responsibility from random citizens. But I certainly do expect it from trained law enforcement personnel who have the fairly awesome responsibility of being allowed to use lethal force in certain limited situations.
posted by flug at 8:41 AM on December 3, 2014 [57 favorites]

No indictment in Eric Garner case, charges dismissed.
posted by desjardins at 11:24 AM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

*enters state of Hulk-like rage*
posted by sallybrown at 11:27 AM on December 3, 2014 [11 favorites]

Jesus Christ. I just had to look up which one Eric Garner was. That's a problem. There are way too many of these.
posted by Weeping_angel at 11:34 AM on December 3, 2014 [5 favorites]

This one was all caught on camera too. So. Yeah.
posted by showbiz_liz at 11:40 AM on December 3, 2014

A friend from college just posted the no-indictment news on her fb feed. She's black; she's a trial lawyer who has done both criminal defense and prosecution work. Her facebook feed has been...something over the last week especially.
posted by rtha at 11:41 AM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

I wasn't at all surprised that Darren Wilson wasn't indicted. I am a little bit surprised at this, given the actual LIVING COLOR VIDEO FOOTAGE.

Surely this. Surely this?
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:41 AM on December 3, 2014 [3 favorites]

It also puts the lie to the idea that body cameras will solve these problems. Eric Garner's murder was taped.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 11:41 AM on December 3, 2014 [7 favorites]

It also puts the lie to the idea that body cameras will solve these problems. Eric Garner's murder was taped.

No, the point of body cameras is to get as many of these fucked up killings on camera. You're right, one particular instance won't fix anything, but 100 or 1000 may. Emphasis on the 'may'.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:43 AM on December 3, 2014 [12 favorites]

Maybe someone could come in and tell us why Garner's not the perfect test case either.

Honestly, if you can see this news and blame anyone for being a part of a riot I just don't know what to say. Why would any black person in that city look at this and think they're actually considered a part of that society? That they should feel constrained by any rule at all? Clearly there's people who have to follow the law - Garner and selling onseies - and people who don't: the cops.

There's exactly one way this outcome says to folks who feel downtrodden that they shouldn't engage in property crime: the fact that it shows our society is perfectly willing to just kill them for it.
posted by phearlez at 11:51 AM on December 3, 2014 [10 favorites]

No indictment in Eric Garner case, charges dismissed.

but..but...but...IT WAS THE PERFECT CASE! I have been assured of this!
posted by Drinky Die at 11:52 AM on December 3, 2014 [9 favorites]

No, the point of body cameras is to get as many of these fucked up killings on camera.

It would also help a ton if there were actual statistics tracked and collected; local police departments should be required to report every incident in which an officer kills a civilian to the DOJ.
posted by rtha at 11:52 AM on December 3, 2014

It's almost as if...maybe the facts and the law...don't matter in these cases and it's just a corrupt system letting it's agents run rampant with no consequence?
posted by Drinky Die at 11:53 AM on December 3, 2014 [12 favorites]

This really is not just lack of care or accountability; it's not just that black lives are held "not to matter" by the state. If it were any other society at any other point in history - apartheid South Africa, Weimar Germany, Guatemala in the eighties - we'd say that these were state-run terror operations on the order of Central American paramilitaries or the Freikorps.

There is a thin layer of deniability because the actual killings aren't planned centrally, but the maintenance of a nationwide network which we all know kills black people out of hand - just maintaining that network unchecked and resisting all efforts (like civilian review boards) to check it - that's intentionality of a kind. It has the same relation to the freikorps, for example, that "free trade zones" have to old fashioned colonialist capitalism - you can't just openly recruit for freikorps or march in and start taking over Mexico so you just decentralize operations and avoid regulation and continue doing the same old thing.

I think that if our governments are either unable or unwilling to check the police - as appears to be the case - we don't have legitimate government at all any more than we would if we were ruled by a junta imposed from outside. A government that can't or won't control a state-supported paramilitary force isn't really a government but a front for the paramilitaries - in this case, the racist paramilitaries who want to return us to Jim Crow or slavery in all but name. That's what these are - they are only "protecting and serving" the friends of the state so that the racist present order can be upheld. If they're not protecting and serving black people as well as white, they're not "cops", they're a bought and paid for racist militia.
posted by Frowner at 11:54 AM on December 3, 2014 [49 favorites]

We could have the best technological panopticon ever and it wouldn't matter for a moment if the people manning the system don't give a shit.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 11:57 AM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

I would have thought the sleeping seven-year old girl who got shot would be a good test case, but those charges got dropped on Sunday. I mean, I guess the cop is still charged with careless discharge of a firearm, but that's it.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 11:58 AM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

I just can't even imagine the despair black people must feel right now. I mean, I am horrified and sickened and my gut is churning, but I get to walk around not feeling like I'm in any danger. I get to feel like my life matters to society.
posted by desjardins at 12:02 PM on December 3, 2014 [7 favorites]

No, the point of body cameras is to get as many of these fucked up killings on camera. You're right, one particular instance won't fix anything, but 100 or 1000 may. Emphasis on the 'may'.

Ugh, I hadn't been thinking of it that way, but of course you're right.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 12:07 PM on December 3, 2014 [3 favorites]

I'm not so privileged that the idea that cops can kill black people with impunity was new to me -- heck, I was surprised but not shocked that it turned out that seemingly anybody can kill a black person with impunity, as long as they say they were afraid of them.

Where my privilege kicks in is that it had not occurred to me that it might take 1,000 more videos like Eric Garner's before anything is done about it.

And there's also what Jazmine Hughes tweeted a week ago: White people: your privilege lives in the fact that you can be outraged, horrified, and upset about tonight. But you are not afraid.

I'm not afraid. But, Christ, do I feel sick.
posted by maxsparber at 12:12 PM on December 3, 2014 [15 favorites]

Probably going to need a "Rosa Parks" i.e. someone who is perfectly innocent and/or well known, who is accosted or killed on camera.

In Dariah Johnson's testimony before the grand jury, the jurors repeatedly question not only why he and Brown were walking in the middle of the street, but why they didn't immediately do as the cop says. It was classic behavior seen on MeFi, where the the real issue is pushed to the side as people obsess over the details of why guilty party didn't behave exactly right.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:24 PM on December 3, 2014 [5 favorites]

New Yorker here. Shocked but not surprised. Medical examiner said it was a homicide, grand jury's like, "eh, whatevs."
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:24 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

Eric Garner grand jury probe shows similarities to Michael Brown case
posted by homunculus at 12:26 PM on December 3, 2014

The medical examiner's ruling of homicide just means that he died because the cop choked him to death. A person who dies because of homicide per the medical examiner could be a victim of nth degree murder, or manslaughter, or someone killing them in self-defense. So physiologically the cop is responsible for Eric Garner's death, but not legally.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 12:27 PM on December 3, 2014

So physiologically the cop is responsible for Eric Garner's death, but not legally.

Well, I get your point, but Eric Garner was selling cigarettes and didn't want to be arrested. Apparently now, that's a justified homicide.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:30 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

It's a brave new world, innit?
posted by Elementary Penguin at 12:31 PM on December 3, 2014

Mod note: A few comments removed, cool it.
posted by cortex (staff) at 12:37 PM on December 3, 2014

So physiologically the cop is responsible for Eric Garner's death, but not legally.

Not necessarily legally. But an important thing to note in the Eric Garner case is the fact that chokeholds were banned by the NYPD, like decades ago, specifically because they kill people. This guy was filmed doing something that sure looks to me like an illegal chokehold, but somehow the grand jury decided it definitively wasn't. Somehow.
posted by showbiz_liz at 12:40 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

Do not understand the Staten Island Grand Jury's decision. No force should have been used in that situation. Suppose it was portrayed as an accidental choke hold, but why are you doing that when he's just complaining, displaying no weapon, not engaging the officer physically, not attempting to flee.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:40 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

New Yorker here. Shocked but not surprised. Medical examiner said it was a homicide, grand jury's like, "eh, whatevs."

Homicide is a description of the cause of death, not a crime. It means the decedent was killed by a person.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:42 PM on December 3, 2014

The medical examiner's ruling of homicide just means that he died because the cop choked him to death. A person who dies because of homicide per the medical examiner could be a victim of nth degree murder, or manslaughter, or someone killing them in self-defense. So physiologically the cop is responsible for Eric Garner's death, but not legally.

Since they opted not to indict him, isn't it more accurate to say that the possibility of making a determination or ruling on his responsibility has been foreclosed upon? And isn't that actually much worse?
posted by clockzero at 12:43 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

So physiologically the cop is responsible for Eric Garner's death, but not legally.

There will be a wrongful death suit that the city will settle. The mayor will see to that. So there will be legal responsibility. Just not criminal responsibility.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:43 PM on December 3, 2014

Homicide is a description of the cause of death, not a crime. It means the decedent was killed by a person.

Like I said above, I understand that. But his wasn't an accidental death. Or self defense. Cop should be responsible, legally.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:43 PM on December 3, 2014

Where is the perfect Black victim? Is there a perfect Black victim? Is he wearing a suit and carrying a briefcase? No scratch that, the case could be a bomb. Scratch the suit too because he could be holstering a gun.

Maybe khaki shorts with no pockets and a polo shirt tucked into his waistband walking slowly with his hands up in a completely open environment with no prior record of arrests and no family history of criminal activity and no prior drug usage at any point who already finished college and spends his free time volunteering with the terminally ill. Is that what he looks like? Will the cop who murders that guy be charged with a crime and taken to trial?
posted by showbiz_liz at 12:44 PM on December 3, 2014 [24 favorites]

Officer who fatally shot Tamir Rice judged unfit for duty by police in 2012
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:49 PM on December 3, 2014 [19 favorites]

Officer who fatally shot Tamir Rice judged unfit for duty by police in 2012

You'd think that police would know how to do a background check.
posted by drezdn at 12:55 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

Officer who fatally shot Tamir Rice judged unfit for duty by police in 2012

quelle surfuckingprise
posted by showbiz_liz at 12:56 PM on December 3, 2014 [6 favorites]

deeply saddened by this outcome. here's hoping the garner family's request for peaceful protest is honored.
posted by fingers_of_fire at 12:56 PM on December 3, 2014

here's hoping the garner family's request for peaceful protest is honored.

I doubt it, there'll be cops there
posted by showbiz_liz at 12:58 PM on December 3, 2014 [39 favorites]

Well, God Bless her: Sen. Gillibrand: I Will Ask Justice Department To Investigate Chokehold Death
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:30 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

NYPD has requested all officers be released from non-essential court appearances for the next couple days.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:32 PM on December 3, 2014

Officer who fatally shot Tamir Rice judged unfit for duty by police in 2012
posted by Golden Eternity at 1:35 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

From the officer's records in the Tamir Rice shooting, circa 2012:

It appears from the pattern developing within our short time frame with Ptl. Loehmann that he often feels that when told to do something, that those instructions are optional, and that he can manipulate them if he so feels it can better serve him. I do not say he is doing this for some benefit, or in an insubordinate way, but he just appears to have the mind set that if he thinks he knows better, than that is the course he follows. …

Unfortunately in law enforcement there are times when instructions need be followed to the letter, and I am under the impression Ptl. Loehmann, under certain circumstances, will not react in the way instructed. …

For these reasons, I am recommending he be released from the employment of the City of Independence. I do not believe time, nor training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:40 PM on December 3, 2014 [16 favorites]

> I do not believe time, nor training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies.

That is an incredibly damning thing to have on any record, moreso one that is public. You do not commit words anywhere NEAR that unless someone is deemed to be completely unfit for the profession.

Because all of that says that he's going to do whatever he pleases, and sees the law as more of a recommendation - playing into the "I am the law!" renegade cop narrative - I expect that this will be spun into something where the words "feels," "appears," "impression," and "recommending" and probably "believe" will be used as reason to disregarded this as "opinion" and toss it aside.
posted by MysticMCJ at 1:53 PM on December 3, 2014 [7 favorites]

Do not understand the Staten Island Grand Jury's decision.

As someone who has lived on Staten Island, I do. It's kind of a small pocket of hideous racism. When I rented there, people told me in hushed tones that I lived on the WRONG SIDE of a certain avenue. Which seemed to mean "quiet residential neighborhood with nice houses and occasional black people."
posted by corb at 1:57 PM on December 3, 2014 [6 favorites]

From The Christian Science Monitor's article on Eric Garner:

In 2010, federal prosecutors sought indictments in about 162,000 cases, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Grand jurors declined to return an indictment in 11 of these.

I'd love to see stats for this year, broken down by race.
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:00 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Eric Garner grand jury probe shows similarities to Michael Brown case

So is there some kind of prosecutor's convention where they have seminars on grand jury techniques like this? WTF.

But his wasn't an accidental death.

A homicide doesn't have to be accidental to be legal. The fact that illuminates this and the nature of state power is that the death certificates for people executed under the death penalty have homicide listed as the cause of death.
posted by rhizome at 2:04 PM on December 3, 2014 [3 favorites]

Ferguson Shooting: UN Torture Committee Condemns US For ‘Excessive’ Force In Law Enforcement
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:11 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Cleveland taxpayers are about to lose a shitload of money in a settlement. Hope they didn't want their parks cleaned or libraries to stay open. I hope the civil suit goes to a jury.
posted by rhizome at 2:15 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

How a Conservative Backlash Silenced #Ferguson Reporters for All the Wrong Reasons
posted by homunculus at 2:37 PM on December 3, 2014

Some of the comments made by Ptl Loehmann during this discourse were to the effect of, “I should have gone to NY”, “maybe I should quit”, “I have no friends”, “I only hang out with 73-year-old priests”, “I have cried every day for four months about this girl.”

Uhhh...guy had issues. They aren't issues that a person can't work through though, not sure it necessarily should disqualify him from employment with another department unless the issues were ongoing.

I don't think the issue with this shooting was his mental state, it was procedure that doesn't put deescalation of potential emergencies as the first priority. Or any priority.
posted by Drinky Die at 2:47 PM on December 3, 2014

Sen. Gillibrand: I Will Ask Justice Department To Investigate Chokehold Death
Well, that saves America's First Black President from having to get involved.

Where is the perfect Black victim?
If a little girl asleep in her own bedroom doesn't qualify, there simply is none.

Maybe the reason Obama is being so cowardly is because he knows damned well that any armed member of his own Secret Service can shoot and kill him and avoid all legal culpability.
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:06 PM on December 3, 2014

Here’s the Data That Shows Cops Kill Black People at a Higher Rate Than White People, via Mother Jones.

Not that there was any doubt.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 3:09 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

via Chris Hayes: But NPYD officer who killed a man back in 1993 chokehold was acquitted by local jury, then convicted on Fed charges
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 3:11 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

They aren't issues that a person can't work through though, not sure it necessarily should disqualify him from employment with another department unless the issues were ongoing.

I don't think the problem is that he was employed by the department, the problem is that he was allowed to carry a gun without, you know, having worked through the "issues."
posted by rhizome at 3:12 PM on December 3, 2014

Maybe the reason Obama is being so cowardly is because he knows damned well that any armed member of his own Secret Service can shoot and kill him and avoid all legal culpability.

Is this based upon anything specific? I mean, it may be so, but I'll bet dollars to donuts that to whatever degree they would have a preference (and I'm inclined to think on-the-ground feds to be apolitical in this context) to allow a patsy to do the dirty business.
posted by rhizome at 3:16 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Cleveland taxpayers are about to lose a shitload of money in a settlement.
American police departments pay out 2-3 BILLION dollars a year in brutality and wrongful death suits and settlements. The NYPD's annual costs are in the hundreds of millions (hard to tie down because there's a $800 million figure that covers ALL legal costs against the NYPD). It's part and parcel of the system - if a cop kills your loved one, don't expect justice, but, HEY! YOU WON THE BLACK FOLKS' LOTTERY!
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:17 PM on December 3, 2014

I don't think the issue with this shooting was his mental state, it was procedure that doesn't put deescalation of potential emergencies as the first priority. Or any priority.

The report where all this comes from indicates that the guy's mental state did not allow him to heed any priority as such. Policy doesn't matter if you have rogue nutballs on the street.

What is needed is for shit like this to be illegal, it's as simple as that. We can go back and forth all day about the is/ought problem, but if we the people would prefer things like this not to be allowed, then changes in the system have to be made, i.e. laws that can't be obviated by union contracts.
posted by rhizome at 3:20 PM on December 3, 2014

It's part and parcel of the system

Sure, but as far as I can tell, Cleveland PD either ignored his history, or didn't conduct a background check at all. I'm guessing they are not going to benefit in any way on testifying as to how that decision was made. I mean seriously, weeping during firearms training. Cutting open a department and finding out how some garbage cop got to patrol tower projects is a good way to get the system changed, because as weird as America can be about these things, it's gonna look real bad.
posted by rhizome at 3:23 PM on December 3, 2014

NYT: The Perfect-Victim Pitfall
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 3:24 PM on December 3, 2014

Departments now “having hard time” finding people who want to be police officers, blaming social media
posted by jeffburdges at 3:26 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

The report where all this comes from indicates that the guy's mental state did not allow him to heed any priority as such.

The report is on his mental state two years before the shooting. Lots of people go through extreme depression at various points in their life. (And uh...I'm not sure of what to make of the reference to hanging out with elderly priests.)

The guy pulled the trigger on a twelve year old, so maybe he really was too unstable to be given a gun, that is entirely possible and not an unreasonable conclusion. But he was with a presumably non-nuttball partner who agreed the best way to handle the situation was to roll up aggressively like a foot away and start screaming commands. I think that procedure as a response to a call that reports a juvenile with a likely fake gun is the bigger issue.
posted by Drinky Die at 3:26 PM on December 3, 2014

The report is on his mental state two years before the shooting.

He was basically fired for his job as a cop for being a bad cop.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 3:33 PM on December 3, 2014

Departments now “having hard time” finding people who want to be police officers, blaming social media
...giving them the perfect excuse to lower their standards further and hire more men like Timothy Loehmann.
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:33 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

Maybe the reason Obama is being so cowardly is because he knows damned well that any armed member of his own Secret Service can shoot and kill him and avoid all legal culpability.

It's part and parcel of the system - if a cop kills your loved one, don't expect justice, but, HEY! YOU WON THE BLACK FOLKS' LOTTERY!

hey, osf, I know that this is coming from a place of indignation and I share in it, but these both feel kind of weirdly crass.
posted by kagredon at 3:34 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Ack, mea culpa. I mixed up Tamir Rice with Akai Gurley.
posted by rhizome at 3:37 PM on December 3, 2014

Departments now “having hard time” finding people who want to be police officers, blaming social media

I call bullshit. There are plenty of people who support the no-bills both with- and without social media awareness. This is just a dogwhistle job ad.
posted by rhizome at 3:39 PM on December 3, 2014

Photo of the protest outside Radio City Music Hall. The NYC Christmas tree lighting starts in a few hours.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 3:40 PM on December 3, 2014

He was basically fired for his job as a cop for being a bad cop.

Did you read the article?
posted by Drinky Die at 3:40 PM on December 3, 2014

Drinky Die, I posted the article. The guy was forced to resign.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 3:43 PM on December 3, 2014

he often feels that when told to do something, that those instructions are optional, and that he can manipulate them if he so feels it can better serve him.

It seems like this type of behavior is system wide. When I've asked myself, "Is this how these guys are trained? Are we seeing 'best practices'?" When I find out, it looks like no. They're NOT supposed to drive right up to an armed suspect, as we've seen them do twice in these recent incidences. They are ignoring what they're taught.

It's like they've bought right into this hero worship stuff that's been going on since 911 and by god, they're going to roll how they roll.

Lord help them if they ever do run up against someone who actually has lethal intent.

They're like bloody Wiggam's crew.
posted by Trochanter at 3:47 PM on December 3, 2014

The guy was forced to resign.

Yes, because he had psychological issues because he could not get over a girl over a period of several months. People go through that sometimes, and they mostly recover over time.

If you seriously want to frame the issue here as an unstable cop upset about his girlfriend...fine. But I think Tamir Rice was unnecessarily shot in a manner where even mentally stable police would have unnecessarily shot because they are taught to by broken training and broken expectations and by broken accountability.
posted by Drinky Die at 3:49 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Remember how we used to bitch because they were tasing everybody left right and center?

Seems so quaint.
posted by Trochanter at 3:54 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

Proposal: give Grand Juries eyes.
posted by Lemurrhea at 3:57 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Yes, because he had psychological issues because he could not get over a girl over a period of several months. People go through that sometimes, and they mostly recover over time.

The report also details longer-term problems, "including Loehmann’s having left his gun unlocked, lied to supervisors and failed to follow orders."

And look, I'm sympathetic to having psychological issues and personal stressors affect my work performance. I've been in that position, of course. But part of being capable of your job, especially a job with the potential to endanger other people, is learning how to self-monitor and remove yourself from situations that you are not capable of safely carrying out, whatever the reason for that incapability is. He could've asked to move his firearm training to another time.

If you seriously want to frame the issue here as an unstable cop upset about his girlfriend...fine.

No one has said anything like that. Part of the "broken training and broken expectations and by broken accountability" that you speak of includes the responsibility of the department to make sure that officers who are being sent out into public-facing situations with the means to inflict lethal force are capable of exercising good judgement about the use of that force.
posted by kagredon at 4:00 PM on December 3, 2014 [3 favorites]

Oh god this tweet is making it hard not to cry at work. "My grandmother is in tears. Tears. She said they marched because she didn't want us to have to. And now look."
posted by naju at 4:03 PM on December 3, 2014 [7 favorites]

kagredon: I see your point of view there, think we are gonna have to agree to disagree though.
posted by Drinky Die at 4:04 PM on December 3, 2014

Did somebody say "best practices"? Well, the White House is on top of it (not).

Charles Ramsey, one of two co-chairs apppointed by President Obama to head a commission on ways to demilitarize local police, is known for leading repeated bloody and abusive crackdowns on protesters when he was Washington, D.C.’s chief a decade ago, according to a civil rights attorney who won millions in damages for 100s of citizens attacked by D.C. police.

“If the president’s idea of reforming policing practices includes mass false arrests, brutality, and the eviscerating of civil rights, then Ramsey’s his man. That’s Charles Ramsey’s legacy in D.C.,” said Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Executive Director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund(PCJF), speaking of the ex-D.C. chief and current Philadelphia Police Commissioner.

But Ramsey IS black (and not to be confused with the Charles Ramsey who is "the scary-looking black dude who helped rescue three kidnapped women from that freak Ariel Castro in Cleveland").
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:12 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

Fox Reacts To Garner Decision: ‘Hope Nothing Happens In NYC… We’ve Got The Tree Lighting Ceremony’
posted by homunculus at 4:22 PM on December 3, 2014

Proposal: give Grand Juries eyes.

I am strongly in favor of this proposal. Let's make it happen!
posted by winna at 4:24 PM on December 3, 2014

Every time another unarmed black man is killed by the police, every time another mentally ill or deaf person or another person in the wrong place at the wrong time is killed by the police, every time they get away with it, I get a little bit more cynical. Every time I think "Surely this.... surely this is the thing that cannot stand." And every time I'm wrong.

There's just a tiny, tiny bit of hope left, and that hope is that we are reaching a critical mass, that there's just too many of them to ignore anymore (or, really, there's too many of them with video proof and too much social media to ignore, but I'll take it). Especially with the Ferguson and Staten Island grand jury decisions coming so close together and the protesters getting more organized, and at least we're all talking about it now, and that tiny flicker of hope flares up. I'm really gonna hate it when I'm wrong and that little flame dies.
posted by Weeping_angel at 4:32 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

This Week in Blackness is live on YouTube, discussing the Garner no-indictment along with Ferguson and related topics. Elon James White - who was on the ground in Ferguson this summer - is one of the hosts; I haven't caught the name of the woman yet. It's interesting to me because it's not mediated for white people at all, unlike anything you'd see on TV or radio.
posted by desjardins at 4:35 PM on December 3, 2014 [7 favorites]

The man who filmed the Garner killing was indicted, however.
posted by rhizome at 4:41 PM on December 3, 2014 [6 favorites]

Proposal: give Grand Juries eyes.

That Justice is a blind goddess
Is a thing to which we black are wise:
Her bandage hides two festering sores
That once perhaps were eyes.
posted by eviemath at 4:43 PM on December 3, 2014 [13 favorites]

Eric Garner grand jury probe shows similarities to Michael Brown case

Well that's one way to get us all to stop talking about this being an abnormal way to use a grand jury, I guess.

“If the president’s idea of reforming policing practices includes mass false arrests, brutality, and the eviscerating of civil rights, then Ramsey’s his man. That’s Charles Ramsey’s legacy in D.C.,” said Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Executive Director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund(PCJF), speaking of the ex-D.C. chief and current Philadelphia Police Commissioner.

Ramsey is fucking awful and Verheyden-Hilliard is sorta right but missing the point there. Ramsey's an enemy of freedom of assembly but he's not necessarily going to be unwilling to find "communities where law enforcement and neighborhoods are working well together" by the President's definition. The whole issue with the protester crackdowns comes down to a view that Those People aren't the community. They're anti-statist agitators and they disrupt traffic for people who aren't making noise against The Way Things Are.

So you can bet that this effort will come out with plenty of suggestions that will focus on the everyday happenings and very little that revolve around outburst protests. If you'll plan ahead and get your permits for the approved locations and hours and keep the noise level down, sure howdy, they'll have stuff for that. The unwashed demanding to be heard regardless of whether its convenient? No way they're going to come out with anything that says it's cool to slow down Black Friday shopping by 5 minutes.

I swear to grodd I was a moderate twenty five years ago. What the fuck did you do to me, America?
posted by phearlez at 4:52 PM on December 3, 2014 [3 favorites]

I swear to grodd I was a moderate twenty five years ago. What the fuck did you do to me, America?

I suspect that, as with a lot of us on the left now, it's not so much about you moving to the left as it is the rest of the country moving to the right starting with the Reagan years. (It was moving to the right before that, but Reagan accelerated it.)
posted by tonycpsu at 4:56 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

I was a moderate before metafilter!
posted by desjardins at 4:57 PM on December 3, 2014

‘Hope Nothing Happens In NYC… We’ve Got The Tree Lighting Ceremony’

Guess where the people in my Facebook feed are talking about going.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:59 PM on December 3, 2014

Judging from Twitter and livestreams, they're not going to get anywhere near it. Police have been jamming cell phones too.
posted by desjardins at 5:08 PM on December 3, 2014

On the topic of white people finally beginning to understand their privilege with the police, the #crimingwhilewhite hashtag is getting a lot of traction right now. I'm not sure how I feel about it - on the one hand, it's fantastic to see white people publicly acknowledging their privilege in police interactions, and I think nearly everyone posting in the tag is doing so with the implication that everyone should be treated that way by the police, but there's an aspect of it that feels like rubbing it in and I've seen a few responses from black folks that seem to interpret it that way. I didn't realize there was such a fine line between acknowledging privilege and bragging about it until I started feeling uncomfortable reading the tag.

That said, some of the stories are just... wow. Drive home slow!
posted by dialetheia at 5:10 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

Yes, I was a Moderate in the 1980s myself. As I've mentioned elsewhere (and wish to make a catchphrase), I've been defenestrated through the Overton Window.

as for #crimingwhilewhite, one particular tweet from a non-white says it all
The fact that people can admit crimes via #CrimingWhileWhite w/o fear that it will likely 1 day be used against them reinforces their point
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:27 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

Eric Garner's Final Words
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:30 PM on December 3, 2014 [5 favorites]

Police have been jamming cell phones too.

i thought there were federal laws against this
posted by pyramid termite at 5:59 PM on December 3, 2014

They're trying - check out Twitter for the hashtag No Justice No Tree.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:04 PM on December 3, 2014

I thought there were laws against killing a guy with a chokehold, too. When the people who are supposed to enforce the laws are breaking the laws... are they really laws?
posted by desjardins at 6:09 PM on December 3, 2014 [3 favorites]

i thought there were federal laws against this

BART did it too some time ago (er, I guess it was shutting down service rather than jamming per se, but... same effect)
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 6:09 PM on December 3, 2014

So, is the tree lighting still happening? When is it supposed to be lit? Is it bad if I really hope they have to postpone it?
posted by Weeping_angel at 6:10 PM on December 3, 2014

It happened, it's lit, most of America is talking more about Leann Rimes' bra than the protestors.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:14 PM on December 3, 2014

It's already lit

posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 6:14 PM on December 3, 2014

Police have been jamming cell phones too.

Yeah, citation needed. I've been at an event where a couple thousand people were trying to access Facebook and Twitter simultaneously. It overloaded both the local 802.11 network and the 3G/LTE networks in the area. No jamming necessary.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 6:15 PM on December 3, 2014 [3 favorites]

Sure, I don't have a cite. I was (probably irresponsibly) repeating what a livestreamer was saying about his (and others') feed going down in a certain area.
posted by desjardins at 6:18 PM on December 3, 2014

Cuomo "stands with Eric Garner's family"

A pity he didn't do that back when he was being asked to appoint a special prosecutor.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:21 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

I thought there were laws against killing a guy with a chokehold, too.

According to this article: not in New York there isn't.

... the default setting for our criminal justice system—both explicitly and implicitly—is to believe that an on-duty officer who takes another citizen’s life was justified in doing so. Unless that baseline assumption changes, we should expect the same result the next time a cop takes someone else’s life in the line of duty. Even when the killing is caught on video. Even when the police officer uses a chokehold that’s been barred by his department. ...

Why then, if chokeholds are banned by the NYPD, wasn’t Pantaleo indicted? While the officer’s use of the banned maneuver received significant scrutiny in the court of public opinion, it likely received much less in the court of law. As Eugene O’Donnell, a professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, argued earlier this week, there is a difference between an act that is banned in the NYPD’s rulebook and one that is deemed criminal. “There is no explicit law that criminalizes the use of a chokehold on someone either by a police officer or someone else,” wrote O’Donnell.

posted by maudlin at 6:30 PM on December 3, 2014

Speaking of which, De Blasio opposes effort to make chokeholds illegal
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 6:34 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

naju: (The quotes in the statement, and probably the entire thing, are from the awful Jeff Roorda who we've discussed at length and is behind the Darren Wilson fundraising efforts. How anyone can still take him seriously is beyond me.)

Chris Hayes had a segment with Roorda tonight, and even more than the expected obfuscation and smarminess, the thing that really jumped out at me was several minutes in when he says:

Let's not forget that in both the Garner case and the Brown case, if either of them had complied with the police, these events would have had different outcomes... not that the outcome's not tragic, and, other than a police officer dying, the worst outcome that could come from these interactions...

I'm not surprised that he feels that a police officer dying is a worse outcome than a citizen that the officer's there to serve and protect dying, but I am surprised that he said it on national television.
posted by tonycpsu at 6:38 PM on December 3, 2014 [8 favorites]

NYC protest livestreams:

https://news.vice.com/article/live-from-the-eric-garner-protests-in-new-york?utm_source=vicenewstwitter

http://new.livestream.com/JamesFromTheInternet/events/3634145

https://www.stringwire.com/watch/jzTn

http://www.ustream.tv/stopmotionsolo
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 6:41 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Ta-Nehisi Coates: "Fatalism really isn't an option."
posted by tonycpsu at 6:44 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

HUGE amount of protestors just walked past our building on the Upper West Side, with helicopters overheard. (I would be out there as well if I hadn't ruptured my ankle muscle.)
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:49 PM on December 3, 2014

Roorda: Let's not forget that in both the Garner case and the Brown case, if either of them had complied with the police, these events would have had different outcomes

Never forget that the basic police belief is always that if you don't do what you're told then you deserve to get hurt. Arguably you are expected to be even more defferential than that given the choice of the word "challenge" by the author.
posted by phearlez at 6:54 PM on December 3, 2014 [6 favorites]

I'm not surprised that he feels that a police officer dying is a worse outcome than a citizen that the officer's there to serve and protect dying, but I am surprised that he said it on national television.

I suspect he would (and will) be surprised to have people suggest that there's anything questionable about that orientation.
posted by Lexica at 7:03 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah. If you've ever seen, say, the Daily News or New York Post coverage of police funerals, you would not even be surprised.
posted by corb at 7:07 PM on December 3, 2014

The police chief of little San Luis Obispo, California (far from all the action, and with a 4% black population) got an op-ed in the local daily in which he basically makes a Jeff Roorda argument, while citing "facts" from the Grand Jury testimony that take Wilson's testimony at total face value, plus a couple other known factual inaccuracies. The next time I see any local police officer here, I'm definitely going to "HANDS UP, DON'T SHOOT!!!"
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:14 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Furthermore, at this point and despite all my own in-person interactions with police officers having been positive, I'm cynical enough to think that attitude is probably widespread among cops.

If you think about it, we expect soldiers to die. We talk about how tragic it is, but we expect it. Multiple filled coffins get shipped home at a time, and while we mourn about it, we're not terribly surprised.

Compare to what happens when a single police officer gets shot. We see news footage of a cortege of dozens of police vehicles. We see photos of hundreds of uniformed officers attending the funeral. It's all over the front pages of every newspaper that covers the area it happened in, and possibly farther beyond that. This is A THING THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

This is part of why I think the idea suggested upthread, of somehow elevating the idea of police being willing to die to protect civilians, is a nonstarter.

(On preview: yep, like corb says. I was thinking of the papers here in the Bay Area, who tend to be restrained compared to either of those two, and even so they go basically wall to wall with coverage of police shootings and funerals.)
posted by Lexica at 7:16 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Live stream of Oakland protests
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 7:36 PM on December 3, 2014

Apparently the real villain in the Garner case is tax.
posted by pompomtom at 7:57 PM on December 3, 2014

The lonesome death of Eric Garner
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:30 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

For those who think it's all just about race: in late November, a grand jury decided not to indict a non-white police officer who shot and killed an unarmed white man.
posted by shivohum at 8:33 PM on December 3, 2014

it's kind of funny that you're lecturing us "those who think it's all just about race" and taking pains to specify that it was a non-white cop
posted by kagredon at 8:41 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

i mean usually the "it's not about raaaaaace" crowd confine themselves to "innocent white people get shot by cops too!", but "non-white cops shoot unarmed people too!" is a new one to me
posted by kagredon at 8:42 PM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]

Report: Black Male Teens Are 21 Times More Likely To Be Killed By Cops Than White Ones

...for those possibly not fully grasping the racial element in these sorts of things.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:46 PM on December 3, 2014 [13 favorites]

Yo shivohum I'mma let you finish, but
posted by tonycpsu at 8:47 PM on December 3, 2014 [3 favorites]

To characterize the arguments about racism raised in this thread as "it's all just about race" misunderstands those arguments.
posted by audi alteram partem at 8:48 PM on December 3, 2014 [5 favorites]

ah, don't you see, Drinky Die? That means that 19 more white cops can get off the hook for shooting unarmed black teenagers and it still won't be about race because one time it was an unarmed white guy who got shot by a not-white cop
posted by kagredon at 8:49 PM on December 3, 2014

Report: Black Male Teens Are 21 Times More Likely To Be Killed By Cops Than White Ones
Yo shivohum I'mma let you finish, but

These just show how malleable statistics are. Yes, both of these are true.

It is also true that 326 whites compared to 123 blacks were killed by police bullets in 2012.

It is also true that of the six teen shooters who killed police officers in 2011, 83% were black.
posted by shivohum at 9:20 PM on December 3, 2014

Isn't it great how literally nothing is ever about race?
posted by dirigibleman at 9:30 PM on December 3, 2014 [9 favorites]

It is also true that of the six teen shooters who killed police officers in 2011, 83% were black.

4.98 of them?
posted by kagredon at 9:31 PM on December 3, 2014 [1 favorite]

Shivohum, are you asserting that the homicide of one hundred and twenty-three black teenagers by police officers is somehow justified by the fact that in 2011, five other black teenagers killed police officers?
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:35 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

Shivohum, are you asserting that the homicide of one hundred and twenty-three black teenagers by police officers is somehow justified by the fact that in 2011, five other black teenagers killed police officers?

Hardly. I never called all of those justified. I merely pointed out the misleading use of statistics.

I didn't even mention the extreme disproportion in the per capita commission of violent crimes by race. And how trust in police differs by race. And it stands to reason that if violent crime rates and trust in police differ by race, then resisting arrest differs by race as well. And if resisting arrest differs, then arrest-related deaths by homicide are likely to differ too. That doesn't make them justified. But it does cast doubt on the racial disproportion being a result of racism (though I'm sure racism is at least some factor some of the time, obviously).
posted by shivohum at 9:41 PM on December 3, 2014

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality.

Martin Luther King Jr., 28 August 1963
posted by the man of twists and turns at 9:43 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

And how trust in police differs by race.

"trust in police", which we know is a factor that exists in a vacuum
posted by kagredon at 9:51 PM on December 3, 2014 [5 favorites]

McCulloch reportedly has a reputation for protecting police officers... which certain exceptions: "Ferguson prosecutor indicted a black cop who hit a man with his baton"
Nope, nothing to do with race.
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:56 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

If you'd like to Know Despair™, have a gander at the comments on the policeone.com story on the Garner case. [via, h/t TheWhelk]
posted by ob1quixote at 10:08 PM on December 3, 2014

Never ever read the posts on Policeone.com. If you compared it to say Stormfront, you would find a heck of a lot of similarities. Shoot, just reading /r/protectandserve gives me a headache and their very very tame compared to Policeone.
posted by RedShrek at 10:13 PM on December 3, 2014

have a gander at the comments on the policeone.com

I have a Doctor's note excusing me from this field-trip.
posted by mikelieman at 10:27 PM on December 3, 2014 [12 favorites]

Goldie Taylor speaks at Ebenezer Baptist Church, Atlanta, Georgia, 01 December 2014. She does not pull any punches with Attorney General Holder.
posted by ob1quixote at 10:28 PM on December 3, 2014 [4 favorites]

I've started to read Wretched of the Earth, and this paragraph is very enlightening, in particular w/r/t "black on black" violence (or really any other oppressed people, of course)

"The settler-native relationship is a mass relationship. The settler pits brute force against the weight of numbers. He is an exhibitionist. His preoccupation with security makes him remind the native out loud that there he alone is master. The settler keeps alive in the native an anger which he deprives of outlet; the native is trapped in the tight links of the chains of colonialism. But we have seen that inwardly the settler can only achieve a pseudo petrification. The native's muscular tension finds outlet regularly in bloodthirsty explosions--in tribal warfare, in feuds between septs, and in quarrels between individuals.

Where individuals are concerned, a positive negation of common sense is evident. While the settler or the policeman has the right the livelong day to strike the native, to insult him and to make him crawl to them, you will see the native reaching for his knife at the slightest hostile or aggressive glance cast on him by another native; for the last resort of the native is to defend his personality vis-à-vis his brother. Tribal feuds only serve to perpetuate old grudges buried deep in the memory. By throwing himself with all his force into the vendetta, the native tries to persuade himself that colonialism does not exist, that everything is going on as before, that history continues. Here on the level of communal organizations we clearly discern the well-known behavior patterns of avoidance. It is as if plunging into a fraternal bloodbath allowed them to ignore the obstacle, and to put off till later the choice, nevertheless inevitable, which opens up the question of armed resistance to colonialism. Thus collective autodestruction in a very concrete form is one of the ways in which the native's muscular tension is set free. All these patterns of conduct are those of the death reflex when faced with danger, a suicidal behavior which proves to the settler (whose existence and domination is by them all the more justified) that these men are not reasonable human beings.""

He's really discussing a form of collective/social PTSD that has very real concrete and physical effects on people's physiological states and in turn mental states. What could be called, under Wilhelm Reich's theories "Muscular Armor".

When I read that I felt so many things shatter as if such a potent truth was spoken, something those who listen and pay attention and empathize with the colonists (and a thousand times mores so, even, the colonists themselves) feel deep in their bones...
posted by symbioid at 10:38 PM on December 3, 2014 [7 favorites]

Holder's just running interference these days. I'd like to think he'd be better served with silence.
posted by rhizome at 10:40 PM on December 3, 2014

Protests in US after no charges in police killing of NY black man
posted by infini at 4:59 AM on December 4, 2014

> That'd be the "liberal" MSNBC, of course.

This has really been nagging at me since I watched that clip. Scarborough said, "And by the way, if I've offended anybody by saying what I've said, trust me, 95 percent of America think just like me." I wonder if he was thinking of/including black Americans when he summarized "American" opinion like that. Not that all African Americans are in lockstep about this incident (neither are whites)--and granting that Joe's comment was rhetorical--it still comes across as dismissive and insensitive to the racial divides in the U.S.

Wes Moore & Mika Brzezinski did a fair job of pushing back though. Brzeninski looked intensely uncomfortable all during Joe's tirade. (Note, I don't watch Morning Joe so don't really know anything about these people's perspectives.)
posted by torticat at 5:25 AM on December 4, 2014

Also, for anyone else who watched that Morning Joe clip (or similar clueless bullshit), Charles M Blow's oped in the NYT is the perfectly stated counterpoint.
posted by torticat at 5:36 AM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

Black Panther leaders Fred Hampton and Mark Clark were assassinated by the FBI and Chicago police this day, 1969.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:50 AM on December 4, 2014 [5 favorites]

I didn't even mention the extreme disproportion in the per capita commission of violent crimes by race.

Now I'm not saying these things are justified, I'm just implying black people are a violent criminal element without providing any proof, and that's not racist at all!
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 6:00 AM on December 4, 2014 [8 favorites]

It is also true that 326 whites compared to 123 blacks were killed by police bullets in 2012.


The census holds that non-Latino whites make up 62.6% of the population, and African Americans make up 13.2% of the population.
I'm not a mathematician, in fact I'm really bad at math, so please correct me if I'm wrong in the following:
Eyeballing those numbers, 123 is roughly 40% of 326. 13.2 is roughly 20% of 62.6. In short, based on demographics, and without comment on the individual just-ness of each shooting, you'd expect, if 326 whites were shot by cops, that roughly 65 African Americans would be shot dead by cops. Roughly double that number will killed.
Again, I stink at math, so correct me if I'm wrong here.
posted by qnarf at 6:02 AM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

White House Forms Task Force to Address Police Brutality, Appoints Brutal & Abusive Cop to Lead It

Surprised? Police Union Rejecting New Technology that Tracks Cops’ Driving

You all saw NYPD cop who choked Eric Garner wasn’t indicted — but man who recorded the incident was by now, right?
posted by jeffburdges at 6:06 AM on December 4, 2014

St Louis County PD jump into the Tamir Rice fray. Their tweet:

Kids will be Kids?

On November 22nd 2014, a Cleveland Police Officer shot 12 year old Tamir Rice who had his... http://t.co/IAX15snPXs— St. Louis County PD (@stlcountypd)
December 4, 2014

posted by desjardins at 6:06 AM on December 4, 2014

Again, I stink at math, so correct me if I'm wrong here.

You've got the right idea but the math is wrong (but you are so close!). Because the demographic statistics you cited don't include the other races, we have to redo the proportions. So if we are only looking at African Americans and non-Latino whites, non-Latino whites make up 82.5% and African Americans 17.6%

It is also true that 326 non-Latino whites compared to 123 African Americans were killed by police bullets in 2012.

That would be 449 deaths, of which 72.6% were non-Latino whites and 27.4% were African Americans.

If the proportion of those shot was in keeping with the population proportions recalculated above, if 326 non-Latino whites were killed then 69 African Americans would have been killed. That means 178% of the number that should have been killed were killed (still roughly double if we round up).
posted by LizBoBiz at 6:20 AM on December 4, 2014 [3 favorites]

Thanks for the corrections, LizBoBiz!
posted by qnarf at 6:21 AM on December 4, 2014

I didn't even mention the extreme disproportion in the per capita commission of violent crimes by race. And how trust in police differs by race. And it stands to reason that if violent crime rates and trust in police differ by race, then resisting arrest differs by race as well. And if resisting arrest differs, then arrest-related deaths by homicide are likely to differ too.

I think it's really important to look at the fact that a lot of the commission of crime has to do with economic status as well as policing patterns based on that economic status. And that economic status in the US often varies sharply by race, in part because of the fact that the majority of African-Americans in this country are descended from slaves, who when freed, started off with nothing and faced a lot of discrimination in hiring and housing.

Violent crimes largely differ by socioeconomic status, too - if you think that you have other ways to get what you want besides violence, why would you use violence? Violence is one tool in a vast box for people of higher socioeconomic status, but often the only one that people on the bottom have.

If you're reasonably sure that if you are arrested, you will be able to make your bail and go home to your family immediately, you are less likely to physically resist arrest. If you're reasonably sure that if you're wrongly arrested, you will be able to make the life of the arresting officer fairly difficult, you are less likely to physically resist arrest. If you're reasonably sure that if you're arrested and tried, you are likely to get an extremely light sentence, you are less likely to resist arrest.

So in one way, you are correct - because arrests differ, arrest-related homicide differs. But I think you are looking only at the surface of the reasoning rather than looking at the broader picture there.
posted by corb at 6:37 AM on December 4, 2014 [5 favorites]

Stanford students briefly shut down highway 101 last night
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 6:54 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

St Louis County PD took down the Facebook post I mentioned earlier. Fortunately, I had it open in another tab. The internet doesn't forget, folks.
posted by desjardins at 7:13 AM on December 4, 2014 [4 favorites]

This is for Brandon Blatcher--I wanted to follow up on this from several days ago (I'm just catching up on these threads, having stepped away for a day or two). I did find the testimony of crazy Witness 40. It's here starting on page 86. (Apologies if this was already linked in the thread; I didn't see it.)

Anyway wow that woman is a piece of work. There is a good bit of question as to whether she was actually at the scene; and, for once, the prosecution pushed pretty hard on the inconsistencies. Her story backs up Darren Wilson's in pretty much every respect. But a lot of that detail* she could have picked up from news stories, which she admitted having read (or, more accurately, looked at the pictures).

The high school friend she was supposedly on her way to visit, when she claims to have witnessed the shooting, is black (she says she hadn't seen this friend in many years and was hoping to reconnect). But she is quite frank about some of the unbelievably awful racist stuff she has said/thought/posted online. The testimony is about as nuts as you would expect from the diary entry.

*a lot of the detail, but not all, which is what makes it especially crazy--like, if that was a fabricated account, it almost seems like it must have been coached, or she has quite an imagination.
posted by torticat at 7:15 AM on December 4, 2014

Another maddening point from that FB post you put up - they are advising that the child should throw away the weapon if they have it, you know, holstered in your pants. So they're advising the child grab the gun. Which they then would presumably shoot them for.
posted by corb at 7:16 AM on December 4, 2014 [6 favorites]

Holy cow! South Carolina cop charged with murder in unarmed man shooting.
posted by marxchivist at 7:31 AM on December 4, 2014 [5 favorites]

South Carolina is doing equality better than New York City now?

What the hell kind of backwards world did I wake up in this morning?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:40 AM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

New York hasn't done equality better than anybody where the police are involved in ages.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:02 AM on December 4, 2014 [6 favorites]

It was more South Carolina being ahead of the game that floored me.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:05 AM on December 4, 2014

Dear fellow northerners: The north is pretty racist, too.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 8:11 AM on December 4, 2014 [21 favorites]

This is for Brandon Blatcher--I wanted to follow up on this from several days ago (I'm just catching up on these threads, having stepped away for a day or two). I did find the testimony of crazy Witness 40. It's here starting on page 86. (Apologies if this was already linked in the thread; I didn't see it.)

Anyway wow that woman is a piece of work. There is a good bit of question as to whether she was actually at the scene; and, for once, the prosecution pushed pretty hard on the inconsistencies. Her story backs up Darren Wilson's in pretty much every respect. But a lot of that detail* she could have picked up from news stories, which she admitted having read (or, more accurately, looked at the pictures).

Yeah, that testimony was crazy and I wouldn't count it as reliable. Her description of what happen does match Wilson's pretty much, except for Wilson's (and Johnson's) account of Mike Brown handing cigarillos to Johnson. There's so much she isn't sure about, except Mike Brown leaning in the car. She admits, then denies reading about the case on the internet, admits she made racist comments, then says she only looked at news articles in the week before testifying. She has known memory problems, insists on the route she took to leave the Apartment complex yet Prosecutor notes its physically impossible and has been for days. And finally they pulled images from the scene and neighborhood and her car isn't in any of them. It just doesn't add up.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:22 AM on December 4, 2014 [3 favorites]

I think it's really important to look at the fact that a lot of the commission of crime has to do with economic status as well as policing patterns based on that economic status.

And policing patterns not based on economic status. The level of disparity in marijuana arrests can't be purely explained on economic means. From the recent DrugPolicy.com report on NYC maryjane arrests, page 4.

RACE TRUMPS CLASS  
One might think that neighborhoods with similar social class or family incomes would have similar rates of marijuana arrests, but that is not necessary the case.  

Consider three Queens neighborhoods with very similar median family incomes. In Flushing (pct 109) the median family income is $58,000; in Fresh Meadows (pct 107) it is $58,000, and in St. Albans and Springfield Gardens (pct, 113) it is $59,000.  

Flushing, with only 19% black and Latino residents, has a marijuana arrest rate of 89 per hundred thousand residents. Fresh Meadows is 32% blacks and Latinos and has a rate of 96 marijuana arrests.  

But the St. Albans neighborhood is 93% black and Latino residents and has a marijuana arrest rate of 396 – four times that of Flushing and over three times that of Fresh Meadows.  For marijuana arrests in these NYPD precincts with nearly identical family incomes, race trumps class.  

So to look at crime statistics about race and assume the number of charges means there's a relationship in violations (which may not result in arrests or prosecutions) is inherently suspect. Similarly just police encounters are going to reflect the unbalanced number of PoC who police choose to frisk/hassle/whatever even before you consider the impact of that group realizing they're being singled out and having an according reaction.
posted by phearlez at 8:29 AM on December 4, 2014 [15 favorites]

St Louis County PD took down the Facebook post I mentioned earlier.

Between the weird scare quotes, the addled structural choices, and the condescending and scolding tone, I really expected that to be printed in Comic Sans. Maybe they meant to tape it to the precinct microwave but stuck it on Facebook by mistake.
posted by cortex at 8:30 AM on December 4, 2014 [5 favorites]

It got worse, too... I guess she testified again later (here, starting p 96) and recanted some of the things she'd said.

I wouldn't count it as reliable

To say the least. However, a minor point, I regret calling her "crazy" because apparently she has bipolar disorder. As far as her racism and problems with the truth go, though, she sounds like a very troubled person.
posted by torticat at 8:33 AM on December 4, 2014

This one's for phearlez: regarding this question I asked upthread, it appears the prosecution were unclear on the point themselves. They discuss the affirmative defense issue with the grand jury here, pages 101-104, and are at that time saying they still need to decide how to advise the jurors on that. It sounds like mostly they are trying to decide whether probable cause or reasonable doubt should be the standard as the jury considered self-defense/excessive force.

One interesting quote in there from (prosecutor) Alizadeh: "...this investigation was, we talked about yesterday, is not typical on how we would present cases to the grand jury. This is an investigation...."

I'd be interested in seeing the discussion from the previous day about how they perceived this to be an atypical case.
posted by torticat at 9:02 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

So to look at crime statistics about race and assume the number of charges means there's a relationship in violations (which may not result in arrests or prosecutions) is inherently suspect. Similarly just police encounters are going to reflect the unbalanced number of PoC who police choose to frisk/hassle/whatever even before you consider the impact of that group realizing they're being singled out and having an according reaction.

Exactly. I went and found this comment I made from an old thread, about stop-and-frisks in NYC. Short version: Cops stop and frisk black people out of all proportion to their population - way, way out.
posted by rtha at 9:11 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

Last night on my show, a key McCulloch ally admitted that McC never wanted an indictment and that GJ was just for political cover. <1/2>— Christopher Hayes (@chrislhayes) December 4, 2014

(will update as soon as the transcript is available. I wish this were surprising.)
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:39 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

The Eric Garner Case And Police Lawlessness
posted by homunculus at 9:51 AM on December 4, 2014 [3 favorites]

Torticat - interesting. Like I said, all my digging about affirmative defenses relates to civil matters so we'd need an actual criminal defense lawyer to speak more about how they tend to relate to charges being filed. My one law prof/defense attorney friend addressed a different aff. defense in the quote I reproduced from the old thread. Here's the specific snip:

Unless police officers have a specific statutory privilege that entitles them to more investigation when their conduct (actus reus) demonstrates a provable murder case (with all the inferences which the govt. enjoys from the use of a deadly weapon in that prosecution), then the process is not playing out in a regular manner. Self-defense is an affirmative defense that must be raised by the defendant. The officer here is being treated differently from any other person who shot and killed someone. Put more bluntly, if you shot someone 6'2", 290 lbs., Linda you'd be charged with murder. (In which case, you should call me.) And I would raise your self-defense claim and the jury would assess these facts. You would not be given the benefit of the doubt in the charging and the investigation in my experience.

Now, this is somewhat different for citizens vs officers, and the Law of Self Defense website lists all the various MO statutes and the various things they cover. There's apparently one for citizens making arrests and one for officers making arrests.

I'm going to assume they reproduced these statutes correctly because I just don't have time to do due dilligence and check official sources. Anyone else can feel free to make sure they're right and I'm not re-parroting something that was, say, struck down as unconstitutional...

Self defense generally, as with what Amy is talking about above:

Unless inconsistent with other provisions of this chapter defining justifiable use of physical force, or with some other provision of law, conduct which would otherwise constitute any crime other than a class A felony or murder is justifiable and not criminal when it is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no fault of the actor, and which is of such gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability of avoiding the injury outweighs the desirability of avoiding the injury sought to be prevented by the statute defining the crime charged.

I think the "by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no fault of the actor" is kind of a big deal there, and I would say it's in accordance with what I was taught 10+ years ago at an armed security guard class called "duty to retreat." I've beat my drum repeatedly about this issue and how I think we can trace almost every one of these things to violating that concept so I'll refrain from further here beyond commenting that this standard isn't in the .046 section for cops, though it's implied by the 1970s decision on deadly force.

We can't really have a definitive answer to Amy's belief that a private citizen wouldn't get this lattitude as a judgment call from a prosecutor, but there is a bit in the MO statutes from LoSD here talking about an absolute defense.

1. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 563.016, a person who uses force as described in sections 563.031, 563.041, 563.046, 563.051, 563.056, and 563.061 is justified in using such force and such fact shall be an absolute defense to criminal prosecution or civil liability.

2. The court shall award attorney’s fees, court costs, and all reasonable expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant has an absolute defense as provided in subsection 1 of this section.

.016 is about civil remedies notwithstanding, 031 is defense of persons, 041 is defense of property, 046 and 051 are law enforcement and civilians making arrests. 056 and 061 aren't in their listings - maybe someone else can look them up.

That sounds like it would indicate boom-you're-done, but the general def of "absolute defense" doesn't mean it's a shield against a charge. The general definition from wikipedia is this:

In law, an absolute defence is a factual circumstance or argument that, if proven, will end the litigation in favor of the defendant. The concept of an absolute defence is not a rigid one. Statutes frequently use the term merely as a synonym to "full" or "complete". It is more often used, however, as a term of art in both criminal and civil law to refer to an underlying set of facts and laws, not raised by the complaint or indictment, which will require the defendant's dismissal even if the factual allegations of the complaining pleading are true.

they get to some examples here, and it's very pertinent on the never charge/dismiss later issue:

Use of the word "absolute" sometimes causes confusion, because even in the law "absolute" is sometimes used simply as a synonym for "full" or "complete". As a term or art, however, there are many complete defenses which are not customarily called absolute. Most notably, innocence, while a complete defence to a criminal charge, is not generally termed "absolute", because it involves a material fact of the pleading. On the other hand, double jeopardy is more likely to be termed an absolute defence; an indictment or (other criminal initiating pleading) does not have to state that the defendant has not previously been tried on the crime, but once a defendant shows that he has been previously tried for a crime, his dismissal is required by the US Constitution.

I don't find a def of "absolute defense" in the MO code, though perhaps it's in a procedure document somewhere.

Never the less, it certainly seems that - based on the clause specifically demanding that the defense be raised by a defendant - there's nothing in the law itself as written precluding a charge. The existence of this defense means they could very well file a plea for dismissal and, if there weren't facts in dispute, the charge would get dismissed - potentially with prejudice, preventing future re-filing. It's also possible there's an interpretation from a higher court decision altering the code as it's written from its strict wording. You'd need a MO lawyer for that, or at least access to the annotated code from Westlaw.

So this doesn't much change my perspective, which matches Amy's: they really should have just charged him. If they filed for dismissal and got it, well, at least there'd be a more typically adversarial finding of fact. One can certainly take the position that it's bad/unethical to file charges that are likely/certain to be dismissed - certainly I'd think that if you willfully violated double jeopardy - but I think the variety of witness testimony and arguments over the facts in the case indicates there's matters of veracity to figure out.

tl;dr: I don't think anything easily visible to a layperson or presented to the public supports an argument that the self defense law in MO precludes a charge being filed.
posted by phearlez at 9:55 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

I was under the distinct impression that affirmative defences are only used at trial, not at grand juries.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:58 AM on December 4, 2014

The level of disparity in marijuana arrests can't be purely explained on economic means.

I think what I'm trying to say is: police tend to worry less about doing negative things to the people in society that they think they can get away with - the ones with the least power. And it doesn't require that the police, themselves, are racist - it requires that they accurately assess where people stand on the power scale (which has racism baked in), and how much flak they will take for assaulting people without power. If we want that to change, we need to either change the dictates we're giving the police, or change the amount of power various people have in society.
posted by corb at 10:24 AM on December 4, 2014

Or we could train police to understand that racist behaviour isn't allowed. You're doing that thing again where you're trying to insist police aren't racist in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 10:28 AM on December 4, 2014

To be clear, my statement above was not intended as a defense of the police. I think police brutality is absolutely a very real thing that happens - I just think that police brutality is broader and even more pervasive than I think you may be thinking. (For example, if you really feel like weeping, try googling "police kill homeless man.")
posted by corb at 10:34 AM on December 4, 2014

And it doesn't require that the police, themselves, are racist - it requires that they accurately assess where people stand on the power scale (which has racism baked in), and how much flak they will take for assaulting people without power.

Why is it important to remove police officers from responsibility for assessing people and preying on them according to a racist power scale? Why is this fine distinction necessary?
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 10:39 AM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

Sorry corb, but that is Nuremberg bullshit. "They're not racist, they're just the violent agents of a racist system," is damn thin gruel. I think it's past time to focus on only the macro, and it's kind of condescending to zoom out and say that we first have to deal with some huge thing that involves a lot of moving parts.

You're right that police training and the legal structures surrounding their interactions with people need to change, but that's a pretty ineffectual prescription for something with so much institutional support. For instance, how many DAs get elected without law enforcement endorsement? How many win over an opponent who got the endorsement?
posted by rhizome at 10:41 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think the "by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no fault of the actor" is kind of a big deal there, and I would say it's in accordance with what I was taught 10+ years ago at an armed security guard class called "duty to retreat." I've beat my drum repeatedly about this issue and how I think we can trace almost every one of these things to violating that concept so I'll refrain from further here beyond commenting that this standard isn't in the .046 section for cops

I agree. That something in the nature of DTR should be in the law I mean.

Anyway even as the law stands I think Wilson's perception (whether genuinely felt by him or not) that Brown was a lethal threat to him or to other cops or to the general public, at the time that he killed him, was ridiculous. And the question of whether his perception was reasonable is one of the things that ought to have been hammered out in trial--although in terms of the legal outcome it wouldn't have made a difference because cops are given so much leeway, which, as you say, creates the problem to begin with. Ugh.

So this doesn't much change my perspective, which matches Amy's: they really should have just charged him.

I agree.
posted by torticat at 10:45 AM on December 4, 2014

GOP leadership member calls for Garner hearings

House Republican Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) early Thursday said there should “absolutely” be hearings into the death of Eric Garner in New York.

The politics of this are interesting. A lot of police lawlessness happens in Democratic districts and the Democratic Party is probably beholden to police unions to some extent, but the GOP risks alienating their racist FOX News base if they try to embarrass Democrats on police brutality.
posted by Golden Eternity at 10:47 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

Popehat - "Broken Windows, Broken Lives"
posted by rhizome at 10:53 AM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

Why Should Anyone "Respect" the Law?
posted by brundlefly at 10:58 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

To expand on my last comment--I feel like some parallels could be drawn between this case and the shooting in Florida by Michael Dunn. The jury there found that maaaaaybe Dunn felt his life was in danger while he was in his car (enough for reasonable doubt I guess), but weren't buying that he still felt threatened while the kids were driving away. (Well, they hung on that point, but he was convicted on retrial.)

Anyway, in Darren Wilson's case--even if everything went down in the car exactly as he described, and he was unable to use his baton or his mace or whatever and had to resort to his gun--what about once he was out of the car, when the fatal shooting actually happened? Did he go through the whole "triangle of force" thing in his head again and decide that shooting was still his only alternative? Isn't this the kind of thing a prosecution would ask during trial? It sure as hell wasn't asked in the grand jury.
posted by torticat at 10:58 AM on December 4, 2014

Sincere question, not at all intended to distract from the more important questions but since there's a new Garner thread, maybe there's some room in this longboat for it - why don't white people much seem to care about police brutality against white people, either? I vociferously disagree with the argument that this stuff isn't about race, because it very clearly is, but the statistic shivohum posted earlier is utterly breathtaking - 449 police killings in one year! To me it's obvious that the black share of that number is about twice as large as it would be expected to be from the population proportions, and that is definitely the most important issue in the context of the recent cases, but that still leaves 326 white deaths at the hands of police that white people just ... don't seem to care about, or at least they aren't out protesting it like they probably ought to be.

Is it just a reflexive pro-law-enforcement attitude, or is it that the white people that were killed were homeless or marginalized so people think it can't happen to them, or what? Again, the most important issue here is ending the summary execution of unarmed black people for minor petty crime (or for playing with toys, as in Tamir Rice's case), but examining white peoples' attitudes toward police brutality against white people might help illuminate ways in which we could get people to understand and care about all of these problems. It would be a lot easier to take people who say "this isn't about race" if they seemed to give a shit at all about any of this police brutality at any other time as anything other than a "white people get shot too" fig leaf.
posted by dialetheia at 10:59 AM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

why don't white people much seem to care about police brutality against white people, either?

Says who? Are you saying that there should be 326 FPPs if anything in this thread is to be taken seriously? Really, I can't figure out your point and what content is there sounds pretty axe-grindy.
posted by rhizome at 11:11 AM on December 4, 2014

Is it just a reflexive pro-law-enforcement attitude, or is it that the white people that were killed were homeless or marginalized so people think it can't happen to them, or what?

Yes?

I think a lot of stuff plays into it. I'd say the big thing is the belief that this happens to Bad People and you don't have to go far in the Facebook morass before you find people saying "if they had just X they'd be alive." It's common enough that the WaPo runs that "if you don't want to get hurt don't challenge me" thing from someone who felt secure enough of perception that they'd put that out there in public.

Some congresscritter said that Garner would be alive if he wasn't fat. That's sort of a good indicator. We're okay in society talking shit about people's weight. Why not combine that with saying that any resistance gets you killed?

The people who the cops kill are the Other. Combine that with the relentless marketing campaign they do about how dangerous their job is - though it isn't, compared to being a truck driver - and how they're going to be the ones to save you - even though they don't have to - and I think you get people who assume it can't happen to them and feel a sense of duty to the people doing this.

You see law enforcement and their apologists say nasty things about who you should call the next time you're being assaulted, as if you no longer have any right to protection if you don't reflexively assume the cops are in the right. Standard tribalism.

I think more of us melanin-deficient people have concerns than you might think, but the people with the platforms tend to be better off and more secure. So for them the police mostly are their bulwark against someone who might take their shit, and they have more shit. So for them the police fill a more valuable role than for someone who is less well off. If they have always been in a better financial class they've been less likely to have those formative negative encounters. My gut suspicion is that someone who has been hassled non-violently by cops is more likely to reflexively feel empathy for people being more violently oppressed by them, or at least less likely to shrug it off.
posted by phearlez at 11:16 AM on December 4, 2014 [4 favorites]

Really, I can't figure out your point and what content is there sounds pretty axe-grindy.

I think that noise you hear is your own ax, rhizome. I get maybe you're tired - as am I - by this nonsense "why do people keep talking about this like it's a racial issue!" BS, but I don't think it's a stretch at all to say there's a lot of folks who aren't concerned about police brutality regardless of whether it's disproportionately racist.
posted by phearlez at 11:19 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

Says who? Are you saying that there should be 326 FPPs if anything in this thread is to be taken seriously? Really, I can't figure out your point and what content is there sounds pretty axe-grindy.

What? Axe-grindy? I peppered that comment with disclaimers that "what about the white people" was not at all my intention in asking the question, only trying to understand why most of the white people around me don't seem to care at all about these issues, and I've made my opinions on the appalling racism and complete miscarriage of justice very clear in all of these cases . I'm specifically responding to arguments like shivohum's that "this happens to white people too" - so why isn't there much public outcry about it? Why aren't white people protesting police brutality and killing? Why do white people only whip out the "police brutality against white people" arguments as a way to deflect from the obvious racial disparity and not really at any other time? That's all.
posted by dialetheia at 11:20 AM on December 4, 2014

I kinda get what is leading corb to say what she's saying, and it's not all wacked-out batshit or anything.

However (turns to corb), the way that this society is set up, what you're talking about shakes down in such a way that trying to make this distinction does kind of come across like you're quibbling about whether something is the People's Front Of Judea or the Judean People's Front, so it's kind of a so-close-as-to-really-not-matter kind of thing.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:22 AM on December 4, 2014 [4 favorites]

Sincere question, not at all intended to distract from the more important questions but since there's a new Garner thread, maybe there's some room in this longboat for it - why don't white people much seem to care about police brutality against white people, either?

I have an opinion on this, as a white person: the very idea of state violence is organized around anti-blackness, nationalism and white supremacy, which is why a lot of violence against marginalized white people "disappears" in white discourse. State violence is ipso facto that which happens to people who are not counted as fully human/who fall outside the protections of civil society, who are therefore outsiders/dangerous/lawless/bad/fair game. In the white imagination, those people are people of color, especially black people. Violence by the state against whites can only be recognized if the whites in question are painted as somehow not properly white, so for instance if the cops shot, like, a juggalo or some poor trailer dwelling schizophrenic, that might be treated like when cops shoot people of color. But admitting state violence against "regular white people" threatens all kinds of mental categories - the distinction between real/white people and outsider/POC, the legitimacy of all state violence, etc.

I mean, I think that white discourse recognizes that the American state exists to protect whiteness, but can't say that "officially" - we can't say "the state functions to dispossess native people and enslave or steal the labor of people of color, and to protect white people from the consequences of those actions" or "low income white people thinkingly or unthinkingly accept the wages of whiteness when we assume that we have more in common with wealthy whites than with poor people of color". We can't say those things because they conflict with the official ideology of democracy and would call the legitimacy of the state and civil society into question. But I think that we are unconsciously aware of them.

And that means that we can't admit that state violence against whites is blowback from the larger white supremacist campaign against black people and other people of color.

(On a side note - as I've recounted here many times, I know white people - of varying class backgrounds and degrees of dirty hippiedom - who have been the victims of pretty scary police violence. It is very, very difficult to get other white people to believe this - either the violence is minimized ("oh, they wouldn't really have shot that person just because the cops held a gun to her head and said they were going to blow her head off") or made up stupid stories about why the people in question deserved it. Or else used "real" state violence as a reason why what happened wasn't so bad - it was completely okay to get beaten unconscious in your cell while being called a faggot because you're white and "real" police violence happens to black people, look at how much harder they have it...only the people who say that stuff don't actually care about violence against black people, they just want to discredit the experience of the white person.)
posted by Frowner at 11:27 AM on December 4, 2014 [39 favorites]

And that means that we can't admit that state violence against whites is blowback from the larger white supremacist campaign against black people and other people of color.

What a fantastic answer, Frowner, thanks. That really clicked a lot of things into place for me.
posted by dialetheia at 11:32 AM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

only trying to understand why most of the white people around me don't seem to care at all about these issues,

You should consider asking them...unless them is we?

I'm specifically responding to arguments like shivohum's that "this happens to white people too"

That just reads like a simple analogy to the standard conservative trope with regard to police-on-black violence: "what about black-on-black violence? That happens much more often!" It's a distraction, and it's not a zero-sum game: respecting the right to life and Constitutional rights of black people in America is a tide that raises all boats. This entire thread is about certain ways that people of color get the shittiest possible end of the stick in America, so let's start there.
posted by rhizome at 11:40 AM on December 4, 2014

You should consider asking them...unless them is we?

Jeez, I'm not sure if you're actually implying I don't care about racial injustice (which is clearly false as even a brief look at my posting history in this thread will show) but you might consider ratcheting down the hostility. I'm looking for a rebuttal to shivohum's argument, not backing it up. I consider my question worth asking in that it led to Frowner's fantastic comment, which will definitely inform the way I frame these issues when I talk to other white people about them.
posted by dialetheia at 11:48 AM on December 4, 2014

Arthur Chu on Twitter:

WTF is the impulse behind changing #BlackLivesMatter to #AllLivesMatter. Do you crash strangers' funerals shouting I TOO HAVE FELT LOSS

and

Do people who change #BlackLivesMatter to #AllLivesMatter run thru a cancer fundraiser going "THERE ARE OTHER DISEASES TOO"
posted by Joey Michaels at 11:50 AM on December 4, 2014 [24 favorites]

A Herstory of the #BlackLivesMatter Movement - by Alicia Garza.
posted by rtha at 12:26 PM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

In case anyone was still under the impression that the St. Louis police don't have a disgusting openly racist culture, and in case anyone still doesn't understand the link between these police killings and lynchings, apparently one of their supervising officers hung up a fucking noose in the office in 2006 and was hardly even censured for it. In 2010, a civil trial finally granted $850k in damages to black officers who brought suit, but nobody involved was suspended or anything, and the supervisor who dismissed it as "all in good fun" and was found to have retaliated against black officers for complaining was allowed to keep his position. I don't even have words for how appalling and scary that is.
posted by dialetheia at 12:40 PM on December 4, 2014 [9 favorites]

I mean, I think that white discourse recognizes that the American state exists to protect whiteness, but can't say that "officially"

Could you elaborate on this point, Frowner? I'm not sure what you mean.
posted by zug at 12:47 PM on December 4, 2014

Tom Tomorrow Cuts Through the BS
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:48 PM on December 4, 2014 [7 favorites]

Has this link been posted already? A 22-year-old shoots an actual BB gun at the police and is arrested rather than shot within 2 seconds. I wonder what the difference could be...
posted by TwoStride at 12:53 PM on December 4, 2014 [8 favorites]

Colorado Man Arrested After Pointing Banana At Police
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:56 PM on December 4, 2014 [4 favorites]

Could you elaborate on this point, Frowner? I'm not sure what you mean.

I will try! I hadn't thought this all through quite like that until just now.

"White discourse" is a vague term. I think what I'm trying to say is "all public discourse in the US that does not explicitly work to be anti-racist" or "all public discourse in the US that assumes that this is a basically non-racist society, slavery is over, racism does not dramatically impact the life chances of people of color, etc". Discourse where it is assumed that while it's kind of sad that native people lost their land, it happened a long time ago and probably would have happened anyway and there's nothing we can do about it now. The kind of conversation where saying that something is racist is considered rude; the kind of conversation where "reverse racism" is a legit phrase.

Other public discourses exist - and white people participate in other discourses - but I feel like there's this "centrist" set of assumptions that are the mainstream, ABC/CBS/NBC discourse - not even the far right discourse - where there's this pretense that racism isn't a large factor in American life, that we are post-racial, etc. And this discourse doesn't just center white people; it centers white supremacy, because it refuses any kind of anti-racist discourse as partisan, PC, special interest, "minority", divisive, etc. White discourse purports to be neutral but what is neutral is really white supremacist.

However, there's a lot of ways that acknowledgement of white supremacy appears in white discourse, sort of glancingly - you hear conversations where the assumption is that one race has to be superior, like "black people would do the same thing to white people if they got the chance"; the anxiety to "prove" that slavery "wasn't that bad" and that black people complain too much about bias, showing that they are trying to "play the race card" to get stuff from white people; just the assumption in all discourses everywhere that white people always and forever both have and deserve resources and that black people are always trying to get stuff they don't deserve. I think that there is an awareness that the state is white supremacist, but it's masked by these "well, the state has to be white supremacist because otherwise look at all the corruption, theft of benefits, etc that would overwhelm us, and "they" would be just as bad as "us" if they had power anyway.

Like, the continuous obsession with black "criminality", "hypersexuality", etc...all that is this discourse designed to say that of course the state must protect "us" from this bestial other. (I would argue that the frequent refusal to recognize black artists and intellectuals, especially avant-garde ones, is part of this - if black artists can be quirky-as-part-of-their-genius, or if black artists can be just as avant-garde and difficult as, like, Schoenberg or Wittgenstein or someone, that means that they can't possibly be these lesser others....so black genius very often gets reframed or written out.)

And the obsession with proving that obviously racist things aren't actually racist, or if racist, are not really that bad - it's like disavowal, the obsession with denial that shows the truth of the case.

But it's not okay - worldwide or within our borders - to say openly "we white people believe that the state needs to protect us from black people because we white people are superior and should therefore have more stuff and more privileges". This country has justified so much on the rhetoric of equality, and it is so globally unacceptable to be an openly apartheid state...I think that's why there's always this return to "science"/genetics/neurology, because there's a tension in white discourse - we want simultaneously to be able to say that black people (and other people of color) are inferior and not to contradict our belief in "equality". It's like a perpetual "oh, anyone can go to Harvard and become a millionaire, except unfortunately some people because of their inferior genetics or their absent fathers or their criminal behavior or their drug use can't but then they deserve it".

I think the strongest cases - and I'm sorry this rambles, I'm still working it out - are the widespread disenfranchisement of black voters under the guise of working against voter fraud or punishing criminals and the ridiculous punishments for drug convictions (loss of student loans, etc). We want to call ourselves "democratic" but we don't want black people to vote, so we have to pretend that lots of black people are going to commit fraud, or that committing a crime means that you somehow are no longer a democratic subject. We say that drug use is bad, but we turn a blind eye when it's white people - it's cute when it's grannies smoking up but Trayvon Martin was a monster. Basically, we want to believe in ourselves as egalitarian democrats while still reaping the benefits of white supremacy, so we have to figure out how to both talk about white supremacy (so that we can keep white people united around whiteness) and disavow it at the same time.
posted by Frowner at 1:46 PM on December 4, 2014 [86 favorites]

Holy shit. Frowner for dictator-for-life. No joke. All the applause.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:54 PM on December 4, 2014 [4 favorites]

(Since people said kind things about these two comments, I want to add: these thoughts are the results of reading Andrea Smith, WEB DuBois, Bell Hooks, James Baldwin and many tumblr things by black tumblr-ites and tumblr-ites of color, also from talking to Native friends, plus other work and conversations I'm sure I'm not thinking of in the moment. These comments are things that I just realized in this form but they're not ideas that are original to me.)
posted by Frowner at 2:03 PM on December 4, 2014 [27 favorites]

Wow. A Protest just sprung up here in sleepy Savannah. Nothing violent happened, but a majorstreet was blocked and it got a bit tense before moving on to the local black college. This happened right outside where I work, oddly enough.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:17 PM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

Frowner, thank you. This is why I always go back and re-read the comment whenever I see your name at the bottom of it.

I had never thought of mainstream US thought as explicitly white supremacist, but you're right, it really really is.
posted by zug at 2:25 PM on December 4, 2014 [4 favorites]

Phoenix.
posted by showbiz_liz at 2:49 PM on December 4, 2014

From Showbiz_Liz's link:

Dickerson said he never saw the officer try to talk with Brisbon. He also said his friend wasn't yelling at the officer.

"Who's gonna argue with police?" Dickerson said. "He had no death wish yesterday."

Yes, who would argue with police, unless they had a death wish.
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:59 PM on December 4, 2014

it's cute when it's grannies smoking up but Trayvon Martin was a monster.

Holy shit, yes yes yes. Marijuana turns white people into adorable comical slackers, but turns black people into rampaging monsters. I'd not thought of this before right now and now I'm turning into a rampaging monster because it makes me so angry.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:47 PM on December 4, 2014 [19 favorites]

It's not about race.
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:23 PM on December 4, 2014 [4 favorites]

WTF is the impulse behind changing #BlackLivesMatter to #AllLivesMatter. Do you crash strangers' funerals shouting I TOO HAVE FELT LOSS

I am actually seeing this "AllLivesMatter" garbage all over my Facebook and while snarky twitter responses are witty, are there any longer/more detailed counter responses to this shitty attitude of "I can get behind this issue AS LONG AS WE AGREE IT'S NOT ABOUT RACE"? I'm extremely interested if there's anything out there or if anyone has read anything good. Lotta people are starting to trot out the ol' "More white people are actually killed each year" and trying to use it as some kind of gotcha card and it's getting old. Would love to gather some great links if they exist.
posted by windbox at 4:29 PM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

Winbox: frowner's post is maybe actually a good start.
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:35 PM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

Um, what?

Flavor Flav chanting w/ #Ferguson protesters outside police station

[laughing] That's awesome.
posted by limeonaire at 6:39 PM on December 4, 2014 [5 favorites]

High school newspaper's Ferguson survey stopped by administration

Apparently 350 Webster Groves High School students walked out today, though! Wow. The movement lives.
posted by limeonaire at 6:45 PM on December 4, 2014 [1 favorite]

are there any longer/more detailed counter responses to this shitty attitude of "I can get behind this issue AS LONG AS WE AGREE IT'S NOT ABOUT RACE"?

From the Alicia Garza - one of the founders of the #blacklivesmatter - piece I linked above (and which I was able to use in a fb discussion earlier this week with a guy I knew in college who was doing the #alllivesmatter thing, and it was a good discussion):

I created #BlackLivesMatter with Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi, two of my sisters, as a call to action for Black people after 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was post-humously placed on trial for his own murder and the killer, George Zimmerman, was not held accountable for the crime he committed. It was a response to the anti-Black racism that permeates our society and also, unfortunately, our movements.

{snip}

Suddenly, we began to come across varied adaptations of our work–all lives matter, brown lives matter, migrant lives matter, women’s lives matter, and on and on.

{snip}

We completely expect those who benefit directly and improperly from White supremacy to try and erase our existence. We fight that every day. But when it happens amongst our allies, we are baffled, we are saddened, and we are enraged. And it’s time to have the political conversation about why that’s not okay.

I don't want to keep {snip}ping because the whole thing is fantastic and everyone should read it in its entirety. But one more:

When we deploy “All Lives Matter” as to correct an intervention specifically created to address anti-blackness,, we lose the ways in which the state apparatus has built a program of genocide and repression mostly on the backs of Black people—beginning with the theft of millions of people for free labor—and then adapted it to control, murder, and profit off of other communities of color and immigrant communities. We perpetuate a level of White supremacist domination by reproducing a tired trope that we are all the same, rather than acknowledging that non-Black oppressed people in this country are both impacted by racism and domination, and simultaneously, BENEFIT from anti-black racism.

posted by rtha at 7:06 PM on December 4, 2014 [19 favorites]

45 years ago today

and 80 years ago

"But things are so much better today..." well, somewhat less brutal and blatant, but the same goals and purpose
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:12 PM on December 4, 2014

dialetheia: On the topic of white people finally beginning to understand their privilege with the police, the #crimingwhilewhite hashtag is getting a lot of traction right now.

Cf. #livingwhileblack.
posted by ob1quixote at 7:31 PM on December 4, 2014 [2 favorites]

Oh wow—apparently kids from my high school walked out two days ago. I had no idea.
posted by limeonaire at 7:45 PM on December 4, 2014

Time for a #BlackLivesMatter #GeneralStrike ?
posted by mikelieman at 4:25 AM on December 5, 2014

I think AllLivesMatter happens partly because of dismissiveness and partly because it's uncomfortable for someone like me, as a comfortable white dude, to say "Black lives matter" and not have it taken as paternalistic and inappropriate. So even as I recognize that it's appropriation and minimizing, I want to be a part of the conversation and call for a better world.

Since I'm fortunate enough to have sounding boards like Metafilter in my life I know that I should just forgo the shorthand and keep saying my piece w/o being a problem or making people feel crappy. It's not like missing out on a hashtag is a hardship (specially since I mostly hate them). But I get why even well-meaning people do it.
posted by phearlez at 7:55 AM on December 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

In Boston: "Whose tracks? Our tracks!"
posted by showbiz_liz at 9:01 AM on December 5, 2014 [3 favorites]

I think AllLivesMatter happens partly because of dismissiveness and partly because it's uncomfortable for someone like me, as a comfortable white dude, to say "Black lives matter" and not have it taken as paternalistic and inappropriate.

I dunno, as a white lady I have no problem with the tag. It's a way, as a white liberal, of fighting back against the "ally" attempt to whitewash the whole thing by claiming that it's about anything but race.
posted by zug at 9:25 AM on December 5, 2014 [4 favorites]

I think AllLivesMatter happens partly because of dismissiveness and partly because it's uncomfortable for someone like me, as a comfortable white dude, to say "Black lives matter" and not have it taken as paternalistic and inappropriate.

It's my understanding it's used in more of a "NotAllMen" sense, though.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:21 AM on December 5, 2014 [2 favorites]

That would be the partly. I think there's people who legitimately mean well but are uncomfortable with being the white voice that gets listened to saying this about a group they don't belong to. I'm not saying I think that it's the majority or that there's no crossover of it happening and racism - conscious or not - but I think it gets excused for that reason.

I don't know that I'd agree with paralleling it to NotAllMen, which feels like excusing rather than co-opting. NotAllMen implies it's not as bad as all that. AllLivesMatter is more appropriation and "why aren't you talking about MEEEEEEEEEE?"
posted by phearlez at 10:41 AM on December 5, 2014

I don't know that I'd agree with paralleling it to NotAllMen, which feels like excusing rather than co-opting. NotAllMen implies it's not as bad as all that. AllLivesMatter is more appropriation and "why aren't you talking about MEEEEEEEEEE?"

Hmm. I'd say the two come from the same impulse, though - "Not All Men" is more like "no fair, you're accusing MEEEEEE of being like that and I'm not!" while "All Live Matter" is more like "you're not talking about MEEEEE and I do matter too!" But in both cases there's a "you're not expressly and accurately describing MEEEEEEE" point-of-origin, I'd say.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:44 AM on December 5, 2014 [2 favorites]

I'd add also that the effect of both are to deflect responsibility--if #NotAllMen do the thing, then men as a group don't have a responsibility to combat sexism. Since #AllLivesMatter, people who aren't targeted by anti-black racism don't have a responsibility for that, either.

I think #CrimingWhileWhite may be a good example of phearlez's point though--I think there were a lot of well-intentioned people in the hashtag who were trying to talk about the Brown and Garner cases in a way that acknowledged their privilege, but the execution was pretty tone-deaf.
posted by kagredon at 10:50 AM on December 5, 2014 [5 favorites]

Missouri Attorney General says that grand jury was misled in Wilson's nondictment.

(Worth noting in the headline of the story: Michael Brown Grand Jury. As though he were the one potentially on trial. It's racism all the way down.)
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:37 AM on December 5, 2014 [10 favorites]

Missouri Attorney General says that grand jury was misled in Wilson's nondictment.

Sincere question - is that sufficient to call for a do-over and re-submit this to another grand jury?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:43 AM on December 5, 2014

If there's any justice, yeah I would hope so.

Problem is...
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:45 AM on December 5, 2014

is that sufficient to call for a do-over and re-submit this to another grand jury?

You don't even need that much, he could call a grand jury just because he felt like it. This is why (I think) McCulloch announced the grand jury results when and in the way he did, the National Guard buildup, etc.: to ensure the reaction made headlines everywhere and poisoned (and/or polarized) the jury pool in advance of any further GJ possibilities. That's how fucking many chess moves ahead (I think) they're thinking just to keep this asshole out of a courtroom.
posted by rhizome at 11:52 AM on December 5, 2014 [7 favorites]

it's uncomfortable for someone like me, as a comfortable white dude, to say "Black lives matter" and not have it taken as paternalistic and inappropriate.

As a white guy who right now looks like a caricature of The Man, if not a police officer, I think I know what you mean, but I don't feel it. Do you think the same thing about "I like kumquats?" You aren't a kumquat, after all. How about "Black people are people, too," would that make a difference? How about applied to the homeless? It's pretty much all the same thing: advocacy.
posted by rhizome at 11:57 AM on December 5, 2014

Well, maybe it's just me. I dunno. It may also be that this sort of thing is on my mind because of the situation with Cosby allegations suddenly only getting attention when a male comic makes noise about it. Which in fairness, I feel like it's better that attention be gotten at all, but the feel is icky.

Perhaps it's just the difference between my saying I support X or I believe in Y rather than a statement of fact about a group I am not a part of. It is for sure a statement - Black lives matter - that I believe and which should be uncontroversial. It just doesn't feel like My Statement.

Like I said, I'm not letting it stop me from advocacy or protest; it's just not using a (lumped together into one) word.
posted by phearlez at 12:42 PM on December 5, 2014 [2 favorites]

(Worth noting in the headline of the story: Michael Brown Grand Jury. As though he were the one potentially on trial. It's racism all the way down.)

YES, this has been driving me up the wall! Thank you for bringing it up. In a less depressing and more just world, we'd be talking about the Darren Wilson grand jury.
posted by dialetheia at 1:16 PM on December 5, 2014 [4 favorites]

Something similar that's been nagging me is my local NPR affiliate and newspaper describing local protests as "Ferguson" protests, nicely eliding the systemic problems that protesters are addressing and constraining the story to one isolated event.
posted by audi alteram partem at 1:27 PM on December 5, 2014 [5 favorites]

You don't even need that much, he could call a grand jury just because he felt like it.

For the record, in Garner's case, the Staten Island DA only gets 2 tries at a GJ.
posted by rhizome at 1:33 PM on December 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

Family Of Tamir Rice Files Wrongful Death Lawsuit Against Cleveland Police
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:08 PM on December 5, 2014 [3 favorites]

> Of course, it's Seattle, not Ferguson, MO, so I imagine there's some semblance of decency there

No felony charges for SPD cop’s bone-breaking punch of handcuffed woman.
posted by The corpse in the library at 2:49 PM on December 5, 2014 [8 favorites]

I'm sorry if this has already been posted. The NAACP's Journey for Justice march had to run a guantlet of racist performances before arriving at the state capitol. Marchers were undeterred.
posted by Miko at 7:19 PM on December 5, 2014 [7 favorites]

What President Obama told me about Ferguson's movement: think big, but go gradual, Phillip Agnew, The Guardian.
posted by nangar at 10:38 PM on December 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

Just came here to post that, Miko. Post-racial society, indeed.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:45 PM on December 5, 2014

I think #blacklivesmatter is actually an important thing for white people to be saying. Chris Rock talked about how the race problem in the US is talked about as if it is a universal problem, but in a lot of cases it's really a case of white people devaluing and abusing black people (and people of color), and one of the only ways to combat it is for other white people to call white people to account. White voices raised to say #blacklivesmatter is a direct way of expressing that, of centering blackness and the gross miscarriages of justice that have been occurring across the US for as long as there was a US (and, indeed, even before).

Most of the pushback I heard from against white allies was about shifting the discussion away from blackness. The issue is allies trying to be colorblind, or make universal statements, when in this moment, right now, the issue is that black lives are not treated like they matter and that is wrong.
posted by Deoridhe at 12:06 AM on December 6, 2014 [10 favorites]

A timely must read if you haven't already - The Karma of Brown Folk

Vijay Prashad ponders the rise of Asian America-and calls for ‘model minority suicide’-in this smart, biting rumination on color lines in multiracial America. Along the way, he produces a complex picture of emergent South Asian communities. Indeed, The Karma of Brown Folk is both a fascinating genealogy of America’s idea of India and a love/hate letter to Prashad's fellow desis, or South Asian immigrants. At the heart of the book is Prashad's history of the model minority myth, which he traces to Cold War immigration reforms and civil rights movement backlash. The myth offers Asians the role of ‘perpetual solution to what is seen as the crisis of black America,’ and riffing on Du Bois, Prashad suggests the question for Asian Americans is: ‘How does it feel to be a solution?’ A kaleidoscopic critique that deconstructs the logic of Asian American chauvinists like Dinesh D'Souza as well as the ‘New Age Orientalism’ of Deepak Chopra, The Karma of Brown Folk is remarkable not only for its radical analysis of U.S. racism but of desi ‘bad faith’-even as it contains fascinating accounts of Afro-Asian collaboration and multiracial organizing.
—

Village Voice
posted by infini at 1:13 AM on December 6, 2014 [5 favorites]

“Coalition Karma: On Vijay Prashad’s Uncle Swami”

The “America today” covered in Uncle Swami reportedly differs a bit from that covered in Karma. In a relatively recent interview with Brown Town Magazine reflecting on the tenth anniversary of Karma’s publication, Prashad identifies three dynamics of the current context. The first is “how after 9/11 and really after 1993,” South Asian Americans are associated with “the idea of ‘terrorist;’” the second is the unacceptability of attempting “to separate some of us from others, whether by saying we are not Muslims, they are, or by saying we are not terrorists;” and the third is South Asian Americans needing to acknowledge that “domestic racism is integrally related to imperialism.” Uncle Swami addresses these points while also remaining committed to the goals of Karma, which Prashad informs Brown Town Magazine include encouraging South Asian Americans “to be much more aware of Black struggles” so as to “not take a casually racist attitude toward the social dilemmas of African Americans” and to “shun the culture of cruelty proposed by the rise of Hindu fundamentalism, and equally all forms of social suffocation.” And like with Karma, Prashad hopes Uncle Swami will inspire “intellectual” and “praxis-oriented” solidarity and participation in “struggles alongside other communities as a part of our own experience in the US.”

This last goal of Prashad’s, to inspire coalition “from below” between Blacks and Asian Americans, is a common theme of the historian’s work and has helped make him a popular figure among progressives both in and outside of academia. Yet what, exactly, are the terms of solidarity Prashad advances in Uncle Swami and how does a particular reading of third world coalition, as well as of United States racial history, scaffold his call to arms?

The racial politics of Battleship America
posted by infini at 1:16 AM on December 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

White Indians (imho an FPP in its own right)

Everybody Was Kung Fu Fighting: Afro-Asian Connections and the Myth of Cultural Purity
posted by infini at 1:34 AM on December 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

5% of NYPD officers account for 40% of all resisting arrest charges.
posted by Artw at 8:46 AM on December 6, 2014 [18 favorites]

Wouldn't it be something if we could get police departments to implement broken-windows policing on their own selves?
posted by rtha at 9:21 AM on December 6, 2014 [11 favorites]

There is this weird statistical/cultural phenomena whereby a minority of a population (usually under 10%) isolates around certain behaviors or resources and dominates them. It shows up in rape culture too - where there's this weird tolerance of something which is very outside the norm in actuality. I'm wondering if it has to do with the numbers found around content creators versus audience - that is, in any given community, usually about 10% provides content of some sort at a given moment, and 90% are audience/consumers. My gut says who is in which percent moves around a great deal (that is, a person is an audience when they read a book, but a content creator when they write a review, and it's the same person but different mediums).

For actual cruel behavior toward others, though, I find it both baffling and heartening the numbers are so low. Baffling because if they are a minority - why are they tolerated and protected? SOMETHING is going on there. Heartening because all we have to do is shift who is in that 10% group "leading" in a given behavior and perhaps we can affect real change.
posted by Deoridhe at 4:43 PM on December 6, 2014

For tonight's Bulls vs Warriors matchup, Derrick Rose wore an "I Can't Breathe" shirt during warmups. The NBATV announcers seemingly had no clue and made no comment on it. Kudos to Rose.
posted by cashman at 5:36 PM on December 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

That's an interesting application of that Forrestrr creator vs. curator vs. follower etc. data, Deoridhe. I might also look for some ideas in network effects (Gladwell talks about this in the Tipping Pint as Connector, Maven, Salesman). I know there is more legitimate discussion of this elsewhere but I'm heading out the door. I think you raise something important, though. What's clear in history's atrocities is that not everyone is a driver, not everyone is collectively inventing oppressive ideas. They're the work of a few, but they spread and become norms. How?
posted by Miko at 5:37 PM on December 6, 2014 [1 favorite]

No charges against cops in Darrien Hunt killing
posted by mbrubeck at 6:05 PM on December 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

torticat: Anyway wow that woman is a piece of work. There is a good bit of question as to whether she was actually at the scene; and, for once, the prosecution pushed pretty hard on the inconsistencies. Her story backs up Darren Wilson's in pretty much every respect. But a lot of that detail* she could have picked up from news stories, which she admitted having read (or, more accurately, looked at the pictures).

I just wanted to follow up on this business of "Witness 40." I just encountered in the wild a person who, rather then downplaying Witness 40, touts it as the definitive proof of Wilson's account. I have now found that this is the actual analysis being pushed into the wingnutosphere. God help us all.
posted by ob1quixote at 7:04 PM on December 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

There are simply no "Good" cops anymore. When you put it all together like that... Damn.
posted by Weeping_angel at 7:13 PM on December 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

“Portland is not comfortable with race. Unable to focus on race, they have fixated on another property of the Ferguson riots: authoritarian police brutality.” —Mattias Lehman on The Subtle Racism of “Post-Racial” Activism in Portland, Oregon.
posted by mbrubeck at 7:17 PM on December 6, 2014 [15 favorites]

That is a really astute piece, mbrubeck. Thanks for posting.
posted by Miko at 8:08 PM on December 6, 2014

Nice photos: The Unprecedented Scale of the #BlackLivesMatter Protests
posted by Joe in Australia at 11:23 PM on December 6, 2014 [2 favorites]

heh, that portland piece

Our few white supporters have joined in with

Black. Lives. Mat. Er.

I chuckle to myself over an unspoken joke about white people and rhythm. Much as “fascist” began to replace “racist”, I begin to hear a new chant under my own. I don’t know where it starts, but I hear it from two locations: the hecklers across the street and a fellow protester behind me and to the left:

All. Lives. Mat. Er.

If i had to sum up, in like a snarky 7 second vine sort of thing young white guys participation in these protests(at least in the northwest) this would be it.

I mean it isn't as stark as the whole "this isn't about you" thing with my mom above, but it's a lot more neatly packaged as something you can actually engage someone in an actual discussion with, without them just shutting down from the record-needle-drag and uncomfortableness of it all.

Seattle might not be as copy-paper white as portland*, but i'd still easily place it in the "awkwardly, stare at the ground and kick your foot and go "welll uhh..."" category of whiteness. And this sort of "lets make it less about race, and more about the cops!" not-so-subtle nudging has been happening here since the very beginning. Like, literally, on the night of the very first protest since the non-indictment it was like i watched the gears turn in peoples heads. And it's not just that one group of "let's fuck shit up!" young white kids i was harping on previously, it's a whole mix of different kinds of white people who just find that less uncomfortable to deal with since they don't have to do any real introspective thinking about it that takes them to uncomfortable places.

In the end, "All lives matter" is saleable to them for the same reason and logic as anything that could fall in to the category of "i don't want to have to explain it to my kid or have them ask me an awkward question in public". Black lives matter is to them, basically a direct personal attack because they're white, and it's aimed at white people.

I've heard and seen more than a little dumbfuck retcon justification for how the other, decontextualized version they push is "more inclusive", but it's all just a shitty fig leaf.

I still see a lot of this as an indictment of crunchy granola white conflict-averse culture though. The northwest is full of REI and NPR liberals in $400 outdoor gear jackets who have a noticeable presence everywhere, but also at these protests. And the very first night, before the stupid incident i described in my first post in this thread, a woman who i would pretty much slot in to that group got on a megaphone and monologued about how "we're not going to do the good protester, bad protester thing" and basically said that anyone who called anyone out on acting a fool was out of line, and that we just all focus on the message and bla bla bla.

And no, fuck that. All that means is that the white people who want to downplay the race thing win, because other somewhat uncomfortable, or just brain-idling-in-neutral white people back them up. The number one thing i want to see more of people doing is what i also saw a couple times that night; mainly people shutting that shit down right when it starts. Someone starts going "all lives matter"? Yell the right thing louder. Or yell something else good. Or support someone else chanting something that isn't stupid, or decontextualizing.

This is basically #notallmen garbage, but on a bigger playing field with higher stakes. Fuuuuuck that. If you reduce this down to just an absolute one sentence concentrated form, it would say something to the effect of "I care about my own comfort more than your safety or message", as an implicit statement from the white people doing it to black people in general. Yea, that's an inflammatory statement, but sit down and think about it and tell me i'm not right with a straight face.

*Which, and i've had to argue this on on here before, is probably the whitest relatively major city, like one that would show up on an illustrated map of the whole US. I know there's some suburb near you that's like 99.999% white. Portland is a real city though, with light rail and an apple store and a downtown with real buildings taller than 10 stories and malls and an airport that planes larger than minivans actually land at. And it's REALLY, uncomfortably, white.
posted by emptythought at 4:39 AM on December 7, 2014 [15 favorites]

One thing I wish could happen at these protests, based on having been a white person at a number of them: I think someone (in consultation with the organizers and choosing the best person to say this kind of thing, whoever it is) could say, at the short speeches that begin these things, "I want to talk to the white people who are here tonight" and then just say "we are here for Michael Brown and Eric Garner and the black people who have been killed. We're here to say that black lives matter because those are the lives that are disregarded"...and a few more sentences about just who needs to lead in this struggle, etc. (I have heard a speech like this at a protest when Trayvon Martin was killed.)

My impression has always been that while there are definitely some white people at these protests who are actually going to chant "all lives matter" and look for opportunities to fuck shit up and tell people of color that they are not doing a good enough job, at least better than 50% of the white people at these things are just confused. Many don't go to protests and aren't involved in this stuff and have bad liberal ideas and are just chanting along. I'm not saying that they are all deeply committed anti-racists and just confused, but I think that in terms of what they actually do, they want to respect the terms of the protest but in a loud confused setting (where half the time you can't hear all the chants, etc) they are uncertain.

When I have been at the Minneapolis ones, for example, I have been deeply confused about participating in the "hands up don't shoot" business, because I have definitely been gestured to by organizers of color to get me to chant along (and I look very very white-Swedish, no one could have thought that I was not white), the chant has been started by organizers of color at substantially majority-white events, etc. I don't do that chant, I decided, but I think that many white people could legitimately be confused. I have said to people I'm with that I don't feel we should do that chant, but again, circumstances are weird.

Here, at least, the organizers have been pretty clear on "let's keep this all legal and safe" end, and people have respected that as far as I have seen. At the same time, the "we have to do more and take more risks including being more militant" speeches I have heard have been by organizers of color, which is how I know this is serious.

There's always stuff lurking in the background, IME, though - the one thing I'm not always easy with is the way that the blog pieces I have seen tend to frame it as "people of color are uniformly moderate and don't want things to get militant and they are all on the same page", when actually the more serious, policy-based meetings I've attended suggest that there's a lot of debate behind the scenes.

I do get the sense that for some reason - possibly just that militant white anarchism is in eclipse in MPLS right now for a variety of reasons - I have not observed too much "let's fuck shit up" stuff. Maybe it's happening and I haven't seen it.

What I have observed most crucially is the huge split between political groupings that extends even to information-sharing at the Facebook level. There's some people doing policy-based work over north (more POC but plenty of white people) and people doing some policy but mostly protest-y stuff in S MPLS, and never the twain shall meet, except for a very very few people. Some of that is genuine ideology (liberal or "radical" whites in SMPLS) but a lot is geography, social networks and knowledge. The fact that we are a very, very deeply segregated city is huge, because many white people lack even the most basic intellectual ground work, and that means that even white people who really, truly want to step back and be useful just don't even know what that really looks like. And I think there's no really good model in place for "white people supporting a black-led movement about police brutality". I hope one evolves because given the size and composition of the city - never mind the state - any wins on numbers will have to include white people.
posted by Frowner at 8:11 AM on December 7, 2014 [13 favorites]

Crooked I did a song titled "I Can't Breathe" over the Tupac "Pain" instrumental, that showed up on PRhyme's (Royce & Premier) soundcloud. It's pretty awful, especially compared to what Crooked I can do, so I'm not linking it. Ty Nitty did a song called "Don't Shoot" that's somewhat ok. Wu-Tang put together a themed video to their previously released song "A Better Tomorrow", that has clips of Obama speaking, crowds protesting, and the like.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with this newer generation of rappers, and see if they get involved. All these guys are rappers that have been around for a long long time. My guess is Jay Smooth is thinking about these things as well. Rappers say a lot, and I know Killer Mike and other rappers have been directly involved with a lot of things, but I'm also interested in hearing what they produce in the form of music related to this.
posted by cashman at 11:36 AM on December 7, 2014 [3 favorites]

My guess is Jay Smooth is thinking about these things as well.

cashman: You may have missed AceofRock posting it earlier, but Jay Smooth is most certainly thinking on these things.
posted by jammy at 2:31 PM on December 7, 2014 [3 favorites]

There was definitely a rift in the Oakland protest I attended. Almost everyone was there to peacefully, but loudly and actively, protest. But there was also a group of maybe a dozen black bloc people (obvious attire and waving black flags, not subtle) who were definitely there to start shit. They were the ones smashing the windows of businesses, throwing trash cans, etc. When windows started getting smashed, chants of "peaceful protest!" rose up in response. I joined in, because the sentiment of the night was definitely not a "smash everything" sentiment. There are times when that needs to happen, but this wasn't it. You've got hundreds of people out, of all colors, looking to be productive and to be heard - some with strollers and kids, some protestors in wheelchairs - and these people aren't prepared for that kind of action. And it's no accident that the people looking to cause trouble were invariably around 20 years old, white, and male. I overheard a young black woman talking to her friend in front of me saying "I understand the anger, but they're making us feel unsafe, and we want to be part of this." It's just incredibly sad, to me, when women and people of color feel like they're being pushed out of a movement that absolutely should be including them, because Angry Young White Men want to make it all about them, like they always do. We kept confronting these guys and one of them said "Didn't you read that article? This isn't a protest, it's an uprising! Don't tell people how to react!" Which sounds okay on paper - I think violence has its place, in certain contexts, and I'm the last person to condemn rioters - but I want to respond with "check your young angry college white guy privilege" or whatever the non-silly equivalent of that is. Because the main effect you're having is actively dividing the protesters and pushing away the people it was intended to be about - ordinary people are out here, older people with graying hair, people with jobs and families, we're all fed up with the system and there's strength in numbers, there's strength in people like you and me going out there and making a stand. We need to figure out a way to make everyone work on the same page. When there was so much heartening display of conscious anger and support, that little group left a sour taste in my mouth.
posted by naju at 3:33 PM on December 7, 2014 [18 favorites]

Black Bloc in these situations is such a nostalgic, media-ignorant strategy.
posted by rhizome at 3:38 PM on December 7, 2014 [1 favorite]

ple out, of all colors, looking to be productive and to be heard - some with strollers and kids, some protestors in wheelchairs - and these people aren't prepared for that kind of action. And it's no accident that the people looking to cause trouble were invariably around 20 years old, white, and male. I overheard a young black woman talking to her friend in front of me saying "I understand the anger, but they're making us feel unsafe, and we want to be part of this." It's just incredibly sad, to me, when women and people of color feel like they're being pushed out of a movement that absolutely should be including them, because Angry Young White Men want to make it all about them, like they always do.

This is, including almost word for ward that exact comment by a young black woman, exactly what i experienced.

I don't really know what else to add, except that it deeply saddens me that wherever you go, there you are.

I also heard them repeat a bunch of BS talking points about people shooting back at the cops in ferguson and molotov cocktails and shit and just UGH UGH UGH.
posted by emptythought at 4:54 PM on December 7, 2014 [4 favorites]

This isn't a protest, it's an uprising!

no, mr fake revolutionary, it's a temper tantrum you're throwing while the adults are trying to work out something

a few bricks through a starbucks window means nothing

in my area, we've had people trash rest area bathrooms and high school football fields for no damn political reason at all, just because they felt like doing it

what makes them any different?
posted by pyramid termite at 5:16 PM on December 7, 2014 [4 favorites]

It is, sadly, possible that the people trying to provoke violence are not acting in good faith; they may be agents provocateurs. This appears to have been standard practice in the UK, where some agents were in such deep cover that they took partners in their movement and sired children with them.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:13 PM on December 7, 2014 [9 favorites]

where some agents were in such deep cover that they took partners in their movement and sired children with them.

Every time I hear about this it seriously grosses me out
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:33 PM on December 7, 2014 [3 favorites]

Grand Jury Refuses To Indict Cops Who Killed Man With Down Syndrome Who Wouldn’t Leave Movie
posted by jeffburdges at 8:27 PM on December 7, 2014 [5 favorites]

I'm not going to pretend that Australian police are perfect (or even necessarily better), but here's a story about a police shooting local to me. I think many people in the USA will be surprised by the differences in how it was handled: Policeman 'gung ho' before fatal shooting

Note: there was an investigation because of course you investigate police shootings. The coroner (public investigator) was an appointed official, not an elected one and his career path does not include being a member of the police force. The man shot was "armed and violent", had stabbed a woman and was "bearing down" on the police officers, but the police officers were criticised for having killed him; their "inexperience" was seen as a mitigating factor. Their senior officers were also blamed, for not having correctly briefed their juniors about the possible presence of the armed men. Finally, the coroner recommended that these events be used as the basis for further training in operational safety.

Oh yes, and a total of three bullets were fired: one by one officer and two by another. The man was struck once in the chest, and once in the shoulder.
posted by Joe in Australia at 8:51 PM on December 7, 2014 [6 favorites]

So in 1994, I joined the St. Louis Police Department. I quickly realized how naive I’d been. I was floored by the dysfunctional culture I encountered.

Op-ed by Redditt Hudson in the Washington Post.
posted by nangar at 3:38 AM on December 8, 2014 [7 favorites]

Cops routinely called anyone of color a “thug,” whether they were the victim or just a bystander.

Gosh, it's almost like "thug" is substituting for some other word!
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:46 AM on December 8, 2014 [13 favorites]

"Canadian"? (See, definition number 2)
posted by symbioid at 8:28 AM on December 8, 2014

Oh for a more Platformist styled anarchism in the states.
posted by symbioid at 8:40 AM on December 8, 2014

Officer Loehmann not only shot Tamir Rice, but per his mom, handcuffed his 14-year-old sister at the scene while her brother lay dying.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:56 AM on December 8, 2014 [3 favorites]

It is, sadly, possible that the people trying to provoke violence are not acting in good faith; they may be agents provocateurs.

This is true, and I would never dispute that - but it is also never true to the extent that individuals would like to claim.

Black bloc is real. They are young anarchists who have the wrong tactic and I am extremely frustrated by - but they are not all police plants. They are, largely, people who have been homeless or squatting for a few years, many of whom have direct experience with police violence. I recall one anarchist I know talking about how the police set their dogs on a fellow anarchist friend, because she tried to run - how she has severe scarring and terror of police to this day. I have met one anarchist who makes a living from settling police violence suits, because they engage in them - and are beaten - so often. They are frequently arrested and raided just for living together. Generally, no one cares - they're white, so they don't have a community against racism to be with them, and they're anarchists, so politically marginalized. I've yet to see any campaigns against police beating black bloc kids at protests.

They are angry at mainstream protests, in part, because they feel that we should be with them and are not. I am not specific to any one protest here. I have been a part of protests where the police swept in and took out the black bloc kids, and our first reaction was relief that we would not have to put up with their shit. They are children - usually early twenties at oldest - who see that the world is broken but have not yet learned that trying to smash it out of anger in return is not a feasible strategy. They want a revolution and have not yet learned that this is not the way they get there.

Yes, sometimes a police officer is in among them - though honestly, less often to get them to commit property violence - which requires little urging - and more to try to convince them to buy illegal guns or build pipe bombs so they can lock them away. Police provocateurs attend these things often because they are trying to establish "cred" for infiltration later.

Again, I'm not saying they're right, because they're not. But they are a thing that is organic and will not go away until the causes of them go away. It's not as simple as "Police!"
posted by corb at 9:59 AM on December 8, 2014 [12 favorites]

Good Morning America interview with mother of Tamir Rice
posted by desjardins at 12:53 PM on December 8, 2014 [1 favorite]

Ferguson documents UPDATED DEC. 8 with new evidence released.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:38 PM on December 8, 2014 [2 favorites]

“Respectability Politics Won't Save Your Black Life,” Goldie Taylor, Ebony, 08 December 2014
posted by ob1quixote at 5:31 PM on December 8, 2014 [1 favorite]

The Dec 8 release roomthreeseventeen links to is a bunch of interviews from the FBI for the federal investigation. Interesting stuff.
posted by Justinian at 5:37 PM on December 8, 2014

Having read the FBI transcripts I don't see anything to change my impression that there was easily enough for an indictment if the DA actually wanted an indictment (which he clearly didn't) but that there was no way a conviction was going to be obtained with this evidence.
posted by Justinian at 5:42 PM on December 8, 2014

Remember witness 40, with the weird racist diary? Here's her interview with the FBI. (It's 99 pages, I've only skimmed it so far.)
posted by desjardins at 6:00 PM on December 8, 2014 [3 favorites]

(I saw that it was included in roomthreeseventeen's link but I wanted to highlight it because we've discussed her before.)
posted by desjardins at 6:01 PM on December 8, 2014

That's the one I'm reading now.
posted by Justinian at 6:10 PM on December 8, 2014

Remember witness 40, with the weird racist diary? Here's her interview with the FBI. (It's 99 pages, I've only skimmed it so far.)

Holy SHIT skip to the end (around page 89). Someone got busted lying about witnessing the shooting - *shocking*. It sounds like perhaps this "witness" was also one of the people involved in starting the fund for Wilson.
posted by sallybrown at 6:12 PM on December 8, 2014 [8 favorites]

OK, page 63 is where it starts to get interesting. The interviewer says "Here is the problem that we have" and then begins to dissect the witness's statement about her movements, implying that she wasn't even there that day because she couldn't have gotten from point A to point B the way she said she did. Then on page 71, the interviewer starts asking about the friend she was driving to visit, again implying that she was lying about being in the area. On page 73 the witness admits to researching the case before talking to detectives. On page 77 she admits to having a brain injury that affects her memory! On page 85 she admits to writing comments using the N-word on articles about the case! "They need to kill the f--king n---rs. It is like an ape fest." (page 92) On page 95 she talks about raising money for Darren Wilson!!!

So yeah... wasn't she the only witness who completely corroborated Wilson's story?
posted by desjardins at 6:18 PM on December 8, 2014 [19 favorites]

Is the FBI interview something that would have been presented to the jury, or would they only have had the journal entry? Would they have had the journal entry at all? Someone should search the transcripts for any references to Witness 40.
posted by sallybrown at 6:25 PM on December 8, 2014

Huh. Yes I'm reading that now. That's damning stuff. Very damning.
posted by Justinian at 6:30 PM on December 8, 2014

Yeah, ok, a competent DA would shred witness 40s testimony to the point I'm not even sure she would be put on the stand in a trial. Which torpedoes Wilson's primary defense witness.

Clearly in the absence of Witness 40 there should have been an indictment. Just goes to show how much of a farce the grand jury was.
posted by Justinian at 6:36 PM on December 8, 2014 [4 favorites]

sallybrown, per roomthreeseventeen's link, both the FBI interview of witness 40 and her journal entry were included in the evidence given to the grand jury.
posted by desjardins at 6:36 PM on December 8, 2014

So what's the take away from the new evidence? Witness 40 was full of it?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 8:14 PM on December 8, 2014

That's the only piece I've read. I haven't seen a good summary yet, but there's a lot to go through. I'm sure one of the mainstream sites will have one by tomorrow.
posted by desjardins at 8:24 PM on December 8, 2014

From two former prosecutors:–

This Case Cries Out for Disclosure
What were grand jurors told about Eric Garner’s death?
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:35 AM on December 9, 2014 [2 favorites]

corb that is a seriously astute observation of the contradictions inherent to black bloc, also +1 for not instant accusation that every dipshit crying for peanut butter revolution time is a cop

expansion on the portland scene: i was surprised (maybe i shouldnt have been) that some white activist dudes have reacted with open hostility to requests to center black lives. like i do not know why but the idea that these protests are about cops killing black people and not generic "police brutality" drives a small quantity of activist white dudes into a frothy rage frappe
posted by beefetish at 7:56 AM on December 9, 2014 [3 favorites]

Here's another summary of Witness 40's testimony to the FBI. Much longer than what I said above, but still shorter than reading 99 pages. I don't understand why on earth a prosecutor would present this to the grand jury. It'd be more credible if she saw Bigfoot or aliens.
posted by desjardins at 8:35 AM on December 9, 2014 [2 favorites]

like i do not know why but the idea that these protests are about cops killing black people and not generic "police brutality" drives a small quantity of activist white dudes into a frothy rage frappe

Because a few cops once gave them some trouble when they mouthed off about their right to scream FUCK in the park or something. Self-centered douche gonna vinegar, or whatever.
posted by phearlez at 8:39 AM on December 9, 2014 [4 favorites]

The percentage of young white men who have been arrested is pretty high.

By age 18, 30 percent of black males, 26 percent of Hispanic males and 22 percent of white males have been arrested.

By age 23, 49 percent of black males, 44 percent of Hispanic males and 38 percent of white males have been arrested.

I initially formed my negative opinions about police because of my interactions with them. I was never physically abused, but I had experiences that left me with a negative view of police. This included a cop screaming at me at the top of his lungs in a really scary rage when I was 16 for a traffic violation I had not committed. Like angrier than I have ever seen a human being, and my family has some emotional people. He pulled me over next to a gas station I worked at and my boss had to come over and say he saw that I didn't do it to get him to stop. Later when I was 17 I was arrested for pot and found it pretty distasteful that the police kind of viewed the whole thing as a joke even though they were seriously messing with my life over a pretty minor issue. They lied all over the place in the police report to make the situation look worse even though they had me red handed anyway. I was arrested again later and the officer was much more respectful to me personally but he also lied all over the place on the police report.

That's what makes me have incredible amounts of doubt about what they say in regards to any of these shootings. My experience is that they routinely lie as a matter of habit even when they have nothing at stake. How can I trust them when their entire career and standing in the community is at stake?

So I'm 100% not saying take the focus off a black folks, because everything that happened to me happens to them along with about 100 gigatons of additional police bullshit and abuse. But I am saying those guys who seem to lack that perspective at least likely have slightly better reasons to be mad at the police than that they wanted to scream fuck.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:58 AM on December 9, 2014 [6 favorites]

Oh, I went the other day to /r/anarchism (since I was on /r/alltheleft and they had that in the sidebar) Oh FFS.
The ol': "Diversity of Tactics"
The ol': "Don't you oppress us"
This one is new: "Some of us ARE black so don't tell us to shut up and let black people speak when we have black people, too. Why are you silencing their voices?"
And then they droned on and on about how the lead organizing black woman in Oakland was from RCP and it's all a giant RCP plot or whatever. So of course, why should the anarchos listen to Avakianites or whatever?

Ugh, so tired of manarchists. I used to support Black Bloc, then I grew up. I realize that they have a time and place, but now is neither that time nor place.

Insurrectionary anarchism is bullshit and a dead-end -- I won't necessarily claim it's counterproductive, though that's my intuition.
posted by symbioid at 9:03 AM on December 9, 2014 [1 favorite]

i don't know why, but this ALL PEOPLE MATTER bullshit is making my eyes bulge out with the need to dope slap
posted by angrycat at 9:04 AM on December 9, 2014 [4 favorites]

Also, I just got this change.org petition (and I'm not sure if it's allowed - so please flag if this is beyond the rules for posting as a comment), from Michael Brown, Sr to push for congress passing a law for police to wear body cameras.

It's a start, it's not the solution, but it's better than nothing. Again - please delete if necessary. But I hope it can stay for those who wish to sign on.
posted by symbioid at 9:05 AM on December 9, 2014 [2 favorites]

drinky here is a srs biz question for you: what does it take for young white dudes who have experienced cop brutality to get hip to race stuff
posted by beefetish at 9:10 AM on December 9, 2014 [2 favorites]

To be fair, though this is sort of inside baseball, the RCP does have a justifiably bad reputation with a lot of leftists and activists. They have a history of trying to co-opt protests. That is no excuse for blowing off protests you agree with just because the organizer might be RCP, but they're not totally wearing tinfoil hats there.
posted by corb at 9:13 AM on December 9, 2014 [3 favorites]

drinky here is a srs biz question for you: what does it take for young white dudes who have experienced cop brutality to get hip to race stuff

They probably are to a decent degree if they are actually being an activist on this issue, even if they want some focus for themselves. I mean look, if I had been beaten by police I would probably be doing the same thing, it's just human nature. You don't want to hear that what happened to you was rare compared to other groups because it happened to you. If I was gonna try I would point out that a lot of the proposed remedies, like cameras, will help victims regardless of race so it's not a big deal if we focus on the most likely future victims for the moment.

The question is more general really, "How do we prevent special interests from diluting protests?"

I don't know, I don't have enough experience with protest or activism to say.
posted by Drinky Die at 9:17 AM on December 9, 2014

what does it take for young white dudes who have experienced cop brutality to get hip to race stuff

You asked Drinky, but I have an opinion:

Growing up would do that.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:17 AM on December 9, 2014 [1 favorite]

dude if growing up made people less racist
posted by beefetish at 9:32 AM on December 9, 2014 [9 favorites]

Metafilter: I have an opinion.
posted by wuwei at 9:39 AM on December 9, 2014 [7 favorites]

Yeah - I know quite well of RCP (hence "Avakianites"). As you said - it still doesn't mean that the protests were suddenly RCP owned or whatever. It also doesn't mean smash shit down. RCP are fucking clowns, but the movement is the movement.

--------
Speaking to the race and white dudes...

I understand I'm a white dude, and I certainly have privilege. I try my damnedest to argue the race issue, about statistics, etc.

That said - I want to know the most productive way to both get them on board, enlighten them/educate them, and help them evolve. I don't know how to do that. I worry about white people yet again co-opting a black movement, yet again, meaning it's only important because white dudes are saying it is. Just like it's only important when a dude goes on OKCupid and says "Hey - guess what - Girls really DO get harrassed on OKC! They weren't just lying!"

I worry that beating them over the head means they will continue to fight against us, or rather, not join us, and split the unity we need to address the issue. If we acknowledge that they have to deal with bullshit, that helps, but to do that without making them understand and be aware of the racist issues at play, as well, means we fail in our duty.

I don't necessarily think that dismissing their own concerns is the right way to go about it, when dealing with them directly. I think acknowledging that "yes you have been harrassed" (I've told this story on the blue about where I had a cop yelling at me when I had my hands on the wheel and he had has hand right on his holster read to draw (what I *hope* was a taser)... ) I don't sit there and make it about me, because I recognize. But what about the dude who could be convinced, but just needs to get his defenses down? I worry that those defenses are only hardened by us yelling at him.

But I don't want to whitewash anything... And in that case, I feel that we have to make sure that we don't deny #BlackLivesMatter...

It's just. It's frustrating, and that's a privileged me saying that. I can't even imagine the despair and anger black people have to go through everytime they try to raise the issues and deal with this bullshit over and over and over. Discounting their stories and their lives to make way for the whiny white dudes...

We need to have a set of people who can engage and have empathy and guide them along. There are those who really are racist under it all and just don't give a shit about black people. But I hazard there are quite a few, like my nephew and his friends, who really do have good hearts but have bought into this libertarian-ish narrative that wants to pretend we live in a colorblind society, and that just because some white guy gets a bit of slack for recording the police, it's just exactly the same as white guys being shot for walking along. Or harassed for being black, etc... I want to bring them into the wing and slowly nurture and educate them.

But I am not a patient person, I am an angry person, and I am white, which means I do not have the means and knowledge and ability to speak for black people. Only black people can speak for black people. I can only speak to my knowledge, my experience, my perspective. I just don't have that patience, though...

I think we need to figure out a process to deal with this very vital issue if we are ever to get traction regarding privilege and oppressed peoples and cause unity.

I think the closest we ever got was Fred Hampton in Chicago working to get a broad selection of people together. He was killed for that, and I fear that, in the end, that is what we'll see if we ever see someone successfully starting to unite people against the Police State.

And I don't think a lot of people with privilege are ready to die for such a cause, if they don't feel they have a vested stake in it. Which means we need them to understand that Black Lives Matter, not just to Black People, but to all of us. But there needs to be some sort of reciprocity. They (white dudes) need to feel that we are listening to them so they can put their defenses down.

We need tactics and strategies to communicate our vision while softening their defenses. Is there any manual or book regarding such techniques? I suppose any rhetoric book might work, but that seems argumentive. We need less "debate" and more psy-ops in general regarding how to break down defenses, not just presenting facts as if that alone will win the debate.

And it's a long road ahead. There are a lot of people out there that need educating.
posted by symbioid at 9:42 AM on December 9, 2014 [2 favorites]

dude if growing up made people less racist

Yeah, I was a little glib, sorry. What I mean was that growing up tends to chill people out and learn how to pick their battles, and also re-frames your perspective so that everything isn't all about you any more. Some people do stay in this mindset and turn into old cranks, but most people do learn with time that you don't have to approach everything at Defcon 1 level aggression - and that it's actually more effective when you don't.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:52 AM on December 9, 2014

EmpressCallipygos I substantially agree with you and was pretty glib back np.

not being led around by the nose by anger is a pretty fantastic thing.
posted by beefetish at 10:13 AM on December 9, 2014 [1 favorite]

But I hazard there are quite a few, like my nephew and his friends, who really do have good hearts but have bought into this libertarian-ish narrative that wants to pretend we live in a colorblind society, and that just because some white guy gets a bit of slack for recording the police, it's just exactly the same as white guys being shot for walking along.

If they are scientifically accepting, the Project Implicit is a good place to start. We have studies showing that implicit bias affects our perception, choices, and behavior in ways we aren't consciously aware of, and this can be a window into it. I'd also recommend any sort of the latest cognitive science on perception. The concept of the Invisible Gorilla is sort of the Ur-example, but there are a bunch of white men studying this and talking about this, so people are more likely to accept it. At this point, I'd recommend focusing on white, male talking heads for them.

If they reach the point where they go, "How do I change this bias?" the easiest way to do so is to consciously privilege other voices. Find a half dozen blogs of people along the axis you're privileged in, and read without commenting. Reach who they link to. Read who they recommend. Check out the books they recommend. Say NOTHING. The saying nothing is very, very important - one of the habits to try to break is the hamster wheel of "I HAVE IMPORTANT THOUGHTS THAT MUST BE SHARED". Practice looking for the validity in the viewpoint even if you disagree with it.

At a certain point, they will then start to notice how biased the world is. I remember the summer I became aware of just how fucked up we are on race - how overwhelmingly and senselessly white everything in the US is. That will suck. No where near as badly as the people who are actually under the heel of that bias, but seeing it and seeing how complicit you have been and will continue to be is painful. Be there for them, then, both about how hard it is to suddenly see, and in the importance of continuing to see even while it hurts. Emphasize to them that it is not the job of the people affected most directly by the bias to sooth us - it is not their job. Their job is survival (which sometimes includes soothing us, which is fucked up).

Help them through the first few times they then try to speak about what they see. Let them know it's normal for the response to bringing up race is for people to identify you with it, even if you do it a handful of times. I was "the race girl" for my Masters Classes; it happens. Help them keep in mind that anything they say is not on behalf of others and they shouldn't use the presumed agreement of others as a shield (my friend is black...!). They are speaking for themselves and what they see.

Remind them that people outside of the movement will focus on them. Remind them to refer those people to the people they learned from. Remind them to only ever speak for themselves.
posted by Deoridhe at 1:16 PM on December 9, 2014 [6 favorites]

Whites are more confident than ever that their local police treat blacks fairly, Scott Clement, Washington Post. (MSNBC)
posted by nangar at 2:16 PM on December 9, 2014 [3 favorites]

Whites are more confident than ever that their local police treat blacks fairly

There is something really, really wrong with white people - the more I think about my own experiences as a white person and the more I feel like I'm able to separate out and identify about "white culture[s]" the more I think that the process that sort of begins with the crusades but really picks up with colonization/imperialism and slaveholding has permeated how white people are socialized and we're all warped by it. Just growing up white pushes you to learn to be blind to so much and to be comfortable with so much. Every time I read all these statistics about how apparently some substantial majority of white people are totally okay with a return to lynch law, I just....it feels like finding the sunglasses and realizing that everyone around you is really evil lizard aliens, but then you realize that perhaps you are also a lizard alien. It's like in the torture thread, where you realize that a majority of Americans are totally okay with torture.

I had always figured, honestly, that most white people acted this way from ignorance and moral laziness rather than conviction. Recently figuring out out that most white people are actually actively ideologically racist rather than just chug-chug-chugging along participants in good old structural racism - I have to admit that it has upended my worldview more than anything has in many years.
posted by Frowner at 2:29 PM on December 9, 2014 [11 favorites]

There is something really, really wrong with white people - the more I think about my own experiences as a white person and the more I feel like I'm able to separate out and identify about "white culture[s]" the more I think that the process that sort of begins with the crusades but really picks up with colonization/imperialism and slaveholding has permeated how white people are socialized and we're all warped by it.

There is a MIND-BLOWING passage I read, from a US history textbook of the 1880s which discusses the US-Mexican war, but casts it in these amazingly over-the-top terms which imply that the whole Mexican-American war of the early 1800s was nothing less than the culmination of a thousand-year struggle between the Vikings and the "Moorish Celts". Seriously, Leni Riefenstahl could have filmed a dramatic recitation of the thing and it would have made total sense.

The point being, that that kind of mindset was at one time all but FOSTERED in this country.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 2:38 PM on December 9, 2014 [2 favorites]

@MonaHol: African-American Kwame Ajamu, 56, released from prison after 27 yrs. Cops railroaded him

The two other accused, Ajamu's brother, Wiley Bridgeman, 60, and Ricky Jackson, 57, were released from prison last month. The men won their freedom after a witness last year recanted his testimony from the trial, saying he was coerced by detectives at the time. Ajamu was originally sentenced to death, but it was vacated because of a paperwork error.

posted by Golden Eternity at 5:54 PM on December 9, 2014 [1 favorite]

Frowner wrote: most white people are actually actively ideologically racist rather than just chug-chug-chugging along participants in good old structural racism

Frowner, what do you mean by "actively"? Are you referring to the implied intentionality you mention above ("resisting all efforts ... to check [police killings] - that's intentionality of a kind"), or simply to support for state violence, under the rubric of "law and order", that targets othered and marginalised groups? Or something else?
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:30 PM on December 9, 2014 [1 favorite]

Evidence of Things Unsaid, Ta-Nehisi Coates, The Atlantic.
posted by nangar at 6:31 PM on December 9, 2014 [11 favorites]

Evidence of Things Unsaid, Ta-Nehisi Coates, The Atlantic.

"What clearly cannot be said is that violence and nonviolence are tools, and that violence—like nonviolence—sometimes works. "Property damage and looting impede social progress," Jonathan Chait wrote Tuesday. He delivered this sentence with unearned authority. Taken together, property damage and looting have been the most effective tools of social progress for white people in America. They describe everything from enslavement to Jim Crow laws to lynching to red-lining."

Damn. Daaaamn.
posted by cashman at 9:56 AM on December 10, 2014 [16 favorites]

Seriously. This country has violence at its foundation, and I don't say that as an irrational hater of America- it's just a simple fact. We took this country from its original inhabitants by force, fought a war to break off from England, fought another war in order to keep the country as a unified whole... hell, we mythologize a famous episode of civil disobedience and looting to the point where the ultra-conservative wing of the conservative party is explicitly named after it.

Seeing members of the Tea Party condemn looting is the sort of surreal thing that, if it were in a book instead of actual reality, would be edited out for being too unbelievably on-the-nose.

Basically, violence is considered totally fine if it either maintains the status quo or is employed by the eventual 'winners.'
posted by showbiz_liz at 10:37 AM on December 10, 2014 [11 favorites]

"Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

You're absolutely right, showbiz_liz, and there are reasons why we don't decry state-endorsed violence, but I do think there's a huge difference between violence to achieve an end and violence that is undirected and falls back on the community that the individuals are trying to protect. Some people also draw a moral line between violence in the service of what they perceive to be a good cause, and violence that is the lashing out of frustration. The Tea Party also, from my understanding, took specific care not to loot but destroy - to show that they were not motivated by petty thievery, but by the refusal to pay the tax. Similarly, while the Black Panthers armed up to defend their community with violence if necessary, I can't think of a single example of them committing crimes against their own community - rather the opposite.
posted by corb at 10:45 AM on December 10, 2014 [1 favorite]

Frowner, what do you mean by "actively"?

I mean that 50% of white people are confident that their local police treat blacks fairly....after months of police killings in the news. More white people are convinced of this now than before Ferguson. I mean that when white people read about disproportionate sentencing of black people, their confidence in the prison system increases. If actual facts about contemporary racial disparities inspire you to double down on the causes of racial disparities, then you're committed to racism. You may not describe yourself in your own head as a racist, but you are functionally committed to producing racist outcomes.

This is not the same as what I had hitherto assumed, which was that finding out about this stuff would not perhaps lead to white commitment to change but would at least lead to a little bit of skepticism about the state and the prison system - apathy and moral weakness rather than doubling-down. I expected that for the majority of white people the driver of racism was moral laziness - the fact that it is so easy to keep "I am not racist" and "many aspects of contemporary life are racist" in separate mental categories. But it seems to be the reverse - the fact that it is so easy to think both "I am not a racist" and "boy howdy, our prisons are full of black people because they deserve to be there" is the result of white desire to be able to keep black people in their place.

For me the threshold of "active racism" is where you know that something is producing racial inequality - or you know that you did something problematic (like getting the two black students in your class confused even though they look nothing alike, or thinking that a black shopper must be a worker just because she is black) - and you don't think "something is wrong here, I wonder what it could be" or "I didn't mean to do that, I guess I look like kind of a hick" but instead decide that everything is great. It's a pretty low bar - it doesn't require people to do anything. All it requires is that when you see something that is generating racial inequality, you recognize that something is wrong.

I mean, it's a low bar - normal people would be like "we have a national emergency, something is causing our fellow citizens to be shot and jailed over trivial offenses, we must do something to address this in some way even if we are reluctant to identify this as actual racism".
posted by Frowner at 11:31 AM on December 10, 2014 [10 favorites]

I mean that 50% of white people are confident that their local police treat blacks fairly....after months of police killings in the news. More white people are convinced of this now than before Ferguson.

Didn't the article say though that it was precisely because they were horrified by the effects of Ferguson, such that the comparatively smaller racism of their local department didn't register?
posted by corb at 11:36 AM on December 10, 2014

Many people simply believe that more black people are targeted by police and in prison because black people simply commit more crimes. That is the source of all this, and I don't know how in hell we can actually convince people who are committed to such a worldview in 2014 otherwise. There must be a way, but I don't know it.
posted by showbiz_liz at 11:50 AM on December 10, 2014 [2 favorites]

Many people simply believe that more black people are targeted by police and in prison because black people simply commit more crimes.

Oh my God, yes -

WNYC had a story this morning about "how to deal with people who post racist things on your Facebook wall," and they actually recommended doing something other than my usual approach (i.e., "unfriend that fucker"); they actually had some good suggestions for how to speak in such a way that you actually can get heard and taken seriously.

And LITERALLY THE THIRD COMMENT made on the web site this morning in response was:

"Whites are far more likely than Blacks are to be victims or interracial crimes.
Blacks are more likely to commit violent crimes than Whites are.
Asians are less likely than either Blacks or Whites to commit violent crimes.
Facts.
Deal with them."

Wiser heads have prevailed, but seriously.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 12:00 PM on December 10, 2014

I'm still reading linked articles and sorting out my opinion. But reading this thread, the Coates piece, and mbrubeck's Mattias Lehman link, I get the impression that violence was effective before, but now it's mostly a tool for the system and racism. The police are unfairly brutal and discriminatory against black and brown people, but police retribution seems to overwhelmingly fall on colored officers as well. In the same vein, white protesters who don't have to deal with being the default suspect, and haven't really dealt with random loss due to racism, are a lot more enthusiastic about destroying other's property, while the results unjustly tar colored protesters...

There's definitely cases where people used force to prevent a terrible outcome, but overall it's been very stacked towards the existing race system. The trampled can use it in defense and specific objectives, but they can't run publicly wild like a lynching mob. Even in cases with armed resistance, blacks suffer immense casualties and deaths compared to whites, like the Tulsa riots, or have the entire deck arranged against them, like the Sweet trials (neighbors, police, courts, witnesses).
posted by halifix at 1:15 PM on December 10, 2014 [2 favorites]

I was thinking about all this after hearing about the looting in Berkeley last night. Also, one activist went on NPR about how yesterday, she came back to her apartment to find rioters preparing to set her apartment on fire. They had taken a tank of gas to the protest and everything. This was an apartment with tenants of many races...
posted by halifix at 1:32 PM on December 10, 2014 [2 favorites]

In that context, I would wonder why if someone wants to be violent that it is aimed at property and a neighborhood, rather than at the police themselves.
posted by rhizome at 1:38 PM on December 10, 2014 [1 favorite]

Some people distinguish between property damage and violence, do not wish to commit violence, but have fewer objections to property damage.
posted by eviemath at 1:51 PM on December 10, 2014 [4 favorites]

Also, property can't shoot you.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:53 PM on December 10, 2014 [3 favorites]

Sadly, sometimes not attacking the police also gets you killed. It's hard to say what exactly you have to do to avoid getting killed, really.
posted by Justinian at 5:30 PM on December 10, 2014 [6 favorites]

There is an old video essay When Should You Shoot a Cop making the rounds now, btw. Dude Godwinned himself quickly though.
posted by jeffburdges at 5:47 PM on December 10, 2014

From this article, The Making of Ferguson:

Until the mid-1960s, Ferguson was a “sundown town” from which African Americans were banned after dark. Ferguson had blocked off the main road from Kinloch with a chain and construction materials but kept a second road open during the day so housekeepers and nannies could get from Kinloch to jobs in Ferguson

The mid-1960s?! I did a FPP on a related topic, and I still find that hard to believe.
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:15 PM on December 10, 2014 [2 favorites]

There is an old video essay When Should You Shoot a Cop making the rounds now, btw. Dude Godwinned himself quickly though.

Ouch. That's a great question, but the person doing that commentary should not be the one asking it.
posted by anemone of the state at 8:48 PM on December 10, 2014

So, I did see this yesterday...

Richmond, CA Chief of Police stands with protesters with "#blacklivesmatter" sign.

Much as I hate our system, I think if we're gonna hate the bastards that do wrong and talk about how the good ones don't do the right thing, I hope that by upholding ones who are taking a stand we can start to make a difference. If we can make cops see that our hate to them isn't some inherent law of nature (amongst a portion of the public it may very well be, of course)...

I hear stories about people with medical emergencies getting killed, and then I saw a story about how the cops were called on a suicidal guy, and I'm thinking "NOT THE COPS!" (of course it's 911 dispatch, so they're the ones), but at this point I really do think we need to let mental illness cases be handled by mental professionals. I think there's that story upthread where one cop was getting water for a mentally disturbed person, and his fellow cops decided that talking the person down wasn't good enough so they had to kick the shit out of him, because ... I dunno... He (the cop who was out of the room)put them at risk by not being an asshole? I think the water cop was campus security? And the two were "real" cops? Or the other way around?

Anyways, I cringe now when I think of calling the police. When I hear "don't call the police" I'm really starting to feel that, and really, that's about the best message the crooks can have. If you erode the trust in the police by your actions, cops, you open yourself to being victims of criminals for fear the pigs will be just as much criminals.
posted by symbioid at 7:34 AM on December 11, 2014 [5 favorites]

“A Pastoral Letter to White Americans,” Jim Wallis, Sojourners, 11 December 2014
posted by ob1quixote at 8:30 AM on December 11, 2014 [3 favorites]

Richmond, CA Chief of Police stands with protesters with "#blacklivesmatter" sign.

Much as I hate our system, I think if we're gonna hate the bastards that do wrong and talk about how the good ones don't do the right thing, I hope that by upholding ones who are taking a stand we can start to make a difference. If we can make cops see that our hate to them isn't some inherent law of nature (amongst a portion of the public it may very well be, of course)...

That was all over the CopBlock facebook posts, for what it's worth. That's a crowd with inherent suspicion and people who question any and all policing for taxation/fines and they're still standing up and taking notice for these things.

I think the more brief & on point message I have seen about the police is someone saying they don't call them unless they're prepared to get someone shot. You can unpack that into all the issues about use of force and the way they typically resolve conflict and how they perceive the folks they encounter. It reflects my thought process now - if I am in a situation, is it one where I think the outcome if I don't call the cops will be as bad as if they show up and shoot this person? Is this scary enough I'm willing to risk them killing my dog? If not I'll walk away or close my door or try to retreat or accept the consequences and call my insurance agent afterwards.
posted by phearlez at 8:33 AM on December 11, 2014 [2 favorites]

Apparently, in Oakland last night/early this morning, Undercover (potential Provocateurs) Agents were busted by the crowd, so instead of denying and moving away, they bust out the guns.

Storify here. OPD claims it's not theirs, apparently it's CHP.

Here's an angle you probably don't ever want to see... (Second pic in the series)

God it's like they just don't even.
posted by symbioid at 12:09 PM on December 11, 2014 [2 favorites]

I wonder what their backgrounds might be.
posted by infini at 12:22 PM on December 11, 2014

Witnesses are tweeting in that Storify link the undercover cops in the Berkeley protest "are the ones who were hitting bank windows before T-Mobile got looted!" It would be great if there's video of that.
posted by mediareport at 12:45 PM on December 11, 2014 [1 favorite]

What's happening in the Capitol?
posted by infini at 12:47 PM on December 11, 2014 [1 favorite]

Anyone pulling shit like that you should always assume they are a cop - on the off chance you are wrong and they are just an idiot nothing is lost.
posted by Artw at 12:56 PM on December 11, 2014 [7 favorites]

I had wondered if there weren't undercovers involved out there. I felt like there wasn't much point arguing about it without any information - and there's always the possibility of anarchists doing fool things, if I may say so as an anarchist - but this has all seemed so amped up even for Berkeley/Oakland protests, and it just sort of felt wrong, like not quite the kind of thing that I would expect even when anarchists do fool things. There have been some things I've read about where I feel like I recognize what's going on - whether that's good recognition or bad recognition - and some things where it just...it's like that joke about Gladstone and Queen Victoria, that if you tell me you've seen Queen Victoria's ghost I'll be an agnostic about it, but if you tell me that Gladstone was introduced to the Queen, slapped her on the back and offered her a cigar, there's no way I'll ever believe you.

If those ones got outed, there are probably more.

Maybe at the moment the best argument against breaking things is that if no one from our side is doing it, it helps us to spot the undercovers.
posted by Frowner at 1:03 PM on December 11, 2014 [3 favorites]

Staffers Walk Out Of Congress In Protest Over Brown And Garner Cases, Bill Chappell, NPR.
posted by nangar at 2:59 PM on December 11, 2014 [8 favorites]

St. Louis police say they'll discipline officer who wore 'Wilson' name tag at City Hall protest
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:00 PM on December 12, 2014 [1 favorite]

911 Caller: "There's a Caucasian Man with a Gun"... so naturally Police sit down with him and Talk
posted by Golden Eternity at 6:48 AM on December 13, 2014 [1 favorite]

@hdagres: #Syria's opposition shows solidarity with #BlackLivesMatter #ICantBreathe protests across the USA ht Raed Fares
posted by Golden Eternity at 7:02 AM on December 13, 2014

Ferguson Protesters Filed Restraining Order Against Cops. It Worked! Tear Gas Use (Slightly) Restricted
posted by jeffburdges at 12:16 PM on December 13, 2014 [1 favorite]

Forgive me if this has already been posted, but this piece in the LA Times is pretty good:

Women find their voice in Ferguson protest movement

(via Imani ABL @AngryBlackLady)
posted by joseph conrad is fully awesome at 2:02 PM on December 13, 2014 [4 favorites]

From Teh Guardian: Oakland undercover officer who drew gun on protesters 'could have shot anyone'

[...]
The patrol’s Golden Gate division told the San Francisco Chronicle that officers had been dressing like and walking with protesters since the first demonstration on 24 November, attempting to gather intelligence to stop highway shutdowns.
[my emphasis]

I think we should presume that the secret police attend every demonstration or other large public gathering in the USA.
posted by Joe in Australia at 5:08 PM on December 13, 2014 [11 favorites]

Legendary NYC cop Frank Serpico:

"I remember a guy I worked with back in the 81st Precinct, an ex-Marine named Murphy. He would not turn out for roll call until his shoes were spit-shined, and his uniform was creased.

One night, he was called to a family dispute. There was a man waiting behind the door, and he came out with a butcher knife and slashed Murphy’s face.

Murphy could have emptied his gun in him. Instead, he disarmed the man and put him in cuffs. What’s happening today in the performance of some officers can only be described as sheer cowardice. They don’t belong in the uniform, and they shouldn’t have weapons — whether they’re cops or not.”

via.
posted by cashman at 7:09 PM on December 13, 2014 [24 favorites]

Missouri Prosecutor Releases More Ferguson Grand Jury Evidence - "St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch apologized for “inadvertently” omitting to release some of the evidence collected after the shooting of Michael Brown. "
posted by the man of twists and turns at 7:58 PM on December 13, 2014 [3 favorites]

Maybe he should "inadvertently" stop getting a paycheck. Ever again.
posted by wuwei at 8:17 PM on December 13, 2014 [9 favorites]

Live the rest of his life on public assistance and never work again, that is.
posted by wuwei at 8:29 PM on December 13, 2014 [1 favorite]

Comedian Dave Chappelle says he was choked by the police in New Orleans

[...] The weirdest thing about being a black man being choked by the police, Chappelle said, is that you don't even wonder why it's happening. You just think, he said, "OK, here we go."

To be fair to the police officer, Chappelle was not yet famous, was dressed like a mugger, and was black.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:52 PM on December 13, 2014 [1 favorite]

Also from NOLA: 2 Mississippi women admit hate-crime role in running over, killing black man

Two women have pleaded guilty in connection with a series of attacks on African-Americans in Mississippi that included running over and killing a man.
[...]
Anderson's death outside a Jackson hotel in 2011 sparked a broader investigation into reports that young white men and women were driving from mostly white Rankin County into majority-black Jackson to assault African-Americans. Six others also have pleaded guilty.

Wait, what? This was a regular thing?

"What are your plans tonight?"
– "Oh, I don't know, might drive down to Jackson and kill some African-Americans."¹

Really? I appreciate that there's a pretty intense news cycle on right now, but you would think that news of a black-beating social club could still make the front page.

¹ Yeah, probably not the term they would have used.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:59 PM on December 13, 2014 [1 favorite]

I'm a little uncomfortable with the triumphal pulling out of instances where police don't shoot white people as a problem. If the goal is to get police to not shoot anyone, shouldn't we be talking about those incidents as good and a model for other policing? As it stands it seems like people are suggesting "those guys should have got shot too."
posted by corb at 9:25 AM on December 14, 2014

I hear it more like "If he'd been black, he would have been shot." I don't think anyone is actually advocating that more people should be shot by police. They are advocating that if police can manage to talk down a ranting, gun-brandishing dude who happens to be white, maybe they can use words instead of bullets in other situations, like when the person is black.
posted by rtha at 9:46 AM on December 14, 2014 [28 favorites]

Yes, the argument is that both protesters in this situation should have received the treatment that Ben (the white one) did. (Some interesting experiences in the comments, too, from bouncers talking about how police handle rowdy bar patrons...)
posted by TwoStride at 10:05 AM on December 14, 2014 [1 favorite]

Ferguson to Increase Police Ticketing to Close City’s Budget Gap
posted by rhizome at 12:09 AM on December 15, 2014 [8 favorites]

"Witness 40" potentially discovered. If this investigation is correct, she would seem to have a history of trying to insert herself in to high-profile investigations.
posted by dhens at 6:22 PM on December 15, 2014 [16 favorites]

Get a load of this asshole.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:33 PM on December 15, 2014

"Criticize any of us and you criticize all of us," is textbook gang logic.
posted by rhizome at 10:42 PM on December 15, 2014 [4 favorites]

I'm a little uncomfortable with the triumphal pulling out of instances where police don't shoot white people as a problem. If the goal is to get police to not shoot anyone, shouldn't we be talking about those incidents as good and a model for other policing?

That's....exactly what they are doing. It's just that they're emphasizing that it is a model for how police deal should with BLACK suspects as WELL as white ones.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:28 AM on December 16, 2014 [2 favorites]

Oh God - there is apparently this small movement on Facebook now, for people to post examples of their positive encounters with police or some kind of statement to the effect that police have been getting a bad rap, and "personally I don't feel unsafe when I see a policeman." It is taking EVERY BIT OF MY WILLPOWER to not retort, "well, yeah, UncleCallipygos, but that's because you're white."

i will not get in a facebook argument i will not get in a facebook argument i will not get in a facebook argument i will not get in a facebook argument i will not get in a facebook argument
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 12:19 PM on December 16, 2014 [9 favorites]

I think there's also something, it occurs to me - police often tend to respond better when you treat them as in a position of authority above you - not quite subservient, but almost. And you know, for someone who's in a powerful position every day, and treated well by the rest of society, it's NBD for you to buckle under to a police officer and "Yes-sir, no-sir" him. You're doing it for a minimum of 5 minutes, and it doesn't affect your perception of self.

But if you're a member of a historically oppressed group, and part of that oppression has been insisting upon your subservience and your "yes-sir, no-sir," then that expectation becomes somewhat more problematic.
posted by corb at 12:47 PM on December 16, 2014 [2 favorites]

Speaking of how the police react when someone isn't properly fawning...
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:12 PM on December 16, 2014

i will not get in a facebook argument

On the other hand, these interactions can be a good catalyst for removing racist reactionaries from your life.
posted by anemone of the state at 1:20 PM on December 16, 2014 [1 favorite]

these interactions can be a good catalyst for removing racist reactionaries from your life.

Yeah, except this is family so that's kind of hard. (Non-relatives I have no problem telling them off and then unfriending them.)
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:38 PM on December 16, 2014

Alexis Templeton ( @MusicOverPeople ) and Brittany Ferrell ( @bdoulaoblongata ) are engaged. (Same-sex marriage was legalized in Missouri while everything else was going on.) Two Prominent Ferguson Protesters Get Engaged, Mariah Stewart, Huffington Post.

Alexis Templeton has been dubbed "chant leader of the revolution" on Twitter. She's responsible for some the Ferguson protest chants that have since spread nationwide: "Show me what Democracy looks like: This is what Democracy looks like", "The whole damn system is guilty as hell", "It is our duty to fight for our freedom. It is our duty to win ..." (The last one is a quote from Assata Shakur.)

They both took part in founding MAU (Millennial Activists United) in the immediate aftermath of Mike Brown's shooting and the first unorganized protests, and they've been core organizers in the St. Louis area in the months that followed, along with other MAU people and the leadership network that's emerged over the course of the protests.
posted by nangar at 8:08 PM on December 16, 2014 [4 favorites]

She's responsible for some the Ferguson protest chants that have since spread nationwide: "Show me what Democracy looks like: This is what Democracy looks like",

I hate to piss on anyone's parade, but this is actually pretty old. I was chanting this in the 90s.
posted by corb at 9:14 PM on December 16, 2014 [4 favorites]

The point is it's silly to give her credit for that chant. Many people have been chanting that well before Ferguson erupted. It's like the most common protest chant ever. Not to take away from whatever else she's been doing.

As an aside, it always seemed like kind of a wrongheaded chant to me. I mean, if we really lived in a democracy, would we really need to be marching around with signs all the time?

posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 9:45 PM on December 16, 2014 [1 favorite]

Virtual Ferguson
posted by unliteral at 10:01 PM on December 16, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah, I should have checked. Misattributing the chant to her was just a matter of me being dumb and not something claimed in the article I linked to.
posted by nangar at 5:16 AM on December 17, 2014 [1 favorite]

Just tell UncleCallipygos not to water his lawn, EmpressCallipygos.

American cops killed like 1000 people last year (related). British police killed nobody last year and only one the year before that. Icelandic police have only killed one person ever. etc.

American cops are being trained to be murderous psychopaths. Apparently many whites are dumb racist enough to favor risking their own lives so long as many more blacks get killed.
posted by jeffburdges at 2:30 AM on December 18, 2014 [9 favorites]

Not to belabor the point, but there's even a documentary about the 1999 Seattle WTO protests called This is What Democracy Looks Like.
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 7:23 AM on December 18, 2014 [1 favorite]

Bob McCulloch's Family Links Him to Darren Wilson Legal Team: Report, Danny Wicentowski, Riverfront Times.

Ferguson prosecutor has deep family ties to police brutality cases, Kevin Connor, LittleSis.
posted by nangar at 7:46 AM on December 18, 2014 [6 favorites]

these interactions can be a good catalyst for removing racist reactionaries from your life.

Yeah, except this is family so that's kind of hard. (Non-relatives I have no problem telling them off and then unfriending them.)

Muting people on facebook is a great way to never have to see their ignorant nonsense without any of the drama of unfriending whining. They may still show up in your comments but at least you don't see their I AM DARREN WILSON'S DESIRE TO KILL memes.
posted by phearlez at 10:24 AM on December 18, 2014

White people are more likely to engage with other white people objecting to racism, even if it's to continue to be vile. It would probably be helpful if white people who wanted to improve things told other white people to not be racist.
posted by Deoridhe at 1:35 PM on December 18, 2014 [7 favorites]

Prosecutor Says He Knew Some Witnesses Were Lying To The Ferguson Grand Jury
posted by Golden Eternity at 1:47 PM on December 19, 2014 [5 favorites]

Oh holy fuck. Will someone please do something about this man? Disbar him or unappoint him or whatever it takes? Jail time too, preferably.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 2:07 PM on December 19, 2014 [3 favorites]

Here is the page on the Missouri State Bar Association's web site which explains what kind of disciplinary actions can be brought against an attorney, and which explains exactly how to file a complaint against a lawyer that has acted unethically.

Just leaving that there.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 2:22 PM on December 19, 2014 [5 favorites]

Fuuuuuuuuuuck.

Two NYPD officers 'assassinated' while sitting in patrol car in Brooklyn by gunman who boasted on Instagram about 'revenge' killing cops

Two NYPD cops were executed Saturday after a gang member from Baltimore trekked to Brooklyn to kill police officers in a twisted bid to avenge the deaths of Eric Garner and Michael Brown, sources told the Daily News...

“I’m Putting Wings On Pigs Today. They Take 1 Of Ours...Let’s Take 2 of Theirs,” Brinsley, 28, wrote on Instagram alongside a photo of a silver handgun. He also included the sick hashtags: #ShootThePolice #RIPErivGarner #RIPMike Brown. “This May Be My Final Post...I’m Putting Pigs In A Blanket.”

.... The Rev. Al Sharpton, in a statement, said Garner’s family was incensed the killer invoked his name on social media. “I have spoken to the Garner family and we are outraged by the early reports of the police killed in Brooklyn today,” Sharpton said. “Any use of the names of Eric Garner and Michael Brown, in connection with any violence or killing of police, is reprehensible and against the pursuit of justice in both cases.”

I really, really fucking hope this does not affect how the NYPD respond to the protests against the Garner death planned for Christmas week. They have a serious history of going off half cocked after the deaths of police.
posted by corb at 5:03 PM on December 20, 2014

Jesus, that's terrible.
posted by rtha at 5:40 PM on December 20, 2014 [1 favorite]

Horrendous tragedy. The police union is already making all sorts of statements blaming the mayor and advising cops how to respond to calls- can they even do that? Tell police how to do their jobs? I get that they are the cops but isn't the authority to direct action in the force itself? This is all so ugly.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 5:46 PM on December 20, 2014

And now activists have to waste time distancing themselves from this asshole. If they don't say anything, they'll be accused of condoning it.
posted by desjardins at 5:52 PM on December 20, 2014 [9 favorites]

Stupidity warning: Daily Mail.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:35 PM on December 20, 2014

. .
posted by tonycpsu at 7:05 PM on December 20, 2014

Lefty politics blogger and NYC resident Steve M. has a post up that summarizes some earlier reporting about the "Black Guerilla Family" that Ismaaiyl Brinsley is allegedly affiliated with, along with some of the predictable reactions from the Fox News crowd.

He's also right about this:

If you force-fed the Fox News audience paranoia-inducing controlled substances for three days straight, this is precisely the scenario they'd hallucinate: members of an inner-city drug gang acts as violent agents of progressive revenge against the forces of law and order. This is what they thought the New Black Panthers were.

[...]

But if it's real, I'd expect (and Fox watchers would not expect) the FBI in cooperation with Baltimore and New York authorities (yes, Bill de Blasio, too) to bring the hammer down on this gang. Would you have a problem with that? I wouldn't.

I don't think it'll save de Blasio's career, however. He is now going national as the second-biggest right-wing Antichrist in America, after President Obama. They're going to destroy him. And, frankly, if he somehow fails to be protected from an attack on his life in the near future, I won't be the least bit surprised.

posted by tonycpsu at 7:12 PM on December 20, 2014 [1 favorite]

Given what's happened with the NYPD, can you imagine what would happen if President Obama came out as forcibly as de Blasio has?
posted by wuwei at 7:42 PM on December 20, 2014

Conservatives already hate Obama though. They would just have a new issue to latch onto.
posted by desjardins at 7:45 PM on December 20, 2014

Jesus.
I am sad for the two officers -- it is very sad. But for the union to say that there's blood on the mayor's hands -- it's like, God, it's too depressing to even argue with.
posted by angrycat at 5:33 AM on December 21, 2014

It's the police themselves, their leadership, past mayors, like Giuliani, Bloomberg, etc. who cost the NYPD its legitimacy. Mayor de Blasio will need to crack down hard on the NYPD's abuses if he wants to restore legitimacy.
posted by jeffburdges at 5:53 AM on December 21, 2014 [2 favorites]

Ismaaiyl Brinsley was apparently quite unhinged, supposedly shot his girlfriend the day before he shot the two cops, not exactly a planned gang thing.
posted by jeffburdges at 6:21 AM on December 21, 2014

Yes, this is just suicide by cop by somebody taking advantage of the anger against the police to justify his own behaviour; the fact that he attempted to murder his girlfriend first says enough. This wasn't a political killing.
posted by MartinWisse at 6:36 AM on December 21, 2014

Yup, just another part of the price we pay to ensure freedom for guns.

Fucker couldn't have had worse timing though.
posted by Artw at 7:19 AM on December 21, 2014

And now activists have to waste time distancing themselves from this asshole. If they don't say anything, they'll be accused of condoning it.

You know, you had a couple of Anti-Government white people kill two cops and three civilians in a similar manner just a few months ago.

How much Tut-tutting did Hannity and Beck do about the violence inherent in right wing white culture then ?
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 8:10 AM on December 21, 2014 [12 favorites]

I think it's possible it's both - that the guy was disturbed and wanted suicide by cop AND that he had political anger over Brown/Gardner. People are complex. It's not just the career activists who are upset over what's going down, it's regular people too - not all of whom are saints.
posted by corb at 9:23 AM on December 21, 2014 [2 favorites]

It's true that gun availability facilitates this sort of "going out in a blaze of glory" version of suicide by cop, Artw, but maybe not as much as it increases the murder rate in domestic violence, which I'll remind you was Ismaaiyl Brinsley's initial crime.

It's arming the police themselves that really facilitates suicide by cop, whether the "blaze of glory" version or not. If cops diffuse situations rather than attack then fewer people go to the cops to find a fight.

Actually, I'd wager that (a) Ismaaiyl Brinsley had committed domestic violence before, but (b) his girlfriend never called the cops because they're more dangerous, making this really the NYPD's problem from the beginning. See :
- Why I Don’t Call the Police by Emily Bazelon
- This is what happens when you call the cops! by Rob Hustle

Just fyi, almost all suicide by cop victims were white males (over 90%), most carry a weapon, although half the time it's not loaded, so yeah this gets hushed up all the time, Pogo_Fuzzybutt, but usually only the suicide case is in danger.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:39 AM on December 21, 2014 [7 favorites]

New thread about the NYC police murders.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:46 AM on December 21, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think it's possible it's both - that the guy was disturbed and wanted suicide by cop AND that he had political anger over Brown/Gardner. People are complex.

I think this is accurate as far as Brinsley's state of mind--choosing to frame one's suicide in terms of dramatic, violent, political terms is unfortunately nothing new, and cuts across the political spectrum--but I don't recall, for example, former governors blaming anti-tax positions of Republican politicians for Andrew Joseph Stack's acts.
posted by kagredon at 10:09 AM on December 21, 2014 [4 favorites]

The Cops Hate Being Filmed. So Why Are They OK With Body Cameras?
posted by the man of twists and turns at 8:37 PM on December 21, 2014 [3 favorites]

I'm sure everyone still reading thread has seen these pictures of the protest in the Mall of America the other day, but seriously.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 5:04 AM on December 22, 2014 [3 favorites]

Breaking news: no charges filed in the Dontre Hamilton case in Milwaukee (my summary above). There are reports that the Wisconsin National Guard is being put on standby for possible unrest. (Note: all protests have been peaceful thus far, though they're increasingly disruptive, e.g. blocking freeways.) Press conference at 10 am central (live blog), full investigative report (pdf) here.
posted by desjardins at 7:38 AM on December 22, 2014 [3 favorites]

Blue Lives Matter (Ta-Nehisi Coates)

To challenge the police is to challenge the American people, and the problem with the police is not that they are fascist pigs but that we are majoritarian pigs. When the police are brutalized by people, we are outraged because we are brutalized. By the same turn, when the police brutalize people, we are forgiving because ultimately we are really just forgiving ourselves. Power, decoupled from responsibility, is what we seek.

posted by Golden Eternity at 8:26 AM on December 22, 2014 [5 favorites]

The time is ripe for bar disciplinary proceedings to be brought against McCulloch. He should be given a thorough judgment from the Supreme Court of Missouri and at the very least suspended. There are multiple clear ethical violations. If he didn't allow justice to happen, then the next step is that he needs to answer for it professionally.

And to be clear: bringing forth a witness to testify whom you are positive is committing perjury - this is grossly unethical.
posted by naju at 11:31 AM on December 22, 2014 [2 favorites]

> Prosecutor Says He Knew Some Witnesses Were Lying To The Ferguson Grand Jury

A Startling Admission By The Ferguson Prosecutor Could Restart The Case Against Darren Wilson
posted by homunculus at 1:52 PM on December 22, 2014 [9 favorites]

Limited hangout.
posted by rhizome at 1:59 PM on December 22, 2014 [4 favorites]

Drinky Die: For my next prediction, the Eagles will win the Super Bowl!

*grumble*
posted by tonycpsu at 5:27 PM on December 22, 2014 [1 favorite]

Horrific Racist Song at Glendale, CA Elks Lodge Charity Police Event 'AND HE'S DEAD, DEAD MICHAEL BROWN'

Wow, these guys are the real killas! The "Elks" are basically like the klan aren't they?
posted by Golden Eternity at 8:59 AM on December 23, 2014 [2 favorites]

Update on the child who was injured by a flash grenade: Family Owes $1 Million In Medical Bills Because Their Toddler Was Injured In SWAT Raid
posted by homunculus at 4:12 PM on December 23, 2014 [1 favorite]

And another: 18-year old Antonio Martin fatally shot by police at a gas station in Berkeley, MO.

Every. 28. Hours.
posted by yasaman at 11:19 PM on December 23, 2014 [2 favorites]

I don't really understand what's happening with these cops in MO, their operational procedures seem completely half-assed and questionable. I have no problem at all with an officer actually defending against deadly force, but this is yet another bit of footage where we see an officer roll right up practically on top of folks in his cruiser.

Two dudes are standing around in front of the shop, they see two people and a baby carriage walking diagonally across the lot. They start walking to intercept them and begin walking along side them, talking, and then the cruiser pulls into the lot and cuts all of them off. Officer gets out of the car and apparently is talking to someone, perhaps the men to determine if they're bothering the women(?). However the women don't use this opportunity to beat a hasty exit, and seem to dawdle.

Charitably I want to think this is an officer making sure women late at night are safe (versus just hassling folk), but calling this a business check is curious. There's almost nothing that could have transpired there that would make it okay for this guy to pull a gun on a cop, but why do the police in this department never seem to keep what I would think of as a safe distance from people when they start an encounter?
posted by phearlez at 7:24 AM on December 24, 2014

Autopsy shows that mentally ill man was shot in the back by cop who fired 14 bullets into him, cop won't be prosecuted
posted by jeffburdges at 12:11 PM on December 24, 2014

I don't really understand what's happening with these cops in MO, their operational procedures seem completely half-assed and questionable.

Missouri was a slave state.
posted by rhizome at 12:16 PM on December 24, 2014 [3 favorites]

If that's supposed to be something besides sneering (and I am not saying it is) then I am afraid I need it spelled out for me. Do you mean they are doing this because the people are black? (I am receptive to this but it's not like that racism is absent in yank states) Everything is inherently less competent in slave states, or just policing?
posted by phearlez at 1:59 PM on December 24, 2014

Both regions and policing itself have traditions that date back much further than recent events. What's been happening is a continuation of these traditions (along with an infinity of additional examples) revealed through the tools of the Information Age. Not so much sneering as a reminder.
posted by rhizome at 2:06 PM on December 24, 2014 [2 favorites]