It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A plea for the officers name. . . what do you think ATS?

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:04 AM
link   
I am on the fence governing this topic at the present time, which I feel most of the answers express my concerns in parallel.

If they release the name his INNOCENT family will be in jeopardy. Some would probably think this is acceptable, but I personally could not condone that.
So. . . . . No, do not release the name.
At the same time the police are responsible to protect his immediate family and also the general public, to which they are making some historic mistakes in the process(if they are mistakes). This was a public event and all information should be made public. Or in other words, it's the police department's mess, they should clean it up. In which the name should be released and que sera sera.

In my gut, I feel the officers name must and should be made public ASAP!
So maybe the real question is here:
When and under what pretense should they release the officers name?
And I can see already where that can of worms is going to lead us. . .
edit on 8/13/2014 by AnteBellum because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: thesmokingman

Uh...

Sorry.

What I meant to say, what I should have typed was, UNARMED, which is pretty much the definition of innocent. If you are not armed, and the police are, you are no threat to them, especially if you are lying on the ground. So the fact of the matter is, that this man was innocent in so far as he represented no threat what so ever, leave alone a lethal one, to the officer involved.

Therefore, whether the dead man was technically innocent of a crime or not is immaterial to the case at hand.

Boiled down, an unarmed man, lying on the ground, was shot dead by an officer. There is no way he can of provoked a lethal response, without presenting a lethal threat, something that is impossible to do while unarmed, and lying down, unless you happen to be Chow Yun Fat. Shooting an unarmed person, while they present zero threat to the officer in question, makes this an out and out bad shoot, and there ought be no question as to whether charges ought to be filed. Charges should ALWAYS be filed when an unarmed person is shot dead.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
It's not like we are stripping him of due process.


No, just possibly his life and his families. Have you seen the attitude that cops have been getting for the last few years? Even here at ATS? Do you think there's no possibility that someone would take it upon themself to exact what they think is justice? They hold names back all the time for various reasons. If this have been a civilian who's name had been withheld no one would be saying anything. Thus my point.


Sounds like an issue for protective services to handle and/or our justice system if something happens to the cop or his family. Or is the cop exempt from all the systems in place for the average person?

To be honest, I think you are stretching anyways with the idea of backlash. Look at George Zimmerman. His name was plastered all over the news. Pretty much half the country truly believed he was racist and guilty. He received some death threats, but did any retaliation happen to him or his family during or post trial? Nope. So I'm not buying your argument.

By the way, usually the only time a name is withheld is if they are a juvenile.
edit on 13-8-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: AnteBellum

It will be public at some point but right now isn't the time.

Look at it this way. To release his name you're basically saying that our Laws and Justice System no longer matter and/or no longer exist. So here is his name, now go get revenge.

If that's the case, then go loot, and destroy and murder and rape or whatever since none of it matters anymore. Or, give the system a chance to do the right thing. You don't know how it's going to come out yet. No sense and going all anarchy just yet.

Let's see what happens.

Plus, what if his name is Steve Smith or Bob Jones??? How many of those will you have to go through till you're sure you got the right one??? How will that sit with you if you had to go through 15 of them before you found the right one??



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You don't have to buy it because I wasn't selling anything. If you can't see the attitude cops are getting today, I can't help you. It's quite blatant.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You don't have to buy it because I wasn't selling anything. If you can't see the attitude cops are getting today, I can't help you. It's quite blatant.



O I see it. It is well deserved, but that doesn't mean that they should become protected citizens when they abuse their power. If anything their cases should be MORE transparent than civilian ones. I'm not the one who signed up to protect the peace. He did. Then he failed the public in his duty by doing what he did (allegedly).

If upon releasing his name, the public tears him apart for it. Oh well, we have laws in place to prosecute those people.
edit on 13-8-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   
It would be idiotic to post his name before the facts come in.
What if they post the officers name (which I believe is long gone from the area) and these animals that are looking for trouble go to some other persons house with the same name?

Think people!



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I hate to run out on this in the middle of it but I have to.



but that doesn't mean that they should become protected citizens when they abuse their power. If anything their cases should be MORE transparent than civilian ones. I'm not the one who signed up to protect the peace. He did. Then he failed the public in his duty by doing what he did (allegedly).


I agree with this statement above, which makes it even harder for me because I also agree with what Intrepid is saying!
Thus the problem I am having in making a personal choice. . .



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You don't have to buy it because I wasn't selling anything. If you can't see the attitude cops are getting today, I can't help you. It's quite blatant.



O I see it. It is well deserved, but that doesn't mean that they should become protected citizens when they abuse their power.


Do you have information that we don't that he abused his power?


If upon releasing his name, the public tears him apart for it. Oh well, we have laws in place to prosecute those people.


What a consolation to everyone that may be affected. Like if someone burns his house down. His family goes too. That's comforting.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Heres the thing man...armed, unarmed, it does not matter until we know exactly what happened, if we ever do. I will say one thing, you might be surprised how much a cell phone, or even a finger can look like a weapon in the dark of night. I am pretty sure if this man had put his arms in the air and got down on the ground when confronted by the officer, he would not have been shot. Again, we simply do not know the logistics of the situation at this point to be able to make an assumption as to what exactly caused the man to be shot.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




If upon releasing his name, the public tears him apart for it. Oh well, we have laws in place to prosecute those people.


What if you lived in the same area and have the same name as the officer?

Oh well!



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Either you believe we are a nation of Laws or you don't.

If you do, then you'll just have to sit tight for now and wait. They won't keep his name secret forever. Just until the investigation is over. Then it will come out one way or another.

If you don't believe in a nation of laws. Then you have no valid reason to say anything about anything because if we are a nation without Laws, then there wasn't any law broken by this cop, allegedly shooting this kid. He had the right to murder him just like some of you want to murder the cop too.

You see how that works???



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: ObjectZero
Has the family pressed charges yet? I keep on hearing the out roar but nothing on a case filing.

I also believe the longer they hold out giving a name will not let things blow over but build pressure up.

The thing that has to be considered is the media circus that has developed in Ferguson. It looks like a Travon Martin situation all over again. Al Sharpton is already there and we're still waiting on Jesse Jackson to arrive. The sad part is no facts are known as to what actually happened other than a cop shot a black man.

The reaction to this event was excessive with rioting and looting. Al and Jesse are not going to make things better just add gasoline to the fire. To release the policeman's name will throw the media into a feeding frenzy as in the Zimmerman case. They prejudged him as a white man when he was Hispanic. What will they do to this cop?



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Like I said, people have access to the defendant's name when the person isn't a police officer. So all those questions could be asked and assumed about non-police officers who have their names released to the public while the trial is going on. Again, I ask, how much retaliation was visited upon George Zimmerman?



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: thesaneone

Your and Intrepid's responses are assuming a response will even happen. What makes you think that one will happen when we didn't get one against George Zimmerman? The man was literally hated by most of the black community, was acquitted and still didn't receive retaliation.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Plain and simple here, It is evident by the way these people have taken a mob mentality here, they are destroying their own neighborhood, as well as the business of hard working individuals in the community, and the police are expected to release the name of a man who may very well have just been doing his job and may be innocent? Tell you what, lets turn the spotlight on the residents of Furgeson to act like CIVIL HUMAN BEINGS, and let the process work itself out. If they are willing to destroy their own neighborhood, what exactly are they willing to do to this man?



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Why chance it?



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You're betting that there won't be retaliation because none happened to Zimmerman? Where's the logic in that? That's like saying in 1913, "There won't be a world war. Never had one in the past." Yeah.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: thesaneone

Because we chance it all the time when someone isn't a police officer. What makes him so special?



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Why does his name need to be released?





top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join