Anonymous Playing Hardball With Ferguson - Releases Officer's Name, and More

originally posted by: 0bservant
Everyone that's saying Anon did the wrong thing should rethink that.

Well, other then posting the wrong man and his pic.....now I hope that man doesn't have any problems because of it. The hacker who posted the wrong info doesn't have any accountability in this, but you complain that the police need to have accountability.

Care to rethink your statements?

a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

So giving out the wrong name is a good thing huh?

This thread had 5 flags when I posted a tweet saying it was the wrong name on the first page..

It still got 60 flags and lots of attention for a hoax.

proof? nothing is concrete yet man, looks like the cop doesnt like black people in all honesty, but its only a theory, a reply to: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: Painterz
I'm pretty certain under UK law if a name was released like this, it would mean the defence would be able to argue prejudice, and it would make it absolutely impossible to get a conviction in a court of law.

Well, the UK must be different than here. Because the minute you are arrested here, your name is made public. Before trial, innocent, guilty, it does not matter. Unless you're a cop that is.

Why would an investigation be hampered when it is a cop vs. a normal citizen?

Why don't I see all the naysayers asking their representatives to stop distributing citizen names?

originally posted by: thesaneone
Hey anonymous thank you for f#####g the internet up you people are useless all you are going to do is screw up everything for the little guy.

What a waste of talent.

Not true...

Essentially what you're saying is, every tool you use to fight tyranny is a tool that becomes restricted and thus, we shouldn't fight tyranny.

That's screwing it up for not just the little guy, but the medium guy, the big guy, pretty much everyone. We should use all means available to fight tyranny and hope we win, if we win -- the restrictions would be removed, if you lose fighting, at least you can say we fought... if you lose because you stood by and watched, you deserve that bed to lay in....

I support Anon, all they've done is open the eyes of more people to the corruption that exists -- how could that be a bad thing unless you support the corruption?

It's not exactly like net neutrality issues are new, and it's not like they weren't pushing for restrictions before anonymous....

If anything, anonymous makes people realize the value of the internet as it stands -- it could very well be because of anonymous that net neutrality is still only something people "talk" about, rather than a thing we live with....

Don't be so naive in the future.

From my vantage point, one being informed and knowledgeable about how they do what they do, as well as why they do what they do, all I can say is -- what a superb use of talent...

The real truth is, systems with officers names on them and such, should be in closed intranets, not open internets. If anything, all this will do is force the government to actually protect sensitive information, rather than leave it on servers that are easy to exploit into... Just some food for thought.

originally posted by: pimptriggs
AS SOON as you start "chasing" someone who is unarmed esp. its considered murder, if they are coming at you its self defense, a back shot would defiantly be a hard one to pass up in court. a reply to: Tardacus

I agree that this is how it is for civilians, but history proves it's not for the police.

ALSO, it's bull# that this is a thing. Someone could be running at you, zig, then zag, as they zag their upper torso rotates exposing the back. You don't have to run towards or away from someone in straight lines, in fact -- the greater the distance, the less likely you are to run B-Line towards your target since it puts you at the most danger. You can catch a bullet to the back as easy as turning 90ºs to your target, especially if you look over the opposite shoulder while you do it.

So it's indeed VERY possible for someone to catch a bullet to the back while running AT you. So this whole precedent is rubbish, since it's based on fallacy.

This is like No Fault accident states, that say -- if you hit someone in the back, you're at fault. What? I've had people back into the front of my legally parked car, and because the front of my car made contact with the back of theirs it means I "Hit" them, when that's 100% totally opposite of the truth.

regardless if the cop was in the right or in the wrong, i think the world see this as just another police brutality incident and someone is going to have to pay for it. a reply to: Laykilla

a reply to: thesaneone

You missed his point entirely there.
In the case of a person accused of murder in a high profile case their names are released prior to trial. Such as was the case with George Zimmerman and countless others. The MSM, NOT anonymous, in those cases released the names of the people accused, but not yet convicted of murder.

Basically he's saying that you're a hypocrite because you don't judge the MSM for putting innocent people at risk by releasing names but you judge anonymous for doing the same thing the MSM does all the time. It's not abnormal for peoples names to be released prior to trial in these cases. Stop acting like it is. You're just being over protective of the cop for some reason. Is a man yet to be convicted of murder or rape less at risk then the cop for some reason? Like if anyones family is safe, it's a cops....they'll have more protection anyway.

a reply to: lonweld

Your selective quoting is hularious. Cheers!

a reply to: Laykilla

Anon is a name. Anonymous is 9 simple letters strung together.

Anonymous could be me. It could be you. Anonymous could be Barack Obama playing a sadistic little game or it could be a Convict with momentary access to a computer and skill to do something nasty with it.

In short.. Anonymous deserves no support. EVER. Anonymous deserves no condemnation. EVER. This..all my personal opinion of course..and I've been known to be wrong (once or twice in my life, at least..hehe)

The ACTIONS of those choosing that moment to use an open banner that is there for the temporary taking should be taken on the face of it. In this case? Well......They released entire lists of Officers for St Louis area departments. I have one of them in my own archives from a couple nights ago. It's accurate and it's real, to the best of my ability to determine...and it'll never see the light of day from MY archive. It should never have been out at all

So..While the Anon name has been used to do a few things I praise highly? The hackers that endangered the lives of families and the men who serve the St Louis area ...with NO regard to their guilt or actions ... should be hunted down, captured and given 10+ year terms in a very ugly federal institution of lower learning and correction.

Sooner...would be better, as more than ONE group of people in this mess desperately need a date with Lady Justice.

a reply to: LrdRedhawk

Thank you Anonymous.

a reply to: GrimReaper86

Instead of saying something silly and getting banned because you and a couple of other posters who replied with the same nonsense without thinking about the bigger picture I ask that you look at Wrabbits reply.

a reply to: thesaneone

I don't understand how you can feel that way. We need Anonymous and groups like that to fight against the authorities and the ones in power. We need them more than ever as we as a people cannot stand together to fight for what is right without being forced to back down. We need them because the average person doesn't do anything about the wrongs that are being done. We need them because the citizens CANNOT react with our lives being cornered into the boxes that they are. We need Anonymous to do these things. And more. I am so thankful they exist.

a reply to: gottaknow

Those are some weak excuses.
What has anonymous done for the people besides make a bunch of crappy videos?

How has anonymous benefited your life?

So prior to contact with law enforcement, the guy who was shot and killed participated in a strong armed robbery. They flee the scene to avoid being caught.

A short time later the guys are contacted by law enforcement for an unrelated issue (to the cop). The cop makes contact for one reason while its entirely possible to the 2 guys thought the police were making contact reference the strong armed robbery. The individuals attack the cop in order to get away and in the process go for his gun.

When multiple individuals are involved and attack one officer, attempting to gain control of his duty weapon, the individuals attacking do not have to be armed to be considered a deadly threat to the officer.

Ironic since people spouting off claimed the guy who was shot had no criminal history and was a good kid. Apparently his own family did not have all the facts either.

And again I still don't see the media talking about the protester who was killed on the second night. He pointed a gun at a cop and was shot and killed. The individual had been identified in other videos of the protests.

How about you let the investigation continue before J. Jackson and A. Sharpton find a tree and rope and demonstrate just how racist they are to gain ratings.

What's sad and pathetic is the guy was not shot and killed because he was black. Those who make that argument are just as racists as those who argue this is race related.

a reply to: LrdRedhawk

All of this is so weird to me. Michael Brown killed during a "confrontation". Trayvon Martin killed during a "confrontation". Then there's poor Chavis Carter. No "confrontation", arrested and patted down twice and put into a police car and while he has his hands cuffed behind his back...shoots himself in the temple and dies of a self-inflicted bullet in the back of the patrol car. No one marches, no one riots, the news barely covers the story. No Anonymous, no Rev. Sharpton, no National Guard, just a poor forgotten man. Sometimes I don't understand the world I live in and I don't understand how people pick and choose their martyrs.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Source please? Too much hearsay on this thread.

What a chaos, if it wasn't for the poor guy killed by a cop, this would almost be an hilarious/surreal situation.
Swats,cops,aljareeza crew shooted with teargas canisters,bits of news, twitter, now the cop's name, anonymous and Obama saying that this is all wrong.
I'm trying to imagine how they would handle a situation like this but on a national scale without laughing....

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: HandyDandy

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: TheMistro81
Murderer's are usually named, unless they are in the police force. What makes them so special? He's getting what hhe deserves. Period.

America's biggest gang strikes again.

Do you have all the fact that this officer is 100% guilty or are you someone who acts before thinking?

They release the names BEFORE trial even begins.

GEORGE ZIMMERMAN comes to mind......

Were you calling them (the MSM) out too for releasing HIS name? Nah, you only want to protect cops....

Another person not thinking.

What about the innocent people around this cop?

Why is everyone worried about the cops family and friends? Are Americans just animals going to revenge on innocent people just for the fact they know the guy??

I would think not, and if they did, they are worse than the cop and need to be shot too.