It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: alphacenturi
a reply to: LDragonFire
Those are not pants, they are shorts, I think the blue could be his underwear, or possibly another shirt tied around his waist, but it looks like his shorts, lite tan color are pulled down a bit.
definitely same guy, and yeah I don't see numerous shots to the back either.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: UnBreakable
The media always portrays the victims as innocent youngsters. They always show a younger looking photo, whether it's Michael Brown, Travon Martin, etc. Plus everyone says he was college bound, as if he was going to campus next month. He was thinking about enrolling. Big difference there. Kinda like when I think about Kate Upton being my wife.
Luckily there are concerned apologists to come along and vilify victims in order to somehow justify what would otherwise be considered unjustifiable uses of lethal force.
There's a poster making blatantly racist remarks in this thread in order to accomplish JUST THAT and yet none of the would-be truth seekers can be bothered to speak up.
originally posted by: Jennyfrenzy
a reply to: Vasa Croe
Because he stole a box of swisher sweets he's a thug?! Yes, he committed a crime. Does that mean he should have been shot in the back with his body left on the street for 4 hours? No, it doesn't. There is a justice system to handle punishments. Look at the way the situation was handled in the days following the shooting. That police department is out of control.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: AgentSmith
In this GRAPHIC PHOTO of his body in the street you can clearly see he is wearing exactly the same clothes (with his long shorts pulled down) as in the CCTV photo.
That does look very similar to the description released of the assault suspect.
Has anyone seen a Cardinals hat in the videos or photos which would add further circumstantial evidence that this was the same person?
originally posted by: theantediluvian
originally posted by: amazing
So let's see. shoplifting and petty theft get you a death sentence in Ferguson. Got it. Some of you guys are okay with that?
As long as it's a black "thug" who may or may not be shooting "gang signs" in a picture and was like about to "smoke a blunt" who probably wasn't "raised with respect for right and wrong" and is likely to be killed by "one of his own" at some point in the future. When it's a black kid who gets shot down in the street, then we have to know their height and weight, because that's more important than age when it comes to an unarmed person getting shot in the back by cops.
Now, if you're a white rancher who doesn't want to pay grazing fees, well then you're a hero and a patriot and you can expect armed support to arrive in droves to help you battle against the militarized police who aren't shooting you in the back.
To many, particularly the right-wingers, including those on ATS, white people's property is more important than black people's lives, regardless of the circumstances. Fact.
originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
To add my two cents on the video? I have just one question. In my mind, it is the ONLY question which matters, before getting to anything else.
Are we seeing a 100% untouched, unedited and unenhanced video as it popped out of the recording equipment or computers of the Quiktrip store....or are we seeing segments and edits, possibly enhanced...from the Fergie or St Louis County PD technical wizards?
I flat out, without qualification, do NOT trust anyone in this situation right now but the State Police (and possibly the FBI). They have NO dog in this hunt, and they have a very capable lab in Jefferson City, Missouri that could answer the above question. If it turns out to be valid...what can we say? If that's him, it's him, and he wasn't such a nice guy after all. Not deserving of multiple shots to a street death ...but so much we don't know.
Is the vid unmodified though...from Departments we can probably agree have a track record fit for an outhouse at this point?
The FPD did, however, post a still from surveillance footage it claims shows Michael Brown in the act of robbing a convenience store of a box of cigars. The claim is being cited by police apologists as important in the context of the shooting of Michael Brown. In my two and a half years covering police brutality issues here at Reason (and before that a year and a half of doing the same on Freedom Watch), and in my years of reading about these kinds of stories, I have never come across an incident where someone suspected of a crime who was shot by cops wasn’t immediately identified as such in initial news reports. Cops make sure this information gets out, because they believe it will strengthen their narrative, provide the right context for their shooting. It’s impossible to say for sure that Wilson didn’t know Brown was a robbery suspect when he engaged him, but if he did know it, police have no compelling reason, and have given none, for why that information was withheld. Considering that mainstream media are often quick to give cops the benefit of the doubt, police identification of Brown as a “suspect” may have kept the national media from covering the story at all.