Video of Michael Brown robbing store just before being shot to be released today.

These are two separate incidents, even if they occurred right after each other. The first one has no bearing on the second one, unless the cop was going to arrest him because he was a suspect in a shoplifting. Even so, this supports any claim of police brutality if people want to connect the two incidents. Kid stole cigars, ends up laying in the street for 4 hours with a clip unloaded into him?

This issue became a lot bigger than Michael Brown when innocents and reporters were fired on by police in Ferguson.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: abe froman

If this police report is valid, then why is it just now being released. Wouldn't this information being out days ago, helped the Ferguson PD with justification of the shooting?


What I really do not like abut the police report is the fact it mentions Brown by name. There would not have been enough information at store robbery to positively ID Brown in time for the police report. Because of this I suspect the report was written after the fact, in an attempt to make the shooting seem justified.

Because there's absolutely no chance the other 4 or 5 people in the store knew him by name right?

It's possible for people to be mistaken, haven't you ever been out shopping in the super market and had someone mistake you for someone they OBVIOUSLY know pretty well?

Like, I've been shopping and had someone come up behind me, hug me and be like "What's up Joe" -- I turn around and I'm like Hey how are you doing, this person still has no idea that I'm NOT Joe until I say "By the way, my name's not Joe" -- That's when it becomes "I'm so sorry, you look JUST like him..."

This is why when someone makes a decisive statement like "John Smith robbed me" the police report if written properly will say "The suspect is BELIEVED TO BE John Smith."

That's why they are called "SUSPECTS" because they are suspected, not guaranteed.

Furthermore, the altercation that resulted in his death was NOT a result of him being a suspect in a robbery. It was a separate standalone incident. As such, it should be judged as such.

originally posted by: Milew23
There is actually a video of this, and he does take the cigars, but it was far from "violent" he pushed the guy, once. Still, as wrong as that is, being shot 8 times is a little mucch

Laying hands on another person in the commission of a crime is violent behavior. Serious injury and death have occurred from just giving someone a 'push'.

And it is obvious, by the grip on the man's neck, that he was doing more than 'pushing'. His behavior in that store was abhorrent.

a reply to: Milew23

Hey the law is the law! Under MO. law strong arming an individual while taking private property IS FELONY ROBBERY! You and others like you can white wash it all you want. Oh………..he just stabbed the guy in the arm……..he didn't shoot him in the head!!!!!! LOL Come on!!!!! Your argument and justification is stupid.

It's like the stupid black guy that was spray painting Avenge Michael Brown on a USPS mail box. He could legally be charged with destruction of federal property which is a felony. Oh but it's just spray painting……we have laws in this country for a reason!!!!! I can't believe how people are rationalizing this young punk kid's action regardless of what happened afterwards.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

I don't take joy in this boys death, Vasa. It won't bring me joy to learn he was innocent and a pristine example of a fine citizen..OR to learn he was a scumbag in disguise who just got lucky to keep a clean record up to now. Honestly...EITHER could be 100% true and accurate to all we know at this moment. Neither will make anything about this situation happy, amusing or something to feel good with proving, in my opinion.

I have no idea why people are staking their direct online reputation to the credibility of evidence only viewed through news broadcasts across the net and televisions ..but I sure am noticing more than a few taking stands here so strong, it'll transcend this period for memory, I think.

I'm staying in the comfy middle on guilt or how this really started ..until I have more than news reports under extreme pressure, evidence produced by the cops current on the hot seat for their OWN futures, and 2nd hand "I saw such and such" reports. That's just me.

originally posted by: Jennyfrenzy
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I'm defending him because he lost his voice when his life was cut short while his hands were up in the air.

We will agree to disagree

I can live with that. Bad things happen to bad people....moral is....don't be bad.

I agree that robbery and assault do not warrant be shot to death.What this new information does show is that brown had a propensity to violence and criminal behavior.
It`s not difficult to believe that he would resort to violence and criminal actions against a police officer in an attempt to avoid being arrested for the robbery and assault that he had just committed at the store.
He had just committed a serious crime so there is no doubt that when he saw the police officer he had to be thinking that the jig was up and he was about to get arrested for the robbery and assault that he had just committed at the store.. In an attempt to avoid being arrested he resorted to his proven propensity to violence and criminal behaviour.
To me that makes the police officers account much more believable.

It`s interesting that his partner in crime never told the police or the DOJ that Brown assaulted the storekeeper, he just told them that Brown "stole" some cigars, which proves that his account of what happened with the police officer can`t be relied upon.He already left out an important part of the robbery story so there is no doubt that he is leaving out important details of the encounter with the police officer.

a reply to: Tardacus

Yes very well put!!!!!!!!!!!!

originally posted by: GreenMtnBoys
a reply to: Milew23

Hey the law is the law! Under MO. law strong arming an individual while taking private property IS FELONY ROBBERY! You and others like you can white wash it all you want. Oh………..he just stabbed the guy in the arm……..he didn't shoot him in the head!!!!!! LOL Come on!!!!! Your argument and justification is stupid.

It's like the stupid black guy that was spray painting Avenge Michael Brown on a USPS mail box. He could legally be charged with destruction of federal property which is a felony. Oh but it's just spray painting……we have laws in this country for a reason!!!!! I can't believe how people are rationalizing this young punk kid's action regardless of what happened afterwards.

You realize that you are condoning vengeance right?

You don't kill someone because they committed a felony crime. That's not how this works. You don't KILL SOMEONE for stabbing a man in the arm. You KILL someone if they are ABOUT to stab someone. If they STABBED someone and ran away, you APPREHEND the suspect unless he puts you in another deadly force moment, and if that one comes to pass, you switch BACK to APPREHEND.

You don't kill someone for shooting someone in the head. You kill someone for shooting someone in the head and if he persists as a threat, you kill. If he shoots the dude in the head and drops his weapon with his hands up, you DON'T SHOOT. If you shoot, you're just as guilty as him, because your actions are identical, even worse -- because you're doing it out of pure hatred and vengeance.

That's how RULES OF ENGAGEMENT WORK. Or R.O.E.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I don't take joy in this boys death, Vasa. It won't bring me joy to learn he was innocent and a pristine example of a fine citizen..OR to learn he was a scumbag in disguise who just got lucky to keep a clean record up to now. Honestly...EITHER could be 100% true and accurate to all we know at this moment. Neither will make anything about this situation happy, amusing or something to feel good with proving, in my opinion.

I have no idea why people are staking their direct online reputation to the credibility of evidence only viewed through news broadcasts across the net and televisions ..but I sure am noticing more than a few taking stands here so strong, it'll transcend this period for memory, I think.

I'm staying in the comfy middle on guilt or how this really started ..until I have more than news reports under extreme pressure, evidence produced by the cops current on the hot seat for their OWN futures, and 2nd hand "I saw such and such" reports. That's just me.

I totally get where you are coming from. My view is that the community is in mob mentality and protect our own mentality from this and has been for a long time. The PD is their "enemy" and they will lie to defend it. The video simply shows that this kid was not who they claim he was and with the statement that the police knew him says that he never has been the way they are trying to portray him.

I blame the community more than anything else.

post removed as it was based on incorrect information

a reply to: Greven

Exactly, even if it's the same guy they're isolated incidents.

'SUSPECT WEARING RED CARDS CAP, YELLOW SOCKS, W/ANOTHER MALE, SUBJECT WALKING TOWARDS QT AT THIS TIME'

results in..

'SHOTS ON CANFIELD' ?

not even close.

I'm still on the fence as to if the shooting of Brown was justified or not...we still only have one side of the story...we need the full story from the police side as well.

However, people need to stop trying to paint Brown in a certain light to justify their own opinions.

If he did rob that store and was an overall thug throughout his life...that alone does nothing to justify his shooting.

If he was an innocent kid who had never done anything before...that does not mean he didn't do something this time during a confrontation with the police that did justify the police in shooting him.


In both cases...coming from both sides...it is an attempt at character manipulation and it just takes away from the real issue.

Attempting to paint him as a thug doesn't make it ok that the police may have shot him when it wasn't needed.

Attempting to paint him as an innocent kid doesn't mean that the police officer had a valid reason for shooting him.

All it does it muddy the waters and distracts from the facts.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

You know, ultimately? I see more from your side of this than not. I really do mean I am in the middle, which means I am still just as open to the possibility this cop turns out justified on a good shoot determination. I think it's unlikely, but what I think has nothing to do with the outcome of the shooting review board he'll be standing before, and then a possible grand jury.

The community? Yeah.. I can see that too in the most modern context. In long term, and if we want to talk about the community? Don't forget the KKK "Adopt a Highway Sign" these nice folks got to tolerate being forced to see and know their kids were being bused pass, as intended by the Klan, on a major St Louis area interstate. Things like that burn deep in a community, and defined a racial component that no one familiar with that area could ever have doubted.

Really, when it comes down to it? Both sides have every reason to lie right now. Both sides have the best and worst to offer in their respective human parts. Some of the cops are the worst I have seen in a current even, in this nation. Some...I'd elect to higher office tomorrow if the ballot were in front of me. We don't need to note the protesters vs. rioters on the other side. Best and Worst.....and plenty of both.

Now where in all that junk does the truth lay?

a reply to: Laykilla

Hey genius I'm talking about THE CRIME he committed and how he committed it. My point has NOTHING to do with the fact he was shot aftewards. People are downplaying the fact that he strong armed this clerk. My point was oh ok unless someone shoots someone in the head it's not a bid deal when they are committing a crime?

Nice way to twist my words buddy!

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000

a reply to: Vasa Croe





Until then? A kid planning for college in a couple days was shot to death by a department who attempted to do the same to the whole damn neighborhood a couple days ago. Their video evidence ranks with the Bigfoot video until someone OUTSIDE has signed off on it being legit.

Can't wait for his grandma to post his college applications as evidence of her truly sweet and gentle boy that was about to become a highly educated scholar...../sarcasm

He was on his way to mail his college applications but got sidetracked stealing cigars.

I'm kind of going off the track a little here, but I think this is very important and worth pointing out,
You know what I think the media is doing with this story so far? Topic overload. I've mentioned several times regarding other news-dominating stories that this kind of narrow focus on one story that overtakes other events is a surefire way to drum up apathy, be it intentional or not. After hearing about something ad nauseam, most people tend to not care at all anymore.

I don't think it should be buried & forgotten because it was reaction overkill to kill the kid based on the info thus far, but this is already on the fast track to being a "who cares?" deal like Martin, Gaza or Benghazi are. We have no news balance in this country in terms of amount of exposure, we're all about the all-at-once, all-the-time 24/7 news shoveling until people are sick to death of hearing about it. The question is, how the hell do we go about bringing a balance that won't garner apathy from being too much or too little exposure?

Sorry, I know it's not exactly in line with the rest of the thread, but this news story overabundance thing really bothers me lately.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No it is not. I have seen clearer images of Bigfoot, the video proves nothing.

Armchair experts opinions mean nothing. Just as the rioters were quick to blame the PD for the shooting, the armchair experts and Ferguson PD apologists are quick to use this as proof that Mr. Brown was a 'criminal'.

The police report itself raises many flags.....hopefully it will not got unnoticed by those doing a proper investigation.

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: abe froman

I'd like to point one thing out, according to the report:

At the top of the report it says "REPORT DATE 08/09/2014 1151"
"The entire incident takes place on Saturday, 08/09/2014 between 11:52:58hrs and 11:54:00hrs"

08/09/2014 11:57:47
SUSPECT WEARING RED CARDS CAP, YELLOW SOCKS, W/ANOTHER MALE SUBJECT WALKING TOWARDS QT AT THIS TIME

08/09/2014 14:11:36
SHOTS ON CANFIELD

Two hours difference between the alleged robbery and the shooting.

If you scroll further down you will see that it actually occurred at 12:02, so only minutes after the robbery. It is indicated on the last page by the dispatch to Canfield and asking for an EMS vehicle at that time.

a reply to: kosmicjack

I'm calling coverup; this is all just very 'convenient'....