If Half of His Story Is True. . . the Ferguson Shooting

by Jack

In the interview, Johnson said that the police stopped them for no reason as they were heading to Johnson’s house. He claimed the police officer told them to “get the f- – – on the sidewalk,” grabbed Brown by the neck, pulled his gun, threatened to shoot him, and then did. Johnson said he and Brown ran. That the officer shot Brown again. That Brown yelled that he was unarmed, and that the officer shot him again and again.”

This was the statement of Brown’s crime-partner, they robbed a convenience store of cigars and other items moments earlier, as shown on the surveillance video.

The title above was borrowed from another news site who printed the account. But, what if none of his story was true? It is possible he’s lying because he has a very strong motive.

Does it make sense that a single white officer would casually roll up in his squad car on two black males, one that was tatted up and the other that was a giant and deliberately provoke them, using the F- – – for no reason? Does it make any sense that this officer would do this while seated in his car? (That’s a very vulnerable position) Does it make any sense that he would jump out of his car, pull his gun and grab the giants neck? (There’s no control there and just using the F word when speaking to citizens can get a cops a reprimand or a suspension. Why would he do that? Of course we know that using the F – – – word is used fairly casually in the hood. Who had more motive to attack and start a chain of events that ended in a shooting…the robbers or the cop who didn’t even know they had just robbed a store?

We can’t know these answers just yet, and we may never know all of what we want to know, but this is reason enough to step back and wait for the facts to come out. Lets all wait and see how things play out with the FBI investigation.

We made the same pleas in the Trayvon Martin shooting and in the long run we were absolutely right and the African-American community that called it a 1st degree murder was absolutely wrong. The jury concluded the shooting was justifiable and Martin was determined to be the aggressor. This time it’s much worse than the Trayvon Martin case because of the rioting and looting.

Don’t encourage more rioting by jumping to conclusions (Dewey). Let the law take it’s course.

Robbery defined: Anyone who commits a theft by force or fear is guilty of a strong arm robbery. If a weapon is used this is called armed robbery. If no weapon, no force and no fear were used, this is deemed shoplifting, however even shoplifting can be a felony if the dollar amount is high enough or if the person had the intent to enter the building to steal, then it becomes burglary – not shoplifting.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to If Half of His Story Is True. . . the Ferguson Shooting

  1. Tina says:

    Jack I read the linked article and note the following:

    In a city that is two-thirds black with a police force that is overwhelmingly white, it isn’t surprising that a death like this occurred. It’s inevitable.

    I think this is an absurdity since we don’t yet know the facts. I find it extremely offensive that racism is assumed in white people…in white police officers.

    Thanks to programs like section eight housing, a leftist social engineering project, people have been moving out of the big city ghettos and into relatively small urban (mostly white) towns and cities. Some come and bring their young kids to a better life. Others bring gang activity and thuggery common to cities like Chicago and Los Angeles.

    Despite this change we have seen very few (undeserved) shooting deaths of minorities by cops in the mostly white small town America.

    Lee Habeeb gets to the heart of this “problem” in a story from january 2013 in National Review, “The War Against Black Men”

    You don’t know the names of those kids and adults gunned down in Chicago this January, all by handguns. But the Chicago Tribune’s RedEye website tracks the Chicago body count since January 1: Gregory Bady, 28; Damian Barnes, 22; Marcus Wallace, 23; Tyrone Soleberry, 39; Brian Cross, 34; John Taylor, 23; Darville Brown, 24; Tyshawn Blanton, 31; Marcus Turner, 19; Lavonshay Cooper, 22; David Bartzmark, 25; Michael Kozel, 57; Ulysses Gissendanner, 19; Kevin Jemison, 29; Myron Brown, 30; Devanta Grisson, 19; Octavius Lamb, 20.

    You don’t know the names of the other 530 young people, most of them minorities, who were killed in Chicago between 2008 and January 2012 either. You don’t know their names, and the national media haven’t parked their media trucks in Chicago, because the liberal narrative does not offer easy answers to the problems haunting Chicago.

    You don’t know their names because the real racism that exists in the media is this: A young black male’s life is not worth reporting when it is taken by another black male.

    You don’t know the names because the media don’t or can’t blame the deaths in Chicago on a weapon like the AR-15, or on the NRA. (Or a cop on the beat in MS)

    You don’t know their names because the media aren’t interested in getting at the real cause of much of the senseless gun violence in America: fatherlessness.

    About 20,000 people live in my hometown of Oxford, Miss., and there are probably twice as many guns. Folks own handguns, shotguns, rifles, and all kinds of weapons I’ve never even heard of. But I can’t remember the last murder story in the local paper.

    That’s because my town has lots of guns, but lots of fathers, too.

    Chicago doesn’t have a gun problem; it has a father problem.

    Gun control isn’t the problem on Chicago’s streets; self-control is.

    When young men don’t have fathers, they don’t learn to control their masculine impulses. They don’t have fathers to teach them how to channel their masculine impulses in productive ways.

    When young men don’t have fathers, those men will seek out masculine love — masculine acceptance — where they can find it. Often, they find it in gangs.

    In my little town, if some boys tried to form a gang and do violence on our streets, the fathers wouldn’t bother calling the sheriff. Those boys would face a gang of fathers hell bent on establishing order in our community. And if that meant using physical force, so be it.

    A February 2008 posting at Cop in the Hood, “Police kill white people, too,” gives the issue added perspective:

    But you usually don’t hear about it. I call this the Al Sharpton effect. There is no white version of Al Sharpton.

    As the trial of the officers involved in the Sean Bell killing begins, I’ve been thinking more about police-involved shootings and race. Given media reports, it certainly seems like police only kill black people. But I know this isn’t true.

    I did a little research. According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports from 2000 to 2004, police-involved “justifiable homicides” kill about 350 people a year, 99 percent by shooting. Virtually all police-involved killings, most for good reason, are categorized as justifiable. Of those killed by police, 32 percent are black and 64 percent are white. While the percentage of blacks killed is high compared with the black percentage in America (13%), it is low compared with other indicators of violence, such as the percentage of homicide victims and offenders believed to be African American (both 48%).

    Perhaps it is more useful to compare police-involved shootings with those killed by non-police officers. Among “justifiable homicides” by regular citizens—about 210 a year—African-Americans are 40 percent of those who kill and 56 percent of those killed. Compared with these numbers, police seem restrained in their use of force toward the black community.

    Of course the numbers do not tell us the race of innocent people killed. And numbers are no solace to the family of any victim of police bullets.

    Selective media hype in these cases is political…and unhelpful.

    Jim Fisher blogs about crime and noted in his piece, “Police Involved Shooting Statistics: A National One-Year Summary,” that our government does not track some information that could be important. See here:

    The government does maintain records on how many police officers are killed every year in the line of duty. In 2010, 59 officers were shot to death among 122 killed while on the job. This marked a 20 percent jump from 2009 when 49 officers were killed by gunfire. In 2011, 173 officers died, from all causes, in the line of duty. The fact police officers feel they are increasingly under attack from the public may help explain why they are shooting so many citizens.

    Unaddressed societal problems contribute greatly to situations like this. If we don’t start talking honestly about them they will never be resolved and this type of senseless death, looting, gang activity, and other lawlessness will continue to get worse.

  2. Tina says:

    Oh, I forgot to add the following conclusion from Jim Fisher:

    In 1971, police officers in New York City shot 314 people, killing 93. (In California, the state with the most police involved shootings in 2011, the police shot 183, killing 102.) In 2010, New York City police shot 24, killing 8. Last year, in the nation’s largest city, the police shot 16, killing 6. In Columbus, Ohio, a city one eighth the size of New York, the police shot 14, killing 8. Statistical diversities like this suggest that in the cities with the highest per capita shooting rates, better people ought to be hired, or the existing forces need a lot more training in the use of deadly force.

    And you’re right , Jack, the narrative on the officer doesn’t make any sense.

  3. Post Scripts says:

    Thanks Tina, we’re on the same page, but as usual you always say it better than I ever could. There was an assumption of racism from the start, as you duly noted. What an outrage. That’s something that needs to be addressed.

  4. Post Scripts says:

    We’re on the same page, but as usual you always say it better than I ever could. There was an assumption of racism from the start, as you duly noted. What an outrage. That’s something that needs to be addressed.

  5. Chris says:

    Jack, I wouldn’t say conservatives were “absolutely right” about Zimmerman. The man has a history of violence and domestic abuse allegations that have continued even after the Trayvon Martin shooting. I think the jury made the right call (as far as not charging him for murder–the prosecution was incompetent for not going for criminal negligence), but I also don’t think Zimmerman was morally innocent in Martin’s death. All signs point to Zimmerman being a violent man who doesn’t know when to stop.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Zimmerman#Other_encounters_with_police

    I am suspending judgment on the Ferguson case until we have more concrete information. Neither of the accounts make sense to me. You’re right that the officer didn’t have much of a motivation to do what some witnesses claim he did, but what you don’t mention is that Brown (who was unarmed) also had no motivation to attack an armed officer!

    One thing we both seem to agree with is that the response from both the community in Ferguson and the police there has been out of proportion and counterproductive. Looting helps no one; it’s a completely nihilistic act of rebellion, and no rational person would argue that it’s a legitimate form of protest. The militarization of the police, and the arrests of journalists and tear-gassing of peaceful protesters who were already retreating, has only added to the problem. Neither has made their community look good; for supporters of police, the looters confirm that there is a subculture of black lawbreakers who relish in chaos; for supporters of Brown, the police tactics makes their claims of excessive force seem plausible. This is a conflict with no clear good or evil, and both sides are to blame for the devolution of Ferguson into something approaching a war zone.

  6. Soaps says:

    Chris says:
    You’re right that the officer didn’t have much of a motivation to do what some witnesses claim he did, but what you don’t mention is that Brown (who was unarmed) also had no motivation to attack an armed officer! – See more at: http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2014/08/16/story-true-ferguson-shooting/#sthash.8P2iqGRc.dpuf
    ***

    Anyone who has worked in law enforcement does see a connection between the street altercation and the strong-arm robbery shortly before. Brown certainly had a motivation to attack the lone police officer. Whether the police officer knew that Brown and his accomplice (who later was touted as the unbiased witness in this case)had just committed a violent robbery, the two thugs definitely knew it. They even had evidence of the robbery in their pockets at the moment. They could not stand to be interviewed by the police, identified, searched, or temporarily detained while the pathetic little store clerk victim identified them in a line-up. Criminals often panic when approached by an officer, and their first instinct is to escape by any means possible.

  7. Dewey says:

    Jack

    No worries I am speechless…. Jack read the police Blogs….. Understand the area…..

    Congressman Lacy said it at the press conference…

    You can all sit in that safe place where the police are always going to do the right thing

    I can tell you… it appears the cop will not be charged… Congressman lacy stated…you will not get a fair trial… wait for the DOJ to file a civil rights case…..

    I am not going to comment…. People who watch it on news have not a clue……

    again… good bye I am disgusted and amazed at the unwillingness to understand what is going on

    Have fun.. I am going back into the thick of it, like collecting racists remarks off the cop sites…

    Speechless and Sad for what is about to happen

  8. Peggy says:

    Let’s all hope this thing calms down until the investigation is over. Information is still coming in. Here’s the latest I’ve seen

    Does This Video Vindicate the Officer Who Shot Michael Brown?: (w/ transcript)

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/17/does-this-video-vindicate-the-officer-who-shot-michael-brown/

    New Black Panthers Lead Death Chant Against Officer Involved in Ferguson Shooting:

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/168710-black-panthers-lead-death-chant-officer-involved-ferguson-shooting/

  9. Tina says:

    Peggy the witness heard in the background of the video posted by The Blaze, see also here, does seem to corroborate the officers version of events and bring into question the version offered by the victims friend.

  10. Tina says:

    Jack I always appreciate it when you write about these stories because you bring a police officers perspective, instincts, and experience that no ordinary civilian could. Believe me when I say you think of things that the average person would not!

  11. Chris says:

    Good points, Soaps.

Comments are closed.