In the Case of Michael Brown: Were Recent Grand Jury Leaks and Autopsy Reports a Deliberate Effort to Help “Set the Stage” for Darren Wilson’s “Non-Indictment?”

Michael Brown

Michael Brown

By Elaine Magliaro

My curiosity was aroused the other day when I read several news reports about “selective” grand jury leaks and forensic experts’ analyses of Michael Brown’s official autopsy report. Many of the reports were based on information provided in an article that was published in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch earlier this week. I didn’t think that the Post-Dispatch article really provided much new information…or evidence in the case. It did appear to me, however, that the article was an effort to give credence to Officer Wilson’s version of what happened on the day he shot Michael Brown and to call into question the accounts of several people who were eyewitnesses to the killing of the unarmed teen.

In their St. Louis Post-Dispatch article, authors Christine Byers and Blythe Bernhard quoted renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Judy Melinek who had done an analysis of Michael Brown’s official autopsy report.

Byers and Bernhard:

Dr. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco, said the autopsy “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.” She added, “If he has his hand near the gun when it goes off, he’s going for the officer’s gun.”

Sources told the Post-Dispatch that Brown’s blood had been found on Wilson’s gun.

Melinek also said the autopsy did not support witnesses who have claimed Brown was shot while running away from Wilson, or with his hands up.

She said Brown was facing Wilson when Brown took a shot to the forehead, two shots to the chest and a shot to the upper right arm. The wound to the top of Brown’s head would indicate he was falling forward or in a lunging position toward the shooter; the shot was instantly fatal.

A sixth shot that hit the forearm traveled from the back of the arm to the inner arm, which means Brown’s palms could not have been facing Wilson, as some witnesses have said, Melinek said. That trajectory shows Brown probably was not taking a standard surrender position with arms above the shoulders and palms out when he was hit, she said.

Dr. Melinek, however, claimed that her analysis was taken out of context and partly misconstrued. She said that “snippets” from her conversation with a reporter from the  St. Louis Post-Dispatch were “inaccurate and misleading.” She even wrote a blog post on the subject:

Forensic Sound Bites & Half-Truths

Excerpt:
A reporter from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch called me earlier this week, saying she had Michael Brown’s official autopsy report as prepared by the St. Louis County Medical Examiner, and asking me if I would examine and analyze it from the perspective of a forensic pathologist with no official involvement in the Ferguson, Missouri shooting death. I read the report, and spent half an hour on the phone with the reporter explaining Michael Brown’s autopsy report line-by-line, and I told her not to quote me – but that I would send her quotes she could use in an e mail. The next morning, I found snippets of phrases from our conversation taken out of context in her article in the Post-Dispatch. These inaccurate and misleading quotes were picked up and disseminated by other journals, blogs, and websites.

This is the text of my actual email exchange with Post-Dispatch health and medical news reporter Blythe Bernhard:

“From: “Dr. Judy Melinek”
Date: October 21, 2014 at 5:53:21 PM PDT
To: Blythe Bernhard
Subject: Re: media request

Great talking to you. Here are the quotes:

“The autopsy report shows that there are a minimum of 6 and maximum of 8 gunshot wounds to the body. The graze wound on the right thumb is oriented upwards, indicating that the tip of the thumb is toward the weapon. The hand wound has gunpowder particles on microscopic examination, which suggests that it is a close-range wound. That means that Mr. Brown’s hand would have been close to the barrel of the gun. Given the investigative report which says that the officer’s weapon discharged during a struggle in the officer’s car, this wound to the right thumb likely occurred at that time. The chest wounds are going front to back, indicating that Mr. Brown was facing the officer when he was shot in the torso, then collapsed or leaned forward exposing the top of his head. You can’t say within reasonable certainty that his hands were up based on the autopsy findings alone. The back to front and upward trajectory of the right forearm wound could occur in multiple orientations and a trajectory reconstruction would need to be done using the witness statements, casings, height of the weapon and other evidence from the scene, which have yet to be released. The tissue fragment on the exterior of the officer’s vehicle appears to be skin tissue, but only DNA analysis would confirm if it is from Mr. Brown or the officer. It is ‘lightly pigmented’ but even African-American skin can appear lightly pigmented on a small microscopic section, depending on what part of the body it came from.”

This is how I was quoted in the Post-Dispatch the next day:

Dr. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco, said the autopsy “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.” She added, “If he has his hand near the gun when it goes off, he’s going for the officer’s gun.” Sources told the Post-Dispatch that Brown’s blood had been found on Wilson’s gun. Melinek also said the autopsy did not support witnesses who have claimed Brown was shot while running away from Wilson, or with his hands up.

Notice the difference? There’s a big difference between “The hand wound has gunpowder particles on microscopic examination, which suggests that it is a close-range wound. That means that Mr. Brown’s hand would have been close to the barrel of the gun” and “he’s going for the gun.”

In her blog post, Dr. Melinek said that she was fortunate to have had an opportunity to set the record straight when she appeared on Lawrence O’Donnell’s program The Last Word on MSNBC. She added that O’Donnell allowed her “to explain the autopsy findings clearly and in context—if not in full.” She said she was also extremely grateful “to Tyrmaine Lee, whose companion article to last night’s Last Word segment…serves as an excellent corrective to the Post-Dispatch article.

Here’s a link to Tyrmaine Lee’s article: Darren Wilson’s lawyer speaks out on leaked Brown autopsy.

And here’s an interesting tidbit of information: Christine Byers, co-author of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch article that I referenced above, is the same reporter who tweeted about witnesses corroborating Darren Wilson’s version of events in Michael Brown’s killing while she was on medical leave from the paper in August:

********************

Christine Byers ✔@ChristineDByers

Follow

Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting #Ferguson

10:30 PM – 18 Aug 2014

3,517 Retweets 1,413 favorites

********************

According to Justin Baragona (Politicus USA), the reporter’s tweet “set off a firestorm due to a number of media outlets reporting it as fact because of her position as crime reporter for The Post.” Baragona said it was revealed later that Byers was, “in fact, on medical leave and was just tweeting out an unfounded rumor.” The Post-Dispatch issued a correction—and Byers later tweeted that her earlier tweet “did not meet the paper’s standards.”

Baragona continued:

To say that she is seen with a bit of scrutiny by many in and around Ferguson is putting it lightly. The autopsy article will likely be seen as incredibly biased by some due to her history, especially as she focused on traces of marijuana found in Brown’s system and interviewed forensic experts (but not the county medical examiner, who refused comment) who stated that the autopsy supported Wilson’s statements.

Baragona wrote that a number of events that occurred last Tuesday “seemed to foreshadow the inevitable non-indictment of Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, who shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown on August 9th.” He added, “While there had been leaks in recent days providing information from the federal and county investigations into the shooting, Tuesday served up the culmination of what appears to be a deliberate effort by prosecutors, police and government officials to change public opinion towards Wilson and set the stage for him to walk.”

On Thursday morning, radio host and CNN contributor Mo Ivory told the network “that the leaking of the Michael Brown autopsy and information about African American witnesses during the grand jury hearing, both of which reportedly confirm Officer Darren Wilson’s account of the shooting, sure was suspicious. Ivory claimed it was “all an attempt to continue to paint Michael Brown in a negative manner, to set up a defense for officer Wilson.” She added, “It’s really disturbing that this is the manner in which the information is coming out.”

Ivory also noted that Michael Brown’s family “had been asking for the St. Louis county autopsy for months, yet it got leaked instead to the St. Louis Dispatch.”

CNN Mo Ivory on Leaked Reports on Ferguson’s Mike Brown 10/23/14

Jessica Lussenhop of Riverfront Times reported that RFT reached “Eric Davis, Brown Jr.’s cousin, and a family spokesman, to get their reaction to the leaks.” Lussenhop said that Brown’s family “wants to know why none of the leaked information points to any possible culpability on Wilson’s part — specifically why he shot as many times as he did outside of his vehicle, his toxicology report or his record as a police officer prior to joining the Ferguson department.” She said that the family is “also very concerned about how the new accounts differ from the initial narrative provided by Ferguson police chief Tom Jackson, saying, ‘It’s like they’re fabricating the story as they go along.’ He called their investigation ‘bungled.’”

What Michael Brown’s autopsy report reveals about his death (Judy Woodruff discusses the forensic evidence and its limitations with Dr. Judy Melinek of the University of California, San Francisco, on PBS Newshour.)

SOURCES

Official autopsy shows Michael Brown had close-range wound to his hand, marijuana in system (St. Louis Post-Dispatch)

Media Leaks And Governor’s Press Conference Set Stage For Darren Wilson Non-Indictment (Politicus USA)

Leak? It Probably Means That Darren Wilson Won’t Be Charged In Michael Brown’s Death
Prosecutors are preparing those of us outraged about Brown’s death for what we don’t want to hear. (The Root)

Expert: My Michael Brown Autopsy Analysis Was Taken ‘Out Of Context’ (Talking Points Memo)

Darren Wilson’s lawyer speaks out on leaked Brown autopsy (MSNBC)

New Michael Brown shooting witnesses describe scene (CNN)

The Official Michael Brown Autopsy Report Doesn’t Say What the St. Louis Post-Dispatch Says It Does (Daily Kos)

Forensic Sound Bites & Half-Truths (Dr. Judy Melinek’s Blog)

Report: Autopsy Suggests Michael Brown Reached for Ferguson Officer’s Gun (NBC News)

Autopsy, toxicology report on Michael Brown reportedly reveal marijuana, cast doubt on witness claims he was running away (Fox News)

Ferguson protest heats up after autopsy report is leaked (CNN)

CNN Guest: Leaked Michael Brown Autopsy, Witnesses ‘All So Shady’ (Mediaite)

Michael Brown Family: Media Leaks Show Pro-Darren Wilson Bias, Bungled Investigation (Riverfront Times)

This entry was posted in Courts, Crime, DOJ, Equal Rights, Government, Justice, Law Enforcement, Local Government, Media, Missouri, Propaganda, Racism, Society, United States and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

133 Responses to In the Case of Michael Brown: Were Recent Grand Jury Leaks and Autopsy Reports a Deliberate Effort to Help “Set the Stage” for Darren Wilson’s “Non-Indictment?”

  1. Bob Kauten says:

    Elaine,
    In a word, yes.
    It’s apparent that the sole way to set things straight in Ferguson, is for the majority of its citizens (oh, yeah, “the mob”) to disrupt the activities of the Ferguson White Citizens’ Council.
    I certainly don’t expect anything from Holder’s “Justice” Department.

  2. bettykath says:

    I’m in another world. This is a responsible post on a controversial topic. What’s to say except, good job.

  3. Mike Spindell says:

    Elaine,

    To answer your question…….absolutely yes. Then again, who am I but merely a member of a “mob” rushing to judgment against a poor, abused police officer?

  4. michaelbeaton says:

    Wonder if any of the legal folks here know if there is recourse to the family if, as it seems to be the case, the state is unwilling to pursue justice for the Brown family? Something akin to the OJSimpson case where the criminal case was lost, in this case not even pursued, yet a civil case was brought and won.
    Or is the fact of this being a police officer negate that option?

  5. michaelbeaton says:

    It seems to me this case is functioning on two primary levels : 1/ the family , individual level. And how much and deep must be the grief of this family to realize that the state with its presumption of “blind justice”, is blinded by something more pernicious… And justice is likely to not be pursued, much less given. And 2/ the sociological level… Is it simply the reporting? or does it seem there is a surfeit of cases involving our armed authorities killing black men. Not to mention the “private” events like Travon Martin a while ago…

    One is grief. The other is tragedy.
    One exposes the lies of justice at the level of the individual.
    The other exposes the national lie we live that everything is going along just fine. That racism is not an issue in our country. And this lie is eroding our foundations of civilization and will continue to infect the body politic in ways that transcend simple race boundaries…

    Everything is connected. But in our case, at the level of our most difficult issues and problems, (thinking of this case of racism but also climate change, the dysfunctional governance and etc and etc… As in one thing, so as in all…) we are desperate to disconnect the moments from the meaning. It is the willful blinkering that will lead to our unrecoverable blindness.

    Or… so it seems to me.

  6. michaelbeaton says:

    apologies for the to many posts, meant to add this to the prior.
    By way of example of the disconnect see this between O’Reilly and Stewart. Stewart said later it could have been done better but still the point is made… there is a functional ignorance of the realities of how “things are” for people… especially poignant when “white men” in powerful positions, like O Reilly, start pronouncing verities for people and sub cultures they know nothing about.
    It is a special form of the proposition “well, let them eat cake”… that lives in the hollows of the empty mind of men like this…
    http://thedailyshow.cc.com/extended-interviews/dc3ok3/bill-o-reilly-extended-interview

  7. Michael Beaton,

    If Wilson is found to have acted properly within the scope of his official duties, some form of sovereign immunity will likely bar civil suit against him for wrongful death (I’d have to look at MO law for details to be sure though).

  8. buckaroo says:

    For heaven sake give it a rest – wait until we know for sure. Otherwise those citizens of the area will be unable to manage due to the choas in such a manner as to achieve a desired result to their needs & obligations. Many will be awaiting surgery, births, critical illnesses,- yes, even transplant of vital organs.

  9. blouise17 says:

    Well done, Elaine, very well said.

    In my opinion, the fix has been in from the beginning and decided long before any forensics was done. What we see is the cover-up that such decisions require.

  10. Bob Stone says:

    Did Judy Melinik’s problem with the St. Louis Post Dispatch article cause the New York Times or Washington Post to print any retractions?

    No.

    Why?

    Because the forensic evidence does in fact support Officer Wilson’s narrative of events:

    “I’m not saying that Brown going for the gun is the only explanation. I’m saying the officer said he was going for the gun and the right thumb wound supports that,” said Melinek.

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/judy-melinek-ferguson-autopsy-report-msnbc

  11. Elaine M. says:

    From the Talking Points Memo article:

    “I’m not saying that Brown going for the gun is the only explanation. I’m saying the officer said he was going for the gun and the right thumb wound supports that,” Melinek. “I have limited information. It could also be consistent with other scenarios. That’s the important thing. That’s why the witnesses need to speak to the grand jury and the grand jury needs to hear all the unbiased testimony and compare those statements to the physical evidence.”

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/judy-melinek-ferguson-autopsy-report-msnbc

  12. bettykath says:

    Bob, I think you did what the reporters did – you cherry picked what you wanted her to say but ignored the rest of her statement, thereby taking it out of context and creating a half-truth that amounts to a falsehood.

  13. Bob Stone says:

    “That’s why the witnesses need to speak to the grand jury and the grand jury needs to hear all the unbiased testimony and compare those statements to the physical evidence.”

    And that’s what they did:

    “[M]ore than a half-dozen unnamed black witnesses have provided testimony to a St. Louis County grand jury that largely supports Wilson’s account of events of Aug. 9, according to several people familiar with the investigation who spoke with The Washington Post.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-evidence-supports-officers-account-of-shooting-in-ferguson/2014/10/22/cf38c7b4-5964-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html

    See how that works?

  14. bettykath says:

    michaelbeaton, Jon Stewart made a good start. Chris Hayes took it further.

    http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/debating-white-privilege-343856195933

  15. Bob Stone says:

    bettykath,

    So the New York Times and Washington Post are cherry picking? And all the other papers that are coming to the same conclusion; they’re cherry picking too?

    Hmmm

  16. bettykath says:

    Bob, that story is based on a tweet that was done by a reporter who was on medical leave and her tweet was based on nothing as she admitted.
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/21/1323475/-The-case-of-Michael-Brown-Missing-police-reports-anonymous-sources-and-shoddy-journalism

  17. bettykath says:

    Bob, The St. Louis Dispatch did the cherrry-picking and the NYT and WaPo just picked up the story from there without doing any of their own fact checking.

  18. Bob Stone says:

    bettykath,

    Actually, officials involved in the federal civil rights investigation spoke to the NY Times. And the Washington Post had their own sources as well.

    So… how did they not do any fact checking again?

    And how exactly does one cherry pick an autopsy report?

  19. bettykath says:

    Bob, I think you’re deliberately being obtuse. 😦

  20. Elaine M. says:

    Jim Crow persists: How Ferguson case leaks revive a shameful tradition
    A string of leaks to the media protecting Darren Wilson are part of a very big problem. Here’s the sordid history
    http://www.salon.com/2014/10/25/jim_crow_persists_how_ferguson_case_leaks_revive_a_shameful_tradition/

    Excerpt:
    On those rare occasions when it makes a real effort to grapple with the raw brutality of Jim Crow, the American mainstream media usually returns to a particular set of images that, by their very nature, are jarring and extraordinary: the burning cross, the hangman’s knot, the Klansman on horseback. This isn’t a bad thing; you can’t understand Jim Crow without understanding the significance of the Klan, for example. But it’s not an entirely good one, either.

    The problem with focusing so much on these potent symbols is that it can lead us to a mistaken conclusion: namely, that the only evil of Jim Crow (and U.S. white supremacy in general) was manifested in these menacing, otherworldly forms, rather than in the system’s more humdrum and everyday modes of dehumanization. The problem with the former is easily solved. Today, the burning cross, the noose and the Klansman are all enemies of polite society. But those subtler manifestations of apartheid — the interlocking social networks and political institutions that together worked to disempower black citizens and deny them their rightful place as full members of the community — have proven more difficult to shake.

    The proof is all around us, but if you want a more tangible example, the news out of Ferguson, Missouri, is happy to oblige.

    After briefly turning the small, hard-luck suburb into the center of the world, the media has as of late been paying much less attention to the story of Michael Brown’s killing, mostly because people on both sides of the controversy have been stuck in an anxious holding pattern, waiting to see if a county grand jury will bring charges against Officer Darren Wilson. Many observers, and seemingly most pro-Brown Ferguson protestors, expect it will not; and many are already positioning themselves to win the war for public opinion that will ensue the moment the charges (or lack thereof) come down.

    That’s the tense atmosphere into which the New York Times and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch recently dropped two bombs, both of which cited unnamed government sources saying evidence suggests Wilson’s claim to have shot Brown only after the youth tried to nab his gun — and to have killed Brown only after the wounded and unarmed teenager decided to charge him head-on — is indeed the case, in spite of what multiple eyewitnesses have said. As more than a few people noticed, the leaks all seemed to go in a certain direction (Wilson’s). Rather unnecessarily, the Brown family’s lawyer assured the media that the leaks weren’t coming from them. More necessarily, a forensic pathologist quoted extensively in the Post-Dispatch story said her remarks were taken out of context.

    At this point in the story, anyone familiar with the dynamics of American race politics would suspect that like countless racially stratified and unharmonious small-town authorities before it, the establishment in Ferguson was doing its damnedest to quash an embarrassing investigation and protect one of its own. Perhaps aware of the likely widespread nature of that view, former St. Louis County Police Chief Tim Fitch was swiftly thereafter quoted speculating that the leaks weren’t coming from Ferguson authorities, but rather were the result of the Department of Justice’s machinations. Because the feds recognize that it’s “probably very unlikely” that Wilson will be charged, Fitch said, the DOJ was selectively leaking evidence in order to “let people down slowly” before the announcement of no charges being filed came.

  21. Bob Stone says:

    bettykath says: “Bob, I think you’re deliberately being obtuse.”

    The warden in “The Shawshank Redemption” was deliberately obtuse.

    I was being sarcastic.

    The real question is are you honest enough with yourself to admit when you’ve been proven to be wrong.

  22. Bob Stone says:

    “many are already positioning themselves to win the war for public opinion that will ensue the moment the charges (or lack thereof) come down.”

    And here they are blocking traffic and attacking anyone (white) who dare exit their vehicle.

  23. Bob Stone says:

    And here they are kindly offering to fornicate with this policeman’s wife.

  24. Bob Stone says:

    “Seven or eight African American eyewitnesses have provided testimony consistent with Wilson’s account, but none have spoken publicly out of fear for their safety, The Post’s sources said.”

    Jim Crow my ass.

  25. Bob Stone says:

    More like snitches get stitches.

  26. Bob Kauten says:

    Bob Stone,
    Regardless of the outcome of this investigation,
    you have lost it.
    “Jim Crow my ass”?
    That’d be an improvement over where your ass is now.
    You’ve made it unnecessary for me to point out that your reaction to this “tactically leaked” autopsy report speaks volumes about where you are.
    Where you are is pathetic. I hope that you find your way out.

  27. Bob Stone says:

    Bob,

    Where I am, as this strategically leaked evidence allows a mob to slowly acclimate to reality, is morally outraged at people who rushed to judgement against a man who was doing his job.

    Civilized people admit when they’re wrong and apologize to anyone they’ve hurt.

    Pathetic people would rather save face; regardless of how unjust and immoral their actions are.

  28. Elaine M. says:

    Troubling lack of transparency in Michael Brown case
    http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/troubling-lack-transparency-michael-brown-case

    Excerpt:
    The lack of transparency around the leaks seems consistent with the bungled messaging from local officials at virtually every juncture of Brown’s case.

    It took Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson 6 days after Brown was killed to reveal the name of his shooter. And instead of calming concerns, the press conference where Wilson’s name was announced was overshadowed by the release of the surveillance video purported robbery just hours before Brown was first shot.

    Then, 12 days after the shooting, the Ferguson Police Department released a scant and heavily redacted 2-page incident report only after the ACLU filed a lawsuit to obtain the information. By the department’s own policy, officers are required to file a use-of-force report detailing why escalated action was necessary, even in non-fatal events. They haven’t released the report to the public. And according to Yahoo News, such a report on Brown’s death may not even exist. Meanwhile information that is available to the public is locked behind layers of exorbitant fees for journalists.

  29. Mike Spindell says:

    “[M]ore than a half-dozen unnamed black witnesses have provided testimony to a St. Louis County grand jury that largely supports Wilson’s account of events of Aug. 9, according to several people familiar with the investigation who spoke with The Washington Post.”

    Bob,
    So this is what constitutes evidence in your practice. A leak to a Washington Post reporter by several people “familiar” with the investigation.

    “Actually, officials involved in the federal civil rights investigation spoke to the NY Times. And the Washington Post had their own sources as well.”

    A leak yet again is not fact, though you seem to accept it as such. To compound your “obtuseness”, though I think BK is kind in using the word, you state:

    “So… how did they not do any fact checking again?”

    A story by a reporter based on leaks by unknown sources do not constitute facts.

    “And here they are blocking traffic and attacking anyone (white) who dare exit their vehicle.”

    I watched your video and what I saw were protesters. A few of whom probably went slightly overboard in their protest perhaps, but that is unclear because just what is going on in the video clip was unclear. Ah but yes, those protesting were Black and so perhaps in your mind as with all your writings on this subject seem to imply, one equates “blackness” with being part of a mob and incivility. Then again the video which you lead in with:

    “And here they are kindly offering to fornicate with this policeman’s wife.”

    Bullshit. They were asking this police Sergeant pertinent questions about why the police didn’t turn on their video cameras and he was refusing to answer, so one man made the imprecation out of frustration. however, he was Black and the policeman’s wife was probably white, though truthfully we don’t know if he was even married. I get it Bob, you were being snide, but perhaps your “snideness” reveals a certain perspective that seems to run through all you write on this subject?

    “Seven or eight African American eyewitnesses have provided testimony consistent with Wilson’s account, but none have spoken publicly out of fear for their safety, The Post’s sources said.”
    Jim Crow my ass.”

    Again, the alacrity you exhibit, when you accept as fact leaked “evidence” from unknown sources, is breathtaking in its credulity. Then again, when one is seeing an issue from a certain lens of pre-judgment, so-called “facts” and “evidence” remain in the eye of the beholder.

    “Where I am, as this strategically leaked evidence allows a mob to slowly acclimate to reality, is morally outraged at people who rushed to judgement against a man who was doing his job.
    Civilized people admit when they’re wrong and apologize to anyone they’ve hurt.
    Pathetic people would rather save face; regardless of how unjust and immoral their actions are.”

    To parse this strange paragraph via paraphrase hitting at the truth of your mentality behind it:
    You are are stating:

    Responsible authorities are leaking this information so that “the mob (black people and misguided white radicals)” who are condemning an innocent policeman, who we should assume is correct in his behavior because he is a policeman, need to be shown the error of their ways. They are doing this because Wilson will rightly not be indicted. Yet this uncivilized mob (Black people) lack the moral character to admit they are wrong in believing this was an unlawful act on the part of this policeman. These Blacks and Radicals are pathetic people, perhaps sub-human because of their lack of civilization, are too proud to admit the wrongness of their ways due to their lack of morality.

    That Bob is exactly what you are connoting in your defense of illegal “leaks” being perpetrated to ensure that White public opinion understands there is nothing to the charges that police are killing Black people unlawfully.

    You stated to BettyKath:

    “The real question is are you honest enough with yourself to admit when you’ve been proven to be wrong.”

    My opinion is that this is a case of the psychological defense mechanism known as projection, since I think you are the one not being honest with what attitudes you are expressing here.

  30. Bob Kauten says:

    I had to check to see which blog I was reading. I don’t recall reading anything quite that repulsive on this blog, before.
    I guess I just don’t get out enough, ya think?
    Nah.
    I no longer hear that kind of talk, since I stopped hanging out with deliberately ignorant folks. That kinda stuff doesn’t belong in a discussion among educated people.
    Or anywhere else, for that matter.

  31. Elaine M. says:

    Bob K.,

    I think it was Gene who called that other blog a “teabagger cesspool.” One can’t have reasoned discussions there these days.

  32. bettykath says:

    Elaine, “reasoned discussions there” I tried but it’s hopeless. I may check for an occasional topic but won’t bother on the comments which tend toward the base and uncivil as well as ignorant.

    It seems that the leaks have done their job if you believe the unscientific msnbc poll at the link you provided. Or maybe the sockpuppets have voted.

    Mike, Thanks for the response to Bob S. I couldn’t have said it better.

  33. Bob Stone says:

    Mike,

    “To parse this strange paragraph via paraphrase hitting at the truth of your mentality behind it:
    You are are stating:

    Responsible authorities are leaking this information so that “the mob (black people and misguided white radicals)” who are condemning an innocent policeman, who we should assume is correct in his behavior because he is a policeman, need to be shown the error of their ways. They are doing this because Wilson will rightly not be indicted. Yet this uncivilized mob (Black people) lack the moral character to admit they are wrong in believing this was an unlawful act on the part of this policeman. These Blacks and Radicals are pathetic people, perhaps sub-human because of their lack of civilization, are too proud to admit the wrongness of their ways due to their lack of morality.

    That Bob is exactly what you are connoting in your defense of illegal “leaks” being perpetrated to ensure that White public opinion understands there is nothing to the charges that police are killing Black people unlawfully.”

    Gee Mike, I had no idea I said all that.

    (Brushing away the straw man)

    You see Mike, I was referring to EVERYONE who rushed to judgment against Wilson. EVERYONE who forced that man into hiding for fear of his life. That includes the media, the governor and the attorney general, to name a few.

    But you didn’t rush to judgment against Wilson; did you Mike. So you don’t have to worry about apologizing.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “You see Mike, I was referring to EVERYONE who rushed to judgment against Wilson. EVERYONE who forced that man into hiding for fear of his life. That includes the media, the governor and the attorney general, to name a few. But you didn’t rush to judgment against Wilson; did you Mike. So you don’t have to worry about apologizing”

      Bob,
      Your written record on this topic proves my point and you can’t escape it. As for my writing on the issue of police murder/mayhem/brutality/prejudice I’ve written a number of factually based posts both here and on RIL. In writing those I never relied on “informed sources” talking to some reporter looking for a scoop. When a particular situation repeats itself literally thousands of times, then one can have certain presumptions about the latest one. By you attempting to “pristinely”. defend the officer as if this mis-policing was a “rare” occurrence is at the least naive and at the worst ignorant. As to the harshness of my indictment of your position on this, I would refer to your continued intemperance in characterizing those wanting answers in this case and your “rush to judgment” of Wilson’s innocence, which went far beyond the legal definition of presumption of innocence and was filled with accepting rumor an innuendo as “facts”. Finally, as to the “straw man” you raised regarding “people of the mob lacking the integrity” to apologize in the face of contrary evidence, I have a long history of apologizing when I’m proven wrong……you not so much.

  34. Bob Stone says:

    And Mike,

    Please enlighten me how your “facts” about the Brown shooting are of a higher pedigree than mine.

    What “facts” were you relying on when you wrote all you did about the shooting?

  35. Elaine M. says:

    Bob,

    Who is the “EVERYONE” who rushed to judgment? Does “EVERYONE” include people who think that Darren Wilson may not have been justified in killing Michael Brown? What about the people who rushed to judgment regarding the character of Michael Brown–including those who think the unarmed black teenager deserved to die?

  36. Mike Spindell says:

    “Please enlighten me how your “facts” about the Brown shooting are of a higher pedigree than mine.”

    Six bullets in Brown, including one to the top of the head on a 6’4″ man. No gun from Brown recovered at the scene.I call this the Amadou Diallo Police Defense, where a wallet becomes a potential lethal weapon requiring 43 bullets to the body.

  37. Bob Stone says:

    “Six bullets in Brown, including one to the top of the head on a 6’4″ man. No gun from Brown recovered at the scene.I call this the Amadou Diallo Police Defense, where a wallet becomes a potential lethal weapon requiring 43 bullets to the body.”

    I rest my case.

  38. Bob Stone says:

    “Does “EVERYONE” include people who think that Darren Wilson may not have been justified in killing Michael Brown?”

    No.

    Because “may” is not a judgment.

    “May” says let the legal process do its work.

    “May” does not threaten to riot in the streets if Wilson is not indicted and convicted.

  39. Elaine M. says:

    Bob,

    What about the people who WERE SURE/HAD NO DOUBT that Darren Wilson acted in self defense and that Michael Brown got what he deserved…from the get-go? Did those folks rush to judgment? Or is just people who think Wilson is guilty of killing an unarmed teen without justification who are defined as a mob that rushed to judgment

  40. Bob Stone says:

    No, because in the United States, everyone is presumed innocent until proven (and judged) guilty.

    That, as you well know, is the connotation behind “rush to judgment” in a criminal investigation.

    And if you insist on feigning ignorance, feel free to replace “rush to judgment” with “rush to condemn” wherever you like.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “No, because in the United States, everyone is presumed innocent until proven (and judged) guilty.”

      Bob,
      You KNOW that’s the myth, better than I since you are a lawyer. That’s the standard of the “Rule of Law” tis true. Unfortunately, for people of color, the poor and even white middle class people that remains simply the mythology, rather than the reality. The reality is money, power and white skin triumphs over the rule of law 99% of the time. Maybe as a lawyer you have to soothe your sense of integrity to carry on your trade with a clear conscience, that is understandable and even laudable, but the reality is our legal system is a stacked deck and you’re defending that stacked deck when it comes to overreach of police powers. He murdered the kid Bob and that murder of innocents will carry on because most people like you prefer to live in a fantasy land, where the Constitution reigns supreme. The only way to get to a rule of law is for people to recognize we’ve never had it.

  41. blouise says:

    My goodness, this sounds sooo familiar. I wonder where I’ve heard it before?

  42. Elaine M. says:

    Bob,

    I’m feigning ignorance because I ask you questions? Are you being a tad petulant today?

    The “unmob” “rushed to condemn” Michael Brown. They presumed him to be guilty of doing something that justified Officer Wilson’s killing him.

  43. blouise17 says:

    Now, now, Elaine. What more proof do you require? Just look at the videos Bob S chose to post. Look at all those black men insulting those poor white boys. Good heavens, they even insulted their mothers! One would think those black men have no respect for The Law which is just down right ignorant as we all know every citizen is equal under The Law. Now, do you really want to be part of that mob?

    Of course not, so be a good little citizen and allow the people in charge to run the show. They’ve been doing it for a long time in Ferguson and they know exactly how to work The Law … my bad, I meant, how The Law works.

  44. bettykath says:

    Blouise, ” they know exactly how to work The Law … my bad, I meant, how The Law works.”

    You were right the first time, they work it. 😦

  45. bettykath says:

    But you know that.

  46. Bob Stone says:

    “I’m feigning ignorance because I ask you questions?”

    Well, when you ask questions like: “What about the people who WERE SURE/HAD NO DOUBT that Darren Wilson acted in self defense and that Michael Brown got what he deserved…from the get-go? Did those folks rush to judgment?”

    Enlighten me. Show me your definition of “rush to judgment” in action.

    Show me a few instances of the phrase “rush to judgment” applying to a “rush to judgment of innocence.”

    How does one make a rash decision by affording a presumption guaranteed under rule of law?

  47. Bob Stone says:

    “He murdered the kid”

    There you go again.

  48. blouise17 says:

    “No, because in the United States, everyone is presumed innocent until proven (and judged) guilty.”

    Unless, of course, one is an unarmed, 18 year old, black kid caught jaywalking in Ferguson, Missouri.

    The philosophers were right in their theories regarding contractarianism. Rousseau’s liberal democracy and republicanism as a guiding light behind the Declaration … that leap from the state of nature into civil society … depends in large part on the Rule of Law wherein the government acts as an impartial, objective agent, legitimate only to the extent that they fulfill their part of the agreement. When the government does not act as an impartial, objective agent, The Rule of Law breaks down, the government becomes illegitimate as it has broken the contract and we revert to that state of nature where “all against all” reigns.

    Theory only?

    I’m going to suggest that neither Wilson or his boss, as agents of the government, understood their real obligations to the social contract nor the actual importance of the Rule of Law to that contract. The outcome was predictable. When equal under the law becomes meaningless, the societal order breaks down and military force must be imposed as it is the only means to remain in power that the government has left.

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” ( Good ol B. Franklin once again)

  49. Bob Stone says:

    Race baiting.

    And I’m not biting.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “Race baiting.
      And I’m not biting.”

      Bob,
      “Mob”? “Thug”? Those were only two of the racial connoting epithets that you have thrown out. Of course you pretend innocence in this respect, but then so did the Nixon supporters claim innocence when they used the term “tough on crime” as part of their Southern Strategy, which won the White House in 1968. I’ll grant though that you are as unaware of your pre-judgments in this case, as say was Donald Trump when he called Barack Obama a foreigner.

  50. Elaine M. says:

    Bob,

    I wasn’t feigning ignorance. I was trying to elicit a response from you. You’ve called those who think Darren Wilson killed Michael Brown without justification members of a mob…a grievance syndicate. Josie, your trusted source on what went down in Ferguson on the day Officer Wilson killed Michael Brown, was someone who called “into Dana Loesch’s radio show claiming she knew the real story of Michael Brown’s shooting because Darren Wilson had told her. The story spread like wildfire through The Blaze, Breitbart.com, Drudge, and more. Then it shot right into mainstream media with CNN jumping on it too.”

    http://crooksandliars.com/2014/08/media-punked-fake-josie-account-michael

    Can’t find a more unimpeachable source than some unknown individual who calls into a hatemonger’s radio program with the scoop on what happened in Ferguson, Missouri!

    Do tell us more about how members of the mob rushed to judgment while you remained calm, cool, and sought out the truth unlike the grievance syndicate.

  51. blouise17 says:

    Bob S,

    Lol

  52. blouise17 says:

    Bob S,

    In one of your early posts, before your Dog, Mother May I column, you described Brown as a “thug”. Remember?

  53. Elaine M. says:

    blouise,

    For shame, you ole coloratura mezzo race baiter!

  54. blouise17 says:

    Elaine,

    He’s above it all as those videos he posted clearly show.

  55. Bob Stone says:

    Elaine,

    So you can’t show me a few instances of the phrase “rush to judgment” applying to a “rush to judgment of innocence”?

  56. Bob Stone says:

    Mob is “racial connoting epithet?”

    Wow; who knew all those Frankenstein movies were racist.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “Leaking information from a grand jury is a criminal act, which has also undermined faith in the legal system,”

      Tut, tut. It only violates the rule of law when it’s about a policeman’s rights, say some people.

  57. Elaine M. says:

    Gene,

    Is Bob comparing Darren Wilson to the Frankenstein monster? Inquiring minds want to know!

  58. Elaine M. says:

    What’s next for Ferguson?
    As grand jury decision over Michael Brown’s shooting looms, a Columbia Journalism panel questions early leaks
    http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/_the_story_of_ferguson.php?page=all&print=true

    Excerpt :
    The story of Ferguson, MO, roils on. On Tuesday, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch published Michael Brown’s leaked autopsy report, and The New York Times and Washington Post featured unnamed sources implying that a grand jury may accept police officer Darren Wilson’s account of the confrontation which left Brown dead. Fresh protests of over 200 people followed outside the Ferguson Police Department, as well as reports that Attorney General Eric Holder is “exasperated” at the “selective flow of information.”

    Antonio French, an alderman in St. Louis who reported much of the protests on Vine and Twitter, called into question the media’s role in publishing those leaks at a public talk at Columbia Journalism School Thursday evening. Wesley Lowery, reporter for The Washington Post, Alice Speri, reporter for Vice News, and Zeynep Tufekci, a sociologist at the University of North Carolina, also participated in the event.

    “In this news world, this environment we live in, most news organizations won’t turn down a leak,” French said. “But I think what people were most upset by was some of the reporting was almost editorializing, saying that this [autopsy] substantiates the version of events from police.”

    Most unnamed sources in the Times and Post have supported Wilson’s account of events. Leaking information from a grand jury is a criminal act, which has also undermined faith in the legal system, said French. He noted that this plays right into a narrative that many African-American residents of Ferguson have held—that the justice system is stacked against them.

  59. blouise17 says:

    Elaine,

    I take issue with Bob’s comparing Wilson to Frankenstein. Frankenstein was an unnnatural life form whereas Wilson is a natural born … white policeman.

  60. bettykath says:

    blouise, I thought it was Igor who was the unnatural life form. Of course, Dr. F. was more than a little weird.

  61. bettykath says:

    Elaine, LOL.

  62. bettykath says:

    Elaine, How could I forget that you’re a teacher, you “made me” look it up. Igor was his assistant and Dr. F’s creation had no name. My bad. Poor memory. Literature wasn’t my interest and such details didn’t stick, obviously.

  63. blouise17 says:

    Does that make Wilson the unnatural life form? Piffle! I’m going to go find me a mob and relax

  64. James Knauer says:

    From the “Can’t Be Bothered” Dept.:

    Judge Tosses Case That Earned Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson An Award

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/darren-wilson-ferguson-felony-case-dismissed

    Excerpt:

    The felony drug case that earned Ferguson, Mo. police officer Darren Wilson a commendation earlier this year was thrown out of court on Monday because he was a no-show, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported.

    The case, involving a marijuana possession charge against Christopher A. Brooks, was on hold since September, when Wilson missed a preliminary hearing, the newspaper reported.

    St. Louis County Associate Circuit Judge Mary Bruntrager Schroder reportedly gave prosecutors until Monday to get Wilson to testify before the grand jury. When he didn’t show, she dismissed the case.

    The paper reported that a signed order said: “State not ready. Cause dismissed for failure to prosecute. State opposed.”

  65. blouise17 says:

    I wonder if he was subpoenaed to appear.

  66. Mike Spindell says:

    “Officer Darren Wilson “wasn’t available,” said Ed Magee, a spokesman for the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney. He said prosecutors would not take any action against Wilson, who has not been seen publicly since the Aug. 9 shooting that sparked weeks of protest and unrest. “We don’t get people in trouble for not showing up for court,” he said.

    A spokesman for the Ferguson Police Department and Wilson’s lawyer did not immediately return requests for comment. Magee said he could not provide details on the cases because they were now closed, but the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that the latest involved a felony drug charge against Christopher Brooks, who claimed in a Facebook post that Wilson roughed him up during the 2013 arrest. The judge tossed out the case after giving Wilson, who received a commendation in the case, weeks to show up before the grand jury.”

    This was from Elaine’s link above. It is interesting that cases (felonies it seems) are being dismissed because of Wilson’s failure to appear. It would seem that Wilson was the chief witness against the accused since the cases were dismissed for lack of HIS evidence. Could it be that perhaps Wilson’s testimony might have revealed some negative pattern in his actions as a police officer that could reflect upon the Brown case. However, since Wilson is White and a LEO, according to some we MUST presume his innocence. Is it because Black people are the only ones that we can see as criminals and thugs.

  67. Bob Stone says:

    James: “From the “Can’t Be Bothered” Dept.”

    Mike: “It would seem that Wilson was the chief witness against the accused since the cases were dismissed for lack of HIS evidence. Could it be that perhaps Wilson’s testimony might have revealed some negative pattern in his actions as a police officer that could reflect upon the Brown case. However, since Wilson is White and a LEO, according to some we MUST presume his innocence. Is it because Black people are the only ones that we can see as criminals and thugs.”

    So Wilson didn’t go into hiding for fear for his life?

    Okay then.

    • James Knauer says:

      “So Wilson didn’t go into hiding for fear for his life?”

      Bob, I never made that claim, for or against, mainly because I have no way of knowing, but more importantly because I do not care. Wasting the Court’s time and the county’s money, however, is plain bad form, terrible ethics, and sends the exact opposite message required to maintain law and order. Five cases, and counting (thank you, Elaine). “Fear of his life” is an emotional response, one easily overcome if his intent is to do the right thing based on the oath he swore to uphold. Further, your continued unjustifiable use of the word “mob” is meaningless as far as the case you keep struggling to make.

  68. Bob Stone says:

    This just in…

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “Darren Wilson is still in the St. Louis area and recently attended a Blues game. He has been made aware of the impending Grand Jury and US DOJ decisions in his favor and is now comfortable enough that he has just closed purchase on a new home in the south county area. He is still co-habitating with his girl friend “Barbie”, who is now pregnant with their first child. I guess his paid vacation for murder has been productive in more ways then one.”

      Bob,
      This is from your link. Wilson doesn’t sound that afraid for his life, unless your idea is that Black people don’t attend hockey games. Cherry picking again Bob. Good lawyer’s tactic, but certainly not valid evidence.

  69. Bob Stone says:

    Gee Mike,

    I wonder why the mob is so interested in finding Wilson and revealing his new address.

    Perhaps they want to mail him some fresh fish wrapped in newspaper?

  70. Elaine M. says:

    Wilson came out of hiding to testify before the grand jury. He wasn’t killed. Evidently, he got protection against the violent mob that day.

  71. Elaine M. says:

    Officer Darren Wilson Is Missing His Court Dates
    http://news.yahoo.com/officer-darren-wilson-missing-court-dates-131304203.html

    Excerpt:
    Wilson was a no-show for September’s preliminary hearing in the case, then avoided a grand jury appearance as well. As the primary witness, the case could not proceed without him and the judge ruled to dismiss it. This particular arrest, notes the Post-Dispatch, “had led to a commendation for Wilson in front of the City Council earlier this year.” Brooks, however, claimed Wilson had beat him during the arrest, while he was handcuffed and helpless.

  72. Elaine M. says:

    15 Questions for Darren Wilson
    10/21/14
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/21/1337729/-15-Questions-for-Darren-Wilson#

    Excerpt:
    While leaks from the federal investigation of police officer Darren Wilson’s shooting of Mike Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, August 9 are starting to appear, concerned citizens in Ferguson and beyond have a plethora of unanswered questions they’d love ask to Wilson—not only about his mindset, but his actions the day Brown was killed. To begin, here are 15 questions:

    1. When your SUV pulled up alongside Mike Brown and Dorian Johnson as they were walking along Canfield Drive, did you tell them to “get the fuck on the sidewalk?”

    2. When you pulled away from Brown and Johnson on Canfield Drive, why exactly did you decide to put your SUV in reverse to confront them again? Your chief says you did not know about the earlier convenience store incident where it is alleged Mike Brown stole some cigars. Was it to express your anger that they didn’t obey your earlier command to “get the fuck on the sidewalk?”

    3. Four eyewitnesses report seeing and hearing your tires screech as you violently put your SUV in reverse on Canfield Drive, nearly hitting Brown and Johnson. Why did you reverse in such a reckless and provocative manner?

    4. When you arrived back at where Brown and Johnson stood, if you did not know about the store incident, why exactly did you open your door to confront them? Did you intend to arrest them for jaywalking?

  73. gbk says:

    Supposedly some information garnered by Anonymous, dated Oct. 27:

    “. . . The following is a synopses of the leaked information:

    On or about November 10, 2014 the Grand Jury decision will be announced. Darren Wilson will NOT be indicted on ANY charges related to the murder of Mike Brown. All local police Chiefs and jail commanders have been notified to begin preparing for major civil unrest. Governor Nixon has been notified of the impending announcement and has ordered the Missouri National Guard to begin preparations for a possible re-enstatement of the martial law that was declared at the beginning of the Ferguson protests.”

    Additionally, there is this:

    “Finally on an un-related note. “Josie” who called into a radio station during the early days of the Ferguson protests and purported to give Darren Wilson’s “side” of the story, from which many conservative media outlets (such as FOX News) have since spun the most outlandish falsehoods – has been identified as an account assistant at Javelin, Inc. and is associated with the Ferguson PD. We are still gathering info on this person and what exactly her relationship is with the FPD and her interest in Mike Brown’s murder.”

    http://www.nothingbuttruth.com/gateway-pundit/130497-anonymous-posts-information-on-officer-darren-wilson%E2%80%99s-location-and-his-friend-%E2%80%9Cjosie%E2%80%9D

  74. Elaine M. says:

    Anonymous Claims Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson Will Not be Indicted for Mike Brown Killing
    Police on high alert for renewed protests if hackers’ claim proves true
    http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/anonymous-claims-ferguson-police-officer-darren-wilson-will-not-be-indicted-mike-brown-killing-1471910

  75. swarthmoremom says:

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/oct/28/ferguson-police-spending-thousands-riot-gear-protests?CMP=twt_gu “The police department overseeing the protests in Ferguson, Missouri, over the killing of an unarmed 18-year-old has spent tens of thousands of dollars replenishing their stocks of teargas, “less lethal” ammunition and riot gear in advance of a potential revival in demonstrations.

    St Louis County police made the purchases amid concerns that hundreds of demonstrators will return to the streets if Darren Wilson, the officer who shot dead Michael Brown in August, is not indicted on criminal charges by a grand jury currently considering the case.

    A breakdown of the department’s spending since August on equipment intended for the policing of crowds and civil disobedience, which totals $172,669, was obtained by the Guardian from the county force.

    Since the height of the protests, the department has spent almost $25,000 buying 650 teargas grenades, smoke-and-gas grenades, smoke canisters and “hornets nest” CS sting grenades, which shoot out dozens of rubber bullets and a powdered chemical agent upon detonation.

    It has spent a further $18,000 on 1,500 “beanbag rounds” and 6,000 pepper balls, paintball-style projectiles that explode with a chemical irritant when they strike a protester. The department uses LiveX branded pepper balls, which are billed as ten times hotter than standard pepper rounds.

    Another $77,500 has been spent on 235 riot gear helmets, 135 shields, 25 batons and 60 sets of shin guards, and other “uniform items”. A further $2,300 was used to buy another 2,000 sets of the plastic handcuffs that have been used to detain dozens of demonstrators plucked from crowds on West Florissant Avenue.

    In addition, an estimated $50,000 has been set aside by the department for repair work for damaged police vehicles. However, in a sign that further clashes are expected, they are in fact “not repairing any vehicles until unrest is over”, a department inventory said.

    “We purchase these items in hopes that we never have to use any of them,” said Sergeant Brian Schellman, a spokesman for the county police department. “But it is our responsibility to have proper equipment to keep our police officers and all citizens safe should violence break out anywhere at any time.” “

  76. Mike Spindell says:

    When it’s been said time and again that grand juries will indict a ham sandwich if the prosecutor wants it, it is so comforting to know in advance the decision of this Grand Jury that is supposed to be secret. In America the indictment of a police officer for murder is so extremely rare as to be inconsequential. The same platitudes of innocent until proven guilty are trotted out by those prejudiced in favor of the police. Would that this would be the case for average citizens, but sadly the “rule of law” in our country mirrors those famous lines from Orwell’s “Animal Farm”.

    All animals are equal
    Some animals are more equal than others

  77. blouise says:

    Similar notices went out before the Kent State Massacre.
    And the rubber bullets the National Guard had been issued during the week before the Massacre when they were patrolling the Teamster’s strike in Cleveland were replaced with live ammunition when they got to Kent State. Note: The fatalities at Kent State were innocent bystanders.

    A word to the wise. Keep the children indoors and don’t go outside to watch.anything for you all know what’s happening here … wash, rinse, repeat. Good luck.

  78. blouise17 says:

    Mike,

    And it’s a lot easier to turn guns on a mob than on an unruly crowd. Dehumanize first.

    The difference this time around is the internet. Nobody can claim ignorance.

  79. blouise17 says:

    One other thing, if you survive the military assault the government has planned, get thee to a ballot box and vote those suckers out of office.

    Oh yes, beware the “brother” who comes knocking at your door asking you to join the march. He could very well be a government agent assigned to inciting. You know what I am talking about. 😉

  80. James Knauer says:

    From the “Well, glad we cleared that up” Dept:

    Columnist Sets Off Storm Calling Michael Brown ‘Animal’ Who Had To Be ‘Put Down’

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/don-surber-michael-brown-animal-put-down-charleston-daily-mail-apologizes

    Excerpt:

    His exasperation was understandable. On Saturday, Don Surber, the West Virginia paper’s lone editorial columnist, took to his personal blog to offer his thoughts on “police brutality” and the killing of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown.

    “This summer I had an epiphany as I watched packs of racists riot in Ferguson, Missouri, in support of a gigantic thug who was higher than a kite when he attacked Ferguson Police Department Officer Darren Wilson, who unfortunately had to put this animal down,” Surber wrote.

    By Sunday morning, Surber appended an update to the top of the post and crossed out the final phrase of the sentence.

    “I made a factual error. Michael Brown was not an animal but a man. Big. Brutal. High,” Surber wrote in the update. “His death was a justifiable homicide and not a putting down.”

  81. gbk says:

    Another, “Tin solders and Nixon coming,” moment. Hope not, but it’s leaning that way.

  82. gbk says:

    Governor Nixon this time, though. The world is really strange sometimes.

  83. Elaine M. says:

    James,

    I hadn’t seen that article. I’d say that columnist’ isn’t the only one who harbors that type of attitude about Brown…and other young black “thugs.”

  84. gbk,

    As the saying goes, “History doesn’t repeat, but she sure does rhyme.”

  85. Bob Kauten says:

    ???
    “On Saturday, Don Surber, the West Virginia paper’s lone editorial columnist…”

    West Virginia has a paper?

  86. gbk says:

    Gene,

    “As the saying goes, ‘History doesn’t repeat, but she sure does rhyme.'”

    Rhymes just as well as, “Brother, can you spare a dime.”

  87. blouise says:

    One has to feel empathy for the citizens of Ferguson. If the Anonymous info is correct then the local, state, and federal government has sanctioned open season on black kids by police … a license to kill without fear of any legal repercussions.

    If the citizens of Ferguson protest, the government is fully prepared to crush them with military precision. If they don’t protest, no black kid is safe anywhere police are present. One mis-speak, one perceived disrespectful glance, one step off the sidewalk … bam, you’re dead cause you’re a thug.

    That’s certainly the way it was back in “Poor Paula’s” day (remember what happened to the black woman who disciplined lovely little Paula) and it looks like that’s the way it still is for the folk in Ferguson.

    I sure hope the Anonymous info is wrong cause that’s one hell of a shitty way to live.

  88. Elaine M. says:

    Ferguson police chief expected to step down, officials say
    By Evan Perez and Shimon Prokupecz, CNN
    http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/28/us/ferguson-police-chief/index.html

    Excerpt:
    (CNN) — The police chief in Ferguson, Missouri, is expected to step down as part of the effort by city officials to reform the police department, according to government officials familiar with the ongoing discussions between local, state and federal officials.

    But Chief Thomas Jackson and the city’s mayor say the reports aren’t true.

    Under the proposed plan, after Jackson leaves, city leadership would ask the St. Louis County police chief to take over management of Ferguson’s police force.

    The announcement could come as soon as next week.

    It would be one step in what local officials hope will help reduce tensions in the city as the public awaits a decision on whether the St. Louis County grand jury will bring charges against Officer Darren Wilson in the fatal shooting of Michael Brown.

  89. Elaine M. says:

    Police In Ferguson Stock Up On Riot Gear Ahead Of Grand Jury Decision
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/28/riot-gear-ferguson-protests_n_6062608.html

    Excerpt:
    A breakdown of the $172,000 that the police department has spent since August on gear for dealing with protesters, first reported by Jon Swaine of The Guardian, shows that the St. Louis County police have purchased “650 teargas grenades, smoke-and-gas grenades, smoke canisters and ‘hornets nest’ CS sting grenades, which shoot out dozens of rubber bullets and a powdered chemical agent upon detonation,” at a cost of nearly $25,000. Sgt. Brian Schellman, a spokesman for the St. Louis County Police Department, provided a breakdown of the spending in an email to The Huffington Post.

    The department has also spent $7,740 on 1,500 “sock rounds,” or beanbag rounds, and $10,200 on 6,000 pepper balls rounds, which sting the eyes and nose when they hit at a protester. Roughly $77,000 went toward 235 helmets, 25 new batons and 60 pairs of shin guards. The county has purchased 2,000 plastic “flex” handcuffs, which cost just over a dollar each. In addition, the department has put aside $50,000 to repair damaged police vehicles, but that work won’t begin “until unrest is over,” according to the summary of the spending.

  90. blouise says:

    Businesses, Schools Being Warned of Potential Ferguson Unrest

    Seven school superintendents in a letter ask St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch to time the announcement so it doesn’t threaten the school day.
    They would like it to happen after 5 p.m. on a weekday, or on a weekend – preferably a Sunday

    http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/10/28/businesses-schools-being-warned-of-potential-ferguson-unrest/

  91. blouise17 says:

    Ferguson Grand Jury Leaks Risk Everyone’s Right to Fair Trial by Mark Kogan, Washington D.C. lawyer

    Although it provides a fascinating look into the ongoing grand jury proceedings surrounding the Michael Brown shooting, the leaked information risks the right to fair trial for all parties involved and must be met with swift and strong action. Members of the press should reveal the source of these leaks either publicly or to the relevant judicial authorities, in order to hold them accountable and help the courts protect the integrity of the judicial process. If the leakers believe making this information public is worth the risk to the right to a fair trial, then they should be made to stand behind their position publicly.

    http://mic.com/articles/102252/ferguson-grand-jury-leaks-risk-everyone-s-right-to-fair-trial

  92. Elaine M. says:

    Probe into Alleged Juror Misconduct on Michael Brown Grand Jury May be Nearing an End
    10/29/14
    http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/10/29/probe-into-alleged-juror-misconduct-on-michael-brown-grand-jury-may-be-nearing-an-end/

    Excerpt:
    CLAYTON, Mo. (KMOX) – No word yet from the Michael Brown grand jury in Clayton on the fate of Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, but we may soon learn the outcome of an investigation into alleged juror misconduct on the panel.

    We could get word soon on the investigation into reports that early this month, someone tweeted a message saying they know someone sitting on the grand jury, and there isn’t enough to warrant an arrest of Wilson.

    The judge and prosecutor Bob McCulloch have been investigating for three weeks.

    If the tweet is legitimate and not a hoax, the source of the leak could be dismissed from the grand jury.

  93. Bob Stone says:

    Which purpose of Grand Jury Secrecy was frustrated by the leak in this instance?

  94. Bob Stone says:

    “It’s about transparency,” family lawyer Benjamin Crump told CNN. “This community has a distrust for the local enforcement officials. So if you have a secret grand jury proceeding, where nobody knows what the prosecutor presents … and the grand jury comes back and says we find this (shooting) justified, I think that’s going to be very problematic for this community to accept.”

  95. Elaine M. says:

    Pathologist says Brown autopsy quotes in Post-Dispatch were taken out of context
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/pathologist-says-brown-autopsy-quotes-in-post-dispatch-were-taken-out-of-context/2014/10/28/30829296-5dea-11e4-9f3a-7e28799e0549_story.html

    Excerpt:
    Melinek told The Washington Post that the autopsy facts could be viewed differently.

    “Bullet trajectory analysis is complex, and you cannot interpret autopsy reports in a vacuum,” she wrote in an e-mail. “You need the scene data and the witness statements. When a forensic expert says something ‘appears to be’ or is ‘consistent with’ the findings, that doesn’t mean it is the only explanation. It means it is one possible explanation — one that fits the current forensic data. That opinion might change as other data comes to light.”

    ●Melinek, who is based in San Francisco, also challenged statements attributed to her that said the autopsy did not support that Brown was shot while fleeing or had his hands up when he was killed.

    The idea that Brown was trying to surrender has fueled much of the outrage over the shooting.

    In her e-mail, Melinek, who is also an assistant clinical professor of pathology at the University of California at San Francisco Medical Center, wrote in detail about one of at least six shots that hit Brown: a bullet to his right arm that “goes back to front.”

    While noting that “it would not be consistent with the standard ‘hands up palms front’ surrender position,” Melinek said the wound could have happened in several ways.

    It “could be when he was running away if his arm was positioned with the lower back forearm exposed toward the shooter,” she wrote.

  96. blouise17 says:

    Chuckle, chuckle … sure, it was a juror who orchestrated all these well timed leaks. Couldn’t possibly be any other officer of the Court like, oh I don’t know, a lawyer maybe. Heavens no because that would be such a blatant disrespect for the, ahem, Rule of Law and no lawyer would want to undermine the Constitution.

    Could someone or someones actually be trying to sway public opinion in favor of Wilson and could that someone or someones have also made attempts to sway the grand jury not to indict? Again, a pox on such a thought as that would be criminal and could even lead to the suspicion of subornation of perjury.

    No lawyer would ever contemplate such a thing let alone do it so, yeah, all these well-defined, well-orchestrated leaks must be coming from a juror. Now I wonder who leaked the information that the juror was being investigated.

  97. blouise17 says:

    I just got an email …

    Of course!! It was the juror who leaked the information about the investigation into the juror. The classic “would I leak the information about an investigation into my own behavior if I was the leaker!?

    Veeery canny.

  98. Blouise,

    I beg to (slightly) differ in re lawyers. It isn’t so much the disrespect for the Rule of Law that is the heart of that problem as it is what creates that mindset in the first place: the emphasis in training on both 1) win at all costs (which is somewhat unavoidable under the canon of zealous advocacy) and 2) the stressing of ethical relativism to the point to where it doesn’t just engender the ability to morally/ethically distance one from the job when working for unsavory clients but creates a sort of spinelessness which in effect nullifies the any sense of duty to the court or to the law in pursuit of winning at all costs. To me, that is at the core of why I’m not interested in practicing. I see the job as making sure your client gets a fair hearing in comport with the law but the notion of win at all costs is an anathema to the Rule of Law. One can be zealous in representation and still uphold the system although it may mean your client loses their case on the merits. That, unfortunately, isn’t what they teach in most law schools. It’s win Win WIN! That kind of “ethical flexibility” is also why a lot of sociopaths and hypocrites are attracted to the profession in the first place. Law should be a calling, but for most, it’s a license to steal. When you undermine the Rule of Law and the objectivity and neutrality of courts by overzealous behavior, you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

  99. blouise17 says:

    Gene,

    I agree, not because I have any experience practicing law but because I have so many friends and acquaintances who do and have spent many an evening listening to their tales of triumph and of woe and the philosophical discussions that attend both.

    I suspect, note I said suspect, what we are seeing in this particular situation is overzealousness. Pointing the finger at a particular juror is an attempt at misdirection. With all the worldwide attention focused squarely on this grand jury, I also suspect the lawyers involved will be needing their own lawyers.

  100. Mike Spindell says:

    “The stressing of ethical relativism to the point to where it doesn’t just engender the ability to morally/ethically distance one from the job when working for unsavory clients but creates a sort of spinelessness which in effect nullifies the any sense of duty to the court or to the law in pursuit of winning at all costs.”

    Gene,
    I remember my Torts 1 class, my first semester in Law School. The professor delighted in posing past cases to us, soliciting our opinions and then destroying our points when he gave the actual decisions on the case. The same technique seemed to be used in my other classes, with the point being to teach us how to take either side of a case and supply a good argument, no matter what made ethical sense to you personally. While I understand the process and even the why of it, it does kind of give the practitioner permission to ignore the equity of a case in the service of victory. .

  101. Elaine M. says:

    Initial Ferguson police report calls Darren Wilson’s testimony into question
    The report lacks details integral to Wilson’s defense
    http://www.salon.com/2014/10/29/initial_ferguson_police_report_calls_darren_wilsons_testimony_into_question/

  102. blouise17 says:

    It will be interesting to read the transcripts of the grand jury’s proceedings which the prosecutor said he would release and compare what Wilson told the grand jury to what he told the investigating officer.

  103. blouise17 says:

    Of course, a policeman giving false statements on a police report is perjury … at least here in my state. I don’t know if police are allowed to make false statements on their police reports in Missouri.

  104. Elaine M. says:

    Earliest police report from Ferguson is released and conflicts with Darren Wilson’s testimony leaks
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/29/1340042/-Earliest-police-report-from-Ferguson-is-released-and-conflicts-with-Darren-Wilson-s-testimony-leaks#

    Excerpt:
    On October 21, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch released the official autopsy results for Mike Brown. Accompanying the autopsy was an analysis and commentary from forensic scientist Dr. Judy Melinek. Her commentary actually made more news than the results of autopsy itself.

    Tucked away inside of the full autopsy report is an initial statement of Darren Wilson’s perspective as told by Detective Patrick J. Hokamp of the St. Louis County Police Department. It is the first known statement from a detective who was actually on the scene soon after the shooting and appears to have been given to the medical examiner soon after the shooting. What’s most surprising isn’t necessarily what is included in this statement, but some glaring omissions when compared up against recent statements purported to be from Darren Wilson’s testimony to the grand jury…

    *****

    It’s easy to understand, when comparing the discrepancies between the account of Detective Hokamp on the scene that day and the alleged account of Darren Wilson months later, why concerned citizens would think Wilson injected key details later to aid in his own defense.

    If Darren Wilson put his SUV in reverse to confront two men he believed to be involved in a robbery, why did Detective Hokamp not include such a key statement in his report?

    If Mike Brown punched Darren Wilson so hard that he nearly lost consciousness, why was such a harsh assault of a police officer not included in the report from Detective Hokamp?

    Why did Detective Hokamp vaguely report that the gun mysteriously discharged in a struggle when it is clear that Darren Wilson fired each and every shot from his weapon?

    Ultimately, the report from Detective Hokamp raises just as many questions as it gives answers about exactly what happened between Darren Wilson and Mike Brown.

  105. Elaine M. says:

    Brown’s family pathologist questions leaked autopsy report
    10/29/14
    http://www.kvue.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/29/browns-family-pathologist-questions-leaked-autopsy/18154107/

    Excerpt:
    The forensic pathologist hired by Michael Brown’s family said tonight that he is questioning the St. Louis County medical examiner’s conclusion that the teen had gunshot residue on him the night he was fatally shot by police.

    Michael Baden conducted an autopsy on Brown’s body in August at the request of the teen’s family and concluded then that the teen could have been shot from as far away as 30 feet. A leaked copy of the St. Louis County medical examiner’s autopsy report says microscopic particles of gunshot residue were found in a deep layer of skin showing that the teen was shot once in his thumb at close range.

    Baden said he wants a gunshot residue report as well as several pieces of evidence to draw his own conclusions. He said is willing to testify to his findings before a grand jury deciding whether to charge the officer who shot Brown.

    “Gunshot residue can look very similar to ordinary dirt on the ground and his hand, for four hours, was on the ground,” Baden said. “So dirt on the ground, the body being moved when they were putting him in the body bag could create the microscopic appearance of gunshot residue.”

  106. blouise17 says:

    If Officer Wilson Is Not Indicted, McCulloch Plans To Release Grand Jury Transcripts, Recordings

    “If the St. Louis County grand jury fails to indict Officer Darren Wilson, Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch will immediately release full transcripts and audio recordings of the grand jury proceedings, his spokesman said Tuesday.”

    http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/if-officer-wilson-not-indicted-mcculloch-plans-release-grand-jury-transcripts-recordings

    I wonder if McCulloch will renege on that promise.

    Is it illegal to take bets on this blog?

  107. Bob Stone says:

    Re: “Earliest police report from Ferguson is released and conflicts with Darren Wilson’s testimony leaks”

    The author intentionally omitted the boiler plate at the bottom of the narrative, just above the signature, which read:

    “Any additional information will follow in the usual supplemental manner.”

    Furthermore, it’s signed by a medical examiner investigator; not the police department.

    It’s a “This is what I could get from the detective at the moment, more to follow in the usual manner” narrative.

    Not a police report.

  108. Bob Stone says:

    Re: “Brown’s family pathologist questions leaked autopsy report”

    & “Brown’s family pathologist wants to testify before grand jury”

    10/29/14

    Six days earlier …

    DR. MICHAEL BADEN, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: Hi, Kimberly.

    GUILFOYLE: Hi. Great to have you here tonight.

    BADEN: Yeah. I think the new report that’s been release from the first autopsy is — I agree with much of what it said in there. There is evidence of a wound being inflicted while his hand was in the car at least because he does have a gunshot graze wound in the hand, the right hand.

    GUILFOYLE: The decedent, Michael Brown?

    BADEN: The decedent, yes. And his blood was found by the FBI in the car. So, that, I think, is agreed upon. There is some gunshot residue in the hand, only seen under the microscope. It wasn’t seen the first autopsy on the skin surface but under the skin.

    GUILFOYLE: Again, on Michael Brown. So that’s GSR, gunshot residue, which would suggest that he was in close proximity with the weapon, right, of the officer?

    BADEN: Right, yes. So, and that gun shot wound of the car would fit that description.

    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/2014/10/23/dr-baden-vs-official-michael-brown-autopsy-report

    Obviously Crump & Parks were not pleased.

  109. Mike Spindell says:

    “and that gun shot wound of the car would fit that description.”

    Bob,
    “Would fit” implies that there are also other descriptions that might fit as well. You’re a lawyer. If you were doing cross examination of that statement and it was negative to your client I’m sure you would question it. But no matter, Officer Wilson was ALWAYS innocent being a cop and Brown was always guilty being a Black “tug”.

  110. Mike Spindell says:

    Oops! “thug” not “tug”.

  111. blouise17 says:

    “The St. Louis County police department presumably did file an incident report, but any such documents will not be made public until a grand jury investigating the officer-involved shooting concludes its investigation, according to officials from the office who briefed NBC News on the case.”

    http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/michael-brown-shooting/michael-brown-shooting-why-ferguson-police-never-filed-incident-report-n186431

    “As a result, the officer’s account of what transpired when the two men met just after noon on Aug. 9 remains a mystery.

    And it will be for some time, according to Brian Schellman, a spokesman for the St. Louis County police department Schellman told TIME that the department does not intend to release the “investigative” component of the incident report, the part that details Wilson’s version of events.”

    http://time.com/3159680/ferguson-michael-brown-shooting-police-report/

    ———————————————————–
    Further:

    “Tucked away inside of the full autopsy report is an initial statement of Darren Wilson’s perspective as told by Detective Patrick J. Hokamp of the St. Louis County Police Department. It is the first known statement from a detective who was actually on the scene soon after the shooting and appears to have been given to the medical examiner soon after the shooting. ”

    ——————————-

    It’s all sworn as the “official” report so all statements contained within are subject to scrutiny for perjury and/or obstruction of justice. More lawyers are going to be needed.

    Interesting side note. The Ferguson Police department did quickly release an incident report and video of Brown at the Convenience store proving they are capable of investigating some things. Lol

  112. Bob Stone says:

    Mike: “But no matter, Officer Wilson was ALWAYS [guilty].”

  113. Bob Stone says:

    ST. LOUIS, Mo. (KMOV.com) — St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch said Thursday that recent leaks in the Darren Wilson grand jury case are not coming from grand jury members.

    Several weeks ago, a tweet claimed the author talked to a friend who was serving on the grand jury about the case. McCulloch said that never happened, and that Twitter account had been hacked. McCulloch added that the owner of that Twitter account had no connection to any grand jury member.

    Recent reports by the New York Times and St. Louis Post Dispatch, which disclosed information pertinent to the case, also did not come from inside the grand jury, McCulloch said. The New York Times stated their information came from an official in Washington D.C. and the Post Dispatch stated the grand jury was not their source, according to McCulloch.

    Read more: http://www.kmov.com/news/editors-pick/McCulloch-Grand-jury-members-not-responsible-for-recent-leaks-280938442.html#ixzz3HfVi2IFJ

  114. Mike Spindell says:

    “Mike: “But no matter, Officer Wilson was ALWAYS [guilty].”

    Bob,

    I knew you’d come around to my side.,

  115. bigfatmike says:

    This does not really belong here. But I think it is interesting and relevant. From the AP regarding the capture of Eric Frein:

    “He made no attempt to flee and didn’t put up a fight…..”He had nowhere to go. There is nothing he could’ve done,” Malkowski said, adding: “From what I saw, he felt defeated because we’d won. We’d defeated him.”….Frein, 31, could be seen with a gash on the bridge of his nose and a scrape over his left eye. Malkowski and Kimball said he suffered the injuries while marshals had him down on the pavement. ”

    I have no sympathy for Frein. However I find striking that ‘…he didn’t put up a fight….could be seen with a gash on the bridge of his nose….suffered the injuries while marshals had him down on the pavement.’

    • Mike Spindell says:

      BFM,
      The injuries are telling, but consider this. The man is supposedly a cop killer, armed and extremely dangerous, yet he didn’t get shot. Is it permitted to ask the question whether he would have been shot on sight if he were Black?

  116. bigfatmike says:

    @Mike Spindell:

    Several times you have commented on the treatment of African Americans by LE. I agree, it seems that interaction with LE is far more dangerous for African Americans than any other group.

    My perception is that interactions with LE, in the past few years, have become more dangerous for all of us, but more dangerous for minorities and most dangerous for young African American men. I don’t have the stats to back that up, but that is what I see from the news stories widely available.

  117. Elaine M. says:

    Ferguson No-Fly Zone Was Aimed At Media, Recordings Show
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/02/ferguson-no-fly-zone_n_6090502.html

    Excerpt:
    WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. government agreed to a police request to restrict more than 37 square miles of airspace surrounding Ferguson, Missouri, for 12 days in August for safety, but audio recordings show that local authorities privately acknowledged the purpose was to keep away news helicopters during violent street protests.

    On Aug. 12, the morning after the Federal Aviation Administration imposed the first flight restriction, FAA air traffic managers struggled to redefine the flight ban to let commercial flights operate at nearby Lambert-St. Louis International Airport and police helicopters fly through the area — but ban others.

    “They finally admitted it really was to keep the media out,” said one FAA manager about the St. Louis County Police in a series of recorded telephone conversations obtained by The Associated Press. “But they were a little concerned of, obviously, anything else that could be going on.

  118. Elaine M. says:

    Parents Of Michael Brown To Speak Before U.N. Committee In Geneva
    11/2/14
    http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/parents-michael-brown-speak-un-committee-geneva

    Excerpt:
    The parents of Michael Brown plan to travel to Geneva next week with human rights attorneys and Ferguson activists.

    The group plans to speak to the United Nations Committee Against Torture and formally present a brief under the U.N. convention against inhumane treatment.

  119. bettykath says:

    There was another manhunt awhile ago. Black man deliberately burned alive(?). Michael Dorner. There are questions about the murders that were attributed to him and he definitely didn’t write then entire manifesto that was attributed to him.

  120. bettykath says:

    The NOTAM said NO planes were to fly in the Ferguson no-fly zone. If there were shots at police helicopter, why were the police helicopters flying in the no-fly zone? Yep, liars.

  121. bettykath,
    Here is the actual NOTAM authorizing the TFR. The TFR is not a true “no fly” order. It permits police and rescue helicopter operations.

  122. bettykath says:

    Chuck, thanks for the actual wording. What I saw was here:
    http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ferguson-no-fly-zone-keep-press-away
    So the only aircraft authorized are the ones being shot at (if you believe that any were being shot at)

Comments are closed.