FERGUSON UPDATE: Suspect in police shooting in custody

By Chuck Stanley:

Police in Ferguson, MO report they have apprehended a suspect in the sniper attack on two officers.  Details are sketchy. Lot of gossip on Twitter.  The weapon used has been seized, according to reports. No details on the weapon.  I am on record as suspecting it is a medium caliber rifle, so quite curious as to what it really is.  Presser was scheduled to start at 1:30 PM local time.

From one of the newspapers:

Authorities say they have made an arrest in the shooting of two officers outside the Ferguson Police Department.

St. Louis County Police Sgt. Brain Schellman said the details will be discussed at a 1:30 p.m. Sunday news conference. St. Louis County prosecuting attorney Robert McCulloch and St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar will attend.

Link below the fold to live feed from KDSK, Channel  5 in St. Louis.

http://www.ksdk.com/videos/news/local/2015/01/29/3144211/

About Chuck Stanley

Dr. Charlton (Chuck) Stanley is a board certified forensic psychologist, with interests in aviation psychology, peace officer selection and training, ethics and communication skills.
This entry was posted in Crime, Criminal Law, Law Enforcement, Local Government, Missouri, Society and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to FERGUSON UPDATE: Suspect in police shooting in custody

  1. Just said in the press conference the firearm seized was a handgun. That may account for the fact neither officer was killed, even with a head shot. Either a heck of a marksman with a pistol, or just lucky shots. “Lucky” being a relative term in this case.

  2. rafflaw says:

    I am glad that an arrest was made. Do you think the alleged suspect will be indicted??

  3. Elaine M. says:

    Police: Suspect arrested in shooting of two officers in Ferguson
    By Wesley Lowery and David A. Fahrenthold March 15 at 2:56 PM
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/police-suspect-arrested-in-shooting-of-two-officers-in-ferguson/2015/03/15/eb3140c2-cb38-11e4-8a46-b1dc9be5a8ff_story.html?wprss=rss_whitehouse

    Excerpt:
    FERGUSON, Mo. — Police have arrested a suspect and recovered a gun in connection with the shooting of two officers early Thursday as they stood guard during a peaceful protest outside police headquarters here.

    In a news conference Sunday, officials identified the man as Jeffrey Williams, 20. Officials said that Williams, who is African American, lives in the St. Louis area and that he had attended the demonstration earlier in the evening and other demonstrations in Ferguson in the past.

    As the demonstration was ending, Williams allegedly fired four shots from atop a hill near the police station, striking the two officers. Robert McCulloch, the prosecuting attorney for St. Louis County, said that Williams had admitted firing the shots but had told officers that he was aiming at someone else and struck the police by accident.

    “He may have had a dispute with some other individuals. . . . I’m not sure we completely buy that part of it,” McCulloch said. “We’re not sure there was a dispute.” McCulloch said that there were demonstrators located between the officers and the gunman at the time the shots were fired but that investigators had not located anyone who had been in a dispute with Williams earlier in the evening.

  4. raff,
    They seem to be unsure at present if it was the officers who were targeted. The charges on which he is being held are assault with a deadly weapon, and firing a weapon from a car. The suspect is on probation for receiving stolen property, so that adds a Federal charge. Apparently they are considering the possibility somebody besides the officers were the target….perhaps gang related, etc.

    Looks as if they already have enough for two life sentences in Missouri, even if they don’t add any other charges.

  5. Bob Kauten says:

    I, for one, am relieved that Robert McCulloch is on the case.

  6. blouise17 says:

    Will there be another tell all GJ or will we go straight to indictment?

  7. pete says:

    Fair trial and a legal hanging.

  8. eniobob says:

    The next time you hear the term “KNUCKLE HEAD” this is the type of individual that term applies to :

    “Jeffrey Williams was arrested late Saturday without a struggle and charged with two counts of first-degree assault.”

  9. swarthmoremom says:

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/235774-missouri-rep-ferguson-protesters-despise-man-arrested-for-police “Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) said early Monday that protesters in Ferguson, Mo. “despise” the man who allegedly shot two police officers in the city.

    Authorities say Jeffrey Wilson, 20, was demonstrating, but protest leaders say is unknown to them.

    “The thing is, the protesters despise this guy who damaged what they consider to be a movement,” he said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

    Police on Saturday arrested Wilson for the shooting of two police officers during a protest last week.

    Officials said that Wilson had been participating in a protest outside of the of the Ferguson Police Department. But many protest leaders told the press that they did not recognize Wilson, and a minister who said he had spoken with Wilson told CNN that the suspect had admitted that he had not been demonstrating.

    Authorities also said that Wilson may not have been targeting the police officers. But Cleaver dismissed that as irrelevant.

    “It doesn’t matter if he was shooting at a squirrel, he needs to go to jail,” he said.

    On the night of the shooting, protesters had gathered outside of the police department following the resignation of Police Chief Thomas Jackson.

    Jackson resigned after the release of a scathing report from the Department of Justice that found that Ferguson’s police department regularly violated the civil rights of African Americans, in part to raise revenue through traffic tickets and other citations.”

  10. nivico says:

    This is what the folks trying to distance the looters, arsonists, and shooters from the rest of the protesters reminds me of:

  11. Mike Spindell says:

    “This is what the folks trying to distance the looters, arsonists, and shooters from the rest of the protesters reminds me of:”

    Nivico,

    This is what you remind me of because for you to draw reference from one persons actions to a whole bunch of people exemplifies the same type of thinking and ignorance of the facts.

    “Theodore Gilmore Bilbo (October 13, 1877 – August 21, 1947) was an American politician. Bilbo, a Democrat, twice served as governor of Mississippi (1916–20, 1928–32) and later was elected a U.S. Senator (1935–47). A master of filibuster and scathing rhetoric, a rough-and-tumble fighter in debate, he made his name a synonym for white supremacy. Bilbo believed that black people and Jews were inferior, defended segregation, and was a member of the Ku Klux Klan.”

  12. Mike Spindell says:

    Oh forgive me………am I playing the dreaded “race card”? Yes I am, since you’re playing the “mob card” as a euphemism for people of color. Now I’m a Jew. My people have a long history of being stereotyped, by taking individual instances and applying it to our whole ethnicity. I tend to be sensitive when I see others playing the same game. From your viewpoint the DOJ study was only valid with respect to the White cop and off base on everything else. Now I’m not saying that you definitely are a racist, though the point could be made. My real guess about you is that you’re merely a contrary asshole who likes to argue against what you perceive is a majority opinion. The sad fact though, is that you’re basically an authoritarian personality, with little self awareness, which makes you ignorant, rather than as particularly stupid as your argumentation.

  13. nivico says:

    “The sad fact though, is that you’re basically an authoritarian personality, with little self awareness, which makes you ignorant, rather than as particularly stupid as your argumentation.” – Mike S.

    Speaking of self awareness and sadness, apparently you haven’t figured out yet that you are perpetually stuck in the 60’s when you still felt that your life had meaning and purpose… you’ll bitterly cling to looking for racism under every rock and in every shadow for the rest of your days because you’ve experienced nothing before and nothing since that fulfills you.

    Like a modern day Don Quixote who has filled his head full of nonsense and rhetoric and who spends his pointless life tilting at windmills and imaginary enemies because it makes him feel useful and important.

    But hey, you were able to work the race card AND Nazis into the same argument… give yourself a pat on the back!

    * and go ahead and ban me from the site, I’m well aware of the double standard when it comes to personal attacks here

  14. Actually, you apparently aren’t aware of squat when it comes to this site, nivico. There is no double standard here on insult (which, again, is not the same thing as ad hominem). If you want double standards, might I suggest RIL, but the brutal facts here are that the rule is as a follows:

    1) Civility is encouraged but the Ethic of Reciprocity applies. If someone gives you insults back for insults given? That’s just what you deserve. If one has a position and advocates it, one owns it unless stating the position is some form of Devil’s Advocacy. If it is an abhorrent position that causes recoil and/or social rejection, then the problem might rest with the position first and the holder as consequence. If one does not like the consequences of being seen in a negative light, one should revisit their position(s) or live with it. If disruptive behavior (or inherently disruptive or dishonest trollish behavior – flooding/spamming, manufacturing false consensus, deflection, etc.) becomes a persistent problem and disrupts the peace and utility of the commons that are the threads? You will be warned. You might get a time out. You might get banned. This soiree has (very minimal) rules and bouncers. Agreement is not required. Argument is a cornerstone of the marketplace of ideas. You will not run afoul of this rule for simply having and voicing an unpopular opinion. A good rule of thumb is DBAD.

    Emphasis added for the hard of understanding.

    Carry on. If you call that weak rebuttal carrying on that is. “You’re out of touch, grandpa” isn’t really much of a defense to being made look the fool. However, you are free to continue operating here until you do break the rules. Even bad examples have their place in debate.

  15. gbk says:

    “Speaking of self awareness and sadness, apparently you haven’t figured out yet that you are perpetually stuck in the 60’s when you still felt that your life had meaning and purpose… you’ll bitterly cling to looking for racism under every rock and in every shadow for the rest of your days because you’ve experienced nothing before and nothing since that fulfills you.” — nivico

    Apparently you don’t read much of Mike’s contributions, except for the threads on Ferguson. He’s written about many more issues than the racial problems in this country.

    You also seem unwilling to consider the possibility that racial prejudices are still a very real and ugly issue in this country.

    You seem to want to sweep it under the carpet, while pointing to the same legal system that ruled on Dred Scott v. Sandford for vindication of your “just the facts” perspective.

    “. . . stuck in the 60’s when you still felt that your life had meaning and purpose . . . Like a modern day Don Quixote who has filled his head full of nonsense . . .”

    What tripe is this? As if speaking out on social ills is nonsense. The ’60’s brought a surge of legislation that is currently being dismantled, which apparently does not bother you. Without the work of people like Mike, and many others on this blog, and in this country, issues of racial motivation in police actions, legislation, equal access to services, etc. would be ignored, and “factually justified” by law of which this country has innumerable examples.

    People are only called to the carpet when enough make light of social issues. This is how real change is manifested.

  16. Elaine M. says:

    “you’ll bitterly cling to looking for racism under every rock and in every shadow for the rest of your days…”

    Some people refuse to see racism even when it is pointed out to them. Some people cling to denying that racism still exists in many parts of this country.

  17. Elaine M. says:

    Why white people freak out when they’re called out about race
    SAM ADLER-BELL, ALTERNET
    16 MAR 2015
    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/why-white-people-freak-out-when-theyre-called-out-about-race/

  18. John says:

    “Hands up, don’t shoot was built on lie.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/

    A good column, from a liberal columnist that WAS a Mike Brown supporter, that shows reasonable people can hold two thoughts in their head at the same time: (1) there was/is systemic racism in the Ferguson Police Department and it must be addressed; and (2) that Michael Brown was shot because he acted like a violent criminal, not because he was Black.

  19. Mike Spindell says:

    Elaine,

    As you will see I used your raw story link for my new post today, which is incidentally quite explanatory of Nivico’s viewpoint.

  20. Mike Spindell says:

    “* and go ahead and ban me from the site, I’m well aware of the double standard when it comes to personal attacks here”

    Nivico,

    Don’t you understand that I welcome personal attacks from you, especially since I clearly personally attacked you as well? You see Nivico I live my beliefs, no matter how outdated you may find my ethics and morality. That said I’m proud I was a 60’s hippie and given who you’ve shown yourself to be, I welcome your rather limp snark. Is that the best you can do?

    “Speaking of self awareness and sadness, apparently you haven’t figured out yet that you are perpetually stuck in the 60’s when you still felt that your life had meaning and purpose…”

    Wherever did you get the stupid idea that I need to cling to the past in order for my life to have meaning and purpose? I could stop writing today and my life still would have meaning and purpose. Meaning and purpose in life come from inside oneself, though apparently you’ve yet to put the work in to learn that crucial lesson. I have.

    “Like a modern day Don Quixote who has filled his head full of nonsense and rhetoric and who spends his pointless life tilting at windmills and imaginary enemies because it makes him feel useful and important.”

    Yes I get it. From the denial inherent when you speak about the race issue I can see how someone with my views might seem Don Quixote’ish. As I said though and will reiterate:
    “The sad fact though, is that you’re basically an authoritarian personality, with little self awareness, which makes you ignorant, rather than as particularly stupid as your argumentation.” – Mike S.

    Ah but notice Nivico, I acknowledged you weren’t stupid, just hopelessly ignorant due to you state of denial. So you can at least take that away from my critique, the rest of which stands reinforced by your own lame attempt at invective.

    I explained to you that I played the “race card” because you had played the “mob card”. Perhaps a bit puckish in my reply, but frankly your drivel makes me somewhat giddy. It is a treat to read a comment from someone so dedicated to denying there is any racism in this country and so unaware of themselves, that they can’t see the innate racism that they feel. I would suggest you apply yourself to years of therapy, but I would have to have sympathy for anyone who would be treating you, because denial is a hard defense mechanism to deal with. You can stay around and play all you want Nivico, but frankly you need to hone your forensic skills.

  21. Mike Spindell says:

    “that Michael Brown was shot because he acted like a violent criminal, not because he was Black.”
    John,

    Read the article, but what puzzles me is if Michael Brown were ALL the “evidence” given about him, why was there a need to shoot him, when he was a distance from Wilson’s car? Perhaps you and the author agree that anyone who assaults a police officer is fair game for shooting even if no longer in the process of assault. An interesting legal position. Part of what I’ve written about for some time is that the use of deadly force by police officers has reached an unconscionable level.

  22. ” my views might seem Don Quixote’ish.”

    Were you looking for the word “quixotic”? 😉

    • Mike Spindell says:

      “Were you looking for the word “quixotic”? ;)”

      Gene,

      I was come to think of it by my synapses aren’t what they used to be. 🙂

  23. BTW, also a devastating Scrabble play if properly placed.

  24. Bob Stone says:

    “what puzzles me is if Michael Brown were ALL the “evidence” given about him, why was there a need to shoot him, when he was a distance from Wilson’s car? ”

  25. blouise17 says:

    Were you looking for the word “quixotic”? 😉 – Gene

    That is known as a Dr. Sheldon Cooperism

  26. Mike Spindell says:

    I always look to cartoons to help me understand pressing problems, in my Quixotic quests to tilt at windmills.

  27. swarthmoremom says:

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/leon-wolf-chris-hayes-ferguson “RedState.com contributing editor Leon Wolf and MSNBC host Chris Hayes found themselves bridging an ideological divide on Monday night, agreeing that many on the right should give more credence to a Department of Justice report finding widespread patterns of racial bias in Ferguson, Missouri.” There are some conservatives that are not wed to the idea that the Ferguson PD and Darren Wilson are the righteous ones.

  28. Bob Stone says:

    Mike,

    My apologies.

    It’s a running gag.

    But you can catch up with it by clicking here:

    http://jonathanturley.org/2015/03/06/police-consider-charges-against-brown-family-in-ferguson/#comment-1423049

    and here:

    http://jonathanturley.org/2015/03/06/police-consider-charges-against-brown-family-in-ferguson/#comment-1424763

    Then perhaps you’ll see how it also pertains to you and everyone else that attempts a book report on DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REPORT REGARDING THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION IN TO THE SHOOTING DEATH OF MICHAEL BROWN BY FERGUSON, MISSOURI POLICE OFFICER DARREN WILSON

    without bothering to read it first.

    • Mike Spindell says:

      Bob,

      Thanks for clarifying but as I’ve told you and the other principles here I no longer visit Turley’s website.

  29. Elaine M. says:

    swarthmoremom,

    Thanks for the link! Here’s a video of Chris Hayes talking with Leon Wolf:

  30. Bob,

    I’m about sick of you insisting that everyone who disagrees with you “hasn’t read the book”.

    Get a new gag. (Double-entendre possibly intentional.)

  31. Bob Stone says:

    Gene,

    I only insist they didn’t read the book when it’s painfully obvious that they didn’t.

    And about our agreement; it’s you that broke it this time.

  32. No, Bob, I didn’t. I commented about your tired rehashing of a bullshit notion as if it is proof of something other than your own arrogance in considering that people can see the same evidence and still rationally come to different conclusions just as easily as people can reach a common conclusion via multiple paths. Ergo I was criticizing your form, not your content.

  33. swarthmoremom says:

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/james-okeefe-kill-cops-script “Conservative provocateur James O’Keefe allegedly instructed an undercover operative to goad Black Lives Matter protesters with statements like “I wish I could just kill some of these cops,” according to one of his ex-employees.”

Comments are closed.