Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

#Ferguson: Obama says stop the looting and police excessive force

#Ferguson: Obama says stop the looting and police excessive force

All the Ferguson updates and then some.

What a nightmare Ferguson has become. Five days after the fatal shooting of unarmed teen, Michael Brown, and there’s still no consensus as to what actually happened. If you’re just jumping into this story, check out previous posts here and here.

Dorin Johnson’s Attorney

Yesterday I mentioned that the St. Louis Police who are handling the Ferguson cluster, have not yet interviewed Dorin Johnson, who claims he was with Michael Brown when Brown was gunned down by law enforcement Saturday. Johnson appeared on MSNBC in an interview with Chris Hayes, accompanied by his lawyer, Freeman Bosley, Jr.

Bosley is an interesting character himself. The former St. Louis mayer seems to have a checkered past, with “ethics violations” being a reoccurring theme. Last year, Bosley sent fundraising letters soliciting donations to cover his daughter’s college tuition. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported, “Bosley said his daughter worked hard to finish in the top two percent of her graduating class at St. Elizabeth Academy. He said she deserves to go to a private school.” When the odd fundraising request was brought to light, Bosley vowed to return any donations received.

Earlier this year, the board governing Missouri lawyers moved to suspend Bosley’s law license for two years. The list is a pretty great read. Misuse of client funds and malpractice make appearances more than once.

St. Louis Police Department Hacked by Anonymous 

Originally, the St. Louis Police Department planned to release the name of the law enforcement officer who shot and killed Brown. As violence escalated, SLPD opted not to release the identity of the officer in order to protect him. So Anonymous, the infamous hacking conglom got involved and called for a “Day of Rage,” because that’s helpful. According to CNN, Anonymous has the name of the officer, but CNN refused to announce the officer’s name on air.

Should The Public be Privy to the Officer’s Name?

Kevin Williamson at National Review has an interesting take on this question:

Here’s a microcosm of the relationship between state and citizen: We know the names of the nine people charged with felonies in the Ferguson looting, but not the name of the police officer at the center of the case.

The government is all discretion when it comes to one of its own. True, there have been threats against the police officer in question — but if any municipal institution is positioned to defend its members, it is the police. And are there no threats against private individuals who are arrested or investigated? Are there no threats against people in prisons? Police departments and prosecutors regularly release discretionary information that has serious consequences for the lives of private individuals, including those who have not been charged with or convicted of any crime.

If we take seriously the idea that political power ultimately resides in the people, then for the people to do their job and oversee the activities of the representatives they have elected to take care of their affairs, they need information. They are entitled to know the details of the case, including the identity of the officer and the details of his professional history. It is wrong to withhold that information. The investigation of the shooting cannot be evaluated in the absence of that knowledge.

This is just an excerpt, but I recommend reading his argument in its entirety.

Two Reporters Detained (Arrested?) Last Night

Should reporters be given special privileges in tumultuous and dangerous social settings? The people certainly have a right to know and it’s the job of the fourth estate to keep the people informed, right? Yeah, sorta.

A few years ago when Occupy was raping and pooping everywhere, I headed down to Occupy Denver. I’d been watching the Twitter feed and saw that riot police were moving in to clear Occupiers out of the park. It was within walking distance of my hotel and I had to check it out. Sure enough, a riot armor-clad calvary was moving in. I tried to stay on the outskirts of the activity. Close enough to see what was happening, but far enough away to avoid getting trampled or tear gassed.

As happens in these situations, I got caught up in the crowd and the next thing I knew, was face to face with a cop who had a gun pointed in my face. I threw up my hands, yelled “media” and got out of the way as quickly as I could. It was the first encounter I had with law enforcement trying to get a story, but wouldn’t be my last.

All of that to say, the expectation of special treatment by law enforcement in extreme situations is horrendously arrogant. If you want to be in the middle of the action, be in the middle of the action, but that doesn’t protect you from getting caught up in the mix.

You can read the Washington Post’s police encounter here.

Rep. John Lewis Calls for Martial Law

Police tanks provided by the Pentagon (we have a federal program that’s actively militarizing police departments) are working to “keep the peace” in Ferguson. So naturally, the Democratic response to extreme militarization is… martial law? It is if you’re asking Rep. John Lewis.

This Guy Really Wants to People to Stop Rioting

And he has a great point. “What we’re doing out here is not helping… Change isn’t going to come until we change it.” You’ll definitely want to take a few minutes to check this out:

President Obama Finally Weighs In

President Obama briefly touched on the situation in Ferguson today. No one was spared. He scolded the police, the protestors and anyone who might be doing something they shouldn’t be doing in Ferguson:

“When something like this happens, the local authorities including the police have a responsibility to be open and transparent about how they’re investigating that death and about how they’re protecting people in their communities. There is never an excuse for violence against police or for those who would use this tragedy as a cover for vandalism or looting. There’s also no excuse for police to use excessive force against peaceful protest.”

Follow Kemberlee Kaye on Twitter 

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 14, 2014 at 2:20 pm

Has it occurred to anyone that the PBA rep of the cop has told the investigators that if they release the name of the cop he’s going to sue their ass into oblivion. I would not want to be the guy who releases it prematurely.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | August 14, 2014 at 2:34 pm

    I don’t think that really matters at this point, it is a straight out safety issue right now. They couldn’t defend him and keep the savages who are rioting in control, they already can’t do just that last one.

    Oh and now I notice that the rioters are using Molotov’s but folks are giving the Cops crap about using tear gas. There is a huge difference between the two and as far as I am concerned station snipers around the city with instruction that anyone with a Molotov is a Green Light.

0bama: C’mon you brothas, don’t you know only the gubmint has a license to steal?

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 14, 2014 at 2:25 pm

Anonymous has so far released four different names for the shooters.
Ferguson Cheif of Police thinks they are just releasing random names, hoping to get the right one.

Was it a different Obama that told his followers “punish your enemies” and “get in their faces” and “if they bring a knife we bring a gun”?

Peace is good, but POS Obama has no credibility. None.

    Insufficiently Sensitive in reply to pst314. | August 14, 2014 at 3:47 pm

    It was a different Obama. No telling if that one or this one is the real one – or if both are opportunist masks – but this speech is the most reasonable one his entire political history.

“True, there have been threats against the police officer in question”

And nightly mobs of savages that would be happy to lynch him/her if they could get their hands on him, which is something the 9 others mentioned don’t have threatening them.

I read the rest of the justification, but I believe the increased threat still out weighs the need for transparency at this point. Which is something the savages don’t understand, they are the reason that the name hasn’t been released, period.

“All of that to say, the expectation of special treatment by law enforcement in extreme situations is horrendously arrogant. If you want to be in the middle of the action, be in the middle of the action, but that doesn’t protect you from getting caught up in the mix.”

Exactly, in a very real sense you are taking many of the same chances “imbeded” journalist do when they willing enter a warzone.

“Rep. John Lewis Calls for Martial Law”

Yea, take a look at some of Rep. Lewis’s other suggestions and you will truly understand how much crazy is going on there. Besides, what Rep. Lewis is really suggesting it Martial Law so that the feds can seize the officer in question and trot him out in front of the people (imho).

“This Guy Really Wants to People to Stop Rioting”

I wanted to buy this guy a beer, until he said folks were “acting like Curious George on Red Bull”. Now I want to by him several beers.

I hope and pray for a day when we are no longer “white americans”, “black americans” and latino americans” and truly become just Americans, which we can do if we chose.

Phillep Harding | August 14, 2014 at 2:46 pm

Two things come to mind.

First, it might be time to go back to the old style ghetto as a walled and gated community with guards. (How did it come to mean “slum”, anyhow?)

Second, ja, sure, no excuse for violence against peaceful protesters, but how many of those are really around? More photo’s!!! More videos!!!

Char Char Binks | August 14, 2014 at 2:47 pm

All they want is to know the name of the cop who shot Brown so they can boil him in a pot for dinner.

    This shooter leo has some major problems right now. If he has decided to stop talking, then the DA can only go from the other eye witnesses. The grand jury will only hear from these people and not the cop who has decided to remain silent. Therefore, there is no evidence that he was attacked prior to the shooting. Grand jury indicts.

    Then during the trial, he can’t testify or maybe testifies because if he doesn’t there is no evidence that he got into a fight caused by the dead guy. Only evidence is from the eye witnesses. If he doesn’t testify, he goes directly to jail. So, it’s better for him to tell the whole story from his perspective, now and hope for the best and stick to whatever story he wants to come up with and hope no one is holding back a video.

      Milhouse in reply to steveo1. | August 14, 2014 at 3:52 pm

      How do you know he’s not talking to the DA?

      Then during the trial, he can’t testify or maybe testifies because if he doesn’t there is no evidence that he got into a fight caused by the dead guy.

      There’s physical evidence.

      Only evidence is from the eye witnesses. If he doesn’t testify, he goes directly to jail.

      Only if these so-called eye witnesses’ testimony holds up to cross-examination. The onus is on the prosecution to make its case beyond reasonable doubt, not for him to prove his innocence. If he uses the physical evidence to let the jury know what happened, he doesn’t have to tell it himself. Or, you know, he could decide to tell it himself; if he’s actually innocent, and has nothing that he doesn’t want the jury to know about, then why not?

      Humphrey's Executor in reply to steveo1. | August 14, 2014 at 4:03 pm

      I wonder what, if anything, the officer said is recorded on the dispatch log/recording?

      your comment lacks logic… and I hope that someone took photographs of the injuries sustained by the LEO.

just imagine if Chicago rioted for every teen gunned down …

“who cares if we were wrong and those people get killed. This is justice !” – Anonymous

They’re no better than Al Sharpton.

nice strawman Obama … violence against peaceful protesters … should read violence against violent rioters …

    Uncle Samuel in reply to dorsaighost. | August 14, 2014 at 4:57 pm

    Right – there was NO violence against peaceful protestors.

    There was an attempt to quell looting (theft) and destroying property (vandalism) and disturbing the peace.

    Obama is employing affirmative action to the law and wants to exempt the criminal behavior of his sons and daughters in this case and all over the country.

    Obama and Holder want it to be a crime to defend your person, family and property with a firearm if blacks decide they want to steal your possessions or assault you. They also want a lighter punishment for blacks than for other races. How would they calculate the punishment for a half or 1/3 black like Obama or Holder?

    There is something rotten and repugnant at the core of this administration.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Uncle Samuel. | August 14, 2014 at 5:30 pm

      There is NO excuse for rioting, looting, burning – or assaulting the police.

      These uncontrolled lawless thieving people and Obama/Holder/Sharpton/Crump/NBPP make blacks look bad.

      Phillep Harding in reply to Uncle Samuel. | August 14, 2014 at 6:16 pm

      The handbooks and pamphlets given out by various activist groups instruct supporters with cameras to avoid shooting or releasing footage of protesters committing acts of violence.

      How much evidence do we have that the protestors were violent or peaceful? Could be either way.

nice phrase “gunned down” … no bias intended right ?

Williamson moral equivalence BS … i.e. they released the names of the people ARRESTED for rioting why not release the name of the cop … is self refuting …

the people ARRESTED … cop hasn’t been arrested or charged yet …

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 14, 2014 at 3:18 pm

For people interested here is a live redit feed ( hard to describe ) of people listening to scanner reports and collecting them.

http://www.reddit.com/live/tdrph3y49ftn/

BTW I liked one of the recent tips. Witness report: I just drove down carondelet (sp) west of bemiston and there are about 20-30 peaceful protestors. “No peace,no justice” all peaceful.

Does anyone get the contradiction?

    tom swift in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | August 14, 2014 at 5:06 pm

    “Peace” or lack thereof isn’t determined by what one says, it’s determined by what one does. So, what were these “protesters” doing? Protesting? Rioting? Looting?

    I think you meant “no justice, no peace”: That’s the traditional leftist chant, which means “give us what we want or there will be violence”.

The government is all discretion when it comes to one of its own. True, there have been threats against the police officer in question — but if any municipal institution is positioned to defend its members, it is the police. And are there no threats against private individuals who are arrested or investigated? Are there no threats against people in prisons?

No, generally there are not. But we all know what will happen to this cop and his entire family the moment his name becomes generally known. Sure, the police can give them all bodyguards, at great public expense, but even so the quality of their lives will be severely damaged, so why should they have to endure that? What have they done to deserve it?

Note that while “We know the names of the nine people charged with felonies in the Ferguson looting”, we don’t know the names of anyone arrested but not charged, unless they chose to reveal it. Since the cop has not been charged, and we don’t know whether he ever will be, the comparison is invalid. But more importantly, there is no prospect that these nine will suffer any consequences from being identified, so even if they had been identified without being charged the comparison would still be invalid.

He’s an accused murderer with direct eye witness testimony. Let them do like they would in any case, charge him, throw him jail and do a perp walk for the cameras.

    Milhouse in reply to imfine. | August 14, 2014 at 3:54 pm

    Anyone can be accused of anything. Are these supposed witnesses credible? You don’t know, so don’t say.

      imfine in reply to Milhouse. | August 14, 2014 at 4:13 pm

      All they need is probable cause, and from what I see they have that in spades. Failing to arrest one of their own is what caused this problem. It gives the impression that the police are nothing but a gang rather than law enforcement.

        Milhouse in reply to imfine. | August 14, 2014 at 4:57 pm

        Where’s the probable cause? Without knowing whether the shooting was justified, there is no probable cause to charge him with a crime. Was there probable cause to charge Zimmerman? No, there was not.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to Milhouse. | August 14, 2014 at 5:26 pm

      If Dorin Johnson’s attorney is any indication of his client’s integrity, then the credibility of his witness is dubious at best.

    tom swift in reply to imfine. | August 14, 2014 at 5:19 pm

    They’re a long way from charges or an arrest. The LEO certainly has a story to describe the incident, and it may be a perfectly good one. But in the realm of public relations, a secret story is no story at all.

    A story like this one has to come out pretty quickly, a window they seem to have missed here. The story is not a substitute for an actual investigation, which will take longer, maybe much longer, and a trial in a court of law will take even longer than that.

      gmac124 in reply to tom swift. | August 14, 2014 at 7:30 pm

      “A story like this one has to come out pretty quickly, a window they seem to have missed here. The story is not a substitute for an actual investigation, which will take longer, maybe much longer, and a trial in a court of law will take even longer than that.”

      I can’t agree with that at all Tom. Releasing details while there is an active investigation can screw up the entire investigation. Many people keep bringing up Zimmerman and the correlation just isn’t there. When Zimmermans name was released there was no outside pressure. The outside pressure came weeks later when Crump cranked up the PR machine. Also remember much of the detail information like the autopsy and such wasn’t released for a considerable time after national attention was brought to Zimmermans case. Why don’t we back off a little and give our system a chance to work.

        Ragspierre in reply to gmac124. | August 14, 2014 at 7:50 pm

        Yeeeeeeup. All true.

        Of course, a certain Ukulele hacker will solemnly lie about that.

        tom swift in reply to gmac124. | August 14, 2014 at 10:03 pm

        An investigation, a trial, and intelligent PR are entirely different things, performed by different people in pursuit of different objectives. Ideally, all have some foundation in reality; but that doesn’t make them identical.

        When the PR is delayed, no matter what the excuse, it won’t be only black rioters who start to suspect that the delay is an tactic by the police to see what they can get away with. True or not, the optics are bad. Which the police chief, who we can assume wasn’t born yesterday, knows perfectly well.

        Releasing details while there is an active investigation can screw up the entire investigation.

        In this case … how, exactly? The investigation will take some time to determine some factual things. Number and location of bullet holes; gunshot distances; factual things of that nature. But these are in no way dependent of what sort of bizarre beliefs the public or the press are tossing around.

        Recall Jesse Jackson and the claim that Trayvon was shot in the back. A liberal thought he had me stumped with that one, so I looked up the autopsy report online, and found that the claim was dead false. But what Jesse Jackson claimed influenced the coroner not at all.

JohnOfEnfield | August 14, 2014 at 3:33 pm

As a resident & citizen of the UK with our own problems with riots in multi-ethnic parts of town (like Enfield) how is it that Obama never quite hits the right note on these occasions. Or should I really say, always makes it much much worse? I’m staggered that someone who is so un-statesmanlike & so obviously a rabble rouser with no respect for the law ever got into a position of such power.

It is only just over two years to when he leaves power, after no doubt the longest list of presidential pardons ever seen. I hope your society can last that long.

Obama will leave a permanent stain on your country.

    nordic_prince in reply to JohnOfEnfield. | August 14, 2014 at 6:31 pm

    That doesn’t begin to describe the mess Zero is making of this country. Just in terms of race relations alone, he has set our society back at least 75-100 years.

    Barry Soetoro, the Indonesian citizen has already left one very big ugly stain….

    …. and yes I speak as another foreigner on the outside, looking in…..

    David R. Graham in reply to JohnOfEnfield. | August 14, 2014 at 11:52 pm

    “I’m staggered that someone who is so un-statesmanlike & so obviously a rabble rouser with no respect for the law ever got into a position of such power.”

    A: Electorate on drugs, voter and voting fraud, academic faculties, trial lawyers, extortionist politicians, rent-seeking, power junkie bureaucrats, mainly female, aging hippie and hippie-wanna-be harridans, Cheka/KGB/FSB active measures, ChiCom PLA subversion and espionage, cash crops, excessive free time and money, the pill, pervasive cowardice.

    David R. Graham in reply to JohnOfEnfield. | August 15, 2014 at 12:52 am

    “I’m staggered that someone who is so un-statesmanlike & so obviously a rabble rouser with no respect for the law ever got into a position of such power.”

    I amend my previous A to comprise just three phenomena: drugs, promiscuity, step-parents. Those are the core of America’s problems.

Should reporters be given special privileges in tumultuous and dangerous social settings? The people certainly have a right to know and it’s the job of the fourth estate to keep the people informed, right? Yeah, sorta.

Absolutely not. In America we don’t have the first three “estates”, so we certainly don’t have a fourth one. Reporters’ use of that term is pure arrogance. So is their ridiculous pretense that the first amendment’s “freedom of the press” refers to them. They should not be humored in their delusion of grandeur.

John Lewis is not a respectable human being. Nothing he calls for deserves the dignity of a response.

Insufficiently Sensitive | August 14, 2014 at 3:44 pm

Says the Prez: “When something like this happens, the local authorities including the police have a responsibility to be open and transparent about how they’re investigating that death and about how they’re protecting people in their communities. There is never an excuse for violence against police or for those who would use this tragedy as a cover for vandalism or looting. There’s also no excuse for police to use excessive force against peaceful protest.”

That’s the most reasonable speech he’s ever made. And it’s the very best evidence of his realization (or his advisors’) that his strawman-beating, race-flogging, Republican-blaming divisiveness we so clearly saw in the Zimmerman and Henry Louis Gates episodes will only drive his poll ratings further in the direction of down.

Maybe there’s a chance that between now and January 2017 he’ll try being President of all of us, instead of just the left half.

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 14, 2014 at 4:29 pm

Oh wow. Now Eric Holder is saying the Ferguson’s PD should diversify. It impresses me that this guy so in touch with the situation that he doesn’t know that the Cheif has already said several times that he was finding it hard to do because of lack of personnel.

    Char Char Binks in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | August 14, 2014 at 5:57 pm

    There should be NO WHITE POLICE in Ferguson at all, after this. Their circus, their monkeys. The second amendment is better protection than the police.

Williamson and Cooke at NRO should take a look at that video before they mouth off. The problem is black behavior not a militarized police or a wood shampoo of a limp wristed Huffpo writer acting passive-aggressive with the po-po. The 5-0 was well within their authority to empty out a closed McDs. The scrounger commie reporters were trespassing and using free wi-fi.

The executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police criticized President Obama Thursday for his remarks about law enforcement in Ferguson, Mo.

“I would contend that discussing police tactics from Martha’s Vineyard is not helpful to ultimately calming the situation,” director Jim Pasco said in an interview with The Hill

“I think what he has to do as president and as a constitutional lawyer is remember that there is a process in the United States and the process is being followed, for good or for ill, by the police and by the county and by the city and by the prosecutors’ office,” Pasco added.

Pasco harkened back to 2009, when Obama criticized a Massachusetts police officer for arresting Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, when he was attempting to break into his own home. Obama said the officer had “acted stupidly.”

“That is one where the president spoke precipitously without all the facts,” Pasco said, adding that the current situation “is a much larger and more tragic incident.”

Pasco said both police and members of the public are entitled to due process but said he is not convinced police have used excessive force in Ferguson.

“I’m not there, and neither is the president,” Pasco said. “That is why we have due process in the United States. And this will all be sorted out over time. But right now, I haven’t seen anything from afar — and maybe the president has — that would lead me to believe the police are doing anything except to restore order.”

Owww…

and HEH!

Actually, Obama believes in the application of excessive, especially deadly force, before it becomes a “burden”. This guy needs to get his story straight.

Besides, Obama also believes that looting (e.g. devaluation of capital and labor) should occur through legal channels. He calls it redistributive change and classifies it as “progressive”. Although, he never qualified whether it has a positive or negative character.

Finally, stop the lynch mob and indiscriminate criminal perversions, and those who feed it, including “Anonymous”, and similar agitators. This was done in Florida by Obama et al and must be considered unconscionable and surely illegal… or perhaps undocumented.

I’ve been saying for the last few days that OF COURSE LEOs are different than the rest of the population.

I have not offered anything but a challenge to others to think of WHY that is true, which is kind of my way.

I could TELL people why I know that is true, but it would mostly just fall on deaf ears.

SO…here is kind of the nut-cuttin’ observation…

Had Mr. Brown been killed by a civilian…crickets.

But he was killed by a LEO, and THAT makes all the difference, like taking the road less traveled in a yellow wood.

LEOs are not like civilians. And that hardly eclipses ALLLLLLLlLLLLLllll the differences, either.

    Rags I agree… but I would change some wording:

    “if Mr Brown had been killed by a fellow black gang member, crickets.”

    All the same, you make a good point on the subject.

    There are differences.

    For example, when a LEO is shot, penalties are greater because we expect and view LEO’s as representing and upholding the law. When a LEO is shot, as a society we take that to be an attack on the law and general order of society.

    Likewise, when LEO’s break the law or are accused of breaking the law, a trust between the people and the LEO has been broken. Your position is that LEO’s are different and therefore should be held to an investigatory standard that is less than that of the average citizen. If anything, because of the trust society places in LEO’s and because of the oath LEO’s take, the investigatory standard should be higher – not lower.

    If Brown had been killed by a civilian who was known to the police, where there was no other suspect, the police had appeared to have done nothing, the voices may not have been as loud, but there would still be an outcry.

    The fact of the matter is that the police have screwed this up and screwed it up badly.

      Ragspierre in reply to gitarcarver. | August 15, 2014 at 7:09 am

      “Your position is that LEO’s are different and therefore should be held to an investigatory standard that is less than that of the average citizen.”

      That’s a lie, and you’re a liar.

      Nobody HONEST could read what I’ve written and come up with that.

      My position is that DUE PROCESS should be followed. That the safety of the officer and his family in this situation calls for care in how information flows. That the investigatory process IS A FLUCKING PROCESS, and not prone to your braying for instant gratification.

      You lying sack of shit.

      “If Brown had been killed by a civilian who was known to the police, where there was no other suspect, the police had appeared to have done nothing, the voices may not have been as loud, but there would still be an outcry.”

      More of your highly worded bullshit.

      And a straw man. Have the “police appeared to have done nothing”? Only if you have your eyes tightly shut.

      “The fact of the matter is that the police have screwed this up and screwed it up badly.”

      The fact of the matter is you don’t have any basis for that but your own broke-dick opinion. You appear to understand LESS about this matter than most here, in fact. And you work at it.

        “My position is that DUE PROCESS should be followed.”

        As long as that “due process” is consistent and not dependent upon who is the subject of the investigation, I would agree. However, that didn’t happen here. The officer got treatment that no one else involved in a similar situation would have ever gotten.

        “More of your highly worded bullshit.”

        Which of course you did not refute other than your standard accusation that everyone is lying but you.

        “Support that with some evidence, because capital murder is capital murder. Attempted capital murder is attempted capital murder. And the penalties assessed by JURIES, not by LEOs, are what the LAW establishes. DAs charge for capital crimes at their discretion.”

        Sorry Rags, JUDGES asses penalties in most criminal trials, not juries. Your next step is to call me a liar when you are once again shown to be wrong.

        Here is the Florida statute:

        782.065 Murder; law enforcement officer, correctional officer, correctional probation officer.—Notwithstanding ss. 775.082, 775.0823, 782.04, 782.051, and chapter 921, a defendant shall be sentenced to life imprisonment without eligibility for release upon findings by the trier of fact that, beyond a reasonable doubt:
        (1) The defendant committed murder in the first degree in violation of s. 782.04(1) and a death sentence was not imposed; murder in the second or third degree in violation of s. 782.04(2), (3), or (4); attempted murder in the first or second degree in violation of s. 782.04(1)(a)1. or (2); or attempted felony murder in violation of s. 782.051; and
        (2) The victim of any offense described in subsection (1) was a law enforcement officer, part-time law enforcement officer, auxiliary law enforcement officer, correctional officer, part-time correctional officer, auxiliary correctional officer, correctional probation officer, part-time correctional probation officer, or auxiliary correctional probation officer, as those terms are defined in s. 943.10, engaged in the lawful performance of a legal duty.

        Notice how that even in cases of 2nd and 3rd degree murder, if the person killed was a LEO the penalty is increased to that of 1st degree felony murder.

        Also notice that gregjgrose showed how wrong you were.

        “The fact of the matter is you don’t have any basis for that but your own broke-dick opinion. ”

        Really? How stupid are you? Look what happened yesterday. The governor changes the lead LEO organization from the Ferguson PD and the St Louis County PD to the Missouri Highway Patrol. They change the focus from confrontation to conversation and lo and behold, things calmed down.

        It took almost 6 days to release the name of the cop. The family says they have not been spoken to. Other witnesses are saying they have not been spoken to.

        The police walked down residential streets lobbing tear gas at citizens standing on their own property. The police pointed weapons at people in violation of every gun safety rule known to mankind. The aiming of the weapons at protesting citizens escalated the situation to where someone else had to come in and take it over.

        Only an ostrich thinks that the police handled this correctly.

        I await your apology.

          Ragspierre in reply to gitarcarver. | August 15, 2014 at 2:37 pm

          “The officer got treatment that no one else involved in a similar situation would have ever gotten.”

          Well, more of your lies and bullshit didactic pronouncements.

          How is the investigation below the standard of what a civilian would be exposed to, liar? When you have TWO agencies (AT LEAST) investigating the matter, liar?

          I want you to be SURE to hold your breath, lying SOS, waiting for my “apology”.

          Tell us your views on immigration, please. Be brave. Step up.

          Ragspierre in reply to gitarcarver. | August 15, 2014 at 2:55 pm

          You poor moronic, reading-challenged idiot…

          a defendant shall be sentenced to life imprisonment without eligibility for release upon findings by the trier of fact that, beyond a reasonable doubt:

          So… According to your SELECTIVELY quoted statute, THE TRIER OF FACT (which is most always a JURY in a criminal trial) DETERMINES the applicable penalty.

          Liar. What a moron.

          Ragspierre in reply to gitarcarver. | August 15, 2014 at 3:09 pm

          782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.—
          (1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
          (2) A person who causes the death of any elderly person or disabled adult by culpable negligence under s. 825.102(3) commits aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
          (3) A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence under s. 827.03(2)(b) commits aggravated manslaughter of a child, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
          (4) A person who causes the death, through culpable negligence, of an officer as defined in s. 943.10(14), a firefighter as defined in s. 112.191, an emergency medical technician as defined in s. 401.23, or a paramedic as defined in s. 401.23, while the officer, firefighter, emergency medical technician, or paramedic is performing duties that are within the course of his or her employment, commits aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

          See, we DO find that people in various classes are NOT the same as other citizens.

          Don’t we, liar.

          I LOVE punking you. It is SO sweeet…!!!

          Poor little Rags….

          You wrote:

          “Support [the idea that cops are treated differently when victims] with some evidence, because capital murder is capital murder. Attempted capital murder is attempted capital murder. And the penalties assessed by JURIES, not by LEOs, are what the LAW establishes. DAs charge for capital crimes at their discretion.”

          Now that I did that you showed how ridiculous you are, you want to try and say “see. I was right all along!”

          Your own words condemn you.

          Ragspierre in reply to gitarcarver. | August 15, 2014 at 4:07 pm

          Wow. Still can’t read, huh…???

          Nothing I can do for you, moron.

          What is your position on immigration?

          “How is the investigation below the standard of what a civilian would be exposed to, liar?”

          You mean in most cases the police don’t interview witnesses? That in most cases the police don’t release the name of suspects?

          Wow.

          You are totally clueless as to how investigations work, aren’t you?

          “When you have TWO agencies (AT LEAST) investigating the matter, liar?”

          Why do you think that is? Or don’t you realize that the second investigation was brought forth because the first was in deep trouble?

          “I want you to be SURE to hold your breath, lying SOS, waiting for my “apology”.”

          Right. No problem. I would have expected an adult to admit they were wrong, but you clearly have issues with acting like an adult.

          “So… According to your SELECTIVELY quoted statute, THE TRIER OF FACT (which is most always a JURY in a criminal trial) DETERMINES the applicable penalty.”

          I know that you don’t understand ideas that are above that of 2nd grade comprehension, but according to the statute, the trier of fact determines the guilt or innocence, and then the penalty is given by statute.

          Perhaps you don’t understand the difference between “guilt” and “penalty?”

          It wouldn’t surprise me if you don’t.

          Ragspierre in reply to gitarcarver. | August 15, 2014 at 4:12 pm

          BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA…

          Keep it up.

          I LOVE you just presenting your lying ass for more punking…!!!

          Please, honey, honey, honey….

      Ragspierre in reply to gitarcarver. | August 15, 2014 at 7:14 am

      “For example, when a LEO is shot, penalties are greater because we expect and view LEO’s as representing and upholding the law.”

      Support that with some evidence, because capital murder is capital murder. Attempted capital murder is attempted capital murder. And the penalties assessed by JURIES, not by LEOs, are what the LAW establishes. DAs charge for capital crimes at their discretion.

      So prove it up, moron.

      Now, YOU TRY to think of how LEOs are different. I mean HONESTLY. ‘K?

        pst314 in reply to Ragspierre. | August 15, 2014 at 8:35 am

        I don’t know about current statistics in sentencing, but it was long true that society regarded deadly attacks on symbols of social order (police, firefighters, priests, doctors, etc) as more heinous than similar attacks on any random person, precisely because an attack on those sorts of people was an attack on the foundations of society. In the sixties one of the Left’s ploys to undermine our society was to try to discredit such ideas.

          Ragspierre in reply to pst314. | August 15, 2014 at 8:55 am

          Kind of my point. We have this concept as “received wisdom”.

          Over the last several decades, crimes and sentences have been revolutionized…and not always for the better.

          Here in Texas, certain murders are just going to be changed as capital crimes. A recent case involved a woman who killed a young lady for the express (crazy) purpose of taking her unborn child.

          Killing a LEO on duty will get you a capital murder charge…DEPENDING. And a LEO who kills is NOT uncommonly charged for it, and sometimes under a capital charge (appropriately).

          So, let’s use the wonderfulness of the interweb and dispel the question of the FACTUAL stuff here, not the assumptions we got from our parents.

        gregjgrose in reply to Ragspierre. | August 15, 2014 at 10:47 am

        Rags, I’m not about to get between you and a moron, but if for “shot” one reads “assaulted”, and if out of an excess of kindness one thinks it’s remotely pertinent to the point at hand–see CA penal code 241, here http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=240-248 and below

        There are, I expect you’ll agree, various “theories of policing”. Part of one of the oldest theories (which by itself is no proof of superiority) is this:

        Peel’s view, was [that]: “The police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.” source: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/385439/looks-kill-kevin-d-williamson

        Fairly naive, I know, considering the state of large parts of the public these days, still, a morsel for thought?

        240. An assault is an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another.

        241. (a) An assault is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by both the fine and imprisonment.
        (b) When an assault is committed against the person of a parking control officer engaged in the performance of his or her duties, and the person committing the offense knows or reasonably should know that the victim is a parking control officer, the assault is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars ($2,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by both the fine and imprisonment.
        (c) When an assault is committed against the person of a peace officer, firefighter, emergency medical technician….

          gregjgrose in reply to gregjgrose. | August 15, 2014 at 10:50 am

          Ah, chopped the quote too soon, oh well, the point was that maximum punishment is doubled for assault on “a peace
          officer, firefighter, emergency medical technician…”, not just on meter maids, which I hardly think surprises anyone

          Ragspierre in reply to gregjgrose. | August 15, 2014 at 12:06 pm

          Well, data, sure.

          Police are not mere members of the civil population, and we’d be really riled at them if they conducted themselves like they were. As I’ve said…and nobody has addressed this…they have burdens and prerogatives we do not. The term “first responder” is suggestive of a bunch of thoughts, innit…???

          When was the last time you served a search warrant? Or an arrest warrant for a violent criminal? Or you could drive 100 mph to catch someone or get to a wreck to save a life? When was it a duty imposed by your job?

          Or consider a fireman. I cannot knock down your door, break a hole in your wall, hack through your roof, etc. with impunity. I can’t rip the door off your car, or bust out your car windows so I can pass a hose through, or even drive on your property without your permission.

          Isn’t your statute citation A citation to one state, and isn’t it dealing with AGGRAVATING factors in assault? I don’t think that goes directly to the question raised, but it is suggestive that society DOES recognize some of us as DIFFERENT due to the roles they play. Which I’ve been saying for days now. Not better, not above the law, not any other BS. Just different.

          But, yeah. That is some data, some on point, some not.

I noted with some interest that Barracula had the temerity to suggest it was a BAAAAAAD thing to detain two Collectivist journalists in Ferguson who “where just trying to do their jobs”. (Which may not have been the reason for their detention, at all.)

But wasn’t it official government policy to forbid even Congressmen to “just do their jobs” WRT low-intensity invaders being held all over the U.S. just days ago, and to threaten prosecution under Federal law against those who talked?

Yeah. Thought so.

If you didn’t hear Mark Levin tonight, you need to find a recording tomorrow.

David R. Graham | August 14, 2014 at 11:35 pm

Over at The Blaze a commenter writes in re the fire house invasion today: “I smell a set-up; I think the NBPP is doing just what Obammy and Holder has asked them to do.” I tend to agree. And liar in chief sounding equivocal and inane over the situation on the same day reinforces my agreement. “Obammy and Holder,” under the usual cover of sanctimony while their myrmidons cry havoc for them, are preparing a move that will more speedily weaken, distract and enrage the nation to bring it to chaos. They are certain they control the situation.

I have a few questions for the folks who say the journalists where wrongly arrested. I counted the number of times the police officer, calmly asked the reporter to leave the premises. That’s right he asked him 23 times to leave! So how many times should a police officer have to ask a reporter to leave, would 24, 25 or how about 100, would that have been enough? I would say that once was enough.

The police officer was asking the reporter to leave because they could no longer protect the reporter. If the police had left the reporters behind and they had been assaulted it would surely be the polices fault. And a law suit would surly follow! This is a no win situation, damned if you do damned if you don’t.

As for militarized of police. I seem to remember a Quick Trip being burned to the ground. How come they stopped showing the pictures of that, I say it doesn’t fit the narrative of peaceful protest. How about the looting, criminals going through the broken windows of of local business’. How about the women who was shoot in the head, lets put her picture up to show how peaceful the protest was. What about the citizens that had to arm themselves to protect there business, are they militarized?

These are the big lies that the media keeps promoting! We saw them images of rioting for two days and all of a sudden they no longer exist. Shame on the media!

    Ragspierre in reply to Merlin01. | August 15, 2014 at 7:58 am

    Levin addressed those things in the next segment or two, following the one Mouse found for us.

    If you follow Levin, he is one of those who has been warning about the militarization of the police, and the “police-a-fication” of MANY of the agencies in the Federal regulatory state who have no business whatsoever trying to be Robocop.

    But his take on the Ferguson police was quite different. You should try to find it.

    He was not very impressed with the sob story of the two Collectivist reporters, either.

    “So how many times should a police officer have to ask a reporter to leave, would 24, 25 or how about 100, would that have been enough? I would say that once was enough. ”

    You watched a different video than I did.

    First, the officer never “asked” the reporter to leave. The cop told them to leave.

    The reporters were charged with “trespassing” yet the McDonald’s manager has said they had no problems with the reporters being there. So what is the basis for the trespassing charge? And under what authority did the cops have to demand the reporters leave the premises?

    It is telling that once the police chief got word that the reporters had been arrested, he immediately let them go. Is that because they were reporters? Or was that because the charge could not stick?

    It may be a little of both and I would accept that.

    No matter what, the cops never asked them to leave, created a confrontation when none was necessary and amped up the situation when they did not have to.

      Ragspierre in reply to gitarcarver. | August 15, 2014 at 2:30 pm

      Where are your links, liar?

      How was the police treatment of these reporters different than that at a Biden fund-raiser…???

      You moron.

        “Where are your links, liar?”

        You just love getting beat up by people, don’t you?

        First, the link for the video is available anywhere. The police do not ask the reporters to leave – they tell them.

        Secondly, from the manager of McDonalds:

        “”It’s just a terrible thing what happened,” said Eyer, who has worked for the company for 34 years. “It’s a bad thing. It’s just not good.”

        Eyer was there when armed officers strode into the fast food joint and ordered out patrons, including Huffington Post reporter Ryan J. Reilly and The Washington Post’s Wesley Lowery.”

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/ferguson-mcdonalds-arrest_n_5677161.html

        The charges and release:

        http://gawker.com/washington-post-huffpo-reporters-arrested-in-ferguson-1621284034

        “How was the police treatment of these reporters different than that at a Biden fund-raiser…???”

        You really don’t have a clue, do you?

        The difference is that at a Biden fundraiser, the person controlling the event can ask that the person be removed. Here in Ferguson, the police initiated the removal without any prompting from the person in charge of the property.

        The police went beyond their legal authority in demanding the reporters leave.

          Ragspierre in reply to gitarcarver. | August 15, 2014 at 5:18 pm

          I seeee….

          ”It’s just a terrible thing what happened,” said Eyer, who has worked for the company for 34 years. “It’s a bad thing. It’s just not good.”

          And that VERY selective quote was about the terrrrrrrible, horrrrrrible incident with the two Collectivist reports, and not the larger “terrible thing that happened”?

          You will swallow anything they shot in your mouth, huh?

          You idiot, Biden handlers pushed reporters into a closet.

          Like I say, you are beyond help. But you ARE FUN to punk…!!!

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/08/opportunism-knocks-in-missouri.php

Paul Mirengoff is not impressed with Rand Paul’s opportunism.

Me either.

At this point, there is nothing to protest.

I support their right to protest as long as it is peaceful. The obligation to keep it peaceful is on the public not the police. The obligation to respond to criminal escalations is on the police not the public….in that instance, the obligation of the public is to get out of the way.

An investigation is still ongoing at this point. What exactly is there to protest?

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 15, 2014 at 2:01 pm

Video of Michael Brown ripping off the store before the incident.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/multimedia/videos/ferguson-police-release-convenience-store-surveillance-video/html_9cdfc317-764d-5ccd-a574-2c75d2d0c753.html

Warning there are two clips, so don’t stop watching two early. The second clip doesn’t show all that much.

Not long ago a black cop shot an UNARMED white man in Maryland.

see: https://legalinsurrection.com/2014/07/breaking-new-jersey-road-rage-cop-acquitted-in-maryland-murder-trial/

He got off Scott free.

I did not for one second considering rioting.

Hmmmmmmmm….

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend