How so? They have cameras on dashboards or they're cars so they could do it. Maybe make to where they only turn em on during a uhhh stop or something? This way there would be proof of something happening or not.

 

Your "source" is little better than the National Enquirer. Try again, with less bias.

 

Heard an interesting interview today contending that much of the violence in recent events has been started by "outsiders" to the community who've come in to take advantage of the chaos. The molotovs were thrown by Anarchists from Chicago, the looting done by criminals from out of town.

Ferguson protesters: The peaceful, the elders, the looters, and the

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/...verybody-overdid-the-jailed-journalist-story/

Ferguson Community Sees a Double Injustice - TIME


Seems like it's a claim with some weight to it. Would be easier to tell with more publicly available police footage, I bet.

 

I'm sure they would have to file some kind of consent to get it shown publically say on the news.

Dashcams are different than say running through someone's house and showing private property or people's faces without consent that aren't the criminals.

Also, they don't show dashcams publically incase it's in regards to that case and they have some sort of consent.

There isn't supposed to be any type of filming inside or on the premises of many business it's posted most of the time.

 

Ah, yes. Cause clearly that's not excessive use of force at all by the officer!

In addition, it was shown from the autopsy that there were no signs of a struggle.

 

If that's the case, why should the poorly-transcribed testimony of the witness in the video be given greater credibility than others at the scene who have appeared to implicate the police in a use of excessive force?

This is basically the reason why physical footage and evidence takes precedence over testimony, and one of the greatest factors in favor of police cameras.

 

Because its multiple witnesses giving a more or less consistent report vs one contrary one?

 

Discredits, no, but just because one person saw it differently doesn't mean the others are wrong by default.

 

Or is it odd that a random unconnected witness is overheard relaying a version of events that directly corroborates what the officers version of the incident is?

I called the whole "innocent" crap way back when this thread started, its also slowly coming out. Well, pretty much not slowly, he was living his thug life and how did it work out for him? Whatever truly happened, right or wrong, at the end of the day his actions were a large part of it.

It has been mentioned that if the media was not biased in reporting and all the race baiting head line bullshit was taken out of the equation I bet there would a lot less arguing and something more positive coming out of this.

Also I want to know how you are going to report something anonymously when all law enforcement is wearing cameras.................It will be a money grab just like red light cameras. I always feel extra tingly and want to divulge all the information when I'm being recorded.

I've never said the officer was in the right, or that the kid was in the wrong, but this has been played out so many times on the news, why should I or anyone else care about this one? Since 6:30pm Fri night thru Sun night, 7 killed and 29 wounded in Chicago. From the articles I found from leading Chicago newspapers, there wasn't a "Smith" among any of the listings. Where are those high priced lawyers with political connections at now? Where is Jackson at? Those Black Panthers? Never mind, I figured it out, no one to try and sue, no time for mugging for the cameras because they are not there..........

 

Yeah, those stupid urban folk, amiright? Always covering each others asses.

How the hell has the media been race baiting? By reporting that the town of Ferguson is majority black but with an almost entirely white police force? That there have been incidents of blatant police thuggery in its recent past? What, are they supposed to gloss over that just so that entitled white folk don't feel "persecuted" by the "liberal media", and so they can continue "tsk-tsk"ing at "those animals"?

What the hell did he do that justified his death? Shoplift those cigars? Jaywalk? Oh right, he allegedly rushed a cop with nothing but his bare hands and tennis shoes. But hey, those urban folk can be pretty scary, so I guess its cool.

Also, real classy with the "thug life" thing. I guess in this context it means "life, whilst looking to a cop like a thug". And I don't know what the Black Panthers have to do with this, they've long ago ceased to be relevant.

 

I'm 6'6 260# I don't back down from urban folks, even the stupid or scary ones 

You seem to have some kind of personal vendetta on this whole situation where you cannot posses an objective view point because you hate the police. Believe half of what u see and only a quarter of what you hear.

I never said his death was justified either. I said the life he lived and the decisions he made made him the man he is today, a dead one. Both might have made bad decisions, but both share responsibility in the end. If you want to go on about police incidents in the past you also have to use his past against him as well.

I can assure you I do not feel persecuted by the liberal media, I just laugh at the stupidity that it continually spews.

"those animals" are just that. You want to destroy the place you live? The town you grew up in? I'm shocked that someone would comment on that....Again, I never said all, there are actually people there that are peaceful and are trying to do the right thing. But rioting, molotov cocktails, arson, more shootings, shooting at police and on and on do not qualify as protests.

Thug life? Did you not see the video of him knocking over the store clerk and stealing cigars? That was not a first timer actions, it was deliberate and intentional. Thug life isn't how you look in and of yourself it is a life style all its own. Some are real, some are fake, but its hard to say that he wasn't a thug when you have evidence to the contrary.

The Black Panthers are there, even carted in folks from San Francisco to be there as well. His lawyer is politically connected, the DA is politically connected and anyone is supposed to believe they are there for Michael Brown? Like I said, 27 shot and 7 killed in Chicago over the weekend, where are they here? I mean its not like their making a point out of it because it was a white cop and a black male. It's a dog and pony show for the masses.

 

"Thug", the new, socially-acceptable "n-word".

As for the cameras, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes.

 

That sounds about right. When London had our riots in the Summer of 2011 it turned out that a lot of the trouble makers were actually coming in from Birmingham and elsewhere just to take advantage (and try and steal a new TV).

 

Even if ones frames the autopsy's results as self-defense, that doesn't account for the shots in the head. A shot to the knees is all one needs to disable a criminal, not to mention a charging one.

 

The knee is a small target, and one that constantly shifts position while a person is motion, even for trained marksmen that's the sort of shit you pull off every 10,000 shots and hardly ever because you meant it.

Hell I've only ever fired a gun once and I know that.