Posted on 08/16/2014 1:27:37 AM PDT by Olog-hai
The unarmed black teen whose fatal shooting by police in a St. Louis suburb sparked violent protests was a suspect in a robbery moments before, but the deadly encounter was not sparked by the robbery, the city's police chief said Friday.
Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson earlier Friday released documents alleging 18-year-old Michael Brown had been suspected of stealing a $48.99 box of cigars from a convenience store in a “strong-arm” robbery shortly before he was killed.
Jackson said at an afternoon press conference that Brown and his friend were stopped Saturday “because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic.” …
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
The Chief was not the one interviewing Wilson.
“I don’t know what came out in his interview.”
~when did he see the cigars?~
According to the purported family friend...
After he had asked them to move off the street and was met with belligerence,
he pulled to the side of the road, perhaps to call back up,
when he saw something in their hands that looked like
it could be what was stolen during the robbery.
~ how did he see them in those big hands~
How did you, if you’ve watched the convenience store video,
miss seeing the “numerous packs of Swisher Sweets” in Brown’s hand?
~where were they during the fight???~
I don’t know, my guess would be, on the ground
and while that information will likely become available in time,
frankly, it is rather irrelevant.
Thanks. That is good detail and kind of confirms what I think probably happened.
More likely, store owner knew Big Mike would be back on the street and returning to the store later the same day, to show his displeasure over being "snitched" on.
Store owner didn't want to be beaten bloody or killed.
What all parties are asking the Chief for is just the facts — the autopsy, location of bullet holes, bullet trajectories, location of the shell casings, blood spatter ...
Instead he spends a week putting together a report on a robbery charge that he is not going to file because the guy is dead.
I still think both is the answer.
Initial encounter based on the street blocking.
Encounter escalates when suspicion raised.
I don’t know it for a fact, but there are multiple reports indicating the officer backed up... something caused him to go back.
Something also caused another officer to arrive within 3 minutes.
I don’t think the stories emerging are mutually exclusive. You apparently do...
We will have to agree to disagree and continue to pay attention to the facts as they become available.
My question about the cigars would be this —
They were about what — half mile from the store. Why would they still be in his hands at that point and not in his pants pocket?
And with hands that big — how would you see a cigar in them?
And if the description went out of a big black guy with red cap, grey shirt, beige pants, ... then why wouldn’t those things have been more noticeable than the cigars???
Why is the Chief making a big thing about the cigars and not what he is wearing???
Some people aren't looking for clarity, they just want to assign blame.
Yet logically, you can't rightfully determine the latter until you've discerned the former.
Nice job! Your post fits all facts as I've seen them.
The part that I couldn't figure out was why the officer backed up, but it would make sense if it wasn't until after the initial contact that he heard the description.
Which means he was wrapping up the call and could have conceivably NOT heard the description until it was rebroadcast several minutes later.
Like after the initial contact with the perp.
Indirectly it is related. Michael Brown knew what he had just done, and did not know that the policeman did not know.
Do you have a link for that???
I agree with your entire post.
It is the rioters and race pimps that seem to think it makes a difference if the LEO knew beforehand about the strong arm robbery.
As I see it Brown's conduct was driven not by what the LEO knew or didn't know, but by what Brown knew and what he thought the LEO knew.
According to the LEO's account, Brown (and his sidekick) are the ones the one who escalated the encounter from a routine stop to a violent confrontation.
And even if the LEO knew there was a strong arm robbery he didn't know that Brown was the perp - but Brown knew he was the perp and likely thought the LEO knew it too.
Brown's paranoia got the best of him and, thinking the LEO knew he was the culprit, he decided to attack the LEO before he could be arrested.
LOL! Oh, my. You are a piece of work, aren't you?
Why would I 'have a link for that' since my statement was: could have conceivably..... as in a possibility.
I know, it's one of those confusing words for you, like when you're all in a tizzy about how the Chief said the officer didn't have the description in the INITIAL contact, you just can't seem to grasp the fact there was also a secondary contact that night, just seconds from the first.
----
BTW - Did you think you demand for proof would obscure the fact that you're ignoring that your own time-line doesn't ad up?
HOW could the officer have heard the initial broadcast if he was still on the scene of his last call? They DO turn their radios down when they're talking to someone on a scene.
Not surprising, though. Not the first time I've seen you go off on a tangent to try to avoid the facts that won't fit your narrative that some innocent party was killed.
----
You are the one who has continually asserted the officer heard the broadcast the first time at the second it was broadcast, so why don't YOU provide us with YOUR link to prove it.....unless this is just yet another round of your 'pin-the-guilt-on-the-copper' game.
There was the friend who said he saw cigars in Michael Brown’s hands, but I believe it was the description...How many 292 lb, 6’ 4” young black males could there have been on the scene?
The officer was still in his car when descritions and robbery came in, so he heard it all, looked in rear view mirror and realized he was looking right at them.
I never said that he heard at all —
LOL! Some of us have been following these threads since this happened, and your entire premise of the officer's guilt has been built upon the officer KNOWING of the robbery and KNOWING Mike was the perp.
Trying to dodge it now with such a pathetic reasoning as if you never said the officer was ever knowledgeable about what was going on is just beyond contempt.
You spin like an Obama.
I know! I saw him pushing that poor like clerk like a ragdoll, and I thought - Good grief! That guy is a walking eclipse! You couldn't miss him if you tried!
According to Dorian Johnson's account, they were walking down the middle of the street when the cop drove by and told them to get the f--- onto the sidewalk. Instead of moving to the sidewalk, they responded they were almost home, causing the cop to become enraged at their 'attitude'. The cop reached out his window and grabbed the "gentle giant", initiating the confrontation that ended in his shooting.
So, one must ask the question, Why, if they had just robbed a convenience store, would they have not been relieved that the cop only wanted them to get out of the street? And why would they have divulged the approximate location of their 'home'?
Whose timeline? He got the convenience store robbery call and the descriptions while already at the scene, what is so hard to understand about those few minutes, everything else is not tied to the shooting itself.
Police: Officer Wasn't Aware Michael Brown Was Suspect in Alleged Robbery
Chief Thomas Jackson also released documents and surveillance video, alleging that Mr. Brown was tied to a robbery at a convenience store shortly before he crossed paths with police.
Hours later, Mr. Jackson held another news conference in which he said Mr. Wilson, who is white, wasn't aware of the robbery when he stopped Mr. Brown.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3193523/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.