General Discussions

Sedition is a fairly loosely define legal term for using (free) speech in such a manner that intends to or causes others to act in a criminal, riotous, or disorderly manner. Basically its a fancy word for inciting a riot, which is exactly what Sharpton and the rest are doing. So no, the "sentiment" that they are acting seditious is not over the top. Especially when the rioting had subsided for a fairly significant period of time before being re-ignited close to the end of the grand jury's deliberations. It could have been argued that the current rioting was a result of the grand jury's decision not to indict the officer except the rioting began several days before the decision was logged in the courts.

As to the gun instead of taser, the kid pummeled the officer prior to the officer drawing his weapon. Besides, if he would have used the taser, a wrongful death suit would have been twice as likely to succeed because if the kid died there are implications that the officer did not feel his life was threatened (non-lethal weapons always have that associated with their use). Basically, if a cop tasers a person and the person dies, he can easily be charged with involuntary manslaughter (killed but no intent). The gun was less risky from a legal standpoint. That all being said, I sincerely doubt that's what the cop was thinking as his head was being bashed in. Police training states that if an officer has to draw his weapon, shoot first, ask questions later. The Hollywood notion that a cop draws his weapon and asks for surrender before shooting is rarely done in real life, especially among everyday patrol officers. SWAT teams or other tactical units are another story. They do have their weapons out prior to actively engaging but their RoE's are generally a step or two under max alert (i.e. they aren't usually given the "shoot-to-kill" green light from the get-go) and they do have to ID themselves as law enforcement verbally prior to opening fire (unless fired upon first).

Edit: Removed erroneous information taken from an early account of the incident.

[Edited by Wrythe1985, 11/25/2014 8:10:16 PM]

The accounts I've read state that the kid did not have a weapon and that the officer did not carry a taser because they are so bulky. The officer stated that he drew his gun because he could not reach anything else and MACE was out of the question due to the close quarters in the car fight. According to the officer, Brown had hold of his gun and was trying to point it at him, the gun would not fire due to two hands interfering with the trigger. Finally the officer got it pointed at Brown and fired, that's when Brown retreated. Eyewitnesses gave differing versions of what happened after that and it should be noted that all versions were from black eyewitnesses so no white bias can be interjected into accounts favourable to the cop. I'd like to read an autopsy report as to whether or not Brown was shot in the back, this has not been made clear.

The photos of the cop taken afterwards do not look at all like someone with a broken nose, damaged eye sockets etc. His face and neck showed reddened areas but I cold not see serious lacerations etc. All that said, Brown stole cigarillos from a convenience store shortly before the incident, pushed and shoved the store owner (this is on camera) then walked down the middle of a street forcing cars to drive around him and his buddy. Of course the cops were going to show up. It wasn't necessary to attack the officer. Brown came at the cop with one hand in his waistband which would look like drawing a weapon; I suspect he was holding an abdominal wound. But how could the cop know that in the general craziness?

Was it necessary to shoot and kill Brown? I cannot know because I wasn't in that officer's shoes.

Photos taken minutes after sustaining injuries but before any visible signs of internal trauma start to appear or hours after when the swelling has gone down and the blood and dirt has been washed away are (much) different than medical records and X-ray or CT scans.

Autopsy report says no entry wounds on the backside. There is one (maybe two) entry wounds that appear on the side as opposed to the full front but those wounds appear to be a result of the body contorting in reaction to the initial strikes.

So here are some of the facts released by the St. Louis County Attorney's office:

1. Wilson stopped Brown for jaywalking, and was unaware of the earlier robbery
2. No evidence of shots in the back to the deceased
2. The officer sustained trauma to his head
3. Gunshot residue on the deceased's right hand
4. Victim’s blood found in squad car and on officer’s gun
5. Deceased was shot in the head, torso, right arm, and right hand
6. Officer claims that deceased went for his gun
7. Twelve shots were fired
8. Six shots hit Brown
9. Two shots were made while Wilson was in the squad car
10. Ten shots were made after the officer exited the vehicle

You can wrestle with those in whatever means you see fit.

In re sedition: it really is not a loosely defined legal term (IMO), as the burden of proving it is fairly stringent. Sharpton, et al. have not been calling for rioting, violence, or the like. Hence, my assertion that sedition is not applicable.

The reality is that this police stop gone wrong is not the whole of the protesters’ contentions, and right or wrong activists will exploit these situations to call attention to broader issues. Perhaps the officer is innocent and public figures such as Sharpton are calling for justice when justice has already been served. I really can’t blame them. Ultimately activists have little choice but to dig in their heels when incidents make headlines. That (again, IMO) is merely a symptom of an apathetic or disenfranchised population. People rarely become activists unless something directly affects them or there is a mob mentality to do so. People like Sharpton know this all too well, and that is why they capitalize on these occurrences.

Link

I love Chris Rock!

[Edited by moderator Neo7, 11/30/2014 12:51:06 AM]

So you shoot the policeman in the head, you're arrested and tried for first-degree Murder.

What's next?