An inconvenient truth

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Photizo, Nov 29, 2014.

  1. Bells Staff Member

    You realise you are defending the guy who thinks blacks are inferior to whites, right?

    The DoJ reported on systematic abuse of power and racism in the police department in Ferguson and in other counties.

    It's not that Wilson alone is racist and has issues in how he does his job as a police officer. It's that they are all like Wilson. Same attitude, same inability to not view blacks as criminals and same racist beliefs that permeates the whole department.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Oh, and where is your evidence that Wilson is a racist? It's probably with the evidence you wanted to use to lynch Wilson. It dot exist.

    The Fergust PD is a other issue. It was very apparent from day one Ferguson PD had some very serious problems. But that doesn't mean Officer Wilson did any thing wrong in this case.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bells Staff Member

    Lynching Wilson?

    This is as pathetic as your argument that Turkey could not have save Kobane because they didn't know how to fight alongside other troops...

    Are you aware that the way in which police officers are killing black men and the rate they are shooting unarmed black men and the excuses made for those killings are akin to the way in which black people were lynched in the US up until not that long ago? Just as white men and white police officers were never held responsible for lynching black men for no reason whatsoever, white police officers will never be held responsible for shooting dozens of bullets at unarmed black men.

    Wilson worked for a police department that is so permeated with racism, that what Wilson did, was simply what happens. It is why the prosecutor was able to allow anyone and everyone to claim they were witnesses, even when they were not even in Ferguson, and no one batted an eyelid when the person in question uttered racist comments on the stand. Wilson is a product of his environment.

    An unarmed young man was shot dead, with conflicting reports of what led to his being shot dead and a prosecutor that allowed people to lie to the grand jury and then tainted the grand jury with incorrect legislation for weeks.. For anyone that exists outside of that racist bubble, there are many things wrong with this case, including Wilson's reaction and the many lies he told and the fact that the evidence does not support his testimony. But this was excused. This is the sort of thing that simply happens when a white policeman shoots dead a black person in an area like Ferguson.

    As I said, Wilson is a product of the environment that allowed and encouraged racist policing and openly so. Within that environment, of course Wilson did nothing wrong. Within that environment, Wilson did everything right, especially for people like you who have gone to such lengths to excuse such bad policing and abhorrent and frankly illegal acts in that grand jury hearing. I don't accept that racist bubble as a reality that demands that this is what black people deserve or should expect. So for me, I think everything about this case was wrong. From the reaction that an unarmed black man walking down the street automatically makes him suspect that he needs to be stopped, and so on and so forth, to shooting dead an unarmed man to allowing racist bigots to make things up and lie in front of a grand jury all to make sure that the police officer is not charged with a crime.

    Of course you defend it. This is normal for you. You are the product of that environment This is to be expected and not outside the norm.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Yeah, lynch Officer Wilson. Before the investigation had been completed you had tried and convicted Officer Wilson and found him guilty. You have consistently ignored evidence which exonerated Officer Wilson, including this recent finding by the US Department of Justice.
    When did I say Turkey couldn’t “save” Kobane? I didn’t. You have created a straw man. You argued for the immediate intervention of Turkish troops because they were there. Just because troops are present, it doesn’t mean it is wise to use them. And in any case, this thread isn’t about Turkey. It is about Officer Wilson’s guilt or innocence.
    Well that makes for nice demagoguery, but do you have any evidence to back up that claim? No you don’t. As, I said before and have said consistently, there are well documented cases of police abuse of power. But not in recent history and not on the scale you claim, and the Brown case isn’t one of them.
    The fact is The Department of Justice (DOJ) found Officer Wilson innocent. The DOJ specifically exonerated Officer Wilson and in excruciating detail. Just because the Ferguson Police Department was found guilty of racial discrimination, it doesn’t mean Officer Wilson murdered Brown as you have asserted since day one.

    So are Attorney General Holder and President Obama prejudice against their own race? They are both black men. Do you think they are racists too? Because the investigation and report which exonerates Officer Wilson was completed and written by people who work under their direction and control.
    Yeah, an unarmed young man was shot dead. But news flash Bells, people have been killing people long before firearms. People have been killing people with and without weapons since the dawn of mankind.

    And yes one person lied on the witness stand to support Officer Wilson’s account and was a racist. And multiple witnesses lied on the stand to indict Officer Wilson. People lie on both sides, but most witnesses support Officer Wilson’s account. All credible witnesses support Officer Wilson’s account, and more importantly, so does the physical evidence. You focus so much on one racist who lied to support Officer Wilson and ignore multiple wittneses who lied to indict Officer Wilson.
    Ad hominem really isn’t a convincing argument. So are Attorney General Holder and President Obama racists too because both they and I have reached the same conclusions in this case? Attorney General Holder and President Obama are both “black people”.

    Here is one of the things you leave out of your narrative, Brown and Johnson weren’t just walking down the street. They were walking down the middle of the street presenting a public safety hazard and violating the law. That’s why Officer Wilson initially engaged them. Officer Wilson found Brown actively engaged in a violation of the law and creating a public safety hazard. Brown subsequently assaulted Officer Wilson and attempted to get Officer Wilson’s gun. Those are among the inconvenient details you are leaving out. The picture your painting of Brown isn’t as innocent as you would have it be. At some point facts and reason need to account for something.

    One racist bigot lied before the grand jury in order to support Officer Wilson, multiple witnesses lied in order to indict Officer Wilson. It is telling you focus so much on one discredited witness and ignore the other discredited witnesses. Unfortunately, this case has become a cause célèbre for racists of every sort and of every color. Grand jurors saw all the evidence, they heard all the witnesses and they evaluated all the evidence. They made a decision you didn’t like. The Department of Justice independently investigated the case and came to similar conclusions. There is ample evidence; you just don’t like the conclusions because those conclusions are not consistent with your beliefs. It is good and a testimony to the US system of justice that truth and reason ultimately prevailed in this case.
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2015
  8. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    because the reason he ended up getting the job in fereguson was he was let go from another PD that was disbanded due to rampant racism? and in a job previous his former supervisor stated he shouldn't be a police officer
  9. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    So he stole his ideas from a woman, Rosalind Franklin, and then used them to attack Africans.
    That fits.
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2015
  10. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Could it be that there are more white officers than black, and more black people being shot than white?
  11. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    It's been well-documented that, nationwide, black people are stopped, shaken down, roughed up, chased, shot, killed, arrested, prosecuted and convicted, in proportion to their numbers, far more than white people.

    The insane drug war is a perfect example. Every sociological study has found that black Americans and white Americans use drugs at almost exactly the same rate; in fact white people smoke more pot than black people. Yet the average black American is twice as likely to be arrested for drug possession, use or other drug crime, than a white American. Once arrested, he is twice as likely to be prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned.

    In other words, black people are four times as likely to be in prison for drug offenses than white people, even though their rate of usage is identical.

    The race of the cop actually has only a moderate effect on these statistics. Nearby Prince George's County, Maryland, is the nation's largest majority-black jurisdiction, as well as the nation's most prosperous majority-black jurisdiction. (It borders on Washington DC, so many of the residents are federal employees.) A majority of its police force are black. Yet the outrages perpetrated by the black cops on their black constituents is incredible. I have white friends who live there and most of them have never had an encounter with a cop.
  12. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    "Incredible"? Have you ever watched old Tarzan movies?
  13. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    It is also apparent in the officer's testimony; the underlying problem affecting so many officers in so many departments is simply this: As one assesses an individual to determine risk and threat, being black is a threat criterion.

    And that, pure and simple, is racism.

    Let us consider a parallel:

    • You shoot someone to death, and claim self-defense. Not only does the evidence fail to support your account and, in fact, reinforce accusations that you just killed someone for no reason, you also leave signs that you tampered with the physical evidence in order to support your account of what happened.​

    What would happen to you?

    What if you're a cop?

    Well, if you're a cop, the department might fire you if the situation brings enough of a political headache. But a crime?

    There is no reason to charge such an officer with a crime. We must presume his good faith in shooting. We must also presume his good faith in manipulating the physical evidence. And we must also presume his good faith in perjuring himself. No reason to charge the officer, said state and federal officials.

    And it is this sort of outlook that licenses what we saw in Missouri, New York City, and have seen for so long in many communities across the country.

    And it is this sort of outlook that our neighbors must depend on in order to cry about lynch mobs and celebrate another white guy getting away with never even having to answer for killing an unarmed black person.

    For many of us, the law is the law, and the problems exist therein.

    For others, that the law is the law and brings this sort of outcome is something to celebrate.

    Then again, the overlap between those people and paranoid tinfoil racists who expect the guv'mint to grind them beneath its bootheel any day might seem curiously paradoxical insofar as here they are celebrating that very outcome, but we should not find the common cause surprising―such paranoia has always been driven by bigotry.

    And, frankly, one would not blame you for wondering at the priorities and values of those who celebrate such lethal bigotry.
  14. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Nothing in the report as quoted by you exonerates Wilson.

    It does not even exonerate the Ferguson prosecutor, for rigging the grand jury hearing.

    It exonerates the Justice Department for failing to bring Wilson to trial, as a Federal endeavor. But that is old news here - agreed and set aside early in this thread.
  15. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    While that maybe true my point was that we very seldom see any white on white killings by police even if what you say is true. I would also add that the media very rarely waits to understand the entire story and posts what they think happened instead of waiting until all of the investigations are finished to report the truth not something they spin it to be.
  16. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    If you are black rather than white, the officer is somehow more likely to think that your key ring/belt buckle/shiny wallet is a gun and shoot you.
    The anticipated threat is greater.
  17. Bells Staff Member

    There hasn't been evidence that exonerated Wilson. It exonerated the State for failing in its duties towards its citizens, but not Wilson.

    Still rewriting history I see.

    Says he who keeps saying that people are trying to lynch the white guy for killing a black guy..

    Not to mention that you keep referring to him as "Officer" when he resigned as a police officer. Who do you think you are fooling here?

    Link was provided. Before you get yourself into a lather claiming that Wilson was being lynched for killing an unarmed black kid, perhaps you could read it.

    No it didn't.

    They said they would not prosecute. Not prosecuting does not make them innocent. Just means they are not going to be prosecuted. The man who raped me was not prosecuted. Did not make him innocent. Just meant they were not going to prosecute.

    Are you aware that the only people saying Wilson was exonerated by the DoJ are the racist right wing sites and Fox News?

    Google it, it's hysterical just how much you are falling into that right wing bigoted and white supremacist bullshit.

    They didn't exonerate him. They just did not charge him.

    Beg yours?


    This is your fallback?

    You are actually saying that black people did not charge him, so he must be innocent...

    What kind of racist bullshit are you into Joe?

    Do you know what exonerate means? Or is this the same as you thinking that "lather" meant laughter?

    When you exonerate someone, it means they are absolved from any blame, that they literally did nothing wrong. The reason the DoJ did not prosecute Wilson is because there was not enough evidence to prosecute him. The DoJ did not exonerate Wilson. They just did not charge him. There is a massive difference.

    Yes, and white people have been killing black men and not been charged or prosecuted for their crimes in the US for centuries Joe. All of this is just normal in the States. Hence why police departments like Ferguson is so racist in and of itself. It breeds racism and thus, if police officers are racist, they fit right in. For people who believe in people like Wilson, he was simply following what is the usual case in such departments. Young black men are being shot dead by police all the time. This is what happens. This is normal in such departments. And as we always knew, nothing would happen to Wilson for it. His incompetence, his lack of training which resulted in confrontation with Brown.. He was taught to be afraid of black people. Because to him, talking to black people has to involve yelling and swearing at them right from the get go. His tone was confrontational. His approach was directly confrontational. Once again, this is how the police view black people, and how police in racist departments like Ferguson's police department generally behave around black people.

    The fact that you think that lying to the grand jury is acceptable and something that can be defended says it all.

    Do you understand how racist your argument actually is?

    And thus deserved to be shot?

    No one left it out.

    What you fail to notice is that Wilson turned something that should have been simple into a shooting. He was incapable of deescalating conflict that he caused.

    The grand jury were fed incorrect information and the prosecutor gave them the wrong legislation and let that incorrect and absolutely contradictory legislation taint the well, so to speak. Not to mention allowed people to lie to the grand jury knowingly, invited one to come back and lie some more and provide fake "evidence", then acted as though they were Wilson's defense lawyers.

    They made a decision that they were going to make because of what the prosecutor fed them. And that was the issue. I get that you don't see just how bad that was.

    Everything about that grand jury hearing was a farce. But then it was always going to be from a prosecutor who had an axe to grind. It was to be expected. Everyone knew what the outcome was going to be from the get go. Why? Because in departments like Ferguson, this is the sort of shit that is acceptable.
  18. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    I can only conclude you are lying.
    ST. LOUIS (KMOX) - Former Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson’s attorney is reacting to the findings of the Justice Department investigation saying there will be no federal civil rights charges filed against Wilson.
    Attorney Neil Bruntrager says Wilson is pleased with what amounts to an “exoneration” from the DOJ.” -
    Only in your mind Bells….
    Hmm, when did I interject race into this discussion? Oh, that’s right I didn’t. Black people weren’t the only ones on the streets of Ferguson seeking Wilson’s blood.
    And that bothers you…seriously? At the time this event occurred Officer Wilson was employed as a police officer. Further, in this country, one carries the title even after they exit public employment.
    Yeah, the link was provided mostly citing data which was more than 130 years old. That is hardly convincing. I’ll help you out a bit. This afternoon NPR cited a new study which indicated 800 people are killed every year by police in this country. That includes whites, blacks, yellow and brown skinned people. It’s includes everyone. And considering the population of this country is more than 320 million people, that is really far from the epidemic your are trying to represent.
    Either you haven’t read the report issued by the Department of Justice or you are lying. Below is the DOJ conclusion. It’s the same conclusion the grand jury arrived at.
    “As discussed above, Darren Wilson has stated his intent in shooting Michael Brown was in response to a perceived deadly threat. The only possible basis for prosecuting Wilson under section 242 would therefore be if the government could prove that his account is not true – i.e., that Brown never assaulted Wilson at the SUV, never attempted to gain control of Wilson’s gun, and thereafter clearly surrendered in a way that no reasonable officer could have failed to perceive. Given that Wilson’s account is corroborated by physical evidence and that his perception of a threat posed by Brown is corroborated by other eyewitnesses, to include aspects of the testimony of Witness 101, there is no credible evidence that Wilson willfully shot Brown as he was attempting to surrender or was otherwise not posing a threat. Even if Wilson was mistaken in his interpretation of Brown’s conduct, the fact that others interpreted that conduct the same way as Wilson precludes a determination that he acted with a bad purpose to disobey the law. The same is true even if Wilson could be said to have acted with poor judgment in the manner in which he first interacted with Brown, or in pursuing Brown after the incident at the SUV. These are matters of policy and procedure that do not rise to the level of a Constitutional violation and thus cannot support a criminal prosecution. Cf. Gardner v. Howard, 109 F.3d 427, 430–31 (8th Cir. 1997) (violation of internal policies and procedures does not in and of itself rise to violation of Constitution).
    Because Wilson did not act with the requisite criminal intent, it cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt to a jury that he violated 18 U.S.C.§ 242 when he fired his weapon at Brown.
    VI. Conclusion
    For the reasons set forth above, this matter lacks prosecutive merit and should be closed.”
    It’s more than Fox News. It’s NPR, it’s CNN, and it’s CBS.
    It’s not a “fallback”. It’s the truth. You rest your entire argument on what you perceive to be a tainted grand jury process. The fact is the Department of Justice which is under the direct control of President Obama and Attorney General Holder both of whom are black have concluded the Ferguson grand jury whose decision you hate was indeed the correct decision. That is the simple fact of the matter and it isn’t racist. It is just a fact. The Department of Justice conducted a thorough independent investigation and reached the same conclusion as the grand jury you claim was tainted. So are President Obama and Attorney General Holder racists?
    You are being more than a little disingenuous Bells. The DOJ report does exonerate Officer Wilson. If Officer Wilson didn’t commit the crime you allege, there would be no evidence. If you read the DOJ report, it does find Officer acted reasonably and within the law and cites the physical evidence and credible eye witness testimony as the basis for their conclusion.
    Your reasoning is reminiscent of witch trials where accused witches were submerged in water and if they didn’t die they might be dead but they were not witches and if they lived they were witches and executed for same.
  19. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    No, they didn't.
    There is no exoneration of Wilson visible in the DOJ report. It does not, for example, deal with the various inconsistencies between Wilson's grand jury testimony and his earlier statements, the eyewitness testimony, or (especially) several items of forensic evidence.

    It doesn't even try. It instead explains why the DOJ is not indicting Wilson, or pressing lawsuit. And that is old news here.

    1) Not true - they concluded there was no basis for the DOJ to overrule the grand jury, or take Wilson to court in the wake of the grand jury testimony and findings. Not the same thing as concluding the grand jury made the right decision in the first place.
    2) So? The only thing the Ferguson grand jury decided was that there was no point in indicting Wilson, given the evidence that would be brought to the trial. Lots of people would agree with that assessment. That does not exonerate Wilson.

    It is not, however, the report itself - we can all read it, and if NPR has taken some kind of official position that it exonerates Wilson then so much the worse for NPR.
  20. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Denial isn't a river in Egypt.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  21. Bells Staff Member

    From his lawyers.. There is nothing in the DoJ report that exonerates him. At all. Quite the contrary. The report held there was not enough evidence to indict him. That does not mean he is innocent. Just not enough evidence to indict.

    You have a history of this Joe.

    Like when you keep reminding everyone that the President and the Attorney General is black and would they really let a white person get away with it, etc..

    Your posts are full of such racist commentary.

    It doesn't bother me. What it does is make you look a foolish.

    He may have been employed as a police officer, but once he retired, he was no longer a police officer. To identify him as "officer" is to claim that he still somehow retains the privileges that goes with the title. He does not have any such privilege. He is no longer an officer of the law.

    Police officers do not retain life long titles.

    You missed the point of the article. Lynchings were popular 130 years ago. It was a popular way of killing black people, to set an example to other black people to remind them of their place. Hence the similarities between lynchings and police shooting unarmed black men. It is to remind the black community that their lives do not matter and the result of such killings, 130 years ago and today is exactly the same. Police officers always get away with it. Same as white people who lynched black people 130 years ago. The excuses are the same for both, the justifications are the same for both and the result is the same for both.

    I highlighted the relevant bit.

    Do you even read what you quote?

    The reason I ask is that what you quoted says exactly what I have been saying. What the DoJ report found is that it lacked the evidence to prosecute, so they are not prosecuting. It does not exonerate him. Just says that they lack the evidence to prosecute. At no time did they say he was innocent. Just that they lacked the necessary evidence to prosecute.

    You do realise that not prosecuting Wilson has nothing to do with what went on in the grand jury hearing, right?

    You are once again trying to say in a not so subtle round about way that because Obama and Holder are black, that their not prosecuting Wilson means he is innocent and not racist.

    That in itself is racist. What? Are you of the belief that black people always defend black people? That like will always support like? This argument of yours is offensive and racist because you appear to be arguing that "they", being black people, will always stick together. That because Obama and Holder are black, that they are somehow of one belief, for example. This is like when bigots claim they have black friends and therefore they cannot be racist.

    Link me where the DoJ report on Wilson even uses the word "exonerate".

    It does not. Far from it. It just says there was not enough evidence to prosecute. In legal terms, it just means they do not have enough to convict, so they do not prosecute. It does not mean he is innocent. Just means that there is not enough evidence against him to prosecute.

    You mean like when you determined that Brown was guilty of a crime without trial?

    The writing was on the wall for Wilson right from the start.


    Because police officers always get away with killing unarmed black people.
  22. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Well not for a long time now. As with your Kos reference you have to go back more than a century to find substance for that argument. There are undoubtedly departments like Ferguson. But that doesn’t mean they are commonplace. And it is unfair to taint Officer Wilson for the offenses of others. Because some people in the Ferguson Police Department were and are racists, it doesn’t mean everyone in the department are racists. If you have evidence of Officer Wilson’s racism, now is the time to show it. The DOJ report certainly didn’t find it.
    Officer Wilson certainly did pay a price for protecting his life. He lost his job and his career. The evidence shows Officer Wilson was just protecting his life. That is a fact you find unpleasant but it has been validated by the grand jury and now the Department of Justice.
    Oh, now where did I say or insinuate that? The fact is I have never said or even insinuated anything of the sort. If you had a case Bells you could make a cogent argument with facts and free of illogical argument, but you can’t. And that is why you rely so heavily on these straw man arguments and do all this cherry picking.
    Facts aren’t racist, they are just facts. The fact is you have been playing the race card. You have accused everyone who disagrees with you of racism. Obama and Holder have issued a report which agrees with me. So are they too racist?
    You are being ridiculous…argument absurdum. Brown crossed the line when he assaulted Officer Brown and threatened Officer Wilson’s life.
    Oh yes you did. You aren’t being honest Bells.
    Oh, and how is it Officer Wilson is responsible for Brown’s behavior? Nothing Officer Wilson did can justify Brown’s assault on Officer Wilson. This case wasn’t in anyway similar to the Garner case in New York. The NYPD officers were not assaulted. Officer Wilson was.
    Much that is rooted in the fact you refuse to acknowledge that the grand jury isn’t a trial body, but an investigative body. Further the items you brought up were inconsequential and some were just not true (e.g. prosecutor was somehow culpable in lies told on the witness stand, fake evidence).
    In addition to the grand jury’s decision, now you have to contend with the Department of Justice Report which validates the conclusions of the grand jury. You are just on the wrong side of the evidence Bells. If truth favored your position you could make a cogent argument with real facts and without all the illogical argument. But you can’t.
  23. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member


Share This Page