HOLLYWOOD STOCK EXCHANGE
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
The Justice Dept. report disagrees with you.
"When the shootings are viewed, as they must be, in light of all the surrounding
circumstances and what Wilson knew at the time, as established by the credible physical
evidence and eyewitness testimony, it was not unreasonable for Wilson to fire on Brown until he
stopped moving forward and was clearly subdued. Although, with hindsight, we know that
Brown was not armed with a gun or other weapon, this fact does not render Wilson’s use of
deadly force objectively unreasonable. Again, the key question is whether Brown could
reasonably have been perceived to pose a deadly threat to Wilson at the time he shot him
regardless of whether Brown was armed. Sufficient credible evidence supports Wilson’s claim
that he reasonably perceived Brown to be posing a deadly threat. First, Wilson did not know that
Brown was not armed at the time he shot him, and had reason to suspect that he might be when
Brown reached into the waistband of his pants as he advanced toward Wilson. See Loch v. City
of Litchfield, 689 F.3d 961, 966 (8th Cir. 2012) (holding that “[e]ven if a suspect is ultimately
‘found to be unarmed, a police officer can still employ deadly force if objectively reasonable.’”)
(quoting Billingsley v. City of Omaha, 277 F.3d 990, 995 (8th Cir. 2002)); Reese v. Anderson,
926 F.2d 494, 501 (5th Cir. 1991) (“Also irrelevant is the fact that [the suspect] was actually
unarmed. [The officer] did not and could not have known this.”); Smith v. Freland, 954 F.2d 343,
347 (noting that “unarmed” does not mean “harmless) (6th Cir. 1992). While Brown did not use
a gun on Wilson at the SUV, his aggressive actions would have given Wilson reason to at least
question whether he might be armed, as would his subsequent forward advance and reach toward
his waistband. This is especially so in light of the rapidly-evolving nature of the incident.
Wilson did not have time to determine whether Brown had a gun and was not required to risk
being shot himself in order to make a more definitive assessment. "
Washington Post Fact Checker: "Hands up, don't shoot" did not happen in Ferguson Mar 22, 06:32
yes, not putting your hands up is a free pass for the cop to shoot you unarmed {nm} Mar 22, 10:38
'Unarmed' is not relevant when you've gone from robbing a liquor store, to attacking a cop in his car. {nm} Mar 22, 11:55
it's totally relevant when you're 150 feet away from the cop when he shoots you {nm} Mar 22, 14:59
The Justice Dept. report disagrees with you. Mar 22, 15:45
yes the law is overwhelmingly in the favor of police shooting first and asking no questions later {nm} Mar 22, 19:01
well that's much better. 20 feet = fire away {nm} Mar 22, 18:58
You Unload the Entire Clip on the Sucker .... unless it is a White Guy, then You use Non-Lethal Means. Mar 22, 22:10
Which actually happened to the neo-Nazi who went on a shooting rampage in Arizona and killed one. {nm} Mar 23, 11:35
At 20 feet you don't have 4 seconds to decide, much closer to 0.4 seconds to decide AND act. {nm} Mar 22, 22:39
Thanks - I was being generous. That was the police point. And I stil haven't heard what non-lethal means anyone would use {nm} Mar 22, 23:09
They don't call that class of weapon "non-lethal". They are "less lethal" (rubber bullets, tasers, beanbag rounds, etc.) Mar 23, 12:59
Might be new for the rest of the country - but in St Louis, we knew that false a week or two after it happened {nm} Mar 22, 12:24
And that report came out 3 weeks ago. {nm} Mar 22, 12:28
oops meant to include the link to the actual report Mar 22, 12:29
It's still irrelevant to the main point. {nm} Mar 22, 16:56
Which main point is that? {nm} Mar 22, 17:04
That too many people die from police action, and that the victims are disproportionately African-American. Mar 22, 19:46
Okay - I thought this was about the Hands Up part which was false but continually gets perpetuated {nm} Mar 22, 19:56
No, I'm just saying it's irrelevant. Mar 22, 20:24
I'm sorry he died but he brought it on himself. {nm} Mar 22, 20:36
There's the immediate injustice that a person shouldn't die for what he did. Mar 22, 21:26
Just one of many, how is this not an EXECUTION? Mar 22, 23:06
Police have the authority, but the power to make if life-and-death exists on both "sides". Mar 23, 13:12
By power I mean `legitimate power` {nm} Mar 23, 14:39
I think it's change in policing that will be a lot more effective. Mar 23, 05:11
You're Blaming the Victim. Try this - Make Body-Worn Cameras on Police Mandatory - Reduces Use-Of-Force. Mar 23, 05:55
