Ferguson Decision to be released @ 8pm - same time as MU game.

[jesmu84]

I just don't understand destroying your community and causing so much damage to your own area in the name of what? Bunch of small businesses (among others) getting ruined just days before Thanksgiving. It's a travesty.

[Ellisium]

Any history book will show that when a group of people is subjugated, in some form or manner, that they will often resort to violence until their rights are restored.

[muwarrior69]

Any history book will show that when a group of people is subjugated, in some form or manner, that they will often resort to violence until their rights are restored.

If they are subjugated, Ferguson did it to themselves. I guess they never learned that we are a government of the people, by the people and for the people in school. They have the votes to determine what kind of government they want but did not vote for one that reflects their community. Hopefully this will change.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/06/politics/missouri-elections-ferguson-voter-turnout/

[Lighthouse 84]

Gotta agree with this. The legal process played out. The prosecutor even said as much during in front of the camera (of course, many of the news outlets cut away from that instead to show the protestors)

Last night Megyn Kelly had a contributor on who was in Ferguson (or at least the St. Louis area).  Even after the prosecutor laid it out for the American public as to why the grand jury came back with the decision they did, even after painstakingly detailing how many witnesses kept changing their stories, how many witness's accounts changed when they heard what the physical evidence showed, and that the 12 grand jurors are the only people who saw and heard all the evidence, the contributor (coincidentally a democrat who is also black) acted as if none of the evidence should have mattered because Mike Brown was black and the officer white.  I can't remember his name but I think he's even a lawyer, so he should at least understand the judicial process better than some.  But for some, it's not even possible that Mike Brown had any culpability in the events that led to his death. 

[Hards Alumni]

Your post drips with irony and hypocrisy....are you even capable of seeing it?  Yes....people like me is what is wrong with the world.  LOL.   I create no divides, they already exist.

Its finally happened, you made the ignore list.

It has one person on it.

[mu03eng]

I just don't understand destroying your community and causing so much damage to your own area in the name of what? Bunch of small businesses (among others) getting ruined just days before Thanksgiving. It's a travesty.

I wonder how many of those destroying the community are actually from the community.

[Pakuni]

Never let a crisis go to waste....and if needed, create a crisis. 

see: Benghazi.

[reinko]

Also sad that people having so much fear they jump to an immediate conclusion a gun will help. 

Tragic.

http://wgntv.com/2014/11/24/woman-saying-were-ready-for-ferguson-accidentally-shoots-self-in-head-dies/

Plus people like this: http://www.wate.com/story/27472265/knoxville-gun-dealer-says-he-will-ship-firearms-to-ferguson-mo-to-help-arm-residents

[Pakuni]

Last night Megyn Kelly had a contributor on who was in Ferguson (or at least the St. Louis area).  Even after the prosecutor laid it out for the American public as to why the grand jury came back with the decision they did, even after painstakingly detailing how many witnesses kept changing their stories, how many witness's accounts changed when they heard what the physical evidence showed, and that the 12 grand jurors are the only people who saw and heard all the evidence, the contributor (coincidentally a democrat who is also black) acted as if none of the evidence should have mattered because Mike Brown was black and the officer white.  I can't remember his name but I think he's even a lawyer, so he should at least understand the judicial process better than some.  But for some, it's not even possible that Mike Brown had any culpability in the events that led to his death.  

It's because as a minority group that historically has been - and largely continues to be - treated differently (read: unfairly) by the system doesn't see said system as legitimate.
I mean, if the system were more likely to send you to prison than someone of another race for the same crime, would you view the system as legitimate? If the system were four times more likely to arrest you for a minor drug offense than it were a person of another race, would you view the system as fair and just? If people of your race were 21 times more likely to be shot to death by a police officer, would you have faith in the system and see police as being on your side?

When you don't see the system as legitimate, when you see the system as being stacked against you because of the color of your skin, you're going to be (reasonably, IMO) suspicious and skeptical of the justice that system dispenses.

I don't justify/excuse rioting, looting, arson or any other sort of violent protest in this situation. But the mistrust and skepticism? Yeah, I get that.

[GGGG]

I knew this was going to happen.  I knew that there was going to be shades of gray.  I knew that there would be idiot rioters burning things.  I knew that there would be the Chicos and anti-Chicos of the world using this as an opportunity to portray their worldview.

And most of all, I knew that this would never be used as a moment where we can sit back and have a dialogue as a society about race, discrimination, etc.  Everyone just goes back to the same old talking points.  Just like I knew after Sandy Hook that both sides would just sit their entrenched and not try to figure things out and see what the other side sees.

It's so damn depressing.

[GGGG]

It's because as a minority group that historically has been - and largely continues to be - treated differently (read: unfairly) by the system doesn't see said system as legitimate.
I mean, if the system were more likely to send you to prison than someone of another race for the same crime, would you view the system as legitimate? If the system were four times more likely to arrest you for a minor drug offense than it were a person of another race, would you view the system as fair and just? If people of your race were 21 times more likely to be shot to death by a police officer, would you have faith in the system and see police as being on your side?

When you don't see the system as legitimate, when you see the system as being stacked against you because of the color of your skin, you're going to be (reasonably, IMO) suspicious and skeptical of the justice that system dispenses.

I don't justify/excuse rioting, looting, arson or any other sort of violent protest in this situation. But the mistrust and skepticism? Yeah, I get that.

Yeah and then you get stuff like this.  Simply people talking among themselves about problems they don't fully understand or have experienced.

https://twitter.com/PortChecagou/status/537062001164296194

(And I am sure that other examples on the other side exist as well...but this was the one in my twitter feed.)

[MerrittsMustache]

I obviously don't know exactly what happened between Darren Wilson and Michael Brown, but I do know that if Brown and his buddy had listened to Wilson when he initially told them to get out of the middle of the street, Brown would still be alive.

[Pakuni]

I obviously don't know exactly what happened between Darren Wilson and Michael Brown, but I do know that if Brown and his buddy had listened to Wilson when he initially told them to get out of the middle of the street, Brown would still be alive.

I know that if a guy walking in the street turns into a physical struggle that ends with someone dead from multiple gunshot wounds, a truly horrendous job of policing has taken place.
Incompetence isn't strong enough of a word to describe Wilson's handling of the situation.

[MerrittsMustache]

I know that if a guy walking in the street turns into a physical struggle that ends with someone dead from multiple gunshot wounds, a truly horrendous job of policing has taken place.
Incompetence isn't strong enough of a word to describe Wilson's handling of the situation.

Since you don't know what happened, you actually don't know this.

[muwarrior69]

I said last month no indictment and said I'm glad I don't have a student at SLU when I made the comment.....what do I win?  How many people here rushed to judgment....AGAIN!!!

Becoming like clock work....people believing what they want to believe rather than what Is provable, etc.  whether it is Treyvon, Duke LaCrosse, Ferguson, etc, etc.  people can be outraged all they want, but we have a system where actual evidence is required, not just hunches and hopes.

Finally, for the media....a story doesn't go by when these clowns don't add to the problem.  Editing 911 calls, finding 2 witnesses that say one thing but magically not being able to find the 9 witnesses that say the complete opposite and not vetting the ones that agree with their version.  Or putting up pictures of the "victims" when they were 12 years old and 16" shorter and 100lbs lighter in an attempt to draw public sympathy that this "youngster, gentle giant" was killed.  There is no need for this.  None.  None.  None.  Report the news, stop trying to leave out important bits, editing stuff to drastically change reality, or flat out lying in some cases.  No one wants people to die through rogue cops or from criminal activity.  The media does no one any justice when they purposely manipulate public opinion with this ridiculousness.  It is just wrong and why so many people find them in such a low level of respect in our country.  I have no doubt the next week or so they will just make things worse until the next event where they can manipulate things again.

Report the news....period.  

You hit the nail right on the head. Good journalism strives to get at the truth. Honest reporters find themselves in a position where they have to quit because their stories don't reach the light of day because their editors don't feel the story is news worthy (Cheryl Actkinson). I watch and read all the news outlets; its the only way your going to find out what is really happening. It's becoming more and more difficult to cut away through all the spin and just arrive at what, where and how it happened.

[Pakuni]

Since you don't know what happened, you actually don't know this.

One could say the same for your comment ... and every other comment then, right?
Read wilson's grand jury testimony. Even by his own account - which I'm 100 percent sure he wouldn't have ever shaded in his favor - a verbal disagreement over whether these guys should have been using the sidewalk turned into a life-or-death struggle.
Do you seriously believe allowing a minor verbal dispute over where someone is walking to escalate into a fatal shooting is an example of sterling - or even acceptable - police work?

[mu03eng]

It's because as a minority group that historically has been - and largely continues to be - treated differently (read: unfairly) by the system doesn't see said system as legitimate.
I mean, if the system were more likely to send you to prison than someone of another race for the same crime, would you view the system as legitimate? If the system were four times more likely to arrest you for a minor drug offense than it were a person of another race, would you view the system as fair and just? If people of your race were 21 times more likely to be shot to death by a police officer, would you have faith in the system and see police as being on your side?

When you don't see the system as legitimate, when you see the system as being stacked against you because of the color of your skin, you're going to be (reasonably, IMO) suspicious and skeptical of the justice that system dispenses.

I don't justify/excuse rioting, looting, arson or any other sort of violent protest in this situation. But the mistrust and skepticism? Yeah, I get that.

Here is where I struggle with this, and this goes to Sultan's dialogue post as well, what does the discussion and/or solution look like that solves this?  Can we start from the basis of life isn't fair, and accept that as a universal truth?  If we assume that is true, how do we correct a society that has clearly, whether intentionally or accidentally or both, created additional unfairness for certain groups?

This is something I'm trying to articulate in my head so it's probably going to come out wrong and I'll get jumped on (part of the overall issue, but I digress).  Historically, African-Americans have been subjected to institutionalized discrimination that added to the general unfairness of life, essentially stunting societal growth for that group.  So we get to 2014 where I feel that the majority of institutional bias has been removed, however that anchor from years past has gone uncorrected.  How do you correct for that historical anchor without "overcorrecting"?  

That's often the argument you get, random white person "I was born poor, worked 7 jobs and got an education and succeeded, why can't they"?  How do you allow for the randomness of life, while correcting for the wrongs that have been done historically that made things more unfair?  To your point, what reason does a minority group have to trust a system if through generations past that system was intentionally unfair?  Let's assume you 100% remove issues within the system, there are generations condition to not trust it....how do you restore that trust?  That's the struggle I see, how do we come together and say, we've created fair system X and here is how we will get everyone to believe in the system?

[Warriors10]

Who's decision was it to announce this thing at 8 PM CST?  No idea what they were thinking...

[Henry Sugar]

"It’s Incredibly Rare For A Grand Jury To Do What Ferguson’s Just Did"

Former New York state Chief Judge Sol Wachtler famously remarked that a prosecutor could persuade a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich.” The data suggests he was barely exaggerating: According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them.

and (emphasis mine)

Cases involving police shootings, however, appear to be an exception. As my colleague Reuben Fischer-Baum has written, we don’t have good data on officer-involved killings. But newspaper accounts suggest, grand juries frequently decline to indict law-enforcement officials. A recent Houston Chronicle investigation found that “police have been nearly immune from criminal charges in shootings” in Houston and other large cities in recent years. In Harris County, Texas, for example, grand juries haven’t indicted a Houston police officer since 2004; in Dallas, grand juries reviewed 81 shootings between 2008 and 2012 and returned just one indictment. Separate research by Bowling Green State University criminologist Philip Stinson has found that officers are rarely charged in on-duty killings, although it didn’t look at grand jury indictments specifically.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ferguson-michael-brown-indictment-darren-wilson/

"Allegations Of Police Misconduct Rarely Result In Charges"

Of the more than 8,300 misconduct accusations (involving almost 11,000 officers) in Packman’s database from April 2009 through the end of 2010, 3,238 resulted in legal action.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/allegations-of-police-misconduct-rarely-result-in-charges/

[Aughnanure]

But he was a gentle giant....and two convicted felons said they saw something really bad and the 9 who saw it the way the officer saw it should be ignored...don't you know.  And the autopsy report....should be ignored.  All that matters is race....facts be damned.

And you're a racist.

[Henry Sugar]

https://twitter.com/conradhackett/status/502523635371114497

[GGGG]

Here is where I struggle with this, and this goes to Sultan's dialogue post as well, what does the discussion and/or solution look like that solves this?  Can we start from the basis of life isn't fair, and accept that as a universal truth?  If we assume that is true, how do we correct a society that has clearly, whether intentionally or accidentally or both, created additional unfairness for certain groups?

This is something I'm trying to articulate in my head so it's probably going to come out wrong and I'll get jumped on (part of the overall issue, but I digress).  Historically, African-Americans have been subjected to institutionalized discrimination that added to the general unfairness of life, essentially stunting societal growth for that group.  So we get to 2014 where I feel that the majority of institutional bias has been removed, however that anchor from years past has gone uncorrected.  How do you correct for that historical anchor without "overcorrecting"?  

That's often the argument you get, random white person "I was born poor, worked 7 jobs and got an education and succeeded, why can't they"?  How do you allow for the randomness of life, while correcting for the wrongs that have been done historically that made things more unfair?  To your point, what reason does a minority group have to trust a system if through generations past that system was intentionally unfair?  Let's assume you 100% remove issues within the system, there are generations condition to not trust it....how do you restore that trust?  That's the struggle I see, how do we come together and say, we've created fair system X and here is how we will get everyone to believe in the system?

Those are good questions, and I don't know the answers.  I mean, I have no idea what it is like to be a minority.  I am a middle-class, white male.  So I don't know what it is like to have suffered regular discriminations.  I don't know what it is like to have parents and grandparents who have suffered even worse.

I also know that most white people I know aren't racist, believe in justice, and a good many of them think this was a correct decision.

How do you get these two groups to understand that neither is really out to get the other?

[Ellisium]

One could say the same for your comment ... and every other comment then, right?
Do you seriously believe allowing a minor verbal dispute over where someone is walking to escalate into a fatal shooting is an example of sterling - or even acceptable - police work?

Brown was stoned according to the toxicology report.  Very well he could have been paranoid and acted irrationally out of fear.  At the same time you have a police officer who stated that this was a very bad area that he was in.  He wasn't comfortable there and fearful for his life during the altercation.  He knew it was a bad area.  Of course, a heightened sense of fear is due to a lack of understanding of the area.  Perhaps if police tactics in Ferguson consisted of community outreach, getting to know the actual people there, this fear based reaction wouldn't have happened on both ends.  We already know the Ferguson police chief's first inclination was one of imposing fear when they sported their armored vehicles in the protests over summer.  That type of attitude only creates more problems.  

Policing isn't about intimidation.  It's about repairing strained relationships and establishing new bonds with people in the community.  Once people get to know the police force and the police force begins to know those people in the "bad" areas, trust is earned on both sides, and respect develops on both ends.

Ultimately, this was a systematic failure by the Ferguson police department, because its culture dictated fear rather than openness.  This lack of insight into the issue has scarred Michael Brown's family, the police officer, and the community of Ferguson.  Had they actually gotten out of their police cars and developed relationships, this may have never happened.  

[ChicosBailBonds]

25 days the Grand Jury took, 60+ witnesses, 1000's of documents.  Those 12 people said pushing forward made no sense as there wasn't enough evidence to have a trial, let alone a reasonable chance at a conviction.  That's what the grand jury system is for so we aren't parading people into jury trials ad nauseum on trumped up charges or wasting the court's time.  I'm sorry people don't like it, but they are the only ones that were able to see all the evidence.  Not Al Sharpton, not Jesse Jackson, not some neo Nazi guy, no one on MU Scoop, or Don Lemon, or Bill O'Reilly. 

Shame people burn things down, smash windows, burn cars, steal stuff.....most likely the vast majority of the looters don't even live in Ferguson yet the Ferguson people pay for it, directly and indirectly.  Justice.  Progress.  Moving Forward.  Would it surprise anyone if CVS says they aren't coming back?  AutoZone? Some of the locally owned businesses?  Maybe tonight the Gov will actually deploy the National Guard he put on alert 8 days ago....what a concept.

[Aughnanure]

Brown was stoned according to the toxicology report.  Very well he could have been paranoid and acted irrationally out of fear.  At the same time you have a police officer who stated that this was a very bad area that he was in.  He wasn't comfortable there and fearful for his life during the altercation.  He knew it was a bad area.  Of course, a heightened sense of fear is due to a lack of understanding of the area.  Perhaps if police tactics in Ferguson consisted of community outreach, getting to know the actual people there, this fear based reaction wouldn't have happened on both ends.  We already know the Ferguson police chief's first inclination was one of imposing fear when they sported their armored vehicles in the protests over summer.  That type of attitude only creates more problems.  

Stop the weed fear-mongering. Seriously? Marijuana can be in your system for freaking weeks, and still this wouldn't explain it.