• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michael brown paid, full footage shows

I don't agree with a lot of what you've posted - your dismissal of what seems obvious to me is puzzling - however, different views and perspectives make life interesting. Have fun.
I thought about this post alot last night. I wasn't directing my comments at you and I think it probably sounded that way. Sorry if it came off like that. Your response was intelligent and civil and I appreciated hearing your perspective.
 
I thought about this post alot last night. I wasn't directing my comments at you and I think it probably sounded that way. Sorry if it came off like that. Your response was intelligent and civil and I appreciated hearing your perspective.

Not to worry - I didn't take any offense to your comments and didn't feel you were singling out me or my comments in any way - it was just an exchange of ideas. We clearly have different views on the matter and there's nothing wrong with that. You didn't call me a racist, didn't call me names, didn't tell me to mind my own business and spew out xenophobic hatred of Canada and Canadians - that's a win-win for me - I considered it a banner exchange of views and ideas!!
 
The story the OP posted said he appears to have paid. I am not sure why they say that because it looks like he asked for the cigars behind the counter and passed them to his friend and then walked away. I did not see a wallet or exchange of cash. What leads people to believe he paid based on this footage?
 
You said the whole "you people" thing was racist. Since the "people" referred to was Conservatives...

You can't be racist against a group that isn't a race.

I didn't....

Another poster was implying that "you people" was a racist term.
 
Michael Brown appears to have paid for the cigars he was suspected of having stolen.

What’s more appalling is that the supposed robbery likely had nothing to do with the altercation between Wilson and Brown, as the video was not obtained until well after Brown had been shot and killed by Wilson.

It’s shameful that the Ferguson authorities would engage in such tactics. Even if Brown had robbed the convenience store, it is irrelevant to the circumstances of the shooting.

The punishment for petty theft isn’t death. The punishment for suspected petty theft isn’t death. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?


Michael Brown Paid, Full Footage Shows | Ring of Fire

Does this look like footage of someone committing a crime?
This article makes a greater point, one that I think we can't afford to ignore. That point being there seems to be a consistent practice of people shooting unarmed young black men dead then the media demonizing them by creating a false narrative that draws from and perpetuates unfounded stereotypes and prejudices.

Sometimes I'm not sure which disgusts me more. The people who create these lies or the people who allow themselves to be distracted by them and lose sight of an obvious injustice.

Does anyone really believe that ALL of these stories of young unarmed black men being shot dead are BS? If so, I see that as a somewhat willing ignorance.
I know I smack around a store clerk after paying for my cigars. Its normal, right?
 
Who said that?

I posted this in another thread, but just to put this one to rest:

Here is the relevant portion of the transcript from the store owner's lawyer:

KANZLER: Sure. I mean, first of all, my clients have never said that that is Michael Brown in the video. In fact, before that weekend they had never seen that individual, Michael Brown, or the individual on the tape in the store. What I can say is that what occurs on the tape, what you see on the tape, did occur in the store. Somebody did come in. Somebody did attempt to steal cigars. Just as that individual on the tape can be seen doing it, he reached around the counter and tried to grab additional cigars from the clerk. There were words exchanged with the female cashier and then the store clerk did try to go to the front door to lock the door and to talk to the individual in the video.

Apparently what some of you believe was Michael Brown paying for the cigars was just Michael Brown stealing additional cigars.

CNN.com - Transcripts
 
I ran with this when I saw an article suggesting the video shows he paid, but in the end I took down my support of that view.

There are things you can deduce from the video that works each way.

In Support of Purchase:

Brown has a number of products he seems to have taken to the counter and the exchange with the clerk, and his other movements and behaviors, come across as very natural; he's not being forceful and he's not attempting to be sneaky. There's even some movements that indicate he left some products behind as though he couldn't afford them all. Then, when the clerk comes around and goes past him, there's no sign of hostility or strange behavior by either person.

Then there's a couple other things not directly related to the longer video. If the clerk went up there with the intent to stop Brown, well... that's just an incredibly stupid decision. Brown is twice his size. How exactly did the clerk expect to stop him? Lastly, the clerk never called the cops to report a robbery. The call was made by another customer and there's no telling what that customer saw; if they only saw altercation at the door it'd be logical to assume a robbery, but perhaps not factual.

In Support of Robbery:

The final altercation would suggest a robbery, though it remains possible there were simply words exchanged that offended Brown, or some other cause for it. Then the store hasn't seemed to dispute the fact there was a robbery, so there probably was one.
 
I ran with this when I saw an article suggesting the video shows he paid, but in the end I took down my support of that view.

There are things you can deduce from the video that works each way.

In Support of Purchase:

Brown has a number of products he seems to have taken to the counter and the exchange with the clerk, and his other movements and behaviors, come across as very natural; he's not being forceful and he's not attempting to be sneaky. There's even some movements that indicate he left some products behind as though he couldn't afford them all. Then, when the clerk comes around and goes past him, there's no sign of hostility or strange behavior by either person.

Then there's a couple other things not directly related to the longer video. If the clerk went up there with the intent to stop Brown, well... that's just an incredibly stupid decision. Brown is twice his size. How exactly did the clerk expect to stop him? Lastly, the clerk never called the cops to report a robbery. The call was made by another customer and there's no telling what that customer saw; if they only saw altercation at the door it'd be logical to assume a robbery, but perhaps not factual.

In Support of Robbery:

The final altercation would suggest a robbery, though it remains possible there were simply words exchanged that offended Brown, or some other cause for it. Then the store hasn't seemed to dispute the fact there was a robbery, so there probably was one.

This was exactly kind of rational and objective response I had hoped to get when I posted this video. Thank you
 
I don't care what happened in the store because it had nothing to do with him being shot. In the end what matters is the autopsy, specifically were there choke marks on Brown and where and how did the bullets penetrate his body. Does the science match witness descriptions of the event? Fact is it tells a completely different story, one that supports the cop's version not Darian Johnson's.
 
I don't care what happened in the store because it had nothing to do with him being shot. In the end what matters is the autopsy, specifically were there choke marks on Brown and where and how did the bullets penetrate his body. Does the science match witness descriptions of the event? Fact is it tells a completely different story, one that supports the cop's version not Darian Johnson's.


Please stop being so logical and reasonable you're messing up the DP mojo
 
Neither one of us knows what provoked the confrontation between these two men do we? Maybe the clerk suspected him of something and accused him aggressively? You think just because the clerk is small that means he could not possibly have been the one who started the problem?

I wonder how often that clerk initiates fights with paying customers that are much larger than him?
 
Back
Top Bottom