Michael Brown verdict discussion policy

Simon

When the OJ decision was released, I was shocked that every one of my African-American friends thought it was a just decision. The right decision. They actually thought he was innocent. I know of no white persons who sided with the OJ decision. The opinions about the OJ decision were split down racial lines much more than the MB decision is.

Too many people base the decision of whether someone is guilty or innocent on whether they have the same skin color or not. While it's possibly excusable or at least understandable as an initial knee-jerk reaction it's less justifiable when there has been an investigation and more facts based on evidence have come out.

We need to separate the reality of what happened from the claims being made about what happened. Some people just can't do that. It shows how danerous the "first lies" are - things that are initially reported get repeated over and over and some accept them as fact even if they are debunked.

The OJ case is rather unique because it was a very public and very botched prosecution. I don't believe black people really believed he was innocent, I think they didn't want him found guilty because he was a black icon.

Pacopoolio

The sentiment of the OJ case around the black people in my area was basically "we're happy that the system worked in favor of a black man for once and we can benefit from the same tehcnicalities as everyone else, there -is- hope," and not necessarily that he was innocent (some did think that, but it was not necessarily a majority or that significant of a number from what I saw). That was from being in a 98% black school at the time and being in an 85% black city at that time and EVERYONE around talking about it. I don't know if this represents overall opinion, but it could be the difference between observing people were happy and assuming they thought he was innocent, as opposed to hearing the actual conversations.

Still an anecdote, but a little more precise and broad than "I know some black people and they said this, so this is what overall opinion was."

WTWizard

The courts decided that the shooting was in self defense, as it does not take a gun to murder someone (or threaten to do so). Hence, the cop had the right to defend himself. As there was no blatant miscarriage of justice with the grand jury, I have no reason to go against that.

But, when people go race-baiting, all it does is compounds the problem. It doesn't fix anything. I do not give a fxxx what race which party was, simply the actions each took or threatened to take. As for the "Black lives count" line, yes they do count--but this is not something that could happen to anyone, any time. I believe this whole case was taken way beyond reasonability, and should not be used to trample people's right to self-defense.

skeeter1

OJ was innocent in the criminal system, but "liable" for money damages in the civil system. There is a difference in "beyond a reasonable doublt" and "preponderance of the evidence."

No jury, man, judicial committee ever knows exactly what actually occurred. But, until God opens up the Heavens, our system (set by God to Moses) is the best we have.

Simon

The sentiment of the OJ case around the black people in my area was basically "we're happy that the system worked in favor of a black man for once and we can benefit from the same tehcnicalities as everyone else, there -is- hope," and not necessarily that he was innocent

That is a sad indictment. It's things like this that cause people to dismiss claims and not take them seriously and view another group with suspicion.

I think there is significant belief that the TM and MB cases both only got then support and attention they did simply because of skin color which undermines trust in a groups motivation or honesty.

A simple test is whether, if the races of the actors involved were reversed, would opinion of guilt or innocence be reversed too? If you suddenly think the opposite result would be correct then guess what - you're a racist! It doesn't matter whether you are black or white.

In both the TM and MB case, I think you'd have a hard time claiming the results should be any different based on the evidence but if people of one race would suddenly be rejoicing and celebrating the results then that highlights a big problem.

Racism is racism, whatever the racists color.

Paralipomenon

Reviewed much of the facts of the case and really I feel that it was excessive force on the part of the police officer. To say the handling of the crime scene was botched would be a massive understatement.

The first responding officer didn't take a recorded statement or even take notes.

The on site forensic scientist didn't bring their tools to do accurate measurements

The gun and clothes of the officer were cleaned before they were submitted for evidence.

Eyewitness accounts were all over the map mainly due to race tensions. Some accounts were embellished or proven to be fabrications.

I agree with the verdict though, there was just not enough evidence to levy charges. However, I would dispute Simon's original post on this thread. This decision was just not to charge him with anything. It merely said that there was not enough evidence to charge him with a crime at this time. It doesn't not make him innocent as he can be charged again at any time.

I feel race came into play after the shooting. I do agree though that if this case had been any other racial matchup with identical circumstances, it wouldn't have even been considered by news agencies.

MeanMrMustard

Looks like some house members copied the "hands up don't shoot" stance on the house floor: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/lawmakers-ferguson-hands-up-113254.html

Good lord. *FACE PALM*

MMM

designs

Oh why can't- they- just behave.

'Before Obama, people barely noticed skin color; that goes back 150 years. Blacks were happy and grateful for what we were given" Dr. Ben Carson on the Mark Levin show, 10/22/14.....