Ferguson prosecutor Robert McCulloch: “…they [the jurors] gave up their lives….” What about Michael’s life?
Today Ferguson prosecutor Robert McCulloch announced at the press conference that the grand jury voted not to indict Officer Darren Wilson with the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown. During the Q&A session after the official announcement, McCulloch said something rather unusual, unexpected which I find to be completely out of line, and frankly, selfish and cold-hearted:
“You need to keep in mind that these grand jurors poured the hearts and souls into this process. Their term was scheduled to end in early September, and they gave up their lives, they set their – they put their lives on hold, they put their families on hold, they put everything on hold so that they could come in and do their civic duty. And it was a very emotional process for them.”
Ferguson Prosecutor Robert McCulloch Gives Bizarre Press Conference
Excuse me?? The grand jurors put their lives on hold??? Oh, cry me a river. Michael Brown didn’t get the chance to put his life on hold for whatever reason — he had it taken by six bullets.
Additionally, you think this was a very emotional process for the jurors? What the hell do you think Michael’s family is going through now? Has been going through, and will continue to go through for the rest of their lives?
The jurors may have had to give up their families for a few days, but the Brown’s gave up their son, actually had him taken, for the rest of their lives.
To Robert McCulloch: That was a cruel, cold thing to say. It only shows that you care more about your jurors than you do about a young black man from a poor section of town who was in the wrong spot at the wrong time. Your jurors were not the victims. Michael Brown and his family were, and still are, the true victims here.
McCulloch went on to say that the social media is to blame for the tension in the months following Brown’s death. Maureen Johnson, a Twitter user and an author, tweeted a perfect response, “Social media isn’t the problem, shooting children is the problem.”
Huffington Post: Ferguson Prosecutor Robert McCulloch Gives Bizarre Press Conference
The New York Times: Autopsy Shows Michael Brown Was Struck at Least 6 Times
Reblogged this on MrMilitantNegro™.
He clearly had no empathy for this young man’s life nor was he concerned about justice Neither was the jury Trying to justify their decision, outcome. Delivering the news in the evening and not in the day? Feeling sorry for the jurors? They can try to convince or lie to themselves in thinking they did the right thing. But hopefully there is an ounce of compassion or decency in them and one day acknowledge their wrong-doings. It frightens and saddens me that there is such injustice and hatred still in a country that I so love.
The police are really having too much free reign with impunity. I live in Albuquerque and earlier in the year, the police shot and killed a homeless man because they felt “threatened.” The police were 20 ft away from him and all he had were two rusty camp knives. He was in the process of turning himself in — he even says so in the video recording. Then they shot a flash grenade followed with bullets. He was mentally ill and never showed any signs of aggression – just a lot of talk. That made the news big time.
Then the police shooting a 12-year old boy in Ohio the other day…..
“Michael Brown didn’t get the chance to put his life on hold for whatever reason…”
Sure he did. But, Brown chose to violently attack a store manager, then violently attack an armed police officer, breaking a bone in the officer’s skull before the officer fired in self defense.
Brown, a 300 lb monster of a man, had two opportunities to respect the lives of others and thereby save his own. He had every opportunity to NOT attack other people.
Note: Attacking a police officer is a good way to get dead.
A lot of other people in the vicinity did not attack a police officer. Notice how they did not get dead?
Let this man explain it:
Chris Rock: How not to get your ass kicked by the police
I do not condone attacking an officer for any reason. But such an attack should be a sentence of more time in the slammer — not a death sentence.
Frankly, I was unimpressed with the photos of Wilson’s injuries. He didn’t even have a bruise on the upper half of his face.
Actually, I just heard that the officer himself was 6’4″ tall and just over 210 lbs. He, by far, wasn’t small. And wearing Kevlar and carrying a gun. If Michael frightened him, then I think he needs to find another line of work because he’s not cut out to be an officer.
The violent racists have threatened, bullied and resorted to violence in order to sway the outcome of the jury’s decision. It took great courage to make a decision based on the evidence rather than on fear.
Today, the bullies have lost a round in their agitation game.
If the jurors ARE attacked, it will do even more to damage the credibility of the race-baiters.
Let’s be clear – Michael Brown’s attack on an armed police officer might not have ever occurred if the convenience store manager he robbed and attacked had also been armed. Clearly, Brown, a 300 pound violent thug, was used to throwing his weight around.
This is the Michael Brown whose streak of robbery and violence ended when he chose the wrong target:
First of all, the police had not been informed of this robbery. But even if they had, the police are not a judge and executioner.
Secondly, I don’t believe for one moment that the police officer was beaten. Not to the extent he claims. I believe Brown was resistant, but not violent enough to the point to where warrant being shot.
Third, if the officer was being threatened, one bullet will stop Brown. Six is an execution. Even two shots is “acceptable” when defending one’s life. But six…. That is hate.
Lastly, the jury wasn’t there to render a verdict. Only to determine if there was enough evidence for a trial, and there was.
Are you really this conservative and opposed to so many of my views? Or are you playing “devil’s advocate?”
Again, more guns (in this case, for the store owner) would have prevented the problem? Why can’t conservatives suggest something more constructive than more guns?
The police officer’s head was struck so hard by Brown, the arch bone of his eye socket was broken. That’s the sort of blow that can kill a person. Brown was a very strong man and knew it.
What you believe is rather irrelevant, isn’t it? The jurors got to see the evidence for themselves, free of media sensationalism and agitators’ lies. That’s why they chose to uphold the SELF DEFENSE shooting that finally put a stop to Brown’s attacks.
And, you demonstrate that you are not familiar with self defense use of firearms. In the most respectful and kindly way possible, I suggest you go get professional training or you may end up firing that ‘one bullet’ then get dead as a result. A whole lot of cops and other folks have. If you are trying to save your own life, you keep firing until the attacker is no longer a threat. Don’t learn about defensive use of guns from the movies, please.
Are you really going to continue defending a vicious, 300 pound, pot-smoking violent thug like Michael Brown, who attacked TWO people before being fatally shot? Can’t you guys find an actual victim upon which to hang this sort of protest?
A whole lot of black people are shot to death every day in our major cities, mainly by other black people. When a little baby girl is a victim of this sort of violence, isn’t that the perfect victim to bring everyone onto the streets to demand an end to the violence?
To make matters worse, the Ferguson protestors, in their own rampage of violence, have even attacked and destroyed the convenience store where Michael Brown’s rampages began on that fateful day.
I won’t read “The Blaze.” It’s nothing but right-wing propaganda. I took a glance and saw one comments real quick and saw:
Proverbs17-12NLT -Nov. 25, 2014 at 1:00pm
If Blacks don’t like it here, no one is stopping you from moving back to Africa…..
These are the type of people that The Blaze likes to feed, therefore, I will not read lies and twisted facts. (And there are some liberal media site that I won’t read either, because they do the same damn thing, just the other way around. I am a Mensan and can make my own decisions based on facts.)
A correction – more recent reports say Wilson’s eye socket was not broken when Brown attacked him in his patrol car. This does not change the self defense nature of the shooting in any way.
We can thank the jury, who saw all the evidence (free of media hype), for doing their civic duty. When a violent thug attacks multiple people before being shot by one of his victims, we don’t punish the victim.
Michelle, I see you’re not interested in the facts of the matter. You won’t consider the facts presented in a Blaze article because you’re offended by something a visitor to the site commented below. Well, just go visit Huffington Post and see the insanity in the comments section. Do you REALLY think you can find a news site where not one person will express inane comments, when given the chance to speak freely?
You could have looked at the video on the page, showing the wrecked convenience store and the manager (the guy Michael Brown robbed and beat) standing amid it all. You could have looked on Google to confirm that this is, in fact, true. You have a LOT of other sources to get the same information.
Please, be intellectually curious enough to get the facts on this matter before taking a position. If you take a position contradicted by the facts, it’s called being “wrong”. We are better than that, aren’t we?
I’ll try to help you get past that mental block. Here’s another link showing the video of the ransacked store. Look at it quickly before someone posts something in the comments that might offend you!
Again… What Michael purportedly did in the store has nothing — absolutely nothing — to do with being shot and killed by the officer. The police was not even aware of the theft at that time, it was just coming out. Brown was stopped for other reason. Even if he had been stopped for robbery, the last time I checked, it is not a death sentence, and the cop is not there to render judgment – which is sounds like you approve of the cop shooting Brown for purportedly robbing a store (remember, innocent until proven guilty).
I can say the same about you, that you’re not interested in the facts of the matter. I’ve read and followed along the whole time. I never saw a single photo of the officer beaten as he claimed. There is no proof that Michael even attempted to beat the cop – we have the word of a cop against the word of a dead man. Who’s going to win that? The witness accounts all vary so who is telling the truth? Who is lying? Who is exaggerating facts? Neither you nor I were there and I just never saw the proof the Brown beat the cop. Why didn’t the officer use a taser gun? Bobbies in the UK don’t carry firearms. I don’t see a pile of dead officers growing over there.
Let me guess… I’ll bet you feel that Zimmerman had every right to shoot Trayvon and that Trayvon was also beating up Zimmerman?
Again, when Michael attacked the store manager, BEATING and robbing him, it had everything to do with Michael’s attack on the cop. It demonstrates his mindset just a few minutes before he attacked the cop. Michael DID NOT KNOW that the cop was unaware of his convenience store robbery. Hence, his violent attack on the cop who had no idea what was going on.
The cop, surprised by this spontaneous attack and the huge thug trying to grab his gun to kill him, fought for his life.
You keep pretending Michael Brown did not violently attack the police officer. That is the only way to pretend that Brown was somehow a ‘victim’ instead of a violently rampaging criminal.
You can look at photos of the injuries to the cop online. You can look at reports of Michael Brown’s blood splattered inside the cop’s car, because Brown was leaning into the car to attack the cop and try to grab his gun. But that would take some intellectual curiosity and a desire to be “correct”.
It’s a fair bet the high amount of cannabis in Brown’s blood had an effect as well, dulling his senses and perhaps making him psychotic. The cop likely saw this as a PCP effect, especially since Brown became more and more aggressive while the cop was shooting him. Put yourself in the cop’s shoes – they get killed by PCP freaks all too often.
If you read Huffington Post, you’d see the photos of the injuries to officer Wilson. If you bother to Google, you’ll find the reports of the injuries. It’s up to you, whether or not you wish to have a correct viewpoint.
Meanwhile, consider another factor in Michael Brown’s violent rampage… he was stoned.
However, anxiety and paranoia are more common than hallucinations, especially at high doses. It’s therefore possible that marijuana use was a factor in the events leading up to Brown’s death.
“Marijuana does impair judgment and thinking,” according to Jonathan Caulkins of Carnegie-Mellon University. “Anything that clouds judgment or interferes with communication ability can promote misunderstanding, and misunderstanding can lead to bad resolutions of conflict situations.”
That photo is a hoax, assuming you’re talking about the one with a man lying in bed with a swollen eye. That happens to be “a picture of now-deceased motocross rider Jim McNeil, who was killed in an accident in 2011 and sustained the injuries seen in the image above back in 2006.”
A hoax created for various reasons of which I really don’t need to go into.
And I don’t believe for one second that Michael kept coming at the officer after he was shot. He said, she said. Of course the officer is going to embellish his story – he just whacked an unarmed man.
Look, we can keep going on back-and-forth but I’m firm in what I believe in as are you. We not going to change the other one’s mind. So, to use a common phrase which was used frequently in Men in Black 3, “Let’s agree we disagree.”
No, Michelle, I’m not talking about the hoax photo. I’m talking about the real one. You really could have found it if you Googled “Darren Wilson Injury”. I’m sorry you instead chose to focus on a hoax photo then debunk yourself. It’s not what I’m talking about.
It’s okay to disagree on matters of opinion, such as whether cops should use guns to defend themselves when violent criminals attack them. However, if one chooses to disbelieve the facts of the matter, that does not do one’s credibility any good.
As for credibility – if this protest were about one of the many innocent victims of violence instead of a violent robber and would-be cop killer (he WAS trying to seize the cop’s gun), then the protestors might have some.
If the protestors weren’t rampaging around smashing, burning and looting, destroying innocent people’s lives and livelihoods, they might have some.
If anything, the current actions in Ferguson wholly justify the notion that cops need to be more forceful against violent thugs, not less. A whole lot of innocent people are having their lives ruined because the cops are going too easy on the criminals.
It is almost as if some agitators were ‘community organizing’ the violence in order to justify ever more heavy-handed police tactics in the future.
Think About It
Yes, I caught that “they gave up their lives” when he said it and thought it was a terribly insensitive (not to mention irrelevant) thing to say under the circumstances. Yes, the jurors spent a great deal of time away from their homes, families, and jobs to consider a huge amount of evidence. I don’t fault them at all for what they did and what they decided; I fault the system that apparently required a grand jury before a regular public trial could be conducted. I expected they wouldn’t indict, simply because there seemed to be a reasonable doubt about what happened. And there would have been the same reasonable doubt with a public trial. But at least it would have been public.
The Grand Jury is a safeguard, a means of determining whether the evidence supports a criminal accusation before making one. It protects the identity of witnesses, so that they can speak freely without fear of retaliation from, say, criminal mobs who might want to murder them.
This is a system to protect the innocent and to ensure the most freedom to examine evidence.
Six bullets speaks loud and clear.
Well, the final one was convincing. The others, not so much.
Michael Brown ignored the first one. Kept attacking.
He ignored the second one.
Ignored the third…
The last one finally convinced Michael Brown to stop attacking. And that’s when the cop stopped shooting.
“Michael Brown didn’t get the chance to put his life on hold for whatever reason”
In truth, it is this opposite-of-fact rhetoric that inspired me to respond to this blog. If one speaks the opposite of truth (a lie) then one’s position has no merit.
It is my hope that by honest examination of evidence, reasonable people can come to reasonable conclusions. The key elements here are “honest” and “reasonable”.
It is a fact that Michael Brown had every opportunity to NOT attack and rob the convenience store owner.
It is a fact that Michael Brown had every opportunity to NOT attack and try to seize the gun of a police officer.
He had every chance and every reason to be a good person, that day. Lots of people call him a ‘child’, implying innocence. He certainly had the opportunity to BE innocent. When the 300 pound, violent man attacked and robbed the convenience store owner and chose to reach into a police car to try to seize a cop’s gun… when he chose to HURT other people…
He chose poorly.
Now, there are more violent people making poor choices in Ferguson.
Poor choices have consequences.
Think About It
I am proud to call this man my Brother:
Some very wise words chock full of common sense.
Your Mission: Disguise yourself as Al Sharpton and have your team remove him, so you can take his place and turn back the tide of racism he has fomented.
This message will self destruct in five seconds.
In response to speak2truth (and the thread in general)
While I have to agree that the documented behavior of Michael Brown is the opposite of what I think is appropriate and laden with culturally induced attitudes and behaviors, the very same is true of Darren Wilson as a member of a police that has become so reactionary and militarized. There are, in my opinion, so many bad intrenched attitudes and expectations from both sides. Disrespect to a police officer when asked to move out of the street? Way beyond my idea of social and appropriate. But I also must ask why the only response that Darren (and presumably the rest of most police forces) have at their fingertips and use with impunity is a totally lethal one. Baton? Tazer? Wait for Backup? Simple discussion? What a total waste of a life, a police officer, a government of the people by the people, vital businesses, public peace, and the focus of a nation. Shame on so so many.
The ‘documented behavior’ of Michael Brown includes leaning into the police cruiser to attack Darren Wilson while trying to seize his gun and kill him.
A self-defense shooting does not indicate a ‘militarized’ police officer. It’s just self defense.
Shame on Michael Brown for attacking and robbing the store owner, then putting the cop into that position of having to defend his very life.
It was, as you say, a waste of a life. Brown should have made better choices that day.
What we do not want is a society in which police are required to retreat from violent criminals or to call for backup before defending their own lives. To retreat in the face of violent attackers just because of the color of the attackers’ skin is ridiculous.
Woops, we are already there. Look at the cops retreat as black mobs loot and burn Ferguson. Once we let violent, predatory criminals know they have the upper hand, they’ll take full advantage of it.
Our own Constitution requires use of deadly force to stop the sorts of violent insurrections we see in Ferguson. But, with the law being ignored, the innocent are at the mercy of mobs of violent criminals.
That is not an improvement in the situation. Just ask those who are losing their lives and livelihoods to the violent predators.
There was once a time when it was standard practice to shoot looters on sight. That’s called, “Defending the Innocent” and is entirely the choice of the person who decides to be a looter. They know the consequences. If they choose to die for an armload of Nikes, so be it.
In a civil society, there is no logical limit to how forcefully one defends the innocent.
Um… I see snowflakes falling in this forum. How cute!
Ha! Did they turn that on? I’ve been so busy working these past several days I haven’t even been on my site for a while. Yeah, it comes on every year.