Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE STREETS OF Ferguson were decidedly calmer on Wednesday after two days of nationwide protests against the decision not to prosecute a white policeman who shot dead an unarmed black teenager.
Just a few dozen protesters and clergy braved rain and light snow to protest outside the police department in the St Louis suburb, where 18-year-old Michael Brown was killed on 9 August.
A Missouri grand jury decided on Monday not to prosecute Officer Darren Wilson, who fired the fatal shots — a move that inspired coast-to-coast anger in the United States as well as a rally across the Atlantic in London.
The simmering fury led a small group of protesters to attempt to storm St Louis city hall earlier in the day. After they were rebuffed, extra police and a National Guard Humvee were drafted to protect the building.
In Ferguson late yesterday, the group of mostly young people — bundled up against the cold — shouted, “This is what democracy looks like.”
One or two taunted and swore at the 50 National Guard in riot gear who stood on duty at the police department. Witnesses said police took one person into custody.
A couple of dozen protesters accompanied by clergy, volunteer medics and a gaggle of media marched down the road from Ferguson police station past city hall to an intersection where the National Guard had a discreet presence.
They briefly blocked traffic but dispersed peacefully after police in riot gear turned up. Protest organizers ordered them out of the road onto the sidewalk to avoid confrontation with the police.
During the day volunteer clean-up crews swept the streets of Ferguson, where angry crowds on Monday torched businesses and looted stores.
Heavy security — police, state troopers and National Guard troops — was still visible in the streets on Wednesday, but the situation was stabilizing. Already, Tuesday night did not see the scale of destruction that followed Monday’s decision.
“I think generally it was a much better night,” St Louis County police chief Jon Belmar told reporters, despite a police car having been set on fire and more businesses having been attacked.
Many thousands of people on Tuesday joined demonstrations in dozens of cities — a relatively rare occurrence in America, and evidence that the case has struck a raw nerve in race relations.
In Britain, where thousands of sympathisers angered by Brown’s treatment marched in London chanting the same slogan: “Hands up, don’t shoot.”
“We need to send a message to Mike Brown’s family,” said Carol Duggan, the aunt of Mark Duggan, a 29-year-old black man whose shooting by British police in 2011 sparked riots in London.
US civil rights leaders have called for more protests on Saturday.
Similar rallies were held last year after the acquittal on murder charges of neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, who shot dead another unarmed black teen, Trayvon Martin, in Florida.
Another case in Cleveland, Ohio — that of a 12-year-old black boy shot dead by police at the weekend while carrying a replica gun — seemed certain to stoke racial tensions inflamed by Brown’s death.
Surveillance video released Wednesday showed that the boy, Tamir Rice, was shot within seconds of the patrol car arriving on the scene.
Moving on
In Ferguson, where the National Guard presence was tripled to 2,200 on Tuesday in a bid to quell violence, residents said on the eve of Thanksgiving that they hoped looting and arson would stop.
Brown’s mother, Lesley McSpadden, told CBS News that they hoped protests would remain peaceful.
“We continue to ask for calm,” McSpadden said.
Brown’s parents however had harsher words for Wilson, who had said Tuesday he had a “clean conscience” about the shooting.
The grand jury found that Wilson had shot Brown in self-defense after an altercation with him. A total of 12 shots were fired.
In his first televised comments since the incident, Wilson told ABC News he had feared for his life during the confrontation, believing Brown was attempting to wrestle his gun away from him.
“I don’t think it’s haunting. It’s always going to be something that happened,” he said, adding that his conscience was clear because “I know I did my job right.”
A visibly emotional McSpadden said on NBC’s “Today” show that Wilson’s remarks added “insult after injury” and were “so disrespectful.”
His father, Michael Brown Sr., said on NBC he felt the officer’s version of events was “crazy.”
“For one, my son, he respected law enforcement,” Brown said. “Two, who in their right mind would rush or charge at a police officer that has his gun drawn? It sounds crazy.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Remember how all the white people of America looted and rioted after the acquittal of OJ Simpson?
Me neither
That’s because it had nothing to do with race and the systematic and institutional abuse and oppression of poc by American society and the police force
If a 300 pound white guy shortly after robbing a convenience store charges a police officer and tries to snatch his weapon he’d be shot as well.
That story isn’t even credible
How so? The grand jury seem to think so. Maybe you know better.
The National Bar Association disagrees with the grand jury. All the grand jury decided was that there wasn’t enough evidence to prosecute, not that Wilson was innocent and not that his story stood up.
The national bar association is made up of predominantly African American lawyers. Its a racial identity group similar to the association for black lawyers in Uk. Keep digging.
So their ethnicity is enough to dismiss them, is it?
On cases like this, I ‘d put there lack of credibilty just slightly behind that of Sharpton and Jackson.
Why?
The fact that they’re a racial advocacy group.
They advocate on the issues of voter protection, federal judiciary, immigration reform, criminal justice, education and housing. They are NOT a racial advocacy group. They are a network of 60,000 lawyers, judges, professors and students. You can’t just dismiss them because they’re predominantly African American.
60,000 predominantly african american lawyers, students and judges in a country where less then 15%of the pop. are African American.
So? They’re still highly educated professionals and students who know a lot more about the law than you and even the grand jury. Yet you’re attempting to completely dismiss them on the grounds of race. Why? You even claimed that they’re a racial advocacy group, which they aren’t.
And you claimed the story isn’t ‘credible’ despite it being corroborated by the witness statements and the autopsy reports.
And it is contradicted by other witness statements. There’s also the fact that Wilson, more than anyone in this case, has every reason to lie, the prosecutor is an active supporter of Wilson, and there were similar flaws and changes in the claims of witnesses supporting Wilson as there were in the claims of witnesses contradicting him. Also the fact that the NBA, a group with significant credibility, disagrees with the decision of the grand jury.
You’re still not answering me though
The witness statements that were debunked during the Grand Jury proceeedings some of which were proven not to have being anywhere near the scene.
How exactly was the prosecutor an active supporter of Wilson?
The NBA is a politcal group with a clear racial bias in this. Credibility in one section of the populace does not equate general credibility.
Danny. You said you read the Grand Jury transcripts. Then you will know full well that the witnesses against Officer Wilson have been proven to be undisputed liars. They gave evidence under oath that they “Made Up” their stories. And 3 even had to admit that they were nowhere near the scene and they were just repeating what they had “heard on the street”. So in conclusion their were No independent witnesses contradicting Officer Wilsons version.
Obviously Danny feels on cases such as this one, the Grand Jury should consist solely of members of the National Bar association.
me neither.
No riots when Dillon Taylor was shot recently either.
Looting,rioting and generally just wrecking the community you live in can be tiring…maybe the clean up won’t be as draining.
Perhaps the response has been emotionally charged. Not rational. Like is possible when you are not affected by or do not care about what happened.
Nobody is going to riot on a holiday.
calming down again now,the looters..sorry protesters,got the nike runners and widescreen tellys they needed.
Black Friday coming soon but no where to shop:-)
Apparently the only premises not looted were the Book store, and the Job Centre.
They ran out of steam and need a nap …. Maybe when they wake up they will realise they just shot themselves in the foot.
No excuse for rioting and destroying peoples livelihoods.That behaviour gives places a bad name, who would put money in a place like that now? They are trying to make out the victim was as pure as the driven snow to make themselves look betterbut it will be interesting to see the eventual outcome.Good move by the police to put the officer on camera, I though he came over as fair and honest but then I guess I must be racist or something to say that??
- The guy robs convenience store assaulting staff member.
- heads on his way walking down the middle of the road.
- police officer drives up & suggests they use the footpath.
- Altercation ensues with brown attempting to seize police officers weapon.
- brown shot & injured, officer leaves vehicle to pursue.
- Brown charges officer who discharges 11 more rounds finally killing brown with a head shot.
We are all vile racists I guess!
The right man walked away from that incident.
Simple rule. Never try and take a cops gun. He will kill you. Thats what they are trained to do. What kind of fool would attempt to do that? A dead fool.
When you already looted everything there was to loot and then burnt every place to the ground. Not much left for you to do except loot the house next door (what your neighbours have looted).
“I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God,indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” …unless your black…
…you’re
To redmarauder.
…,and the rule of law,and the responsibility of pulling myself up by my bootstraps like all other disadvantaged groups do,etc.
I just cannot believe the police’s version of events. To rush a cop with a gun drawn in his own car, run away, then turn to rush the officer with no gun after he has shot at you multiple times shouting don’t shoot I am unarmed????? Don’t believe it. Que the amount of people to tell me the cop’s side.
Shoot a 12 year old “within seconds” of arriving & were doing “their job” in protection even though the child never pointed anything at them.
If I were the mother of a young black man what do you tell them? Obey the police? Tell them you unarmed? Hit the deck because you are likely to be shot first, ask questions (or make-up sh*t) later? Wow!
You would probably tell them not to try to take a cop’s gun off him.
Btw around 7 black witnesses gave evidence to the grand jury backing up the cop’s story but of course they can’t go public with their version.
Plus the witnesses that gave the alternative version(s) all changed their stories when they had to give evidence under oath that was completely contradicted by the physical evidence. Some of them were forced to admit they weren’t even there.
Deborah when someone waves a gun at you its important that you dont give them the benefit of any doubt no matter what age they are.I am not saying the officer was right or wrong because I dont know the full picture so cannot comment but as I said before if a gun is involved the only answer is lethal force.
This is in answer to the Cleveland shooting but it applies to any similar happening where firearms are involved in any way including the officers gun being used against him. Lets see hiw these situations pan out before we get our knickers in a twist.
The cop’s version is irrelevant.
If it had been an Irish or British cop, they’d have incapacitated him with pepper spray and arrested him.
The one cop in question is only symptomatic of a wider flaw in police engagement.
12 year old child… where did you get that?
Any article I’ve been seeing has said fully grown 18 year old, 6’4, 300lb man.
She’s referring to the more recent case, Drew. Pretty obvious
A lot of witnesses changed their stories as well but they can’t tell their story either & to compare this to OJ Simpson just shows how out of touch the “white” people are. Change the word “black” for “Irish” or “Palestinian”& see how you feel. Yes there are looters, these people tend to be some of the most uneducated & breaking the law is a form of rebellion for them even though it can be a tool to beat them down with & say what they feel is unjustified or not important. Which ever way you feel about this, something needs to happen to reach out to these citizens because they do not feel like the law or the country is on their side or the side of their children & that is dangerous.
Bollox. A thief is a thief no matter what their Race or Nationality.
No one is arguing against that, Mick
Danny. Deborah is trying to justify the looting by portraying it as some sort of protest against the authorities.
Its not. Its theivery 1 0 1
No, she isn’t trying to justify it. She’s pointing out that the education system in many of these areas is a failure, and that they feel abandoned by society, the government and the law, and that this is their expression of anger and outrage. That isn’t an attempt to justify it
And as such justifying it. Spin it how you want. It reads as it reads.
That’s not a justification
The journal your subheading reads…
“An officer will not be prosecuted over the shooting dead of Mike Brown (18).”
Was he not in fact prosecuted, and found to be not guilty by a grand jury?
No, the grand jury decides whether there is sufficient evidence to charge
Prosecute def. to initiate legal proceedings against. To bring someone up in front of any court is to prosecute them.
Thus trial by grand jury is in effect a prosecution, if the headline read ‘will not face criminal prosecution’ you would be accurate as the grand jury found him to be acting within the line of duty and thus no crime to have occurred.
Trail by grand jury doesn’t charge you with a crime a charge is just accusation, you’re charged at the police station. It issues an inditement, meaning it finds a crime has occurred and has probable cause to believe it was committed by the suspect.
You’re sticking too rigidly to the dictionary, Drew, and that’s just not how it works. The grand jury believed that there was not enough evidence to bring it to trial. That means that Wilson has not been found guilty, but he also hasn’t been found not guilty. It is not a prosecution in the legal sense. There was a prosecutor, who actively supports Wilson btw, but they were not there to prosecute, they were there to establish whether or not there was sufficient evidence to prosecute.
Danny. As much as you wanted Officer Wilson to be tried and found guilty. The Grand Jury after looking at All the evidence (have you btw) decided that Officer Wilson had no case to answer for. That his actions were both legal and necessary for Officers Wilsons self defence.
They did not decide that he was innocent, that his story stood up, or that he was acting within the law. They decide that there was not enough evidence to prosecute. That’s all, don’t twist it.
I have looked at most of the evidence
And you are prepared to completely ignore 99.99% of it because it doesn’t fit with your preconceptions of Officer Wilsons Guilt.
Danny. If he had acted outside the law they would have elected to send it to trial. They reviewed the evidence, they decided that there was NO case to answer.
Build a bridge and get over it.
Your first statement is untrue
Mick, they did not rule on his innocence or guilt, therefore it would be impossible for them to have ruled that he acted lawfully. They decided that there was not enough evidence to prosecute. That implies neither innocence nor guilt
Danny. They Ruled there was NO case to answer. Now why would they send the case forward for trial when the overwhelming Physical, Forensic and Eye Witness evidence All concured with Officer Wilsons version of events.
Now you say you looked at the evidence presented to the Grand Jury. If so then you must agree that the Forensics evidence from the Car corroborated Officer Wilsons testimony, and the 3 Autopsy reports and the 7 independent witnesses also corroborated Officer Wilsons version of events outside the Car.
And those supposed witnesses against Officer Brown were proven beyond all reasonable doubt to have lied in their statements to the investigators.
And as for Officer Wilsons innocents. Correct me if I am wrong but I believe he is automatically presumed to be innocent.
They ruled there was not enough evidence. That is all they ruled. Not that there was no case to answer for, and not that he was innocent.
There was no case to answer ergo Officer Wilson did nothing wrong ergo Innocent.
That’s not how it works
Yes it is Danny Thats exactly how it works. Unless you believe that their is no automatic right to the presumption of innocence?
In fact the US Grand Jury is a much fairer system than ours. Where under our system the Director Of Public Prosecutions alone would get to decide if their was a case to answer. And as such a Political appointee would be subject to political pressures from outside.
There is automatic presumption of guilt, but, unlike you’re trying to make out, there is no implication of innocence by the grand jury deciding that there isn’t enough evidence to bring the case to trial. That’s also not the same as them deciding that there is no case to answer for.
Presumption of innocence I mean, not guilt
Danny. Maybe in the Socialist Utopia your mind inhabits but those of us that that live in Western Democracies it isn’t.
The entire foundation of the Western Justice System is the automatic presumption of Innocence.
And as the Grand Jury came to threatening decision that there was no case to answer it is inherently obvious that means that Officer Wilson is innocent.
Now what type of justice System would it be that put on trial for no other reason than political expediency someone where all the evidence overwhelmingly pointed to that persons innocence.
Just after watching the video of the cold blooded killing of the 12 year old and it now makes sense to me as to why these people feel angry .. I mean.. if they were white they’d be playing x-box now ..#sosad
Lots of problems with this story, especially the evidence…
All the shop must be completely looted at this stage. From what I seen on the news this wasn’t a protest but mindless riot in order to steal from business that had nothing to do with the police
have your say