While like many I was shocked by the story of the shooting of an unarmed man, Michael Brown, by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, I have refrained from making public comments due to the conflicting accounts that have arisen in the case. As a criminal defense attorney, I have long resisted the tendency to rush to judgment, particularly in the midst of public unrest, in such cases. I saw that as a problem in the Trayvon Martin case. Those same concerns were raised this morning with the statement of Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon who publicly stated that “a vigorous prosecution must now be pursued.” Presumably, he is speaking of the arrest and prosecution of Officer Darren Wilson. However, the investigations into the case are continuing and, in my view, Nixon’s comments are wildly inappropriate at this stage.
Nixon previously referred to Brown as the “victim” and denounced the release of this video of Brown strong-arming a store owner in stealing some cigars shortly before the shooting:
The video was released by police who were accused of trying to portray Brown as a violent thug — a similar concern that was raised in the aftermath of the Martin shooting. Police insisted that it is part of the record of the case since this was the crime that preceded the confrontation with Wilson. Of course, even if Brown stole the merchandise and threatened the store owner, it still does not justify the use of lethal force on an unarmed individual. Moreover, I am appalled that Brown’s body was left on the street for hours.
However, the facts in this case remain in considerable conflict. Rivaling accounts support both Brown and Wilson. The early objective evidence is also in conflict. While Brown’s friend said that Brown was shot in the back, the autopsies do not appear to support that (though the family insists that one of the arm wounds could have come from behind). Moreover, a recording and some witness accounts after the shooting seemed to support the claim of Wilson. Others support Brown. In other words, the facts are in dispute. Under some circumstances, the shooting of an unarmed individual can be found to be justified under standards governing officers.
There is also the recent report that Wilson suffered facial injuries or an “orbital blowout fracture to the eye socket” from the encounter. Such an injury, if true, could boost a defense.
The case could be submitted to a grand jury as early as today. We should learn more from the tests and forensics in the days to come. However, as a criminal defense attorney, I am deeply concerned about the Governor’s statements. Any prosecution would already be hindered by venue and bias issues. It is the duty of a governor to reinforce the rule of law and avoid pre-judging cases before any investigation is completed. Others certainly have the right to be heard on their views of the facts, even as they continue to emerge. However, Nixon is the chief executive of this state and does a disservice to legal process in prejudging the facts in my view. Such comments from either a President (who in the case of Obama has been much more restrained and circumspect) or a governor can seriously undermine the foundation for a fair trial and create the appearance of political pressure on prosecutors, judges, and others.
Nixon stated that “We have a responsibility to come together, and do everything we can to achieve justice for [Brown’s] family . . . to achieve justice in the shooting death of Michael Brown must be carried out thoroughly, promptly, and correctly.” The “correct” way of achieving justice is not to presume guilt as the facts are still being investigated in my view.
Jack, Where did I say the cop was racist?
John, Sprinters look down to aid concentration on hearing the shot. Their heads come up when they want to see where they are going, which is immediately.
John,
bettykath “he shot at an unarmed teen who was running away”
Supported by people who weren’t connected to Mr. Brown.
—-
Yeppers, he shot a guy who was running away…in the front. Was Brown moonwalking?
Supported by hearsay of friends of the cop.
“His story is that he was being rushed by someone running with his head down”
That’s not the cop’s story. That’s your propaganda.
Friends of the cop say he was “bum rushed” or “bull rushed” but, according to the preliminary autopsy report, the kill shot was to the top of his head. I have to admit that I’m assuming that “bum rushed” and “bull rushed” are forms of running. Basic physiology suggests that in order to get shot in the top of the head, from a distance where the shooter’s feet are on the same plane and the person getting shot, that the head was down.
——
“Cop didn’t call for backup. Cop didn’t report to dispatch that he shot someone.”
See. This is what happens when you hang out at Freddy’s. You don’t get corrected because Freddy only permits posts that support his point of view. You don’t know what the cop called in.
Actually, the dispatcher tape has been released.
————
“I would not feel threatened by someone who was 35 feet away”
Yet another misconception. You have no evidence that Brown was 35 feet from Wilson when he shot him. None. Zip! Nada. The relayed officer’s story is that he started chasing Brown when Brown turned around and started to bumrush him.
While the approximate distance may be established by the shell casings, that information has not been released.
I’m too tired to go through the logic of this tonight. Maybe tomorrow. But you’re right about the shell casings, if his buddies didn’t move them.
————-
Personal attacks on fellow defense attorneys is allowed here? I hope not. The entire post about Professor Leatherman is a personal attack.
John, Go over to Frederick Leatherman’s blog and try to post a comment that opposes the view of Leatherman. It will be awaiting moderation, and will then be deleted. Freddy “The Freeloader” Leatherman is a washed up attorney who begs for donations on his blog instead of being a productive member of society. In order to keep those donations coming in, he publishes one-sided propaganda stories, and far too man people buy into them. Very sad.
bettykath “he shot at an unarmed teen who was running away”
Yeppers, he shot a guy who was running away…in the front. Was Brown moonwalking?
“His story is that he was being rushed by someone running with his head down”
That’s not the cop’s story. That’s your propaganda.
“Cop didn’t call for backup. Cop didn’t report to dispatch that he shot someone.”
See. This is what happens when you hang out at Freddy’s. You don’t get corrected because Freddy only permits posts that support his point of view. You don’t know what the cop called in.
“I would not feel threatened by someone who was 35 feet away”
Yet another misconception. You have no evidence that Brown was 35 feet from Wilson when he shot him. None. Zip! Nada. The relayed officer’s story is that he started chasing Brown when Brown turned around and started to bumrush him.
While the approximate distance may be established by the shell casings, that information has not been released.
“Maybe the jocks here can give examples where you run with your head down.”
Look at EVERY sprinter leaving the blocks of a 100 meter race.
Bettykath,
I wasn’t aware the investigation had concluded and the report made public. Do you have irrefutable evidence to support your post or is that simply your opinion?
John – Linebackers run with their heads down. Short burst of speed designed to drive their head into the opposing player’s chest.
bettykath, The worst kind of racism is “manufactured racism”. There is not a single credible source indicating that Officer Wilson was in any way racist. Any racist element is the product of fantasy from the true racists. You can see a list of them at Freddy “The Freeloader” Leatherman’s blog.
In considering the entire event, let’s not forget what started this. It was an aggressive cop ordering two teens to “get the f*** on the sidewalk”. When they didn’t immediately do so, he aggressively backed his SUV to where they were and parked perpendicular to the curb and so close to the young men that he couldn’t open his door without hitting them. Cop started it and cop escalated it to the point that he shot at an unarmed teen who was running away and ultimately killed him. His story is that he was being rushed by someone running with his head down (head down according to the preliminary autopsy). Maybe the jocks here can give examples where you run with your head down.
Cop didn’t call for backup. Cop didn’t report to dispatch that he shot someone. Cop didn’t write an incident report.
I would not feel threatened by someone who was 35 feet away from me except possibly if that person had a gun.
DA has said that he doesn’t expect all the evidence to go to the Grand Jury until the middle of October. He has invited the cop to talk to the Grand Jury. Don’t hold your breath for an indictment.
bettykath – there are so few ‘real’ facts out there it is like dealing with Hitler’s background. The Allies spent so much time libeling and slandering him, it is hard to get the real facts anymore. That is what is happening here. The parents (through their attorney were first to the media gate) we have yet to hear from the officer or see his report.
I am thinking, just spitballing here, he did not hurt his eye socket by himself. So, since that has come out, it changes so much of the direction of the dialogue, assuming one actually wants to have a dialogue, about this incident.
Sandi Hemming, “It sounds like Nixon has convicted the policeman. It’s Zimmerman all over again. Why are deaths of blacks more important than Latinos or whites? Because we don’t riot and loot. A policeman may be railroaded because of riots and looting. These riots are not about Brown. Especially when you hear of people from other states. Racism in Ferguson is being rewarded. How about some charges for looters?”
I agree that Nixon’s words were inappropriate.
Since when did the deaths of blacks become more important than Latinos or whites? They are regular targets of false charges, vigorous prosecution with inept or overworked public defenders, and receive longer sentences. That is, if they manage to survive their encounter with the cop. Blacks in Sanford FL did not riot. Neither are the Blacks of Ferguson rioting. These are, for the most part, non-violent protests. Even the protesters are “policing” the few troublemakers. Looters are being arrested (along with journalists.) Racism in Ferguson has been rewarded for decades. The community is fed up with it.
Oh, for heaven sake, if Officer Darren Wilson has a “blowout orbital fracture” which means that the involved eye might be displaced back into his sinus. Some one has to ask: How did that happen ? If a ± 300 pound boy hits an ordinary person to cause that who has a gun – what would be the expected response ?
Oil and water can mix just fine – and the results can be delicious.
Buy any basic cook book. Learn how to make a roux (it’s not hard). Then make a sauce or gravy.
The poem, well put, Squeeky.
Darren, you’re probably right, about saving face.
Karen S, what is your sentiment about the police beating to death Kelly Thomas in Fullerton?
Missouri cop was badly beaten before shooting Michael Brown, says source
Fox News – 47 minutes ago
Darren Wilson, the Ferguson, Mo., police officer whose fatal shooting of Michael Brown touched off more than a week of demonstrations, suffered severe facial injuries, including an orbital (eye socket) fracture, and was nearly beaten unconscious by Brown …
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/20/missouri-cop-was-badly-beaten-before-shooting-michael-brown-says-source/
You’ve got to be asking, why is this information coming out only now?
The straw men are definitely flaming.
I’m looking for where people are saying that the officer who killed the unarmed teenager should be convicted without a trial. I’m looking for where people are saying he shouldn’t be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I’m looking for where people are claiming that public opinion should determine the officers fate rather than a fair administration of justice.
And I’m not finding anything. Indeed, the argument actually being made is, in general terms, that the justice system should proceed, but that multiple conflicts of interest endanger the possibility of justice.
Questioning why the Ferguson Police Department is in charge of investigating one of their own is not saying “convict without a trial.” It’s noting a conflict of interest.
Questioning the neutrality of the prosecutor is not saying “guilty until proved innocent.” It’s noting a conflict of interest.
Questioning why the identity of the shooter was kept secret, and why the incident report is still being kept under wraps isn’t asking for a “trial by public opinion” it’s noting the strong possibility of a cover-up. Indeed the FPD’s release of an unrelated theft allegation and toxicology results of trace amounts of marijuana (apparently causing “reefer madness”) seem to indicate a desire by the Ferguson PD to try this in the papers.
The irony is that these flamers of straw men are essentially arguing that the shooter should be treated like everyone else . . . but that is exactly what those protesting the handling of this killing are arguing.
Is there any doubt whatsoever that a black teenager accused of repeatedly shooting and killing a white, unarmed cop in Ferguson would be in jail and charged by now? Even if the black teenager claimed the cop attacked him first? Any doubt whatsoever?
But black teenagers don’t have the same connections in the PD and DA. And the call isn’t for a lynch mob; it’s for a justice system untainted by conflict of interest and corruption.
jonathanturley
Dredd, I have now had to delete a third comment today in clear violation of our civility rule. If you cannot conform to our rule on civil discourse, we will have to suspend continued postings.
============================
What, you can’t handle ABC News?
ABC New, Nightline:
KKK member cop in Ferguson:
NEWSFLASH – CNN – OBAMA RELEASED THE ISIS DECAPITATING
EXECUTIONER FROM GUANTANAMO.
Darren Smith, that was an insidious, evil thought. The officer gets “framed.” It can never happen here – Mr. Zappa.
Anon, I don’t have answers. I have questions. I never try to fool Mother Nature. I don’t argue with physics. I gain the knowledge of axioms. I don’t argue with the dazzling brilliance of Abraham Lincoln; there is a monument to him, you know. I brought forth the teachings of Lincoln regarding emancipation and compassionate repatriation of slaves in light of current events. Lincoln appears to have agreed, on some level, with the physical axiom that oil and water will not now, nor will they ever literally and completely mix. No matter how hard one forces the two together. It was Lincoln’s thought. The brilliant Lincoln’s thought. That cannot be refuted, right?
Did America go down Lincoln’s path. Did America go down the right path?
I wonder if the emancipated slaves would have actually been happier, content, successful and satisfied by returning to the their land of origin; their home. Would you have wanted to return home? Did the Israelites effect the “exodus” from Egypt to go home to the “promised land?”
Emancipation and repatriation was Lincoln’s plan. Was he correct and brilliant; enough to deserve a national monument? Was he wrong?
If slavery represented bias, what does affirmative action represent? Neutrality? Equitability? Did America achieve Lincoln’s vision?
Will you change the laws of physics and mix oil and water?
You have the floor.
What say you?
Jfk was shot in the neck, but the Warren Commission claimed it was a shot that hit him in the back and EXITED out his neck.
Why don’t we just relax and let LEO internal affairs decide whether Wilson did anything wrong that would justify his eye injury. If LEO and that fine DA decide that it’s a 50/50 deal, then who are we, or the Governor to speak out before The System finishes it’s no-doubt thorough investigation and the possible political ramifications of indicting the officer – who is, after all, from a nice family and everything — except for the unpleasantness of his poor mother’s “occupation”.
I worry that now that some of these politicians have committed themselves to the presumption that this officer is automatically guilty of a crime, there will be a lot of pressure to make certain he must found guilty; regardless of what the evidence shows.
In the minds of many of their kind it is better to sacrifice an expendable individual rather than lose face politically or worse yet, egotistically.
John:
One of our friends is a cop who had a high number of shootings, most involving African Americans. The figure looked bad to a reporter. But then it was discovered that he worked a gang unit, where the gangs were black, and he himself had been shot several times. His shootings were always defensive, in a two-way shootout. He said one time he was chasing a perp when the guy suddenly turned and shot at him mid-stride. No cover. He had to pull his weapon and fire while running. Luckily, his aim was better.
But if he was tried in the court of public opinion on this blog, he would have been found guilty of racist murder. Which would have been dead wrong.
All sorts of meaning can be ascribed to data that turn out to be false. It’s best to research from all directions first, and then come to a strongly-supported conclusion.