Posted on 11/29/2014 9:50:31 AM PST by SeekAndFind
There were no surprises to come out of Ferguson, Mo., last week. Neither the grand jury’s decision not to indict Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown, nor the riot that decision engendered was unexpected by anyone with even a modest familiarity with the matter. And just as predictable has been the left’s attempt to undermine the former and thereby justify the latter. They are to be excused in their rioting, we are told, for the grand jury’s decision is illegitimate.
To cite but one example of this, we turn to the New Yorker, where people of a leftist persuasion turn for guidance on how to think about current events. In a Nov. 25 post at the magazine’s website [1], legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin criticizes St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch for what Toobin sees as a failure to follow the “customary rules” of his profession. “If McCulloch’s lawyers had simply pared down the evidence to that which incriminated Wilson,” Toobin writes, “they would have easily obtained an indictment.”
Perhaps so, but an indictment in the case would have led to a trial that McCulloch knew, as Toobin himself should know, would result in Darren Wilson’s acquittal. Reasonable doubt was everywhere in the case, and prosecutors are ethically bound to proceed to trial only if they are confident of their ability to convince twelve jurors that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It wasn’t going to happen.
So, unless the Justice Department brings civil rights charges against Darren Wilson – still a possibility despite little chance of success – he will not face the public criminal trial that Jeffrey Toobin and so many others wished to see. And even a civil trial arising from a wrongful death claim against Wilson and the city of Ferguson is far from a certainty. Yes, there will be a lawsuit, of course, but it will likely be resolved through a settlement rather than a trial. If a trial were to take place, both sides would have much to lose. If a jury finds for the plaintiffs, the city faces the possibility of a multimillion-dollar judgment, and even if it prevailed, the city might face further rioting and disruptive protests. But lawyers representing Michael Brown’s family have risks to weigh as well. In a civil trial, Brown’s juvenile record would almost certainly be introduced. If it revealed serious violations of the law, a jury might be less sympathetic to his family request for damages. And is there anyone who believes he has no juvenile record?
But even as Michael Brown’s death recedes from the front pages, there are still aspects of the case that require examination, not least of which are the tactics employed by Darren Wilson in the moments leading up to the shooting. Though I’m in agreement with the grand jury’s decision in declining to charge Wilson in Brown’s death, it doesn’t mean I agree the shooting was unavoidable. If we imagine a counterfactual scenario and back up, step by step, from the moment the first shot was fired, we can come up with a way in which Michael Brown might have been arrested without the use of deadly force. This is not intended as a criticism of Darren Wilson, but rather as a reminder to police officers who may someday find themselves in a similar situation.
Among my first thoughts on hearing of the Michael Brown shooting was to wonder if the officer was working alone. An article in Police magazine [2] points out that of 536 police officers killed from 2000 to 2009, only about a third were working alone, suggesting that it’s somehow safer to work without a partner. I’m certain that a deeper exploration beyond the raw numbers would show this to be untrue, but let’s examine the issue as it relates to the Darren Wilson-Michael Brown confrontation.
We are told that Wilson was unaware of Brown’s involvement in the convenience store robbery until he had already initiated contact with Brown and his companion, Dorian Johnson. Had Wilson had a partner, there would have been an extra set of ears in the car to monitor the radio traffic, perhaps allowing the officers to learn in advance of the initial contact that they were dealing with robbery suspects rather than simple traffic violators.
But putting that aside, even if our two hypothetical officers had not been apprised of the robbery, they might have taken an extra moment to discuss how they would handle a pedestrian stop of two men, one of whom weighed 300 lbs. And Michael Brown might have been more hesitant to challenge two officers than he was to take on Darren Wilson alone.
Now take a partner officer out of our scenario. How might an officer riding alone have handled the encounter differently? Wilson told the grand jury that his request to Brown and Johnson to get out of the street was met with expletive-laden defiance. Wilson then radioed for backup, as indeed he should have. But rather than wait for that backup to arrive, he reversed his car and pulled within a few feet of Brown and Johnson, thus giving Brown the opportunity to attack him. The more prudent course would have been to keep the two men under observation from the relative safety of the police car until other officers arrived, then initiate a stop. Had Brown and Johnson attempted to run away, the officers could have set up a containment perimeter and found them through a systematic search. And even if Brown and Johnson eluded the search, how many people living on Canfield Drive are 6-3 and 300 lbs.?
Again, none of this is to imply that the grand jury reached the wrong decision in declining to charge Darren Wilson. But he made the choice to put himself in a vulnerable position while confronting two men, one of whom outweighed him by 90 lbs. Wilson told George Stephanopoulos his conscience was clear, but I can’t imagine he doesn’t harbor some regret at having placed himself in so precarious a position.
Of course, since we’re indulging in counterfactuals, we can imagine that Michael Brown didn’t rob the store, didn’t walk down the middle of the street, got out of the street when told to, didn’t punch Officer Wilson and try to take his gun, didn’t turn around as he ran away, and did lie on the ground when ordered to.
Change any one of those decisions Brown made and he’d be alive today.
Also read:
That’s what the authorities did do Monday night.
Everybody’s got something to say about this. They all think that the words coming from their mouths are pearls of infinite wisdom, and that the world should listen in awe to what they have to say.
People in Hell want Ice Water.
You must have known my Grandmother ;)
Exactly. He was supposed to anticipate that a kid walking in the street was going to go after his gun? That was a crazy, unexpected reaction, and a cop would be acting normally not to anticipate that kind of escalation of the situation.
What was a teen roaming the streets at night? It was a *school night*, no?
yes, Barnaby always just ‘winged ‘em’...
Stupid “what if” article.
Respectfully, the author is active duty LAPD, 20 year veteran of the department. Having followed him, regularly, over the years, I think he was truly trying to benefit other police, with his observations, based on real life circumstances.
Thank you.
IF,IF,IF?
What if, on 09/11/2001, all the Policemen and Firemen waited for the full compliment needed for action had waited? Some people that were saved would not have been. Some of those that rushed in died but took that action, knowing that danger.
The MEN and WOMEN that go into those professions, know the inherent dangers and except that.
God Bless them.
The germ(idea) that ignited/ initiated this incident started with one person who wanted someone else’s property. Instead of paying a few dollars, he robbed(felony). He.and others, have to except the outcome of his actions.
If a frog had wings ...............~
Office Wilson should have called the St. Louis zoo and asked for help dealing with a wild ape. /s
All this second guessing gives the socialists credability when their aim was to divide US and set up “victims” with phoney racism claims. Their “victims” were the attackers killed while feloniously engaged in attempting to seize a weapon from lawfull authority. Their charges were initially designed to inflame (which culminated into the destruction of a city) and misguide a group to prevent constitutional redress so they could stay in office.
If a flying pig had collided with Darrel Brown at the right moment...
Kindly, please view my post, #68. Thank you.
:)
If the 4 year old kid had been playing at a different playground the stray bullet wouldn't have killed him.
What unbelievable BS. Some people are great asat 2nd guessing. Wilson was a police officer, who doesn’t have to retreat, he was in a life and death struggle and he won. God bless him!
Then at the 1:30 a.m. Tuesday morning press conference, the Missouri state police commander said, "The main thing is, there were no fatalities."
No, the main thing was, the authorities by their wilful inaction did not maintain law and order, people were terrorized, millions of dollars of property was destroyed, and violent criminals ran rampant.
The authorities first and foremost should've maintained law and order. If that meant fatalies, so be it.
your post is the most necessary one.
The change that needs to happen to prevent another Ferguson is simple. DO NOT ATTACK A COP.
If you wish to be judged by the content of your character, your behavior is the ONLY WAY others can see evidence of your character.
What about the 4 NY cops who arrested the BIG black man recently using a chokehold and killed him? Same thing could have happened to punk Brown!
Here in Texas, it is a continual political controversy in many small jurisdictions like Ferguson to have two man cop cars! Answers always the same, no money!
And, here in Texas in rural areas cops can’t wait for backup. Wilson was a pretty big guy too and had already been assaulted by the guy. So, I don’t imagine he felt much like waiting however many minutes so Brown could possibly or likely get away. And, WHO would Brown harm next???
At this point, Wilson knew the man was a strong arm thief because Brown was holding the evidence of it and fit the description given to a tee.
On top of that, Seconds earlier Brown had slugged him and tried to kill him with his own gun. I don’t think Wilson even needs the help of “the benefit of the doubt”in this instance.
He was duty bound to apprehend this guy and could not have known how many minutes would pass before help arrived!
The writer of the story is incorrect, in my opinion.
That’s a no-go. Rodney King proved that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.