Parents of Michael Brown sue Ferguson MO but refuse to release school records of son

[GHook93]

They're afraid of the truth. Of course their son's school records and thus earnings expectancy are pertinent in deciding what his life was worth. Michael was most likely illiterate and thus had zero earnings expectancy.

The Associated Press

dec 31 2016 KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) -- Michael Brown's parents are objecting to a request from Ferguson for their son's medical and academic records as the city defends itself against a lawsuit the parents filed over the 2014 police shooting death of the unarmed 18-year-old.

Michael Brown Sr. and Lezley McSpadden, in December court filings, asked U.S. District Judge E. Richard Webber in St. Louis to at least limit if not scuttle altogether a push by the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, its former police chief and the officer who shot their son to turn over the documents. The parents say the documents are irrelevant and that the repeated demands for them are harassing and invasive.

Brown's parents argue in their lawsuit that the death of their son during an August 2014 confrontation with Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson deprived them of financial support through his future potential wages. An attorney for Ferguson, Wilson and the former police chief have countered in court filings that Brown's lifelong medical records are pertinent to determining his potential life expectancy and future income.

Brown's parents insist the academic records are shielded as private because they involve a juvenile

Lol you can't sue over future earnings for a numbnutz that got all F's!

These people are a disgrace no wonder their son was a thug who attacked a police officer.

The world is seriously a better place without their son!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[ClosedCaption]

What the people in video failed to say or see isn't the point. Again you're talking about things that arent. The witnesses saw Brown with his hands up from ALL INITIAL REPORTS. The only people that disagreed with it was police who no doubt pressured the witnesses and then threw in a bunch of shot about them contridicting each other which doesn't mean dick coming from the cops who always find a way that they are free to go. Then you cite the NY Times who cite the police as confirmation.

You're trying to make this about the police version of the truth vs what people saw at the time. At the time several people saw it happen and not only that, there it is on video.

So again, unless your position consists of some mass hypnosis by several people on the scene then it's bogus. You can't explain how several people saw the same thing other than to say all those people were mistaken. That's a hard sell.

Prove it.

PS: The New York Times didn't cite the police as evidence-go back and re-read the article or improve on your reading comprehension skills.

Also you keep claiming that the incident is on video...but your video doesn't show it.

Obviously my version wasn't a hard sell since a 3rd party investigation hired by Brown's family agrees with me.

I'll prove right now with your own words. You yourslef said that many of the shootings were questionable or they should've been punished.

Tell me then, why do you think the police failed to find themselves guilty in those cases? And this one too?

Is it because they deserved to walk in all the cases or is the MB case the only one free from the blue wall?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Also you keep claiming that the incident is on video...but your video doesn't show it.

Ivw said the video was on the scene at the time. You're playing semantics

 

[EverCurious]

Here's a layman's version of the deal with the "hands up don't shoot" thing, witnesses in the video included - Psychology of Rumors: 6 Reasons Why Rumors Spread | Social Psych Online

Let’s start by defining what we mean by a “rumor” in the same way social psychologists have. Nicholas DiFonzo and Prashant Bordia describe four basic qualities of rumors:

They are information statements. We’re not talking about the opinions that people share. Instead, rumors are meant to be informative.
They are in circulation. In other words, if you have your own personal conspiracy theory that the moon isn’t real, it’s not a rumor if you never tell anyone.
They are unverified. This is key. If I’m at a high school reunion, and I try to spread the news that Jeff and Tina just had a baby[1], that’s not a rumor if Jeff and Tina posted the baby’s picture to Facebook. Yes, it’s informative and in circulation, but since it’s been definitively verified as true, it’s not technically a rumor.
Finally, rumors are “instrumentally relevant.” They answer questions that people want answered because they feel important or significant. If there’s a rumor that your office is laying people off, that’s instrumentally relevant because that information impacts your life! Some have called rumor spreading a “group sensemaking activity” because they serve to help people understand an ambiguous situation.

*If you’re interested in how rumors are different from “gossip” [2] and “urban legends,”[3] see the previous two footnotes!

"If you’ve been paying attention, the primary function of a rumor is to make sense of something that’s already unclear. Rumors help explain a confusing element of the world. In the soda rumor I opened with, the tensions between groups of people are scary and confusing. “Why are bad things happening?”

This confusion opens the door to rumors, which people can hold onto in order to give them at least some idea about why the world is working in the way that it is."

----

It falls under "rumor" (vs. gossip) because it obviously wasn't a factual statement as proven by the autopsy and because of how it spread through, and was believed so easily, by the gathering crowd of folks afterwards. As a note, I distinguish between this and "lies" in so far as up until the autopsy proved it wasn't true, after that it becomes a [politically/culturally/socially motivated] lie though.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Here's a layman's version of the deal with the "hands up don't shoot" thing, witnesses in the video included - Psychology of Rumors: 6 Reasons Why Rumors Spread | Social Psych Online

Ahh yes, several people on the scene simultaneously heard the same rumor via telepathy dispatched moments after the incident.

This is the best explanation

 

[Anathema]

Like I said, you on the alt-right care more about Michael Brown's grades than Trump's tax returns.

Neither set of documents has any value.

Trump's tax returns are irrelevant, as they have nothing to do with his electoral eligibility. Brown's school records have no relevance as his family's lawsuit has no validity.

 

[EverCurious]

Ahh yes, several people on the scene simultaneously heard the same rumor via telepathy dispatched moments after the incident.

This is the best explanation

NPR's Melissa Block interviews Washington Post opinion writer Jonathan Capehart about his column, " 'Hands Up, Don't Shoot' Was Built On A Lie." Capehart says he regrets the building of a movement on the false rumors that Michael Brown was shot in Ferguson, Mo., while putting up his hands in surrender. - 'Hands Up, Don't Shoot' Movement Built On False Rumors, Columnist Says

-----

It’s easy to see how protesters adopted -- and the media repeated -- the “hands up” mantra. The majority of eyewitnesses - 22 - told authorities that Brown’s hands were up when he was killed.

But DOJ investigators found the accounts of all 22 witnesses to be unreliable because other parts of those witnesses’ stories conflicted with physical or forensic evidence or with the accounts of credible witnesses.

Many of these witnesses denied incontrovertible evidence that Brown reached into the police car, struck Wilson in the face, was wounded by a gunshot inside the car, fled 180 feet, suffered no wounds in the back and then moved back at Wilson immediately before the fatal shots.

In many instances, the discounted witnesses repeated what they had heard from neighbors or on the news. Some witnesses admitted they made up stories so they could be part of a big event in their community.

Brown’s companion, Dorian Johnson, and friends quickly spread the word that Wilson had killed Brown execution style. An iPad recording and videos that captured conversations among the gathering crowd document the development of the false narrative.

When Attorney General Eric Holder released the Department of Justice report and a separate report documenting Ferguson’s deeply racist and unconstitutional police and municipal court practices, he said that Ferguson residents’ experience with racist police and court practices prepared them to suspect the worst when Wilson killed the unarmed teen.

To be part of something

When confronted with the ways in which their accounts differed from evidence, many witnesses acknowledged that they had made up details they hadn’t witnessed. Eight of the 22 eventually admitted they had lied about all or part of what they had claimed to see.

One admitted to be sitting in a flowerbed away from the shooting. Another acknowledged she hadn’t seen anything because she was smoking behind a dumpster.

Two of those who admitted lying said they just wanted “to be part” of something.

In addition to the eight who admitted lying, one woman admitted blacking out, a man admitted he may have hallucinated details and another woman broke into hysterics and was unable to give a cogent account.

Another witness had bad eyesight, another memory loss and psychiatric problems, another was fiddling with a cell phone camera and yet another was a regular protester who waited seven months before reporting anything and then admitted she was upset “Darren Wilson got away.”

The FBI concluded that this last account, by Witness 148, was fabricated in much the same way as the much publicized account of Witness 140 who had apparently invented a convoluted story to help clear Wilson.

Most of the rest of the 22 witnesses who said Brown’s hands were up gave accounts that were so at odds with physical evidence that they were not credible. Several swore that Wilson shot Brown in the back, even though there were no wounds in the back. Several said that Brown was kneeling and Wilson killed him execution style. Other witnesses claimed to see multiple police officers at the scene and multiple police cars.

None of that was true. - Why did the Justice Department conclude that 'Hands Up, Don't Shoot' was a myth?

-----

Witness accounts spread after the shooting that Brown had his hands raised in surrender, mouthing the words “Don’t shoot” as his last words before being shot execution-style. The gesture of raised hands became a symbol of outrage over mistreatment of unarmed black youth by police. - ‘Hands up, don’t shoot’ did not happen in Ferguson

-----

"It came after Dorian Johnson, the guy that was with Mike Brown, and others said that Mike Brown had his hands up," Russell says.

As residents gathered where Brown's body lay for hours in the street, Russell says, a local activist, Brother Anthony Shahid, was on the scene. Russell recalls that as more police came, with dogs and weapons, Shahid said, "My hands are up; don't shoot me." He and others began to chant.

"So it's very organic, but it comes actually out of the story of the life and the death of Mike Brown Jr.," he says.

The idea of Brown being shot while his hands were raised in surrender would spread like wildfire on social media, and became a rallying cry and a mantra that inspired demonstrations across the country — even as the debate about the accuracy of the phrase continues. - Whether History Or Hype, 'Hands Up, Don't Shoot' Endures

-----

FERGUSON, Mo. (AP) — Some witnesses said Michael Brown had been shot in the back. Another said he was face-down on the ground when Officer Darren Wilson "finished him off." Still others acknowledged changing their stories to fit published details about the autopsy or admitted that they did not see the shooting at all. - http://bigstory.ap.org/article/078c...f14/grand-jury-documents-rife-inconsistencies

-----

And media coverage of the shooting's aftermath made it into the grand jury proceedings. Before some witnesses testified, prosecutors showed jurors clips of the same people making statements on TV.

Their inconsistencies began almost immediately after the shooting, from people in the neighborhood, the friend walking with Brown during the encounter and even one woman who authorities suggested probably wasn't even at the scene at the time.

Jurors also were presented with dueling versions from Wilson and Dorian Johnson, who was walking with Brown during the Aug. 9 confrontation. Johnson painted Wilson as provoking the violence, while Wilson said Brown was the aggressor.

But Johnson also declared on TV, in a clip played for the grand jury, that Wilson fired at least one shot at his friend while Brown was running away: "It struck my friend in the back."

Johnson held to a variation of this description in his grand jury testimony, saying the shot caused Brown's body to "do like a jerking movement, not to where it looked like he got hit in his back, but I knew, it maybe could have grazed him, but he definitely made a jerking movement."

Other eyewitness accounts also were clearly wrong.

One woman, who said she was smoking a cigarette with a friend nearby, claimed she saw a second police officer in the passenger seat of Wilson's vehicle. When quizzed by a prosecutor, she elaborated: The officer was white, "middle age or young" and in uniform. She said she was positive there was a second officer — even though there was not.

Another woman testified that she saw Brown leaning through the officer's window "from his navel up," with his hand moving up and down, as if he were punching the officer. But when the same witness returned to testify again on another day, she said she suffers from mental disorder, has racist views and that she has trouble distinguishing the truth from things she had read online.

Prosecutors suggested the woman had fabricated the entire incident and was not even at the scene the day of the shooting.

Another witness had told the FBI that Wilson shot Brown in the back and then "stood over him and finished him off." But in his grand jury testimony, this witness acknowledged that he had not seen that part of the shooting, and that what he told the FBI was "based on me being where I'm from, and that can be the only assumption that I have."

The witness, who lives in the predominantly black neighborhood where Brown was killed, also acknowledged that he changed his story to fit details of the autopsy that he had learned about on TV.

"So it was after you learned that the things you said you saw couldn't have happened that way, then you changed your story about what you seen?" a prosecutor asserted.

"Yeah, to coincide with what really happened," the witness replied.

Another man, describing himself as a friend of Brown's, told a federal investigator that he heard the first gunshot, looked out his window and saw an officer with a gun drawn and Brown "on his knees with his hands in the air." He added: "I seen him shoot him in the head."

But when later pressed by the investigator, the friend said he had not seen the actual shooting because he was walking down the stairs at the time and instead had heard details from someone in the apartment complex.

"What you are saying you saw isn't forensically possible based on the evidence," the investigator told the friend.

Shortly after that, the friend asked if he could leave.

"I ain't feeling comfortable," he said. - http://bigstory.ap.org/article/078c...f14/grand-jury-documents-rife-inconsistencies

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Why would Obama ever release his school records?

To prove he's not the affirmative action baby everyone thinks he is. Obama can't read or even add up a column of numbers.

 

[mgh80]

What the people in video failed to say or see isn't the point. Again you're talking about things that arent. The witnesses saw Brown with his hands up from ALL INITIAL REPORTS. The only people that disagreed with it was police who no doubt pressured the witnesses and then threw in a bunch of shot about them contridicting each other which doesn't mean dick coming from the cops who always find a way that they are free to go. Then you cite the NY Times who cite the police as confirmation.

You're trying to make this about the police version of the truth vs what people saw at the time. At the time several people saw it happen and not only that, there it is on video.

So again, unless your position consists of some mass hypnosis by several people on the scene then it's bogus. You can't explain how several people saw the same thing other than to say all those people were mistaken. That's a hard sell.

Prove it.

PS: The New York Times didn't cite the police as evidence-go back and re-read the article or improve on your reading comprehension skills.

Also you keep claiming that the incident is on video...but your video doesn't show it.

Obviously my version wasn't a hard sell since a 3rd party investigation hired by Brown's family agrees with me.

I'll prove right now with your own words. You yourslef said that many of the shootings were questionable or they should've been punished.
d
Tell me then, why do you think the police failed to find themselves guilty in those cases? And this one too?

Is it because they deserved to walk in all the cases or is the MB case the only one free from the blue wall?

Well every case needs to be conducted and examined on an individual level...something which isn't possible to accomplish if you go in with the pre-conceived notion that every case of a (white) cop shooting a (black) person is racially motivated. The cases I think the cops are to blame are the ones where we have video footage showing the police abusing their power--we don't know exactly what happened with Brown/Wilson. You don't and I don't. We can look at the evidence and make up our own minds, but ultimately we don't know 100% for sure (mind you this isn't what's required by the court law, just reasonable doubt). However if we see video footage of the time leading up to and the actual shooting...of course we can be much more accurate in making our determinations--that's common sense.

In some cases I do think that there was corruption and the police covered things up...however do I think that happens every single time? No.

We need to look at every situation as an individual case. Just because some cops kill black people unjustly doesn't mean that every cop that does does so unjustly. We can't make assumptions about Wilson or his job. It would be like people assuming that as a male teacher I would potentially engage in sexual conduct with a student of mine in a private one on one tutoring session during a lunch period. It's complete bullshit...but I still have to keep my door open just in case, because there are idiots who see teachers molesting students on the media and think that many of us do so, or would do so if given the chance.


Honestly at this point I'm thinking you just can't admit when you're wrong...I bet that in your 48K+ posts there's not one post of you admitting to being wrong.

 

[ClosedCaption]

First I made no mention at all about it being racially motivated. Second, I damn sure didn't say that EVERY case was racially motivated.

Third I didn't make any assumption 's about Wilson or his job. My point was simple. The video and what it showed.

In some cases I do think that there was corruption and the police covered things up...however do I think that happens every single time? No.

Well, well now...so how reasonable would it be for me to ask you to prove the police covered up anything in any case? Lol...because that is what you asked me. Lol. Because so far all you've done is cited the very people who find themselves free from fault in every case including ones you yourself think should've been punished as proof.

Finally this isn't about whether or not I've ever admitted to being wrong. Again, this is about the video and your claims that hands up never happened. I've made the same point since the beginning

 

[ClosedCaption]

This is the flip I'm talking about

But DOJ investigators found the accounts of all 22 witnesses to be unreliable because other parts of those witnesses’ stories conflicted with physical or forensic evidence or with the accounts of credible witnesses.

They found inconsistencies with other parts of their stories so that means all of it was thrown out. Not because it didnt happen, or because they found that they lied. Noo, only because some of their stories changed on other things months later!!

Imagine you saying you went to VA beach, ate a burger and then a sprite. Then later you said you had a chicken sandwich and I determined you never went to VA Beach

 

[EverCurious]

Nice attempt at a flip yourself. Your exact statement was

Ahh yes, several people on the scene simultaneously heard the same rumor via telepathy dispatched moments after the incident.

This is the best explanation

Did I prove you wrong too hard? ~hands a tissue~

 

[ClosedCaption]

Nice attempt at a flip yourself. Your exact statement was

Ahh yes, several people on the scene simultaneously heard the same rumor via telepathy dispatched moments after the incident.

This is the best explanation

Did I prove you wrong too hard? ~hands a tissue~

Yes, mass telepathy proved me wrong

 

[EverCurious]

No the power of group psychology proved you wrong. Stay ignorant, it amuses me.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

They refuse to release his school records? When there is nothing to hide, nobody minds.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[ClosedCaption]

No the power of group psychology proved you wrong. Stay ignorant, it amuses me.

Group psychology that involves spreading a rumor by brain waves lol. Good one.

 

[EverCurious]

I hope other folks read the presented statements and can use their brains, yours is obviously turned off atm. Stay ignorant, it amuses me!

 

[blastoff]

They refuse to release his school records? When there is nothing to hide, nobody minds.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

Well Mikey was on track to not graduate with his class because his poor academic work left him X credits short of those required for earning a diploma.

His mother, Bingo McSpadden, was completely unaware of her ungentle giant's impending academic peril because she was only peripherally involved in raising him throughout his life, preferring to farm him out to be "raised" by others who, coincidently, had already failed Parenting 101 with their own offspring. Well, word eventually reached mom that he wasn't going to receive his parchment and, shocked to learn, went to his school to complain about such an injustice, whereupon she learned Mike had in fact earned his current status through diligent lack of interest in his studies.

Ah, but a school counselor offered a potential answer to the Brown-McSpadden family academic dilemma. Through some state or federal government program - forget the name of it just now - Mikey could, in very short time and with little work, somehow qualify to earn the missing credits or acceptable substitutes and thus walk with his class on graduation night.

So, the dead criminal thug was definitely on track to someday earn his PhD for sure.

 

[WillowTree]

They don't have to produce anything. Right Trumpbots?

Who?

 

[WillowTree]

Funny. The alt-right cares more about Michael Brown's school records than Donald Trump's tax returns.

The bigoted left hopes Donald Trump isn't rich or the President. Sorry for the bigoted left! Poor Ewe!