ferguson

[Pio1980]

Appears they are intent on keeping thugs and the out of town opportunists from exploiting the situation. The family is on board with cooling things down.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by Pio1980

Appears they are intent on keeping thugs and the out of town opportunists from exploiting the situation. The family is on board with cooling things down.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

They don't want any more scrutiny on their boy.

[Pio1980]

Originally Posted by Zeke

They don't want any more scrutiny on their boy.

The family admits that "he was not an angel". I imagine there is some "there" there if one digs.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by Pio1980

The family admits that "he was not an angel". I imagine there is some "there" there if one digs.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Hence my argument.

Personally, while I am sure they didn't desire their son killed, I bet they didn't want post event scrutiny or looting, either.

[Pio1980]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Hence my argument.

Personally, while I am sure they didn't desire their son killed, I bet they didn't want post event scrutiny or looting, either.

Certainly not in spite of recent events, they live there.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Pio1980]

St Louis Post Dispach has been on top of this with timely updates, go to the site if sufficiently interested.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Pio1980]

Apparently the release somehow of the surveillance vid was against advice, concerns about it being provocative for the present situation.
Regardless, I think it provides context to the incident.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by Pio1980

Apparently the release somehow of the surveillance vid was against advice, concerns about it being provocative for the present situation.
Regardless, I think it provides context to the incident.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

If so, it is one sided. People are looting and rioting because they feel law enforcement is withholding information intentionally. Then they came out in full combat gear and they were replaced by HP on the governor's orders.

Why do they now need to get into the act, especially since they have been sidelined and then release the video against the wishes of the HP that's doing the current law enforcement or the Justice Department. I call it running interference while withholding information on the shooting itself. .

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by BeamOn

If so, it is one sided. People are looting and rioting because they feel law enforcement is withholding information intentionally. Then they came out in full combat gear and they were replaced by HP on the governor's orders.

Why do they now need to get into the act, especially since they have been sidelined and then release the video against the wishes of the HP that's doing the current law enforcement or the Justice Department. I call it running interference while withholding information on the shooting itself. .

OTOH, one needn't worry about prejudicing a jury against a dead victim. I suppose they thought the video would make the protestors reconsider who it was they were protesting for.

[Rajoo]

May not be prejudicial to the victim but sure as hell goes a long way to ensure that any possible criminal case against the officer will not be in Ferguson. My observation is based on the fact that violence re-erupted after this video was released and did very little to paint the victim as a perp.