back to article Know what Ferguson city needs right now? It's not Anonymous doxing random people

Anonymous has called off efforts to name and shame the cop who shot unarmed teen Michael Brown dead in Ferguson, Missouri – after the hacktivists identified a bloke whom the police say has never worked as a beat officer. On Thursday the group released the name and pictures from Facebook of a man they accused of shooting 18- …

  1. Unicornpiss
    Alert

    Ahh, vigilante "justice"

    I truly believe Anonymous has done some good in the world, but they really need to take a couple of steps back and reassess their methods and priorities, as well as their methods for fact checking.

    I truly hope these poor people aren't harassed by the unwashed masses over Anonymous' mistake. The whole thing just makes me sad. Sadder is people's willingness to scream for blood before information. And saddest of all is that oppression, frustration, ignorance, and feelings of low self worth can build up in a community to such a boiling point that lynch mobs and riots can be sparked like a wildfire in dry brush when something like this occurs.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. asdf
      Trollface

      Re: Ahh, vigilante "justice"

      You should cheer yourself up by watch the movie The Ox-Bow Incident. Oh wait maybe not.

    4. This post has been deleted by its author

    5. streaky

      Re: Ahh, vigilante "justice"

      There is a counter-argument that this sort of nonsense breeds in an environment without transparency. They promised to name the chap involved but never did, citing safety - yet they happily parade suspected everything else (paedophiles for example are routinely and often mistakenly targeted for vigilante justice).

      One could argue they have created a new problem where they have two officers under threat as opposed to just the one that was actually involved. Doesn't make it right, but it might be the case.

    6. Gray
      Alert

      Re: Ahh, vigilante "justice"

      Don't assume that the alleged "death threats" are real. Consider the source. The Ferguson chief made that allegation, but he also gave an incomplete account of the fatal confrontation that has been totally refuted by eyewitness accounts from three separate witnesses, each from a different vantage point, and two of which were within very close proximity at the time of the shooting.

      It's noteworthy that neither the Ferguson PD or the St. Louis county prosecutor's office has seen fit to recognize or take statements from those three witnesses; but have chosen instead to discredit at least one by implying "he ran away" and thus cannot be taken seriously.

      Credible death threats? ... apparent cover-up motivations to date suggest otherwise.

      And what is the excuse for failing to release documents which are available upon demand according to Missouri state law, immediately upon completion ... most importantly, the officer's incident report. Why is all of the information being suppressed and public documents being withheld?

      The majority population of Ferguson, MO historically have absolutely no reason to trust or believe their police authorities. Why do some outside observers then take the "death threat" statement of an obviously frightened and incompetent police chief as gospel truth?

      1. chris lively

        Re: Ahh, vigilante "justice"

        Oh, I don't know, probably because it's highly likely to have occurred. People get death threats for just posting contrary views on the net. I'd bet my house that death threats, yes more than one, were sent shortly after a target was identified.

        Unfortunately that's the jacked up world we live in. Anonymous had no business releasing that info. Especially considering it was wrong and very easily identified as such.

    7. This post has been deleted by its author

    8. This post has been deleted by its author

    9. This post has been deleted by its author

  2. ian 22

    Meh

    The local populace know who the plod is. It seems he's constantly bashing heads (black ones).

    More interesting are the heavy weapons being deployed against anyone who objects to being abused by the police. Armoured vehicles? Sniper rifles? Automatic weapons? When will they bring out the F16s with "Ferguson Police Department" emblazoned on them?

    1. Captain DaFt

      Re: Meh

      Well, according to a lot of soldiers on the front lines overseas, The Ferguson Police are better armed against protesters than they are against enemy combatants:

      https://storify.com/AthertonKD/veterans-on-ferguson

      (BTW, somebody just forwarded me a tweet that the Ferguson Police have removed their badges and nametags to keep the protesters from identifying them. If true, that's in violation of so many Federal laws!)

      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: CaptainDaFt Re: Meh

        ".....somebody just forwarded me a tweet....." In this kind of incident which draws all the wannabes out of the woodwork it is best to treat such tweets as suspect unless backed up by a proper journo's report. Individual, outrage-driven Tweeters are one thing, but newspapers, radio and TV usually have lawyers to try and keep their reporters from going too far into wishful thinking.

        1. Tom 13

          Re: but newspapers, radio and TV

          Because they gave George Zimmerman fair treatment and haven't tried to make themselves part of the story this time, right?

        2. chris lively

          Re: CaptainDaFt Meh

          I agree with the sentiment, but what qualifies as a proper journal report?

      2. Monkey Cheese Pants

        Re: Meh

        Ferguson Police are still wearing badges and nametags. And even if they didn't - are you going to walk up to one and say "hey, put your badge and nametag on"??? Not unless you want to pick your teeth off the pavement. They're not playing Officer Friendly right now ...

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Anonymous

    Synonymous with preposterous.

    AC, yes I know.

  4. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Florida1920
      Headmaster

      Re: One wonders ...

      One wonders ...

      ... why so many are up in arms over statistically[1] meaningless police shootings, and yet refuse to stand up against the vastly more wide-spread gang violence?

      [1] If you don't understand statistics, learn math(s) before commentarding ...

      Statistics are meaningless here. We expect criminals to be criminals. We expect law-enforcement officers not to be criminals.

      1. Roj Blake Silver badge

        Re: One wonders ...

        "We expect law-enforcement officers not to be criminals."

        Sounds pretty naive to me.

      2. Tom 13

        Re: We expect law-enforcement officers not to be criminals.

        Not based on the rush to judgement which has been displayed on these pages.

      3. jake Silver badge

        Re: One wonders ...

        (a cat stepped on my keybr0ad before I was ready to post ... this is what I intended[4])

        ... why so many are up in arms over statistically[1] meaningless[2] police shootings, and yet refuse to stand up against the vastly more wide-spread gang violence?

        [1] If you don't understand statistics, learn math(s) before commentarding ...

        [2] Don't get me wrong, I feel for the surviving family & friends. But for the rest of the rabble bellowing about "justice"[3], puh-lease, try to grow a sense of proportion.

        [3] For values of "justice" that is roughly equal to "retribution".

        [4] ElReg, why was I not allowed to edit my original?

    2. alwarming
      Coat

      Re: One wonders ...

      >... why so many are up in arms over statistically[1] meaningless police shootings, and yet refuse to

      > stand up against the vastly more wide-spread gang violence?

      Just because there is a lot of piss in the swimming pool, doesn't mean that I can't protest the

      Pee in my dinner plate. (aka Statistics have meaning when you apply appropriate filter on datasets).

      Time for me to commit my ad-hominem :

      Is that you, Jake?

    3. Matt Bryant Silver badge

      Re: Jake Re: One wonders ...

      "... why so many are up in arms over statistically[1] meaningless police shootings...." Whilst you could go further and say that more Yanks die every minute on the highways, isn't that greater loss more important, the problems here appear twofold (and I say 'appear' as there is yet to be a legal examination of the events) - firstly, the cop involved appears to have shot the victim whilst he was trying to surrender; secondly, the altercation seems to have been partially triggered by racial attitudes on the part of the cop. Both are behaviour we do cannot condone in police actions. Whilst you could argue that the youths involved probably had plenty of racial attitude of their own that does not excuse the cop's attitude, and definitely does not justify shooting a wounded and surrendering 'criminal'. Whilst Michael Brown or the other youth involved may have posed a lethal threat when (allegedly) wrestling with the officer, he does not seem to have posed such a threat if he was actually trying to surrender, which makes the subsequent shots (IMHO) a criminal act and possibly murder. So the 'up in arms' concern is how people do not want cops that are (allegedly) racist and (allegedly) illegally execute people.

      Whilst there do seem to be a lot of the usual 'civil rights' bandwagon-humpers that have jumped on this event (surprise, surprise, Al Sharpton was there before the gun smoke cleared - did he even get out of bed for Sandy Hook?), and the looting and vandalism haven't helped, the local police seem to have done a very, very bad job of dealing with the situation. The Anonyputzs have jumped in with their usual level of stupidity, doxing random people being just being the equivalent of pouring gas on the settling fire. TBH, whilst I want to see the cop involved in the shooting in court, I would also want the Anonyputzs involved brought up on some form of incitement charges. Taking the policing and investigation out of the hands of the local cops and giving it to the State Highway Patrol was the only smart move the authorities have made.

  5. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. jake Silver badge

    One wonders, MkIII

    The first was posted by a cat before I finished my thoughts, the second was apparently nuked by ElReg for reasons which I really don't understand ...

    ANYway, why so many are up in arms over statistically[1] meaningless[2] police shootings, and yet refuse to stand up against the vastly more wide-spread gang violence?

    [1] If you don't understand statistics, learn math(s) before commentarding ...

    [2] Don't get me wrong, I feel for the surviving family & friends. But for the rest of the rabble bellowing about "justice"[3], puh-lease, try to grow a sense of proportion.

    [3] For values of "justice" that is roughly equal to "retribution".

    1. Swarthy
      Stop

      Re: One wonders, MkIII

      Sorry jake, the footnotes don't help. It's a matter of trust. Why would someone be hurt that their wife had one affair when there are prostitutes in Nevada?

      Also, my taxes aren't paying the gang members to shoot at me, and they are also not paying for the bullets, training, and range time so the gangs can shoot me more efficiently.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: One wonders, MkIII

      The Ferguson PD's motto has been changed from "To Serve And Protect" to "Us Versus Them". Much catchier.

      @jake: whataboutery.

  7. Version 1.0 Silver badge

    In Amerika

    Over here the police see themselves as The Law - they do not enforce the laws of the land, they are The Law - what they say is right and what you say is wrong. If you are stopped by the police then you must be guilty of something - they are never wrong.

    I'm white and law abiding - yet if the police stop me, I get out of my car and I raise my hands because I don't want to get shot - yes, I'm scared of them. Their attitude, even for a simple traffic stop, is confrontational in the southern states.

    How have to ask yourself, how does an unarmed kid get shot multiple times by a cop for jaywalking? Oh wait - he was black wasn't he? That's not a racist statement, that's simply the way it is in the USA.

    1. Fatman

      Re: In Amerika

      Since 9/11, the terrorists have won.

      Unfortunately, these terrorists wear badges.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: In Amerika

      I have a few friends who are cops and they say it is scary to walk up to a car not knowing what could happen. They are trained to assume every car they pull over is a dangerous situation until they are certain the driver and passengers pose no threat. Imagine walking into an unknown situation every time you pull over a car - is the driver/passenger a person who has done something bad and will do anything to get away, on drugs, have a mental disorder and not right in the head?

      The best thing you can do is to STAY in your car with your hands in plain sight until the officer tells you to get out, be polite, talk about the latest sports game (it helps to make them like you), and don't get lippy. Some cops are a-holes and enjoy the power trip but most that I have encountered are not bad.

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: In Amerika

        The obvious answer is to call in an airstrike

    3. Gene Cash Silver badge

      Re: In Amerika

      To your 2nd paragraph, I must say "me too"

      And on the contrary to everyone else, I think anon should keep pushing for this guy's name. The papers are going to do it, and someone needs to.

      They even arrested a Washington Post reporter because he was dark skinned

      http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/nationworld/os-washington-post-reporter-recounts-arrest-in-ferguson-20140814,0,3832479.story

      I notice that story's disappeared from the BBC. It was there yesterday.

    4. Tom 13

      Re: how does an unarmed kid get shot multiple times

      Well it starts with not complying with the police officer's direction. It escalates when you give the cop lip for doing his job. And it's pretty much guaranteed once you assault the police officer.

      Yeah, I've been pulled over by the police for speeding. I've always found them polite, direct, and forceful. Pretty much what an officer needs to be these days.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: how does an unarmed kid get shot multiple times

        Yeah, I've been pulled over by the police for speeding. I've always found them polite, direct, and forceful. Pretty much what an officer needs to be these days.

        Unfortunately, even today it appears it still depends on your skin colour what treatment you get. THAT is wrong. I work with enough police to dig that they are the front line and have to be weary all the time, but if it is evident that some characters are prone to shoot people for no reason they MUST be identified and removed because that's quite simply murder.

    5. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Stop

      Re: Beta Version Re: In Amerika

      "Over here the police see themselves as The Law...." Seeing as you could not possibly have met and interacted with every law enforcement officer in the land, not even a majority, your 'assessment' is obviously based on groundless prejudice. I have been stopped on three occasions in the Southern states over the years and have never felt threatened in the slightest. On the most recent occasion I was stopped in downtown Atlanta last August when I got lost in a friend's car (no satnav, dead mobile battery) at 5am. The cop involved was very professional and - after he had confirmed I wasn't a DUI - sent me on my way with good directions. I didn't know that there had been a shooting only an hour before and the cops were hunting for the presumably still armed killer, an event which would have given the cop involved reason to be overly assertive, yet he was anything but.

      ".....That's not a racist statement, that's simply the way it is in the USA." No, you're just astynomiaphobic. You should probably listen to less rap records and watch more news (I wouldn't suggest reading more until you get out of Beta).

  8. Matt Bryant Silver badge
    Alert

    Update throws doubt on Johnson's story.

    Looks like Mr Brown may not have been the 'innocent, gentle giant' as claimed - http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-28806313 - and his buddy, Mr Johnson, forgot to mention their possible involvement in a bit of robbery.

    And the officer involved has been named as Darren Wilson with a clean six-years of service. It doesn't excuse the officer allegedly shooting an unarmed and surrendering suspect, but the story given by Johnson is already looking a bit thin and holed. A lot will now depend on the analysis of the shooting and whether Mr Brown could actually have been surrendering as claimed. If it is inconclusive and comes down to one's word vs the other's in court I suspect Mr Johnson will lose.

    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge

      Re: Update throws doubt on Johnson's story.

      Another hole in Johnson's version is the claim that the cop, Darren Wilson, started the physical engagement when he reached out of the car window and grabbed Mike Brown around the neck. That simply sounds unlikely seeing as Brown was 6 foot 4 and supposedly standing upright, so unless the cop had six foot gorilla arms and could pull a 292lb Brown into his car it is far more likely that Brown was bent over and reaching for the cop. Assaulting a cop is a felony offence, giving the officer the right under Missouri law to shoot Brown.

      "Hands up, we were conned?"

    2. Florida1920

      Re: Update throws doubt on Johnson's story.

      Looks like Mr Brown may not have been the 'innocent, gentle giant' as claimed -

      (CNN) -- Ferguson, Missouri, police Chief Thomas Jackson told reporters that "the initial contact between" Michael Brown and the police officer who fatally shot him was not related to the alleged convenience store robbery committed nearby a short time earlier.

      The officer approached Brown not because of the robbery, but "because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic."

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    White teen, riots? Hispanic teen, riots? Opportunistic rioting and looting?

    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      FAIL

      Re: AC

      "White teen, riots? Hispanic teen, riots?...." There appear to be plenty of white youths/troublemakers involved in the riots and confronting the police.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So you want to be a cop

    If you think traffic stops are routine and simple you may want to watch this.

    http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2013/10/oregon_state_police_video_capt.html

  11. jake Silver badge

    Original intention, before a cat trod on the keybr0ad (was: "One wonders")

    ... why so many are up in arms over statistically[1] meaningless[2] police shootings, and yet refuse to stand up against the vastly more wide-spread gang violence?

    [1] If you don't understand statistics, learn math(s) before commentarding ...

    [2] Don't get me wrong, I feel for the surviving family & friends. But for the rest of the rabble bellowing about "justice"[3], puh-lease, try to grow a sense of proportion.

    [3] For values of "justice" that is roughly equal to "retribution".

  12. EJ

    So apparently the brains of Anonymous have been scooped up in previous raids, leaving just the tech dregs to carry on the work. Time to close shop or hire new talent.

  13. Henry Wertz 1 Gold badge

    Anonymous vs. Anonymous

    Yeah I saw this; then a second Anonymous account is like (paraphrasing here) "Yeah we have a name too, and it's not the name those Anons released."

    The good news, I think, the report of the name found being the wrong one seems to have spread far more widely than the wrong person's name and address.

    I do think the PD (Police Departrment)'s behavior has been quite irresponsible though. Hiding the name of the (allegedly...) responsible party. The head of the PD pledged (I think Monday?) to take any lawsuit against the PD through the courts as far as possible (which is irresponsible to say before they had a chance to even investigate this properly). Indiscriminate use of teargas and rubber bullets. And arresting and harrasing the media as well as protestors.

    It sounds like at this point, due to the level of misconduct the last few days in.. umm... "crowd control"... (plus building animosity against the local PDs at this point), the Ferguson PD (and probably other local PDs) are basically being kicked out of Ferguson and Missouri Highway Patrol taking over.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Now I have to defend myself and I didn't do anything wrong.

    If only the victim got the same chance

  15. Monkey Cheese Pants

    Anonymous Fools ...

    Well - there goes Anonymous's Credibility. Instead of We Are Anonymous, it should be We Are A(s)(s)es. Can't even get their facts right. I think there should be riots in the street and people protesting Anonymous for cyberbullying a guy not even involved with this circus. Way to go Anonymous - you probably just murdered an innocent person and his family and caused another senseless Tragedy in Ferguson. Cyber Pinheads.

    1. chris lively

      Re: Anonymous Fools ...

      The problem is I'm not sure which store I'm supposed to loot from and burn down. What's the racial identity of the anon member that posted the wrong name?

      As you can tell I'm ill informed but trying to make sure I hit the right target - probably means I'd be a lousy rioter. Maybe I should just stay home.

  16. Matt Bryant Silver badge

    This is the Missouri law I think needs tightening up.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/seanmdav/status/500286071801126912/photo/1

  17. Matt Bryant Silver badge

    Moving forward?

    The problem seems to be that the two groups doing the majority of the shouting (selectively amplified by an eager press corp) are so polarised. That the local police released the footage of the robbery, whether under pressure from the press (who just want a good story), hasn't helped with the case as it seems the officer involved did not know Brown was a suspect in a robbery when the confrontation started. In effect, what we have is a police stop for jaywalking that escalated into a man being shot. The rest is just trigger points for selective bias, unfortunately spurred by a lack of clarity as to how events unfolded.

    So, how did it get from a police stop to a shooting, and - possibly more importantly - how can it be prevented from happening again, especially as it may actually have been a 'righteous' shooting? The first step I would suggest should be implementing cameras on all street cops, dashcams, and guncams. If needed, the money should come from the US Government rather than individual state police funds and be enforced by a national law. That would be the first step to rebuilding trust in the police, and it would also help in stopping these type of events escalate into uninformed rioting because it would remove a lot of the doubt (and sometimes purposeful misinformation) surrounding events.

    Secondly, I would have to suggest a change in the local/state law. It seems bizarre that it could actually be legal for a cop to shoot an unarmed suspect if they do not pose a direct threat to the officer or a byestander, just because they committed a felony offence. I do not understand enough about US national vs state law setting to know if the Government can impose laws on acceptable force across the whole country, but it would seem the Missouri law needs addressing as a major step in stopping a similar event happening again.

    And thirdly, it has to be made clear (with tightening of laws if required) that groups that threaten IT infrastructure, as done by the Anonyputzs, and incite violence with their half-arsed doxings, are committing crimes and will be investigated and prosecuted. I don't care how 'good' or 'righteous' they think they were being, the simple truth is they added nothing of any value to the situation.

    1. JCitizen

      Re: Moving forward?

      State's powers still trump federal in many instances. But the US Federal Department of Justice still has a lot of its own power to enforce infractions of personal civil rights. It doesn't take much evidence to say some official or other deprived someone of their civil rights. Killing someone when it isn't clear deadly force was issued in a proper reaction, could easily be construed as improperly depriving this person of his civil rights and right to life. So the DOJ can always pull out that trump card even if no Missouri law was broken by the officer. The punishment is wide ranging, so it is nothing to laugh at.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Moving forward?

      Instead of spending all my tax money on BS, how about this: change nothing. That way the next dumbass that thinks its a good idea to start a fight with a cop will know how things are going to turn out. It's called natural selection. If you're too dumb to figure out that the guy with the gun is going to win then maybe you didn't make the cut.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Moving forward?

        Instead of spending all my tax money on BS, how about this: change nothing. That way the next dumbass that thinks its a good idea to start a fight with a cop will know how things are going to turn out. It's called natural selection. If you're too dumb to figure out that the guy with the gun is going to win then maybe you didn't make the cut.

        Until we have all the facts, it still very much looks like giving certain people a gun and racial profiling can lead to murder. And *nobody* should be allowed to get away with murder. If you don't make people responsible for their actions, especially those with more power, you're begging on your knees for just about the most explosive social situation possible because the right to defend is then going to be claimed by both sides.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Random citizen?

    I'd hardly call a poilce dispatcher a "random citizen".

  19. Matt Bryant Silver badge

    Postmortem shows killing shot could not have been delivered from behind.

    The two bullets that hit Brown's head both entered his head almost parallel to the plane of his face, with the killing shot going through the upper brow into his brain. So there is no way Brown was killed running away, not unless he had some form of physically-impossible running technique that included running with his head tilted right back. Brown was a football player, an athelete, so his running posture would be very orthodox. People running from being shot tend to hunch their shoulders and keep down, so the killing shot is impossible from behind. If his head had been turned to look over the shoulder then the shot that hit his eye socket would have traversed his face, but instead it travelled down his cheek and into his upper chest, and the shot that entered the top of his head would have smashed a trench across the top of his skull but not made a right-angled turn down into his brain.

    If the killing shot was made whilst the officer was standing and Brown was on his knees at twenty-odd feet then the posture again doesn't fit, he would need to be kneeling and leaning forward with his chin tucked down into his chest to get close to the right angle. Some of the witnesses claim he was on his knees and had his hands and head up and was saying "don't shoot", in which case the shot would have entered the front of his head/face and travelled at a slight downward angle, almost horizontally. If the cop was six foot tall he would have been holding the gun at a level of roughly five-and-a-half feet, Brown on his knees would put his brow at four-and-a-half to five feet above the level street, so the shot would drop about a foot at most in twenty-plus feet - a relatively shallow angle. This did not happen, not with either headshot, the angle of penetration was almost parallel to the plane of his face. If Brown was on his knees and the cop walked up to close range and 'executed' Brown then the angle would be much steeper, but still not the almost vertical angle of the shots if Brown had his head up as claimed.

    If the killing shot had been fired with Brown already face-down on the road, the so-called 'execution' claim, then the angle of the shots would actually penetrate the top of his head and travel forward in his head in relation to the plane of his face - this did not happen, both bullets that hit his head travelled at an angle slightly backwards from the plane of his face. If Brown was hit with both headshots when falling forward onto the ground then the two shots would have to have been fired in very rapid fire and at a distinctly different time to the shots that hit his right side and arm more horizontally, yet some of the witnesses claim the shots were all fired "pow-pow-pow-pow" when Brown was on his knees. Such 'witness' statements are beginning to look a bit unclear, being generous.

    Rapid fire would fit with the idea the cop was being rushed, not with the more deliberate and aimed fire that a trained shooter (such as a cop) would use against a stationary target. Even if the cop was using double-taps there would be two 'pows' with a pause to adjust aim before the second set of shots - 'pow-pow....pow-pow' - and not the string of rapid shots.

    But, if Brown had his shoulders hunched and head down and was rushing the cop in the manner of an American football forward, something Brown was accustomed to doing, then the impact angles are possible, and the rapid fire is more likely as the cop switches to trying to stop the attacker in the short space between them. Therefore it appears to me that the autopsy report adds more weight to the cop's side of the story than those of the 'witnesses'.

    As to why an highschool graduate would be stupid enough to try rushing an armed cop, you have to ask why an highschool grad would be stupid enough to rough-up a store clerk and steal a box of cigars in front if a video camera, or attack a cop in his car, which suggests Brown may have been less than lucid. Obvious suggestions would be drink or drugs, both of which should show up on the full autopsy report in the bloodwork.

    If posters wish to propose otherwise then please do so without relying on JFK-style 'magic bullets' that defy the rules of physics. The more 'Libertarian' might also want to ponder the idea that the Tasers they so hate might have stopped Brown without the need for lethal force.

    1. chris lively

      Re: Postmortem shows killing shot could not have been delivered from behind.

      Excellent right up.

  20. chivo243 Silver badge
    Unhappy

    As I posted on the other Ferguson article

    the collateral damage has begun.

    Releasing it will be bad, very bad

    "Releasing the officer's name now would create a vehicle for much worse injustices to be committed, and innocent people will be caught in the feeding frenzy. It's a tragedy about to get worse."

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like