The Department of Justice “urged” Ferguson Police not to release Michael Brown robbery video
Last Friday the Ferguson Police Chief, Tom Jackson, held a press conference in which he released the name of the officer who fatally shot Michael Brown, and during this press conference he also stated that Michael Brown was a suspect in a robbery which occurred shortly before he was shot. A surveillance video of the alleged robbery has subsequently been released.
The question is: why did he wait so long to make this known to the public once the riots started? While this information probably would not have helped to quell the riots it was a piece information which we should have had. And by not releasing it in a timely manner the media was allowed to portray this as the killing of an innocent man who had never done anything wrong.
Please do not misunderstand me here: I am not saying this video proves anything. I am not saying this video makes the shooting of Michael Brown justified because we simply do not know the facts at this time. Michael Brown was still unarmed and as far as I know holding up a store for a box of cigars is not a crime punishable by death. Did the police feel threatened or did they over-react? Did Michael Brown charge the police officers or was he in the act of surrendering? We still do not know at this time and there are conflicting reports as to whether or not the police officer knew Michael Brown was a suspect in the robbery or not.
However, we do know now, if this story is correct, why the Ferguson Police did not release the video in a more timely manner. According to the story linked to above the Department of Injustice urged the Ferguson Police not to release the video.
The Department of Justice urged Ferguson police not to release surveillance video purporting to show Michael Brown robbing a store shortly before he was shot and killed by police, arguing the footage would further inflame tensions in the St. Louis suburb that saw rioting and civil unrest in the wake of the teenager’s death.
If the video does indeed show Michael Brown committing a crime then I fail to see any reason why it should not have been released. This was a pertinent piece of information which the public should have had because it could have shed some light on the events leading up to the shooting.
Again, it probably would not have stopped the rioting but at the same time I fail to see how releasing the truth, if this is the truth, could have further inflamed the tensions unless the people are not interested in getting to the bottom of this story but are instead only interested in the truth as they see it. Or as the mainstream media wishes to portray it.
It makes one wonder if the Department of Injustice had an ulterior motive here. Ordo ab chao, or if you prefer, never let a good crisis go to waste…
America's Watchtower 
If you don’t commit crimes you don’t have to worry about being shot by the cops. Just sayin.
LikeLike
That certainly lessens the chances anyway…
LikeLiked by 1 person
These days, not committing a crime does not protect anyone from police abuse of authority. Completely innocent people are being harassed, arrested, injured, shot, and killed by LEOs.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Which is what I was alluding to in my short comment above.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That which was is no longer. The comment you so nicely adverted Steve and the point Laura makes is only exemplifies the problem. When people ‘believe’ the wrong source they don’t realize the right one – the lie becomes the truth and the truth becomes: ‘Oh, that’s not true!’ Once again is the ‘plan’.
Maybe this is the ‘August Surprise’ to introduce more for Sep. and Oct.
LikeLike
Yeah, if you are doing nothing wrong then you shouldn’t oppose the PATRIOT Act, or the NSA spying program. This type of thinking neglects the infringement on our rights and that is the problem.
LikeLike
New information — a ‘friend’ of the police officer is confirming the officer’s account of the incident. This friend says Brown did push the officer, did try to grab the gun. He is saying Brown did rush the officer which is the reason the officer said he fired.
Don’t know what to make of this whole thing now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Several witness are now backing the officer’s story, there is still too much unknown at this point about what the truth is.
LikeLike
Eric Holder licking his chops, desperate for a race war.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is what it seems like.
LikeLike
I’m glad they showed the video as it clearly counters the “gentle giant” claims his friends were making about him, and needed to be countered. The public wanted this 18 year ‘innocent’ kid to be the next poster boy for black on white racism and this video put a quick, nasty grinding halt to that as a possibility. I’m not saying he should have been shot or killed, that needs to come out under investigation. But I’m really getting tired of these parents/relative/friends all coming out and trying to make this the race issue this has become. If the officer didn’t need to shoot, he needs to be dealt with. Regardless, this kid was no gentle giant. He was a thug,and no one will change my mind of this after seeing him in that video…
LikeLiked by 1 person
It just doesn’t make any sense for the authorities to sit on this video for so long and allow the story to fester.
LikeLike
I’ve thought about writing about what is taking place in Ferguson, but have not. There is plenty I could say, but so many of the facts are still unknown, I just don’t care to wade into the mud. Having said that, there is no legitimate reason for this video to have been withheld for so long. It is clearly pertinent information.
Another question I have is this. How would this situation unfolded before Obama and Holder were in power? I think it would have been different because the people who perpetrate such nonsense have been emboldened because they have “two of their own” in places of authority.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I almost did not write this post Larry because we really don’t know all the details, but found the DOJ urging the withholding of this video to be too interesting not to write about.
LikeLike
It’s my understanding that the police stopped the men for walking in the street, not because they suspected Brown of stealing cigars from the carry-out. That information wasn’t discovered until later. Regardless of why Brown was stopped, being shot and killed was unjustified. It doesn’t matter what Brown was doing. He was unarmed and at a distance from the LEOs – lethal force was not warranted.
The results of the first autopsy show no shots from behind, a total of six gunshots – two of which were to the head – one that entered on a downward trajectory.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is how I understand it as well, the officer did not know about the robbery until after the confrontation began. The officer is now claiming he was punched and Michael Brown went for his gun. We still don’t know what the truth is but unless he was shot at point blank ranges this scenario doesn’t hold water.
LikeLike
The only evidence that the office did anything wrong was what people were screaming in the streets. Now that the facts are coming to light we now know that Michael Brown had brutally assaulted the officer before being shot. The truth is that the people rioting are more to blame for Mr. Browns death than the police. The people have allowed these teens to think its ok to steal, rob and use drugs. When Mr. Brown lay dead in the street all the bystanders were screaming “THE POLICE KILLED THE NIGGER FOR NO REASON”. The residence were way more surprised to find out that the police had killed the teen than the fact that a dead man was laying in the street. The residence were used to seeing dead shooting victims but normally killed by other residence as if it were fine as long as the police didn’t shoot him
LikeLike