Ferguson. News, Accuracy, and Errors

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The previous Ferguson thread went a bit off the rails and has been archived. However it's too big an event to ignore. I'm starting this thread so people can post news about the ongoing events, and discuss the accuracy of the facts claimed in that news.

Please avoid general discussion of bias, racism, predictions, speculation, or the rights and wrongs of the situation. Facts only please.

Remember there are many eyes on this situation. So from a Metabunk perspective it's best to focus specifically on things that might lead to conspiracy theories.
 
It is my understanding that
- the officer claims the final act of Michael Brown was bull rushing that officer.
- there is a bullet wound to the top of Michael Brown's head.

I'd appreciate if you don't post "understandings" (too much like opinions), but instead post actual evidence. i.e. linked quotes from reliable sources.
 
CNN does a good job of discussing "what we know" vs what questions are left unanswered. They are also holding a townhall style meeting tonight to discuss the shooting of Mr. Brown and CNN will air it live.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/19/us/ferguson-michael-brown-dueling-narratives/.
Don Lemon hosts a live town hall to discuss race in America in light of the shooting of Michael Brown and the unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, tonight at 10 ET on CNN.
Content from External Source
 
I would be more inclined to believe the police if they weren't hassling reporters on the scene. If they are doing everything above board, then wouldn't they want the world to see how they are doing. Instead they arrested those two reporters (from the Huffington Post and the Washington Post) http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ashington-post-reporter-arrested-in-ferguson/
Then there was the arrest of a photographer from Getty Images arrested the other day. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...y-photographer-arrested-scott-olson/14265155/

These two incidents look very bad. That the police is blatantly violating freedom of the press and trying to blind the public's eye is telling. Again if they are doing things right, why do they fear outsiders seeing what it is they are doing... unless what they are doing is wrong.
 
I would be more inclined to believe the police if they weren't hassling reporters on the scene.

Inclinations are not too useful here. Someone could equally say they would trust the media more if they'd stop disregarding police instructions and getting themselves arrested for the story. Then we'd just have a big inclination-off.

Please avoid subjective interpretations of contentious events. That's not what Metabunk is for.
 
I would be more inclined to believe the police if they weren't hassling reporters on the scene. If they are doing everything above board, then wouldn't they want the world to see how they are doing. Instead they arrested those two reporters (from the Huffington Post and the Washington Post) http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ashington-post-reporter-arrested-in-ferguson/
Then there was the arrest of a photographer from Getty Images arrested the other day. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...y-photographer-arrested-scott-olson/14265155/

These two incidents look very bad. That the police is blatantly violating freedom of the press and trying to blind the public's eye is telling. Again if they are doing things right, why do they fear outsiders seeing what it is they are doing... unless what they are doing is wrong.
I'm sure there are two sides to every story, but with respect to the Washington Post and Huffington Post reporters it seems like they were somewhere they should'nt have been, and even admit as much. Protest are heated at times and I'm sure with all the scrutiny the police were under they didn't have time for nonsense. The police were using the McDonalds like a forward base of sorts because it's in a perfect location to deal with the riots. Police told the reporters he couldn't guarantee their safety (from the violence not police), and then after returning he demanded that ALL members of the media to leave immediately. There's a great deal of tension in those situations and reporters don't always listen to the authorities while trying to record or catch that one extra shot.
And I'm sorry but for those of you who've never been arrested before or put in handcuffs, it always feels demeaning and always feels like they are "doing it to hard or tight". There is no "nice" way to arrest an individual, and it doesn't matter who you are when being arrested, everyone gets treated the same way. No harm was done because the Police Chief let them leave without charging them of a crime or for interfering with police business.
Patrons working in the McDonald’s, which reporters had been using as a staging area near demonstrations, were ordered to leave, Lowery said. When the journalists said they were working members of the media, the police told them that was fine, but they couldn’t guarantee their safety.

Police then left and returned a short time later, Lowery said, this time demanding that the reporters leave. Lowery began filming a video on his phone while also using his other hand to pack up his things. An officer objected, Lowery said, but did not press the issue.

Lowery was directed to leave through one door, and then told to go through another, at which point his bag fell off of his shoulder.
Content from External Source
 
Last edited:
I would be more inclined to believe the police if they weren't hassling reporters on the scene. If they are doing everything above board, then wouldn't they want the world to see how they are doing. Instead they arrested those two reporters (from the Huffington Post and the Washington Post) http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ashington-post-reporter-arrested-in-ferguson/
Then there was the arrest of a photographer from Getty Images arrested the other day. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...y-photographer-arrested-scott-olson/14265155/

These two incidents look very bad. That the police is blatantly violating freedom of the press and trying to blind the public's eye is telling. Again if they are doing things right, why do they fear outsiders seeing what it is they are doing... unless what they are doing is wrong.

Examine the reasons they were arrested, and remove the hyperbole printed. The police entered the McDonalds and ordered everyone out. That includes media who do not get special leave from lawful instructions. In asking them to leave that specific area police are not preventing the reporter from continuing to do his job, just go to another area. But he chose instead to argue the point about video taping and stood there long after the cop gave him plenty of warning and time to move. Watch the video and count how many times he was asked to leave without compliance. It should be pretty clear why he was removed.
 
Examine the reasons they were arrested, and remove the hyperbole printed. The police entered the McDonalds and ordered everyone out. That includes media who do not get special leave from lawful instructions. In asking them to leave that specific area police are not preventing the reporter from continuing to do his job, just go to another area. But he chose instead to argue the point about video taping and stood there long after the cop gave him plenty of warning and time to move. Watch the video and count how many times he was asked to leave without compliance. It should be pretty clear why he was removed.


They were told to leave because the police couldn't protect them. They said they were fine with that. The McDonald's was still open. So why weren't the workers told to leave. Just order the McDonald's to close. No they focused on the reporters for some unimaginable reason and proceeded to rough them up a little to prove a point. It was also telling that they didn't charge them with anything. Quite odd if they were doing something wrong, to be arrested and not charged. The cops won't even admit they were arrested. Almost as if they were taken into protective custody against their will. Odd how the police have to violate rights to keep the peace.

And it would be different if this was an isolated incident, but as has been reported, many other photographers and journalists from all sorts of publications have been harassed or arrested or cuffed by over zealous police.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...erguson-arrest-and-threaten-more-journalists/

And here's a more comprehensive article about the various arrests which watch dog groups are calling a concerted effort to blind the world to what is going on in Ferguson.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/19/us/ferguson-journalists-arrested/index.html
 
Last edited:
They were told to leave because the police couldn't protect them. They said they were fine with that. The McDonald's was still open. So why weren't the workers told to leave. Just order the McDonald's to close. No they focused on the reporters for some unimaginable reason and proceeded to rough them up a little to prove a point. It was also telling that they didn't charge them with anything. Quite odd if they were doing something wrong, to be arrested and not charged. The cops won't even admit they were arrested. Almost as if they were taken into protective custody against their will. Odd how the police have to violate rights to keep the peace.

And it would be different if this was an isolated incident, but as has been reported, many other photographers and journalists from all sorts of publications have been harassed or arrested or cuffed by over zealous police.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...erguson-arrest-and-threaten-more-journalists/

And here's a more comprehensive article about the various arrests which watch dog groups are calling a concerted effort to blind the world to what is going on in Ferguson.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/19/us/ferguson-journalists-arrested/index.html
Overnight, several journalists reported being detained, threatened or otherwise prevented from covering the unfolding story.
Content from External Source
How are they being prevented from covering the unfolding story, when they have become the story? I'm sorry but the entire article in the WP is about the reporters and little about the events that are unfolding in the city, and that's not because they spent a few hours behind bars or in a police car. I don't understand why the reporters consistently interfere with police business, and then wonder why they police had to remove them from the area.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media...will-continue-to-arrest-reporters-194162.html
Police in Ferguson, Missouri, are continuing to arrest journalists and have said that they will continue to do so because of safety concerns, despite condemnation from media organizations that say such detentions are unwarranted.
Content from External Source
"I'm going to tell you in the midst of chaos, when officers are running around, we're not sure who's a journalist and who's not," Johnson said, according toan audio recording. "Yes, if I see somebody with a $50,000 camera on their shoulder, I'm pretty sure. But some journalists are walking around, and all you have is a cellphone because you're from a small media outlet. Some of you may just have a camera around your neck."

"So yes, we may take some of you into custody," he continued. "But when we do take you into custody, and we have found out you're a journalist, we've taken the proper action. But in the midst of it, we cannot — in the midst of it, in the midst of chaos, and trying to move people on, we have to be safe. ... And we are providing protection for journalists. We had, we had a journalist who was trapped in the midst of that gunfire, in the midst of that chaos. And we're providing protection for them. We took journalists back to their trucks."
Content from External Source
 
Last edited:
They were told to leave because the police couldn't protect them. They said they were fine with that. The McDonald's was still open. So why weren't the workers told to leave. Just order the McDonald's to close. No they focused on the reporters for some unimaginable reason and proceeded to rough them up a little to prove a point. It was also telling that they didn't charge them with anything. Quite odd if they were doing something wrong, to be arrested and not charged. The cops won't even admit they were arrested. Almost as if they were taken into protective custody against their will. Odd how the police have to violate rights to keep the peace.

I didn't see where it said the McDonalds was still open, nor whether staff were asked to leave. Watch the video- they were telling everyone to leave, they're saying to everyone "grab your stuff, let's go" and told them several times clearly to do so, but the reporter just stands there filming clearly against instructions. Little wonder he is arrested in the end. I didn't see anywhere in the video where he was "roughed up", can you provide clarification? Other than the reporter saying so?

Being arrested under a breach of the peace is common here, where under certain criteria a person can be removed and released without charge, I'm not sure what legislation in the US is like regarding that. It may not be their safety the police are removing them for, look into the legislation and it may become clearer.

Again, this is not an attempt to "blind the public", as this event will be reported upon, there's no way to quietly riot. And just because someone is arrested doesn't mean their rights are violated because they object to an instruction given to them by police. They are free until the law is broken. During emergency situations (like riot) police are hardly going to stand around and debate matters of constitution with a reporter who seems to want to inflame the situation by doing the wrong thing and then complain when arrested.
 
Please stay with specifics here. Avoid more general interpretation. i.e. what actually happened, not guesses about motives.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/mi...on-police-never-filed-incident-report-n186431
Article explaining why Ferguson Police didn't file an incident report. They immediately handed it over to St. Louis County police, and the media and critics have questioned why they would release an incident report for the "alleged" strong arm robbery but not for the murder of Michael Brown (police shooting).
The St. Louis County police department presumably did file an incident report, but any such documents will not be made public until a grand jury investigating the officer-involved shooting concludes its investigation, according to officials from the office who briefed NBC News on the case.

The grand jury reviewing the facts in the case is impaneled until mid-September, but could continue to deliberate beyond its term, in which case their sole focus would be on the shooting of Brown. At the conclusion of its investigation, the grand jury will decide whether to indict Wilson in connection with the shooting.

The St. Louis County prosecutor's office stressed that it is cooperating with the concurrent federal investigation of Brown’s death and is sharing information with FBI agents who are looking into whether his civil rights were violated.
Content from External Source
 
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/suit-claims-police-brutality-ferguson-protests-25166263
The five plaintiffs in the suit in St. Louis include a clinical social worker who said she and her 17-year-old son were roughed up and arrested after not evacuating a McDonald's quickly enough. They also include a 23-year-old man who said he was shot multiple times with rubber bullets and called racial slurs by police while walking through the protest zone to his mother's home, and a man who said he was arrested for filming the disturbances.
Content from External Source
 
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/suit-claims-police-brutality-ferguson-protests-25166263
The five plaintiffs in the suit in St. Louis include a clinical social worker who said she and her 17-year-old son were roughed up and arrested after not evacuating a McDonald's quickly enough. They also include a 23-year-old man who said he was shot multiple times with rubber bullets and called racial slurs by police while walking through the protest zone to his mother's home, and a man who said he was arrested for filming the disturbances.
Content from External Source
The police were just doing their job, and we have no proof the police used racial slurs besides the word of the person who's suing them for 40 million dollars...
The lawsuit seeks $40 million in damages and names Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson, St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar, Ferguson officer Justin Cosma, several unnamed officers identified collectively as John Doe, and the city and county governments.
Content from External Source
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top