General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOdd Notes From Ferguson Police Chief Jackson's Press Conference (Thurs Aug 14)
For those not close to a teevee, the Police Chief of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson, gave a short press conference around noon local time. Here are some of my observations, including mostly the odd moments of the press conference.
1) Shushing his Subordinate - At one point, Jackson was asked about the two journalists who had been arrested in the McDonald's last night. He hemmed and hawed awkwardly, then one of his subordinates grabbed a mic and said something like "They were upset because they wanted to be on television..." at which point Jackson literally pushed him away and shushed him.
2) "We're Reviewing that Today Again" - On naming the officer who shot and killed Michael Brown, the Jackson had a few interesting things to say: a) He absolutely denied that the person named by Anonymous earlier today was that officer, but then suggested that the person named was actually an officer, which is different from what he'd said earlier, saying something like "The officer they named who was not involved," b) He hemmed and hawed oddly when another name - Gary - was thrown at him, saying "No comment" to that name (why deny the one but not the other?), c) most importantly, he mentioned that they were reviewing the decision "again today." (see 3)).
3) Reviewing the Decision not the Release the Name - Jackson made some very odd remarks about naming the officer involved, saying "We're reviewing that again today." He said that he had mentioned two circumstances in which he'd release the name: forced to by a judge, or if the officer was charged. But he also said that a third condition applied: that he could change his mind on a day-to-day basis, and today was a new day! It was a remarkable thing to say. He then implied that he would be having a meeting on that question today, "this afternoon." And promised "more on that!"
On point three, I think Jackson is under great pressure to release the name of this officer, and that some of the pressure is coming from the Justice Department / White House. Notice that in Obama's statement (which was, let's face it, underwhelming at best) kept mentioning an "open and transparent investigation." I think that was code for "release the name," and that this is coming down at Jackson from federal and from Nixon.
In any case, a very odd conference indeed.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)And yes, I got that impression today from the WH press statement: while it didn't say very much, it was clear that calls had been made and that behind-the-scenes actions were taking place regarding "transparency" and "excessive force." My guess (or at least hope) is that we will be seeing some major changes later today.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)anyway... with journalists "wanting to get on TV". Gosh, he must hate the very idea of any protesters too, as they want to get on tv.
Fucking idiot. Wish I could find the presser with better audio.
VanGoghRocks
(621 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)I'm hoping there's a link to it later so I can watch!
CatWoman
(79,302 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)injustice if these stories get out.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)VanGoghRocks
(621 posts)was done speaking. Now I can find no link to this presser nor to any transcript thereof. Really frustrating.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)VanGoghRocks
(621 posts)Historic NY
(37,452 posts)NV Whino
(20,886 posts)he is in control of his officers and should be fired.
winstars
(4,220 posts)The questioner said, IMHO: "The protesters who just left already know the name, and since we are using first names (the Chief had said the first name of the mis-identified person) is the officer named Gary?"
He then froze, making me think that that is the first name of the officer...
ghawtho1
(1 post)Actually in reviewing the interview, the name Darren Wilson is mentioned at time stamp 11:05. That's when he really got shook up, because, as we found out today that is the right name. He was probably wondering "what the?", "how do they know that?"
lpbk2713
(42,766 posts)Really.
It does.