The "crime" committed by Mike Brown was shoplifting - NOT "stong arm robbery"

[CatWoman]

same as these people:



Arrested for stealing $5,500 worth of clothes and accessories at Saks Fifth Avenue in Beverly Hills (2001)



Walked out of a jewelry store with a $2,500 necklace (2011)



Allegedly stole a wig from the Hustler store in Hollywood and a lighter from a gas station (2007)



Admitted to stealing make-up from Wal-Mart when she was a teen


http://www.ranker.com/list/celebrities-who-have-been-caught-shoplifting/celebrity-lists?format=SLIDESHOW&page=3

[cwydro]

1. I dont think he should have been killed.

But if that is him on that tape roughing up the store owner...that is just wrong.

And that is not just shoplifting.

[CatWoman]

6. what I saw was the clerk being rebuffed

after the clerk grabbed him first.

[onenote]

105. Doesn't matter if clerk grabbed him first.

If you use force to complete the act of stealing something --- such as pushing the clerk out of the way -- its second-degree robbery (aka "strong arm" or "strong armed" robbery).

At least that's what I learned in law school. Maybe you learned something different.

[840high]

112. Certainly not just stealing.

[maced666]

136. "Rebuffed" LOL

Is that what they are calling it these days LOL
Would really be funny if you were serious!

[Chemisse]

92. I agree. If that was him, he committed shoplifting and assault.

Although I can't see how it could be considered armed robbery.

Either way, that is NO excuse for shooting the young man. And throwing that tape out there is just a way of saying, 'See? He's just a thug. Do we really care so much that he's dead?"

Maybe people won't consciously think this (although we know some people will), but it will sap their indignation, take the wind out of their sails.

And don't forget, they need to get the fix in on that future jury pool.

[maced666]

137. No! It's rebuffing LOL!

Rebuffing is....
I can't.
Feeling sorry for the poster.

[Chemisse]

142. I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about.

[Boom Sound 416]

2. Didn't look like shoplifting to me

[CatWoman]

3. Shoplifting (also known as boosting, five-finger discount, or shrinkage within the retail industry)

is theft of goods from a retail establishment. It is one of the most common crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoplifting

[Boom Sound 416]

8. WOW! great post.

[CatWoman]

10. Praise from Caesar?

where's my laurel wreath when I need it?

[Boom Sound 416]

14. You'll have to look I suppose

[CatWoman]

19. found it!!

and an extra one for you

[Boom Sound 416]

23. I'm fine. I'm resting...

[pinboy3niner]

35. :)

[Boom Sound 416]

39. ...

Thank you sensei

[CatWoman]

126. Ed McMahon in da house!

[CatWoman]

47. nice to meet you Resting

I'm Midori

[Boom Sound 416]

49. Now you're just being sweet, but I'm too old to be green

[CatWoman]

53. same here

that is actually my name

[Boom Sound 416]

60. ...

[Ms. Toad]

129. wikipedia is not the best source for how crimes are defined in Missouri. n/t

[linuxman]

4. Yep.

Once he went hands on, it became something more than simple shoplifting.

[LanternWaste]

20. I'm sure the courts will allow your statement all the validity and credibility it warrants.

I'm sure the courts will allow your statement all the validity and credibility it warrants.

[Boom Sound 416]

25. Huh?

I'm sorry. Am I the only one in this thread feels this way.

I mean I know everyone thinks I'm a hip guy. And let's face it. I am. But give someone else a golden light

[ohnoyoudidnt]

65. Did he take the guys wallet or some item of his person?

I missed that part.

It looks like shoplifting and I believe there is also a law in some states about resisting a merchant ( referring to trying to detain shoplifters). I didn't see a robbery.

[Boom Sound 416]

71. What does that mean, resisting a merchant?

[ohnoyoudidnt]

72. A merchant has the right to detain a person if they

have a reason to believe they have stolen property. I'm no lawyer, but I assume the circumstances are similar to resisting arrest. The person in the video did not force the clerk to hand over property, he just refused to be detained after shoplifting.

[Boom Sound 416]

89. That is interesting.

I only take issue with one point.

That, the person did not simply refuse to be detained. He raised his hand and "used" his size to intimidate and threaten.

That said, perhaps the root crime does not change but either an additional threat specific law or an aggravated type addition.

So, I may be wrong.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

90. Perhaps assault.

Again I am not a lawyer, but I am pretty darn sure his actions do not amount to robbery. The altercation that was initiated by the clerk happened after he had taken the items and was walking out the door.

[Boom Sound 416]

96. Perhaps

I wouldn't say the clerk initiated the altercation after the person unlawfully took things.

That's a little thin.

But I'm hearing you. You're probably right.

Cheers.

[onenote]

106. I am a lawyer. And his actions would amount to robbery in the second degree

(also known as "strong arm" or "strong armed" robbery.

Here are the relevant definitions from the Missouri criminal code:

(1) "Forcibly steals", a person "forcibly steals", and thereby commits robbery, when, in the course of stealing, as defined in section 570.030, he uses or threatens the immediate use of physical force upon another person for the purpose of:

(a) Preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of the property or to the retention thereof immediately after the taking…

570.030. 1. A person commits the crime of stealing if he or she appropriates property or services of another with the purpose to deprive him or her thereof, either without his or her consent or by means of deceit or coercion.

569.030. 1. A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree when he forcibly steals property.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

119. According to those definitons, I see where that case could be argued.

With a good defense lawyer, the charges could probably be plead down. Regardless, his actions at the store do not justify gunning him down from a distance when his hands are raised. (Assuming the 3 witness accounts are correct). There are some that would hear black man and robbery and not care about a cop killing him. There is another thread here about cops killing an unarmed white male because he had headphones and could not hear their commands.
. There is a problem with cops being to quick to fire their weapons and it is something everyone should be concerned

about.

[onenote]

120. I don't think anyone here has even remotely suggested that shooting Brown was justified

However, this thread began with a declaration that "The 'crime' committed by Mike Brown was shoplifting -- NOT 'strong arm robbery' with links to celebrity shoplifting cases.

That is an assertion of a legal conclusion. And it is wrong. And correcting the OP's erroneous assertion in no way equates to excusing in the slightest the unjustified use of deadly force against Mike Brown.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

123. Yes.

Anyone slightly familiar with right-wing propaganda knows how the robbery label will be used. This wasn't a guy with a gun taking cash from the register. It was a guy who stole some cigars and refused to be detained by the clerk. A supect with a weak lawer might be convicted of robbery, a suspect with the means to hire a good lawer probably would get a better deal.
You are a lawer. Can you cite a case where a person in an incident like this has been convicted of
robbery. I'm sure your research resources are better than mine.

[onenote]

127. People are charged with and convicted of forcible (second degree) robbery frequently.

In fact, you can be convicted of attempted forcible (second degree) robbery. In the following case, a conviction of attempted second degree robbery was found to be a violent crime for purposes of enhanced sentencing for a subsequent crime. https://ecf.moed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/USA_V_ALLEN_SHELTON-DDN-12.PDF

I have no reason to think that Brown wouldn't have been charged with second degree robbery. I also have no reason to believe that the case would not have been resolved on a plea to a lesser offense.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

131. Thanks for the info.

Just out of curiousity, what kind of lawyer are you, prosecuter, defender, or whatever specialty.

[onenote]

132. Currently I'm a regulatory attorney and litigator

I have practiced criminal law in the past. And please note -- my post had an unfortunate and inadvertent typo -- I left out the word not in the final clause. In other words, what I meant to say is that while I would expect Brown to have been charged with second degree robbery, I also would expect the charges to be reduced as part of a plea bargain.

[Ms. Toad]

130. In Missouri, robbery = theft + violence (e.g. shoving the merchant). n/t

[tenderfoot]

73. Still doesn't justify getting shot.

[Boom Sound 416]

74. No shit!!!

[SaltyBro]

5. Those claiming this incident was "robbery"

are trying to give a justification for the police officer to murder him. We all made mistakes as teenagers, Mike was murdered for it.

[CatWoman]

7. BINGO!!!

[wercal]

11. It was robbery

But unrelated to the shooting.

[SaltyBro]

12. I didn't see a weapon

Weapons are usually used in robberies. The clerk confronted the young man and blocked his exit.

[CatWoman]

13. well

they had to get the "strong arm" in there somehow

[cwydro]

27. Strong arm is a legal term

for robbery with force.

Obviously this young man was no choir boy.

[CatWoman]

29. and in this case

the harsher the better -- for that police department, anyway.

[wercal]

59. No

You are confusing one type of robbery (armed robbery aka first degree robbery) with all types of robbery.

[WinkyDink]

69. "Usually" does not equal "are mandatory for the charge."

[OrwellwasRight]

116. Try looking up the definition

According to the Missouri criminal code:

Missouri Revised Statutes

Chapter 569
Robbery, Arson, Burglary and Related Offenses
Section 569.030

August 28, 2013



Robbery in the second degree.
569.030. 1. A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree when he forcibly steals property.

2. Robbery in the second degree is a class B felony.

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5690000030.HTM

"Forcibly" does not mean you have to have a weapon. And no, just because people think that what he did was not simple shoplifting, they are not looking for an excuse to shoot him. The kid was an unarmed teen. Even if he had murdered 4 people, he should not have been shot. What someone is or is not suspected of doing is not an excuse for a cop to kill him. Appropriate force is determined by the suspect's behavior during the arrest. You can't just go around shooting murder suspects because they "might" be dangerous. Likewise, pretending no force was used against the shopkeeper is ignorant and doesn't portray our side well.

[Logical]

63. Bullshit.....

It was assault on the store clerk, strong armed robbery!
So your son/daughter gets assaulted by a shop lifer then you are ok with it???
This robbery was not good and should not be defended!
And what the fucking cop did was murder IMO based on the facts so far.
So we don't need to minimize the robbery to still send the cop to prison!

[onenote]

108. Some of us are trying to clarify what the law is.

It doesn't mean we're trying to justify anything. Whether he committed second degree robbery (i.e. robbery without a weapon) or merely shoplifted or whatever, there was no justification for the police to use deadly force against him.

[Spider Jerusalem]

9. Theft + assault = robbery.

It went from shoplifting to robbery when he used physical force against the store clerk who was following him and further used physical intimidation to back him off. That's pretty straightforward under the legal definition of "robbery". It's no justification for him being shot by the police, but it wasn't simple shoplifting, either.

[Cooley Hurd]

15. FWIW... I was a grocery store clerk in 1983...

...and a person took a sandwich from the store I was working in. As was my job, I confronted him and he shoved me backwards and ran (I never lost my footing). The cops caught him a few blocks away and, when I said he shoved me, they asked if I had any bruises or cuts. I did not, so they said they couldn't prove assault. The person was charged with shoplifting.

[Spider Jerusalem]

17. In the days before CCTV

there's CCTV footage of assault. It wouldn't be a shoplifting charge.

[Cooley Hurd]

18. I just saw the CCTV of the convenience store incident...

...and the clerk was shoved no harder than I was.

...and why, if the "robbery" was such a "heinous" crime, did we NOT hear about it UNTIL the police were FORCED to reveal the name of the officer involved in the incident? Timing is everything.

[Spider Jerusalem]

22. Which is irrelevant

as shoving itself is enough to constitute assault. The issue in your case from 30 years ago was that there was no video of it.

[Cooley Hurd]

26. Gotcha...

I know where you're coming from. Thanks for letting us all know.

Video wasn't necessary since my co-workers told the cops the same thing I did, but they said IF there were no visible marks, they couldn't charge him with assault. If he had merely brushed me while escaping, I could've claimed assault (and would've been lying).

Again, WHY was this exposed TODAY?

[Spider Jerusalem]

28. I'm coming from having an actual understanding of the law:

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5650000070.htm

And it's pretty clear this was exposed in order to try to justify the shooting, somehow--which it doesn't do, because the police chief also said the cop who shot Brown was unaware of the robbery and wasn't looking for a suspect. It's totally unrelated and has absolutely no bearing on the shooting, whatever, and looks at best like a gross attempt to prejudice a future jury.

[Cooley Hurd]

30. In what capacity do you have an "understanding of the law"?

...given the "Blue Wall" (and I am the son of a Police Officer), I think it's entirely relevant that you disclose this.

[Spider Jerusalem]

31. I'm not a cop, if that's what you're asking.

In the capacity that I actually am aware of what constitutes robbery and assault (since I can read the relevant statutes). "Robbery" would be an appropriate charge for what's described as happening, based on the CCTV evidence. Whether it'd be reduced had it gone to trial, one can't say. (And again it doesn't justify Brown being shot by the police, especially not when the officer in question stopped him for something totally unrelated.) I find it a bit strange that you seem to be interpreting my comments as a defence of the actions of the police here, which they aren't, at all.

[Cooley Hurd]

36. Robbery has different meanings in the law.

There is Shoplifting. There is Petit Larceny. There is Armed Robbery. There is Assault and Battery (with intent to commit larceny).

Was the store clerk examined by medical professionals after the incident? And, again... WHY was this brought up MINUTES after the police were forced to disclose the identity of the officer involved in the incident? Riddle me THAT, Skippy...

[Spider Jerusalem]

42. Doesn't matter if he was examined by medical professionals, or not?

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5690000030.htm

Robbery doesn't mean "a weapon was used" or "someone was injured". The threat of force and actual use of physical force in the commission of theft are sufficient to elevate it to robbery.

And I already told you why it was brought up. Can't you read?

[Cooley Hurd]

43. I can read...

...you're just not adept at making your case.

[Spider Jerusalem]

46. Are you sure you can?

Since I said that a) the robbery has nothing to do with the shooting and it in no way justifies it and b) that it's obvious that the police released the info in order to make the shooting look justifiable?

It's quite possible to think that what's shown on that CCTV footage constitutes robbery while at the same time finding the police shooting of Mike Brown afterward to be a criminal act that charges should be brought for. (I suppose some people have problems with nuance.)

[Cooley Hurd]

52. You didn't clearly say either...

...unless you just edited.

Are you sure you can write what you're actually thinking?

[Spider Jerusalem]

54. Yes, I did:

And it's pretty clear this was exposed in order to try to justify the shooting, somehow--which it doesn't do, because the police chief also said the cop who shot Brown was unaware of the robbery and wasn't looking for a suspect. It's totally unrelated and has absolutely no bearing on the shooting, whatever, and looks at best like a gross attempt to prejudice a future jury.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5392979

[Cooley Hurd]

58. While I agree with that...

...we also don't see what happened immediately before the tape started, before Brown shoved the clerk. Did the clerk shove Brown?

[onenote]

109. Doesn't matter if clerk shoved him first.

Here is the relevant statutory language in the Missouri criminal code:

(1) "Forcibly steals", a person "forcibly steals", and thereby commits robbery, when, in the course of stealing, as defined in section 570.030, he uses or threatens the immediate use of physical force upon another person for the purpose of:

(a) Preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of the property or to the retention thereof immediately after the taking…

[LisaL]

40. Even touching someone without permission can be assault.

Let alone shoving someone.

[Cooley Hurd]

45. I'm basing what I said on a personal incident 30 years ago.

[cui bono]

44. The timing of the release of info about the theft has no bearing on the definition of the crime.

It is an entirely different aspect of this whole ordeal.

There was physical force used during the alleged theft so it is not shoplifting any more.

[Cooley Hurd]

50. It means a lot - why today if they had this info days ago?

What is the motive of the PD to release this minutes after releasing the name of the officer who killed Brown?

Don't you think the cover up (by LO agencies) itself is not a crime greater than shoplifting?

[cui bono]

66. I means a lot about something OTHER than whether or not this is strong-armed robbery

or shoplifting.

Your other questions also don't mean anything as far as what the definition of shoplifting vs. strong-armed robbery is. You are making leaps in logic that make no sense.

How exactly does them releasing the info later change what Brown did that we can see on the videotape?

[unapatriciated]

16. Thank You

that is exactly what I thought when I first read about this. It is always the same.... vilify the victim in order to cover their tracks.

[yeoman6987]

76. Those video feeds are damaging

I have seen a ton of changed minds everywhere today from Facebook to USA Today. The police knew that would happen and used that as a strategy.

[unapatriciated]

138. I saw them

I didn't like it but it didn't change my mind on what happened. The two were not related and the cop was not acting on any knowledge of the incident.

[Nye Bevan]

21. Whether he was a shoplifter, a strong-armed robber, or anything else,

that still does not justify him being shot in the back with his hands up.

[Hoyt]

32. That's the key point. I'm not one to think the video is totally irrelevant, but shooting someone

in that situation is beyond any imaginable justification.

[nomorenomore08]

93. +1000000

Thank you! Common sense!

[Octafish]

24. I think the cops got their damn tapes and stories mixed up.

No property is worth a human life, which is the problem facing democracy.

[JEB]

85. Not sure I understand that being the problem facing democracy.

Certainly the problem facing capitalism though. I think the cops got their hoods and robes mixed up with their riot gear and camo.

[Octafish]

134. ''Money trumps peace'' abroad and at home.

Police departments are militarized, in part, to protect the wealthy class during a societal breakdown.

Never discussed is the idea that people are more important than any thing.

[kentuck]

33. This morning a local radio host said he had robbed a bank...

He said he had heard it on FOX News.... and they are always "fair and balanced", he said.

[cui bono]

34. While I have no doubt that the use of the term "strong-armed robbery" is intentional

on the part of the FPD and they clearly tried to make a connection between the theft and the murder, what we saw on the video was not mere shoplifting. There was force used against the clerk/store owner.

I don't recall seeing or hearing about Ryder or Lohan shoving anyone when they stole. I don't know who the last two are. It doesn't do anyone any good to make a false equivalency such as this. You wouldn't want anyone to go the other direction and say that it is the equivalent of armed robbery.

[LisaL]

38. I think strong-armed robbery clarifes that it's not armed robbery.

Since weapon was not used.

[cui bono]

41. Yes. And "strong-armed" clarifies that it's not shoplifting.

Since force was used.

[name not needed]

56. The threat of force is sufficient for a robbery charge.

[tblue37]

75. Britney Spears and (maybe?) Megan Fox. nt

[LisaL]

37. That's false.

It's not shoplifting because of physical altercation with the clerk.

[CatWoman]

51. my op is based on observations from Brown's friends attorney

n/t

[mythology]

79. An unbiased source if there ever was one

It seems pretty clear that legally this was not just shoplifting, no matter how hard people want to spin it as such.

[CatWoman]

111. I tend to not listen to armchair lawyers

but hey, that's just me......

[onenote]

113. But you have no problem in being one?

[CatWoman]

117. I fail to understand your claim

as I said, my OP is based on what the attorney said.

WORDS, hon.

WORDS.

Did you not see where I said that?

[onenote]

121. What I saw is an OP that declared (and still declares):

"The 'crime' committed by Mike Brown was shoplifting -- NOT 'strong arm robbery' with links to celebrity shoplifting cases."

That is an assertion of a legal conclusion. And it is mistaken. If you're quoting someone else in that OP, maybe you should edit the OP and make that clear.

[CatWoman]

122. and yet your original response is to my post in which I reference to

my getting this info from that attorney.

your original response to me that is.

[onenote]

125. Could you provide a link?

Since neither your original post (which didn't mention Dorian Johnson's attorney at all) nor any of your subsequent posts attributing your OP to that attorney offer any link. All I've seen is an AP story reporting that Dorian Johnson's attorney has acknowledged that his client and Mike Brown were involved in the theft of cigars from the convenience store. http://www.ksdk.com/story/news/local/2014/08/15/attorney-dorian-johnson-michael-brown-robbery/14118769/

[IronGate]

114. How about MO. state law?

Here are the relevant definitions from the Missouri criminal code:

(1) "Forcibly steals", a person "forcibly steals", and thereby commits robbery, when, in the course of stealing, as defined in section 570.030, he uses or threatens the immediate use of physical force upon another person for the purpose of:

(a) Preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of the property or to the retention thereof immediately after the taking…

570.030. 1. A person commits the crime of stealing if he or she appropriates property or services of another with the purpose to deprive him or her thereof, either without his or her consent or by means of deceit or coercion.

569.030. 1. A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree when he forcibly steals property.

[rudolph the red]

55. Yep it crossed the line when he assualted the clerk,

it certainly does not justify his subsequent murder, but it is what it is.

[gvstn]

48. As far as I know

Michael Brown was never arrested for any crime let alone convicted of one. He has absolutely no police record. Same as last week.

[standingtall]

57. Nah it was alleged shoplifting

Strong armed robbery would've never held up in a court of law. Instead of being a cowboy the clerk should've just called the police and let them do their job. For one no cigars were found on Brown or his friend. Matter of a fact shoplifting couldn't even be proven. The clerk was blocking the exit which is also illegal. Brown reacted by shoving him out of his way. You cannot hold someone in a building against their will unless they committed a
crime you can prove, and in this case the evidence of shoplifting
is shaky at best.

[exboyfil]

62. Statute from website of lawyer on detaining suspect

The shopkeeper is within his rights in trying to detain a suspected shoplifter. This discussion has nothing to do with the shooting, but consider the implications of allowing free reign five finger discounts on society. I personally think it is unwise to attempt to detain a man of this size, but if the story had been different (such a story appeared recently of a fast food restaurant employee who was killed who had been held responsible for a prior theft).

The storekeeper called 911 immediately after the incident (with no knowledge of the later shooting). Why would he do that unless there had been a theft???

Use of Force in Making Detention

What if the suspect tries to flee or attacks the merchant who is attempting to detain him? How much force may the merchant use when detaining a thief?

The key word, once again, is reasonable. The shoplifter detention statute (537.125) points out that the merchant may detain the suspect in a "reasonable manner" for a "reasonable length of time."

Another statute (563.041) provides that a person may use "physical force upon another person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to prevent what he reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission by such person of stealing" or property damage. Deadly force, however, may not be used merely to protect property from being stolen or damaged. The use of deadly force will be discussed in following paragraphs.

The citizen's arrest statute (Section 563.051) applies to shoplifting and stealing cases. It states that a person acting on his own account may use physical force to effect arrest or prevent escape only when and to the extent such is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent escape from custody of a person whom he reasonably believes to have committed a crime and who in fact has committed such crime. Deadly force is not usually going to be justified by a person making a citizen's arrest.

[tblue37]

77. Apparently a customer called the cops about the robbery. The store clerk did not. nt

[jberryhill]

83. Why might that be?

[tblue37]

84. Minor loss, perhaps, and the clerk did not want to deal with all

the rigamarole involved in dealing with the cops and a filing a police report, acting as a witness, etc.

[Liberal_from_va34]

61. Well said. It's unbelievable how the police are trying to justify this heinous killing.

Unfortunately, I fear that we will see more such incidents in the future, especially since the police in this country are becoming more and more militarized. A truly sad state of affairs.

[WinkyDink]

70. They are trying to smear the murder victim, not necessarily "justify."

[JEB]

64. Killing an unarmed kid is more serious

than pinching some stinking cigars. Hell in my book, selling cigars should be a crime.

[yeoman6987]

78. Who was the kid killed

I read of no kid in the story at all.

[JEB]

87. Kid or adult, he's just as dead by brutal execution.

I'm so old everybody under 40 is a kid.

[yeoman6987]

133. Lol. Fair enough

And I do agree he was executed without trial.

[nomorenomore08]

94. Your last sentence is a bit silly. But otherwise you're dead-on.

[davidn3600]

67. I dont think Winona or Lindsay beat up the clerk on the way out of the store

[Enrique]

68. i notice you said nothing about Megan Fox...

[JEB]

80. They are not dead in the street either.

[nomorenomore08]

95. +1

[CatWoman]

98. i shouldn't laugh, this is a serious subject

but damn you made me ROFL.

[JEB]

99. Amidst all this discussion, it's easy to forget

that a young man is dead, never to make any more mistakes or ever learn from them. It is a sad loss to all of us including the young women who got their second chances and the ones who want to smear his reputation. Many, many people maybe even most people have to rehabilitate themselves and then go on and do wonderful things.

[CatWoman]

100. beautiful words

[JEB]

102. Thanks. This whole story and

all the brutal responses is very hard for me. It is just so sad and such a waste on so many levels. Maybe I'm just a gone to seed old fool, but...

[Smarmie Doofus]

82. Thanks. Nor were they twice the size of the clerk; nor did they outweigh him/her by 200 lbs.

At this point , some people here are so in love w. the "police murder" narrative that they literally can't think straight.

And they won't be able to from hereon out.

[npk]

103. When was the clerk beat up.

[IronGate]

107. Once Mr. Brown put his hands on the clerk,

it was no longer simple shoplifting, it became strong arm robbery.
The clerk doesn't have to be beaten up, just the act of being shoved was enough to turn it into a felony.
That said, he sure as fuck didn't deserve to be executed by some POS rage filled cop.

[Warpy]

81. Police always engage in charge inflation

It looks good to the press and it's like throwing mud at a wall, you know some of it might stick.

The crime was petty shoplifting complicated by simple assault.

[bigtree]

86. agreed

. . . except for the simple assault; not 'strong-arm' robbery for most juries who would have looked at the case and decided.

[HuckleB]

88. In high school, I shoplifted a Bic lighter from Walgreens.

I gave it to someone else as soon as I could, because I was filled with fucking Catholic guilt.

The point is, I agree with you. The shoplifting had NOTHING to do with what happened afterward. NOTHING AT ALL!

[rustydog]

91. IF the person in the video is Brown then he did commit Strong-Arm robbery

when he pushed the store clerk (seen on video) and menacingly approach the clerk.
shoplifting is the stealing of property. when you use physical force, it is strong-arm robbery.

We need to learn if the subject in the video is Brown first.
THEN we need to ask WHY was Brown killed by the police officer.

[hamsterjill]

104. I heard that Brown's parents said it is him in the video.

Is that not confirmed? I heard it on CNN around 5:00 p.m. in the car. Couldn't tell who was saying it since it was radio.

[nomorenomore08]

97. And even if a more serious charge might have been possible - based on the CCTV footage -

that's still not much compared with shooting the fucking guy in cold blood. Focusing on Brown's alleged crime only serves to downplay the heinous nature of his murder.

[Chimeradog]

101. unreal

petty theft is a misdemeanor, it doesn't warrant DEATH. If tere was an assault, armed robbery would require a gun threat from the shoplifter, which apparently didn't happen here.

This case is going to be skewed by the msm, demonizing the victim.

Fact is Ferguson police are prolly a lot like the Sanford cops in FL...an "HOA mall cop" Zimmerman shoots a kid dead.


It is sickening and disgraceful. Koch Bros., ALEC "Stand your ground Laws" are returning us to the wild west where anyone can shoot to kill, and get off.

There is so much at stake here, our civil liberties, and RIP Mr Brown.

I no longer watch main-scream media bcs it sickens me.

[IronGate]

110. It wasn't petit larceny/theft.

once Mr. Brown pushed the clerk, it became strong armed robbery.

Here are the relevant definitions from the Missouri criminal code:

(1) "Forcibly steals", a person "forcibly steals", and thereby commits robbery, when, in the course of stealing, as defined in section 570.030, he uses or threatens the immediate use of physical force upon another person for the purpose of:

(a) Preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of the property or to the retention thereof immediately after the taking…

570.030. 1. A person commits the crime of stealing if he or she appropriates property or services of another with the purpose to deprive him or her thereof, either without his or her consent or by means of deceit or coercion.

569.030. 1. A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree when he forcibly steals property.

Under MO. law, once he pushed the clerk, it became a felony.
But that doesn't excuse his being executed by that cop.

[DustyJoe]

115. Egad

There is some video of a person not yet positively identified
that may show a person shoving a store employee and may
or may not have stolen an item in the store.

so

The "crime" committed by Mike Brown

This statement is just so much guessing. No positive ID, no physical evidence
but this cut and dried indictment of an 'Alleged' crime, with a 'possible' person
of interest that may resemble the teen shot.

guesses guesses guesses

[IronGate]

118. Ummm, his parents have already said it's him in the video

and it's crystal clear that he did shove the clerk as the clerk tried to stop him, but that STILL doesn't justify the cop executing Mike Brown, especially considering that the cop didn't even know that Mr. Brown was a suspect in the strong arm robbery.

[Lil Missy]

124. The video is proof a strong arm robbery was commited by whoever is in the video.

Of course it's not cause to kill him. Nobody is arguing that it is.

[Ms. Toad]

128. And how many of those occurred in Missouri?

Crimes are defined by each state. A particular act (shoplifting + shoving the owner) may be called something else in a different jurisdiction - but in Missouri, once you add force or threat of force to a theft it become robbery.

[Rex]

135. Yeah they keep using that term to scare people.

The cop shot him down in the street and until I see any evidence to the contrary, without provocation by either kid. I don't care who tries and make excuses for the Ferguson PD. They are clearly violating all kinds of civil rights and need to be investigated by federal authorities.

I don't care WHAT Mike Brown did, he died because of a racist cop. Gonna be hard to change my mind on that one.

[Vinca]

139. Exactly. It was shoplifting.

Back in my younger days I was a cop and there is no way I'd describe this as a "robbery." People shoplift every day and store people often try to stop them. It doesn't do the locals any favors to try and "puff" up the crime to try and justify the killing of an unarmed jaywalker.

[MohRokTah]

140. It was obviously so trivial that the store itself never called the cops

http://www.stltoday.com/news/state-and-regional/missouri/lawyer-store-didn-t-call-cops-on-missouri-teen/article_a0255818-8de7-5a4a-a83b-5c01b8bb1514.html

[rudolph the red]

141. Did you mean to say trivial? It may be that the store owner knew that calling the cops was useless

It was a pretty blatant theft, and the thief acted as if he had every right to just take stuff. I'm sure that that sort of thing happens several times a day in that store.

[Chimeradog]

143. thank you

That's interesting. SO basically the store didn't seem to think it was a "violent robbery"

Missouri has some draconian legislators, it seems. I wonder if the kid stole a stick of gum would the cop have killed him as well?.

insanity.