Ferguson, Missouri police have announced that they are about to name the officer who shot and killed an unarmed black teen, sparking looting and rioting. The move comes five days after a “hacktivist” group published a name on its Twitter account (since suspended), claiming it was the officer who pulled the trigger. “However,” usatoday.com reports, “police, Ferguson’s mayor and the stepmother of the man named all said the group was incorrect and that the person named is not a police officer.” The officer’s name also emerges . . . after a relatively calm night, the first since Michael Brown was shot.

No violent clashes were reported after hundreds of protesters gathered and marched near the flashpoint where riots and civil unrest have unfolded here in recent days. Citizens protesting Brown’s death appeared to be getting along peacefully as they marched alongside state troopers, who took over operational control of the protest scenes Thursday.

Question: should TTAG publish the officer’s name?

85 Responses to BREAKING: Ferguson, Missouri Police About to ID Officer Who Shot Unarmed Black Teen, Sparking Riots

  1. Considering a group of lawyers threatened to riot in front of the guys house….I’d say wait longer. It’s not like he’s leaving the country (but if I were him I’d be getting out of town for my own safety)

  2. What does it matter what his name is? Do the investigation, find out weather or not he is guilty, and let the courts take over. Giving out a name will just add one mor thing for them to shout.

    • I think they should publish his name with a mugshot – like they do with regular non-cop citizens. You know – since there is no double standard – right?

      • In a perfect world. Also in a perfect world police would get handcuffed and charged for breaking and entering. Having been on the victim side of police break-in I can say that nothing usually comes of police breaking the law. Perfect world aside police are protected from having to answer to their actions and the rules generally don’t apply unless John Q. Public makes a big enough stink.

      • You mean after the investigation shows probable cause for his arrest, right?

        Or, have you convicted him already with pretty much zero known-reliable evidence?

        • I can’t convict him of anything – I am, however, entitled to my own opinion. The shooter should have due process – just like anybody else.

          Probable cause? There are three witnesses or more – that would be enough for my arrest if I was the shooter.

        • Two of those witness did NOT see the events leading up to the shooting or the shooting. One claims to have and it turns out he was an accomplice in the felony assault and robbery that Brown has just committed, they were both fleeing at the time.

    • It’s not their choice. The open records act requires the release of the name. Sounds like a bad idea to me, but there you go.

    • well we are also going to see Browns juvenile record in any trial despite team brown attempt to suppress. The attempt to suppress means it is likely there is a long rap sheet of violent crime

  3. These animals will likely target the officer’s family. You’re dealing with people that have so little regard for themselves and everyone around them that they destroy their own neighborhood. They certainly won’t have respect for the officer’s family. I wouldn’t want that blood on my hands. Take the high road, the MSM will take the usual course.

      • I see you drank the shut up now that we have a video of the violent felony Mike Brown had committed and was fleeing. So much for brown having no motive to resist police

    • They could provide protection by booking his a$$ in the police station jail. Just like they would treat a regular non-cop citizen who was identified by three separate corroborated witnesses indicating he killed someone.

      • Yup. Either that or don’t arrest people until you have actual evidence and not the word of some random person.

        • 1 dead guy – three or more eyewitnesses – more than enough for a non-cop citizen arrest.

        • There is ONE witness claiming to have seen the entire event and he was an accomplice in the violent felony he and Brown were fleeing from when brown attempted to grab the cop’s gun.

      • Sorry, but at this stage of the game, unless you are part of the investigation, those reported eyewitness testimonies mean exactly squat.

        It may turn out they are reliable witnesses, so I am not dismissing them out of hand. What I am saying is that you and I don’t know how reliable they are.

        I’ve testified in felony cases, including a murder, where eyewitness testimony was ripped to shreds.

        THIS is why no one should be saying jack squat about this stuff until the investigation plays out, and contrary to what the tv molded generation thinks, that takes time. It’s not known in 22 minutes who did it and why and what they had for breakfast for the last three weeks.

        • Very important point.

          My questioning of suspects and witnesses is limited to military police work. However, it was not uncommon at all for the sidewalk version of events to be completelly different from the sworn statement version of events.

          What really caught me offguard was the first time I witnessed a change from the sworn statement to the testimony. I just wish a video was available for every “witness” that wanted too scream and yell about a miscarriage of justice. Well, you are saying you saw the deceased drop his weapon and raise his hands…. yet here we have you on video saying after the alarm went off you starting running and did not stop until you were at home. So which is it, are you lying now or were you lying then?

        • those reported eyewitness testimonies mean exactly squat.

          If I had a gun and was standing next to a dead guy – three or more eyewitnesses would definitely afford me a jail cell “pending the investigation.” But sure – he is a cop and all that. So administrative leave with pay while we figure all this out. BBQ at joes monday – don’t worry about the investigation Darren, I’m sure everything will pan out. You want to leave the country for a few days? Sure. No problem.

          Now, if the other cops had tackled him, cuffed him, and put him in the back of the squad car while they spoke to the witnesses – there likely never would have been a riot. Think about that. It’s called Justice, Fairness, and the lack thereof. The riot exists because of the “blue line.” The riot escalated because Darren wasn’t arrested “pending an investigation.” The riot escalated more, because in lieu of processing Darren after their ridiculous burning of vehicles and a quicktrip that has nothing to do with MIchael Brown, instead, they bring out the APC’s, Afghanistan armor and “Battle Dress Uniforms” accented with knee pads. Action and reaction.

        • Given the police attacking the press, banning any flights other then their own over the area, and repeated changes of statements when they put out a press release,how can a sane person remotely assume that the police are in the right here ? These are actions you take to hide,cover up, and muddle the events of what went on.
          The premise of testimonies and…we don`t know what happened are extremely weak here as reasons to think the police are somehow on the level. Police MUST be held to a much higher standard of conduct because of who they are, and what they are tasked with doing. Harsh reactions must be taken when that conduct fails to meet the high standard. Otherwise, guess what you get… uniformed criminals.

        • Again there is EXACTLY ONE witness claiming to have seen the entire thing. the other two witness saw events after the shooting finished.

          The witness that claims to have seen the whole thing already almost certainly perjured himself in the affidavit of the event by initially denying hew was at the robbery with Brown that they both were fleeing.

          We now know why brown attacked the cop — he was fleeing a felony assault and robbery

  4. For TTAG not to publish it would be the height of hypocrisy — a right not exercised is meaningless, regardless of which amendment we’re talking about, and regardless of the consequences. That’s the price for a free society.

    Fiat justitia ruat caelum, and all that.

  5. Publish it if it is 100% confirmed. This all torpedoes the whole anti gun argument.

    the police will protect us
    only trained professionals can handle being armed
    we don’t need guns because government tyranny is ridiculous
    society has evolved, everyone is civil now
    if a mob is banging down your door just call 911
    you dont live in a combat zone
    trust the government
    trust your community
    etc.

    Everyone on all sides of this is proving why we need the 2A.

    • It truly is bizzare how so many of the anti’s keep saying that times are different; that we don’t need guns like when the colonists used guns to defend against rampaging humans looting and burning.

      Human beings haven’t changed; just more technology and more efficient ways of killing each other; which means the law abiding needs those same efficient tools to defend against the human predators ; both in the street and in government.

      • Amen brother.

        I wonder how many times millennials are going to have to get their heads bashed in by riot gear they paid for… just for exercising their 1A, before the understand 2A.

        Or how many times they are going to have to be looted by nefarious among them… taking advantage of the cover and confusion provided by a large civil protest, before they understand.

      • Humans gonna keep being humans, one of those ultimate truths right.

        As a millenial, I have a certain ironic pleasure of hearing people in the extended family I married into talk about being at a OWS camp ground and the cops busting up their camp and talking about the police state/constitutionality… I have to leave the room sometimes as I feel my brain cells are lining up for the suicide booth 🙂

    • Unfortunately after this has passed the public consciousness, these same people on the left that are all anti-police state now, will be screaming that only the police need guns. Take the huffpo and washpo reporters. They screamed unconstitutional when they were detained for being reporters. As they should. But give it a month, and they will have both published some ridiculous lie spewing article about how all guns need to be banned. Its the Liberal Way.

  6. Why would you publish it? This is a race story or not depending on which side you listen to, not a police story, and not a gun related story other than the means… Can we just get back to gun reviews and gun politics?

    • Disagree. Any story that demonstrates the SWATzie nature of police is fine with me. That storyline is growing fast in the MFM and I’m all for the fanning of those flames.

  7. Somehow I get the feeling we’re replaying the whole George Zimmerman/Treyvon Martin thing again.

    • Except that this time we don’t know (yet) whether the shooting was justified. It could be a reverse of that, where it turns out that people who kneejerk complain about the group the shooter was in are actually right. In this case it’s those who reflexively accuse the police, in the Zimmeramn case it’s those who reflexively accuse whites. (Never mind that Zimmerman was Hispanic, his last name was German, that’s good enough for the race baiters.)

      We’ve certainly seen a lot of knee-jerk cop defenders and cop-bashers here, each willing to uncritically accept the story that bolsters their bias and accuse the other side of being toadies for either “liberals” or “police thugs”. That argument now has over four hundred replies on it.

      • It took a long time for all the facts to come out in the Zimmerman case. If this is a replay then right now we’re at the stage where everyone was outraged that Zimmerman was getting away with cold blooded murder. Perhaps this case will be different, but I could see this playing out pretty much the same, where a decent law abiding person is branded for life as a racist killer and the ‘victim’s’ reputation is whitewashed. Or the mob could have it right, we’ll find out. Probably.

    • and how did that turn out for the Martin family? Other than a few quick payoffs from insurance companies for their policy limits, what did they get out of this? their 15 min are over and the locusts of Crump, Jackson and Sharpton moved on (after collecting their $$$). Same will happen here.

      Hey, I actually like the protests and the rioting. destroys the whole “only police can protect you” narrative and makes sure the legislature will go into session with the right mindset when they push more pro-gun bills after getting an earful from their constituents.

      • Any riot, for any reason, is evidence of the rightness of widespread civilian ownership of firearms of significant firepower with the largest capacity magazines available. This one is over a case of (possible) police mis-action which narrows it even more; it calls into question the trustworthiness of the offered alternative.

        Regardless, I am sure you realize that’s a very different question than whether the actual shooting was justified. Or whether the cop’s name should be printed on TTAG.

      • ‘…makes sure the legislature will go into session with the right mindset..’

        I wouldn’t count on that. The antis will be just as anti as they ever were and will in fact use riots to push for more gun control and a more militarized police force, and the logically challenged will still buy their BS. There will be a few fence sitters out there who will wake up and realize that they can’t trust their safety with the government though. I just wouldn’t count on it changing anyone’s attitude in government.

        • in Missouri, the republicans control both chambers with veto proof majorities. it will harden the RIGHT attitudes

        • True, the good folks of Missouri have an abundance of common sense, but then they’re not exactly fence sitters. Their colleagues across the river in Springfield, not so much. Same for our overlords in Washington.

    • I feel like the other side tries to take any possible crisis involving race and turn it into that, regardless if the event was truly racially motivated or not. Because in the end it comes back down to the same anti logic (or lack of)…

      • Race shouldn’t even come into it, although the cop might be more comfortable shooting black people. I don’t know about his upbringing, but racism is alive and well and within living memory shooting blacks was more or less legal in Missouri.

        However, the only confirmed narrative is cop shoots unarmed teen with hands raised. The racial overtones are at this time at best questionable.

        The race card should be kept in a retention holster in a safe in a locked room.

        • Race will always come out in these situations because race in this country is political. The Democratic Party makes it’s living on racial and gender divides. As long as there’s racial animosity the minorities will vote for them, blind to the party’s racist history or to how the party’s policies actually hurt them. They (the Democrats) are on their side, fighting for them and that’s all they need to know. Throw in a little white guilt and a few twenty-somethings voting with their lady parts and they’re in business. If we ever achieve racial harmony it will be the end of the Democratic Party. So it should be no surprise that the party and it’s supporters will gin up racial animosity at any and every chance.

        • To some extent, that’s true. It’s tragic that it’s true; but facts are facts. It’s hard to measure the magnitude of this animosity. It’s probably declined over the past 150 years, but it’s not gone. That acknowledged, to the extent that it is true: Why are minorities still devoted to blind faith that Government is the solution? Minorities seem to have lost touch with their love of individualism and self-reliance; and local-community reliance. In our sphere of interest, they seem to have lost touch with the history of Blacks’ (and Mexicans’ and Native Americans’) experience with armed self-defense; and the tragedy of attempts at dis-armed self-defense.

        • Hmmm…

          M’self, I suspect that the Pachyderms have a little bit of improvement to make on that subject.

          While the Democats are indeed no longer the party of Roosevelt II, neither are the respected opposition any longer the party o’ Lincoln.

          Not that I care for either o’ the major players, mind you.

        • Russ, I have my issues with the Republican Party myself, but they have no interest in ginning up racial animosity to get out the white vote. Racial politics are the domain of the Democratic Party. Personally in my view we have progressive party and an ultra-progressive party. But the libertarians have a decent chance of becoming major players in the supposed party of the right. They have no chance of influencing the party of the left. In the meantime, the lesser of two evils is still the lesser of two evils.

        • The lesser of two evils is still evil. Murdering one person is arguably “less evil” than murdering six million, but it is still just plain evil.

          Everyone should vote Libertarian because it’s the closest thing to “none of the above” that we’ve got.

          Libertarians don’t advocate rampant pot smoking/whoring/gambling, simply not incarcerating those who do.

          Libertarians: slowly transforming the country with our secret plot to seave you alone.

        • ” although the cop might be more comfortable shooting black people”

          Cops shoot and kill more white people. But don’t let facts bother you

  8. the issue over releasing this is to see if the officer in question has any history of confrontations, assaults, discipline problems, etc. they will also target his home for protests, but Ferguson PD will have moved him and his to an offsite safe house for the time being. Finally, it allows people to focus on this was an issue between individuals that resulted in death. I am sure the MSM will publish all of the details about Mike Brown and his friend (like the friend’s criminal record). fair is fair. not.

  9. If I shot someone, even in self defense, and it sparked a riot, the police would release my name. (I think someone above said the same) so hell yeah publish his name please. After all we’re always ranting about lack of police accountability…

    • It’s not quite parallel. The police would release the name of a “civilian” (meaning, really, non-police) shooter, so fairness demands that they release the name of the cop involved.

      Whether TTAG should be consistent and mention the name (which everyone will have heard everywhere else anyway) depends on what TTAG’s policy in the past has been, not the police’s. And TTAG has done so in the past with non-police shooters; TTAG names names on its irresponsible gun owner series without flinching.

      Therefore they should print the cop’s name, especially since everyone will know what it is from other sources, anyway.

    • They democrats perceive that they have won, or will win soon, and that they will have a pretty solid grip on the levers of power for decades to come. So the police will work for them and help to implement their policies. They will tend to be more pro-police as this process continues, and that will be their dynamic until such time as they get kicked in the shins and realize they aren’t winning.

  10. The name should have been released as soon as the identity had been verified. If there was concern about the officers safety they certainly could take other actions to protect them.

    There are many good reasons to have openness of government. Contrary to current thinking, keeping secrets creates conspiracy theories and undermines the rule of law and trust of government institutions.

  11. @ews Conference – Ferguson Police Chief Jackson mentioned there was a “strong arm robbery” around same time. . . .and there is video. Hmmmm.. . . . .

  12. Articulate all the reasons why police are special. Why an allegedly unlawful act committed by a government official is deserving of secrecy whereas the same allegation against a non-official civilian is a public record. What are the arguments to make a distinction between a LEO vs. a bureaucrat vs. a politician. I really want to hear the arguments pro and con; and, then, think about whence those considerations go. When anyone gores someone else’s ox there is a risk of retaliation. That’s why we take care to provide police protection to presidents/governors/mayors; to a lesser extent to legislators. Police officers are empowered to protect themselves; but, not their families. Families of all government officials are as vulnerable to retaliation (or unprovoked attacks) as ordinary citizens.
    – – – So, how has our benevolent government decided that police officers’ identities – when involved in an official act – are a state secret while the public acts of politicians are recorded and published. I really want to understand how our society has reached this conclusion.
    – – – isn’t the legislator’s wife, policeman’s wife, and my wife ultimately responsible for her own self-defense? What is the rational for making a special case for one class of wife but denying civilians’ wives the same right of an effective means to self-defense.

    • The rationale is “might makes right,” and those who make the laws serve first themselves and their flunkies, next their constituents (our and their moneyed owners), next the material needs of the State and lastly (if at all) us.

  13. I say release the name – I’d rather get the news from TTAG than from anywhere else, and the story is clearly gun-related. I doubt the mob – the ones doing the actual looting and rioting – reads TTAG anyways. If the officer winds up being targeted there isn’t much TTAG can do anyways.

    • In California a great many years ago I was arrested, charged with homicide and held for six weeks on a general description. Eventually [by some fluke] they identified the correct guy and released me, now broke and jobless, with scant apology.

      Bastard didn’t even look like me, and he dove a Chevy while I had a Dodge.

      Methinks the F-Town police are a tidge trigger-happy.

      Why does the TTAG community generally view the police with distrust and skepticism unless it involves “Obama’s son?,” in which case it’s always a “good shoot” – until proven otherwise in trippplicate?

    • I would disagree that it is another Trayvon.

      Lets compare:
      —Trayvon was attacking/striking Zimmerman repeatedly in the face when Trayvon was shot (1 shot) and subsequently died. Zimmerman claimed self defense.

      —Allegedly, assuming the 3 statements made by the witnesses is true, Michael Brown was running away from the police officer and shot in the back. He turned around with his hands up and was shot 5 or 6 more times in the head and the chest.

      Two very different scenarios.

  14. I take exception to the phrasing “… shot an unarmed teen, sparking riots.”

    The actions and inaction of the department over the years have alienated the community, and the latest incident – about which I claim no special knowledge – sparked some serious protesting.

    Police with military weapons, military uniforms, military vehicles and an affected, Hollywood-inspired “military” mindset provoked riots.

    Storm in like an invading army prepared to conquer, burn and salt and how in Hell do you expect Americans to respond?

    In contrast, the Missouri Highway Patrol shows up prepared to serve and protect and there’s kumbaya all over the place.

    There’s a lesson there for us all.

    • The looting preceded the cops going all swatty on the protesters. But once the cops showed up en mass, they violently engaged with the protesters and vice versa. The protesters had a different agenda than the looters, but they were treated no better.

      There’s no question that the Highway Patrol poured oil on troubled waters. They didn’t show up like an occupying army. Instead, they listened to the protesters, spoke with them respectfully and with understanding and generally handled their policing duties like professionals. Kudos to them. They just might have saved the town.

      Ironic, too, since in my experience, most highway patrols are not known for their delicate touch.

      • Ralph wrote: “Ironic, too, since in my experience, most highway patrols are not known for their delicate touch.”

        I can _personally_ attest to that…

        OK, so I was going *mumble* miles over the limit…

    • Storm in like an invading army prepared to conquer, burn and salt and how in Hell do you expect Americans to respond?

      Bingo – winning statement – right here. This is really the concept behind police militarization. Show respect – get respect. Police serve the people – not the other way around. “Operation Shock & Awe” should not be performed on American soil against Americans.

  15. This link is by no means unique; it is in fact starkly typical of results obtained a search of news items relating to That Place:

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/15/the-day-ferguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html

    Y’know, I hate to feel (and admit to) prejudice in anything, but I must admit to having developed a strong bias against the official institutions of F-Town.

    In future, I’ll make certain that any driving or flight plan involving li’l ol’ me avoids that sucking vortex of evil by at least 60 miles.

      • Yeah “daily beast” where you will learn “gun murder is up,” the AR-15 is an “automatic” and that gun owners are all insane.

        And almost everything in that article ahs already been show false by the FACTS. We now know brown was fleeing a violent felony he had committed and that the sole “witness” claiming to have seen the entire interaction with the police officer was himself a criminal and an accomplice in the assault and robbery.

  16. Okay I am of two different minds about this. First I don’t trust a cop any further than I can pick one up and thow them. Not all cops are jerks, I should know becasue I have worked with and spent a lot of time with Local, County and State Police. Some I would trust my life with, but most I wouldn’t trust in an outhouse with a muzzle on. Would a cop lie? In a heart beat. Do I think the cop was justified to shoot the kid? Well, the kid shoved the officer into the car, and was attacking him. Under that curcumstance I mlight find myself shooting the kid as well. Just becasue cops are jerks doesn’t mean that every thing they do is wrong, or inapproperate. But the police were witholding the officers name to protect him and his family. Now they are releasing the name under pressure of a hacker group who themselves hide in the shadows like cockkroaches. Will they come forward if the police officers family is harmed or killed?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *