This is the sort of propaganda put out by the liberal media to try to shape the opinion of those unwilling or unable to think for themselves. In the article, the writer uses a statement by the attorney for the store where the strong arm robbery took place--a statement of fact that it was someone else besides the store owner or store employees who called 911 after the robbery. Then the article tries to use this statement to imply that the robbery ws of no moment in the subsequent shooting. Well, lets think about that for a second: We see on the video the elements of the theft and the subsequent intimidation and assault--which escalate the seriousness of the crime from one of shoplifting to a serious violent crime--not because of the value of the items stolen, but because of the actions of the criminal in securing the items. We also see the store clerk following the perp into the street, undoubtedly to get better descriptive info and to see where he was going. We know by deduction and from the timing of the 911 call, that it was made almost immediately upon the crime being committed. We can accept the assertion that it was a customer who called it in, as this is a commonplace occurrence in many crimes. However, the Daily Kos writer then tries to make much of the fact that it was a customer, instead of a clerk making the call (remember--the clerk was out in the street at the time). If we put ourselves into the moment, in that store, and imagine what would have occurred in the minutes after the crime, the clerk would have returned to the store--probably intending to report the crime--I mean, is it REASONABLE to think that a man who had just lost store property to a criminal who had insulted, assaulted and intimidated him, would simply straighten up the mess and go on with business as usual? Of course not! But when the store clerk returned, he learned that the patron had already called (or perhaps was in the process of calling in the crime to 911)--so there was no need for a second call. He knew that units were responding and that he would soon be speaking to an officer. As far as the lawyer making a point about this, I mean..Have you been watching the news? The attorney wants to tell the community to stop blaming the victim of the crime for what happened later. He wants folks to stop bashing in his clients store windows and looting and setting fire to his store. He wants to lessen the probabilities of some irate protester deciding to shoot the owner or to firebomb his house--because the store owner and the lawyer both know the mindset of these numbskulls--that they dont care to listen to the facts--that they are driven by some external source of animosity and by their love of drama and of ill gotten gains and that many have no compunction about committing further felonies under cover of mob action (just watch the videos for corroboration of this statement). And thus--the public relations effort by the lawyer to decouple his client from the shooting. As for the womans statement in the video and the writers assertion that the previous crime had nothing to do with the subsequent shooting, nothing could be further from the truth. While is seems to be accurate that the officer did not know details of the crime report when he first ordered the two to get out of the roadway, it is also certain that BOTH of the subjects (Brown and Johnson) knew the nature of what they had just done and surely had at least a rough idea that they would be in deep doo-doo if they were detained. So you see, whether the cop knew about the shoplifting turned strong-armed robbery and assault, the fact that the perps did WAS material to the sequence of events that occurred next. Now the Daily Kos writer knows all this, but his job isnt to present facts--but rather to create news--and to create news palatable to his companys readership--and THAT, my friend, requires a bit of creative shaping of the story to fit the desired narrative. You can be sure that the store owner (who may well not have been present) and the clerk WOULD have called in the 911 call, had the customer not already done so. You can be SURE that Brown and Johnson were FAR more worried about the robbery and assault they had just perpetrated than they were about the minor traffic obstruction and public safety hazard they presented walking down the street. And you can be fairly certain that the facts will continue to emerge--clarifying the picture of events that day--but you can also be equally assured that sources, like the Daily Kos, will continue to craft stories that ignore certain facts and distort others, all to achieve satisfaction for their liberal base reader and for their management. rnm 8-23-2014 dailykos/story/2014/08/18/1322560/-Ferguson-Store-Owner-Says-NO-ONE-From-His-Store-Called-Cops-To-Report-Cigar-Theft
Posted on: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 14:10:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015