Did Michael Brown commit robbery or petty theft?

[Little Star]

[Logical]

1. He assaulted the clerk while stealing items. Not good. But still.....

The cop murdered him and should go to prison.

[Little Star]

6. Doesn't answer my question.

[IronGate]

68. According to MO. law,

yes he committed strong arm robbery, which is a class B felony.

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.

But, that still doesn't justify the cop executing Mr. Brown.

[sabrina 1]

93. I couldn't see what happened at the counter. Looked to me as though he and his friend

went to the counter with something they had removed from a shelf. Up to that point it looked like two people shopping. Then something happened at the counter but we could not see the person behind the counter nor hear the exchanges. Next thing he grabbed some, we are told, cigars. But it looked more like an angry response to something than a robbery. When they fell on the floor, his friend picked them out and returned them to the counter.

He took something. Did he pay for what he took, did the person behind the counter say something that got him upset, or did he go to the counter to take the cigars?

The fact that his friend returned what fell on the ground seems to indicate that they didn't go there to steal anything.

We just don't know what happened in the over the counter exchange.

I wouldn't put it past the police to just throw this out to create an impression, and leave out anything that might have explained it. This kid had no record of doing anything like that. From me, he gets the benefit of the doubt and from the video I wonder if something was said to him that got him upset and he simply reacted.

[randys1]

2. Has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with his execution

Have you ever broken the law, a minor offense?

Has your child ever?


should you or your child be EXECUTED for that crime?

[Little Star]

7. I am in agreement with you but my point is....

TV says ROBBERY, I say minor petty theft. Why are they saying robbery?

[randys1]

13. Oh, i see your point...he may have done nothing but it wasnt robbery, you are right

Again, reverse everything the past 300 yrs, and this is an 18 yr old white kid who has been oppressed by his oppressors, he doesnt steal cigars, he steals cars and flat screens and shoots anyone trying to stop him

my point is us white folk sitting back and judging people we cant imagine their shoes etc

fucking nuts, excuses nothing that isnt my point

[pintobean]

21. Because Missouri law

says it's robbery when force or a threat is used. When he shoved the clerk, he made it a robbery.

[Little Star]

23. That's f'd up, imho.....

take a pack of gum could actually be the same as robbing a bank.

[pintobean]

28. I guess.

The use of a weapon is robbery in the first, physical force is robbery in the second.

[dsc]

31. no the amount still matters

which is why there are degrees of robbery. In his case the amount of the robbery and the limited amount of force would make this far less serious than a violent robbery or a large robbery.

[IronGate]

71. No, it was the use of force on the clerk that makes it robbery. nt.

[Ms. Toad]

75. In terms of the nature of the wrong - yes.

• plain old stealing without force
  
• stealing combined with force or threat of force
  
• stealing while in possession of (or using) a weapon

The length of punishment generally depends on the value of the item taken - which is where the difference between using force to take gum and using force to take money from the bank plays a role.

[treestar]

26. Yes, I've seen that

Defendant grabbed something from the victim by force, they charged him with robbery because of the force used.

Seemed extreme but I guess it's technically in the definition.

[Little Star]

29. More than slightly extreme imho.

[840high]

67. Thanks for info

[Arrowood]

42. It will be used against him...

... as a motive.

IOW, a reason that he might have fought against the police.

It will also be used to discredit the version of events given by the other guy in the video.

[Agschmid]

3. Are you supposed to be executed for those crimes?

No.

[Little Star]

14. agree but you are missing my point.

[Bjorn Against]

4. So far he has not been proven guilty of anything

I do not trust the source of this video and I am giving Brown the benefit of the doubt.

[Little Star]

11. Me too.

[MADem]

81. He will never be proven guilty of anything. He's dead. You can't try a corpse.

Remember (to the disbelief of many who still think he's sunning himself in far off Fiji or somewhere), Ken Lay died an innocent man.

[TorchTheWitch]

86. neither has the officer that shot him

Doesn't stop anyone for even waiting for an investigation to be done before deciding that Johnson's story is the absolute truth no matter how ludicrous it is and calling the officer a murderer though, does it?

Brown having assaulted someone in the past does bolster the story that the police department gave that the officer who shot Brown was attacked. And Johnson also has a record of lying to the police.

[pintobean]

90. Not many want to make that connection.

Brown assaulted someone minutes before his encounter with officer Wilson. Wilson may not have known what Brown had just done, but Brown certainly did, and he didn't know that Wilson wasn't aware of it. It makes an attack on Wilson more plausible.

[jberryhill]

5. A quick word about "how states define crimes"

What is, or is not, a crime in any given state is a matter of:

1. The acts and mental state required.

2. The name given to that combination.

Threads on DU over "what is this offense" called are generally pointless, since it is unlikely that we have many people here conversant in what the Florida code calls "using force or threat of force to take something".

I recall one outraged thread a while back over someone who was charged with "sexual assault" instead of "rape" in a state which, in point of fact, did not have any criminal offense denominated as "rape", but which did have several degrees of "sexual assault".

So, is the question "what would this combination of actions be called under a specific section of the Florida criminal code" or is this question "golly gee, what should it be called?"

[Little Star]

9. So there is no difference between petty theft & robbery?

[jberryhill]

20. OMG.... here's petit theft in Florida... robbery in just a sec....

I'll do this in two posts.

IN FLORIDA, "petit theft" is defined in section e(3) below

812.014 Theft.—
(1) A person commits theft if he or she knowingly obtains or uses, or endeavors to obtain or to use, the property of another with intent to, either temporarily or permanently:
(a) Deprive the other person of a right to the property or a benefit from the property.
(b) Appropriate the property to his or her own use or to the use of any person not entitled to the use of the property.
(2)(a)1. If the property stolen is valued at $100,000 or more or is a semitrailer that was deployed by a law enforcement officer; or
2. If the property stolen is cargo valued at $50,000 or more that has entered the stream of interstate or intrastate commerce from the shipper’s loading platform to the consignee’s receiving dock; or
3. If the offender commits any grand theft and:
a. In the course of committing the offense the offender uses a motor vehicle as an instrumentality, other than merely as a getaway vehicle, to assist in committing the offense and thereby damages the real property of another; or
b. In the course of committing the offense the offender causes damage to the real or personal property of another in excess of $1,000,

the offender commits grand theft in the first degree, punishable as a felony of the first degree, as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(b)1. If the property stolen is valued at $20,000 or more, but less than $100,000;
2. The property stolen is cargo valued at less than $50,000 that has entered the stream of interstate or intrastate commerce from the shipper’s loading platform to the consignee’s receiving dock;
3. The property stolen is emergency medical equipment, valued at $300 or more, that is taken from a facility licensed under chapter 395 or from an aircraft or vehicle permitted under chapter 401; or
4. The property stolen is law enforcement equipment, valued at $300 or more, that is taken from an authorized emergency vehicle, as defined in s. 316.003,

the offender commits grand theft in the second degree, punishable as a felony of the second degree, as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. Emergency medical equipment means mechanical or electronic apparatus used to provide emergency services and care as defined in s. 395.002(9) or to treat medical emergencies. Law enforcement equipment means any property, device, or apparatus used by any law enforcement officer as defined in s. 943.10 in the officer’s official business. However, if the property is stolen within a county that is subject to a state of emergency declared by the Governor under chapter 252, the theft is committed after the declaration of emergency is made, and the perpetration of the theft is facilitated by conditions arising from the emergency, the theft is a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this paragraph, the term “conditions arising from the emergency” means civil unrest, power outages, curfews, voluntary or mandatory evacuations, or a reduction in the presence of or response time for first responders or homeland security personnel. For purposes of sentencing under chapter 921, a felony offense that is reclassified under this paragraph is ranked one level above the ranking under s. 921.0022 or s. 921.0023 of the offense committed.
(c) It is grand theft of the third degree and a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, if the property stolen is:
1. Valued at $300 or more, but less than $5,000.
2. Valued at $5,000 or more, but less than $10,000.
3. Valued at $10,000 or more, but less than $20,000.
4. A will, codicil, or other testamentary instrument.
5. A firearm.
6. A motor vehicle, except as provided in paragraph (a).
7. Any commercially farmed animal, including any animal of the equine, bovine, or swine class, or other grazing animal, and including aquaculture species raised at a certified aquaculture facility. If the property stolen is aquaculture species raised at a certified aquaculture facility, then a $10,000 fine shall be imposed.
8. Any fire extinguisher.
9. Any amount of citrus fruit consisting of 2,000 or more individual pieces of fruit.
10. Taken from a designated construction site identified by the posting of a sign as provided for in s. 810.09(2)(d).
11. Any stop sign.
12. Anhydrous ammonia.

However, if the property is stolen within a county that is subject to a state of emergency declared by the Governor under chapter 252, the property is stolen after the declaration of emergency is made, and the perpetration of the theft is facilitated by conditions arising from the emergency, the offender commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, if the property is valued at $5,000 or more, but less than $10,000, as provided under subparagraph 2., or if the property is valued at $10,000 or more, but less than $20,000, as provided under subparagraph 3. As used in this paragraph, the term “conditions arising from the emergency” means civil unrest, power outages, curfews, voluntary or mandatory evacuations, or a reduction in the presence of or the response time for first responders or homeland security personnel. For purposes of sentencing under chapter 921, a felony offense that is reclassified under this paragraph is ranked one level above the ranking under s. 921.0022 or s. 921.0023 of the offense committed.
(d) It is grand theft of the third degree and a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, if the property stolen is valued at $100 or more, but less than $300, and is taken from a dwelling as defined in s. 810.011(2) or from the unenclosed curtilage of a dwelling pursuant to s. 810.09(1).
(e) Except as provided in paragraph (d), if the property stolen is valued at $100 or more, but less than $300, the offender commits petit theft of the first degree, punishable as a misdemeanor of the first degree, as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3)(a) Theft of any property not specified in subsection (2) is petit theft of the second degree and a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083, and as provided in subsection (5), as applicable.
(b) A person who commits petit theft and who has previously been convicted of any theft commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(c) A person who commits petit theft and who has previously been convicted two or more times of any theft commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

[jberryhill]

24. There are a couple of flavors of robbery in Florida

This:

812.13 Robbery.—
(1) “Robbery” means the taking of money or other property which may be the subject of larceny from the person or custody of another, with intent to either permanently or temporarily deprive the person or the owner of the money or other property, when in the course of the taking there is the use of force, violence, assault, or putting in fear.
(2)(a) If in the course of committing the robbery the offender carried a firearm or other deadly weapon, then the robbery is a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(b) If in the course of committing the robbery the offender carried a weapon, then the robbery is a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(c) If in the course of committing the robbery the offender carried no firearm, deadly weapon, or other weapon, then the robbery is a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3)(a) An act shall be deemed “in the course of committing the robbery” if it occurs in an attempt to commit robbery or in flight after the attempt or commission.
(b) An act shall be deemed “in the course of the taking” if it occurs either prior to, contemporaneous with, or subsequent to the taking of the property and if it and the act of taking constitute a continuous series of acts or events.

And this:

812.131 Robbery by sudden snatching.—
(1) “Robbery by sudden snatching” means the taking of money or other property from the victim’s person, with intent to permanently or temporarily deprive the victim or the owner of the money or other property, when, in the course of the taking, the victim was or became aware of the taking. In order to satisfy this definition, it is not necessary to show that:
(a) The offender used any amount of force beyond that effort necessary to obtain possession of the money or other property; or
(b) There was any resistance offered by the victim to the offender or that there was injury to the victim’s person.
(2)(a) If, in the course of committing a robbery by sudden snatching, the offender carried a firearm or other deadly weapon, the robbery by sudden snatching is a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(b) If, in the course of committing a robbery by sudden snatching, the offender carried no firearm or other deadly weapon, the robbery by sudden snatching is a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3)(a) An act shall be deemed “in the course of committing a robbery by sudden snatching” if the act occurs in an attempt to commit robbery by sudden snatching or in fleeing after the attempt or commission.
(b) An act shall be deemed “in the course of the taking” if the act occurs prior to, contemporaneous with, or subsequent to the taking of the property and if such act and the act of taking constitute a continuous series of acts or events.

And this:

812.135 Home-invasion robbery.—
(1) “Home-invasion robbery” means any robbery that occurs when the offender enters a dwelling with the intent to commit a robbery, and does commit a robbery of the occupants therein.
(2)(a) If in the course of committing the home-invasion robbery the person carries a firearm or other deadly weapon, the person commits a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(b) If in the course of committing the home-invasion robbery the person carries a weapon, the person commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(c) If in the course of committing the home-invasion robbery the person carries no firearm, deadly weapon, or other weapon, the person commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
History.—s. 2, ch. 93-212; s. 1, ch. 2004-290.

-------

It would appear that the first definition is the operative one.

But "what do you call crime X" has no meaning absent reference to what any particular state defines it to be.

There is no "universal definition of state crime names" in this country.

[onenote]

70. I think you meant to reference Missouri law, not Florida.

Or am I missing something? Why the debate over Florida law?

[jberryhill]

83. Lol

You're right. The point remains that state definitions of offenses and their names vary wildly.

[exboyfil]

8. Robbery but it could have been argued in court

and chances are it would have been plead down. Storekeeper had a right to detain a suspected shoplifter and Brown used force to prevent that from happening. Still not sure of the events in the store though (identify of Brown etc) and events in the store had nothing to do with the shooting.

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.

537.125. Shoplifting – Detention of Suspect By Merchant – Liability Presumption

2. Any merchant, his agent or employee, who has reasonable grounds or probable cause to believe that a person has committed or is committing a wrongful taking of merchandise or money from a mercantile establishment, may detain such person in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable length of time for the purpose of investigating whether there has been a wrongful taking of such merchandise or money. Any such reasonable detention shall not constitute an unlawful arrest or detention, nor shall it render the merchant, his agent or employee, criminally or civilly liable to the person so detained.

[Little Star]

10. No such thing as petty theft?

[onenote]

72. Where no force is involved in the stealing, the amount matters.

And without the use of force, taking a box of cigars would be a misdemeanor in Missouri. But with the use of (or threatened use of) force to complete the misappropriation of the cigars, it becomes a Class B Felony.

I believe this is pretty standard.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

12. Petty theft is a form of larceny - robbery is a theft with the addition of force or threat of force

The difference between a petty larceny and grand larceny usually hovers around going above $400 to $500 depending on the jurisdiction. Robbery is a different animal; as it involves a taking not by deception but by use of force or threat of force (such as pointing a gun at a clerk). The punishment is stricter in accordance with the added dangerousness of the perpetrator.

[Little Star]

16. So how would you classify taking a pkg of cigarillos?

[Travis_0004]

33. I would define it as robbery when there is also assult involved.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

34. I don't know enough details from a silent video of a few seconds that doesn't capture

most of the interaction but only the tail end. Did Brown actually pay for the cigars and he and the store manager argued over something else? Did he and the store owner have a prior history of disagreement such that the owner might call the police to mess with Brown? Did the store owner owe Brown money? We know so little but everyone is projecting something onto a few seconds of video. If I had to predict how the DA would charge Brown if he were still alive, I'd say they'd charge him with a Class 4 simple robbery. It's not an aggravated robbery or armed robbery as no weapon was involved. The DA would probably throw in the charge of petty larceny as well, in case they can't make the robbery stick, which in this case would be a misdemeanor.

[arcane1]

58. Exactly. I couldn't tell WTF was going on in the first 3/4 of that video

They interact, he leans in and we can't see what is actually happening at the counter. Something gets picked up off the floor, other things get picked up or handled...

Since we don't really know what the store clerk said to the police, I don't yet have enough information to conclude that a robbery took place.

[Chemisse]

63. You make some interesting points about us not seeing an actual theft. n/t

[onenote]

74. You're not referencing Missouri law.

There is no such thing as a "Class 4 simple robbery" in Missouri. Robbery falls into two categories: First degree (stealing committed with a weapon), is a Class A felony. Second degree (stealing committed by force or threat of force) is a Class B felony.

[jberryhill]

84. I was thinking "fucked up state"....

...and I reflexively thought of Florida.

The point remains, definitions vary and folks often overlook that in these kinds of threads generally.

[MADem]

82. They can't make anything stick even if the video showed Brown, clearly, hitting the clerk with a

baseball bat.

Michael Brown is dead and ya can't try a dead man. He died with the presumption of innocence, and we shouldn't ever forget that. That is how we play it in this country.

[AgingAmerican]

80. Petty theft does not involve person to person interaction

Robbery involves person-to-person interaction with force, intimidation, and/or coercion.

It should have been shoplifting, but turned into robbery when he intimidated the store owner.

No matter, doesn't excuse the cop murdering him.

[me b zola]

15. Did Darren Wilson commit first or second degree murder?

[Little Star]

18. Man was surrendering? Then I say first.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

25. First nt

[Chemisse]

64. But how much of a premeditation is required for first?

In this case, it could be a second or two.

It could have been done in a burst of anger with no premeditation at all (would that be manslaughter?).

[HooptieWagon]

17. Neither.

At this point, all there is is a video of an incident in a convenience store. A person in the video resembles Brown, but a positive ID hasn't been made. That person in the video is alleged to have shoplifted cigars, but the video doesn't show that. The video appears to show an assault, but whom is assaulting who is unclear. If the large man ressembling Brown is being falsely accused by the clerk, then it can be claimed that he was defending himself from an assault by the clerk.

This is not to defend Brown, but simply pointing out that if we eliminate guesses then the actual remaining facts aren't very conclusive. It IS possible the person in the video had the cigars in his possession before entering the store, and was falsely accused. There simply isn't enough information based on the video and what the clerk claims.

[Little Star]

19. Well I think the word robbery is over the top.

[HooptieWagon]

39. Well, if the person in the video did steal the cigars...

... the clerk is legally within his rights to detain them (whether thats smart or not). And using force to resist that detention is assault, and escalates the crime from petty larceny (shoplifting) to second degree robbery (strong-arm robbery). However, the video doesn't show the person stealing cigars... so its unclear what or even whether a crime actually occured.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

22. Petty theft.

The short clip I saw showed him shove the clerk away. Of course, some will use the robbery claim to argue he was a violent thug who was a somehow danger to the cop, even though he was apparently shot multiple times at a distance when his hands were up.

[Little Star]

37. .

[OrwellwasRight]

76. That's not how crimes work.

You don't just get to call it "petty theft" because you are afraid others will use a different charge to accomplish some goal. Crimes have elements, each of which must be proved by the prosecution. I can tell you that shoving the clerk constitutes use of force and raises the crime beyond a simple theft or larceny, which by definition have no force element.

[VanGoghRocks]

96. I guess my rejoinder to that is that it can't be elevated "beyond a simple theft or

larceny" when it hasn't even been fully established that there was any theft to begin with. The store owner\manager may have told police that there was a theft and they may have taken down and subsequently broadcast a report that says as much. But that does not necessarily mean that a theft actually occurred.

Is it possible that Brown paid for, or attempted to pay for, the merchandise (no theft) but that the physical altercation was actually about something else entirely? Why haven't we heard from the store owner or manager who appears in the video?

I apologize if some of these questions have already been answered. Trying to keep up with this story and its shifting sands is proving very challenging.

[OrwellwasRight]

99. That's not what's being discussed.

What's being discussed is whether, if we accept that the video is true version of the events that produced the shoplifting call, and if the person in the video is Mike Brown, then what's the crime? And a prosecutor would have to prove the identity of the perpetrator, would have to prove that taking of property occurred, and would have to prove the "force" element. A defense attorney could argue all those are incorrect, and a jury would hash that out, and they could say, we don't believe that's the guy, or we don't believe merchandise wasn't paid for, or whatever. But you cannot watch the shoving in the video and discount the force element, and just call it petty theft because you wish for the crime to be less severe. That isn't how it works.

In any case, whether it was robbery doesn't excuse the killing and there will never be a prosecution because Brown in dead, so I am not sure why people are so interested in pretending they don't see force used in that video. Perhaps they just don't understand the law. As in, did you know you can assault someone just by touching them? You don't have to hit them or hurt them, you just have to touch them and it can be assault.

[Ms. Toad]

77. Under Missouri law, once you shove the person you are stealing from

it becomes robbery. It has nothing to do with the later interaction with the police. It is how the Missouri legislature defined robbery.

[B Calm]

85. Any degree of force to complete the crime is strong-arm robbery.

[Ms. Toad]

94. It doesn't even have to be actual force -

Just the threat of immediate force.

But what happened in the video is that the person alleged to be Michael Brown grabbed the shopkeeper by the shirt front and shoved him. That certainly qualifies as force or threat of immediate force - I was merely describing what happened, not stating the only way it could happen.

[TheKentuckian]

27. I think it is an irrelevant issue to distract from at least the 2nd degree murder of a kid

[Little Star]

36. I am not trying to distract....

I think the media is inflaming tensions by using the word robbery.

The kid lifted some smokes (like many, many young people have done) yet they make it seemed liked he robbed a friggin bank.

[TheKentuckian]

43. I understand that but the line of conversation, is a reprieve from the core issue

Fuck playing the game of being put on the defensive, the murder and the out of control cops is all that needs to be focused on because that is all this about.

[Little Star]

53. You are right but...

my point is the use of the word robbery by the media will place the light on the horrible Mike Brown and off the murder by the cop who killed him.

The media trying to shine the light on Mike as a thug, a robber and take it off his murderer, the cop. You know, the good guy who just was serving and protecting.

[Spider Jerusalem]

30. Use of force in the commission of theft elevates it to robbery.

It's irrelevant to the fact that he was shot by the police, though.

[Texasgal]

32. I'm not sure it matters

at this point. The media has done a wonderful job of demonizing him as a thug. UGH.

[Little Star]

38. Exactly. It just pisses me off that they are getting away with it.

[loyalsister]

35. I'm not convinced that there is a valid legal discussion to be had yet

It's my understanding that they have not filed charges. I think using the word robbery instead of a broader term (stealing, shoplifting) was a propaganda tactic intended to make him out to be scary and violent.

[Little Star]

40. Yep. Shame on the media (our wonderful wordsmiths)

[JustAnotherGen]

46. How do you file charges

Against a corpse?

That would be to kinds of fucked up.

[loyalsister]

51. There were none filed while he was alive

To me, with no legal language to describe the suspicion, it is too ambiguous to be known.
I feel sure that the people who are using it are well aware of that fact and that emotional responses to robbery vs. shoplifting are very different.

[JustAnotherGen]

87. and now he is dead

For an entirely different crime.

[Bettie]

41. Petty theft

And even if it were robbery, still not a death penalty offense.

[JustAnotherGen]

44. I understand why you are asking

But does it really matter? It's not like he can be tried in front of a jury of his peers. He's dead. Move on.

His murder happened far away from that convenience store and now the thug in charge in Ferguson is saying he wasn't stopped by the poice officer for that theft. He will just lie and change his story in five minutes but for now -

That was not what lead to the stop.


He was walking while black. That's what really needs to be discussed.

[sheshe2]

54. Sadly yes JAG, walking while black.

Or maybe just living while black. It pisses me the hell off!

[Little Star]

56. I think it might matter to his parents and family. They don't want to see his character defiled....

I know I wouldn't.

[JustAnotherGen]

88. its already been done

The fact that it had nothing to do with why he was stopped has been cleared up by that Police chief.

The bigger issue is why his character was attacked the day he was born. And why in 2014 its just hunky dory to shoot someone like a rabid dog then send in "the troops " when people protest that death.

[WinkyDink]

47. Nothing, since he was not convicted of any crime.

[kestrel91316]

48. Dunno. What did the jury decide in his trial after his indictment and courtroom prosecution?

[IdaBriggs]

78. ^ This. nt

[Avalux]

49. It really doesn't matter. The media is trying to make it seem as if it does.

Whether it was robbery or petty theft doesn't have anything to do with being gunned down by a cop while his hands were in the air.

[Little Star]

55. I think it does matter when it comes to public opinion.....

But you are right the only thing that really matters in the end, is that an unarmed 18 year old was murdered.

[rustydog]

50. IF and tha tis a big IF. If he did steal the cigars it is shoplifting

If he got into a physical struggle, it is strong-arm robbery, a more serious charge.

Strong-arm robbery is NOT ARMED robbery.

[elias49]

73. "Strong-arm robbery" cracks me up!

I haven't heard that term since Raymond Chandler pulp fiction. But it sure makes it sound more scary!

[Little Star]

92. .

[gollygee]

52. Is only the police officer considered innocent until proven guilty?

I guess he doesn't get that presumption of innocence thing. He isn't guilty of either as he hasn't stood trial and can't because he got shot.

[geomon666]

57. Why hasn't the store reported a robbery to this day?

Why hasn't Dorian Johnson been arrested? Could it be there are no charges pending? Could it be there was no crime committed?

[Travis_0004]

65. The store did report a robery

Police were out that night looking for a suspect.

Also, I could see why Dorian Johnson would not be arrested. If I was the prosecutor, I would probably be willing to give him immunity for the robbery to allow him to freely explain all the events that night. Getting to the bottom of the shooting investigation is a much higher priority.

[Nye Bevan]

59. I don't think that question can be answered at this point,

based upon the evidence we have seen.

But either way, he did not deserve to be summarily executed.

[alcibiades_mystery]

60. Apart from the general irrelevance, the real question is whether he would be convicted of a class 2

felony given what we've seen. A class 2 felony in Missouri carries a minimum of 5 years in prison. Would any jurisdiction in the US have convicted him of such a crime and sentenced him to 5 years in state prison. For what we saw in the video?

The answer there is "Clearly not." He might have been charged initially with strong arm robbery, but it would have been pleaded to shoplifting and misdemeanor assault. He would have received 12 month probation and some community service, maybe.

[jwirr]

61. Are we now sure that the man in the photo is Michael?

[Ms. Toad]

79. Johnson, through his attorney, admitted it. n/t

[Chemisse]

62. I think it was theft, followed by an assault.

It seems as though robbery should use physical threat to obtain the item. In this case, he already had the item in his possession.

It would be interesting to hear from a lawyer on this.

[840high]

69. He pushed the clerk - which made

it worse.

[countryjake]

66. Without knowing what exactly went on at that convenience store counter...

there's no way for any of us to define what actually occurred.

Because the person who is alleged to have been Michael Brown in that newly released video spent so much time at the checkout, there could be a few explanations for why he allegedly walked out with those cigars. Maybe the clerk didn't believe that he was old enough to purchase tobacco and demanded photo ID, who knows at this point? Some sort of frustration is evident in the person in that video, as he turns, picks stuff up off the floor, and walks away from the checkout.

I don't imagine that it makes much difference at this point, since he was gunned down for walking in the street.

[JustAnotherGen]

89. Agreed

It doesn't accomplish much unless it gets the Ferguson PD to release the report on the murder.

[rocktivity]

91. So it has been definitely established that it IS Brown in the video.

Then what happened to the stolen property? Was it found on his body after he was shot?


rocktivity

[MoonRiver]

95. Let's face it, his main crime was Walking While Black.

same ole same ole

[Little Star]

97. Bingo.

[riseabove]

98. He committed the crime of being a black pedestrian. Oh and being a big guy.

That's usually enough for police force, and neck grabbing.

Eric Gardner knows about it too.