Here’s an open thread to keep up on events, as it seems we may be expecting the Ferguson grand jury decision any moment. The quintessential Friday night news dump.
Interesting news tonight from Ferguson, Missouri: Officer Darren Wilson in Talks to Resign.
If the reports we’ve been getting about the Grand Jury in the Michael Brown case in Ferguson are accurate, it seems like a foregone conclusion that officer Darren Wilson is not going to be charged in Brown’s killing.
And now in preparation for the soon-to-be released decision of the Grand Jury, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon is declaring a state of emergency and activating the National Guard, obviously expecting trouble even though recent protests have been peaceful. Here’s the official statement: Executive Order 14-14 | Governor Jay Nixon.
Two videos released today by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch show Officer Darren Wilson (in a white T-shirt) at the police station immediately after he shot Michael Brown to death in Ferguson; the first shows him leaving the station to go to the hospital, the second shows him returning from the hospital.
These videos are the final word on St. Louis hate-blogger Jim Hoft’s “fractured eye socket” hoax — because there are absolutely no visible injuries to Wilson’s face, and when he returns from the hospital there are no bandages, either. If he was indeed struck by Michael Brown, it could not have been severe enough to fracture his eye socket; by this time there would have been severe pain and swelling, but here we see Wilson walking casually with no assistance and in no apparent discomfort. Hardly the behavior of a man who had just suffered a “savage beating,” as Jim Hoft (and other right wing media) claimed.
So how does Hoft react to this definitive proof that his story was false? By linking to his “fractured eye socket” post and repeating his claim that Wilson was “severely injured,” of course — right under the video that shows it to be a lie.
Officer Darren Wilson was severely injured during his confrontation with 18 year-old rapper Mike Brown. Darren Wilson was treated at a local hospital after the shooting.
“18 year-old rapper.” Nice.
The Stupidest Man on the Internet is also the most relentlessly dishonest.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch article also includes a newly released timeline from police, showing that Wilson was not taken to the hospital until two hours after the shooting. It goes without saying that if Wilson had received head injuries severe enough to cause facial fractures, he would have gone to the hospital much sooner.
You may remember this LGF post from last August, when Ferguson, Missouri, erupted in street protests after the shooting death of Michael Brown: FAA Shuts Down Airspace Over Ferguson at Request of Police.
At the time, St. Louis County and Ferguson police said the 12-day flight restriction was for the safety of law enforcement personnel, including police helicopters. I wrote:
Last night, police ordered media to leave the area. Is this [FAA restriction] really out of concern for safety, or an attempt to keep media from watching what’s going on in Ferguson for the next 6 days? It’s an unusual step, to say the least; normally police helicopters and media helicopters are able to share airspace in areas like this without fear of accidents.
For the record, more than a few people pooh-poohed this idea and suggested it was a conspiracy theory. But today we’ve learned, just as I surmised, that in fact this restriction was intended to keep media out of the area.
On Aug. 12, the morning after the Federal Aviation Administration imposed the first flight restriction, FAA air traffic managers struggled to redefine the flight ban to let commercial flights operate at nearby Lambert-St. Louis International Airport and police helicopters fly through the area — but ban others.
“They finally admitted it really was to keep the media out,” said one FAA manager about the St. Louis County Police in a series of recorded telephone conversations obtained by The Associated Press. “But they were a little concerned of, obviously, anything else that could be going on.
At another point, a manager at the FAA’s Kansas City center said police “did not care if you ran commercial traffic through this TFR (temporary flight restriction) all day long. They didn’t want media in there.” …
“There is really … no option for a TFR that says, you know, ‘OK, everybody but the media is OK,’” he said. The managers then worked out wording they felt would keep news helicopters out of the controlled zone but not impede other air traffic.
The conversations contradict claims by the St. Louis County Police Department, which responded to demonstrations following the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown, that the restriction was solely for safety and had nothing to do with preventing media from witnessing the violence or the police response.
Took this video of the very unfortunate Orbital Sciences rocket explosion. Video was taken in our Cessna 177 Cardinal from an altitude of 3000ft. Sorry for the sound. I’ll have a better one up once it’s been edited out.
Darren Wilson’s Grand Jury Testimony Destroys Jim Hoft’s Bogus “Fractured Eye Socket” Claims for Good
You may recall Jim Hoft’s now-infamous repeated claims that anonymous sources told him police officer Darren Wilson suffered an “orbital blowout fracture to the eye socket” in a struggle with unarmed teenager Michael Brown, before Wilson shot Brown to death.
LGF’s article debunking Hoft’s unsourced claims went viral on Twitter and Facebook, and now shows almost 250,000 views and many thousands of retweets and shares. Yet Hoft has continued to push this claim over and over, in almost everything he posts on the subject.
Well, today the New York Times has a report on the grand jury testimony of officer Wilson, and his account contains absolutely no mention of a fractured eye socket, or of any injuries more serious than scratches and swelling: Police Officer in Ferguson Is Said to Recount a Struggle.
WASHINGTON — The police officer who fatally shot Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., two months ago has told investigators that he was pinned in his vehicle and in fear for his life as he struggled over his gun with Mr. Brown, according to government officials briefed on the federal civil rights investigation into the matter.
The officer, Darren Wilson, has told the authorities that during the scuffle, Mr. Brown reached for the gun. It was fired twice in the car, according to forensics tests performed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The first bullet struck Mr. Brown in the arm; the second bullet missed.
The forensics tests showed Mr. Brown’s blood on the gun, as well as on the interior door panel and on Officer Wilson’s uniform. Officer Wilson told the authorities that Mr. Brown had punched and scratched him repeatedly, leaving swelling on his face and cuts on his neck.
Notice also that all of the blood found on Wilson’s gun, inside the car, and on Wilson’s uniform belonged to Michael Brown — not to Darren Wilson. So clearly, if there was a struggle at all (about which there remains considerable doubt) the only person who came away from it with serious injuries was Michael Brown.
So how does the Dumbest Man on the Internet cover the story, now that his claims are totally destroyed by Wilson’s own testimony? With yet another deceptive, misleading headline: NY Times: Michael Brown Beat Officer Darren Wilson Before His Death - Blood Found on Wilson’s Gun | the Gateway Pundit.
Notice that Hoft phrased his crummy headline to give the impression that the blood on Wilson’s gun came from Michael Brown’s “beating,” when it was actually Brown’s blood from Wilson shooting him.
Hoft even has the gall to claim that the New York Times article backs up his accounts.
The New York Times story mirrors what The Gateway Pundit reported in August on the attack.
If you click the link Hoft posts to his own site, you’ll notice something odd; suddenly, for the first time, he’s no longer linking to his “fractured eye socket” post, but to one of his earlier posts before he started pushing his false story.
The only question remaining now is whether Hoft actually did have anonymous sources in the St. Louis County PD and prosecuting attorney’s office, as he said, or whether he just completely made up this story. In other words, lied like a rug.
I strongly suspect the latter.
‘Clipboard Man’ Seen Without Protective Gear Near Workers in Full Hazmat Suits Transporting Ebola Patient
There’s probably not an issue here since ‘clipboard man’ kept his distance from the fully encased Ebola patient, and his time near the patient was short. However from an abundance of caution perspective — that we should be following since we have two new cases, he probably should have been wearing gear if he was going to handle the biohazard bags.
Video footage of a plain-clothed man surrounded by people in full hazmat suits as they transported the second US Ebola patient to Atlanta has sparked widespread shock and concern among US viewers.
In the footage, aired lived by NBC 5, the unidentified man can be seen clutching a document as health workers in full hazmat suits transported Ebola patient Amber Vinson from an ambulance towards a specially-equipped jet at Dallas’ Love Field.
Viewers immediately took to Twitter to ask why the man appeared completely unprotected, with one quipping: “Apparently, there is someone immune to Ebola”.
Ms Vinson, 29, had been treating Ebola victim Thomas Duncan at the Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital before flying to Ohio. She was the second person to contract the virus in Texas when preliminary tests came back positive for Ebola on Wednesday.
UPDATE: MYSTERY SOLVED
He is a medical safety coordinator with Phoenix Air, the air carrier that took Vinson from Love Field to Atlanta. Phoenix Air takes three healthcare workers on these flights. Two wear hazmat suits and one doesn’t.
“One of the three people on the medical team are the eyes and ears,” said Randy Davis, a vice president at Phoenix Air. “They know how far to stay away from the patient.”
Davis said that Phoenix Air has gone on 11 missions so far transporting Ebola patients, including from Liberia to the United States and to Europe. The hazmat suits limits a person’s peripheral vision, smell and hearing.
@Tarkloon I think he is of no consequence.— Greg Laden (@gregladen) October 16, 2014
Another epidemic worse than Ebola.
Also — claims in the media that mass shootings aren’t increasing are wrong.
Check out this horrifying Harvard timeline graphic:
Have mass shootings become more common?
According to our statistical analysis of more than three decades of data, in 2011 the United States entered a new period in which mass shootings are occurring more frequently. Our analysis used data compiled by Mother Jones on attacks that took place in public, in which the shooter and the victims generally were unrelated and unknown to each other, and in which the shooter murdered four or more people. (An incident with four or more homicide victims was the threshold count for mass killing established by the FBI a decade ago; a federal law signed by President Obama in 2013 defined the threshold as three or more victims killed.)
So why do we keep hearing in the media that mass shootings have not increased?
This view stems from the work of Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox, who has long maintained that mass shootings are a stable phenomenon. (“The growing menace lies more in our fears than in the facts,” he has said.) But Fox’s oft-cited claim is based on a misguided approach to studying the problem: The data he uses includes all homicides in which four or more people were murdered with a gun. His analysis, which counts the number of events per year, lumps together mass shootings in public places with a far more numerous set of mass murders that are contextually distinct—a majority of which stem from domestic violence and occur in private homes. Fox’s annual count and use of overly broad data including many types of mass killings fail to detect the recent shift in public mass shootings.
The scene in St. Louis pic.twitter.com/c1cf2NlhY8