Tag Archives: brown

Farming in the Sky

Why agriculture may someday take place in towers, not fields. chipmunk_1/Flickr A couple of Octobers ago, I found myself standing on a 5,000-acre cotton crop in the outskirts of Lubbock, Texas, shoulder-to-shoulder with a third-generation cotton farmer. He swept his arm across the flat, brown horizon of his field, which was at that moment being plowed by an industrial-sized picker—a toothy machine as tall as a house and operated by one man. The picker’s yields were being dropped into a giant pod to be delivered late that night to the local gin. And far beneath our feet, the Ogallala aquifer dwindled away at its frighteningly swift pace. When asked about this, the farmer spoke of reverse osmosis—the process of desalinating water—which he seemed to put his faith in, and which kept him unafraid of famine and permanent drought. Beyond his crop were others, belonging to other farmers, so that as far as the eye could see were brown stretches of newly harvested cotton plants. When I think of the potential ills of contemporary agriculture, I think of this farm, a 19th-century crop taken to its 21st-century logical limit, organized largely the same way it was two centuries ago—only with less human labor, and over a much bigger expanse. There is, even in Texas, only so much usable surface area, and so much irrigable water to maintain future commercial crops, and it made me wonder: What would a truly modern crop look like? To keep reading, click here. Read this article –  Farming in the Sky ; ; ;

See original article:  

Farming in the Sky

Posted in alo, Citadel, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, Monterey, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Farming in the Sky

This weird plant might be the future of Alaskan agriculture

This weird plant might be the future of Alaskan agriculture

By on 12 May 2015commentsShare

Alaska, the Last Frontier, is not known for its balmy climate or productive agricultural scene. But one new plant on the scene might be shaking up the state:

“I tried killing it—you can’t kill it. That’s my kind of plant,” says [Al] Poindexter. “It can go weeks without water. Moose don’t eat it, rabbits don’t eat it, weather doesn’t seem to bother it. It’s a real easy plant to grow.”

This is Rhodiola rosea—golden root, rose root—a succulent that was used for centuries as folk medicine and once considered something of a Soviet military secret. Decades ago, the Soviets realized that Rhodiola could boost energy and help manage stress. These days, a small group of Alaskan farmers are hoping that it could enter the pantheon of plants (coffee, chocolate, coca) whose powers people take seriously—and, along the way, become Alaska’s most valuable crop

The plant has been known in scientific circles since the 18th century, when Carl Linnaeus named it. Soviet scientists tried to keep it under wraps during the Cold War, using it to  buck up their soldiers and athletes, even the cosmonauts. And while I don’t know what a Rhodiola bar would taste like, nor whether it would help me climb flights of stairs without huffing, I do know that fitting the crop to its climate sounds pretty sensible.

“It’s actually an environment that the plant wants to grow in, as opposed to everything else we grow in Alaska,” says Stephen Brown, a professor and district agriculture agent at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. “It’ll grow in the Arctic and sub-Arctic. It wants our long days. It’s already coming up out of the ground—and the ground’s still frozen.”

It might not be the Fertile Crescent when it comes to corn and potatoes, but south-central Alaska just might be the cradle of the coming Rhodiola renaissance.

Source:
THE SOVIET MILITARY SECRET THAT COULD BECOME ALASKA’S MOST VALUABLE CROP

, Atlas Obscura.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

sponsored post

Small-scale farmers fight back against the climate monster

“Small Scale Farmers Cool the Planet” shows how organic farmers just might hold the key to slaying the biggest beast of our age.

Get Grist in your inbox

Originally posted here – 

This weird plant might be the future of Alaskan agriculture

Posted in alo, Anchor, Annies, FF, GE, LG, Mop, ONA, organic, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This weird plant might be the future of Alaskan agriculture

Even If Walter Scott’s Family Wins in Court, the Cop Won’t Pay a Dime

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The family of Walter Scott, the man who died on Saturday after being shot eight times by North Charleston police officer Michael Slager, has decided to sue Slager, the city of North Charleston, and its police department. The civil lawsuit, which will seek damages for wrongful death and civil rights violations, follows murder charges already filed against the now-dismised officer.

Scott’s family is hardly the first to seek civil damages after a police killing. In recent months, relatives of Mike Brown, Tamir Rice, and Eric Garner have all pursued civil court claims, where success isn’t contingent on a criminal ruling against any police officer. But in the event that the Scott family wins a settlement, it’s highly unlikely that Slager himself will have to pay. As I reported in January:

Instead, taxpayers will shoulder the cost. Between 2006 and 2011, New York City paid out $348 million in settlements or judgments in cases pertaining to civil rights violations by police, according to a UCLA study published in June 2014. Those nearly 7,000 misconduct cases included allegations of excessive use of force, sexual assault, unreasonable searches, and false arrests. More than 99 percent of the payouts came from the city’s municipal budget, which has a line item dedicated to settlements and judgments each year. (The city did require police to pay a tiny fraction of the total damages, with officers personally contributing in less than 1 percent of the cases for a total of $114,000.)

This scenario is typical of police departments across the country, says the study’s author Joanna Schwartz, who analyzed records from 81 law enforcement agencies employing 20 percent of the nation’s approximately 765,000 police officers. (The NYPD, which is responsible for three-quarters of the cases in the study, employs just over 36,000 officers.) Out of the more than $735 million paid out by cities and counties for police misconduct between 2006 and 2011, government budgets paid more than 99 percent. Local laws indemnifying officers from responsibility for such damages vary, but “there is little variation in the outcome,” Schwartz wrote. “Officers almost never pay.”

Schwartz’s study did not include North Charleston or any other law enforcement agency in South Carolina. But if other jurisdictions serve as any indication, Slager likely won’t pay a dime, even if a jury finds him guilty of murdering Scott. Out of the 7,000 cases of police misconduct Schwartz studied, only 700 officers were convicted of a criminal charge. And only 40 officers ever contributed to a civil settlement out of their own pocket.

Read more: 

Even If Walter Scott’s Family Wins in Court, the Cop Won’t Pay a Dime

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Scotts, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Even If Walter Scott’s Family Wins in Court, the Cop Won’t Pay a Dime

For the First Time, California Is Enforcing Water Restrictions

Mother Jones

Today, California Governor Jerry Brown announced mandatory water restrictions for the first time in the state’s history. The announcement follows a drought of more than three years, which has officials worrying that Californians may have only one year of drinking water left.

The regulations require California cities to decrease water use by 25 percent, though, crucially, only requires agricultural users to report their water use and submit drought management plans. Agriculture accounts for about 80 percent of California’s water usage. (For more drought background, check out our past coverage on agricultural water use—almonds are the biggest suck—and municipal water use.)

From the press release:

The following is a summary of the executive order issued by the Governor today.

Save Water

For the first time in state history, the Governor has directed the State Water Resources Control Board to implement mandatory water reductions in cities and towns across California to reduce water usage by 25 percent. This savings amounts to approximately 1.5 million acre-feet of water over the next nine months, or nearly as much as is currently in Lake Oroville.

To save more water now, the order will also:

Replace 50 million square feet of lawns throughout the state with drought tolerant landscaping in partnership with local governments;
Direct the creation of a temporary, statewide consumer rebate program to replace old appliances with more water and energy efficient models; Require campuses, golf courses, cemeteries and other large landscapes to make significant cuts in water use; and
Prohibit new homes and developments from irrigating with potable water unless water-efficient drip irrigation systems are used, and ban watering of ornamental grass on public street medians.

Increase Enforcement

The Governor’s order calls on local water agencies to adjust their rate structures to implement conservation pricing, recognized as an effective way to realize water reductions and discourage water waste.

Agricultural water users – which have borne much of the brunt of the drought to date, with hundreds of thousands of fallowed acres, significantly reduced water allocations and thousands of farmworkers laid off – will be required to report more water use information to state regulators, increasing the state’s ability to enforce against illegal diversions and waste and unreasonable use of water under today’s order. Additionally, the Governor’s action strengthens standards for Agricultural Water Management Plans submitted by large agriculture water districts and requires small agriculture water districts to develop similar plans. These plans will help ensure that agricultural communities are prepared in case the drought extends into 2016.

Additional actions required by the order include:

Taking action against water agencies in depleted groundwater basins that have not shared data on their groundwater supplies with the state;
Updating standards for toilets and faucets and outdoor landscaping in residential communities and taking action against communities that ignore these standards; and
Making permanent monthly reporting of water usage, conservation and enforcement actions by local water suppliers.

Jump to original: 

For the First Time, California Is Enforcing Water Restrictions

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on For the First Time, California Is Enforcing Water Restrictions

Here Are the Justice Department’s Full Reports on Darren Wilson and the Ferguson Police Department

Mother Jones

On Wednesday, the Justice Department released its highly anticipated report unveiling patterns of racial discrimination among officers and officials from Ferguson, Missouri.

Here is the full report on the police department:

DV.load(“//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1681210-doj-report-on-ferguson-police-department.js”,
width: 630,
height: 540,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-1681210-doj-report-on-ferguson-police-department”
);

DOJ Report on Ferguson Police Department (PDF)

DOJ Report on Ferguson Police Department (Text)

The department also chose not to pursue charges against Officer Darren Wilson, who shot and killed Michael Brown last August.

Here’s the full report on the Michael Brown shooting investigation:

DV.load(“//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1681211-doj-report-on-shooting-of-michael-brown.js”,
width: 630,
height: 540,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-1681211-doj-report-on-shooting-of-michael-brown”
);

DOJ Report on Shooting of Michael Brown (PDF)

DOJ Report on Shooting of Michael Brown (Text)

Read some of our previous coverage here and here.

View this article:

Here Are the Justice Department’s Full Reports on Darren Wilson and the Ferguson Police Department

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here Are the Justice Department’s Full Reports on Darren Wilson and the Ferguson Police Department

Netanyahu and Obama Agree: Global Warming Is a Huge Threat

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Today Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed Congress on Iran’s nuclear ambitions, at the invitation of House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). The speech has caused a considerable flap, with Democrats criticizing it as an unprecedented affront to President Barack Obama.

But while the president and Netanyahu might have vastly different visions for how to deal with the threat posed by Iran, they do seem to agree on one thing: the threat posed by climate change. Over the past few months Obama has repeatedly emphasized the dangers associated with global warming. In his State of the Union address in January, he said that “no challenge poses a greater threat to future generations” than climate change. And in a recent national security document, Obama called climate change an “urgent and growing threat.” Despite GOP protestations to the contrary, Obama’s concerns are legitimate: New research released yesterday, for example, found that man-made climate change was a key factor in the Syrian civil war.

It seems Bibi had the same thought as early as 2010, when his cabinet approved a wide-reaching plan to reduce Israel’s carbon footprint. At the time, the prime minister said that “the threat of climate change is no less menacing than the security threats that we face.” From the Jerusalem Post:

At the UN Copenhagen Climate Summit in December 2009, Israel pledged to reduce emissions by 20 percent from a “business as usual” scenario by 2020.

“The recent dry months, including the driest November in the history of the state, are a warning light to us all that the threat of climate change is no less menacing than the security threats that we face. I intend to act determinedly in this field. In a country that suffers from a severe water shortage, this is an existential struggle,” Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said at the cabinet meeting.

Israel doesn’t face the kind of political resistance from climate change deniers that is all too common in the United States, said Gidon Bromberg, Israel director of EcoPeace Middle East. But the country is struggling to meet its carbon emission and renewable energy targets because government spending is so heavily concentrated on defense, he said.

“They’ve given the issue a great deal of lip service,” he said, “but in practice none of these targets have been met.”

Still, Israel has been at the forefront of developing seawater desalination technology to confront drought. The country has the biggest desal plant in the world, and last year Netanyahu signed a deal with California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) to share research and technology for dealing with water scarcity.

View post – 

Netanyahu and Obama Agree: Global Warming Is a Huge Threat

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, Hagen, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Netanyahu and Obama Agree: Global Warming Is a Huge Threat

I Am a White Mother of Black Sons. Here’s What I Know.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This story first appeared on the TomDispatch website.

For Adam and Khary

Black bodies
swingin’ in
the summer
breeze
strange fruit hangin’ from the poplar trees

It was 1969 and 1973, both times in early fall, when I first saw your small bodies, rose and tan, and fell in love for the second and third time with a black body, as it is named, for my first love was for your father. Always a word lover, I loved his words, trustworthy, often not expansive, sometimes even sparse, but always reliable and clear. How I—a first-generation Russian-Jewish girl—loved clarity! Reliable words—true words, measured words, filled with fascinating new life stories, drawing me down and in. The second and third times I fell in love with black bodies I became a black body, not Black, but black in a way I’d say without shame and some humor, for mine is dark tan called white. But I am the carrier, I am the body who carried them, released on a river of blood.

Am I black in a cop’s hands when he is pushing, pressing hard for dope or a gun or a rope or a knife or a fist? I am not a black body, yet my body is somehow, somewhere, theirs—Trayvon’s, Emmett’s, thousands more at the end of a rope’s tight murderous swing, black as a night stick splits my head, shatters my chest, black as a boy not yet a man walking toward a man with a gun, suddenly shot dead, a just-become man walking down the stairs toward a gun, black as a tall man, a big man, looking strong but pleading for his breath, killed by choking arms and bodies piled on top of his head.

Continue Reading »

Continue reading: 

I Am a White Mother of Black Sons. Here’s What I Know.

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, Mop, ONA, oven, PUR, Radius, Smith's, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on I Am a White Mother of Black Sons. Here’s What I Know.

How About If We All Get Back to Protecting and Serving?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

My neighboring city of Costa Mesa may be thousands of miles from New York and much, much smaller (population: 112,000), but they have something in common: police unions that don’t seem to know when to quit. Check this out:

An Orange County Superior Court judge on Wednesday ordered a private investigator to stay away from two Costa Mesa councilmen he allegedly helped surveil in the run-up to local 2012 elections.

….The false-imprisonment charge relates to the filing of a police report that caused Councilman Jim Righeimer to be detained briefly when an officer responded to his home to perform a sobriety test, according to prosecutors….Scott Impola ‘s firm was retained by the Costa Mesa Police Assn. to surveil and research local councilmen who were trying to cut pension costs and reduce jobs at City Hall, according to the Orange County district attorney’s office.

As part of their work, Impola and private investigator Chris Lanzillo allegedly put a GPS tracker on Councilman Steve Mensinger’s car and later called in a false DUI report on Righeimer as he was leaving Skosh Monahan’s, a restaurant owned by fellow Councilman Gary Monahan.

….Prosecutors say they have no evidence that the police union knew of any illegal activity beforehand.

Well, yeah. No evidence. But there is this:

Costa Mesa police officers mocked members of the City Council and suggested ways to catch them in compromising positions in the run-up to the 2012 municipal election, according to emails contained in court documents reviewed Monday by the Daily Pilot.

…. In one message, the association’s then-treasurer, Mitch Johnson, suggested telling the union’s lawyer about two of the councilmen’s upcoming city-sponsored trip to Las Vegas….”I’m sure they will be dealing with other ‘developer’ friends, maybe a Brown Act violation or two, and I think Steve Mensinger is a doper and has moral issues,” Johnson wrote in an email from a private account. “I could totally see him sniffing coke off a prostitute. Just a thought.

Yes. “Just a thought.” I have a feeling that maybe the GPS and DUI revelations didn’t come as a big shock or anything when the union was confronted with them. There’s also this:

The association’s president at the time, Jason Chamness, told the grand jury that he asked the law firm to dig up dirt on certain City Council members because he believed they were corrupt. Shortly after the DUI report involving Righeimer, the union fired the law firm, although the affidavit notes the union continued to pay a retainer until as recently as January 2013.

During his testimony, Chamness also said he deleted emails from his private account, which he used to contact the law firm about union business.

And why did the police union hire these two goons? Because the city councilmen in question were trying to cut pension costs and reduce jobs at City Hall. How dare they?

Source – 

How About If We All Get Back to Protecting and Serving?

Posted in FF, GE, Jason, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How About If We All Get Back to Protecting and Serving?

I Told a Grand Jury I Saw a Cop Shoot and Kill an Unarmed Man. It Didn’t Indict.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Many years ago, during the 1980s, I witnessed a killing: a New York City cop shooting an unarmed homeless man near the Metropolitan Museum of Art. I was later called as a grand jury witness in the case. The grand jury did not indict the officer.

It was a summer evening. I was heading to play softball in Central Park. At the corner of Fifth Avenue and 79th Street, I got off my bicycle to walk toward the Great Lawn. The west side of Fifth was crowded with New Yorkers enjoying the beautiful night. People were streaming in and out of the park. Sidewalk vendors were doing brisk business. The vibe was good. And in the midst of the hubbub, I spotted a fellow wearing dirty and tattered clothing. His hair was filthy, his face worn. It was hard to determine his age. He reminded me of Aqualung. (See this Jethro Tull album cover.) He was carrying a large and heavy rock with both of his hands, pushing his way through the throng, and muttering unintelligible words. I wondered, what’s his story? But I didn’t give it much more thought.

Most of the people on the corner were not paying attention to him. Those in his direct path, as he lumbered north, did quickly step out of his way. But no one seemed much alarmed by the guy. In New York City, unfortunately, you often saw broken people—and shrugged them off as just another crazy.

I was about to head down the footpath toward the baseball fields, when I saw a commotion to my right. Several police officers—four or so, I recall—were approaching the man with the rock. And their guns were drawn. As they neared the fellow, he dropped the rock, he then began to run in the same direction he had been walking. The cops were not grouped together; they were spread out—in a circle that was drawing tighter. The man, displaying a fair degree of agility, leaped into the street and tried to cut between two of the officers to get away.

Shots were fired. Two or three. Maybe four. And he went down.

The cops surrounded the man. He didn’t move. This was no longer a person. This was a body.

I moved closer to the scene. Passersby had stopped to watch. It was still difficult to assess his age. His clothes were a grimy gray. I saw his dirty hands. Both were empty.

Soon police cars and an ambulance arrived. The paramedics did not move fast. They covered the body with a sheet. Several police officers were standing around a female officer. She was in anguish. They were consoling her. It was obvious: She had fired the shots that killed the man.

Her race? She was white. His skin color? I thought it was dark, but it was tough to tell if it was dirt or pigment.

Cops were buzzing about the scene. Flashing lights illuminated this ritzy stretch of Fifth Avenue. On-lookers gawked. And I noticed something that struck me as odd: The police officers were not talking to any of the witnesses. They were talking to each other and the paramedics. I approached one cop and said that I had seen it all. He wasn’t impressed and looked at me as if to say, “So what?” I had thought the police would want to round up eyewitnesses to the shooting.

“Shouldn’t I talk to someone?” I asked this officer. He nodded his head toward another policeman. I went up to that cop. “Excuse me, officer,” I began. “I saw what happened.” Again, I received a look of disinterest. “Shouldn’t I….” He cut me off: “Talk to him.” He was looking at another officer who was barking instructions to other cops.

I tried once more. I approached this officer who seemed to be in charge. “Officer, I saw….” He shut me up with a wave of his hand, signaling I should wait. And wait I did, as he directed other cops to do this or do that. The paramedics were preparing to cart off the body. After a few minutes, I went up to this officer again and told him I had witnessed the whole episode.

“Okay,” he said.

He said nothing else. He didn’t ask me for my name. He didn’t ask if I would provide a statement. I was surprised by his lack of interest.

“Shouldn’t I tell someone what I saw,” I said.

“If you want to,” he said, not in an encouraging tone.

“Okay, who do I talk to?” I ask.

“If you want to make a statement,” he said, as if I was inconveniencing him and the entire police force, “you can go down to the station and do it there.” Now I got it: He didn’t want my statement, even though he had no idea what I would say. He was not interested in taking my name and contact information. It was my job apparently to make it to the police station on my own, and the station was a mile or so south.

This ticked me off. He was essentially trying to shoo me away. As the paramedics were loading the body on to the ambulance and as the cop who had shot the man was surrounded by her colleagues, I got on my bike and started to ride down Fifth.

At the station, I approached the front desk and told the officer staffing it that I had witnessed the shooting and had been told to come to the station to provide a statement. This fellow looked surprised to see me. He asked me to wait on a bench. I waited. Five minutes, fifteen minutes. I went back to the desk. Yes, yes, I was told, someone will be with you shortly. Another five minutes, another fifteen minutes. Obviously, no one would have minded if I gave up and left.

Sitting next to me in this waiting area was a woman—middle-aged and white (if that matters)—who was also a witness. We probably weren’t supposed to compare our accounts, but we did. (No one had told us not to.) She mentioned that she thought she had seen the victim holding something in his hand, perhaps a knife, when he started to run. Her vantage point had not been as good as mine, and I told her that I had seen the man drop the big rock and immediately begin to run. There had been no time for him to pull out a knife. Moreover, I had been in a position to see his hands—before and after he was killed—and I saw no knife. We looked at each other and didn’t know what else to say.

Finally, a detective—I think he was a detective, he didn’t say—came over and gave me a form on a clipboard and asked me to write a statement of what I had seen. I did. I stuck to the facts: nutty-looking homeless man carrying a small boulder, approached by cops, drops rock and runs, cops get closer, he darts between two of the officers, cop fires on him.

It was clear to me that the officer did not have to shoot the man. He was not threatening the officers. He was trying to run from them. But I didn’t write down this conclusion. I presented the facts; I believed their implication were undeniable.

When I finished, I handed my statement to one of the officers. I was told, “You’ll be contacted, if that’s necessary.” None of my interactions with the police led me to believe that a thorough investigation was in the works.

As I left the station, I saw the female officer who had fired the fatal shots. She was with several colleagues. She was upset and appeared to be crying. The other cops were being supportive. I couldn’t help but feel sorry for her. My interpretation was that she had screwed up; she had overreacted or panicked and fired her shots too soon. My hunch was that she knew that.

The next day—this was long before the internet era—I checked the newspapers and saw no stories on the shooting. Some time later—I think it was a couple of months—I received a call. A grand jury was examining the shooting, and my presence was requested.

I went to the courthouse at the appointed hour and waited to be called into the grand jury room. My time in the drab conference room with the grand jury was brief. The jury was, as they say, a diverse group. But most of the jurors looked bored. A few seemed drowsy. The prosecutor asked me to identify myself and certify I had filed the statement. He asked me to describe where I had been and whether I had seen the full episode. But he never asked me to provide a complete account. The key portion of the interview went something like this:

Prosecutor: You saw him start to run?

Me: I did.

Prosecutor: Did you see anything in his hand?

Me: No.

Prosecutor: Did you see him holding a knife?

Me: No. But I….

Prosecutor: Thank you.

I had wanted to say that I had seen him drop the heavy rock and bolt and that it was unlikely he had been able to grab and brandish a knife while sprinting. And I thought the grand jurors should know that he had not charged at any of the officers; he had been trying to dash through an opening between two of the cops in order to flee. And if they were interested in my opinion regarding the necessity of firing on him, I would have shared that, too.

But the prosecutor cut me off. He didn’t ask about about any of this. And not one of the jurors asked a question or said anything.

I left the room discouraged. This was not a search for the truth. It appeared to be a process designed to confirm an account that would protect the officer who had killed the man. The prosecutor was in command and establishing a narrative. (A knife!) The jurors appeared to be only scenery. (Insert your own ham sandwich reference here.) Long before the present debate spurred by the non-indictments in the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases, it seemed clear to me that the system contained a natural bias in favor of police officers. That certainly makes sense. Police officers have damn tough and dangerous jobs, and they are going to look out for their comrades-in-blue who slip up. And prosecutors work closely with cops to rack up convictions, and they don’t want to alienate their law enforcement partners. No one in that grand jury room was there to serve the interests of the dead guy.

On the way out of the courthouse, I realized I did not know the name of the victim.

I subsequently called a reporter who worked on the metro desk of the New York Times to tell him about my experience, hoping the paper would dig into the case. But I never saw a Times story on it. (At the time, I was working for a magazine that covered arms-control issues and in no position to write about the event. And back then, there was no equivalent to tweeting, blogging, or Facebooking.)

Several weeks, or a month or two, after my grand jury appearance, I called the person who had contacted me about testifying. Whatever happened? I asked. Oh, the man said, the case is over. I took that to mean the officer was not charged. Before I hung up, another question occurred to me. I don’t know why I thought about this, but I asked, “Whatever happened to the body of the man who was shot?” He was never identified and buried somewhere, he replied. And I wondered, never identified? How hard did they try?

Originally posted here – 

I Told a Grand Jury I Saw a Cop Shoot and Kill an Unarmed Man. It Didn’t Indict.

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Pines, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on I Told a Grand Jury I Saw a Cop Shoot and Kill an Unarmed Man. It Didn’t Indict.

5 Key Inconsistencies in What Happened During the Michael Brown Shooting

Mother Jones

Since the St. Louis County prosecutor’s office released a trove of documents and evidence reviewed by the grand jury that decided to not indict Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, there have been numerous reports pointing out the discrepancies between Wilson’s and various witness accounts of what happened on the day that Wilson shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown. While the grand jury has put an end to the state’s case against Wilson, questions about witness accounts could still sway the outcome of the Justice Department’s ongoing investigation. The Washington Post, Vox, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, PBS, and the Wall Street Journal have reported on these different accounts in further detail, especially the differences between the testimonies of Wilson and Dorian Johnson, a friend who was with Brown when Wilson approached them. We matched those accounts up with McCulloch’s statement during his announcement of the grand jury decision. Here are five key discrepancies:

1. What happened during Wilson’s initial encounter with Brown and Dorian Johnson?

Prosecutor Robert McCulloch: Wilson saw Brown and Johnson in the street, slowed down and told them to get on the sidewalk, and words were exchanged.

Darren Wilson: Wilson saw Brown and Dorian Johnson walking in the middle of the road. He told Johnson and Brown to get on the sidewalk. He noticed Brown was holding Cigarillos and remembered the report about the theft.

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370883-grand-jury-volume-5-darren-wilsons-testimony/annotations/190071.js’);

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370883-grand-jury-volume-5-darren-wilsons-testimony/annotations/190317.js’);

Dorian Johnson: Brown stole the Cigarillos from the Ferguson Market and then the two of them were walking toward their apartments as Wilson passed. Wilson told them to “Get the fuck on the sidewalk.”

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1372191-grand-jury-volume-4-dorian-johnsons-testimony/annotations/190094.js’);

2. How did the situation escalate?

McCulloch: Wilson reverses his car at an angle, blocking traffic and Brown and Johnson’s path. Wilson and Brown get into an altercation, with Wilson still in the car and Brown standing at the driver’s window.

Wilson: After Wilson told Brown and Johnson to get on the sidewalk, he says he heard Brown respond “fuck what you have to say.” He backed the car up to contain them, and asks Brown to come over to the car. He starts to get out of the car and Brown slams the door shut and says “what the fuck are you going to do about it.”

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370883-grand-jury-volume-5-darren-wilsons-testimony/annotations/190078.js’);

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370883-grand-jury-volume-5-darren-wilsons-testimony/annotations/190063.js’);

Johnson: Johnson says neither he nor Brown said a word and Wilson reversed his car unexpectedly, then opened his door and hit both him and Brown, and the door bounced back closed. Wilson then grabbed Brown by the shirt around his neck.

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1372191-grand-jury-volume-4-dorian-johnsons-testimony/annotations/190093.js’);

3. What exactly happened during Wilson and Brown’s “tussle”?

McCulloch: McCulloch says witness statements were inconsistent, with some saying Brown was never in the car at all, and others saying Brown was punching Wilson, some saying they were wrestling, and another saying that it was a tug-of-war. Two shots are fired during the altercation.

Wilson: After getting the door slammed on him, Wilson told Brown to “get the fuck back,” and tried to use the door to push him. Brown shut it again, and Brown then came “in my vehicle.” Brown punched Wilson. Wilson had one hand on his gun and tried to fire twice. Brown reached for Wilson’s gun. The gun goes off twice, and one bullet hits the door.

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370883-grand-jury-volume-5-darren-wilsons-testimony/annotations/190090.js’);

Johnson: Johnson says that Wilson reached his hand out of his car window and grabbed Brown’s shirt by his neck. A “tug of war” ensued with Brown trying to escape Wilson’s grip, but Brown’s hands never entered the car. After hearing the first gun shot, Johnson noticed blood on Brown, then turned and ran away. Brown followed behind him.

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1372191-grand-jury-volume-4-dorian-johnsons-testimony/annotations/190097.js’);

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1372191-grand-jury-volume-4-dorian-johnsons-testimony/annotations/190089.js’);

4. Did Wilson shoot at Brown and Johnson as they ran away?

McCulloch: McCulloch again says witness statements were inconsistent, with claims ranging from Wilson firing from the car, firing at Brown’s back as he was running, and others saying Wilson didn’t fire until Brown turned around and came back toward Wilson.

Wilson: Brown begins to run from Wilson after two shots were fired from the car. Brown runs but then turns around, and won’t comply with demands to get on the ground. Wilson says he didn’t open fire while Brown and Johnson ran away.

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370883-grand-jury-volume-5-darren-wilsons-testimony/annotations/190096.js’);

Johnson: Johnson hid behind a car, and watched as Brown ran past him and Wilson followed. Wilson opens fire while Brown is still running, at which point Brown stops and turns around. (Witness Piaget Crenshaw has told CNN Wilson shot as Brown ran away, adding that one bullet struck the building she was standing in. Another witness told investigators Wilson shot at Brown as he ran away.)

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1372191-grand-jury-volume-4-dorian-johnsons-testimony/annotations/190109.js’);

5. What was Brown doing when Wilson shot him?

McCulloch: McCulloch says witness accounts differ on whether Brown’s hands were up when he was facing Brown after turning around. Some say Brown didn’t move at all before Wilson shot him, others say he was in “full charge.” McCulloch stressed that several witnesses’ stories changed over the course of multiple interviews with authorities.

Wilson: Brown initially runs away but then turns around, and won’t comply with Wilson’s demands to get on the ground. Brown appears to charge toward Wilson. Brown put his hand at his waistband. Wilson opens fire.

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370883-grand-jury-volume-5-darren-wilsons-testimony/annotations/190095.js’);

Johnson: When Brown turned around to face Wilson, Brown’s hands were up, one higher than the other. His hands were nowhere near his waist. Brown appeared to try and tell Wilson that he didn’t have a gun, starting to take a step forward. Before Brown could complete his sentence, Wilson shot him several more times. (Crenshaw told CNN that after Brown turned around, he barely moved toward Wilson and that his hands were up. “They were just slowly going up, it probably didn’t even have a chance to get all the way up there before he was struck.”)

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1372191-grand-jury-volume-4-dorian-johnsons-testimony/annotations/190106.js’);

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1372191-grand-jury-volume-4-dorian-johnsons-testimony/annotations/190102.js’);

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1372191-grand-jury-volume-4-dorian-johnsons-testimony/annotations/190112.js’);

PBS Newshour analyzed more than 500 pages of witness testimony and compared them to Wilson’s statements. Their graphic shows 16 witnesses testified that Brown put his hands up when fired upon:

Read More:  

5 Key Inconsistencies in What Happened During the Michael Brown Shooting

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Pines, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 5 Key Inconsistencies in What Happened During the Michael Brown Shooting