Re: Michael Brown

[Cow Poke]

Gonna be honest, I didn't realize that some states differed quite that much.

Yeah, in this case, I have to keep checking Missouri law, because I know it can be much different from Texas.

Also...maybe I should move to Texas.

There's plenty of room!

[Cow Poke]

The officer himself never filed an incident report,

How do you know that?

[robrecht]

How do you know that?

There was some bare bones report released to the public a week or two ago, but it said almost nothing at all. Rather shocking in the lack of anything substantive. Must be posted on the Internet somewhere.

[tabibito]

Wouldn't any such report be sub judice?

[robrecht]

Wouldn't any such report be sub judice?

Police did not disclose/produce it until sued by the ACLU under FOI; prosecutor won't release more. Here is the 'report'.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/aclu-mich...ks-key-details

[tabibito]

The police officer who shot and killed unarmed teenager Michael Brown may not have filled out a detailed incident report following the Aug. 9 shooting.

The prosecutors office says no report, narrative, or details from the investigation will be released to the public while there is a grand jury empaneled to review the incident.

First and last lines of the article. So what is the first line of the article based on?

[robrecht]

First and last lines of the article. So what is the first line of the article based on?

This is explained in the middle of the article:

"During a briefing with the St. Louis County Prosecutor’s Office on Thursday, prosecutors told NBC News that since turning over the investigation into Brown’s death, the Ferguson Police Department had yet to generate an incident report.

Late Wednesday night, the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri released what it described as a report turned over to it by the police department following a lawsuit it filed to obtain the records. The report is scant on details typically found on an incident report involving a homicide. It lists little more than the date, time and location of the incident. But more curious are the timestamps on the document.

According to information on the report a supervisor had not reviewed the document until Aug. 19, 10 days after the fatal shooting. And final approval wasn’t given until Aug. 20."

[Teallaura]

Let's see - rioters in the streets or review an incident report that no one in their right minds would release yet...



I notice there's no mention of their normal turn around - so is this late or normal?

Releasing redacted or partial reports, where inflammatory or likely to damage the prosecution, during investigations and prosecutions is the norm. Defense isn't entitled to it yet (no indictment so no defense to make) and they are the only ones that have a legitimate demand for it anywhere near this early on. Yes, it's a public document and, barring significant evidence that it would be a danger to someone or the public to make it public, it will eventually have to be made public. Police and prosecutors have some discretion here.

[tabibito]

Let's see - rioters in the streets or review an incident report that no one in their right minds would release yet...



I notice there's no mention of their normal turn around - so is this late or normal?

Releasing redacted or partial reports, where inflammatory or likely to damage the prosecution, during investigations and prosecutions is the norm. Defense isn't entitled to it yet (no indictment so no defense to make) and they are the only ones that have a legitimate demand for it anywhere near this early on. Yes, it's a public document and, barring significant evidence that it would be a danger to someone or the public to make it public, it will eventually have to be made public. Police and prosecutors have some discretion here.

That's what I thought. The article is a beat up.

[robrecht]

That's what I thought. The article is a beat up.

Wouldn't you expect a more substantive incident report to be written up by an officer involved in a fatal shooting?

[Cow Poke]

There was some bare bones report released to the public a week or two ago, but it said almost nothing at all. Rather shocking in the lack of anything substantive. Must be posted on the Internet somewhere.

We don't know, however, that that's ALL the report that was written. It could be that they're saving something for the defense. We simply don't know, and just because we don't have the report in the public domain does not mean there isn't one.

[Cow Poke]

Wouldn't you expect a more substantive incident report to be written up by an officer involved in a fatal shooting?

Most officer involved shootings of which I am aware are geared toward the shooting board which will analyze in incredible detail everything that happened. It's also possible that this department is simply mirroring the current DC administration with regards to complying with FOIA requests.

[robrecht]

Most officer involved shootings of which I am aware are geared toward the shooting board which will analyze in incredible detail everything that happened. It's also possible that this department is simply mirroring the current DC administration with regards to complying with FOIA requests.

So you're thinking that this report is not the report that was written by the officer at the time but possibly a dummy report created as a pro forma nonresponse response to a FOI request?

[tabibito]

It looks like a cover sheet to me.

[Cow Poke]

So you're thinking that this report is not the report that was written by the officer at the time but possibly a dummy report created as a pro forma nonresponse response to a FOI request?