Posted on Apr 23, 2015
Should Michael Brown's parents be able to sue the city over son's death?
17.2K
178
81
4
3
1
I get it!
What happened between Michael Brown and Officer Wilson was tragic.
But the GRAND JURY found that officer Wilson was NOT at fault, how is another jury going to say that Brown's death was wrongful? I believe Officer Wilson was the victim in this case. Just much like the case I just sat on. If the lead detective says he can't say the defendant was in possession, then how does he expect us to?
Even more so, I don't understand how two parents that left him a gammys are able to bring up a lawsuit. He lived there until his death. Grandma should be getting that money, if there is any won.
AND moms might face some felony charges of her own... because of money.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/michael-brown-mom-face-felony-armed-robbery-charges-article-1.2001373
SO if this doesn't prove that all they were interested in was fame and monetary gain, I don't know what else will. I think this has gone beyond Ridiculous.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/civil-lawsuit-set-filed-michael-browns-death-30519005
What happened between Michael Brown and Officer Wilson was tragic.
But the GRAND JURY found that officer Wilson was NOT at fault, how is another jury going to say that Brown's death was wrongful? I believe Officer Wilson was the victim in this case. Just much like the case I just sat on. If the lead detective says he can't say the defendant was in possession, then how does he expect us to?
Even more so, I don't understand how two parents that left him a gammys are able to bring up a lawsuit. He lived there until his death. Grandma should be getting that money, if there is any won.
AND moms might face some felony charges of her own... because of money.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/michael-brown-mom-face-felony-armed-robbery-charges-article-1.2001373
SO if this doesn't prove that all they were interested in was fame and monetary gain, I don't know what else will. I think this has gone beyond Ridiculous.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/civil-lawsuit-set-filed-michael-browns-death-30519005
Posted in these groups: 
Lawsuit
Lawsuit
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 28
2
2
0
If prisoners can use our tax dollars to sue, then anyone should be able to sue (not necessarily with our tax dollars though). Do I think they should win? Only if the the city of Ferguson wins a counter suit for all of the chaos, vandalism, and criminal activities directly related to the case!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Yes he died by the hands of the law enforcement officer, NO it was not a mistake. What happened in that city is the horrible thing, not the fact that a violent criminal was taken off the streets permanantly.
i dont want to soiund like a bigot, but really?- we are still talking about this tired subject...? i dont see any benefit to society from any of the discourse and recourse the public took from this event.- hell i truely feel things have gotten worse.
i probably shouldnt vote this but its my honest opinoin and here goes.....
i dont want to soiund like a bigot, but really?- we are still talking about this tired subject...? i dont see any benefit to society from any of the discourse and recourse the public took from this event.- hell i truely feel things have gotten worse.
i probably shouldnt vote this but its my honest opinoin and here goes.....
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Omg NO!! Brown was a criminal shot while committing an unlawful act. It was a legal shoot. Plain and simple. Tired of this crybaby crap for a man who posed a clear and present danger to citizens. I don't care that he smoked marihuana. I don't care that he was a bit high. I care that he robbed a store and assaulted a police officer. He got shot for failing to abide by the law. There is nothing unlawful about his death. End of story. I feel bad for his family but end of the day he died due to his own actions.
(2)
(0)
SPC Rishawn Perreau
So, that's your child got shot when he clearly stopped, I don't know what video you seem but I seen him put his hands up given his self up to authorities!!! But it's cool right just shot someone in the back cause he didn't listen the first time??? Gtfoh?????
(0)
(0)
MSG(P) (Join to see)
What video did you watch? Because that is clearly not what happened. That's not what the evidence shows nor is it what was found after investigation. As to what I would do if it were my child? Well I would have made sure my kids knew robbing people and assaulting police officers was wrong and that behaving in that manner has repercussions and consequences. I would mourn them. Id be very upset. But I would t blame other people for my child's poor decision making and bad choices.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The Officer that was involved in this had done nothing wrong. Moments before this young man had just stole from a store and pushed the employee around. Once confronted by Officer Wilson, things started to escalate. To make a long story short, Officer Wilson drew his weapon in self defense since moments before Michael Brown had tried to take Officer Wilson's Gun. Michael Brown was a bully and a thug. It is very unfortunate that anybody had lost their life. If I would have been in the same situation, I am very sure that I would have done the same thing.
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Yeah, such BS. SSgt (Join to see) have you seen the video of Michael Brown beating up this 70 year old in front of some apartments?? That was sad man.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I agree with you completely how and why should a second trial be held, but if you remember, O.J. Simpson was found totally innocent of murder, but the ex-wife's family filed a wrongful death suite against him and took everything he had and ever will have. Just because one is criminal and one is civil this is allowed because the standards of proof are far less in a civil trial than a criminal trial. My belief is that if you are found innocent, regardless if it is the right verdict or not, that should be the end of it
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
It's almost like a double jeopardy. I've thought about that. Took that into account and the victim of those murders was Nicole and that other gentleman. The victim in this case is officer Wilson. SO...can he sue for defamation?? I think he should counter-sue.
(0)
(0)
SFC Collin McMillion
He's now a disgraced police officer, any action he would start would be dismissed very quickly. Damn shame!
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I have an issue with these civil suits because "justice" becomes "payout" and not "guilt". The person who was or wasn't found criminally liable, now becomes financially liable with less proof required visa vie the OJ Simpson debacle. They are trying to pull this with the Aaron Hernandez conviction. He was found guilty - isn't this justice served - but the victim's family wants to go for the payout by suing in civil court.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
That's what I am saying. The victim WAS WILSON. It's not the other way around. How this is going to work, well, is beyond me.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
If he was not found at fault it is no ones fault but their own. They are just looking for a way to collect money they don't deserve. Grandma, maybe.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
It is not a question of whether Michael Brown's parent should be able to sue the city of Ferguson, MO for the death of their son, it is whether are not a judge will approve of the law suit. Anyone can sue for anything. Their case may never reach a court for it would be expensive just to go to court. The city would just settle.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Wrongful death is a civil suit, and has different rules of evidence and different standard of proof than a criminal case. Just because the grand jury decided not to bring a criminal case against the police officer does not automatically mean there isn't enough evidence to sue him in civil court.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The Grand Jury did not indict Officer Wilson for murder; they did not find that he was not at fault. He clearly was "at fault" since it is beyond dispute that his weapon completed the homicide.
Whatever your thoughts on OJ's guilt or innocence, the fact of the matter is that he was acquitted of murder in criminal court, but found liable in civil court for wrongful death. Michael Brown's parents are at least entitled to the same process, though perhaps not the same outcome. So, what's love got to do with it?
Maybe there will be "standing" issue if his mother really did sever ties with him; maybe only his grandmother is entitled to bring a civil suit.
Whatever your thoughts on OJ's guilt or innocence, the fact of the matter is that he was acquitted of murder in criminal court, but found liable in civil court for wrongful death. Michael Brown's parents are at least entitled to the same process, though perhaps not the same outcome. So, what's love got to do with it?
Maybe there will be "standing" issue if his mother really did sever ties with him; maybe only his grandmother is entitled to bring a civil suit.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
What exactly is your problem with what I said?
This is not hard. Officer Wilson admits that he fired the weapon at Brown and that Brown died as a result. That he caused the death, i.e. "at fault" for it, isn't even necessarily a legal conclusion. Keep your criticisms of my profession to yourself. You have unbelievable nerve.
This is not hard. Officer Wilson admits that he fired the weapon at Brown and that Brown died as a result. That he caused the death, i.e. "at fault" for it, isn't even necessarily a legal conclusion. Keep your criticisms of my profession to yourself. You have unbelievable nerve.
(0)
(1)
LTC (Join to see)
I wasn't making a legal conclusion about the officer's fault. I also wasn't taking Professor Ballinger's criminal law exam. I was responding to the original posting which said that the Grand Jury found that he was not "at fault." There has been no legal conclusion drawn on self defense because there was no trial, so his legal "fault" is undetermined at this stage. Moreover, "fault" in a civil suit for wrongful death has to do with causation, not motivation. With your grasp of the law, surely you must understand that.
I'm not exhibiting petty childishness. You are out of line to launch attacks against me on a civilian-profession level, and I won't tolerate it. Your initial response was trollish, and I just can't understand why you would go to the trouble of attacking me professionally especially in this forum. When I make a comment on RallyPoint, let me be clear, I am not inviting you to respond. We obviously don't get along. I won't seek you out so just leave me alone.
I'm not exhibiting petty childishness. You are out of line to launch attacks against me on a civilian-profession level, and I won't tolerate it. Your initial response was trollish, and I just can't understand why you would go to the trouble of attacking me professionally especially in this forum. When I make a comment on RallyPoint, let me be clear, I am not inviting you to respond. We obviously don't get along. I won't seek you out so just leave me alone.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google