Ferguson police: Officer doxed by Anonymous isn't the one who shot Mike Brown


CNN is reporting that Missouri police say neither of the two officers whose names, photographs, and personal data were released this morning by Anonymous are the officer who shot and killed unarmed teen Michael Brown.

The young man's death sparked massive displays of public grief; peaceful protests were met with overwhelming military response by heavily armed SWAT teams.

From CNN.com:

On Wednesday, [Ferguson Police Chief Thomas] Jackson told CNN that the officer who shot Brown had been hit and suffered swelling on the side of his face. He was taken to a hospital and released the same day, Jackson said. Five days have passed since Brown's killing, and the public still does not know the name of the person who pulled the trigger. There have been cries of a cover-up, but authorities said police have received death threats against the officer and his family. And they want to prevent further violence. Hackers have gone after the personal information of government and police officials, authorities said.

Below, two tweets from the account that later released what purports to be personally identifying information for two Missouri police officers. This Anonymous account says one of the two officers shot Brown. Other Anonymous accounts have voiced concern that the data was published prematurely, and there appears to be the usual infighting between self-proclaimed Anonymous leaders. Don't ever change, Anonymous.


Notable Replies

  1. Reprehensible. No matter if your opponent is the cops or an abortion doctor, this tactic is an invitation to murder and it has to stop.

  2. zikzak says:

    The entire police department is an invitation to murder, and unlike your purely theoretical fears of vigilantes killing cops, the department has actually murdered people.

    It's terrifying to see that even after a situation like this, people still wring their hands over concern for the safety of the cops.

  3. ChuckV says:

    But as you acknowledge there are two different groups, the protesters and the "assholes." The latter's criminal acts do not give the police the right to harass, intimidate, and criminalize the protesters.

  4. bwv812 says:

    Maybe the police should deploy their manpower to address these "assholes to the north" instead of intimidating peaceful protestors? You know, instead of saying they're not going to respond to 911 calls because they're too busy aiming their guns at people walking around with their hands up.

  5. In the same sense that the good cops in that department (if there happen to be any) are unintentionally giving cover to the assholes who MURDERED an unarmed young man.

    The police have the right to detain people who are committing crimes. That doesn't mean that the First Amendment right to peaceably assemble (or even document the situation for the media) need be suspended until every other person in the city stops committing crimes.

Continue the discussion bbs.boingboing.net

32 more replies