INFO:
At approximately noon on Saturday, August 9, 2014, Officer Darren Wilson of the Ferguson Police Department (“FPD”) shot and killed Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old. The Criminal Section of the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) (collectively, “The Department”) subsequently opened a criminal investigation into whether the shooting violated federal law.
Please address the following:
Do you concur with the results of the investigation? Why or why not?
Use standard argumentation:
1) state a claim (e.g., agree or disagree with the investigation’s results)
2) cite evidence (cite to relevant literature, laws that support your argument)
3) provide warrants (warrants are the logical connection between your claim and your evidence)
4) Address one counterargument to your claim (a counterargument addresses potential objections to your claim. What might someone who has the opposite claim say that undermines your position?)
Title: Evaluating the Investigation into the Shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson
Claim: I disagree with the results of the investigation into the shooting of Michael Brown as I believe it failed to adequately address the issues of police brutality and systemic racism.
Evidence:
The investigation conducted by the Department of Justice, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri, and the FBI focused on determining whether the shooting violated federal law. However, it is essential to consider the broader context of systemic racism and police brutality that has plagued many communities across the United States.
Literature and studies on racial profiling, police use of force, and systemic inequalities in law enforcement practices provide substantial evidence of the challenges faced by minority communities, including African Americans. These studies highlight disparities in treatment by law enforcement agencies and underscore the need for comprehensive reforms to address systemic racism and police brutality.
Warrants:
The logical connection between my claim and the evidence lies in the failure of the investigation to address the underlying issues of systemic racism and police brutality. While the focus was on determining whether the shooting violated federal law, the broader societal and institutional factors that contribute to such incidents were not adequately addressed.
Counterargument:
A counterargument to my claim may suggest that the investigation's primary purpose was to determine whether the shooting violated federal law, and it fulfilled that objective. This counterargument might emphasize the importance of adhering to legal standards and procedures in evaluating law enforcement actions.
However, it is crucial to recognize that addressing systemic issues goes beyond legal determinations. The shooting of Michael Brown sparked widespread outrage and protests, reflecting deeper concerns about racial injustice and police accountability. Ignoring these broader societal implications undermines efforts to achieve meaningful reforms and erodes trust in law enforcement institutions.
In conclusion,
while the investigation into the shooting of Michael Brown may have fulfilled its legal mandate, it failed to comprehensively address the systemic issues of racial injustice and police brutality that underlie such incidents. Embracing a more holistic approach to addressing these challenges is essential to fostering trust, equity, and justice within our communities.