Fox "News" guest: Was Michael Brown too large to be an ‘unarmed teen’?

[kpete]

Appearing on Fox & Friends, a former nominee for Labor Secretary took the media to task for inflaming racial tensions by describing slain teen Michael Brown as “unarmed” when he was, in fact, “six foot four and weighed almost three hundred pounds.”

Linda Chavez, who was nominated to head up the U.S. Department of Labor by President George W. Bush but withdrew when it was discovered she employed an undocumented immigrant as a maid, wrote a column last week for the New York Post stating, “Publicly available videos and still photos of Brown and Wilson show significant size differences between the two men, with Brown looking to have a height advantage over Wilson and outweighing the officer by about 100 pounds.”

Chavez also repeated the now-discredited report http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/08/22/cnn-source-unequivocally-disputes-report-that-ferguson-officer-suffered-broken-bone/ that Brown punched officer Darren Wilson in the eye and “was treated at a hospital for facial wounds, perhaps even a fracture to his eye socket.”


Speaking with host Steve Doocy, Chavez avoided addressing the errors in her column, instead blaming Attorney General Eric Holder and saying “the media has not acted responsibly.”

“I think the media has not acted responsibly,” she explained. “I think that what is happening is really not calming racial fears but is actually enhancing them by acting as if, you know, this mantra of the unarmed black teenager shot by a white cop. You know, that description in and of itself actually colors the way in which we look at this story. We’re talking about an 18-year-old man who is six foot four and weighs almost three hundred pounds, who is videotaped just moments before the confrontation with a police officer strong arming an employee and robbing a convenience store.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/08/25/fox-news-guest-thinks-unarmed-teen-narrative-is-misleading-because-michael-brown-was-large/

[Scuba]

2. OFFS

[dflprincess]

3. I should have guessed that's why the wing-nuts

on the Mpls Star Tribune's comments section were all claiming he was too big to be called "unarmed".

[Arkansas Granny]

4. The last I heard, people older than 12 and younger than 20

are considered teenagers and people who do not have weapons on their person are considered to be unarmed.

[cyberswede]

5. Jeez Louise. My 13 y.o. is 6'2" 230 - is he scary?

...only to the kids across the line of scrimmage.

[AverageJoe90]

6. *facepalm*.

Also, isn't there evidence that suggests that Mike Brown had actually paid for the cigars that people asked questions about?

[gratuitous]

7. I guess that means Large is the new Black

I'll spell it out for Linda and Steve, who seem to have trouble with basic English words: "Unarmed" means without a weapon. No gun, no knife, no hand grenade; "teen" means a person between the ages of 12 and 20, all those numbers that end with "teen"; e.g. thirteen, fourteen and so on.

Fucking idjits.

[Contrary1]

10. BLWB

Being large while Black...the latest offense deserving of execution.

Things haven't changed much in the last couple hundred years after all.

It was 1968 when a fellow campaigner for Bobby Kennedy gave me a ride home, but was reluctant to drive up my driveway. T didn't give it much thought at the time, but maybe he was fearful of being shot at too.

It saddens me. I am getting up there now and we seem to be regressing.

[Ilsa]

8. So the new policy is to shoot tall people?

And heavy or obese people? Hell, that's almost half the state of texas that would be shot because they are too scary.

[jwirr]

9. This bunch of people are idiots. I don't care how big he was - he was a long ways away from the cop.

My brother was 6 feet 6 inches and weighed about the same. And he too was a gentle giant. He was also not the most coordinated person in the world.

This will not stick. From close range size might have made a difference but not the distance between this victim and the murderer.

[all american girl]

11. I can't stand the stupid

I'm all of 5'2" on a good day, my husband is a foot taller than me...by this logic, I should be ascared of my husband. Maybe I'm strange, but I have never been afraid of big dudes, since most are big compared to me. Now I have been afraid of my own shadow or when my goofy kids jump out at me...come to think of it, they are taller.........