Announcement from Ferguson Missouri

[fatdaddycool]

No skull it doesn't make it true.
The victims body laying 150'4" from the squad car that they started the fight in makes it true. Unless of course your saying Wilson dragged his lifeless body there?

 

[fatdaddycool]

Here's the deal though, isn't he going to chase him to arrest him? Who says a police officer has to use pepper spray or a tazer? How do you know exactly what Wilson was thinking? Maybe he did perceive his life was in danger? Maybe the adrenaline goes off and maybe he thinks testimony is exactly how it happened but everything happened so fast that he has inconsistencies? Not one testimony matches Wilson's detail to a tee but there are several that are pretty damn close, and there are 4 who say Brown charged back at the police officer. There are many who said he shot Brown in the back? You say he was shooting at him as he fled, he must have been a pretty bad shot because he never had entry wounds from the back and then you can discredit all testimony by any of those who said he shot him in the back. There is enough evidence there not to put him on trial and too many inconsistencies to get a conviction. No fed indictment yet and it's very unlikely one is coming.

Dude,
He testified that the reason brown is dead is that he feared for his life! So if the boogie man beats you up in your car and the flees, do you chase him screaming I'm so scared? No you roll your window up and wait for assistance.
Wilson testified to shooting twice at him while he was fleeing. Read his testimony.
You keep saying there is enough evidence to prove he's not guilty? There is no such thing. There is none other than his word. You seem to think that someone unarmed being gunned down is okay. It isn't okay when the circumstances around it are false and lied about by the shooter.
Trevor, look, you don't get to discount someone's testimony just because you don't like something they testify to. A witness saying he shot him in the back when there are no bullet holes in his back doesn't mean the mother fucker didn't shoot at him and miss!
Besides that, the grand jury doesn't decide guilt it jai decides if the evidence is enough for trial. In a grand jury you don't impeach anyone's testimony. Not the point.
Wilson is lying. That's why he's not a cop, that's why he received no severance from the city.
"He gave my gun and twisted into my hip" which means there would be fingerprints on the gun (none) his belt (none) his wrist, this from Wilson's testimony, would have been twisted back towards his hip in such a fashion that he would have sustained some trauma to the wrist (none). Wilson even went so far as to say he felt Brown's finger going for the trigger, so where are the prints? Brown had lacerations and bruises on the back of his neck consistent with the size and shape of Wilson's left hand. Wilson testified that he never ever got hold of him, yet another three witnesses testified that Wilson grabbed brown behind the head and dragged him down into the car through the open door. Wilson testified that Brown hit him through his open car while he was getting out. Not a single witness verified that event. Every single witness except Wilson testified that Wilson backed up the squad car to cut off the two men, then Wilson opened the door into Brown's knee and leg. Brownn then shoved the door back closed onto Wilson. It was then that Wilson grabbed at Brown through the open window at which point Brown punched at Wilson hitting him twice. Now Wilson testified that Brown never got hit by the door but was standing by the squad's back door and that he hit Wilson's door as he backed up and tried to open it. Wilson said he attempted to exit the vehicle and was punched in the face twice.
So how is it that Wilson says he did that yet testified that Brown punched him twice with his right hand on the right side of his face? So Wilson says Brown was on his left side, as he exits the left side of his face is pointing at Brown yet Brown somehow miraculously swings and twice his fist goes all the way around Wilson's head and his him on the opposite side of his face so hard that he fears hell be knocked out by the next one? It's bullshit Trevor. Absolute bullshit.

I honestly believe you're looking for evidence to support Wilson that just isn't there bro. I believe you're wrong on this one

 

[fatdaddycool]

And what's more Trevor, by your own words if a guy said he shot him in the back but that's proven to be false you can't trust any of his testimony? That's what you said. So if any tenet of Wilson's testimony proves to be false, by your measure, all of it is false, correct?

 

[JT]

View attachment 3128

On the bottom part percentage wise blacks are still much higher. For the top part maybe it's becase blacks are in jail in this country at a much higher rate then in South Africa before Apartheid.

 

[Duff Miver]

And what's more Trevor, by your own words if a guy said he shot him in the back but that's proven to be false you can't trust any of his testimony? That's what you said. So if any tenet of Wilson's testimony proves to be false, by your measure, all of it is false, correct?

Cool down, fatdaddy.

The grand jury decided whether there was enough evidence to charge Wilson and bring him to trial.

What the jury heard was a bunch of testimony where witness contradicted one another and the factual evidence - spent casings, blood splatter, measurements, powder residue, photos of Wilson's face, etc.

What the grand jury decided was that the totality of the testimony and evidence did not constitute enough to charge Wilson.

They were there, they saw everything, heard everything, debated what they'd seen and heard, listened to explanations of the law from the judge, and decided there was not enough credible evidence to bring a charge against Wilson.

I don't know exactly what happened that day and neither do you. Nor does the grand jury, hence no indictment. The grand jury did not find probable cause to indict Wilson. That is the standard which a GJ must find.

When a reasonable person is unsure what to think, he has not reached the probable cause threshold.

In the end, Wilson and Brown got their days before the jury. Justice was done as best the jury could do it. Either you believe in following the law or you don't. In this case you don't like the outcome. So? Someone dislikes the verdict every day in every trial.

A cop is disgraced and a punk hoodlum is dead. Maybe the cop is a punk too. Life goes on.

 

[yyz]

No skull it doesn't make it true.
The victims body laying 150'4" from the squad car that they started the fight in makes it true. Unless of course your saying Wilson dragged his lifeless body there?

I like to think it was only 1/35th of a mile.

 

[bleedingpurple]

Dude,
He testified that the reason brown is dead is that he feared for his life! So if the boogie man beats you up in your car and the flees, do you chase him screaming I'm so scared? No you roll your window up and wait for assistance.
Wilson testified to shooting twice at him while he was fleeing. Read his testimony.
You keep saying there is enough evidence to prove he's not guilty? There is no such thing. There is none other than his word. You seem to think that someone unarmed being gunned down is okay. It isn't okay when the circumstances around it are false and lied about by the shooter.
Trevor, look, you don't get to discount someone's testimony just because you don't like something they testify to. A witness saying he shot him in the back when there are no bullet holes in his back doesn't mean the mother fucker didn't shoot at him and miss!
Besides that, the grand jury doesn't decide guilt it jai decides if the evidence is enough for trial. In a grand jury you don't impeach anyone's testimony. Not the point.
Wilson is lying. That's why he's not a cop, that's why he received no severance from the city.
"He gave my gun and twisted into my hip" which means there would be fingerprints on the gun (none) his belt (none) his wrist, this from Wilson's testimony, would have been twisted back towards his hip in such a fashion that he would have sustained some trauma to the wrist (none). Wilson even went so far as to say he felt Brown's finger going for the trigger, so where are the prints? Brown had lacerations and bruises on the back of his neck consistent with the size and shape of Wilson's left hand. Wilson testified that he never ever got hold of him, yet another three witnesses testified that Wilson grabbed brown behind the head and dragged him down into the car through the open door. Wilson testified that Brown hit him through his open car while he was getting out. Not a single witness verified that event. Every single witness except Wilson testified that Wilson backed up the squad car to cut off the two men, then Wilson opened the door into Brown's knee and leg. Brownn then shoved the door back closed onto Wilson. It was then that Wilson grabbed at Brown through the open window at which point Brown punched at Wilson hitting him twice. Now Wilson testified that Brown never got hit by the door but was standing by the squad's back door and that he hit Wilson's door as he backed up and tried to open it. Wilson said he attempted to exit the vehicle and was punched in the face twice.
So how is it that Wilson says he did that yet testified that Brown punched him twice with his right hand on the right side of his face? So Wilson says Brown was on his left side, as he exits the left side of his face is pointing at Brown yet Brown somehow miraculously swings and twice his fist goes all the way around Wilson's head and his him on the opposite side of his face so hard that he fears hell be knocked out by the next one? It's bullshit Trevor. Absolute bullshit.

I honestly believe you're looking for evidence to support Wilson that just isn't there bro. I believe you're wrong on this one

I'm saying there is not enough evidence to convict him, as I stated before the only way he would be found guilty is if he admitted to the killings. I also saying there is evidence that does support some of Wilson's claims. There is absolute reasonable doubt. The only person who knows for sure is Wilson and unless he testifies against himself then he's not going anywhere.

 

[bleedingpurple]

And what's more Trevor, by your own words if a guy said he shot him in the back but that's proven to be false you can't trust any of his testimony? That's what you said. So if any tenet of Wilson's testimony proves to be false, by your measure, all of it is false, correct?

I would say that a person saying he was shot in the back and wasn't was blatantly lying. Wilson may actually thinking what happened was true, it could be what he perceived. If he did shoot at Brown running away he is lucky he is one bad shot, cause a round in the back may have cooked him. Is he that lucky? i don't know

 

[fatdaddycool]

I'm not upset in the least duff.
It isn't the law I'm upset about, it's the lack of it that bothers me at all. It's very well documented that the prosecution did not properly or even ethically present the "evidence" or instruct the jury correctly.
A grand jury only needs a preponderance of evidence of a crime committed. It doesn't have to be murder or anything of that nature.

Have you ever wondered if a cop shooting an unarmed black man has EVER not been considered justified? You call Brown a criminal, a thug, etc. .., yet attach a moniker of respect like cop to the only one if the two that ever killed anyone and didn't do it in the line of duty.

Trevor,
So you say that a witness looking through a window of a parked car that saw Wilson shooting at Brown as he fled and stated he "saw him shooting him in the back", is a liar, but the guy that testified he never grabbed Brown in anywhere around the head or neck yet there are his handprints on the corpse. Testified that he "felt Brown's finger going for the trigger while his hand twisted his gun into his pelvis" yet not a finger print one on that gun. The guy that testified that he never hit Michael Brown with his door, yet every other witness in the case. .....yes, every single one of them, testified to that very thing happening...... He's the guy that might just have a couple inconsistencies? Holy shit dude, quit giving the badge the benefit. Keep in mind if it wasn't for the Ferguson police department releasing that security tape accusing Brown of robbery (which in of itself is ridiculous since there is no weapon no money stolen no threat of danger and most importantly, no trial to prove guilt) in an effort to garner white support, you'd never be able to call him anything but a good student. Instead, because of a 16 second fuzzy video tape of someone you could never identify, people accept yet another miscarriage of justice with the comfort of knowing another black street thug is dead.

Imagine your entire life being summed up by strangers that only see the worst 16 seconds of it, and then imagine those same ignorant fucks assigning a value to your untimely death equal to a dead rat in the street.

I don't know what it takes to make a person question the always justified deaths of so many unarmed black citizens.

 

[bleedingpurple]

I have been reading and re reading..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...the-michael-brown-case-supported-the-officer/

According to this the physical evidence matches what Wilson says.
Brown's DNA was on the gun, his right hand was 6 - 9 inches from the barrel.

 

[bleedingpurple]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-had-a-reasonable-belief-he-needed-to-shoot/

 

[fatdaddycool]

6-9 inches certainly isn't indicative of his finger going for the trigger. DNA could have been transferred from sweat, spit, hair. If he grabbed the gun there'd be a print. There isn't.

 

[bleedingpurple]

6-9 inches certainly isn't indicative of his finger going for the trigger. DNA could have been transferred from sweat, spit, hair. If he grabbed the gun there'd be a print. There isn't.

To me 6-9 inches away show a high probability he was going for the gun. Did Wilson think he touched the gun and go for the trigger, or
Is he bullshitting, plain and simple? What does a person's mind do during a "fight or flight" response. Idk, having witnessed a few fights, I have a buddy who gets so wound up he doesn't remember what happened when he fights. (Dummy) or his recollection of what happened isn't what happened. Anyway back to Brown- so
We do know he was shot, then tries to flea. What should Wilson have done? Let Brown continue to
Flea and wait for backup? In light of what happened it would have been the smartest thing to do but I don't think many cops would have. At this point the cop has to figure he has the upper hand. A. He has a weapon and the fleeing purp may stop and give himself up. B. If Brown has a gun, he is in good position to take him out. Now from this point on, why does Brown not easily give himself up? If I am fleeing the scene and a police officer is shooting at my back, wouldn't I hit the ground? Especially if I have already been hit and am a big slow guy, ( that's just an assumption I have that Brown wasn't very fast.) does Brown have insight that the cop is a horrible shot and can't hit him from behind ?So Wilson says he orders him to the ground but Brown disobeys which 4 people say and Brown charges at Wilson, now the injuries sustained support Wilson's testimony as the bullet wounds enter from a downwards position. Had Brown simply been standing there with his hands up, the entry point and exit points would have been parallel or moving upwards. It's consistent with someone charging him according to the article I read, plus if he was as standing target I would have to think Wilson would have been able to kill him in less shots. So if Brown started charging at him which I believe happened then I believe Wilson had every right to do what was necessary to stop him. Wilson wasn't the best of shot but he did what he had to do IMO. Is his after story 100% accurate? No but is it what he perceived? I cant say it wasn't and the blue will always get the benefit of the doubt, especially to peers. Had there been bullet wounds in Brown's back, had he been shot with bullets parallel or going upwards then there is a good chance I would be on Brown's side. Had every bodies testimony matched and the evidence confirmed that testimony then I would be on Brown's side but it doesn't. I'm not the biggest cop fan per se, I think many look trouble or are complete dickheads.

I know this has nothing to do with what happened, but I don't understand why you have doubts that this was Brown in the store. The guy who was laying in the street dead is wearing the Same exact clothes that the guy in the store is wearing. Plus his buddy Johnson admits that brown stole and puts him in the store. They know it is him regardless of what the store owner says who probably doesn't want bullets in his head. I don't blame the police one bit for releasing the video showing what Brown's behavior could be like, especially after the Trayvon case when the media only releases pictures as a smaller child. Cops beat the media to the punch.

 

[Duff Miver]

I'm not upset in the least duff.
It isn't the law I'm upset about, it's the lack of it that bothers me at all. It's very well documented that the prosecution did not properly or even ethically present the "evidence" or instruct the jury correctly.
A grand jury only needs a preponderance of evidence of a crime committed. It doesn't have to be murder or anything of that nature.

Have you ever wondered if a cop shooting an unarmed black man has EVER not been considered justified? You call Brown a criminal, a thug, etc. .., yet attach a moniker of respect like cop to the only one if the two that ever killed anyone and didn't do it in the line of duty.

Slow down for a minute, FDC.

First off the prosecutor does not "instruct the jury". The judge does that. I know of nothing which says that the jury was not properly instructed by the judge. Do you?

Second: A Grand Jury does not decide whether a preponderance of evidence exists. P of E is appropriate only in civil trials, not in criminal.

Thirdly: A grand Jury does not decide guilt or innocence. It's charge is to determine whether probable cause exists to bring a criminal charge.

In this case the jury found so much contradiction among the witnesses and the physical evidence that they did not find probable cause to charge Wilson. You may not agree, but you weren't there, didn't hear the testimony or examine the evidence. They did, for days on end.

As far as a white cop unjustifiably shooting a black man - sure, it happens all the time. Here's one from a couple months ago-

http://www.diversityinc.com/news/white-s-c-cop-fired-charged-shooting-unarmed-black-man/


The white officer has been fired and charged with assault and battery. Fortunately the black man survived. Otherwise the cop would have been charged with murder.

Did I call Brown a thug and a criminal? Yes, because he was. Surely you've seen the video of Brown committing a strong-arm robbery earlier that day.

What moniker of respect did I attach to Wilson the cop? The only thing I said about him is that he might be a punk, I don't know.

Look at it this way FDC. If you stuck your head in a cop car, starting whuppin' on an officer, maybe tried to grab his gun, what do you think would happen to you?

There are plenty of times when black folks have been abused by whites, both cops and ordinary citizens, but his isn't one of them.

 

[fatdaddycool]

Duff,
The ADA gave the GJ a document describing reasons for use of deadly force. The document tabbed a law that was ruled unconstitutional. When the jurors asked about it, they were told that "we don't want to get into a class on the law" and to just disregard that part of the document. Also the DA has been questioned as to his presentation of evidence at the GJ so much so that the National Bar Association condemned it as being a case fire the defense. There is plenty of information about how the prosecution purposefully mishandled this case.
I wasn't getting on you at all though brother. I assure you that. I just don't agree with the grand jury being all good and on the up and up. I think McCullough misrepresented the evidence because he didn't want to go to trial.

Trevor,
I don't know if it was Brown on the security tape or not. I'm not concerned with it if it is. It's not evidence in this case. As a matter of fact, the tape being made public by the Ferguson police department further convinces me of police wrongdoing in this matter. The Feds told them specifically not to release the tape as the perp was never officially identified. Why would a police department, the one office whose sole responsibility is to protect and serve ALL citizens equally put out something that there had been no trial for, no arrest made, no investigation, nothing? They did it to draw attention away from Wilson's bullshit. They had no right to make it public. It was done for the sole purpose of turning public opinion. So they broke the law and violated a family's rights of fair judgement and ruined any chance at justice for their murdered son. Why didn't they post Michael Brown's criminal record? Oh because he doesn't have one, that's right. The criminal thug doesn't have a single prior, but the cop's sure painted him right by you huh? He's a thug according to everyone on the murderers side. Hey guess what though, Wilson had prior incidents if injustice! He attacked a kid for recording him on his phone. The video is on the internet but since nobody ever identifies the cop as Wilson on the tape the Ferguson police department aid that if was inappropriate of anyone bringing that tape up. Wow, that's weird huh? A tape of a supposed crime being committed but they won't show it because the perp was never identified, hmmmmmm.......... wasn't Wilson part of a police force that was disbanded due to complaints of racial hatred and questionable tactics? Why yes, yes he was.
My point is that you are making assumptions in order to make Wilson's testimony more believable to you. Read your own post. You said 6-9 inches away make it sound reasonable that he was going for the gun, but that's not what Wilson testified to under oath and he's a cop sworn to uphold the law, but its not even close to what he testified to, is it? No, 6-9 inches isn't grabbing the gun, twisting it, then feeling his fingers crawl past his to get at the trigger? They don't have the same ring to it.
Also, only one round entered in a downward motion. The fatal one that entered the top of his head as he was falling to the ground, like most people that have been shot five times do, entered in a downward motion. Wilson said he shot as he was "charging". Unfortunately the blood evidence doesn't support the claim of him charging at all. Why weren't all five shots from a downward angle? If he was charging as Wilson states they'd all be as such. He's lying that's why. The blood evidence shows movement of only 20 feet? Six to seven of it covered by Brown's dead body. That means two steps at the most, over to plead for his life and one to catch his stumble as he fell forward dying. It also supports the several claims by witnesses that Brown turned with his unshot hand out in front of him pleading for the killer to stop shooting that he was unarmed. It also supports that he took a single step was shot several more times, stumbled, began to fall forward and was shot in the top of the head as he fell.

See here is what's wrong with your and the cop's story. Brown was shot at 12 times, six finding their mark. For some reason you'd rather believe that a 17 year old with no prior record is more likely to attack a cop for absolutely no reason, take five rounds and still turn and charge at the cop with some super human strength. Then you'd rather believe the one guy that has the most to lose in the aftermath who us without a doubt lying. His testimony is false by all accounts but his own! The evidence doesn't even support his bullshit. He didn't open the door into Brown, yet how many people saw it? He didn't curse at Brown yet how many people heard it. Gee didn't have his arms up or it but was reaching for his waistband, yet hide many people saw it differently. He "didn't have time to think and was so scared for his life that he just reacted and shot", yet then he testified "I paused and thought about, can I legally shoot to kill this guy". He said he never initiated any contact our handed Brown, yet there are his palm prints around the back of his neck. He claims that he never looked for a weapon, yet two sentences later says his hand was going for his waistband, like grabbing for a gun. You see, if Wilson would have testified that he thought Brown had a weapon, he wouldn't have been able to use the "fear for his life" bullshit excuse for murder, that's why he said it. "He grabbed the gun" total bullshit, no prints. The facts, the witnesses, neither support his account. Some of the evidence supports there was a struggle and a murder though. The tape has nothing to do with it other than to assist in the rouse.
That's why Idon't care about the tape. This was a miscarriage of justice and the killer for away with it. Plain and simple

 

[Duff Miver]

Duff,
I wasn't getting on you at all though brother.

I don't mean to get on you either, FDC. I know you're not some moron like skulnutz or hedge. We just see this one differently.

:0008

I know as you do that blacks get treated more harshly by cops, at least by some cops. And that sucks. However in this case I think it's too close to call, and therefore too close to indict the cop.

 

[fatdaddycool]

I don't mean to get on you either, FDC. I know you're not some moron like skulnutz or hedge. We just see this one differently.

:0008

I know as you do that blacks get treated more harshly by cops, at least by some cops. And that sucks. However in this case I think it's too close to call, and therefore too close to indict the cop.

This is great. This is how normal, sensible people act. I completely understand your position. I'm probably more skeptical because I lean more towards that the cop lied in his testimony and is at fault for at least that. Cheers Duff. We agree to disagree on a point and I can live with that. Appreciate the discourse sir.

 

[HankWilliamsJr]

I don't mean to get on you either, FDC. I know you're not some moron like skulnutz or hedge. We just see this one differently.

:0008

I know as you do that blacks get treated more harshly by cops, at least by some cops. And that sucks. However in this case I think it's too close to call, and therefore too close to indict the cop.

nice to see you see it hanks way! there is hope for you yet!

:00hour

 

[Duff Miver]

nice to see you see it hanks way! there is hope for you yet!

:00hour

'fraid I can't see things the way hank does. I haven't ingested enough booze or street drugs to burn up that many brain cells.