• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's see, three witnesses and an autopsy vs a bunch of unsupported crap in the right wing blogosphere.....

Such a dilemma.

I wish you would quit that...

I mean that the wounds had already been cut open and probed for the wound tracks, the organs removed and cut open, etc.

The body had been embalmed, too.

I meant that the first autopsy is likely to be more accurate, and may reflect a different conclusion about a fatal shot.
 
Last edited:
Sounds to me like 6+5. If that is the total rounds Wilson fired... he's gonna hang. Without video or defense eyewitnesses, it's too easy to picture all the worst of the accounts so far as matching that audio.

edit - sorry... that's if the audio is verified as legit.

That's the problem. You can't just have some dude show up with a supposed recording of a random conversation, and say "Well, he say's it's connected..." As sorry, but as little as I think of many cops on the scene, and the chief, I can't accept this. And even worse, "alleged" things like this really tear people up. I know Goldie Taylor, and the locals, are thinking *a lot* about this issue, and it's simply no good to mess with them with "alleged" audio. C'mon, media, verify your facts! That's what you're supposed to do!

ETA: Wait, never mind, that last sentence is wrong...

*sigh*
 
Last edited:
Let's see, three witnesses and an autopsy vs a bunch of unsupported crap in the right wing blogosphere.....

Such a dilemma.

Yet the people on the right will point out how the autopsy supported the officer.

A couple of days ago I heard on a local, non-FOX affiliate TV news show a witness claim that he wondered why Brown went back towards the officer.

Patience is still the best route. Many of the claims of the anti-Wilson crowd have been shown to be wrong.

No shots to the back.

I don't want to go on, but I am fairly sure now that the police officer reacted correctly.
 
When a company has been dissolved, do we typically refer to the now, out of work employees, as having been ' fired ' ?


That depends, was this company in your hypothetical disbanded because of grievous corruption involving said employees?

Also, you are literally calling dozens and dozens of news agencies out for also saying he was fired:

The small city of Jennings, Mo., had a police department so troubled, and with so much tension between white officers and black residents, that the city council finally decided to disband it. Everyone in the Jennings police department was fired.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...c796f0-2a45-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html



I better add something else to this post to give you the opportunity to ignore the above and focus on attempting to attack the below as biased:

Here is an interesting aspect of that disbanding: As noted earlier, insufficient records were kept (see relevant side-story here), and they were all fired; so it is not really possible to know which officers in particular were corrupt.

New officers were brought in to create a credible department from scratch.


And yet many of the fired officers re-applied for that new attempt at a credible department:

Some of the Jennings officers reapplied for their jobs, but Wilson got a job in the police department in the nearby city of Ferguson.


I'm not saying it is proof he was involved in the shenanigans in that depended department, but I'm sure we can all guess one reason why certain officers would not re-apply. Or perhaps just the bad ones re-applied and the good ones were fed up and went elsewhere? Or perhaps it is unrelated.
 
It's not true. Brown was actually reaching into the cashier area to point out the cancer-causing death sticks that the cashier was callously selling to Fergusonian youths. The cashier got mad at him because the the cashier was a paid shill for Big Tobacco.


That would explain why Michael Brown walked away with the cigars. He no doubt planned to save other Ferguson youth from the risk of tobacco addiction by selflessly smoking them himself.

As we've heard, Michael Brown was all about helping others.
 
Last edited:
It's not true. Brown was actually reaching into the cashier area to point out the cancer-causing death sticks that the cashier was callously selling to Fergusonian youths. The cashier got mad at him because the the cashier was a paid shill for Big Tobacco.


I just responded to this very poster asking for a cite of people being jovial about this tragic event, and what do you know, they also have a post thinking that this killing, whether justifiable or not, is something to joke about. Can't believe I wasted my time.
 
As Jones writes in The Atlantic, Americans' segregated social circles have influenced responses to the events in Ferguson, Missouri, over the past few weeks. Polls show deep divides between blacks and whites on topics from the role of race in Ferguson to the propriety of responses by protesters and police.
The numbers above offer insight into why so many whites have expressed bafflement over protesters' responses to the shooting of Michael Brown. The history between many black communities and the police forces that serve them is long, complicated, often violent, and characterised by an extreme imbalance of power. But as Jones notes, most whites are not "socially positioned" to understand this history, simply because they know few people who've experienced it.
To be fair, the numbers suggest there is plenty of racial self-selection in black Americans' friend networks, too. But focusing solely on black-white relations, there's a pretty big difference between having only one member of a given race in your friend network, and having eight of them.
In fact, PRRI's data show that a full 75 per cent of whites have "entirely white social networks without any minority presence." The same holds true for slightly less than two-thirds of black Americans.


Some more information on the background to the protests.
 
Yet the people on the right will point out how the autopsy supported the officer.

A couple of days ago I heard on a local, non-FOX affiliate TV news show a witness claim that he wondered why Brown went back towards the officer.

Patience is still the best route. Many of the claims of the anti-Wilson crowd have been shown to be wrong.

No shots to the back.

I don't want to go on, but I am fairly sure now that the police officer reacted correctly.

Several shots to the arm, which could have been facing backwards. The post mortem diagram shows the arms in what is not a natural posture. Larger people often walk with the palms facing backwards, indeed, the video of Brown shows him walking with his palms facing bacwards.
 
I guess it's not hard to imagine 10-11 shots fired at a charging suspect, with 4-5 missing.


Why are you imagining that all were when he was "charging"? Didn't the police state that there were shots fired in 3 separate time-frames in one of their press releases?

AFAIR they said there was:

1: One in the car.

2: An unknown number as the suspect fled. (We have since found from the Baden autopsy that only one of those was possibly a hit; unless of course the suspect was fleeing backwards (backpedaling) which no-one claims.)

3: An unknown number as the suspect returned aggressively. (We have since found from the autopsy that the majority, or all, of the hits were here.)


Also, that police statement correlates closely with one of the primary witnesses. That witness said one shot in the car, then some shots while the suspect fled (the witness interpreted one of these as a hit and that it made the suspect jump but that was likely the witness misreading the suspect flinch around in the fear that being shot at produces), and then the lethal volley of shots when the suspect turned around.


Both "sides" seem to agree on that basic grouping (though the actions of the suspect after he turned around are not agreed upon).

What is not as clear and agreed upon by the police and the witnesses are the exact facts on which the police officer was basing the right to shoot. I believe the police have claimed a punch to the face and a reach for the weapon, correct me if I am wrong.

I suspect more details than we have about those two facts, and potentially others, are being presented to the grand jury.

Also, they are openly, clearly, and specifically not claiming that the theft of the cigars or the jaywalking are part of that right to shoot.
 
Why would you "double over" if you were shot in the arm?

Yes.

And regardless of the reason Brown was doubling over or surrendering, why keep shooting?

Maybe because he kept charging.

If Wilson was incompetent or in a rage, he still used excessive force.

Unless a violent thug was charging him, then he didn't. All sorts of possibilities here if one applies critical thinking skills, aren't there?:rolleyes:
 
That would explain why Michael Brown walked away with the cigars. He no doubt planned to save other Ferguson youth from the risk of tobacco addiction by selflessly smoking them himself.

As we've heard, Michael Brown was all about helping others.

I didn't see the funeral yesterday, but I understand they had to have a second casket just for his heart, because it was so big. He was the Gentle Giant, indeed. :cry1:
 
I didn't see the funeral yesterday, but I understand they had to have a second casket just for his heart, because it was so big. He was the Gentle Giant, indeed. :cry1:

I wonder if the detectives were there, trying to spot his killer in the funeral crowd. That's what Columbo would have done.
 
Why are you imagining that all were when he was "charging"? Didn't the police state that there were shots fired in 3 separate time-frames in one of their press releases?

AFAIR they said there was:

1: One in the car.

2: An unknown number as the suspect fled. (We have since found from the Baden autopsy that only one of those was possibly a hit; unless of course the suspect was fleeing backwards (backpedaling) which no-one claims.)

3: An unknown number as the suspect returned aggressively. (We have since found from the autopsy that the majority, or all, of the hits were here.)


Also, that police statement correlates closely with one of the primary witnesses. That witness said one shot in the car, then some shots while the suspect fled (the witness interpreted one of these as a hit and that it made the suspect jump but that was likely the witness misreading the suspect flinch around in the fear that being shot at produces), and then the lethal volley of shots when the suspect turned around.


Both "sides" seem to agree on that basic grouping (though the actions of the suspect after he turned around are not agreed upon).

What is not as clear and agreed upon by the police and the witnesses are the exact facts on which the police officer was basing the right to shoot. I believe the police have claimed a punch to the face and a reach for the weapon, correct me if I am wrong.

I suspect more details than we have about those two facts, and potentially others, are being presented to the grand jury.

Also, they are openly, clearly, and specifically not claiming that the theft of the cigars or the jaywalking are part of that right to shoot.

Without a clear statement from Wilson, I'm not sure we can rely on anything the police said to the media at first.

The police said not very many rounds were fired.

I wouldn't call between 10 and 12 "not very many".

It doesn't take long to count empties in the street and what's left in the gun and get a number.

Has any witness said they heard 10-12 shots before this audio was released?

The shots in the audio reflect a person firing at a charging suspect, imo. Several rounds are fired with little effect, quick pause to re-aim, fire again until the subject drops.

However, we still don't know if the audio is related to the Brown case.
 
I just responded to this very poster asking for a cite of people being jovial about this tragic event, and what do you know, they also have a post thinking that this killing, whether justifiable or not, is something to joke about. Can't believe I wasted my time.

Yu should really learn the difference between humour and sarcasm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom