Michael Brown Shooting

[Ammonitida]

But that analogy would need corroborating evidence of the Lourdes' miracle and there is none.

There's no corroborating evidence for the three alleged eyewitness in this case either. Not even the autopsy or the "audio" corroborate them (which may not even be a gunshot. I've heard plenty of pow pow noises where I live and I'm pretty sure they weren't gunshots).

 

[Ammonitida]

Just going by what the pathologists said. You can assume there are parallels in all gunshots that hit bone. I know bullets do go all over the place.

Baden and Parcells said what they said and that is the evidence I have at the moment.

They'll be countered by other pathologists if it ever goes to trial. Bullets tend deflect upon impact with bone. You can't make any definitive conclusions about bullet trajectory on a head shot.

 

[Ammonitida]

The shot above the eyebrow had a back to front trajectory? How does that happen?

It's called ricochet. It happens when bullets hit bone. The bullet that entered Travis Alexander's skull had a weird trajectory too, that could be seen as evidence that Jodi Arias shot him while she was standing up and he was sitting down, but the examiner was quick to point out that this could not be determined because of the possibility of deflection.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RqZ8BU6I-jI#t=119

CNN reporting on the multiple gunshots fired a few minutes after 2pm.

Two hours after the incident?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The shot above the eyebrow had a back to front trajectory? How does that happen?

That's what Parcells said. Why don't you listen to him in the interview instead of trying to make up some other version.
The bullet went in above the eyebrow and came out through the eye then back in passing through the jaw and entered the chest. That's a downward trajectory, it certainly isn't in the forehead aimed straight on. Parcells said it also had a back to front trajectory. Maybe Nancy Grace had him all flustered, she interrupted him enough times.

 

[Ammonitida]

Two hours after the incident?

We don't even know if those are actual gunshots in that audio.

 

[plague311]

The bullet went in above the eyebrow

ok

and came out through the eye

In through the eyebrow, and out through the eye.....huh?

then back in passing through the jaw and entered the chest.

If it exited through the eye, how did it come back in? Did it bounce off of the ground, or something?

That's a downward magic trajectory,

ftfy

it certainly isn't in the forehead aimed straight on.

It's an impossible flight path, bullets don't leave the body then go back in.

Parcells said it also had a back to front trajectory.

If this is what he really said, I would have a hard time believing he had a clue what trajectory the bullet actually took. Unless you possibly misunderstood and/or are explaining it completely incorrectly.

Maybe Nancy Grace had him all flustered, she interrupted him enough times.

Uh, yeah, that's it.

 

[Ranb]

It's an impossible flight path, bullets don't leave the body then go back in.

Tell that to Governor Connally.

Ranb

 

[Ammonitida]

Just going by what the pathologists said. You can assume there are parallels in all gunshots that hit bone. I know bullets do go all over the place.

Baden and Parcells said what they said and that is the evidence I have at the moment.

And here's what else he said.

“It can be because he’s giving up, or because he’s charging forward at the officer.”

Funny how you ignore that part.

 

[plague311]

Tell that to Governor Connally.

Ranb

Are you for real? I'm not sure, so I'm going to answer.

Completely different scenario, the bullet that exited Connally didn't turn back around and enter under his nipple again. The bullet went in his back, out his chest, through his wrist and into his leg. That's a path the bullet should take, it's doesn't do a 180 and go back.

 

[Ladewig]

Do any of the posters using the words murder or execution believe that the murder case against Wilson has been proved beyond reasonable doubt?

If you were on a jury and had only this evidence ( and no explanation of why any other evidence was not introduced in court) would you find Wilson guilty of murder.

 

[Axiom_Blade]

If you were on a jury and had only this evidence ( and no explanation of why any other evidence was not introduced in court) would you find Wilson guilty of murder.

Without a doubt.

 

[Cain]

Without a doubt.

Scary.

 

[a_unique_person]

Do any of the posters using the words murder or execution believe that the murder case against Wilson has been proved beyond reasonable doubt?

If you were on a jury and had only this evidence ( and no explanation of why any other evidence was not introduced in court) would you find Wilson guilty of murder.

There is more evidence, we don't have it yet, so more hypotheticals, which means no conclusions.

 

[Axiom_Blade]

Scary.

Scary that there are people who disagree with you?

 

[Axiom_Blade]

Yep: a large individual fighting with a police officer could be armed very quickly if things go the wrong way, it has happened many times that an officer is shot with his or her own weapon after a struggle.

Assuming that he was actually charging, and Wilson was in fear for his life...why not shoot him in the legs? Why aim for the head?

Unless you think there is a conspiracy, or the police chief is lying or mistaken, this appears to be the best account we have (so far) of what the officer had to say about what happened:

Where is the police chief getting this information from?

 

[Mumbles]

There's no corroborating evidence for the three alleged eyewitness in this case either.

Since we're comparing to the Lourdes miracle, the first piece of corroborating evidence would, of course, be the dead body of Michael Brown.

 

[Cain]

...why not shoot him in the legs?

Because his name tag says "Wilson," not "Riggs."

 

[Mumbles]

Assuming that he was actually charging, and Wilson was in fear for his life...why not shoot him in the legs? Why aim for the head?

The better question would be "why not shoot at his chest", but he apparently did that. If you're shooting a gun at someone, you're trying to kill them, period.

Here's the real question - why would Brown run down the street, and then turn around and begin running back?

 

[NYCEMT86]

Assuming that he was actually charging, and Wilson was in fear for his life...why not shoot him in the legs? Why aim for the head?
<snip>

Is it safe to assume that you have never fired a gun in your life? Trying to aim for an arm and leg is hard enough under normal conditions, try it under stress with adrenaline flowing.

Officers are taught to shoot center mass for two reasons, it is the largest part of the body so it is less likely to miss (which does still happen obviously) and hit a bystander. The second reason is officers are taught to shoot until the threat is stopped.