Michael Brown Shooting

[Upchurch]

Keep in mind, finding evidence if Brown touching the gun would prove he tried for it, but not finding it wouldn't prove he didn't. You can try for a gun without touching it, or touch a gun without depositing prints/DNA, or touch Wilson's hand rather than the gun, etc.

Then how does Wilson support his claim that Brown went for his gun? If, indeed, Wilson actually makes that claim.

 

[Lerxst]

How so? How will we resolve the question of whether or not he "went for the gun"? Darren Wilson will almost certainly make this claim. No one who was close enough to the scuffle has agreed with that claim. So in the end, you'll have his word vs. Dorian Johnson's. How is that different from what we know now? Furthermore, what will forensics show us? I suppose we could find Mike Brown's fingerprints on the gun, and if so, that would be pretty hard evidence. But absent that, what evidence do you imagine will answer this question you have no doubt will be answered?

You're misunderstanding...I have no doubt that this will go to trial and we will know how a court of law sees it. That's all.

I agree that if Brown's fingerprints are on the gun that's pretty damning evidence. In the absence of anything like that though if you think like Wilson's defense team is going to you will likely bring up eyewitnesses that report the weapon discharging inside the vehicle, any evidence of injury to Wilson (if it exists), any evidence of a struggle, etc. Then you hope that the jury comes to the conclusion that Wilson's account is more believable than Johnson's.

 

[johnny karate]

I agree that scenario is likely, though given Brown's other actions I would not rule out him dying while still acting like a violent idiot who thought he was invincible as many teens do.

Violence and idiocy don't exist on an unbroken continuum. We're all violent and idiotic up to a certain point. Michael Brown was no different. To insist that a single act of violence or idiocy opens the door for any and all acts of violence and idiocy is a slippery slope of epic proportions.

Thing is, if your scenario is spot on, and I think there's a very good chance it is, what punishment is appropriate? I say none.

I feel like the law might disagree.

 

[Unabogie]

Keep in mind, finding evidence if Brown touching the gun would prove he tried for it, but not finding it wouldn't prove he didn't. You can try for a gun without touching it, or touch a gun without depositing prints/DNA, or touch Wilson's hand rather than the gun, etc.

Which is why we'll never "know" the answer to this. For instance, I'm sure that there is no lack of evidence there that would dissuade you from "knowing" that Brown went for the gun, just as you're completely convinced he "charged like a bull". Just as you remain convinced that Michael Dunn got a raw deal because there was "likely" a shotgun somewhere around those kids. In other words, you will never change your mind.

 

[Lerxst]

Then how does Wilson support his claim that Brown went for his gun? If, indeed, Wilson actually makes that claim.

Well the police chief does make that claim on behalf of Wilson, and I don't see any logical reason for him to suddenly change it.

 

[Cylinder]

A police officer is in an adreline-fueled state of panic/fear/anger after being assaulted by a physically imposing robbery suspect. The suspect flees, and in the span of seconds - without any time to think - he squeezes the trigger more times than reasonable force allows.

I find that scenario a lot more plausible than one in which someone is running away from a cop shooting at him, decides to stop and taunt the cop, and then charges the cop "like a bull" directly into a hail of bullets.

That scenario would be justified by virtue of without any time to think.

 

[Unabogie]

You're misunderstanding...I have no doubt that this will go to trial and we will know how a court of law sees it. That's all.

I agree that if Brown's fingerprints are on the gun that's pretty damning evidence. In the absence of anything like that though if you think like Wilson's defense team is going to you will likely bring up eyewitnesses that report the weapon discharging inside the vehicle, any evidence of injury to Wilson (if it exists), any evidence of a struggle, etc. Then you hope that the jury comes to the conclusion that Wilson's account is more believable than Johnson's.

Then it won't be answered. You'll just get to know what 12 people's opinion is on it. Jury verdicts don't provide answers, they just demonstrate the opinions of the people who serve on them, and they're just as vulnerable to biases and stupidity as any other group of people.

 

[Lerxst]

Then it won't be answered. You'll just get to know what 12 people's opinion is on it. Jury verdicts don't provide answers, they just demonstrate the opinions of the people who serve on them, and they're just as vulnerable to biases and stupidity as any other group of people.

No, we won't have answers, but we'll have a verdict. Do we always get all the answers in every case? On the other hand, juries do get it right sometimes...

I for one am hoping Wilson gets his day in court, I would be shocked if the GJ doesn't indict. I would **** and fall back in it as my mother in law used to say.

 

[Elagabalus]

A police officer is in an adreline-fueled state of panic/fear/anger after being assaulted by a physically imposing robbery suspect. The suspect flees, and in the span of seconds - without any time to think - he squeezes the trigger more times than reasonable force allows.

I find that scenario a lot more plausible than one in which someone is running away from a cop shooting at him, decides to stop and taunt the cop, and then charges the cop "like a bull" directly into a hail of bullets.

Josie's/Wilson's statement has Brown taunting Wilson before Wilson takes any shots. If the audio is genuine, than this means Wilson shot at a charging Brown and then waited another 3 seconds, presumedly to let Brown get closer (like the shark in the final scene of "Jaws"), fire once, then wait another second and then fire his final 3 shots. We need "Spike the Dog" here to say "it just don't add up!".

 

[Upchurch]

Well the police chief does make that claim on behalf of Wilson, and I don't see any logical reason for him to suddenly change it.

Well, it is certainly unlikely that Wilson would not make that claim, but it is still currently second-hand anecdotal information. We can't really attribute it to Wilson, yet.

 

[Unabogie]

Josie's/Wilson's statement has Brown taunting Wilson before Wilson takes any shots. If the audio is genuine, than this means Wilson shot at a charging Brown and then waited another 3 seconds, presumedly to let Brown get closer (like the shark in the final scene of "Jaws"), fire once, then wait another second and then fire his final 3 shots. We need "Spike the Dog" here to say "it just don't add up!".

It's undisputed that Wilson fired at Brown as he was running away. That means that the first volley is towards Brown's back, then the pause is the only time in which the alleged taunting could have possibly taken place. Since that's not enough time for such a thing to happen in the real world, it's very damaging to "Josie's" account.

 

[Mumbles]

Which is why we'll never "know" the answer to this. For instance, I'm sure that there is no lack of evidence there that would dissuade you from "knowing" that Brown went for the gun, just as you're completely convinced he "charged like a bull". Just as you remain convinced that Michael Dunn got a raw deal because there was "likely" a shotgun somewhere around those kids. In other words, you will never change your mind.

Ah, I knew I could remember the name - Marcus Jeter. Somehow, there's an amazing number of young black men who beat someone mercilessly, and attempt but fail to grab their victim's gun, at which point their victim miraculously heals and *they* get their gun, and shoot their black superstrong opponent. Or, possibly, there are a lot of people who say "he went for my gun", even though the guy that they shot did no such thing, because well, then it's kill or be killed?

Again, *every* witness agrees that Brown was standing next to Wilson's Tahoe, with two agreeing that he's pulling away. Even with his reach, how was he going to grab Wilson's gun, which should have been on his right hip?

Furthermore, if Brown wanted to escape arrest, why would he shoot a cop, with the cop's own gun, in a residential neighborhood, in broad daylight, knowing that his friend is watching, and knowing that the police are already looking for him? That's basically signing your own death warrant, and everyone knows it.

Unless there's something very interesting in Wilson's actual story, I'm switched over to him being guilty of manslaughter at least.

 

[Unabogie]

Ah, I knew I could remember the name - Marcus Jeter. Somehow, there's an amazing number of young black men who beat someone mercilessly, and attempt but fail to grab their victim's gun, at which point their victim miraculously heals and *they* get their gun, and shoot their black superstrong opponent. Or, possibly, there are a lot of people who say "he went for my gun", even though the guy that they shot did no such thing, because well, then it's kill or be killed?

Again, *every* witness agrees that Brown was standing next to Wilson's Tahoe, with two agreeing that he's pulling away. Even with his reach, how was he going to grab Wilson's gun, which should have been on his right hip?

Furthermore, if Brown wanted to escape arrest, why would he shoot a cop, with the cop's own gun, in a residential neighborhood, in broad daylight, knowing that his friend is watching, and knowing that the police are already looking for him? That's basically signing your own death warrant, and everyone knows it.

Unless there's something very interesting in Wilson's actual story, I'm switched over to him being guilty of manslaughter at least.

Well you know who I feel bad for? The guy making that sexting video. At some point, he'll have to get up on the stand (actually, I'm not sure if a civil judge can compel him to testify or not) and explain what he was doing that day. And then they'll play that tape of him over and over. No wonder he took so long to come forward. And by the way, that shows real character. He's basically exposing himself to utter ridicule in order to allow justice to be done.

 

[Elagabalus]

It's undisputed that Wilson fired at Brown as he was running away. That means that the first volley is towards Brown's back, then the pause is the only time in which the alleged taunting could have possibly taken place. Since that's not enough time for such a thing to happen in the real world, it's very damaging to "Josie's" account.

Just pointing out a very large hole in Josie's account. But I agree it is very damaging either way.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Hard to imagine why Wilson would shoot Brown absent such actions.

No it isn't.

Brown already smarted off in some way (verbal or actions) when he didn't get off the street.

Whether Wilson opened the door into Brown who pushed it back, or Brown did something else, if Wilson had a swollen cheek (which I have no reason to doubt), I don't doubt the door or Brown hit Wilson. I'm leaning toward the door because I can't see a kid who's gotten to 18 without having been arrested is the kind of person who is going to punch a cop in the face for very little reason other than the door hitting Brown. It's possible, I'm not ruling it out.

One way or the other, Wilson got hit in the face. Now he's been hit and his authority disrespected.

If you've never seen a cop turn into a real jerk because someone didn't kiss their ass when the cop asserted his authority, you've missed out on seeing a fairly common occurrence. Not all cops do it, some are very good at not doing it. But some of them really have power trip issues. That cannot be brushed off as unlikely in this scenario.

We know Wilson was upset enough to pull that trigger multiple times. Whether that was true self defense or out of control anger, both begin as equally possible scenarios. I know some people would weigh one of the two more heavily than the other, but neither is so unlikely as to be unimaginable.

What is the reason you find out of control anger to be off the table?

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

We have a video of Brown shoving a guy. He was probably stealing the cigars,

I'd upgrade that to almost certainly stealing cigars, and then very likely rolling a blunt.

Regardless, that is no reason to believe he would either wrestle a cop or attempt to kill someone.

It's certainly not conclusive evidence that he would, and I haven't seen anyone claiming it is. But I'd say its reasonable to believe he's more likely to do so than the general population.

Reminds me of the Simpson's episode where the mob boss is trying to figure out who snitched and must decide between Tight-lipped Tony or Lenny the Squealer.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It is logical that if Brown attacked Wilson in any way, Wilson would draw or attempt to draw his gun. It is what any cop would do when attacked by someone Brown's size.

It is also logical that Brown would try to gain control of the firearm at that point. He'd either do that or surrender but someone who attacks a cop is more likely to keep doing the stupid thing.

Since we know a struggle people couldn't see their hands during took place inside the cruiser, a struggle for the weapon is a near certainty.

No, those are completely unsupportable conclusions.

Brown might have pushed the gun away before taking off running if Wilson pulled it out. It's what a person might do with a gun in their face if they were reacting before thinking.

But take it away, not a certainly by a long shot.

 

[Ammonitida]

What is the reason you find out of control anger to be off the table?

Many shots missed, suggesting that he was dazed from a punch to the face, effecting his aim. And yes, I lean towards a "punch" because Brown assaulted a store clerk in a strong armed robbery just minutes prior -- revealing himself to be a thug who was quite capable of resorting to violence if someone (like a cop or a clerk) got in his way. If Wilson claims that he was punched by Brown and has medical records to prove that he sustained an injury consistent with a punch, that's it -- He was punched by Brown. None of this mental gymnastics about doors punching cops, causing them to lose their temper blah blah.

 

[Elagabalus]

Well you know who I feel bad for? The guy making that sexting video. At some point, he'll have to get up on the stand (actually, I'm not sure if a civil judge can compel him to testify or not) and explain what he was doing that day. And then they'll play that tape of him over and over. No wonder he took so long to come forward. And by the way, that shows real character. He's basically exposing himself to utter ridicule in order to allow justice to be done.

Very much Yes to this. When I heard that audio I thought "Oh, man! That dude is talking to some stripper or some other thing that is TMI!". I'm waiting for the Pro-Wilson crowd to use it to impugn the character of the witness-which is actually only the audio not the person who recorded the audio!

"Oh, my! He was doing what on his phone?"Harumph

 

[Kestrel]

Do we know if Wilson routinely kept a round in the chamber?