WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
It's evidence when it's the very state we're talking about.
Do you think there was probable cause to bring an indictment here? If so, provide some details.
Michael Brown shooting II
- Thread starter Distracted1
- Start date
- Status
Do you think there was probable cause to bring an indictment here? If so, provide some details.
You forgot. There was a demonic assist.
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 13,844
Alas they did no such thing. They investigated nothing and were spoon fed evidence from the cops defence attorney dress up as a prosecutor.
plague311
Great minds think...
You keep saying that and provide absolutely nothing to support your position. Is it just your intention to make this conversation circular? Take a look at the evidence provided, they weren't spoon fed anything. They were given everything and allowed to make a decision. The individual you keep claiming was Wilson's "Defense attorney" wasn't even presenting the case. I get that willful ignorance is bliss, but if you aren't going to add anything to the conversation then why even include yourself?
People's opinions have changed as new evidence has come in, and I think that is great. I was on the fence about how everything would stack up once we had all of the information. If you have evidence showing that anyone was acting as Wilson's defense attorney, then provide it; however, considering that everyone here has access to the information it would take more than just your assertion. Provide something or just admit you're wrong. It's not that complicated.
davefoc
Philosopher
My mind changed and now it's changed again a bit. I pretty much bought in to the arguments that were put forth in this thread about the speed that Brown was coming towards Wilson at based on the physical evidence. I haven't been able to confirm those calculations when I went back to look at those claims.
Plus the more I think about this and the more I look at it, my opinion of Wilson's actions goes down. Unfortunately when this issue is staged as a should Wilson have been indicted or not issue, the issue of reasonable doubt is paramount and I think it is there Wilson's defenders in this thread have made the best case. There just doesn't seem to be enough hard facts to sustain a beyond a reasonable doubt kind of conviction.
But what probably happened is that Wilson acted in an antagonistic way and pissed everybody involved off and then when he was ignored he reversed his car and inflamed the situation even farther by getting close enough to Brown that Brown panicked and/or was mighty pissed and attacked Wilson. After that Wilson was pissed and he went hunting. And hunting might be the right word. The chances that he was going to need to kill Brown in this situation was great. Brown was obviously excited and he was fleeing so he wasn't surrendering voluntarily and what was Wilson going to do to get him to surrender? His only option was to threaten to shoot him. And yet he knew that Brown was unarmed.
And then when Brown turned and faced Wilson, did Wilson show reasonable restraint. I don't think so. It is very difficult to put oneself in somebody else's shoes but I think it is likely that a reasonable person would not have fired the second round of shots. I think it is extremely likely that Brown was falling as Wilson unloads on him. Why did Wilson fire in this circumstance? One explanation is that Wilson was seeking vengeance. Another is that he was in such a heightened emotional state that he was incapable of clear thought. If that was the case then that is something he should have considered before he went charging out of his car.
This was a killing that shouldn't have happened and Wilson is front and center of the problem. Could better training have helped? maybe. Maybe if the police department hadn't been burying misconduct reports, Wilson would have had some feedback that suggested a need for reform on his part. Maybe Wilson just shouldn't have been a cop.
Brown did some bad stuff, but with more thoughtful police work Brown would be alive today.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Reasonable doubt isn't the standard for indictment. The lower standard of preponderance of evidence is all that is required. The prosecution couldn't even meet that lower standard.
Cool story, bro. And now that the Grand Jury evidence has been made public, you can walk us through it and show how the preponderance of evidence supports that story.
davefoc
Philosopher
If you mean proof there isn't any. Before I saw the video (linked to earlier in this thread) where the cops shot the mentally disturbed individual I thought that it was wildly unlikely that cops would fire on somebody in that kind of situation. That video suggested my view about the reticence of cops to shoot people might be wrong.
The Arman video went a long way to making me think that Wilson unnecessarily ramped up the emotion and the potential for violence as he did his job. I find Johnson's testimony about what happened in the initial encounter is more credible than Wilson's.
I didn't find Wilson's explanation as to why he backed up and confronted Brown and Johnson at close quarters likely to be true. I think he was pissed and looking for a fight or a taste of vengeance over two guys he thought had disrespected him. If he truly knew that those two guys were involved in a strong arm robbery (and this is suspect given the conflicting information available on this up until his GJ testimony) then he was an idiot. You don't need to be a cop to know you need to keep space between you and somebody who might be able to attack you. He's the cop. He knows he has a gun. Why would he put himself in harm's way like this if he was thinking clearly?
Lastly, you really need to see this in Wilson's way to think that some part of the shooting wasn't cowardly. He had a gun, it was very likely that Brown didn't. He'd already put multiple shots in to Brown. Could he have retreated while the bullets took effect? I think so.
But if you're asking for proof that a Wilson favorable scenario didn't happen, then in my opinion there isn't any.
Can you prove that a Brown favorable scenario didn't happen. What's your evidence for that?
Last edited:
davefoc
Philosopher
Given the nature of the Grand Jury which was much longer than normal, I think as a practical matter the decision by the Grand Jury panel may have moved in to the territory of a beyond a reasonable doubt kind of decision. A normal grand jury hears only a subset of the available evidence and it's easy for them to imagine that more incriminating evidence exists or will be developed. In this case, the GJ must have believed they heard just about all the evidence there was and at least part of their thought process must have been along the lines of wondering how a beyond a reasonable doubt verdict could be obtained when they probably correctly assumed that they had just seen all the evidence that there was ever likely to be.
However, my view differs from the people here critical of the prosecution since I see their use of the grand jury as ethical and reasonable, unless it can be shown that they colluded with Wilson or the police department to misrepresent the evidence to favor Wilson.
As I understand the evidence right now, I would not have voted to convict Wilson and I probably wouldn't have voted to indict him in the grand jury as it was carried out. I imagine in a more normal grand jury, where I would get a much narrower, prosecution favorable view of the evidence I probably would have voted to indict Wilson.
My view is open to change. If you think that you can prove that some aspect of what I suggest didn't happen I will look at your response with an open mind. I have used the facts that I am aware of to attempt to make a guess about what actually happened. It could be that my understanding about some of the facts is wrong or that my view about the nature of the world relevant to this case is wrong. And that has lead me to make a guess about this situation which is unlikely or impossible.
We have no idea how Wilson saying, "Get the **** out of the road" was phrased. My opinion would have it spoken conversationally as he would have no reason at that point to be antagonistic.
Backing up to reengage may have been a touch over the top, but Brown slamming the door and attacking Wilson took the encounter to the worst level possible.
Brown could have kept running. Wilson was in pursuit and back up was on the way.
Brown should have stopped when he turned around. He didn't as the blood evidence shows. He advanced and caught two volleys. The only one to blame is Brown.
To say Wilson went hunting is disgusting.
Backing up to reengage may have been a touch over the top, but Brown slamming the door and attacking Wilson took the encounter to the worst level possible.
Brown could have kept running. Wilson was in pursuit and back up was on the way.
Brown should have stopped when he turned around. He didn't as the blood evidence shows. He advanced and caught two volleys. The only one to blame is Brown.
To say Wilson went hunting is disgusting.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Uh, you speculating based on no evidence and demanding that others prove you wrong is not how this works.
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
http://www.scribd.com/doc/236754541/Dorian-Johnson-Q-A
NewsChannel 5's Farrah Fazal has a one-on-one sit down interview with Dorian Johnson, who was with Michael Brown at the time of his death.
Nobody is yelling out the car hey kids. Get out the street. Nobody is making any wrong turns to get around us so, we didnt feel like we was causing any harm to anyone. Now, when the officers approached us, we were on our way to home we both live in the same area. So, were both headed home and the officer s approaching us and as he pulled up on the side of us, he didnt say freeze, halt or nothing like we were committing a crime. He said, get the eff on the sidewalk. More like chastising from a father or something, where you are doing something wrong, you know, not committing a crime. So, my friend Big Mike didnt speak, I was the only one who spoke. At that time, I told the officer that we were a minute away from our destination and that we would be out the street shortly. And at that time, we proceeded to walk again because we thought the officer proceeded to drive because we felt like we were doing no wrong.
If someone has a link to the pages with Johnsons GJ testimony, it would be interesting to compare.
I may have asked this before, so at the risk of repeating myself (apologies if I am) why do yo usuppose he drove off if he was so angry about being disrespected ? And why do you suppose johnsons words don't reflect that supposed anger ?
1. I don't think this is suspect ? Don't we have radio records with time stamps that cylinder posted
2. No need to respond - just going to re-iterate that no one has demonstrated wilson did anything wrong or foolish, and that he apparently followed proper police procedures.
You can certainly argue that those procedures may be wrong or foolish, but that's not the same claim.
I think a brown favorable scenario would involve him stopping, and getting on the ground. I think there is evidence that didn't happen. What else would it include ?
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 27,494
plague311
Great minds think...
Take speed out of the equation. You still have Brown disobeying police orders after assaulting a police officer, and showing that he is more than willing to be violent. His speed doesn't matter in the slightest. If he would have followed orders then he would still be alive today, he would just have been shot a few times.
You may have whatever opinions of Wilson that you would like, it doesn't change the facts at hand.
Anything to prove that? Just one random video that we know very little about that proves that at one time Wilson might have, maybe, acted inappropriately? Oh, and the commentary by an individual that has shown he is more than willing to lie to law enforcement?
But he wasn't ignored, he was spoken to by Johnson. If he didn't put his car in reverse, how was he expected to backup? The kids were in the middle of the street. Was he then supposed to drive on the sidewalk to avoid not getting close to them?
He's not Elmer Fudd, and Brown attacked him. He did not attack Brown, remember? If he went hunting, it would follow that he would have attacked Brown initially.
This has been addressed ad nauseam. Unarmed =! not a threat. You can be unarmed and still be considered a threat. Brown proved he was a threat when he attacked a police officer and attempted to steal his gun. Do you require that Brown take his gun before being considered a threat?
Based on?
Again, previously addressed, because Brown, despite being shot, continued to advance on Wilson and refuse to listen to commands.
False Dichotomy, I gave another very reasonable explanation above, neither of them requiring Wilson to be an angry, uncontrollable, hulk-like individual.
All of the evidence seems to disagree with this statement.
Could Brown have not attacked a police officer, and after doing such, complied with orders that the officer was trained to give, and did? To which, had Brown followed, he would still be alive?
Any evidence misconduct reports on Wilson were buried or is this just poisoning the well?
Ah, yes. Since he was attacked and defended himself and his community, followed police procedure, but unfortunately had to take a life that means that he shouldn't be a cop? Nevermind the years of service he provided with, maybe, one incident. What a crock.
Brown did all of the bad stuff that would lead to someone being shot. Perhaps with more thoughtful actions on his part he wouldn't have been shot that day. Turn it around all you want, but all you're doing is apologizing for Brown's behavior, and demonizing Wilson. Which is fine, that's completely up to you, but the evidence doesn't support your theories.
plague311
Great minds think...
I wonder if Mr. Johnson was able to be located. I was under the impression that he disappeared. The fed's just did a data dump of their stuff as well. I'll see if I can find it in there. Although, the articles I read stated that the Federal Investigation came to the same conclusion.
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 27,494
Read the link that I provided. Johnson gave a two hour video recorded interview.
plague311
Great minds think...
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 27,494
I may be confused. Is his testimony to the FBI identical to what we see in the document dump? Is it basically a copy of the same thing?
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
TY.
P45, no description of Wilsons tone of voice, whether he spoke or yelled, just the statement to get the eff off the street.
- Status