• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Michael Brown shooting II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skeptic Ginger said:
When I get time later I'll address how I looked at the DoJ discussion of the eyewitnesses. It's another place I've been falsely accused of not looking at the evidence.
Click to expand...

Your post that revived this thread clearly shows that you did not look at the evidence.

Let me quote you;

"Five witness' accounts dismissed against some whack-job nut case claiming she was there when there was evidence she wasn't?

As for discounted evidence, five eye witnesses vs one recognized fabricator doesn't sound discounted to me."

Spoken like someone who relied on Alternet, Gawker or Dailykos to form an opinion. Those sites focused on that "recognized fabricator" as if it was her testimony that swayed the grand jury to Wilson's side. Those of us who actually looked at the evidence instead of relying on alternet to cherry pick it knew that witness 40 had no impact on the grand jury. If you had actually looked at the evidence, that would have read, "seven eyewitnesses accounts who say that Brown charged Wilson vs discredited witness accounts who either admit to lying, told multiple, irreconcilably inconsistent stories, or told accounts that were inconsistent with the forensic evidence".
 
tyr_13 said:
I don't follow your analogy here. All that would be evidence of what, for the person hanging with etc the Bloods? It would indicate that they are a Blood. Would you be alright calling them a racist (or a pot head, or violent, whatever) because they were in the Bloods? Wilson was obviously part of the PD, so that's not the question.

Wilson, like all the officers, is guilty of participating in a gravely unjust system. His motivations for doing so are unknown though. He could be racist, or simply tolerated racism for whatever reason. The same is true of all the officers, including the (two?) black officers.
Click to expand...

The point is two-fold. First, simply being in a picture with a gang member does not make you a gang member yourself. However, posing in gang wear, throwing gang signs, and hanging with people who are doing gang activities, all at the same time, is a good sign you're in a gang. Wilson Ran with a racist police force, sent back people to a racist judge, was apparently rude and ornery towards people based on their skin color, and told a story on the Stand of Brown "bulking up" like the Incredible Hulk to run through a hail of bullets. That's rather telling.

Secondly, the entire argument of whether or not Wilson is *personally* racist is a bit of an aside. His real trial was for shooting Mike Brown, not for "being a racist". While he certainly deserves no applause even if he were merely the Joe Paterno of the FPD, the Grand Jury that was run unethically was for murder an manslaughter.
 
Ammonitida said:
Your post that revived this thread clearly shows that you did not look at the evidence.

Let me quote you;

"Five witness' accounts dismissed against some whack-job nut case claiming she was there when there was evidence she wasn't?

As for discounted evidence, five eye witnesses vs one recognized fabricator doesn't sound discounted to me."

Spoken like someone who relied on Alternet, Gawker or Dailykos to form an opinion. Those sites focused on that "recognized fabricator" as if it was her testimony that swayed the grand jury to Wilson's side. Those of us who actually looked at the evidence instead of relying on alternet to cherry pick it knew that witness 40 had no impact on the grand jury. If you had actually looked at the evidence, that would have read, "seven eyewitnesses accounts who say that Brown charged Wilson vs discredited witness accounts who either admit to lying, told multiple, irreconcilably inconsistent stories, or told accounts that were inconsistent with the forensic evidence".
Click to expand...
Don't bother. Pressing home the truth about the witness testimony before the GJ just triggers a pivot to Wilson Caused the Shooting Through Racist Incitement. It's a much more resilient response, too, since it doesn't rely on actual evidence, just supposition and guilt by association.
 
Originally Posted by isissxn
Oh, my stars! She He swears?! How perfectly unladylike ungentlemanly . No President police officer of this great nation has ever sworn before. This is absolutely shocking, appalling really.

Said the 14-year-old who'd just wandered out of Bible school.
Click to expand...
Anyone see where the edited quote may be applicable in this thread?
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
Yeah, the "systemic racism" evidence is 3 emails sent by the city clerk 3-6 years before the shooting. The rest is just typical "town using the police for revenue" stuff pretty much every city does.
Click to expand...
Yep. There's a little town in Missouri called Macks Creek that was notorious for using traffic fines as a revenue generator for as much as 90% of its revenue some years. There's even a law Missouri passed after the notorious speed trap there called the "Macks Creek law."

The big difference between Macks Creek and Ferguson is there are almost no black people to issue fines to in Macks Creek so no one can cry racism.
 
Bogative said:
Yep. There's a little town in Missouri called Macks Creek that was notorious for using traffic fines as a revenue generator for as much as 90% of its revenue some years. There's even a law Missouri passed after the notorious speed trap there called the "Macks Creek law."

The big difference between Macks Creek and Ferguson is there are almost no black people to issue fines to in Macks Creek so no one can cry racism.
Click to expand...

There are several links upthread that explains the situation. There is no reason too keep beating up this straw man.
 
Why on Earth does his family need "recourse?" We don't compensate the families of criminals when they go to jail, why should we compensate families when their criminal dependents get themselves killed?
 
carlitos said:
Why on Earth does his family need "recourse?" We don't compensate the families of criminals when they go to jail, why should we compensate families when their criminal dependents get themselves killed?
Click to expand...

I confess, it makes no sense to me either.
I think that they actually owe money and should be doing the compensating, not the other way around.
 
Monketey Ghost said:
I confess, it makes no sense to me either.
I think that they actually owe money and should be doing the compensating, not the other way around.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that makes no sense. They are just looking for their payday after losing their son, despite it being from his own actions.

I said this before and I'm not sure if it still stands, but would they even have a good chance at winning a law suit? There were 2 investigations that showed no law was broken, and that this was not a 'wrongful death'. Brown was shot because of his own actions that escalated a situation.
 
Monketey Ghost said:
I confess, it makes no sense to me either.
I think that they actually owe money and should be doing the compensating, not the other way around.
Click to expand...

Can the city sue Michael Brown Sr. for inciting a riot and property damage? He is on video record saying something to the effect of, "Burn this ************ to the ground!", is he not? :rolleyes:
 
Mike! said:
Can the city sue Michael Brown Sr. for inciting a riot and property damage? He is on video record saying something to the effect of, "Burn this ************ to the ground!", is he not? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I would love to hear an explanation for why the man hasn't been arrested for inciting to riot. His meaning couldn't have been clearer had he said "Let's all riot!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom