Status
Not open for further replies.
For days now multiple sites have been having a field day with this cherry picked testimony:

“The only way I can describe it, it looks like a demon, that’s how angry he looked. He comes back towards me again with his hands up. At that point I just went like this, I tried to pull the trigger again, click, nothing happened,” Wilson testified.


Every single day I see a new article trying to make something of it.

http://www.alternet.org/5-not-so-credible-events-darren-wilsons-testimony

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...rguson-officer-who-shot-michael-brown-resigns
 
Probably true



Well the witness was using it a description, but it fits the autopsy.



He was hit 4-5 times in the final volley, we don't know which shot(s) hit his arm during that volley. We do know that the shot to the hand and forearm was first, back at the car, and we can assume that the shot to the top of the head was last, as it stopped him and he dropped immediately afterwards. One of the two shots to the arm was superficial and could have happened at the car or in the final volley, the second appeared on reading to have slight downwards direction, but without diagrams it is had to know exactly where the entry vs exit wounds are because the autopsy read top of arm and back of arm. The other two shots, especially the one that hit the forehead and ended up at the 5th rib, clearly show that Brown was bent over with the top of his head towards Wilson when he was shot, there is no other way that a bullet could strike the forehead and end up at the 5th rib unless the shooter was directly above whish would have Wilson standing in mid-air.

You can disbelieve it all you want too, it doesn't change the path of the bullet, and that bullet clearly shows beyond any doubt whatsoever, that when it hit, Brown was in a position where the top of his head was pointing directly towards Wilson. The fatal bullet says the same thing, the bullet that hit the upper chest and ended up at the 8th rib also confirms that Brown was bend over at the time of the shooting.

This evidence is indisputable, it's from the private autopsy done for the family and it clearly backs up the claims of the witnesses that stated that brown was bent over in a charge head first.

As Skeptics we have to accept the evidence even if we don't like the answer, but the autopsy results, the bullet shells and the blood trail all point to Wilson's claims being the correct ones.

You make it sound as though I am disputing the path of the bullet. I am not. I am disputing the narrative that Brown was "charging" at Wilson. The path of the bullets could happen while a person is simply bent over.
 
Thank you for acknowledging that. I take it that you are withdrawing your previous allegations and that you now accept that your previous assertions, and the sources upon which they were based, were incorrect.

For purposes of clarity, I am referring to these posts of yours and the allegations made in them, and in the sources that you cited in those posts, which were incorrect:

I still have my concerns. And perhaps you would be ble to address those concerns. But neither have the time, nor the inclination to sit here and debate about it on an internet forum, now that this holiday week is about over. And besides, this thread is nearing 60 pages long as it is. Probably my "concerns" have already been addressed earlier in this thread. As I have stated, I probably shouldn't have come in here and put in my 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
You make it sound as though I am disputing the path of the bullet. I am not. I am disputing the narrative that Brown was "charging" at Wilson. The path of the bullets could happen while a person is simply bent over.

The shell casings, the pools of blood and the final location of the body confirm that the witnesses who saw Mike Brown charge were correct. The blood shows he'd reached that point, the body (obviously) indicates where he ended up, and the shell casings that Darren Wilson fired almost all the shots from very close to where Mike Brown fell, and that Wilson was likely backing up when he fired the final volley.
 
Last edited:
I still have my concerns. And perhaps you would be ble to address those concerns. But neither have the time, nor the inclination to sit here and debate about it on an internet forum, now that this holiday week is about over. And besides, this thread is nearing 60 pages long as it is. Probably my "concerns" have already been addressed earlier in this thread. As I have stated, I probably shouldn't have come in here and put in my 2 cents.

I am, of course, not talking about the entirety of the thread but about the specific allegations that you made in your previous posts as cited above. I take it that you've since read the relevant portions of the transcript that I cited, and I take it that you are withdrawing your erroneous assertions made within those posts. Is that so or not?
 
I am, of course, not talking about the entirety of the thread but about the specific allegations that you made in your previous posts as cited above. I take it that you've since read the relevant portions of the transcript that I cited, and I take it that you are withdrawing your erroneous assertions made within those posts. Is that so or not?

No. I haven't read the transcript. And no. I am probably not going to. I am not going to put any skin in this game.

Oh give it up. This thread is full of erroneous assertions. As is this forum and indeed the Internet. Is that so or not?

LOL.
 
You make it sound as though I am disputing the path of the bullet. I am not. I am disputing the narrative that Brown was "charging" at Wilson. The path of the bullets could happen while a person is simply bent over.

The problem is that standing bent 90 degrees at the waist looking at the ground is not a comfortable nor stable position to be standing in, and Brown had no reason to be standing like that. Charging head down makes sense, and is no where near as hard or unstable, in fact it's a fairly common place technique used by tacklers, something shown earlier in the thread with links to dozens of photos both head up and head down in football matches. It also matches the casing and a good number of the witness statements.

Nothing else makes sense regardless of how much you want to deny it.
 
The problem is that standing bent 90 degrees at the waist looking at the ground is not a comfortable nor stable position to be standing in, and Brown had no reason to be standing like that. Charging head down makes sense, and is no where near as hard or unstable, in fact it's a fairly common place technique used by tacklers, something shown earlier in the thread with links to dozens of photos both head up and head down in football matches. It also matches the casing and a good number of the witness statements.

Nothing else makes sense regardless of how much you want to deny it.

Just going to say, that if one is sick or injured, bending over like that is fairly typical. And certainly, one can stagger forward being bent over as well.

As for football, head down is actually really bad practice. You want to keep your head up, but bent at the waist, as low to the ground you can go. And again, one only bends down like that, when one is ready to tackle someone in a mere matter of a few seconds. One does not really run for 20 paces like that.

To be fair, though, in football, it is natural for a person to come at their opponent head-down. It is why they work, work, and work some more at correcting this mistake. But that is neither here, nor there.
 
Citing security concerns, Darren Wilson resigns from Ferguson police force

"I, Darren Wilson, hereby resign my commission as a police officer with the City of Ferguson effective immediately. I have been told that my continued employment may put the residents and police officers of the City of Ferguson at risk, which is a circumstance that I cannot allow.

"For obvious reasons, I wanted to wait until the grand jury made their decision before I officially made my decision to resign. It was my hope to continue in police work, but the safety of other police officers and the community are of paramount importance to me. It is my hope that my resignation will allow the community to heal. I would like to thank all of my supporters and fellow officers throughout this process.

The cop who shot Brown has quit the force.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/darren...-fatally-shot-michael-brown-resigns-1.2855003

Would have been better all around if he hadn't joined the Ferguson PD to begin with.

I see you missed the comment above yours.
 
It's the standard of proof, that is what we are talking about here. All the 5th amendment does is declare the right to a grand jury. Im not sure why you keep bringing it up.
It was brought up because you wanted to skip the Grand Jury, or ignore their findings. The 5th Amendment says you can't do that.

Who said it was unjust? The burden in a GJ is low, capiche?
You think it is just to put someone on trial for serious crimes without showing a crime likely occurred? Yes, the standard of proof for a GJ is low, so if a GJ can't even indict what are the odds of a Petit Jury convicting "beyond a reasonable doubt"?

What, you've never seen expert witnesses debate forensics? You know, at trial, which is public and where witnesses can be heavily cross-examined.
All 3 autopsies came to the same conclusion, there wasn't any opposing side to that. What key points do you think are debatable? That 2 shots were fired from inside the car? That the rest of the shots were fired from roughly the same location over 100' from the car? That Brown came back towards Wilson at least 20' prior to the fatal shot as evidenced by the blood droplets?

According to you it does. I think it a trial would have been a good way to determine those facts.
According to the evidence it does. Grand Juries determine facts too you know.

I don't know, why not let a jury decide? Again, you seem to be drawing your conclusions based on snippets of the GJ testimony, which some have argued was tailored by the prosecutor to be heavily in favor of Wilson.
Because before a Petit Jury can decide a Grand Jury has to indict, and that didn't happen. 5th Amendment again, remember?

Your ignorant sarcasm doesn't help your argument any. I've never said that it shouldn't have gone to a GJ--where you got that idea I haven't a clue. What I have said is that the burden of proof in a GJ is very low, which is why a return of no-bill is extremely rare. Whether that is a good thing or not is irrelevant, it is what it is. The first mistake here was not appointing a special prosecutor, but that is just the first mistake.
Oh, so you're just advocating that the Grand Jury findings should be ignored. Again, you can't do that.

It isn't my job to determine who is credible here--that is a jury's function. And that credibility would be best determined in a full trial where lawyers could cross-examine the heck out of the witnesses--it just is not usual or fair for that level of inquiry to occur at the GJ stage. Anyone who has any experience with the criminal justice system knows that.
But It is quite clear that many of the witnesses gave testimony that Brown was shot while fleeing, shot while putting his hands up, shot while down etc--you've seen the chart posted here. From my reading of the various witness statements, there is more that supports a finding of probable cause than that favors letting Wilson walk. Whether they are credible or not should have been determined at trial. There was enough to meet the initial burden, and that is what you seem to be missing, mainly because of your unfamiliarity with our justice system. I could just as easily ask you if you think Wilson's testimony is plausible. Personally, the only way I think I could believe Wilson's story is if Brown were committing suicide--and I haven't seen any stories about him being suicidal.
I never said it was your job, it was the Grand Jury's job. And they did not find enough evidence that a crime was committed to indict.
 
The problem is that standing bent 90 degrees at the waist looking at the ground is not a comfortable nor stable position to be standing in, and Brown had no reason to be standing like that. Charging head down makes sense, and is no where near as hard or unstable, in fact it's a fairly common place technique used by tacklers, something shown earlier in the thread with links to dozens of photos both head up and head down in football matches. It also matches the casing and a good number of the witness statements.

Nothing else makes sense regardless of how much you want to deny it.

What Nih said. To me, it seems most reasonable that it was simply a seriously injured person falling forward. Have you seen he photos of the blood spatters on the road? (sorry no link available) They are spread out from side to side. There is no way a person moving forward a straight line (as in charging) could have made that pattern. There was no one trying to tackle M Brown. Seems clear to me he was severely injured and disoriented by previous bullets and was staggering from side to side.
 
How did Wilson know Brown had a demonic look when he was charging him face down.
Can you cite any testimony from Wilson where he described the look on Brown's face while he was charging?

No? Didn't think so but thanks for playing!
 
What Nih said. To me, it seems most reasonable that it was simply a seriously injured person falling forward. Have you seen he photos of the blood spatters on the road? (sorry no link available) They are spread out from side to side. There is no way a person moving forward a straight line (as in charging) could have made that pattern. There was no one trying to tackle M Brown. Seems clear to me he was severely injured and disoriented by previous bullets and was staggering from side to side.
Why wouldn't blood from his hand be as you describe? If he is facing one way, then turns around and faces the other way those blood drops are exactly as we'd expect. If he's "staggering side to side" how did he end up 20' towards Wilson?
 
What Nih said. To me, it seems most reasonable that it was simply a seriously injured person falling forward. Have you seen he photos of the blood spatters on the road? (sorry no link available) They are spread out from side to side. There is no way a person moving forward a straight line (as in charging) could have made that pattern. There was no one trying to tackle M Brown. Seems clear to me he was severely injured and disoriented by previous bullets and was staggering from side to side.

Here's a pic, but I don't understand your objection, whether he was charging at that moment has no bearing on the fact that the stain indicates he got that far (or close) but that obviously wasn't where he dropped, which was twenty feet back towards the police vehicle in the area surrounded by shell casings.
 
Last edited:
What Nih said. To me, it seems most reasonable that it was simply a seriously injured person falling forward. Have you seen he photos of the blood spatters on the road? (sorry no link available) They are spread out from side to side. There is no way a person moving forward a straight line (as in charging) could have made that pattern. There was no one trying to tackle M Brown. Seems clear to me he was severely injured and disoriented by previous bullets and was staggering from side to side.

So how'd he get 20 feet closer to Wilson, in a matter of seconds, before falling face first into the pavement, if he was only 'staggering from side to side'? That's a whole lot of sideways staggering.
I can see a fairly easy, more logical second explanation, for the spatter pattern. He was pissed off and shifting his weight from side to side for a moment, before charging back at Wilson.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom