Michael Brown shooting II

[Fudbucker]

Did you not read any of the links we've been posting? This is false.



So in the face of evidence you don't like, it's SKEPTIC SHIELD UP, but all of this other stuff you know from similarly unsourced leaks? That stuff is fine?



Because he was being SHOT AT from THE BACK. If you see someone shooting at another person while that person runs away, and then this person jerks as if he was shot, then unless that's the end of it, you'd never know he wasn't. In Brown's case, he was shot four more times after this, so the witnesses would have no way of knowing which of the half dozen times Wilson shot Brown was from behind or after he surrendered.



That's just..the hypocrisy! And "weed these days" is what you get at the dispensary. Mike Brown probably didn't have a card like you apparently do. In other words, pure speculation on your part. You have no clue how much THC was in his system. You have no clue when he was last high. So a true "skeptic" would not consider this relevant.



Untue.

'

Unknown. And irrelevant. Brown had no history of bulrushing a hail of bullets either, yet you think that fact is irrelevant.



Not if he was shot at from behind. This negates the Josie scenario.



So you're perfectly willing to use unsourced and phony information like the orbital fracture that Jim Hoft just made up, but my New York Times link doesn't cut the muster? I think True Skeptics would call this cherry picking, but what do I know? I'm just getting the hang of it.

You missed an important word there: IF

For whatever reason, I don't think you can rationally discuss this.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

<SNIP>

2. Brown was not shot from behind.

Untue.
<SNIP>

So you'll be providing proof he WAS shot from behind, then ?

 

[Unabogie]

So Wilson shoots six times, misses, then what? Corrects his aim, and lands the next six from the front? Is Brown still kneeling with his arms up all this time?

Remember, there's a three second pause AFTER the first shots (if we're going by the recording). Don't you think Brown would be running for his life by this time? Or on the ground at least? Your scenario supposes he's just standing there, statue-like, and then somehow gets shot through the eyebrow AND the top of the head.

What makes more sense is Brown charges Wilson, gets hit a few times from the front, (or pauses from getting shot multiple times), lowers his head to charge (or just stumbles from being shot) and gets the final one through the top of the head.

I see what the issue is. You don't seem to have a clear picture of what I'm saying happened. I explained this all in the last thread but I'll do it again.

There are three "volleys" of shots. The first shot, which is not caught on tape, the second volley, which is six shots, and the last volley, which is four shots.

Mike Brown was shot six times.

I believe, based on what we know so far, that one shot was fired and hit him by the car, with Wilson inside the car and Brown outside. When this shot was fired, Mike Brown and Dorian Johnson took off running. Johnson hid behind a car, and Wilson exited his vehicle and as witnesses and the police say, he was firing at Brown, but did not apparently hit him. However, since we know the last volley was only 4 shots, this math does not add up. The second volley had to have grazed his arm, which is what made him stop running. At that point, he turned around.

--Bear in mind that every version of the story has him running away and turning around --

2-3 seconds later we hear four evenly spaced shots. I believe the reason why all four of these hit was because unlike the previous six, Brown and Wilson were now stationary. Brown stopped running, and Wilson stopped running. These four hits account for all six bullets, match the eyewitnesses, match the autopsy, and match the audio.

To reject this, you're forced to dismiss all of the eyewitnesses as liars, or the audio as phony, and to accept the idea that a person who had already been shot twice would turn around and taunt a cop by saying "You're not gonna shoot me", and then run head down into a hail of bullets. A person who up until that moment had only stolen $50 worth of cigars and had just graduated high school.

 

[Unabogie]

You missed an important word there: IF

For whatever reason, I don't think you can rationally discuss this.

I'm discussing this rationally right now. You're the one who appears to be relying on debunked information and I'm only trying to correct your misapprehensions.

 

[Kestrel]

…
2-3 seconds later we hear four evenly spaced shots. I believe the reason why all four of these hit was because unlike the previous six, Brown and Wilson were now stationary. Brown stopped running, and Wilson stopped running. These four hits account for all six bullets, match the eyewitnesses, match the autopsy, and match the audio.

The fatal shot that hit Brown in the top of the head has been interpreted by some as proof that Brown was charging headlong at Wilson, by others as Brown collapsing forward due to the effects of the prior hits. Is it possible that Brown was simply ducking or diving for the dirt because Wilson opened fire again?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Please semantically parse the difference between shooting from behind and being shot from behind.

Fudbucker is saying he wasn't hit from behind, not shot at. Perhaps we should use 'Hit' and 'shot at' to differentiate.

One of the bullet wounds is consistent with either coming from the front or from behind.

Why do you keep posting that all the entry wounds were from the front?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That you keep posting this lie ....

No Elvis, it is you that keeps repeating the lie.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Since SG isn't going to let me know which post demolished my theory, maybe SG should retract her statement...

Highlighted and bolded cited quote from the autopsy conference and you still ignored or misread it. One might have reason to think you are trolling.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So you'll be providing proof he WAS shot from behind, then ?

No, you have that wrong. You made the claim he was NOT shot from behind.

So you'll be providing proof he WAS NOT shot from behind, then ?

 

[Fudbucker]

http://freedomslighthouse.net/2014/...n-michael-brown-autopsy-complete-video-81814/

at 17:25, you can see from the diagram that, apart from a wound on the SIDE of Brown's arm (that shows up in red on the diagram of the back of his body), all the shots hit the FRONT of his body. There are no entrance wounds to the back of his body.

Now this is from Baden's own press conference.

The kindest interpretation of this (from Brown's position) is that he was shot in the arm while running away, turned for some reason, and took the rest of the shots in the front.

Since all the other shots are to the front of his body, the most likely explanation (based on Brown's prior aggressive behavior, and the tox report), is that he was running at Wilson, a bullet caught him on the side of the arm while it was in motion, and all the rest hit him square in the front.

And yes, the tox report is confirming evidence. It's possible he didn't have much THC in his system, but it's also possible he was high as a kite. That latter possibility wouldn't exist if the tox report came back clean. Since the report didn't come back clean, it has to be considered, as well as the possibility that there were other drugs in his system.

 

[a_unique_person]

Are you talking about Brady, because he said doubled over, not bending over clutching his arm.

Holding is arms across his front. Brady seemed to assume he was holding his front, I am saying he was holding his arm.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

http://freedomslighthouse.net/2014/...n-michael-brown-autopsy-complete-video-81814/

at 17:25, you can see from the diagram that, apart from a wound on the SIDE of Brown's arm (that shows up in red on the diagram of the back of his body), all the shots hit the FRONT of his body. There are no entrance wounds to the back of his body.

Now this is from Baden's own press conference.

The kindest interpretation of this (from Brown's position) is that he was shot in the arm while running away, turned for some reason, and took the rest of the shots in the front.

Since all the other shots are to the front of his body, the most likely explanation (based on Brown's prior aggressive behavior, and the tox report), is that he was running at Wilson, a bullet caught him on the side of the arm while it was in motion, and all the rest hit him square in the front.

And yes, the tox report is confirming evidence. It's possible he didn't have much THC in his system, but it's also possible he was high as a kite. That latter possibility wouldn't exist if the tox report came back clean. Since the report didn't come back clean, it has to be considered, as well as the possibility that there were other drugs in his system.

You need to pay attention to this particular comment:

[The autopsy diagram] is the anatomical position. This is not how we stand, how we walk, but medically speaking, we like to describe wounds this way. ...

In the meantime, I see you went from none to one. That's progress.

 

[Fudbucker]

You need to pay attention to this particular comment:



In the meantime, I see you went from none to one. That's progress.

No, one shot hit him on the SIDE of the arm. That is consistent with Brown facing Wilson or with his back to him.

No shots hit him in the back.

 

[Cain]

There are three "volleys" of shots. The first shot, which is not caught on tape, the second volley, which is six shots, and the last volley, which is four shots.

Not necessarily. There was the shot in the police car. Then Wilson could have fired shots as Brown fled. Then there are the shots we hear in the audio, six and four. In the past you've made it a point of authority that the police admit Wilson fired as Brown fled, but the police have also said those shots didn't hit anybody.

Mike Brown was shot six times.

In order to get the math to work, because the shots heard are six and four, you have to say Brown was hit in the car, then Brown was hit on the run (from the one bullet that could have come from the back), and that Brown was hit all four times when he turned around.

That's possible, but I'm not convinced it's the most plausible scenario.

The first six shots we hear could have been the four wounds in the right side of Brown's body. Then there's a pause, and two of the next four shots went to the face/head. So, 4/6 (including the graze), and 2/4. Alternatively, Brown, as per your account, could have been wounded back near the Police SUV, and the next five hits are distributed over 10 shots.

In your view Wilson goes 1/6 (and the one is practically a miss, but Brown IS running), and then 4/4, presumably because, Brown stands still and Wilson just... what, murders him? This second series of shots is not exactly a tight pattern... Wilson works up(?) the right side of Brown's body to his face.

--Bear in mind that every version of the story has him running away and turning around --

2-3 seconds later we hear four evenly spaced shots.

You're messing with the timeline. Yes, everyone agrees to the first part, but not everyone agrees the six shots we heard came with Brown's back turned.

These four hits account for all six bullets, match the eyewitnesses...

Not all of the witness accounts.

To reject this, you're forced to dismiss all of the eyewitnesses as liars,

Not liars, but mistaken, as witnesses often are.

or the audio as phony,

No, I accept the audio, but allow for the six shots to come with Brown facing Wilson.

turn around and taunt a cop by saying "You're not gonna shoot me", and then run head down into a hail of bullets.

See above; this also messes with the alternative timeline. As Elvis and others have said, Brown could have taunted before Wilson fired the six rounds we hear on the recording.

Also, for your account, you would have to believe that Wilson essentially murders Brown at high noon in the middle of the street, after attracting attention with a half-dozen gun shots.

A person who up until that moment had only stolen $50 worth of cigars and had just graduated high school.

We only know he stole cigars. He could've stolen other things. I wouldn't be surprised if this brazen robbery was his first.

 

[a_unique_person]

http://freedomslighthouse.net/2014/...n-michael-brown-autopsy-complete-video-81814/

at 17:25, you can see from the diagram that, apart from a wound on the SIDE of Brown's arm (that shows up in red on the diagram of the back of his body), all the shots hit the FRONT of his body. There are no entrance wounds to the back of his body.

Now this is from Baden's own press conference.

The kindest interpretation of this (from Brown's position) is that he was shot in the arm while running away, turned for some reason, and took the rest of the shots in the front.

As I have said before, Brown was big. Many big people move with their hands facing backwards, as you can see in the video of him. It's not a matter of being 'kind', it's just a matter of fact. The autopsy diagram is a convenient pose, but most people don't move around with their palms facing directly forward.

People reported him reacting as if being shot, and assume it was in the back, but it was possibly one or more shots to the arm. He is then reported to be clutching his arms, as if he was cradling an injury.

 

[Kestrel]

The mistake is assuming that live humans always hold thier limbs the way a pathologist lays them out on a mortuary table.

 

[steve s]

No, one shot hit him on the SIDE of the arm. That is consistent with Brown facing Wilson or with his back to him.

No shots hit him in the back.

Now you're just being a troll. No one here is claiming he was shot in the back. The argument is whether he was shot from behind. Baden clarified that one of the wounds to the arm could have come from behind.

Steve S

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Highlighted and bolded cited quote from the autopsy conference and you still ignored or misread it. One might have reason to think you are trolling.

Post 145 ?

No, you have that wrong. You made the claim he was NOT shot from behind.

So you'll be providing proof he WAS NOT shot from behind, then ?

No, why would I need to ?

Maybe he was shot from behind by one of the first few rounds. Seems unlikely based on the grouping, but maybe. Doesn't make my scenario untenable.

The whole point is, not being hit from behind is consistent with the autopsy

 

[Fudbucker]

Now you're just being a troll. No one here is claiming he was shot in the back. The argument is whether he was shot from behind. Baden clarified that one of the wounds to the arm could have come from behind.

Steve S

So the claim is he was shot from behind? Where's the evidence? To make that fit the autopsy result, Brown would have to have been shot while running away, turn around, and then been gunned down by Wilson.

Based on Brown's prior aggressive behavior, Wilson's record, and the toxicology report, I don't find that a plausible scenario.

 

[Axiom_Blade]

This.

Also: are Brown's juvenile records now unsealed?

Are Wilson's?

You know, I don't see how anybody's juvenile records have any bearing on whether or not they should be shot in the street, but if you're going to go that route, at least be consistent. If we're going to examine Brown's records, we should examine Wilson's, too.