Can you provide some details of your calculation here? When Brown began to rotate forward how bent over was he? What is the pivot point that you are assuming that the body is rotating around? Are any muscle contractions by Brown before or after he has been shot relevant in your calculation of how long it would take Brown's head to rotate? I take it you now understand that a calculation based on the notion that Brown's head would have been in free fall is not correct?
The problem that you and those that argue my calculations seem to keep forgetting is that the claim is that Brown was
already falling before the three shots were fired. In other words, that he was already in free fall before he was shot. Even you say it (the most likely scenario is just falling towards the ground.) My calculation was to show that even had his head been at full height, a free falling object would have hit the ground between the shots being fired. Physics says that if Brown
was falling before shot 1 of those 3, as you and others keep claiming, the tracks
cannot have been all but identical. You also seem to want to conflict this idea that Brown was falling pre-first shot with "but he was falling by shot three" however then you walk into the issue of the fact the 3 shots were fired within a period of about 1.5 to 2 seconds so you are condemning the officer for doing exactly what they are trained to do, fire a burst rapidly, in fact many would say that it is almost impossible not to do this with their weapons.
And you became an expert on police procedures when?
Wilson had a choice of two courses of actions if he believed that the Brown and Johnson were suspects in a strong arm robbery. Back off a bit and keep them under surveillance while he waited for backup or move to within about 20 feet of them, get out of the car, draw his gun and order the pair to surrender.
First off you simply pull these options out of your butt to suit your claims, you have zero actual rational position for them. Second you create a false dichotomy. Why should these be his only options, and why are they the best?
Personally I think both are terrible. Option 1) he just been told they were almost home and so staying back and watching all he does is give them the opportunity to escape into the development and be lost in the community. How is this a good idea? Option 2) this is even worse. Given them 20 feet head start is they decide to run, and should they go in opposite directions, what does he do then? Drawing the gun not only limits his options but it escalates the situation.
Doing what he did actually gave him the opportunity to resolve the issue without drawing his firearm. Had Brown not decided to attack him, the situation would have been resolved without a firearm being drawn, surely that is far better policing than pointing a gun at people and demanding they get on the ground?
Wilson didn't do either of those things. He put himself so close to them that he put himself at considerable risk if they were armed with either a knife or a gun. He put himself so close to them that even without a gun or a knife Brown was able to attack him.
There was no evidence that either of them were carrying weapons. He had seen no weapons in his previous encounter, and there was no weapons mentioned in the robbery report. Given the lack of evidence for them being armed, why should he have treated them like they were? Again we are seeing this "Caps can never be right" attitude coming through. Caps see a kid with what looks to any normal rational person like a gun and treat them like they are carrying a real gun, they are wrong and should have guessed it was a toy,. Cop treats people like they are unarmed and acts as if they are, and he should have treated them like they had a gun.
He had also just interacted with them without violence, what reason did he have to believe that things would change so dramatically in the second engagement?
Why did Wilson do that? He seemed to be bad police strategy whatever his goal was unless his goal was to get in their face because they had disrespected him by ignoring his commands to get out of the street.
No, you call it a "bad police strategy" because of your agenda, but whatever he did had it ended in tragedy due to Brown's actions, you'd be claiming that his make a bad choice and should have done it your way, there is a term for that...
The fact that it was was so confused for so long about whether Wilson claimed to know they were suspects in the strong armed robbery suggests to me that it was his intent to pick a story that best suited his purposes after he had a chance to review the evidence surrounding the shooting.
Rubbish, we have his radio calls acknowledging the original robbery call asking if they needed help, then him saying his call out was over and he was looking, and finally his call requesting back up because he had them. One more thing they you and your like-minded friends seem to over look. If he wasn't aware of them being suspects in the robbery, why did he call for back up?
On top of that, as was pointed out by plague311, Wilson gave his statement the night of the incident. The confusion occurred because the police didn't release the details right away and members of the community started making stuff up about it and spreading lies which the helpful idiots all swallowed as the truth because it fitted what they wanted to believe, evil racist cop guns down innocent unarmed black kid.
So I suspect that Wilson wasn't a hero for putting himself in harm's way
.
No one is saying Wilson is a hero, they are saying he did his job.
I suspect he was just a cop with a little rage going from the disrespect he perceived that he had received. This scenario fits what we learned about Wilson from the Arman video. He was a cop that engaged in unnecessarily antagonistic behavior and that he lied about.
You suspect it based on zero evidence other then your own preconceived bias, this is not sceptical behaviour. The evidence of the radio call shows that it was unlikely that Wilson acted out of rage. He is calm when he radios for back up.
