Michael Brown shooting II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skeptic Ginger said:
The witness was credible. The police department has a reputation of just this kind of behavior. There is no evidence Wilson politely asked the men to move to the sidewalk. There is evidence the encounter was confrontational.
Click to expand...

What witness exactly would that be?
 
HenryLee said:
What witness exactly would that be?
Click to expand...
Dorian Johnson.

I'm capable of not dismissing his entire account just because he was likely to downplay certain aspects of the account. Keep in mind he refused to participate with Brown's robbery. Dorian put the stolen item Brown gave him back on the counter.

Of course if one is bigoted, sorry but it's what I think, one can dismiss everything he said instead of considering how truthful he would have been.


Now you tell me, why should we think Wilson gave an honest account?
 
Last edited:
Because his account matches the evidence.

But to be clear, only a "bigot" would think this...
...material parts of Witness 101’s account are inconsistent with the physical and forensic evidence, internally inconsistent from one part of his account to the next, and inconsistent with other credible witness accounts that are corroborated by physical evidence.

...

Accordingly, after a thorough review of all of the evidence, federal prosecutors
determined material portions of Witness 101’s account lack credibility and therefore determined that his account does not support a prosecution of Darren Wilson.
pg 47 of DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REPORT REGARDING THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE SHOOTING DEATH OF MICHAEL BROWN BY FERGUSON, MISSOURI POLICE
OFFICER DARREN WILSON
Click to expand...

But what do they know? They only looked at all the evidence and interviewed the witnesses(and "witnesses"). They don't know the correct method is feelings.
 
Upchurch said:
Oh, semantic games and still no evidence?

Look again. The guy on top of the military vehicle is wearing a tactical jacket.

Now, when was the first looting "and" burning in Ferguson? Was it before or after August 9, 6:25 PM?
Click to expand...
A tactical jacket is not riot gear.

Face it, Mumbles assertion that the cops in riot mode preceded the looting and burning is nothing but his fevered imagination at work.
 
WildCat said:
A tactical jacket is not riot gear.
Click to expand...
They are sold as such.

WildCat said:
Face it, Mumbles assertion that the cops in riot mode preceded the looting and burning is nothing but his fevered imagination at work.
Click to expand...
Why should anyone believe you? Mumbles and, now, I have supported supported his claim that riot gear and military vehicles were used as early as 6:25 PM on August 9. I haven't found any evidence of burning and looting, if you want to continue to play the semantic game, until the evening of August 10th. This is well after large groups of police (I've read both 50 and 150) showed up in full riot gear. If this is the work of Mumble's fevered imagination, his imagination at least brought along a camera and time stamped documentation. What have you got?

Now, please, explain to me why you believe the things that you do. Do you have some scrap of evidence that supports your belief or is it simply faith in a narrative? You may very well be correct, but you are not demonstrating it. You have merely claiming it over and over. Is there anything, anything at all, that shows burning and looting in Ferguson between Brown being shot and 6:25 PM on August 9?

And if there isn't, why do you keep insisting that it happened?
 
Cop attacked by violent, criminalistic punk. Cop shoots punk, generating riots and 96 turgid pages of "skeptic" rhetoric.

Wow. What a country!
 
Last edited:
Toontown said:
Cop attacked by violent, criminalistic punk. Cop shoots punk, generating riots and 96 turgid pages of "skeptic" rhetoric.
Click to expand...

The event itself, unfortunately, is not all that remarkable.

What is remarkable is that it brought the problem of local systemic racism in the justice system to the world stage. When you boil it all down, that's the problem we're discussing here and it is far from resolved.
 
The Wilson case is done. Everything else belongs in the riot thread or the DOJ report thread.
 
Upchurch said:
They are sold as such.
Click to expand...
As are light sticks and blankets... I guess you'll next claim shoes are riot gear too since all the cops wear them. :rolleyes:


Upchurch said:
Why should anyone believe you?
Click to expand...
It's really not my burden to prove Mumbles' unsupported claim. It's up to Mumbles to prove it, and you too since you've decided to carry his water for him. Especially since Mumbles has established a rep here of making wild claims and never supporting them with any evidence.
 
Upchurch said:
The event itself, unfortunately, is not all that remarkable.

What is remarkable is that it brought the problem of local systemic racism in the justice system to the world stage. When you boil it all down, that's the problem we're discussing here and it is far from resolved.
Click to expand...
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.
 
WildCat said:
It's really not my burden to prove Mumbles' unsupported claim.
Click to expand...
You have made a competing claim to Mumbles' claim. You claim the burning and looting occurred first. Mumbles claims that the riot gear and military vehicles came first.

Clearly, Mumbles has provided evidence to support his claim of riot gear and military vehicles appearing at 6:25 PM on August 9. If you don't believe a tactical jacket counts, there is evidence of more police showing up in full riot gear during the day on August 10.

Thus far, I have only seen evidence for burning and looting on the evening of August 10, after the appearance of military vehicles and various forms of riot gear.

No one can prove the negative claim that there was no burning and looting prior to 6:25 PM on August 9 or during the day of August 10 (depending on how strictly you care to play your little semantic game). The burden of proof is therefore on you to support your claim that there was burning and looting prior to those point(s) in time.

So far, you have continually declined to do so. Again, I question what makes you think your claim is correct.
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
The event itself, unfortunately, is not all that remarkable.

What is remarkable is that it brought the problem of local systemic racism in the justice system to the world stage. When you boil it all down, that's the problem we're discussing here and it is far from resolved.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything remarkable about the the world poring over the US news every day, searching for anything it can fixate on to get it's daily shot of US-bashing, and then staying fixated for weeks, months, and sometimes years.

Happens all day every day. Same old song and dance. Some days they don't find much. Then they dig up some old bone they've previously gnawed on for weeks.
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
You have made a competing claim to Mumbles' claim. You claim the burning and looting occurred first. Mumbles claims that the riot gear and military vehicles came first.

Clearly, Mumbles has provided evidence to support his claim of riot gear and military vehicles appearing at 6:25 PM on August 9. If you don't believe a tactical jacket counts, there is evidence of more police showing up in full riot gear during the day on August 10.
Click to expand...
That jacket is not riot gear, and none of the other cops in that picture have riot gear on.

Riot gear is padding, helmets, etc... not a tactical jacket.

And it's Mumbles claim, and now yours, so you provide evidence. I cannot prove a negative after all.

Upchurch said:
Thus far, I have only seen evidence for burning and looting on the evening of August 10, after the appearance of military vehicles and various forms of riot gear.
Click to expand...
None of which you've provided any evidence for. Unless you calling a tactical jacket "riot gear" (and frankly it looks like the bulletproof vest they wear every day) counts somehow.

Upchurch said:
No one can prove the negative claim that there was no burning and looting prior to 6:25 PM on August 9 or during the day of August 10 (depending on how strictly you care to play your little semantic game). The burden of proof is therefore on you to support your claim that there was burning and looting prior to those point(s) in time.

So far, you have continually declined to do so. Again, I question what makes you think your claim is correct.
Click to expand...
By 8:30 attacks on police begin.

This prompted a call for St. Louis County tactical units. At 10pm a call for even more police was issued as the looting and burning began in earnest.

Cause: "peaceful protesters" attacking police.
Effect: More police called, these in riot gear.

Not the other way around, as you and Mumbles claim and have provided no evidence.

Upchurch said:
You clearly have not read the DOJ report.

Here is a summary from the conservative RedState.com.
Click to expand...
I don't take my cues from RedState.com, I can think for myself. There's nothing particularly unusual in that report, you'd find the same crap in just about every police department including the St. Louis city police department you think should take over Ferguson.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom