• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Michael Brown Shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Oh, well since she said it, it must be true. The police can close their investigation.

Unlike the true believers, skeptics look at all the evidence. This statement, which carries no special weight, other than to be piece of evidence to be added to the pile, will be compared and contrasted with all the other evidence. I wonder what you will say if he doesn't have a hole in his head?
Click to expand...

So your intention is to just reject witness after witness, then? Sounds like a real skeptic. Well, I take that back. As soon as a witness backs up what you already want to believe, you'll suddenly find him very, very compelling. Thanks for the lesson on confirmation bias.
 
Unabogie said:
So your intention is to just reject witness after witness, then? Sounds like a real skeptic. Well, I take that back. As soon as a witness backs up what you already want to believe, you'll suddenly find him very, very compelling. Thanks for the lesson on confirmation bias.
Click to expand...
Who is rejecting eyewitnesses? Not accepting on blind faith what they say is to be commended. Just because they say something doesn't mean it's true.
 
Rejecting the video evidence of this guys actions in the store is very telling though.
 
epepke said:
If that's silly, you'll find this a barrel of laughs.

Click to expand...
I've seen this scenario on video at least 2 other times. Police keep shooting when the suspect is cooperating.

Those last two shots after the guy put his hands up on the car show that cops don't think fast enough to stop shooting, unless you want to believe it was intentional murder, which I don't. It's this scenario I picture happening here. There's something about cops pulling that trigger the first time that they just keep shooting after that initial decision.

I'm not sure about the claim Brown was on the ground giving up when more shots were fired. We know eye witness testimony is inaccurate like that. It doesn't make all the accounts useless. Everyone seems to agree a shot was fired from the car, Brown ran, Brown turned around before the last shots hit him.

Brown had no weapon, there's no reason to think he was out of his mind on drugs. From his POV, turning around to attack the cop but not to surrender makes no sense at all. Why run in the first place if he was going to get pissed a minute later and attack the cop?

The cop, on the other hand, were he stopping a robbery suspect the procedure would have been different, ordering the men to the ground, holding them at gunpoint, calling for back up.

And the chief said the initial stop was for walking in the middle of the street.

So he tells the kid to get off the street, which is not done. The cop is pissed. Had he been calm he'd have driven in front of the kid and calmly got out of the car. But he slams it into reverse and pulls the car across the lane in front of the them. He's pissed off.

Whether he opened the door into Brown or Brown pushed the door when the officer went to get out of the car, and whether Brown hit the cop in the face or the door hit him in the face, he pulls his gun. Now he's really pissed.

Brown still doesn't comply. He reacts, the gun goes off. I can see the cop pulling the gun and Brown reaching for it, to take it or push it away. I can see the cop pulling the gun and the gun going off accidentally. It's hard to imagine Brown reaching in the car to get the cop's holstered gun. An 18 yr old who has committed petty crimes is not evidence of a gang banger/thug whose first violent crime is going to be shooting a cop.

A pissed off cop makes sense. A kid grabbing a holstered gun from a cop, no, that doesn't make sense.

A struggle over a gun the cop pulled out, sure, I can see that kind of reaction by Brown, dumb but at least plausible.

Cop is still pissed off. Brown runs, more shots are fired. That's already a mistake by this cop. Whether that's legal or not, that kid could have easily been arrested later.

Brown turns, cop doesn't stop shooting.
 
Last edited:
Monketey Ghost said:
Do try not to completely misrepresent others.
Click to expand...

I wonder how else you can describe someone who has dismissed out of hand the word of multiple eyewitnesses who all the same thing? Either they're all lying, or they all saw Officer Wilson commit a crime. So at some point, dismissing a large group of witnesses as simply inherently unreliable, or biased, or lying, transforms from skepticism to wishful thinking and outright denialism. Note that no one here is defending Brown at the store, nor is anyone claiming that it's all a hoax. In fact, this alleged criminal act is being taken at face value by everyone here. That's the epitome of rational investigation. Taking the facts as they come. Yet the "other side" (the side that wants Brown's shooting to be vindicated) has routinely engaged in conspiratorial thinking. In fact, according to them, every one of these witnesses is in on it, right?
 
Unabogie said:
I wonder how else you can describe someone who has dismissed out of hand the word of multiple eyewitnesses who all the same thing? Either they're all lying, or they all saw Officer Wilson commit a crime. So at some point, dismissing a large group of witnesses as simply inherently unreliable, or biased, or lying, transforms from skepticism to wishful thinking and outright denialism. Note that no one here is defending Brown at the store, nor is anyone claiming that it's all a hoax. In fact, this alleged criminal act is being taken at face value by everyone here. That's the epitome of rational investigation. Taking the facts as they come. Yet the "other side" (the side that wants Brown's shooting to be vindicated) has routinely engaged in conspiratorial thinking. In fact, according to them, every one of these witnesses is in on it, right?
Click to expand...
Fatima.
 
Wolrab said:
Who is rejecting eyewitnesses? Not accepting on blind faith what they say is to be commended. Just because they say something doesn't mean it's true.
Click to expand...

So when Scrut said:

Oh, well since she said it, it must be true. The police can close their investigation.
Click to expand...

That's not handwaving away yet another witness? My, this form of skepticism is rigorous indeed. Where I grew up, saying "oh, well" was how you expressed dismissal of something. Crazy me.
 
Wolrab said:
Who is rejecting eyewitnesses?
Click to expand...

Who is rejecting eyewitnesses, you mean starting with you?

Wolrab said:
Just because they say something doesn't mean it's true.
Click to expand...

I don't have time to go back through the whole thread but these are from the last two pages.

The Central Scrutinizer said:
<snip>
Anyone can go on Oprah and claim that Brown was on his knees begging for his life, and the gullible will gobble it up. "Didn't you see that girl on Oprah? She said they shot him in the head! She must be telling the truth, because the police haven't denied it!!11!!1!!"
Click to expand...

The Central Scrutinizer said:
Oh, well since she said it, it must be true. The police can close their investigation. <snip>
Click to expand...

schplurg said:
I agree that this womans story sounds like bull. <snip>
Click to expand...

Ammonitida said:
LOL

Doesn't have the ring of truth to it. <snip>
Click to expand...

Skeptic Tank said:
<snip>
The brilliance of your post just accelerated after that, re: what this sort of outlandish, theatrical and non-credible account says about the general willingness to lie to roast a police officer among (some) members of that community. <snip>
Click to expand...
 
Unabogie said:
So your intention is to just reject witness after witness, then? Sounds like a real skeptic. Well, I take that back. As soon as a witness backs up what you already want to believe, you'll suddenly find him very, very compelling. Thanks for the lesson on confirmation bias.
Click to expand...

Where did I reject a witness? I simply said their statement would be added to the pile of evidence to be analyzed. That's Skepticism 101. You should take the class. I graduated with honors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom