Looting in Missouri after cops shoot 18 year old (5 Viewers)

[SHIZNITTTT]

SO has anyone changed their opinion of this situation after 188 pages?

Yeah. I originally believed that he was shot in the back and have changed my opinion there. Just think people should look past that and understand that there's a lot of valid reasons that many of us believed those witnesses and some still do. And think people have a bit too much faith in that grand jury when it was set up to get the officer officer off. I don't think a real jury would have convicted him even if it went to trial as it should have though.

Yeah seems pretty easy to send to a trial. I dunno. I guess the same result would have happened.

 

[timschochet]

SO has anyone changed their opinion of this situation after 188 pages?

Yeah. I originally believed that he was shot in the back and have changed my opinion there. Just think people should look past that and understand that there's a lot of valid reasons that many of us believed those witnesses and some still do. And think people have a bit too much faith in that grand jury when it was set up to get the officer officer off. I don't think a real jury would have convicted him even if it went to trial as it should have though.

why should it have gone to trial ?

 

[timschochet]

Sure it would have been easy to send it to trial, but not just, IMO. Trials should be reserved for cases which are possible for the state to win. This one was not possible, unless the jurors decided to forego reason and give in to the mob.

 

[timschochet]

I am curious about the arrest technique of having Brown turn around, raise his hands halfway, and walk towards an officer. We teach our Officers to have the person face away from the Officer, to interlock their fingers behind their head, to step back one step at a time from any building, vehicle, or obstruction which might conceal a weapon, to then kneel, to cross one ankle over the other, and to sit back on their ankles. Alternatively we have them face away, lie prone on the ground with their arms outstretched to the sides with the ankles crossed and raised 90 degrees into the air. Officers are to not approach until cover arrives. The suspect should not be directly covered by the muzzle of the Officer's gun. The muzzle should be pointed just below the target in case there is an accidental discharge.

Moving towards one of our Officers who is doing it right indicates that the suspect is not complying and is a potential danger.

I can envision a scenario where, after the initial fight in the vehicle, Brown is running away and Wilson shoots at him. Brown turns around, shrugs at him, and says what are you gonna do, shoot me? This is backed up by some of the witness testimony. Wilson then does shoot Brown, causing him to lurch or stumble forward. Again, consistent with what witnesses saw. Wilson then finishes him off, perhaps becoming even more fearful as Brown stumbles closer towards him.Both men were in the wrong to some degree, and the wide array of witness accounts saw the same things in a different way. Just a guess, but as I said previously, the truth is somewhere in between the extremes of one or the other of these guys being completely without fault.

Excellent post. The highlighted is what I've believed all along.

but that isn't a wrongful shooting, which is what you have actually been saying.

ive said it was an easily understandable wrongful shooting.

 

[StrikeS2k]

So now it's accepted he was moving forward toward the officer, there's eye witness testimony that match up with the physical evidence and the autopsy supports it as well...but that's still not enough.

Good googily moogily

No it is not enough. If he's not charging, then he's not a mortal threat. And therefore his killing was unjustified. You may disagree with this logic, but why do you have trouble understanding it?

Because by reading your posts it seems like you are in denial, and no matter what, will not accept how things played out. If the GJ had decided to indict him, you would accept every word the prosecutor says as gospel, but since they didn't, he's a liar.

You're very selective and inconsistent in who you believe and the reasons they are credible.

Sorry you feel that way. I don't think it's fair. If you go back to the night of the decision I found the prosecutor to be very credible and posted that here . I naturally assumed that the information he released would back up his assertions. But they haven't, which is why I have since reverted to my previous position. I continue to believe now as I did then that no indictment was warranted and that the correct decision was made.

Have you read the transcripts? Yes or No only please.

Pretending to be a prosecutor again? The answer is: some. Not enough.

Bullsit. You haven't read squat. If so what pages?

 

[SIDA!]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

 

[timschochet]

So now it's accepted he was moving forward toward the officer, there's eye witness testimony that match up with the physical evidence and the autopsy supports it as well...but that's still not enough.

Good googily moogily

No it is not enough. If he's not charging, then he's not a mortal threat. And therefore his killing was unjustified. You may disagree with this logic, but why do you have trouble understanding it?

Because by reading your posts it seems like you are in denial, and no matter what, will not accept how things played out. If the GJ had decided to indict him, you would accept every word the prosecutor says as gospel, but since they didn't, he's a liar.

You're very selective and inconsistent in who you believe and the reasons they are credible.

Sorry you feel that way. I don't think it's fair. If you go back to the night of the decision I found the prosecutor to be very credible and posted that here . I naturally assumed that the information he released would back up his assertions. But they haven't, which is why I have since reverted to my previous position. I continue to believe now as I did then that no indictment was warranted and that the correct decision was made.

Have you read the transcripts? Yes or No only please.

Pretending to be a prosecutor again? The answer is: some. Not enough.

Bullsit. You haven't read squat. If so what pages?

I picture you sitting in your basement as you type this, imagining yourself as some powerful judge in a packed courtroom, all eyes on you as you heroically tear the victim to shreds. Sorry pal, you're not my interrogator. You'll either have to take my word for it, or you'll have to suffer the embarrassment of calling me a liar. Either way I'm not going to prove it to you and never will.

 

[timschochet]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

 

[SIDA!]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

You don't think there is any relevancy to the order of the shots and where they were located on the body?

Why would you have no idea? Do you think the dome shot was the first shot?

 

[Mello]

Sure it would have been easy to send it to trial, but not just, IMO. Trials should be reserved for cases which are possible for the state to win. This one was not possible, unless the jurors decided to forego reason and give in to the mob.

I could honestly live with this either way. I see arguments on both sides. I just want the same standards to be used against officers as would be used against the rest of us. And I don't believe that's the case today.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

You don't think there is any relevancy to the order of the shots and where they were located on the body? Why would you have no idea? Do you think the dome shot was the first shot?

The medical examiner said that they could only tell for certain that the shot to the hand was the first hit and the shot to the top of the head was the last hit.

 

[Stinger Ray]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

Are you serious? Wake up Tim.

 

[StrikeS2k]

So now it's accepted he was moving forward toward the officer, there's eye witness testimony that match up with the physical evidence and the autopsy supports it as well...but that's still not enough.

Good googily moogily

No it is not enough. If he's not charging, then he's not a mortal threat. And therefore his killing was unjustified. You may disagree with this logic, but why do you have trouble understanding it?

Because by reading your posts it seems like you are in denial, and no matter what, will not accept how things played out. If the GJ had decided to indict him, you would accept every word the prosecutor says as gospel, but since they didn't, he's a liar.

You're very selective and inconsistent in who you believe and the reasons they are credible.

Sorry you feel that way. I don't think it's fair. If you go back to the night of the decision I found the prosecutor to be very credible and posted that here . I naturally assumed that the information he released would back up his assertions. But they haven't, which is why I have since reverted to my previous position. I continue to believe now as I did then that no indictment was warranted and that the correct decision was made.

Have you read the transcripts? Yes or No only please.

Pretending to be a prosecutor again? The answer is: some. Not enough.

Bullsit. You haven't read squat. If so what pages?

I picture you sitting in your basement as you type this, imagining yourself as some powerful judge in a packed courtroom, all eyes on you as you heroically tear the victim to shreds. Sorry pal, you're not my interrogator. You'll either have to take my word for it, or you'll have to suffer the embarrassment of calling me a liar. Either way I'm not going to prove it to you and never will.

I have no problem calling you a liar. Clearly you are. Why else would you avoid answering a legit question? You ask people for sources/links all the time.

As far as the basement comments, remember your comments earlier today about insults? Look in the mirror comes to mind.

 

[Mello]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

Pretty sure he's wondering if those could have been "kill shots" and gone beyond necessary use of force.

 

[timschochet]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

You don't think there is any relevancy to the order of the shots and where they were located on the body? Why would you have no idea? Do you think the dome shot was the first shot?

i didn't say there is no relevancy. I wrote that I didn't understand the relevancy, and I don't. That was not meant to be a challenge to you but an honest question. As far as the dome shot being first or last or in between, weren't all the shots fired in very quick succession? That was my understanding.

 

[SIDA!]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

You don't think there is any relevancy to the order of the shots and where they were located on the body? Why would you have no idea? Do you think the dome shot was the first shot?

The medical examiner said that they could only tell for certain that the shot to the hand was the first hit and the shot to the top of the head was the last hit.

Understood. The degree of certitude (is that a word...lol) needed by an examiner for his report is far different standard than our ability to speculate and assess the probabilities of what happened. Agreed?

If we all agree that the shot to the top of the head was the final shot, in what other order or sequence of shots could the forehead shot which entered and moved downward and out the right jaw have occurred?

 

[SIDA!]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

You don't think there is any relevancy to the order of the shots and where they were located on the body? Why would you have no idea? Do you think the dome shot was the first shot?

i didn't say there is no relevancy. I wrote that I didn't understand the relevancy, and I don't. That was not meant to be a challenge to you but an honest question.As far as the dome shot being first or last or in between, weren't all the shots fired in very quick succession? That was my understanding.

Do you think that the order in which shots are fired and where they hit the body is relevant?

 

[timschochet]

I don't know SIDA. Obviously you're trying to formulate some sort of argument or point here but I don't understand it, to be honest. I wouldn't presume to argue any speculation about the order of shots fired. I'm not smart enough, and I don't know enough about this sort of thing to offer an educated opinion. But I am willing to listen. Please continue.

 

[timschochet]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

You don't think there is any relevancy to the order of the shots and where they were located on the body? Why would you have no idea? Do you think the dome shot was the first shot?

i didn't say there is no relevancy. I wrote that I didn't understand the relevancy, and I don't. That was not meant to be a challenge to you but an honest question.As far as the dome shot being first or last or in between, weren't all the shots fired in very quick succession? That was my understanding.

Do you think that the order in which shots are fired and where they hit the body is relevant?

i don't know. Intuitively, it seems to me that, outside of the shot to the hand, if the rest of the shots were fired all close together then it doesn't matter what their order is. But that may be the wrong answer. I have no idea.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Brown was shot in the forehead and the top of the dome. Does anyone here contend that those two shots did not happen in succession and were not the final two shots?

i have no idea. Why is this relevant?

You don't think there is any relevancy to the order of the shots and where they were located on the body? Why would you have no idea? Do you think the dome shot was the first shot?

i didn't say there is no relevancy. I wrote that I didn't understand the relevancy, and I don't. That was not meant to be a challenge to you but an honest question.As far as the dome shot being first or last or in between, weren't all the shots fired in very quick succession? That was my understanding.

Do you think that the order in which shots are fired and where they hit the body is relevant?

i don't know. Intuitively, it seems to me that, outside of the shot to the hand, if the rest of the shots were fired all close together then it doesn't matter what their order is. But that may be the wrong answer. I have no idea.

He1s trying to prove that Brown had his head down while charging and thats when he was shot in the top of his head....he doesnt think that its possible that he could have been shot on the top of his head as he was falling to the ground. He also never addressed my question pages ago about how the bullet that went into the inside of the forearm went in at an upward angle suggesting that Browns arm was raised at some point...like in a surrendering position.

 

[timschochet]

OK. I would think that if the bullet order or angles proved in some way that Brown had been charging, the prosecutor or investigators would have made this argument. But again I don't know enough to respond.

 

[avoiding injuries]

OK. I would think that if the bullet order or angles proved in some way that Brown had been charging, the prosecutor or investigators would have made this argument. But again I don't know enough to respond.

The prosecutor did include this during his statement last Monday night.

 

[Ghost Rider]

But again I don't know enough to respond.

, says the guy with 680 posts in this thread.

 

[Stinger Ray]

But again I don't know enough to respond.

Yet you post and post and post.

 

[jon_mx]

But again I don't know enough to respond.

, says the guy with 680 posts in this thread.

 

[Jim11]

Specially for Tim.

GJ, Vol 6, Witness 10

Q Okay, so Mike Brown turns around, makes that jester, then how long before he then moves in the direction of the officer?

A Immediately after he did his body gesture, he came full force, full charge at the officer.

Q And full charge, I guess, is running?

A Correct

 

[Da Guru]

They really need to add a forensics forum to FBGs where we can discuss crimes,cases and intent. Seems like they are many fans of CSI, Criminal Minds and Law & Order here.

 

[Courtweeks87]

http://fox2now.com/2014/11/30/rams-show-support-for-ferguson-with-hands-up-dont-shoot-enterance/ are these idiots serious. They represent a nfl team to millions of people. What they just did sends another bad message is making people think it's okay what there doing. Could anyone verify if that's real?

Changing the title - Forum Moderator

 

[bigmarc27]

What's there to verify? It's right there in the video.

 

[Nugget]

http://fox2now.com/2014/11/30/rams-show-support-for-ferguson-with-hands-up-dont-shoot-enterance/ are these idiots serious. They represent a nfl team to millions of people. What they just did sends another bad message is making people think it's okay what there doing. Could anyone verify if that's real?

I'm OK with it.

 

[AB in DC]

are these idiots serious. They represent a nfl team to millions of people. What they just did sends another bad message is making people think it's okay what there doing.

In English please?

 

[Steve Tasker]

Looks pretty good to me. Nice gesture from the players.

 

[mr roboto]

Stupid but it's not 'the Rams' its a few players.

 

[FUBAR]

are these idiots serious. They represent a nfl team to millions of people. What they just did sends another bad message is making people think it's okay what there doing.

In English please?

he doesn't like the way the players showed their support for the people of Ferguson.

 

[Dizzy]

are these idiots serious. They represent a nfl team to millions of people. What they just did sends another bad message is making people think it's okay what there doing.

In English please?

Yeah that was brutal.

 

[Mr. Retukes]

Yes, it's quite embarrassing to support something that you believe in.

 

[Ladsud]

I fully support robbery, assaulting police officers and burning your city down.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

They really need to add a forensics forum to FBGs where we can discuss crimes,cases and intent. Seems like they are many fans of CSI, Criminal Minds and Law & Order here.

how about simple physics

 

[Jack White]

I fully support robbery, assaulting police officers and burning your city down.

Do you also fully support cops killing citizens and doing nothing to protect citizens' businesses from being burned down?

 

[Steve Tasker]

 

[skinsrule05]

I fully support robbery, assaulting police officers and burning your city down.

That's what I am confused at. Are they supporting the people protesting or are they saying they wish that kid would have stopped attacking the cop and given up?

I don't think it is bad to show their support for either side and it definitely wasn't the rams. It was a few guys.

 

[Courtweeks87]

My bad, I've had several to many beers. Guess I overreacted. Just doesn't seem all that smart to support Something That is such a highly sensitive subject if your a public figure. Again my bad!

 

[Jack White]

My bad, I've had several to many beers. Guess I overreacted. Just doesn't seem all that smart to support Something That is such a highly sensitive subject if your a public figure. Again my bad!

No need to apologize. It's a topic worth discussing.

 

[General Tso]

How about supporting cops instead of punk bully thugs, looters and rioters?

 

[Stealthycat]

exactly who are they supporting ?

all the thug terrorists that burned their own city blocks and businesses ?

the cop that, according to a grand jury based on all the evidence, was just doing his job ?

were they supporting the giant of a man that robbed a store and attacked a police officer which results in his own death ?

what exactly were they supporting ??

 

[FUBAR]

exactly who are they supporting ?

all the thug terrorists that burned their own city blocks and businesses ?

the cop that, according to a grand jury based on all the evidence, was just doing his job ?

were they supporting the giant of a man that robbed a store and attacked a police officer which results in his own death ?

what exactly were they supporting ??

Maybe showing what you should do if you encounter a cop who thinks you're armed and dangerous?

 

[Mr. Retukes]

exactly who are they supporting ?

all the thug terrorists that burned their own city blocks and businesses ?

the cop that, according to a grand jury based on all the evidence, was just doing his job ?

were they supporting the giant of a man that robbed a store and attacked a police officer which results in his own death ?

what exactly were they supporting ??

You tell'em, iToughguy™.

 

[Courtweeks87]

exactly who are they supporting ?

all the thug terrorists that burned their own city blocks and businesses ?

the cop that, according to a grand jury based on all the evidence, was just doing his job ?

were they supporting the giant of a man that robbed a store and attacked a police officer which results in his own death ?

what exactly were they supporting ??

The hands up don't shoot has been the signature of all the protestors is what the article said. So I take it theyre not supporting the cops

 

[General Tso]

Just a classless move by a loser organization. The ONLY time you do something like that is if it is a slam-dunk issue that 99% of the general public agrees with - like rallying around a national tragedy like 9/11. There are a lot of people in this country who are firmly behind the actions of Officer Wilson and are appalled at the public reaction in Ferguson and elsewhere.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Just a classless move by a loser organization.