Fergosun Decision Rendered... Predictions?

[LazurusLong]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

Astonishing how those whom have NEVER IN THERE LIFE been subjected to racism think they know how it feel, what it is, and its influence in EVERY aspect of life for those whom are walking to walk. Please drop the Feaux News buzz words (race baiters) and try to see things outside of the bubble.

Clarify this for me.

Are you taking the typical stance that ONLY non-white people can ever be the victim of racism? Talk about a lack of real world experience.

Isn't it racism that the news kept repeating that this was a white officer shooting a black man?

Flashback to when the news first reported on Trayvon Martin. They made a very similar claim that he was shot and killed by a white man. I mean, come on, "Zimmerman" HAD to be the last name of a white guy, right?

OOPS, once the fact came out the Zimmerman was actually a "light skinned Hispanic", they tried inserting thw word hispanic in the news reports, Zimmerman became a white Hispanic.

Has the press ever referred to President Obama as a "white African-American"? Or a light skinned African-American?

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

It was the job of the Grand Jury to decide if there was enough evidence to Indict the defendant... Ray Charles could see that there was. The conflicting accounts from eye witnesses were more than enough to justify a trial...

OK.

For the class, how about you please give us the evidence you claim even Ray Charles should have been able to see. The standard for a grand jury to indict is very low. I know that for a fact from my own time serving on a grand jury here in Dallas County. For them to not find enough to indict after everything they were given yet YOU seem to believe they over looked something, please. educate the class.

And please take note that I said evidence. NOT bulllshit lies repeated by people who were not there.

As I noted, once the forensic evidence of the 2 shots having been fired inside the police SUV were presented to the Grand Jury, and that forensics evidence included blood splatter from Brown, I found it funny how the blowhards who claimed they saw the entire 90 seconds of this incident were proved to be liars.

Take the exact incident and remove it being a cop. If someone attempted to come into the window of my vehicle and do harm of any kind, I'd be completely in my own right to fire my own gun in a similar manner.

Am I the only one who remembers the very first self defense shooting by a CHL holder? Similar situation? Large man attacking the driver of a van through the window of the door? That attacker was also shot and killed. Although the CHL holder did the proper thing and kept shooting while the guy was attacking and at the vehicle.

The actual evidence proved the police officer discharged his weapon after being attacked through the window of the SUV and anyone with half a brain who actually went and looked at the photos of the officers face and neck could see the bruising from Brown's attack.

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

No... The only account of the kid reaching for the gun came from the officer. The "facts"/"evidence" as you call it were derived from that statement and are speculative at best. AGAIN... Conflicting witness accounts would normally trigger a trail. What makes this situation different??

BULLSHIT,

Did you bother to read through the ALL evidence? Did you take note of what was said:

"The most credible eyewitnesses to the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., said he had charged toward Police Officer Darren Wilson just before the final, fatal shots, the St. Louis County prosecutor said Monday night as he sought to explain why a grand jury had not found probable cause to indict the officer.

The accounts of several other witnesses from the Ferguson neighborhood where Mr. Brown, 18 and unarmed, met his death on Aug. 9 — including those who said Mr. Brown was trying to surrender — changed over time or were inconsistent with physical evidence, the prosecutor, Robert P. McCulloch, said in a news conference.


When eye witnesses give statements that are proven false by actual evidence, to me, THAT shows a racial bias against the officer.

[rcinokc]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

No... The only account of the kid reaching for the gun came from the officer. The "facts"/"evidence" as you call it were derived from that statement and are speculative at best. AGAIN... Conflicting witness accounts would normally trigger a trail. What makes this situation different??

I'm sure at some point you will get your trial, I have no doubt that at some point his parents will be trying to hit the jackpot in the form of a civil action. And for the record, I have never, ever said or implied that I know what it is like to be discriminated against. I have no doubt that it happens, but I have little doubt that in the split second that someone (officer, military, or civilian) makes the shoot or don't shoot decision they factor in race. I also have little doubt that your mind is one of the many that has been made up from the beginning, regardless of what the evidence may show. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

[threepeckeredbillygoat]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

No... The only account of the kid reaching for the gun came from the officer. The "facts"/"evidence" as you call it were derived from that statement and are speculative at best. AGAIN... Conflicting witness accounts would normally trigger a trail. What makes this situation different??

I'm not talking about peoples stories. It's facts man. I know it's hard for folks like you to accept when they don't point in your favor, but that doesn't change them. Powder residue, bullet trajectory, entry and exit wounds.... those are the true facts. And they only collaboate on side. I'm sorry if it proves the so called "witnesses" liars who say he was shot in the back, or he was on his knees with his hands in the air. But thats what they are... they are liars.

Face it dude. Brown was an idiot and he got what he was asking for.

[Guest070818-1]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

So the police can shoot at a guy because they don't know if he's armed or not?? WTF kind of logic is that?

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

No... The only account of the kid reaching for the gun came from the officer. The "facts"/"evidence" as you call it were derived from that statement and are speculative at best. AGAIN... Conflicting witness accounts would normally trigger a trail. What makes this situation different??

Setting the issue of race aside,

The police exhibit way too much power. Your voice against any public servant is futile nowadays.

Cops don't protect and serve; they shoot and kill.

Also - I wouldn't be surprised if this could be the beginning framework for Obama to declare martial law.

The police intervention in the riots . . .

[Papa Noel]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

No... The only account of the kid reaching for the gun came from the officer. The "facts"/"evidence" as you call it were derived from that statement and are speculative at best. AGAIN... Conflicting witness accounts would normally trigger a trail. What makes this situation different??

I agree with you 100%. But seems like in this case, many of those conflicting witnesses changed their stories when their accounts didn't match the physical evidence and they were confronted by the grand jury. Once a witness starts changing their story, they become worthless as a witness.

But Frique-Me, maybe you can answer for me a question I do have. If Ferguson is 70% black, how, in this day and age, can it have a white mayor, a white city council and a white police force? That right there seems to me to be the place to start an investigation.

[rcinokc]

Originally Posted by Papa Noel

But Frique-Me, maybe you can answer for me a question I do have. If Ferguson is 70% black, how, in this day and age, can it have a white mayor, a white city council and a white police force? That right there seems to me to be the place to start an investigation.

Doubt that needs an investigation, simply voter apathy.

[Frique-Me]

Originally Posted by rcinokc

Doubt that needs an investigation, simply voter apathy.

+1

I will be the first to admit lack of interest in local elections is a contributing for what happened there. Most of the incumbents were recently re-elected and ran unopposed.

Also I'd like to say thanks... Thanks to everyone participating in this discussion and not allowing it to devolve into anger and/or the name-calling BS that usually happens.

[Papa Noel]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

+1

I will be the first to admit lack of interest in local elections is a contributing for what happened there. Most of the incumbents were recently re-elected and ran unopposed.

Also I'd like to say thanks... Thanks to everyone participating in this discussion and not allowing it to devolve into anger and/or the name-calling BS that usually happens.

Thanks for taking the time to sort of answer my question.

[Frique-Me]

Originally Posted by LazurusLong

Clarify this for me.

Are you taking the typical stance that ONLY non-white people can ever be the victim of racism? Talk about a lack of real world experience.

Isn't it racism that the news kept repeating that this was a white officer shooting a black man?

Flashback to when the news first reported on Trayvon Martin. They made a very similar claim that he was shot and killed by a white man. I mean, come on, "Zimmerman" HAD to be the last name of a white guy, right?

OOPS, once the fact came out the Zimmerman was actually a "light skinned Hispanic", they tried inserting thw word hispanic in the news reports, Zimmerman became a white Hispanic.

Has the press ever referred to President Obama as a "white African-American"? Or a light skinned African-American?



OK.

For the class, how about you please give us the evidence you claim even Ray Charles should have been able to see. The standard for a grand jury to indict is very low. I know that for a fact from my own time serving on a grand jury here in Dallas County. For them to not find enough to indict after everything they were given yet YOU seem to believe they over looked something, please. educate the class.

And please take note that I said evidence. NOT bulllshit lies repeated by people who were not there.

As I noted, once the forensic evidence of the 2 shots having been fired inside the police SUV were presented to the Grand Jury, and that forensics evidence included blood splatter from Brown, I found it funny how the blowhards who claimed they saw the entire 90 seconds of this incident were proved to be liars.

Take the exact incident and remove it being a cop. If someone attempted to come into the window of my vehicle and do harm of any kind, I'd be completely in my own right to fire my own gun in a similar manner.

Am I the only one who remembers the very first self defense shooting by a CHL holder? Similar situation? Large man attacking the driver of a van through the window of the door? That attacker was also shot and killed. Although the CHL holder did the proper thing and kept shooting while the guy was attacking and at the vehicle.

The actual evidence proved the police officer discharged his weapon after being attacked through the window of the SUV and anyone with half a brain who actually went and looked at the photos of the officers face and neck could see the bruising from Brown's attack.



BULLSHIT,

Did you bother to read through the ALL evidence? Did you take note of what was said:

"The most credible eyewitnesses to the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., said he had charged toward Police Officer Darren Wilson just before the final, fatal shots, the St. Louis County prosecutor said Monday night as he sought to explain why a grand jury had not found probable cause to indict the officer.

The accounts of several other witnesses from the Ferguson neighborhood where Mr. Brown, 18 and unarmed, met his death on Aug. 9 — including those who said Mr. Brown was trying to surrender — changed over time or were inconsistent with physical evidence, the prosecutor, Robert P. McCulloch, said in a news conference.


When eye witnesses give statements that are proven false by actual evidence, to me, THAT shows a racial bias against the officer.

Interesting... PROVEN false??? I would argue their were conflicting statements which warrants a trial.

Racist are among us Bud. Some of them are Black, White, Latino, Asian, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Islamic, etc. Your whole argument on that subject is moot.

As for the Martin case George approached Treyvon. Please explain why Treyvon didn't have the right to stand his ground. Please explain why it was OK for George to approach him after being advised by the police not to do so and when he starts to get the worst end of a situation HE INITIATED it's OK to kill that kid

BTW your use words like "Bullshit" does not add validity to any of the points made and yes I read the redacted report they released... IT'S A REPORT!!! The actual Grand Jury proceedings are SEALED and wont be released to the public, Forgive me if I don't trust the word/statements from those with a bias for one side over the other

[Bad_Mojo]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

As for the Martin case George approached Treyvon. Please explain why Treyvon didn't have the right to stand his ground. Please explain why it was OK for George to approach him after being advised by the police not to do so and when he starts to get the worst end of a situation HE INITIATED it's OK to kill that kid

Trayvon did have a right to stand his ground. The jury got that one SOOOO wrong. You cant chase someone down and shoot them when they freak out because you're chasing them.. Zimmerman following someone that has committed no crime after the police told him to stop is not standing ones ground. Trayvon turning around and saying "what the fuck do you want?" is.

But now on this case, which admittedly I have not been following, I saw pictures of the officer that seem to indicate he was hit in the head several times.

One of the other posters said the forensic evidence indicates the shots were fired from inside the officers vehicle. Is that accurate? Others have said that witness testimony changed over time. Is that accurate?

[RandB fan]

Maybe this will give you some info you so badly need

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...hed-a-decision

This has links to 72 sets of Grand Jury documents so it should keep you busy.



Results of DOJ investigation.

[rcinokc]

Originally Posted by Bad_Mojo

One of the other posters said the forensic evidence indicates the shots were fired from inside the officers vehicle. Is that accurate? Others have said that witness testimony changed over time. Is that accurate?

Both are accurate, the first 2 shots were fired from inside the vehicle, the rest outside and witness testimony did change.

[RandB fan]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

Interesting... PROVEN false??? I would argue their were conflicting statements which warrants a trial.

Racist are among us Bud. Some of them are Black, White, Latino, Asian, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Islamic, etc. Your whole argument on that subject is moot.

As for the Martin case George approached Treyvon. Please explain why Treyvon didn't have the right to stand his ground. Please explain why it was OK for George to approach him after being advised by the police not to do so and when he starts to get the worst end of a situation HE INITIATED it's OK to kill that kid

BTW your use words like "Bullshit" does not add validity to any of the points made and yes I read the redacted report they released... IT'S A REPORT!!! The actual Grand Jury proceedings are SEALED and wont be released to the public, Forgive me if I don't trust the word/statements from those with a bias for one side over the other

NOT TRUE

http://apps.stlpublicradio.org/fergu.../evidence.html

See ya when you"re educated P~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[dallasfan]

The video of Michael brown robbing the store and how he treated the store owner/employee told me everything I needed to know about the punk and what he is capable of.

Now his dad telling his community to burn down this bitch...wow. What idiots will burn down their community? He should get thrown in jail for inciting a riot. I just feel bad for the part of the ferguson community that was not involved in this. Now they have no store, restaurants, etc. A lot of them are probably poor and can't drive over the neighboring communities to get the food, etc. You can bet a lot of those businesses wil think twice before building again in ferguson.

[yohollyrock]

AND JUST THINK--- IF THESE POOR INNOCENT YOUNG BLACK MEN HAD JUST DONE WHAT THE POLICEMAN ASKED THEM TO DO (which is what I think most law abiding people would do) NONE OF THIS FOOLISHNESS WOULD BE IN THE NEWS===