Ferguson, MO

Post Reply New Topic

Or even sitting or standing in the wrong place.

While waiting for someone the day before a primary election several years ago I was sitting outdoors on a work platform that gave me a pretty good view over a nearby crowd that had gathered to see a Presidential candidate who was due to arrive later that morning. After a few minutes, a cop came over and told me that I was making their SWAT team nervous because of where I was sitting. I quickly got down from the platform and went back inside.

They have more respect for their own life. Should they really take the risk that they will lose the fight? If you decide to use a gun, you are deciding to kill your opponent.

It's much better to defuse the situation before it gets to that.

So, to summarise:

- Black man starts punching white man in the face
- Black man stops punching white man and walks away
- White man threatens black man with gun
- Black man moves towards white man
- White man kills him
- The great and good of the American right jump to the white man's defence

This is institutional racism. The white man has massively overreacted based on the evidence presented and should be facing a murder charge.

If the tables had been turned and Brown had shot a white man who had just assaulted him, he would be in deep trouble.

That's it, blame the victim.

We don't know all the facts, it's certainly not so simplistic.

We have multiple witness statements; the account I have presented is at the more complex end of the scale and thus more flattering to wh***y. I am presuming the witnesses who claim that Brown was stood with his hands in the air and was essentially executed are not presenting accurate information and that wh***y actually was at risk of a degree of harm when he killed Brown.

You are obviously doing your best at trying to minimize Brown's guilt while trying to create guilt for the officer.



Brown, being the thug that he was would be unlikely to get much benefit of the doubt. But then, being a thug, he shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt.

The star witness that claims that Brown was surrendering when shot is hardly believable by any stretch of the imagination. In 2011, he pled guilty to filing a false police report so how could any rational person believe him this time?

From http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/170048-star-witness-michael-brown-shooting-charged-theft-filing-false-police-report/:

Note that his claims that Brown was shot in the back have already been clearly dis-proven. It's not like he could be mistaken -- does he not know the difference between being shot in the front or the back?

My prediction is a very justified total exoneration for the officer.

It is possible Wilson was shooting at his back, but the bullets didn't hit. We don't know how many shots were fired.

If it's not immediately obvious whether someone was shot in the back or not by appearance and condition of the entry and exit wounds then an autopsy would definitely provide the proof.
Obama and Reichsfuhrer Holder have taken an "interest" in this (like that's a surprise) so I have to wonder what influence that might have on the outcome......

The so-called witness, Dorian Johnson, said that Brown was shot in the back. That is not the same at all as being shot at while walking away and then turning around and being shot in the front. He said shot in the back and all the real evidence shows he was shot in the front.

There is NO rational way to interpret that as anything but that Johnson was lying. None at all.

That witness has no credibility at all. Anybody who believes him believes him because they want to believe his lies.

On the other hand, the other witnesses, a dozen or more of them, say that Brown was facing the officer and according to many, he was quite literally charging the officer.

There was an autopsy and it proves that Brown was not shot in the back as Johnson claimed.

The autopsy report.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/20/opinion/m ... n-autopsy/

When these threads started, I'd only read about one witness. I knew absolutely nothing about him. I read articles in my local paper (which is quite liberal) that uncritically repeated accusations of racism without providing any facts to back that up.

You can see a summary of the evidence here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Brown_shooting

The accounts of James Knight and Michael Brady on that page are new within the last day or two. Piaget Crenshaw apparently came forward on the 9th or 10th, but the first and only mention of her name in the Star Tribune (my local Pulitzer-winning paper) is from the New York Times and dated August 18th: http://www.startribune.com/search/?stq= ... 2BCrenshaw

I see that CNN had mentioned both Crenshaw and Tiffany Mitchell by the 11th: http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/11/us/missou ... torysearch

I don't follow CNN, so I hadn't been aware of them. I was simply going by the links that were posted on this thread, since I assumed that anyone who was convinced that Wilson was a racist psychopath would present their best evidence. Here's what I see on this thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_TyUuTbuK8 - posted Aug. 16
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/1 ... 80639.html - posted Aug. 16
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/29/arkansa ... rtial_law/ - posted Aug. 17
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOZJukLBXBI - posted Aug. 18
http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/10/misso ... en-spark-a - posted Aug. 18

So within the first three days and seven pages of this thread there was only one post citing an independent eye-witness. It was posted on the 18th by Dox, linking to Reason Magazine.

On the other thread:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-28806313 - posted Aug. 16
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyr ... etails.php - posted Aug. 16
http://www.ksdk.com/story/news/local/20 ... /14118769/ - posted Aug. 16
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/1 ... 71156.html - posted Aug. 18
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/eyewitness-m ... g-missouri - posted Aug. 18
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... 13992387/# - posted Aug. 18
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow ... story.html - posted Aug. 18
http://news.yahoo.com/none-back-brown-a ... 24156.html - posted Aug. 18
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... e-Incident - posted Aug. 18
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sL-cGjinaM - posted Aug. 18
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/18/us/missou ... index.html - posted Aug. 19th

So I've gone four days and four pages into that thread, and the only mention of an independent witness is in a link that I posted on the 19th. If people jumped to Wilson's defense, it's because his accusers here had presented no evidence, but still felt justified in making wild claims against him.

Full disclosure - I also posted these links which were related to other posts, but not the the evidence of guilt:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSDBswx90Cs - posted Aug. 18
http://www.tactical-life.com/magazines/ ... ting-draw/ - posted Aug. 16
http://www.slingsonly.com/image_files/MP5photo.jpg - posted Aug. 16

Last edited by NobodyKnows on 22 Aug 2014, 2:11 pm, edited 7 times in total.

Actually there is an explanation, the normal confusion of perceiving fast moving events. You may perceive someone as getting shot from behind if they had some reaction to be shot at from behind. Also the ability of an autopsy to determine what actually happened is limited. The examiner may say something is consistent with an explanation to a degree of certainty, but that certainty is seldom absolute.

Have you ever seen Rashomon by Kurosawa? It's about how different people see the same event differently.

From the link:

Big thanks for picking that out. I totally missed it.

Last edited by NobodyKnows on 22 Aug 2014, 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.