Ferguson, MO

Post Reply New Topic

In that case, how does it support your contention that "The white man has massively overreacted based on the evidence presented and should be facing a murder charge?"

I don't remember you referring to police report (AKA "incident report") previously, so you can't possibly be telling me "once again" if that's what you're referring to. Is there another account "provided by the police" that I'm not aware of?



I've made no straw-man arguments here. I responded to the only witness testimony that I was aware of that could support your case.

Won't the truth have to come out ?

Shooting distance determination:

1. Gun powder pattern - "In theory, the closer a discharged firearm is to an object, the smaller its gunpowder pattern will be; likewise, the more distant, the larger the gunpowder pattern". The amount of gun powder drops of substantially after 3-4 feet of distance.

Evidence:
"The bullets did not appear to have been shot from very close range because no gunpowder was present on his body. However, that determination could change if it turns out that there is gunshot residue on Mr. Brown?s clothing, to which Dr. Baden did not have access".
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/mi ... .html?_r=0

2. Test sampling for comparison - "The suspect firearm and suspect ammunition are test fired into similar target material (witness panels) at varying ranges to obtain known standard tests for comparisons".

Evidence:
none so far that tell us the estimated distance between shooter and victim

So, approximate distances of the shots will be determined and this would back up or disprove the "he was charging towards me" story???

Depicted: Bullet hole with residue


source:
https://www.mshp.dps.missouri.gov/MSHPW ... ope9-2.pdf[

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OET8SVAGELA[/youtube]

Just to throw a wrench into the BS factory production line:

The Face book post by "Wilson? saying that Brown attacked Wilson, grabbed his gun, and the terrified cop shot only in self-defense were from a fake Facebook page set up to look like Wilson?s. This was not corrected by Fox or CNN.

The radio show caller telling Wilson's account of the incident (Josie) has since been uncovered as fake. Fox, CNN, Drudge, and Breitbart have yet to correct this. This is where the BS gunshot while being attacked in the car, "are you gonna shoot me" claims, and charging the officer even after being shot come from. This is also where the facial injury line of crap began.

The facial injuries to Wilson are likely untrue. The CT/Xray released was from the University of Iowa, and was not of Wilson. All accounts of facial injury used fake medical images as their proof. This was not corrected by Fox or ABC.

Attorneys for the shop stated that neither the shop owner nor any shop employees reported a robbery and that Michael Brown did in fact pay for the cigars. At around 36/37 second mark in the video of that event, you can see the currency change hands. It doesn't change the fact that he was rude and needlessly aggressive, but those are hardly offenses deserving of death:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maA1FUJqhew[/youtube]

Other things:
Brown had no arrest record. All "proof" to the contrary is from a different Michael Brown (easily proven by age and/or location/date of arrest)
Several pictures of "violent protesters" are actually pictures of protesters throwing tear gas canisters back in the direction of the police who fired them.
The police have illegally detained and seized the equipment of multiple journalists and citizens, including St. Louis City Alderman Antonio French who was there to keep things calm and peaceful.
If you do not include Brown, the number of murders in Ferguson for 2014: ZERO.
Every official statement made by the police about this incident has contradicted some aspect of a previous one.
The official incident report includes little more than the names, date and location. No details of the event whatsoever.
Wilson's name was not released until after he was able to delete all social media traces and relocate.


Here is an excerpt from an examiner.com article (and copy/pasted all over the blogosphere as original work) which should make you think twice before spouting off some things you feel compelled to claim aren't racist:

I'd like mention that Sharpton, Jackson, and Holder have all been been putting great effort into the streets of Chicago and New York for some time now, but I guess facts don't matter when you have some racist garbage to spew.


One thing that bothers me is that the most comprehensive breakdown of the witnesses I've been able to find is not by a journalist, an analyst, a legal scholar, or investigator. It is a from game designer writing here at Addicting Info:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/08/21/ferguson-witnesses/

I'd also like to point out that using a single Facebook photo of anyone to make any sort of argument is absurd. There is a picture of me back before I glued my hair down and kept my beard trimmed where I have a vintage AK over my shoulder from a decade ago that doesn't really match my typical persona now (or even then, really). But if a cop ever gunned me down for any reason, I'm sure that it would be the photo used for whichever side of the news world that wanted to paint the cops as the good guys this go around.

"Rude and needlessly aggressive?" That's an understatement. He grabbed the guy by the throat and threw him over.

Let's look at who's being unreasonable here:

1: "Nobody would charge at an armed cop."

Wrong. It happened today in Saint Paul: http://www.startribune.com/local/stpaul/273013851.html

That was an even more extreme case.

2: "The cop shot him multiple times, so it must have been malicious."

Wrong. In the above case, the officers shot the attacker three times. That didn't even stop him from fighting.

Now let's talk a bit about racial garbage:

I've already gone on record with what I think about militarized crowd-control and cops shooting unarmed black men:



1: "Wilson would be in jail if he'd shot a white man."

That's easy to test.

We had a case in Minneapolis in which a black undercover officer was shot by a white citizen (who had a concealed-carry permit) during a road rage incident. Th officer had been driving so aggressively in his unmarked car that multiple bystanders called 911 to report him. There is no dispute about that.

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/18537149.html
http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?tag=treptow

The officer allegedly drew his gun and pointed it at the man, his pregnant wife, and their two kids, at which point the man shot the officer three times, wounding him. The permit-holder's wife was the first to call 911, and their statements were consistent from that initial call all the way through the trial.

Summary: Cop (who is black) demonstrates conspicuous, wanton disregard for safety and the law, as established by many independent witnesses; multiple people say that he drew his gun in a rage and pointed it at a pregnant woman and two very young children; the male driver (who is white) acted in what would be clear self-defense if that's true; the officer's name was initially withheld; grand jury charges against the officer were dismissed by the prosecutor; the civilian did time in jail.

I addressed this in the other thread on the subject, so will just say that this post of yours goes on from this point to criticise things that I did not post, and also brings in irrelevant anectdotal information.