Michael Brown

I said way back when there were only three, or maybe four, witnesses that Johnson's account could be disregarded and there's still enough probable cause to go to trial. I don't have to evaluate his individual credibility because I'm not on the jury and never will be. The Prosecutor certainly has to consider his credibility as to whether or not he'd ever call him as a witness at trial, but being as the pertinent issues of the kill shot(s) have all six (maybe seven) witnesses saying basically the same thing, I can't imagine any prosecutor leaving his testimony out of the mix, thus disallowing the jury to do their duty and their job by testing his credibility against other witness testimony, the forensics, and whatever Wilson's defense team can provide of his side of the story without putting him on the stand. Or if they put Wilson on the stand, then so much the better. Let the jury decide who's credible and who ain't. That's how it's supposed to work once the threshold of probable cause to bring a charge has been crossed.

Bottom line, Johnson's account(s) can only be tested and scrutinized for credibility by a jury, and that testing and scrutiny can only take place if there's a trial, and that trial can only take place if the Prosecutor or the Grand Jury grow a pair and recognize the relative freakin' mountain of evidence to establish probable cause to bring a charge (or more).

As has been the case from day one, this is about was it a justifiable/not-justifiable shoot for me. I don't get lost in issues or personality traits of people of whom I know nothing but a small sliver that the same media that you decry the non-objectivity of has fed you and everybody else. I ask is there probable cause to bring a charge, not if I can determine the credibility of each and every witness, or potential witness, from several hundred miles away. I ask if Wilson had justification for the final volley of shots, not whether he was white and the person he shot was black. I don't give one flyin' fvck who's employed and who ain't, why they were there on-scene or what they were doing while there. All I care about is was the killing justified and are the witnesses who all were there and say it wasn't can convince a jury to a reasonable doubt that they're telling the truth.

As far as your last question, can Wilson get a fair trial? Did the cops who beat Rodney King get a fair trial? What's the definition of "fair?" Only if he gets off? Only if he's convicted? Look, biased media coverage or not, the system is what it is. I can't do anything but look for justice within that system. This is one of those cases that not everybody is ever going to agree with the outcome of a trial. I can't do anything about that though. Give me a trial to either support the conduct of, or to criticize, but damn man, don't just bail on the process because there's been publicity about the case! That's just a ridiculous thought that I won't waste another second of thought to.

"Cherry picked" my rosy red ass, whodat. The last couple of paragraphs were just more crap about stuff I haven't been talking about. If you want to talk about 'em, that's fine, just don't hit "Reply With Quote" on one of my posts and then ask me a bunch of unrelated-to-anything-I-said questions. And then accuse me of "cherry picking" when I answer all but two.

Blues

There is one question I have about the witnesses. Did they get their statement right after the shooting and before they could talk to each other or were they later? That will have a lot to do with their credibility at trial. Witnesses are the most unreliable thing you can ever have at a trial no matter what case it is. If they discussed it with each other before statements were taken, then their testimony is tainted. And it makes no difference which side they are on, it is how it works. Once discussion occurs, the human mind will shape what it remembers differently.

And no, I don't think that he can escape trial. There are just too many things that need to be brought out and his credibility is also needing questioned.
 

I've said before and I restate my position. All this debate is just wasted bandwidth. We won't know a thing until the entire process is over. There is just too much conjecture and assumption being bandied about to have a clear picture of what happened. Yes, the MSM has distorted things as well as the race baiters and cop haters and cop lovers. But we don't know the facts!
 
They want ‘Justice’ for Michael Brown?? I’m confused, do they want him dug up and shot again?

Yes indeed, you are confused.
Roll_Eyes_Smiley_by_Mirz123.gif
 
There is one question I have about the witnesses. Did they get their statement right after the shooting and before they could talk to each other or were they later? That will have a lot to do with their credibility at trial. Witnesses are the most unreliable thing you can ever have at a trial no matter what case it is. If they discussed it with each other before statements were taken, then their testimony is tainted. And it makes no difference which side they are on, it is how it works. Once discussion occurs, the human mind will shape what it remembers differently.

And no, I don't think that he can escape trial. There are just too many things that need to be brought out and his credibility is also needing questioned.

I've heard nothing of the witnesses being connected to each other, except for the two contractors who were working together that day, but I agree, if they have gotten together, it would (and should) be a hit to their credibility.

I disagree though that he can't escape trial. I think it's nearly a foregone conclusion that he will. Obviously, I hope I'm wrong and that you're right, but my lack of confidence in that happening is a very large percentage of why I post about the case the way I do. It would be a travesty if the amount of probable cause in this case was ignored and Wilson never had to defend his actions to anyone but other cops/prosecutors. It would be a massive hit to the credibility of the grand jury system, the prosecutor's office and the cops, and since cops get away without any accountability for their actions so often, it will just add to the hit rather than create a brand new one.

Blues
 
Yes indeed, you are confused.
Roll_Eyes_Smiley_by_Mirz123.gif
[/QUO

Whet a hoot you are maybe one day you can join the ranks of the real world

If you showed any ability to post something more than one-line, brainless, meaningless quips over the last several months, I would be happy to discuss with you where you believe I've said anything outside the boundaries of the "real world." But since you haven't, I won't.

Blues
 
Nothing to do with the actual case (except that this elected official was protesting outside the police dept.), but cool nonetheless:
Link Removed

Yea I was pretty pissed when I heard that she didn't get charged for a misdemeanor or most likely a felony possession of a firearm. In mo. It's a misdemeanor to be in a possession of an unloaded firearm when intoxicated and felony if it's loaded. I'm fairly certain that firearm was loaded.
 
A source gives an account of Wilson's story. States that Wilson did hear a radio report of a robbery and description of suspect.

Source gives Darren Wilson?s account of Michael Brown shooting | FOX2now.com
And this other side is just as suspect as the ones backing Micheal Brown. Credibility depends on when given as statements hours later by either side are suspect. Having sat thru criminology classes where a perp and the instructor did a fake shooting in front of the class with no advance warning, you would be surprised how varied the reports were. Some could not even recall color of clothes, hair, eyes. Then came a simulated lineup.
 
The problem with this case is that if the cold hard facts disagree with the "eyewitness accounts" the facts will be suppressed in favor of the public good. The one thing about the second hand account of Wilsons story is the claim hat he may have been daze or whatever from getting punched in the head through the window at the initial confrontation. I mention that because I have heard nothing about Wilson being evaluated medically, or reports of that surfacing. If he wasn't checked out shortly after the incident there is nothing besides the coroners report to corroborate his version of the story.
 
The problem with this case is that if the cold hard facts disagree with the "eyewitness accounts" the facts will be suppressed in favor of the public good. The one thing about the second hand account of Wilsons story is the claim hat he may have been daze or whatever from getting punched in the head through the window at the initial confrontation. I mention that because I have heard nothing about Wilson being evaluated medically, or reports of that surfacing. If he wasn't checked out shortly after the incident there is nothing besides the coroners report to corroborate his version of the story.

It was reported that he did go to the hospital and treated for a "swollen face." No medical reports have been made public though.
 
Evidence Supports Police Officer’s Account Of Shooting In Ferguson

Link Removed


Life Is Good. :victory:






~ Abortion Is The Number One Cause Of Death In The United States ~​

(57 Million Murdered Children & Counting )
God Bless America??​
 
Link Removed


Life Is Good. :victory:






~ Abortion Is The Number One Cause Of Death In The United States ~​

(57 Million Murdered Children & Counting )
God Bless America??​

There has been so much crap written and said about all this it will not matter how much evidence is found it will not be believed! To many have made up their mind on what they "want" to believe nothing will change their mind. There will be more riots no matter what the outcome of the Grand Jury. If the GJ indites they will riot to celebrate and riot if the GJ does not indite to try and intimidate and get Holder to step in.

I have found that usually the first story line is almost NEVER correct! Which is why I usually do not watch, listen or read anything about whatever is the story of the day. MSM rushes to get their story line out without fact checking anything. If it fits their agenda then they run with it. Then when finally the true story comes out they are already somewhere else creating a whole new story that is most likely a lie too!
 
Its hard to be sympathetic to the community when just a few minutes before Michael Brown was caught in the act of man handling a small merchant and robbing him in his store and threating his life with his size and intimidation, a mugging...and to suggest Michael Brown was a pillar of the community or all the rhetoric about a young black man who was un armed and a victim ....

They painted the same picture with Trayvon Martin showing pictures of him when he was 8 years old and an innocent kid...not the kid he was on his face book pictures. Zimmerman was the guy with the broken nose and the eye witness saying the guy on top the guy with Marijuana in his system ( Trayvon Martin ) ,was smashing the guys head into the concrete.. if Trayvon Martin had continued smashing his head into the concrete, he would have killed him.. the jury. picked and vetted by both attorneys found GZ innocent... yet the political correctness vote seekers still call the verdict an injustice. Now GZ is paying for killing another thug. Because another thug was taken down and the brethren don't like that someone is standing up to the thugs of the world.. just like the thug we see in those video frames of another thug in Ferguson robbing a mugging a merchant.
 
I sit here and see the obvious dysfunction of Michael Brown.. a kid who was too big for his age and maturity, brought up with the wrong values at a very early age... The perfect example of a delinquent and a threat to any honest people. Michael lived up to his surroundings... on the other hand the Cop was doing his job as a man who put his life on the line every day, in the service of his community but in a hostile environment. Why is it so hard to see that Michael was nothing more than a threat to society. Note the photo of him robbing that little merchant.. what you don't see is this is not his first brush with the law.. this is what he does.. the Cop was in the pursuit of his career to keep the peace... ( Doing his Job...) he didn't put on his vest and gun everyday to say IM going to shoot an innocent kid today... with the evidence at hand, the forensic evidence and the culmination of who Michael Brown was. why is it that the cop doing his job was somehow the thug, and Michael Brown, a proven thug, was the victim.. as so many of the brethren seem to suggest...
 
I wonder how much of this is going on...

"Howard Purnell: Have you given your official statement yet, 'cuz I would be VERY cautious about what went IN it.*
Nick Memphis: Well, maybe I should wait for the report to come out, read it, and THEN remember"

Maybe none...maybe a lot...it seems though if the credibility of the witnesses on video are in question, how come the 7 anonymous witnesses that say otherwise aren't under the same scrutiny?

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,527
Messages
610,761
Members
74,965
Latest member
Roosince1911
Back
Top