Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Peach, if you would, a scenario.
Let's say you're an officer, and you're armed.
Assuming the witness account in that game-changing video is true, you have a 300lb, 6'5" man charging you. You have no taser. What do you do?
1) Run.
2) Shoot him in self-defense.
3) Try to shoot him in the leg and risk missing, ergo risking your life.
4) Assume the fetal position and play dead.
As you are aware, that depends on several factors, some UNKNOWN as of today.[/B]
1. Distance, between the two, distance to the vehicle,
2. Lighting,
3. Ability to get in my police VEHICLE,
4. Johnson's location through the events; he made definite claims, after stating he walked away.
A scenario with no hard evidence, only conflicting statements. So guessing, I would shoot in the air, depending on the above factors, try to shoot near him, or his legs.....possibly [/B]hitting vital organs, of course. I have not seen the officer's height, another factor.
Now, reality: Michael Brown had no criminal record, was too timid to play football...............however toxicology may show the presence of mind altering substances in either or both individuals. That could explain the sudden change to "charging, violent 300lb thug" from "decent, kind, and reasonable young man", and/or "kind, gentle, no disciplinary problems" officer into "vigilante, murderous cop hell bent on killing".
It is clear your mind is set as you accept the statement Michael Brown "charged" the officer; I do not have ESP, thus the autopsy, and investigation(s) must provide the answers. Only speculation is possible without the evidence, however.
The release of the officer's name, thus providing access to his picture, is reprehensible, as is the release of the convenience store video.
Sounds like you're saying the cop should have ran away. But surely I'm just misunderstanding your post.
As you are aware, that depends on several factors, some UNKNOWN as of today.[/B]
1. Distance, between the two, distance to the vehicle,
2. Lighting,
3. Ability to get in my police VEHICLE,
4. Johnson's location through the events; he made definite claims, after stating he walked away.
A scenario with no hard evidence, only conflicting statements. So guessing, I would shoot in the air, depending on the above factors, try to shoot near him, or his legs.....possibly [/B]hitting vital organs, of course. I have not seen the officer's height, another factor.
Now, reality: Michael Brown had no criminal record, was too timid to play football...............however toxicology may show the presence of mind altering substances in either or both individuals. That could explain the sudden change to "charging, violent 300lb thug" from "decent, kind, and reasonable young man", and/or "kind, gentle, no disciplinary problems" officer into "vigilante, murderous cop hell bent on killing".
It is clear your mind is set as you accept the statement Michael Brown "charged" the officer; I do not have ESP, thus the autopsy, and investigation(s) must provide the answers. Only speculation is possible without the evidence, however.
The release of the officer's name, thus providing access to his picture, is reprehensible, as is the release of the convenience store video.
Sounds like you're saying the cop should have ran away. But surely I'm just misunderstanding your post.
Yes, you did:
As you are aware that depends on several factors, some UNKNOWN as of today:
1. Distance, between the two, distance to the vehicle,
2. Lighting,
3. Ability to get in my police VEHICLE,
4. Johnson's location through the events; he made definite claims, after stating he walked away.
HA HA HA> HAven't you embrassed yourself enough already ? You don't have a shred of evidence that Wilson attacked the kid first without provocation. Nor do you have a shred of evidence that he pulled his gun on an unarmed person for nothing. You talk like an IDIOT.
Wilson had to start the scuffle. How else can you get a cop wrestling with someone out of his own police car window? Explain to me how that can happen.
By Brown not complying with the officer's command to stop, which would be Brown responsible for starting the scuffle.
The witnesses appear entirely credible...as credible and earnest as anyone could be.
"Appear" ? Sorry. That's not good enough. Anyone can appear to be anything. Serial killers appear to be like altar boys when they appear in court, falsely apologizing to the victims' families, all in order to try to get a reduced sentence. You don't judge a book by it's cover. The witnesses are NOT EVEN WITNESSES AT ALL, for all we know.
That is how it works. People give eyewitness or testimony, and others judge on how credible it appears to be.
The witnesses are every day people and not serial killers. They have no reason to make up such elaborate stories. Their witness is consistent while the cops story is not.
That is how it works. People give eyewitness or testimony, and others judge on how credible it appears to be.
The witnesses are every day people and not serial killers. They have no reason to make up such elaborate stories. Their witness is consistent while the cops story is not.
Just your everyday welfare dope heads.
Well no. They both worked stupid. Matter of fact that was the only reason one of them was over there. She was picking up an employee.
That is how it works. People give eyewitness or testimony, and others judge on how credible it appears to be.
The witnesses are every day people and not serial killers. They have no reason to make up such elaborate stories. Their witness is consistent while the cops story is not.
LOL Of course they have a reason to make up stories.....they're protecting their own.
You cannot just automatically write their stories off. They have to be given fair consideration and taken seriously.
Hardly a game changer, the officer had a firearm, the deceased, nothing but his hands. Deadly force? Only applicable to the one with the gun; many other alleged conversations have been released also. The officer had no history of being a vigilante, is described as a kind hearted, decent human..............just like Michael Brown; again, there may be no easy answer.
Wait a second here. You are calling Michael Brown a kind hearted, decent human ? Am I hearing you right ?
From reports, just as the officer is reported not to have had any excessive force allegations made against him. The officer is also reported to be devestated, this is unlikely to fit neatly into anyone's ready made box. Again, the officer's name & the video should not have been released, Ferguson PD seems to have no interest in calming the riots........though you may not care about those rioting, try to think..........an officer could be injured or killed.............someone who had nothing to do with the death of Michael Brown.
Wilson had to start the scuffle. How else can you get a cop wrestling with someone out of his own police car window? Explain to me how that can happen.
By Brown not complying with the officer's command to stop, which would be Brown responsible for starting the scuffle.
Even if the officer did call for him to stop which we do not know for sure, Brown did not necessarily even hear the officer from outside the squad car. Since when is it ok for the police to corral suspects who have not obviously done something major with a heavy vehicle?
By Brown not complying with the officer's command to stop, which would be Brown responsible for starting the scuffle.
Even if the officer did call for him to stop which we do not know for sure, Brown did not necessarily even hear the officer from outside the squad car. Since when is it ok for the police to corral suspects who have not obviously done something major with a heavy vehicle?
Since about 100 years ago in America. What gave you the idea a cop can't grab a suspect ?
EARTH TO QHC: Cops can do a lot more than that.
LOL Of course they have a reason to make up stories.....they're protecting their own.
You cannot just automatically write their stories off. They have to be given fair consideration and taken seriously.
Stop talking stupid! We don't even know if they were even THERE, at the time of the shooting. We certainly do NOT have to take them seriously.
"Appear" ? Sorry. That's not good enough. Anyone can appear to be anything. Serial killers appear to be like altar boys when they appear in court, falsely apologizing to the victims' families, all in order to try to get a reduced sentence. You don't judge a book by it's cover. The witnesses are NOT EVEN WITNESSES AT ALL, for all we know.
That is how it works. People give eyewitness or testimony, and others judge on how credible it appears to be.
The witnesses are every day people and not serial killers. They have no reason to make up such elaborate stories. Their witness is consistent while the cops story is not.
FALSE! It is just the OPPOSITE. Their version is ludicrous. The cop's story is the one that makes perfect sense. And the so-called witnesses certainly DO have a reason to make up an elaborate story. They are Black, and friend of the deceased.
"I saw the officer proceeding after my friend, Big Mike, with his gun drawn, and he fired a second shot, and that struck my friend, Big Mike," Johnson said. "And at that time, he turned around with his hands up, beginning to tell the officer that he was unarmed and to tell him to stop shooting. But at that time, the officer was firing several more shots into my friend, and he hit the ground and died."
This matches Crenshaw's and Mitchell's story. Crenshaw told CNN that Brown got about 20 feet away from the police cruiser before the officer shot him again.
LOL Of course they have a reason to make up stories.....they're protecting their own.
You cannot just automatically write their stories off. They have to be given fair consideration and taken seriously.
Stop talking stupid! We don't even know if they were even THERE, at the time of the shooting. We certainly do NOT have to take them seriously.
You cannot just automatically write their stories off. They have to be given fair consideration and taken seriously.
Stop talking stupid! We don't even know if they were even THERE, at the time of the shooting. We certainly do NOT have to take them seriously.
Good thing your retarded ass wont be on the jury. I cant believe you just said you dont even know if they were there. You are a fool.
They were not friends of the Michael Brown. If they were friends, it would have been stated that way in news reports.
Even if the officer did call for him to stop which we do not know for sure, Brown did not necessarily even hear the officer from outside the squad car. Since when is it ok for the police to corral suspects who have not obviously done something major with a heavy vehicle?
Since about 100 years ago in America. What gave you the idea a cop can't grab a suspect ?
EARTH TO QHC: Cops can do a lot more than that.
With the police car. The car almost hit the two suspects who were only known at that time to have offended as jaywalkers. How is that ok?
You cannot just automatically write their stories off. They have to be given fair consideration and taken seriously.
Stop talking stupid! We don't even know if they were even THERE, at the time of the shooting. We certainly do NOT have to take them seriously.
Since they made a statement to a national audience, they will most definitely have to testify about it at a trial if there is one and the jury will most definitely have to take them very seriously.
Stop talking stupid! We don't even know if they were even THERE, at the time of the shooting. We certainly do NOT have to take them seriously.
Since they made a statement to a national audience, they will most definitely have to testify about it at a trial if there is one and the jury will most definitely have to take them very seriously.
No they will not. They will know there is no way of know if these witnesses were even there at the time of the event. Face it. You don't have a case here against this officer.
As you are aware, that depends on several factors, some UNKNOWN as of today.[/B]
1. Distance, between the two, distance to the vehicle,
2. Lighting,
3. Ability to get in my police VEHICLE,
4. Johnson's location through the events; he made definite claims, after stating he walked away.
A scenario with no hard evidence, only conflicting statements. So guessing, I would shoot in the air, depending on the above factors, try to shoot near him, or his legs.....possibly [/B]hitting vital organs, of course. I have not seen the officer's height, another factor.
Now, reality: Michael Brown had no criminal record, was too timid to play football...............however toxicology may show the presence of mind altering substances in either or both individuals. That could explain the sudden change to "charging, violent 300lb thug" from "decent, kind, and reasonable young man", and/or "kind, gentle, no disciplinary problems" officer into "vigilante, murderous cop hell bent on killing".
It is clear your mind is set as you accept the statement Michael Brown "charged" the officer; I do not have ESP, thus the autopsy, and investigation(s) must provide the answers. Only speculation is possible without the evidence, however.
The release of the officer's name, thus providing access to his picture, is reprehensible, as is the release of the convenience store video.
Sounds like you're saying the cop should have ran away. But surely I'm just misunderstanding your post.
Yes, you did:
As you are aware that depends on several factors, some UNKNOWN as of today:
1. Distance, between the two, distance to the vehicle,
2. Lighting,
3. Ability to get in my police VEHICLE,
4. Johnson's location through the events; he made definite claims, after stating he walked away.
Sounds like you're saying the cop should have ran away. But surely I'm just misunderstanding your post.
Yes, you did:
As you are aware that depends on several factors, some UNKNOWN as of today:
1. Distance, between the two, distance to the vehicle,
2. Lighting,
3. Ability to get in my police VEHICLE,
4. Johnson's location through the events; he made definite claims, after stating he walked away.
I want to be sure that I understand your point. Are you arguing that police have a DUTY to run away from an attacking suspect and can only use their firearm if their ability to retreat from an attack is blocked?
Even if the officer did call for him to stop which we do not know for sure, Brown did not necessarily even hear the officer from outside the squad car. Since when is it ok for the police to corral suspects who have not obviously done something major with a heavy vehicle?
Since about 100 years ago in America. What gave you the idea a cop can't grab a suspect ?
EARTH TO QHC: Cops can do a lot more than that.
With the police car. The car almost hit the two suspects who were only known at that time to have offended as jaywalkers. How is that ok?
