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.
I agree, nothing so far has come out about the tests not being correct. And, it may never come out. The tests may have been done on the up and up, who knows. Also, the witnesses may have been questioned at length for both sides, but we'll never know for sure because some witnesses were dismissed as liars. It was handled by people that had a dog in the fight. No outside independent sources, some witnesses dismissed, no word on the two construction workers that witnessed the actual shooting, and was on video the second it happened. So, can any of us be sure that everything was handled correctly, fairly, and above board?It's been know to have happened. Are you saying that bias never enters into police cases?Some are, some aren't. There have been many cases of tainted evidence, misread DNA tests, and other botched tests. And, again, who did the tests? Was it an independent outside source, or was it someone associated with or connect with the government?Forensics experts did the tests. They are VERY good at their jobs. Ever watched Forensic Files?
So now, you are trying to say that the forensic experts are covering for the police? Good Lord. This belongs in the conspiracy theory section of the forum. Your conspiracy theories are worthless.
Sure it has and will in the future, but there is nothing to indicate that in this particular case besides some angry black people.
There was only one story, the cop's. A dead man can't talk and give his story.Where is the side of the story that disputes the cops claim that Mr. Brown reached for the cops weapon while his arm was inside the cop's vehicle?There was only one side of the story to investigate and prove
There were two. There always is, there always will be.
The claim Wilson shot Brown with his hands up was a side, the claim Wilson shot Brown in self defense was the other. This insistence that there be only one side to a tragedy like this is what causes more tragedy, including the shooting of those two cops.
Justice is impartial, justice is blind. It sees no skin color or ethnicity, religion or creed. It is JUSTICE.
The forensics examination agrees with the cop's story. The Grand Jury did not indict the Officer Wilson because the evidence agreed with his version of events, including forensic evidence such as gun powder, blood, and trajectory of bullets. None of the evidence went against his version of events. It has nothing to do with corruption in this instance. The officer was within his right to defend himself against this person.
No hat. sorry. So, do I have to swallow the BS to keep from being called crazy, insane, prejudice, blind, deaf, and dreaming in a fairy tale world?Not to mention falsifying evidence and coercing witnesses is a punishable felony. Sonny, really, take off the tin foil hat please.
You're entitle to believe anything that you want to believe, that's your right, I respect that right.I agree, nothing so far has come out about the tests not being correct. And, it may never come out. The tests may have been done on the up and up, who knows. Also, the witnesses may have been questioned at length for both sides, but we'll never know for sure because some witnesses were dismissed as liars. It was handled by people that had a dog in the fight. No outside independent sources, some witnesses dismissed, no word on the two construction workers that witnessed the actual shooting, and was on video the second it happened. So, can any of us be sure that everything was handled correctly, fairly, and above board?It's been know to have happened. Are you saying that bias never enters into police cases?Some are, some aren't. There have been many cases of tainted evidence, misread DNA tests, and other botched tests. And, again, who did the tests? Was it an independent outside source, or was it someone associated with or connect with the government?
So now, you are trying to say that the forensic experts are covering for the police? Good Lord. This belongs in the conspiracy theory section of the forum. Your conspiracy theories are worthless.
Sure it has and will in the future, but there is nothing to indicate that in this particular case besides some angry black people.
Yes, I believe the officer's story. It aligns with the forensics evidence and other eye witness accounts (which are always questionable anyways, which is why we rely more on forensic physical evidence). Unless you can prove that the forensics experts are also corrupt, then you've got nothing at all to argue about here.
There was only one story, the cop's. A dead man can't talk and give his story.Where is the side of the story that disputes the cops claim that Mr. Brown reached for the cops weapon while his arm was inside the cop's vehicle?There was only one side of the story to investigate and prove
There were two. There always is, there always will be.
The claim Wilson shot Brown with his hands up was a side, the claim Wilson shot Brown in self defense was the other. This insistence that there be only one side to a tragedy like this is what causes more tragedy, including the shooting of those two cops.
Justice is impartial, justice is blind. It sees no skin color or ethnicity, religion or creed. It is JUSTICE.
The forensics examination agrees with the cop's story. The Grand Jury did not indict the Officer Wilson because the evidence agreed with his version of events, including forensic evidence such as gun powder, blood, and trajectory of bullets. None of the evidence went against his version of events. It has nothing to do with corruption in this instance. The officer was within his right to defend himself against this person.
You're entitle to believe that, it's your right.There was only one story, the cop's. A dead man can't talk and give his story.Where is the side of the story that disputes the cops claim that Mr. Brown reached for the cops weapon while his arm was inside the cop's vehicle?There was only one side of the story to investigate and prove
There were two. There always is, there always will be.
The claim Wilson shot Brown with his hands up was a side, the claim Wilson shot Brown in self defense was the other. This insistence that there be only one side to a tragedy like this is what causes more tragedy, including the shooting of those two cops.
Justice is impartial, justice is blind. It sees no skin color or ethnicity, religion or creed. It is JUSTICE.
The forensics examination agrees with the cop's story. The Grand Jury did not indict the Officer Wilson because the evidence agreed with his version of events, including forensic evidence such as gun powder, blood, and trajectory of bullets. None of the evidence went against his version of events. It has nothing to do with corruption in this instance. The officer was within his right to defend himself against this person.
The forensics evidence tells the story of what actually happened. Everything aligned with the officer's versions of events, including trajectory, blood spatter, gun powder burns, etc. There is absolutely no evidence of any corruption involved.
You're entitle to believe anything that you want to believe, that's your right, I respect that right.I agree, nothing so far has come out about the tests not being correct. And, it may never come out. The tests may have been done on the up and up, who knows. Also, the witnesses may have been questioned at length for both sides, but we'll never know for sure because some witnesses were dismissed as liars. It was handled by people that had a dog in the fight. No outside independent sources, some witnesses dismissed, no word on the two construction workers that witnessed the actual shooting, and was on video the second it happened. So, can any of us be sure that everything was handled correctly, fairly, and above board?It's been know to have happened. Are you saying that bias never enters into police cases?So now, you are trying to say that the forensic experts are covering for the police? Good Lord. This belongs in the conspiracy theory section of the forum. Your conspiracy theories are worthless.
Sure it has and will in the future, but there is nothing to indicate that in this particular case besides some angry black people.
Yes, I believe the officer's story. It aligns with the forensics evidence and other eye witness accounts (which are always questionable anyways, which is why we rely more on forensic physical evidence). Unless you can prove that the forensics experts are also corrupt, then you've got nothing at all to argue about here.
So I guess in broad daylight the cops cleaned up the damning blood splatter and powder residue...and then used a brush and tear dropper I guess...to reapply gunshot residue and blood splatter to rig the crime scene? All while everyone watched?
Or did they tow the car and body to their super secret island warehouse they share with Dr. Evil and rig up the crime scene....and then called the DA and DOJ and said "Muwahahahaha we are ready for you to inspect it now".
Do we really need ALL of these ratings? I don't think so.
Your feelings are not evidence. The reports etc are evidence. You have to rebut. No one else has to do anything except point that out to you until you do.Do you know that for a fact, or are you just assuming because you're pro-cop? How many do those things? How many don't do those things?That's cute, very good. I have never ever said that police single out black people, never. Police abuse their power and authority with anyone they feel like it, regardless of skin color, nationality religion, or anything else. They do whatever they feel like doing to anyone that pleases them. In case you're curious or wondering, it's well documented. A couple of days ago on another thread on this forum, I listed a couple of dozen links to prove what I say about low-life social zero cops. You can love them and respect them all you want, it's your right, but don't expect those of us that know what they do to follow suit. We read the daily news and pay attention to what's going on in this country, especially on Main Street America. All of this didn't just start yesterday, it's been going on for many years now. They stories would fill a good size book. Do some research and then tell me how wonderful and great cops are. Tell me just how much they earn our respect.Obviously you misread and/or misunderstood my comment. I have never ever said, nor implied, that the police has taken anyone's rights away. Police can not take rights away. Police do not have the power nor authority to take rights away. Please go back and re-read my comment. Thanks.
The bottom line here is that the police have a job to do. If they come across a belligerant suspect who wants to fight, then they have to think of the safety of everyone and not just themselves. What would you suggest the police do? Just let black people go because they're black and might feel offended if a white police officer tries to arrest them or detain them after being called?
Go read about the old men and old ladies they abuse and brutalize, go read about the children they molest and rape, go read about the stealing they do, the bribes they take, the false testimony they give in court, and the other wonderful things they do each and every day somewhere in this country.
Sorry, but you would be wrong. MOST police officers do not do these things.
YOU are the one throwing about accusations. The burden of proof lies on you, not me. I am skeptical of your claims, as they are ridiculous . . . so how many do these things?
ChrisL admits she has nothing. Thank You.The Free Thought ProjectYou are pulling them out of your butt. "MOST police officers do ot do these things", you say. Really? Link? And, yes, 51% does mean most.51% is most. Stop trying to pretend that cop crime does not occur.
51%? Where do you come up with that number? Link? You can't just pull numbers out of your butt . . .
Theres no link...to incidents that dont occur.
There are 900, 000 cops in America. Even if there were 9, 000 Mike Brown incidents per year...almost 200 per week...that'd only be 1% of cops. And we DO NOT have 200 Mike Browns per week. We have...like 1-2 at most.
READ READ READ READ
This means nothing. This is nothing but a website dedicated to people who hate the police. Lol. Who is responsible for the creation of this website? There is no "about us" available on this website. Not to mention, it in no way is an indictment of ALL or even MOST police officers. Lol. Silly.
There was only one story, the cop's. A dead man can't talk and give his story.Where is the side of the story that disputes the cops claim that Mr. Brown reached for the cops weapon while his arm was inside the cop's vehicle?There was only one side of the story to investigate and prove
There were two. There always is, there always will be.
The claim Wilson shot Brown with his hands up was a side, the claim Wilson shot Brown in self defense was the other. This insistence that there be only one side to a tragedy like this is what causes more tragedy, including the shooting of those two cops.
Justice is impartial, justice is blind. It sees no skin color or ethnicity, religion or creed. It is JUSTICE.
The forensics examination agrees with the cop's story. The Grand Jury did not indict the Officer Wilson because the evidence agreed with his version of events, including forensic evidence such as gun powder, blood, and trajectory of bullets. None of the evidence went against his version of events. It has nothing to do with corruption in this instance. The officer was within his right to defend himself against this person.
Yes, here in America, we routinely use forensics data to determine the exact scenario, and when a person is guilty of murder and/or is lying, the forensic evidence will show that to be the case. When the suspects version of events aligns exactly with the physical evidence presented in the autopsy, then it is pretty much cut and dried . . . unless you are accusing the forensic pathologists of being corrupt too?
There was no suspects version of events. The suspect was dead and unable to give his side on the events. And, yes, anyone chosen by law enforcement that is directly tied to or associated with them, is very capable of being biased. It's not unheard of.There was only one story, the cop's. A dead man can't talk and give his story.Where is the side of the story that disputes the cops claim that Mr. Brown reached for the cops weapon while his arm was inside the cop's vehicle?There was only one side of the story to investigate and prove
There were two. There always is, there always will be.
The claim Wilson shot Brown with his hands up was a side, the claim Wilson shot Brown in self defense was the other. This insistence that there be only one side to a tragedy like this is what causes more tragedy, including the shooting of those two cops.
Justice is impartial, justice is blind. It sees no skin color or ethnicity, religion or creed. It is JUSTICE.
The forensics examination agrees with the cop's story. The Grand Jury did not indict the Officer Wilson because the evidence agreed with his version of events, including forensic evidence such as gun powder, blood, and trajectory of bullets. None of the evidence went against his version of events. It has nothing to do with corruption in this instance. The officer was within his right to defend himself against this person.
Yes, here in America, we routinely use forensics data to determine the exact scenario, and when a person is guilty of murder and/or is lying, the forensic evidence will show that to be the case. When the suspects version of events aligns exactly with the physical evidence presented in the autopsy, then it is pretty much cut and dried . . . unless you are accusing the forensic pathologists of being corrupt too?
I doubt very seriously anyone is ever going to come forth with anything remotely close to what have described. I believe everything that could be put on the table has already been put on the table.And who knows...some loner hermit who was videotaping the incident but has been scared to show it....may pop up in June with a video showing Darren Wilson execute Brown in cold blood while surrendering and no fight ever occurred.
And all.those people would be charged with falsification of evidence and lying to the FBI and DOJ. And many beaurocrats would lose careers.
Which...is why there was no cover up.
There was no suspects version of events. The suspect was dead and unable to give his side on the events. And, yes, anyone chosen by law enforcement that is directly tied to or associated with them, is very capable of being biased. It's not unheard of.There was only one story, the cop's. A dead man can't talk and give his story.Where is the side of the story that disputes the cops claim that Mr. Brown reached for the cops weapon while his arm was inside the cop's vehicle?There were two. There always is, there always will be.
The claim Wilson shot Brown with his hands up was a side, the claim Wilson shot Brown in self defense was the other. This insistence that there be only one side to a tragedy like this is what causes more tragedy, including the shooting of those two cops.
Justice is impartial, justice is blind. It sees no skin color or ethnicity, religion or creed. It is JUSTICE.
The forensics examination agrees with the cop's story. The Grand Jury did not indict the Officer Wilson because the evidence agreed with his version of events, including forensic evidence such as gun powder, blood, and trajectory of bullets. None of the evidence went against his version of events. It has nothing to do with corruption in this instance. The officer was within his right to defend himself against this person.
Yes, here in America, we routinely use forensics data to determine the exact scenario, and when a person is guilty of murder and/or is lying, the forensic evidence will show that to be the case. When the suspects version of events aligns exactly with the physical evidence presented in the autopsy, then it is pretty much cut and dried . . . unless you are accusing the forensic pathologists of being corrupt too?
I doubt very seriously anyone is ever going to come forth with anything remotely close to what have described. I believe everything that could be put on the table has already been put on the table.And who knows...some loner hermit who was videotaping the incident but has been scared to show it....may pop up in June with a video showing Darren Wilson execute Brown in cold blood while surrendering and no fight ever occurred.
And all.those people would be charged with falsification of evidence and lying to the FBI and DOJ. And many beaurocrats would lose careers.
Which...is why there was no cover up.
That is silly, pathetic, and ridiculous, to say the least. People can disagree with me, and that's fine, no problem. I would never ever say that they're corrupt. very silly to say that, really. Also, I have never ever said that anything was falsified. I said that it was possible, not that it did happen. You're just trying to be funny and ridiculous at the same time. Please don't say that I have said something that I have not said. Thanks.There was only one story, the cop's. A dead man can't talk and give his story.Where is the side of the story that disputes the cops claim that Mr. Brown reached for the cops weapon while his arm was inside the cop's vehicle?There were two. There always is, there always will be.
The claim Wilson shot Brown with his hands up was a side, the claim Wilson shot Brown in self defense was the other. This insistence that there be only one side to a tragedy like this is what causes more tragedy, including the shooting of those two cops.
Justice is impartial, justice is blind. It sees no skin color or ethnicity, religion or creed. It is JUSTICE.
The forensics examination agrees with the cop's story. The Grand Jury did not indict the Officer Wilson because the evidence agreed with his version of events, including forensic evidence such as gun powder, blood, and trajectory of bullets. None of the evidence went against his version of events. It has nothing to do with corruption in this instance. The officer was within his right to defend himself against this person.
Yes, here in America, we routinely use forensics data to determine the exact scenario, and when a person is guilty of murder and/or is lying, the forensic evidence will show that to be the case. When the suspects version of events aligns exactly with the physical evidence presented in the autopsy, then it is pretty much cut and dried . . . unless you are accusing the forensic pathologists of being corrupt too?
Entirely predictable. Anyone who doesn't agree with Sonny's version of events is corrupt. Any evidence that doesn't support his argument is falsified, any witness whose testimony doesn't support his argument must have been cherry picked. One vast conspiracy against a poor black boy shot by a villainous white cop.
This is enough to make anyone's head spin.
