Importance of Mike Brown's robbery video

[Rotagilla]

So when you said

It's in the police report.

You were outright lying.

Thanks

No..it's in the police report.Just because they haven't released it to you doesn't mean it isn't there.
No reasonable person believes that there is no police report anywhere describing the shooting.

Prove that the cops version is a lie.

 

[jwoodie]

,

 

[Rotagilla]

Backpedaling and word mincing at its finest...

Who?

 

[jwoodie]

Backpedaling and word mincing at its finest...

Who?

CC, of course!

 

[ClosedCaption]

So when you said

It's in the police report.

You were outright lying.

Thanks

No..it's in the police report.Just because they haven't released it to you doesn't mean it isn't there.
.

The police report hasnt been released so how can you tell anyone what it says?

 

[jwoodie]

So when you said

It's in the police report.

You were outright lying.

Thanks

No..it's in the police report.Just because they haven't released it to you doesn't mean it isn't there.
.

The police report hasnt been released so how can you tell anyone what it says?

Are you going to recant/apologize when it is officially released?

 

[Rotagilla]

Apparently his standard of "proof" is that if he didn't see it, then it didn't happen.

So there goes the entire history of the world that happened prior to when he was born...(probably somewhere around the year 2000.)

 

[ClosedCaption]

Apparently his standard of "proof" is that if he didn't see it, then it didn't happen.

So there goes the entire history of the world that happened prior to when he was born...(probably somewhere around the year 2000.)

My bad who made you say you saw the report then claim that it hasnt been released?

You should get that guy who made you lie

 

[Rotagilla]

Apparently his standard of "proof" is that if he didn't see it, then it didn't happen.

So there goes the entire history of the world that happened prior to when he was born...(probably somewhere around the year 2000.)

My bad who made you say you saw the report then claim that it hasnt been released?

You should get that guy who made you lie

I never said I saw the report.
I said that the cop made a report and the police chief saw it and commented on it specifically as giving the reason for the shooting in the very first news conference.
I also said that, despite your claims to the contrary, you can believe a police report exists concerning the shooting whether you have seen it or not.

I also said that your "standard of proof" being that if you didn't see it, an event didn't occur is ridiculous.

I also said that, therefore by your "standard of proof", nothing in the history of the world prior to your birth in 2000 ever happened since you didn't "see it".

..but I never said I saw the report concerning the shooting.

 

[Meathead]

The video sheds a lot of light on who Michael Brown is. It gives lie to the "gentle giant" narrative and is indisputable and very likely admissible in the unlikely chance of a misbegotten trial.

Simply, it shows Brown was a thug.

 

[RKMBrown]

He's not scary to me. Shoot him dead in the street for being a bully? Sigh.

That's not why he got killed.

If not bullying why did the cop kill the teen?

Self defense, resisting arrest after committing a felony, assaulting a police officer...

So the officer killed the unarmed teen in self defense. I see. How many shots did it take again for him to kill the teen? hmmm... I'm not convinced. Sounds more like anger than self defense. I hunt and I've never even shot an animal half a dozen times.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Apparently his standard of "proof" is that if he didn't see it, then it didn't happen.

So there goes the entire history of the world that happened prior to when he was born...(probably somewhere around the year 2000.)

My bad who made you say you saw the report then claim that it hasnt been released?

You should get that guy who made you lie

I never said I saw the report.
I said that the cop made a report and the police chief saw it and commented on it specifically as giving the reason for the shooting in the very first news conference.
I also said that, despite your claims to the contrary, you can believe a police report exists concerning the shooting whether you have seen it or not.

The narrative of investigators and the officer involved in the incident, Darren Wilson, regarding the shooting that killed Michael Brown were redacted entirely.

I also said that your "standard of proof" being that if you didn't see it, an event didn't occur is ridiculous.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/police-reports-shed-little-light-on-ferguson-shooting-1408757299

I also said that, therefore by your "standard of proof", nothing in the history of the world prior to your birth in 2000 ever happened since you didn't "see it".

..but I never said I saw the report concerning the shooting.

You show me one quote where the Police Chief gave the reason for the shooting. Just one.

 

[RKMBrown]

It's in the police report.

1 count battery on a LEO. Felony.
1 count trying to take a cop's gun. Felony. (arguably; attempted robbery)
Resisting arrest with violence. Another felony.

Want to see the missouri statutes on stopping a fleeing felon?

Ambiguous. What does "trying to take a cop's gun" even mean? Walking toward the cop? Putting your hands down? Pointing at the gun? Saying I'll take that from you? Why was the teen being given access to the cop's? Did that happen before or after the supposed battery?

So what if the teen was a jerk, so what if the cop got punched, I don't like the idea of a police officer going vigilante on a teenager and deciding the teen is gonna die for punching him. The teen was not in close proximity with the police car when he was killed. I don't get it.

I might assume the scenario is cop drives up to boys walking in middle of street to tell them to get out of the middle of the street. Teen punches cop. Cop reaches for gun. Teen reaches for gun. Cop fires weapon. Teen runs. Cop executes teen. Even if that is the scenario. I still don't like it.

 

[Rotagilla]

Apparently his standard of "proof" is that if he didn't see it, then it didn't happen.

So there goes the entire history of the world that happened prior to when he was born...(probably somewhere around the year 2000.)

My bad who made you say you saw the report then claim that it hasnt been released?

You should get that guy who made you lie

I never said I saw the report.
I said that the cop made a report and the police chief saw it and commented on it specifically as giving the reason for the shooting in the very first news conference.
I also said that, despite your claims to the contrary, you can believe a police report exists concerning the shooting whether you have seen it or not.

The narrative of investigators and the officer involved in the incident, Darren Wilson, regarding the shooting that killed Michael Brown were redacted entirely.

I also said that your "standard of proof" being that if you didn't see it, an event didn't occur is ridiculous.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/police-reports-shed-little-light-on-ferguson-shooting-1408757299

I also said that, therefore by your "standard of proof", nothing in the history of the world prior to your birth in 2000 ever happened since you didn't "see it".

..but I never said I saw the report concerning the shooting.

You show me one quote where the Police Chief gave the reason for the shooting. Just one.

Go look for the original press conference and pay attention. I'm not running in circles for you.

You make ridiculous claims that the cop made no report on the shooting. Sure..that's plausible.. /sarcasm

If you need to believe that there isn't a report on the shooting because you haven't seen it, go ahead.

I'm done with you. There's no point trying to have an adult discussion. You prefer playing games.

..but when this all shakes out I'm going to remember you aid there was no report on the shooting.. We'll see who is a fool.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Apparently his standard of "proof" is that if he didn't see it, then it didn't happen.

So there goes the entire history of the world that happened prior to when he was born...(probably somewhere around the year 2000.)

My bad who made you say you saw the report then claim that it hasnt been released?

You should get that guy who made you lie

I never said I saw the report.
I said that the cop made a report and the police chief saw it and commented on it specifically as giving the reason for the shooting in the very first news conference.
I also said that, despite your claims to the contrary, you can believe a police report exists concerning the shooting whether you have seen it or not.

The narrative of investigators and the officer involved in the incident, Darren Wilson, regarding the shooting that killed Michael Brown were redacted entirely.

I also said that your "standard of proof" being that if you didn't see it, an event didn't occur is ridiculous.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/police-reports-shed-little-light-on-ferguson-shooting-1408757299

I also said that, therefore by your "standard of proof", nothing in the history of the world prior to your birth in 2000 ever happened since you didn't "see it".

..but I never said I saw the report concerning the shooting.

You show me one quote where the Police Chief gave the reason for the shooting. Just one.

Go look for the original press conference and pay attention. I'm not running in circles for you.

The reason for the shooting doesnt exist, thanks for playing

 

[Rotagilla]

Ambiguous. What does "trying to take a cop's gun" even mean? Walking toward the cop? Putting your hands down? Pointing at the gun? Saying I'll take that from you? Why was the teen being given access to the cop's? Did that happen before or after the supposed battery?

If you touch a cops gun you have committed a felony. He can shoot you.
Don't think so? Go try to grab one. Give it a try.

So what if the teen was a jerk,

That's not why he got shot.

so what if the cop got punched,

That is battery on a LEO, a felony and he can shoot you.
If you resist with violence, that is another felony and he can shoot you.

I don't like the idea of a police officer going vigilante on a teenager

That didn't happen.

and deciding the teen is gonna die for punching him.

The cop doesn't have to try to determine the attackers intent. If you punch a LEO you're going to jail..at least..and he can shoot you. Go give it a try...

The teen was not in close proximity with the police car when he was killed. I don't get it.

Doesn't matter whether you "get it" or not. They don't need your approval.


Section 563.046 Missouri statutes authorizes a law enforcement officer to use "deadly force" "when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested . . . has committed or attempted to commit a felony."

 

[Rotagilla]

Apparently his standard of "proof" is that if he didn't see it, then it didn't happen.

So there goes the entire history of the world that happened prior to when he was born...(probably somewhere around the year 2000.)

My bad who made you say you saw the report then claim that it hasnt been released?

You should get that guy who made you lie

I never said I saw the report.
I said that the cop made a report and the police chief saw it and commented on it specifically as giving the reason for the shooting in the very first news conference.
I also said that, despite your claims to the contrary, you can believe a police report exists concerning the shooting whether you have seen it or not.

The narrative of investigators and the officer involved in the incident, Darren Wilson, regarding the shooting that killed Michael Brown were redacted entirely.

I also said that your "standard of proof" being that if you didn't see it, an event didn't occur is ridiculous.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/police-reports-shed-little-light-on-ferguson-shooting-1408757299

I also said that, therefore by your "standard of proof", nothing in the history of the world prior to your birth in 2000 ever happened since you didn't "see it".

..but I never said I saw the report concerning the shooting.

You show me one quote where the Police Chief gave the reason for the shooting. Just one.

Go look for the original press conference and pay attention. I'm not running in circles for you.

The reason for the shooting doesnt exist, thanks for playing

saint michael of brown committed 3 felonies
Battery on a LEO, trying to take a LEO weapon and felony resisting arrest.
police chief said so in the first press conference.


Section 563.046 Missouri statutes authorizes a law enforcement officer to use "deadly force" "when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested . . . has committed or attempted to commit a felony."

Run along scooter..you aren't looking very sharp here.

 

[RKMBrown]

Ambiguous. What does "trying to take a cop's gun" even mean? Walking toward the cop? Putting your hands down? Pointing at the gun? Saying I'll take that from you? Why was the teen being given access to the cop's? Did that happen before or after the supposed battery?

If you touch a cops gun you have committed a felony. He can shoot you.
Don't think so? Go try to grab one. Give it a try. No shit he can shoot you, my issue is not with whether it is a felony or not or legal or not, my issue is whether it is proper for police to MOW DOWN 18year old unarmed teenagers with an entire clip including shots to the back and a coup de grâce shot to the head as the teen is begging for his life. If this is what we can expect from police, I'd rather have no police. What if some of those errant shots killed an innocent child who happened to be in the vicinity? The cop is in the middle of the street in an inhabited area firing at the teen horizontally for the first shots before he killed him with the last shot into his brain.

So what if the teen was a jerk,

That's not why he got shot. Only the cop knows why he killed this teen. That's why we have courts of law, so that we can get to the bottom of things vs. making rash decisions in the street, such as having cops kill teens.

so what if the cop got punched,

That is battery on a LEO, a felony and he can shoot you.
If you resist with violence, that is another felony and he can shoot you. Again, there is a marked difference between shooting someone and executing an unarmed felon.

I don't like the idea of a police officer going vigilante on a teenager

That didn't happen. Really? You know this? How much of a chance did the cop give the teen between the first and last shot?

and deciding the teen is gonna die for punching him.

The cop doesn't have to try to determine the attackers intent. If you punch a LEO you're going to jail..at least.. And if the teen went to jail we would not be having this conversation. The issue in my mind is excessive use of force. Their job is to protect and serve, I don't think he did his job in this case.

The teen was not in close proximity with the police car when he was killed. I don't get it.

Doesn't matter whether you "get it" or not. They don't need your approval.


Section 563.046 Missouri statutes authorizes a law enforcement officer to use "deadly force" "when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested . . . has committed or attempted to commit a felony."

Cant' wait to see how they prove reasonable belief that an entire clip was necessary to be fired into the unarmed teen to "effect arrest." Again, there is a marked difference between firing your weapon at a person, and emptying your clip in them with the last shot to their brain. A taser is also deadly force.. I would have assumed something like a taser would have been more in line with what happened here.

In blue.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Apparently his standard of "proof" is that if he didn't see it, then it didn't happen.

So there goes the entire history of the world that happened prior to when he was born...(probably somewhere around the year 2000.)

My bad who made you say you saw the report then claim that it hasnt been released?

You should get that guy who made you lie

I never said I saw the report.
I said that the cop made a report and the police chief saw it and commented on it specifically as giving the reason for the shooting in the very first news conference.
I also said that, despite your claims to the contrary, you can believe a police report exists concerning the shooting whether you have seen it or not.

The narrative of investigators and the officer involved in the incident, Darren Wilson, regarding the shooting that killed Michael Brown were redacted entirely.

I also said that your "standard of proof" being that if you didn't see it, an event didn't occur is ridiculous.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/police-reports-shed-little-light-on-ferguson-shooting-1408757299

I also said that, therefore by your "standard of proof", nothing in the history of the world prior to your birth in 2000 ever happened since you didn't "see it".

..but I never said I saw the report concerning the shooting.

You show me one quote where the Police Chief gave the reason for the shooting. Just one.

Go look for the original press conference and pay attention. I'm not running in circles for you.

The reason for the shooting doesnt exist, thanks for playing

saint michael of brown committed 3 felonies
Battery on a LEO, trying to take a LEO weapon and felony resisting arrest.
police chief said so in the first press conference.


Section 563.046 Missouri statutes authorizes a law enforcement officer to use "deadly force" "when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested . . . has committed or attempted to commit a felony."

Run along scooter..you aren't looking very sharp here.

I'll say it again since you're confused:

The reason for the shooting doesnt exist. If you find one given post it, if not


thanks for playing

 

[Meathead]

I'll say it again since you're confused:

The reason for the shooting doesnt exist. If you find one given post it, if not


thanks for playing

Your problem isn't Rot. Your problem is Wilson's defense which I promise you will be pretty formidable, if needed. There seems to be an extremely good reason that this is not being played out in the court of public opinion on the officer's behalf.

Wilson will walk. rants for "justice" aside. I am sure he has the best consultants money can buy.