Just read Wilson's testimony to the grand jury....WOW!

[RetiredGySgt]

Why didn't Wilson just call for backup? If these kids had robbed a place, did someone get killed? I can understand going after them if they had committed murder or rape, but robbery? Wilson is as dumb as Zimmerman.

Retard alert, Wilson did call for back up, he then went to arrest Brown, at which time brown slammed the door on him attacked him through the open window and tried to kill him by taking his firearm.

 

[R.D.]

Why didn't Wilson just call for backup? If these kids had robbed a place, did someone get killed? I can understand going after them if they had committed murder or rape, but robbery? Wilson is as dumb as Zimmerman.

Christ, have you even read the transcripts? He did call for back up

Geez, really?

I read it. Why didn't he wind his window up or drive off? That would have gotten Brown away.

Because he's a cop, not a coward.

What's wrong with you?

 

[ricechickie]

That's what he says. And we all know cops don't lie.

Why is the dead punk automatically given the benefit of a doubt while the cop is flogged and put to the rack? There's something very wrong with the priorities here.

Maybe because the cop has a lot to gain to tell the story in a way that reflects best on him.

And the witnesses that told the same story ?

Exactly what did they have to gain?

Burned down houses?

What about the witnesses who told a different story?

Like the ones that kept changing their stories, or the ones that admitted they never actually saw it, they were just telling what they heard?

Those witnesses

Or the ones who's testimonies directly conflicted with the autopsy reports and other physical evidence? Those witnesses

Be specific

Any witnesses. What did they have to gain?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Why is the dead punk automatically given the benefit of a doubt while the cop is flogged and put to the rack? There's something very wrong with the priorities here.

Maybe because the cop has a lot to gain to tell the story in a way that reflects best on him.

And the witnesses that told the same story ?

Exactly what did they have to gain?

Burned down houses?

What about the witnesses who told a different story?

Like the ones that kept changing their stories, or the ones that admitted they never actually saw it, they were just telling what they heard?

Those witnesses

Or the ones who's testimonies directly conflicted with the autopsy reports and other physical evidence? Those witnesses

Be specific

Any witnesses. What did they have to gain?

You are aware of course that most of the supposed witnesses were proven to have lied based on the forensic evidence? That the ones not proven to have lied supported the story the cop told?

 

[R.D.]

Why is the dead punk automatically given the benefit of a doubt while the cop is flogged and put to the rack? There's something very wrong with the priorities here.

Maybe because the cop has a lot to gain to tell the story in a way that reflects best on him.

And the witnesses that told the same story ?

Exactly what did they have to gain?

Burned down houses?

What about the witnesses who told a different story?

Like the ones that kept changing their stories, or the ones that admitted they never actually saw it, they were just telling what they heard?

Those witnesses

Or the ones who's testimonies directly conflicted with the autopsy reports and other physical evidence? Those witnesses

Be specific

Any witnesses. What did they have to gain?

What does any liar have to gain?

 

[Pop23]

Why is the dead punk automatically given the benefit of a doubt while the cop is flogged and put to the rack? There's something very wrong with the priorities here.

Maybe because the cop has a lot to gain to tell the story in a way that reflects best on him.

And the witnesses that told the same story ?

Exactly what did they have to gain?

Burned down houses?

What about the witnesses who told a different story?

Like the ones that kept changing their stories, or the ones that admitted they never actually saw it, they were just telling what they heard?

Those witnesses

Or the ones who's testimonies directly conflicted with the autopsy reports and other physical evidence? Those witnesses

Be specific

Any witnesses. What did they have to gain?

In Ferguson, getting "the Man " seems it's own reward.

The GC transcripts are all over the interwebs. You might want to start with the synopsis of the DA.

 

[Pop23]

Hey, where did DeRideo go?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

You don't appear to be a very intelligent person. In a GJ proceeding the only facts that are introduced are from the prosecution with very little counter from the defense

Ironic given that you don't even know that there is no defense attorney present in a GJ presentation.

Are you sure you knew that? Did I teach you something the others on this board have been trying to point out to you all day? Nothing you have posted seems to acknowledge that as a fact of the proceedings. You keep bitching about a full

Why didn't Wilson just call for backup? If these kids had robbed a place, did someone get killed? I can understand going after them if they had committed murder or rape, but robbery? Wilson is as dumb as Zimmerman.

Christ, have you even read the transcripts? He did call for back up

Geez, really?

I read it. Why didn't he wind his window up or drive off? That would have gotten Brown away.

Are you seriously fucking saying it's the job of law enforcement to walk away from a criminal thug? What part of law and enforcement don't you grasp?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I read it. Why didn't he wind his window up or drive off? That would have gotten Brown away.

He's a police officer.
Not sure how things are for you subjects of the Queen, but In the US, police officers don't run away from confrontation w/ people acting suspiciously and/or suspected criminals.

 

[Kondor3]

Grand Jury Volume 5

Beginning on page 195. He was in a battle with Brown!

That's what he says. And we all know cops don't lie.

Why is the dead punk automatically given the benefit of a doubt while the cop is flogged and put to the rack? There's something very wrong with the priorities here.

Maybe because the cop has a lot to gain to tell the story in a way that reflects best on him.

And if the way he told the story was the way it actually happened?

 

[Kondor3]

Why is the dead punk automatically given the benefit of a doubt while the cop is flogged and put to the rack? There's something very wrong with the priorities here.

Maybe because the cop has a lot to gain to tell the story in a way that reflects best on him.

And the witnesses that told the same story ?

Exactly what did they have to gain?

Burned down houses?

What about the witnesses who told a different story?

Like the ones that kept changing their stories, or the ones that admitted they never actually saw it, they were just telling what they heard?

Those witnesses

Or the ones who's testimonies directly conflicted with the autopsy reports and other physical evidence? Those witnesses

Be specific

Any witnesses. What did they have to gain?

Crucifying a White Cop - the most hated kind of critter in their universe?

 

[AmericanFirst]

The facts don't back up your opinion, they back up Wilsons account. Another libtard We don't believe the truth thread. Where is the mod that shuts them down?

The facts were never cross examined. There was no one offering an alternative to the prosecutors case. That isn't justice, that is a whitewash. GJ indictments are easy to obtain but the Ferguson Prosecutor was failed 5 out of 5 times to obtain a GJ indictment when a cop was involved.

Corrupting the justice system is a problem that needs to be addressed because next time it might be you who doesn't get your day in court.

So you say. They did the right thing, get over it.

Nope, justice was denied, not served.

Wrong, a Grand Jury was convened and it checked all the known testimony evidence and statements. 12 Jurors decided that the information available was not even so remotely connected to a need for trial they ruled no BILL.

Remind us again where you obtained your law degree?

Obviously knows more than you.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Grand Jury Volume 5

Beginning on page 195. He was in a battle with Brown!

No shit. Where have you been?

 

[AmericanFirst]

The facts were never cross examined. There was no one offering an alternative to the prosecutors case. That isn't justice, that is a whitewash. GJ indictments are easy to obtain but the Ferguson Prosecutor was failed 5 out of 5 times to obtain a GJ indictment when a cop was involved.

Corrupting the justice system is a problem that needs to be addressed because next time it might be you who doesn't get your day in court.

So you say. They did the right thing, get over it.

Nope, justice was denied, not served.

Wrong, a Grand Jury was convened and it checked all the known testimony evidence and statements. 12 Jurors decided that the information available was not even so remotely connected to a need for trial they ruled no BILL.

Remind us again where you obtained your law degree?

The system works as intended. You are the one claiming to know differently, you need to provide your proof you are a lawyer, a Judge or some other person that would have intimate knowledge of the system.

She can't.

 

[AmericanFirst]

The race card cannot be played if it is tossed from the deck.

Been played by sharp ton and the left, even the lefty media. Not a word from them when the unarmed white kid got shot by a black officer. But that is different, right? Idiots.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Why didn't Wilson just call for backup? If these kids had robbed a place, did someone get killed? I can understand going after them if they had committed murder or rape, but robbery? Wilson is as dumb as Zimmerman.

Sweetie, he wasn't after them for the robbery. Why would he need backup to tell two guys to get out if the street?

He could have let them go. So a couple of dudes are walking in the middle of the road? Big freaking deal.

A) It's ILLEGAL
B) He CLEARLY called in for back up saying he had a suspect who matched the identity of a robbery suspect.

Oh big deal someone was breaking the law, why did the police have to do something about that? What a moron you are.

indeed

 

[Politico]

He would never have gotten away with that testimony in a regular trial.

The forensic evidence contradicts his testimony. According to Wilson he said that Brown was trying to hit him after the shot him in the hand. There should also have been a blood trail from the vehicle to the body. Wilson even said that Brown was holding his hand against his stomach (probably trying to stem the bleeding). Wilson made out that he thought that Brown was going for a gun.

The fact that there was no cross examination is criminal in my opinion.

Ya cause after all the evidence does not include browns blood in the car and on Wilson right?

Not in any of Sharpton's broadcasts.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Who to believe?

Legal professionals or a USMB poster with a dubious reputation when it comes to the truth.

Guess this requires a link to where I have lied.

Provide or apologies.

I actually doubt you provide either

Didn't say you lied, I said that you have a dubious reputation when it comes to the truth.

But let's just put your reputation to the test since you appear to have some doubts.

Which of the following statements are true?

1. Michael Brown was walking in the middle of the street
2. Michael Brown was carrying the cigarellos
3. Michael Brown robbed the convenience store
4. Michael Brown was shot and killed by Officer Wilson

1 true
2 I heard a different brand, but OK
3 actually a shoplifting I believe. My opinion, done in strong arm fashion
4 Sure

Next:

How much wood could a woodchuck chuck.........,

Thank you for proving my point about your dubious reputation when it comes to the truth.

San Francisco Bay View Mike Brown appears to have paid for those cigars

Video evidence proving that MB paid for the cigarillos in that link. The altercation was not a "strong arm shoplifting" and the shopkeeper did not call the cops.

You were gullible enough to believe only what you wanted to believe about MB. That is why you have a dubious reputation when it comes to the truth.

Have a nice day.

You poor dear:

We have no idea why some people think this video shows Mike Brown PAYING for his cigarrillos The Right Scoop -

And what was the testimony of Browns partner in crime? It's in the link, check it out fer yourself.

Things that make you say hmmmmmmm

Even your link, states "appears"

Now, answer the woodchuck question dammit!

Gotta love it when you your own hole on your dubious reputation with the truth even deeper.

Here is the quote from your link;

“He did indeed take some cigarillos, some mini cigarettes, but that it wasn’t a strong-arm robbery, he just stole the cigarillos.”

Read more: We have no idea why some people think this video shows Mike Brown PAYING for his cigarrillos The Right Scoop -

Here is your "answer" to the question;

3 actually a shoplifting I believe. My opinion, done in strong arm fashion

Are you even capable of comprehending why that exposes your dubious reputation with the truth?

Doubtful! Because you didn't see it when you provided that link, did you? Which of you are lying about the "strong arm" aspect? If it isn't you then how can he be credible about the first part of his statement if he is lying in the 2nd part? Now apply the same rules to your statements. It is all about credibility when it comes to the truth and your dubious reputation means that yours is suspect.

But no point in wasting any further time on this since this is probably a congenital condition of yours.

Have a nice Thanksgiving.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Did I teach you something

When someone changes their story the way you just did that is an indication that they are lying. Just ask any cop and they will tell you the same thing. So all you have managed to "teach" everyone here is that nothing you post is credible.

Have a nice Thanksgiving.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Grand Jury Volume 5

Beginning on page 195. He was in a battle with Brown!

That's what he says. And we all know cops don't lie.

Why is the dead punk automatically given the benefit of a doubt while the cop is flogged and put to the rack? There's something very wrong with the priorities here.

Maybe because the cop has a lot to gain to tell the story in a way that reflects best on him.

And if the way he told the story was the way it actually happened?

Wilson's story is hearsay only.

There is no one else to corroborate what was actually said or the sequence of events.

In an actual trial the defense would have exposed all of the holes in it.