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.
My new son in law is 6'5" 325. He makes Hoss Cartwright look like a little fella. But it's not just about Height. This wilson guy looks like the sort that would get beat up by a small girl if he didn't have his gun drawn.Which one is you? Far left?That's because Wilson is a wimp. He had no choice. 9out of 10? I doubt that.9 out of 10 LEOs would have done the exact same thing MIke, you even said yourself - more than once - that you have no problem with him shooting Brown, then you turn around and contradict yourself by calling him a wimp for doing so.
Probably right, probably 10/10
Shit son, that one in the middle? I tower over him.
Spoken like a libtard.My new son in law is 6'5" 325. He makes Hoss Cartwright look like a little fella. But it's not just about Height. This wilson guy looks like the sort that would get beat up by a small girl if he didn't have his gun drawn.Which one is you? Far left?That's because Wilson is a wimp. He had no choice. 9out of 10? I doubt that.
Probably right, probably 10/10
Shit son, that one in the middle? I tower over him.
You realize that your opinion makes no difference in what happened right?
Spoken like a libtard.My new son in law is 6'5" 325. He makes Hoss Cartwright look like a little fella. But it's not just about Height. This wilson guy looks like the sort that would get beat up by a small girl if he didn't have his gun drawn.Which one is you? Far left?Probably right, probably 10/10
Shit son, that one in the middle? I tower over him.
You realize that your opinion makes no difference in what happened right?
Michael Brown was the dime-a-dozen Black thug who got capped for a brazen assault on a dutiful police officer.
This pretty much tells us all we need to know ----- about YOU.
Link?Retard alert we have tape recorded police radio that proves not only did Wilson know of the robbery but ask if he was needed to help with it.No, and I'll tell you why. His chief of police said he didn't know about the robbery at the convenience store but he testified that he did.not to mention the head thump he claims he suffered.If Brown was shot at 49 yards, then Wilson is a world class shot with a handgun. Like seriously. Most people beyond 7 yards aren't going to hit crap, especially in a dynamic, stressful situation.
still haven't bothered to watch the officer's interview, huh..?
Why would I trust him to tell the truth?
I am sorry to hear he is so fat. You should recommend a diet.My new son in law is 6'5" 325. He makes Hoss Cartwright look like a little fella. But it's not just about Height. This wilson guy looks like the sort that would get beat up by a small girl if he didn't have his gun drawn.
For the umpteenth time retard, the PHYSICAL evidence says he did NOT have his hands up when he was shot.
The only physical evidence that could prove that is a photo or a video. Just because a bullet wound is on the other side of his arm does not mean it did not hit his arm when he dropped them from being hit with the first bullet.
Only proves that you know NOTHING about forensic science moron.
Educate yourself.
We had this discussion before and the "science" was suspect.
18 witnesses who as much said Brown was surrendering and a shooting in broad daylight. Only the police can get away with that.
Many that said that were shown to be incorrect, while others admitted they didn't actually see the incident, but heard about it.
The 18 I listed all have where they were at the time after their testimony and all are listed as being within eye contact.
If any of THESE witnesses were proven wrong in cross-examination, you need to prove THAT with a link and not just your say so.
Other eyewitnesses said he was NOT surrendering. Obviously, the grand jury found them to be the more credible.
How can 3 witnesses be found more credible than 18? Impossible that it would not be enough to secure a trial, unless the agenda is protect the cop out of sympathy.
Witness testimony Michael Brown s last moments Reading Eagle - AP
Other eyewitnesses said he was NOT surrendering. Obviously, the grand jury found them to be the more credible.
How can 3 witnesses be found more credible than 18? Impossible that it would not be enough to secure a trial, unless the agenda is protect the cop out of sympathy.
Witness testimony Michael Brown s last moments Reading Eagle - AP
How can eyewitness testimony be found more credible than physical evidence?
For the umpteenth time retard, the PHYSICAL evidence says he did NOT have his hands up when he was shot.
The only physical evidence that could prove that is a photo or a video. Just because a bullet wound is on the other side of his arm does not mean it did not hit his arm when he dropped them from being hit with the first bullet.
Only proves that you know NOTHING about forensic science moron.
Educate yourself.
We had this discussion before and the "science" was suspect.
Anything that does not fit your idea of what happened is "suspect"
18 witnesses who as much said Brown was surrendering and a shooting in broad daylight. Only the police can get away with that.
Many that said that were shown to be incorrect, while others admitted they didn't actually see the incident, but heard about it.
The 18 I listed all have where they were at the time after their testimony and all are listed as being within eye contact.
If any of THESE witnesses were proven wrong in cross-examination, you need to prove THAT with a link and not just your say so.
I think the Grand Jury, with the questions asked had to determine who was and was not credible. The witnesses you have never met or seen are not as credible as the witnesses that backed up Wilson's story.
The Grand Jury did not indict, no one has to prove anything.
For the umpteenth time retard, the PHYSICAL evidence says he did NOT have his hands up when he was shot.
The only physical evidence that could prove that is a photo or a video. Just because a bullet wound is on the other side of his arm does not mean it did not hit his arm when he dropped them from being hit with the first bullet.
Only proves that you know NOTHING about forensic science moron.
Educate yourself.
We had this discussion before and the "science" was suspect.
No it isn't moron.
Crime labs around the world use it to solve crimes. Colleges teach it.
You're simply an idiot.
"science doesn't say what I want it to? Science is wrong"
dumb shit.
No he wasn't.Michael Brown was 148 feet from Wilson as he was shot to death
Other eyewitnesses said he was NOT surrendering. Obviously, the grand jury found them to be the more credible.
How can 3 witnesses be found more credible than 18? Impossible that it would not be enough to secure a trial, unless the agenda is protect the cop out of sympathy.
Witness testimony Michael Brown s last moments Reading Eagle - AP
How can eyewitness testimony be found more credible than physical evidence?
Weighing different kinds of evidence is not a comparison-type process like in a trial but they are sort of adding up what is against the officer to see if it adds up to an indictment, unless the physical evidence alone is strong enough to clear him which it wasn't. Similar kinds of evidence are compared not different kinds.
18 witnesses who as much said Brown was surrendering and a shooting in broad daylight. Only the police can get away with that.
Many that said that were shown to be incorrect, while others admitted they didn't actually see the incident, but heard about it.
The 18 I listed all have where they were at the time after their testimony and all are listed as being within eye contact.
If any of THESE witnesses were proven wrong in cross-examination, you need to prove THAT with a link and not just your say so.
I think the Grand Jury, with the questions asked had to determine who was and was not credible. The witnesses you have never met or seen are not as credible as the witnesses that backed up Wilson's story.
The Grand Jury did not indict, no one has to prove anything.
Yet no one has said a word of how 18 witnesses who clearly saw and testified Brown was not charging can be ignored.
Witness testimony Michael Brown s last moments Reading Eagle - AP
For the umpteenth time retard, the PHYSICAL evidence says he did NOT have his hands up when he was shot.
The only physical evidence that could prove that is a photo or a video. Just because a bullet wound is on the other side of his arm does not mean it did not hit his arm when he dropped them from being hit with the first bullet.
Only proves that you know NOTHING about forensic science moron.
Educate yourself.
We had this discussion before and the "science" was suspect.
No it isn't moron.
Crime labs around the world use it to solve crimes. Colleges teach it.
You're simply an idiot.
"science doesn't say what I want it to? Science is wrong"
dumb shit.
You are stupid to assume I meant all forensic science. Of course, I meant the particular interpretation that supposedly proved he did not have his hands up when he was shot.
18 witnesses who as much said Brown was surrendering and a shooting in broad daylight. Only the police can get away with that.
Many that said that were shown to be incorrect, while others admitted they didn't actually see the incident, but heard about it.
The 18 I listed all have where they were at the time after their testimony and all are listed as being within eye contact.
If any of THESE witnesses were proven wrong in cross-examination, you need to prove THAT with a link and not just your say so.
I think the Grand Jury, with the questions asked had to determine who was and was not credible. The witnesses you have never met or seen are not as credible as the witnesses that backed up Wilson's story.
The Grand Jury did not indict, no one has to prove anything.
Yet no one has said a word of how 18 witnesses who clearly saw and testified Brown was not charging can be ignored.
Witness testimony Michael Brown s last moments Reading Eagle - AP
They SAY they clearly saw the incident. Others have stated that there was witness intimidation and threats to those whose accounts agreed with the officer's. All of these things had to be taken into account by the grand jury. Tell us, which seat did you have when they were given the case?
For the umpteenth time retard, the PHYSICAL evidence says he did NOT have his hands up when he was shot.
The only physical evidence that could prove that is a photo or a video. Just because a bullet wound is on the other side of his arm does not mean it did not hit his arm when he dropped them from being hit with the first bullet.
Only proves that you know NOTHING about forensic science moron.
Educate yourself.
We had this discussion before and the "science" was suspect.
No it isn't moron.
Crime labs around the world use it to solve crimes. Colleges teach it.
You're simply an idiot.
"science doesn't say what I want it to? Science is wrong"
dumb shit.
You are stupid to assume I meant all forensic science. Of course, I meant the particular interpretation that supposedly proved he did not have his hands up when he was shot.
