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.
Yes we realize you chose to ignore the facts and reality but then you do that every time a black criminal is hurt while attacking cops.Yeah if the ME said that. But that's not what he said. You are taking the ME out of context. If you shoot me in the head while my "hands are up" how is the ME gonna prove from the head wounds that my hands were down? Just because the shots to his arm were not "while" his hands were up does not mean they were never up nor does it mean they were not up before he was shot, nor does it mean they were not up for the last four final shots to the chest and head.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.
Shut the fuck up with you're "you're too stupid bullshit" sonny. On THIS particular subject, I doubt many on this board are more qualified than a 20 + year veteran MP who has worked thousands of cases.
In EVERY case I ever worked eyewitness testimony was supplemental to evidence PERIOD.
As for the physical evidence, each piece much be compared to the rest to get a complete picture. When the ME says "he didn't have his hands up when shot" you can take that to the bank.
Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.
In this case, that is absolute nonsense.
We know the last two shots were to the head. If they had been the first, he would have dropped immediately and the other shots to the arms could never have happened.
Since the shots to the arm were first, that means the first one that hit him in the arm would have caused him to drop his arms. It would be impossible to keep them up while being hit with bullets. That means it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for them to be up when he got hit with the bullets to the head, and your analysis is worthless.
Yes we realize you chose to ignore the facts and reality but then you do that every time a black criminal is hurt while attacking cops.Yeah if the ME said that. But that's not what he said. You are taking the ME out of context. If you shoot me in the head while my "hands are up" how is the ME gonna prove from the head wounds that my hands were down? Just because the shots to his arm were not "while" his hands were up does not mean they were never up nor does it mean they were not up before he was shot, nor does it mean they were not up for the last four final shots to the chest and head.Shut the fuck up with you're "you're too stupid bullshit" sonny. On THIS particular subject, I doubt many on this board are more qualified than a 20 + year veteran MP who has worked thousands of cases.
In EVERY case I ever worked eyewitness testimony was supplemental to evidence PERIOD.
As for the physical evidence, each piece much be compared to the rest to get a complete picture. When the ME says "he didn't have his hands up when shot" you can take that to the bank.
Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.
In this case, that is absolute nonsense.
We know the last two shots were to the head. If they had been the first, he would have dropped immediately and the other shots to the arms could never have happened.
Since the shots to the arm were first, that means the first one that hit him in the arm would have caused him to drop his arms. It would be impossible to keep them up while being hit with bullets. That means it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for them to be up when he got hit with the bullets to the head, and your analysis is worthless.
I do not agree the cop was ever attacked. In a fit of rage because Brown would not get out of the street like told, Wilson almost hit them with the SUV and pulled right up to them. There is only one reason he would do that, which is to grab him from the vehicle. Once he grabs him, the cop can always say it was the opposite, and people like you believe it.
Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.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
There is no reason to have a trial when there is NO crime committed. Do you really not understand how our legal system works?Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.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
With so very many against Wilson, that is a call that should be made at a trial with proper cross-examination.
Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.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
With so very many against Wilson, that is a call that should be made at a trial with proper cross-examination.
Try to back up in the direction of a cops in the road and you will go to jail for attempted vehicular homicide, yes or no?Yes we realize you chose to ignore the facts and reality but then you do that every time a black criminal is hurt while attacking cops.Yeah if the ME said that. But that's not what he said. You are taking the ME out of context. If you shoot me in the head while my "hands are up" how is the ME gonna prove from the head wounds that my hands were down? Just because the shots to his arm were not "while" his hands were up does not mean they were never up nor does it mean they were not up before he was shot, nor does it mean they were not up for the last four final shots to the chest and head.
Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.
In this case, that is absolute nonsense.
We know the last two shots were to the head. If they had been the first, he would have dropped immediately and the other shots to the arms could never have happened.
Since the shots to the arm were first, that means the first one that hit him in the arm would have caused him to drop his arms. It would be impossible to keep them up while being hit with bullets. That means it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for them to be up when he got hit with the bullets to the head, and your analysis is worthless.
I do not agree the cop was ever attacked. In a fit of rage because Brown would not get out of the street like told, Wilson almost hit them with the SUV and pulled right up to them. There is only one reason he would do that, which is to grab him from the vehicle. Once he grabs him, the cop can always say it was the opposite, and people like you believe it.
Tactically pulling the SUV up next to the them was a mistake, but "almost hitting" someone who is standing in the damn street is not a crime, and doesn't give anyone license to "defend themselves" I mean surely you get that.
Yeah cause shooting someone in the head isn't a crime... even after you shot them twice in the chest... driving toward people in the road and almost hitting them isn't a crime, they deserved to be run over right?There is no reason to have a trial when there is NO crime committed. Do you really not understand how our legal system works?Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.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
With so very many against Wilson, that is a call that should be made at a trial with proper cross-examination.
Grand jury decides if a crime was committed
Trial jury decides guilt or innocence.
The court of public opinion holds no sway
'Try to back up in the direction of a cops in the road and you will go to jail for attempted vehicular homicide, yes or no?Yes we realize you chose to ignore the facts and reality but then you do that every time a black criminal is hurt while attacking cops.Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.
In this case, that is absolute nonsense.
We know the last two shots were to the head. If they had been the first, he would have dropped immediately and the other shots to the arms could never have happened.
Since the shots to the arm were first, that means the first one that hit him in the arm would have caused him to drop his arms. It would be impossible to keep them up while being hit with bullets. That means it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for them to be up when he got hit with the bullets to the head, and your analysis is worthless.
I do not agree the cop was ever attacked. In a fit of rage because Brown would not get out of the street like told, Wilson almost hit them with the SUV and pulled right up to them. There is only one reason he would do that, which is to grab him from the vehicle. Once he grabs him, the cop can always say it was the opposite, and people like you believe it.
Tactically pulling the SUV up next to the them was a mistake, but "almost hitting" someone who is standing in the damn street is not a crime, and doesn't give anyone license to "defend themselves" I mean surely you get that.
Yeah cause shooting someone in the head isn't a crime... even after you shot them twice in the chest... driving toward people in the road and almost hitting them isn't a crime, they deserved to be run over right?There is no reason to have a trial when there is NO crime committed. Do you really not understand how our legal system works?Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.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
With so very many against Wilson, that is a call that should be made at a trial with proper cross-examination.
Grand jury decides if a crime was committed
Trial jury decides guilt or innocence.
The court of public opinion holds no sway
When threatened cops will and are taught to fire center mass and to continue firing until the threat is eliminated.Yeah cause shooting someone in the head isn't a crime... even after you shot them twice in the chest... driving toward people in the road and almost hitting them isn't a crime, they deserved to be run over right?There is no reason to have a trial when there is NO crime committed. Do you really not understand how our legal system works?Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.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
With so very many against Wilson, that is a call that should be made at a trial with proper cross-examination.
Grand jury decides if a crime was committed
Trial jury decides guilt or innocence.
The court of public opinion holds no sway
When threatened cops will and are taught to fire center mass and to continue firing until the threat is eliminated.Yeah cause shooting someone in the head isn't a crime... even after you shot them twice in the chest... driving toward people in the road and almost hitting them isn't a crime, they deserved to be run over right?There is no reason to have a trial when there is NO crime committed. Do you really not understand how our legal system works?Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.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
With so very many against Wilson, that is a call that should be made at a trial with proper cross-examination.
Grand jury decides if a crime was committed
Trial jury decides guilt or innocence.
The court of public opinion holds no sway
When threatened cops will and are taught to fire center mass and to continue firing until the threat is eliminated.Yeah cause shooting someone in the head isn't a crime... even after you shot them twice in the chest... driving toward people in the road and almost hitting them isn't a crime, they deserved to be run over right?There is no reason to have a trial when there is NO crime committed. Do you really not understand how our legal system works?Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.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
With so very many against Wilson, that is a call that should be made at a trial with proper cross-examination.
Grand jury decides if a crime was committed
Trial jury decides guilt or innocence.
The court of public opinion holds no sway
'Try to back up in the direction of a cops in the road and you will go to jail for attempted vehicular homicide, yes or no?Yes we realize you chose to ignore the facts and reality but then you do that every time a black criminal is hurt while attacking cops.In this case, that is absolute nonsense.
We know the last two shots were to the head. If they had been the first, he would have dropped immediately and the other shots to the arms could never have happened.
Since the shots to the arm were first, that means the first one that hit him in the arm would have caused him to drop his arms. It would be impossible to keep them up while being hit with bullets. That means it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for them to be up when he got hit with the bullets to the head, and your analysis is worthless.
I do not agree the cop was ever attacked. In a fit of rage because Brown would not get out of the street like told, Wilson almost hit them with the SUV and pulled right up to them. There is only one reason he would do that, which is to grab him from the vehicle. Once he grabs him, the cop can always say it was the opposite, and people like you believe it.
Tactically pulling the SUV up next to the them was a mistake, but "almost hitting" someone who is standing in the damn street is not a crime, and doesn't give anyone license to "defend themselves" I mean surely you get that.
What legal purpose would you have for doing so? Wilson was within his duties for doing so.
And no, I don't believe that if you backed up towards a cop with no intention of hitting that cop that any jurisdiction in the world charge, much less convict, you of vehicular manslaughter.
Why do you keep asking me that question, when I keep answering yes?Yeah cause shooting someone in the head isn't a crime... even after you shot them twice in the chest... driving toward people in the road and almost hitting them isn't a crime, they deserved to be run over right?There is no reason to have a trial when there is NO crime committed. Do you really not understand how our legal system works?Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.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
With so very many against Wilson, that is a call that should be made at a trial with proper cross-examination.
Grand jury decides if a crime was committed
Trial jury decides guilt or innocence.
The court of public opinion holds no sway
Shooting someone who is attacking you isn't a crime.
Especially when you are a police officer.
You have been shown the statutes, a police officer in Mo can LEGALLY shoot a fleeing a felon in the back if he feels that is the only way he can prevent his escape. DO YOU GET THAT MIKE? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS THE LAW?
'Try to back up in the direction of a cops in the road and you will go to jail for attempted vehicular homicide, yes or no?Yes we realize you chose to ignore the facts and reality but then you do that every time a black criminal is hurt while attacking cops.
I do not agree the cop was ever attacked. In a fit of rage because Brown would not get out of the street like told, Wilson almost hit them with the SUV and pulled right up to them. There is only one reason he would do that, which is to grab him from the vehicle. Once he grabs him, the cop can always say it was the opposite, and people like you believe it.
Tactically pulling the SUV up next to the them was a mistake, but "almost hitting" someone who is standing in the damn street is not a crime, and doesn't give anyone license to "defend themselves" I mean surely you get that.
What legal purpose would you have for doing so? Wilson was within his duties for doing so.
And no, I don't believe that if you backed up towards a cop with no intention of hitting that cop that any jurisdiction in the world charge, much less convict, you of vehicular manslaughter.
If you can't handle the discussion, go ahead and place me on ignore.'Try to back up in the direction of a cops in the road and you will go to jail for attempted vehicular homicide, yes or no?I do not agree the cop was ever attacked. In a fit of rage because Brown would not get out of the street like told, Wilson almost hit them with the SUV and pulled right up to them. There is only one reason he would do that, which is to grab him from the vehicle. Once he grabs him, the cop can always say it was the opposite, and people like you believe it.
Tactically pulling the SUV up next to the them was a mistake, but "almost hitting" someone who is standing in the damn street is not a crime, and doesn't give anyone license to "defend themselves" I mean surely you get that.
What legal purpose would you have for doing so? Wilson was within his duties for doing so.
And no, I don't believe that if you backed up towards a cop with no intention of hitting that cop that any jurisdiction in the world charge, much less convict, you of vehicular manslaughter.
Come on Mike, don't force me to place you on ignore.
I read your first link, did you?
That guy CLEARLY had EVERY intention of hitting that cop.
Face it, the last two shots to his head was an Execution.
Do you have a link where the GJ said it wasn't an execution?Face it, the last two shots to his head was an Execution.
Face it, the grand jury didn't think so.
Do you have a link where the GJ said it wasn't an execution?Face it, the last two shots to his head was an Execution.
Face it, the grand jury didn't think so.
