new info coming out about Brown shooting.

[Esmeralda]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

Oh come on, seriously: what would motivate someone to 'charge' a person who is shooting a gun at him? Seriously. It belies any realism. Brown would have to be a complete idiot, insane or super, super high on a hard drug. He was none of those.

You have no fucking clue what 'BM' was or wasn't.
The whole world knows BM had no problem going back and intimidating a little store clerk. We all was the video.
Anyway. The GJ will never recommend any charges be laid against Wilson. That is my prediction.
The simians can stay in their trees and go fuck themselves.

I have the ability to do coherent, logical reasoning. We know from the autopsy he was not on any hard drug. We know he was not a moron--he was headed for college. And we know he was not insane. So, I do, indeed, know that he was none of those things. All of us know he was none of those things. And no one who is not insane, a true mental moron, or extremely high on hard drugs or possibly out of his mind on alcohol would not charge someone who is shooting at him, so that assertion is completely ludicrous.

 

[Rocko]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

Oh come on, seriously: what would motivate someone to 'charge' a person who is shooting a gun at him? Seriously. It belies any realism. Brown would have to be a complete idiot, insane or super, super high on a hard drug. He was none of those.

Attacking someone who's pointing a gun at you certainly isn't a wise thing to do, but it has been done before. Maybe he didn't believe the officer would shoot him. I'll wait till there's more evidence before I call this a murder. Furthermore how do you know Brown wasn't a complete idiot??

 

[dilloduck]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

Oh come on, seriously: what would motivate someone to 'charge' a person who is shooting a gun at him? Seriously. It belies any realism. Brown would have to be a complete idiot, insane or super, super high on a hard drug. He was none of those.

You have no fucking clue what 'BM' was or wasn't.
The whole world knows BM had no problem going back and intimidating a little store clerk. We all was the video.
Anyway. The GJ will never recommend any charges be laid against Wilson. That is my prediction.
The simians can stay in their trees and go fuck themselves.

I have the ability to do coherent, logical reasoning. We know from the autopsy he was not on any hard drug. We know he was not a moron--he was headed for college. And we know he was not insane. So, I do, indeed, know that he was none of those things. All of us know he was none of those things. And no one who is not insane, a true mental moron, or extremely high on hard drugs or possibly out of his mind on alcohol would not charge someone who is shooting at him, so that assertion is completely ludicrous.

He was a big enough asshole to steal shit from a store and shove the clerk into a display rack. I suppose you call that sane and rational behavior ?

 

[Asclepias]

Hey Asslips. Surely you're not saying a medical examiner cant tell the difference between an entry and exit wound.

Maybe if you learned how to read you would understand a entry or exit wound has nothing to do with what I'm talking about dummy.

Shut your banana hole monkey.

"Medical examiners cant tell me if Wilson shot at Brown from behind stupid."

Sure sounds like you said that. Unless you're stating you were standing in front of Wilson at the time of the shooting.

Hey cave monkey. No where in my statement does it say anything about entry and exits wounds. You probably had to wear the dunce cap all the time in school. If a bullet doesnt hit the body what good is a medical examiner going to be moron?

 

[Asclepias]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

There are zero witnesses that verify the cop. If there is link to it......I thought so moron.

 

[Esmeralda]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

Oh come on, seriously: what would motivate someone to 'charge' a person who is shooting a gun at him? Seriously. It belies any realism. Brown would have to be a complete idiot, insane or super, super high on a hard drug. He was none of those.

Attacking someone who's pointing a gun at you certainly isn't a wise thing to do, but it has been done before. Maybe he didn't believe the officer would shoot him. I'll wait till there's more evidence before I call this a murder. Furthermore how do you know Brown wasn't a complete idiot??

Are you a complete idiot to ask such a question? Do you understand the difference between insulting someone with that moniker and someone actually be a true mental imbecile? I'm not talking about how we insult people and say how stupid they are; I am talking about someone being mentally incompetent. Brown was headed for college: obviously he was not an idiot. Your comment is just foolish. Foolish.

 

[Asclepias]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

Oh come on, seriously: what would motivate someone to 'charge' a person who is shooting a gun at him? Seriously. It belies any realism. Brown would have to be a complete idiot, insane or super, super high on a hard drug. He was none of those.

Attacking someone who's pointing a gun at you certainly isn't a wise thing to do, but it has been done before. Maybe he didn't believe the officer would shoot him. I'll wait till there's more evidence before I call this a murder. Furthermore how do you know Brown wasn't a complete idiot??

Why would he not believe it if Wilson was shooting at him like the witnesses say? It is beyond ludicrous to assume he attacked the cop then ran then attacked again. If he was a complete idiot he would not have been trying to get ahead in life by going to college.

 

[dilloduck]

People do "beyond ludicrous" every day. Doesn't surprise me at all.

 

[Rocko]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

Oh come on, seriously: what would motivate someone to 'charge' a person who is shooting a gun at him? Seriously. It belies any realism. Brown would have to be a complete idiot, insane or super, super high on a hard drug. He was none of those.

Attacking someone who's pointing a gun at you certainly isn't a wise thing to do, but it has been done before. Maybe he didn't believe the officer would shoot him. I'll wait till there's more evidence before I call this a murder. Furthermore how do you know Brown wasn't a complete idiot??

Are you a complete idiot to ask such a question? Do you understand the difference between insulting someone with that moniker and someone actually be a true mental imbecile? I'm not talking about how we insult people and say how stupid they are; I am talking about someone being mentally incompetent. Brown was headed for college: obviously he was not an idiot. Your comment is just foolish. Foolish.

I understood what you meant by idiot. Let me ask you something, if the alleged story about him breaking the cop's eye socket and trying to grab the cop's gun happens to be true, wouldn't that make it more likely that maybe he's the type of idiot that would possibly charge a police officer with a gun.

 

[Asclepias]

People do "beyond ludicrous" every day. Doesn't surprise me at all.

I know. I bet Wilson is pondering that very fact unless you mean he is immune to being ludicrous like other humans.

 

[Esmeralda]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

Oh come on, seriously: what would motivate someone to 'charge' a person who is shooting a gun at him? Seriously. It belies any realism. Brown would have to be a complete idiot, insane or super, super high on a hard drug. He was none of those.

Attacking someone who's pointing a gun at you certainly isn't a wise thing to do, but it has been done before. Maybe he didn't believe the officer would shoot him. I'll wait till there's more evidence before I call this a murder. Furthermore how do you know Brown wasn't a complete idiot??

Are you a complete idiot to ask such a question? Do you understand the difference between insulting someone with that moniker and someone actually be a true mental imbecile? I'm not talking about how we insult people and say how stupid they are; I am talking about someone being mentally incompetent. Brown was headed for college: obviously he was not an idiot. Your comment is just foolish. Foolish.

I understood what you meant by idiot. Let me ask you something, if the alleged story about him breaking the cop's eye socket and trying to grab the cop's gun happens to be true, wouldn't that make it more likely that maybe he's the type of idiot that would possibly charge a police officer with a gun.

No, I don't think so. I think that would make it more likely that when he was running away, he would keep running and dive behind a car because he was a true badass. I don't think he was a badass, and that's why he turned to surrender. I don't think he attacked the cop. I think the cop tried to grab him by the throat and he struggled to get free an then ran, only turned to surrender when he was being shot at.

 

[Asclepias]

I understood what you meant by idiot. Let me ask you something, if the alleged story about him breaking the cop's eye socket and trying to grab the cop's gun happens to be true, wouldn't that make it more likely that maybe he's the type of idiot that would possibly charge a police officer with a gun.

Not really. It makes sense he socked the cop for grabbing him around the neck and pulling his gun out and threatening to shoot him. It makes no sense to expect someone to believe he ran after the first shot then decided he wanted to die after all.

 

[Rocko]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

There are zero witnesses that verify the cop. If there is link to it......I thought so moron.

8216 A dozen witnesses 8217 say Ferguson teen attacked cop before shooting New York Post

I think you're way too emotionally invested in this case. If you happen to be right and the cop murdered an innocent young black male then yeah that's bad, but let's stop pretending that that sort thing happens all the time and blacks are perpetual victims. It would be best if you save your outrage for the real problems in the black community.

 

[Asclepias]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

There are zero witnesses that verify the cop. If there is link to it......I thought so moron.

8216 A dozen witnesses 8217 say Ferguson teen attacked cop before shooting New York Post

I think you're way too emotionally invested in this case. If you happen to be right and the cop murdered an innocent young black male then yeah that's bad, but let's stop pretending that that sort thing happens all the time and blacks are perpetual victims. It would be best if you save your outrage for the real problems in the black community.

You appear to be too emotionally invested. You believe the cops who are trying to manipulate public perception and doing an admirable job. Is there a reason none of these witnesses have gotten on national TV and said anything? From your link

“Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch crime reporter Christine Byers tweeted, without elaborating.

The police source could be a snitch for all we know. So now we are grasping at tweets instead of interviews.

 

[Rocko]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

Oh come on, seriously: what would motivate someone to 'charge' a person who is shooting a gun at him? Seriously. It belies any realism. Brown would have to be a complete idiot, insane or super, super high on a hard drug. He was none of those.

Attacking someone who's pointing a gun at you certainly isn't a wise thing to do, but it has been done before. Maybe he didn't believe the officer would shoot him. I'll wait till there's more evidence before I call this a murder. Furthermore how do you know Brown wasn't a complete idiot??

Are you a complete idiot to ask such a question? Do you understand the difference between insulting someone with that moniker and someone actually be a true mental imbecile? I'm not talking about how we insult people and say how stupid they are; I am talking about someone being mentally incompetent. Brown was headed for college: obviously he was not an idiot. Your comment is just foolish. Foolish.

I understood what you meant by idiot. Let me ask you something, if the alleged story about him breaking the cop's eye socket and trying to grab the cop's gun happens to be true, wouldn't that make it more likely that maybe he's the type of idiot that would possibly charge a police officer with a gun.

No, I don't think so. I think that would make it more likely that when he was running away, he would keep running and dive behind a car because he was a true badass. I don't think he was a badass, and that's why he turned to surrender. I don't think he attacked the cop. I think the cop tried to grab him by the throat and he struggled to get free an then ran, only turned to surrender when he was being shot at.

It's amusing to see you pretend you know what happened. If he assaulted a cop and tried to grab his gun that is extremely risky behavior. Who is to say he didn't charge at the officer thinking the officer wouldn't shoot? It could have happened, it's not a likely event, but neither is a cop shooting an innocent black kid for no reason.

 

[Rocko]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

There are zero witnesses that verify the cop. If there is link to it......I thought so moron.

8216 A dozen witnesses 8217 say Ferguson teen attacked cop before shooting New York Post

I think you're way too emotionally invested in this case. If you happen to be right and the cop murdered an innocent young black male then yeah that's bad, but let's stop pretending that that sort thing happens all the time and blacks are perpetual victims. It would be best if you save your outrage for the real problems in the black community.

You appear to be too emotionally invested. You believe the cops who are trying to manipulate public perception and doing an admirable job. Is there a reason none of these witnesses have gotten on national TV and said anything? From your link

“Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch crime reporter Christine Byers tweeted, without elaborating.

The police source could be a snitch for all we know. So now we are grasping at tweets instead of interviews.

I'm not emotionally invested at all. I'm telling you that I don't know what happened. Look maybe there are indeed credible witnesses collaborating Wilson's story, maybe not, but it's interesting that you're putting so much stock into the eyewitnesses who's statements have already been proven inaccurate.

 

[Asclepias]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

There are zero witnesses that verify the cop. If there is link to it......I thought so moron.

8216 A dozen witnesses 8217 say Ferguson teen attacked cop before shooting New York Post

I think you're way too emotionally invested in this case. If you happen to be right and the cop murdered an innocent young black male then yeah that's bad, but let's stop pretending that that sort thing happens all the time and blacks are perpetual victims. It would be best if you save your outrage for the real problems in the black community.

You appear to be too emotionally invested. You believe the cops who are trying to manipulate public perception and doing an admirable job. Is there a reason none of these witnesses have gotten on national TV and said anything? From your link

“Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch crime reporter Christine Byers tweeted, without elaborating.

The police source could be a snitch for all we know. So now we are grasping at tweets instead of interviews.

I'm not emotionally invested at all. I'm telling you that I don't know what happened. Look maybe there are indeed credible witnesses collaborating Wilson's story, maybe not, but it's interesting that you're putting so much stock into the eyewitnesses who's statements have already been proven inaccurate.

You must be emotionally invested. You actually argued with me about the eye witnesses verifying Wilson's story but you cant seem to produce the witnesses. Now you are pretending you dont care. OK.

The two women, Tiffany and Piagents stories have not been proven to be inaccurate. Are you going to pretend to not be emotionally invested again when you cant produce a link to that as well?

 

[Rocko]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

There are zero witnesses that verify the cop. If there is link to it......I thought so moron.

8216 A dozen witnesses 8217 say Ferguson teen attacked cop before shooting New York Post

I think you're way too emotionally invested in this case. If you happen to be right and the cop murdered an innocent young black male then yeah that's bad, but let's stop pretending that that sort thing happens all the time and blacks are perpetual victims. It would be best if you save your outrage for the real problems in the black community.

You appear to be too emotionally invested. You believe the cops who are trying to manipulate public perception and doing an admirable job. Is there a reason none of these witnesses have gotten on national TV and said anything? From your link

“Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch crime reporter Christine Byers tweeted, without elaborating.

The police source could be a snitch for all we know. So now we are grasping at tweets instead of interviews.

I'm not emotionally invested at all. I'm telling you that I don't know what happened. Look maybe there are indeed credible witnesses collaborating Wilson's story, maybe not, but it's interesting that you're putting so much stock into the eyewitnesses who's statements have already been proven inaccurate.

You must be emotionally invested. You actually argued with me about the eye witnesses verifying Wilson's story but you cant seem to produce the witnesses. Now you are pretending you dont care. OK.

The two women, Tiffany and Piagents stories have not been proven to be inaccurate. Are you going to pretend to not be emotionally invested again when you cant produce a link to that as well?

I didn't mention the eyewitness who support Wilson's version to make the point Wilson is innocent. I was playing devils advocate. Maybe he's innocent, maybe he isn't, I don't know. I'm the one who keeps saying we should wait for the facts to come to light. You believe that you know enough to make the cop a murderer, which is fine, that is you're prerogative.

 

[Asclepias]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

There are zero witnesses that verify the cop. If there is link to it......I thought so moron.

8216 A dozen witnesses 8217 say Ferguson teen attacked cop before shooting New York Post

I think you're way too emotionally invested in this case. If you happen to be right and the cop murdered an innocent young black male then yeah that's bad, but let's stop pretending that that sort thing happens all the time and blacks are perpetual victims. It would be best if you save your outrage for the real problems in the black community.

You appear to be too emotionally invested. You believe the cops who are trying to manipulate public perception and doing an admirable job. Is there a reason none of these witnesses have gotten on national TV and said anything? From your link

“Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch crime reporter Christine Byers tweeted, without elaborating.

The police source could be a snitch for all we know. So now we are grasping at tweets instead of interviews.

I'm not emotionally invested at all. I'm telling you that I don't know what happened. Look maybe there are indeed credible witnesses collaborating Wilson's story, maybe not, but it's interesting that you're putting so much stock into the eyewitnesses who's statements have already been proven inaccurate.

You must be emotionally invested. You actually argued with me about the eye witnesses verifying Wilson's story but you cant seem to produce the witnesses. Now you are pretending you dont care. OK.

The two women, Tiffany and Piagents stories have not been proven to be inaccurate. Are you going to pretend to not be emotionally invested again when you cant produce a link to that as well?

I didn't mention the eyewitness who support Wilson's version to make the point Wilson is innocent. I was playing devils advocate. Maybe he's innocent, maybe he isn't, I don't know. I'm the one who keeps saying we should wait for the facts to come to light. You believe that you know enough to make the cop a murderer, which is fine, that is you're prerogative.

Next time warn us you are just playing devils advocate. For a minute there you sounded like you were emotionally invested in Wilson's innocence like a lot of people around here spreading lies and disinformation.

 

[Rocko]

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I find it very hard to believe that anyone who is not insane or very, very high on something like angel dust or cocaine would 'charge' someone who is shooting at them. It's not believable, not at all.

It's more than that, its BOGUS! !!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

really ? apparently you didn't see the other St Louis shooting clip.

It's certainly not normal behavior, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

It means it is highly, highly unlikely. The jury will have to use some logical reasoning as well as going by forensic evidence and witness accounts. Reasoning says that human beings, knowing gun shots can kill you, do not walk into them.

There are eyewitness accounts that verify the cops story. The evidence is still being looked at. There's been a lot of conflicting reports about what evidence is actually out. The smart thing is to wait for the dust to settle and let the investigation run it's course before making a judgement, which is hard for many people to do because they're emotionally invested in wanting the truth to fit the narrative that they like.

There are zero witnesses that verify the cop. If there is link to it......I thought so moron.

8216 A dozen witnesses 8217 say Ferguson teen attacked cop before shooting New York Post

I think you're way too emotionally invested in this case. If you happen to be right and the cop murdered an innocent young black male then yeah that's bad, but let's stop pretending that that sort thing happens all the time and blacks are perpetual victims. It would be best if you save your outrage for the real problems in the black community.

You appear to be too emotionally invested. You believe the cops who are trying to manipulate public perception and doing an admirable job. Is there a reason none of these witnesses have gotten on national TV and said anything? From your link

“Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch crime reporter Christine Byers tweeted, without elaborating.

The police source could be a snitch for all we know. So now we are grasping at tweets instead of interviews.

I'm not emotionally invested at all. I'm telling you that I don't know what happened. Look maybe there are indeed credible witnesses collaborating Wilson's story, maybe not, but it's interesting that you're putting so much stock into the eyewitnesses who's statements have already been proven inaccurate.

You must be emotionally invested. You actually argued with me about the eye witnesses verifying Wilson's story but you cant seem to produce the witnesses. Now you are pretending you dont care. OK.

The two women, Tiffany and Piagents stories have not been proven to be inaccurate. Are you going to pretend to not be emotionally invested again when you cant produce a link to that as well?

I didn't mention the eyewitness who support Wilson's version to make the point Wilson is innocent. I was playing devils advocate. Maybe he's innocent, maybe he isn't, I don't know. I'm the one who keeps saying we should wait for the facts to come to light. You believe that you know enough to make the cop a murderer, which is fine, that is you're prerogative.

Next time warn us you are just playing devils advocate. For a minute there you sounded like you were emotionally invested in Wilson's innocence like a lot of people around here spreading lies and disinformation.

I've said in this thread, we don't know what happened and it would be best to judge after more facts are uncovered. I made it obvious I'm not taking a side.