quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

That is if your proposed version is right... what if it is not... what if the physical evidence backs up the offers story... or if the evidence could go either way... what do you say then? Do you really think any innocent declaration of this officer will be believed? Be truthful DomKen... I really would like an honest answer.

What if there is not enough evidence to bring charges because it is ones word against another? In normal circumstances charges would not be leveled in that case. What happens then?

I think we're going to have 2 autopsy reports. If they both say that all the shots hit him in back then it's a good shooting. If they all hit him in the back or while standing it is at least ambiguous. But if any hit him while he was kneeling the cop is toast.

I'm completely ignoring the witnesses. Although I would dearly like to have seen what was on the witnesses cell phones before the local cops got hold of them.

No,
A there were shots fired before he started running.
B your statement implies that if the reports are in conflict the one that looks worse for the cop takes precedence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
More than a few times. It doesn't get the cop off.

The resulting disorientation gets him to reasonable doubt. That's as far as it needs to go.

Of course, I'm speculating that it was a punch that caused the officer's reported facial injury. Given what we saw of the big fat thug in the security footage of the theft, an actual punch isn't even the most likely scenario. He probably hit or was hit by the car door. The punch just makes a good frame of reference for people to grasp how the cop can claim his perceptions might have been momentarily impaired as a result of the injury.

Now if the picture of his injury shows a forehead cut with blood running into his eye/s, that works just as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Showing a tape where he committed strong armed robbery is "maligning" the victim. Are you suggesting that they should suppress evidence? Because not releasing this tape would be just that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: altoonamaster

it amuses me so much hype about this black kid who apparently broke the law. yet no one seems to care about the officer and hid family

Wilson is white, therefore he is guilty, therefore he deserves anything that happens to him.
Anyone who would marry him must be as big a racist as him and so deserves anything that happens to them.
As for any children, they would just grow up to be racists to so who cares?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Yes, it does. That how it works. It's not called an adversarial system for no reason.


Now Ken, think for a minute.
If they conflict the prosecutor may give priority to the one that makes the cop look bad.
However the defense gets to use the one better for him. That is why it is called an adversarial system.
The term for a system where all that counts is what makes the defendant look guilty is kangaroo court.
Conflicting coroner reports = reasonable doubt that is to the advantage of the ........ Defense not the ..... prosecution.
And there is the fact that shots were fired before he ran so even shots in the front would not, by themselves prove guilt.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

This is the St Louis area...I live here

When a black man walked into my hometown's council meeting and shot and killed 7 innocent white men and women... did white people break into stores and loot?

When a black man walked up to my hometown police officer and shot him... then followed the crawling police officer up the street telling him how he was going to blow his brains out... then when the officer asked for help from black bystanders they just watched as the man put the gun to his head and killed him.... did white people riot and loot?

When the 70 year old white man and his wife were walking down the street and a group of passing black men decided to play the knockout game and hit the unsuspecting man so hard it killed him.... did the white people riot and loot?

When the white family got lost after a ballgame and ended up in N. St Louis and a group of black men dragged the man from his car and beat him to death in front of his wife and children... did the white people riot and loot?

When a young white girl stopped at an intersection a black man opened her door and tried to take her cell phone... she was talking to her mother... her mother got to hear her daughters screams as the man shot her dead... did white people riot and loot?

There are many good decent black men and women in Ferguson that are asking for answers and demonstrating in the streets and NOT rioting... but those that are...are the word we can't use without moderation.

I'm mad... as you can tell... and if any of those bastards come onto my property they will get a butt full of buckshot.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Showing a tape where he committed strong armed robbery is "maligning" the victim. Are you suggesting that they should suppress evidence? Because not releasing this tape would be just that.

Excuse me Mr Cop but didnt you hear the police chief say the two incidents were not linked. Even if they were, how the fuck is releasing the tape to the media anything to do with evidence ? I always thought evidence was given to the DA and then used in court.

Maligning was exactly the right word to use. Even the State Governor said something similar.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin


well since EVERYONE here is playing "the take my best guess game", as we all have access to the same INFO, then everything everyone here says is unsubstantiated bollocks, but feeling the need to insult people because their guess is different from yours, well we'll let readers decide what that does to your credibility

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


Do you not feel naming the officer as black is indeed bringing a racist narrative into the argument.

Nope.

quote:

By your own admission, you didnt even try and confirm the facts.

Nope. I'm the one who first came back and posted there was a second Darren Wilson than the guy I saw a photo of.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Yes, it does. That how it works. It's not called an adversarial system for no reason.


Now Ken, think for a minute.
If they conflict the prosecutor may give priority to the one that makes the cop look bad.
However the defense gets to use the one better for him. That is why it is called an adversarial system.
The term for a system where all that counts is what makes the defendant look guilty is kangaroo court.
Conflicting coroner reports = reasonable doubt that is to the advantage of the ........ Defense not the ..... prosecution.
And there is the fact that shots were fired before he ran so even shots in the front would not, by themselves prove guilt.

They'll be able to determine the angle at which the shots hit him. Like I said if all the shots that hit him in the front hit him while he was standing the cop has a chance. It's if the fatal shot hit him after he was kneeling that the cop is done.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: altoonamaster

it amuses me so much hype about this black kid who apparently broke the law. yet no one seems to care about the officer and hid family

Wilson is white, therefore he is guilty, therefore he deserves anything that happens to him.
Anyone who would marry him must be as big a racist as him and so deserves anything that happens to them.
As for any children, they would just grow up to be racists to so who cares?

The above posts are both bullshit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Showing a tape where he committed strong armed robbery is "maligning" the victim. Are you suggesting that they should suppress evidence? Because not releasing this tape would be just that.

Excuse me Mr Cop but didnt you hear the police chief say the two incidents were not linked. Even if they were, how the fuck is releasing the tape to the media anything to do with evidence ? I always thought evidence was given to the DA and then used in court.

Maligning was exactly the right word to use. Even the State Governor said something similar.

It was simply an attempt to taint the jury pool. They know they will have to indict the cop and they can't bring that stuff into the trial so the only way to tell the jury "he had it coming" was now. It was nasty old school racism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: altoonamaster

it amuses me so much hype about this black kid who apparently broke the law. yet no one seems to care about the officer and hid family

Wilson is white, therefore he is guilty, therefore he deserves anything that happens to him.
Anyone who would marry him must be as big a racist as him and so deserves anything that happens to them.
As for any children, they would just grow up to be racists to so who cares?

The above posts are both bullshit.

Quite !!!!!!

quote:

I think we're going to have 2 autopsy reports. If they both say that all the shots hit him in back then it's a good shooting. If they all hit him in the back or while standing it is at least ambiguous. But if any hit him while he was kneeling the cop is toast.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

I think we're going to have 2 autopsy reports. If they both say that all the shots hit him in back then it's a good shooting. If they all hit him in the back or while standing it is at least ambiguous. But if any hit him while he was kneeling the cop is toast.

Not so sure of this DomKen... if there was a struggle at the vehicle the first shot could have very well been while he was kneeling. He could have then run wounded... but that really does not make any difference at all... where and how many times he was shot does not either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

I think we're going to have 2 autopsy reports. If they both say that all the shots hit him in back then it's a good shooting. If they all hit him in the back or while standing it is at least ambiguous. But if any hit him while he was kneeling the cop is toast.

Not so sure of this DomKen... if there was a struggle at the vehicle the first shot could have very well been while he was kneeling. He could have then run wounded... but that really does not make any difference at all... where and how many times he was shot does not either.

The fatal wound was to the top of the man's skull.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?smid=tw-share
It doesn't yet establish whether he was on his knees or not, for that they'll need to get hold of his clothes to check for gunpowder residue to determine the distance at which the shooting occurred but if it was at a distance he was on his knees and that puts Wilson in a very tough spot. The prosecutor can be as pro cop as he wants but if he doesn't indict and prosecute a cop that shot and killed a man who was giving up that is the sort of thing that cannot be explained away.