quote:

How about the side of truth?

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

So, you defend (otherwise why bring it up on this thread) emptying one's magazine into an unarmed person? You see a rationale for it?

Based on the facts we know -- the officer emptying his magazine (in the case sub justice) is the most damning evidence on the table. There is no defensible rationale for it, PERIOD. END OF STORY.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

FR

Two things:

1) I've read that there weren't any powder burns on Michael Brown's body so, unless and/or until powder burns are found on his clothing, he must have been shot at a distance. Is this correct? It doesn't mesh with Brown leaning through the cop's car window, from what I can see.

2) Reportedly, the whole incident with the cop telling Brown to 'Get the f**k onto the sidewalk'. Is that standard tough-talk that a young man might expect from a cop (just about imaginable to me - though I wouldn't expect it here in the UK, I don't know the culture there), or does it indicate an already-angry man?

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

So, you defend (otherwise why bring it up on this thread) emptying one's magazine into an unarmed person? You see a rationale for it?

Based on the facts we know -- the officer emptying his magazine (in the case sub justice) is the most damning evidence on the table. There is no defensible rationale for it, PERIOD. END OF STORY.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

FR

Two things:

1) I've read that there weren't any powder burns on Michael Brown's body so, unless and/or until powder burns are found on his clothing, he must have been shot at a distance. Is this correct? It doesn't mesh with Brown leaning through the cop's car window, from what I can see.

2) Reportedly, the whole incident with the cop telling Brown to 'Get the f**k onto the sidewalk'. Is that standard tough-talk that a young man might expect from a cop (just about imaginable to me - though I wouldn't expect it here in the UK, I don't know the culture there), or does it indicate an already-angry man?

1) That I don't know. Not a ballistics effort. Someone else would have to answer. I imagine that if someone is rushing toward you at say 10mph, you'd shoot them before they were instantly upon you and hence the distance might be sufficient to avoid powder burns because the collision was imminent. But that's a guess.

2) Yes. Absolutely standard, especially in a situation like this. It's got no racial connotations whatsoever. It doesn't indicate anger. It indicates dominance -- not in a bdsm sense, but in a "stand down" sense, as opposed to "please get on the sidewalk, sir" which would be appropriate in a non-confrontational situation, but not here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

A professionally trained police officer should know how to handle an 18 year old, petty thief who by all previous reports has no record of violence. No matter what happened, shooting Brown 6 times will result in charges of excessive force and possibly unjustifiable homicide.

As the private coroner stated in his report -- the basic autopsy facts could have been released one-day after the incident. Why weren't they?

State authorities would not let the private examiner see Brown's clothes. Why not?

Why did Brown's body lay in the road for five hours?

Why did the police release the store video of petty theft when it was unrelated to the shooting?

Yes, if there are no powder marks on Brown's clothes -- it will look even more like an execution.

>Dr. Baden said it was unusual that the authorities in St. Louis had not released most of the information “on Day 1” after the county medical examiner completed her autopsy, especially considering the heightened interest in the case, which involved an unarmed black teenager being killed by a white police officer.<

>“People have been asking: How many times was he shot? This information could have been released on Day 1,” Dr. Baden said in an interview after performing the autopsy. “They don’t do that, even as feelings built up among the citizenry that there was a cover-up. We are hoping to alleviate that.”

....A witness, Tiffany Mitchell, said in an interview with MSNBC that she heard tires squeal, then saw Mr. Brown and Officer Wilson “wrestling” through the open car window. A shot went off from within the car, Mr. Johnson said, and the two began to run away from the officer.

According to Ms. Mitchell, “The officer gets out of his vehicle,” she said, pursuing Mr. Brown, then continued to shoot.

Mr. Johnson said that he hid behind a parked car and that Mr. Brown was struck by a bullet in his back as he ran away, an account that Dr. Baden’s autopsy appears to contradict.

“Michael’s body jerks as if he was hit,” Ms. Mitchell said, “and then he put his hands up.” Mr. Brown turned, Mr. Johnson said, raised his hands, and said, “I don’t have a gun, stop shooting!”

Officer Wilson continued to fire and Mr. Brown crumpled to the ground, Mr. Johnson said. Within seconds, confusion and horror swept through Canfield Drive. On that Saturday afternoon, dozens of neighbors were at home and rushed out of their apartments when they heard gunshots.<

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


A If we are talking about religion and I point out that some people still believe that the world rests on the back of a turtle that means I believe it.
B You have been given valid reasons. Four were in the front of the arm which wouldn't have happened if he had his arms up.
C These situations virtually always have more shots fired than the officer realizes.

There is a difference between explaining why it happened and defending it.

quote:

Cloudboy, you are beginning to sound like a conspiracy theorist. Do you believe 9/11 was an "inside job," too?

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

Cloudboy, you are beginning to sound like a conspiracy theorist. Do you believe 9/11 was an "inside job," too?

I am quoting the coroner. You seem to be defending the Ferguson police -- an organization that killed an unarmed 18 year old teenager (who you imply had it coming because of his size) and that has lost control of its own district.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


A If we are talking about religion and I point out that some people still believe that the world rests on the back of a turtle that means I believe it.
B You have been given valid reasons. Four were in the front of the arm which wouldn't have happened if he had his arms up.
C These situations virtually always have more shots fired than the officer realizes.

There is a difference between explaining why it happened and defending it.

The amount of shots fired will result in a police conviction of misconduct here. I now put my tent pole down on that.

A. Not sure I see the relevance of that. Police officers are professionals, not quacks, and they are held to objective, public interest standards.

B. I have not been given any valid reasons. DS is full of shit.

B. According to the video from the private autopsy report, YES, the Brown's arms could very well have been up in the air.

C. That will not exonerate the police here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AQRMZ

You all ought to check this one out, but watch it all:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f0mVn0HH6U#t=52

Then read the comments under it. Veddy Inderstinng

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

Cloudboy, you are beginning to sound like a conspiracy theorist. Do you believe 9/11 was an "inside job," too?

I am quoting the coroner. You seem to be defending the Ferguson police -- an organization that killed an unarmed 18 year old teenager (who you imply had it coming because of his size) and that has lost control of its own district.

I am defending objective truth. The coroner asked a question. Perhaps they should have been released sooner. Perhaps it's because of a cover-up or perhaps it's just incompetence or bureaucratic meddling. This is government, you know.

The remainder of your points were not, as far as I can tell from your syntax, from the coroner's report, to wit:

State authorities would not let the private examiner see Brown's clothes. Why not? **I don't know why. Reasonable question. They may be a reasonable answer and, yes, the answer should be offered. ***

Why did Brown's body lay in the road for five hours? *** Because you don't move a body until it can be properly viewed forensically. This can take time. I don't see anything here at all. ***

Why did the police release the store video of petty theft when it was unrelated to the shooting? *** Why not? It's relevant. Not releasing it contributes to the narrative of Brown as choir boy. It's disingenuous to want everything released about a cop who is still innocent until proven guilty while objecting to the release of something negative toward Brown. Ask yourself this: Would you have objected to the release of a video showing Brown performing the Heimlich Maneuver on a customer in that store and saving his life?" Didn't think so. ***

Yes, if there are no powder marks on Brown's clothes -- it will look even more like an execution. *** Basic physics. You shoot before you are tackled. The shot could have been from far enough away, taking into account Brown's closing speed on the Officer, such that there were no powder marks. ***

quote:

You seem to be defending the Ferguson police -- an organization that killed an unarmed 18 year old teenager (who you imply had it coming because of his size) and that has lost control of its own district.

quote:

Actually the lack of powder burns makes it look less like an execution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: AQRMZ

You all ought to check this one out, but watch it all:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f0mVn0HH6U#t=52

Then read the comments under it. Veddy Inderstinng

Isn't that what I said! So, is he racist? I don't think so. He is honest.