Autopsy Shows Michael Brown Was Struck at Least 6 Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0)
By FRANCES ROBLES and JULIE BOSMAN
nytimes.com
AUG. 17, 2014
QuoteFERGUSON, Mo. — Michael Brown, the unarmed black teenager who was killed by a police officer, sparking protests around the nation, was shot at least six times, including twice in the head, a preliminary private autopsy performed on Sunday found.
One of the bullets entered the top of Mr. Brown's skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when it struck him and caused a fatal injury, according to Dr. Michael M. Baden, the former chief medical examiner for the City of New York, who flew to Missouri on Sunday at the family's request to conduct the separate autopsy. It was likely the last of bullets to hit him, he said.
Mr. Brown, 18, was also shot four times in the right arm, he said, adding that all the bullets were fired into his front.
The bullets did not appear to have been shot from very close range because no gunpowder was present on his body. However, that determination could change if it turns out that there is gunshot residue on Mr. Brown's clothing, to which Dr. Baden did not have access.
Some key facts from this NYT article:
* This Medical Examiner is not local, but flew in from NYC and did the autopsy at the Brown family's request;
*
Brown was struck by 6 bullets, 4 in the arm, 2 in the head, none from behind;* There have been reports (based on chatter by an eyewitness chatting in the background of a news video) of Brown attempting to flee, stopping when so instructed by the officer, then trying to bumrush the officer by surprise, and then being shot; the 6 bullet strikes are potentially consistent with Brown having tried to rush the police officer ----> 4 to the arm when Brown was moving and difficult to hit, 1 to the face, causing him to fall, and the last, to the top of his head, when Brown was falling (my speculation, except regarding the hit to the top of the head having been the last bullet);
* While the NYC ME could not comment on powder burns or residue on Brown's clothing, this is not relevant to the two hits to Brown's head; powder burns/residue from those shots, if any, would have been on Brown's face and the top of his head; there were none, therefore those 2 hits, including the one that was fatal, were not at close range.
The claim that Brown was shot in the back is disproved. The claim that Brown was shot while having his arms raised is proven highly doubtful (police only aim at arms and hands in movies and TV shows). The claim that Brown was shot at close range while lying on the pavement is disproven.
So once again, the MSM have been deceived by race-hucksters and victimologists, and by their own bias and haste. I was very prepared, despite the huckster-like actions of Brown's family and rioting, to believe that this shooting was unjustified, and possibly even murder. With this autopsy, by the Brown family's chosen ME, all the spectacular claims of the family, the Jackson-Sharpton types, and their MSM poll parrots have almost completely unraveled. At this point, IMO, it would take a hostile, highly biased, jury to convict this officer of anything.
Of course he could have shot him in the arm because he's a piss poor shot. You people alway believe the police because right now they're just shooting blacks. It's only when the show in white neighborhoods shooting whites - and they will - will it dawn on you that public workers with guns are not to be trusted. Right now they're avoiding the Ruby Ridges and the Wacos, but the potential is always there.
Quote from: mdgiles on August 18, 2014, 05:44:12 AM
Of course he could have shot him in the arm because he's a piss poor shot. You people alway believe the police because right now they're just shooting blacks. It's only when the show in white neighborhoods shooting whites - and they will - will it dawn on you that public workers with guns are not to be trusted. Right now they're avoiding the Ruby Ridges and the Wacos, but the potential is always there.
I hope this was satiric.
My next door neighbor (of 20+ years) is a former cop. He hasn't shot anyone hereabouts (or anywhere, that I know of). Ditto for a neighbor 2 doors down in another direction, except that he is still serving.
Quote from: mdgiles on August 18, 2014, 05:44:12 AM
Of course he could have shot him in the arm because he's a piss poor shot. You people alway believe the police because right now they're just shooting blacks. It's only when the show in white neighborhoods shooting whites - and they will - will it dawn on you that public workers with guns are not to be trusted. Right now they're avoiding the Ruby Ridges and the Wacos, but the potential is always there.
Roughly twenty years ago, a friend of my father, a white police chief of a neighboring town, chased a white car thief to literally outside my parents' house, where the perp got out waving a gun and with one shot (not wildly made) the cop managed to put that white asshole down without further harm.
You bet I know the potential is there. It freaking well drove right up to our door.
Just don't expect much sympathy because it was a white cop and a black victim. Black cops shooting white kids don't get that sort of publicity and you know it. The race of either the cop or the victim should not matter. It's what led up to the officer deciding to pull that trigger --- that's the ONLY thing that matters, not the pigment.
Quote from: SVPete on August 18, 2014, 06:03:43 AM
I hope this was satiric.
My next door neighbor (of 20+ years) is a former cop. He hasn't shot anyone hereabouts (or anywhere, that I know of). Ditto for a neighbor 2 doors down in another direction, except that he is still serving.
The 10% Giles, crazy Sharpton devotee, is currently speaking.
Hopefully he'll be replaced by the rational Giles as soon as gets some Ritalin, or orange juice, or whatever he needs, in him.
And Erich Folder has authorized a third-autopsy.
" We've gotta prove that the bullets ricochet'd off something ahead of Brown as he ran, so that they entered from the front because he was being shot from behind. Don't make me look like a fool, people. "
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POLICE_SHOOTING_MISSOURI?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-08-17-18-17-22 (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POLICE_SHOOTING_MISSOURI?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-08-17-18-17-22)
Quote from: kit saginaw on August 18, 2014, 08:45:33 AM
And Erich Folder has authorized a third-autopsy.
" We've gotta prove that the bullets ricochet'd off something ahead of Brown as he ran, so that they entered from the front because he was being shot from behind. Don't make me look like a fool, people. "
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POLICE_SHOOTING_MISSOURI?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-08-17-18-17-22 (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POLICE_SHOOTING_MISSOURI?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-08-17-18-17-22)
Also....
Holder Orders DOJ to Do Further Autopsy on Michael Brown
more @
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/michael-brown-shooting/holder-orders-doj-do-further-autopsy-michael-brown-n182626 (http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/michael-brown-shooting/holder-orders-doj-do-further-autopsy-michael-brown-n182626)
Quote from: mdgiles on August 18, 2014, 05:44:12 AM
Of course he could have shot him in the arm because he's a piss poor shot. You people alway believe the police because right now they're just shooting blacks. It's only when the show in white neighborhoods shooting whites - and they will - will it dawn on you that public workers with guns are not to be trusted. Right now they're avoiding the Ruby Ridges and the Wacos, but the potential is always there.
"You people"? :laugh:
I glad you're the level headed one WAITING for the facts to come out because this ROBBER might be a VICTIM of evil white cops who shoot black yutes for sport.
I do not believe this police officer was out to shoot anyone. I do not believe he committed murder. It makes no sense. He was doing his job, and it was not murder. All police shootings are investigated, as they should be.
How about when there is no charge against this officer? Another excuse to riot?
DaisyJane
Quote from: mdgiles on August 18, 2014, 05:44:12 AM
Of course he could have shot him in the arm because he's a piss poor shot. You people alway believe the police because right now they're just shooting blacks. It's only when the show in white neighborhoods shooting whites - and they will - will it dawn on you that public workers with guns are not to be trusted. Right now they're avoiding the Ruby Ridges and the Wacos, but the potential is always there.
Who, exactly, is 'you people?' Please supply references that support your contention that police officers are 'just shooting blacks,' whether 'right now' or at any other time.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 18, 2014, 12:19:27 PM
Who, exactly, is 'you people?' Please supply references that support your contention that police officers are 'just shooting blacks,' whether 'right now' or at any other time.
"You People" is code for you idiot not accepting the racist excuse/component to justify blacks burning down and looting their own neighborhoods.
"We be trashing our own kind, cause our race baitin masters told us to".
Damn I hate idiots that can't see past their own biased hatred.
A very good question!
Ferguson Protester: "Why Didn't They Shoot Those Looters?" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdIHFM27IhM#ws)
Quote from: walkstall on August 18, 2014, 12:37:33 PM
A very good question!
Ferguson Protester: "Why Didn't They Shoot Those Looters?" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdIHFM27IhM#ws)
Answer: The orders came from much higher up. They got a distraction for the Marxist, and by God, we'll milk it as long as possible.
The autopsy clearly indicates Michael brown was moving towards the bullets at a fairly considerable pace with his head lowered. Note the mention of scrape marks down the front side of the face caused by scraping on the asphalt as the victim fell (almost certainly due to the gunshots to the head). This clearly indicates when the victim fell to the ground he was moving in the direction of the bullets head down. The bullets entered from the top and the scrape marks were on the front side. His momentum being sufficient to cause the victim to slide as he hit the asphalt. This is only possible if the victim was moving forward with his head down as he fell to the ground.
It is possible the one shot which grazed the right arm and then entered the right side of the victims chest caused the victim to collapse to the ground, but much more likely caused by the shots to the head for 3 reasons: 1) According to witness statements the youth pushed the officer into the patrol car and began to struggle for the officers gun. At least 1 shot was fired from within the patrol car. This was likely the shot which entered the side of the victim. None of the 3 superficial shots remained in the victim. If these shots were fired from within the car they would have struck the patrol car. The only shot which fits this profile (non-fatal and remained in the victim) is the shot to the side. The shot which grazed the arm and entered the right side of his chest was likely an early shot. 2) for the side shot to have caused the fall on the face the victim would have to have been moving towards the officer with his right side forward then twist face forward and collapse unprotected with momentum after the shot. Neither this shot nor any of the 3 superficial shots would likely cause complete collapse and a twist without the ability to block the fall. 3) this is a very awkward manner to approach the shooter with speed.
The most likely scenario is the victim strong-armed the officer into the patrol car and began struggling for the gun. The officer controlled the gun and fired at least once from within the car striking the victim on the right side. The victim then retreated and was ordered to stop. The victim charged the officer possibly extending his arms towards the officer as he approached and was fired upon several times. 1 of these shots hit him near the eye top to bottom and another (the fatal shot) hit him in the brain (top to bottom). He then collapsed face forward, sliding without blocking his fall (no scraps on the hands).
The store video is not in dispute. The victims friend has confirmed the persons in the store video were none other than himself and Michael Brown. The store video is completely relevant here as it goes to state of mind of the victim. We were led to believe the victim was a fine upstanding gentle giant of a citizen about to go off to college. This was anything but true as the store video indicates. The victim was a low-life thief with little character, no respect for the law or consideration of others, who had a propensity for violence. Plain and simple. And it fits precisely with the forensic evidence and witness statements. It is understandable the family would like to portray him otherwise, but let's get real here. He was a two-bit, violent, low-life punk who thought he was entitled to do whatever he wanted, with zero respect for the law and a violent tendency. The families failure to teach him otherwise resulted in the inevitable.
Furthermore, regardless of whether the officer knew of the incident, the VICTIM certainly knew what he had just done and was likely reluctant to be apprehended. Even his friend has admitted he strong-armed the officer pushing him into the patrol car (apparently trying to obtain the officers weapon). According to his best friends statements the officer fired at least one shot from within the car. He then CLAIMS after the victim retreated the officer shot him in the back and then in the head with his arms raised in surrender. None of the forensic evidence supports these later claims.
So....what kinda crap was this 6'4" 300 lb. "Kid" smokin that made him think he was bullet proof??? :blink:
Quote from: Ek Ehecatl on August 18, 2014, 03:31:47 PM
So....what kinda crap was this 6'4" 300 lb. "Kid" smokin that made him think he was bullet proof??? :blink:
Was he smoking anything, or was he just stupid? "Children" haven't fully developed the judgment center of the brain until around age 25. It's why "children" do stupid things and take risks that can (and will) kill them.
QuoteBRAIN NOT FULLY DEVELOPED UNTIL AGE 25
By Kristen Rollins
Teenagers are four times as likely to be involved in a car crash and three times more likely to die in one than adults according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Recent studies have shown that these statistics may have to do with teenage brain development.
A National Institutes of Health study proposes that the part of the brain that restrains risky behavior, including reckless driving, and thinking skills is not fully developed until the age of 25.
Jay Giedd, the psychiatrist leading the study, told MSNBC earlier this year that this finding came as a surprise to him because he used to think that the brain was fully developed by the age of 18.
The continuous study uses magnetic resonance imaging to scan 2,000 people's brains every two years. It has been found that teenage brains have extra synapses in the areas where decision making and risk assessment take place. Most of these synapses are useless and even get in the way of one's judgment. Eventually, as teenagers become adults the synapses disappear, but the findings imply that many life choices are made before the brain's decision making center is fully developed.
Laura Caporusso, a nurse at Yale University Hospital, said that her department sees a large number of teenage driving accidents. If brain development is the cause of these accidents, Caporusso said she is uncertain due to Yale's close proximity to the universities in the area.
"The brain is a really hard thing. You can never really know," she said. "We get kids who come in that are supposed to be brain dead, and they leave walking and talking."
Giedd and his team of researchers are also looking into different influences that cause the child brain to develop the way it does. These influences range from parenting and schooling to nutrition. Because many changes in the brain take place during the teenage years, different interactions teenagers experience may have an affect on their brain structure in the future.
Karen Comstock, is psychology professor at Marist College, and has researched the brain and brain development.
"Research on brain development helps us to understand ourselves and others. Our world and human behavior is extremely complex," Comstock said. "To fully understand what goes on with the brain may not be the ultimate goal, if that were even possible. The quest may be in the effort we put into trying to understand ourselves and others."
Comstock also said she has experienced her own children's developmental stages.
"My children who are now 21 and 25, definitely needed help with the thinking through process. There were times during their adolescence when they found the things I tried to teach them difficult to understand," she said. "However, they were eventually able to grasp the concept six months or even a year or more later. So it appears that their development caught up with my teachings.
http://www.academic.marist.edu/mwwatch/fall05/science1.htm (http://www.academic.marist.edu/mwwatch/fall05/science1.htm)
Quote from: LibDave on August 18, 2014, 03:10:37 PM
The store video is not in dispute. The victims friend has confirmed the persons in the store video were none other than himself and Michael Brown. The store video is completely relevant here as it goes to state of mind of the victim. We were led to believe the victim was a fine upstanding gentle giant of a citizen about to go off to college. This was anything but true as the store video indicates. The victim was a low-life thief with little character, no respect for the law or consideration of others, who had a propensity for violence. Plain and simple. And it fits precisely with the forensic evidence and witness statements. It is understandable the family would like to portray him otherwise, but let's get real here. He was a two-bit, violent, low-life punk who thought he was entitled to do whatever he wanted, with zero respect for the law and a violent tendency. The families failure to teach him otherwise resulted in the inevitable.
Furthermore, regardless of whether the officer knew of the incident, the VICTIM certainly knew what he had just done and was likely reluctant to be apprehended. Even his friend has admitted he strong-armed the officer pushing him into the patrol car (apparently trying to obtain the officers weapon). According to his best friends statements the officer fired at least one shot from within the car. He then CLAIMS after the victim retreated the officer shot him in the back and then in the head with his arms raised in surrender. None of the forensic evidence supports these later claims.
:thumbsup:
So why do you call yourself "LibDave"? You're 100% right IMHO
Quote from: Solar on August 18, 2014, 12:30:40 PM
"You People" is code for you idiot not accepting the racist excuse/component to justify blacks burning down and looting their own neighborhoods.
"We be trashing our own kind, cause our race baitin masters told us to".
Damn I hate idiots that can't see past their own biased hatred.
Thanks for the reply, but I think it would be appropriate to hear what Giles has to say.
Quote from: carlb on August 18, 2014, 03:37:47 PM
Was he smoking anything, or was he just stupid? "Children" haven't fully developed the judgment center of the brain until around age 25. It's why "children" do stupid things and take risks that can (and will) kill them.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1076.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw441%2FKrellkneen%2Fbrown5_zps9695a210.jpg&hash=26a135472d52c5a8854f3c9ed9aad2c3b54492ff)
He chose the wrong place and time to be stupid.Fixed link to jpg I hope.
walks
Mike Brown's VERY Explicit Rap Songs Praising Drugs, Drinking, Ho's & Murder
http://clashdaily.com/2014/08/gentle-giant-mike-browns-explicit-rap-songs-praising-drugs-drinking-hos-murder/ (http://clashdaily.com/2014/08/gentle-giant-mike-browns-explicit-rap-songs-praising-drugs-drinking-hos-murder/)
NSFW
Quote from: Rusty Snippets on August 18, 2014, 03:51:04 PM
Mike Brown's VERY Explicit Rap Songs Praising Drugs, Drinking, Ho's & Murder
http://clashdaily.com/2014/08/gentle-giant-mike-browns-explicit-rap-songs-praising-drugs-drinking-hos-murder/ (http://clashdaily.com/2014/08/gentle-giant-mike-browns-explicit-rap-songs-praising-drugs-drinking-hos-murder/)
NSFW
They will tell you none of that justifies his "cold blooded murder." (they've already ruled it "murder" so no need for a trial.
Quote from: carlb on August 18, 2014, 03:59:32 PM
They will tell you none of that justifies his "cold blooded murder." (they've already ruled it "murder" so no need for a trial.
Sure, skip the police investigation and due process. Just consider the police officer CONVICTED of murder.
DaisyJane :huh:
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 18, 2014, 03:44:17 PM
Thanks for the reply, but I think it would be appropriate to hear what Giles has to say.
I was going off of his past posts using the term "you people".
Quote from: mdgiles on August 18, 2014, 05:44:12 AM
Of course he could have shot him in the arm because he's a piss poor shot. You people alway believe the police because right now they're just shooting blacks. It's only when the show in white neighborhoods shooting whites - and they will - will it dawn on you that public workers with guns are not to be trusted. Right now they're avoiding the Ruby Ridges and the Wacos, but the potential is always there.
Ruby Ridge was a government assassination operation, plain and simple. Waco was a bit more complicated, but there's something you may not know about it. The victims -- the people living at the Branch Davidian complex -- were not all generic white Americans. Of the 76 dead, 21 were British citizens, 2 were Canadians, 3 were Australian, 2 were New Zealanders, and two more were Filipinos. Just for good measure, one of the dead was an Israeli.
I can't bear witness as to the race of all those who lost their lives in that Uncle Sam clusterfuck, but I think it's fair to point out that you can't either. You don't quite say so, but your implication is plain enough -- Waco and Ruby Ridge are the rare examples of government coming down on white people. I prefer to think of both incidents as examples of Uncle Sam coming down on PEOPLE, period. I really don't care what color they were. But you seem to care very much about that. Please elaborate.
Would someone please explain to me how you do an autopsy then come out and say they were shot "6-8" times.
Wtf?
To know how many times he was shot, all they have to do is count the bullet holes in the body.
What the hell is this crap "six to eight times".
The Coroner doesn't really know how to count so they're unsure if it's six or eight bullet holes in the deceased's body?
I mean when a body, when a person has a hole put in them by a bullet, it's really easy to see/tell it's a bullet hole in them.
Because it's a hole one doesn't normally have in them.
I mean seriously it's not like there maybe some bullet holes in them, but we don't know for sure if it's a bullet hole or not....so what the hell is this "six to eight" times crap?
I don't know which his worse though, that a coroner would put such a thing down as "autopsy results"....or that folks are so apathetic and stupid today, not to question it when the coroner says something like "they were shot six to eight times"....as if they don't know what the hell the difference between, 6 bullet holes and 8 bullet holes are. :rolleyes:
Quote from: daidalos on August 18, 2014, 08:37:29 PM
Would someone please explain to me how you do an autopsy then come out and say they were shot "6-8" times.
Wtf?
To know how many times he was shot, all they have to do is count the bullet holes in the body.
What the hell is this crap "six to eight times".
The Coroner doesn't really know how to count so they're unsure if it's six or eight bullet holes in the deceased's body?
I mean when a body, when a person has a hole put in them by a bullet, it's really easy to see/tell it's a bullet hole in them.
Because it's a hole one doesn't normally have in them.
I mean seriously it's not like there maybe some bullet holes in them, but we don't know for sure if it's a bullet hole or not....so what the hell is this "six to eight" times crap?
I don't know which his worse though, that a coroner would put such a thing down as "autopsy results"....or that folks are so apathetic and stupid today, not to question it when the coroner says something like "they were shot six to eight times"....as if they don't know what the hell the difference between, 6 bullet holes and 8 bullet holes are. :rolleyes:
According to what I've seen, he was shot six times. Four bullets struck his right arm; two struck his head. I don't know where the '6-8' thing came from.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 18, 2014, 08:52:15 PM
According to what I've seen, he was shot six times. Four bullets struck his right arm; two struck his head. I don't know where the '6-8' thing came from.
Sounds like someone has been looking at the Uninformed MSM, all I have heard is six. But the week is young yet.
Just happy my 4 back up clips hold 15 each.
"It ain't over until the fat lady sings"
CNN Airs 'Officer's Side of Story,' as Recounted by Friend of Darren Wilson
CNN Airs 'Officer's Side of Story,' as Recounted by Friend of Darren Wilson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXYa0X_jeUQ#ws)
They're saying 2 bullets exited then re-entered. They're counting those as 2 separate shots. Shot 6 times, two that struck arm went clean through and entered torso. Shot 8 times. Would make sense if it was a 6-shot duty revolver........... the 8 shot explanation was driving me crazy.
Giles is just being a typical racist. His racism renders him unable to think clearly and rationally. His loyalty is to his race and race alone. Race trumps all other areas of life including his loyalty to country, justice, and humanity. This is why "pro-woman" Oprah stabbed Hillary in the back and endorsed b.o. Decades of supporting women go out the window the second race plays a role. Colin Powell did the same thing with his endorsement. That's why b.o. got nearly 100% of the black vote.
Racists like giles only care about the advancement of their own race and will demonize and villify anyone who says anything to the contrary regardless of what the facts indicate. If anyone calls him on his racist b.s., he just turns around and calls you a racist. Classic projection.
You can't trust a racist like giles. When the chips are down, he's siding with race over any other variable. I guarantee that IF he didn't vote for b.o. (big IF), he certainly struggled with the decision simply because of his race. What should be a slam-dunk not a chance in heck vote was a struggle for him.
Quote from: mdgiles on August 18, 2014, 05:44:12 AM
Of course he could have shot him in the arm because he's a piss poor shot.
And perhaps he hit exactly what he was aiming at. Non-lethal shots to the right side away from the heart.
Quote from: mdgiles on August 18, 2014, 05:44:12 AMYou people alway believe the police because right now they're just shooting blacks. It's only when the show in white neighborhoods shooting whites - and they will - will it dawn on you that public workers with guns are not to be trusted. Right now they're avoiding the Ruby Ridges and the Wacos, but the potential is always there.
I am not at all a fervent supporter of your run-of-the-mill police officer. But what are we to do. It is a thankless and dangerous job, for little pay, And I am glad they are serving instead of me. They do a dangerous and important job and we owe them AT LEAST the same level of due process we all enjoy, if not "benefit of the doubt".
You seem to be of the impression that "you people" haven't been on the receiving end of less than stellar treatment by the police. The vast majority of ALL of us have had our share of run-ins with what we considered rude, arrogant, power-crazed police suffering from a hefty dose of small penis syndrome. If you want to discuss that I suggest you submit a post about run-ins with the police. You would likely get as many non-whites as blacks agreeing with you. Due to the racial history of our nation Blacks just mistakenly attribute this to race as they have a tendency to do with many sources of irritation. It might surprise you to learn that non-blacks are rude, inconsiderate and mistreat other non-blacks too. We just don't attribute it to race. Some people are just mean nasty unhappy and even cruel people.
That said, the repercussions and scrutiny received by police officers following any shooting (let alone the use of deadly force) are anything but pleasant. No police officer can enjoy the stress of the post-incident investigation. We are far from the point where police officers routinely just go around shooting innocent citizens off-hand for no reason; especially in broad daylight in a hostile neighborhood. This assertion doesn't hold water.
We have already seen many supposed "FACTS" from the Ferguson community which have been demonstrably shown to be COMPLETE fabrications of the truth. Michael Brown was ANYTHING BUT a fine upstanding young "gentle giant" of a boy who wouldn't hurt a flea, with a healthy respect for the law in the throws of leading a virtuous life. He was fast on his way to trouble as the store video (not in dispute) clearly indicates. He was a very large and dangerous thug of a full grown man. His family obviously fell short of their responsibility to instill in him any sense of decency or self-restraint.
So while I might agree with you it would be nice to see a higher caliber of public servant across-the-board, in this case I believe the race-baiters and agitators have picked a very poor example of police misconduct. Even so I believe the interest of the public is served by having a complete, fair and open investigation into the man's death. The public has the right to know. So lets look at the actual FACTS as we know them to this point...
FACTS:
- Michael Black (MB) A very large, imposing, 18 year old thug with a propensity for violence entered a convenience store and strong-armed a store clerk as he blatantly stole items from the store ON CAMERA IN FRONT OF WITNESSES. One of those witnesses accompanied him to the store, was his best friend and has confirmed the identity of himself and MB. MB even gave him some of the stolen items which his friend refused to take (at least his friend has some sense).
- 1 minute later a call went out to the police informing them of the robbery.
- At this same moment a patrolman pulls up beside these same 2 men while they are walking in the middle of a residential street and asks them to get out of the street so they don't block traffic. The patrolman was unaware of the nearby robbery incident at that time (though the perpetrator obviously was). The officer was met with the same type of belligerence, and aggression MB exhibited at the convenience store 1 minute earlier.
- The patrolman pulled over to the side of the street to confront the men as the report of the robbery is dispatched over the radio with a description of the suspects fitting that of MB and his friend.
- As the officer gets out of the car MB strong-arms him, shoving him back into the car and punches him in the face. As the officer is being assaulted he attempted to draw his firearm. MB attempts but fails to wrangle the officers gun from him.
- At least 1 shot is fired from inside the car possibly grazing MB in the arm and/or grazing him on the right side of the chest before exiting.
- MB and his friend begin to run and are pursued by the officer who orders them to freeze. They stop at a distance of approximately 35 feet.
None of this is disputed and has been confirmed by MB's own friend as well as other witnesses. What happened next is not entirely clear. Much of the witness testimony has yet to be released. For the most part what has been put out is conjecture and derived from unreliable sources who didn't actually witness the incident. MB's friend at this point claims MB and he raised their arms in surrender with their backs to the officer who supposedly shot MB from behind. Several other witnesses have apparently stated that while MB did initially stop and appear to surrender that he then proceeded to turn, hurl insults, taunt the officer, dare the officer to shoot him, and then charge or "bum-rush" him. This apparently supports the officer's statement but has yet to be confirmed by authorities due to the Constitutional rights of the officer should there be charges. But lets examine the forensic evidence released....
I still harbor a fondness for Giles, at least the 90% of him that's rational and seemingly conservative. He's got a terrible blind spot of about 10% that identifies with the nonsense of Jackson-Rangel-Sharpton.
Not sure how that kind of bi-polar or split personality works, but hopefully he can reconcile it. I'm sure it's painful to feel that you have to be part of social or cultural imperative, when you know it's 100% wrong on the facts and evidence.
He's eaten crow on Trayvon, and is about to enjoy a big plate full on the Brown episode.
Sad thing is we all know that there are indeed examples of racism and racist violence out there. But to jump up and down with the crowd on these 2 incidents, is embarrassing and foolish. Especially for someone who's supposed to fit in with the honesty, common sense, and logic at CPF.
Quote from: Rusty Snippets on August 18, 2014, 10:50:38 PM
They're saying 2 bullets exited then re-entered. They're counting those as 2 separate shots. Shot 6 times, two that struck arm went clean through and entered torso. Shot 8 times. Would make sense if it was a 6-shot duty revolver........... the 8 shot explanation was driving me crazy.
I think the chances are pretty slim that the officer was carrying a revolver. It is a rare cop these days who doesn't pack a semi-auto in 9mm or .40 caliber, either of which typically holds many more than six rounds.
Quote from: LibDave on August 19, 2014, 07:28:20 AM
FACTS:
- Michael Black (MB) A very large, imposing, 18 year old thug with a propensity for violence entered a convenience store and strong-armed a store clerk as he blatantly stole items from the store ON CAMERA IN FRONT OF WITNESSES. One of those witnesses accompanied him to the store, was his best friend and has confirmed the identity of himself and MB. MB even gave him some of the stolen items which his friend refused to take (at least his friend has some sense).
- 1 minute later a call went out to the police informing them of the robbery.
- At this same moment a patrolman pulls up beside these same 2 men while they are walking in the middle of a residential street and asks them to get out of the street so they don't block traffic. The patrolman was unaware of the nearby robbery incident at that time (though the perpetrator obviously was). The officer was met with the same type of belligerence, and aggression MB exhibited at the convenience store 1 minute earlier.
- The patrolman pulled over to the side of the street to confront the men as the report of the robbery is dispatched over the radio with a description of the suspects fitting that of MB and his friend.
- As the officer gets out of the car MB strong-arms him, shoving him back into the car and punches him in the face. As the officer is being assaulted he attempted to draw his firearm. MB attempts but fails to wrangle the officers gun from him.
- At least 1 shot is fired from inside the car possibly grazing MB in the arm and/or grazing him on the right side of the chest before exiting.
- MB and his friend begin to run and are pursued by the officer who orders them to freeze. They stop at a distance of approximately 35 feet.
None of this is disputed and has been confirmed by MB's own friend as well as other witnesses. What happened next is not entirely clear. Much of the witness testimony has yet to be released. For the most part what has been put out is conjecture and derived from unreliable sources who didn't actually witness the incident. MB's friend at this point claims MB and he raised their arms in surrender with their backs to the officer who supposedly shot MB from behind. Several other witnesses have apparently stated that while MB did initially stop and appear to surrender that he then proceeded to turn, hurl insults, taunt the officer, dare the officer to shoot him, and then charge or "bum-rush" him. This apparently supports the officer's statement but has yet to be confirmed by authorities due to the Constitutional rights of the officer should there be charges. But lets examine the forensic evidence released....
Simply put, it appears that Michael Brown was on a roll of feeling big and bad, maybe magnified by being high, and maybe made worse by being just a dopey 18 year-old, sadly a condition of all teens of every color and culture.
He started by throwing a little store owner around, and taking his stuff.
He then was stopped by a cop almost randomly, but decided that his size and attitude would scare the cop just like the storeowner.
It appears that he started by rushing the car, beating the cop and trying to get his gun. Apparently a shot was fired or just went off, and Brown thought twice and started to retreat.
But then he appears to have gone back to 'beast mode' and decided to give the cop another run. Which ended up badly for him.
All of the evidence collected so far is pointing to this.
Sadly, it's a pretty good re-run of the Trayvon story. Slightly different set of characters, but almost the same roles and series of events.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 19, 2014, 08:21:03 AM
I think the chances are pretty slim that the officer was carrying a revolver. It is a rare cop these days who doesn't pack a semi-auto in 9mm or .40 caliber, either of which typically holds many more than six rounds.
Yeah, cops don't do revolvers any more. Maybe their second weapon, but not primary.
They went to semi-auto high-capacity because they were outgunned badly by the criminals, starting in the 80's. No chief would allow his people to carry a revolver today (primary weapon), it's just a dumb thing to do.
I remember switching from the old .38's to the 9mm in the Air Force, around 1985. All police depts. were doing the same, at that time. They've graduated to 10mm and .40 auto, now. It was funny, there was a massive glut of the old .38's being sold to dealers for pennies on the dollar. Should have bought about 50 of them lol, but I didn't.
People should stay focused on the TOPICS and not tear other forum members apart because they split with you on maybe 3%! In other words, make it EASY to bring them around, not drive them away.
Quote from: Dr. Meh on August 19, 2014, 12:14:34 AM
Giles is just being a typical racist. His racism renders him unable to think clearly and rationally. His loyalty is to his race and race alone. Race trumps all other areas of life including his loyalty to country, justice, and humanity. This is why "pro-woman" Oprah stabbed Hillary in the back and endorsed b.o. Decades of supporting women go out the window the second race plays a role. Colin Powell did the same thing with his endorsement. That's why b.o. got nearly 100% of the black vote.
Racists like giles only care about the advancement of their own race and will demonize and villify anyone who says anything to the contrary regardless of what the facts indicate. If anyone calls him on his racist b.s., he just turns around and calls you a racist. Classic projection.
You can't trust a racist like giles. When the chips are down, he's siding with race over any other variable. I guarantee that IF he didn't vote for b.o. (big IF), he certainly struggled with the decision simply because of his race. What should be a slam-dunk not a chance in heck vote was a struggle for him.
Sometimes you have to point up outrageous behaviors and BS.
I like the guy. Doesn't make nonsense...."not nonsense".
Just heard the Democrat/Communist Party has set up a registration booth right next to a memorial for the thug/teen/child. Dems are so damb predictable.
Probably turn into a big fund raiser as well. If every rampaging thug can just scrape 100$ out of their drug profits.....they can probably scrape up a couple million for Hillary.
Turns out more than a dozen witnesses have verified the cop's "story." I doubt that will be good enough for some.
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/08/19/more-than-a-dozen-witnesses-back-up-cops-version-of-ferguson-shooting-police-sources-say-139709 (http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/08/19/more-than-a-dozen-witnesses-back-up-cops-version-of-ferguson-shooting-police-sources-say-139709)
Review the anatomical diagrams closely with an open mind.
MB was struck by precisely 6 bullets (no more no less). 2 were retrieved from his body (in the head) with the fatal shot being the one entering the cranium from the top of the head straight down into the brain. The remaining 4 were grazing wounds to the right arm and hand; 1 of which also entered then sub-dermally exited the right pectoral region. None of the wounds in the arm or hand could have also been attributable to the cranial injuries. None of the rounds which struck the right arm could have attributed to more than one of the arm wounds. So he was hit with EXACTLY 6 rounds.
No scrapes were found on his hands but asphalt scrapes were found on the right cheek clearly indicating MB fell and impacted the asphalt face-first without bracing his fall with enough momentum to slide across the asphalt. Only the 2 head wounds would have rendered MB unconscious. The fact that these 2 wounds entered from the top and momentum was sufficient to cause MB to SLIDE face first on the asphalt clearly indicates MB was moving at a fairly good speed toward the officer with his head down. There is NO POSSIBILITY or any other explanation for the forensic evidence.
None of the arm wounds could have been caused AFTER the fatal head wound as MB was lying face down on the asphalt. Grazing wounds to the inside of the arm were not accessible. Looking at the post-incident video the victims head is clearly towards the patrol car and officer with his arms down at his side.
Examine each of the 6 wounds starting from the hand up to the head.
1. The wound to the hand could only have been inflicted back to front if MB's hand was down at his side not raised. The trajectory followed the line of the thumb at the base pad. You cannot align this pad with the hand raised without placing your hand palm inwards with the hand fully 1 foot behind your shoulders. Try it yourself, not possible and a very awkward position to place your hand.
2. The wound to the inside of the forearm could have come from the front or behind, arm raised or arm down. In all cases the palms would be facing inward at the time the wound occurred.
3. This shot could not have come from behind since it grazed the front of the upper forearm just below the elbow. You cannot face this part of your anatomy rearward.
4. This shot grazed the front of the upper arm then entered the right pectoral region, continued just under the skin and exited in front of the pectoral muscle. This shot is the only shot which entered from the side. As a result it might have been the first wound inflicted during the confrontation in the patrol car. The trajectory was slightly below horizontal indicating MB's right side was facing the gun leaning slightly toward the gunshot. It could not have been delivered from a great distance as this would require the gun to be fired from above the officers head.
5. This shot entered the forehead just above the right eyebrow, destroyed the eye's orbital, continued through the head, exited under the jaw and then penetrated through to the clavicle where it was retrieved at autopsy. This was a top down shot. MB's head was down facing the shooter when it occurred.
6. This was the only fatal shot and either the last or 2nd to last shot fired (possibly just before shot 5). It was fired from the top down and instantly fatal. MB's head was down when this wound was inflicted, PERIOD. The asphalt scrapes to the face and the video at the scene is STRONG evidence his head was down and he was approaching the officer at a pretty good clip when wounds 5 and 6 occurred.
You will note that 4 of the 6 wounds COULD NOT HAVE come from behind. 1 of the 2 remaining (the palm wound) did not occur with hands raised. Only 1 could have come from behind with arm raised. If we are to believe this 1 wound was inflicted from back to front with hands raised this would mean we are also to believe MB's reaction to being fired upon and grazed in the forearm was to turn and charge at an armed and drawn officer from 35 feet away. I find this highly improbable and very hard to believe. Even if this was MB's reaction, this in-and-of-itself would be cause for the use of deadly force on behalf of the officer. It would certainly get my attention if I shot someone in the arm 35 feet away arms raised only to have him turn and charge me.
Looking at everything as a whole it is completely inconceivable to believe charges should be leveled against this officer. The shooting was obviously justified and MB was responsible for his unfortunate demise. He was a large imposing thug headed for no good with no respect for the law who suffered the price for his lack or moral upbringing.
The race baiters have once again chosen a poor example to use for their preconceived political motivation. I don't dispute there is a lot of poor law enforcement which occurs. But this is NOT such an example and justice demands this officer be left in peace to come to terms emotionally with what MB forced upon him.
As a side note it is interesting to note his friend (the one who refused to take the stolen items MB gave him in the store) was not injured in any way. Apparently he had more sense than MB and is alive as a result. Are we to believe the officer unloaded on MB and yet left his companion completely unharmed. Why target MB yet not his companion? The answer: "His friend wasn't acting like a fool".
Quote from: LibDave on August 19, 2014, 09:56:47 AM
Review the anatomical diagrams closely with an open mind.
MB was struck by precisely 6 bullets (no more no less). 2 were retrieved from his body (in the head) with the fatal shot being the one entering the cranium from the top of the head straight down into the brain. The remaining 4 were grazing wounds to the right arm and hand; 1 of which also entered then sub-dermally exited the right pectoral region. None of the wounds in the arm or hand could have also been attributable to the cranial injuries. None of the rounds which struck the right arm could have attributed to more than one of the arm wounds. So he was hit with EXACTLY 6 rounds.
No scrapes were found on his hands but asphalt scrapes were found on the right cheek clearly indicating MB fell and impacted the asphalt face-first without bracing his fall with enough momentum to slide across the asphalt. Only the 2 head wounds would have rendered MB unconscious. The fact that these 2 wounds entered from the top and momentum was sufficient to cause MB to SLIDE face first on the asphalt clearly indicates MB was moving at a fairly good speed toward the officer with his head down. There is NO POSSIBILITY or any other explanation for the forensic evidence.
None of the arm wounds could have been caused AFTER the fatal head wound as MB was lying face down on the asphalt. Grazing wounds to the inside of the arm were not accessible. Looking at the post-incident video the victims head is clearly towards the patrol car and officer with his arms down at his side.
Examine each of the 6 wounds starting from the hand up to the head.
1. The wound to the hand could only have been inflicted back to front if MB's hand was down at his side not raised. The trajectory followed the line of the thumb at the base pad. You cannot align this pad with the hand raised without placing your hand palm inwards with the hand fully 1 foot behind your shoulders. Try it yourself, not possible and a very awkward position to place your hand.
2. The wound to the inside of the forearm could have come from the front or behind, arm raised or arm down. In all cases the palms would be facing inward at the time the wound occurred.
3. This shot could not have come from behind since it grazed the front of the upper forearm just below the elbow. You cannot face this part of your anatomy rearward.
4. This shot grazed the front of the upper arm then entered the right pectoral region, continued just under the skin and exited in front of the pectoral muscle. This shot is the only shot which entered from the side. As a result it might have been the first wound inflicted during the confrontation in the patrol car. The trajectory was slightly below horizontal indicating MB's right side was facing the gun leaning slightly toward the gunshot. It could not have been delivered from a great distance as this would require the gun to be fired from above the officers head.
5. This shot entered the forehead just above the right eyebrow, destroyed the eye's orbital, continued through the head, exited under the jaw and then penetrated through to the clavicle where it was retrieved at autopsy. This was a top down shot. MB's head was down facing the shooter when it occurred.
6. This was the only fatal shot and either the last or 2nd to last shot fired (possibly just before shot 5). It was fired from the top down and instantly fatal. MB's head was down when this wound was inflicted, PERIOD. The asphalt scrapes to the face and the video at the scene is STRONG evidence his head was down and he was approaching the officer at a pretty good clip when wounds 5 and 6 occurred.
You will note that 4 of the 6 wounds COULD NOT HAVE come from behind. 1 of the 2 remaining (the palm wound) did not occur with hands raised. Only 1 could have come from behind with arm raised. If we are to believe this 1 wound was inflicted from back to front with hands raised this would mean we are also to believe MB's reaction to being fired upon and grazed in the forearm was to turn and charge at an armed and drawn officer from 35 feet away. I find this highly improbable and very hard to believe. Even if this was MB's reaction, this in-and-of-itself would be cause for the use of deadly force on behalf of the officer. It would certainly get my attention if I shot someone in the arm 35 feet away arms raised only to have him turn and charge me.
Looking at everything as a whole it is completely inconceivable to believe charges should be leveled against this officer. The shooting was obviously justified and MB was responsible for his unfortunate demise. He was a large imposing thug headed for no good with no respect for the law who suffered the price for his lack or moral upbringing.
The race baiters have once again chosen a poor example to use for their preconceived political motivation. I don't dispute there is a lot of poor law enforcement which occurs. But this is NOT such an example and justice demands this officer be left in peace to come to terms emotionally with what MB forced upon him.
As a side note it is interesting to note his friend (the one who refused to take the stolen items MB gave him in the store) was not injured in any way. Apparently he had more sense than MB and is alive as a result. Are we to believe the officer unloaded on MB and yet left his companion completely unharmed. Why target MB yet not his companion? The answer: "His friend wasn't acting like a fool".
To fill in the blanks.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/news-board/witness-speaks-about-ferguson-shooting/ (http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/news-board/witness-speaks-about-ferguson-shooting/)
It's a cut & dry, open & shut case.
Waiting to be deliberately confused to appease a special group.
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 19, 2014, 10:37:52 AM
It's a cut & dry, open & shut case.
Waiting to be deliberately confused to appease a special group.
From a law enforcement perspective, yes. But what's happening in Ferguson and St. Louis right now has little to do with law enforcement.
We are knee-deep in the cheapest, crudest form of politics -- race-baiting. Whether Michael Brown's shooting death was a 'righteous' use of police force stopped being a relevant question a week ago, about the time Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton announced their travel plans.
Ferguson is a poster child for modern racial strife. The town has undergone a spate of "white flight" that has seen its population mix change from 3/4 white in 1990 to nearly 3/4 black today. Adding to this ugly mix is the predictable lag in administrative turnover -- most of the people responsible for running Ferguson today are still white people. THIS IS THE RESULT OF OPEN ELECTIONS. The voters of Ferguson, roughly 70% of whom are black, have freely elected a white mayor and filled five seats on a six-member city council with white people.
In any case, there is no pattern of racism here. There's no systemic persecution or discrimination based on race. In any town where the population is 70% black, one would be stupid to expect that anything but a majority of arrests would involve black people.
There is merely an opportunity, similar to the one that occurred in Sanford, FL a couple years ago, to construct a narrative of racial hatred. It is not mere coincidence that the Trayvon Martin circus and this one immediately preceded important national elections. Martin was shot in February, 2012, but his case didn't achieve national prominence until late in the summer of that year. An earlier spotlight would have allowed the affair to die down before it had its intended effect on the 2012 elections. The Trayvon Martin case was a nothingburger that was purposely, carefully turned into national "news" during the pre-election summer of 2012 by NBC, a network guilty of doctoring audio recordings of the 911 call, and ABC, a network guilty of doctoring video and photographic evidence of George Zimmerman's injuries. The biggest difference between the two cases is the fact that Brown's death was more auspiciously timed (from the Democrat race-baiters' point of view) and thus didn't require the careful timing that characterized the media's treatment of the Martin/Zimmerman case.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 19, 2014, 05:34:37 PM
From a law enforcement perspective, yes. But what's happening in Ferguson and St. Louis right now has little to do with law enforcement.
We are knee-deep in the cheapest, crudest form of politics -- race-baiting. Whether Michael Brown's shooting death was a 'righteous' use of police force stopped being a relevant question a week ago, about the time Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton announced their travel plans.
Ferguson is a poster child for modern racial strife. The town has undergone a spate of "white flight" that has seen its population mix change from 3/4 white in 1990 to nearly 3/4 black today. Adding to this ugly mix is the predictable lag in administrative turnover -- most of the people responsible for running Ferguson today are still white people. THIS IS THE RESULT OF OPEN ELECTIONS. The voters of Ferguson, roughly 70% of whom are black, have freely elected a white mayor and filled five seats on a six-member city council with white people.
In any case, there is no pattern of racism here. There's no systemic persecution or discrimination based on race. In any town where the population is 70% black, one would be stupid to expect that anything but a majority of arrests would involve black people.
There is merely an opportunity, similar to the one that occurred in Sanford, FL a couple years ago, to construct a narrative of racial hatred. It is not mere coincidence that the Trayvon Martin circus and this one immediately preceded important national elections. Martin was shot in February, 2012, but his case didn't achieve national prominence until late in the summer of that year. An earlier spotlight would have allowed the affair to die down before it had its intended effect on the 2012 elections. The Trayvon Martin case was a nothingburger that was purposely, carefully turned into national "news" during the pre-election summer of 2012 by NBC, a network guilty of doctoring audio recordings of the 911 call, and ABC, a network guilty of doctoring video and photographic evidence of George Zimmerman's injuries. The biggest difference between the two cases is the fact that Brown's death was more auspiciously timed (from the Democrat race-baiters' point of view) and thus didn't require the careful timing that characterized the media's treatment of the Martin/Zimmerman case.
Exactly right! If the POTUS (blech) wanted this to end, he could do it in one press conference.
Simply tell the people the truth, that a thug tried to kill a cop and died instead.
That would end this nonsense, but that's not what the left wants, they want riots, they want death, they want the distraction.
Caligula relived.
6 or 8 wounds.......The crime scene and the officer surrendered weapon will tell how many rounds werew expended, if it is only 6 Its not all that hard to understand, Ballistics are never a consistient science. Bullets tend to travel along the least path of resistance, bullets often fragment when they hit bone/thick tissue, particularly hollow points most LEO use in their duty weapon.
My surmise as a former Homicide dick would be that the shots hitting Brown in the arm passed through the softer tissue or glanced off bone and continued on into the rib cage
or other areas of the upper body.
Quote from: Solar on August 19, 2014, 05:56:09 PM
Exactly right! If the POTUS (blech) wanted this to end, he could do it in one press conference.
Simply tell the people the truth, that a thug tried to kill a cop and died instead.
That would end this nonsense, but that's not what the left wants, they want riots, they want death, they want the distraction.
Caligula relived.
Well, what the Left really wants is votes. I don't think the Left really wants riots and death and mayhem -- unless those things get them more votes. Of course, this entire affair is an expose of the Left, a laying out of their real goals and intentions, but maybe -- just maybe -- this will be the one that finally exposes the mainstream media Democrat whores for who they really are.
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on August 19, 2014, 06:02:07 PM
6 or 8 wounds.......The crime scene and the officer surrendered weapon will tell how many rounds werew expended, if it is only 6 Its not all that hard to understand, Ballistics are never a consistient science. Bullets tend to travel along the least path of resistance, bullets often fragment when they hit bone/thick tissue, particularly hollow points most LEO use in their duty weapon.
My surmise as a former Homicide dick would be that the shots hitting Brown in the arm passed through the softer tissue or glanced off bone and continued on into the rib cage
or other areas of the upper body.
Assuming he still most likely had at least 7 rounds remaining, I'd say he showed restraint, and wasn't shooting out of control in a panic situation.
It appears he was well trained. But no training in the world prepares you for the aftermath of the race baiters..
Quote from: Solar on August 19, 2014, 06:08:00 PM
Assuming he still most likely had at least 7 rounds remaining, I'd say he showed restraint, and wasn't shooting out of control in a panic situation.
It appears he was well trained. But no training in the world prepares you for the aftermath of the race baiters..
The officer would have been justified emptying every round he had into the thug.
The fact he didn't, the fact he stopped firing once the threat was down/gone does indeed show restraint.
Especially given the nature of the injuries the officer recieved at the hands of this thug.
Now the story changes again. Instead of claiming his back was turned or he was a gentle giant, now it has progressed to, "there is no reason to shoot an unarmed man 6 times even if he has assaulted you and tried to take your gun and is charging you". Well did they ever think the first four shots which grazed his right arm actually hit exactly what the officer was aiming at"? Did they ever consider maybe the first four shots were an attempt NOT to kill MB?
Quote from: LibDave on August 21, 2014, 02:08:36 AM
Now the story changes again. Instead of claiming his back was turned or he was a gentle giant, now it has progressed to, "there is no reason to shoot an unarmed man 6 times even if he has assaulted you and tried to take your gun and is charging you". Well did they ever think the first four shots which grazed his right arm actually hit exactly what the officer was aiming at"? Did they ever consider maybe the first four shots were an attempt NOT to kill MB?
Right. MAYBE he
didn't miss when he shot him in the arm (serious). Al;so, if you're attacked by any wild animal (yeah, I said it!--Mark Levin), you fire until the threrat is eliminated! he has my blessing!
Quote from: LibDave on August 21, 2014, 02:08:36 AM
Now the story changes again. Instead of claiming his back was turned or he was a gentle giant, now it has progressed to, "there is no reason to shoot an unarmed man 6 times even if he has assaulted you and tried to take your gun and is charging you". Well did they ever think the first four shots which grazed his right arm actually hit exactly what the officer was aiming at"? Did they ever consider maybe the first four shots were an attempt NOT to kill MB?
And stoned giants with bad attitudes often run through 3-4 shots, unless you put one right down the pike to the brain or heart. They say he probably kept coming even after the eye shot. Took the 6th to shut it down.
This is the only excuse they have left, and one that has no possible merit in a courtroom. But they (Obama / Holder) will probably try to finesse it into a civil suit.
It's all about the reparations. Superficially for Brown & family, and more completely for the whole community of Ferguson against "the man".
St. Louis Medical Examiner SLAMS Brown Family Hire.
snip~
The chief medical examiner of St. Louis County, who performed the first autopsy on Michael Brown after he was shot on Aug. 9, says that she is concerned by one of the men hired by the Brown family to conduct its own exam.
"I can tell you absolutely that I find what Parcells does to be abysmal," Dr. Mary Case told The Daily Caller when asked about Shawn Parcells, a Kansas-based forensic pathologist assistant. He has been accused in the past of fabricating his job title and of conducting autopsies without a license.
more @
http://news.yahoo.com/st-louis-medical-examiner-slams-brown-family-hire-172036981.html (http://news.yahoo.com/st-louis-medical-examiner-slams-brown-family-hire-172036981.html)
Quote from: walkstall on August 21, 2014, 09:32:18 PM
St. Louis Medical Examiner SLAMS Brown Family Hire.
snip~
The chief medical examiner of St. Louis County, who performed the first autopsy on Michael Brown after he was shot on Aug. 9, says that she is concerned by one of the men hired by the Brown family to conduct its own exam.
"I can tell you absolutely that I find what Parcells does to be abysmal," Dr. Mary Case told The Daily Caller when asked about Shawn Parcells, a Kansas-based forensic pathologist assistant. He has been accused in the past of fabricating his job title and of conducting autopsies without a license.
more @
http://news.yahoo.com/st-louis-medical-examiner-slams-brown-family-hire-172036981.html (http://news.yahoo.com/st-louis-medical-examiner-slams-brown-family-hire-172036981.html)
Read, Democrat. Can't wait for him to autopsy the TABLE and declare it died from homicide.
Quote from: quiller on August 21, 2014, 09:37:44 PM
Read, Democrat. Can't wait for him to autopsy the TABLE and declare it died from homicide.
This family is looking to make a bundle on a wrongful death suite. Holder and b o are there to help them.
Quote from: walkstall on August 21, 2014, 10:11:34 PM
This family is looking to make a bundle on a wrongful death suite. Holder and b o are there to help them.
Didn't Trayvon Martin's family try the same thing? The difference in the Ferguson case is that there's actually a deep pocket that might pay -- the city itself. George Zimmerman was never a city employee.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 21, 2014, 10:19:59 PM
Didn't Trayvon Martin's family try the same thing? The difference in the Ferguson case is that there's actually a deep pocket that might pay -- the city itself. George Zimmerman was never a city employee.
One way or the other, the taxpayer will be footing the bill(s) for this for a long time. I also see the insurance rates going up big time for everyone in that area.
Quote from: walkstall on August 21, 2014, 10:36:49 PM
One way or the other, the taxpayer will be footing the bill(s) for this for a long time. I also see the insurance rates going up big time for everyone in that area.
Yes, the taxpayer will foot the bill. That's not exactly news. Yes, it will take a long time before the case is settled. But...
I look for this case to fade pretty quickly. I have a number of reasons for saying so, not the least of which is the fact that every piece of evidence that comes to light supports the cop in the case. But there's a more fundamental reason for this case to fade away.
Within the next two months, it won't matter any more. By late October, the Democrats won't be able to beat another reluctant vote out of this ugly horse, and they'll stop squirting money on it.
Michael Brown will join his brethren in the police hall of dumbass perps that get shot and die. Michael Brown would never have been elected to any office. Michael Brown would never have achieved any fame. Michael Brown would never have even raised a decent family. Michael Brown will be just one more shit-for-brains perpetrator of minor crimes who thought he was bigger and tougher than he really was.
Right now, Michael Brown is being used by the race-baiting Democrat party to raise funds and score points. When the time comes, the Democrat party will be exposed as the racists they are, and Michael Brown will be buried and forgotten.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 19, 2014, 05:34:37 PM
From a law enforcement perspective, yes. But what's happening in Ferguson and St. Louis right now has little to do with law enforcement.
We are knee-deep in the cheapest, crudest form of politics -- race-baiting. Whether Michael Brown's shooting death was a 'righteous' use of police force stopped being a relevant question a week ago, about the time Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton announced their travel plans.
Ferguson is a poster child for modern racial strife. The town has undergone a spate of "white flight" that has seen its population mix change from 3/4 white in 1990 to nearly 3/4 black today. Adding to this ugly mix is the predictable lag in administrative turnover -- most of the people responsible for running Ferguson today are still white people. THIS IS THE RESULT OF OPEN ELECTIONS. The voters of Ferguson, roughly 70% of whom are black, have freely elected a white mayor and filled five seats on a six-member city council with white people.
In any case, there is no pattern of racism here. There's no systemic persecution or discrimination based on race. In any town where the population is 70% black, one would be stupid to expect that anything but a majority of arrests would involve black people.
There is merely an opportunity, similar to the one that occurred in Sanford, FL a couple years ago, to construct a narrative of racial hatred. It is not mere coincidence that the Trayvon Martin circus and this one immediately preceded important national elections. Martin was shot in February, 2012, but his case didn't achieve national prominence until late in the summer of that year. An earlier spotlight would have allowed the affair to die down before it had its intended effect on the 2012 elections. The Trayvon Martin case was a nothingburger that was purposely, carefully turned into national "news" during the pre-election summer of 2012 by NBC, a network guilty of doctoring audio recordings of the 911 call, and ABC, a network guilty of doctoring video and photographic evidence of George Zimmerman's injuries. The biggest difference between the two cases is the fact that Brown's death was more auspiciously timed (from the Democrat race-baiters' point of view) and thus didn't require the careful timing that characterized the media's treatment of the Martin/Zimmerman case.
The lies Brown's "friend" has told. Such as that Brown was shot in the Back, which the FAMILY'S OWN AUTOPSY SHOWS NOT TO BE THE CASE.
And the inciting of riots by the race baiters like Al Sharpton are a separate issue.
One which since Holder and Obama want to get involved, ought to be investigating.
What matters is, did the cop act within the law? Did the cop use justified force?
And so far, apparently, from what we know at this point it appears that the answer to both are yes.
The cop acted within the law.
It is the race baiters inciting riots, and the public officials who publicly pre-judge the officers actions who break the law, and commit the civil rights offenses.
It is clear that no matter what the FACTS are, there are some who will not accept anything but this Cops badge, and jailing.
That is not only a miscarriage of justice, and a violation of the cops civil rights.
But it's "mob" mentality and an attempt at doing to this cop, the very same sort of thing which great leaders such as MLK marched against.
Indeed MLK must be rolling in his grave, to see his own people, trying to deprive someone of a fair trial, trying to lynch someone instead.
Quote from: daidalos on August 21, 2014, 11:52:02 PM
The lies Brown's "friend" has told. Such as that Brown was shot in the Back, which the FAMILY'S OWN AUTOPSY SHOWS NOT TO BE THE CASE.
And the inciting of riots by the race baiters like Al Sharpton are a separate issue.
One which since Holder and Obama want to get involved, ought to be investigating.
What matters is, did the cop act within the law? Did the cop use justified force?
And so far, apparently, from what we know at this point it appears that the answer to both are yes.
The cop acted within the law.
It is the race baiters inciting riots, and the public officials who publicly pre-judge the officers actions who break the law, and commit the civil rights offenses.
It is clear that no matter what the FACTS are, there are some who will not accept anything but this Cops badge, and jailing.
That is not only a miscarriage of justice, and a violation of the cops civil rights.
But it's "mob" mentality and an attempt at doing to this cop, the very same sort of thing which great leaders such as MLK marched against.
Indeed MLK must be rolling in his grave, to see his own people, trying to deprive someone of a fair trial, trying to lynch someone instead.
Yep and yep and yep. How can I improve the United States? Get rid of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and everyone else of that ilk. I'm sure NASA is still looking for volunteers they can send to other planets when and if they're able to rent seats on a Russian space vehicle. Say, two birds killed with one stone! One seat on a space probe filled, and one useless race-baiter gone from the face of the planet.
Quote from: walkstall on August 21, 2014, 10:11:34 PM
This family is looking to make a bundle on a wrongful death suite. Holder and b o are there to help them.
As long as Wilson gets his day in court and sues the media, Brown's family, their lawyers, and everyone else for libel / slander, and denial of due process, then it's all good ! Let the games begin.
I wonder if there's a way to sue Brown's parents for creating the danger to Wilson, in the way they brought up the young man. That would be trick.
Zimmerman should have done that.
But........wanna bet that the Brown side will go hog wild with the lawsuits, books, TV circuit, maybe a movie.........and Wilson will "take the high road", never do a thing or say a single word other than being sorry and respectful ?
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 22, 2014, 02:05:22 PM
As long as Wilson gets his day in court and sues the media, Brown's family, their lawyers, and everyone else for libel / slander, and denial of due process, then it's all good ! Let the games begin.
I wonder if there's a way to sue Brown's parents for creating the danger to Wilson, in the way they brought up the young man. That would be trick.
Zimmerman should have done that.
But........wanna bet that the Brown side will go hog wild with the lawsuits, books, TV circuit, maybe a movie.........and Wilson will "take the high road", never do a thing or say a single word other than being sorry and respectful ?
Ever read John Grisham's
A Time To Kill? Even the movie adaptation is pretty good, probably the only role for Matthew McConaughey I've ever really liked -- and I REALLY liked him in that movie. Grisham is a master at weaving five or six sub-plots together to construct the fabric of his tales. One of the strongest threads in the book and the movie is the conflict between defense attorney Jake Brigance (played in the movie by McConaughey) and the attorneys from the NAACP. Grisham manages to flesh out the complete disconnect between these radically diverging approaches to a murder case.
Sad to say, Netflix does not stream the movie. Get thee to a used book store or rent or buy the DVD. Yes, it's fiction, but it's fiction based on the reality of Grisham's ten years as a civil defense attorney. Well worth a read or a watch.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 22, 2014, 02:59:35 PM
Ever read John Grisham's A Time To Kill? Even the movie adaptation is pretty good, probably the only role for Matthew McConaughey I've ever really liked -- and I REALLY liked him in that movie. Grisham is a master at weaving five or six sub-plots together to construct the fabric of his tales. One of the strongest threads in the book and the movie is the conflict between defense attorney Jake Brigance (played in the movie by McConaughey) and the attorneys from the NAACP. Grisham manages to flesh out the complete disconnect between these radically diverging approaches to a murder case.
Sad to say, Netflix does not stream the movie. Get thee to a used book store or rent or buy the DVD. Yes, it's fiction, but it's fiction based on the reality of Grisham's ten years as a civil defense attorney. Well worth a read or a watch.
A Time To Kill, my most favorite book/movie. Aside from netflix not streaming this movie, I have found that doing a search or participating in the ratings section of netflix via pc helpful in that alot of times I've done the rating thingy and the site will offer other movies based on my choices. I have also done a search and entered movies rarely seen. First, no movie available then some time later the movie that I wanted shows up. Can't tell you how many times this has happened. For instance, The series I like best on tv, Criminal Minds, has finally shown up pn Netflix-nine seasons at no cost. I have been searching Netflix for this one for quite some time.
Here's the CBS News report about troops pulling out of Ferguson...
Ferguson residents frustrated over lack of opportunity (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN-5VmZHll0#ws)
...and The Right Scoop (dot-com, y'all) was right on top of it, asking....
QuoteThe elephant in the room? Destroying businesses is not how you get a job. Applying for a job is how you get a job. Getting marketable skills is how you get a job. It's amazing that they equate "making money" with "looting." I equate "making money" with having a job, not committing a crime. The real underlying issue is the attitude that "they" have to come restore neighborhoods – someone else has to come and do stuff for them. Someone else has to come and provide jobs for them.
And of course the reporter ends with saying they don't want a handout but a hand-up. Because that's what he wants to believe.
http://therightscoop.com/special-cbs-report-ferguson-residents-will-loot-and-destroy-businesses-until-businesses-give-them-jobs/ (http://therightscoop.com/special-cbs-report-ferguson-residents-will-loot-and-destroy-businesses-until-businesses-give-them-jobs/)
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 22, 2014, 02:05:22 PM
As long as Wilson gets his day in court and sues the media, Brown's family, their lawyers, and everyone else for libel / slander, and denial of due process, then it's all good ! Let the games begin.
I wonder if there's a way to sue Brown's parents for creating the danger to Wilson, in the way they brought up the young man. That would be trick.
Zimmerman should have done that.
But........wanna bet that the Brown side will go hog wild with the lawsuits, books, TV circuit, maybe a movie.........and Wilson will "take the high road", never do a thing or say a single word other than being sorry and respectful ?
Andy aside from just having it on record that they slighted him. What good would it do to sue them?
He'd never actually collect filing fees, let alone actual damages and attorney's fees, from them.
All he'd wind up with, is a piece of paper which says he's legally entitled to A.B.C.
But which in practicality can't ever be actually enforced because there is no actual real property to place liens on or take possesion of, wages to garnish, or credit standing to screw up in the first place.