Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Owlbread]

I consider it a murder because it was a wrongful killing. He shot Brown once and should have stayed in his car and called for backup instead of actually pursuing Brown. Brown was unarmed and injured - Wilson could have used pepper spray if he had to pursue him.

But really - if you were shot by a cop while you're high on something (was Brown under the influence?) and the cop actually chases you to apprehend you, are you going to go quietly? Imagine you had Brown's temperament. The only possible outcome from Wilson chasing Brown was Brown being killed. Wilson probably got macho bloodlust though after he shot Brown after he told Wilson he was too much of a pussy to shoot him. That kind of thing fucks with cops' heads.

The fact that Wilson is saying his conscience is totally clear after killing another human being when he didn't have to and causing this terrible outpouring of unrest tells me all I need to know about him. The "Hulk Hogan and the 5 year old" bullshit is particularly terrible considering both men were 6 foot 4 and Wilson was only 80 pounds lighter. But hey, it panders to the "scary big gorilla-like black man" racist stereotype in the minds of white America so it's effective. The way some people, Wilson included, talk about Brown is like he was some kind of animal that needed putting down - like the mad elephant George Orwell shot after it killed a migrant worker. At least Orwell was remorseful.

[smirk]

You don't shoot someone 40 feet away in the head three times for 'running' 'charging' etc at you.

It's worse than that, even: Brown wasn't "20-30" feet away from Wilson when he was killed, he was 152 feet 9 inches away. Also, size comparison: Wilson is 6'4" and 210-ish lbs, Brown was 6'4" and 289lbs. Wider, but not "Hulk vs. a 5-year-old" bigger. Panic and/or rage exaggerate.

why they belive why this is a murder?

Here are the circumstances in US law under which it would be merely manslaughter. I could maybe see it being imperfect self-defense, assuming Wilson was indeed panicking and not acting out of rage. Other than that, shooting a person dead in the street is usually seen as murder. If it's not where you live, consider moving.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

he was 152 feet 9 inches away

Well.. that's definitely murder then. There was plenty of time to think and react as a not-racist would... Do people really think that this Incredible Hulk extreme Saiyan negro would have been charging with bloodlust in his eyes and "reaching into his waistband" after being shot in the kneecap?

[Helgoland]

You don't shoot someone 40 feet away in the head three times for 'running' 'charging' etc at you.

It's worse than that, even: Brown wasn't "20-30" feet away from Wilson when he was killed, he was 152 feet 9 inches away.

That's the distance between Brown and Wilson's car, not between him and Wilson himself...

[Mictlantecuhtli]

You don't shoot someone 40 feet away in the head three times for 'running' 'charging' etc at you.

It's worse than that, even: Brown wasn't "20-30" feet away from Wilson when he was killed, he was 152 feet 9 inches away.

That's the distance between Brown and Wilson's car, not between him and Wilson himself...

I didn't know it was 150 feet away from the car. I thought it happened much closer. Wilson literally had to chase the subject down, was still firing while chasing him [which you're not supposed to do.. a fleeing subject is to be detained].. I especially like the part where suddenly Brown was reaching under his waistband as if he had gun after being shot about 7 times by Wilson which <according to wilson> gave him the justification to shoot him in the head multiple times.

[smirk]

You don't shoot someone 40 feet away in the head three times for 'running' 'charging' etc at you.

It's worse than that, even: Brown wasn't "20-30" feet away from Wilson when he was killed, he was 152 feet 9 inches away.

That's the distance between Brown and Wilson's car, not between him and Wilson himself...

Yes, sorry. But clearing that distance still left enough time in between the car incident and the final shooting for Wilson to take a better look at the situation, had he been capable of it. Especially if Brown was slow and stopped more than once while running away:

I didn?t run as far as him. I stopped and I gave our self at least a 20-foot gap
between me and him. ?cause when he stopped running, I stopped nmning. He
had already had a head start on me and I maintained that distance whenever he
stopped. So, I don?t know the exact. I can?t give you a num. . .a number.

[Helgoland]

You don't shoot someone 40 feet away in the head three times for 'running' 'charging' etc at you.

It's worse than that, even: Brown wasn't "20-30" feet away from Wilson when he was killed, he was 152 feet 9 inches away.

That's the distance between Brown and Wilson's car, not between him and Wilson himself...

I didn't know it was 150 feet away from the car. I thought it happened much closer. Wilson literally had to chase the subject down, was still firing while chasing him [which you're not supposed to do.. a fleeing subject is to be detained].. I especially like the part where suddenly Brown was reaching under his waistband as if he had gun after being shot about 7 times by Wilson which <according to wilson> giving him the justification to shoot him in the head multiple times.

Have you got a reference for Wilson

still firing while chasing him

? The forensic report did not reveal any shots in the back...

[Mictlantecuhtli]

You don't shoot someone 40 feet away in the head three times for 'running' 'charging' etc at you.

It's worse than that, even: Brown wasn't "20-30" feet away from Wilson when he was killed, he was 152 feet 9 inches away.

That's the distance between Brown and Wilson's car, not between him and Wilson himself...

I didn't know it was 150 feet away from the car. I thought it happened much closer. Wilson literally had to chase the subject down, was still firing while chasing him [which you're not supposed to do.. a fleeing subject is to be detained].. I especially like the part where suddenly Brown was reaching under his waistband as if he had gun after being shot about 7 times by Wilson which <according to wilson> giving him the justification to shoot him in the head multiple times.

Have you got a reference for Wilson

still firing while chasing him

? The forensic report did not reveal any shots in the back...

Twelve shots were fired by Wilson. Wilson said two shots were fired during a struggle at his police vehicle and that he then fired three bursts of gunfire as he chased and then backed away from Brown. He testified that his Sig Sauer .40 caliber gun held a maximum of 13 bullets.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/25/justice/ferguson-grand-jury-documents/

He didn't hit while he was looking at brown's back [a good thing for him, as it would've been forensic evidence that he was the aggressor]. He hit after brown turned around. Assumedly the second burst is the body shots, the third burst is the headshots.

[Phmcw]

No I'm sorry, you have it all wrong.


You CAN shoot at limbs but if you do, you MUST have backup.  One shoot at the limb, the other keep his weapon on the suspect. That's one reason why Brown died (though limbshot can be deadly, especially since he was already shot several times at that point).

Your gentle giant, according to all witnesses but one, charged the officer while shot multiple times. I can  understand why Wilston was impressed. And with .40, not mere 9mm.
Beside, the blood splatters did confirm that he turned back and was going toward th officier.


It's absurd that he died for an unarmed attack, but it's because of your police's doctrine, and your socio economical policies, not of Wilson's racism.
Fund your police so they can operate safely, hire european expert to train them, and have nice schools that theach peoples to behave, and you'll have less police shooting. Then there is that "gun for everyone" nonsense, too.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

No I'm sorry, you have it all wrong.

Point out where. Thanks.

[Sheb]

One thing to be noted is that Wilson wasn't even acquitted from the murder, the case didn't even make it through Grand Jury, aka, there wasn't even a trial. Now, we can argue whether the shooting was justified or not, but I think we can all agree the case is murky enough to at least justify a trial to look into the evidence?

[Phmcw]

European police are efficient not because we have non-racist supercops, but because they have the means to do their mission.


Brown didn't die because Wilson is a racist, he died that day because Wilson was alone in his car. Alternatively, Wilson would have been arrested if he wasn't alone.
Train your policemen and don't let them make any excuses, and you will have less similar incident.


If one unarmed man require your "patrol" to use its gun, then your "patrol" is a joke and a one man patrol is a joke anyway. Hell, we require anyone working in a hole to be monitored b a second worker at all time (in case of gaz buildup or any other accident), but you send peoples on patrol alone in sensible area? Someone should get arrested for endangering Wilson's life. He should have the right to sue the city, that situation isn't normal.



The US have about the same amount of police officier by capita as Netherland, despite being much, much bigger and plagued by criminality. And don't get me started on the war on drug, public education, and general attitude toward collectivism.

[Owlbread]

It's childish of you to misrepresent our argument like that, Phmcw. We never said Brown was a gentle giant - he wasn't much of a giant to begin with in comparison to Wilson for a start. He was a morally reprehensible criminal who needed to be arrested. He didn't need to be shot over 10 times and killed for stealing a pack of cigarillos because there was no need for Wilson to put himself in a position where he would have to kill Brown. He did, however.

[Reelya]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown

Reading this was an eye-opener.

First up, so many named witnesses have come forward, all of those say he was shot in cold blood. But all the pro-police witnesses have no names. very convenient. Not even one person with a name is contradicting all the testimony, but we're supposed to pretend all those other people don't exist and put our faith in those few unnamed witnesses who's testimony we can't even legally hear.

A bunch of legal experts have slammed the Grand Jury process as being rigged by the prosecutor and "without precedent" in how shonky it was, plus:

Prosecutor McCulloch had the authority to bypass the grand jury and take the case to a preliminary hearing, but he chose to present all the evidence to the grand jury, leaving to jurors the decision of what charges might be brought, if any. His spokesperson acknowledged that it is "unusual" that the prosecutor is not asking the grand jury to endorse a specific charge.

So in other words he, as the prosecutor is meant to advise the grand jury on the legalities and what charges were applicable, and he deliberately failed to do so, along with everything else listed as weird by the law experts.

Plus there's the fact that Wilson did not produce an incident report:

MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell reported on August 21 that Wilson did not complete an incident report about the shooting, after being advised by a union lawyer not to do so. According to O'Donnell, Wilson did file a report, but not until ten days after the shooting, and the report contained no information other than his name and the date. According to the St. Louis County Prosecutor's Office, the Ferguson Police Department has never generated an incident report on the shooting. On August 20 and August 21, the St. Louis County Police and the Ferguson Police released their respective incident reports, which gave the time when each police force arrived on the scene and classified the incident as a homicide. Neither report contains a narrative description of what occurred. Saki Knafo of The Huffington Post commented that the Ferguson incident report was "almost entirely blank", with the address and time of day of the shooting, and other "bare-bones details".

So basically any claim "Wilson's story matches the evidence!" is clearly circular logic as they deliberately didn't write an incident report so they'd have a couple of months to prepare a story to get him off the hook. This is a clear case of them ensuring the least possible amount of evidence existed.

[Phmcw]

It's childish of you to misrepresent our argument like that, Phmcw. We never said Brown was a gentle giant - he wasn't much of a giant to begin with in comparison to Wilson for a start. He was a morally reprehensible criminal who needed to be arrested. He didn't need to be shot over 10 times and killed for stealing a pack of cigarillos because there was no need for Wilson to put himself in a position where he would have to kill Brown. He did, however.

I dispute that : I think he got into this situation because he was alone, which is completely unreasonable in a sensitive area. His first shots are justified since Brown was trying to get his weapon, and only the second salve is debeatable. But even those shot are at least understandable, he was coming back, accroding to the witnesses, after being shot.

Don't make cops patrol a dangerous neighborhood alone. Actually, cops should never be alone in any remotely dangerous situation, nor should any workers, really.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown

Reading this was an eye-opener.

First up, so many named witnesses have come forward, all of those say he was shot in cold blood. But all the pro-police witnesses have no names. very convenient. Not even one person with a name is contradicting all the testimony, but we're supposed to pretend all those other people don't exist and put our faith in those few unnamed witnesses who's testimony we can't even legally hear.

A bunch of legal experts have slammed the Grand Jury process as being rigged by the prosecutor and "without precedent" in how shonky it was, plus:

Prosecutor McCulloch had the authority to bypass the grand jury and take the case to a preliminary hearing, but he chose to present all the evidence to the grand jury, leaving to jurors the decision of what charges might be brought, if any. His spokesperson acknowledged that it is "unusual" that the prosecutor is not asking the grand jury to endorse a specific charge.

So in other words he, as the prosecutor is meant to advise the grand jury on the legalities and what charges were applicable, and he deliberately failed to do so, along with everything else listed as weird by the law experts.

Plus there's the fact that Wilson did not produce an incident report:

MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell reported on August 21 that Wilson did not complete an incident report about the shooting, after being advised by a union lawyer not to do so. According to O'Donnell, Wilson did file a report, but not until ten days after the shooting, and the report contained no information other than his name and the date. According to the St. Louis County Prosecutor's Office, the Ferguson Police Department has never generated an incident report on the shooting. On August 20 and August 21, the St. Louis County Police and the Ferguson Police released their respective incident reports, which gave the time when each police force arrived on the scene and classified the incident as a homicide. Neither report contains a narrative description of what occurred. Saki Knafo of The Huffington Post commented that the Ferguson incident report was "almost entirely blank", with the address and time of day of the shooting, and other "bare-bones details".

So basically any claim "Wilson's story matches the evidence!" is clearly circular logic as they deliberately didn't write an incident report so they'd have a couple of months to prepare a story to get him off the hook. This is a clear case of them ensuring the least possible amount of evidence existed.

Those are good points, though. If the story is doctored, then everything is different.