ferguson grand jury reaches its decision

Page 6 of 14 [ 219 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 14  Next

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,768
Location: the island of defective toy santas

25 Nov 2014, 4:26 am

Humanaut wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
the working class residents generally consider the police therein as an occupying force

How big is the working class? Do you count the underemployed, or only full-time employees?

trying my best to answer your question- have not read about the exact particulars of ferguson but across America it mainly is made up of colored/poor whites who are [at least in ferguson] all treated as human garbage by the white power structure of the city. we working class folk are the people who clean up your hotel rooms and look after your kids and schlepp you your pizza and such, AKA "the service economy." increasingly it is unemployed as capitalists keep shipping jobs overseas and closing American factories and/or automating everything that can be automated. Stanley Kubrick [and later Steven Spielberg] in the movie "AI" seemed to believe that we were headed to a future where there would be massive unemployment among non-middle and upper-class people, and that there would be a version of the old roman "bread and circuses" [called "flesh fairs" in the movie] in order to keep the peace. anyways [that movie is a perseveration of mine] the working class has become a majority of america, due to the steady descent into the working class, of formerly middle-class folk due to the aforementioned job exodus and manufactured scarcity situation happening here. for example, airplane pilots now are paid less than nurses! grayhound bus drivers are paid barely above minimum wage. that is a good example of how the working class is swelling full of people that when times here were better, made solidly middle-class income [average of $100k for pilots, $35k for long-haul bus drivers]. now they are barely scraping by.



Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

25 Nov 2014, 4:36 am

auntblabby wrote:
Humanaut wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
the working class residents generally consider the police therein as an occupying force

How big is the working class? Do you count the underemployed, or only full-time employees?

increasingly it is unemployed

Incredible.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

25 Nov 2014, 4:55 am

Dillogic wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
I don't care what the grand jury says, the evidence doesn't add up. I think Officer Wilson executed Mike Brown, whether or not Mike Brown was a thug is immaterial since he got shot running away. I don't believe for a second that he charged a cop that had already shot him.


You'd have to prove that he did. If physical evidence and eye witness reports say he didn't, then you may as well go with that because there's nothing else to go on.

Yes, I know you think it's suicide to charge a cop with a firearm, and that no one in their right mind would do it, but it happens. People charge cops with knives. People charge cops unarmed. He also tried it once in the car, so you can see his mental faculties aren't all there -- wasn't he also on drugs?


You have to understand cops aren't stupid, they're drilled at what they have to say when they shot and kill someone. Wilson's story to me isn't believable, he made sure to checks all those things he had to say to get off and it doesn't sound pass the smell test when it is all put together. I 100% believe a cop would kill somebody for punching them or while they're running away.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

25 Nov 2014, 5:25 am

Jacoby wrote:
I don't care what the grand jury says, the evidence doesn't add up. I think Officer Wilson executed Mike Brown, whether or not Mike Brown was a thug is immaterial since he got shot running away. I don't believe for a second that he charged a cop that had already shot him.


The officer and the forensic evidence from the autopsy back up the officer's story that the first shot that hit Mr. Brown happened in the police car at extremely close range.

The other shots that hit were not in Mr. Brown's backside so how could he be shot while running away ? Was Mr. Brown running backwards ? Also, the eye witnesses as well as the forensic evidence show that Mr. Brown was facing the officer when shot i.e., they can see the bullet trajectories.



Last edited by LoveNotHate on 25 Nov 2014, 5:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

KenM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2005
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,491
Location: Mass. USA

25 Nov 2014, 5:27 am

The DA or who ever read the grand jury decision said that many witness' changed there story after being told what the physical evidence was. The grand jury went with the physical evidence and the testimony that supportted that.

He said there was no evidence Brown was shot in the back, while running away.

if you was wearing a gun and in a close up fight with someone and he was clearly going for your weapon, would you be able to not shot to kill? Would you have time in those seconds to make sure the person attacking you was just injured instead of dead? They were very close together and fighting. When they go for your gun, that is a threat to your life and you need to do anything you can to stop it.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

25 Nov 2014, 5:30 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
The officer and the forensic evidence from the autopsy back up the officer's story that the first shot happened in the police car at extremely close range.

The other shots were not in Mr. Brown's backside so how could he be shot while running away ? Was Mr. Brown running backwards ? Also, the eye witnesses as well as the forensic evidence show that Mr. Brown was facing the officer when shot i.e., they can see the bullet trajectories.


There's that thing, where you can't change the opinion of someone that's already made their mind up, even when they have all the facts presented to them*.

If all the facts showed Wilson unlawfully killed Brown, that'd be my opinion.

*If you can't believe the jury, witnesses, physical evidence and the firsthand account, then you can't believe anything



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

25 Nov 2014, 5:48 am

There were two shots in the cop car which struck Brown once and then he was shot something like 40+ feet away, it was clear he was running away. I don't believe he "charged" the cop like some rhino with his hand in his waistband like he has a gun, that sounds like what would a cop would say to get off. I think he got punched and then he wanted blood.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

25 Nov 2014, 5:59 am

Jacoby wrote:
There were two shots in the cop car which struck Brown once and then he was shot something like 40+ feet away, it was clear he was running away. I don't believe he "charged" the cop like some rhino with his hand in his waistband like he has a gun, that sounds like what would a cop would say to get off. I think he got punched and then he wanted blood.


Evidence showed that he did charge Wilson when he got out of the car and ordered him to stop.

Evidence shows the two shots in the car. It also shows what happened later.

So, you want to pick and choose what you believe?



KyleTheGhost
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jul 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 70,218
Location: Wisconsin

25 Nov 2014, 6:02 am

Unbelievable! Now things will get worse in Ferguson.


_________________
I am Ashley. My pronouns are she/her.


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

25 Nov 2014, 6:06 am

Dillogic wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
There were two shots in the cop car which struck Brown once and then he was shot something like 40+ feet away, it was clear he was running away. I don't believe he "charged" the cop like some rhino with his hand in his waistband like he has a gun, that sounds like what would a cop would say to get off. I think he got punched and then he wanted blood.


Evidence showed that he did charge Wilson when Brown got out of the car and ordered him to stop.

Evidence shows the two shots. It also shows what happened later.

So, you want to pick and choose what you believe?


The evidence shows that Brown wasn't shot in the back, that doesn't mean he charged him.

I don't believe Wilson feared for his life, I believe he killed somebody that stepped to him like a thug would. Look at the pictures of his "injuries", I don't believe punching a cop means they can chase and execute you.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

25 Nov 2014, 6:22 am

Jacoby wrote:
The evidence shows that Brown wasn't shot in the back, that doesn't mean he charged him.

I don't believe Wilson feared for his life, I believe he killed somebody that stepped to him like a thug would. Look at the pictures of his "injuries", I don't believe punching a cop means they can chase and execute you.


The Grand Jury obviously had evidence provided to them that Brown was in fact charging Wilson (or better, he was in some way posing a threat to Wilson that justified lethal force), via eyewitness reports and/or forensics.

Punching a cop means he can tell you to stop and surrender. Of course it means he can't execute someone. He can defend himself though if you then attack the cop.

Again, what do you want to believe?

Show me evidence that he executed Brown. That's where the burden of proof lies.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

25 Nov 2014, 6:25 am

KyleTheGhost wrote:
Unbelievable! Now things will get worse in Ferguson.


Right, because burning down and looting the local businesses and buildings is the proper response to an individual being killed (and I'm not even using the point that a jury found no cause to charge Wilson).

It tells a lot of things, and none of them come under the heading of "justice".



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

25 Nov 2014, 6:27 am

Jacoby wrote:
I don't believe punching a cop means they can chase and execute you.


You don't think cops should chase down suspects (i.e., do their job), and kill people if those suspects threaten their lives ?



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

25 Nov 2014, 6:44 am

Dillogic wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
The evidence shows that Brown wasn't shot in the back, that doesn't mean he charged him.

I don't believe Wilson feared for his life, I believe he killed somebody that stepped to him like a thug would. Look at the pictures of his "injuries", I don't believe punching a cop means they can chase and execute you.


The Grand Jury obviously had evidence provided to them that Brown was in fact charging Wilson (or better, he was in some way posing a threat to Wilson that justified lethal force), via eyewitness reports and/or forensics.

Punching a cop means he can tell you to stop and surrender. Of course it means he can't execute someone. He can defend himself though if you then attack the cop.

Again, what do you want to believe?

Show me evidence that he executed Brown. That's where the burden of proof lies.



Obviously? Where do you have that information? The burden of proof should be on Wilson to show that he reasonably feared for his life and I don't believe he did when Brown was 40 feet away from him and he was the one with the gun and had already shot him. Resisting arrest doesn't mean you can kill someone.

This is a problem in this country, cops can kill anybody and they have a presumption of innocence.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

25 Nov 2014, 6:53 am

Jacoby wrote:
Obviously? Where do you have that information? The burden of proof should be on Wilson to show that he reasonably feared for his life and I don't believe he did when Brown was 40 feet away from him and he was the one with the gun and had already shot him. Resisting arrest doesn't mean you can kill someone.

This is a problem in this country, cops can kill anybody and they have a presumption of innocence.


That's easy, because they found that he was charging Wilson via eyewitness reports and forensics (shell casings and blood splatter would be those). Not to mention the Grand Jury must have found that Wilson was justified in killing Brown. I've read the eyewitness accounts, and several say this happened; corroborate that with forensic evidence and a firsthand account, and you have your reasonable doubt. Of course, resisting arrest doesn't mean you can kill someone, but defending yourself means you can. It doesn't matter what you believe, it's what the Grand Jury believed.

That's not how criminal law works. The burden of proof isn't on the accused. Innocent until proven guilty is the saying.

You'll have to show me proof if you want to dissuade me. Your "belief" means nothing. The only thing that matters is tangible facts.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

25 Nov 2014, 6:58 am

Dillogic wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Obviously? Where do you have that information? The burden of proof should be on Wilson to show that he reasonably feared for his life and I don't believe he did when Brown was 40 feet away from him and he was the one with the gun and had already shot him. Resisting arrest doesn't mean you can kill someone.

This is a problem in this country, cops can kill anybody and they have a presumption of innocence.


That's easy, because they found that he was charging Wilson via eyewitness reports and forensics (shell casings and blood splatter would be those). I've read the eyewitness accounts, and several say this happened; corroborate that with forensic evidence and a firsthand account, and you have your reasonable doubt. Of course, resisting arrest doesn't mean you can kill someone, but defending yourself means you can. It doesn't matter what you believe, it's what the Grand Jury believed.

That's not how criminal law works. The burden of proof isn't on the accused. Innocent until proven guilty is the saying.

You'll have to show me proof if you want to dissuade me. Your "belief" means nothing. The only thing that matters is tangible facts.


It's just common sense, somebody isn't going to turn around and charge like a rhino at a guy that has already shot them. I don't trust cops so I don't believe his story, he checked off everything on the list to say to get off for this killing and you can believe it or not. Don't believe for a second that cops and regular people are held to same standards tho, justice is not blind.