• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot[W:72,732]

Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

You fire until the threat is down. Period.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Gaius46 said:
Actually they aren't. Eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable, especially when being exposed to something - like a shooting - for the first time.
Click to expand...

That is crazy! There is no such thing as witness intimidation! Everyone always says exactly what they saw even when the mob is rioting, burning and pilaging their neighborhood based on a contrary narrative.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

jmotivator said:
That is crazy! There is no such thing as witness intimidation! Everyone always says exactly what they saw even when the mob is rioting, burning and pilaging their neighborhood based on a contrary narrative.
Click to expand...

I'm not even talking about people lying or being intimidated. In the aviation world there has been significant amounts of research into problems with eyewitness reports. Turns out people who've never seen a plane crash in real life and only have TV and movie depictions of plane crashes as a frame of reference often see things like fires when there is no physical of pre crash evidence of a fire because movies often show planes on fire before they crash. Their minds simply fill in stuff that wasn't there because their recollections are flawed and they would have expected to see a fire.

It's not any kind of a stretch to believe that someone can witness something and get it completely wrong because their life experience tells them that that's what should have happened. They aren't lying - they truly believe what they say - but they're wrong.
 
Excon said:
Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

By Holly Yan, CNN
updated 12:36 AM EDT, Tue August 26, 2014


[...]

In the recording, a quick series of shots can be heard, followed by a pause and then another quick succession of shots.

"I personally heard at least 11" shots, the man's attorney, Lopa Blumenthal, told CNN's Don Lemon.

The man, who asked that his identity not be revealed, lives near the site of the shooting and was close enough to have heard the gunshots, Blumenthal said.

He was speaking to a friend on a video chat service and happened to be recording the conversation at the same time Brown was shot, Blumenthal said.

[...]​
Lawyer: Audio shows 11 shots when Michael Brown killed - CNN.com​


11 Shots in 5 seconds.
Short pause between 6 and the other five. Likely Brown was still coming at him.
Just more evidence.
Click to expand...

You know - every time the media wants to complain about what the president did during a press conference and how he's so 'absent' or 'taking sides too early' and so-n-so make me laugh when they put advertisements on the beginning of these type of videos for crap like Auto Insurance.

Anyway - This supports a gripe I made the other day that for how supposedly violent Ferguson is the cops sure as hell don't have proper equipment like dash cams. If they did then there'd be less question as to what happened. *rollseyes*
 
Buck Ewer said:
All the Grand Jury needs to recommend an indictment is to have some doubt that this homicide wasn't justified .
Click to expand...
iLOL :doh


Buck Ewer said:
The mere fact that there are 4 witnesses that say they saw Wilson shot a surrendering man presents doubt.
Click to expand...
Worthless witnesses are worthless.
There has been no credible witness that said Brown was surrendering.
What we do know though from a spontaneous, unscripted, uncoached and unrehearsed witness is that Brown was running towards the Officer, while the Officer was shooting at him. He was surprised as he thought the Officer was missing.




Buck Ewer said:
The GJ isn't there to determine guilt or how many shots, or who is lying ... all they are looking for is doubt.
Click to expand...
No one said they were there to determine guilt, so why are you bringing up irrelevancy?
And you really shouldn't speak about things you know not.
A GJ is looking for sufficient evidence to indict. Not doubt.


Buck Ewer said:
This case is going to trial.
Click to expand...
:2rofll:
 
Moot said:
A witness said shots were fired while the officer was still in the patrol car. The pause after the first six shots could have been Wilson getting out of the car.


One of the witnesses said it looked like the cop tried to hit MB with the patrol car door after he tried to cut him off. But was the cop deliberately trying to hit MB with the car door or was MB blocking the door and preventing the cop from getting out of the car?

Shots were fired while the cop was still in the car and since the autopsy shows that six bullets hit MB then it's highly likely that at least a few of those bullets hit him (in the hand and arm?) causing him to back away from the car door which then allowed Wilson to finally get out and proceed to fire four more shots one of which was the fatal bullet to the head. I dunno, it makes more sense that MB would have been backing away from a cop firing a gun at him from inside a patrol car rather than waiting to charge him after he got out of the car.
Click to expand...
:doh
Moot you should have learned the evidence before posting.
No credible witness says shots were fired in the vehicle.
A witness says the firearm discharged in the vehicle. One shot.
The police Chief revealed there was one discharge in the vehicle. One shot.
 
Buck Ewer said:
Like that ridiculously slanted audio tape you presented as "proof" that Brown was running towards Wilson.
Click to expand...
This is your failure to understand.
Ridiculously slanted? It is a spontaneous, unscripted, uncoached, unrehearsed and unreserved witness telling what he saw.


Buck Ewer said:
The perceived number of gunshots on that recording is a perfect example of how people's perception gets skewed when they are told in text what to hear before they really listen.
Click to expand...
No it is not.
It was the article that skewed perceptions.
Perceptions that really don't matter one bit.


Buck Ewer said:
The quality of that recording was so poor and there was so much distracting background noise and yelling that if you played that for ten people with no text overlay you would get ten different interpretations of what was said.
Click to expand...
Really, quit bellyaching.
Most folks could care less about the exact number of repetitive shots that close together. Why should they take the time to figure out exactly how many, when 1.) the article already provided a number and 2.) it really doesn't matter?
You are crying over nothing.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

jmotivator said:
I'm never had a headphones setup that didn't play the mic pickup back in my headphones.
Click to expand...
If you say so.
He was already interview by the FBI before his attorney revealed what he recorded.
:shrug:
 
New audio reveals ..... the officer tried not to fatally injure the young man.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Excon said:
If you say so.
He was already interview by the FBI before his attorney revealed what he recorded.
:shrug:
Click to expand...

Was he interviewed as part of the canvasing on the immediate neighborhood or because he approached the FBI with this audio?
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

tres borrachos said:
This is my favorite post in this thread. :thumbs: Multiple likes.
Click to expand...
Odd. As some things can mostly be assumed to be true.
Like it is highly unlikely that his lawyer is lying about him being interviewed by the FBI. Which would also mean that the recording was presented as it was in the article.
Just as it is highly unlikely that some one will lie about something that can easily be disproved. Which also goes to whether it was fabricated.


So you can pretty much be guaranteed that what we have been informed about is evidence.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

jmotivator said:
Was he interviewed as part of the canvasing on the immediate neighborhood or because he approached the FBI with this audio?
Click to expand...

I don't believe the article included such info.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Tettsuo said:
Wow... so eyewitnesses are no longer credible? Seriously, you're so far from reality on this, it's sad.
Click to expand...
1.) Eyewitnesses do lack credibility in general.
The eyewitnesses that support Brown in this case lack credibility because they are lying.
You not being able to see that is what is sad.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

rocket88 said:
Excon already made up his mind. Anything that contradicts what he thinks is "nonsense." Any evidence that comes out means he was definitely right.
Click to expand...
You are again speaking absurd nonsense.
I go by the known credible evidnece in toto.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Gaius46 said:
Behind barriers, left handed, right handed, against moving target. And yes it's hard. Many times so when under real pressure I'd imagine - and no I've never been in that situation with firearm.

I said as much in post didn't I? I'm simply saying that all those missed shots represent a real risk to innocent people. Not the potential risk that an escaping person might represent or the non risk that Brown represented.

And yeah the though had crossed my mind that the fact that cops are armed with semi autos with high capacity magazines might have something to do with it. When they were typically armed .38 revolvers I don't think situations like Brown's where a dozen shots were fired
were as common but I might be wrong about that.

And I'm not saying we should take away the autos either. Just recognize that you may be trading innocent people's safety for cops' safety
and given that cops voluntarily take on the risks of their jobs - such as they are being a cop is pretty safe occupation - I'm not sure that's a fair tradeoff.
Click to expand...

What's the issue with Brown's shooting and number of rounds? It seems obvious that 6 shots were barely enough...and not enough if the first 6 didnt hit (which they didnt).

And no bystanders were injured...so what's with the BS here? Number of rounds carried has nothing to do with this case, except for the fact that more than 6 *may have* saved the cop's life. (We dont know that yet.)
 
Excon said:
:doh
Moot you should have learned the evidence before posting.
No credible witness says shots were fired in the vehicle.
A witness says the firearm discharged in the vehicle. One shot.
The police Chief revealed there was one discharge in the vehicle. One shot.
Click to expand...

Okay, so we know that at least one shot was fired inside the car and missed. But according to the audio the first six shots were fired consecutively which suggests that the first six shots were fired from inside the car and some of them likely hit MB causing him to back away from the car with his hands up in a defensive mode.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Excon said:
You are again speaking absurd nonsense.
I go by the known credible evidnece in toto.
Click to expand...

This new evidence does not, as you claim, particularly back up anything. We don't know what the situation was wherein the office fired more shots. Your assertion that it's "likely Brown was still coming after him" is speculation on your part. Even the audio expert in the source video says that it "tests the credibility of the officer" not that it backs him up.

You hear what you want, and claim what you think it means based on your own preconceived version of events. The pause doesn't, in fact, prove a thing. It's an audio recording that may show that the officer fired more shots than he said he did. That's a far cry from definitely backing up what he said.
 
Last edited:
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Lursa said:
What's the issue with Brown's shooting and number of rounds? It seems obvious that 6 shots were barely enough...and not enough if the first 6 didnt hit (which they didnt).

And no bystanders were injured...so what's with the BS here? Number of rounds carried has nothing to do with this case, except for the fact that more than 6 *may have* saved the cop's life. (We dont know that yet.)
Click to expand...

I'm not really commenting on Brown. I'm making a more general statement.

And even with that I'm simply speculating that if the extra rounds are in the magazine they're going to get used. That was speculation on my part and I stated as much.

I tried to find stats on how many times bystanders get hit by police and wasn't able to find anything other than statements like "it's uncommon but it happens." I did find a study that the Rand Corporation did on the NYPD that found that officers hit the target on 18% of the time when the bad guy fired back and 30% of the time when they didn't. Considering the population density around here that really isn't all that comforting.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Tettsuo said:
Wow... so eyewitnesses are no longer credible? Seriously, you're so far from reality on this, it's sad.
Click to expand...

Do you know how many people were convicted through the years because of eyewitness testimony only to be exonerated later through DNA?

And do you know how easy it is to influence the mind into thinking it saw something it didn't?
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

tres borrachos said:
Do you know how many people were convicted through the years because of eyewitness testimony only to be exonerated later through DNA?

And do you know how easy it is to influence the mind into thinking it saw something it didn't?
Click to expand...

Yep. I also know that multiple eyewitnesses that report almost identical stories is extraordinarily compelling, and regarded very highly in the court of law.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Gaius46 said:
I'm not really commenting on Brown. I'm making a more general statement.

And even with that I'm simply speculating that if the extra rounds are in the magazine they're going to get used. That was speculation on my part and I stated as much.

I tried to find stats on how many times bystanders get hit by police and wasn't able to find anything other than statements like "it's uncommon but it happens." I did find a study that the Rand Corporation did on the NYPD that found that officers hit the target on 18% of the time when the bad guy fired back and 30% of the time when they didn't. Considering the population density around here that really isn't all that comforting.
Click to expand...


And I would disagree with that speculation. Very much so. And dont really know of anything that supports it...that cops just spray and pray, or just keep blasting away.

You found nothing that supports bystanders are being harmed (altho of course there are some cases) but certainly did find data that supports police needing more rounds: the miss rate while under stress/shooting at moving targets/multiple targets/targets that almost always require more than one shot to stop them.

Try reading the FBI Files and other accounts of gunfights. Trained officers still require multiple shots to stop attacks...and few if any records of collateral damage.
 
Last edited:
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Tettsuo said:
Yep. I also know that multiple eyewitnesses that report almost identical stories is extraordinarily compelling, and regarded very highly in the court of law.
Click to expand...

Do you know how many of the first 130 persons exonerated by DNA were convicted because of eyewitness testimony in the first place? 80 percent. You can look it up on Google. 80 percent, and all of them convicted because of bad eyewitness testimony, and in most of those cases, testimony by multiple eyewitnesses.

This has been a huge issue in the court system that has been studied, documented and analyzed for the last 20 year. Eyewitness testimony, for a number of reasons, doesn't hold up in court the way it once did - for or against the person accused. It's like trace evidence. It can be contaminated. Our memories fade over time. And it isn't scientific.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Lursa said:
And I would disagree with that speculation. Very much so. And dont really know of anything that supports it...that cops just spray and pray, or just keep blasting away.

You found nothing that supports bystanders are being harmed (altho of course there are some cases) but certainly did find data that supports police needing more rounds: the miss rate while under stress/shooting at moving targets/multiple targets/targets that almost always require more than one shot to stop them.

Try reading the FBI Files and other accounts of gunfights. Trained officers still require multiple shots to stop attacks...and few if any records of collateral damage.
Click to expand...

I honestly would love to believe that you're right about the spray and pray part. Though understand I'm not saying that any of this is willful. I was more thinking a scared guy resorting to overkill.

And I'm astounded that the hit rate is so low. Maybe it means they need more rounds. Maybe it means different training. I don't know.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Gaius46 said:
I honestly would love to believe that you're right about the spray and pray part. Though understand I'm not saying that any of this is willful. I was more thinking a scared guy resorting to overkill.

And I'm astounded that the hit rate is so low. Maybe it means they need more rounds. Maybe it means different training. I don't know.
Click to expand...
How many rounds did the officer fire?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom