• 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

Excon refutes just about everything I say and don't be under the impression that that "upsets" me.
I mentioned Parcells because he is the one who mentioned Baden's findings at the press conference, as they related to the fore arm graze wound.
Now, what about the anatomy lesson I just gave?

Anatomy lesson? I didn't understand it but that's because I didn't try hard, with all due respect.

I'm waiting for the Grand Jury. You declared the cop a murderer, Excon declared the cop innocent. I don't know who is right or wrong but since I've seen no official evidence, I'm just waiting around.
 
No it's not. You took evidence and spun it into your narrative using conjecture. You said it was "likely" Brown was still coming at him, and you won't accept any other interpretation of the audio. The audio proves nothing that you said it did, unless you spin it with your own conjecture. That's not looking at evidence, that's shoving it into the hole that you want it to fit into.
Wrong. That is in accordance with the known evidence.
Brown was approaching the Officer.

Learn it.
 
Wrong. That is in accordance with the known evidence.
Brown was approaching the Officer.

Learn it.

Hi! I couldn't help but notice that you skipped right over my simple question...

Why do you continue to act like Emanuel Freeman doesn't exist? Do you not like it because it is published, time stamped immediately after it happened, and in complete disagreement with you?
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

If the officer thought MB was a robbery suspect then why didn't his story mention anything about a robbery or robbery suspects?

Josie's did. We haven't heard Officer Wilson's story from him yet.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

If the officer thought MB was a robbery suspect then why didn't his story mention anything about a robbery or robbery suspects?
Everybody seemed to know about the robbery incident immediately after it happened. It is reasonable that that's why he put his vehicle in reverse to re-engage with them.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

If...if MB was indeed shot while Wilson was still in his cruiser, which is starting to look highly likely, then that would blow a hole a mile wide in the officers story that MB had turned and taunted him to shoot......

Why would MB do that if he was already shot and bullets were whizzing past him as he was trying to run away? We need a ballistic report to know how just how many bullets Wilson did fire.

Say, how long does it take to reload a handgun? Three seconds, perhaps? That might explain the pause in the audio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ls4Uq1aCiTA

Johnson is looking more and more credible by the minute.

Except you have no idea what Brown would or wouldn't do or say, even if he had already been shot. He could have said it or Wilson could have heard him wrong.

Also, there would have been no need to reload the gun for how many shots reported to have been fired.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Anatomy lesson? I didn't understand it but that's because I didn't try hard, with all due respect.

I'm waiting for the Grand Jury. You declared the cop a murderer, Excon declared the cop innocent. I don't know who is right or wrong but since I've seen no official evidence, I'm just waiting around.
Maybe you didn't try because you are afraid it may sway your opinion of Wilson's guilt or innocence that you are pretending not to have.
Mark my words, in the coming trial, arm and hand anatomy and arm and hand position will be discussed and explained much the way I just did.
I gave my opinion of Wilson's guilt early on, based on the early evidence. No new evidence has come along that has changed or altered my earlier opinion.
If it does I will let you know.
 
Wrong. That is in accordance with the known evidence.
Brown was approaching the Officer.

Learn it.

We don't know that he still was after the first volley of shots. That's your conjecture, not evidence.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Maybe you didn't try because you are afraid it may sway your opinion of Wilson's guilt or innocence that you are pretending not to have.
Mark my words, in the coming trial, arm and hand anatomy and arm and hand position will be discussed and explained much the way I just did.
I gave my opinion of Wilson's guilt early on, based on the early evidence. No new evidence has come along that has changed or altered my earlier opinion.
If it does I will let you know.

Once again, I haven't seen any official evidence on this case, nor do I expect to until it's made public. I have no idea if Wilson is guilty or not. I don't presume anything either way. I don't assume someone is guilty. I assume someone is innocent until proven guilty. Constitution, and all of that. There hasn't been anything posted on this board to make me feel otherwise.
 
Why do you continue to act like Emanuel Freeman doesn't exist? Do you not like it because it is published, time stamped immediately after it happened, and in complete disagreement with you?
Act like whom doesn't exist?
:doh
That is funny.


What do you want me to say about him that hasn't already been said?
Or do you not think that he was covered by what I previously said?
Do you want me call him a liar for saying that Brown was shot in the back? Or do you want me to call him a liar for saying he was shot twice in the back? Because that is the question he answered.
Or do you want to talk about his willingness to lie?
Or how about you realize that he was amongst those talking about it and is tainted by what he heard?
 
Hi! I couldn't help but notice that you skipped right over my simple question...
:doh
Wtf? Do you think you come first or something?
Your apparent sense of entitlement is astounding.
 
:doh
Wtf? Do you think you come first or something?
Your apparent sense of entitlement is astounding.
Seriously? You think I said that because I think I am entitled, and not because I think that you ignore (or apparently make up false information about) anything that doesn't fit what you think happened?
 
Seriously? You think I said that because I think I am entitled, and not because I think that you ignore (or apparently make up false information about) anything that doesn't fit what you think happened?
Deflection.
You are the one demanding to be noticed, saying I skipped what you said.
Do you think you get to demand in what order I respond to folks?
Can your silliness.
I was working on a reply to you and posted it when I was finished.

As for making stuff up? That belongs to you.
 
Act like whom doesn't exist?
:doh
That is funny.


What do you want me to say about him that hasn't already been said?
Or do you not think that he was covered by what I previously said?
Do you want me call him a liar for saying that Brown was shot in the back? Or do you want me to call him a liar for saying he was shot twice in the back? Because that is the question he answered.
Or do you want to talk about his willingness to lie?
Or how about you realize that he was amongst those talking about it and is tainted by what he heard?
His tweet is time stamped at 12:03. The time of the shooting.
How could he possibly be "tainted by what he heard" if no time had elapsed between the shooting and his tweet?
:lamo:lamo:lamo:2wave:
5 Eyewitness Accounts of Michael Brown’s Shooting - The Root
 
His tweet is time stamped at 12:03. The time of the shooting.
How could he possibly be "tainted by what he heard" if no time had elapsed between the shooting and his tweet?

5 Eyewitness Accounts of Michael Brown’s Shooting - The Root
:doh
That tweet was about him witnessing someone die.
Did I say that was what was tainted?

And thanks for providing a link to what I found elsewhere but didn't post.

Freeman, whose Twitter handle is @TheePharoah, was sitting in his home in Ferguson when he heard gunshots outside his window.
He clearly didn't see it all, if any.
 
Last edited:
Act like whom doesn't exist?
:doh
That is funny.


What do you want me to say about him that hasn't already been said?
Or do you not think that he was covered by what I previously said?
Do you want me call him a liar for saying that Brown was shot in the back? Or do you want me to call him a liar for saying he was shot twice in the back? Because that is the question he answered.
Or do you want to talk about his willingness to lie?
Or how about you realize that he was amongst those talking about it and is tainted by what he heard?

So, in your opinion, the only eyewitness that isn't tainted by being amongst those talking about it is the guy who is outside in the crowd of people, talking at times inaudibly to another guy next to another guy who is making a video tape and talking about what happened, and who never actually claims to be an eyewitness.

Because...[you think] it doesn't match Johnson's story.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Once again, I haven't seen any official evidence on this case, nor do I expect to until it's made public. I have no idea if Wilson is guilty or not. I don't presume anything either way. I don't assume someone is guilty. I assume someone is innocent until proven guilty. Constitution, and all of that. There hasn't been anything posted on this board to make me feel otherwise.
Fair enough...
I just noticed the posts you "like" and the ones you don't support and it sure seems like you have formed an opinion about Wilson's guilt or innocence.
BTW the "presumption of innocence in the eyes of the law" does not apply to anyone outside of the legal system. If it did no one would ever be allowed to give incriminating testimony because they would have to presume the criminal they saw commit the crime was innocent.
Think about it.
 
So, in your opinion, the only eyewitness that isn't tainted by being amongst those talking about it is the guy who is outside in the crowd of people, talking at times inaudibly to another guy next to another guy who is making a video tape and talking about what happened, and who never actually claims to be an eyewitness.
Funny.
Do you think he isn't a witness to what happened, and is just making it up? What? To impress someone with what he doesn't know? :doh

So again.
What do you want me to say about him that hasn't already been said?
Or do you not think that he was covered by what I previously said?
Do you want me call him a liar for saying that Brown was shot in the back? Or do you want me to call him a liar for saying he was shot twice in the back? Because that is the question he answered.
Or do you want to talk about his willingness to lie?
Or how about you realize that he was amongst those talking about it and is tainted by what he heard?


Because...[you think] it doesn't match Johnson's story.
Oh Gawd. Here we go again. Darian lied about what happened and is a known liar. He has no credibility, and his version did not sound credible but contrived.
 
Last edited:
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Fair enough...
I just noticed the posts you "like" and the ones you don't support and it sure seems like you have formed an opinion about Wilson's guilt or innocence.
BTW the "presumption of innocence in the eyes of the law" does not apply to anyone outside of the legal system. If it did no one would ever be allowed to give incriminating testimony because they would have to presume the criminal they saw commit the crime was innocent.
Think about it.

Because I like the posts. I also like the ones that say the same thing I do.

Wilson is an American citizen. He deserves the same rights that you & I have.

I'll wait until the justice system does its thing.
 
That sounds familiar for some reason.
More deflection.
There is a difference in credibility amongst the accounts.
 
Or how about you realize that he was amongst those talking about it and is tainted by what he heard?
That's what you said and it was obviously wrong. There was no time to talk to anyone before he tweeted.
He saw Brown die ...and since Brown died instantly after being shot in the head we must assume he saw the shots that killed him.
You don't like it because he doesn't fit your conspiracy theory of every witness colluding to lie.
The time stamp proves his independence of witness. Johnson hadn't even spoken to anyone at that point in time.
 
:doh
That tweet was about him witnessing someone die.
Did I say that was what was tainted?

And thanks for providing a link to what I found elsewhere but didn't post.

Freeman, whose Twitter handle is @TheePharoah, was sitting in his home in Ferguson when he heard gunshots outside his window.
He clearly didn't see it all, if any.

You quote a sentence written by the author of an article that writes something that they completely assumed on their own (because Freeman has refused to talk to the media), and in that very article, both immediately above and immediately below the author's sentence that you used to suggest that Freeman didn't see it happen, it shows an actual image of his Tweets that state "I saw it happen man.." and "I JUST SAW SOMEONE DIE OMFG."

I couldn't make you up if I tried.
 
Who needs the justice system when we have Excon & Buck to hash this out? :shock: Actually if one of you could make the compelling case to convince the other one of Wilson's guilt or innocence, we can bypass the trial altogether.

On a serious note, I do enjoy reading both of your posts. You do have a passion.
 
Back
Top Bottom