But in all seriousness, your post is an example of the human condition at its absolute worst.
-
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]
- Thread starter Excon
- Start date
But in all seriousness, your post is an example of the human condition at its absolute worst.
- Joined
- May 29, 2009
- Messages
- 13,061
- Reaction score
- 5,128
- Location
- USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
Sure...
He reapplied and was hired. Not something that would happen to someone that was fired for cause.
Sure...
He reapplied and was hired. Not something that would happen to someone that was fired for cause.
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
No, he applied for a job with the Ferguson PD and was hired.
No, he applied for a job with the Ferguson PD and was hired.
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2012
- Messages
- 40,615
- Reaction score
- 9,087
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Wrong.
Wrong.
It is also meaningless.
It is not the Official autopsy.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2013
- Messages
- 5,729
- Reaction score
- 2,853
- Location
- Colorado mountains
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
Darren Wilson
Ya know Buck ...you probably should have left this one alone.
Your post makes him look worse than mine did.
Darren Wilson
sure.
Ya know Buck ...you probably should have left this one alone.
Your post makes him look worse than mine did.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2013
- Messages
- 5,729
- Reaction score
- 2,853
- Location
- Colorado mountains
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
If it is so "meaningless" ...
Why do you keep quoting it like it was the Gospel according to St Baden?
:lamo:lamo:lamo:2wave:
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 156,720
- Reaction score
- 53,497
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
| Moderator's Warning: |
 OK. The "herd" has been thinned a bit. Plenty of infractions and thread bans have now been issued for baiting, flaming, and all around jerkiness. From here on, if you act out, you will get an infraction AND a thread ban. Stop the personal attacks, STOP the overuse of smilies, stop acting uncivil. You have been warned. |
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot[W:72]
So let's discuss the newly authenticated audio. From the start of first group of shots to start of second group of shots is approximately 5 seconds.
Assuming the most extreme scenario that Brown made it all the way to where he fell two or three feet in front of the officer before the second group of shots, this would have him traveling around 30 feet in 5 seconds, at a speed of 6 ft/s...approximately 4 mph. If Brown didn't make the full 30 feet before the second round of shots, then his speed would have been even slower.
So mathematically, if all the shots in the audio were fired after Brown started charging towards Wilson, then Michael Brown's "full speed" was a maximum possible speed of 4 mph, which is the equivalent of a brisk walk.
To address the situation of the man coming at him at a maximum possible full-speed rate of 4 mph, Wilson stopped shooting, stood there in place for a couple of seconds as Brown was coming at him, and then at that point decided that his only option was to recontinue his use of deadly force.
OR...the above story is crap, and the first shots were fired at his back, and the second shots were fired after he turned around.
So let's discuss the newly authenticated audio. From the start of first group of shots to start of second group of shots is approximately 5 seconds.
Assuming the most extreme scenario that Brown made it all the way to where he fell two or three feet in front of the officer before the second group of shots, this would have him traveling around 30 feet in 5 seconds, at a speed of 6 ft/s...approximately 4 mph. If Brown didn't make the full 30 feet before the second round of shots, then his speed would have been even slower.
So mathematically, if all the shots in the audio were fired after Brown started charging towards Wilson, then Michael Brown's "full speed" was a maximum possible speed of 4 mph, which is the equivalent of a brisk walk.
To address the situation of the man coming at him at a maximum possible full-speed rate of 4 mph, Wilson stopped shooting, stood there in place for a couple of seconds as Brown was coming at him, and then at that point decided that his only option was to recontinue his use of deadly force.
OR...the above story is crap, and the first shots were fired at his back, and the second shots were fired after he turned around.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,351
- Reaction score
- 29,640
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
I still just want to see it from him. I figure that will be the best source.
I will say, it does make sense, Josie's version. At least for what he would say. I have no clue if it actually happened that way or not.
I still just want to see it from him. I figure that will be the best source.
I will say, it does make sense, Josie's version. At least for what he would say. I have no clue if it actually happened that way or not.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,351
- Reaction score
- 29,640
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
CNN does seem to be downplaying that part, but they do mention it in another story.
Dueling narratives in Michael Brown shooting - CNN.com
It is sort of like when so many attached to the idea that this couldn't be the case because the Police Chief said that they weren't approached/stopped by Officer Wilson because of the robbery to begin with. He never said that Wilson didn't stop them the second time because of the robbery, nor did he even mention the second stop. I don't think this Chief is very good at releasing information in a way that helps. He seems exceptionally good at releasing it in a way that makes the situation worse in fact.
CNN does seem to be downplaying that part, but they do mention it in another story.
Dueling narratives in Michael Brown shooting - CNN.com
It is sort of like when so many attached to the idea that this couldn't be the case because the Police Chief said that they weren't approached/stopped by Officer Wilson because of the robbery to begin with. He never said that Wilson didn't stop them the second time because of the robbery, nor did he even mention the second stop. I don't think this Chief is very good at releasing information in a way that helps. He seems exceptionally good at releasing it in a way that makes the situation worse in fact.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,351
- Reaction score
- 29,640
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
The entire force was fired because they "cleaned house". They didn't want any perception by the public that there would be anyone left of the "old group" to cause issues. In reality, this could easily include guys who were completely innocent of any misconduct or abuse of power or discrimination or harassment. That is what happens sometimes. It happens (or at least used to happen, not sure how common it is now) in the business world if there is any kind of scandal that then leads to a business having new ownership. Even people who had absolutely nothing to do with the scandal, didn't know anything about it happening, are let go so that the new people can start from scratch.
The entire force was fired because they "cleaned house". They didn't want any perception by the public that there would be anyone left of the "old group" to cause issues. In reality, this could easily include guys who were completely innocent of any misconduct or abuse of power or discrimination or harassment. That is what happens sometimes. It happens (or at least used to happen, not sure how common it is now) in the business world if there is any kind of scandal that then leads to a business having new ownership. Even people who had absolutely nothing to do with the scandal, didn't know anything about it happening, are let go so that the new people can start from scratch.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,351
- Reaction score
- 29,640
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
That simply isn't how it works. There are lots of times when people get fired because of the perception of the public, especially in public servant jobs, not their actual performance. They could be completely innocent, but still be fired because they are viewed as having "let it happen", even if there was really not much if anything they could personally do about it.
That simply isn't how it works. There are lots of times when people get fired because of the perception of the public, especially in public servant jobs, not their actual performance. They could be completely innocent, but still be fired because they are viewed as having "let it happen", even if there was really not much if anything they could personally do about it.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,351
- Reaction score
- 29,640
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
Because that is making an assumption of guilt based on association. It isn't right. It does happen, especially when it comes to something like whether or not to fire everyone at a specific place of employment due to some sort of scandal or widespread misconduct. It does happen where even those who are innocent of any wrongdoing, or at least the wrongdoing the others are accused of are still fired or let go because of this. It is a flaw in our system that has very little remedy until we can teach the majority of people to judge individuals, not groups.
Because that is making an assumption of guilt based on association. It isn't right. It does happen, especially when it comes to something like whether or not to fire everyone at a specific place of employment due to some sort of scandal or widespread misconduct. It does happen where even those who are innocent of any wrongdoing, or at least the wrongdoing the others are accused of are still fired or let go because of this. It is a flaw in our system that has very little remedy until we can teach the majority of people to judge individuals, not groups.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
Says the guy who praised the BLM blitzkreiging it's way across Nevada.
Says the guy who praised the BLM blitzkreiging it's way across Nevada.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,351
- Reaction score
- 29,640
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
Not likely.
In reality, the pause was almost certainly due to the turn. I have no idea if he was justified in shooting at Brown while he was fleeing. However, that would not get him charged with murder in itself (rights violation maybe under Tennessee v Garner assuming Wilson couldn't come up with a legitimate reason for shooting at an unarmed fleeing suspect). The murder charge has to come from the reason he fired after Brown turned to face Wilson. If Wilson shot Brown without some sort of sign of threat from Brown, then it justifies murder charge. However, if he shot him because there was advancement toward him or movement indicating that he, Brown, was going for a weapon (Wilson did not know whether Brown was armed or not, even if he got a description of the robbery including that there was no weapon used in that incident because a police officer cannot assume that a suspect is unarmed just because they did not use a weapon in an earlier situation), then that is justification for an officer to shoot a suspect, and police officers shoot to kill, not wound. As of right now, we don't know which it was.
Not likely.
In reality, the pause was almost certainly due to the turn. I have no idea if he was justified in shooting at Brown while he was fleeing. However, that would not get him charged with murder in itself (rights violation maybe under Tennessee v Garner assuming Wilson couldn't come up with a legitimate reason for shooting at an unarmed fleeing suspect). The murder charge has to come from the reason he fired after Brown turned to face Wilson. If Wilson shot Brown without some sort of sign of threat from Brown, then it justifies murder charge. However, if he shot him because there was advancement toward him or movement indicating that he, Brown, was going for a weapon (Wilson did not know whether Brown was armed or not, even if he got a description of the robbery including that there was no weapon used in that incident because a police officer cannot assume that a suspect is unarmed just because they did not use a weapon in an earlier situation), then that is justification for an officer to shoot a suspect, and police officers shoot to kill, not wound. As of right now, we don't know which it was.
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2012
- Messages
- 104,071
- Reaction score
- 84,041
- Location
- Biden's 'Murica
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
Not really, Buck. The reason the city council disbanded the PD isn't really clear on all of the links we have seen. It had to do with strained race relations? Not sure what that means. There were something like 50 cops on the force - and Wilson was a rookie. You've been around enough to know a rookie doesn't have much influence. And it's highly unlikely that a decision like that was made for 1, something OTHER than political reasons (showing good faith, we'll get you a new force, now everyone can sing Kumbya), and 2, that the decision was anything but a complete overhaul of personnel, but NOT an implication that everyone was responsible for whatever caused the decision. No, they wouldn't make an exception. This was to send a message, and exceptions would cloudy the message. I assume, unless you show me otherwise, that the 2 or 3 black cops on that force were also "fired". Yes?
Not really, Buck. The reason the city council disbanded the PD isn't really clear on all of the links we have seen. It had to do with strained race relations? Not sure what that means. There were something like 50 cops on the force - and Wilson was a rookie. You've been around enough to know a rookie doesn't have much influence. And it's highly unlikely that a decision like that was made for 1, something OTHER than political reasons (showing good faith, we'll get you a new force, now everyone can sing Kumbya), and 2, that the decision was anything but a complete overhaul of personnel, but NOT an implication that everyone was responsible for whatever caused the decision. No, they wouldn't make an exception. This was to send a message, and exceptions would cloudy the message. I assume, unless you show me otherwise, that the 2 or 3 black cops on that force were also "fired". Yes?
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2012
- Messages
- 104,071
- Reaction score
- 84,041
- Location
- Biden's 'Murica
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
Yup, rogue. I was in one of those Reductions in Force (RIF) due to a need to send a message to stockholders that everything was going to change. They "fired" everyone who was in a management position, even those of us who had no responsibility for anything that had gone wrong. I got a gigantic severance so at the time it wasn't a big deal. They brought it all new management to send the message "we're serious, customers - we heard you, we know there were big problems, and we're bringing in all new people". It isn't that uncommon.
If the decision was made to send some sort of message in Jennings, everyone had to go, period.
Yup, rogue. I was in one of those Reductions in Force (RIF) due to a need to send a message to stockholders that everything was going to change. They "fired" everyone who was in a management position, even those of us who had no responsibility for anything that had gone wrong. I got a gigantic severance so at the time it wasn't a big deal. They brought it all new management to send the message "we're serious, customers - we heard you, we know there were big problems, and we're bringing in all new people". It isn't that uncommon.
If the decision was made to send some sort of message in Jennings, everyone had to go, period.
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
This isn't incorrect per se, but to say he has a spotless record is misleading. Does he have a clean official record? Yes. Is his résumé as a police officer spotless? No, this is still a "spot" that raises some questions that may or may not be answerable.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,351
- Reaction score
- 29,640
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
This raises questions that are unfair although they happen in reality. It is not right when employers look only at base reasons for why a person got fired. They need to ensure they are actually finding out exactly why the individual got fired, especially if it is a case where a lot of people got fired at the same time from a single place. This indicates that it was a decision to "clean house" without any regard for who actually was doing something wrong and who just was working at the wrong place at the wrong time. These sort of assumptions are wrong and lazy.
This does happen. And it is not right when people are judged off of this type of firing. Their getting fired for this is no more an indicator of their personal performance or attitude or work ethic than getting laid off because the company downsizes and simply doesn't require the person's position anymore. It isn't their fault. This is why this should not be viewed as a black spot toward Wilson, because we simply do not know if he was doing anything wrong, and we know that everyone in that police force was fired, even some who likely weren't involved in any unethical practices. Without evidence that Officer Wilson was personally involved in any of that scandal, then it should not be held against him. Will people hold it against him? Absolutely, just as some hiring managers will hold something like that (a person caught up in a cleaning house sweep) will use such a thing as a reason not to hire someone. It doesn't make it right though.
This raises questions that are unfair although they happen in reality. It is not right when employers look only at base reasons for why a person got fired. They need to ensure they are actually finding out exactly why the individual got fired, especially if it is a case where a lot of people got fired at the same time from a single place. This indicates that it was a decision to "clean house" without any regard for who actually was doing something wrong and who just was working at the wrong place at the wrong time. These sort of assumptions are wrong and lazy.
This does happen. And it is not right when people are judged off of this type of firing. Their getting fired for this is no more an indicator of their personal performance or attitude or work ethic than getting laid off because the company downsizes and simply doesn't require the person's position anymore. It isn't their fault. This is why this should not be viewed as a black spot toward Wilson, because we simply do not know if he was doing anything wrong, and we know that everyone in that police force was fired, even some who likely weren't involved in any unethical practices. Without evidence that Officer Wilson was personally involved in any of that scandal, then it should not be held against him. Will people hold it against him? Absolutely, just as some hiring managers will hold something like that (a person caught up in a cleaning house sweep) will use such a thing as a reason not to hire someone. It doesn't make it right though.
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
The problem is that his next job was with a police force with an equally poor record of upholding the Oath of Honor. So now he has been a part of two police forces that have prominently displayed to their communities either their lack of proper training, lack of respect and care for the wellbeing of community, an official policy of excessive policing for political and economic reasons, or some combination of those factors. Even well meaning people are affected in some way by toxic organizational culture after being a part of it for 6 years.
Also, he did just commit a homicide in front of several witnesses that say he shot dead a surrendering man.
Based on this new audio, are we still going with the story that Brown turned around and taunted Wilson that he wouldn't shoot him, now that we know that Wilson already shot at Brown 5 or 6 times? How does that make ANY sense?
Context though, context...let's see where his next job lands him.
The problem is that his next job was with a police force with an equally poor record of upholding the Oath of Honor. So now he has been a part of two police forces that have prominently displayed to their communities either their lack of proper training, lack of respect and care for the wellbeing of community, an official policy of excessive policing for political and economic reasons, or some combination of those factors. Even well meaning people are affected in some way by toxic organizational culture after being a part of it for 6 years.
Also, he did just commit a homicide in front of several witnesses that say he shot dead a surrendering man.
Based on this new audio, are we still going with the story that Brown turned around and taunted Wilson that he wouldn't shoot him, now that we know that Wilson already shot at Brown 5 or 6 times? How does that make ANY sense?
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,351
- Reaction score
- 29,640
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
Based on the "new audio", we don't know what happened. Brown could have easily taunted and stepped toward Wilson or either after turning. The one that matters isn't really the taunting though, but rather did he make any move that could be considered threatening. We don't know how Brown would have reacted. There have been people who have charged police after getting shot at, taunted police, threatened police. We do not know Brown's mindset at that time. Not all people make sense.
As for him committing homicide in front of several witnesses that say he killed a surrendering man, that is what we are trying to find out. He could have been justified in believing that Brown was a threat. At least one person on that video of what was going on right after Brown was shot did say that he saw Brown moving towards Wilson. Is that verified? No clue. But it is there.
Michael Brown shooting recording casts doubt on claims he surrendered to Darren Wilson | Mail Online
If this is real, then it could be a witness statement of events. In fact, given the time it would have occurred, it could be more believable than some of the other witness statements, because there is little time for false memories to set in when more information comes out. Now, it could also be just this guy didn't really get a good view.
There were problems before, but we don't have any evidence that there were complaints against Wilson personally. In fact, there should have been some if he was a problem.
Plus, there is also no evidence that this was racially motivated. Just because Brown was black and Wilson was White does not mean that Wilson only shot at Brown because he was black. You cannot prove racial motivation here. Not with the information we have.
Based on the "new audio", we don't know what happened. Brown could have easily taunted and stepped toward Wilson or either after turning. The one that matters isn't really the taunting though, but rather did he make any move that could be considered threatening. We don't know how Brown would have reacted. There have been people who have charged police after getting shot at, taunted police, threatened police. We do not know Brown's mindset at that time. Not all people make sense.
As for him committing homicide in front of several witnesses that say he killed a surrendering man, that is what we are trying to find out. He could have been justified in believing that Brown was a threat. At least one person on that video of what was going on right after Brown was shot did say that he saw Brown moving towards Wilson. Is that verified? No clue. But it is there.
Michael Brown shooting recording casts doubt on claims he surrendered to Darren Wilson | Mail Online
If this is real, then it could be a witness statement of events. In fact, given the time it would have occurred, it could be more believable than some of the other witness statements, because there is little time for false memories to set in when more information comes out. Now, it could also be just this guy didn't really get a good view.
There were problems before, but we don't have any evidence that there were complaints against Wilson personally. In fact, there should have been some if he was a problem.
Plus, there is also no evidence that this was racially motivated. Just because Brown was black and Wilson was White does not mean that Wilson only shot at Brown because he was black. You cannot prove racial motivation here. Not with the information we have.
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
You seem to be able to put reasonably coherent thoughts together, and I don't blame people for not examining every little bit of evidence first hand. But this case has absolutely highlighted some of the worst aspects of this country.
You have taken the time to write some decent length posts. Take just a minute or two and really listen to the video that you posted. Listen to the whole thing start to finish here if you have the time http://uneditedpolitics.com/ace-joh...rmath-of-michael-brown-shooting-graphic-8914/. If not, start at 8:15, and listen until you get to the "he kept coming towards him" line, which is where it is actually found in the video. Then explain to me how the rational assumption is that "he" was referring to Brown.
And then read Tiffany Mitchell's interview, everything she says, if you haven't already. She was literally right there, standing in the road where it happened. Anyone who is going to defend Darren Wilson's actions should at least understand what people who were there say he did.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/55873200/ns/msnbc/t/last-word-lawrence-odonnell-thursday-august-th/
You seem to be able to put reasonably coherent thoughts together, and I don't blame people for not examining every little bit of evidence first hand. But this case has absolutely highlighted some of the worst aspects of this country.
You have taken the time to write some decent length posts. Take just a minute or two and really listen to the video that you posted. Listen to the whole thing start to finish here if you have the time http://uneditedpolitics.com/ace-joh...rmath-of-michael-brown-shooting-graphic-8914/. If not, start at 8:15, and listen until you get to the "he kept coming towards him" line, which is where it is actually found in the video. Then explain to me how the rational assumption is that "he" was referring to Brown.
And then read Tiffany Mitchell's interview, everything she says, if you haven't already. She was literally right there, standing in the road where it happened. Anyone who is going to defend Darren Wilson's actions should at least understand what people who were there say he did.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/55873200/ns/msnbc/t/last-word-lawrence-odonnell-thursday-august-th/
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,351
- Reaction score
- 29,640
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot
Did you not notice that the guy keeps referring to Wilson as "the police", and then refers to Brown as "he", "him", or some other masculine pronoun? Every single time the guy refers to the officer he says "the police" or "they". That is what makes me believe that it is Brown that the guy is referring to when he started speaking about the movement back. The way people say things is a very big clue about who they are talking about when they don't use specific names of people. In fact, he said specifically "he came back towards them".
And witnesses can change their view or even not see what they think they saw. This is even possible for that guy who said what he did. I'm not dismissing the situation. I am giving the benefit of the doubt though. And what she says does not make much sense. He has to have his head down at some point, yet she never mentions his head ducking. She also said that he stopped shooting as soon as the body hit the ground. The other witnesses and the "tape" indicate 4 shots fired after he turned (which is why I believe he was hit either by the one in the car and/or by one while running, like in the arm or hand). Those were all in close succession, which means he couldn't have fallen fast enough for that last shot to have gone into his head from full standing unless his head was already down when he first starting shooting that last group of shots, particularly if that audio is authentic.
Did you not notice that the guy keeps referring to Wilson as "the police", and then refers to Brown as "he", "him", or some other masculine pronoun? Every single time the guy refers to the officer he says "the police" or "they". That is what makes me believe that it is Brown that the guy is referring to when he started speaking about the movement back. The way people say things is a very big clue about who they are talking about when they don't use specific names of people. In fact, he said specifically "he came back towards them".
And witnesses can change their view or even not see what they think they saw. This is even possible for that guy who said what he did. I'm not dismissing the situation. I am giving the benefit of the doubt though. And what she says does not make much sense. He has to have his head down at some point, yet she never mentions his head ducking. She also said that he stopped shooting as soon as the body hit the ground. The other witnesses and the "tape" indicate 4 shots fired after he turned (which is why I believe he was hit either by the one in the car and/or by one while running, like in the arm or hand). Those were all in close succession, which means he couldn't have fallen fast enough for that last shot to have gone into his head from full standing unless his head was already down when he first starting shooting that last group of shots, particularly if that audio is authentic.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2005
- Messages
- 34,929
- Reaction score
- 12,324
- Location
- Pennsylvania
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot[W:72,732
I truly do not believe you anymore, when you claim to be a "thoughtful man who forms his opinion based on all of the evidence, including eyewitness accounts".
Besides, it was a statement of my opinion, and the only supporting data for your claim of it being a false claim would be somehow reading my mind and proving whether I think that or not.
Can you read my mind?
That's not a false claim.
I truly do not believe you anymore, when you claim to be a "thoughtful man who forms his opinion based on all of the evidence, including eyewitness accounts".
Besides, it was a statement of my opinion, and the only supporting data for your claim of it being a false claim would be somehow reading my mind and proving whether I think that or not.
Can you read my mind?