• 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!

Ferguson LIVE announcement video feed links here [W:60, 267]

that's the whole point
there was sufficient probable cause to go to trial
not allowing it to do so, by a manipulated grand jury proceeding, undermines the pursuit of justice and the public's trust in our justice system

Prove it.
 
your presentation is that there was no witness who saw anything other than that wilson's shooting of brown was a reasonable one
i find that an incredible conclusion

No actual witness, that would be correct. There were a couple who stepped forward as witnesses that weren't even there or were shown to be lying through their teeth (Johnson who all the actual witnesses say was lying). It's a conclusion based upon the evidence which you seem to want to ignore.
 
but there were witnesses who saw it as a inappropriate use of force by wilson
which causes there to be probable cause to have a trial to determine where the truth is

And their account was unsubstantiated by any evidence to support their assertion.

Oopsie!
 
but there were witnesses who saw it as a inappropriate use of force by wilson
which causes there to be probable cause to have a trial to determine where the truth is

Eyewitness testimony is shockingly unreliable. Thousands of people (many if not most being black) have been falsely imprisoned by inaccurate eyewitness testimony. What was actually in front of their eyes at the time, what they actually percieved with their eyes at the time, what they reported seeing to the investigators, what they now remember, and what they today report to have seen can be and often are ridiculously different. Not all eyewitness evidence can or should be weighted equally. Just because someone reports seeing something does not mean that it should be considered fact. Those memories are greatly biased by events outside what was actually witnessed by the person. That is especially true when you start adding in subjective judgments (e.g., the appropriateness of force used).

The purpose of an adversarial trial is not to find truth, but to render judgement.
 
Last edited:
that's the whole point
there was sufficient probable cause to go to trial
not allowing it to do so, by a manipulated grand jury proceeding, undermines the pursuit of justice and the public's trust in our justice system



What was the "sufficient probable cause"?
 
While I understand how you (or anyone else) might feel that way it would be incredibly unfair to subject someone that is obviously operating within the bounds of the law to be subjected to the whims of a jury. Besides, would having a trial really have helped this situation? When the evidence was presented that all the physical evidence supported Wilson and that several of the witness statements supporting Brown were either unsupported by physical evidence or made up out of whole cloth it would have been pretty damned hard to get a conviction on anything.

I'm looking through the whole transcript now to find the specifics but last night I heard that blood evidence on the street pretty much proved that Brown had turned and run at Wilson. If that's the case then that pretty much locks down Wilson's version as fact. There was absolutely nothing unfair that the state did in this process. The only unfair thing I've seen so far is that Ferguson got wrecked and any good people that live there will never get the stain of stupid off themselves.

Witness #40 Showed that and that Dorian was involved in the assault.
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370734-witness-40-journal-entry.html

Page two.
witness-10.jpg
 
No actual witness, that would be correct. There were a couple who stepped forward as witnesses that weren't even there or were shown to be lying through their teeth (Johnson who all the actual witnesses say was lying). It's a conclusion based upon the evidence which you seem to want to ignore.

There was probable cause based on the unbelievability of Wilson's statement alone. It doesn't read true.
 
Actually, no one seems to care what the officer had to say at all, although as the accused, his testimony should be taken with a grain of salt as the prosecutor basically said in his presentation last night. However, the physical evidence and the testimony that was consistent with the physical evidence and with each other.... was considered.

What we are hearing in this thread, and on the news today, is that some people don't trust the system that we have and would prefer to just use a lynch mob form of "justice."

The news media and "group think" had come to their own conclusions - minus all the evidence. I'm watching a video of Al Sharpton talking about "justice" as if justice had not occurred. He at least is asking people to stop burning things down.

As I watched this last night, I kept hearing a lot of people (including Sharpton and other Black Leaders) talking about how the prosecutor and the Grand Jury made mistakes. How the system was, and is flawed. How the police should not have used tear gas, even in the face of gun fire, rioting, looting and arson.

I keep hearing that the black community has lost confidence in the justice system. Maybe they have some good and reasonable reasons to feel so. But... the reason they are giving today is that as long as the system doesn't come to a conclusion that they agree with, that it is flawed. That is not a legitimate reason.


That's the long and short of it. They--the trouble makers and the race hustlers--want the systemchanged so that they don't have to take responsibility for their actions.
 
There was probable cause based on the unbelievability of Wilson's statement alone. It doesn't read true.

The physical evidence supports Wilson's version.
 
There was probable cause based on the unbelievability of Wilson's statement alone. It doesn't read true.

The Grand Jury said differently and in this country the Grand Jury determines an indictment. Seems like with almost everything your opinion matters more than the rule of law and the procedures established to administer law in this country. Wonder what it is about liberalism that creates people like you?
 
There was probable cause based on the unbelievability of Wilson's statement alone. It doesn't read true.

You've already shown the willingness to ignore all the evidence. You don't believe Wilson's statement because you don't want to and for that reason alone. There is nothing behind it but self-conforming fluff and conjecture.
 
then explain to me why there was no tissue under brown's nails that would match wilson's testimony
but a singular instance of probable cause, necessitating a trial

What are you even talking about?
 
Lets just put it this way. Same exact circumstances but the cop was shot and killed. Brown would have been indicted in 5 minutes.



Why would a cop, rob a store, walk down the middle of the street, then charge a man with a gun?
 
Lets just put it this way. Same exact circumstances but the cop was shot and killed. Brown would have been indicted in 5 minutes.

Especially when the cop get shot with his own gun and the suspects prints are all over the gun. :lamo
 
I'm bored as hell with these protestors. The public with the help of the media are skeptical to the point of the absurd due to extenuating circumstances which while correlated aren't directly related. Thanks to the word "Racism" this now has become a case where the burden of proof for the officer to overcome for exoneration is impossible to obtain.

I am disturbed when in our society we have a Press who state boldly and without apology that perhaps there should be an indictment for nothing other than appeasement's sake.

Are you Fing kidding me?

The bottom line is that this punk attacked a police officer and the officer was in fear enough for his life that he had to put the punk down.

Why is the cynicism so high? Why is it this police officer with a sterling record just making things up to save his sorry ass? Because the word "Racism" was thrown into the equation.

Is there any proof that this cop was racist?

Is there any proof that this shooting was racially motivated?

No.

So what this is is a community which thinks that beating a cop is acceptable and that the cop should limit his ability to defend himself. Because the cop was white and the perp was black.

And you've actually got idiots promoting this.

Unbe-friggin-leavable...
 
Re: Ferguson LIVE announcement video feed links here [W:60]

I don't think it matters if the person lived 6 miles away or 600. They came to someone else's neighborhood and destroyed it. Then went back to their own neighborhoods where their Convenient store, McDonald's, pharmacy, etc. were still standing , not inconvenienced in the slightest.

Your argument would hold true for anybody living on one side of Ferguson and traveling to the other side just to participate in the demonstrations/violence. The McD's on his side of town is still good just as the Pharmacy is etc...

So no. As already pointed local is still local and while specifically not Ferguson, their concerns are basically the same.
 
very flawed gj proceedings
that is the point
That is a flawed point as they weren't flawed.
And the information presented was not able to be cross examined by Wilson. Which is why you complaining about no cross examination is ridiculous.
It was Wilson in this instance that was not allowed to cross examine the witnesses.
 
That they lied, or he isn't bringing perjury charges?
Honestly?
You didn't see what I quoted only had to do with the claim of not charging?
Wow!
 
because the evidence was presented in a very one-sided manner
the presentation was made to focus on that which exculpated wilson and away from the evidence which might convict him
You do not know that.
And if they presented everything to the Jurors your claim is absurd.
 
Back
Top Bottom