• 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]

It actually is. That is how MANY jury trials are determined...by jurors listening to both sides of the story and determining who is credible. The grand jury didn't understand their role in the process ....either that or they simply chose to let the thug walk because he carries a badge.
 
Excon said:
Honestly?
You didn't see what I quoted only had to do with the claim of not charging?
Wow!
Click to expand...

Be more specific next time. Your question could have gone both eays.

I don't know that it's definitive, but I can't see it happening.
 
It's good to know that the GJ upheld justice.

That's 2-0 for justice and the rule of law.
 
disneydude said:
It actually is. That is how MANY jury trials are determined...by jurors listening to both sides of the story and determining who is credible. The grand jury didn't understand their role in the process ....either that or they simply chose to let the thug walk because he carries a badge.
Click to expand...

The grand jury listened to both sides of the story.
 
disneydude said:
It actually is. That is how MANY jury trials are determined...by jurors listening to both sides of the story and determining who is credible. The grand jury didn't understand their role in the process ....either that or they simply chose to let the thug walk because he carries a badge.
Click to expand...

Your opinion noted and that is what you always base your beliefs on, personal opinion. You didn't listen to the endless hours of testimony and made your decision on your own biases. Seems to be a problem with liberals these days, opinions trump actual facts and legal procedures.
 
justabubba said:
the grand jury did their job
they heard the evidence and rendered an opinion
they could not control that they were manipulated by a one-sided presentation
it is that flawed prosecutorial presentation that is the basis for the grand jury outcome
if you want peace, work for justice
it didn't happen here
Click to expand...

I like the phrase, if you want peace, work for justice. How was justice not served? A young man who assaulted a police officer was shot. That's not earth shattering news and I'm sure it happens frequently. The young man who was shot was much larger than the officer and the officer was concerned for his safety. The shooting was justified, the grand jury who had heard all the evidence, even more than strangers on a message board, determined that the officer acted lawfully. It's too bad the young man died but it appears he caused it. Justice was served.
 
justabubba said:
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
Click to expand...
Wtf?

What witnesses think is an unreasonable use of force is irrelevant as to whether it really is or isn't.
And their belief does not establish probable cause.
 
disneydude said:
It actually is. That is how MANY jury trials are determined...by jurors listening to both sides of the story and determining who is credible. The grand jury didn't understand their role in the process ....either that or they simply chose to let the thug walk because he carries a badge.
Click to expand...

Or they listened to everything and determined there was no probable cause. Which is also how many cases are decided.

From what I have heard, it sounds like the GJ took the job seriously, wanted to ensure they had all evidence before making a decision and (even witnesses that supported Michael Brown indicated) were not biased one way or the other while asking good questions.
 
apdst said:
Be more specific next time. Your question could have gone both eays.
Click to expand...
No it actually couldn't have. And it was specific.

apdst said:
I don't know that it's definitive, but I can't see it happening.
Click to expand...
Thank you, but I think it was already answered in the affirmative by tres.
 
JoeTrumps said:
In order to ACTUALLY believe that justice was NOT served here...you would have to believe a conspiracy theory so incredible it would make the 9/11 conspiracies look like small potatoes. Think about all the twists and turns you have to go through to believe such nonsense. OTHER AFRICAN AMERICANS -including one with a handwritten letter- described the event the SAME WAY THE OFFICER DID. the witnesses who's stories DIDN'T match up with the officer ALSO didn't match with the DNA and physical evidence at the scene(by the way, those people should be thrown in jail for perjury_).
Click to expand...

Greetings, Joe Trumps. :2wave:

1) Three separate autopsies ordered by Holder - why? It appears he was hoping for something that wasn't found. 2) "Witnesses' stories changed when they were found to be untrue? Isn't that perjury? 3) There were three blacks on the Grand Jury - does the outcome have to be unanimous, or simply a majority, since their only role is to determine if a case has enough merit to go to trial? Other than more destruction, what's next?

4) Why were businesses looted and burned - what did they have to do with this case? They and their employees now have no jobs, and it was black-owned businesses that were targeted by other blacks. Who thought that was a good idea? 5) Police cars burned? Taxpayers paid for those - who pays for new ones? This is a nightmare!
 
Re: Ferguson LIVE announcement video feed links here

shrubnose said:
And it's just as easy for other critics to claim that he did need to use the force that he did.

If we weren't there at the time none of us (Including me!) really know what happened and what the results should be.

I will say that this won't be over for Officer Wilson anytime soon.
Click to expand...

This is true, but the benefit of the doubt always lies with the defendant in such matters and especially so if the defendant is a police officer. And you're right about things not being over for Wilson - the feds are still nosing around, but there's no apparent evidence that Wilson did anything justifying federal charges - and the civil courts will get their crack, but more likely the police department, city and state will be the primary defendants there.
 
disneydude said:
There was probable cause based on the unbelievability of Wilson's statement alone. It doesn't read true.
Click to expand...

And you are wrong because it does.
 
disneydude said:
It actually is. That is how MANY jury trials are determined...by jurors listening to both sides of the story and determining who is credible. The grand jury didn't understand their role in the process ....either that or they simply chose to let the thug walk because he carries a badge.
Click to expand...

All of which you believe solely because you wish that to be so in direct contradiction of all of the evidence. It is you who does not seem willing to understand the GJ.s place in the process or what their duties entail.
 
Now that all the evidence is all public, it is clear that there was no necessity to even convene a grand jury except for as a show of good will.


Frankly, in the wake of their incitement to arson now becoming public, it now appears that Brown's mother and stepfather should be arrested and / or subject to class action lawsuit due to civil liability.
 
Excon said:
Wtf?

What witnesses think is an unreasonable use of force is irrelevant as to whether it really is or isn't.
And their belief does not establish probable cause.
Click to expand...

actually, witnesses stating they saw brown with his hands in a surrender position prior to being gunned down does seem to offer a perspective of events which necessitates a jury trial to sort out fact from fiction
 
justabubba said:
actually, witnesses stating they saw brown with his hands in a surrender position prior to being gunned down does seem to offer a perspective of events which necessitates a jury trial to sort out fact from fiction
Click to expand...

No, the actual witnesses rebut what the proven liars and posers said.
 
disneydude said:
Lets just put it this way. Same exact circumstances but the cop was shot and killed. Brown would have been indicted in 5 minutes.
Click to expand...



You can speculate all you want, but lets be real here, 91% of all black people shot and killed, were done so by other black people. The real threat is within, not outside of the black community.


I for one am a staunch opponent to militarized police, and can state undoubtedly ferguson police response sucked, but this officer shot to defend himself according to the evidence we have.
 
Re: Ferguson LIVE announcement video feed links here

clownboy said:
Interesting, the panel on BET is mono colored as well. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Nice admission that fox is to white people (Certain white people) what "Black Entertainment TV" is to black people. I agree.
 
JayDubya said:
Now that all the evidence is all public, it is clear that there was no necessity to even convene a grand jury except for as a show of good will.


Frankly, in the wake of their incitement to arson now becoming public, it now appears that Brown's mother and stepfather should be arrested and / or subject to class action lawsuit due to civil liability.
Click to expand...

I would not go that far, however, Brown's stepfather deserves public condemnation rather than mere dismissal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom