• 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!

ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209:785]

re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

Do you think this person has reason to lie? He doesn't know he's being recorded. He's telling his version of events without any coaching and to random people on the street. Absolutely no reason to lie.
And if you were him, would you come forward with a story that incriminates Brown and testify? Especially after threats written in graffiti, like, say, "Snitches get stitches"?

You have unfairly and illegally edited my quote to make it sound like I am saying that the man in the recording fabricated his story...
Not nice.
Here is the accurate quote;
"Witness" described Brown as coming towards the police. Never can he be heard to say running towards the police. Never can he be heard to say running towards the police with his head down.
That is a fabrication presented by those who are trying to explain how some one can be shot into the top of their head from ten yards away from the front...
BTW ...What is this "witnesses" name?
Do you believe he is prepared to testify?
The "fabrication" refers to those who WOULD say that he ran head down towards Wilson... Not what that witness said.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

A police report on the death of Michael Brown is missing key information and violates Missouri open records laws, an ACLU attorney told Yahoo news on Friday.

Read the article here: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael Brown's death violates law


Eventually all of the facts will come out because the ACLU will insist on that.

But the question right now is: what are the Ferguson police trying to hide?

Allow me to take a wild guess, that the assassin wrongfully fired his piece six times at Brown while Brown was trying to surrender, and that the pig in question has an anger management problems?
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

Text over audio is an old trick employed to get people to think they heard something that they didn't.
At first such a ploy seems like a courtesy to help the listener to understand hard to hear passages.
The person at the source of the recording is obviously trying to make the case for Wilson, so I distrust anything that he typed.
"Running" in street vernacular indicates an attempt to get away. Running towards someone would be described as "rushing" not running, just as Excon has, from the football terminology ( rushing the quarterback).
All you are doing is attempting to make excuses to deflect.
That doesn't work.
You are wrong.

The guy said, he was running, then coming towards the police, indicating Brown ran away then turned and came towards him, in a slow walk, not a run.
Wrong. He does not say "then". He doesn't use that word at all.

Two words are there that are not clear. None of those words sounds like "then".
It sounds more like he says "cept for" as in, [except for].
So stop making things up.


This man and no one else ever described Brown as running towards Wilson with his head down.
:doh
That does not have to be describe by anyone else.

Running towards the officer would indicate that your head is bent forward. Period.

And as already pointed out it is in-line with the reported hearsay account.



Besides it makes no sense ...no one would rush with their head facing down when their destination was still over thirty feet away.
Besides nothing. It does make sense especial when considering the hearsay account.


That posture may occur in the last few feet just before impact, but not at over thirty feet away.
:doh T
Thirty-five feet from the vehicle. Not from the Officer.


No one would "rush" the shooter from thirty+ feet away after that shooter had just shot them.
Double d'oh! :doh
Thirty-five feet from the vehicle. Not from the Officer.


The only sensible thing for someone to do in that situation would be to surrender hands up and to lie down, face down to get them to stop shooting.
That is exactly what Brown was trying to do.
1.) You do not know that.
2.) That is not what the evidence says.

The evidence say he was moving towards the officer as the Officer fired. That is not laying down. That is not surrendering.
That is moving towards the Officer.
Stop making things up.


At that point, an out of control raging Wilson vengefully shot the prone, or near prone kid, twice in the head.
The thought that an un-armed teen would run head long, face down towards someone who had already shot them four times from over thirty feet away is absurd fantasy.
Stop making things up.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

Allow me to take a wild guess, that the assassin wrongfully fired his piece six times at Brown while Brown was trying to surrender, and that the pig in question has an anger management problems
?




I don't know all of the facts, but I suspect that most of them will come out at any trials that are held.




I suggest that everyone wait and see what happens.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

I don't know all of the facts, but I suspect that most of them will come out at any trials that are held.




I suggest that everyone wait and see what happens.

This is seemingly taking forever to get basic questions answered. I wonder how the AG is going to spend his weekend in St. Louie?
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

All you are doing is attempting to make excuses to deflect.
That doesn't work.
You are wrong.

Wrong. He does not say "then". He doesn't use that word at all.

Two words are there that are not clear. None of those words sounds like "then".
It sounds more like he says "cept for" as in, [except for].
So stop making things up.


:doh
That does not have to be describe by anyone else.

Running towards the officer would indicate that your head is bent forward. Period.

And as already pointed out it is in-line with the reported hearsay account.



Besides nothing. It does make sense especial when considering the hearsay account.


:doh T
Thirty-five feet from the vehicle. Not from the Officer.


Double d'oh! :doh
Thirty-five feet from the vehicle. Not from the Officer.


1.) You do not know that.
2.) That is not what the evidence says.

The evidence say he was moving towards the officer as the Officer fired. That is not laying down. That is not surrendering.
That is moving towards the Officer.
Stop making things up.


Stop making things up.

The only one making things up is you.
This fantasy scenario of a wounded kid running blindly face down towards the man who had just shot him four times is something out of a zombie movie not real life. It's the only way Wilson could deliver a bullet into the top of Browns head and still be a threat so this all you have.
Then take that improbable scenario and extrapolate it to mean that Wilson's life was in danger because of it becomes even more absurd.
If someone unarmed and wounded was truly running at me with his head down facing the street, not looking where he was going, my instinct would be to step aside not shoot him twice in the head. What threat can someone be if he isn't even looking where he is going?
It is just like when you made up the scenario that McBride was a threat to Wafers life because she had knocked on his locked screen door and he had to open the inside door and shoot her face off to save his life.
When your favorite tool is a hammer everything looks like a nail. When your favorite tool is a gun everything looks like a target.
Wilson was so pissed off that this teen had disrespected him and pushed the car door back at him that he was in a vengeful rage and shot the kid even as he surrendered in the only way he could... Putting up his hands and lying face down in the street.
If Brown were truly running towards Wilson with his head down there would be abrasions on his exposed knees and elbows as the 300 pound kid dropped while at a run... No such marks or abrasions were noted in the autopsy reports. None.... because he wasn't rushing Wilson, he was in the process of lying down, surrendering when he was shot into the top of his head.
Murder.
 
Last edited:
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

The only one making things up is you.
This fantasy scenario of a wounded kid running blindly face down towards the man who had just shot him four times is something out of a zombie movie not real life. It's the only way Wilson could deliver a bullet into the top of Browns head and still be a threat so this all you have.
Then take that improbable scenario and extrapolate it to mean that Wilson's life was in danger because of it becomes even more absurd.
If someone unarmed and wounded was truly running at me with his head down facing the street, not looking where he was going, my instinct would be to step aside not shoot him twice in the head. What threat can someone be if he isn't even looking where he is going?
It is just like when you made up the scenario that McBride was a threat to Wafers life because she had knocked on his locked screen door and he had to open the inside door and shoot her face off to save his life.
When your favorite tool is a hammer everything looks like a nail. When your favorite tool is a gun everything looks like a target.
Wilson was so pissed off that this teen had disrespected him and pushed the car door back at him that he was in a vengeful rage and shot the kid even as he surrendered in the only way he could... Putting up his hands and lying face down in the street.
If Brown were truly running towards Wilson with his head down there would be abrasions on his exposed knees as he dropped while at a run... No such marks or abrasions were noted in the autopsy reports. None.... because he was in the process of lying down when he was shot into the top of his head.
Murder.

You're thinking along the lines of what I was thinking, the cop was in a rage when he decided to off Brown.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

This is seemingly taking forever to get basic questions answered. I wonder how the AG is going to spend his weekend in St. Louie?

The Cardinals are away in Pennsylvania all weekend so a baseball game is out of the question.
Maybe he will go up in the arch... I hear the view is spectacular.
images (13).jpg
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

The only one making things up is you.
Wrong. Tha tis you as shown.


This fantasy scenario of a wounded kid running blindly face down towards the man who had just shot him four times is something out of a zombie movie not real life.
You are doing it again. :doh
He was injured as he was approaching the Officer.



It's the only way Wilson could deliver a bullet into the top of Browns head and still be a threat so this all you have.
There you go again making things up again.
Have you already forgotten that it is quite possible that as he advanced he started failing forward after being hit by the gun fire? That too could account for the way the the bullet traveled.

But what is sure though is your made up scenario of laying down is not at all true given the known evidence.






Then take that improbable scenario and extrapolate it to mean that Wilson's life was in danger because of it becomes even more absurd.
If someone unarmed and wounded was truly running at me with his head down facing the street, not looking where he was going, my instinct would be to step aside not shoot him twice in the head. What threat can someone be if he isn't even looking where he is going?
:doh
Holy ****.
Charging someone in this manner happens all the time.
Just because some idiot does it to a cop, matters not.


It is just like when you made up the scenario that McBride was a threat to Wafers life because she had knocked on his locked screen door and he had to open the inside door and shoot her face off to save his life.
More bs from you than has nothing to do with this topic. Figures.
She was banging trying to get it, so of course you want to call it knocking. It's like you think this person was just standing out side of the door, when in reality she jump up from the side.

He was allowed to investigate and answer his door like that under those circumstances. And under the circumstances that person trying to break in was a threat. You can't change that.
And what we knew at the time was that is was an accidental firing. That was manslaughter. So get over it.


Wilson was so pissed off that this teen had disrespected him and pushed the car door back at him that he was in a vengeful rage and shot the kid even as he surrendered in the only way he could... Putting up his hands and lying face down in the street.
There you go making **** up again. Stuff that the evidence shows doesn't fit.


If Brown were truly running towards Wilson with his head down there would be abrasions on his exposed knees and elbows as the 300 pound kid dropped while at a run... No such marks or abrasions were noted in the autopsy reports. None.... because he was in the process of lying down when he was shot into the top of his head.
There you go making up more ****.
What is even more absurd is that you are making up things when you do not even know what the Official autopsy says.




Wrong.
 
Last edited:
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

You're thinking along the lines of what I was thinking, the cop was in a rage when he decided to off Brown.

Not only had Brown and Johnson not jumped to the sidewalk when ordered but when Wilson opened to door trying to hit them with it Brown pushed it back at him bumping his head. Wilson tried to pull the three-hundred pound kid through the window he was so pissed. Brown was able to pull away and ran.
When Wilson exited his cruiser he had decided that Brown was going to be killed no matter what the kid did at that point.
It was a vengeful, murderous rage.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

Not only had Brown and Johnson not jumped to the sidewalk when ordered but when Wilson opened to door trying to hit them with it Brown pushed it back at him bumping his head. Wilson tried to pull the three-hundred pound kid through the window he was so pissed. Brown was able to pull away and ran.
When Wilson exited his cruiser he had decided that Brown was going to be killed no matter what the kid did at that point.
It was a vengeful, murderous rage.
Still making things up I see. Figures.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

You have unfairly and illegally edited my quote to make it sound like I am saying that the man in the recording fabricated his story...
Not nice.
Here is the accurate quote;

The "fabrication" refers to those who WOULD say that he ran head down towards Wilson... Not what that witness said.

No, I did not. I trimmed your post, I did not edit it. I wanted to address your question where you asked what this witnesses name was. You asked if he was willing to testify.
I pointed out his lack of reason to lie and an explanation why it is unlikely he will testify. Nice try.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

No, I did not. I trimmed your post, I did not edit it. I wanted to address your question where you asked what this witnesses name was. You asked if he was willing to testify.
I pointed out his lack of reason to lie and an explanation why it is unlikely he will testify. Nice try.
You omitted a sentence that changed the apparent meaning of my post. .
That is called content editing and that is unethical underhanded and here at DP .. illegal.
Your attempt to cover up your illegal content edit of my post is only going to get you into more hot water.
 
Last edited:
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

You omitted a sentence that changed the apparent meaning of my post. .
That is called content editing and that is unethical underhanded and here at DP .. illegal.
Your attempt to cover up your illegal content edit of my post is only going to get you into more hot water.

Oh stop you little drama queen, I clearly stated that I was NOT addressing that part. I was addressing your last two questions. Just like all your arguments here, you are making nonexistent connections. I never said you thought he was fabricating. I was pointing out his lack of reason to lie, and the reason if he doesn't testify. Does that make sense, or are you going to completely gloss over this too?
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

This fantasy scenario of a wounded kid running blindly face down towards the man who had just shot him four times is something out of a zombie movie not real life. It's the only way Wilson could deliver a bullet into the top of Browns head and still be a threat so this all you have.
Then take that improbable scenario and extrapolate it to mean that Wilson's life was in danger because of it becomes even more absurd.
If someone unarmed and wounded was truly running at me with his head down facing the street, not looking where he was going, my instinct would be to step aside not shoot him twice in the head. What threat can someone be if he isn't even looking where he is going?
It is just like when you made up the scenario that McBride was a threat to Wafers life because she had knocked on his locked screen door and he had to open the inside door and shoot her face off to save his life.
When your favorite tool is a hammer everything looks like a nail. When your favorite tool is a gun everything looks like a target.
Wilson was so pissed off that this teen had disrespected him and pushed the car door back at him that he was in a vengeful rage and shot the kid even as he surrendered in the only way he could... Putting up his hands and lying face down in the street.
If Brown were truly running towards Wilson with his head down there would be abrasions on his exposed knees and elbows as the 300 pound kid dropped while at a run... No such marks or abrasions were noted in the autopsy reports. None.... because he wasn't rushing Wilson, he was in the process of lying down, surrendering when he was shot into the top of his head.
Murder.
Brown took at least four other bullets in his arm/chest before the two in the head. Regardless of whether he was walking or running towards Wilson, isn't it possible that he started falling after those first four wounds, and since Wilson was likely shooting rapidly, the other two bullets hit near the top of Brown's head simply because he was already falling by then? Why is it necessary for Brown to be moving toward Wilson with his head down the whole time? That doesn't make sense to me.

I think it's a good point that Brown doesn't appear to have any road rash that would suggest he was running, but that doesn't automatically mean he was not a threat to officer Wilson. For all we know Brown was disobeying Wilson's orders to stop approaching and get on the ground, until the shots were fired. Or maybe Brown stopped to surrender and was murdered. I don't think we have enough facts yet to determine which.
 
Last edited:
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

This whole "moving toward Wilson with his head down" argument doesn't make sense to me. Brown took at least four other bullets in his arm/chest before the two in the head. Isn't it possible that he started falling after those first four wounds, and since Wilson was likely shooting rapidly, the other two bullets hit near the top of Brown's head simply because he was already falling by then? Why is it necessary for Brown to be moving toward Wilson with his head down the whole time? That doesn't make sense to me.
It's not necessary. Either is acceptable speculation given what is known.
The evidence says he was moving toward the Officer.
The non-Official autopsy says he was facing the Officer when he was shot.
The person we are arguing with apparently can not accept that.
That is all.


I see you have since edited. Oops! :shrug:


I don't think we have enough facts yet to determine which.
What other possible information do you think is going to change what we have already been informed of?
How are those witnesses on Brown's side going to rehabilitate their fabrications?
 
Last edited:
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

Dorian Johnson's testimony remains credible and compelling.
A prominent New Orleans attorney now represents the eyewitness at the center of the investigation into the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo.

Dorian Johnson, 22, who was with Brown when he was shot to death by a police officer, has hired James Williams and a St. Louis-based partner.

Williams' firm of Gauthier, Houghtaling and Williams has a St. Louis office, where it operates as Bosley Williams. Freeman Bosley Jr., William's partner in the Johnson case, was St. Louis' first black mayor.

Williams is in St. Louis, and made the media circuit Friday (Aug. 22) to redirect attention from his client and toward the officer who shot Brown, Darren Wilson.

Johnson said in interviews immediately after the shooting that Wilson shot Brown as he was running away.

Skeptics have assailed Johnson's credibility, pointing to a prior arrest for lying to officers. They also note that a recently released autopsy shows that Wilson's bullets struck Brown from the front, which they say contradicts Johnson's story.

Williams defended Johnson's credibility.

There's a reason why someone's prior criminal history is not usually admissible in court, he said; it's usually irrelevant to the veracity of their testimony.

Credibility should be established in the context of other evidence, Williams said, and, in this case, the evidence aligns with Johnson's version of events.

Johnson's story, as told by Williams:

Johnson and Brown were walking on a neighborhood street when Wilson approached them from the front in a squad car. As he did so, he shouted for them to "Get the 'ef' on the sidewalk."

They responded that they were almost to their destination. Wilson switched into reverse and swung back in front of them to cut them off, stopping so close that his door smacked Brown when Wilson tried to open it.


Attorney James Williams

Brown took exception and slammed the door shut, prompting Wilson to grab Brown by the neck. There was a scuffle. Wilson fired a shot from inside the squad car and the two took off.

Johnson ducked behind a car, and watched as Brown kept running by him. Wilson kept firing.

That's when Brown shouted that he was giving himself up and turned to face the officer, who continued to shoot. Brown was struck, sunk toward the ground, and was struck again as Wilson continued to fire.

Williams said that version is consistent with other witnesses who have also said they saw Brown running away.

"I've spoken with a lot of witnesses, and this young man is telling the truth," Williams said. "He has such vivid details, seeing his friend's eyes blink with every bullet that hit him."

Johnson has been interviewed by the FBI, Williams said, and will probably be called to testify before a grand jury.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

Dorian Johnson's testimony remains credible and compelling.
iLOL
:doh
No he isn't credible or compelling to anybody who is rational.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

But the question right now is: what are the Ferguson police trying to hide?

Poor pistol marksmanship training of it's officers. :lol:

Now here on the "left Coast" we also see the "left" and race baiters complaining, bitching, yelling that there's no transparency of the LAPD and even death threats being made over the shooting of an unarmed black.

>" The California Supreme Court recently ruled that police departments must generally provide the names of officers involved in shootings, unless they can demonstrate there are credible threats to their safety.

LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith said Tuesday that the department was continuing its "threat assessment" in the Ford case. In general, he said, investigators will look at "any kind of threats against the officer," including any made via social media.

Smith said he did not know whether any threats had been made against the officers who shot Ford, or how long the department's inquiry would take. The officers involved in the shooting were assigned to home as of Tuesday, he said.

Police have also placed a security hold on Ford's autopsy so that coroner's officials will not publicly release information about the procedure. Beck defended that decision Tuesday, saying that details of Ford's wounds could "taint" potential witness statements..."<

LAPD chief faces tense crowd over shooting of mentally ill man - LA Times
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

This thread is hilarious... everyone seems to think they know all the evidence in this case from what they read or hear from the media...:lamo too funny :lamo
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

It's not necessary. Either is acceptable speculation given what is known.
The evidence says he was moving toward the Officer.
The non-Official autopsy says he was facing the Officer when he was shot.
The person we are arguing with apparently can not accept that.
That is all.

There is evidence that Brown was moving towards Wilson. I have always accepted that. . There is no evidence that he was rushing at Wilson and that is the only scenario that claims that Brown could have been a threat.
The autopsy says he was facing the officer when he was HIT by most of the shots. One of the wounds that grazed his arm could have been inflicted either facing away or towards Wilson. That fact was reported in Baden's press conference about the autopsy.
There are six confirmed shots that hit Wilson. Witness accounts say there could have been as many as ten shots fired and we know at least one hit a house across the street. Wilson could have been shooting and missing with most shots as the kid ran away.
Johnson's account is consistent with all the evidence that Wilson was shooting and Brown was hit while running away from Wilson and that when Brown surrendered Wilson kept shooting.
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

Wilson was so pissed off that this teen had disrespected him and pushed the car door back at him that he was in a vengeful rage and shot the kid even as he surrendered in the only way he could... Putting up his hands and lying face down in the street.

Well said.

In fairness though, it is very, very possible that Brown was a willing participant in a macho contest with the police officer that then escalated very quickly. In contrast to CNN's communiques of the gentle giant, Brown's actions dont potray him as one. Gentle Giants dont:

-Shove store clerks aside to steal mechandise (and yes, its Brown in the video, his attorney and relatives have confirmed it)
-pose with mouthfuls of money while holding a pistol
-sing a song whose main theme appears to be women swallowing his ejaculate (I guess many people may participate in many sex acts for many reasons, but something tells me the "Gentle Giant" had a dominance complex of his own.)
-Walk down the middle of the street while returning from a theft.

One day, the "Gentle Giant" encountered an Alpha male cop who was used to giving curt orders and having them obeyed instantly. Things escalated. The cop got physically disrespected (humiliated) and as you say, responded in a rage. Police officers, however, are expected to have far more maturity and self control than " Not so Gentle Giants".
 
re: ACLU: Ferguson police report on Michael brown's death violates law [W: 209]

iLOL
:doh
No he isn't credible or compelling to anybody who is rational.

What reason would he have to lie?
Johnson was the only witness to the entire encounter between Wilson and Brown and by far the closest.
His account remains credible and consistent with all other witness accounts that are known.
 
Back
Top Bottom