• 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]

Buck Ewer said:
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.
Click to expand...
Holy ****. Wrong.

I did not say at any time that that tweet was tainted by his talking to anyone.
If you think that, that is your failure to understand what you read. Which is now typical for you.
 
Buck Ewer said:
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.
Click to expand...

But..but..there were all those people around from the neighborhood, and there was this crazy rumor spreading like wildfire that Brown was shot trying to surrender..well yes, I suppose that some of those neighborhood people who were the first ones there may have also actually witnessed some or all of what happened and that's why that version of the story was spreading, but much more likely is that Johnson was able to disseminate his evil lies and taint the entire community immediately after it happened and now all eyewitness accounts are tainted except for the guy you can't actually hear but can assume that he said that Wilson is innocent.
 
Excon said:
Holy ****. Wrong.

I did not say at any time that that tweet was tainted by his talking to anyone.
If you think that, that is your failure to understand what you read. Which is now typical for you.
Click to expand...

No, you didn't. What you did was accuse him of being either a, a bold faced liar with an agenda, or b, someone who has such a poor memory that literally within an hour he could completely forget that he saw Brown running full speed at Wilson over 30 feet in favor of someone else's story that he was shot while standing there.

You have zero evidence to support either accusation.
 
JC_CT said:
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.
Click to expand...
And again. I thanked him for providing a link to what has been reported elsewhere. So either it is accurate or it is one copying the other. Do you know?
If it is as reported, then he did not see it all. Or do you not understand that?
And if he did not see it all, he is likely filling in the blanks.
 
Excon said:
And again. I thanked him for providing a link to what has been reported elsewhere. So either it is accurate or it is one copying the other. Do you know?
If it is as reported, then he did not see it all. Or do you not understand that?
And if he did not see it all, he is likely filling in the blanks.
Click to expand...
Actually, I read his entire twitter feed, on twitter, days ago.
 
JC_CT said:
No, you didn't. What you did was accuse him of being either a, a bold faced liar with an agenda, or b, someone who has such a poor memory that literally within an hour he could completely forget that he saw Brown running full speed at Wilson over 30 feet in favor of someone else's story that he was shot while standing there.
Click to expand...
Wrong.

And 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?​


JC_CT said:
You have zero evidence to support either accusation.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
How the **** do you think he knew Brown stole the cigars if he had not been exposed to others?
Of course he had been talking to others.
So can your bs and learn what the heck we are talking about.
 
Last edited:
Excon said:
:doh
The witness account that he was approaching the Officer has already been provided.
Click to expand...

We know he was at first, we don't know that he continued to after the first volley of shots. If we knew, why would you say it was "likely?"
 
rocket88 said:
We know he was at first, we don't know that he continued to after the first volley of shots. If we knew, why would you say it was "likely?"
Click to expand...
:doh
You are simply wrong because you are not paying attention to what is known.

Let me try to simplify this for you.
The witness already said he was approaching the Officer and he thought the Officer was missing.
In what direction was Brown found laying on the ground? Towards the Officer, or away from the Officer?
 
Excon said:
Wrong.

And 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?​


Wrong.
How the **** do you think he knew Brown stole the cigars if he had not been exposed to others?
Of course he had been outside and talking to others.
So can your bs and learn what the heck we are talking about.
Click to expand...

First of all, the fact that he was exposed or talked to others doesn't even remotely address what I said about your accusations being baseless. Second, he didn't tweet about the cigarellos until 3:27, which is after he tweeted everything else that is relevant, but again, who cares. It is irrelevant, unless you think he is a bold faced liar with an agenda or that you think he could confuse running at full speed over 30 feet with turned around and getting hit with a barrage of shots over the course of an hour.

So the only thing you have that is even remotely arguable is that Brown wasn't hit with any bullets from the back, but when you take into consideration that the police said that Wilson fired at them while they were running away and the fact that the Dr. Baden did not rule out that one of the wounds could have been shots from the back and the fact that just because a witness heard gunshots being fired while someone had their back turned and erroneously concluded that those shots were on target does not mean they are a liar, then I would have to say that you really don't have anything remotely arguable other than your apparent belief that when you say something it makes it true.
 
Last edited:
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Buck Ewer said:
The bullet entered the "very top of his head" and "lodged in the front portion of his brain" according to the autopsy.
Brown was well over six feet tall.
The geometry isn't all that controversial.
Click to expand...

I have somehow missed the detail about the trajectory; I though they had only released the placement of the wounds. Do you have a link for that?

If this is correct, unless Darren Wilson is 8 feet tall or taller, it would appear almost certain that the fatal shot would have been fired when Brown was face down on the ground. The trajectory of the other bullet to enter his head suggests that either Brown was charging in an almost fully-bent-over position, or was kneeling when shot from above. If the above trajectory is correct, it looks like probably the latter.
 
tres borrachos said:
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.
Click to expand...

It's a little like watching old episodes of Perry Mason or The Defenders isn't it?:wink:
 
JC_CT said:
First of all, the fact that he was exposed or talked to others doesn't even remotely address what I said about your accusations being baseless.
Click to expand...
You have no baseless accusation by me. So try again.


JC_CT said:
Second, he didn't tweet about the cigarellos until 3:27, which is after he tweeted everything else that is relevant, but again, who cares. It is irrelevant, unless you think he is a bold faced liar with an agenda or that you think he could confuse running at full speed over 30 feet with turned around and getting hit with a barrage of shots.
Click to expand...
:doh He answered in reply to a question. You have no idea when he found that out.
Secondly, back to what is reported. If it is as reported, he did not see it all. He had to invest time to see what was going on.

Nor have you addressed his willingness to lie. Or have you forgot he tweeted that too?


JC_CT said:
So the only thing you have that is even remotely arguable is that Brown wasn't hit with any bullets from the back,
Click to expand...
:lamo
What I have is a known untruth as told by a supposed witness.


JC_CT said:
but when you take into consideration that the police said that Wilson fired at them while they were running away
Click to expand...
You haven't provided the link to this. And if the report exists, you are not relaying it accurately at this time, as I believe you earlier indicated it is an anonymously confirmed report.
So under those condition we must accept the Officer's hearsay account, and the supposedly 12 accounts that back it up, because those were also anomalously confirmed by multiple Official sources as being accurate.


JC_CT said:
and the fact that the Dr. Baden did not rule out that one of the wounds could have been shots from the back
Click to expand...
:doh
Not a fact.
Fact - Dr.Baden said all the shots were from the front.
Showing that you too do not understand what has been said.


JC_CT said:
and the fact that just because a witness heard gunshots being fired while someone had their back turned and erroneously concluded that those shots were on target does not mean they are liars and that their entire testimony is scrapped, then I would have to say that you really don't have anything remotely arguable other than your apparent belief that when you say something it makes it true.
Click to expand...
Not! And frankly all you are doing is whining.
If they are making erroneous conclusions or deliberately lying their account is not trustworthy. Period. And yes it is scraped unless what they say is verifiable from another untainted account.
But what you do not do is assemble tainted accounts and say, see they all match. That has no weight and is just silly.
 
Last edited:
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

JC_CT said:
"The eye witness"? There are numerous eye witnesses. The fact that they saw/heard shots being fired with Brown's back turned and mistakenly concluded that he was hit does not discredit their accounts. It's a perfectly natural conclusion to go from "shots fired at someone" to "someone was shot."

Has anyone mentioned the fact that Dorian Johnson's account that Brown "was struck in the chest or upper region [by the first shot in the car] because I saw blood splatter down his side, his right area" is completely consistent with a number of the wounds shown on the autopsy sketch? Or does the fact that Johnson had committed a petty theft a few years ago and gave police a false age and slightly different first name mean that we throw out his entire testimony, in spite of evidence that supports it?
Click to expand...

Nice way to spin.

Without the exact statements from the witness its speculation on what they are really trying to convey.

Your statement of "It's a perfectly natural conclusion to go from "shots fired at someone" to "someone was shot.". only improves my statement that witness statements need to be supported by other evidence. With what has been released the "shot in the back" statement does not hold up.

I for one am not throwing out anything. I have stated one should wait till the investigation is done. ALL of the evidence needs to be looked at to determine what happened.

So many times some rush to judgement. Some even try to play the race card (white cop / black teenager).

It was a tragic event. Hopefully the investigation will be done that the results are not questioned. But they will be, no matter the outcome.:mrgreen:
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

ashurbanipal said:
I have somehow missed the detail about the trajectory; I though they had only released the placement of the wounds. Do you have a link for that?

If this is correct, unless Darren Wilson is 8 feet tall or taller, it would appear almost certain that the fatal shot would have been fired when Brown was face down on the ground. The trajectory of the other bullet to enter his head suggests that either Brown was charging in an almost fully-bent-over position, or was kneeling when shot from above. If the above trajectory is correct, it looks like probably the latter.
Click to expand...
See the video near the end of the conference from 32:00 on.


Note Parcells gesture indicating the angle of trajectory.
 
Last edited:
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Excon ... I noticed you neglected to address this post of mine about the anatomy of the arm and the autopsy diagram.
I would be interested in what you may have to say about it.
I will re-post it for convenience;


BTW I thought of something from anatomy classes I took many years ago...
When a pathologist or any anatomist says "front" they are usually referring to the "anterior" or front view as in the anatomical chart they use, with the hands open, thumbs out and the palms facing in the same direction as the face. As opposed to the posterior chart showing the back view of the same un-natural gesture.
Well guess what...People don't walk with their hands facing that way. The normal position for the hand in a walk is with the thumbs at the hips and the palms facing back. The forearms and upper arms also face back when standing or in a normal gait.
The figure in the chart has it's arms rotated 180 degrees at the shoulder from a normal relaxed position with the thumbs pointed away from the hips.
When Baden described all the shots as coming from the front he was referring to the front, (anterior) view of the anatomical chart and not necessarily to the animated orientation of a living, walking subject.
For the graze wounds on Browns fore arm, upper arm and thumb palm to be hit from the front Brown would have to assume the un-natural 180 degree arm rotation of the anatomical chart... Or else, a hands up / surrender posture.
Stand in front of a mirror and check it out.
Or look at this:
images (4).jpgimages (5).jpg
Walking man front view..............Autopsy chart front and rear view[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

mike2810 said:
Nice way to spin.

Without the exact statements from the witness its speculation on what they are really trying to convey.

Your statement of "It's a perfectly natural conclusion to go from "shots fired at someone" to "someone was shot.". only improves my statement that witness statements need to be supported by other evidence. With what has been released the "shot in the back" statement does not hold up.

I for one am not throwing out anything. I have stated one should wait till the investigation is done. ALL of the evidence needs to be looked at to determine what happened.

So many times some rush to judgement. Some even try to play the race card (white cop / black teenager).

It was a tragic event. Hopefully the investigation will be done that the results are not questioned. But they will be, no matter the outcome.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I suppose you could consider it spin to assume that five different witnesses, who have given accounts that have a degree of inconsistency within the details (as expected with any eyewitness account) but are unanimous that Brown did not charge at Wilson, are telling the truth until proven otherwise instead of assuming that they are lying until proven otherwise.

Other than that, I agree with everything you say. This is a court of public opinion, not a court of law, and nobody (I hope) is denying that Wilson should get his day in court and that all of the available evidence (of which I am sure that much, much more exists than has been made public) should be considered.
 
Re: Attorney: New audio reveals pause in gunfire when Michael Brown was shot

Buck Ewer said:
Excon ... I noticed you neglected to address this post of mine about the anatomy of the arm and the autopsy diagram.
I would be interested in what you may have to say about it.
I will re-post it for convenience;


BTW I thought of something from anatomy classes I took many years ago...
When a pathologist or any anatomist says "front" they are usually referring to the "anterior" or front view as in the anatomical chart they use, with the hands open, thumbs out and the palms facing in the same direction as the face. As opposed to the posterior chart showing the back view of the same un-natural gesture.
Well guess what...People don't walk with their hands facing that way. The normal position for the hand in a walk is with the thumbs at the hips and the palms facing back. The forearms and upper arms also face back when standing or in a normal gait.
The figure in the chart has it's arms rotated 180 degrees at the shoulder from a normal relaxed position with the thumbs pointed away from the hips.
When Baden described all the shots as coming from the front he was referring to the front, (anterior) view of the anatomical chart and not necessarily to the animated orientation of a living, walking subject.
For the graze wounds on Browns fore arm, upper arm and thumb palm to be hit from the front Brown would have to assume the un-natural 180 degree arm rotation of the anatomical chart... Or else, a hands up / surrender posture.
Stand in front of a mirror and check it out.
Or look at this:
View attachment 67172118
Click to expand...
 
Excon said:
:doh He answered in reply to a question. You have no idea when he found that out.
Secondly, back to what is reported. If it is as reported, he did not see it all. He had to invest time to see what was going on.

Nor have you addressed his willingness to lie. Or have you forgot he tweeted that too?

:lamo
What I have is a known untruth as told by a supposed witness.
Click to expand...

I don't think Freeman lied, I think he was mistaken about a detail that would be very difficult for someone at a distance to know with any accuracy, unlike the part that matters most, which is what happened when Brown turned around.

However, we don't know if it was an "untruth" or an honest mistake of fact. I will take the position that he is telling the truth of what he thinks he saw, until evidence strongly suggests otherwise. You can take the opposite position, and while I think it's absurd, I can't argue with it because we don't know. I can certainly argue your assertion that you know for sure that he was tainted and lied and didn't just make an honest mistake.

Everyone is a supposed witness, since we have no video of anyone watching what happened. He tweeted out that he saw it happen, within a minute or two of the time it happened. The entirety of the tweets he made that day do suggest that he did not see the altercation at the police vehicle, and he never claims to have seen that part. The author of the article you quoted was most certainly not trying to claim that Freeman didn't see the shots that ultimately ended his life.



Excon said:
You haven't provided the link to this. And if the report exists, you are not relaying it accurately at this time, as I believe you earlier indicated it is an anonymously confirmed report.
So under those condition we must accept the Officer's hearsay account, and the supposedly 12 accounts that back it up, because those were also anomalously confirmed by multiple Official sources as being accurate.
Click to expand...

Your assertion that I have not provided a link to this is 100% false. Furthermore, you are trying to compare a single reporter from a local news outlet that has been on FMLA for six months and was tweeting personally, who later tweeted that her prior tweets did not meet the standards for publication, with The New York Times, the third-largest newspaper in the country and the winner of 112 Pulitzer Prizes. And might I remind you that you have nobody from the police department stating on the record that Wilson ever said that Brown charged him, at least not that I have seen. Provide links if there is someone with authority involved in the investigation that is on the record saying that Brown charged Wilson, and I will retract this.

JC_CT said:
Sure, when we ignore the fact that it fits perfectly with the five eyewitnesses and, as reported by the New York Times nine days ago with no denial whatsoever from local law enforcement or anyone involved with the investigation, WHAT LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS SAID HAPPENED, which is that shots were fired as the two men were running away from Wilson (and ignore the fact we will, because we already determined they were liars because no shots entered Brown's body from the back and therefore it can be deduced with certainty that no shots were fired at Brown's back, and furthermore we can then deduce that all the witnesses, and I suppose the local law enforcement officials now too, must be deemed to be liars)...

then it is the next most logical scenario.

Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/u...er-as-holder-schedules-visit.html?ref=us&_r=1
Click to expand...



Excon said:
:doh
Not a fact.
Fact - Dr.Baden said all the shots were from the front.
Showing that you too do not understand what has been said.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that Dr. Baden didn't say that the arm graze could have been from a shot from behind, that is my mistake. Parcells said it with Dr. Baden standing at his side. It does seem likely that all of the bullets that hit Brown could have been fired from the front though. But, as I have said repeatedly, I will not throw out five different eyewitness testimonies because they mistakenly believed that the shots fired from behind hit Brown instead of missing him, and neither will the grand jury and neither would a trial jury if it gets there.



Excon said:
Not! And frankly all you are doing is whining.
Click to expand...

Ok.



Excon said:
If they are making erroneous conclusions or deliberately lying their account is not trustworthy. Period. And yes it is scraped unless what they say is verifiable from another untainted account.
But what you do not do is assemble tainted accounts and say, see they all match. That has no weight and is just silly.
Click to expand...

Links?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom