• 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!

Source: Darren Wilson says Michael Brown kept charging at him

JC_CT said:
You are trying to argue that it is nonsense to think that a citizen of Ferguson, MO might have a deep-rooted mistrust of the police. You aren't in a position to lecture anyone about nonsense.
Click to expand...

No. The speculation I read in your post specifically claimed Brown believed it. A specific person and a declaration as if truth.
 
JC_CT said:
You are trying to argue that it is nonsense to think that a citizen of Ferguson, MO might have a deep-rooted mistrust of the police. You aren't in a position to lecture anyone about nonsense.
Click to expand...
Yeah, if I had just robbed a store I'd have a deep-rooted distrust of a cop who confronted me while I was jaywalking.
 
Brown's attorney said that Brown's Family and the " protesters" WILL NOT be convinced by the autopsy reports and or witness statements that back up Wilsons story.

WTH ??
 
Fenton said:
Brown's attorney said that Brown's Family and the " protesters" WILL NOT be convinced by the autopsy reports and or witness statements that back up Wilsons story.

WTH ??
Click to expand...

Confirmation bias aided by the fact that they are so invested in their biased delusion that it will be extremely stressful and anxiety-inducing to recognize that they have been wrong. At this point, for them, it is simply easier to maintain the delusion than it is to face the truth. Add in the sheer number of people who join them in their delusion, supporting each others' biases, and you have a pretty nasty situation depending on the numbers. Hopefully people will remain calm and let the emotions of the moment pass.
 
mike2810 said:
Or are you "being racists" in separating witness by skin color? If a witness is telling the truth it should not matter what race they are.

Latest I heard today is there are 6? black witnesses that collaborate Wilson's statements.
Report: Several Black Witnesses Largely Back Up Officer's Account Of Michael Brown Shooting


A
Click to expand...

From the article itself:

Many of the witnesses to Brown's death who have come forward have told the same basic story about Brown's final moments, saying that Brown was attempting to surrender and had his hands in the air when the officer fired the fatal shots. But there have been a string of recent leaks of information that backs up Wilson's account of the confrontation.
Click to expand...

Case of selective reading?
 
mike2810 said:
Or are you "being racists" in separating witness by skin color? If a witness is telling the truth it should not matter what race they are.

Latest I heard today is there are 6? black witnesses that collaborate Wilson's statements.
Report: Several Black Witnesses Largely Back Up Officer's Account Of Michael Brown Shooting


A
Click to expand...

Considering that the neighborhood was over 90% black, no I'm not being racist in separating witnesses by skin color. All I'm saying is that practically all of the pro Wilson crowd will say that the any black witness is not credible if they support brown because "blacks support blacks".

Now as for the six black witnesses that are said to support Wilson. Are you suggesting that their credibility is all of a sudden higher than those in support of Brown? Who is to say that these people had problems with Brown? I would like to see them cross examine before passing judgement.

However, I highly doubt this case goes to trial. Thats why I'm not even getting worked up about it.
 
Tettsuo said:
Case of selective reading?
Click to expand...

Ultimately, the Grand Jury will be examining multiple sources of data including the autopsy report, forensic evidence, medical reports, and witness accounts. If the autopsy report, forensic evidence, and medical reports are generally consistent with/supportive of one set of witness accounts, the Grand Jury will have more confidence in that set of witness accounts. The Grand Jury's decision will be evidence-based.
 
justabubba said:
No, his discharge was not for racial bigotry.
Click to expand...
actually, his dismissal from the police force WAS for racial bigotry
the entire force was terminated because of it
Click to expand...
No, as you were already told, this is your bigotry speaking. As his discharge actually was not for your perceived "racial bigotry", but because his position no longer existed.

It is like you do not know what the terms you are using and the ones reported means. :doh

When something is disbanded it no longer exists. Duh!
They formed a new force with new positions. Duh!

And even this "racial bigotry" is made up bs.
Racial tensions is what was reported.
Those tensions could be from anything from falsely perceived injustices to real ones.

So can the bs,. He was not terminated because of, or for, any bigotry.
He was terminated because his job no longer existed.
And as Buck pointed out, he was welcome to apply for a new job that came into existence with the creation of the new force.


justabubba said:
That is your bigotry speaking
Click to expand...
.no. my information tracks news stories such as this one:
Click to expand...
No. That clearly was your racial bigotry in calling it "racial bigotry".
Especially as what you just provided clearly states racial tensions, which does not automatically equate to "racial bigotry", and for all we know, could solely be based on the false perceptions of the community alone.


justabubba said:
His discharge was because his job no longer existed because the Department was disbanded.
Click to expand...
yes, that job continued to exist. only it was filled instead by another LEO who was found not to be tainted by a history of racist behavior
every member of that jennings police department was fired. because of the persistence of racial bigotry they exhibited. including the shooter of the young black man
Click to expand...
Wrong.
You clearly do not know what disband means.
That job no longer existed as that force was disbanded and a new one created.
And as already pointed out to you by buck, he was welcome to apply for a new position within that new force.


justabubba said:
Why it was disbanded was not attributable to him.
Click to expand...
and one must question why a innocent would have been fired for racist actions while serving as a law enforcement officer
Click to expand...
No. Simply nonsense.
It had nothing to do with his actions, and as such, is not a reason to make such absurd queries.


justabubba said:
And he had a clean record at that department.
Click to expand...
now, let's all ponder ...
Click to expand...
There is no reason to ponder anything.
The force was disbanded. It had nothing to do with his actions and he was welcome to apply for a position with the new force.
All you want to do is try to cast ridiculous aspersion upon him.
The crap you are spitting doesn't fly.
 
Evidently, all the witnesses are saying is that there was a struggle in the car. This much as already been established.

Wilson, however, needs alot more than that. He must show that the struggle in the car was severe enough that attempting to use lethal force was justified and he must show that what ever happened outside the car was justified with a lethal force response.

Sure, the Brown, the not so gentle giant could have been a crazed anti authority zealot. He might have attacked Wilson in the car. He could have ignored his own wounds and also could have ignored the fact that Wilson was very willing to us his weapon. He then might have made series of "all or nothing" banzai charges against Wilson- maybe like ISIS combines with Tupac Shakur.

Meanwhile, the federal agents that Leonard Peltier killed (aim shoot out on Pine Ridge), might have been part of a right wing death squad. They might have been trying to murder Peltier and other native americans in the area. Being possible zealots, they might have ignored the fact that they were heavily out numbered and initiated a banzai charge in a car....

Or, maybe both Officer Wilson and Leonar Peltier need to change some maybes,into probablys and definetlies using hard evidence rather than their word alone? I am not comparing Wilson to Peltier. Peltier committed first degree murder. Wilson was acting in the line of duty, but he may well have committed a crime.
 
Tettsuo said:
From the article itself:

Many of the witnesses to Brown's death who have come forward have told the same basic story about Brown's final moments, saying that Brown was attempting to surrender and had his hands in the air when the officer fired the fatal shots. But there have been a string of recent leaks of information that backs up Wilson's account of the confrontation.
Click to expand...

Case of selective reading?
Click to expand...
You realize that a comparison is being made there, right?

The witnesses that have come forward already, for the most part, have not been credible.
So continue reading below.


rcart76 said:
Now as for the six black witnesses that are said to support Wilson. Are you suggesting that their credibility is all of a sudden higher than those in support of Brown? Who is to say that these people had problems with Brown? I would like to see them cross examine before passing judgement.
Click to expand...
"Over a half-dozen black witnesses" is more than six.
But you were asking if they are more credible. Of course they are.
We already know the publicly known accounts which supported Johnson's, and by virtue, Brown, were not credible.
They have been falling apart from the get, from claims being outright false to changing to fit the known forensics.
Of course those accounts, as known, have no credibility.
What is not known is what these folks told investigators or the GJ if they testified.

It was reported that Dorian is in protective custody. It is not reasonable to believe that such PC is from Police, or for telling his publicly known account again. But it is reasonable to believe his PC is from his local community. Which would indicate that he testified to a different account of what happened.
 
Cryptic said:
Wilson, however, needs alot more than that. He must show that the struggle in the car was severe enough that attempting to use lethal force was justified and he must show that what ever happened outside the car was justified with a lethal force response.
Click to expand...
:doh
Struggle confirmed.
Residue found on Brown.​

Wilson's claim that Brown was going for his firearm is credible and nothing more than that really needs to be shown for use to be justified.

Brown was advancing on the Officer.​
That is a known and established threat advancing on an Officer. So again, nothing more than that really needs to be shown for use to be justified.
 
donsutherland1 said:
Ultimately, the Grand Jury will be examining multiple sources of data including the autopsy report, forensic evidence, medical reports, and witness accounts. If the autopsy report, forensic evidence, and medical reports are generally consistent with/supportive of one set of witness accounts, the Grand Jury will have more confidence in that set of witness accounts. The Grand Jury's decision will be evidence-based.
Click to expand...


For purposes of Indictment, the Grand Jury may decide to resolve conflicts in testimony in the light most favorable to the prosecution, in assessing Probable Cause, in handing down an indictment. It is the function of the Trial Court to test the weight of the evidence, in assessing what evidence is beyond a Reasonable Doubt.


"A layman could bring a bill of indictment to the grand jury; if the grand jury found there was sufficient evidence for a trial, that the act was a crime under law, and that the court had jurisdiction, it would return the indictment to the complainant. The grand jury would then appoint the complaining party to exercise the authority of an attorney general, that is, one having a general power of attorney to represent the state in the case. The grand jury served to screen out incompetent or malicious prosecutions.[15] The advent of official public prosecutors in the later decades of the 19th century largely displaced private prosecutions."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_jury


"While all states have provisions in their laws that allow for grand juries, roughly half of the states don't use them. Courts often use preliminary hearings prior to criminal trials, instead of grand juries, which are adversarial in nature. As with grand juries, preliminary hearings are meant to determine whether there is enough evidence, or probable cause, to indict a criminal suspect.


Unlike a grand jury, a preliminary hearing is usually open to the public and involves lawyers and a judge (not so with grand juries, other than the prosecutor). Sometimes, a preliminary hearing proceeds a grand jury. One of the biggest differences between the two is the requirement that a defendant request a preliminary hearing, although the court may decline a request. - See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/how-does-a-grand-jury-work.html#sthash.u3DAKh0l.dpuf"

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/how-does-a-grand-jury-work.html




//
 
Last edited:
Tettsuo said:
From the article itself:



Case of selective reading?
Click to expand...

and there are those witnesses that support the LEO. "witnesses gave testimony before the grand jury that was "consistent" with Wilson's " account,.." from the article I posted.

Case of selective reading on your part?
 
rcart76 said:
Considering that the neighborhood was over 90% black, no I'm not being racist in separating witnesses by skin color. All I'm saying is that practically all of the pro Wilson crowd will say that the any black witness is not credible if they support brown because "blacks support blacks".

Now as for the six black witnesses that are said to support Wilson. Are you suggesting that their credibility is all of a sudden higher than those in support of Brown? Who is to say that these people had problems with Brown? I would like to see them cross examine before passing judgement.

However, I highly doubt this case goes to trial. Thats why I'm not even getting worked up about it.
Click to expand...

Nope. if you recall I have stated that a witness statement needs to be collaborated with other evidence.

With what evidence that has been released in the press, which witness testimony is more likely being supported?

I also doubt the Grand Jury will recommend charges being filed. Lets hope if that happens the citizens don't riot.
 
mike2810 said:
and there are those witnesses that support the LEO. "witnesses gave testimony before the grand jury that was "consistent" with Wilson's " account,.." from the article I posted.

Case of selective reading on your part?
Click to expand...

Copy it from the article please.
 
Excon said:
You realize that a comparison is being made there, right?

The witnesses that have come forward already, for the most part, have not been credible.
So continue reading below.


"Over a half-dozen black witnesses" is more than six.
But you were asking if they are more credible. Of course they are.
We already know the publicly known accounts which supported Johnson's, and by virtue, Brown, were not credible.
They have been falling apart from the get, from claims being outright false to changing to fit the known forensics.
Of course those accounts, as known, have no credibility.
What is not known is what these folks told investigators or the GJ if they testified.

It was reported that Dorian is in protective custody. It is not reasonable to believe that such PC is from Police, or for telling his publicly known account again. But it is reasonable to believe his PC is from his local community. Which would indicate that he testified to a different account of what happened.
Click to expand...


Your statement is total BS. The medical examiner herself said that she can't give a credible opinion yet because she don't have the evidence in. It is also opinion not fact that the pro brown witnesses are not credvle.


PLEASE STOP MAKING S*** UP !!!!!
 
Tettsuo said:
Copy it from the article please.
Click to expand...

You seem to not understand quotes . I did, you must not have read the source from an ealier post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/michael-brown-shooting_n_6030220.html

"Sources told The Washington Post that seven or eight black witnesses gave testimony before the grand jury that was "consistent" with Wilson's account, but that none have spoken out publicly about what they witnessed because they fear for their safety."
 
Last edited:
mike2810 said:
Nope. if you recall I have stated that a witness statement needs to be collaborated with other evidence.

With what evidence that has been released in the press, which witness testimony is more likely being supported?

I also doubt the Grand Jury will recommend charges being filed. Lets hope if that happens the citizens don't riot.
Click to expand...


This is the only part I agree with. I don't think the citizens will riot. I know the community organizer are already making plans to cool the fire. And lets be honest here, most black wouldn't be surprise if he walks. You can say that we gotten use to it.
 
mike2810 said:
Nope. I quoted the article. Didn't you note the quotations. my earlier post contained the link to the source.

Not going to chase the rabbit. do your own work.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Then you didn't understand the article. Every witness has confirmed there was a struggle between the officer and Brown at the vehicle. Beyond that, NO witness supports Wilson's ENTIRE account of the encounter. Every witness reports that Brown was not a threat when he was killed.

Like I said, selective reading.
 
Tettsuo said:
Then you didn't understand the article. Every witness has confirmed there was a struggle between the officer and Brown at the vehicle. Beyond that, NO witness supports Wilson's ENTIRE account of the encounter. Every witness reports that Brown was not a threat when he was killed.

Like I said, selective reading.
Click to expand...

Like the way you shift discussions. Did I state the statements by the witness supported Wilson 100%?
 
mike2810 said:
Like the way you shift discussions. Did I state the statements by the witness supported Wilson 100%?
Click to expand...

No you did not. I was wrong.

So, what statements do you believe the witnesses support?
 
Tettsuo said:
No you did not. I was wrong.

So, what statements do you believe the witnesses support?
Click to expand...

One witness has come out and said Brown's hands were not up in surrender and he kept coming towards Wilson despite being told to stop - even if that same witness still believes it to be murder not that his opinion on that subject matters..
 
justabubba said:
actually, his dismissal from the police force WAS for racial bigotry
the entire force was terminated because of it...
Click to expand...

This is such bull****...

"The City of Jennings Police Department was disbanded by the city in 2011 due to corruption within the department, including cases of missing money. [7] [8]"

Jennings, Missouri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"(KMOV.com) -- The Jennings, Missouri city council decided to dissovle the police department and hand over operations to the St. Louis county police department.
The council said corruption inside the department led to this. Some cases involve missing money and a slew of internal investigations."

Jennings police department dissolves | KMOV.com St. Louis

Nowhere in either of those two does it talk about being disbanded purely for the force exhibiting racial bias, nor in that matter for specifically Officer Wilson exhibiting such...This is a lie by the left to taint this incident...

Cop Who Killed Michael Brown Formerly Worked for Police Dept. Disbanded for Racism, Corruption | Americans Against the Tea Party
Click to expand...

Are you freakin' kidding me? American's against the Tea Party? :doh

Ah well....who would expect anything more from looking to slander this cop....

yes, that job continued to exist.
Click to expand...

Nope, as with most slanderers, you're wrong again....

"The City of Jennings contracts with the St. Louis County Police Department to provide professional police services to the city."

Jennings, Missouri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

only it was filled instead by another LEO who was found not to be tainted by a history of racist behavior
Click to expand...

Wrong again...Show me proof that Officer Wilson himself was ever fired for racist behavior, or any kind of corruption, not just dismissed when they shut the entire force down to contract with St. Louis County...But I know you won't do that...

every member of that jennings police department was fired. because of the persistence of racial bigotry they exhibited. including the shooter of the young black man
Click to expand...

Ok, So, in your mind, If you work for a company, and the management is charged with corruption, and embezzlement, then you too are corrupt, and a thief, right? Even though all you did was work for them when the management was caught, and the company went under....Talk about Guilt by association....

and one must question why a innocent would have been fired for racist actions while serving as a law enforcement officer
Click to expand...

Because the Job no longer existed. It was contracted out to St. Louis County...And he wasn't "fired for racist actions"...That is a lie by you.

now, let's all ponder what a "clean record" would look like within a police department which was disbanded because its members were found to act in a racist manner towards the black community it was intended to serve
Click to expand...

It would look like Wilson's to those not trying to lie about him.

and then let's also ponder why a police officer who was innocent of racist charges did nothing to preserve his job
Click to expand...

What exactly would you like to have seen him do? He worked for the dept., he wasn't Senior in the dept., nor, was he anything other than a patrolman for the dept. and the dept. no longer existed...I guess I am not getting what it is you think he had litigation against....If your job disappears, you don't have grounds for anything...You don't own the job.

he took no action to resist his firing/... for engaging in racist behavior.
Click to expand...

I separated this for clarity. No action was able to be taken to preserve something that no longer existed. As for the last part, you ought to quit lying.

he did nothing to preserve his integrity as an honest cop.
Click to expand...

His personal integrity was never in question for the actions of corrupt individuals that resulted in his police dept. being disbanded.

instead he was fired for being a member of a department which was found to engage in racist actions
Click to expand...

I thought you didn't like guilt by association...Oh, I guess only when it is used against someone you support...

In conclusion, your whole post here is really little more than lies, and slander. You are now dismissed.
 
rcart76 said:
Your statement is total BS. The medical examiner herself said that she can't give a credible opinion yet because she don't have the evidence in. It is also opinion not fact that the pro brown witnesses are not credvle.


PLEASE STOP MAKING S*** UP !!!!!
Click to expand...
Wrong again. In addition,; WTF are you talking about?

Nothing has been made up except for that by the witnesses that supported Dorian Johnson's account.
That has already been proven.

So again.
We already know the publicly known accounts which supported Johnson's, and by virtue, Brown, were not credible.
They have been falling apart from the get, from claims being outright false to changing to fit the known forensics.
Of course those accounts, as known, have no credibility.
What is not known is what these folks told investigators or the GJ if they testified.​

He wasn't shot in the back as claimed. They didn't see that, and were just mimicking Dorian's false account. And yes, their claim has already been proven to be false.
Then they changed their stories about his hands being up. To they were just up a little, to they were just going up. Clearly demonstrating that they lied.

And yet here you are accusing me of making things up (when I clearly haven't) when it was them who did so. All you have done is expose your ignorance of the subject. :lamo

You are the one obviously making things up about others. So stop making things up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom