• 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!

Wilson Leaves Lawn Half Mowed

Wilson made his bed, now he has to lie in it. My personal opinion has nothing to do with it, I wasn't on the GJ.

Okay? You said he escaped justice. My question is "Is justice only what we personally agree with?"
 
Too late! I've already served on several juries.

Hopefully you were more intellectual on whatever jury you may have served on then you are on this thread.
 
Although it appears that Wilson has escaped justice here, he will face the court of public opinion. This senseless act of his will cost him and his family dearly for years. I feel bad for his family, not for him.

Well it looks like the "senseless act of" of the NYT reporters that published Darren Wilson’s Address might cost [them]. You cool with that too?

New York Times Reporters who put out Darren Wilson’s Address have their Addresses made Public
Tim Brown November 26, 2014

I have often said that turning the tables on liberals, such as publicly displaying addresses of gun owners in order to intimidate them or exposing the addresses of individuals aligned with the Southern Poverty Law Center will do wonders to demonstrate their hypocrisy. Lo and behold, that is just what has happened with two New York Times reporters who thought it a "righteous" thing to put out the physical address of Officer Darren Wilson, putting him and his new wife in danger. Now, their addresses are out in the open.​


Read more at New York Times Reporters who put out Darren Wilson

This article then goes on to provide the Names, Addresses, and Phone Numbers of the NYT reporters that provided Wilson's's location to the mob that was chanting:

...days or hours before the grand jury’s decision—the demands have become a base ultimatum.

“What do we want?”

“Darren Wilson!”

“How do we want him?”

“Dead!”​

Ferguson Protesters Harass Black Police, Call for Darren Wilson




Wilson made his bed, now he has to lie in it.

So... If Wilson is harmed and the reporters become targets, will you so cavalierly state... 'they made their bed, now they have to lie in it.'
 
Well, well, well - I like it when we can see karma come home to roost.

What a bitch - I'll bet that Wilson never batted an eye.

Bwaahaahaahaa!

I wonder who she'd rather have protecting her, Wilson or Brown.
 
I don't know of anybody who thinks that the death of an 18-year old, somebody's son, is "nothing." I surely would never trivialize any human life, and race (gender, orientation, religion, blah-blah-blah) have nothing to do with it. It's tragic that Michael Brown's life was cut short, but his choices led to his death.

I do think that Officer Wilson did what was right. He was upholding his duty, and he also had the right to defend his own life. But you can be satisfied that his life as he once knew it is ruined, as is his career in Ferguson, and that he will live in fear for quite some time.

I wish I could give this multiple likes.
 
Wilson did the wrong thing.

What is your evidence of that?

The right thing would be to have a trial and actually cross examine the evidence and witnesses.

Which did not happen.

That is because under our laws and constitution, you cannot try a person in court unless there is evidence of a crime. After listening to all of the witnesses and examining the forensic evidence, there was no evidence that Darren Wilson committed a crime. The forensic evidence supported his claims as well as the testimony of most of the witnesses.
 
Wilson hasn't cost them anything. Brown has. Wilson was just defending his life, and it's a shame that that thug has now ruined the officer's career.

You can argue the case ad infinitum, I am looking at the reality of the aftermath. Since Brown is no longer alive, Wilson is the liability. Your guilt and innocence reasoning has no bearing that fact.
 
Presumably we are still talking about the Ferguson incident, but no Wilson did not have several minutes to make a decision.

What we do know and most agree on is that Wilson stopped his car to address a couple of kids walking in the middle of the street. Wilson then drove a few feet then realized the description of the location and perps on a BOLO fit the situation where hewas. Wilson then backed up and was attack in his car, getting off one non lethal shot and suffering injuries. We know that because Brown's blood was found in the car and Wilson had injuries consistent with that account. Brown then wandered off, turned, and ran back toward Wilson and got shot for his troubles. All the evidence and the reliable witness accounts point in that direction.

Total time elapsed could not have been more than a minute, unless you believe that Brown and Wilson both stopped for a smoke before proceeding.

The "should have gone to a jury" is just a cop out. The level required in a GJ is far less than the level in a criminal trial. Additionally, there is nothing to stop the prosecutor from proceeding if he thinks the GJ is wrong. The GJ role is largely advisory.

It is amazing to me the lengths that certain people will go to to prove a point they don't have. The short memory people fail to remember the Zimmerman case . The rabble rousers got their way, went to trial, and a few million dollars later the jury decided the original decision was correct. The legal system has worked in both cases. It's just that some people refuse to believe the facts if they fail to prove their beliefs.

None of which has much to do with my original point. That Monday morning quarterbacks can take weeks to decide what a cop should have done in his split second decision.

Everything you posted was not determined in a court of law with two advocate attorneys determining the voracity of the evidence.

You can argue your case on an on-line forum all you wish, but that does not take the place of a court of law...sorry
 
Perhaps the black community in Ferguson feels that is what they have been experiencing in the form of an institutionalized mob. Who knows. Maybe it will cause cops to think twice before they kill someone whether their authority to use deadly force is worth the price of not trying a different approach.

The mob that Ferguson has been suffering under isn't the cops. It's the people burning their city down right now.
 
Everything you posted was not determined in a court of law with two advocate attorneys determining the voracity of the evidence.

You can argue your case on an on-line forum all you wish, but that does not take the place of a court of law...sorry

Everything I posted was determined in accordance with the law. The GJ job is to determine whether or not sufficient evidence exists to bring the case to a court.

In spite of a lower standard of evidence required, the GJ said no. That's the legal process, and it's a good one. You don't get a do over just because you don't like the results.
 
The mob that Ferguson has been suffering under isn't the cops. It's the people burning their city down right now.

The people burning the city down might have a different opinion about who has been suffering under whom.
 
The people burning the city down might have a different opinion about who has been suffering under whom.

Your statement is self defeating.

Do you know who this is?

deandre-joshua.jpg

He is DeAndre Joshua, the innocent young black man shot and set on fire by the Ferguson mob as he was trying to go home after work.
 
Last edited:
99% of rational people would shoot first in order to survive then ask questions. If blacks feel it is their right to attack our police then let them die. They have lived with the mostly white police force since the town was founded, why now are they concerned with it?
 
It does seem that the media in the US gets away with subtly inciting violence. Perhaps one day a brave prosecutor will take up your challenge.

He can start with Al (not so) Sharpton. He has his own show!
 
Wilson did the wrong thing.

The right thing would be to have a trial and actually cross examine the evidence and witnesses.

Which did not happen.
Then you don't understand grand juries. Plus, let me ask, if you were in Wilson's shoes, what would you have done?

You've confronted two guy's on the street, told them to get on the sidewalk, then notice that one of them fits the description of a robbery suspect, snd go back, only to have the big one attack you in your car. He punches you, and fights for your gun and you shoot twice inside your car hitting hin once in the arm. He then takes off, as you exit and give pursuit, because that's your job, and he is now a fleeing felon.

He gets about 35 to 40 feet away and turns back toward you, taunting you as you order him to stop amd give up. He then starts to rush at you...What do you do?
 
You can argue the case ad infinitum, I am looking at the reality of the aftermath. Since Brown is no longer alive, Wilson is the liability. Your guilt and innocence reasoning has no bearing that fact.
Felons are shot everyday fleeing in this country...Something is seriously wrong that you take the side of criminals.
 
You can argue the case ad infinitum, I am looking at the reality of the aftermath. Since Brown is no longer alive, Wilson is the liability. Your guilt and innocence reasoning has no bearing that fact.

The liability are the racists who believe in mob rule.
 
Felons are shot everyday fleeing in this country...Something is seriously wrong that you take the side of criminals.

I take the side of justice. Not for criminals, not for Micheal Brown, for everyone. I have a clear cut understanding of the law and the Constitution...I don't have any idea what you value. Or care.
 
Everything I posted was determined in accordance with the law. The GJ job is to determine whether or not sufficient evidence exists to bring the case to a court.

In spite of a lower standard of evidence required, the GJ said no. That's the legal process, and it's a good one. You don't get a do over just because you don't like the results.

You don't have a clue as to what the function of this grand jury was...do you?

The function of a grand jury is not to consider all the evidence presented by the police investigation to determine whether there is cause for the incident. The function of a grand jury is to evaluate the evidence presented by a prosecutor seeking an indictment of the accused.

The grand jury is never used to determine if a case exists...that is up to the DA. The DA never treated this case as a prosecutor.

That's ok, live in your delusion of due process and the rule of law. It has served you well till now.
 
I take the side of justice. Not for criminals, not for Micheal Brown, for everyone. I have a clear cut understanding of the law and the Constitution...I don't have any idea what you value. Or care.

I don't care if you care or not....Don't want your integrity questioned? Get off a public debate site....You are taking the side of a criminal, NOT JUSTICE....If you value our system, then you'd understand that the GJ is an important part of that system. They made their decision, and all you have is sour grapes...Because you wanted to see the criminal win.
 
Back
Top Bottom