- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Read this and explain to me how Darren Wilson is not charged with something
Posted on 11/20/14 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 11/20/14 at 3:43 pm
LINK
My first thought is that the witness accounts are all over the place, and maybe that's how a no-true-bill results.
But multiple witnesses say they were at a distance and not at close range when the kill shots were fired. The alleged struggle over the weapon had ended after the first shot was fired, and nobody has said Wilson had reason to believe Brown had a weapon.
idk. Maybe people are getting all "wee-weed up" for no reason and there will be an indictment. Perhaps all the leaks were a "just in case."
My first thought is that the witness accounts are all over the place, and maybe that's how a no-true-bill results.
But multiple witnesses say they were at a distance and not at close range when the kill shots were fired. The alleged struggle over the weapon had ended after the first shot was fired, and nobody has said Wilson had reason to believe Brown had a weapon.
idk. Maybe people are getting all "wee-weed up" for no reason and there will be an indictment. Perhaps all the leaks were a "just in case."
16
Posted on 11/20/14 at 3:44 pm to baybeefeetz
Posted on 11/20/14 at 3:48 pm to baybeefeetz
I don't know enough to say what did or did not happen.
My best guess:
Wilson is an a-hole cop that MAY have acted precipitously.
Brown was an a-hole thug that MAY have acted provocatively
There is a legal process and a grand jury that will have heard much more evidence and I'll respect their decision.
However, in any case, acting like a wild pack of criminal assholes is a bad look (for both sides)
ETA: I didn't vote at all and have NEVER down voted anyone
My best guess:
Wilson is an a-hole cop that MAY have acted precipitously.
Brown was an a-hole thug that MAY have acted provocatively
There is a legal process and a grand jury that will have heard much more evidence and I'll respect their decision.
However, in any case, acting like a wild pack of criminal assholes is a bad look (for both sides)
ETA: I didn't vote at all and have NEVER down voted anyone
This post was edited on 11/20/14 at 3:50 pm
Posted on 11/20/14 at 3:51 pm to baybeefeetz
Look up Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)[/i
[i]Law enforcement officers pursuing an unarmed suspect may use deadly force to prevent escape only if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.
[i]Law enforcement officers pursuing an unarmed suspect may use deadly force to prevent escape only if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.
This post was edited on 11/20/14 at 3:59 pm
Posted on 11/20/14 at 3:56 pm to baybeefeetz
If the cop did something wrong, people shouldn't have a problem with him getting what he deserves.
I have a problem with those defending Michael Brown (or the cop) without even knowing the facts.
I have a problem with those defending Michael Brown (or the cop) without even knowing the facts.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 3:58 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
and not at close range
Where did you get this? I dont see that in the article
Also, we don't know what the jury members are being told. It doesn't matter what we read about the case, because we don't hear directly from the witnesses as the GJ will.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 4:00 pm to baybeefeetz
I almost want to see him indicted so we can see what celebratory looting looks like.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 4:00 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
In the months since Brown was killed, numerous eyewitnesses have come forward to describe what they saw during the teen’s final moments, while controversial disclosures to the press have served to describe Wilson’s version of the events that day.
This is everything we know about the shooting.
quote:In short, because ""this"" is not everything we know about the shooting. ""This"" is certainly not everything the Grand Jury knows about the shooting.
Read this and explain to me how Darren Wilson is not charged with something
Posted on 11/20/14 at 4:01 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
Read this and explain to me how Darren Wilson is not charged with something
Thanks for the link. It clearly outlines why he won't be charged under Missouri state law:
quote:
Under Missouri state law, police officers are granted authority to use deadly force “in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody” if “he reasonably believes” it is necessary “to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested has committed or attempted to commit a felony…or may otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.”
I think any sane person believes Brown was the instigator and assaulted the police officer in the car believing he was about to be arrested for his assault on the shop keeper minutes before.
This post was edited on 11/20/14 at 4:03 pm
Posted on 11/20/14 at 4:02 pm to baybeefeetz
Posted on 11/20/14 at 4:04 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
But multiple witnesses say they were at a distance and not at close range when the kill shots were fired. The alleged struggle over the weapon had ended after the first shot was fired, and nobody has said Wilson had reason to believe Brown had a weapon.
Missouri law is such that after Brown committed the felony of attacking the officer, police can shoot a person to effect an arrest. So, all the discussion of this and that is fun but irrelevant. I don't like the law, but there it is.
You could argue the law is unconstitutional. But that would probably end up being more important for a civil case or a Federal case (?) than the city's case against Wilson.
And you're of course ignoring some pretty key points of testimony in saying "the struggle had ended."
Posted on 11/20/14 at 4:12 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
But multiple witnesses say they were at a distance and not at close range when the kill shots were fired.
At what distance would you feel safe with a 6'4" 300 lb guy, possibly hopped up on drugs, rushing you from?
Pop pop pop.
Sorry, man, reasonably fearing of great bodily harm is valid justifiable use of deadly force.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 4:47 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
casting a harsh light on the disproportionate number of black men killed by police, on St. Louis County’s exploitative and racially discriminatory municipal court system, and on the militarization of law enforcement.
quote:
high hopes for college bound son
Are we suppose to read what follows with the open mind the author left at the door? Just curious
Posted on 11/20/14 at 4:49 pm to baybeefeetz
Posted on 11/20/14 at 5:12 pm to baybeefeetz
THE WITNESS TESTIMONY IS COMPLETE bullshite ALL OTHER EVIDENCE POINTS TO WILSON BEING 100% INNOCENT YOU IDIOTS ARE WRONG ON THIS ONE GET A NEW PET ISSUE JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:15 pm to baybeefeetz
baybeefeetz
How long have you served as a peace officer ? Do you know the first thing about protocol in a deadly force encounter ? I'll answer both for you, ZERO.
If a perpetrator attempts to disarm you (we don't know yet but what was leaked showed there was a struggle for the weapon and shots fired inside the vehicle w/ Brown's blood on it) it is called a DEADLY FORCE encounter....... Now, if you are able to survive and maintain control, while creating distance, you are to announce to the perp that he is UNDER ARREST (as he committed a felony - attemtped disarming of a peace officer). If he does not comply and subsequently engages you again (whether he's 10 feet or 25 feet from you) he's coming to TAKE YOUR WEAPON AGAIN ! You are TAUGHT to SHOOT for center mass to stop the threat, if threat continues you may and have every right to attempt a HEAD SHOT to immediately stop the threat. Does this spell it out to you ? I don't know if this happened, but the distance is irrelevant if the perp continued to engage the officer after he already attempted to disarm him. As for as Johnson as a witness, well he has ZERO credibility as he has been proven to be a previous liar with a criminal record, while the autopsy disproving his accounts.
How long have you served as a peace officer ? Do you know the first thing about protocol in a deadly force encounter ? I'll answer both for you, ZERO.
If a perpetrator attempts to disarm you (we don't know yet but what was leaked showed there was a struggle for the weapon and shots fired inside the vehicle w/ Brown's blood on it) it is called a DEADLY FORCE encounter....... Now, if you are able to survive and maintain control, while creating distance, you are to announce to the perp that he is UNDER ARREST (as he committed a felony - attemtped disarming of a peace officer). If he does not comply and subsequently engages you again (whether he's 10 feet or 25 feet from you) he's coming to TAKE YOUR WEAPON AGAIN ! You are TAUGHT to SHOOT for center mass to stop the threat, if threat continues you may and have every right to attempt a HEAD SHOT to immediately stop the threat. Does this spell it out to you ? I don't know if this happened, but the distance is irrelevant if the perp continued to engage the officer after he already attempted to disarm him. As for as Johnson as a witness, well he has ZERO credibility as he has been proven to be a previous liar with a criminal record, while the autopsy disproving his accounts.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:46 pm to baybeefeetz
There should be enough to grant an indictment, if not an actual guilty verdict. Obviously the background on the prosecutor is bad and he should have never been on this case.
If anything we need to get a full account of the witness statements in public, under oath.
If anything we need to get a full account of the witness statements in public, under oath.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News