- 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
2
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:30 am to igoringa
quote:
Still interesting to me his neighborhood knew immediately about the robbery (twitter witness posted it), but it stayed under radar for week
Likely due to Darian talking to neighbors... Which kind of leads you to believe that Brown figured that Wilson was there to apprehend him for the robbery and was prepared to fight him off.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:31 am to Langston
The story may be legit. That wasn't his account.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:32 am to igoringa
quote:
It is funny... Lambasted for not releasing right away (and I agree they should have). But then when they want to release on Thur told no by Feds.... Should hold longer. Hold another day and slammed again.
Had they released it right away, this probably wouldn't have been as big a mess as it's turned into. By the time they released the robbery video, they crowd was already in a frenzy and out for blood - they weren't going to be calmed down at that point.
From that perspective, the Justice Dept advising not to release it when they did makes sense. It was gasoline on the smoldering embers at that point. They either needed make it public immediately, or wait until things diffused. But they did what they did, and the Justice Dept may be looking to make them pay for publicly ignoring their advice.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:34 am to semotruman
No question they screwed up timing but that is not proportional to the reaction
It is a pretty strong indictment of the protesters to say truthfully that the delay of information a few days makes them incapable of appropriately absorbing and calibrating to the information. I say appropriate since we all seem to agree the response would have been different.
It is a pretty strong indictment of the protesters to say truthfully that the delay of information a few days makes them incapable of appropriately absorbing and calibrating to the information. I say appropriate since we all seem to agree the response would have been different.
This post was edited on 8/20/14 at 8:41 am
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:34 am to Langston
quote:
but I would be very surprised if they aren't combing through the police departments records for anything they can find to make an example out of him.
This will 100% happen. Take it to the bank.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:35 am to Topwater Trout
Yea its funny how they bitch about 'driving while black" insinuating that they are pre judged by police to be guilty of something but then turn around and pre judge Wilson and want him locked away before an investigation is ever done.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:35 am to bamarep
quote:
Second, every "expert" they had on repeatedly kept saying Wilson "murdered" Brown. That 15 minutes was enough to tell anyone what their agenda is.
This furor isn't about the people on the ground; it never was. It's become a proxy war for people who hate the police.
The ghetto faction just wanted free big gulps.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:35 am to the808bass
You want to give me your elevator synopsis of this ordeal? Where do things stand with the police's side of the story and corroboration of that story?
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:35 am to polydorr
quote:
free big gulps.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:36 am to FelicianaTigerfan
quote:
Yea its funny how they bitch about 'driving while black" insinuating that they are pre judged by police to be guilty of something but then turn around and pre judge Wilson and want him locked away before an investigation is ever done.
Of course, the first actually happens to them which is why so many in the black community are inclined to believe that the story created by Brown's supporters around this event are true.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:36 am to The Third Leg
The way I see it.. if he gets an indictment from this grand jury, it will be because of public pressure, not from facts.
(Keep in mind, the prosecutor basically controls what the grand jury decides)
(Keep in mind, the prosecutor basically controls what the grand jury decides)
This post was edited on 8/20/14 at 8:37 am
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:40 am to The Third Leg
quote:
You want to give me your elevator synopsis of this ordeal? Where do things stand with the police's side of the story and corroboration of that story?
There's several rumors out there.
1). Multiple on scene witnesses corroborate the story which we've heard in pieces from the friend of Wilson's gf and the chief.
2). STL reporter says it's 12 other witnesses. That would be stunning.
3). Rumor that Wilson had an orbital fracture from the scuffle at the car with Michael.
4). Grand jury starts today. Run by local county prosecutor (though he's not presenting, I gather) who has political aspirations.
The fact that it's going to the GJ early leads me to believe that it's a pretty simple case.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:42 am to semotruman
Here is my question for y'all and particularly if any OT'ers are prosecuting attorneys or lawyers that do a lot of criminal work. I had asked it last night but didn't see an answer.
The Missouri statute regarding justification sets out the elements of it. What I am curious about is how it relates to the GJ. The statute pretty clearly states it is a defense to be injected into the case by the defense.
IF IF IF I am reading this right and IF IF IF the prosecuting attorney is doing his job, does that mean he isn't putting on evidence of justification during the grand jury phase? If I'm reading it right that it is to be raised by the defense, not the prosecution, that tells me that the 12 witnesses and evidence of the assault wouldn't be brought before the GJ because that is part of a defense to be raised by the defendant later in the case.
If that's right, and only evidence that supports charges and not the defense are brought to the GJ, I frankly don't see how an indictment isn't obtained short of the prosecuting attorney getting a preordained result and that will result in even more fuel to the fire.
Having said all of that, it doesn't seem right or fair that evidence that supports the defense of justification can't be raised at the GJ phase so I tend to believe I am reading it wrong.
Thoughts???
The Missouri statute regarding justification sets out the elements of it. What I am curious about is how it relates to the GJ. The statute pretty clearly states it is a defense to be injected into the case by the defense.
IF IF IF I am reading this right and IF IF IF the prosecuting attorney is doing his job, does that mean he isn't putting on evidence of justification during the grand jury phase? If I'm reading it right that it is to be raised by the defense, not the prosecution, that tells me that the 12 witnesses and evidence of the assault wouldn't be brought before the GJ because that is part of a defense to be raised by the defendant later in the case.
If that's right, and only evidence that supports charges and not the defense are brought to the GJ, I frankly don't see how an indictment isn't obtained short of the prosecuting attorney getting a preordained result and that will result in even more fuel to the fire.
Having said all of that, it doesn't seem right or fair that evidence that supports the defense of justification can't be raised at the GJ phase so I tend to believe I am reading it wrong.
Thoughts???
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:43 am to the808bass
quote:nope
Of course, the first actually happens to them
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:44 am to reedus23
Interesting. It looks like it to me.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:45 am to GEAUXmedic
quote:
if he gets an indictment from this grand jury, it will be because of public pressure, not from facts.
What bothers me is that the DA won't recuse himself on his own... He said "Well if the gov asks me to I will".
That leads me to believe that he is going to only present the info he needs in order to get a True Bill and take the heat off of himself. I don't see any reason why if he knew that it wasn't gonna go to trial, he wouldn't recuse himself in order to take the heat off of himself and give the illusion of transparency.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:45 am to FelicianaTigerfan
quote:
nope
Lol. Yes, it does. My friend puts me on speaker every time he gets pulled over. It's comedy gold.
This post was edited on 8/20/14 at 8:46 am
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:46 am to reedus23
Which is why they say if the prosecutor wants an indictment, he gets an indictment.
Posted on 8/20/14 at 8:47 am to Lsut81
15 mins until the GJ begins....
What do you think would be the "acceptable" time needed to look at the evidence, assuming he is innocent?
You think there is any acceptable time in order for the protesters to be like....okay, you looked long and hard and now we know he was innocent?
Also, Wilson gets to testify if he wants...but cannot have a lawyer present if he does so
What do you think would be the "acceptable" time needed to look at the evidence, assuming he is innocent?
You think there is any acceptable time in order for the protesters to be like....okay, you looked long and hard and now we know he was innocent?
Also, Wilson gets to testify if he wants...but cannot have a lawyer present if he does so
Page 764 of 826
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News