|
Cenodoxus posted:What part of my post ever said it absolves the officer of anything? I just said it adds some credibility to the PD's claim that Brown was combative/there was a violent struggle, and it removes some credibility from the Brown side. Removes some credibility from Brown's side? I'll bite: what about this makes the reports of 3 eyewitnesses who tell the same story less credible?
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 06:12 |
|
|
thefncrow posted:Removes some credibility from Brown's side? I'll bite: what about this makes the reports of 3 eyewitnesses who tell the same story less credible? Physical evidence. Also witness testimony (and I wont even touch the "theyre telling the same story" because you are in crazyland) is the lowest form of evidence for anything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
thefncrow posted:Removes some credibility from Brown's side? I'll bite: what about this makes the reports of 3 eyewitnesses who tell the same story less credible? Well one of them is also a swisher's theft so automatically he lies about everything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
swiss_army_chainsaw posted:What about these allegations that the person on the security tape might not even be Michael Brown? Pretty goddamn laughable seeing how the clothing are identical alongside his friend fully admitting that Michael did take the 'swishers' or whatever they're called.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
RonMexicosPitbull posted:Physical evidence. What physical evidence are you referring to? Because the police haven't released any physical evidence about the shooting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
If Brown is in the video, then does that mean his friend walking with him when the shooting happened would have also been in the video? He's the one who can confirm what happened, if it was them in the video, yes?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:Oh god no, here comes 20 pages of people arguing over the definition of "kid"! "Black people grow up faster than whites" - a racist
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:If Brown is in the video, then does that mean his friend walking with him when the shooting happened would have also been in the video? He's the one who can confirm what happened, if it was them in the video, yes? Yes. It's him and Brown. At this point it shouldn't even be a question anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:What physical evidence are you referring to? Because the police haven't released any physical evidence about the shooting. He believes Brown struggled with the officer in the car possibly actually firing off rounds before fleeing pretending to be non-threatening.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:If Brown is in the video, then does that mean his friend walking with him when the shooting happened would have also been in the video? He's the one who can confirm what happened, if it was them in the video, yes? It was already posted earlier that it was confirmed to be him and they admitted to taking the cigars through the attorney statement to police.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
edit: I believe Brown's friend will clear up a lot of misinformation if he was willing to supposedly admit to being involved.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:What physical evidence are you referring to? Because the police haven't released any physical evidence about the shooting. Read his avatar, if FYAD kicks you out you are likely a nazi.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
RonMexicosPitbull posted:Physical evidence. Physical evidence of what? His claim was that the robbery made the story of 3 eyewitnesses less credible. So again, I ask, how does the robbery story, specifically, reduce the credibility of 3 eyewitnesses who report the same story? And if you can work in how "physical evidence" is an element of this, I'd love to hear it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
thefncrow posted:Removes some credibility from Brown's side? I'll bite: what about this makes the reports of 3 eyewitnesses who tell the same story less credible? Eyewitnesses have varying levels of credibility. For instance, I would consider Brown's friend to be less credible than, say, someone across the street. But I'm not talking about the credibility of the witnesses. My statement about "removes credibility" was referring to the narrative that Brown was incapable of violence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
Cenodoxus posted:Eyewitnesses have varying levels of credibility. For instance, I would consider Brown's friend to be less credible than, say, someone across the street. But I'm not talking about the credibility of the witnesses. My statement about "removes credibility" was referring to the narrative that Brown was incapable of violence. thefncrow posted:His claim was that the robbery made the story of 3 eyewitnesses less credible. That was not my claim, see above. ^^^ e: poo poo, quote instead of edit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
Untagged posted:It was already posted earlier that it was confirmed to be him and they admitted to taking the cigars through the attorney statement to police. Just to be clear, "they" couldn't have admitted poo poo because one of the two of them is dead. It matters since part of the problem is we will never get to hear Mike Brown's side of the story.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:If Brown is in the video, then does that mean his friend walking with him when the shooting happened would have also been in the video? He's the one who can confirm what happened, if it was them in the video, yes? Yes. And all those things happened, and were confirmed in statements by the witness to the FBI. And none of them have anything to do with unloading a clip on an unarmed citizen in broad daylight, or in going wild with the teargas and rubber bullets on the protest afterward.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
SectumSempra posted:So the video is entirely an attempt to downplay causing a riot and trying to rationalize the cops actions? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0FpMgurltk Incidentally, I'm seeing conflicting reports now on the timeline, that the shooting was just after noon, and another shots fired incident - not the one that killed Brown - happened just after 2pm. This could explain the confusion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
swiss_army_chainsaw posted:What about these allegations that the person on the security tape might not even be Michael Brown? Unlikely, Brown's friend/accomplice admitted it was them. RonMexicosPitbull posted:Physical evidence. Also witness testimony (and I wont even touch the "theyre telling the same story" because you are in crazyland) is the lowest form of evidence for anything. A black teen in posession of a swisher is not exactly uh compelling evidence of a robbery.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
If Brown's actions were sufficient cause for shooting him in the back as he ran, then Halloween Horror Nights Orlando would be a bloodbath every night. We literally have nightly incidents of assault and battery, including fighting the cops who pull security. Somehow we've avoided any deaths. Imagine that, we don't need to kill every rear end in a top hat who punches a dude!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
RonMexicosPitbull posted:Even though the whole interaction is on video we still got the "make whatever I want up the NARRATIVE needs to be maintained no matter what" crowd is unfazed. The video on can just showed the altercation but watching the whole thing on YouTube it appears the bodega keeps the Swisher right on the counter
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Cenodoxus posted:Eyewitnesses have varying levels of credibility. For instance, I would consider Brown's friend to be less credible than, say, someone across the street. But I'm not talking about the credibility of the witnesses. My statement about "removes credibility" was referring to the narrative that Brown was incapable of violence. I dunno matey. The three independant witnesses who are saying he was shot down like a dog in the street with his hand up are pushing a narrative?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Yes. And all those things happened, and were confirmed in statements by the witness to the FBI. And none of them have anything to do with unloading a clip on an unarmed citizen in broad daylight, or in going wild with the teargas and rubber bullets on the protest afterward. Which would be the store clerk?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Any competent prosecutor ought to be able to get any mention of the robbery banned from being mentioned to the jury, for the record.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
thefncrow posted:Removes some credibility from Brown's side? I'll bite: what about this makes the reports of 3 eyewitnesses who tell the same story less credible? When the reports were made matters. If these other eyewitnesses came forward after the rioting and other nasty business, it's very likely that their stories are less reliable; people tend to fill in the gaps in their memory with what they think happened rather than what actually happened. Not that I would discount an eyewitness's testimony offhand because of that alone, which is why I'm not arguing that the cop is 100% blameless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Any competent prosecutor ought to be able to get any mention of the robbery banned from being mentioned to the jury, for the record. No poo poo Sherlock. That isn't even an issue unless you are a racist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:What physical evidence are you referring to? Because the police haven't released any physical evidence about the shooting. Berke Negri posted:The video on can just showed the altercation but watching the whole thing on YouTube it appears the bodega keeps the Swisher right on the counter Popular Thug Drink posted:Unlikely, Brown's friend/accomplice admitted it was them. thefncrow posted:Physical evidence of what? His claim was that the robbery made the story of 3 eyewitnesses less credible. So again, I ask, how does the robbery story, specifically, reduce the credibility of 3 eyewitnesses who report the same story? And if you can work in how "physical evidence" is an element of this, I'd love to hear it. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
And now that we have the officer's name, so it begins: http://colorlines.com/archives/2014/08/officer_darren_wilson_to_young_woman_shut_the_f_up_sit_the_f_down.htmlquote:Woman: I was maced and I had come up to QuickTrip because they said I could use their sink. So I was trying to clean out my eyes with some water and one of the employees told me to go get some milk, because that would help. So as I was pouring milk in my eyes, the officers had come in and told me to get out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Just to be clear, "they" couldn't have admitted poo poo because one of the two of them is dead. It matters since part of the problem is we will never get to hear Mike Brown's side of the story. Don't know if you realize what that word means in the context of one person speaking for a group.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Spacman posted:No poo poo Sherlock. You'd think, but people keep posting like they think that clip can be played at the trial. It's obviously not relevant (after all the police themselves said it wasn't) and prejudicial. Jury's not going to see it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Evil_Greven posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0FpMgurltk I've wondered this as well. The Wikipedia article has conflicting times - one says 12:01, another says shortly after 2:00. I would love to know the true timeline. It's easier to link the two when they're only a few minutes apart, and harder to link things together when you've got a span of at least 2 hours. Given that the PD came out and said that the officer wasn't responding to the robbery when he came across them, I'm guessing it was 2:00. Cenodoxus fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Aug 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Any competent prosecutor ought to be able to get any mention of the robbery banned from being mentioned to the jury, for the record. It seems like competence has been on vacation for a while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Yes. And all those things happened, and were confirmed in statements by the witness to the FBI. And none of them have anything to do with unloading a clip on an unarmed citizen in broad daylight, or in going wild with the teargas and rubber bullets on the protest afterward. I don't think you understand, it's all ok. He stole some cigarettes and was stopped in a completely unrelated instance of, I hope young and old readers are sitting down, JAYWALKING. So the killing of an unarmed man, shooting unarmed people with rubber bullets, attacking and arresting the press, and firing tear gas into peaceful neighborhoods and protestors is all justified.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Untagged posted:People in this thread keep mixing up two different police departments. For the record, I'm aware of the situation and was being intentionally obtuse. I'm from St. Louis (Metro East) and the greater St. Louis area is a stupid mess of small towns that shouldn't be and white people preventing them from being one thing. Also, I want better recording to keep cops safe too. I'm lucky that my dad always came home.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/7im/timelines/499639344613695488 e: this is admissible hearsay evidence, no? present sense impression
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
And ultimately in the eyes of the law, isn't is illegal to escalate violence? Which is to say that it seems unanimous that Brown was unarmed, and clearly so. Even if Brown took a swing at the officer - and that's a stretch - that's still very, very clearly non-lethal force, especially when combined with him attempting to flee, and then attempting to surrender. The officer could have responded with non-lethal force, pepper spray, a taser, whatever - but going straight for a sidearm and then continuing to apply lethal force after a suspect has surrendered is murder. There's no two ways about it. If someone takes a swing at you on the street, in most places you have a right to defend yourself in kind. But if you pull a knife, you are now guilty of assault due to escalating the situation to lethal force. If the dude who tried to punch you responds to your drawing of a weapon by doing so himself he's actually justified because you're now committing a more serious crime than him, even though he 'started it.' The point here being is that we're applying some double-standard here because a cop is involved. If this was a case of two random strangers getting into a fistfight and one of them drawing a weapon and killing the other after he surrendered there would be no question about it - murder in the 2nd. But since it is a cop who did the slaying, we're all worried about heat-of-the-moment and didn't-mean-to and not-actually-murder.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
I wonder how much Nixon is making GBS threads down this chief's throat right now. His national ambitions (however plausible to begin with) are basically on hold until he can get some heads.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:You'd think, but people keep posting like they think that clip can be played at the trial. It's obviously not relevant (after all the police themselves said it wasn't) and prejudicial. Jury's not going to see it. Yeah, no poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
SectumSempra posted:It seems like competence has been on vacation for a while. The FBI and federal prosecutors get involved if they think the locals are covering this up (and given the local prosecutor has been complaining about the replacement of the local police, that is a real issue), and they do not like to lose.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 06:12 |
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:https://twitter.com/7im/timelines/499639344613695488 holy gently caress quote:@SLIKK_DARKO the first two was, the next 5 werent, he turned around
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 21:03
|
|
