What the Hell is going on in Ferguson, Missouri?

[Kermit]

Apparently this autopsy is the one done BY Baden that was brought in by Crump and the family.....also states shots were not fired at point blank or close range....and now Crump releases a statement saying 'the scattering of the bullets shows a blatant disregard for the public the officer was supposed to be protecting"


What happened to 'mike was executed at point blank range, on his knees, unloaded on' Mr Crump you racist lying motherfukker

Crump, Sharpton, Jackson ALL need to be charged with slander, libel, inciting these riots.....and sent a bill for all the police overtime and damage to property in Ferguson. Unreal these assholes.

There is an exit or entry wound on his right hand and they are saying this must have happened when he had his hands in the air surrendering. Crump said that Mike brown was shot in the back of the arm despite no entry wounds to the back of the arm.

[The Kraken]

The fact that no shots entered the back is actually close to irrelevant.

Here are a few relevant facts.

Brown was unarmed. He was shot six times. There was enough distance between Brown and the cop that no gunpowder was found on the body. What threat did Brown present for the officer to fear for his life or the life of another? No weapon and not close enough to leave GSR on Browns body.

What the female eye witness said was "after that, he was running away and the officer shot. He jerked LIKE he was hit in the back. He then turned around and put his hands in the air".

Now, given this statement, it could still be 100% accurate. It's perfectly reasonable to conceive Brown "jerking" as the shot was fired, even though he wasn't shot. Maybe out of surprise or fear or whatever. I'd probably do the same. If all you heard was the shot and saw him jerk, it's easy to see why the eye witness thought he was shot in the back.

The cop still proceeded to shoot him six more times. An unarmed man that was just running away.

Like it or lot, this cop is going to prison.

100% lock

[Kermit]

The fact that no shots entered the back is actually close to irrelevant.

It discredits the main witness's recount of the incident.

So you think the cop fired a warning shot so that he could get the guy to stop so he could kill him execution style? Makes no sense.

[jtoler]

The fact that no shots entered the back is actually close to irrelevant.

Here are a few relevant facts.

Brown was unarmed. He was shot six times. There was enough distance between Brown and the cop that no gunpowder was found on the body. What threat did Brown present for the officer to fear for his life or the life of another? No weapon and not close enough to leave GSR on Browns body.

What the female eye witness said was "after that, he was running away and the officer shot. He jerked LIKE he was hit in the back. He then turned around and put his hands in the air".

Now, given this statement, it could still be 100% accurate. It's perfectly reasonable to conceive Brown "jerking" as the shot was fired. Maybe out of surprise or fear or whatever. If all you heard was the shot and saw him jerk, it's easy to see why the eye witness thought he was shot in the back.

The cop still proceeded to shoot him six more times. An unarmed man that was just running away.

Like it or lot, this cop is going to prison.

I dont understand whats hard to understand about this. Also the cop could have shot at him from behind and missed which got those statements. Unloading a full clip on an unarmed person is insane to me.

[jtoler]

It discredits the main witness's recount of the incident.

So you think the cop fired a warning shot so that he could get the guy to stop so he could kill him execution style? Makes no sense.

What if the shot(s) missed.

[itchypickle]

The fact that no shots entered the back is actually close to irrelevant.

Here are a few relevant facts.

Brown was unarmed. He was shot six times. There was enough distance between Brown and the cop that no gunpowder was found on the body. What threat did Brown present for the officer to fear for his life or the life of another? No weapon and not close enough to leave GSR on Browns body.

What the female eye witness said was "after that, he was running away and the officer shot. He jerked LIKE he was hit in the back. He then turned around and put his hands in the air".

Now, given this statement, it could still be 100% accurate. It's perfectly reasonable to conceive Brown "jerking" as the shot was fired, even though he wasn't shot. Maybe out of surprise or fear or whatever. I'd probably do the same. If all you heard was the shot and saw him jerk, it's easy to see why the eye witness thought he was shot in the back.

The cop still proceeded to shoot him six more times. An unarmed man that was just running away.

Like it or lot, this cop is going to prison.

100% lock

But if according to the cop...the witness on video released today that Brown was rushing him and he fired til he dropped...along with the autopsy brought in after they didnt trust the one done by the original authorities...will you concede thats viable to?

Think Kraken, this thing went from he was standing and shot, kneeling shot, never struggled, struggled but never went for gun, he was stood over and fired into, a dozen narratives. All keeps changing as news comes to fit the attention whores on camera....

[Kermit]

So all week long the shot to the back was relevant in everyone's eyes and now that it turns out that it never happened, it isn't?

All week long people were saying "He shot him in the back while he was running away"

[jtoler]

So all week long the shot to the back was relevant in everyone's eyes and now that it turns out that it never happened, it isn't?

All week long people were saying "He shot him in the back while he was running away"

It was never relevant to 99% of the posters in this thread remember, all that mattered was that Brown was big, black, and "thuggish" looking.

[Kermit]

The angles of these entry wounds is also going to be a factor.

[retard]

[Kermit]

It was never relevant to 99% of the posters in this thread remember, all that mattered was that Brown was big, black, and "thuggish" looking.

The fact that he was shot in the back was the main reason why I took interest in this. If anyone is shot in the back, it is obvious that a law was broken and a cop should go down. Now I feel foolish that this new information has come out and the shot to the back never happened.

[jtoler]

The fact that he was shot in the back was the main reason why I took interest in this. If anyone is shot in the back, it is obvious that a law was broken and a cop should go down. Now I feel foolish that this new information has come out and the shot to the back never happened.

I remember Kerm, you are the only one who stated that. With that said, did he need to be shot in the back for it to be murder, if he's only shot in the front is it automatically justified?

[The Kraken]

So all week long the shot to the back was relevant in everyone's eyes and now that it turns out that it never happened, it isn't?

All week long people were saying "He shot him in the back while he was running away"

It was never relevant. At least to me. I know first hand how unreliable eye witnesses are. I basically disregard everything they say.

What these ppl are saying doesn't mean a thing. They're being fed lines by attorneys and reverends to win the court of public opinion. It's sickening. So ignore them.

So what do we know? Brown was unarmed and was shot 6 times. All in the front side. And that's about it. Now it's up to us to assess the situation with that info and here's the problem I have.

What threat could he have presented at that exact time that the officer feared for his life?

I can't fathom any scenario a cop would need to shoot an unarmed man 6 times at a distance great enough that no GSR was on the body. Meaning he likely wasn't a threat to physically disarm him.

Did Brown go for the gun initially? Who cares. That really won't fly. It's all about the threat that was present when the first shot was fired. Not 10 seconds before the first shot.

Help me out guys, what am I missing? I admit I could be missing somethkg

[d2bets]

The fact that he was shot in the back was the main reason why I took interest in this. If anyone is shot in the back, it is obvious that a law was broken and a cop should go down. Now I feel foolish that this new information has come out and the shot to the back never happened.

Well, being shot from behind is certainly one way but not the only way for indication that the shooting was bad.

[Plaza23]

Pussy ass cop had to shoot an 18 year unarmed kid 6 times to "stop him"

If he had better aim, he should have dropped him with one.

However, a 6'2 300 pounder isnt going to go down just shooting him in the arm

[d2bets]

It was never relevant. At least to me. I know first hand how unreliable eye witnesses are. I basically disregard everything they say.

What these ppl are saying doesn't mean a thing. They're being fed lines by attorneys and reverends to win the court of public opinion. It's sickening. So ignore them.

So what do we know? Brown was unarmed and was shot 6 times. All in the front side. And that's about it. Now it's up to us to assess the situation with that info and here's the problem I have.

What threat could he have presented at that exact time that the officer feared for his life?

I can't fathom any scenario a cop would need to shoot an unarmed man 6 times at a distance great enough that no GSR was on the body. Meaning he likely wasn't a threat to physically disarm him.

Did Brown go for the gun initially? Who cares. That really won't fly. It's all about the threat that was present when the first shot was fired. Not 10 seconds before the first shot.

Help me out guys, what am I missing? I admit I could be missing somethkg

The distance seems critical. If any of the shots were more than few feet away then it's hard to find a justification.

[The Kraken]

But if according to the cop...the witness on video released today that Brown was rushing him and he fired til he dropped...along with the autopsy brought in after they didnt trust the one done by the original authorities...will you concede thats viable to?

Think Kraken, this thing went from he was standing and shot, kneeling shot, never struggled, struggled but never went for gun, he was stood over and fired into, a dozen narratives. All keeps changing as news comes to fit the attention whores on camera....

Yes. I will concede that's viable IP. And I agree the media skews a the details. Very few facts right now.

I'm not sure, even if he was rushing the officer, if that gives him the right to shoot him, legally speaking. Maybe it does. Maybe some of you know and I'll find out for certain in a few hours.

[jtoler]

It was never relevant. At least to me. I know first hand how unreliable eye witnesses are. I basically disregard everything they say.

What these ppl are saying doesn't mean a thing. They're being fed lines by attorneys and reverends to win the court of public opinion. It's sickening. So ignore them.

So what do we know? Brown was unarmed and was shot 6 times. All in the front side. And that's about it. Now it's up to us to assess the situation with that info and here's the problem I have.

What threat could he have presented at that exact time that the officer feared for his life?

I can't fathom any scenario a cop would need to shoot an unarmed man 6 times at a distance great enough that no GSR was on the body. Meaning he likely wasn't a threat to physically disarm him.

Did Brown go for the gun initially? Who cares. That really won't fly. It's all about the threat that was present when the first shot was fired. Not 10 seconds before the first shot.

Help me out guys, what am I missing? I admit I could be missing somethkg

Missing nothing, but you may withholding that youre somehow related to Morris Dees or John Brown.

[d2bets]

If he had better aim, he should have dropped him with one.

However, a 6'2 300 pounder isnt going to go down just shooting him in the arm

Seems clearly he did go down or was heading down if he was shot on the top of the head. Brown much taller than Wilson.

I wonder if Brown stumbled forward after being shot in the arm so that even if Wilson might have been trying to shoot his arm it hit his head as he was stumbling forward. That might explain it.

[Plaza23]

Did Brown go for the gun initially? Who cares. That really won't fly. It's all about the threat that was present when the first shot was fired. Not 10 seconds before the first shot.

Help me out guys, what am I missing? I admit I could be missing somethkg

You realize that police dont just shoot once, reload, and shoot again. This lunatic was charging at the cop, and the cop discharged his weapon 6 times (probably all at once). This is what happened to this man when he charged at the police. And how would the cop know that he was unarmed? Cops dont wait for the suspects to show their weapons. If a cop makes a command, and the perp does not adhere to the command - then the cops will shoot if charged at.

Standard protocol.

Some have called it suicide by cop.

[recon1]

The fact that no shots entered the back is actually close to irrelevant.

Here are a few relevant facts.

Brown was unarmed. He was shot six times. There was enough distance between Brown and the cop that no gunpowder was found on the body. What threat did Brown present for the officer to fear for his life or the life of another? No weapon and not close enough to leave GSR on Browns body.

What the female eye witness said was "after that, he was running away and the officer shot. He jerked LIKE he was hit in the back. He then turned around and put his hands in the air".

Now, given this statement, it could still be 100% accurate. It's perfectly reasonable to conceive Brown "jerking" as the shot was fired, even though he wasn't shot. Maybe out of surprise or fear or whatever. I'd probably do the same. If all you heard was the shot and saw him jerk, it's easy to see why the eye witness thought he was shot in the back.

The cop still proceeded to shoot him six more times. An unarmed man that was just running away.

Like it or lot, this cop is going to prison.

100% lock

Suspect was a threat and after the tussle in car where it is alleged the suspect reached for cops gun makes this an active threat scenario. either 10' or 10" away cops are trained to STOP THE THREAT. No way if I'm the cop do i allow the threat to walk around the community after reaching for my sidearm.
"Lock" cop goes to prison? I think its a "Lock" Brown is in hell unfortunately

[The Kraken]

The angles of these entry wounds is also going to be a factor.

I agree. Especially on the arm. Which holes are entry and which ones are exit. Could prove whether his hands were up or not.

The arms rotate as they're lifted over the head, palms would be facing the officer. When they're at your side, palms tend to be facing away to your body or even behind you.

[Plaza23]

I wonder if Brown stumbled forward after being shot in the arm so that even if Wilson might have been trying to shoot his arm it hit his head as he was stumbling forward. That might explain it.

Well the autopsy report does say he was leaning forward. All they would have to do is look at the angle of the exit wound to tell if that was the case.

[The Kraken]

You realize that police dont just shoot once, reload, and shoot again. This lunatic was charging at the cop, and the cop discharged his weapon 6 times (probably all at once). This is what happened to this man when he charged at the police. And how would the cop know that he was unarmed? Cops dont wait for the suspects to show their weapons. If a cop makes a command, and the perp does not adhere to the command - then the cops will shoot if charged at.

Standard protocol.

Some have called it suicide by cop.

So the premise of your statement is that cops assume everyone is armed and dangerous until proven otherwise and they will react accordingly?

[The Kraken]

Suspect was a threat and after the tussle in car where it is alleged the suspect reached for cops gun makes this an active threat scenario. either 10' or 10" away cops are trained to STOP THE THREAT. No way if I'm the cop do i allow the threat to walk around the community after reaching for my sidearm.
"Lock" cop goes to prison? I think its a "Lock" Brown is in hell unfortunately

I'm not a heaven/hell guy but if I was, I'd probably try to parlay your pick with mine.

[BatemanPatrickl]

I agree. Especially on the arm. Which holes are entry and which ones are exit. Could prove whether his hands were up or not.

The arms rotate as they're lifted over the head, palms would be facing the officer. When they're at your side, palms tend to be facing away to your body or even behind you.

Now he's a forensics expert. A few days ago this clown was an expert on stocks. The Kraken dislikes the police because he himself has a lengthy criminal record including resisting arrest.

[Plaza23]

Suspect was a threat and after the tussle in car where it is alleged the suspect reached for cops gun makes this an active threat scenario. either 10' or 10" away cops are trained to STOP THE THREAT. No way if I'm the cop do i allow the threat to walk around the community after reaching for my sidearm.
"Lock" cop goes to prison? I think its a "Lock" Brown is in hell unfortunately

The cop isnt even going to be charged with anything.
Its taught in the academy to shoot when charged at. Doesnt matter if the guy ends up being unarmed or not. If you have a crazy person rushing towards police (who actually have the weapons), you use your weapon. Thats what it is there for. Especially against a 6'2 300 pound man. This wasnt some crazy woman going at the police. 6'2 300 pound man rushes toward you in an aggressive provoking matter, you shoot. Thats how its taught everywhere. How can you charge the cop with breaking the law when he's following procedure?

[recon1]

I'm not a heaven/hell guy but if I was, I'd probably try to parlay your pick with mine.

Sense of humor, i like it

[The Kraken]

Now he's a forensics expert. A few days ago this clown was an expert on stocks. The Kraken dislikes the police because he himself has a length criminal record including resisting arrest.

For once you dumb imbecile, try to not hijack a thread with your personal agenda. We get it , you don't like me and I can't stand you . Go start another thread about it and I'll deal with your weasley ass in there.

[jtoler]

The cop isnt even going to be charged with anything.
Its taught in the academy to shoot when charged at. Doesnt matter if the guy ends up being unarmed or not. If you have a crazy person rushing towards police (who actually have the weapons), you use your weapon. Thats what it is there for. Especially against a 6'2 300 pound man. This wasnt some crazy woman going at the police. 6'2 300 pound man rushes toward you in an aggressive provoking matter, you shoot. Thats how its taught everywhere. How can you charge the cop with breaking the law when he's following procedure?

Amazing youre the only one who knows exactly how it took place.

[BatemanPatrickl]

For once you dumb imbecile, try to not hijack a thread with your personal agenda. We get it , you don't like me and I can't stand you . Go start another thread about it and I'll deal with your weasley ass in there.

Not until you come clean about your criminal record and why you dislike the police so much. It's okay you piece of white trash most won't judge you.

[itchypickle]

Yes. I will concede that's viable IP. And I agree the media skews a the details. Very few facts right now.

I'm not sure, even if he was rushing the officer, if that gives him the right to shoot him, legally speaking. Maybe it does. Maybe some of you know and I'll find out for certain in a few hours.

Big piece needed will be the pictures and Dr reports from the facial injury of the officer I still think. As far as the legality of escalation of force, once you assault an officer in every place I've ever heard thats an auto felony. Every department has their own escalation of force protocol but if in the midst of a struggle the weapon is gone for....game over....lethal force is a go. I know its hard to track this thread as its filling up fast so I'll say it again, if he gets out and walks up to a kneeling and surrendering Brown, even though he got punched in the face at the truck, and shoots him then yep he's toast but if he fired and hot or missed, and Brown turns in his direction and charges him...cop does not have to flee himself...rounds fly until threat hits the ground.

[recon1]

The cop isnt even going to be charged with anything.
Its taught in the academy to shoot when charged at. Doesnt matter if the guy ends up being unarmed or not. If you have a crazy person rushing towards police (who actually have the weapons), you use your weapon. Thats what it is there for. Especially against a 6'2 300 pound man. This wasnt some crazy woman going at the police. 6'2 300 pound man rushes toward you in an aggressive provoking matter, you shoot. Thats how its taught everywhere. How can you charge the cop with breaking the law when he's following procedure?

Sorry, where and which academies is that taught? What's taught is progression of officer weaponary.
You bring fist, i bring asp (Baton) take out knife, i take out gun. Most academies REQUIRE that you must go hands on when no weapons from suspect are present. If you are getting your ass kicked and are loosing or about to loose consiousness you may use deadly force. In this case cop was knocked in head and suspect reached for gun all equals a progression in force used…..cop will be cleared.
I just slept in a Holiday Inn express so, take with a grain of salt.

[jtoler]

Big piece needed will be the pictures and Dr reports from the facial injury of the officer I still think. As far as the legality of escalation of force, once you assault an officer in every place I've ever heard thats an auto felony. Every department has their own escalation of force protocol but if in the midst of a struggle the weapon is gone for....game over....lethal force is a go. I know its hard to track this thread as its filling up fast so I'll say it again, if he gets out and walks up to a kneeling and surrendering Brown, even though he got punched in the face at the truck, and shoots him then yep he's toast but if he fired and hot or missed, and Brown turns in his direction and charges him...cop does not have to flee himself...rounds fly until threat hits the ground.

That sounds silly. A natural reaction could be to charge if youre shot, especially if youre resisting. If one is shot when not intending to be shot shock could take place one thinking they are about to die and approach the shooter to stop him from firing.

[Plaza23]

So the premise of your statement is that cops assume everyone is armed and dangerous until proven otherwise and they will react accordingly?

They are within their legal rights to assume so. Have you ever been arrested or even ticketed in a traffic violation? If you get out of your car during a traffic stop, the cops will immediately tell you to freeze, get back in your car, or show your hands. If you start walking towards a cop and disobey orders, he is legally within his right to shoot you.

I'm pretty sure that most officers use discretion when firing their weapons though Cops could be killing way more criminals than they actually do if they fired their weapons whenever they were legally authorized too. I bet most are hesitant too since all shootings are internally investigated and no cop wants internal affairs on his ass.

However, because it is always up to a COP's DISCRETION as to when to fire his weapon, they almost are NEVER prosecuted when they do. And you'd have to find one way stronger case to try to argue the cop used unreasonable force than to shoot a 6'2 300 pound man charging towards you (who had tussled for your gun just moments earlier). Use common sense.