Riots in Missouri - Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not talking about the evidence, but his own words, his general presentation. It is as if he is telling everyone outside they are wrong.
Because they ARE wrong. You don't know the facts. He just went through them all. Sorry you don't like them.
 
This country is broken.
A jury of his peers (including black people) voted not to indite. Whatever evidence they were presented with clearly indicated that the officer was not at fault. Time to move on.

Five minutes after a miscarriage of justice isn't really enough time to adequately move on. :o
 
A jury of his peers (including black people) voted not to indite. Whatever evidence they were presented with clearly indicated that the officer was not at fault. Time to move on.
:up:
Exactly. Good luck trying to explain that to some folks though, apparently the outraged ones know something that the judge and the jury did not.
 
Because they ARE wrong. You don't know the facts. He just went through them all. Sorry you don't like them.

Wow what a surprise defending prosecator who lets off cop for public executions.I know a lot of people here are conservative but still.
 
Because they ARE wrong. You don't know the facts. He just went through them all. Sorry you don't like them.
You are clearly missing the point. They are handling this as badly as they have handled this entire situation. You think they are rioting just to riot? ****.
 
I've steered clear of this thread for months. The only thing I'll say is no doubt Michael Brown was doing something he shouldn't have been (anyone who denies that is delusional), but why was lethal force used instead of a taser-gun? Don't most police have tasers or less lethal options exactly for these sort of situations?
 
From his and the grand jurys' mouths. They have all of the evidence, you do not.
What are you talking about? Do you even realize what the post you were replying to says?
 
Not talking about the evidence, but his own words, his general presentation. It is as if he is telling everyone outside they are wrong.

We must be watching something very different...he simply read off the evidence, the eye witness accounts and the autopsy evidence.

The only question that they have asked where he was to give his own opinion was whether he still felt that going to a grand jury was the right thing to do...

No where in what he has said did he say anyone was wrong.
 
Wow what a surprise defending prosecator who lets off cop for public executions.I know a lot of people here are conservative but still.
Because no one ever gets away with murder. Never happens, especially with cops and the wealthy. Never, ever happens.
 
Wow what a surprise defending prosecator who lets off cop for public executions.I know a lot of people here are conservative but still.

Wait, Conservatives support public executions?!?!?!? :wow:

I guess I won't be seeing my relatives anymore.

*hides under bed*

:ninja:
 
This country is broken.


Five minutes after a miscarriage of justice isn't really enough time to adequately move on. :o

A jury of his peers voted not to indict. I don't see an issue with this. They probably got more of the story than we ever will.
 
We must be watching something very different...he simply read off the evidence, the eye witness accounts and the autopsy evidence.

The only question that they have asked where he was to give his own opinion was whether he still felt that going to a grand jury was the right thing to do...

No where in what he has said did he say anyone was wrong.
Every he read was evidence? I honestly must be watching something else. Because the way he was talking about about how people jump to conclusions sounded a lot like that to me.
 
Time for more cameras.

I saw something a while back about many of the Ferguson residents getting body cams and having "know your rights" classes. This is something that should be happening nationwide.
 
I've steered clear of this thread for months. The only thing I'll say is no doubt Michael Brown was doing something he shouldn't have been (anyone who denies that is delusional), but why was lethal force used instead of a taser-gun? Don't most police have tasers or less lethal options exactly for these sort of situations?

We may never know, the only thing I can discern from what the evidence has shown is that there was a gunshot while they had an encounter in the police car. Maybe at that point, he saw it as needing the force he took later. A police officer losing their gun is one of the worst things that can happen to the officer, and others. I don't know...just a sad, sad situation all the way around, and I don't see a solution.
 
You are clearly missing the point. They are handling this as badly as they have handled this entire situation. You think they are rioting just to riot? ****.
I don't try to pretend that I know what people are thinking. Unlike the people who are sure that the officer is guilty when they really don't know what they're talking about.
 
A jury of his peers voted not to indite. I don't see an issue with this. They probably got more of the story than we ever will.
I thought they were going to release all the info and findings?
 
I've steered clear of this thread for months. The only thing I'll say is no doubt Michael Brown was doing something he shouldn't have been (anyone who denies that is delusional), but why was lethal force used instead of a taser-gun? Don't most police have tasers or less lethal options exactly for these sort of situations?

This.

I don't understand why this hasn't been asked or said to this man. The very first thing P.O. are taught is that they are supposed to use lethal force as a last resort.
 
We may never know, the only thing I can discern from what the evidence has shown is that there was a gunshot while they had an encounter in the police car. Maybe at that point, he saw it as needing the force he took later. A police officer losing their gun is one of the worst things that can happen to the officer, and others. I don't know...just a sad, sad situation all the way around, and I don't see a solution.
Did he lose his gun? How did he shoot Brown if he lost his gun?
 
I've steered clear of this thread for months. The only thing I'll say is no doubt Michael Brown was doing something he shouldn't have been (anyone who denies that is delusional), but why was lethal force used instead of a taser-gun? Don't most police have tasers or less lethal options exactly for these sort of situations?

This.

I don't understand why this hasn't been asked or said to this man. The very first thing P.O. are taught is that they are supposed to use lethal force as a last resort.
Easier said than done. Brown's blood was in the car, he was aggressive and grabbed at a gun. He's a huge guy. Don't assault a cop. THE END.
 
I don't try to pretend that I know what people are thinking. Unlike the people who are sure that the officer is guilty when they really don't know what they're talking about.
Irony as that is exactly what you are doing by claiming you understand what people who think Wilson should have charged are thinking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,268
Messages
22,076,843
Members
45,876
Latest member
Crazygamer3011
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"