Ferguson Police Chief Admits Officer Was Not Aware Of Robbery

a reply to: loam

And what narrative is that, pray tell? That an unarmed man was shot 9 times by a police officer? That narrative?

I don't think that's a narrative, Loam, that's just what happened.

Nope, the narrative comes in with trying to bring in hearsay material and make it fit ANY STORY that takes away from that simple fact that no one, anywhere is disputing.

A cop shot an unarmed 18 year old boy in the head multiple times at a distance of 30 or more feet.

/shrug You spin it anyway you like, but don't pretend that you're dealing with "evidence."

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Gryphon66

Seems like the only narrative you are interested in is the one that confirms your view of what happened.

The off camera remarks by the one guy clearly tells a different version from the one told by the 'two ladies'.

You can't just wish that away.

Moreover, it matches the account given by the LEO's acquaintance on the radio program.

Yes but you have to remember that we have different reports, some that vary slightly some more than slightly. Most importantly though is, and I think this is why Gryph is getting pissed, at first when it was only eye witness accounts from the neighbors and Dorian I heard everything from, "Well you can't trust anything in the hood says cause they're all criminals" to just plain old, "Eyewitness accounts are never correct." Now when there might be some accounts heard in the background of some video that might go the other way, those are credible for some reason.

I'm not talking about anyone specific or anything. But that's the gist of it I think and I understand what Gryph means too. I had more than one attack against me like that a few days ago and it's frustrating.

Sorry. My clicker finger is faulty.

Double Post.

a reply to: Libertygal

You are 100% on the right track here.

Don't let the deflections and tangent "analysis" stop you.

We will be seeing every trick in the book thrown.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: Libertygal

I am rather surprised by this, as police ammo, usually hollow points, would have caused a noticeable exit wound. I cannot obviously say how many bullet wounds there are, but, I can tell you if there is a back wound at all, it is a grazing wound. The most obvious appears to be a head wound. That is easily determined by the blood on the street seeming to have flowed from the head. Head wounds have a proclivity to bleed, heavily and quickly.

This would all match the officer's testimony as given on the radio show I posted.

Wait. I haven't heard his report on this. What did he say about the fatal shot?? Did he say that Brown was coming at him and he shot him in the head??? Or how did he explain the events of the actual shooting and especially the head shot??

Here is the radio show. A young lady called in and stated she is a personal friend of the police officer. She offers his side, as it has not yet been given.

She states that the officer saw them in the street, asked them to get out of the road, and drove by. He paused and watched in his mirror, maybe called for backup, she's not certain.

As he watched them, he got the radio call about the strong arm robbery. He realized they were carrying the cigars, the product of said robbery.

He put the vehicle in reverse and backed up to Dorian and Michael. He moved to exit the car, and Michael slammed the door back on Darren. He moved again, to get out of the car, and Michael rushed him, shoving him back into the car, and punched him in the face.

Darren went for his gun, and Michael then went for the gun. A struggle ensued within the space of the interior of the vehicle. The gun, she states, was being turned, and pushed against Darrens' hip.

The gun went off and Michael and Dorian ran. Darren exited the car, following them.

They got about 35 feet away, when Michael turned and taunted him, saying things like, "Whatcha gonna do? You gonna shoot me?"

Michael then rushed at the officer, who opened fire. She stated he just kept coming. Darren fired more shots as Michael approached, and the final shot was in the forehead.

Michael then dropped, and died.

This is not an exact transcript, but as close as I can get from memory.



ETA - she also stated there were no shots in the back, and that the autopsy will bear that out.

Sorry, accidentally left that out.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Libertygal

You are 100% on the right track here.

Don't let the deflections and tangent "analysis" stop you.

We will be seeing every trick in the book thrown.

Sure, sure, because we're "in on it" too, right? We all got our instructions from the Marxist-Fascist-Progressive-Liberal Hotline this afternoon so that we know how to combat the True Red White and Blue Americans that are jumping through their collective butts to claim that ANYTHING ELSE IS TRUE BESIDES WHAT WE ALL KNOW TO BE TRUE?

Thank god I had my copy of Alinsky with me so I knew how to attempt to counter Libertygal's amazing crime-fighting powers, eh?

"Ewige blumenkraft!"

/shakes fist at the sky

a reply to: Libertygal

Sounds like a well-written script that accounts for everything that would totally exonerate Officer Wilson and totally incriminate Michael Brown, doesn't it?

I mean, it's like it's the perfect explanation!

Perfect.

a reply to: mOjOm

originally posted by: mOjOm
... I think this is why Gryph is getting pissed....

Maybe Glyph should take a breather then, because I read that person's posts as from someone not terribly interested in civil discussion or discovery.

I have also not read all of Libertygal's posts, so maybe there is some history between those two.

All I'm responding to are the two most recent videos she posted and what additional information they may provide.

I am by no means suggesting it is now clear what happened. If anything, things are less clear.

What I do know, however, is that the original story that an 18 year old was gunned down by a police officer for simply jaywalking is not the full story.

a reply to: Gryphon66



Oh Pleeeeze.

The game is just starting.

Wait till we get confirmations and especially the toxicity report from the "body".

pa reply to: mOjOm

The eyewitness accounts in the background are not credible "for some reason".

They are MORE credible, because they are unforced, unprovoked, unwittingly recorded accounts of people talking.

Accounts like these tend to be more truthful than others. They deserve a MORE discerning ear than someone posing on television for their 15.

One thing that I can almost promise you is, once the poster of that video realizes what is in that crosstalk, he will almost be guaranteed to delete that video.

If the people on that video did not think, nor realize, actually comprehend the fact that they were being recorded, they may actually get very upset with that video poster.

There is a VERY good chance that video could be used in court, hence, why I emplored anyone capable of saving it, to do so. It may be valuable evidence, and may lead the police to some real, credible, witnesses.

People in that area, when approached by police for informatiin have a tendency to repeat heresay, or claim they saw nothing.

They need to locate that person that actually saw this, and that video may help them to do so.

When people don't know, or realize, they are being recorded, they have a tendency to speak more openly.

It has also come to mind that video may cross some sort of privacy laws, but that's another story, for another time. Regardless, it may help find a witness.

a reply to: mOjOm

Me? I'm not really peeved about anything here, except maybe that we all witnessed, directly a real example of what so many here rail about on a daily basis ... about government-organized tyranny, military grade weapons being brought out to threaten American citizens, and at least four or five Amendments of the Bill of Rights being SPIT ON AND GROUND UNDERFOOT!

You see, contrary to the, heh, narrative that is spun here and in the right-wing media echo-chamber on a daily basis, I do love America. I do love the Constitution. I do not trust the government, any government, but especially not local governments (city and county) because there is where the real CORRUPTION in this country has taken root.

I could read the video a bit differently than some have, but, essentially, I can see (my opinion) that Michael Brown stole a few cigars. I think someone mentioned somewhere that the whole box was worth less than $50 retail. And yes, that's wrong, it's a crime, and there was probably a level of assault on the shopkeeper. That's a crime too.

And if he slugged the cop and ran, well, that's just stupid too. But, he is was an 18 year old male.

We're known to do stupid things at times.

There is no scenario in which Michael Brown needs 9 slugs pumped into him for jay-walking. Or cigar-snatching. Or even cop-punching.

I can't imagine any cop who would want to live with that.



(BTW, has anyone wondered how differently this would be going if it came out that the shopkeeper was a Muslim ... oh, nevermind).

originally posted by: Libertygal

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: Libertygal

I am rather surprised by this, as police ammo, usually hollow points, would have caused a noticeable exit wound. I cannot obviously say how many bullet wounds there are, but, I can tell you if there is a back wound at all, it is a grazing wound. The most obvious appears to be a head wound. That is easily determined by the blood on the street seeming to have flowed from the head. Head wounds have a proclivity to bleed, heavily and quickly.

This would all match the officer's testimony as given on the radio show I posted.

Wait. I haven't heard his report on this. What did he say about the fatal shot?? Did he say that Brown was coming at him and he shot him in the head??? Or how did he explain the events of the actual shooting and especially the head shot??

Here is the radio show. A young lady called in and stated she is a personal friend of the police officer. She offers his side, as it has not yet been given.

She states that the officer saw them in the street, asked them to get out of the road, and drove by. He paused and watched in his mirror, maybe called for backup, she's not certain.

As he watched them, he got the radio call about the strong arm robbery. He realized they were carrying the cigars, the product of said robbery.

He put the vehicle in reverse and backed up to Dorian and Michael. He moved to exit the car, and Michael slammed the door back on Darren. He moved again, to get out of the car, and Michael rushed him, shoving him back into the car, and punched him in the face.

( Edit by me, im noob with this forum script lol : this story i hear it from the witness and his "dread buddy" so it fit. The buddy, talk about the middle of the street, then that the cop went off, came back, Brown kick the door, then his version start : That the cop grabbed brown, fire him, then he ran fire in the back, hands up etc etc )


Darren went for his gun, and Michael then went for the gun. A struggle ensued within the space of the interior of the vehicle. The gun, she states, was being turned, and pushed against Darrens' hip.

( the "gun story" started by the police "groups" and it copy the case here in Quebec of Freddy villenueva, a 18yrs un-armed guy getting show with 2 other people. The police here too use the "rush for the gun during struggle" argue + here police was on "strike/protest" for money, so they didnt have the proper pant, so the gun were loose/not stable .... ( the cops never got arrested or nothing )

The gun went off and Michael and Dorian ran. Darren exited the car, following them.

( autopsy will show if it's true, if the first gunshot from the car to outside, didnt hit nobody )

They got about 35 feet away, when Michael turned and taunted him, saying things like, "Whatcha gonna do? You gonna shoot me?"

Michael then rushed at the officer, who opened fire. She stated he just kept coming. Darren fired more shots as Michael approached, and the final shot was in the forehead.

( ALLLLLLL this is "new" all witness ( 2 neutral/not involve ) and more, tell the "Hands up dont shoot" story. I can't belive all these people are lying. They cops NEVER deny it too... They said : "no comment" because of the future trial. )

Michael then dropped, and died.

This is not an exact transcript, but as close as I can get from memory.


ETA - she also stated there were no shots in the back, and that the autopsy will bear that out.

Sorry, accidentally left that out.

Sorry for my bad english, i really dont believe the "go for the gun" theory due to been use here in Quebec too. And the ( rush on police and getting shot ) due to all witness talking about the "hand up, dont shoot". They can't make it up all, due to say it hours after the crime.

Police had 1 week to make up their story with the lawyer xD. Theses civils just said what happenned to the media just after the event, so they can "groups up and tell a fake story". So i believe the withness about the "hands up dont shoot".

The cop ( from what i gather ) just panicked and was aggresive in life ( He had past "douchery" act with a girl 1month past ).

Maybe he got a mental illness, but HE FAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL the system.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Has the "9 slugs" been confirmed yet ?

a reply to: Libertygal

I have to give you credit. That video is a very good find.

It's a nearly real-time recollection of an eye witness that cuts against the original assertions.

I agree it seems very relevant.

a reply to: xuenchen

Yeah, what d'ya figure it'll be this time?

Wait, they already used Skittles ...

No, I totally agree that this has really taken a different turn and what was once an Upstanding Innocent Boy getting murdered in cold blood has now changed.

However, I'm not sure yet how much has changed other than now we certainly know that at least on that day he certainly wasn't an Upstanding Innocent Boy.

I still find it difficult to justify him getting shot down in the middle of the street though.

Since there is so many conflicting reports now it's hard to figure out what to believe. Plus there is some question as to what is actually the right way to handle such events by an officer, depending of course on what actually happened.

Beyond that there is still the bigger question as to how all of this is going to be handled and what the outcome is going to be and why. In fact. because of the variables in play now, the result of this case and the way it's handled is REALLY going to be interesting. There are sides being chosen for various reasons and all of them are pretty sincere in their commitment to the sides they've chosen.

a reply to: xuenchen

Heck I don't know, Foxy!

Has Michael Brown's abilities to interdimensionally phase into a police car through a closed door been substantiated?

And can anyone tell me how there was enough room in that front seat for a guy that big to roll around and scuffle with a adult-sized police officer? And yet, Quick Draw Wilson was STILL able to get the drop on Big Mike?

LOL ... see what happens when we use our imaginations?

a reply to: mOjOm

Exactly. He could have aimed for a knee. He could have made any other nonlethal judgement. He chose not to.

ETA : I choose life. That's my side. Both of these men should still be alive. Whether one would be behind bars seems to be what the discrepancy is.

originally posted by: mOjOm

Since there is so many conflicting reports now it's hard to figure out what to believe. Plus there is some question as to what is actually the right way to handle such events by an officer, depending of course on what actually happened.

Far be it from me to jump on the conspiracy wagon, but, you're making a most excellent point here. Misinformation, disinformation, one scenario after another being built up and floated out across the waves of American media ... and gosh, who knows just WHAT to think here?

Doesn't remind me of the Kennedy Assassination, or 9/11 or any thing else where there were so many conflicting stories and so much contradictory data that no reasonable person could possibly draw any conclusions from it except ...

"You have to pick a side. You're either fer us er agin us."

I don't think I'd expect the waters to get very much clearer as time goes on.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Well, I happen to agree with you about the subsequent obscene use of force and unjustified arrests of reporters and the shooting of tear gas and rubber bullets into the peaceful protesters. ALL VERY unacceptable.

But it appears you minimize Brown's actions in a way I also find unacceptable. The store video shows me Brown is a criminal and very willing to use violence. Period. That is much more than youthful indiscretion, imo. It's depraved behavior.

...as was the subsequent rioting and looting.

Concerning the 'shopkeeper' being muslim, it just so happens that might be the case:

See here.

It's from 2008 and it's not clear if ownership has changed.

But what relevance do you think him being muslim might have? I don't understand your comment about this at all.