It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ferguson Grand Jury: No Indictment for Darren Wilson in Michael Brown Shooting

page: 58
138
<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

Just another piece of evidence this man shouldn't have even been a LEO.


I want you to try an expeiment, but since you Brits aren't allowed to have guns you'll have to work with me here.

Go outside and pick up a fist full of rocks. Pick a man sized target about 15m away and try to hit it with the rocks. It's pretty east to get close, you'll most likely hit it with several of those rocks.

Now place a tin can on the ground to simulate a kneecap sized target, grab another fistful of rocks and SPRINT, I mean really put all your effort in to running as fast as you can, around your house (to simulate a stressfull, possibly life-or-death situation), stop quickly and try to hit that tin can/simulated kneecap with those rocks at 15m.




posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

These are the same type of people that riot and loot over sports games.

They would have done it anyways, because the end result isn't what they want. Has nothing to do with the factual events of what took place.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: sirlancelot

A taser's effective range is really only a few yards at most. After that they get really squirrely.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: jaffo

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: luthier



The trial was not based on justified actions.

I am not aware that has been any trial.

The grand jury hearing my bad.

It shows you how charged this is when that comment gets starred



Full grand jury transcripts and evidence presented, in case anyone wants facts rather than fully and yet illy-formed opinions...

www.nytimes.com...


So you read all that right? And you have the ability to interprit law. Do you know what the defence had to prove or the prosecution?



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: macman

I may be idealistic, but I believe if Wilson had been wearing a body cam, and people could see for themselves what had transpired, there wouldn't be any reason for them to go nuts like they did.



im a realist and i believe it still would have played out the way it did because wilson is white..
the chants of racism started immediately....

i would like to see the cops wear body cams too but those are not going to show the whole picture either.
i dont know how good of a picture we would get when brown was trying to get the gun in the car or when they were tangled up.

i still think this would have played out just like it did.

i also think if wilson was black it would not have played out like this..
the outrage is coming from the fact that wilson is white



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

So tell me this brown was reaching for his gun when he was running away and shot in the back?


Three autopsy reports clearly debunk the claim that he was shot in the back. Where have you been for the last 4 months?



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Lipton

Your arguing fine motor skill driven actions, like shooting a 4" by 4" target, under a fight or flight scenario with someone that has no clue on firearms.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

If there's one change in law that I could support, it would indeed be a mandate for the police to wear cameras. In fact, if I were in law enforcement, I'd be wearing one voluntarily to protect myself from accusations like the ones in this case.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

That's nice.

Well, I am a nice savage. So says under my name.

You seem so.


So, for no reason, a LEO out of no where, attacked you.

Sure sure.

Yes.


And why were you raided??

Doesn't make a difference, I was found innocent before it even went to trial.



No more a criminal then Wilson I guess.

I don't know what you're implying about me but its called slanderous.


Ahhh, so sad.

You're sad... That's evident!
edit on 25-11-2014 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: luthier



The trial was not based on justified actions.

I am not aware that has been any trial.

The grand jury hearing my bad.

It shows you how charged this is when that comment gets starred


I think it is important to remember the difference, because Wilson (if my suspicions are correct) will end up going to trial on Federal charges. Then there is always the possibility of a civil trial when (if) Michael Brown's family sues him for wrongful death.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: nullafides

Poopyhead is a name. Jerkoff is a name.


Criminal is a definition of someone who's actions are criminal.




Yes, those are examples of names.

But, is someone who was once convicted of an offense, a crime, who was convicted and sentence to penalty, still necessarily a criminal?

I was 14 when convicted of assault. I received two years probation.

I was 22 when detained for shoplifting.

I was guilty of both. I took my penalties, and changed my outlook and behavior as a result.

I am now 45 years old, a father, a husband, and a professional that has had an impact not only on several major corporations within the US, but also the local and federal government. Not to mention the TSA, NSA, DHS, Dept of State, DOD, and all branches of the US military.

Am I, in your opinion, a criminal? Is the title, the conviction, something the combination of time/behavior/repentance cannot clean the slate?

edit on 25-11-2014 by nullafides because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman

They would have done it anyways, because the end result isn't what they want. Has nothing to do with the factual events of what took place.



correct
its not about the facts at all
its about their perception of the events that took place
its about their perceived injustices



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

If a grand jury decides not to indict, pursuing federal charges becomes nearly impossible. I'm not saying it won't happen, there's always that possibility, but it's unlikely.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lipton

originally posted by: luthier

So tell me this brown was reaching for his gun when he was running away and shot in the back?


Three autopsy reports clearly debunk the claim that he was shot in the back. Where have you been for the last 4 months?


On leave taking care of newborn twins.

But it doesnt matter they could have shot him in the back wilson would still have qualified immunity.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
This is a symptom of police brutality, the blue wall, and how police officers in the US have gotten away scott free with things like this in the past, present and soon to be future. Most people think the average police officer assumes they are above the law and can get away with abusing it. The pressure has been mounting and mounting for years and it was going to blow over eventually. This unfortunate case just happened to be the spark to ignite the situation.

Will anything positive, or change come of the peaceful protests... Probably not, but the discontent is duly noted by various protests around the country.

This is coming from a black male so take it how you will; Another large issue at hand is the issue of disproportinate crime within the black community within America. This issue of crime in the black community gives the police a reason / excuse to assume the worst when it comes to black males since we are perpetrators of most violent crimes reported, and have the largest prison population per capita. Does not help that the media does their job of sensationalizing it well. It is even worse when the criminal culture is glorified and celebrated by music artists and television. By all means I'm not condoning any of what happened by stating this; I'm just stating the cold and ugly truth!

Where are the protests when a black male kills another black male within the community? Why does this outrage mostly seem to happen when the police are involved? I'm drifting too far off topic I'll stop while I'm ahead...
edit on 25-11-2014 by majesticgent because: ETA: change only from mostly

edit on 25-11-2014 by majesticgent because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grovit

originally posted by: macman

They would have done it anyways, because the end result isn't what they want. Has nothing to do with the factual events of what took place.



correct
its not about the facts at all
its about their perception of the events that took place
its about their perceived injustices



Let us not forge their perceived justice.

Justice, after all, is a concept based off of perception. Not everyone perceives things the same way.

Being on the lighter end of the see-saw does not automatically dictate right or wrong.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

They are not accurate. They are not a 100% effective method to stop a lethal threat. Tazers were never meant for that.

They were designed to deal with non-combative persons and those resisting.

Not someone attacking.

The tazer is about the worst thing to happen to police work sine I don't know what else. It is pitched and pushed to Agencies as a "cure all" to deal with people. It isn't.
It has removed the hands on aspect of police work.

I agree........LEOs now days have very little training in hand to hand combat. I have stated that on ATS many times.
This is due to departments not training, LEOs being lazy/over worked or the LEO not being that type of person to begin with.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: majesticgent
This is a symptom of police brutality, the blue wall, and how police officers in the US have gotten away scott free with things like this in the past, present and soon to be future. Most people think the average police officer assumes they are above the law and can get away with abusing it. The pressure has been mounting and mounting for years and it was going to blow over eventually. This unfortunate case just happened to be the spark to ignite the situation.

Will anything positive, or change come of the peaceful protests... Probably not, but the discontent is duly noted by various protests around the country.

This is coming from a black male so take it how you will; Another large issue at hand is the issue of disproportinate crime within the black community within America. This issue of crime in the black community gives the police a reason / excuse to assume the worst when it comes to black males since we are perpetrators of most violent crimes reported, and have the largest prison population per capita. Does not help that the media does their job of sensationalizing it well. It is even worse when the culture is glorified and celebrated by music artists and television. By all means I'm not condoning any of what happened by stating this; I'm just stating the cold and ugly truth!

Where are the protests when a black male kills another black male within the community? Why does this outrage only seem to happen when the police are involved? I'm drifting too far off topic I'll stop while I'm ahead...



EXCELLENT points.

Thank you for your thoughts and comments. They were truly inspired, well thought, and beautifully versed.



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: butcherguy

If a grand jury decides not to indict, pursuing federal charges becomes nearly impossible. I'm not saying it won't happen, there's always that possibility, but it's unlikely.

I don't think it will stop Eric Holder from filing civil rights charges.
I cite the case of the 'Rodney King Cops'. They were acquitted of the charges in a trial in Los Angeles... Only to be brought up on civil rights charges later. The charges were different, so no double jeopardy.
edit on bu302014-11-25T10:02:09-06:0010America/ChicagoTue, 25 Nov 2014 10:02:09 -060010u14 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   
There will be no charges , its done so move on.

There can be no civil charges if there is not an arrest and formal criminal charges.




top topics



 
138
<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in

join