Ferguson Corruption PROOF

a reply to: Shamrock6

its actually quite amazing isnt it...
i cant believe he is still going after you and phage have worked him for the past few days

keep up the good work shamrock

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: deadeyedick

originally posted by: mysterioustranger

a reply to: deadeyedick







Given all the potential factors...you just admitted you can't accept that. Oh...and my classes were not for purchasers...it was advanced law enforcement and military based suppositional training about understaning potentially misunderstood situations.







Just because youve said you cant accept it, doesnt mean its not true. Nor that it IS true.







These Range Instructors-instructional training points were well taken for this "what-if"?. And according to a few other members, they were also made aware of the same outcome for the premise presented.







Maybe we could send an instructor over to your place so you can correct them? I mean...given all the potential variables n all...???

Nobody i know round here would even wait for the knife to be drawn. The lesson would be cut short. That was the just of my response that if i came to your house with a knife i would likely get shot and the other way around.



It is true both ways that we are limited by our training. think deep about that one



putting that aside it still shows that wilson was off with his remarks about distance and actions. The comment may have been aimed at showing what one could do in 25' but it only shows that all the things brown said happened in that time could not fit in the time and distance aspects of his statments.

I find it absolutely stunning that you're sitting here railing endlessly against Wilson for over reacting, making things worse, not doing things "normal" people would do, going outside what you believe policy is, and you say something like this.



You just said you know people, and given that you offered to provide your own address I think it's safe to include YOU in that "people" you know, who would shoot somebody who they believed had a knife but that hadn't drawn the knife yet, and we're over 21 feet away. You just said you and others you know would shoot somebody based purely on the belief that they were armed and may have intent to harm you, but had not displayed a weapon and were not close enough to touch. And you say that after everything you've posted the last several says. That is utterly mind blowing to me.

Now you know why i am not a cop. It should not be that stunning that a person could recognize their own bounderies in life and choose to stay away from scenerios such as gun fights. It should not be stunning either that i am telling everyone that if they show up to a gun fight with a knife they will loose especially if they know you are coming and post others with guns around to protect. This is life saving information i am giving you all for free.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Your life saving info is to not bring a knife to a place that is surrounded with armed people, after telling those armed people that we intend to bring harm to them with a knife? Well....thanks

a reply to: Shamrock6

Yes it would be unwise for anyone to show up to someones house wielding a knife looking for some member of an internet forum and for those who monitor all this and already know where the member is should also know that it is extremely unwise to post such info on the net such as the thought that if you have a knife and are within 20' of a cop you can win the battle cause you can beat him to the draw. Do you see how some might believe the knife 20' away is faster than one can draw a weapon.

Not only is it false it is negligent to say such falsehood unless you aim to get people killed.

Knives always loose in gun fights so does being unarmed and black.

You get that for free also.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Surely you don't Really believe that knives Always lose in "gun fights", or as I prefer "fights"? This is just hyperbole, no?

I was watching the George Stephanopolis interview with Wilson, turned to my wife and said he's a liar or at best has constructed in his mind a version of events that lets him live with himself.

I don't think the physical injuries to Brown from the pavement are consistent with a charge stopped by a bullet to the head inducing a rag doll effect.

The reason i called him a liar so quickly after hearing the Stephanopolis interview is because he said that he heard Brown grunt animalisticly as he was charging him. I find it hard to believe that anyone who had just fired two rounds while inside a car could hear anything but a high pitched ring.

Tested it out with my .40 by shooting a couple of rounds from inside my car and couldn't hear anything for about a minute.

I'm not saying there was ever any chance of a conviction, i don't think there was, but it is quite obvious that the prosecutor had no intention of even trying to get an indictment. The pursuit of justice died needlessly early in this case. The details deserved full exposure in an adversarial trial with Wilson facing judgement by twelve of his peers.

a reply to: deadeyedick

It's worth exactly what I paid for it

And yea, nobody here has posted anything that isn't plastered all over the Internet anyway. The 21 foot rule has been around years. And years. And years and years and years.

Also, in your earlier comment, you said you and others would shoot somebody before the "could even draw" the knife. Now you're talking about somebody who is "wielding" a knife. Wielding is holding or using a weapon. You've already said you'd shoot somebody who was simply carrying a knife and hadn't "drawn" it yet. So you'd readily shoot somebody who had no knife in their hands, but you thought they might harm you, and even though they're not close enough to harm you, you'd shoot them anyway. Instead of running away and calling for backup, like you say a police officer should've done with somebody who was also not displaying a weapon but was well within arms reach and had already demonstrated the intent and willingness to do the officer harm. Yep, feel like we've got that all nailed down


Oh, and yes, I do see how people can "think" a knife in the hand of a person 20 feet away from somebody they intend to attack will likely be able to get an attack off before the other person has time to draw and fire their weapon. Because it's like....a fact.

There is a limit on how fast humans on foot can travel.
There is no limit on how slow they can travel.

a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Trust me that the Irony of his Statement "to brother ___ Fight the good fight" is just poetic justice. I am not racially prejudiced at all however I do not think he would normally write that to a man so white I am almost clear….

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: deadeyedick





Also, in your earlier comment, you said you and others would shoot somebody before the "could even draw" the knife. Now you're talking about somebody who is "wielding" a knife. Wielding is holding or using a weapon. You've already said you'd shoot somebody who was simply carrying a knife and hadn't "drawn" it yet. So you'd readily shoot somebody who had no knife in their hands, but you thought they might harm you, and even though they're not close enough to harm you, you'd shoot them anyway. Instead of running away and calling for backup, like you say a police officer should've done with somebody who was also not displaying a weapon but was well within arms reach and had already demonstrated the intent and willingness to do the officer harm. Yep, feel like we've got that all nailed down

This is exactly the problem here. You are letting your personal views get in the way of facts. To be clear no feelings i can have of what i would do or should do in fighting situations should get in the way of me being able to view the events that day as told by wilson. Just because i am pro law enforcment does not mean i should turn a blind eye to facts and neither should it if i am someone that is able to do the same as wilson. Facts are facts and you pick sides based on factors other than facts. You also enjoy along with other members post harmful information online that very well could promote further violence to law enforcment even after being called out on it so that alone shows you do not want to see the big picture and feel the justification that it has been done before is enough to excuse your actions. it is not. take some personal responsibility and face facts.

originally posted by: Tusks
There is a limit on how fast humans on foot can travel.

There is no limit on how slow they can travel.

yes
we also have a minimum traveling speed mentioned by wilson who stated brown ws running and never stopped and was threatening. that establishes some parameters that should not be ignored either.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Nah dude. There hasn't been one ounce of "personal" in anything I've said. At any point. Everything I've said is supported by testimony, evidence, and things like science. I don't make things up and throw out 12 "if's" in a row and then claim that it's a fact.

You consistently substitute your own beliefs and interpretations for actual evidence and testimony. You take wildly inaccurate views and interpretations of the most inane comments made during testimony.

You see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. That's plain as day. And the fact that you would willingly do things that you claim were so completely wrong for Wilson to have done (even though he didn't actually do them, you just SAY he did) is the cherry on top.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Bravo Serria

The op is a very simple one you choose to ignore and bring in my character in to question as if anything about the way i am affected wilson to the point that he decided to give false statments. Let's just say i am a crazy person and leave it there and focus on the op if you want to keep posting in this thread.

Wilsons statment contridict themselves and proves that at some point certain things he described as actual events could not have been due to timing. Again refer to the facts in the op and let's both try not to derail away from the statments he made.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Wilson stated that when Brown charged him he back peddled to create more distance between the two.

Could that not account for the discrepancy you have with the distance?

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: deadeyedick



Wilson stated that when Brown charged him he back peddled to create more distance between the two.



Could that not account for the discrepancy you have with the distance?

Well i think there were other events that happened between the two points you mentioned there.

My problem is that wilson said that brown turned toward him and began to run toward him. Then once in the motion of the run wilson gave the order at least two times to "get on the ground". Then only after seeing brown was still coming at him did he began to fire at brown and the shots were recorded and lasted 6+ seconds.

That is depending on how many seconds we allow for the words get on the ground to be stated at least twice plus the six seconds. A very low time of even one secomd per command would put us at over 8 seconds.

Even though wilson statd brown was running we will give the benefit of doubt yet again and compare the times to an average human walks 4 feet per second.

That would be around 32' covered and that is taking the figures to the extreme low end and does not match the 25' foot blood trail.

If we take the figures to the context of a run that was reported by wilson then we get figures that double or triple the 32' i mentioned depending on how fast brow was running.

I take from this that some part of his statment was fabricated in some way and the prosecutor led the jury to ignore this for some reason. I call that corruption.

This is just a very tiny piece of many other factors that leads one to believe that something other than what was reported to the gj happened that day.


eta according to figures the average human runs 22 feet per second

even if brown being over weight and high was only travelling half that he would have been over 88'

keep in mind that i contend that to be running and a threat one would have to be traveling at least 11 feet per second.

It is one thing to say that brown should or should not have been shot but it is a whole other ball game when someone says that wilsons statments add up. that is an outriight lie or great ignorrance of his statments.

a reply to: deadeyedick

LAst time...the man HAS the knife drawn above his head...coming at you at 3-4 steps and 20 ft. You keep trying to say you'd draw and fire. Youve missed the point entirely.

Once more and I give up with you...

1. Knife over head raised and running at you. You have 20ft, a millisecond of someone running at you.
2. Youre gun is holstered.

By the time you recognize the threat...its already at you AS YOU DRAW.

The lesson here is dont think you can remove all threats, in time, every instance. You cant. Good chance in a Ferguson-type threat discussed here...the assaliant is right on top of you.

Looking up and seeing someone up at and on you and you havent drawn yet?

Now Im done. Good luck. Ill tell my instructor if he's ever in that situation...to give you a call. He'd never have time to get the phone out.

My problem is that wilson said that brown turned toward him and began to run toward him. Then once in the motion of the run wilson gave the order at least two times to "get on the ground". Then only after seeing brown was still coming at him did he began to fire at brown and the shots were recorded and lasted 6+ seconds.



That is depending on how many seconds we allow for the words get on the ground to be stated at least twice plus the six seconds. A very low time of even one secomd per command would put us at over 8 seconds.



Even though wilson statd brown was running we will give the benefit of doubt yet again and compare the times to an average human walks 4 feet per second.



That would be around 32' covered and that is taking the figures to the extreme low end and does not match the 25' foot blood trail.



If we take the figures to the context of a run that was reported by wilson then we get figures that double or triple the 32' i mentioned depending on how fast brow was running.



I take from this that some part of his statment was fabricated in some way and the prosecutor led the jury to ignore this for some reason. I call that corruption.



This is just a very tiny piece of many other factors that leads one to believe that something other than what was reported to the gj happened that day.





eta according to figures the average human runs 22 feet per second



even if brown being over weight and high was only travelling half that he would have been over 88'



keep in mind that i contend that to be running and a threat one would have to be traveling at least 11 feet per second.



It is one thing to say that brown should or should not have been shot but it is a whole other ball game when someone says that wilsons statments add up. that is an outriight lie or great ignorrance of his statments.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Didn't Wilson say he was backpedaling when he was being charged.

I know I would of been if that huge robbery suspect was charging me.

Couldn't that account for some of that distance ?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: deadeyedick

phage please stick to the info in the op please.

I am. Wilson said that Brown was running toward him in spite of being told to get on the ground. In spite of being fired upon. Brown may not have been "running" but he could have been advancing at a threatening pace, or even a walk. Wilson fired because he felt threatened.

the times and distances do not align with wilsons statments but do align with the first statments of witnesses and show that they were possibly forced to change their statments.

And his statement aligns with statements from witnesses who did not change their statements. What about the ones that didn't change statements that could be seen as evidence against Wilson? Why weren't they threatened too? You seem to think that the case hinges on some eyewitness reports while others don't matter. You seem to want to second guess the grand jury. You seem to think that you are more capable of reaching a conclusion than they are even though they actually heard the witnesses, they actually saw the evidence. Why do you think that?

If a fat kid is walking towards you and you feel that threatened to shoot him..... It's either because he's scared because he was in the wrong in the first place and panicked, maybe some trash talk and/or racial slurs between both parties... Or he really wanted to shoot someone and picked the perfect kid to mess with... Most cops aren't little girls and will take you down without a gun..... If the kid had a gun or a knife, hell with it, justified....

a reply to: deadeyedick

You're right! The OP is VERY simple. You say you have proof of corruption. All you've done thus far is talk about conflicting accounts, throw out some "what if" scenarios, and take things like "estimate" and "approximate" as if those words mean "absolute" and "definite" and then create scenarios.

So, where is the PROOF you have of CORRUPTION?