New Michael Brown Documentary Says Video Proves Cops Are Lying!

a reply to: Spider879

Just to let everyone know. The prosecutor for the Michael Brown grand jury trial was on a local radio show around 3:30pm. A lengthier version of the new video has supposedly been released by the attorney for the shop and I believe St. Louis County. In the extended version of the clip; after Michael Brown leaves the employees at the store put back the cigarillos onto the shelf and the drinks he had gathered. The employees even put back the bag that the cigarillos had been put into when they thought that Michael Brown was going to purchase them. This contradicts the claims made in the film. The film does not show all of the events that occurred that night. It had been edited.

a reply to: feldercarb

The bits we've seen in the documentary clips are so brief, it's obvious that context was intentionally removed.

Wow, watching the film maker on FOX right now and he's a total piece of work.

He's the spitting image of intolerance on the left.

Can't wait for someone to upload this clip.

edit: WOW, this guy owes an apology to the Brown family for reigniting this controversy so he could get his 15 minutes of fame.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Spider879

please, it obvious.

ok just for the sake of arguing

Lying by omission

what does this mean if your not saying the reason for the stop was a lie? hence retrying the case.

two fking yrs too late have a change of mind about what really went down and the events leading up to that young man's death.

and this seems to be stating that a drug deal gone wrong, or put off was the reason that he took the cigarillos and that the cops choose to ignore it, hence retrying the case.

then this post,

that Mike Brown was just some thoughtless thug no context as to the earlier vid.

the earlier part of the video had nothing to do with brown attacking the cop after he backed up to stop him. the video they released as i said earlier showed that yes brown and johnson were indeed the two, and that yes he( brown) was prone to violence. he choose to become violent twice in a short span of time. that's the context open your eyes.
it wasn't until you started getting spanked and you realized that your OP was in trouble, that you went the DOJ route and police corruption.

Having released the vid first vid, to make him seemed like a super thug, not to bring any clarity, from that point on the hateful comments started pouring in non stop as he was judged by John Q public..mission accomplished.
Lying by omission is about the the release of the first vid but not the other at-least no one saw it.

The second vid at least from the clip that Iv'e seen , indicate that there was more to the story, although non of it was material to the actual incident as no one used it in either defense or prosecution.
And i've seen this behavior before in the cases of Trayvon Martin and Timir Rice.
But for real tho, I carry my own water despite opposition , in the opening I asked why the DOJ had not shown this, and again some had made reference to the community at large about their collective irresponsibility without looking at the community leaders actions that helped created that mistrust in the first place , the DOJ released it's report about the conditions in that community some folks would like to ignore.

Here it is:



Better watch it quick before it gets deleted.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

I agree with the lady, the vids are irrelevant to the case, I am being repetitive again, it was release for a smear job.

a reply to: Spider879

You know you would be taken a little more seriously if you talked and acted like an adult...Also what evidence is there that a Police Officer should have been prosecuted for anything. You seem like a person who see's the world as the police are out to get people like Mike Brown. You see one side of the story instead of the whole story and you interpret it the way that fits your beliefs and only those beliefs.

a reply to: Spider879

I maybe acted like a teenager when I was growing up, but I never "acted the ass" I never attacked a store clerk, robbed him or tried to sell him weed.

originally posted by: caf1550
a reply to: Spider879

You know you would be taken a little more seriously if you talked and acted like an adult...Also what evidence is there that a Police Officer should have been prosecuted for anything. You seem like a person who see's the world as the police are out to get people like Mike Brown. You see one side of the story instead of the whole story and you interpret it the way that fits your beliefs and only those beliefs.

To date I haven't commented on the guilt or innocence of Darrel Wilson, that's stuff being added , I have not even talked around that issue, I said the DOJ gave it's report , what I think makes no difference, the issue for me from pg1 was the release of the vid.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

what a tool he is, can't win a argument so he starts yelling trying to shout her down while she dishes up some facts. looks like he might needs some


to smooth that butt hurt he just suffered.

a reply to: Spider879

There was more of the video released by a St. Louis prosecutor, yesterday. Michael Brown TRIED to trade pot for cigarillos and two drinks, but the cashiers declined the offer and Michael Brown took his bag of pot back and left. The clerks then returned the merchandise to the shelves.

The documentarian selectively edited out all of that to make some argument that Michael Brown did not try to steal the cigarillos hours later and that he was owed them for pot.

And then this idiot documentarian had the nerve to claim it was investigators that *created* some false narrative by not releasing this *new* video when, in fact, it is the documentarian that tried to create a false narrative by butchering the video to suit his version of events.

Michael Brown looks even more thuggish now. Like I said, yesterday, he would stoop to any low for some cigarillos.

a reply to: Spider879

the fact that no one had a camera no cop will be prosecuted

You don't have to talk about guilt or innocence when you throw around stuff like this. You said because no one had a camera around that "no cop will be prosecuted" which makes me believe that you think he his guilty of something. What do you think Mr. Wilson or any other police officer that was there the night of the shooting should be prosecuted for?

originally posted by: caf1550
a reply to: Spider879

the fact that no one had a camera no cop will be prosecuted

You don't have to talk about guilt or innocence when you throw around stuff like this. You said because no one had a camera around that "no cop will be prosecuted" which makes me believe that you think he his guilty of something. What do you think Mr. Wilson or any other police officer that was there the night of the shooting should be prosecuted for?

Anything beyond this point would be conjecture on my part, the DOJ made it's findings, so we are all bound by it, but what I think happened?? the kid was told to get out of the street and he mouthed off to the cop, the cop felt disrespected and things spiraled down wards, cops do not respond well to being disrespected or challenged , even small amount of it or what they perceived as being disrespected such as, why are you stopping me or no you may not see my I.D. even Fk-U.

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: caf1550
a reply to: Spider879

the fact that no one had a camera no cop will be prosecuted

You don't have to talk about guilt or innocence when you throw around stuff like this. You said because no one had a camera around that "no cop will be prosecuted" which makes me believe that you think he his guilty of something. What do you think Mr. Wilson or any other police officer that was there the night of the shooting should be prosecuted for?

Anything beyond this point would be conjecture on my part, the DOJ made it's findings, so we are all bound by it, but what I think happened?? the kid was told to get out of the street and he mouthed off to the cop, the cop felt disrespected and things spiraled down wards, cops do not respond well to being disrespected or challenged , even small amount of it or what they perceived as being disrespected such as, why are you stopping me or no you may not see my I.D. even Fk-U.

That is probably what happened. However, once Brown decided to reach in car all bets are off. It wouldn't surprise me if Wilson may have come off like a d*ck. Regardless, once you step to a cop, you are escalating the situation and it won't end well for you regardless if cop may have been wrong.

I've stated this numerous times in these debates. My dad was a cop for nearly 30 years. I am black. My dad sat me down when I was a young teenager and told me to STFU and do whatever a cop says. It didn't matter if the cop was being an azzhole, if I was right, or whatever the situation. Just do what they say, STFU and deal with it later. Arguing with a cop on the side of the street is not going to end well. It is an argument you will NEVER WIN. Worst case scenario you wind up dead.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

OK, so best case scenario is Brown tried to make a drug deal. Yep, that really convinces me he was a great citizen, as I always go into gas stations trying to trade weed for cigars. African American witnesses said Brown went after the cop, if you're crazy enough to do that, then sometimes you will suffer the consequences. Brown's parent should have taught him better.

a reply to: Spider879

You truly believe that because Officer Wilson was "disrespected" he decided to kill Mike brown...are you F***ing kidding me? As for being disrespected and challenged I personally have not met a single person in my life who responds well to either of those, its not just the police its everyone.

a reply to: caf1550

More common than you think or would admit.