Breaking: Michael Brown Allegedly Involved in Second Degree Murder Case

a reply to: Greven

Hmm....funny accounts of the story all differ. So you are going to use this workers account now? Guess you aren't buying the recording that is allegedly of the incident as well, because if you believe the recording and how quickly the successive shots were fired then this worker is full of it.

Here is the analysis of the recording by a VERY reputable company call ShotSpotter....

Source

The purported audio recording of the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., reflects 10 shots all taken from the same place, according to acoustic experts who specialize in helping police identify urban gunshots.

Clark said the company confirmed that the sound on the recording is gunshots. His company specializes in distinguishing gunshot sounds from other noises like fireworks and car backfires. In addition, Clark said they could determine that the recording has 10 shots and then seven sounds that are echoes.

Clark said the recording has a three-second pause after the first six shots before the final four shots. His experts were also able to confirm that the shots were all taken from within a three-foot radius – there was only one shooter and that person was not moving.

So....do you believe the witness that you just quoted the whole story from? Or do you believe the recording is a fake? They surely can't both be correct since this great witness you are quoting says that the officer fire a shot while chasing Brown, Brown stopped and turned around after another shot....that makes two with a pause. Then he said Brown began moving towards the officer and the officer was backing away while firing more shots at this point, again not working with the analysis from the experts on the recording.

Also not working with other accounts. The recording says 6 shots, pause 4 more shots. Hmmmm.....so who is lying? Or is the recording faked? Has to be one or the other right? Yeah, lets all just believe the witness....Brown was shot and was just walking towards the officer while he was firing at him and made it 25 feet stumbling.....sure thing.

Oh...and seriously? I am supposed to believe that Brown stopped to discuss God because the guy said a cuss word 30 minutes prior to robbing a store......Geez.....you'll buy ANYTHING that tries to make this look like Brown was innocent won't you?

Thug Dead.....end of story.

Who is They? Please show me a single credible news source, outside of a blogger, that posted fake pics of the officer......

originally posted by: Lyxdeslic

originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Nope...his death was acceptable already. The kid was a "contribute nothing to society thug" that decided he could rough up a police officer and found out the hard/dead way that he couldn't.

What?

You think a police officer has the right to be judge, jury, and executioner?

We still don't have all the facts, but even if the account of Officer Wilson is correct and Brown was coming back at him, unarmed, I don't think that justifies him shooting him...once let alone multiple times.

But it seems like you honestly don't care...you just seem like you are actually glad that there is one more dead black kid. How very nice of you.

They've faked pictures of the officer twice now. I really don't believe that the officer was harmed at all. He just wanted to deal a heavy dose of fear.
willyloman.wordpress.com...

Uh, the picture on that page is the picture circulating that if apparently the officer. It's actually Jim McNeil. Who died in 2011. Look up Jim McNeil picture being used to support officer Wilson, and it's all there. Even conservative pages. Hell, look up just Jim McNeil and go to google images and the picture they are using is plastered everywhere there.

Add that to Jim Hofts lie about the Xray and www.mediaite.com...
Sorry, but they've been caught in their lie.

originally posted by: Lyxdeslic

Uh, the picture on that page is the picture circulating that if apparently the officer. It's actually Jim McNeil. Who died in 2011. Look up Jim McNeil picture being used to support officer Wilson, and it's all there. Even conservative pages. Hell, look up just Jim McNeil and go to google images and the picture they are using is plastered everywhere there.

Add that to Jim Hofts lie about the Xray and www.mediaite.com...
Sorry, but they've been caught in their lie.

Like I said....a CREDIBLE news source that is running that picture please.....not a bunch of bloggers.

It's credible when they say where they got the information. Are you really that oblivious?
I'm sorry you want this officer to be in the right so badly, but when people show you proof of what happened, you need to take it instead of hiding in denial. It doesn't matter where information comes from as long as they cite where they got said info and have links. Both link I've given you have given other links to show where they get their information. You're just being lazy and that's not my problem.

originally posted by: Lyxdeslic
It's credible when they say where they got the information. Are you really that oblivious?
I'm sorry you want this officer to be in the right so badly, but when people show you proof of what happened, you need to take it instead of hiding in denial. It doesn't matter where information comes from as long as they cite where they got said info and have links. Both link I've given you have given other links to show where they get their information. You're just being lazy and that's not my problem.

No, it's not credible. I could sit as a blogger all day long and say whatever I wanted to say....does that make it credible? I have clicked on both links and followed them to their source bloggers......the bloggers did not get them from any credible sources...they simply posted pics without checking any facts.....similar to what you are doing right now.

I guess by me being lazy that makes you completely ignorant?

Yes, it is credible if someone posts something but cites where they got their information, and if it checks out. Which it does.
It' s fine though, with people like you someone could shove information down your throat and you'd still deny it's validity.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

What are you talking about? It's yet another witness account that largely matches other witness accounts. Saying they don't all substantively say the same thing is ignoring how similar they are to each other.

How far do you think you can walk backwards with a gun drawn and firing somewhat accurately in the timeline of the shots being fired?

The entire span of the shooting, according to your source, is 6.572 seconds from first to last shot.
The time between the first shot and the first salvo of 5 shots is a little over half a second.
The first salvo of 5 shots takes place over about 1.25s.
There was a pause of about 3s between that salvo and the next shot.
There was another pause of about a second between that shot and the final three.
The last salvo of three shots took place over less than a second.

Anyway, you'll note that I didn't say anything about believing this witness above the others, only that it was yet another witness saying mostly the same thing as the others.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe


Like I said....a CREDIBLE news source that is running that picture please.....not a bunch of bloggers.

Link the blog in the op? Have you looked at it, this is based on Twitter posts. link

originally posted by: Lyxdeslic
Yes, it is credible if someone posts something but cites where they got their information, and if it checks out. Which it does.
It' s fine though, with people like you someone could shove information down your throat and you'd still deny it's validity.

No...none of their pics checked out at all...as you said, they are not of the officer. Trouble is people will believe what they want when they see it. Like I have said....bloggers started the pic circulation and NONE of them are a credible source at all, so what is your argument again because you seem to be getting tripped up in your own words.....

originally posted by: Lyxdeslic
It's credible when they say where they got the information. Are you really that oblivious?

I'm sorry you want this officer to be in the right so badly, but when people show you proof of what happened, you need to take it instead of hiding in denial. It doesn't matter where information comes from as long as they cite where they got said info and have links. Both link I've given you have given other links to show where they get their information. You're just being lazy and that's not my problem.

I don't think it's a question of someone that "want this officer to be in the right so badly". He was in the right. He won't face charges. Book it. A month has gone by and they can't even fabricate charges at this point, despite undue pressure from AG Holder and visits from Rev. Al Sharpton to stir things up.

originally posted by: LDragonFire

originally posted by: Vasa Croe


Like I said....a CREDIBLE news source that is running that picture please.....not a bunch of bloggers.

Link the blog in the op? Have you looked at it, this is based on Twitter posts. link

Just looked at your link and there are no pics of anyone with a facial injury or claims that anyone is the officer in it...not really sure what you are trying to point out.

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What are you talking about? It's yet another witness account that largely matches other witness accounts. Saying they don't all substantively say the same thing is ignoring how similar they are to each other.

How far do you think you can walk backwards with a gun drawn and firing somewhat accurately in the timeline of the shots being fired?

The entire span of the shooting, according to your source, is 6.572 seconds from first to last shot.
The time between the first shot and the first salvo of 5 shots is a little over half a second.
The first salvo of 5 shots takes place over about 1.25s.
There was a pause of about 3s between that salvo and the next shot.
There was another pause of about a second between that shot and the final three.
The last salvo of three shots took place over less than a second.

Anyway, you'll note that I didn't say anything about believing this witness above the others, only that it was yet another witness saying mostly the same thing as the others.

So now you are posting things to back up your version of the story that you want to be true, that you don't believe? How does that make ANY sense? That is almost the definition of blind faith right there.

And your story that you posted sounds nothing like the story of the gun shots in question on the recording. The story states that the gunshots heard on the audio came from the exact same position, within 3 feet.....the story you have from an eye witness says the officer chased with the first 2 shots, which the audio says 6 shots were initially fired, then backed away firing a barrage or shots, which the audio says is 4 more.

So how do we go from 2 to 6, from expert analysis saying in one place, to backing away and continuing to fire more shots and Brown dropping 25 feet from where he was first hit?

This is a simple case of a community sticking to itself, lying to the press and being pressured by others to make it out as if the officer was in the wrong. Love how all these "eye-witnesses" come out after the fact.....maybe they all had a town hall meeting to get the story straight in between the incident and finally reporting it, or maybe they didn't.

Either way, regardless of what anyone WANTS done, no charges have been filed and likely the officer will be cleared after the investigation is over.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Bogus Photo Does Not Show Ferguson Cop Darren Wilson's Injuries; It's Not Even Him:

On Tuesday, Chicago firefighter Kevin O'Grady shared a Facebook photo he claimed showed a injured Wilson in the hospital after the incident. As it turned out, the man pictured is not Darren Wilson, but that didn't stop the image from going viral.

Huff Post

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Bogus Photo Does Not Show Ferguson Cop Darren Wilson's Injuries; It's Not Even Him:

On Tuesday, Chicago firefighter Kevin O'Grady shared a Facebook photo he claimed showed a injured Wilson in the hospital after the incident. As it turned out, the man pictured is not Darren Wilson, but that didn't stop the image from going viral.

Huff Post

I haven't argued that it WAS him. I have said that NO CREDIBLE SOURCES said it was him....this came from bloggers and others posting it.....like I said.....credible sources people. Anyone that believes what comes out of these sources....well I really have no comment.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

This entire thread is based on a blog and twitter posts.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: Vasa Croe

This entire thread is based on a blog and twitter posts.

Those bloggers went to court and showed the papers that they went there. They solicited a response from the court. The court responded by saying no class a or b felonies but haven't released the records.....that speaks volumes.

Not sure what you are arguing as I was responding to the post about the pictures.

I would say the guy that began this quest for the records to be released has more than put enough information out there and solicited enough of a response to make the story credible. The non-responsiveness of the court shows that they are indeed hiding something that speaks to Brown's sterling character......:rollseyes:

a reply to: Vasa Croe

So you need a credible news source for the fake pictures, but you don't require a credible news source for a alleged Second Degree Murder Case??

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So you need a credible news source for the fake pictures, but you don't require a credible news source for a alleged Second Degree Murder Case??

The pics have been proven fake....no credible news sources posted them as being real. The second degree murder case, which never said he was involved in the murder...only connected, have been proven real. The court docs and court statements back it up. The lack of information provided by the court lend even further credibility to the accusation. Their omission of anything but a class a or b felony in their statement speaks more to his guilt than to his innocence.

originally posted by: Kangaruex4Ewe
a reply to: TiedDestructor

My problem is, that the officer was not aware of who Brown was... Let alone his prior record before any action was taken on his part. The officer's reactions that day were based on what occurred or didn't occur between him and Brown before he was killed. Introducing this in makes it seem like the officer knew about this and that's why he did what he did.

And that's a very valid point, but the reason why the history of the deceased becomes important is because it can be instructive as to present events.

The officer is claiming that Brown's actions were overtly violent and he felt there was a risk sufficient to use lethal force. One of the questions will be whether Brown acted in a way that justified this belief.

If Brown's history shows that he has a tendency towards violence, then it makes it more believable that he was acting in a way that the officer could reasonably view as "aggressive".

If Brown's history shows him to be a squeaky-clean practicing Buddhist and shrinking violet, this makes it less believable that he was acting in a way that the officer could reasonably view as "aggressive".

Whether that history is admissible as evidence depends on the jurisdiction, and I am not familiar with the laws of evidence in that location so I couldn't comment specifically on that point.