Ferguson Corruption PROOF

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: deadeyedick



Ahhh we're back to the mysterious "disappeared" witnesses. So now we have ferguson pd, st louis pd, the ME office, the FBI, the DA office, and the grand jury all on on this conspiracy of yours. Is there anybody who ISN'T involved in it?

so far i have eliminated myself as not being corrupted but i am biased so???

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: deadeyedick



This comment alone proves you have no semblance of a clue about an idea about what you're talking about. It is well established, and long established, that 21 feet is the MINIMUM reactionary gap needed to draw, clear, and present one's firearm against an assailant who is advancing at you. Do an ounce of research and not only will you find that, but you'll find that many trainers think 21 feet is still too close.

it has been done and there is no need to even draw a weapon in that case. we do have to take into account the style of weapon and holster. much less the fact that anyone running at you has too much momentmem to react as quickly as one standing flatfooted. Why would you stand in place and let someone stab you. it is a scare tactic used to keep guns not drawn. i am not disagreeing with it's use or need but that in the real world application it will get one killed if it is not understood to be what it is a simple exercise to show that someone charging in a threatening manner that warrented shooting would cover well over 25' in 6 seconds. if they never stopped or slowed as stated by wilson.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Vasa Croe

not quite but longer strides and adreniline help. i would refer you to the kenyans that can run faster than most all. Why have no corner backs ever won those fastest man alive titles? there are exceptions to being tall like extra weight that would slow some down. so who really knows

just because my style of thread writing and debate is not normal does not negate that the jury was at the lest misled.

Has nothing to do with your style of thread...you are suggesting that Mike Brown at 6'4" and 290 pounds of mostly fat, who was also very high at the time, was moving faster than an average person. He was far from being a Kenyan, nor are Kenyans average....you said average person. Why don't you look up the average distance a Kenyan travels in that amount of time and compare....

See...Kenyans typically have fast twitch muscle. They also have a natural predisposition to the sport:

There are a few popular theories, which break along nature-versus-nurture lines. The vast majority of Kenya's brightest running stars were born and raised at high altitude. Running at higher elevations builds greater lung capacity, because athletes grow accustomed to the thinner air. Many of the finest runners, for example, hail from the hilly region surrounding Eldoret, about 7,000 to 8,000 feet above sea level. This area also possesses a fairly mild climate that allows for year-round running.

If altitude alone determined distance-running success, of course, then Nepalese marathoners would dominate. So, perhaps a more important factor is the nation's running culture, particularly among the Kalenjin tribe. Though Kalenjins represent just 12 percent of Kenya's population, they comprise about three-quarters of the nation's elite runners. The trend started with Kip Keino, who won Olympic gold in the 1,500 meters in 1968 and added an Olympic steeplechase title in 1972. The ex-policeman's success inspired succeeding generations of Kalenjins, who grew up idolizing Keino. As a result, Kalenjins now aspire to distance-running titles in the same way American youths dream of playing in a Super Bowl. (Okayo, who set a new course record for women in New York, is one of the few Kenyan marathon stars not of Kalenjin extraction.)

Because interest in running is so high, competition to make traveling squads is intense, and Kenyan training regimes are notoriously difficult. And many young Kenyans view distance running as a ticket out of poverty. Kalenjins, in particular, grow up seeing the wealth of returning marathon champions, whose relatively modest earnings abroad—the top prize at New York was $100,000—make them rich men and women by Eldoret standards.

Physiology and genetics may also factor into the Kenyans' accomplishments. In 2000, the Danish Sports Science Institute published a study that compared the distance-running prowess of several Kalenjin youths—all of them competitive neophytes—against those of a Danish track star, Thomas Nolan. Though the boys had just three months of formal training, they easily beat Nolan in a 12-and-a-half-lap race. The researchers concluded that the Kenyans had a born advantage and speculated that it might have something to do with their "birdlike legs." (The study incensed a number of Kenyan running heroes, including Keino, who viewed the results as an affront to the Kenyan work ethic.)

Either way, the average 6'4", 290 lb, overweight and high person is going to statistically be a lot slower.

So lets make a fair assumption based on your "statistical" statement....Kenyans win because they train hard, are typically from regions that are well above sea level giving them a greater lung capacity, and are genetically better at the sport than others....along these same lines, Mike Brown is statistically obese, was high on marijuana and had just strong arm robbed a place which would statistically make him a felon who did not exercise and was mentally slow based on his THC levels.

This would mean he would NOT cover the same amount of ground as any other person out there....likely a LOT less ground than most.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: deadeyedick

a reply to: Vasa Croe



not quite but longer strides and adreniline help. i would refer you to the kenyans that can run faster than most all. Why have no corner backs ever won those fastest man alive titles? there are exceptions to being tall like extra weight that would slow some down. so who really knows



just because my style of thread writing and debate is not normal does not negate that the jury was at the lest misled.

Has nothing to do with your style of thread...you are suggesting that Mike Brown at 6'4" and 290 pounds of mostly fat, who was also very high at the time, was moving faster than an average person. He was far from being a Kenyan, nor are Kenyans average....you said average person. Why don't you look up the average distance a Kenyan travels in that amount of time and compare....



See...Kenyans typically have fast twitch muscle. They also have a natural predisposition to the sport:

There are a few popular theories, which break along nature-versus-nurture lines. The vast majority of Kenya's brightest running stars were born and raised at high altitude. Running at higher elevations builds greater lung capacity, because athletes grow accustomed to the thinner air. Many of the finest runners, for example, hail from the hilly region surrounding Eldoret, about 7,000 to 8,000 feet above sea level. This area also possesses a fairly mild climate that allows for year-round running.



If altitude alone determined distance-running success, of course, then Nepalese marathoners would dominate. So, perhaps a more important factor is the nation's running culture, particularly among the Kalenjin tribe. Though Kalenjins represent just 12 percent of Kenya's population, they comprise about three-quarters of the nation's elite runners. The trend started with Kip Keino, who won Olympic gold in the 1,500 meters in 1968 and added an Olympic steeplechase title in 1972. The ex-policeman's success inspired succeeding generations of Kalenjins, who grew up idolizing Keino. As a result, Kalenjins now aspire to distance-running titles in the same way American youths dream of playing in a Super Bowl. (Okayo, who set a new course record for women in New York, is one of the few Kenyan marathon stars not of Kalenjin extraction.



Physiology and genetics may also factor into the Kenyans' accomplishments. In 2000, the Danish Sports Science Institute published a study that compared the distance-running prowess of several Kalenjin youths—all of them competitive neophytes—against those of a Danish track star, Thomas Nolan. Though the boys had just three months of formal training, they easily beat Nolan in a 12-and-a-half-lap race. The researchers concluded that the Kenyans had a born advantage and speculated that it might have something to do with their "birdlike legs." (The study incensed a number of Kenyan running heroes, including Keino, who viewed the results as an affront to the Kenyan work ethic.)

Either way, the average 6'4", 290 lb, overweight and high person is going to statistically be a lot slower.



So lets make a fair assumption based on your "statistical" statement....Kenyans win because they train hard, are typically from regions that are well above sea level giving them a greater lung capacity, and are genetically better at the sport than others....along these same lines, Mike Brown is statistically obese, was high on marijuana and had just strong arm robbed a place which would statistically make him a felon who did not exercise and was mentally slow based on his THC levels.



This would mean he would NOT cover the same amount of ground as any other person out there....likely a LOT less ground than most.

even if he was slower than most that would lessen the threat stated by wilson and would still be faster than the average human walking if he was charging making the time it takes to say get on the ground at least twice and a 10 rnd burts of fire lasting six seconds
covering the accepted distance of 25' not real. that is the point here.

brown may or may not have been below or above average we can not know withour reasearching his back ground i will give you that but let's be honest he was charging in a threatening manner according to wilson so either way that would have to be a speed greater than walking to pose a danger and would have him covering a distance greater than what was accepted.

a reply to: deadeyedick

I literally can't even anymore. You've been at this for days. Whenever you get hammered on one thread you go to another and start posting the same drivel that's been shot to pieces over and over and over again. Now you're trying to say there's no reason to draw a weapon against somebody who's 21 feet or more away from you and talking about momentum and being flat footed and somehow trying to tie it all back together. You're going all over the map to try and find something that acrually sticks, to include ignoring years and years of studies being done on the reactionary gap needed when facing an assailant.

Let somebody with an edged weapon charge you from 21 feet. Take him on bare handed. Let us all know how that works out for you

originally posted by: deadeyedick

originally posted by: johngrissom
a reply to: deadeyedick



Interesting...

I dare you to do something stupid and try running from the cops while reaching for something out of their view.

Lets see how long you last.

I dare a cop that has two suspects who he believes are both armed and one is in front of his car and the other is behind his car i dare him to leave the cover of his car if he really believes them to be armed and dangerous.

I dare you to actually read Wilson's testimony in regard to your claim.

originally posted by: deadeyedick

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: deadeyedick



Ahhh we're back to the mysterious "disappeared" witnesses. So now we have ferguson pd, st louis pd, the ME office, the FBI, the DA office, and the grand jury all on on this conspiracy of yours. Is there anybody who ISN'T involved in it?

so far i have eliminated myself as not being corrupted but i am biased so???

Are you sure you can do that? This is clearly a very far reaching conspiracy. I wouldn't rule yourself out so fast.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Can you please point out where in the papers it says that he told Brown to get on the ground WHILE he was charging at him? Brown was running away/stationary when Wilson yelled those commands, THEN turned and began his charge....so by your calculations that would only be 6 seconds, which even at 4 ft/sec only gives him 24 feet, not to mention he would have slowed from rounds hitting him.

Again....your theory holds no weight.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: deadeyedick



I literally can't even anymore. You've been at this for days. Whenever you get hammered on one thread you go to another and start posting the same drivel that's been shot to pieces over and over and over again. Now you're trying to say there's no reason to draw a weapon against somebody who's 21 feet or more away from you and talking about momentum and being flat footed and somehow trying to tie it all back together. You're going all over the map to try and find something that acrually sticks, to include ignoring years and years of studies being done on the reactionary gap needed when facing an assailant.



Let somebody with an edged weapon charge you from 21 feet. Take him on bare handed. Let us all know how that works out for you

you did not comprehand my statments. i agree with you when you say you can not and will add that you never could.

it is quite simple op

a person charging in a threatening manner will cover more than 25' in 6 seconds plus the time it takes to say get on the ground twice.

according to the knife vs gun theory if someone were charging you then you could not even coherrently say get on the ground twice before they arrive at you much less the 6 sec. of shots. this does not mean guilt for anyone but that the gj failed for some reason.

it is just one small piece of the puzzle.

Walking. Running. Charging. Dude made some really poor choices on that day, and repeatedly ignoring the command to "get on the ground" was the final poor choice.

If the store owner had blown his ass away, regardless of number of shots, distance, etc., Michael Brown is just a dead kid and the store owner is hailed as the new poster boy for the NRA.

a reply to: deadeyedick

And you're fixated on 25 feet. It's 25 feet of blood trail. Nobody aside from you has said Brown travelled 25 feet. Ever. The grand jury established a minimum and maximum distance that Brown could've moved after turning around on Wilson. Something like 21 feet up to 48 feet. Not one single person said at any point that Brown travelled 25 feet.

You're right, I can't comprehend whatever it is you're making up.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: deadeyedick



Can you please point out where in the papers it says that he told Brown to get on the ground WHILE he was charging at him? Brown was running away/stationary when Wilson yelled those commands, THEN turned and began his charge....so by your calculations that would only be 6 seconds, which even at 4 ft/sec only gives him 24 feet, not to mention he would have slowed from rounds hitting him.



Again....your theory holds no weight.

that becomes unclear at that point because other statments by wilson stated he did give commands to wilson facing him and even went on to say that while charging towards wilson after begining towards him brown reached into his waist band. So by those statments it adds even more time to the six seconds.

keep in mind that the speed used here is that of someone walking normal and not a charge.

it should be clear that you are not trying to see things any way other than disgreeing with me.

a charge in a threatening manner can only be taken as speed is the threat because brown gave no hand gestures and said nothing unless we count the color of skin to be threatening. it can not be his size that threatened wilson because they were the same height and that would mean that today cops can go out and shoot large people for walking towards them.

the threat had to be speed when you take in the reference wilson made to a football player coming off the line.

what was the threat if you disagree withme show me the threat and how one only covers 25' in 6+ seconds while being unarmed.

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
Walking. Running. Charging. Dude made some really poor choices on that day, and repeatedly ignoring the command to "get on the ground" was the final poor choice.



If the store owner had blown his ass away, regardless of number of shots, distance, etc., Michael Brown is just a dead kid and the store owner is hailed as the new poster boy for the NRA.

the same can be said if wilson hd landed the first shot correctly. he did not and put everyone i the neighborhood in danger by chasing one of two suspects while being injured. if they were as bad as made out to be then wilson would have been killed. if wilson was interested in perserving life then he would have used his taser when he left the cruiser.if they had not robbed the store then none of this would have happened.

the problem is that brown was fleeing the scene and wilson told him to put his hands up and brown did then got shot and this was stated to police by 16 people that were forced to say something different when the lives of family were threatened.

he was not the only one making poor choies that day.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: deadeyedick



And you're fixated on 25 feet. It's 25 feet of blood trail. Nobody aside from you has said Brown travelled 25 feet. Ever. The grand jury established a minimum and maximum distance that Brown could've moved after turning around on Wilson. Something like 21 feet up to 48 feet. Not one single person said at any point that Brown travelled 25 feet.



You're right, I can't comprehend whatever it is you're making up.

it is because the blood trail was left from the police cruiser out 150' then back toward the cruiser 25' appox.

originally posted by: deadeyedick

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: deadeyedick



Can you please point out where in the papers it says that he told Brown to get on the ground WHILE he was charging at him? Brown was running away/stationary when Wilson yelled those commands, THEN turned and began his charge....so by your calculations that would only be 6 seconds, which even at 4 ft/sec only gives him 24 feet, not to mention he would have slowed from rounds hitting him.



Again....your theory holds no weight.

that becomes unclear at that point because other statments by wilson stated he did give commands to wilson facing him and even went on to say that while charging towards wilson after begining towards him brown reached into his waist band. So by those statments it adds even more time to the six seconds.

keep in mind that the speed used here is that of someone walking normal and not a charge.

it should be clear that you are not trying to see things any way other than disgreeing with me.

a charge in a threatening manner can only be taken as speed is the threat because brown gave no hand gestures and said nothing unless we count the color of skin to be threatening. it can not be his size that threatened wilson because they were the same height and that would mean that today cops can go out and shoot large people for walking towards them.

the threat had to be speed when you take in the reference wilson made to a football player coming off the line.

what was the threat if you disagree withme show me the threat and how one only covers 25' in 6+ seconds while being unarmed.

He was obese, almost morbidly so, he was really high (very high THC content in blood), from the pictures his pants were sagging below his butt with the waist about at the top of his thighs (unless you believe the officer walked over and pulled them down that way), he was hit multiple times before coming to a stop which also slows him down, and from your own words he reached into his waistband (perceived weapon threat) when coming towards the officer. A charge does not have to be fast, and Brown was HUGE compared to any normal sized person which would pose a big threat, not to mention he had assaulted the officer seconds before in his own vehicle.

Those combined make a life threatening situation and YES I do disagree with you completely because your bending of what you want to be fact is factually incorrect.....you are basing it on assumptions.

You are using a ballpark assumption that he was as fast as a healthy, physically fit adult male with no substances in their system and not wearing pants around their thighs.

Not sure how big you are, but put some sandbags on to get to 290 lbs, put your ankle length shorts on, belted around your thighs and sprint as fast as you can for 6 seconds straight forward with someone firing rubber bullets at you.....you are the one wanting to prove it incorrect, so try it out and let me know...oh, and don't forget to get really high before you try it too.....

originally posted by: deadeyedick

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
Walking. Running. Charging. Dude made some really poor choices on that day, and repeatedly ignoring the command to "get on the ground" was the final poor choice.



If the store owner had blown his ass away, regardless of number of shots, distance, etc., Michael Brown is just a dead kid and the store owner is hailed as the new poster boy for the NRA.

the same can be said if wilson hd landed the first shot correctly. he did not and put everyone i the neighborhood in danger by chasing one of two suspects while being injured. if they were as bad as made out to be then wilson would have been killed. if wilson was interested in perserving life then he would have used his taser when he left the cruiser.if they had not robbed the store then none of this would have happened.

the problem is that brown was fleeing the scene and wilson told him to put his hands up and brown did then got shot and this was stated to police by 16 people that were forced to say something different when the lives of family were threatened.

he was not the only one making poor choies that day.

Incorrect.....Brown was shot first while assaulting Wilson inside his vehicle, as evidenced by the residue on his hand and his blood inside Wilsons vehicle. But I guess if someone did that to you it would not be life threatening and if you were an LEO you would let them run away without trying to stop them after they attempted to use deadly force to stop you from arresting them?

Seriously...the Ferguson huggers need to just get over the fact that this kid was a complete thug in every sense of the word, not the poster that that community should get behind. He was killed in the act of being a thug....end of story. No police brutality, he disobeyed a direct order at least 3 times AFTER assaulting a police officer and attempting to take the officers weapon.

Sure the is a woulda shoulda coulda situation, but would you be saying the same crap had Brown managed to take the officers pistol and kill the officer? Or would that just be a tragic death because drug using, felon did what they do best?

Oh...ETA....Wilson did not have a taser on him which would be why he didn't use one.....

so this dude is using kenyan distance runners for a comparison to the tub?
hahahah

wow

in several threads he as been attempting to form theories to fit his version of events.

first it was distance traveled plus an extra few seconds for how long it took for wilson to say something...
these are all his calculations btw..

now its kenyans

ok

shamrock, i want to say that i have enjoyed your posts. not just because they have been chopping down his arguments but because you make very clear, rational points.
phage as well. in both threads.

thanks for that...

a reply to: Grovit

false i used the fastest people in the world being tall when asked by another member what size has to do with speed. you are being very misleading of my statments.

the question was put to me as why if lineman are faster than corner backs. i did not bring up the references but noted that the fastest are usually tall.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Wilson said he back peddled in an attempt to create distance and give Brown more time to stop in which he refused.

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

Perhaps Brown did cover more than 25' but due to Wilson back peddling from his original proximity from Brown it only appeared to be 25' from where everyone ended.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Grovit

false i used the fastest people in the world being tall when asked by another member what size has to do with speed. you are being very misleading of my statments.

the question was put to me as why if lineman are faster than corner backs. i did not bring up the references but noted that the fastest are usually tall.

i still dont get it...
you keep mentioning the average speed of the average person

do you think a dude that is stoned and pushing 3 bills moves anything like average?