You should follow your own advise, as the above was in relation to his facing the Officer.In the back? ...No
Forearm from behind? ... Absolutely possible.
You take the news headline as the whole and the end of the story.
Learning the facts takes a little more effort.
The Glock 22, 15 + 1.They could. Many semi-automatics, including service weapons, hold 10 in the magazine and 1 in the chamber.
your agreement with my speculation indicates that the fabric we wear is of the same fiber
and no, yours isn't teflon
take your own advice.
One eye witness (also involved in the robbery) made the statement that Brown was shot in the back. The medical examination does not support that statement.
The investigation is not done. People are jumping to conclusions without knowing all the facts. Any eye witness statement needs to be collaborated by other evidence.
I will wait till the investigation is done before having an opinion on if the shooting was justified or not.
NO. Start at 0:00 That tells us what this man saw.No Moot.
He stated that Brown was approaching the Officer as the Officer was firing and thought the Officer was missing. Those shots were so tightly grouped together in sequence that it is exactly what that witness describes. Brown had doubled back and was now approaching as the Officer fired multiple times missing.
Start @ 06:28
:doh:lamo:doh:lamo:dohNO. Start at 0:00 That tells us what this man saw.
You should follow your own advise, as the above was in relation to his facing the Officer.
And the truth is only one way was possible, and that is likely why the scheme team are not revealing any trajectory analysis in regards to that shot.
"..so the question asked of us was, could that wound occur from him walking away and then he turns around?
It’s consistent with that. -Dr Parcells
:doh:lamo:doh:lamo:doh
No it doesn't.
That man didn't see it.
He is repeating what he heard, he made that clear in what he said, and what he heard is false.
He heard the shots, came outside and Brown was laying in the street dead.
He didn't see ****.
And that is what you do not understand.Here is what Parcells said about the graze wound on Browns right fore arm, that he and Dr Baden agreed on;
Wrong. He was speaking to all the wounds as that is what was asked. "Dr. Baden, are any of these wounds ..."
He clearly stated in his reply "... but, they all came from the front".
If you continue on past that point folks, you hear exactly what Buck Ewer seems to be trying to hide.
Dr. Baden was asked a question about a the wounds being inconsistent with running from the Officer, Baden clearly stated that they were from the front and that they are consistent with moving forwards or backwards, not running away from.
Why? Do you want to go silence him?Who was the witness heard talking at 6:28 in the video?
We already know this person is a liar and has lied about what happened."...Still in his car, the officer grabs Brown by his neck, Johnson said. Brown tries to pull away, but the officer keeps pulling Brown toward him, he said.
Johnson: "My friend, Big Mike, very angrily is trying to pull away from the officer."
The officer draws his weapon. He says "'I'll shoot" or "I'm about to shoot." "I'm standing so close to Big Mike and the officer, I look in his window and I see that he has his gun pointed at both of us. And when he fired his weapon, I moved seconds before he pulled the trigger. I saw the fire come out the barrel and I instinctually knew it was a gun. I looked at my friend Big Mike and saw he was struck in the chest or upper region because I saw blood spatter down his side."
Johnson: "At no point in time did they struggle over the weapon because the weapon was already drawn on us.".....read..."
What happened when Michael Brown met Officer Darren Wilson - CNN.com
1.) Three seconds is not long.That long pause in the audio is key.
Then why did you post the video?Why? Do you want to go silence him?
Doesn't matter to us whom he is.
Yeah, He lied about his age....whoop de doo.We already know this person is a liar and has lied about what happened.
Long enough to see that the victim was already wounded and unarmed with his hands up.1.) Three seconds is not long.
No, it didn't show anything of the kind. The audio could work against the officer as well.2.) If the recording is of this incident, it may be key for the Officers version, but is shows that Brown definitely did not turn around at the pause.
Wrong.And just in case anybody is thinking that the pause possibly indicates the point where brown turned to confront the Officer ...
There were four shots after the pause. According to a un-official autopsy, Brown was hit six times, with all shots coming from the front.
So if this recording is of the shots, the pause being where Brown turned is not a possible scenario.
This time around? For you to hear what the witness said.Then why did you post the video?
1.) Hew cute. You thought I was speaking to that previous incident.Yeah, He lied about his age....whoop de doo.
What a ridiculous assertion. Darian has no credibility.At this point he's more credible than the entire Ferguson police department and St. Louis county sheriff department combined.
Still not a long time.Long enough to see that the victim was already wounded and unarmed with his hands up.
Wrong.No, it didn't show anything of the kind.
:lamo:doh:lamo:doh:lamoWrong.
They never said that he was shot six times. They said that there were six gunshot wounds.
At least two of those wounds were re-entry wounds, three were graze wounds and at least one wound could well have been received while walking away, from the first group of shots.
One of those wounds, according to Johnson, were received at the window when the gun discharged inside the car.
Nothing is inconsistent with four shots fired from the front .
Only three bullets were recovered from Browns body.
Are you saying then that Professor Parcells is a liar too?And that is what you do not understand.
And we have already been over this.
"... but, they all came from the front"
:lamo:lamo:lamo:2wave:..so the question asked of us was, could that wound occur from him walking away and then he turns around?
It’s consistent with that.
How many times do you have to be told that you do not understand what has been said for it to sink in?Are you saying then that Professor Parcells is a liar too?
You would have to be, because Parcells clearly stated that he and Dr Baden AGREED that the forearm graze wound was consistent with being shot from behind, and then turning around.
How many times do you have to be told that you do not understand what has been said for it to sink in?
It's the same **** that you didn't understand about a bullet traveling from the rear to the front while the shot came from the front.
And in this case, they all came from the front.
And as for Parcells?
Shawn Parcells’ credentials, role in Michael Brown autopsy questioned by doctors | fox4kc.com
Baden was standing right there and he never said ,I never agreed to that. He stood and listened intently as Parcells made that part of the presentation...so the question asked of us was, could that wound occur from him walking away and then he turns around?
It’s consistent with that.
And again.Baden was standing right there and he never said ,I never agreed to that. He stood and listened intently as Parcells made that part of the presentation.
When Baden was asked if the shots came from the front ... he responded "it's possible". He didn't say it was a sure thing.
:lamo:lamo:lamo:2wave:
As I said, you are wrong.Wrong.
They never said that he was shot six times. They said that there were six gunshot wounds.
Who was the witness?This time around? For you to hear what the witness said.
It probably looked like he was since the officer was shooting at him while his back was turned.1.) Hew cute. You thought I was speaking to that previous incident.
2.) He lied in this case. Brown was not shot in the back.
Neither does the Ferguson police chief. He said there was a struggle in patrol car for the gun before it went off. The coroner didn't find any gun powder residue on Brown's hands or any sign of a struggle on his body.What a ridiculous assertion. Darian has no credibility.
Long enough to see that the victim was wounded and unarmed with his hands up.Still not a long time.
Alleged by you. Several witnesses saw MB get hit or grazed from behind.Wrong.
What is being alleged is that Brown turned to face the Officer at that point.
That is impossible given the number of shots after the pause, 4, and the unofficial autopsy reporting that all shots came from the front, at least 6.
So Brown would have had to turn before the last 4 shots to get 6. Duh!
.
Whoa, look at the pot calling the kettle black. :roll:What has become apparent. is that you chose a side without knowing the evidence and are now attempting to justify the side you took.
What a shame
How many times do you have to be told that you do not understand what has been said for it to sink in?
It's the same **** that you didn't understand about a bullet traveling from the rear to the front while the shot came from the front.
And in this case, they all came from the front.
And as for Parcells?
Shawn Parcells’ credentials, role in Michael Brown autopsy questioned by doctors | fox4kc.com
And again.
"... but, they all came from the front"
unless the officer was already injured in a scuffle with the guy, because at that point it would be silly to assume he would immediately be trying to surrender after physically assaulting a police officer. right?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?