• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police Officer in Ferguson Is Said to Recount a Struggle


I am just telling you what witnesses actually said, not what I want them to have said. I think it makes sense in the context that all parties involved were under extreme duress and made decisions that in hindsight wouldn't be considered the best available option. Again, not a single eyewitness said that Wilson gave any commands for Brown to get down. Excon's emoticons won't change that fact.

For example, the latest "black witness who claims to have seen the killing of Mike Brown by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson 'from start to finish' and who also purports to have just completed testifying in front of the Grand Jury" actually said, and I am quoting from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch which is the newspaper that actually interviewed him:




When we contrast it to certain other interpretations of this witness's account, we can see that:

Rather than stopping, beginning to "advance" on Wilson, and Wilson firing only after Brown refused another of Wilson's commands to stop, the eyewitness said that Brown "took a step" towards Wilson and Wilson yelled one more "stop" and started firing before Brown could even take a second step.

Rather than staggering, apparently being struck by one or more rounds, "then continuing to advance" on Wilson, the eyewitness said that Brown was staggering because he was just shot several times, after already being shot by the SUV, and was about to collapse. The officer did yell "stop" again but Brown was still staggering forward, with his hands out in a motion of disbelief, and he was trying to stand back up. He was "trying to stay on his feet."

Rather than support the actions of Officer Darren Wilson as reasonable under the circumstances, the eyewitness summarized what he saw as follows: "Wilson didn't have to kill Brown. 'It went from zero to 100 like that, in the blink of an eye. ... What transpired to us, in my eyesight, was murder. Down outright murder.'"


Witness adds new perspective to Ferguson shooting : News
 

This seems to indicate Michael Brown did go for the police officer's gun: "...The forensics tests showed Mr. Brown’s blood on the gun, as well as on the interior door panel and on Officer Wilson’s uniform...."

Isn't deadly force authorized if a suspect tries to take a police officers gun?
 
His interpretation of the event is not evidence of what happened and matters not.
The Officer continuing to shoot is reasonable.
 
It establishes him as a threat to the Officer.
Some here wrongly think that this threat magically goes away when he turned and ran, and a whole new set of circumstances come into play when he started approaching the Officer after he turned back around.
 
Excon said:
His interpretation of the event is not evidence of what happened and matters not.
The Officer continuing to shoot is reasonable.
Click to expand...

Deflection from all the flaws I pointed out in your interpretation of his account, attempt to directly refute the eyewitness's words like I personally said them, and then conclude with a couple of unsupported opinions.

You have this gig down.

Wait, let me get some condescending emoticons in there.
:bs :screwy :liar :naughty
 
:naughty

:liar You haven't pointed out any flaws in my interpretation. :doh


Funny that you think you have. :lamo
 
Last edited:
So in your view, what should Wilson have done?
 
Moon said:
So in your view, what should Wilson have done?
Click to expand...

I don't claim to know exactly what he actually did. I am only confident enough to say that he shouldn't have fired the last volley of shots which ended Michael Brown's life, and that he should be held accountable for it (not murder, but more like involuntary manslaughter for use of excessive force), and I am also well aware that he won't be held accountable for it.
 
Which is nonsense.
Brown was a known threat. A threat that had just tried to take the Officer's firearm.
A threat that continued to move towards the Officer despite being ordered not to.
Both groupings of shots were justified. Which is why he wouldn't be held accountable able for it.
 
Last edited:

Never mind the kid was a thug. Completely irrelevant.
 

You mean the thug that went with Brown to choke the store owner was lying?

Physical evidence doesn't matter in a witch hunt.
 
Have toxicology results been released?
 
Last edited:
Thank you. I am wondering about the presence of PCP.
 
Excon said:
:naughty

:liar You haven't pointed out any flaws in my interpretation. :doh


Funny that you think you have. :lamo
Click to expand...

I just caught your underline of the word "my." Please enlighten me to what respectable mainstream news outlet referred to Dorian Johnson as Brown's "criminal cohort." Can you please provide a link to your source?
 
JC_CT said:
You can bet your life that you would have already heard about it...Brown that is.
Click to expand...
You do not know that.

Btw, still waiting on you to point out these flaws in interpretation that you absurdly claim. :doh
:lamo

:laughat:
JC_CT said:
I just caught your underline of the word "my." Please enlighten me to what respectable mainstream news outlet referred to Dorian Johnson as Brown's "criminal cohort." Can you please provide a link to your source?
Click to expand...
I see you didn't follow the provided link. D'oh!
:doh
 
Excon said:
You do not know that.

Btw, still waiting on you to point out these flaws in interpretation that you absurdly claim. :doh
:lamo

:laughat:
I see you didn't follow the provided link. D'oh!
:doh
Click to expand...
No I didn't, my bad.
 
Excon said:
You do not know that.

Btw, still waiting on you to point out these flaws in interpretation that you absurdly claim. :doh
:lamo

:laughat:
I see you didn't follow the provided link. D'oh!
:doh
Click to expand...

The flaw in the interpretation is the implication that the witness claimed that Brown resumed voluntary motion towards Wilson after he was shot (and started stumbling while putting his hands in the air).
 
JC_CT said:
The flaw in the interpretation is the implication that the witness claimed that Brown resumed voluntary motion towards Wilson after he was shot (and started stumbling while putting his hands in the air).
Click to expand...
:doh
That is a witnesses account. Not an assumption.

Brown was moving forward and continued to do so.
The witness was in disbelief and thought that the Officer was missing him because Brown kept moving forward.
Or did you forget about the taped witness in the parking lot?

In regardfs to this witness.

As reported.
A black witness who claims to have seen the killing of Mike Brown by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson “from start to finish” and who also purports to have just completed testifying in front of the Grand Jury, has subsequently been interviewed by the local St. Louis Post-Dispatch newspaper (on condition of anonymity).

Key facets of his testimony to the grand jury, as he recounts it, include:

  • Officer Wilson did not fire while Brown was moving away form him, but only when Brown turned back towards him.
  • Brown motioned with his arms out to his sides, but never raised them high.
  • Brown continued to advance on Wilson despite repeated orders to stop.
  • When Wilson fired his last rounds Brown was only ~20 feet away (those of you familiar with the Tueller drill understand the tactical implications of that distance, although this witness almost certainly did not).
  • Brown’s friend and criminal cohort Dorian Johnson took off running when the first round was fired inside Wilson’s police vehicle (thus casting further doubt on his testimony of later events, as if further doubt was needed).
  • He saw a struggle inside the patrol car, and saw Wilson’s hat fly off.
  • A shot was heard, at which point Brown ran, followed by Wilson (thus measurements of Brown’s body from Wilson’s vehicle are not likely representative of the distance between the men when Wilson fired).
  • Wilson, gun drawn, shouted repeatedly at Brown to stop his flight.
  • Brown stopped, mumbled something inaudible, and began advancing on Wilson, despite Wilson having his gun in hand.
  • Wilson again ordered Brown to stop, and fired three shots.
    [*] Brown staggered, apparently from being struck by one or more rounds, then continued to advance on Wilson.
    [*] Wilson fired four more rounds, the last of which discharged as Brown was falling.

Remarkably, after having provided this testimony, the witness is quoted in the interview as saying “He was already on his way down when he fired those last shots. What transpired to us, in my eyesight, was murder. Down outright murder.”

Ferguson | Mike Brown |Grand Jury Testimony​


The comment about staggering is an assumption, continuing to move forward is not, nor is it a resumption as you claim/assume.
 
Last edited:
That is not as reported. As reported was as reported by Christine Byers of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch who actually interviewed the witness. I already posted a link to the source article. Your link is just some hack re-report with added spin.

And the problem with your "video witness" (besides the fact that we can't ask him any clarifying questions, and the minor detail that we couldn't even clearly hear everything he said)? He could be the same person as this latest witness, or Michael Brady, or Philip Walker, or James McKnight, or so on.
 

Where's the part where Brown's blood was found on the gun and in the car? That's a pretty big piece of evidence to not list, no? As far as I know, the there was no blood from the officer found in the car. Interesting.
 
JC_CT said:
That is not as reported.
Click to expand...
Oy vey. Yes that is as reported.
Maybe you just do not understand the term. :shrug:


JC_CT said:
As reported was as reported by Christine Byers of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch who actually interviewed the witness. I already posted a link to the source article.
Click to expand...
And a link to it, and credit given, was in the report I provided. As reported.
Long before you provided anything. My providing it again, before you provided yours, was just a repeat. So the information was already known.


JC_CT said:
Your link is just some hack re-report with added spin.
Click to expand...
:naughty
Legal Insurrection and the author Andrew Brancaare are neither hacks.
Added spin? :doh There was no spin in what was provided.


None of the bullet points reported in what I provided were different from the information provided at the source. Duh!

So back to you being wrong.
Which you didn't address.

In regards to this witness.

As reported.
A black witness who claims to have seen the killing of Mike Brown by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson “from start to finish” and who also purports to have just completed testifying in front of the Grand Jury, has subsequently been interviewed by the local St. Louis Post-Dispatch newspaper (on condition of anonymity).

Key facets of his testimony to the grand jury, as he recounts it, include:

  • Officer Wilson did not fire while Brown was moving away form him, but only when Brown turned back towards him.
  • Brown motioned with his arms out to his sides, but never raised them high.
  • Brown continued to advance on Wilson despite repeated orders to stop.
  • When Wilson fired his last rounds Brown was only ~20 feet away (those of you familiar with the Tueller drill understand the tactical implications of that distance, although this witness almost certainly did not).
  • Brown’s friend and criminal cohort Dorian Johnson took off running when the first round was fired inside Wilson’s police vehicle (thus casting further doubt on his testimony of later events, as if further doubt was needed).
  • He saw a struggle inside the patrol car, and saw Wilson’s hat fly off.
  • A shot was heard, at which point Brown ran, followed by Wilson (thus measurements of Brown’s body from Wilson’s vehicle are not likely representative of the distance between the men when Wilson fired).
  • Wilson, gun drawn, shouted repeatedly at Brown to stop his flight.
  • Brown stopped, mumbled something inaudible, and began advancing on Wilson, despite Wilson having his gun in hand.
  • Wilson again ordered Brown to stop, and fired three shots.
    [*] Brown staggered, apparently from being struck by one or more rounds, then continued to advance on Wilson.
    [*] Wilson fired four more rounds, the last of which discharged as Brown was falling.

Remarkably, after having provided this testimony, the witness is quoted in the interview as saying “He was already on his way down when he fired those last shots. What transpired to us, in my eyesight, was murder. Down outright murder.”

Ferguson | Mike Brown |Grand Jury Testimony​


The comment about staggering is an assumption, continuing to move forward is not, nor is it a resumption as you claim/assume.​

Continuing is a continuous movement. Resumption implies a stop and then a resumption of moving forward, which is an assumption on your part.


There is no problem with tast witness.
What may be unclear to you has no impact on his account of Brown continuing to moving forward while be shot at, or his claimed astonishment by it.
Nor does the possibility of him being any of those you proffer have any effect on what he has already said.
The fact that this person is anonymous to us matter not one bit to what he said.
 
Middleground said:
Where's the part where Brown's blood was found on the gun and in the car? That's a pretty big piece of evidence to not list, no? As far as I know, the there was no blood from the officer found in the car. Interesting.
Click to expand...

What you quoted from me, is the account from one witness. Which has nothing to do with what you ask.

What you ask though, was provided in the first post of this thread.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…