Michael Brown assaulted Officer Wilson for no reason. He reached into the truck and punched him and Wilson fired two shots. Brown then ran and Wilson got out and told him to stop. So Brown turned around and started towards Wilson. Both sides had wrong doing. But Wilson had a right to defend himself from brown because of the assault on him. I'm not saying shooting Brown to death was right, but what would you do if someone twice your size was coming at you? Would you shot? If you felt threatened enough to the point you felt the need to shot would you? I think yes. So all this talk about Wilson doing the wrong thing is absurd. What's done is done and people need to realize Wilson was defending himself. Even some African Americans are on Wilson's side. The riots are pointless and National Guard needs to put a stop to it.
Our system calls for a impartial jury. You know this. We try to uphold this principle the best we can. It's hard to impartial when your city is under siege, and the events on 2 different occasions have been on a 24 hour news feed. Eliminating emotion from legal proceedings is needed for true justice. The justice being protested for, equal justice.
️ through my observations studying the African American species, I've come to the conclusion that black youth are brainwashed through black media and their parents just as most Islamic radicals are in the Middle East.
This is the fault of the media for once again, as always, bending the truth to dramatize a story. This is why I dont even watch the news. It's suggestive thinking is designed to cause your perspective to change.
Ghetto youth are a product of their environment. The U.S. government makes a huge proffit off prisoners, which is why America only has 5% of the world's population, but 25% of the world's prison population. Ghettos are just breeding grounds for future inmates. I mean, we have enough money to go to "war" (oil hunting) but not enough money to clean up our educational systems in poor neighborhoods? Give me a break. Society is a ruthless machine.
Damn. That's harder than where's Waldo when he's hiding In a candy cane patch. That's harder than finding xtremes genitalia. That's harder than Monica lewensky... Oh wait, that ones pretty easy.
So King Calm on page 2 is saying the prosecutor twisted the facts and presented them to a racist jury in order to manipulate them into returning a no indictment? That's your take on what happened? He gave them all forensic evidence and all creditable eye witness accounts. If anyone was trying to manipulate facts it was all the eye witnesses, that later had to change their story because they were lying. I don't know how you can maintain this opinion even after reading all the forensic evidence.
They ran forensic evidence through 3 different specialists, one of them even being through forensic analyst's from the US department of defense.... And by moving it outside of Ferguson in minimalized false information and bias in the hearing. So many of the reports of the incident were falsified and once legitimate tests were run many of the people making outlandish claims withdrew their statements or said they heard that's what happened...
Because Larry, their minds are allready made up, please don't confuse them with the facts. Simply put brown assaulted a store owner over a box of smokes (fact) then assaulted a police officer (fact). What happened next is the reasonable result of the two previously mentioned events. No matter of color or religion of either party involved, PERIOD
The only guilty person was the one that decided to steal. If he had not robbed a store then this would not happen. Quit making excuses for bad behavior. President Obama was first to stir crap. What would happen if you tried to hurt Obama. If you live a life of crime, then somer or later you will pay for it. Who's crying over the 500 plus murders yearly in Illinois. Mostly black on black. What does race have to do with crime? Who commits most crime? What percent of what race? If a pit bull bites a child... Do we blame the breed, all dogs, or the dog?
That's easy. Just read the transcripts. First of all, it's not the role of the grand jury to determine if Wilson was guilty or not. Their role is to determine if there was "probable cause" to indict Wilson. That would have been easy to do in light of all the conflicting testimony. Instead, the prosecutor basically held a closed trial in which testimony and evidence was presented, but no one was allowed to cross exam the witnesses or dispute the evidence. Second, now that the transcripts are out, we're seeing all the problems with the investigation and grand jury proceedings. 1. Wilson washed away blood evidence. Wilson admitted that after the shooting he returned to police headquarters and washed blood off his body -- physical evidence that could have helped to prove or disprove a critical piece of Wilson’s testimony regarding his struggle with Brown inside the police car. 2. The first officer to interview Wilson failed to take any notes. There's no written record of what Wilson said immediately after the shooting. 3. Investigators failed to measure the likely distance between Brown and Wilson. We don't know the distances because no one measure it. 4. Investigators did not test Wilson’s gun for fingerprints. Wilson also told police that he thought Brown would overpower him and shoot him with his own gun. “I was not in control of the gun,” Wilson said. But later an investigator argued before the grand jury that the decision was made not to test the weapon because Wilson “never lost control of his gun.” Why wasn't it tested? The prosecutor also relied heavily on the testimony of witness #10. He was the one who said he saw Brown charge Wilson. But witness #10 stated in his first interview he was about 100 yards away and his testimony is full of "I don't know" and "I'm not sure". Witness #10 was also one of those who changed his testimony. When he testified before the grand jury witness #10 said he was only 50 yards away. He cut the distance in half. We know nothing about the witness and no one challenged him on any of his statements because it wasn't a trial. That's just some of the stuff that's been found so far. I'm sure more will be found. But this is why it would have been better to have a trial. The proceedings would have been public. We would know who the witnesses are and be able to judge their credibility. Their statements could have been cross examined. Instead, we had a closed proceeding that clearly was biased in Wilson's favor. Understand, the chances that Wilson would be found guilty at trial are exceedingly small. Missouri state law, as in most states, makes it very difficult to convict a police officer. But the process would have been public. Everything would have come out. Instead it didn't, which only reinforces the community's view that they were denied justice. This whole case was bungled from the start. The police left Brown's body laying face down in the street for over 4 hours. They didn't even bother to cover it or screen it from view. Then they immediately began releasing information that attacked Brown's character while not releasing any information about the shooting. Now after reading the grand jury transcripts, it's looking like they bungled parts of the investigation too. So yeah, it's not hard to believe that the prosecutor didn't want an indictment. He basically acted like Wilson's defense attorney.
Well, that's kind of what the protests are about. Statistically blacks commit more crimes as a percentage of the population because blacks are targeted more than any other group. Don't think so? Let's look at marihuana arrests. Black and white people use marijuana at roughly the same rates: [/URL] For young people ages 18-25, the rates of use are higher for whites: [/URL] So who gets arrested more? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... ne-charts/ So yeah, blacks commit more crimes. They're targeted more. By the way 84% of white victims were killed by white offenders. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fac ... er-blacks/ So it's not like blacks have a monopoly on killing each other.
Black Dragon you are typical liberal that twists facts until they make your point and always with some conspiracy theory.. Maybe the prosecutor photoshopped the surveillance tape of Brown robbing the store. Maybe the prosecutor has maybe up the stuff about brown assaulting a police officer. Maybe the prosecutor went for Wilson's gun. I think it should be ok for Brown to rob the store and assault the cop because he had a tough life. The cop should have just given his gun up to Brown because the cop was white and had no right to stop Brown
That's outdated information, it's 2014 not 2010 Edit: Blacks kill more blacks than white people do, can you get dated good sources next time?
Yes, and if you're black or brown it's more likely to be sooner and you'll pay more for it. "While African Americans comprise 13% of the US population and 14% of monthly drug users they are 37% of the people arrested for drug offenses - according to 2009 Congressional testimony by Marc Mauer of The Sentencing Project. African Americans, who are 13% of the population and 14% of drug users, are not only 37% of the people arrested for drugs but 56% of the people in state prisons for drug offenses. The police stop blacks and Latinos at rates that are much higher than whites. In New York City, where people of color make up about half of the population, 80% of the NYPD stops were of blacks and Latinos. When whites were stopped, only 8% were frisked. When blacks and Latinos are stopped 85% were frisked according to information provided by the NYPD. The same is true most other places as well. In a California study, the ACLU found blacks are three times more likely to be stopped than whites. The U.S. Sentencing Commission reported in March 2010 that in the federal system black offenders receive sentences that are 10% longer than white offenders for the same crimes. Marc Mauer of the Sentencing Project reports African Americans are 21% more likely to receive mandatory minimum sentences than white defendants and 20% more like to be sentenced to prison than white drug defendants. The longer the sentence, the more likely it is that non-white people will be the ones getting it. A July 2009 report by the Sentencing Project found that two-thirds of the people in the US with life sentences are non-white. In New York, it is 83%. A study by Professor Devah Pager of the University of Wisconsin found that 17% of white job applicants with criminal records received call backs from employers while only 5% of black job applicants with criminal records received call backs. Race is so prominent in that study that whites with criminal records actually received better treatment than blacks without criminal records." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-quig ... 58947.html And you wonder why these people are pissed off? This isn't just about Darren Wilson and Michael Brown. It's about decades of being screwed over by the police and the courts. It's about living in a country where numerically, whites commit more crimes than blacks, but no one ever says they do it because they're white or imply it's a failure of white culture. But if a black commits a crime it becomes an indictment of the whole race. Does that excuse the looters and rioters? No, it doesn't. But it's a lot easier to call people thugs when you haven't spent your life being treated like one by the police and courts.