Missouri Police Officer guns down unarmed 18 year old

Page 88 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Catriona

Senior member
May 10, 2012
976
18
81
I'm amazed at how many people didn't learn a lesson from the TM debacle. Don't get so entrenched on your unsupported opinions until more facts come out. I think this case will be fairly clear once details come out. Just like in the TM case the initial story that started the uproar ends up being false. The initial eyewitness report from Dorian Johnson claimed Brown was shot in the back as he was trying to run away, which we now know is false based on actual evidence.

You probably won't believe this, but I agree with you. That's why I'm asking questions rather than stating opinions.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,040
136
Your information comes from folks who have a very strong motivation to lie, one of whom was brown's felon accomplice. That information also doesn't line up with the other evidence shown.

You're just falling for it fool.

You know who else usually doesn't snitch on each other...police officers.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
The autopsy diagram is labeled "entry, re-entry and exit perforations".

The entry wounds seem to be indicated by round marks. The mark by the collarbone, where one of the bullets lodged, has an "x" through it, as does the mark in the upper right chest. Is that where the bullet through the upper arm lodged?

And only 3 bullets were recovered from the body, so how has it been determined how many shots were fired?

I'd appreciate it if someone could explain all of this.

Does it matter?

3 Autopsies.

Conclusion will still be the same, kid dead.
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,464
2
0
Why do you insist on being so fucking stupid all the time? Seriously!

Spidey made the claim that all the witnesses that have come forward have an agenda because they know brown and are essentially lying. I provided him with a witness that has no motive and who doesn't know brown and they don't live there. He then went off on a rant describing the reasons why she is a bad witness and is lying, despite the fact he had no such evidence. The discrediting of another human being for perceived stereotypical reasons when the facts don't support the claim is what makes his rant racist.

Do you fucking get it now or would you like to continue being obtuse?

They both were basing their arguments on the same point, a societal district of the police and policy to not cooperate "snitches get stitches".

Did Spidey make the argument is less eloquent terms? Yes. Still substantially the same point.

Do you fucking get it now or would you like to continue being obtuse?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,565
15,449
136
Does it matter?

3 Autopsies.

Conclusion will still be the same, kid dead.

It's important if you want the truth. It's important if you are trying to use this incident to enact change. It's important if you are collecting evidence for a trial you will be in. It's important if you are a parent and are seeking closure for your sons death.
 
Last edited:

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,565
15,449
136
They both were basing their arguments on the same point, a societal district of the police and policy to not cooperate "snitches get stitches".

Did Spidey make the argument is less eloquent terms? Yes. Still substantially the same point.

Do you fucking get it now or would you like to continue being obtuse?


My conversation was completely separate from DVC's. What they said to each I couldn't care less. What I was responding to was spideys dismissal of a key witness for racist reasons (hint his line about black people being unable to change is racist).

If you don't get it then fuck off, you don't need to derail this thread anymore than you already have.
 

Druidx

Platinum Member
Jul 16, 2002
2,971
0
76
Of course it was. These are poor black people living in subsidized housing (the shooting happened in a Section 8 housing area). They are under great societal pressure not to cooperate with the police at all, and particularly not when it comes to clearing the name of a white police officer who killed a black guy. The "snitches get stitches" phenomenon is very real. If you want to get completely pissed off, watch this 60 Minute segment - http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1ss1u_60-minutes-stop-snitching-04-22-200_shortfilms
That video is a real eye opener. It's no surprise to see the wannabe gangsters with that attitude but to have the kids from the church group support that belief is extremely sad and frustrating.
 

Attic

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2010
4,282
2
76
I'm amazed at how many people didn't learn a lesson from the TM debacle. Don't get so entrenched on your unsupported opinions until more facts come out. I think this case will be fairly clear once details come out. Just like in the TM case the initial story that started the uproar ends up being false. The initial eyewitness report from Dorian Johnson claimed Brown was shot in the back as he was trying to run away, which we now know is false based on actual evidence.


This is why I am very apprehensive about trusting the initial story and squeamish with any trajectory that Crump tries to push the case. Crump has been very heavy handed in his attempts to try this in the media under HIS assumptions/lies of what took place (he commonly refers to his lies as facts), just like he did in TM. That this is allowed to happen again, and has been supported by the media AGAIN is one of the most shocking aspects of this incident and it's aftermath.

If you want a look at uncovering a lot of the mischief Crump and Co has been upto on the Brown incident check out

http://theconservativetreehouse.com

those guys are pretty dedicated at exposing the fraud and presenting stuff the Main Stream narrative doesn't.


I tossed my hat in the ring off the bat though for the version of events painting the Cop as murdering Brown, this is exactly what initial reports were showing. This looked very much like cold blooded murder when I first looked into it. Whatever these guys are able to cook up to get people motivated for their cause, it works. Problem is Crump and Co work very quickly to supress information that runs counter their cause and they are very quick to put out narrative (true or not) to gain support in the mainstream.
 
Last edited:

Catriona

Senior member
May 10, 2012
976
18
81
Is the kid dead or not?

Is that a rhetorical question? Does it matter to you how he came to be dead, or not? If not, why are you here?


ETA: I feel like I'm in an episode of "Whose Line Is It Anyway". LOL
 
Last edited:

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,320
126
Sure I can accept that there is evidence that hasn't been released. Should I assume that evidence exist or should I rely on evidence that is currently available?
actually if there is conclusive evidence that exonerates the policeman then they should have already released the evidence!! If this evidence would have helped stop of calm the unrest and all the violations of peoples right they should have released the evidence.

Lets say they don`t have such evidence and as such the policeman is guilty.....
 

positivedoppler

Golden Member
Apr 30, 2012
1,137
226
106
I'm amazed at how many people didn't learn a lesson from the TM debacle. Don't get so entrenched on your unsupported opinions until more facts come out. I think this case will be fairly clear once details come out. Just like in the TM case the initial story that started the uproar ends up being false. The initial eyewitness report from Dorian Johnson claimed Brown was shot in the back as he was trying to run away, which we now know is false based on actual evidence.

its possible the witness confused shot fired in the back with shots fired while his back was turned running away but missed. I believe most accounts do agree the officer fires while he was fleeing
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,565
15,449
136
actually if there is conclusive evidence that exonerates the policeman then they should have already released the evidence!! If this evidence would have helped stop of calm the unrest and all the violations of peoples right they should have released the evidence.

Lets say they don`t have such evidence and as such the policeman is guilty.....

Yes it would have been nice if such evidence existed that it should have been released however this police department hasn't really done anything well in regards to the handling of this case.
 

Attic

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2010
4,282
2
76
For someone who wishes to seek the truth you certainly seem willing to take irrelevant facts and apply them to this issue.

This would be part of seeking the truth.

How is the past (and likely current) threat of hostility to anyone who tells the truth (snitches getting stiches) in Ferguson surrounding the Brown incident irrelevant to this case?
 
Last edited:

Attic

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2010
4,282
2
76
actually if there is conclusive evidence that exonerates the policeman then they should have already released the evidence!! If this evidence would have helped stop of calm the unrest and all the violations of peoples right they should have released the evidence.

Lets say they don`t have such evidence and as such the policeman is guilty.....

This makes sense, but there's the question of if they have that evidence could they release it?

Should they is subjective, wondering what the objective reason for withholding that info (should it exist) be. HIPAA seems hit or miss as a reason.

Edit: In the TM case the injuries to GZ weren't released until long after there was speculation GZ was beaten severly by TM.
 
Last edited:

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I'm saying that Mitchell and Brady are saying that Wilson was firing, plural.

Not that he fired one shot from behind, but that one of the shots Wilson fired from behind hit Brown. That is, Wilson was firing at Brown, and hit him once, which caused him to turn around.

If so, we will have more than 7 empties.
Not necessarily. It's possible that every shot fired hit. One of the MEs specifically said one graze could have been fired from behind, and personally I don't see why some of the others might not have been fired from behind. If one is running either away or to, one's arms are probably pumping through a cycle of front to back motion that exposes most of the arm regardless of direction.

You know who else usually doesn't snitch on each other...police officers.
lol Point.

That video is a real eye opener. It's no surprise to see the wannabe gangsters with that attitude but to have the kids from the church group support that belief is extremely sad and frustrating.
Granted, it's a widespread and ultimately destructive mindset. But if we automatically discount testimony from black people because of this, then we establish that mindset as the de facto standard. If one isn't going to be believed, then one's best course is clearly to say nothing and thus avoid possibly getting brought into the blame, even beyond the us-versus-them mindset.

In a way this may be a continuation of the willful ignorance of slavery. By speaking up as witness, a slave might help justice, but might just as easily make an enemy of a white person against whom he was powerless. There might be a component of that even today, so that maybe it's partly "never help The Man against a brother no matter what he's done" on the principle of us against them, partly "if you try to help The Man, brothers will hurt you", and partly "if you try to do the right thing and help The Man, he'll just screw you over somehow because you're black." Certainly a lot of inner city blacks feel powerless against the police and the legal system, and that's a source of rage as no one likes to feel helpless.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Yes it would have been nice if such evidence existed that it should have been released however this police department hasn't really done anything well in regards to the handling of this case.

So far no official evidence has been released. None.
 

Attic

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2010
4,282
2
76
Granted, it's a widespread and ultimately destructive mindset. But if we automatically discount testimony from black people because of this, then we establish that mindset as the de facto standard. If one isn't going to be believed, then one's best course is clearly to say nothing and thus avoid possibly getting brought into the blame, even beyond the us-versus-them mindset.

In a way this may be a continuation of the willful ignorance of slavery. By speaking up as witness, a slave might help justice, but might just as easily make an enemy of a white person against whom he was powerless. There might be a component of that even today, so that maybe it's partly "never help The Man against a brother no matter what he's done" on the principle of us against them, partly "if you try to help The Man, brothers will hurt you", and partly "if you try to do the right thing and help The Man, he'll just screw you over somehow because you're black." Certainly a lot of inner city blacks feel powerless against the police and the legal system, and that's a source of rage as no one likes to feel helpless.

I don't follow here. "Snitches get Stiches" doesn't discount testimony from my understanding (conflicting physical or other definitive evidence would), rather it would inhibit people from coming forward with any information not aligned with the cause. The cause being guilt of Wilson. Anything not supporting the cause or "party line" will get dealt with appropriately. In this way it might bias the aggregate of eyewitness accounts without necessarily discounting individual eyewitness accounts.

I'm working with the mindset that eyewitness accounts are truthful (from one perspective) but *not* necessarily the truth.


We should find out at some point some of these answers, as ballistics should tell a more detailed and definitive story of how shots took place.


If we reverse the party line in Ferguson (clearly currently "Wilson guilty") on this issue, to innocence of Wilson, I think it would be less likely to see folks happy to go on TV and publicly denounce Wilson (but it wouldn't necessarily mean they are lying). We'd also more than likely see the witness on the video who describes a charging Brown lawyered up and telling his story on the nightly news. Doesn't change the truth or the witness integrity, just shifts some motivations and burdens around which might change the overall presentation of overall information or information on a set timeline.
 
Last edited: