Missouri Police Officer guns down unarmed 18 year old

Page 93 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Attic

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2010
4,282
2
76
I'm well aware that eyewitnesses can be very mistaken about what they think they see, which is why a video would be the best evidence. But one witness is valid in the eyes of many of the posters here, only because he backs up the officer's account. They believe that witness and dismiss all the others, why do you think that is the case?

Maybe he saw the gorilla. Maybe he didn't.

It simply means there is a possiblity/likelihood that there is more to the story than the eyewitness accounts that Wilson shot a surrendering Brown.

Some of us are working from presumption of innocence and not guilt, there is a large standard to prove this cop murdered Brown in cold blood (hopefully this is obvious, it's important). It is also unlikely that Wilson murdered a surrendering and helpless Brown.

Burden of proof is a real PITA if you're proving Brown's case. Partly why I expect a civil judgement but not criminal.
 
Last edited:

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
The one that backs up the officer's claims isn't even on camera, only a voice in the background.

And I've also stated, I can't even count how many times, that witnesses on one side are no more or less credible than the witnesses on the other side. Try and keep up.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
It also seems odd that the only one's that have come forward in the media are telling a story that doesn't match up that well with the evidence as being shot in upraised arms or from behind wouldn't strike a person like the rounds that struck Brown. Based on the idea that Wilson had been struck in the face and his face was beginning to swell would make sense that his vision could be altered/affect his aim and why so many shots hit Brown in the right arm and as Brown got closer the more the shots moved towards the center of his body. I don't believe a person running towards a person and shooting would have the same effect, in fact from my experience of running while shooting I would expect a wider scattering of shots landing.
 

Attic

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2010
4,282
2
76
The one that backs up the officer's claims isn't even on camera, only a voice in the background.


In this way he has nothing lose, but as importantly, no motivation to lie. For all he knows he's not on camera and we know he JUST saw the encounter rather than giving an account days later. He and the two women being the most impartial of the accounts we've heard.

That none of this is to police is important, but we won't have that side of the story for awhile.
 
Last edited:

Attic

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2010
4,282
2
76
It also seems odd that the only one's that have come forward in the media are telling a story that doesn't match up that well with the evidence as being shot in upraised arms or from behind wouldn't strike a person like the rounds that struck Brown. Based on the idea that Wilson had been struck in the face and his face was beginning to swell would make sense that his vision could be altered/affect his aim and why so many shots hit Brown in the right arm and as Brown got closer the more the shots moved towards the center of his body. I don't believe a person running towards a person and shooting would have the same effect, in fact from my experience of running while shooting I would expect a wider scattering of shots landing.

The most reasonable explanation for shots landed locations have to do with the fact that they are all in a fairly consistent vertical line on Browns Right side. Possibly indicating Brown was facing the same direction when all bullets hit him and also lining up with indications from autopsy that all shots hit Brown while Brown was facing the officer. The possibility was left that one may have struck him from the back (unlikely but possible from the report). Both set of circumstances appearing to match up with the eyewitness whom described Brown charging the cop.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,764
28,977
136
Lying to a news camera doesn't quite carry with it the same punishment as lying to police investigators. Since we don't have testimonies/statements to police, the witnesses might as well be imaginary too.

Basically, statements made to the cameras aren't really very credible.

Who lied to the camera and what was the lie?

Has Brown's side put out any false information into the media unlike the police?
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
Who lied to the camera and what was the lie?

Has Brown's side put out any false information into the media unlike the police?

Never said anyone definitely lied. I'm saying that lying to the camera carries no punishment so there is no way to prove a lie one way or the other. So just like I plainly stated, statements made to the cameras aren't very credible.

I can't determine what is false yet. Can you prove the police has put out any false information? Didn't think so.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,315
1,215
126
There appears to be HUGE divide between whites and blacks on this issue. As a white man I can say that I do not know if the shooting was justified. How can one conclude justifiable or not based on the near absolute lack of information provided?

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/missouri-national-guard-begins-leaving-ferguson

As tensions in Ferguson, Missouri appear to be easing, a new poll shows that Americans across the country are divided along racial lines on the justification of the fatal police shooting of unarmed black teen Michael Brown.
More than half — 57% — of black Americans said the killing of the 18-year-old Brown by Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9 was “not justified,” according to a New York Times/CBS News poll published Thursday. Eighteen percent of white Americans said the shooting was not justified.
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,464
2
0
We "know" the witnesses siding with the officer exist based on a single reporter who made such claims. Absolutely not credible seeing as no authorities have validated her claim.

Rumors of witnesses amount to nothing.
Your argument would be far more compelling if any evidence were released officially...
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,764
28,977
136
Never said anyone definitely lied. I'm saying that lying to the camera carries no punishment so there is no way to prove a lie one way or the other. So just like I plainly stated, statements made to the cameras aren't very credible.

I can't determine what is false yet. Can you prove the police has put out any false information? Didn't think so.

There are 2 sides to this case Brown family and police. What are the odds Brown family put out the broken orbital story?
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
There are 2 sides to this case Brown family and police. What are the odds Brown family put out the broken orbital story?

What are the odds the police did? You sound more like a complete idiot the more you post.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,040
136

That witness is the one I posted about earlier in the thread. I don't see how his story helps the officer with the exception of his description of the incident at the car, he states that Brown was 20-25 feet from the officer, he saw no charging and the kill shot was delivered as brown was going down and was no threat to the officer.
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,575
126
That witness is the one I posted about earlier in the thread. I don't see how his story helps the officer with the exception of his description of the incident at the car, he states that Brown was 20-25 feet from the officer, he saw no charging and the kill shot was delivered as brown was going down and was no threat to the officer.

Brady only saw the ending of the "charge" when he was able to see the scene again.

That would explain it.

20-25 feet is no problem given Tueller Drill training.

Brady took a video apparently, in which he says Brown ran up to the SUV and began punching on Wilson.

Brady puts Johnson at the front of the vehicle during the window struggle. Contradicting Johnson.

Brady did not hear the gun shot during the struggle, which likely indicates that the gun was well inside the vehicle when it went off during the struggle. This favors the idea that Brown tried to take the gun by reaching into the vehicle.

Does anyone recognize the object near the far cone?

http://blackbergtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Shooting-Scene-Red-Hat.jpg
 
Last edited:

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
That witness is the one I posted about earlier in the thread. I don't see how his story helps the officer with the exception of his description of the incident at the car, he states that Brown was 20-25 feet from the officer, he saw no charging and the kill shot was delivered as brown was going down and was no threat to the officer.

No way to know yet which shot was the kill shot. No way to know yet how long had transpired between shots. If he is going down and the officer is making three shot bursts (normal training) then you can't recall/turn back a bullet that had already been fired. Its conceivable that Brown's head was down because he was falling down when the last shot was fired but how does that change anything?
 
Last edited:

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,040
136
Brady only saw the ending of the "charge" when he was able to see the scene again.

That would explain it.

20-25 feet is no problem given Tueller Drill training.

Does anyone recognize the object near the far cone?

http://blackbergtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Shooting-Scene-Red-Hat.jpg

But his statement (of the parts he did see) matches the other witnesses (except for the background off-camera guy). He also stated that Wilson fired as Brown was running away as the others have said. You still are clinging on to the "charge", that no one has claimed, not even the guy off-camera said Brown "charged". There is a difference between running and charging.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
You are not well informed, that has been proven not to be true.

There are four seperate sources including in the prosecutors office that say otherwise. It absolutely has not been proven false, in fact quite the opposite. Try to keep up with the facts of this case and stop spreading your racist lies.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,040
136