• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Missouri Police Officer guns down unarmed 18 year old

Page 82 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Is it illegal for an officer to shoot at an unarmed person who is running away from them? So far there are three witnesses that state that the officer shot at Brown while he was running away from the officer, no witnesses have stated that is not the case. If it is illegal for an officer to shoot at someone unarmed running away, then he is guilty of that.
 
Can we nail mike browns accomplice on felony murder and charge him?

The fact of the matter is his accomplice was with him when MB committed multiple felonies, and during one felony battery/attempted murder of a policeman he was justifiably killed.

That means we can nail his ass accomplice for murder, felony murder. I demand Justice! Lock the criminal up for 30 years or seek death penalty.
 
soundforbjt said:
Is it illegal for an officer to shoot at an unarmed person who is running away from them? So far there are three witnesses that state that the officer shot at Brown while he was running away from the officer, no witnesses have stated that is not the case. If it is illegal for an officer to shoot at someone unarmed running away, then he is guilty of that.
Click to expand...

All shots were to the front.

So he was running away...backwards?

You yahoos never learn, every time you're wrong on these cases. Every time. You simply refuse common sense fact and truth.
 
soundforbjt said:
Is it illegal for an officer to shoot at an unarmed person who is running away from them? So far there are three witnesses that state that the officer shot at Brown while he was running away from the officer, no witnesses have stated that is not the case. If it is illegal for an officer to shoot at someone unarmed running away, then he is guilty of that.
Click to expand...
So three witnesses are all you need?

What is this, the Salem Cracker Trials?
 
soundforbjt said:
Is it illegal for an officer to shoot at an unarmed person who is running away from them? So far there are three witnesses that state that the officer shot at Brown while he was running away from the officer, no witnesses have stated that is not the case. If it is illegal for an officer to shoot at someone unarmed running away, then he is guilty of that.
Click to expand...

Its not illegal generally speaking for an officer to shoot an unarmed person who is running away from them. Although, if that was the case in this specific instance, then I would agree it would be illegal (the shooting that is) and he should be charged.
 
TechBoyJK said:
well in Mike Brown's case, I'm sure every reasonable person knows he would have murdered someone eventually, possibly even the cop that shot him.

Dude was out of control crazy big bear. Not a young cute pup.
Click to expand...

What a load of shit. Amazing what you dipshits come up with.
 
soundforbjt said:
Well, your "side" has one person claiming Brown moved towards the officer and that hasn't stopped them from claiming/believing Brown charged him. 🙄
Click to expand...

His side is the quest for the most accurate version of the truth to be determined. If there is a "my side" versus "your side", then... are you not interested in truth? Are you only interested in truth that supports your preconceived beliefs? To find Brown innocent and the cop guilty of murder? Is that "your side"?
 
soundforbjt said:
Well, your "side" has one person claiming Brown moved towards the officer and that hasn't stopped them from taking that info and turning it into claiming/believing Brown charged him. 🙄
Click to expand...

What is the more outrageous scenario?

Whichever one is more unlikely requires a larger burden of proof.


If we see an apple sitting below a tree, we don't have to rigorously detune someone claiming the apple fell from the tree.

If there's an orange sitting below a tree and someone claims it fell from an apple tree, we might be more questioning of one witness vs another if one claims it fell from the tree and one says it didn't.


An officer shooting a fleeing unarmed man or a man with his arms up in surrendering pose is not a typical or expected situation, the officer shooting a man charging him is the expected situation. It's just the way it is.

The different narratives are not equally plausible. Sorry, this is just the way it is. Most people know this which is why the case has attracted attention, if the man was shot dead while fleeing or surrendering it is absolutely outrageous. What it isn't, is likely.
 
Last edited:
TerryMathews said:
Well, that and an autopsy that shows 5/6 wounds from the front and one inconclusive.
Click to expand...

Or shows that he turned around after getting shot and went to put his hands up, before being shot.

Attic said:
An officer a shooting fleeing unarmed man or a man with his arms up in surrendering pose is not a typical or expected situation, the officer shooting a man charging him is the expected situation. It's just the way it is.
Click to expand...

Except when it actually happens.

We could ask Oscar Grant about how unlikely it is to be shot by a cop when you are handcuffed and with people recording it. But since he was murdered by that cop, I guess we can't.
 
Last edited:
xBiffx said:
Can you name any eyewitness other than the criminal friend of Brown to back up Brown's side?

Here's a hint though, even if you can, does them having a name make them any more credible to anyone here?
Click to expand...

Yes.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5677003

Feel free to watch the msnbc video and point out her inconsistencies.

Nothing in her story contradicts the evidence. Brown, while fleeing might have been grazed by a bullet which caused him to jerk, he then turned around and gave up where he was shot multiple times, after being hit in the lower part of his body he folded his arms and stumbled forward where he was shot in the face, as he fell down he was shot in the top of the head. He fell face first to the ground with his arms still folded under his stomach.
 
Last edited:
Apparently you guys have not heard about the latest eyewitness. It was either on CNN or MSNBC late last night around 1:30. He first saw the officer running after brown and firing at him (from his window) he also saw Brown jerk as though he may have gotten hit, he ran downstairs and saw Brown clutching his arms in his stomach (now facing the officer) taking a step or two forward and stumbling towards his knees as the officer continued to shoot.
I have no "side" at this point, but I'm leaning towards the side with actual witnesses vs un-named"sources" so far.
 
xBiffx said:
Its not illegal generally speaking for an officer to shoot an unarmed person who is running away from them. Although, if that was the case in this specific instance, then I would agree it would be illegal (the shooting that is) and he should be charged.
Click to expand...

He appears to have missed Brown if he fired at him while he was running away.

Keep in mind the shot count.

IOW, if there are only 7 empties, then Wilson couldn't have fired any shots at Brown as he fled. Those 7 shots are already accounted for.

We would have to see more than 7 empties for Wilson to have fired several shots at a fleeing Brown to stop him.

There is only one disputed bullet wound, as far as direction. If we go ahead and say that one came from behind, then we have only one shot fired as Brown fled. That one shot could have been a warning shot, or an accidental shot while Wilson was running, or Wilson could have tried to hit Brown.
 
The hand/arm bullet was from when Brown was attempting to gain access to the Officer's firearm inside the car after he brutally and viciously attacked the officer. So that blows that theory out of the water.

This is confirmed by the star witness....Brown's felony accomplice.
 
soundforbjt said:
Apparently you guys have not heard about the latest eyewitness. It was either on CNN or MSNBC late last night around 1:30. He first saw the officer running after brown and firing at him (from his window) he also saw Brown jerk as though he may have gotten hit, he ran downstairs and saw Brown clutching his arms in his stomach (now facing the officer) taking a step or two forward and stumbling towards his knees as the officer continued to shoot.
I have no "side" at this point, but I'm leaning towards the side with actual witnesses vs un-named"sources" so far.
Click to expand...

This doesn't come across as impartial this late to the game and *after* the Crump and Co team had their guy do an autopsy and reveal results to the public. Depends on circumstances of this revelation. Do you know when the original account of this was given? It's pretty valid if given to officers at time of incident.

It's pretty worthless if given in past few days, if this isn't obvious, we're not being impartial.
 
Last edited:
soundforbjt said:
Apparently you guys have not heard about the latest eyewitness. It was either on CNN or MSNBC late last night around 1:30. He first saw the officer running after brown and firing at him (from his window) he also saw Brown jerk as though he may have gotten hit, he ran downstairs and saw Brown clutching his arms in his stomach (now facing the officer) taking a step or two forward and stumbling towards his knees as the officer continued to shoot.
I have no "side" at this point, but I'm leaning towards the side with actual witnesses vs un-named"sources" so far.
Click to expand...
I'm far more interested in evidence.

Lean whichever way you want but pinning your hopes and dreams on witness testimony alone is no better than flipping a coin.
 
soundforbjt said:
Apparently you guys have not heard about the latest eyewitness. It was either on CNN or MSNBC late last night around 1:30. He first saw the officer running after brown and firing at him (from his window) he also saw Brown jerk as though he may have gotten hit, he ran downstairs and saw Brown clutching his arms in his stomach (now facing the officer) taking a step or two forward and stumbling towards his knees as the officer continued to shoot.
I have no "side" at this point, but I'm leaning towards the side with actual witnesses vs un-named"sources" so far.
Click to expand...

Well, both sides have actual witnesses.

Both sides have actual evidence, too.

This witness account is an example that would require a lot more than 7 shots to have been fired.
 
TerryMathews said:
I'm far more interested in evidence.

Lean whichever way you want but pinning your hopes and dreams on witness testimony alone is no better than flipping a coin.
Click to expand...

With no video, it's the officer's account against multiple eyewitnesses and very little definitive forensics...the witnesses have all stated the officer fired at Brown while he was facing the officer as well as while the was running away.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Well, both sides have actual witnesses.

Both sides have actual evidence, too.

This witness account is an example that would require a lot more than 7 shots to have been fired.
Click to expand...

I have not seen one named witness that agrees with the officer's account, Link?
 
LTC8K6 said:
Well, both sides have actual witnesses.

Both sides have actual evidence, too.

This witness account is an example that would require a lot more than 7 shots to have been fired.
Click to expand...

Who is the witness for Wilson's side?

Why would there need to be more than 7 bullets? The amount of shots fired and when they were shot and when they hit brown all match up to eye witness accounts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top