Posted on 09/01/2014 8:44:16 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Darren Wilson might eventually be exonerated for the death of Michael Brown and there's a chance he indeed acted appropriately, at least in terms of self-defense, that fateful day. The law protects him, but it also allows the family of Michael Brown to inquire as to how their unarmed son was killed while walking in the street. Shoplifting cigars from a convenience store does not deserve the electric chair and Wilson never knew of the alleged theft. According to The Wall Street Journal, Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson "said the officer stopped Mr. Brown because he was walking in the road and disrupting traffic."
Time magazine has quoted Police Chief Thomas Jackson as stating, "This robbery does not relate to the initial contact between the officer and Michael Brown." So, don't connect the two incidents when trying to justify Brown's death. There might indeed have been a scuffle at one point after Brown was told to get on the sidewalk, but Wilson did not have a fractured eye socket, a CNN source dispelled that myth. One can't say Brown was a human deadly weapon if Wilson simply had bruising and not a fracture, or something of that nature. In court, Wilson will have to prove that an unarmed man (not committing a crime that moment and undeserving of death for any alleged prior crime) not only went after his gun, but was also either beating him as he shot six times, or rushing towards him with deadly intent before the shooting. Either way, it's hard to go from "get off the street" to scuffle within a car or suicidal charge at a Glock staring at you, without question Wilson's mindset, or behavior during the interactions of that fateful day....
(Excerpt) Read more at huffingtonpost.com ...
Police Chief now says officer might have realized Michael Brown was robbery suspect
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3193465/posts
This muddying of the details is exactly what happened in the St. Trayvon of Skittles case. I remember random FReepers popping in here and helping along. One guy in particular I remember claimed Zimmerman walked down the sidewalk with his gun drawn.
Details matter, and clowns like this are trying to make sure nobody’s sure what happened exactly which makes it easier to demonize the victor of the altercation.
Even though we know he’s innocent we still hate him and we still hate the fact that our hate whitey narrative isn’t working like we like for it too - or something like that.
Numbers two and three were with a washed corpse.
Does the lunacy ever stop? The facts have pretty much come out and these liberals still insist on finding some new and imaginative way to say “I reject your reality and substitute my own”. They’ll just keep at it until the public consciousness remembers something that didn’t happen.
Simple: don’t want to die? Don’t assault the police.
Regarding what was known by Saint Mickey and not known by the officer:
http://www.lawofficer.com/article/lifeline-training/open-letter-captain-ronald-s-j
Appropriate to consider when we hear those that should know better say we should not consider the robbery as part of what happened a short while later.
Which contradicts what he said before. So with all due respect why should be give him any more benefit of the doubt than any of the other witnesses who changed their story?
When new information comes in, you change your narrative, right? Or would you want him to stick to the old story even though it turns out to be incorrect?
Except for the speculation that 1 shot might have been fired during the initial struggle the rest were from a distance. The author is an idjit.
There is a theory that Dorian Johnson was an active participant in the initial assault on Wilson. As evidence is cited a gold bracelet he is wearing in the convenience store video but not wearing after the shooting. An item on the road near Wilson’s vehicle appears to be that bracelet.
If this theory is correct, Wilson had two assailants. It could be that as Brown fled Wilson turned his attention to Johnson—whose position was in the opposite direction from Brown. [This is known by where Johnson ended up after he too fled.]
Such a scenario would have put Wilson’s back to Brown, who may then have charged him in order to distract him from confronting Johnson. If this is what happened, Wilson may have heard the sound of the charge, turned & observed a huge young man bearing down on him in a headlong rush. The shots ensued.
What evidence? Seriously, what real evidence has anyone seen? None. So we have absolutely no idea which side the evidence supports.
As for the quiet, I imagine it's because the looters got tired, figured they taken all they could, and went home.
If the evidence clearly showed Wilson “assassinated” Brown in cold blood he would have been charged by now in order to keep the spectacle going.
By the same token, if the evidence clearly showed that Officer Wilson was in the right then it would have been released by now to show that the Ferguson PD was the crack police force they want people to think they are.
It all goes back to my original point. Nobody outside of the various police and district attorney offices knows what happened, and even they don't know with 100% certainty. Only two people know that, and one is dead.
H. A. Goodman is an author and journalist who studied International Relations at USC and worked for a brief stint at the U.S. Department of State’s Foreign Service Institute. He’s been published in Salon.com, the Jerusalem Post, Chicago Tribune, The Hill’s Congress Blog, the Roanoke Times, and various other publications throughout the country. Goodman is also the author of Breaking the Devil’s Heart and Logic of Demons, a widely acclaimed series of existential fantasy novels.
Did he know or not know. Irrelevant.
What happened is relevant.
Now, it is unquestioned Saint Micky knew and that likely shaped his response.
What we see are pressures to hold press conferences, make statements, answer questions, etc. . .and when time passes and facts become known, some things change. . .and it is those changes that too many people point at and say “ahah!, there’s something fishy going on here, the story is changing!”
These are the same people that wail about cover-up and hiding things if only the facts released are the facts known. . .
Get's it wrong from the get go. It was not shoplifting. It was strong arm robbery. He made no effort to sneak it out of the store. He openly and boldly used his size and bulk to take it and then used his size and bulk to get out the door by assaulting the clerk.
We have no idea what shaped his response.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.