Which reports? it would be helpful to provide links.
On a guess? An assumption? A projection?
We have no idea what happened, and I doubt we ever will.
No thoughts on that but I notice the media portraying last night as a peaceful night but it appears to be false.
Also, the Paleostinians are now standing in support of the animals of Ferguson.
https://twitter.com/search?q=Ferguson&src=tren
That ruins the story of the people who want to moan about cops all the time because they want anarchy with the far left,
How do we know that was what he was trying to do?
Considering the cop that did shoot him, shot him when Brown was in no position to hurt anybody any longer because the cop could have ordered him on the ground and call for backup, how do we know Brown wasn’t simply trying to save his life?
Right now I’d take very little of the initial reporting as complete or even at face value.
What? You mean the cops name WASN’T Tony Stewart?
He was trying to take the weapon from the cop if you believe the cop. We can’t believe cop because he was white. All cops must be black.
No. He was standing in the road, reading his Bible when the policeman shot him for being black.
Try to keep up.
* Dash-cam ?
* Radio traffic?
* Injuries to the cop?
* Witnesses?
* Evidence of a round shot inside the patrol car?
* Autopsy of victim (shot in the back?)
Isn’t the only such “report” from the cop who killed him?
From what I have read the cop sure seemed like He just shot him in the back. I think the kid had a pretty clean record, at least I havent seen anything to contradict that. So why would a fairly normal kid try to take a cops gun? that just doesnt make any sense. But then neither does just shooting him in the back, I think there is more going on, but unfortunately only ONE person is alive to tell it.
This in NO way excuses the behavior of the other vermin...
Just because someone is unarmed doesn’t mean they aren’t a dangerous person. Guns are not the only thing that kill people. Thousands die every year from bludgeoning with various objects, even just hands and feet. To me the “unarmed” part of this story doesn’t mean much until we hear the rest of the story.
Assuming he was trying to take a gun from the police officer -- and that's a really bold assumption right now -- by every account that I have read, the cop was 35 feet from an unarmed Brown when he opened fire. Even under the laws of the most gun-friendly states, a private citizen who used deadly force after the imminent threat was no longer a threat, would be sitting in jail right now.
My thoughts are this ... legally it does not matter. I Prosecuted for 25 years. At the moment the teen walked off and ESPECIALLY had his hands in the air, when the cop shot him it was murder pure and simple.
Now are the LibTards trying to make this kid look “innocent”? Sure. But it is a hands down, slam dunk manslaughter charge at a minimum. My Office would have charged 2nd Degree murder without batting an eye.
Why are the police not releasing evidence to prove their case,such as the officer’s injury report and forensic evidence of the shot fired inside the squad car?
Let me apply the same basic litmus that I always do, i.e.
What would happen if I shot and killed someone under similar circumstances as the cop?
If a kid breaks into my car, we struggle, and I shoot him in the back as he runs away, will I get prosecuted or not?
I believe the operative words concerning me would be, “Was the kid a threat at the time that I shot him?”
Now the police are generally allowed to use deadly force to keep dangerous criminals from fleeing (can shoot a rapist in the back, can’t shoot a shoplifter in the back). What was this kid’s initial crime?
Everything then hinges on the word of the cop. I used to instinctively go with the cop, but not so much anymore.
Let me apply the same basic litmus test that I always do, i.e. What would happen if I shot and killed someone under similar circumstances as the cop?
If a kid breaks into my car, we struggle, and I shoot him in the back as he runs away, will I get prosecuted or not?
I believe the operative words concerning me would be, “Was the kid a threat at the time that I shot him?”
Now the police are generally allowed to use deadly force to keep dangerous criminals from fleeing (can shoot a rapist in the back, can’t shoot a shoplifter in the back). What was this kid’s initial crime?
Everything then hinges on the word of the cop. I used to instinctively go with the cop, but not so much anymore.
None of the facts as we know them make a lot of sense.
I’m sure cops aren’t trained to grab people through their car window. That makes no sense, especially if the person is 300 pounds.
How would one reach inside the car to take the cops’ gun? That would be quite difficult to do unless the cop is asleep.
Why would the cop keep shooting when the kid stopped running and held his hands in the air like witnesses claimed?
The female witness, Tiffany Mitchell sounded fairly credible, but I’m sure she was coached by her lawyer.