Who is that racist store clerk attacking the gentle teenager? Do you see how he is using his neck to twist the boy's hands?
Makes me want to riot!
Posted on 08/15/2014 7:19:37 AM PDT by McGruff
Michael Brown, the unarmed black teenager who was fatally shot by a police officer in a St. Louis suburb, fit the description of a strong-arm robbery suspect that police were responding to the night he was shot, the Ferguson police chief said at a Friday press conference.
Police have said Brown was shot after an officer encountered him and another man on the street. They say one of the men pushed the officer into his squad car, then physically assaulted him in the vehicle and struggled with the officer over the officer's weapon. At least one shot was fired inside the car before the struggle spilled onto the street, where Brown was shot multiple times, according to police
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
In my opinion being ‘unarmed’ does not transform into ‘no danger’. Physical beatings can be/are dangerous to the point of maiming or death and looking at the size of the ‘young boy’ and his pictured actions I tend to think he was a bully boy.
I guess my “poke in the MSM’s eye” required more explanation.
I was demonstrating the absurdity of their assertion by stating it plainly instead of their tiptoeing around it an implying it.
Just saw the pictures. The guy is a giant pushing around the store owner. Looks like Brown is a scumbag.
I see a big, black guy. Other than that, it’s impossible to make out who it is. There are lots of big, black guys.
And there’s been too much water under the bridge for me to automatically believe what cops say.
Ducking for cover.
If you are suggesting that a dying man or a collapsing man must fall and lie with his arms in the same position that they were at the moment he received his wound, then I respectfully disagree. Of course this suggestion is worthy of analysis and research.
This argument will not likely be made by attorneys when they defend the policeman in court, because it is easily countered. The photograph shows little that is helpful in assessing what will prove to be important in the final judgment.
Who is that racist store clerk attacking the gentle teenager? Do you see how he is using his neck to twist the boy's hands?
Makes me want to riot!
The pictures are too blurry to tell anything other than it was a big, black guy.
There’s a CNN reporter on right now trying as hard as he can to twist the story against the police. Doubling down.
Please don’t make this personal. There’s no reason to. I don’t care how this turns out one way or the other.
And “maybe” is absolutely consistent with waiting for all the facts.
Plus, the officer has not been exonerated yet. Not to say he won’t be — but it hasn’t happened yet.
But since you want to speculate — by guess is that the perp was shot shortly after the officer won the struggle for his weapon. The perp may have made a show of giving up (maybe even intended to) but the officer in that situation is battling instinct versus training.
All speculation at this point, of course.
It can also transform in a split second into "armed" when he grabs the LEO's weapon, as this case proves.
I'll say this until I'm red in the face: The only "weapon" that ultimately matters is a criminal intent. All the rest is detail.
From what I heard the perp reached through the window and there was a struggle for the gun in which the perp took a bullet. He staggered off and as the cop got out of his car the perp charged him again, which is why there were so many shots fired.
There are people who look at this and are denying the person face down and the robber are the same person.
Seems pretty obvious to me that it is the same person. Besides the shoes, I look at the light colored piping on the edge of the sleeve and the shoes.
I will concede the remote possibility that someone may have doctored something to make them look alike, or even that it is very huge coincidence that someone was wearing such amazingly similar clothes, but...I don’t think so.
The dialogue around this is just amazing.
It seems obvious.
But for some reason, people want to disbelieve their own lying eyes.
Caution is one thing, but this denial by some that the dead guy and the robber are the same person is disconcerting.
LOL
Correct! Strong arm robbery. Just brazenly take stuff! No kind of sneaky shoplifting needed. Just jack up the store owner if he gives you any problems
With a jury of whose peers?
Dennis, you don’t know the whole story. It’s possible that he was on the way to his grandmothers house. His grandmother may have been suffering From a disease and needed medicinal marijuana.
But it is illegal in Missouri. So as a loving beautiful grandson he stole some Swisher sweets that he could hollow out and roll a blunt with in order to give it to his grandmother to ease her pain. But he didn’t have the money. He had to do what he had to do.
I would do the same thing to help my grandma who raised me while my parents were at work. She was a saint.
Is anybody buying this version of the story?
The Sequel =)
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.