Posted on 08/21/2014 8:48:23 PM PDT by Nachum
Here’s another follow-up to my article about Jim Hoft’s dishonest tactics in promoting his bogus claim that officer Darren Wilson suffered a fractured eye socket in a purported struggle with teenager Michael Brown.
As I pointed out in the earlier piece, Hoft posted a stock image of a CT scan of a fractured eye socket, but apparently erased the words “UNIV OF IOWA” from his copy of the image.
Well, thanks to LGF readers @franklinftw and @loveheylola, I can now remove the word “apparently” from that description, because we have proof that Hoft (or someone who works with him) did indeed alter that CT scan, almost certainly to mislead people into believing it was an image of officer Darren Wilson. (And he was successful in fooling many right wingers, including Ann Coulter.)
A cached version of Hoft’s page at the Internet Archive Wayback Machine captured at 18:08:39 (UTC) on August 19th shows that when Hoft first posted the image, it did contain the words “UNIV OF IOWA.” Here’s a screenshot of the Internet Archive’s cached version:
(Excerpt) Read more at littlegreenfootballs.com ...
I doubt that there is a single reader of Hoft who thought he had obtained WILSON’s actual scan or X-Ray!
Is there anything left to loot? No wonder.
If four shots went to the arm (I didn’t know that) then that is a good point why the victim did not go down.
Witness reports are not going well for the officer, so the direct evidence better be flawless and convincing.
Certainly a change of venue has to happen.
“I doubt that there is a single reader of Hoft who thought he had obtained WILSON’s actual scan or X-Ray!”
It’s still hard to understand the motivation for updating the post with the U of Iowa cropped off the CT scan.
Apparently, what CNN wants us to conclude is that Wilson should have realized that he had no right to shoot the thug because he should have known his eye socket was not fractured.
Huh?
Don lemmon would have been able to do it also and certainly the resources to promote the LIE.
So you are an expert on lethal force incidents, to be able to judge how many shots one should need to take down a man pushing 300#?
Tell us more.
I am not an expert, but will tell you that from what I have read, six shots is not that many. Guns don’t work like they do in the moves, and there are many cases of men continuing a violent attack long after suffering a fatal gunshot wound. Long enough to get you dead if you stopped to assess efficacy of your shots after firing one or two.
From what I have seen experts on surviving a lethal force incident generally recommend to keep firing until the threat has stopped, as here. Realize that many shots are made in just a few seconds, and that thought processes and reactions after a full adrenaline dump are not what they are sitting at a computer keyboard.
Thank You Caww! These People are true Hope and Change. My compliments to each one of this Patrol Group.
> I used to be a member on LGF a few years ago, but suddenly it veered of in a strange direction.
As has this country.
With the mountains in the Springtime, the beauty all around us; this ugly of lies and liars is chilling to the bone. May each of us (savedbygrace, everyone, myself) be reminded of our best memories and forget the lies and the liars from time to time for peace in hearts and souls and give Thanks to God for the beauty of this planet He gave us (for one moment) while each one is given the chance to forget the ugly and never may the ugly be brought into being once more.
When a friend’s son was shot, they didn’t get the real story until the trial came along months later. Which was agonizing, but they believe in justice and understood why that had to be.
No attorney worthy of the name is going to let anything out that might compromise his witnesses or the jury. This is standard procedure with both criminal courts and military courts.
I will be very surprised if they release any kind of pictures “as calm returns.”
Yes, there has been an information flow and am in agreement Officer Wilson's attorney is protecting his client and as usual my comment or thought was all wet.
Shooting until the threat is over is standard practice. Most gunshot wounds that kill do it over time, by someone bleeding out for instance. Plenty of guys in the military can testify to having been shot and not even realizing it until the situation is calmer. Shooting someone does not stop the threat; there have to be other signs that the threat is over, like the guy going down or something.
If, as I suspect, the one to the top of Brown’s head was the last shot, AND if the cop had more ammunition in his gun, then he quit shooting sooner than most. It’s quite common for people to accuse cops of “shooting someone in the back”, and for there to be bullet wounds in the back, not because the cop shot someone facing away, but because the cop kept shooting while the guy lunging at him was twisting around as he fell through the field of fire (the twisting generally due to a natural physical process set going by the first shot). If the cop in this case had more bullets, he stopped shooting soon enough that didn’t happen.
Depending on the gun and the shooter, six shots can be less than two seconds of Real Time. Studies done in the eighties showed that an average running man can cover 21 feet in 1.5 seconds; bringing a knife to a gun fight can work just fine if the knife wielder is close enough before things start. Cops since then are often put through the “Tueller Drill,” just to drill that point home. Mythbusters puts the cut off point at 20 feet (over twenty feet, guy with the gun may win; under twenty feet, guy with the gun gets knifed).
Six shots are not excessive.
Thanks for the prayers. I’m as sure he’s with the Lord as you can be, this side of heaven. :)
One of the challenges facing the black community in trying to change things is dealing with the grieving parents. One of the rumors floating around after their son died was that he’d grabbed for the gun. The guy who told them this version was trying to convince them their son was a “hero,” but although my friends didn’t argue with him, they thought it would have been a stupid thing to do in that situation. OTOH, they recognized that, in the heat of the moment, their son might have done it.
In the end, it was clear that wasn’t what happened. But it’s equally clear that impulse to martyr or make a hero of the victim is not just a black one; so far as I know, everyone involved here was white.
OTOH, one of the guys who got jail time out of this was the officer in charge, and I once ran across an internet debate between that officer’s family and the victim’s family. The officer’s family absolutely bought into the whole, “he was just a boy, should be given another chance, his life is ruined” routine. That isn’t a black or white thing, either — whites make the same arguments when their kids are held accountable for doing something dumb that got someone killed.
My friends absolutely pursued justice, while forgiving the sinner and refusing to see revenge, and I admire them all kinda lots for it. And I truly believe that, had there been evidence that their son contributed to his own death, they would have accepted that, instead of just rejecting it out of hand while finding someone else to blame.
But both of those are challenging, challenging things to do. I won’t go so far as to say it is impossible without community support, but clearly it is a lot easier if you are surrounded by people who also understand that there is a difference between justice and revenge, and to help you keep that in mind. When emotions run that high, even if you normally expect people to act responsibly, it must be incredibly easy to just slide into a mindset of unaccountability for whoever matters to you, while blindly blaming the other guy.
Although to be honest, it sounded like the officer’s family hadn’t been holding him accountable for some time anyway. *sigh*
This thread may be too emotional or irritating for you, given your high demand for exclusively “expert” opinion only.
Have you informed all the other posters here, or just me?
LOL! No emotion here, other than amusement.
You’re the one clearly claiming the number of shots fired were excessive, or did I misunderstand your #35?
If I did not, on what basis is 6 shots excessive? Emotion?
Hmmm.
More than 2 or 3. I used to post there. I got banned for being a Tea Party supporter. Charles Johnson is radical left now.
I hardly ever go there, so the timeline was fuzzy for me.
Circumstances, not your emotions, determine what is “excessive”, a word commonly being used and reported since August 9— thus, the quotation marks at 35.
Body weight will be but one factor of the circumstances.
Charging an officer or surrendering to him will be another circumstance.
Witness and ballistics reports will be another.
The officer was a sympathetic hero when he had the so called blown eye socket, was my point. Now it’s one more ordinary “meanie-cop-shoots-unarmed-fleeing-black-teen-six-times”.
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.