Posted on 03/13/2015 6:28:09 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Talk about your bitter-clingers: Crazy Larry O'Donnell just can't give up on the notion that Michael Brown might have had his hands up. On today's Morning Joe, it led to a nasty little spat with Joe Scarborough. Joe asked Jeff Roorda of the St. Louis Police Officers Association whether, "since Eric Holder agreed with your side of the story," he had received an apology from the St. Louis Rams for the "hands up, don't shoot" display by several of its players.
O'Donnell interrupted to claim that "Eric Holder doesn't agree with the officers' side of the story." According to O'Donnell, the report merely found that "hands-up" couldn't be proved "beyond reasonable doubt." The spat was on, culminating with O'Donnell condescendingly telling Scarborough "understand what reasonable doubt is." That led to Scarborough's saracastic "thank you so much for giving me a lecture on the law."
View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Crazy Larry can’t give up idea Michael Brown had hands up. Ping to Today show list.
The EVIDENCE of the placement of the gunshots proves that Brown DID NOT have his hands up. Stop lying!
The forensic evidence doesn't lie you moron. Also, witnesses under oath also corroborated Ofc. Wilson's account. It showed that Ofc. Wilson's account is true and the "Gentle Giant" was the aggressor which caused him to succumb to lead poisoning.
It has little or nothing to do with whether a suspect is charged with a crime. Suspects are charged based on evidence.
The fact is, Holder, with the resources he has at his disposal, was unable to find ANY real evidence to support the "hands up, don't shoot" claims - and that fact casts a lot more than just "reasonable doubt" on those claims.
Larry O'Donnell is an ignorant moron.
I respectfully disagree. O’Donnell is an informed moron. The facts don’t fit his narrative or wishful thinking, but clings to his beliefs regardless. He is a typical liberal who will not change his mind not matter how overwhelmingly the facts prove that he is wrong. If he did, he would then have to reconsider his world view...and THAT might lead to thoughts based on facts that could dangerously close to what conservatives think and believe.
No way that will happen.
The two that said he had his hands up:
1) Witness lied to the FBI, said his brother was in the FBI (he was not), that he observed Wilson shooting-shooting-shooting until he ran out of bullets and then he HEARD ‘click-click-click‘ as Wilson kept pulling the trigger. . .on his empty semi-automatic, no less.
2) Witness lied when he said he saw Brown with hands up. . .turn out, and the ‘witness’ admitted this to investigators, that he wasn't even there, that he was repeating what he heard on TV
The reasonable doubt standard has nothing to do with the evidence that Brown had his hands up. The question would only be one piece of evidence for a jury to consider whether Wilson reasonably concluded that Brown represented a threat of death or serious bodily injury. A jury would have been instructed to decide, based on ALL the evidence presented, whether the shooting was not justified. That is the question to be decided “beyond a reasonable doubt”. A jury would not be asked: “Did Michael Brown have his hands up beyond a reasonable doubt?” which is what the insane libtard socialist O’Donnell suggests with his ranting.
He ignores facts and spews talking points beyond a reasonable belief.
He did! He didn’t!
Here to provide proof is the only credible eyewitness who was actually there: (you guessed it…) Brian Williams.
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.