Mike Brown may have paid for cigars, the storeowners never called 911.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

Brown was not shot at close range according to the autopsy,so we know he wasn`t shot while standing next to the vehicle,so then what was the officer shooting at while he was sitting in the vehicle?

Let`s look at the possibilities and see which looks most probable:

1) The officer tried to shoot brown through the open window but missed,leaving no gunshot residue on brown,from only about 1 foot away.

2)The officer drew his weapon and intentionally and voluntarily just randomly discharged it into the floor, seat,dashboard etc, of the vehicle.

3)The weapon involuntarily discharged for some unknown mysterious reason.

4)The weapon involuntarily discharged while brown and the officer struggled to gain control of it.


Nobody is disputing that the weapon discharged inside the vehicle
Nobody is disputing that Brown was not shot at close range.
The only dispute is about why the weapon was discharged inside the vehicle.The police have said it discharged while brown was trying to take the weapon from the officer.
The brown team have offered no explaination for why the weapon discharged inside the vehicle.

Can you think of any logical reason why the officer would draw his weapon inside the vehicle,aim it away from brown and voluntarily discharge it? That is exactly what the defense wants us to believe is what happened.
Out of all the possible reasons for why the weapon discharged inside the vehicle i know which one seems the most logical and most likely to me.

if 4 was the case brown would have tested positive for residue
and well be hearing about that in 3......2........damn

when was the gunshot to the vehicle discovered?
should have been one of the first things that was checked seeing as how it would help corroborate the officers story

watching this story mutate is pretty damned interesting

originally posted by: roadgravel

The relevance of the call is that the call that may or not have happened is the reason the confrontation between the officer and Brown happened.

It was triggered by the fact the two were walking in the street. One may argue that it escalated because of the theft but whether Mike knew of a report or not doesn't mean he might not have thought one was made which fueled his actions. He could have also done what he did because that's his attitude, using force to get his way.

Incorrect though. The officer approached them and then traveled on past them. Then allegedly got a report that there was a call about a theft and then he returned to them. However it said there was a struggle and the gun went off in the car (along with a story Brown punched the officer and a story the officer grabbed Brown by the shirt and pulled him close). The thing is once that shot went off in the car that is maximum escalation and Brown would have been shot there at the car window. However in reality he was shot from a good distance while allegedly (bent over completely to be shot in the top of the head even though he was 6 4) charging the officer.

Too much conflicting info.

I think the call is a lie. I think they needed justification for why the officer returned to harass them a second time after stopping once and leaving. We won't know until we hear a 911 call.

originally posted by: sirhumperdink

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: sirhumperdink
a reply to: Vasa Croe

the criminal element he robbed the store with?
you mean the dude that seemed apprehensive and put the cigars back on the counter
real hardened criminal that one

again though this isnt a character analysis
its not about whether or not mike brown was a good guy or deserved this or that
its about whether or not the officer in question was justified in their actions
and it certainly does not appear that way

Sorry, didn't realize we were categorizing criminal elements now. Guess that would fly in court....sorry judge, I am not a hardened criminal, so will you set me free now?

so then how is it that you know the guy with him was a criminal?
he committed no criminal actions that im aware of

Accomplice to a strong armed robbery makes you a criminal. Hence why people are locked up all the time for being with their friends that commit crimes....I don't recall seeing him reach into his pocket to pay for the cigars they stole.....

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: roadgravel

Excellent, excellent response! Star for you because you beat me to it.

It does not matter if the store owner called or not. It does not matter if ANYONE called.

If Brown was being stopped for walking in the road (which is a legal reason to stop someone) and ASSUMED that the police were called on him because of the strong armed robbery then that could absolutely explain an aggressive action by Brown.

The only reason why people are saying the cop was in the wrong because he was allegedly unaware of the robbery is because they are trying to suggest that he stopped him because he was black.

WRONG and yes it absolutely does, because if there is no call there is no report, if there is no report the officer doesn't turn around and approach Brown a second time.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I haven't answered anything? Maybe direct a question at me, which I have yet to see, and I will answer. I am not one to shy away.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

he put them back on the counter
hes not being charged with anything because he committed no crime
so what you have are assumptions

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

You're another ghetto thug apologist. Ghetto thugs can run around and terrorize the local populace and you're okay with it. They can gun each other down in the double digits and you don't mind. They can pilfer from a local convenience store, you got no beef.

But buddy, if the police ever treat these guys with anything other than utmost respect, they gotta deal with you.

Michael Brown displays in that video exactly what he'll do to that man if the man tries to stop him. Would you want anyone to know that you called the cops on that guy?

Michaels ghetto thug homies showed the world exactly how they handle snitches when they burned down his store. So what's your theory exactly?

Video of ghetto thugs mistreating a convenience store.
www.youtube.com...

Convenience store clerk fights back
www.youtube.com...

Michael Browns behavior is part of a pattern in these communities.

What about the ones from the floor he walks out with?
a reply to: sirhumperdink

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

It is correct. From the very start his first contact was about walking in the road. The buddy of Mike even states it.

You can erase that...

Ever hear of the word intimidation? Did you ever see flash mobs go wild in shopping districts? Stop excusing criminal behavior! He stole from the store and assaulted the owner. That makes him a criminal. Mike Brown knew he was a criminal and that caused him to react as one when confronted by law enforcement. Stop treating the criminal element with kid gloves and trying to excuse it as minor stuff. A $48.00 box of cigars one day, multiply that many times, day after day! It adds up. Why pay when you can steal is what you're saying is OK. Pathetic logic...

originally posted by: sirhumperdink
a reply to: Vasa Croe

he put them back on the counter
hes not being charged with anything because he committed no crime
so what you have are assumptions

Ok...lets review the definition of accomplice:

At law, an accomplice is a person who actively participates in the commission of a crime, even if they take no part in the actual criminal offense. For example, in a bank robbery, the person who points the gun at the teller and asks for the money is guilty of armed robbery. Anyone else directly involved in the commission of the crime, such as the lookout or the getaway car driver, is an accomplice, even if in the absence of an underlying offense keeping a lookout or driving a car would not be an offense

But I guess your view is he was just a good kid in the wrong place at the wrong time while his other really good kid friend just made a one time bad decision that ended his, soon to be well educated and great model citizen, business owner life.

What is so impossible about a person outside a vehicle being able to leave before a person sitting in it can exit? A struggle at the vehicle doesn't have to end there.

a reply to: sirhumperdink
the police have the vehicle so they know exactly where the bullet went based on the hole the bullet left in the vehicle,but they aren`t telling us yet.
I`m also sure the police know if brown has gunshot residue on his hands,but they aren`t telling us yet.

If brown wasn`t trying to take the gun then I just can`t understand why the officer would voluntarily discharge the gun inside the vehicle, since we now know that he wasn`t aiming it at brown.

Dorian Johnson heard the gunshot from inside the vehicle and assumed that brown had been shot at that point,but we now know that he wasn`t shot at that time.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I haven't answered anything? Maybe direct a question at me, which I have yet to see, and I will answer. I am not one to shy away.

have a look in your thread replies and you will see a 2 direct questions from me...one on page 2 of this thread and one on page 3...how about we start there hey

a reply to: hammanderr

You are another blanket statement making idiot. Also you are potentially a racist that think cops are always justified in killing black people for any crime as long as you suspect that black person was a thug in their day to day life. (i think it's only fair I can return fire after your comment).

Look at my picture. I'm as white as it gets. I have been jumped by real ghetto thugs. This was just a teen that may or may not have stolen some cigars. The police have not even officially said he did.

Besides, I am not apologizing for his actions. He acted like a dick. That doesn't justify his murder.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: sirhumperdink
the police have the vehicle so they know exactly where the bullet went based on the hole the bullet left in the vehicle,but they aren`t telling us yet.
I`m also sure the police know if brown has gunshot residue on his hands,but they aren`t telling us yet.

If brown wasn`t trying to take the gun then I just can`t understand why the officer would voluntarily discharge the gun inside the vehicle, since we now know that he wasn`t aiming it at brown.

Dorian Johnson heard the gunshot from inside the vehicle and assumed that brown had been shot at that point,but we now know that he wasn`t shot at that time.

They said brown had no gunshow residue on his body after the autopsy.
Also they have never actually said for a fact he even had cigars. The cop that killed him said so, but nothing official.

a reply to: roadgravel

Both cars and bullets are faster than people and if he had gone after the gun and discharged it as the officer claimed the officer would have shot him right there point blank. Instead he was shot from a distance facing the officer.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow
That so racist of you to call them ghetto thugs! See what I did there? You of course forgave them for mugging you I'm sure.

Actually, in a press conference, the chief was asked about evidence of the theft being found at the scene and he said yes.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: GogoVicMorrow

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

The same rules that apply to citizens should apply to cops.

this is what doesn't sit well with me...if the cop was fearfull for his life he would have just gotten out of there and called in backup instead of going all clint eastwood on him..(granted with a sever lack of accuracy)

Exactly.. that's why I keep repeating he was at his damn car, maybe in it, until he got out to shoot.

Same with the cops that pulled up on the kid walking with the toy ak. They shot and killed him after they yelled and he turned around. It was airsoft, but they feared for their lives so they got off.. but no one called them to check the kid out, they spotted him walking. They put themselves in what they apparently perceived as danger (idiots) and could have extricated themselves.

Completely different situation. That kid had not just robbed a store and Brown was no kid. That kid also did not attempt to assault an officer in his car, Brown did. That kid did not try to bum rush the police.....Brown did.

can you back that statement up ?...other than with conjecture

Yes, Browns accomplice friend said in a statement from his attorney that he in fact stole the cigars from the store. Yes, in the same accomplices words Brown struggled with the officer inside the vehicle. And yes, based on a third party family autopsy performed, all the bullet wounds come from the front of the body and conform to his "bullrushing" the officer. There are no wounds on his back at all.