Dorian Johnson Recants Media Statement ?

a reply to: Xcathdra

You seem hung up on a term of art. I cited a recent Missouri case governing the concept of accomplice liability that had direct applicability to the point I made above. All Johnson had to do was lie about the convenience store situation to be on the hook.

562.041 governs the when you are equally responsible for the criminal actions of others- essentially accomplice liability.

Moreover, even the Missouri bar uses the phrase "accomplice liability" to describe the Lewis case.

www.mobar.org...

Didn't realize you expected me to write an actual legal brief to make my point on a conspiracy discussion board. Lol

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Xcathdra

Um...I don't get how you think I disagree with your post? I only pointed out there Is an accomplice statute, where previously you said there wasn't.

Otherwise, it doesn't appear we disagree at all.

See here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

MO does not have an accomplice statute. It used to but has been removed and replaced. The statute must specifically state the accomplice portion and to my knowledge I don't think I have ever seen a criminal statute with accomplice references in it. If you and a friend decide to go kill someone, and you drive the car while your friend shoots the person, you are not charged as an accomplice. You can be charged with the murder itself, even if you did not pull the trigger.

Thank you, and you have both put it more succinctly, though in differing terms, than I was able to.

I have explained, innumerable times, that Dorian could be charged with the same charges as the officer.

Being told there would be no charges against him about the store means literally nothing.

He had much, much bigger fish to fry, at that piont.

Explaining the lies and misinformation he gave out is simply one way of explaining the leverage, along with the bench warrant, that both federal and local police have over him.

Not to mention, as was pointed out, there is a new witness account placing Darion at a whole new place at the scene. On the PASSENGER side of the vehicle.

The brings into question then, nearly his entire accounting.

Mr. Brady said he could see Mr. Johnson at
the front passenger side of the car when
he and Mr. Brown suddenly started
running.

mobile.nytimes.com...

Another interesting note:

According to his account to the Ferguson
police, Officer Wilson said that Mr. Brown
had lowered his arms and moved toward
him, law enforcement officials said.
Fearing that the teenager was going to
attack him, the officer decided to use
deadly force. Some witnesses have backed
up that account.

Darion made so many statements about being on the drivers' side, from, the door "brushing open, it almost knocked the wind out of me, but it hit Big Mike harder, it barely tapped me." *Boggle* that was all in one breath!

To, "I had to get out of the way, or I was in the line if fire, I would have been shot." After just talking about how Big Mike was being pulled, full body, against the door.

The logic failed in so many ways.

a reply to: Greven

No he cannot -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: loam

Your point is not correct. Reread my post in its entirety please. I even pointed out the flaw in your argument using your link to the court case.

a reply to: Xcathdra

What point are you disagreeing with? My use of the phrase 'accomplice liability' to describe 562.041?

Maybe you need to re-read Lewis. It says:

Although Missouri at one time made a distinction
between principals and accessories to crime, Missouri has since eliminated such a
distinction with respect to accomplice liability; therefore, all persons who act in concert
to commit a crime are equally guilty. Sistrunk, 414 S.W.3d at 596-97.

In other words, the statute doesn't eliminate the concept of 'accomplice liability' but rather the distinction between principals and accessories.

Beyond that, where are we disagreeing?

a reply to: Libertygal

I didn't say the reporting on the warrant wasn't credible, I said it wasn't particularly relevant to the veracity of Dorian Johnson's statement and that WND released it because they regularly indulge in far-right propagandizing and the far-right has embraced Darren Wilson's account from DAY 1.

You're not trying to prove that it's likely true that Dorian Johnson has changed his story (as alleged by OP) because a) he's been lying about everything and b) he's been granted some sort of immunity? My question was both rhetorical and sarcastic.

You've been busily focusing on pointing out any and all inconsistencies in Dorian Johnson's statements for days. For the sake of argument, let's stipulate that the "lying liar got caught" as you've so objectively and dispassionately opined. Toss out everything that Dorian Johnson said.

What about the rest of the eye witnesses whose statements do not corroborate Darren Wilson's account? Do you believe that they're all lying too?

As for what I quoted from the NYT article you linked. I know WHY you linked it but I was pointing out that there was new information about additional witnesses that didn't support Darren Wilson's story and also, that it appeared that FPD officials were admitting that Darren Wilson exited the vehicle and began firing.

Most relevant to the point you're making about the apparent inconsistency in Dorian Johnson's statements about Michael Brown's hands being raised, there's this:

According to his account to the Ferguson police, Officer Wilson said that Mr. Brown had lowered his arms and moved toward him, law enforcement officials said.

That would mean that his arms were UP at some point in order for them to have then been LOWERED. So does that mean that Dorian Johnson AND Darren Wilson have BOTH lied about Michael Brown's hands being raised?

Nm. Not worth it.

Original source of this story is WND.

a reply to: kosmicjack

Actually, a radio station claims credit: 100.7

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But nonetheless looks real sketchy.

a reply to: theantediluvian

You've been busily focusing on pointing out any and all inconsistencies in Dorian Johnson's
statements for days.

That should be evident why.

He is the star witness. The only one that was present with Michael, aside from Darren, when the incident occurred. His statements deserve, and require, the closest of scrutiny.

He is also one of the only ones, but not the only, that has provided multiple statements, for comparison.

When people questioned why the police took so long to question Johnson, I explained that aside from time constraints, and the inability to find him, that they were allowing him to talk, talk talk, for a reason.

This was likely beneficial to police when they took him in for questioning, as they had evidence, already, and were prepared to see how he responded.

I speculated, and made no bones about it, and used that word, the word assume, and other similar vocabulary. I don't see the issue here?

When looking at any witness statements, multiple statements are excellent, for comparison, to look for changes, embellishment, and factual vs non-factual statements.

His talking so much us actually a gift, because it offers a chance to review his videos, and anyone inteterested in interview and interrogation would likely enjoy watching them.

I have watched every witness video that has been made.

I have read every statement that has been made. (That is publically available)

I have had people post videos and DEMAND I provide a response of what I thought. (Was that you? I think it was!)

I have seen one with Tiffany and Piaget, who later got a new lawyer, and recompiled her statement to match the autopsy.

So no, I do not believe, nor disbelieve every statement, but when people obviously lie, then, it's easy to decide who to disbelieve. Especially when it is the key witness caught lying between 5 different videos.

Heard on Fox News that because Governor Nixon called for a state of emergency, he can remove the right of prosecution, and the grand jury, from state prosecutor McCullough.

This is particularly concerning with Eric Holder coming to Ferguson Wednesday, the day the Grand Jury is to convene, along with the CRS.

The last time the CRS was publically known to come to town was during the Trayvon Martin incident.

For those who are not familiar with the CRS, I will provide a link.
www.frontpagemag.com...

DOJ documents provided to Judicial

under the Freedom of Information Act show
that in the weeks before Zimmerman was
charged, CRS expended thousands of dollars to
help organize marches in which participants
exacerbated racial tensions

demanded that he be prosecuted.

While it is no secret the same players are involved in Ferguson, are we to expect the same outcome, as well?

It has also come to light that CRS agents can be seated in a Grand Jury, and if anyone outs them as CRS agents, they can face federal penalties.

It is concerning that a full replay of the Trayvon Martin incident is at hand, both for the community that is being both used and abused, as well as the people that are being victimized.


www.judicialwatch.org... rtin-protests/

March 25 – 27, 2012, CRS spent $674.14 upon being
“deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations,
and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”

March 25 – 28, 2012, CRS spent $1,142.84 “in Sanford, FL to
work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the
shooting and death of an African-American teen by a
neighborhood watch captain.

See much more at the link provided. FOIA documents released provided details in government tax payers' money spent on rallies in Florida.

Is this what we are already seeing in Mo.?

It is, and should be concerning to everyone.

a reply to: Libertygal

He's saying the same thing over and over just wording is changing.

To accept "source close to a source" as fact, is pathetic.

This should be under the Prediction forum but this seems a more appropiate home here, but no charges will be brought against the officer. Book it. The blowback will make what's happened in Ferguson so far a walk in the park.

a reply to: Sremmos80
Why are you acting like a hall monitor? Telling people where they should post, what is appropriate, labeling people, etc. Are you auditioning for some position of authority? Stick to the topic and stop with the scolding of posters you disagree with.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Libertygal



How about a rescheduled court date?

I don't get how 'its been handled' turns into the federal immunity from charges.

The merchandise he was handed, he put back

Did he put them back before or after he assaulted the storeowner>?

a reply to: Not Authorized

Yeah, how does one get a fair trial with even the Governor calling for your head.

Yes, this guy has been the weak link since the beginning. It is not about him being charged but threatened with charges. I am sure this guy have some rough interrogations over the last week and he broke.

Here is a perfect case to use. You do not need a law brief....

blogs.riverfronttimes.com...

Missouri law says that this teenager can be charged for felony murder since Murphy died during the burglary, in which he was an accomplice.

Only difference is a private citizen and not a cop....

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: mOjOm



We should move the live feed stuff over here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Very off topic in this thread

General question - are you a 'member' or a 'moderator'? Just askin'.

a reply to: matafuchs

You are assuming that this story is accurate. It clearly is an outright lie because the MSM has been milking this whole thing and this would be a major development yet we're hearing nothing about it?

a reply to: Mikeultra

Oh noes!
Not facts!