National Bar Association Lawyers Release Statement Indicating Ferguson Prosecutor Corruption

a reply to: deadeyedick

He should not have gone after brown because the other suspect was crouched behind a vehicle very near and possibly had a gun pointed at his back and wilson was injured and had already called for back up that was less than a minute from the scene.

Did you read his testimony? But in any case, is that a crime?

missing means that one can not be found and that is a seperate investigation case that has revelance to this case because they gave statments then were not anywhere to be found so they could go to some secret room and sit down with a member of a system that believes it is ok to gun down unarmed citizens in the middle of the street in broad daylight.

That is one hell of a run on sentence there. Who cannot be found?

All the witnesses in tis case have zero protection from a corrupt police force and therefor have zero reason to feel comfortable enough to tell what they saw and then here come the feds that magically find a couple witnesses days after the shooting that suddenly tell a completly different story from what multiple witnesses stated in reports right after the shooting.

You have real talent for run on sentences. Do you know how many witnesses testified? Do you know how much their stories varied from each other?

We will all be judged by our actions and words and believe it or not we have an obligation to our selves to seek out truth and fairness in the name of justice.

Seems that you have judged Wilson yourself without really knowing much about the case or the legal process.

a reply to: Phage


loud and clear dumb people are wrong because smart people can point out errors in grammer and sentence structure thereby making every word false and making actions of murderers justified.

i will type slow for you now.
witnesses to the shooting are now missing persons.

wilson had a head injury that effected his judgment.

his sparatic shooting put the neighborhood in far greater danger that brown ever did. very lucky that he did not hit any of the witnesses with stray bullets.

he should at the least be fired

a reply to: deadeyedick

witnesses to the shooting are now missing persons.

You have made this claim several times. I have asked you about it several times. You have not answered my questions, you have just repeated the claim.

wilson had a head injury that effected his judgment.

How do you know?

his sparatic shooting put the neighborhood in far greater danger that brown ever did. very lucky that he did not hit any of the witnesses with stray bullets.

How do you know? Was there anyone in the line of fire?

he should at the least be fired

So, you agree with the grand jury that there was no evidence that he committed a crime.

a reply to: Phage

in your proper sentence structure you make zero sense. Do you want me to go find out where the missing persons are? Is that what you are asking? Do you want me to look up the definitin of missing persons? Do you want me to post names pics and former addresses of them? Are you thick? Do you deny the words of the officer and prosecutors when they claim brown assulted wilson and that wilson claimed to be almost unconcious yet ran 150 ft and gunned him down when he was unarmed and backup was less than one minute away? Have you read or heard any of this information. it is out there feel free. How would you feel if you had officers firing random shots where you live? It iss dangerous and if it happened everyday at your house you would do something about it.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Do you want me to go find out where the missing persons are?

No. I want you to show me that there are any missing persons who were witnesses.

Do you deny the words of the officer and prosecutors when they claim brown assulted wilson and that wilson claimed to be almost unconcious yet ran 150 ft

Neither the prosecutor or Wilson said that.

Have you read or heard any of this information. it is out there feel free.

Yes, I have. I have been reading the grand jury transcripts. Have you?

How would you feel if you had officers firing random shots where you live? It iss dangerous and if it happened everyday at your house you would do something about it.

I wouldn't like it. There are policemen firing weapons every day in Ferguson?

a reply to: deadeyedick

Regardless of what thread you post it in, a missing witness still isn't probable cause. Nothing you've said is probable cause. At least not for the charges that the grand jury was considering.

so now we can not even agree that wilson testified that he sustained injuries or that witness statments matter. you all are saying that it is ok to dimiss any witness statments if one can make a witness disappear.

if we go by the views of some here then there is absolutely nothing that was done or could have been done that would warrant a jury in the first place much less any actions that could ever be done to warrent a true bill.


if i witness a murder and give a stament to officers then i go missing then it should be the same as if i was never seen anything at all.

the future changes when the past does. if you all stick to that logic then it will be stuck to you.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: deadeyedick

Do you want me to go find out where the missing persons are?

No. I want you to show me that there are any missing persons who were witnesses.

Do you deny the words of the officer and prosecutors when they claim brown assulted wilson and that wilson claimed to be almost unconcious yet ran 150 ft

Neither the prosecutor or Wilson said that.

Have you read or heard any of this information. it is out there feel free.

Yes, I have. I have been reading the grand jury transcripts. Have you?

How would you feel if you had officers firing random shots where you live? It iss dangerous and if it happened everyday at your house you would do something about it.

I wouldn't like it. There are policemen firing weapons every day in Ferguson?

you have gone over the top with ignorrant statments so much so that you contridict your self much and are being blatently just an actor on a message board.

a reply to: deadeyedick

so now we can not even agree that wilson testified that he sustained injuries or that witness statments matter.

This is what you said:

wilson claimed to be almost unconcious yet ran 150 ft

Wilson did not say that. In this case, witness statement vary widely and often conflict with physical evidence.

if we go by the views of some here then there is absolutely nothing that was done or could have been done that would warrant a jury in the first place

Who has said that?

if i witness a murder and give a stament to officers then i go missing then it should be the same as if i was never seen anything at all.

Same claim. No answer.

a reply to: Phage

wilson said one more blow and he could have been out.

theprosecuror said witnesses went missing.

i posed the question of what if any evidence would lead one to return a true bill to another member now i ask you the same.

What if one of those rnds fired from an injured in a nearly unconcious state would have struck a bystander would you then see the need for true bill?

what does same claim no answer mean?

a reply to: deadeyedick

wilson said one more blow and he could have been out.

He said that he was afraid that a blow from Brown could have rendered him unconsioius or dead. He did not say he was almost unconsious. Do you think it is unreasonable to be worried about being knocked out by a blow from a very large man?

theprosecuror said witnesses went missing.

Seeing as how you have demonstrated a tendency to distort the facts as presented, do you think you could provide some more information about this? A link perhaps?

i posed the question of what if any evidence would lead one to return a true bill to another member now i ask you the same.

Evidence that Wilson had no reason to fire his weapon would be good start.

what does same claim no answer mean?

It means that you have not provided any answer about what witnesses had become missing persons. All you do is repeat the claim.

a reply to: deadeyedick

If a round fired had struck a bystander it's STILL not probable cause in regards to the Brown shooting. It could well be probable cause if Wilson was before a grand jury to determine whether he had injured a bystander in a criminal manner.

This has been, and remains, the crux of your issue: you fail to understand that probable cause has to directly relate to the charges the grand jury is considering. Literally nothing you've cited can in any way be considered probable cause for the charges the grand jury was considering. Example: you are charged with robbery. On the same day you allegedly committed the robbery, you also hit somebody with your car, but drove away. Nobody can use the fact that you hit a pedestrian and drove away as probable cause on the robbery charge. They're two completely separate issues.

And I still have yet to see anything, anything at all, that says witnesses have disappeared. I've seen witnesses changed their story, totally recanted their story, etc but not one thing about witnesses disappearing.

a reply to: Phage

dude i said in the very first post to you that the prosecutor made the statment that multiple witnesses went missing during the jury gathering. i told you he stated that along with the statment that wilson had recieved injuries. all this was in his statment of decision to the press. go back to my post and see that you have been assuming i did not tell you where to find that info. i even suggested that you listen to it and your response was for me to read wilsons testimony. you then went off posting as though i am saying something without merit to this thread.

one has to take a reverse look at the whole to see the corruption that is very possible. the same way you would reverse engineer something. you will never reach any fair ground if you already have your mind made up cause then every detail that is brought us is givin the benefit of the doubt. if you take the other view and a strong picture can be formed then it becomes possible then that corruption may have been present.

you will gain no understanding of my post by breaking them down. they stand together to form a thought. it is painting a picture. i do not claim that every single word or phrase i write is 100% correct but that as a whole there is meaning and a smart person would seek out the ones that may have merit and focus on that instead of focusing on a part that may be right. i am not suggesting not to call out bs but to not pu all your focus on trying to find bs. yes i do understand i give much ammo for many.

a reply to: deadeyedick

dude i said in the very first post to you that the prosecutor made the statment that multiple witnesses went missing during the jury gathering.

Dude. I know what you have said. And keep saying. I have repeatedly asked you to support what you are saying.

go back to my post and see that you have been assuming i did not tell you where to find that info.

I am not assuming it. You did not tell me where to find it and you still have not.

i do not claim that every single word or phrase i write is 100% correct but that as a whole there is meaning

So it's ok to make stuff up? I don't think so.

a reply to: Phage

then why do you keep asking if you knew. over and over you ask who said this or that . i told you from the begining it was the prosecutors statment so why play it off now like you knew? i say you know very much more than you leed on and you do much pretending when it suits you.

you want me to call the prosecutor for you or do you think you can understand that my statments are backed by the nationwide press conference over the situation. do you want me to link that for you?

a reply to: deadeyedick

i told you from the begining it was the prosecutors statment so why play it off now like you knew? i

I know you said it. Just because you said it, it does not make it true. You just said you make stuff up.


I will say it slowly:

Show... me... the... statement... from... the... prosecutor...about...missing...persons.

do you want me to link that for you?

Um. Yes.

a reply to: Phage

no go listen for yourself and let's us just leave it at you think i make stuff up.

a reply to: deadeyedick

I would be glad to.
Show...me...the...link.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Ahhh. After watching the press conference and reading the transcript, suddenly the problem is clear. Question: did any witnesses refuse to testify? Answer: some disappeared yes.

I think you've siezed on a turn of phrase and are hammering away at it. He goes on to say that aside from one person who gave a written statement, there were some people who claimed to be witnesses and then could not be located to be interviewed. Again, that's hardly probable cause. That's no different than were I to say I witnessed the entire incident and then wouldn't talk to investigators about it. And let's be honest, those "witnesses" had ample opportunity to come forward and chose not to. It's hardly the same as your earlier implications that they were kidnapped.