KU Journalism Major Shreds “Case” Against Mike Brown

a reply to: Klassified

Let all that crap come out in open court in a fair and impartial venue somewhere outside of Ferguson.

Until then all I know is that Michael Brown was as big and strong as Hulk Hogan and 'looked like a Demon'.

Surely dehumanizing enough to justify Wilson's use of deadly force (rolls eyes).

Mike Brown was a street thug, quit using him as an example. There real injustices in the world and what happened to Mike Brown is not one of them. Disinformation and race baiting keeps the people distracted from the real issues.

a reply to: Klassified

This is what the Chief of Police said...

When Chief Belmar sat down the next day to brief the press on his summary of the facts, he stated at 1:13 (and then even more emphatically at 6:01) in the video below, "The entire scene, from approximately the car door (of Officer Wilson) to the shooting, is, uh, about 35 feet."

YouTube Video

The SHOOTING happened within 35 feet of the cruiser. That means the distance between Wilson and Brown was approximately 110 feet.

Yes, this student journalist has listed some bad information and some very compelling information. If only half of it is true, there's still a strong case for criminal prosecution.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: Klassified

This is what the Chief of Police said...

When Chief Belmar sat down the next day to brief the press on his summary of the facts, he stated at 1:13 (and then even more emphatically at 6:01) in the video below, "The entire scene, from approximately the car door (of Officer Wilson) to the shooting, is, uh, about 35 feet."

YouTube Video

The SHOOTING happened within 35 feet of the cruiser. That means the distance between Wilson and Brown was approximately 110 feet.

Yes, this student journalist has listed some bad information and some very compelling information. If only half of it is true, there's still a strong case for criminal prosecution.

He said the entire scene, not just where Wilson was.....the entire scene meaning Brown's body AND Wilson are encompassed in that number.

a reply to: NotMoose

Mike Brown was a street thug, quit using him as an example. There real injustices in the world and what happened to Mike Brown is not one of them. Disinformation and race baiting keeps the people distracted from the real issues.

Welcome to ATS?

This thread is about the real injustice that occurred in Ferguson. Not likely to go away any time soon. Other "real issues" can be found here:

Link to "real issues"...

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Maybe read the grand jury link.

While I agree the testimony is important (and I have been all over it), it's a TESTIMONY, not necessarily a fact. This case did not go to trial and we don't actually know what happened. But we cannot treat the testimony, especially Wilson's "side" of things, as fact... It's only HIS story. There were a LOT of things said in the GJ Testimony... Some are probably lies and some are probably facts. The truth is somewhere in between...

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Maybe read the grand jury link.

While I agree the testimony is important (and I have been all over it), it's a TESTIMONY, not necessarily a fact. This case did not go to trial and we don't actually know what happened. But we cannot treat the testimony, especially Wilson's "side" of things, as fact... It's only HIS story. There were a LOT of things said in the GJ Testimony... Some are probably lies and some are probably facts. The truth is somewhere in between...

It was based on enough facts not to indict....and obviously others testimony lined up with Wilson's or there would be an indictment.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

And yet...

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
He said the entire scene, not just where Wilson was.....the entire scene meaning Brown's body AND Wilson are encompassed in that number.

That's why I find it compelling... The original link I posted (from the OP) shows clearly, the cruiser was 148 feet away from the body. Why would the chief of police say everything took place within 35 feet? Or did he mean the SHOOTING (Wilson) was 35 feet away from the cruiser? Because there's no arguing the SUV was 148 feet away from Brown's body.

There's a discrepancy here that requires more investigation.

you know one of the things that gets me is that they keep on saying there were no photographs taken, this i claerly wrong unless i'm missing something. it was the Medical Examiner who didn't take pictures not The Crime Scene Units. he says that his camera was dead not the CSI's camara's.

in volume one on page 25, you see the ADA start their questioning of Medical Examiner/Coroner. for the next five page she goes through his qualifications and and such. then all through the testimony he talks of being with the cops as they took pictures and seeing them take pictures while he did something else.

in the beginning of his testimony he clearly states that he saw the CSI taking photos, and they have access to the photos taken by the police,on page 32 line 13 and again he says it on page38 line 8 to line16 he says he was with CSI when they took pictures of the body. then on page 70 he is asked if he is a representing a police agency or is a agent for one police. he says that his mission is just for the body. he also say that he documents in writing taking notes and then writes a report.

then if you look at page 77 line 8 to the end of the volume you can clearly read where he is asked if he had pictues taken by CSI and he said yes.

the no pictures thing is just bs.

ETA: i didn't show what line he said his camera died, which was page 32 line 3 or where he first said that they were taking photos, which is page 32 line 7.

also if you do to the link that is volume five in the op source, and look at page 95 where they claim that the the forensic examiner said their camera broke down it's not there, i went all the way back to page 91 and didn't see it mentioned once. and if you go on to page 96 they mention pictures being taken at the hospital.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

It was based on enough facts not to indict….and obviously others testimony lined up with Wilson's or there would be an indictment.

About that testimony? "Obviously", the Grand Jury was misled:

But the gentle questioning of Officer Wilson revealed in the transcripts, and the sharp challenges prosecutors made to witnesses whose accounts seemed to contradict his narrative, have led some to question whether the process was as objective as Mr. McCulloch claims.

link to times article

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
He said the entire scene, not just where Wilson was.....the entire scene meaning Brown's body AND Wilson are encompassed in that number.

That's why I find it compelling... The original link I posted (from the OP) shows clearly, the cruiser was 148 feet away from the body. Why would the chief of police say everything took place within 35 feet? Or did he mean the SHOOTING (Wilson) was 35 feet away from the cruiser? Because there's no arguing the SUV was 148 feet away from Brown's body.

There's a discrepancy here that requires more investigation.

No there is no discrepancy. Your picture is wrong about the locations of the shooting overall. Wilson ran down the street passing cars...Brown stopped and turned and Wilson stopped....Brown then charged and Wilson backpeddled so the scene and distances are now in flux. It was not a stationary shooting.....both of them were moving.

Everybody wants some $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

It's sad really sad!

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
No there is no discrepancy. Your picture is wrong about the locations of the shooting overall. Wilson ran down the street passing cars...Brown stopped and turned and Wilson stopped....Brown then charged and Wilson backpeddled so the scene and distances are now in flux. It was not a stationary shooting.....both of them were moving.

It sounds like you were there... I was not. I also do not so immediately trust an officer that is trying to prove he had reason to kill someone - not to mention the prosecutor and police department who are trying to protect him. I'm a little more critical in my thinking. I don't just blindly take the officer's word as proven fact.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

No there is no discrepancy. Your picture is wrong about the locations of the shooting overall. Wilson ran down the street passing cars...Brown stopped and turned and Wilson stopped....Brown then charged and Wilson backpeddled so the scene and distances are now in flux. It was not a stationary shooting.....both of them were moving.

Or, it could have gone like this:

Based on the very excellent and easy to understand summary of all the relevant witness statements written by Mark Sumner, it appears that the initial aggressor in the conflict was Wilson who multiple witnesses stated nearly hit Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson with his car, and then actually did hit them with the car door as he opened it, which then bounced back onto him. He then reached through the window and grabbed onto Brown by the shirt and throat. A struggle ensued with Brown pulling back away from the car, possibly punching to get Wilson to release him until ultimately Wilson pulls his gun and fires two shots, one hitting Brown in the thumb.

Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson then ran in opposite directions away from Wilson's SUV, with Brown traveling about 50 yards and turning into a driveway where he stopped after multiple witness seem to think he's been shot a second time [possibly in the right arm]. He looks at his bloody shirt and turns, talking to the officer as he draws closer in pursuit and then takes several steps back into the street while raising his hands to shoulder height, palms facing Wilson.

Wilson continues to fire, striking Brown again. Brown begins to wobble, stumbling and falling forward, his arms curl inward as he takes a few more steps as he's hit in the eye and top of the head, ultimately landing face first on the pavement.

Very Awesome Opinion Piece from the DailyKos

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
No there is no discrepancy. Your picture is wrong about the locations of the shooting overall. Wilson ran down the street passing cars...Brown stopped and turned and Wilson stopped....Brown then charged and Wilson backpeddled so the scene and distances are now in flux. It was not a stationary shooting.....both of them were moving.

It sounds like you were there... I was not. I also do not so immediately trust an officer that is trying to prove he had reason to kill someone - not to mention the prosecutor and police department who are trying to protect him. I'm a little more critical in my thinking. I don't just blindly take the officer's word as proven fact.

Nor do I, but that is based on several witnesses and the officer speaking about the scene according to the grand jury papers. Both involved in the shooting were in flux after they both left the vicinity of the vehicle. As an earlier poster said, if he hit Brown shooting a pistol at over a hundred feet with that many rounds while moving and in an adrenalized situation, then he is the best shot I have ever heard of.

People who don't fire guns often or ever at all do not realize how hard it is to be that accurate at over a hundred feet, even at a range with no outside influences messing with your aim and no situation that dulls the senses in your extremities as adrenaline does.

For me, it is common sense that it could not occur at over 100 feet, but I have also had plenty of experience with pistols. For him to hit a moving target at over a 100 feet with 6 rounds while he was moving as well....sorry....that doesn't happen. Now at a much closer range of say 35 feet, sure.

All I know is shooting a person multiple times with a pistol from 130+ feet away while they are fleeing is extremely hard. Was Wilson a olympic class shooter to pull that off or something?

Here's a test. GO to a gun range. amp up your heart rate to 150+ take a pistol and try shooting at a target 130+ feet away that's humans sized. Wanna make a bet you won't even come close to the target. Under those conditions is extremely hard to do. Under normal conditions it's pretty damned hard to do.

More went on then he shot the guy from 130+ feet away.

Also, it wouldn't hurt to have all LEO's wear cameras while serving. We wouldn't be arguing about this right now, and nobody would likely be rioting either. If bus drivers have to document their entire shift with cameras mounted all over the place in case something happens I don't see why a LEO can't too.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
People who don't fire guns often or ever at all do not realize how hard it is to be that accurate at over a hundred feet, even at a range with no outside influences messing with your aim and no situation that dulls the senses in your extremities as adrenaline does.

I have plenty of experience with firearms and this is why I am so compelled by this information or lack thereof.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe

No there is no discrepancy. Your picture is wrong about the locations of the shooting overall. Wilson ran down the street passing cars...Brown stopped and turned and Wilson stopped....Brown then charged and Wilson backpeddled so the scene and distances are now in flux. It was not a stationary shooting.....both of them were moving.

Or, it could have gone like this:

Based on the very excellent and easy to understand summary of all the relevant witness statements written by Mark Sumner, it appears that the initial aggressor in the conflict was Wilson who multiple witnesses stated nearly hit Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson with his car, and then actually did hit them with the car door as he opened it, which then bounced back onto him. He then reached through the window and grabbed onto Brown by the shirt and throat. A struggle ensued with Brown pulling back away from the car, possibly punching to get Wilson to release him until ultimately Wilson pulls his gun and fires two shots, one hitting Brown in the thumb.

Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson then ran in opposite directions away from Wilson's SUV, with Brown traveling about 50 yards and turning into a driveway where he stopped after multiple witness seem to think he's been shot a second time [possibly in the right arm]. He looks at his bloody shirt and turns, talking to the officer as he draws closer in pursuit and then takes several steps back into the street while raising his hands to shoulder height, palms facing Wilson.

Wilson continues to fire, striking Brown again. Brown begins to wobble, stumbling and falling forward, his arms curl inward as he takes a few more steps as he's hit in the eye and top of the head, ultimately landing face first on the pavement.

Very Awesome Opinion Piece from the DailyKos

Except for the fact Brown had gunshot residue on his hand AND his blood was found inside the car, which puts Brown partially inside the car and his hand close enough to the gun or on the gun in order to have residue from a shot.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
People who don't fire guns often or ever at all do not realize how hard it is to be that accurate at over a hundred feet, even at a range with no outside influences messing with your aim and no situation that dulls the senses in your extremities as adrenaline does.

I have plenty of experience with firearms and this is why I am so compelled by this information or lack thereof.

And could you hit a moving target in the same situation they were in at over 100 feet with six rounds? If so, then I hope your line of work has something to do with needing to shoot because that would make you a HIGHLY sought after individual.