KU Journalism Major Shreds “Case” Against Mike Brown

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Right. We have to make Mike Brown a robber, a thug, a violent criminal, an angry demonic monster the size of Hulk Hogan in order to convince the GJ that Wilson WAS in fear of his life. A man who, after he'd been shot was still gathering strength to charge Wilson like a wild bull, bowl Wilson over like a lineman, and thus, needed to be executed by 2 shots to his head!

I didn't make him anything....the video of him robbing the store and assaulting the clerk are pretty obvious he is a thug and violent.....they also show he is huge as does the autopsy report giving his height and weight. I can only assume at this point that you are trolling, especially with your comment about him being off balance and using the cops face to break his fall.

Would you have us believe he was a timid small child that was afraid of his own shadow?

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Browns blood inside the police vehicle indicates a struggle took place in the vehicle.

You said "indicates". An indication isn't proof.

Another reason to go to trial.

a reply to: NotMoose

A grand jury decision is part of the judicial system = justice served.

Like you said grand jury decision are only part part of the justice system.

In a trial all the evidence can come out in the open and then everyone can abide by that verdict. Instead of a "decision".

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Browns blood inside the police vehicle indicates a struggle took place in the vehicle.

You said "indicates". An indication isn't proof.

Another reason to go to trial.

I will say it again....look at the picture. There is blood and tissue INSIDE Wilsons vehicle. Wilson was not cut and it was not his blood or tissue. Brown was partially INSIDE Wilsons vehicle....that is a fact.

I can't believe anyone is even trying to say that an officer would discharge his weapon inside his own vehicle if there was no struggle and trying to make it out like Brown was some innocent kid that didn't deserve what he got.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

I didn't make him anything....

"We" as in the court of public opinion, and yes there is modus operandi to turn victims into monsters.

the video of him robbing the store and assaulting the clerk are pretty obvious he is a thug and violent.....

I don't recall Brown being tried and convicted of that crime. At any rate, petty theft and bullying is not grounds for execution.

I can only assume at this point that you are trolling

Cheap shot.

especially with your comment about him being off balance and using the cops face to break his fall.

If the witnesses were correct, and Wilson almost ran the men down with his patrol car, then used his door to smack Brown, then grabbed brown by his shirt and pulled him into his car window, Brown could easily have stumbled and his hands could have made contact with the officers face, a struggle ensues, resulting in the red mark that looks like a slap on Wilson's cheek.

Would you have us believe he was a timid small child that was afraid of his own shadow?

Resorting to hyperbole is also a cheap shot!

a reply to: intrptr

All the evidence IS out in the open. Right now. You can go find it.

And a jury DID decide. They decided not to indict. I'm sorry.

Yes, the justice system is inherently corrupt, and yes miscarriages of justice occur frequently, and I will be happy to hop on any bandwagon where a miscarriage of justice has been proven, but this case simply does not fit the bill. I have looked at the evidence, and I agree with the Grand Jury decision. There was no abuse of the justice system here.

A man is dead, and that's always a tragedy, but he's dead because of his actions, and a man who acted in response to save his own life.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

So, please let me know how all of this got there if Brown was not partially inside the car?

The picture doesn't show Brown "in" the car, just blood. If thats his blood in that car. How do I tell? Because Ferguson detectives released a pic and you're claiming its "proof"? I have no evidentiary chain of custody for that or any other "proof". Not without a trial where attorneys for both sides accept entering into the court record as "exhibit A".

Next time I have a bigfoot or Ufo photo I'll run it by you…

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So, please let me know how all of this got there if Brown was not partially inside the car?

The picture doesn't show Brown "in" the car, just blood. If thats his blood in that car. How do I tell? Because Ferguson detectives released a pic and you're claiming its "proof"? I have no evidentiary chain of custody for that or any other "proof". Not without a trial where attorneys for both sides accept entering into the court record as "exhibit A".

Next time I have a bigfoot or Ufo photo I'll run it by you…

Seriously? That is a photo from the files of the case that was released along with all the documents. If you look at the link I posted with all of the released files, it is ONE of dozens from the case.

Yes, that was Browns blood INSIDE the car....the spatter pattern and drips can only occur that way if part of his body was INSIDE the car when he was hit with the bullet. The fact he also had gunshot residue on his hand proves he was INSIDE the car when the shot was fired as he could not have gotten that residue on his hand from OUTSIDE the car.

This is getting ridiculous really.....lead a horse to water comes to mind....

a reply to: windword

It's hard to try and convict a dead person. It's CLEARLY brown in that video. It's funny how you will use the legalities of the justice system when it supports your stance, but discard it when it does not.

You're right, Brown is innocent of that crime. He was never convicted. He was never tried, therefore he cannot be guilty of a crime. What is indisputable is that he DID rob that store. The cigarillos were at the crime scene where brown died. He committed a crime, but he cannot be convicted of that crime.

Another note: Wilson has NEVER been accused of misconduct in his career as an LEO until the Brown incident. His history as an LEO would show that it is VERY out of character for him to roll up on some teens, bark at them to get off the street, and when given lip go all Dirty Harry on them and "pull the kid by his shirt into the vehicle and threaten to shoot him completely unprovoked"

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

and I will be happy to hop on any bandwagon where a miscarriage of justice has been proven

Nothings "proven" until its proven in a court of law.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Brown was partially INSIDE Wilsons vehicle….that is a fact.

Says who, you? I looked at the pic. It doesn't show Brown inside the car, just some blood in "A" car.

Damn my lying eyes.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I didn't make him anything....

"We" as in the court of public opinion, and yes there is modus operandi to turn victims into monsters.

the video of him robbing the store and assaulting the clerk are pretty obvious he is a thug and violent.....

I don't recall Brown being tried and convicted of that crime. At any rate, petty theft and bullying is not grounds for execution.

I can only assume at this point that you are trolling

Cheap shot.

especially with your comment about him being off balance and using the cops face to break his fall.

If the witnesses were correct, and Wilson almost ran the men down with his patrol car, then used his door to smack Brown, then grabbed brown by his shirt and pulled him into his car window, Brown could easily have stumbled and his hands could have made contact with the officers face, a struggle ensues, resulting in the red mark that looks like a slap on Wilson's cheek.

Would you have us believe he was a timid small child that was afraid of his own shadow?

Resorting to hyperbole is also a cheap shot!

He wasn't tried and convicted....he was video taped and shown to the world. It was not "petty theft" it was a strong armed robbery which is a felony and speaks VOLUMES about his state of mind at the time.

No cheap shots taken....I was being completely serious. You are acting as if Brown was some tiny kid and had never done anything wrong. And the scenario you present of the officer pulling a 300lb 6'4" thug through his window by the neck is laughable at best...you must think Wilson had Inspector Gadget arms or something for that to occur.

Why do the Ferguson sympathizers try to make the most outrageously complicated events to hypothetically occur, the story they back and continue to try to paint Brown as some saint? You realize how ridiculous that theory of events you just described is right?

a reply to: Klassified

Much of this is the same crap that is being spewed by "news" outlets that don't have the facts correct (in fact, she sites a few of those as "sources" for her "facts" that "shreds" the case. When she does cite things from the GJ testimony, she misinterprets much of it, and nitpicks "protocol" (about which I'm suuure she's an expert) as if Wilson had the skills to aim at specific points of Brown's body and hit them as Brown was moving toward him in a high-stress situation.

There is too much wrong with this OP to even consider it credible, and the only media outlets that will take this girl seriously are the ones that ones that condemned Wilson before the investigation even officially began. This post only serves to perpetuate falsities, and the thing(s) that my be correct are inconsequential to the elements of the charges proposed.

a reply to: intrptr

First: The grand jury is one of the first procedures in a criminal trial.
Second: Evidence already came out and it resulted in no indictment.
Third: Justice was served for the innocent victim Officer Wilson.

What don't you get?

If someone accused you of a crime the DA would have to see if there was supporting evidence in order to prosecute you. If not then you don't get charged.

It's not just justice for the accuser but for the accused also.

a reply to: intrptr

Actually, the rules of evidence are much more relaxed in a grand jury investigation, meaning that things can get entered into evidence that may not be able to during an actual trail.

If you're trying to imply that the grand jury process doesn't have enough evidence at its disposal to make a proper decision, you are grossly mistaken. Also, the 'burden of proof'--or, probable cause that a crime was committed--is much more lax as well during the grand jury investigation, so they need even less evidence to take a case to trial than a jury needs in order to convict in the trial.

You're basically bass ackwards on your implied point...assuming I have taken your point correctly.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Yes, that was Browns blood INSIDE the car

You can tell me that all day. I don't believe you any more than I believe the Ferguson PD.

Evidence is only considered evidence once its been entered in to the court record by attorneys for both sides in a trial.

A grand jury isn't supposed to decide forensics, experts testifying in open court for the prosecution and the defense are.

It doesn't take 100 days to decide if a crime has been committed, it takes 100 days to figure out how to tell people one wasn't.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Brown was partially INSIDE Wilsons vehicle….that is a fact.

Says who, you? I looked at the pic. It doesn't show Brown inside the car, just some blood in "A" car.

Damn my lying eyes.

Says the forensic report. None of the pics show Wilson at the scene either, so I guess it wasn't him right? As a matter of fact, Brown isn't seen in any of them either, just a body under a cover, so it was all a cover up just to riot in MO right?

Yes, there is blood in that car, yes, the forensics determined it was Brown's blood AND tissue on the inside of the door of the car, yes it was consistent with his wound and having been shot in the hand while it was INSIDE the car.

So you are suggesting that is either A) not Brown's blood/tissue or the bullet hole from this incident and that Wilson was just driving around in his car with blood/tissue and a bullet hole in his vehicle for a while, or B) it is planted evidence, or C) it is a faked picture and the whole thing is a conspiracy.


Let me make it abundantly clear with clips from the actual forensic reports I have linked to and told you about now at least 5 times.



Officer Wilsons upper left thigh had Brown's blood on it. The only time he could have gotten that would have been inside the car as he did not have physical contact with Wilson after the assault.



Wilsons pistol swab had Browns DNA on it meaning Brown had at some point had his hand on Wilsons gun.



The INSIDE door handle of Wilsons vehicle had Browns DNA on it meaning part of Brown was INSIDE the vehicle.


This is getting old....now please prove these forensic findings incorrect or inconsistent with Wilsons account of events.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

What is indisputable is that he DID rob that store. The cigarillos were at the crime scene where brown died.

Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson stated that Officer Darren Wilson was unaware of this incident during his confrontation with Mike Brown. He later came out to say that he was unsure if Darren Wilson knew or didn't know.

Wilson knew nothing of the shoplifting claim at the time of stop.

What Mike Brown did and did not do inside of the Ferguson convenience store

a reply to: windword

Wilson testified that as soon as he stopped Brown and his colleague, he put two and two together and thought "these may the guys from the robbery report earlier".

Sooooo.... Yeah, that's bunk.

ETA: He also testified that he had heard the police dispatch about the robbery on his scanner while wrapping up at another location before encountering brown. So, saying he knew nothing of the robbery is an outright lie.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

What is indisputable is that he DID rob that store. The cigarillos were at the crime scene where brown died.

Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson stated that Officer Darren Wilson was unaware of this incident during his confrontation with Mike Brown. He later came out to say that he was unsure if Darren Wilson knew or didn't know.

Wilson knew nothing of the shoplifting claim at the time of stop.

What Mike Brown did and did not do inside of the Ferguson convenience store

Wilson stated he had heard the report but did not put it together until he saw the cigarillos and the clothes matched the description. The radio call went out prior to his stopping them in the road. I will have to dig to find the police report of when the incident was reported to all police in the area to be on the lookout for the suspects.

He got the call about the robbery at 11:53, roughly 10 minutes prior to stopping Brown.