KU Journalism Major Shreds “Case” Against Mike Brown

a reply to: intrptr

He was the falsely accused which in return resulted in proving he was the victim.

Case closed, if you don't like it write your congressman and see how far that get you.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

The blood in car was tested, and verified as brown's. Brown's hand was tested for GSR. It was found. The path and trajectory of the bullet in the car indicates it was fired during a struggle.

Was that evidence cross examined?

Huh? Cross examined? That makes absolutely no sense at all. It was DNA....it matched Brown.

Not sure how you cross examine DNA evidence.

a reply to: NotMoose

Case closed

Far from it! There's still Eric Holder's federal investigation and the Brown family is sure to file a civil, Wrongful Death case against Wilson.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Huh? Cross examined? That makes absolutely no sense at all. It was DNA....it matched Brown.

Not sure how you cross examine DNA evidence.

Nice dodge. By letting someone else besides Ferguson PD determine how it got on a car door.

a reply to: windword

And without a Grand Jury indictment, pursuing federal charges is all but impossible. Holder can investigate all he wants, but given the facts, I'd not be surprised in the least that Holder quietly mothballs the investigation and tries to make it all go away.

And regarding a civil suit, again, without an indictment, there is little chance for success there. Take the OJ Simpson Civil trial as an example, he was indicted, and tried, yet found innocent. However, it took MONTHS for a civil trial to render a verdict in the victim's favor due to the legalities of him being innocent of his crime. They had to present some pretty overwhelming evidence of OJ's involvement.

Without even an indictment, a civil trial will be short, and result in sad realizations for the Brown family.

a reply to: intrptr

A dodge? It's Brown's blood in there. The DNA proved it. You can't cross-examine DNA evidence. Either it is, or it isn't. HOW it got there was determined by looking at the available evidence. The position of the gun when it was fired, the GSR on Brown's hands, the blood in the vehicle, it all indicates a struggle for the weapon. You can't cross examine forensic evidence. The gun was fired at a certain angle, which means the gun was near Wilson's holster/hip when it was fired. The GSR on Brown's hand means he was in contact with the weapon while it was fired. There's nothing to cross examine.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Huh? Cross examined? That makes absolutely no sense at all. It was DNA....it matched Brown.

Not sure how you cross examine DNA evidence.

Nice dodge. By letting someone else besides Ferguson PD determine how it got on a car door.

Dodge? Nope...if you look at the picture from the evidence file it is pretty obvious how it got there....

Do you think there is some conspiracy here? You think they planted it and made the whole thing up?

I have given you ample forensic evidence.

The ONLY reason this is even a topic anymore is because Brown was black. Every single piece of this story points to it happening exactly how Wilson said it happened.

I can't make you read the reports, but if you choose to follow the media over the evidence then there is nothing more to argue with you....i prefer to read everything and gather all information, not just one side that fits an agenda....it appears you do not have the same philosophy.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: jimmyx

If my kid robbed a store, got stopped by a cop went for the policeman's gun, punched him, and then charged at him even after being shot... Well, I'd have to say I made some terrible choices as parent to let a kid go that far down into thuggery.

I'd be devastated. Nobody wants to lose a family member. I'd also let the Justice System do it's work. If they conclude that the officer acted in self defense, that would be that.

I'd sad, I'd grieve for my child, but I would not demand the officer face prosecution for carrying out his duty.

then why did the officer leave the scene, before an on-site investigation take place?....remember this involved an officer SHOOTING and KILLING a suspect in broad daylight, on a public street. I don't know what LEO's do in your part of the country, but in every case I know, or have heard about, it simply doesn't happen this way.

A lot of your questions would be cleared up if you'd just simply read the files. He was told by his Sargeant to take the Sargeants car and go back to the station because of the crowd already gathering and becoming hostile.

tell me something....why wouldn't you want this to go to trial? if officer Wilson was innocent, it would come out in a trial just like you said, due to the slam dunk of this "forensic evidence"....it might have lessened the extreme rage felt by the residents, and although uncertain now, alleviated some of the damage done.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NotMoose

Case closed

Far from it! There's still Eric Holder's federal investigation and the Brown family is sure to file a civil, Wrongful Death case against Wilson.

That would be a joke. Holder won't do a thing...they will start distancing themselves quickly.

As for Brown's family....stepdad incited the riot so he isn't goin to get far, and Brown hadn't even lived with his family for a while. He wasn't raised in a great environment, which I think is the real issue and what should really be discussed and focused on rather than anything else. They won't file anything in my opinion, mainly because a LOT more about the family and Michael will come out that they don't want to come out.

a reply to: jimmyx

Why put into place a lengthy, expensive trial and extend the media circus even further when the evidence makes it clear there is no legal avenue pursue?

a reply to: windword

There was no evidence that Wilson committed a crime.
So a civil suit is a waste of time and so is the DOJ trying to prosecute a hate crime.

Wilson should sue the so called witnesses that initially lied about what they seen, and Mike browns family for slander and his loses.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

And without a Grand Jury indictment, pursuing federal charges is all but impossible. Holder can investigate all he wants, but given the facts, I'd not be surprised in the least that Holder quietly mothballs the investigation and tries to make it all go away.

We'll see.

A dodge? It's Brown's blood in there.

There's all kinds of evidence to be challenged in a court of law. None of which was challenged before the Grand Jury.

Of course it's Brown's blood. Wilson had Browns blood all over his hands. Some of it could have been transferred onto the car, thereby tainting the evidence. That looks like a thumb print on the arm rest to me. Could be Wilson's thumb.

At any rate, the blood evidence doesn't prove that Wilson was NOT the aggressor here, and that Brown wasn't wrestling to get free of Wilson and away from his gun.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: jimmyx

If my kid robbed a store, got stopped by a cop went for the policeman's gun, punched him, and then charged at him even after being shot... Well, I'd have to say I made some terrible choices as parent to let a kid go that far down into thuggery.

I'd be devastated. Nobody wants to lose a family member. I'd also let the Justice System do it's work. If they conclude that the officer acted in self defense, that would be that.

I'd sad, I'd grieve for my child, but I would not demand the officer face prosecution for carrying out his duty.

then why did the officer leave the scene, before an on-site investigation take place?....remember this involved an officer SHOOTING and KILLING a suspect in broad daylight, on a public street. I don't know what LEO's do in your part of the country, but in every case I know, or have heard about, it simply doesn't happen this way.

A lot of your questions would be cleared up if you'd just simply read the files. He was told by his Sargeant to take the Sargeants car and go back to the station because of the crowd already gathering and becoming hostile.

tell me something....why wouldn't you want this to go to trial? if officer Wilson was innocent, it would come out in a trial just like you said, due to the slam dunk of this "forensic evidence"....it might have lessened the extreme rage felt by the residents, and although uncertain now, elevated some of the damage done.

Never said I wouldn't want it to....i would love for it to. Talk about exhonerating....Wilson would probably have preferred it to go to trial too.

But alas....it didn't because a jury found it didn't need to...and that jury had to unanimously decide it didnt.

a reply to: NotMoose

I don't believe Wilson will be suing anybody. He seems like a man of at least SOME integrity.

originally posted by: intrptr

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.

That's really the bottom line. It's called clarity. It takes time to filter & obscure evidence to align with an outcome that will exonerate themselves and their employee. It happens everyday and it is the status quo of how many LEA's operate in the U.S. today and has nothing to do with the existence of racism.

How exactly can a grand jury begin to function when the prosecutor feeding them the evidence is at the same time raising a half million dollars for thou whom he pretends to prosecute?

I wasn't born yesterday, nor was the rest of the world and that is why the world is focused on Ferguson.

It has nothing to do with Brown being a thug or deserving (or not) to die for his behavior that day.

It is about LEA's & their public servants that operate outside the scope of human morality and our Constitution.

What we have is not one thug, but two young thugs. One which is backed by his peoples along with those aligned with them and the other backed by the state and those aligned alike.

I don't support either, but saying nothing by default makes one a supporter of the state which I could never do.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

IC'mon, now. You're trying to make it seem like Office Darren "Grand Wizard of the KKK" Wilson got dressed that day and set out to kill him a black guy.

Growing up I was next door neighbors with folks that were the nicest people in the world to me (a big white guy), but that which came out of their mouths about black people downright disgusts me to this day. It isn't hard at all for me to believe that indeed this LEO and his band of brothers in this LEA could or would be grand wizards if it were publicly accepted in this day and age. Be it not, their actions speak for themselves.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

The prior robbery by Brown with video, proves that Brown was an aggressor though.

The best evidence yet that proves...... Uh, huh.

a reply to: windword

Tell me something, Witness accounts have said that Wilson drew his weapon and pointed it at Brown while he was inside the car.

So why would a shot have been fired from Wilson's hip, near his holster? Why would, if Wilson wanted to gun down Brown in cold blood, holster his weapon, and attempt to draw it AGAIN to shot Brown? Could it be that Witnesses are lying?

The ONLY reason for GSR to be on Brown's hand is that he was going for the gun. That's it.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun



True, I was making a point to the member windword.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Do you think there is some conspiracy here? You think they planted it and made the whole thing up?

The whole thing stinks of a cover up. Not just some DNA on a car door.

In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not the only one.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

that is one thing I do agree with you...the mother and father have a lot to answer for how this kid was brought up. both of them don't appear to be model parents by any stretch of the imagination. and he himself appeared to be pretty thuggish in that convenience store tape.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

But alas....it didn't because a jury found it didn't need to...and that jury had to unanimously decide it didnt.

Au contraire, mom frere.

Myth: The grand jury was unanimous.

Fact: Robert McCullough, the St. Louis County prosecutor, explicitly stated that he would not disclose whether the grand jury was unanimous (at about 25:40 in the video). Under Missouri State Code § 540.260, nine of the twelve jurors need to agree in order to indict someone for a crime. Since there was no indictment, all we know is that there were not nine votes to indict Darren Wilson on any given charge. Indeed, there could have been eight votes to indict him on one or more of the charges. Or the decision not to indict could have been unanimous. But we don't know. And given that Missouri State Code § 540.310 prohibits grand jurors from disclosing any individual juror's vote, we likely never will.

www.huffingtonpost.com...