It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: coop039
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: Shamrock6
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: intrptr
Michael brown? He still assaulted the shop clerk, but that's not a crime right
Another lie, in addition to the one having him 'assaulting' the officer from thirty yards away, on his knees with his hands up, begging him not to shoot.
Using a lie to try and prove something else is a lie is kind of a fail.
Prove that was a lie. Oh you can't, conveniently there was no court trial.
But if there was the eyewitness statements would have to come out, let alone video evidence, which they will never show... and forensics which will never be addressed...
The eyewitness statements have him gunned down after complying with officer command to put his hands up.
"Hands up!"
"Don't shoot".
Its easy to call people liars , the liars are those covering it up. If there is nothing to cover up, then have a trial and prove it to the people who are literally seething down there, again, from more police killings, again.
Tell them theres no need to examine all the evidence in open court.
Hands up dont shoot was a lie. Completely fabricated by Mike Browns friend. Read the transcripts from the grand jury. Nothing happened at all like the thugs claimed it did.
originally posted by: DrStevenBrule
originally posted by: growler
a reply to: matafuchs
Jason Stockley has been found not guilty in the death of a citizen with his own personal gun. Protesting has already begun.
it's a shame it isn't a neo-nazi rally, everyone here would be against the protesters.
The types of people that usually turn up for these "protests" are way more of a threat to society than a tiny fringe group of neo-Nazis.
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: coop039
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: Shamrock6
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: intrptr
Michael brown? He still assaulted the shop clerk, but that's not a crime right
Another lie, in addition to the one having him 'assaulting' the officer from thirty yards away, on his knees with his hands up, begging him not to shoot.
Using a lie to try and prove something else is a lie is kind of a fail.
Prove that was a lie. Oh you can't, conveniently there was no court trial.
But if there was the eyewitness statements would have to come out, let alone video evidence, which they will never show... and forensics which will never be addressed...
The eyewitness statements have him gunned down after complying with officer command to put his hands up.
"Hands up!"
"Don't shoot".
Its easy to call people liars , the liars are those covering it up. If there is nothing to cover up, then have a trial and prove it to the people who are literally seething down there, again, from more police killings, again.
Tell them theres no need to examine all the evidence in open court.
Hands up dont shoot was a lie. Completely fabricated by Mike Browns friend. Read the transcripts from the grand jury. Nothing happened at all like the thugs claimed it did.
Include the video that proved Brown bought the cigars earlier. Video they had all along but hid, because they didn't want it to come out in trial, because the official excuse to kill him was that he had robbed the store, and that was BS. If they lied about that they lied about witness statements, too. Duh...
But again, let it come out in "Open" trial, not a hidden grand juries job to decide guilt or innocent. But used regularly (now) in lieu of trial by those state employees guilty of state ordained murder.
originally posted by: coop039
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: coop039
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: Shamrock6
originally posted by: intrptr
originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: intrptr
Michael brown? He still assaulted the shop clerk, but that's not a crime right
Another lie, in addition to the one having him 'assaulting' the officer from thirty yards away, on his knees with his hands up, begging him not to shoot.
Using a lie to try and prove something else is a lie is kind of a fail.
Prove that was a lie. Oh you can't, conveniently there was no court trial.
But if there was the eyewitness statements would have to come out, let alone video evidence, which they will never show... and forensics which will never be addressed...
The eyewitness statements have him gunned down after complying with officer command to put his hands up.
"Hands up!"
"Don't shoot".
Its easy to call people liars , the liars are those covering it up. If there is nothing to cover up, then have a trial and prove it to the people who are literally seething down there, again, from more police killings, again.
Tell them theres no need to examine all the evidence in open court.
Hands up dont shoot was a lie. Completely fabricated by Mike Browns friend. Read the transcripts from the grand jury. Nothing happened at all like the thugs claimed it did.
Include the video that proved Brown bought the cigars earlier. Video they had all along but hid, because they didn't want it to come out in trial, because the official excuse to kill him was that he had robbed the store, and that was BS. If they lied about that they lied about witness statements, too. Duh...
But again, let it come out in "Open" trial, not a hidden grand juries job to decide guilt or innocent. But used regularly (now) in lieu of trial by those state employees guilty of state ordained murder.
The whole video was the reason thing was all speculation by people other than the grand jury. It was not relevant to the actual shooting. Most of the lies that came out about the whole Mike Brown thing were pushed by the media. Again, read the transcripts. Mikes fingerprints were found on the officers gun, its just one of the things youll discover.
originally posted by: 2Baaka
originally posted by: DrStevenBrule
originally posted by: growler
a reply to: matafuchs
Jason Stockley has been found not guilty in the death of a citizen with his own personal gun. Protesting has already begun.
it's a shame it isn't a neo-nazi rally, everyone here would be against the protesters.
The types of people that usually turn up for these "protests" are way more of a threat to society than a tiny fringe group of neo-Nazis.
No they are not! These people are powerless while the neo-nazi are your police, Judges, Prosecutors and law makers.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: intrptr
You should probably bone up on what a grand jury does and what it doesn't do.
A grand jury decides whether there's probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and the defendant committed it.
It doesn't "only decide if there's enough evidence to go to a trial."
Yes, it is from Missouri.
A change of venue is the legal term for moving a trial to a new location. In high-profile matters, a change of venue may occur to move a jury trial away from a location where a fair and impartial jury may not be possible due to widespread publicity about a crime and its defendant(s) to another community in order to obtain jurors who can be more objective in their duties. This change may be to different towns, and across the other sides of states or, in some extremely high-profile federal cases, to other states.
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: 2Baaka
Nah...maybe locally, at municipal levels, but I would argue that the national level of change affected by the civil-rights movement was because words actually touched people's hearts, and the changes were out of love, not fear.
But, you know, to each their own.
originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: ketsuko
Yes, murder 1 has a very high hurdle (and rightly so). The prosecution did not have enough for that given the history of their client. Wishing is not a legal strategy....unless....the protest and riot is exactly what they hoped to gain by doing that.
originally posted by: jimmyx
originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: ketsuko
Yes, murder 1 has a very high hurdle (and rightly so). The prosecution did not have enough for that given the history of their client. Wishing is not a legal strategy....unless....the protest and riot is exactly what they hoped to gain by doing that.
hey, you figured it out......I don't know why people think that this prosecutor didn't ALREADY know that this WAS NOT a murder 1 charge?....of course he knew, Christ, he works with law enforcement and those judges every day. he knew that if the charge was murder 1, it would be impossible for a judge there to convict....even a first year law student would reach that conclusion due to the "high hurdle" you mentioned.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: matafuchs
However, people of race hold power on both sides.
Not in Missouri, they don't.
Judges are cogs of state, too. Not very high on the totem pole.