Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not saying it happened, but over 3 months anyone could match a story to physical evidence,
esp. if they had privy to the autopsies and forensics.
distance from the front wheel of the officer’s S.U.V. to Mr. Brown’s body was 153 feet, 9 inches, an investigator said. Farther away from the car, the investigator showed with photographs, were two blood-spatter patterns — evidence that Mr. Brown was moving toward the officer, and the car, when he was killed in the second flurry of shots.
The medical examiner described the succession of bullet wounds to the chest and face that, in his view, would not have immediately incapacitated Mr. Brown. The prosecutors repeatedly questioned the doctor about this, driving home that Mr. Brown could have still been mobile (and dangerous) after the initial gunshot wounds.
They seemed intent on emphasizing this point, which supports Officer Wilson’s description of Mr. Brown lunging toward him despite serious wounds.
He may also have been staggering towards Wilson in order to surrender.
There is only one witness, one, who said that Michael Brown "charged" Officer Wilson. And somehow that is the only one that that sleazy DA mentioned in his announcement. This is the same witness who originally said he saw the events from 100 yards away (the length of a football field), and later modified that distance to 50 to 75 yards when he testified to the grand jury. Yet the discrepancies in that witnesses' testimony were never revealed to the grand jury, whereas discrepancies of other witnesses were pointed out by the Assistant DAs to the grand jury, or discredited.
The rest of the witnesses say that Michael Brown walked or took a few steps towards the officer.
And the prosecutors stating the part I bolded to the grand jury was 100 % not their role, and shows they were advocating for Officer Wilson, exactly the opposite of what their role as prosecutors is supposed to be.
The transcripts have been released, you can read them yourself if you want.
This is not like a regular jury and the threshold for an indictment is lower, you don't have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
So the verdict has even more meaning. If the evidence wasn't there with a lower threshold, it's not there. At least it wasn't in the courtroom. We do have to keep in mind that they make their decision based on what IS presented in the courtroom.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
