Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,192
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 01:01:29 +0100, nestork
wrote:

Couldn't Wilson have shot Brown in the leg once to stop him?


Oh Nestor, where do I start

And if he missed?

And if an innocent bystander was shot in the leg, instead or in the
head?

Officer Wilson did exactly as he is trained. Law Enforcement, Police,
etc., have some form of Certification by the state. Any training
required by his agency - in addition.

Why are practice targets using black silhouettes?
  #42   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 485
Default Fergy, no guilty


"Oren" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 01:01:29 +0100, nestork
wrote:

Couldn't Wilson have shot Brown in the leg once to stop him?


Oh Nestor, where do I start

And if he missed?

And if an innocent bystander was shot in the leg, instead or in the
head?

Officer Wilson did exactly as he is trained. Law Enforcement, Police,
etc., have some form of Certification by the state. Any training
required by his agency - in addition.

Why are practice targets using black silhouettes?


racism?


  #43   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 647
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/25/2014 01:05 PM, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:08:41 -0600, "Pete C."
wrote:


Oren wrote:

On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:08:13 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

No indictment in Fergy, it's all over.


No yet. The feds have nothing for civil rights violation, BUT the
Brown family will sue Wilson in civil court for wrongful death. Make
him a financially broke man.


Last I knew cops had civil immunity for their lawful actions on duty.
The family is sure to try to sure someone - the city, the state, the
store their thug robbed, etc. but I think they are SOL on the cop.


The cop is liable for denial of medical attention for a prisoner
(SCOTUS); he does have immunity for his lawful actions ... The Brown
family will still sue Officer Wilson.


Maybe the family of the shop keeper could sue the Brown
family for the robbery and getting roughed up? Maybe
even sue them for being such crappy parents that they
would raised such a thug?
  #44   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 647
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/25/2014 06:33 PM, bob_villa wrote:
On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:15:15 PM UTC-6, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

You've been watching too much TV. The Lone Ranger has silver bullets in
his six shooter. Police today have guns capable of 8 or 10 shots in a
clip and may have a spare loaded clip..


http://i1181.photobucket.com/albums/...pse3541862.jpg



Easy way to remember: you shove the contents of a "clip"
into a "Magazine"
  #45   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 485
Default Fergy, no guilty


"Todd" wrote in message
...
On 11/25/2014 06:33 PM, bob_villa wrote:
On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:15:15 PM UTC-6, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

You've been watching too much TV. The Lone Ranger has silver bullets in
his six shooter. Police today have guns capable of 8 or 10 shots in a
clip and may have a spare loaded clip..


http://i1181.photobucket.com/albums/...pse3541862.jpg



Easy way to remember: you shove the contents of a "clip"
into a "Magazine"


but then along comes the M1 Garand . . .




  #46   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,730
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/26/2014 2:30 PM, Pico Rico wrote:
"Oren" wrote in message

Why are practice targets using black silhouettes?


racism?


Most incidents occur at night?

-
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
  #47   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,515
Default Fergy, no guilty

Oren posted for all of us...


Back years ago, or escape contingency plan required a warning shot
before shooting a fleeing felon.

Hmm, where do the warning rounds go?

I had two escapees on the roof of the jail one night, I directed the
perimeter officer that if they jumped off the roof over the fence
"shoot them both'. I meant right then, not fifty yards away...

Better accuracy.

Miami FBI, DEA, DUSM, local Metro once served a warrant on a house for
drug storage. One agent was killed in the gun fight. One of the
traffickers was shot 6 times in the chest (.357?) AND lived. I
couldn't believe it until I saw the guy and welcomed him into the jail
from the hospital. He looked like the walking dead, but had a pulse

He had a good embalmer...


--
Tekkie
  #48   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,192
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 11:34:08 -0800, Todd wrote:

On 11/25/2014 01:05 PM, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:08:41 -0600, "Pete C."
wrote:


Oren wrote:

On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:08:13 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

No indictment in Fergy, it's all over.


No yet. The feds have nothing for civil rights violation, BUT the
Brown family will sue Wilson in civil court for wrongful death. Make
him a financially broke man.

Last I knew cops had civil immunity for their lawful actions on duty.
The family is sure to try to sure someone - the city, the state, the
store their thug robbed, etc. but I think they are SOL on the cop.


The cop is liable for denial of medical attention for a prisoner
(SCOTUS); he does have immunity for his lawful actions ... The Brown
family will still sue Officer Wilson.


Maybe the family of the shop keeper could sue the Brown
family for the robbery and getting roughed up? Maybe
even sue them for being such crappy parents that they
would raised such a thug?


....or the Brown family sue the shop owner for having a video security
system that showed their poor innocent angelic child committing a
felony strong arm robbery.

They can sue, but _I_ think it is a long stretch because Officer
Wilson, under Color of Law, did nothing wrong. Except go to work that
day.

I've had inventive excusive ways to call in sick for the day or three.

© Oren

- 'sick of working'

- 'going fishin''

Replying to: "What is wrong with you?"

Me: "I don't know, I'm not a doctor. You better find my replacement."

Those were my most used favorites. I could take three days before
needing a doctor slip
  #49   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,515
Default Fergy, no guilty

Mike posted for all of us...



On 11/26/2014 7:24 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Still waiting for Holder on Brown? Did Holder ever weigh in on
Zimmerman/Martin? AFAIK, after he started the similar big investigation,
I never heard him give a result. AFAIK, that one is still going on. How
do they get anything done around ther? Good grief.


They don't.


That might be a good thing except for the initial chest beating the "do-
gooders" spew.

--
Tekkie
  #50   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,192
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 11:37:38 -0800, Todd wrote:

On 11/25/2014 06:33 PM, bob_villa wrote:
On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:15:15 PM UTC-6, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

You've been watching too much TV. The Lone Ranger has silver bullets in
his six shooter. Police today have guns capable of 8 or 10 shots in a
clip and may have a spare loaded clip..


http://i1181.photobucket.com/albums/...pse3541862.jpg



Easy way to remember: you shove the contents of a "clip"
into a "Magazine"


_Journalist’s Firearms Identification Guide_

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/journalists_firearms_identification_guide/

This one is a hoot:

http://oi42.tinypic.com/2ivbnft.jpg


  #51   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 647
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/26/2014 12:11 PM, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 11:37:38 -0800, Todd wrote:

On 11/25/2014 06:33 PM, bob_villa wrote:
On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:15:15 PM UTC-6, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

You've been watching too much TV. The Lone Ranger has silver bullets in
his six shooter. Police today have guns capable of 8 or 10 shots in a
clip and may have a spare loaded clip..

http://i1181.photobucket.com/albums/...pse3541862.jpg



Easy way to remember: you shove the contents of a "clip"
into a "Magazine"


_Journalist’s Firearms Identification Guide_

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/journalists_firearms_identification_guide/

This one is a hoot:

http://oi42.tinypic.com/2ivbnft.jpg


Ha! Loved both of them!
  #52   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 647
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/26/2014 12:05 PM, Oren wrote:
- 'going fishin''


1+

Rule #10:
Fishing: if you are not having fun, you are not doing it right. Readjust.
  #53   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,848
Default Fergy, no guilty

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message


CY: US cops now days typically carry 9 MM semi
automatic pistols. That round has been known to
fail to stop, at least a lot of times. IIRC part
of the reason the US Military went from .38
revolvers to .45 pistols, the smaller round
didn't stop enemy soldiers.


Specifically, the Moros on Mindanao (mostly). They had a habit of getting
drugged up and the drugs kept them going even after being shot. The army
wanted something that would knock them down...there were several
contenders, Colt ,45 won.

Did I mention that the Moros were - and are - Muslims? They have been
giving people problems for 400 years or so.

They also gave rise to the derogatory phrase, "Zamboanga, where the
monkeys have no tails" (Zamboanga is a large city on Mindanao).

--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net

  #54   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,848
Default Fergy, no guilty

"trader_4" wrote in message


And perps are shot six times and more in
encounters with police frequently. Once some SOB is coming at you and
you're convinced that your life is in danger, you do what you have to
do.
And that is to make sure you put him down, ASAP.


A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his
canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say,
there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him
to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you
knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you
say, "Swiss cheese"?

Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope.


--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net

  #55   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,192
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 16:08:26 -0500, "dadiOH"
wrote:

And that is to make sure you put him down, ASAP.


A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his
canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say,
there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him
to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you
knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you
say, "Swiss cheese"?

Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope.


Bah. He didn't need a gun. Make a furtive move. Cops will write good
reports.

(done by stealth : surreptitious) - sneaky, shady, shifty, slippery,
sly, sneaking, stealthy...

Never let the facts interfere with the writing of a good report.


  #56   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,748
Default Fergy, no guilty

Per dadiOH:
A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his
canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say,
there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him
to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you
knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you
say, "Swiss cheese"?

Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope.


Reminds me of what I saw on the news vis-a-vis those two losers that
bombed the Boston Marathon.

Looked like The Keystone Kops to me.

To Wit:

- They knew the surviving perpetrator was alone inside
that boat

- They did *not* know if the perpetrators had planted
additional bombs but, obviously, the guy in the boat did.

- Presumably the guy in the boat was totally surrounded
with absolutely no possibility of his escape.

- Presumably the people surrounding him had taken up positions
of safety and were in no immediate danger.

- There was obviously a strong interest (item #2 above) in
taking the guy alive.

- Whoever had him surrounded poured fire into that boat for
what seemed like a very long time - long enough that it
seemed like a miracle that the guy survived.

I think the term-of-art is "Contagious Fire".

Long, long ago and far, far away I think this was
called "A Mad Minute".


Were the deaths of either of those two morons any loss?
Absolutely not... quite the contrary IMHO....

But did the actions of law enforcement appear to be
professional, competent, or in the best interests of the
community?

I would argue "Not so much".

Wasn't one of the main faults found with the 911 response a
lack of communication/centralized command?

Doesn't seem like The Powers That Be have taken sufficient
corrective action.
--
Pete Cresswell
  #57   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,192
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:27:29 -0800, Todd wrote:

Fishing: if you are not having fun, you are not doing it right. Readjust.


Jr's. Bait and Sushi Shop. Boat named "MasterBaiter".
  #58   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,232
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/25/14, 7:01 PM, nestork wrote:
I'm having a problem with that.
Couldn't Wilson have shot Brown in the leg once to stop him?


If Wilson had what Stormy has, there would have been no need to shoot
Brown in the leg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkIz...Y&spfreload=10
  #59   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/25/2014 10:24 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 11/25/2014 2:08 PM, Pete C. wrote:

Oren wrote:

On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:08:13 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

No indictment in Fergy, it's all over.


No yet. The feds have nothing for civil rights violation, BUT the
Brown family will sue Wilson in civil court for wrongful death. Make
him a financially broke man.


Last I knew cops had civil immunity for their lawful actions on duty.
The family is sure to try to sure someone - the city, the state, the
store their thug robbed, etc. but I think they are SOL on the cop.



It's not the judgment he has to fear, it's the law suit. ANYONE can sue
ANYONE for ANYTHING. The action still must be defended and that costs
money.

Further, if punitive damages are sought, then the individual must/should
have his OWN attorney - generally not paid for by the municipality - to
defend HIS interests. If punitive damages are awarded (and never say
never) it's HIS to pay. The city or county cannot indemnify him as it
is against public policy. Punitive damages are awarded to PUNISH wrong
doing. No punishment of the individual agent if the municipality pays
them on his behalf, hence they are not allowed to.




I don't know where you are getting this but it sounds wrong. Maybe a
real lawyer can chime, but from my experience, the city would most
likely be the first name on the lawsuit. Followed by everyone else that
has two or more nickles and is connected to the lawsuit. The city will
probably pay all legal expenses unless the cop was grossly incompetent
and, according to the sham grand jury judgement, that wasn't the case.
  #60   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,279
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 11:17:10 AM UTC-5, nestork wrote:
trader_4;3313355 Wrote:

According to Wilson's testimony, he ordered Brown to stop, lay down,
repeatedly.


Yes, I watched that interview where Stefanopolous interviewed Wilson
last night on TV. Wilson said that he fired at least one bullet at
Brown several different times telling him to get down on the ground (or
something to that effect) each time.

trader_4;3313355 Wrote:

There are many police incidents where suspects are hit multiple times,
in non-strategic areas, and they don't stop.

I do recall hearing some people talking that were involved in gun
violence in some way, and occasionally you will hear someone say that
they were shot and didn't even know it at the time. I guess if it's a
small bullet and doesn't hit any vital organs, that can happen.

trader_4;3313355 Wrote:

We know 100% from forensic evidence that Brown was already shot
once in the initial engagment many seconds ago, while the officer was
still in the car.


According to the prosecutor in the Grand Jury trial, that first bullet
only grazed Brown's finger before getting lodged inside the car door.
There was soot from the gunpowder found on Brown's hand in the
autopsies. Brown probably felt it, but realized that it was nothing
more than a scratch.




--
nestork


The point is not how much damage the initial gun shot inflicted on Brown.
I agree it was likely minimal. The point is that it shows how determined,
aggressive, Brown must have been. A 40 caliber pistol going off
at point blank range, almost in his face, is quite an experience and suggests
that things will very likely get worse and yet he still didn't just surrender.

There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything wrong.
Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another felony,
by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop and get on the
ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a fight, grab for an cops
gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends in them getting shot to death,
it's "the cop shot an unarmed black teen". Even if a cop made some error along
the way, I reject the notion that a scoundrel can do anything they please,
create a deadly situation, and then the cop is still expected to do everything
100% correct and if he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what
happened, racism, etc.


  #61   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,279
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 4:08:35 PM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message


And perps are shot six times and more in
encounters with police frequently. Once some SOB is coming at you and
you're convinced that your life is in danger, you do what you have to
do.
And that is to make sure you put him down, ASAP.


A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his
canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say,
there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him
to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you
knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you
say, "Swiss cheese"?

Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope.


--

dadiOH


Similar happened a couple years ago in california. That guy that gunned down
a cop there. Same thing, big manhunt, they were even worried about him
showing up at the Academy Awards and had extra security, etc. About a week
later, they located him in a cabin in a resort area and surrounded the place.
I'm not sure they even told him to come out. Shortly after the cabin was
burned to the ground, with the fire started by police. They chose to use some
tear gas like device that is well known to also be incendiary. The perp
died inside. There was no investigation, no questioning of police action.
Of course the perp and most of the police were white.
  #62   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,279
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 4:38:15 PM UTC-5, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per dadiOH:
A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his
canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say,
there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him
to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you
knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you
say, "Swiss cheese"?

Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope.


Reminds me of what I saw on the news vis-a-vis those two losers that
bombed the Boston Marathon.

Looked like The Keystone Kops to me.

To Wit:

- They knew the surviving perpetrator was alone inside
that boat

- They did *not* know if the perpetrators had planted
additional bombs but, obviously, the guy in the boat did.

- Presumably the guy in the boat was totally surrounded
with absolutely no possibility of his escape.

- Presumably the people surrounding him had taken up positions
of safety and were in no immediate danger.

- There was obviously a strong interest (item #2 above) in
taking the guy alive.

- Whoever had him surrounded poured fire into that boat for
what seemed like a very long time - long enough that it
seemed like a miracle that the guy survived.

I think the term-of-art is "Contagious Fire".

Long, long ago and far, far away I think this was
called "A Mad Minute".


Were the deaths of either of those two morons any loss?
Absolutely not... quite the contrary IMHO....

But did the actions of law enforcement appear to be
professional, competent, or in the best interests of the
community?

I would argue "Not so much".

Wasn't one of the main faults found with the 911 response a
lack of communication/centralized command?

Doesn't seem like The Powers That Be have taken sufficient
corrective action.
--
Pete Cresswell


Another good example of an unarmed white guy getting mowed down.
And AFAIK, there was no investigation into who fired the first shot
that started it all. It certainly wasn't the bomber, because as you
say, he didn't have a gun, was already wounded and just hiding in the
boat. I'm not sure if they even gave him an order to surrender and
come out.
  #63   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,730
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/26/2014 6:04 PM, J Burns wrote:
On 11/25/14, 7:01 PM, nestork wrote:
I'm having a problem with that.
Couldn't Wilson have shot Brown in the leg once to stop him?


If Wilson had what Stormy has, there would have been no need to shoot
Brown in the leg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkIz...Y&spfreload=10


That's really a gripping video.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
  #64   Report Post  
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,498
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trader_4 View Post
There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything wrong.
Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation, and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened, racism, etc.
I think the more succinct way to put it is that Michael Brown lowered the quality of life in the neighborhood he lived in.

Anyone that walks into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and punches out the store owner for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan. In China, hooliganism is punishable by death.

While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a racist white cop shooting an innocent child, the people that owned that convenience store, and undoubtedly many others in Ferguson are glad that Michael Brown was killed. Their lives will be happier without Michael Brown in them.

I think your US Constitution that says all men are created equal is correct. But it's not correct to say that all lives are of equal value. Some amongst us work to build our communities and create positive change by serving our community in our profession or in our business or in public office or spiritually as an spiritual leader. Others contribute nothing to society, and in fact are a burden on it. They become addicted to drugs, gambling or alcohol or something else and often sell drugs or commit crimes to support their own addiction. They are incarcerated at the public's expense and the cost to society is generally quite high for each individual. They abuse the people in their lives such as wives and children, often scarring them mentally for life. To say that the lives of people from both of these catagories are of equal value is simply wrong. To say that is to say that person was of equal value to their community as a criminal, alcoholic or drug addict as they would have been as a productive member of their community, and that is clearly wrong. All of us would clearly more enjoy living in a community where everyone is productive and supportive than in one where crime, addiction and family violence are common place.

Last edited by nestork : November 27th 14 at 06:46 AM
  #65   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,232
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/26/14, 7:37 PM, trader_4 wrote:
Another good example of an unarmed white guy getting mowed down.
And AFAIK, there was no investigation into who fired the first shot
that started it all. It certainly wasn't the bomber, because as you
say, he didn't have a gun, was already wounded and just hiding in the
boat. I'm not sure if they even gave him an order to surrender and
come out.


How about Mal Evans in Los Angeles in 1976? Three deputies went up to
his bedroom, where he was unarmed, drugged, and probably asleep. Two
fired 6 shots, hitting him 4 times and killing him.

A woman purporting to be his girlfriend had phoned, saying he was
confused from valium and in his room with a 30-30. The cops reported
that he pointed it at them. They told him several times to drop it. He
refused several times, so they shot him. It was an unloaded BB gun.

The newspaper called him the out-of-work former Beatles manager. It
neglected to say that he'd been active in the business since the breakup
and, for the last several months he'd been writing a book about the
Beatles. He was excited because it was scheduled to go to the publisher
in 4 days. It neglected to say he'd been presented with a badge as an
honorary LA sheriff.

John Hoernie said Evans had hired him as his co-author. He neglected to
say he was a Capitol executive; Capital had the American rights to all
the Beatles songs and an ongoing contract with McCartney. Before
joining the Beatles, Evans had been an electrical engineer. He'd
published articles in journals. He could write, and he'd kept diaries
while with the Beatles. It's not credible that he would have hired a
Capitol executive, with little direct knowledge of the Beatles, to
co-author his memoirs.

Hoernie said the girlfriend had asked him to come over because Evans was
despondent and groggy. He helped Evans upstairs to his bedroom. Evans
picked up a BB rifle. Hoernie wrestled him for it, but Evans was
bigger, so Hoernie had the girlfriend call the cops.

Hoernie knew it was a BB gun. Reporting it as a 30-30 strongly suggests
murder by cop. If she'd called Hoernie to take charge, why hadn't he
been the one to call the cops? Why call them about somebody in his room
with a BB gun? Did Evans, 40, even own a BB gun as a British visitor
living in a motel apartment?

It's not credible that Hoernie tried to take the gun from Evans, who was
6'6" and known as a gentle giant. The Beatles had asked him to be their
road manager because he was big enough not to need violence as their
bodyguard and chauffeur. He was always kind, good-natured, fun-loving,
and cooperative. He'd had lots of contact with many friends lately, and
all had found him in good spirits.

He'd sung and played instruments in several Beatles recordings, and he'd
written some of their hits. His diary noted that at one point they'd
promised royalties for one of his songs, but they reneged. They were
making millions, but he had to support his family on miserly wages. He
stayed because he loved the business.

The Beatles and Capitol had untold millions at stake in maintaining
their image as supreme songwriters and musicians. It seems they'd
claimed the work of better songwriters and musicians hired under
nondisclosure agreements. I think Hoernie offered his services so he
could send copies of the manuscript to McCartney. Evans may not have
known he was revealing secrets, but McCartney said publication had to be
stopped by any means. I think Hoernie spiked a beverage with valium,
took him to his room, and had him sit in a chair facing the door. When
he passed out, Hoernie got the BB gun from his car, turned off the
bedroom light, and had the woman sic the cops on him.

Nobody claimed Evans had threatened anyone. He hadn't harmed Hoernie in
the alleged fight. He was alleged to be a groggy man in his room with a
deer rifle. The logical solution would be for an unarmed friend like
Hoernie to call his name from the hallway. If there was no answer, the
apparent danger might be that Evans would shoot at the door in his
confusion. So, without standing in the doorway, you push the door open
and listen. In a minute, it should be reasonable to peek. If there had
been a sign of hostile intent, that sounds like a case for teargas.

Having cops with guns bust in sounds like terrible police work. They
certainly didn't tell him several times to put down the rifle as he
aimed it at them. They would have had a split second to decide to
shoot. If his rifle was pointed at the door, it would already have been
too late. That approach sounds trigger happy.

Around here lately, a man on his way home from work stopped at a
convenience story one afternoon. A state cop pulled in behind him.
When he got out, the cop demanded his license. He said it was on the
seat. The cop told him to get it. He leaned in and got it. When he
stood back up, the imaginative cop started shooting, screaming at the
wounded driver on the pavement with his license in his hand. The dash
cam showed it all. I guess it was cops like that who killed Evans.

Naturally, the LA sheriff wouldn't admit that his cops had been fooled
into participating in a murder. He didn't ask why they'd been told it
was a 30-30. He didn't investigate the origin of the BB gun. The cops
hopped into bed with the murderers.


  #66   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/26/2014 10:36 PM, nestork wrote:
trader_4;3313595 Wrote:

There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything
wrong.
Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another
felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop
and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a
fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends
in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black
teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion
that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation,
and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if
he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened,
racism, etc.


I think the more succinct way to put it is that Michael Brown lowered
the quality of life in the neighborhood he lived in. Anyone that walks
into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and
punches out the store owner


Just for clarification. Per the video we've all seen, MB didn't
"punch-out" the store owner. Mike Brown pushed him, a little roughly,
out of the way.

for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan.
In China, hooliganism is punishable by death.


That is a silly argument. This isn't China.

While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a racist
white cop shooting an unarmed child, the people that owned that
convenience store, and undoubtedly many others are glad that Michael
Brown is out of their lives.



I wouldn't go quite that far.

The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the
prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at
least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand
jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have
said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR
or PRI.

  #67   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,016
Default Fergy, no guilty

In article , gonjah
wrote:


I wouldn't go quite that far.

The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the
prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at
least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand
jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have
said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR
or PRI.


Did any of them suggest the trial should have occurred because of
the evidence or because the "community" should have it?
(Serious question)
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein
  #68   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,730
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/26/2014 7:29 PM, trader_4 wrote:
The point is not how much damage the initial gun shot inflicted on Brown.
I agree it was likely minimal. The point is that it shows how determined,
aggressive, Brown must have been. A 40 caliber pistol going off
at point blank range, almost in his face, is quite an experience and suggests
that things will very likely get worse and yet he still didn't just surrender.

There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything wrong.
Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another felony,
by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop and get on the
ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a fight, grab for an cops
gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends in them getting shot to death,
it's "the cop shot an unarmed black teen". Even if a cop made some error along
the way, I reject the notion that a scoundrel can do anything they please,
create a deadly situation, and then the cop is still expected to do everything
100% correct and if he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what
happened, racism, etc.


We ought coin a new urban term for this syndrome.
I mean, this is just begging for a catchy name.

Teenage Undestructibility (where the teen goes T.U.?)

Got to be some thing we can call this.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
  #69   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/27/2014 6:17 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , gonjah
wrote:


I wouldn't go quite that far.

The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the
prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at
least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand
jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have
said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR
or PRI.


Did any of them suggest the trial should have occurred because of
the evidence or because the "community" should have it?
(Serious question)


From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that
contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough
to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling
the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help
either. The whole thing was odd.

Don't get me wrong. I have a great deal of respect for law enforcement.
I want to believe Wilson, but we can't just ignore the witnesses.
  #70   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,730
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/27/2014 7:07 AM, gonjah wrote:
as far as I can tell.
I haven't read the grand
jury transcript,
most of the experts I've heard have
said.
I usually get my news from NPR


You're ignorant of the facts, listen to
the left wing media, and get your news
from the far left NPR, and then wonder
why we question your conclusions?

Uh, gee, not sure I can explain it to you.
How's that hope and change thing going
for you?

-
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


  #71   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/27/2014 6:35 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 11/27/2014 7:07 AM, gonjah wrote:
as far as I can tell.
I haven't read the grand
jury transcript,
most of the experts I've heard have
said.
I usually get my news from NPR


You're ignorant of the facts, listen to
the left wing media, and get your news
from the far left NPR, and then wonder
why we question your conclusions?

Uh, gee, not sure I can explain it to you.
How's that hope and change thing going
for you?

-
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
.


If that's all you got, you ain't got much. Argue the facts.

I can smell bs. Sure, NPR provides a different point-of-view, but
sometimes we need to look at both sides.

Believe me. I can't watch Rachael Maddow or Bill Maher without rolling
my eyes.


  #72   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,016
Default Fergy, no guilty

In article , gonjah
wrote:


From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that
contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough
to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling
the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help
either. The whole thing was odd.

The GJ's job was to look at the evidence in total to see if there
was enough probable cause to indict. Grand jury members must hear
**all** aspects of the evidence before they take action. This evidence
typically consists of witness testimony and written documents. Grand
jury members may question witnesses and can decide how many witnesses
they want to hear. They can also subpoena more witnesses from anywhere
in the United States. (Emphasis added)
After the evidence has been presented, grand jury members must
deliberate to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to produce an
indictment -- also known as a "true bill" -- which is a formal criminal
charge. Grand jury members must ** evaluate all aspects of the
evidence*** and may request transcripts for clarification on previous
testimony or request that written documentation evidence be made
available for reference. If grand jury members decide there is no
probable cause to believe that a person has committed a crime, they can
vote for a "no bill," or "not a true bill," which frees the person from
having to plead to a criminal charge.




Read more :
http://www.ehow.com/info_8287966_dut...y-members.html

Don't get me wrong. I have a great deal of respect for law enforcement.
I want to believe Wilson, but we can't just ignore the witnesses.

But we also can't ignore the witnesses for either side, and
especially not the forensic evidence.
(Actually if it was up to me, I'd keep witness testimony out of trials
entirely since every study ever done shows how wildly inaccurate eye
witness testimony is. But that ain't gonna happen.
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein
  #73   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,730
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/27/2014 7:35 AM, gonjah wrote:
From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that
contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough
to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling
the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help
either. The whole thing was odd.

Don't get me wrong. I have a great deal of respect for law enforcement.
I want to believe Wilson, but we can't just ignore the witnesses.


Gee, I bet you feel terrible. I presume you're
white, and you must feel totally guilty because
your people are out there with guns and badges,
shooting unarmed black teens with hands in the
air surrendering, after the minor crime of jay
walking, which isn't even a felony. How are you
ever going to punish yourself for all that white
privilege? You going to sell all you own, and
go to a soup kitchen and hand out twenty dollar
bills to all the persecuted minorities?

I don't know how you're ever going to get to
deal with all that white privilege. Raise taxes
on the rich, maybe?

-
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
  #74   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,730
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/27/2014 7:42 AM, gonjah wrote:
On 11/27/2014 6:35 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 11/27/2014 7:07 AM, gonjah wrote:
as far as I can tell.
I haven't read the grand
jury transcript,
most of the experts I've heard have
said.
I usually get my news from NPR


You're ignorant of the facts, listen to
the left wing media, and get your news
from the far left NPR, and then wonder
why we question your conclusions?

Uh, gee, not sure I can explain it to you.
How's that hope and change thing going
for you?

-
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
.


If that's all you got, you ain't got much. Argue the facts.

I can smell bs. Sure, NPR provides a different point-of-view, but
sometimes we need to look at both sides.

Believe me. I can't watch Rachael Maddow or Bill Maher without rolling
my eyes.


How does one argue the facts with a person
(I mean yourself) who writes to the list
that he / she is ignorant?

-
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
  #75   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/27/2014 6:44 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , gonjah
wrote:


From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that
contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough
to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling
the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help
either. The whole thing was odd.

The GJ's job was to look at the evidence in total to see if there
was enough probable cause to indict. Grand jury members must hear
**all** aspects of the evidence before they take action. This evidence
typically consists of witness testimony and written documents. Grand
jury members may question witnesses and can decide how many witnesses
they want to hear. They can also subpoena more witnesses from anywhere
in the United States. (Emphasis added)
After the evidence has been presented, grand jury members must
deliberate to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to produce an
indictment -- also known as a "true bill" -- which is a formal criminal
charge. Grand jury members must ** evaluate all aspects of the
evidence*** and may request transcripts for clarification on previous
testimony or request that written documentation evidence be made
available for reference. If grand jury members decide there is no
probable cause to believe that a person has committed a crime, they can
vote for a "no bill," or "not a true bill," which frees the person from
having to plead to a criminal charge.




Read more :
http://www.ehow.com/info_8287966_dut...y-members.html

Don't get me wrong. I have a great deal of respect for law enforcement.
I want to believe Wilson, but we can't just ignore the witnesses.

But we also can't ignore the witnesses for either side, and
especially not the forensic evidence.
(Actually if it was up to me, I'd keep witness testimony out of trials
entirely since every study ever done shows how wildly inaccurate eye
witness testimony is. But that ain't gonna happen.


Okay, for argument sake, ignore the eyewitnesses. What do you think
about the prosecutor's behavior?

It appears to me; the prosecutor was bowing to public pressure to do
something, so he brought it before the grand jury, and then acted like
the defense attorney. Was it all for show?


  #76   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,279
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:07:10 AM UTC-5, gonjah wrote:
On 11/26/2014 10:36 PM, nestork wrote:
trader_4;3313595 Wrote:

There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything
wrong.
Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another
felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop
and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a
fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends
in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black
teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion
that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation,
and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if
he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened,
racism, etc.


I think the more succinct way to put it is that Michael Brown lowered
the quality of life in the neighborhood he lived in. Anyone that walks
into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and
punches out the store owner


Just for clarification. Per the video we've all seen, MB didn't
"punch-out" the store owner. Mike Brown pushed him, a little roughly,
out of the way.

for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan.
In China, hooliganism is punishable by death.


That is a silly argument. This isn't China.

While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a racist
white cop shooting an unarmed child, the people that owned that
convenience store, and undoubtedly many others are glad that Michael
Brown is out of their lives.



I wouldn't go quite that far.

The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the
prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at
least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand
jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have
said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR
or PRI.


Well, that explains why you think most "experts" think he should have
gone to trial. Most of the experts in the rest of the media, think
otherwise. And they also think Holder at the DOJ has no case at all.

I don't see how anyone could think the decision is not supported by the
evidence. You have one credible eyewitness that completely corroborates the
officer's account, including that Brown was charging back. Many of the
other alleged eyewitnesses, changed their stories along the way or
admitted they didn't even see the key parts of it. The officer;s version
was consistent with the forensics. There is no way you'd ever get a
conviction.
  #77   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,279
Default Fergy, no guilty

On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:44:49 AM UTC-5, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , gonjah
wrote:


From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that
contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough
to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling
the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help
either. The whole thing was odd.

The GJ's job was to look at the evidence in total to see if there
was enough probable cause to indict. Grand jury members must hear
**all** aspects of the evidence before they take action. This evidence
typically consists of witness testimony and written documents. Grand
jury members may question witnesses and can decide how many witnesses
they want to hear. They can also subpoena more witnesses from anywhere
in the United States. (Emphasis added)
After the evidence has been presented, grand jury members must
deliberate to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to produce an
indictment -- also known as a "true bill" -- which is a formal criminal
charge. Grand jury members must ** evaluate all aspects of the
evidence*** and may request transcripts for clarification on previous
testimony or request that written documentation evidence be made
available for reference. If grand jury members decide there is no
probable cause to believe that a person has committed a crime, they can
vote for a "no bill," or "not a true bill," which frees the person from
having to plead to a criminal charge.


Exactly. If the bar for indictment was that there was an eyewitness
who's testimony conflicts with the accused, then you'd have 10X more
indictments all across the country. One of those eyewitnesses was
Brown's buddy who was a possible accomplice in the robbery 10 mins
before. His version was totally discredited and his obviously a liar.
I understand other eyewitnesses changed their stories along the way too,
admitting they didn't see key parts of what happened, if at all. The
GJ heard all that directly from the witnesses, determined how credible
each was, saw all the forensics and made their decision based
on the totality of it all.
  #78   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,730
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/27/2014 8:14 AM, trader_4 wrote:
Well, that explains why you think most "experts" think he should have
gone to trial. Most of the experts in the rest of the media, think
otherwise. And they also think Holder at the DOJ has no case at all.

I don't see how anyone could think the decision is not supported by the
evidence. You have one credible eyewitness that completely corroborates the
officer's account, including that Brown was charging back. Many of the
other alleged eyewitnesses, changed their stories along the way or
admitted they didn't even see the key parts of it. The officer;s version
was consistent with the forensics. There is no way you'd ever get a
conviction.


Do you mean there is now way you'd
ever get an HONEST conviction based
on THE EVIDENCE? (caps text is my
qualifiers.)

I'd dare to guess there were at least
a few wrongful convictions in the US
history.


-
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
  #79   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 428
Default Fergy, no guilty

On 11/27/2014 7:14 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:07:10 AM UTC-5, gonjah wrote:
On 11/26/2014 10:36 PM, nestork wrote:
trader_4;3313595 Wrote:

There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything
wrong.
Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another
felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop
and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a
fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends
in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black
teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion
that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation,
and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if
he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened,
racism, etc.

I think the more succinct way to put it is that Michael Brown lowered
the quality of life in the neighborhood he lived in. Anyone that walks
into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and
punches out the store owner


Just for clarification. Per the video we've all seen, MB didn't
"punch-out" the store owner. Mike Brown pushed him, a little roughly,
out of the way.

for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan.
In China, hooliganism is punishable by death.


That is a silly argument. This isn't China.

While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a racist
white cop shooting an unarmed child, the people that owned that
convenience store, and undoubtedly many others are glad that Michael
Brown is out of their lives.



I wouldn't go quite that far.

The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the
prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at
least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand
jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have
said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR
or PRI.


Well, that explains why you think most "experts"


Sorry I can't be more specific.

think he should have
gone to trial. Most of the experts in the rest of the media, think
otherwise. And they also think Holder at the DOJ has no case at all.


That's what I've heard too. The hurdle for the DOJ is pretty high.

I don't see how anyone could think the decision is not supported by the
evidence. You have one credible eyewitness that completely corroborates the
officer's account, including that Brown was charging back. Many of the
other alleged eyewitnesses, changed their stories along the way or
admitted they didn't even see the key parts of it. The officer;s version
was consistent with the forensics. There is no way you'd ever get a
conviction.


Can you cite a credible source? I'd be interested in reading that in detail.

TIA
  #80   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 485
Default Fergy, no guilty


"gonjah" wrote in message
...
On 11/27/2014 7:14 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:07:10 AM UTC-5, gonjah wrote:
On 11/26/2014 10:36 PM, nestork wrote:
trader_4;3313595 Wrote:

There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything
wrong.
Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit
another
felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop
and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a
fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it
ends
in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black
teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the
notion
that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly
situation,
and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and
if
he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened,
racism, etc.

I think the more succinct way to put it is that Michael Brown lowered
the quality of life in the neighborhood he lived in. Anyone that walks
into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and
punches out the store owner

Just for clarification. Per the video we've all seen, MB didn't
"punch-out" the store owner. Mike Brown pushed him, a little roughly,
out of the way.

for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan.
In China, hooliganism is punishable by death.


That is a silly argument. This isn't China.

While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a
racist
white cop shooting an unarmed child, the people that owned that
convenience store, and undoubtedly many others are glad that Michael
Brown is out of their lives.



I wouldn't go quite that far.

The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the
prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at
least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand
jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have
said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR
or PRI.


Well, that explains why you think most "experts"


Sorry I can't be more specific.

think he should have
gone to trial. Most of the experts in the rest of the media, think
otherwise. And they also think Holder at the DOJ has no case at all.


That's what I've heard too. The hurdle for the DOJ is pretty high.

I don't see how anyone could think the decision is not supported by the
evidence. You have one credible eyewitness that completely corroborates
the
officer's account, including that Brown was charging back. Many of the
other alleged eyewitnesses, changed their stories along the way or
admitted they didn't even see the key parts of it. The officer;s version
was consistent with the forensics. There is no way you'd ever get a
conviction.


Can you cite a credible source? I'd be interested in reading that in
detail.

TIA


here is but one.

http://news.yahoo.com/grand-jury-doc...223558856.html


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Man not guilty of WD40 'frenzy' [email protected] UK diy 26 September 14th 14 08:51 PM
Ray Nagan GUILTY! BurfordTJustice Home Repair 29 February 18th 14 09:11 PM
OT; I feel slightly guilty..... The Medway Handyman UK diy 25 February 1st 14 09:51 PM
Huhne pleads guilty.. The Natural Philosopher[_2_] UK diy 133 March 9th 13 12:27 AM
This is just great - who's the guilty one JoeJoe UK diy 22 March 27th 09 05:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:25 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"