Brown's Murder was Live-Tweeted

[Politico]

You are incorrect in calling this a murder at this point. Your evidence appears to be unreliable and you need to wait until all the facts come out before you call it a murder. Calm down

Murder lol. Jesse Jackson and CNN have been calling it an execution since Sunday.

 

[Rotagilla]

Why would I research your unsubstantiated claims?

Well, because my "claims" are substantiated by missouri law...and you should do your own research so you don't sound like a complete fool like now.

Missouri Law authorizes officer to use deadly force when necessary
Section 563.046 authorizes a law enforcement officer to use “deadly force” “when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested . . . has committed or attempted to commit a felony.”

 

[Faun]

Yes..those same witnesses who said he was shot in the back....and shot with his hands up surrendering...while kneeling on the ground..all that BS has been floated and debunked.

Though they said the officer shot him in the back, it doesn't discount that the officer was shooting at him while he was fleeing. Only means they didn't realize the officer missed him. Still, the tweets are corroborated by other eye witness accounts. And I could be mistaken, but I don't recall hearing a single eyewitness state that the officer did not fire at Brown while he was fleeing.

 

[Rotagilla]

Though they said the officer shot him in the back, it doesn't discount that the officer was shooting at him while he was fleeing. Only means they didn't realize the officer missed him. Still, the tweets are corroborated by other eye witness accounts. And I could be mistaken, but I don't recall hearing a single eyewitness state that the officer did not fire at Brown while he was fleeing.

It's legal for a cop to shoot fleeing suspects. Hate it for you, but that's the truth.

Section 563.046 Missouri statutes authorizes a law enforcement officer to use "deadly force" "when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested . . . has committed or attempted to commit a felony."

 

[Faun]

Being unaware of a law doesn't make sound like a fool; it means I was unaware of the law.

 

[Faun]

eyewitness accounts or not, he wasn't shot in the back according to two autopsies.

Good, now go argue that with someone who said he was shot in the back.

 

[Rotagilla]

Being unaware of a law doesn't make sound like a fool; it means I was unaware of the law.

Well, check your facts before you run your mouth. It was a good shoot. The cop was in the right.

 

[Rotagilla]

Good, now go argue that with someone who said he was shot in the back.

I don't need to. Dr. Baden has much better credentials than I do and he saw the body and performed the autopsy.

brown was not shot in the back and you'd know that if you payed attention.

 

[Ravi]

If a negro "eyewitness" says he was shot in the back...it doesn't matter if an autopsy proves he wasn't.
As long as it feels good, negroes will believe it.

Only one of the "negroes" said he was hit in the back. And the autopsy report confirms that the graze wound could have come from behind and him jerking could have made it look like he was shot in the back.

 

[Marianne]

Good, now go argue that with someone who said he was shot in the back.

What for? It won't change their minds or the direction of the bullets. If they can't accept the results of two autopsies I don't know what I can do about it.

Maybe Rev. Al should should hire his own personal ME and sit in the room during the autopsy to see what the ME is seeing to prove he wasn't shot in the back. Then he can reassure the black community that the findings are accurate.

 

[Rotagilla]

Only one of the "negroes" said he was hit in the back. And the autopsy report confirms that the graze wound could have come from behind and him jerking could have made it look like he was shot in the back.

He was not shot in the back..May have..might have...could have...all irrelevant. He was not shot in the back. The "witness" is a liar.

 

[Missourian]

What happened at the patrol car is irrelevant to the cop firing his gun at Brown while he was trying to leave the scene. Once Brown was away from the cop he was no longer an imminent threat and could have been taken down with a taser, or other cops, or just picked up later.

Tennessee v. Garner the Supreme Court said differently.

Law enforcement officers pursuing an unarmed suspect may use deadly force to prevent escape only if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.

Tennessee v. Garner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
​

Imminent threat is the standard for civilians, not police.

The standard for police is Tennessee v. Garner.

I'd say that the assault in the police car, if accurate, meets the standard.

 

[Rotagilla]

What for? It won't change their minds or the direction of the bullets. If they can't except the results of two autopsies I don't know what I can do about it

. Maybe Rev. Al should should hire his own personal ME and sit in the room during the autopsy to see what the ME is seeing to prove he wasn't shot in the back. Then he can reassure the black community that the findings are accurate.

Tennessee v. Garner the Supreme Court said differently.

Law enforcement officers pursuing an unarmed suspect may use deadly force to prevent escape only if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.

Tennessee v. Garner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
​

Imminent threat is the standard for civilians, not police.

The standard for police is Tennessee v. Garner.

I'd say that the assault in the police car, if accurate, meets the standard.

Thanks for that.

Here's missouri law regarding the same thing.

Missouri Law authorizes officer to use deadly force when necessary
Section 563.046 authorizes a law enforcement officer to use “deadly force” “when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested . . . has committed or attempted to commit a felony.”

Good shoot. Move on.

 

[JimH52]

sharpto


Thanks for that.

Here's missouri law regarding the same thing.

Missouri Law authorizes officer to use deadly force when necessary
Section 563.046 authorizes a law enforcement officer to use “deadly force” “when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested . . . has committed or attempted to commit a felony.”

Good shoot. Move on.

Yup, it appears the officer had a good reason to use deadly force IF Brown rushed him. Remember that, according to reports, Brown had tried to take the gun away from the officer. No conclusion....just the way it is looking right now. It will be interesting, but I am tired of hearing about it on the news 24/7.

 

[Stephanie]

So did I....LMAO...why lie when it is to easy to prove


Neighbor Live-Tweeted Brown Shooting; May Be Damning Evidence Against Officer



Read more at Neighbor Live-Tweeted Brown Shooting; May Be Damning Evidence Against Officer | The Free Thought Project

ouch, burn
good job

 

[Valerie]

oh jebus... another one.

St. Louis police fatally shot an African-American man only four-miles from where unarmed black teenager Michael Brown was killed only 10 days ago by a white officer.

The man aggressively approached police brandishing a knife and repeatedly shouted "shoot me now," St. Louis police chief Sam Dotson said as he recounted what witnesses told investigators shortly after the disturbing lunchtime incident.

http://www.aol.com/article/2014/08/...d=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk2&pLid=517459

 

[Faun]

Well, check your facts before you run your mouth. It was a good shoot. The cop was in the right.

Are you always this so easily excitable? Exactly what "fact" do you think I stated?

 

[Rotagilla]

Are you always this so easily excitable? Exactly what "fact" do you think I stated?

This has nothing to do with me or excitement..nice try to deflect.

You said that cops can't shoot unarmed fleeing suspects and included some smart ass comment.
I proved you were wrong and posted the missouri statute...now you're pretending like you don't understand and it never happened.

 

[Theowl32]

Anyone hear about the injuries of the cop?

BREAKING REPORT: Officer Darren Wilson Suffered “Orbital Blowout Fracture to Eye Socket” During Mike Brown Attack | The Gateway Pundit


The Gateway Pundit can now confirm from two local St. Louis sources that police Officer Darren Wilson suffered facial fractures during his confrontation with deceased 18 year-old Michael Brown. Officer Wilson clearly feared for his life during the incident that led to the shooting death of Brown.

Now, let us know, if all of that is true, how that fits the narrative how Michael Brown was a poor victim minding his own business.

How about this Tweet:

Christine Byers ✔ @ChristineDByers
Follow
Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop's version of events in shooting #Ferguson

10:30 PM - 18 Aug 2014


That was subsequently taken down. For strange reasons.

Trust this. Like the Zimmerman case, the actual facts will not matter one bit to those that are perpetually mainulated by the agenda driven left wing media.

 

[EverCurious]

Isn't it nice that the source here Tips For Being An Unarmed Black Teen | The Onion - America's Finest News Source doesn't just provide us with the ENTIRE tweet discussion that took place so we can make our own decisions, instead they rearrange the tweets to fit their slant. Look at the time stamps on the tweets. The photo is posted at 9:05, he doesn't say what happed until an hour later at 10:01.

In any event, from the tweeted picture two minutes after his statement that he saw someone die, at 9:05, it does not appear that TheePharoah can see Wilson's car. He likely did not see the altercation in the SUV, heard the gun shot, saw Brown running away and assumed the shots were ALL as he was running away; an assumption later reinforced after he spoke to the crowd outside - and if you listen to the cellphone video, people who were NOT witnesses were 'adopting' that Brown was surrendering on the street.

Who started the initial story that Brown was surrendering, and did they actually see that or were they too just 'assuming'? Was it Johnson who started the surrender story? Johnson appeared a bit high and out of it (check out how he is acting in the robbery video from camera 7 of the counter)) so perhaps he too 'assumed' what happened while he was fleeing and could not see. Saw Browns arms go up and 'assumed' what Brown was doing.

The human brain is very good at 'filling in blanks' to make sense of a situation, however it is not always 'correct' in it's 'assumptions.' Everyone does this on a daily basis, and I bet everyone makes mistakes in it on a fairly regular basis as well.