Michael Brown was 148 feet from Wilson as he was shot to death

[jc456]

If he was kneeling when he was shot and the forensic evidence showed that, there is no way the GJ would not have indicted. And no, he wasn't standing straight up, he was leaning forward, running toward the bullet.

Leaning forward... you mean like someone would be if they were kneeling down falling to the ground? Face it, the last two shots to his head was an Execution.

They were not. LEOs are trained to fire until the threat is gone PERIOD. The threat is gone when the guy is no longer charging Wilson.

You mean LEOs are trained to kill. I thought you said LEOs were trained to apprehend. You trying to say apprehend means wanted dead or alive, dead is better?

Leos are trained to apprehend first, and to fire at center mass if they must fire. Center mass shots commonly result in death.

So yes, in that sense they ARE trained to kill.

Eggzactly. Serve and Protect means, apprehend - apprehend means trained to judge, convict, and execute unarmed scary teens on the spot.

yes. Please stop with the stupid!!!!!

 

[RKMBrown]

Nonsense.

It isn't nonsense, It's ballistics.

Go ahead, raise your hands above your head and tell me that that doesn't change other aspects of your profile. Of course it does.

Maybe not by much, but we're talking very precise measurements here.

For that matter, the forensic evidence can be used to corroborate witness testimony as to the timeline of each shot as well.

Several people claimed he was already dead when Wilson fired the final two rounds. Easily disproved by showing that Brown was alive when those two rounds struck him

You're obviously a stubborn guy, but come on ALL the forensic evidence agrees with the eyewitnesses who told versions remarkebly close to Wilson's. That should tell you something.

If all the evidence had disputed Wilson's claims then he would have been charged.

Exactly as it should be.

You are moving the goal posts. I was talking about the head shots, you know the ones to the TOP OF HIS HEAD. Raising your arm does not change the "angle" of the top of your head. Precise measurements my ass They were both moving. We're not talking about high speed video tracking of a tennis ball to the lines on a court. We're talking about a bullet to the brain. Not from the front but to the top of his head. For example you shoot someone in the chest they look down to see their new bullet holes and you shoot them in the head when the head lowers for a look see.

Oh, okay you want to talk about just the one bullet? Yes, well obviously he didn't have his head lowered like a bull to rush the cop as he had his hands raised in surrender.

You know though, one POSSIBLE scenario here is that Wilson DID fire from 148' away and from that distance he had to fire at a 45 degree angle to score a hit and what happened is the bullet fell straight down and hit poor little Mikey right on the top of the head as he was trying to surrender. I mean that's as feasible as what some of you are proposing.

Huh?

I was making fun of those who believe WIlson shot Brown from 148' away

I know.. I was making fun of comparing a shot to the top of a head cause the guy is one of looking down, kneeling down, or leaning over to the odds of a straight up shot hitting the target on the way down. Mine's more plausible. FYI 45 degree angle will be too shallow for that shot... for the distance depending on wind that shot would have needed to be closer to 90 degrees.

 

[RKMBrown]

Leaning forward... you mean like someone would be if they were kneeling down falling to the ground? Face it, the last two shots to his head was an Execution.

They were not. LEOs are trained to fire until the threat is gone PERIOD. The threat is gone when the guy is no longer charging Wilson.

You mean LEOs are trained to kill. I thought you said LEOs were trained to apprehend. You trying to say apprehend means wanted dead or alive, dead is better?

Leos are trained to apprehend first, and to fire at center mass if they must fire. Center mass shots commonly result in death.

So yes, in that sense they ARE trained to kill.

Eggzactly. Serve and Protect means, apprehend - apprehend means trained to judge, convict, and execute unarmed scary teens on the spot.

You're simply trolling at this point.

A LEOs job is to protect society, not protect criminals

Really? So you are not a "part" of society after stealing a couple cigars and/or trying to defend yourself from a cop? Do they get to re-enter society when they get their mind right?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

They were not. LEOs are trained to fire until the threat is gone PERIOD. The threat is gone when the guy is no longer charging Wilson.

You mean LEOs are trained to kill. I thought you said LEOs were trained to apprehend. You trying to say apprehend means wanted dead or alive, dead is better?

Leos are trained to apprehend first, and to fire at center mass if they must fire. Center mass shots commonly result in death.

So yes, in that sense they ARE trained to kill.

Eggzactly. Serve and Protect means, apprehend - apprehend means trained to judge, convict, and execute unarmed scary teens on the spot.

You're simply trolling at this point.

A LEOs job is to protect society, not protect criminals

Really? So you are not a "part" of society after stealing a couple cigars and/or trying to defend yourself from a cop? Do they get to re-enter society when they get their mind right?

He wasn't defending himself from a cop, he was assaulting a cop, and yes that makes you a danger to society.


I'm done with this thread, you're trolling now. Wilson don't commit a crime, THE END

 

[RKMBrown]

You mean LEOs are trained to kill. I thought you said LEOs were trained to apprehend. You trying to say apprehend means wanted dead or alive, dead is better?

Leos are trained to apprehend first, and to fire at center mass if they must fire. Center mass shots commonly result in death.

So yes, in that sense they ARE trained to kill.

Eggzactly. Serve and Protect means, apprehend - apprehend means trained to judge, convict, and execute unarmed scary teens on the spot.

You're simply trolling at this point.

A LEOs job is to protect society, not protect criminals

Really? So you are not a "part" of society after stealing a couple cigars and/or trying to defend yourself from a cop? Do they get to re-enter society when they get their mind right?

He wasn't defending himself from a cop, he was assaulting a cop, and yes that makes you a danger to society.


I'm done with this thread, you're trolling now. Wilson don't commit a crime, THE END

Wilson never said I'm gonna shot you? Even he admitted he said that. Wilson didn't drive his car backwards past the suspects and cut them off? Even he admitted he did that.

What part of attempted vehicular homicide is confusing you?

What part of the fact that threatening to shooting someone may cause that person to defend themselves is confusing?

Brown had every reason to defend himself from the cop... He may have had no "right" to defend himself from cops, but he did have a reason.

Wilson also had a right and reason to do what he did. But he also could have done it differently.

It's ok that your perspective is "locked" into Wilson's. I would expect that from you. Put your feet in Brown's shoes... if you can. If you can't, whatever. But no I'm not trolling, you.

 

[JWBooth]

Yet no one has said a word of how 18 witnesses who clearly saw and testified Brown was not charging can be ignored.

Witness testimony Michael Brown s last moments Reading Eagle - AP

Credible vs. Non Credible witnesses.

 

[jc456]

Leos are trained to apprehend first, and to fire at center mass if they must fire. Center mass shots commonly result in death.

So yes, in that sense they ARE trained to kill.

Eggzactly. Serve and Protect means, apprehend - apprehend means trained to judge, convict, and execute unarmed scary teens on the spot.

You're simply trolling at this point.

A LEOs job is to protect society, not protect criminals

Really? So you are not a "part" of society after stealing a couple cigars and/or trying to defend yourself from a cop? Do they get to re-enter society when they get their mind right?

He wasn't defending himself from a cop, he was assaulting a cop, and yes that makes you a danger to society.


I'm done with this thread, you're trolling now. Wilson don't commit a crime, THE END

Wilson never said I'm gonna shot you? Even he admitted he said that. Wilson didn't drive his car backwards past the suspects and cut them off? Even he admitted he did that.

What part of attempted vehicular homicide is confusing you?

What part of the fact that threatening to shooting someone may cause that person to defend themselves is confusing?

Brown had every reason to defend himself from the cop... He may have had no "right" to defend himself from cops, but he did have a reason.

Wilson also had a right and reason to do what he did. But he also could have done it differently.

It's ok that your perspective is "locked" into Wilson's. I would expect that from you. Put your feet in Brown's shoes... if you can. If you can't, whatever. But no I'm not trolling, you.

just more stupid from the source of stupid RMK

 

[RKMBrown]

Eggzactly. Serve and Protect means, apprehend - apprehend means trained to judge, convict, and execute unarmed scary teens on the spot.

You're simply trolling at this point.

A LEOs job is to protect society, not protect criminals

Really? So you are not a "part" of society after stealing a couple cigars and/or trying to defend yourself from a cop? Do they get to re-enter society when they get their mind right?

He wasn't defending himself from a cop, he was assaulting a cop, and yes that makes you a danger to society.


I'm done with this thread, you're trolling now. Wilson don't commit a crime, THE END

Wilson never said I'm gonna shot you? Even he admitted he said that. Wilson didn't drive his car backwards past the suspects and cut them off? Even he admitted he did that.

What part of attempted vehicular homicide is confusing you?

What part of the fact that threatening to shooting someone may cause that person to defend themselves is confusing?

Brown had every reason to defend himself from the cop... He may have had no "right" to defend himself from cops, but he did have a reason.

Wilson also had a right and reason to do what he did. But he also could have done it differently.

It's ok that your perspective is "locked" into Wilson's. I would expect that from you. Put your feet in Brown's shoes... if you can. If you can't, whatever. But no I'm not trolling, you.

just more stupid from the source of stupid RMK

placed on ignore... bye bye ass hole.

 

[Ravi]

We had this discussion before and the "science" was suspect.

No it isn't moron.

Crime labs around the world use it to solve crimes. Colleges teach it.

You're simply an idiot.

"science doesn't say what I want it to? Science is wrong"

dumb shit.

You are stupid to assume I meant all forensic science. Of course, I meant the particular interpretation that supposedly proved he did not have his hands up when he was shot.

Shut the **** up with you're "you're too stupid bullshit" sonny. On THIS particular subject, I doubt many on this board are more qualified than a 20 + year veteran MP who has worked thousands of cases.

In EVERY case I ever worked eyewitness testimony was supplemental to evidence PERIOD.

As for the physical evidence, each piece much be compared to the rest to get a complete picture. When the ME says "he didn't have his hands up when shot" you can take that to the bank.

Yeah if the ME said that. But that's not what he said. You are taking the ME out of context. If you shoot me in the head while my "hands are up" how is the ME gonna prove from the head wounds that my hands were down? Just because the shots to his arm were not "while" his hands were up does not mean they were never up nor does it mean they were not up before he was shot, nor does it mean they were not up for the last four final shots to the chest and head.

Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.

Conversely, if you know where the shot came from (this is where the locaton of the shells comes into play) you can backtrack and use angles to determine whether it is possible that a suspect was shot under certain circumstances.

For example. If I'm 6' tall and firing at you from 50' away and you are also 6' tall , we know at what angle the bullet would have to be traveling to hit you from where I fired, we could then do some math and figure out if the holes in your body match those angles.

It wasn't guess work the ME used to determine that Brown's hands weren't raised when he was shot.

Why do you call him Mike?

 

[Ravi]

We had this discussion before and the "science" was suspect.

No it isn't moron.

Crime labs around the world use it to solve crimes. Colleges teach it.

You're simply an idiot.

"science doesn't say what I want it to? Science is wrong"

dumb shit.

You are stupid to assume I meant all forensic science. Of course, I meant the particular interpretation that supposedly proved he did not have his hands up when he was shot.

Shut the **** up with you're "you're too stupid bullshit" sonny. On THIS particular subject, I doubt many on this board are more qualified than a 20 + year veteran MP who has worked thousands of cases.

In EVERY case I ever worked eyewitness testimony was supplemental to evidence PERIOD.

As for the physical evidence, each piece much be compared to the rest to get a complete picture. When the ME says "he didn't have his hands up when shot" you can take that to the bank.

Yeah if the ME said that. But that's not what he said. You are taking the ME out of context. If you shoot me in the head while my "hands are up" how is the ME gonna prove from the head wounds that my hands were down? Just because the shots to his arm were not "while" his hands were up does not mean they were never up nor does it mean they were not up before he was shot, nor does it mean they were not up for the last four final shots to the chest and head.

Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.

Conversely, if you know where the shot came from (this is where the locaton of the shells comes into play) you can backtrack and use angles to determine whether it is possible that a suspect was shot under certain circumstances.

For example. If I'm 6' tall and firing at you from 50' away and you are also 6' tall , we know at what angle the bullet would have to be traveling to hit you from where I fired, we could then do some math and figure out if the holes in your body match those angles.

It wasn't guess work the ME used to determine that Brown's hands weren't raised when he was shot.

I just raised and lowered my arms 20 times and my head didn't move once.

 

[jc456]

You're simply trolling at this point.

A LEOs job is to protect society, not protect criminals

Really? So you are not a "part" of society after stealing a couple cigars and/or trying to defend yourself from a cop? Do they get to re-enter society when they get their mind right?

He wasn't defending himself from a cop, he was assaulting a cop, and yes that makes you a danger to society.


I'm done with this thread, you're trolling now. Wilson don't commit a crime, THE END

Wilson never said I'm gonna shot you? Even he admitted he said that. Wilson didn't drive his car backwards past the suspects and cut them off? Even he admitted he did that.

What part of attempted vehicular homicide is confusing you?

What part of the fact that threatening to shooting someone may cause that person to defend themselves is confusing?

Brown had every reason to defend himself from the cop... He may have had no "right" to defend himself from cops, but he did have a reason.

Wilson also had a right and reason to do what he did. But he also could have done it differently.

It's ok that your perspective is "locked" into Wilson's. I would expect that from you. Put your feet in Brown's shoes... if you can. If you can't, whatever. But no I'm not trolling, you.

just more stupid from the source of stupid RMK

placed on ignore... bye bye ass hole.

yeah, when stupid prevails the only last resort is to ignore. Dude you've been leading the stupid this entire thread, you want to ignore, go for it, but know your stupid analogies are soooooooooooooooo stupid. Good luck with your future stupid. And know that every post you make that is stupid I will post on it that it is.

 

[RKMBrown]

No it isn't moron.

Crime labs around the world use it to solve crimes. Colleges teach it.

You're simply an idiot.

"science doesn't say what I want it to? Science is wrong"

dumb shit.

You are stupid to assume I meant all forensic science. Of course, I meant the particular interpretation that supposedly proved he did not have his hands up when he was shot.

Shut the **** up with you're "you're too stupid bullshit" sonny. On THIS particular subject, I doubt many on this board are more qualified than a 20 + year veteran MP who has worked thousands of cases.

In EVERY case I ever worked eyewitness testimony was supplemental to evidence PERIOD.

As for the physical evidence, each piece much be compared to the rest to get a complete picture. When the ME says "he didn't have his hands up when shot" you can take that to the bank.

Yeah if the ME said that. But that's not what he said. You are taking the ME out of context. If you shoot me in the head while my "hands are up" how is the ME gonna prove from the head wounds that my hands were down? Just because the shots to his arm were not "while" his hands were up does not mean they were never up nor does it mean they were not up before he was shot, nor does it mean they were not up for the last four final shots to the chest and head.

Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.

Conversely, if you know where the shot came from (this is where the locaton of the shells comes into play) you can backtrack and use angles to determine whether it is possible that a suspect was shot under certain circumstances.

For example. If I'm 6' tall and firing at you from 50' away and you are also 6' tall , we know at what angle the bullet would have to be traveling to hit you from where I fired, we could then do some math and figure out if the holes in your body match those angles.

It wasn't guess work the ME used to determine that Brown's hands weren't raised when he was shot.

Why do you call him Mike?

My name, coincidentally, is Mike Brown.

 

[PGreen]

In our country the police are a greater danger to the public than are criminals. That's right. But not in this case. Anybody regardless of skin color that does that to any officer will most likely get the same results!

 

[jc456]

You are stupid to assume I meant all forensic science. Of course, I meant the particular interpretation that supposedly proved he did not have his hands up when he was shot.

Shut the **** up with you're "you're too stupid bullshit" sonny. On THIS particular subject, I doubt many on this board are more qualified than a 20 + year veteran MP who has worked thousands of cases.

In EVERY case I ever worked eyewitness testimony was supplemental to evidence PERIOD.

As for the physical evidence, each piece much be compared to the rest to get a complete picture. When the ME says "he didn't have his hands up when shot" you can take that to the bank.

Yeah if the ME said that. But that's not what he said. You are taking the ME out of context. If you shoot me in the head while my "hands are up" how is the ME gonna prove from the head wounds that my hands were down? Just because the shots to his arm were not "while" his hands were up does not mean they were never up nor does it mean they were not up before he was shot, nor does it mean they were not up for the last four final shots to the chest and head.

Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.

Conversely, if you know where the shot came from (this is where the locaton of the shells comes into play) you can backtrack and use angles to determine whether it is possible that a suspect was shot under certain circumstances.

For example. If I'm 6' tall and firing at you from 50' away and you are also 6' tall , we know at what angle the bullet would have to be traveling to hit you from where I fired, we could then do some math and figure out if the holes in your body match those angles.

It wasn't guess work the ME used to determine that Brown's hands weren't raised when he was shot.

Why do you call him Mike?

My name, coincidentally, is Mike Brown.

Stupid Mike Brown!!!

 

[RKMBrown]

In our country the police are a greater danger to the public than are criminals. That's right. But not in this case. Anybody regardless of skin color that does that to any officer will most likely get the same results!

Nah..

Some officer's are more dangerous than some criminals. Some criminals are officers.

But that does not mean by and large the police are a greater danger than criminals. Nah... that's hyperbole.

 

[Statistikhengst]

And still, no one has gotten the very simple mathematical point presented in the OP that can only lead to one logical conclusion. Almost 700 postings, bitching like schoolchildren, but very little cogent thought.

What a shame.

 

[jon_berzerk]

And still, no one has gotten the very simple mathematical point presented in the OP that can only lead to one logical conclusion. Almost 700 postings, bitching like schoolchildren, but very little cogent thought.

What a shame.

you did not even get the title of the youtube correct

which is

Mike Brown was killed over 130 feet away from Darren Wilson's SUV

not

Michael Brown was 148 feet from Wilson as he was shot to death

which is an obvious falsehood given the facts of the case

 

[skookerasbil]

nobody cares about Mike Brown anymore..........might as well have been 148 miles on those shots by Wilson.

Who cares at this point?

Well.........some of the fairies......some of the hipsters with nothing better to do........racist blacks.........race baiters.

Nobody else.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

We had this discussion before and the "science" was suspect.

No it isn't moron.

Crime labs around the world use it to solve crimes. Colleges teach it.

You're simply an idiot.

"science doesn't say what I want it to? Science is wrong"

dumb shit.

You are stupid to assume I meant all forensic science. Of course, I meant the particular interpretation that supposedly proved he did not have his hands up when he was shot.

Shut the **** up with you're "you're too stupid bullshit" sonny. On THIS particular subject, I doubt many on this board are more qualified than a 20 + year veteran MP who has worked thousands of cases.

In EVERY case I ever worked eyewitness testimony was supplemental to evidence PERIOD.

As for the physical evidence, each piece much be compared to the rest to get a complete picture. When the ME says "he didn't have his hands up when shot" you can take that to the bank.

Yeah if the ME said that. But that's not what he said. You are taking the ME out of context. If you shoot me in the head while my "hands are up" how is the ME gonna prove from the head wounds that my hands were down? Just because the shots to his arm were not "while" his hands were up does not mean they were never up nor does it mean they were not up before he was shot, nor does it mean they were not up for the last four final shots to the chest and head.

Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.

In this case, that is absolute nonsense.

We know the last two shots were to the head. If they had been the first, he would have dropped immediately and the other shots to the arms could never have happened.

Since the shots to the arm were first, that means the first one that hit him in the arm would have caused him to drop his arms. It would be impossible to keep them up while being hit with bullets. That means it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for them to be up when he got hit with the bullets to the head, and your analysis is worthless.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No it isn't moron.

Crime labs around the world use it to solve crimes. Colleges teach it.

You're simply an idiot.

"science doesn't say what I want it to? Science is wrong"

dumb shit.

You are stupid to assume I meant all forensic science. Of course, I meant the particular interpretation that supposedly proved he did not have his hands up when he was shot.

Shut the **** up with you're "you're too stupid bullshit" sonny. On THIS particular subject, I doubt many on this board are more qualified than a 20 + year veteran MP who has worked thousands of cases.

In EVERY case I ever worked eyewitness testimony was supplemental to evidence PERIOD.

As for the physical evidence, each piece much be compared to the rest to get a complete picture. When the ME says "he didn't have his hands up when shot" you can take that to the bank.

Yeah if the ME said that. But that's not what he said. You are taking the ME out of context. If you shoot me in the head while my "hands are up" how is the ME gonna prove from the head wounds that my hands were down? Just because the shots to his arm were not "while" his hands were up does not mean they were never up nor does it mean they were not up before he was shot, nor does it mean they were not up for the last four final shots to the chest and head.

Actually Mike, they CAN tell from a head shot wound whether a guy's hands were up when he was shot. When you raise your arms above your head it slightly changes the angle of your head , those slight angles can be used to compute where a shot would have had to come from.

In this case, that is absolute nonsense.

We know the last two shots were to the head. If they had been the first, he would have dropped immediately and the other shots to the arms could never have happened.

Since the shots to the arm were first, that means the first one that hit him in the arm would have caused him to drop his arms. It would be impossible to keep them up while being hit with bullets. That means it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for them to be up when he got hit with the bullets to the head, and your analysis is worthless.

Yes we realize you chose to ignore the facts and reality but then you do that every time a black criminal is hurt while attacking cops.