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

[ClosedCaption]

Or are you guys just lying? explain why a cop would be driving with his dispatch radio turned off. Please explain that to me.

Explain why the Chief of police said Wilson didnt know about it then he did

 

[Yarddog]

He was 148 ft away from the car...Why do you lie when a tape measure proves you wrong?

The car did not shoot michael brown.

What are you saying then, that Wilson got out of the car, chased Brown down and killed him? Why would he need to shoot him at all if the kid was running away and was no danger to him? It wasn't like he was chasing a murderer. He was chasing a jaywalker.

Wilson said in his testimony that even tho he wasnt a threat anymore he (paraphrase) could be to someone sometime.

You didn't read the DOJ report did you, though they questioned Wilson's pursuing at that time, Wilson thought that due to the fact he felt Brown was involved in robbing the store, and he was so aggressive at going after Wilson's gun, he thought brown was a threat. He did nothing illegal nor did he violate Brown's civil rights.

Wilson didnt know anything about robbing the store unless we are ignoring the Police chief who a day after the incident held a presser.

Are we going with the first story from the Capt or the revised story?

I heard First storys that said Brown was shot in the back as well. Are we still going to go by that? sometimes, first reports are out of context or incomplete.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Wilson said in his testimony that even tho he wasnt a threat anymore he (paraphrase) could be to someone sometime.

You didn't read the DOJ report did you, though they questioned Wilson's pursuing at that time, Wilson thought that due to the fact he felt Brown was involved in robbing the store, and he was so aggressive at going after Wilson's gun, he thought brown was a threat. He did nothing illegal nor did he violate Brown's civil rights.

Wilson didnt know anything about robbing the store unless we are ignoring the Police chief who a day after the incident held a presser.

Are we going with the first story from the Capt or the revised story?

Again, I am going with the DOJ report. He said a bulletin came over the air reporting a robbery and the Cigarillos were taken, that is a reason Wilson pulled up to them, them. He saw the Cigarillos in Brown's hand and suspicioned he was one of the robbers. He started to get out of his car and Brown leaned into the door to prevent Wilson from getting out.

I know what you're going on but why you are ignoring the Chiefs own words?

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

 

[ClosedCaption]

The car did not shoot michael brown.

What are you saying then, that Wilson got out of the car, chased Brown down and killed him? Why would he need to shoot him at all if the kid was running away and was no danger to him? It wasn't like he was chasing a murderer. He was chasing a jaywalker.

Wilson said in his testimony that even tho he wasnt a threat anymore he (paraphrase) could be to someone sometime.

You didn't read the DOJ report did you, though they questioned Wilson's pursuing at that time, Wilson thought that due to the fact he felt Brown was involved in robbing the store, and he was so aggressive at going after Wilson's gun, he thought brown was a threat. He did nothing illegal nor did he violate Brown's civil rights.

Wilson didnt know anything about robbing the store unless we are ignoring the Police chief who a day after the incident held a presser.

Are we going with the first story from the Capt or the revised story?

I heard First storys that said Brown was shot in the back as well. Are we still going to go by that? sometimes, first reports are out of context or incomplete.

But he wasnt tho...Forensics proved that. Forensics didnt prove Wilson heard something on the radio. The Chief would know about the movements of his officers wouldnt he?

 

[Yarddog]

I never said Wilson shot him becaus

What are you saying then, that Wilson got out of the car, chased Brown down and killed him? Why would he need to shoot him at all if the kid was running away and was no danger to him? It wasn't like he was chasing a murderer. He was chasing a jaywalker.

Read the DOJ report, Wilson was chasing down Brown because after Brown tried to take Wilson's gun, and the gun discharged into Browns hands, Wilson felt Brown was a threat. Brown turned around and then charged Wilson, the evidence of the shell casing being behind Brown prove he was charging.

It's all in the DOJ report. It also found that many witnesses accounts were not credible.

So the shell casings were behind the direction Brown was running from ? didnt quite see that. but this clip is also from th ereport.

9. Brown’s Toxicology A toxicologist with the St. Louis University (SLU) Toxicology Laboratory and the Chief of the Division of Forensic Toxicology at AFMES each conducted blood and urine screens on samples collected from Brown’s body. Brown tested positive for the presence of cannabinoids, the hallucinogenic substances associated with marijuana use. The SLU Toxicology Laboratory found 12 nanograms per milliliter of Delta-9-THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, where AFMES found 11 nanograms per milliliter of Delta-9-THC in Brown’s blood. According to both laboratories, these levels of Delta-9-THC are consistent with Brown having ingested THC within a few hours before his death. This concentration of THC would have rendered Brown impaired at the time of his death. As a general matter, this level of impairment can alter one’s perception of time and space, but the extent to which this was true in Brown’s case cannot be determined. THC affects individuals differently depending on unknown variables such as whether Brown was a chronic user and the concentration of the THC ingested.

This isnt about weed dude...be serious

Why did they bother to put the toxology report in ? of course it has something to do with factoring in Behavior in the situation.

If you can explain what weed has to do with this I'll agree but if you are going to try some "weed makes you crazy" defense then that bunk from the gate.

Either way that doesnt matter, he didnt shoot him because of weed and the Police chief made it clear Wilson wasnt responding to any robbery call. Now you're on to something different

I never said Wilson shot Brown because of weed, BUT its a Possible reason why Brown would have shown disregard and act like a dumbass, attacking an officer.

below is more example of acting like a dumbass, from the DOJ report

Brown and Witness 101 proceeded to the exit and the clerk, who is about 5’6” and 150 lbs, attempted to stop them. The clerk first tried to hold the store door closed to prevent Brown’s exit. However, Brown shoved the clerk aside, and as Witness 101 walked out the door, Brown menacingly re-approached the clerk. According to the store employees, Brown, looking “crazy” and using profane language, said something like, “What are you gonna do about it?” Brown then exited the store and the clerk’s daughter called 911.

 

[Papageorgio]

You didn't read the DOJ report did you, though they questioned Wilson's pursuing at that time, Wilson thought that due to the fact he felt Brown was involved in robbing the store, and he was so aggressive at going after Wilson's gun, he thought brown was a threat. He did nothing illegal nor did he violate Brown's civil rights.

Wilson didnt know anything about robbing the store unless we are ignoring the Police chief who a day after the incident held a presser.

Are we going with the first story from the Capt or the revised story?

Again, I am going with the DOJ report. He said a bulletin came over the air reporting a robbery and the Cigarillos were taken, that is a reason Wilson pulled up to them, them. He saw the Cigarillos in Brown's hand and suspicioned he was one of the robbers. He started to get out of his car and Brown leaned into the door to prevent Wilson from getting out.

I know what you're going on but why you are ignoring the Chiefs own words?

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Wilson didnt know anything about robbing the store unless we are ignoring the Police chief who a day after the incident held a presser.

Are we going with the first story from the Capt or the revised story?

Again, I am going with the DOJ report. He said a bulletin came over the air reporting a robbery and the Cigarillos were taken, that is a reason Wilson pulled up to them, them. He saw the Cigarillos in Brown's hand and suspicioned he was one of the robbers. He started to get out of his car and Brown leaned into the door to prevent Wilson from getting out.

I know what you're going on but why you are ignoring the Chiefs own words?

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

Yeah, obviously...Of course the robbery fits the timeline silly...Do you think that they wouldnt have their story together after 2 months? LOL....I mean come on...this is silly

 

[Yarddog]

What are you saying then, that Wilson got out of the car, chased Brown down and killed him? Why would he need to shoot him at all if the kid was running away and was no danger to him? It wasn't like he was chasing a murderer. He was chasing a jaywalker.

Wilson said in his testimony that even tho he wasnt a threat anymore he (paraphrase) could be to someone sometime.

You didn't read the DOJ report did you, though they questioned Wilson's pursuing at that time, Wilson thought that due to the fact he felt Brown was involved in robbing the store, and he was so aggressive at going after Wilson's gun, he thought brown was a threat. He did nothing illegal nor did he violate Brown's civil rights.

Wilson didnt know anything about robbing the store unless we are ignoring the Police chief who a day after the incident held a presser.

Are we going with the first story from the Capt or the revised story?

I heard First storys that said Brown was shot in the back as well. Are we still going to go by that? sometimes, first reports are out of context or incomplete.

But he wasnt tho...Forensics proved that. Forensics didnt prove Wilson heard something on the radio. The Chief would know about the movements of his officers wouldnt he?

Every cop drives with his dispatch radio ON! to not have it on would be an anomaly. I dont need to have forensic evidence only common sense as simple as 2 + 2 = 4

 

[JoeMoma]

Wilson didnt know anything about robbing the store unless we are ignoring the Police chief who a day after the incident held a presser.

Are we going with the first story from the Capt or the revised story?

Again, I am going with the DOJ report. He said a bulletin came over the air reporting a robbery and the Cigarillos were taken, that is a reason Wilson pulled up to them, them. He saw the Cigarillos in Brown's hand and suspicioned he was one of the robbers. He started to get out of his car and Brown leaned into the door to prevent Wilson from getting out.

I know what you're going on but why you are ignoring the Chiefs own words?

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

And to quote the Hildabeast, what difference does it make? What got Brown shot was attacking Wilson and trying to take his gun.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I never said Wilson shot him becaus

Read the DOJ report, Wilson was chasing down Brown because after Brown tried to take Wilson's gun, and the gun discharged into Browns hands, Wilson felt Brown was a threat. Brown turned around and then charged Wilson, the evidence of the shell casing being behind Brown prove he was charging.

It's all in the DOJ report. It also found that many witnesses accounts were not credible.

So the shell casings were behind the direction Brown was running from ? didnt quite see that. but this clip is also from th ereport.

9. Brown’s Toxicology A toxicologist with the St. Louis University (SLU) Toxicology Laboratory and the Chief of the Division of Forensic Toxicology at AFMES each conducted blood and urine screens on samples collected from Brown’s body. Brown tested positive for the presence of cannabinoids, the hallucinogenic substances associated with marijuana use. The SLU Toxicology Laboratory found 12 nanograms per milliliter of Delta-9-THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, where AFMES found 11 nanograms per milliliter of Delta-9-THC in Brown’s blood. According to both laboratories, these levels of Delta-9-THC are consistent with Brown having ingested THC within a few hours before his death. This concentration of THC would have rendered Brown impaired at the time of his death. As a general matter, this level of impairment can alter one’s perception of time and space, but the extent to which this was true in Brown’s case cannot be determined. THC affects individuals differently depending on unknown variables such as whether Brown was a chronic user and the concentration of the THC ingested.

This isnt about weed dude...be serious

Why did they bother to put the toxology report in ? of course it has something to do with factoring in Behavior in the situation.

If you can explain what weed has to do with this I'll agree but if you are going to try some "weed makes you crazy" defense then that bunk from the gate.

Either way that doesnt matter, he didnt shoot him because of weed and the Police chief made it clear Wilson wasnt responding to any robbery call. Now you're on to something different

I never said Wilson shot Brown because of weed, BUT its a Possible reason why Brown would have shown disregard and act like a dumbass, attacking an officer.

.

So you cant explain why weed is important but you're presenting it like it is? I mean...you might as well point out that MB had an ingrown toe nail and claim maybe thats why he was angry because ingrown toenails hurt

 

[Yarddog]

Again, I am going with the DOJ report. He said a bulletin came over the air reporting a robbery and the Cigarillos were taken, that is a reason Wilson pulled up to them, them. He saw the Cigarillos in Brown's hand and suspicioned he was one of the robbers. He started to get out of his car and Brown leaned into the door to prevent Wilson from getting out.

I know what you're going on but why you are ignoring the Chiefs own words?

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

Yeah, obviously...Of course the robbery fits the timeline silly...Do you think that they wouldnt have their story together after 2 months? LOL....I mean come on...this is silly

Wilson would have been found guilty then by the DOJ. too bad they didnt have you guys there to straighten things out for them.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Wilson said in his testimony that even tho he wasnt a threat anymore he (paraphrase) could be to someone sometime.

You didn't read the DOJ report did you, though they questioned Wilson's pursuing at that time, Wilson thought that due to the fact he felt Brown was involved in robbing the store, and he was so aggressive at going after Wilson's gun, he thought brown was a threat. He did nothing illegal nor did he violate Brown's civil rights.

Wilson didnt know anything about robbing the store unless we are ignoring the Police chief who a day after the incident held a presser.

Are we going with the first story from the Capt or the revised story?

I heard First storys that said Brown was shot in the back as well. Are we still going to go by that? sometimes, first reports are out of context or incomplete.

But he wasnt tho...Forensics proved that. Forensics didnt prove Wilson heard something on the radio. The Chief would know about the movements of his officers wouldnt he?

Every cop drives with his dispatch radio ON! to not have it on would be an anomaly. I dont need to have forensic evidence only common sense as simple as 2 + 2 = 4

No facts needed...seems to be a pattern.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I know what you're going on but why you are ignoring the Chiefs own words?

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

Yeah, obviously...Of course the robbery fits the timeline silly...Do you think that they wouldnt have their story together after 2 months? LOL....I mean come on...this is silly

Wilson would have been found guilty then by the DOJ. too bad they didnt have you guys there to straighten things out for them.

Guilty of what?

 

[Yarddog]

I never said Wilson shot him becaus

So the shell casings were behind the direction Brown was running from ? didnt quite see that. but this clip is also from th ereport.

9. Brown’s Toxicology A toxicologist with the St. Louis University (SLU) Toxicology Laboratory and the Chief of the Division of Forensic Toxicology at AFMES each conducted blood and urine screens on samples collected from Brown’s body. Brown tested positive for the presence of cannabinoids, the hallucinogenic substances associated with marijuana use. The SLU Toxicology Laboratory found 12 nanograms per milliliter of Delta-9-THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, where AFMES found 11 nanograms per milliliter of Delta-9-THC in Brown’s blood. According to both laboratories, these levels of Delta-9-THC are consistent with Brown having ingested THC within a few hours before his death. This concentration of THC would have rendered Brown impaired at the time of his death. As a general matter, this level of impairment can alter one’s perception of time and space, but the extent to which this was true in Brown’s case cannot be determined. THC affects individuals differently depending on unknown variables such as whether Brown was a chronic user and the concentration of the THC ingested.

This isnt about weed dude...be serious

Why did they bother to put the toxology report in ? of course it has something to do with factoring in Behavior in the situation.

If you can explain what weed has to do with this I'll agree but if you are going to try some "weed makes you crazy" defense then that bunk from the gate.

Either way that doesnt matter, he didnt shoot him because of weed and the Police chief made it clear Wilson wasnt responding to any robbery call. Now you're on to something different

I never said Wilson shot Brown because of weed, BUT its a Possible reason why Brown would have shown disregard and act like a dumbass, attacking an officer.

.

So you cant explain why weed is important but you're presenting it like it is? I mean...you might as well point out that MB had an ingrown toe nail and claim maybe thats why he was angry because ingrown toenails hurt

Its not that important to me, but I happened to see it in the report and posted it. I have to wonder why a person in their right mind would try to attack a cop and take his gun, wouldnt you wonder? being stoned is a factor

 

[Papageorgio]

Again, I am going with the DOJ report. He said a bulletin came over the air reporting a robbery and the Cigarillos were taken, that is a reason Wilson pulled up to them, them. He saw the Cigarillos in Brown's hand and suspicioned he was one of the robbers. He started to get out of his car and Brown leaned into the door to prevent Wilson from getting out.

I know what you're going on but why you are ignoring the Chiefs own words?

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

Yeah, obviously...Of course the robbery fits the timeline silly...Do you think that they wouldnt have their story together after 2 months? LOL....I mean come on...this is silly

You are right, you are being silly. The time a radio bulletin goes out,,it is time stamped, the officer calls in, it is time stamped. No need to get the story straight, an investigation checks out the timelines and you are being pissed because you are dead wrong and the DOJ that wanted so badly to hang Wilson could not do it because he went by the book. Keep crying, bitching and moaning, the side you desperately want to win was shown in error. Even this thread is based on a falsehood. However, you will believe whatever you need to believe regardless of the truth that is in front you.

 

[Yarddog]

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

Yeah, obviously...Of course the robbery fits the timeline silly...Do you think that they wouldnt have their story together after 2 months? LOL....I mean come on...this is silly

Wilson would have been found guilty then by the DOJ. too bad they didnt have you guys there to straighten things out for them.

Guilty of what?

Serious? what was the whole DOJ report about?

 

[Yarddog]

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

Yeah, obviously...Of course the robbery fits the timeline silly...Do you think that they wouldnt have their story together after 2 months? LOL....I mean come on...this is silly

Wilson would have been found guilty then by the DOJ. too bad they didnt have you guys there to straighten things out for them.

Guilty of what?

Did you just get stoned or something? hey its ok with me

 

[ClosedCaption]

I know what you're going on but why you are ignoring the Chiefs own words?

I don't care what the Chief said, I don't find him to be believable. Wilson's story with all the evidence and forensics in, stood up. I have no reason not to believe him. All the stories out there, a few witnesses were telling the truth, the majority lied, the forensics and ballistics stood up for Wilson's story. If he was going to lie at the beginning. I would think reason would tell you he lied else where to cover the first time lie, that didn't occur, his story was consistent with the evidence, otherwise the DOJ would have been all over it, they had an agenda.

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

Yeah, obviously...Of course the robbery fits the timeline silly...Do you think that they wouldnt have their story together after 2 months? LOL....I mean come on...this is silly

You are right, you are being silly. The time a radio bulletin goes out,,it is time stamped, the officer calls in, it is time stamped. No need to get the story straight, an investigation checks out the timelines and you are being pissed because you are dead wrong and the DOJ that wanted so badly to hang Wilson could not do it because he went by the book. Keep crying, bitching and moaning, the side you desperately want to win was shown in error. Even this thread is based on a falsehood. However, you will believe whatever you need to believe regardless of the truth that is in front you.

If the times are stamped then why didnt the Chief know about this stamping record? If they didnt need to get the story straight then how did the story change after 2 months. What? He found out about time stamping 2 months later?

I mean, what is the best reason you can think of of how the Chief told two different stories? Both true? Both lies?

 

[Yarddog]

You didn't read the DOJ report did you, though they questioned Wilson's pursuing at that time, Wilson thought that due to the fact he felt Brown was involved in robbing the store, and he was so aggressive at going after Wilson's gun, he thought brown was a threat. He did nothing illegal nor did he violate Brown's civil rights.

Wilson didnt know anything about robbing the store unless we are ignoring the Police chief who a day after the incident held a presser.

Are we going with the first story from the Capt or the revised story?

I heard First storys that said Brown was shot in the back as well. Are we still going to go by that? sometimes, first reports are out of context or incomplete.

But he wasnt tho...Forensics proved that. Forensics didnt prove Wilson heard something on the radio. The Chief would know about the movements of his officers wouldnt he?

Every cop drives with his dispatch radio ON! to not have it on would be an anomaly. I dont need to have forensic evidence only common sense as simple as 2 + 2 = 4

No facts needed...seems to be a pattern.

Cops drive with their dispatch radios on, its a FACT. you dont need forensic evidence to prove that. Silly is the word for what your saying .
Ask a cop the next time you see one. As a matter of fact Im going to bring up that conversation the next time I do.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So basically we're just dismissing any information we dont like and embrassing the ones we do

No, the Chief was obviously mistaken, if that is what he said. There is a lot of confusion around at the time, people misspeak, see the WH for their mistakes.

The DOJ believe the evidence that was presented that said Wilson knew about the robbery because the timeline fits the story. The radio bulletin, again went off BEFORE Wilson met up with Brown. So, you still have nothing.

Yeah, obviously...Of course the robbery fits the timeline silly...Do you think that they wouldnt have their story together after 2 months? LOL....I mean come on...this is silly

Wilson would have been found guilty then by the DOJ. too bad they didnt have you guys there to straighten things out for them.

Guilty of what?

Serious? what was the whole DOJ report about?

You tell me...What was the DOJ report about?