Parents of Michael Brown sue Ferguson MO but refuse to release school records of son

[jknowgood]

Funny. The alt-right cares more about Michael Brown's school records than Donald Trump's tax returns.

The alt-right cares more about Michael Brown's school records than Donald Trump's tax returns.

Nice deflection.

the 'right' is still waiting for Obamas school records.

How about Trump shows his tax records when Obama shows his school records.

But, back to the topic.

Why are they against releasing Browns records?

Why would Obama ever release his school records?

I agree with you on that one. It would prove how ignorant he and his supporters are.

 

[ClosedCaption]

By the way no evidence will be "very convincing" to you. But being very convincing and being true are two different things. You can deny anything but that doesn't make it disappear.

Why do you think that no evidence would convince me? It sounds like you're making assumptions. Of course reasonable evidence would sway my views. However if the only evidence you can provide is a video of an eye witness claiming what they saw happened (and as another poster already pointed out part of it was inaccurate)--well what do you expect? At this point I think you're either refusing to be incorrect or are desperate to believe the false narrative.


Do you deny that:

-Brown committed a crime shortly before being shot
-Wilson had probable cause to approach Brown and Johnson
-Johnson was not shot
-Johnson changed his retelling of the story over time
-Brown's DNA was found on the gun, clothing, and inside of the car of Wilson
-Several eye witness accounts contradict each other

?

You asked for the video. I provided it and now you're saying unless it showed the moment he was shot then any and all videos, witnesses etc are liars and you're not convinced. This is about true or false. Not convincing or unconvincing.


I've never denied he robbed a store or any otmf the other stuff. That's why in my very first post I quoted only that part to dispute. Now you are wiggling and squirming trying to make points I never contested.

The video is there. I'd love to hear how 2 white guys just so happen to see the same thing as all the other witnesses but you don't have an explanation for that. No one does.

This is not true as several of the witnesses gave testimony that contradicts this, do you deny that

I'm not wiggling out of anything, I'm merely pointing out all of the evidence (that cannot be disputed-as you don't) that stacks the deck in my favor.

PS: I never stated that all witnesses are liars, go back and re-read what I said. I see no reason for the witnesses to lie...however many times witnesses don't actually witness what they think they do (which is why witness testimony doesn't hold a lot of credibility in a courtroom).

So all of them aren't liars they are just hapless fools...much better. You can hide behind what you think several witnesses said according to the police but the video doesn't change and hiding behind their report doesn't mean this video vanishes.

You can't explain this video matching what many others said happened too. So your only play is to pretend the cops story is bond and ignore the video or ask me about other things I've never disputed.

Nice try...but my focus is the video. Yours is to dismiss it somehow with clever talk and reassurances that you aren't dismissing just "asking".

 

[jknowgood]

They're afraid of the truth. Of course their son's school records and thus earnings expectancy are pertinent in deciding what his life was worth. Michael was most likely illiterate and thus had zero earnings expectancy.

The Associated Press

dec 31 2016 KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) -- Michael Brown's parents are objecting to a request from Ferguson for their son's medical and academic records as the city defends itself against a lawsuit the parents filed over the 2014 police shooting death of the unarmed 18-year-old.

Michael Brown Sr. and Lezley McSpadden, in December court filings, asked U.S. District Judge E. Richard Webber in St. Louis to at least limit if not scuttle altogether a push by the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, its former police chief and the officer who shot their son to turn over the documents. The parents say the documents are irrelevant and that the repeated demands for them are harassing and invasive.

Brown's parents argue in their lawsuit that the death of their son during an August 2014 confrontation with Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson deprived them of financial support through his future potential wages. An attorney for Ferguson, Wilson and the former police chief have countered in court filings that Brown's lifelong medical records are pertinent to determining his potential life expectancy and future income.

Brown's parents insist the academic records are shielded as private because they involve a juvenile

Why should they? We just elected a "president" who won't release his tax returns tho promising on several occasions to do so.

He said he would release them when the audit was over. Obama could've done it.

 

[aaronleland]

Funny. The alt-right cares more about Michael Brown's school records than Donald Trump's tax returns.

The alt-right cares more about Michael Brown's school records than Donald Trump's tax returns.

Nice deflection.

the 'right' is still waiting for Obamas school records.

How about Trump shows his tax records when Obama shows his school records.

But, back to the topic.

Why are they against releasing Browns records?

Why would Obama ever release his school records?

I agree with you on that one. It would prove how ignorant he and his supporters are.

What would Trump releasing his tax records prove?

 

[mgh80]

By the way no evidence will be "very convincing" to you. But being very convincing and being true are two different things. You can deny anything but that doesn't make it disappear.

Why do you think that no evidence would convince me? It sounds like you're making assumptions. Of course reasonable evidence would sway my views. However if the only evidence you can provide is a video of an eye witness claiming what they saw happened (and as another poster already pointed out part of it was inaccurate)--well what do you expect? At this point I think you're either refusing to be incorrect or are desperate to believe the false narrative.


Do you deny that:

-Brown committed a crime shortly before being shot
-Wilson had probable cause to approach Brown and Johnson
-Johnson was not shot
-Johnson changed his retelling of the story over time
-Brown's DNA was found on the gun, clothing, and inside of the car of Wilson
-Several eye witness accounts contradict each other

?

You asked for the video. I provided it and now you're saying unless it showed the moment he was shot then any and all videos, witnesses etc are liars and you're not convinced. This is about true or false. Not convincing or unconvincing.


I've never denied he robbed a store or any otmf the other stuff. That's why in my very first post I quoted only that part to dispute. Now you are wiggling and squirming trying to make points I never contested.

The video is there. I'd love to hear how 2 white guys just so happen to see the same thing as all the other witnesses but you don't have an explanation for that. No one does.

This is not true as several of the witnesses gave testimony that contradicts this, do you deny that

I'm not wiggling out of anything, I'm merely pointing out all of the evidence (that cannot be disputed-as you don't) that stacks the deck in my favor.

PS: I never stated that all witnesses are liars, go back and re-read what I said. I see no reason for the witnesses to lie...however many times witnesses don't actually witness what they think they do (which is why witness testimony doesn't hold a lot of credibility in a courtroom).

So all of them aren't liars they are just hapless fools...much better. You can hide behind what you think several witnesses said according to the police but the video doesn't change and hiding behind their report doesn't meat this video vanishes.

You can't explain this video matching what many others said happened too. So your only play is to pretend the cops story is bond and ignore the video or ask me about other things I've never disputed.

Nice try...but my focus is the video. Yours is to dismiss it somehow with clever talk and reassurances that you aren't dismissing just "asking".

You're making the mistake that I am accepting the cop's statements at face value, which is incorrect. I happen to think that in most of the recent police brutality cases over the past few years the police have absolutely been guilty and wrong-this one happens to be the exception. Now that we've gotten that out of the way:

Do you think that all 3 autopsy reports covered up police brutality? Including the DOJ's investigation and a 3rd party approved from Brown's family?

Do you really think that the New York Times would lie about 9 out of 12 witness statements that Brown charged Wilson?

"The fact that at least nine members of the 12-member panel could not agree to indict the officer indicates that they accepted the narrative of self-defense put forth by Officer Wilson in his voluntary, four hours of testimony before the grand jury.

...

According to witnesses and blood and other evidence found inside the car, Officer Wilson first fired two shots while he struggled with Mr. Brown through the window of his patrol vehicle, a Chevrolet Tahoe, grazing Mr. Brown’s hand.

Mr. Brown started to run away, with Officer Wilson in chase, then stopped and turned. According to the prosecutor’s summary, the officer fired five shots as Mr. Brown charged him, then another five shots as he made what one witness called a 'full charge'".

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/...ed-at-darren-wilson-prosecutor-says.html?_r=0

I'm citing the New York Times (not police) reporting what eyewitnesses (9 out of 12) were reporting that complete contradicts the other 3 (and/or the people in your video).

 

[aaronleland]

They're afraid of the truth. Of course their son's school records and thus earnings expectancy are pertinent in deciding what his life was worth. Michael was most likely illiterate and thus had zero earnings expectancy.

The Associated Press

dec 31 2016 KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) -- Michael Brown's parents are objecting to a request from Ferguson for their son's medical and academic records as the city defends itself against a lawsuit the parents filed over the 2014 police shooting death of the unarmed 18-year-old.

Michael Brown Sr. and Lezley McSpadden, in December court filings, asked U.S. District Judge E. Richard Webber in St. Louis to at least limit if not scuttle altogether a push by the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, its former police chief and the officer who shot their son to turn over the documents. The parents say the documents are irrelevant and that the repeated demands for them are harassing and invasive.

Brown's parents argue in their lawsuit that the death of their son during an August 2014 confrontation with Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson deprived them of financial support through his future potential wages. An attorney for Ferguson, Wilson and the former police chief have countered in court filings that Brown's lifelong medical records are pertinent to determining his potential life expectancy and future income.

Brown's parents insist the academic records are shielded as private because they involve a juvenile

Why should they? We just elected a "president" who won't release his tax returns tho promising on several occasions to do so.

He said he would release them when the audit was over. Obama could've done it.

The audit means nothing. The IRS has said as much.

 

[jknowgood]

Funny. The alt-right cares more about Michael Brown's school records than Donald Trump's tax returns.

The alt-right cares more about Michael Brown's school records than Donald Trump's tax returns.

Nice deflection.

the 'right' is still waiting for Obamas school records.

How about Trump shows his tax records when Obama shows his school records.

But, back to the topic.

Why are they against releasing Browns records?

Why would Obama ever release his school records?

I agree with you on that one. It would prove how ignorant he and his supporters are.

What would Trump releasing his tax records prove?

Lol, your liberal buddies think it will somehow.

 

[aaronleland]

Funny. The alt-right cares more about Michael Brown's school records than Donald Trump's tax returns.

The alt-right cares more about Michael Brown's school records than Donald Trump's tax returns.

Nice deflection.

the 'right' is still waiting for Obamas school records.

How about Trump shows his tax records when Obama shows his school records.

But, back to the topic.

Why are they against releasing Browns records?

Why would Obama ever release his school records?

I agree with you on that one. It would prove how ignorant he and his supporters are.

What would Trump releasing his tax records prove?

Lol, your liberal buddies think it will somehow.

I suspect it has more to do with his actual net worth than anything incriminating. It's a strange reason to be the first candidate in 50 years to withhold your tax records, but Trump has always been weird about people questioning his worth.

 

[ClosedCaption]

By the way no evidence will be "very convincing" to you. But being very convincing and being true are two different things. You can deny anything but that doesn't make it disappear.

Why do you think that no evidence would convince me? It sounds like you're making assumptions. Of course reasonable evidence would sway my views. However if the only evidence you can provide is a video of an eye witness claiming what they saw happened (and as another poster already pointed out part of it was inaccurate)--well what do you expect? At this point I think you're either refusing to be incorrect or are desperate to believe the false narrative.


Do you deny that:

-Brown committed a crime shortly before being shot
-Wilson had probable cause to approach Brown and Johnson
-Johnson was not shot
-Johnson changed his retelling of the story over time
-Brown's DNA was found on the gun, clothing, and inside of the car of Wilson
-Several eye witness accounts contradict each other

?

You asked for the video. I provided it and now you're saying unless it showed the moment he was shot then any and all videos, witnesses etc are liars and you're not convinced. This is about true or false. Not convincing or unconvincing.


I've never denied he robbed a store or any otmf the other stuff. That's why in my very first post I quoted only that part to dispute. Now you are wiggling and squirming trying to make points I never contested.

The video is there. I'd love to hear how 2 white guys just so happen to see the same thing as all the other witnesses but you don't have an explanation for that. No one does.

This is not true as several of the witnesses gave testimony that contradicts this, do you deny that

I'm not wiggling out of anything, I'm merely pointing out all of the evidence (that cannot be disputed-as you don't) that stacks the deck in my favor.

PS: I never stated that all witnesses are liars, go back and re-read what I said. I see no reason for the witnesses to lie...however many times witnesses don't actually witness what they think they do (which is why witness testimony doesn't hold a lot of credibility in a courtroom).

So all of them aren't liars they are just hapless fools...much better. You can hide behind what you think several witnesses said according to the police but the video doesn't change and hiding behind their report doesn't meat this video vanishes.

You can't explain this video matching what many others said happened too. So your only play is to pretend the cops story is bond and ignore the video or ask me about other things I've never disputed.

Nice try...but my focus is the video. Yours is to dismiss it somehow with clever talk and reassurances that you aren't dismissing just "asking".

You're making the mistake that I am accepting the cop's statements at face value, which is incorrect. I happen to think that in most of the recent police brutality cases over the past few years the police have absolutely been guilty and wrong-this one happens to be the exception. Now that we've gotten that out of the way:

Do you think that all 3 autopsy reports covered up police brutality? Including the DOJ's investigation and a 3rd party approved from Brown's family?

Do you really think that the New York Times would lie about 9 out of 12 witness statements that Brown charged Wilson?

"The fact that at least nine members of the 12-member panel could not agree to indict the officer indicates that they accepted the narrative of self-defense put forth by Officer Wilson in his voluntary, four hours of testimony before the grand jury.

...

According to witnesses and blood and other evidence found inside the car, Officer Wilson first fired two shots while he struggled with Mr. Brown through the window of his patrol vehicle, a Chevrolet Tahoe, grazing Mr. Brown’s hand.

Mr. Brown started to run away, with Officer Wilson in chase, then stopped and turned. According to the prosecutor’s summary, the officer fired five shots as Mr. Brown charged him, then another five shots as he made what one witness called a 'full charge'".

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/...ed-at-darren-wilson-prosecutor-says.html?_r=0

I'm citing the New York Times (not police) reporting what eyewitnesses (9 out of 12) were reporting that complete contradicts the other 3 (and/or the people in your video).

Again, my focus was on your claim that his hands were up was proven to be a lie. That is false Mr. I don't take the cops word at face value. No one has proven dick and there is the video showing witnesses on the scene at the time saying the same thing.

Now you want to talk about the NY Times, police abuse etc. Focus...if you dare

 

[Auld Phart]

Why do you think that no evidence would convince me? It sounds like you're making assumptions. Of course reasonable evidence would sway my views. However if the only evidence you can provide is a video of an eye witness claiming what they saw happened (and as another poster already pointed out part of it was inaccurate)--well what do you expect? At this point I think you're either refusing to be incorrect or are desperate to believe the false narrative.


Do you deny that:

-Brown committed a crime shortly before being shot
-Wilson had probable cause to approach Brown and Johnson
-Johnson was not shot
-Johnson changed his retelling of the story over time
-Brown's DNA was found on the gun, clothing, and inside of the car of Wilson
-Several eye witness accounts contradict each other

?

You asked for the video. I provided it and now you're saying unless it showed the moment he was shot then any and all videos, witnesses etc are liars and you're not convinced. This is about true or false. Not convincing or unconvincing.


I've never denied he robbed a store or any otmf the other stuff. That's why in my very first post I quoted only that part to dispute. Now you are wiggling and squirming trying to make points I never contested.

The video is there. I'd love to hear how 2 white guys just so happen to see the same thing as all the other witnesses but you don't have an explanation for that. No one does.

This is not true as several of the witnesses gave testimony that contradicts this, do you deny that

I'm not wiggling out of anything, I'm merely pointing out all of the evidence (that cannot be disputed-as you don't) that stacks the deck in my favor.

PS: I never stated that all witnesses are liars, go back and re-read what I said. I see no reason for the witnesses to lie...however many times witnesses don't actually witness what they think they do (which is why witness testimony doesn't hold a lot of credibility in a courtroom).

So all of them aren't liars they are just hapless fools...much better. You can hide behind what you think several witnesses said according to the police but the video doesn't change and hiding behind their report doesn't meat this video vanishes.

You can't explain this video matching what many others said happened too. So your only play is to pretend the cops story is bond and ignore the video or ask me about other things I've never disputed.

Nice try...but my focus is the video. Yours is to dismiss it somehow with clever talk and reassurances that you aren't dismissing just "asking".

You're making the mistake that I am accepting the cop's statements at face value, which is incorrect. I happen to think that in most of the recent police brutality cases over the past few years the police have absolutely been guilty and wrong-this one happens to be the exception. Now that we've gotten that out of the way:

Do you think that all 3 autopsy reports covered up police brutality? Including the DOJ's investigation and a 3rd party approved from Brown's family?

Do you really think that the New York Times would lie about 9 out of 12 witness statements that Brown charged Wilson?

"The fact that at least nine members of the 12-member panel could not agree to indict the officer indicates that they accepted the narrative of self-defense put forth by Officer Wilson in his voluntary, four hours of testimony before the grand jury.

...

According to witnesses and blood and other evidence found inside the car, Officer Wilson first fired two shots while he struggled with Mr. Brown through the window of his patrol vehicle, a Chevrolet Tahoe, grazing Mr. Brown’s hand.

Mr. Brown started to run away, with Officer Wilson in chase, then stopped and turned. According to the prosecutor’s summary, the officer fired five shots as Mr. Brown charged him, then another five shots as he made what one witness called a 'full charge'".

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/...ed-at-darren-wilson-prosecutor-says.html?_r=0

I'm citing the New York Times (not police) reporting what eyewitnesses (9 out of 12) were reporting that complete contradicts the other 3 (and/or the people in your video).

Again, my focus was on your claim that his hands were up was proven to be a lie. That is false Mr. I don't take the cops word at face value. No one has proven dick and there is the video showing witnesses on the scene at the time saying the same thing.

Now you want to talk about the NY Times, police abuse etc. Focus...if you dare

there is the video showing witnesses on the scene at the time saying the same thing.

they also said they saw his brain matter blown out of his head

 

[ScienceRocks]

Sorry but you shouldn't attack an officer and expect not to pay a price. Stuff like this is why the democrats are about to lose everything.

 

[Metzor]

Brown deserved to die. Quit trying to reward his parents for raising an idiot.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[AvgGuyIA]

They're afraid of the truth. Of course their son's school records and thus earnings expectancy are pertinent in deciding what his life was worth. Michael was most likely illiterate and thus had zero earnings expectancy.

The Associated Press

dec 31 2016 KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) -- Michael Brown's parents are objecting to a request from Ferguson for their son's medical and academic records as the city defends itself against a lawsuit the parents filed over the 2014 police shooting death of the unarmed 18-year-old.

Michael Brown Sr. and Lezley McSpadden, in December court filings, asked U.S. District Judge E. Richard Webber in St. Louis to at least limit if not scuttle altogether a push by the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, its former police chief and the officer who shot their son to turn over the documents. The parents say the documents are irrelevant and that the repeated demands for them are harassing and invasive.

Brown's parents argue in their lawsuit that the death of their son during an August 2014 confrontation with Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson deprived them of financial support through his future potential wages. An attorney for Ferguson, Wilson and the former police chief have countered in court filings that Brown's lifelong medical records are pertinent to determining his potential life expectancy and future income.

Brown's parents insist the academic records are shielded as private because they involve a juvenile

. So you suppose he really wasn't thinking about his college plans walking down the middle of the street after strong arming the owner of the convienence store he robbed?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

and I'm still trying to find out why you deflected from Browns school records, to Trumps tax records.

Only a snowFLAKE will find a moral equivalence. Between a street thug and the PEOTUS was was elected in a landslide.

 

[mgh80]

Why do you think that no evidence would convince me? It sounds like you're making assumptions. Of course reasonable evidence would sway my views. However if the only evidence you can provide is a video of an eye witness claiming what they saw happened (and as another poster already pointed out part of it was inaccurate)--well what do you expect? At this point I think you're either refusing to be incorrect or are desperate to believe the false narrative.


Do you deny that:

-Brown committed a crime shortly before being shot
-Wilson had probable cause to approach Brown and Johnson
-Johnson was not shot
-Johnson changed his retelling of the story over time
-Brown's DNA was found on the gun, clothing, and inside of the car of Wilson
-Several eye witness accounts contradict each other

?

You asked for the video. I provided it and now you're saying unless it showed the moment he was shot then any and all videos, witnesses etc are liars and you're not convinced. This is about true or false. Not convincing or unconvincing.


I've never denied he robbed a store or any otmf the other stuff. That's why in my very first post I quoted only that part to dispute. Now you are wiggling and squirming trying to make points I never contested.

The video is there. I'd love to hear how 2 white guys just so happen to see the same thing as all the other witnesses but you don't have an explanation for that. No one does.

This is not true as several of the witnesses gave testimony that contradicts this, do you deny that

I'm not wiggling out of anything, I'm merely pointing out all of the evidence (that cannot be disputed-as you don't) that stacks the deck in my favor.

PS: I never stated that all witnesses are liars, go back and re-read what I said. I see no reason for the witnesses to lie...however many times witnesses don't actually witness what they think they do (which is why witness testimony doesn't hold a lot of credibility in a courtroom).

So all of them aren't liars they are just hapless fools...much better. You can hide behind what you think several witnesses said according to the police but the video doesn't change and hiding behind their report doesn't meat this video vanishes.

You can't explain this video matching what many others said happened too. So your only play is to pretend the cops story is bond and ignore the video or ask me about other things I've never disputed.

Nice try...but my focus is the video. Yours is to dismiss it somehow with clever talk and reassurances that you aren't dismissing just "asking".

You're making the mistake that I am accepting the cop's statements at face value, which is incorrect. I happen to think that in most of the recent police brutality cases over the past few years the police have absolutely been guilty and wrong-this one happens to be the exception. Now that we've gotten that out of the way:

Do you think that all 3 autopsy reports covered up police brutality? Including the DOJ's investigation and a 3rd party approved from Brown's family?

Do you really think that the New York Times would lie about 9 out of 12 witness statements that Brown charged Wilson?

"The fact that at least nine members of the 12-member panel could not agree to indict the officer indicates that they accepted the narrative of self-defense put forth by Officer Wilson in his voluntary, four hours of testimony before the grand jury.

...

According to witnesses and blood and other evidence found inside the car, Officer Wilson first fired two shots while he struggled with Mr. Brown through the window of his patrol vehicle, a Chevrolet Tahoe, grazing Mr. Brown’s hand.

Mr. Brown started to run away, with Officer Wilson in chase, then stopped and turned. According to the prosecutor’s summary, the officer fired five shots as Mr. Brown charged him, then another five shots as he made what one witness called a 'full charge'".

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/...ed-at-darren-wilson-prosecutor-says.html?_r=0

I'm citing the New York Times (not police) reporting what eyewitnesses (9 out of 12) were reporting that complete contradicts the other 3 (and/or the people in your video).

Again, my focus was on your claim that his hands were up was proven to be a lie. That is false Mr. I don't take the cops word at face value. No one has proven dick and there is the video showing witnesses on the scene at the time saying the same thing.

Now you want to talk about the NY Times, police abuse etc. Focus...if you dare

I'm not taking the cop's word at face value I'm taking into consideration the DNA, physical evidence (autopsies), New Times, DOJ, etc. You're taking in two wintesses (and you're cherry picking witnesses on top of that). Seriously I know that flawed arguments are USMB fly many times, but you really have nothing to stand on. Your evidence is a youtube video of two witnesses and "I don't take the cops at their words". That's it. Your head is so far in the sand you were probably surprised when Trump won the election (I didn't vote for Trump but it was clear as day what was going to happen).

 

[ClosedCaption]

I presented video on the scene at the time. You so far have nothing to address it so instead you talk in the abstract.

You're not saying the video is wrong, you're not saying the witnesses are fools, you're not taking the cops word for it.

But you never reveal what you are actually saying. It's all about what you're not saying or asking questions around the incident instead of the one and only thing I brought up and that's the video.

 

[miketx]

 

[mgh80]

I presented video on the scene at the time. You so far have nothing to address it so instead you talk in the abstract.

You're not saying the video is wrong, you're not saying the witnesses are fools, you're not taking the cops word for it.

But you never reveal what you are actually saying. It's all about what you're not saying or asking questions around the incident instead of the one and only thing I brought up and that's the video.

The video you cited occurred AFTER the incident-not "at the time". This is a fact.

The video shows a few people saying what they witnessed. There's no physical evidence or video evidence of the incident in your video.

Their recount doesn't add up with everybody else's. It also doesn't add up with the DNA found, the New York Times, the DOJ (which was sent in from the federal government to investigate civil rights violations), the local police, AND an independent third party investigation hired by the Brown family themselves. It also doesn't add up with the autopsies (once again looked into by THREE different organizations).

Your only argument is me not addressing the video (which I clearly did: they were obviously mistaken)...yet you disregard all of the above. Seriously, having a weak argument is one thing-begin a hypocrite is another. You also change the goalposts:

-First ALL of the witnesses saw hands up (according to you)--I proved that wrong through the police's evidence
-You then claim that it's false to blindly believe the police's narrative--so I provided a legit outside source (the New York Times)
-You then claim that I'll be the police's bond regardless (which btw once you go personal instead of addressing the issues it highlights that you're losing), and I proved that wrong by saying I think most of the police shooting over the few years were uncalled for and that the police were in the wrong
-You then say that I'm flat out ignoring the content of the video, when another poster pointed out that somebody in your video claims they saw Brown's brains out his head (which is impossible)-and I pointed that out
-You doubled down on the video (because at this point it's your only piece of "evidence")--once again I pointed out how and why eye witness accounts are some of the worst pieces of evidence in the court of law (a concept which you never responded to mind you)
-You then tripled down on your video because as I stated before it's all you have. You have the word of two witnesses who:

A) Contradict the account of 75% of the witnesses (according to the New York Times)--which cannot be verified by the video
B) Who claim they saw Brown's brains-which according to 3 organization's research proves that would have been impossible (one of which was approved by Brown's family)--and the icing on the cake is that their claim once again cannot be verified by the video
C) The people in the video fail to mention any physical contact between Wilson and Brown before OR after the incident. Brown's DNA was on Wilson's gun, car (inside) and Wilson's clothing. Physical contact was made either before or after the altercation--even if Wilson planted the evidence himself

If you were in the courtroom you'd lose because there's NO WAY your argument passes the legal requirement of "reasonable doubt".

 

[ClosedCaption]

What the people in video failed to say or see isn't the point. Again you're talking about things that arent. The witnesses saw Brown with his hands up from ALL INITIAL REPORTS. The only people that disagreed with it was police who no doubt pressured the witnesses and then threw in a bunch of shot about them contridicting each other which doesn't mean dick coming from the cops who always find a way that they are free to go. Then you cite the NY Times who cite the police as confirmation.

You're trying to make this about the police version of the truth vs what people saw at the time. At the time several people saw it happen and not only that, there it is on video.

So again, unless your position consists of some mass hypnosis by several people on the scene then it's bogus. You can't explain how several people saw the same thing other than to say all those people were mistaken. That's a hard sell.

 

[mgh80]

What the people in video failed to say or see isn't the point. Again you're talking about things that arent. The witnesses saw Brown with his hands up from ALL INITIAL REPORTS. The only people that disagreed with it was police who no doubt pressured the witnesses and then threw in a bunch of shot about them contridicting each other which doesn't mean dick coming from the cops who always find a way that they are free to go. Then you cite the NY Times who cite the police as confirmation.

You're trying to make this about the police version of the truth vs what people saw at the time. At the time several people saw it happen and not only that, there it is on video.

So again, unless your position consists of some mass hypnosis by several people on the scene then it's bogus. You can't explain how several people saw the same thing other than to say all those people were mistaken. That's a hard sell.

Prove it.

PS: The New York Times didn't cite the police as evidence-go back and re-read the article or improve on your reading comprehension skills.

Also you keep claiming that the incident is on video...but your video doesn't show it.

Obviously my version wasn't a hard sell since a 3rd party investigation hired by Brown's family agrees with me.