New Witness to Michael Brown Shooting

[4est_4est_Gump]

Six shots, two to the head, sounds excessive, considering that there was no 911 call from the store.

Unless, as several witnesses say, that 6'4" and 300lbs were charging and the first four shots clearly were being puled to the left and ineffective in getting a message through to the innocent UTEs pot-soaked brain...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It is clear now that which witnesses are given credibility are falling along political lines and who believes the press's story and those who have seen the press manipulate the story too many times in the past to inflame racial tensions in order to keep advancing a political story-line of an America where injustice and prejudice don't just occasionally occur, but are fucking normative!

 

[about_average]

Cop could have capped him in the knee.

I for one certainly don't want cops to starting to "shoot to wound". We'll end up with a lot more shooting deaths.
Do you think the cop intentionally shot Brown in arm three times?

 

[Busybody]

Based on the autopsy

Based on multiple witnesses

What happened is now OBVIOUS

(the DO(in)J, and other will manipulate otherwise....how else to MAKE the BASE energized in the '14 elections and beyond)

Reporter says more than a dozen witnesses to Brown shooting back up police officer's version of events



A St. Louis Post Dispatch reporter says that Ferguson, Missouri, police confirm that more than a dozen witnesses to the shooting of teenager Michael Brown have backed up the account of the incident offered by the officer who killed the teenager.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Christine Byers tweeted Monday that police told her that an account of the shooting by a woman named "Josie" who called into a syndicated radio program last Friday matches the account given by Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Brown.



"Josie" claimed to be a friend of Wilson's and said that Wilson was protecting himself as Brown "bum-rushed" him, punching him and trying to get his weapon.

"Michael and his friend turn around. And Michael taunts him... And then all the sudden he just started bumrushing him. He just started coming at him full speed. And, so he just started shooting. And, he just kept coming. And, so he really thinks he was on something," the caller ("Josie") said. "The final shot was in the forehead, and then he fell about two or three feet in front of the officer."

 

[Busybody]

The BLACK Capt is a PIECE of SHIT as well

Lauding the HULKING DRUG INFUSED THUG and saying he will serve as an example to him and others on how to raise kids, and THANKING the HULKING DRUG INFUSED THUGS so called "parents" for having the DRUG INFUSED HULKING THUG


ENOUGH!

ENOUGH OF THIS SHIT!

Say the truth

You MOTHER FUCKERS have to become fucking civilized, don't fucking rob n steal n act like fucking beasts...when a cop says stop, fucking STOP....ACT LIKE FUCKING HUMANS!

 

[Busybody]

Yet again

It is up to BUNNY SLIPPERS to cut thru all the BULLSHIT of WORDS of DISTRACTION and hit nail on head!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

When you have a hammer...

 

[Busybody]

You had the fucking GALL to IGGY me? Fuckoff, I will never respond to you again....go suck off a fellow echolyte

 

[about_average]

The witness in the OP could be right that Brown was shot from behind, if in fact one of the wounds in the arm was a glancing wound from an undetermined direction as someone suggested. She said he jerked, which probably would happen if shot in the arm.

There are two scenarios that would fit that and end up in Brown's death.
He's running away, the cop opens fire, grazes Brown on the arm with the second or third shot (has it been released how many shots were actually fired?), Brown stops and turns to face the cop.
First scenario, cop, in an adrenalin rush, keeps firing and one bullet enters the top of Brown's head as he's falling forward.

Second scenario, Brown decides to rush the cop (maybe the cop stopped firing and Brown thinks he won't actually kill him?) and the cop opens fire again, at least one bullet hitting Brown in the top of the head as he's leaned over running, or falling forward after the face shot.

His hands being up could even be explained by his reaction to the gun shots, hit in the arm, then in the face, he raises his hands reflexively to the face shot, not in surrender, but just to the pain, but witnesses think it's in surrender.

There are enough scenarios that could have happened that would support either "side" I'll be very surprised if we ever know for sure.

I bet, from this incident, sales of body cameras for cops are going to rise. Hell, if I were a cop I'd buy one with my own money if the department didn't provide them.

 

[Busybody]

Bryan Jones said he felt safer running toward gun shots than police "That tells you the world is horrible." https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvSzPdoCQAAaFwO.jpg

We have MORE to fear from CRAZED THUGS like this, then from MOOSESHITS

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The witness in the OP could be right that Brown was shot from behind, if in fact one of the wounds in the arm was a glancing wound from an undetermined direction as someone suggested. She said he jerked, which probably would happen if shot in the arm.

There are two scenarios that would fit that and end up in Brown's death.
He's running away, the cop opens fire, grazes Brown on the arm with the second or third shot (has it been released how many shots were actually fired?), Brown stops and turns to face the cop.
First scenario, cop, in an adrenalin rush, keeps firing and one bullet enters the top of Brown's head as he's falling forward.

Second scenario, Brown decides to rush the cop (maybe the cop stopped firing and Brown thinks he won't actually kill him?) and the cop opens fire again, at least one bullet hitting Brown in the top of the head as he's leaned over running, or falling forward after the face shot.

His hands being up could even be explained by his reaction to the gun shots, hit in the arm, then in the face, he raises his hands reflexively to the face shot, not in surrender, but just to the pain, but witnesses think it's in surrender.

There are enough scenarios that could have happened that would support either "side" I'll be very surprised if we ever know for sure.

I bet, from this incident, sales of body cameras for cops are going to rise. Hell, if I were a cop I'd buy one with my own money if the department didn't provide them.

Michael Baden says 3 bullets were recovered from Michael Browns body. One of the wounds is a superficial contact injury without penetration, three others were made by the same bullet. Its possible one bullet made 4 wounds.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I had some violent debates with medical examiners about the nature of injuries the ME determined to be intentionally inflicted.

 

[Ishmael]

The cop IS lawyer-ed up and has been from the beginning. That was reported when this first occurred and the initial attorney was furnished by the Fraternal Order of Police. He has probably retained personal attorney as well since then.

As I posted sometime ago NO official statements be witnesses made to the police, including statements by the officer himself, are going to be made public until the investigation is over. That is SOP. In the current atmosphere any statements by either the witnesses or the officer made to the press would be counter-productive in calming the situation and potentially dangerous to the witnesses.

As BS has pointed out there are reports surfacing that several witnesses on the scene corroborate the officers statements as to the chain of events that led up to the shooting. If true, the officer is going to end up being exonerated of any wrong doing.

Ishmael

 

[about_average]

Michael Baden says 3 bullets were recovered from Michael Browns body. One of the wounds is a superficial contact injury without penetration, three others were made by the same bullet. Its possible one bullet made 4 wounds.

Right, and either of the two graze wounds could have occurred without Brown facing the cop.

 

[Busybody]

The cop IS lawyer-ed up and has been from the beginning. That was reported when this first occurred and the initial attorney was furnished by the Fraternal Order of Police. He has probably retained personal attorney as well since then.

As I posted sometime ago NO official statements be witnesses made to the police, including statements by the officer himself, are going to be made public until the investigation is over. That is SOP. In the current atmosphere any statements by either the witnesses or the officer made to the press would be counter-productive in calming the situation and potentially dangerous to the witnesses.

As BS has pointed out there are reports surfacing that several witnesses on the scene corroborate the officers statements as to the chain of events that led up to the shooting. If true, the officer is going to end up being exonerated of any wrong doing.

Ishmael

Unlikely, as the political pressure and threats of RIOTS etc will FORCE some conviction

In the unlikely event he gets off, 1000% sure Holder will charge him with something

Safety valve, don't you know

Its NEVER about RIGHT or WRONG......its to throw meat to RABID BEASTS and hope they eat you last

 

[Busybody]

Right, and either of the two graze wounds could have occurred without Brown facing the cop.

You have an AGENDA and BY GOLLY you will stock to it.....even of you have to personally put wings on an elephant, push it over a cliff and bleat

SEE! IT FLIES!

 

[Ishmael]

Right, and either of the two graze wounds could have occurred without Brown facing the cop.

If the chain of events, as has been reported concerning corroborating witnesses, occurred as according to the officer, whether those arm wounds were inflicted while he was facing the officer or not are immaterial. It doesn't make a damn bit of difference and the shooting was justified.

Ishmael

 

[Busybody]

Poll finds sharp racial, political divide over Ferguson shooting. In 2012, Dems/Media deliberately fomented racial division over the Zimmerman case to boost black turnout. Not so clear that will help them with the Senate.

 

[Busybody]

Shades of Treyvon THUG Martin when all the pics we saw were of a 13 yr old

IT’S ALL IN THE LANGUAGE: Yes, AP Violated Its Style Guide to Refer to Michael Brown, 18 as a ‘Youth.’

Here’s what my 2001 AP Broadcast Handbook says:



youth Don’t use it; people don’t talk that way. Use man or woman for individuals 18 and older, teenager, boy, or girl for people aged 13-18.

So there.


That the "media" is helping to foment the BLOOD LIBEL and the riots etc with outright lies and distortion is obvious

The question is

WHY?

to what BENEFIT?

 

[Busybody]

Missouri law lets cops use deadly force "in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody" http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/19/missouri-cops-license-to-kill.html …

 

[about_average]

If the chain of events, as has been reported concerning corroborating witnesses, occurred as according to the officer, whether those arm wounds were inflicted while he was facing the officer or not are immaterial. It doesn't make a damn bit of difference and the shooting was justified.

I didn't say, nor imply, it was justified or unjustified, and really you don't know either.

All I was saying is that it doesn't mean the witness mentioned in the OP was wrong or lying.
There is a scenario that would fit both both what the OP witness saw and a justified shoot.

 

[Busybody]

Poke in eye to HUSSEIN obama, the laughingstock of the world

Egypt's foreign ministry urging US police to show restraint in #Ferguson. International trolling par excellence.

 

[Ishmael]

Unlikely, as the political pressure and threats of RIOTS etc will FORCE some conviction

In the unlikely event he gets off, 1000% sure Holder will charge him with something

Safety valve, don't you know

Its NEVER about RIGHT or WRONG......its to throw meat to RABID BEASTS and hope they eat you last

Oh, they can charge him. As noted over the years a persistent DA can get a grand jury to indict a Ham sandwich. Getting a conviction is a whole different story, even concerning Civil Rights charges.

From a political standpoint I'm certain the administration feels that some sort of charges will be beneficial to their party in the upcoming mid-terms. I seriously doubt that. First of all any trial, and the results thereof, will not occur until after the mid-terms. Secondly, they way the districts are gerrymandered this will have little effect on the results in those 'safe' districts, who cares if they're energized? Thirdly, in those districts that are competitive the swing vote are the independents and the riots are not beneficial to the cause in those districts. And lastly if charges are filed that means the investigation is over and ALL of the statements made by the officer and witnesses will become public knowledge and indications are that those statements aren't fitting the narrative that's out there now.

This is turning out to be a political tar baby and I suspect that there are many parties that have their hands wrapped around it, don't want it, and are busting their brains trying to figure out how to make it go away.

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Unlikely, as the political pressure and threats of RIOTS etc will FORCE some conviction

In the unlikely event he gets off, 1000% sure Holder will charge him with something

Safety valve, don't you know

Its NEVER about RIGHT or WRONG......its to throw meat to RABID BEASTS and hope they eat you last

That's what I've been saying...

 

[Busybody]

I didn't say, nor imply, it was justified or unjustified, and really you don't know either.

All I was saying is that it doesn't mean the witness mentioned in the OP was wrong or lying.
There is a scenario that would fit both both what the OP witness saw and a justified shoot.

http://www.clker.com/cliparts/d/8/7/f/12154413712084113862lemmling_Wings_3.svg.hi.pnghttp://cartoon-animals.disneyandcartoons.com/_/rsrc/1362496173015/cartoon-elephants/cartoon-elephant-Baby-picture.png

here, are wings and an elephant, get to work


Occam’s Razor ~ The Simplest Explanations Are Usually The Best

February 18th, 2013




The great and wise Einstein is said to have said, “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” This got me thinking about simplicity. Thinking about simplicity is a dangerous thing to do, and sure enough I over thought it and cut myself on Occam’s Razor.

If you don’t know what Occam’s Razor is, think about this classic joke,

Sherlock Holmes and his sidekick Watson go on a camping trip. After sharing a few glasses of chardonnay, they retire for the night.

At about 3 AM, Holmes nudges Watson and says, “Watson, look up into the sky and tell me what you see?”

Watson said, “I see millions of stars.”

Holmes asks, “And, what does that tell you?”

Watson replies, “Astronomically, it tells me there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo. Theologically, it tells me that whatever made all of this is beyond human comprehension. Horologically, it tells me that it’s about 3 AM. Meteorologically, it tells me that we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. What does it tell you, Holmes?”

Holmes retorts, “Watson you idiot, someone stole our tent.”

You can think about BIG, cosmic questions and more personal, daily questions using Occam’s Razor. Genius detectives like Sherlock Holmes (and Columbo) use Occam’s Razor to solve crimes. Occam’s Razor, named after 13th century William of Occam but not used as a phrase until 500 years later, is nicely summarized by Agatha Christie, “the simplest explanation is always the most likely.” More specifically, if you have two theories, go for the simpler one.

If you’ve got a hole in your pocket, it’s more likely that money fell out than was stolen.

If there’s a broken window and your kids are holding rocks, you’ve likely found your explanation rather than the falling meteor your kids are trying to convince you it was.

If it’s a windy night and you hear noises, it’s more likely wind than ghosts.

Etc Etc, you get the idea.

Imagine the possibilities of applying Occam’s Razor to personal situations. Life is full of hurts and disappointments. There is no denying the pain of it. But it’s the extra layers of assumption and interpretation that double and triple the pain. Shave away some assumptions about why things are happening. Stop guessing the motives of other people, and adding drama to pain. The problem with taking things personally is that you add assumption to insult.

Occam’s Razor challenges us to stick as close to reality as possible; reality as it is, not as we wish it were, or fantasize it to be. There’s an interesting example of this in the movie, “She’s Just Not That Into You.”

The girl, Gigi, is talking to a male friend about why a boy didn’t call her back. He’s trying to give her some tough love but she’s in denial. She suggests that he didn’t get the message or lost the number or his grandma died or something. Alex says, “He didn’t call you because he doesn’t want to see you again.”

She says, “What if I’m the exception?”

Alex says, “You’re not. You’re the rule. And the rule is, if a guy doesn’t call you, he doesn’t want to call you.”

Sometimes the harsh truth of reality helps us to move on with our lives rather than pining for a fantasy. Occam’s Razor can cut deep at times.

The positive side of Occam’s Razor is to get to the heart of what’s essential for you. In the words of Impressionist Painter Hans Hofmann,

Eliminate the unnecessary so that the necessary may speak.

It’s true in art as in life. Remove unnecessary theories and baggage from your life so that your true self can shine. For some this will mean leaving behind religious beliefs. For some it will mean leaving behind self limiting beliefs about why things happened to you in the past. For some it will mean giving up expecting the world to do you any favors.

It’s natural to ask the question “Why?” a lot. Whys can make you wise. But they can also torture you with their unsolvable, unknowable roots. Whys that are directed backwards, looking for closure or certainty, are insatiable. They look for answers to questions that only lead to suffering- like why me? Why then? Why did he do that to me? These whys lead to anxiety. Occam’s Razor offers a tool to minimize the time spent on the whys and wherefores of life. Pick the simplest explanation with the least assumptions and move on.

This is so liberating. There’s more to be said about Occam’s Razor, but this is enough for now. In the next articles I will write about the difference between straightforward and simple, and complications and complexity. The reality is that we make life so much harder than it needs to be.

The basis for living simply is to simplify your mind, rein in your wild and fantastic thoughts and desires and let your essence speak clearly through your lifestyle, choices and actions.