• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Ferguson?

The main point I was making there was that their is a difference between war and law enforcement.

Right. But in neither case should you have to put the safety of someone who has attacked you above your own safety, or the safety of innocent bystanders.

Police officers may not take summary action and shoot surrendering suspects

I agree with you, if the suspect is not violent and dangerous and they are absolutely certain the suspect is surrendering.

WE ALL NEED TO BE CONCERNED WITH THE INCREASINGLY MILLITANT STANCE AND "US AGAINST THEM" ATTITUDE MANY LEOS AND POLICE AGENCIES ARE TAKING. THEY WILL EVENTUALLY VIOLATE YOUR RIGHTS TOO.

So innocent or guilty you want this officer to be the poster boy for your cause. Got it.

Do you have any factual evidence of this "increasingly militant stance" police are taking? Large increases in injuries or deaths to suspects for example?

I'm not worried about my rights frankly. It's quite simple...I am respectful, polite, and cooperative when dealing with police. I comply with their requests. I don't argue with them or assault them. If it turns out my stop or arrest is unwarranted, I will deal with that through the legal system later. In return I am treated the same way, in my rare dealings with police. I don't know anyone who's ever had a problem with police. I don't doubt a rogue exists here and there, but I reject your premise that many or most are out there looking to get into confrontations with people.
 
I'm not worried about my rights frankly. It's quite simple...I am respectful, polite, and cooperative when dealing with police. I comply with their requests. I don't argue with them or assault them. If it turns out my stop or arrest is unwarranted, I will deal with that through the legal system later. In return I am treated the same way, in my rare dealings with police. I don't know anyone who's ever had a problem with police. I don't doubt a rogue exists here and there, but I reject your premise that many or most are out there looking to get into confrontations with people.

Quoted for truth.
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-for-darren-wilsons-gun/?tid=trending_strip_1

Evidence that he went for Wilson's gun, and that his hands were not up.

But I'm sure that still won't be enough for some people.

But a St. Louis Post-Dispatch analysis of Brown’s official county autopsy it has obtained suggests the teenager may not have had his hands raised after all. Experts told the newspaper Brown was shot Aug. 9., at close range — and may have been reaching for Wilson’s weapon. The autopsy found material “consistent with products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm” in a wound on Brown’s thumb. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco, said this “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.”

Melinek, who was not involved in the investigation, said the autopsy did not support those who claim Brown was attempting to flee or surrender.

“If he has his hand near the gun when it goes off, he’s going for the officer’s gun,” she said.

Quoting the paper:

She said Brown was facing Wilson when Brown took a shot to the forehead, two shots to the chest and a shot to the upper right arm. The wound to the top of Brown’s head would indicate he was falling forward or in a lunging position toward the shooter; the shot was instantly fatal. A sixth shot that hit the forearm traveled from the back of the arm to the inner arm, which means Brown’s palms could not have been facing Wilson, as some witnesses have said, Melinek said. That trajectory shows Brown probably was not taking a standard surrender position with arms above the shoulders and palms out when he was hit, she said.”
 
The instant that the thug assaulted the cop instead of abiding him he became a threat. He remained a threat even after he stopped punching him. He still defied the cop and advanced on him. The threat was neutralized and I have no problem with it at all. This seems so simple to me. I cannot fathom how anyone could be on the thug's side in this situation. And that's coming from me, who has a shitload of driving infractions and a disdain for the police and authority in general.
 
The instant that the thug assaulted the cop instead of abiding him he became a threat. He remained a threat even after he stopped punching him. He still defied the cop and advanced on him. The threat was neutralized and I have no problem with it at all. This seems so simple to me. I cannot fathom how anyone could be on the thug's side in this situation. And that's coming from me, who has a shitload of driving infractions and a disdain for the police and authority in general.

Yep. I mean, I'm all for due process but you kind of voluntarily relinquish your rights when you punch a cop in the face.
 
Yep. I mean, I'm all for due process but you kind of voluntarily relinquish your rights when you punch a cop in the face.

Exactly, and try to take his gun. WTF did he expect was going to happen? Someone was going to die, either the thug or the cop. The one who deserved to die is dead.
 
And this is really it, right here. You're all about defending your "race" and not dealing with the facts. And in this case, facts are sorely lacking, yet you race people are all drawing conclusions.

The race angle is the least important thing here. The important questions pertain to whether or not procedure was followed, whether or not the threat was legitimate, and whether or not a proper investigation is being conducted. All this race **** you guys keep throwing out is just noise.

Tell that to Jesse and Al...
 
Once again Brown was no longer punching officer Wilson. He was far enough away that he could not cover the ground in one or two steps. He was not even a fleeing felon anymore at that point he had stopped at the officers command and the witnesses say he sort of stumbled toward officer Wilson not charged. The witnesses also say that Brown appeared to be surrendering, it is unlawful for a police officer to shoot a surrendering suspect. I know the difference between the movies and real life I am a combat veteran, I know more about the impact of hot high velocity steel on the human body than you can even imagine.

Put me 8 yards from you and you are on your back in 1.5 seconds via a double leg... well at least when I was in high school... lol... now i'd be at your feet on the ground with a strained muscle.
 
"Leaked autopsy report supports Darren Wilson’s account of Michael Brown shooting"

let the riots begin!
 
I hope this shuts everyone the hell up about this, all these people that "know" what happened...but don't know **** apparently.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/10/2...ortedly-reveals-teen-was-shot-at-close-range/

Autopsy, toxicology report on Michael Brown reportedly reveal marijuana, cast doubt on witness claims he was running away

Michael Brown, the 18-year-old black man whose fatal shooting by a white police officer in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson in August touched off weeks of racially-charged rioting, had marijuana in his system, was initially shot at close range and does not appear to have been killed while running away, according to experts who reviewed the official autopsy and toxicology report.

The documents, obtained by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and analyzed by two experts not directly involved in the case, appears to contradict witness accounts that claimed Brown was running away from Police Officer Darren Wilson, 28, when he was killed on Aug. 9. The new information comes on the heels of reports that Wilson told authorities Brown had reached inside Wilson’s police SUV and struggled for his gun, resulting in Wilson firing twice, hitting Brown once in the hand. Moments later and outside of the vehicle, Wilson fired the fatal bullets that sparked a national controversy.

The newspaper had St. Louis medical examiner Dr. Michael Graham, who is not part of the official investigation, review the autopsy report, and he determined that it “does support that there was a significant altercation at the car” including a shot that hit Brown’s right hand. Dr. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco who also reviewed the documents, concurred that the autopsy “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun" and that it did not support claims Brown was shot while running away from Wilson, or with his hands up.

The toxicology test. also obtained by the newspaper and performed by a St. Louis University laboratory, revealed marijuana in Brown’s blood and urine. Alfred Staubus, a consultant in forensic toxicology at The Ohio State University College of Pharmacy, told the newspaper THC could impair judgment or slow reaction times but that there was no reliable measurement to make those conclusions.

“The detection of THC in the postmortem blood of Michael Brown really indicates his recent use of marijuana (within a few hours) and that he may or may not have been impaired at the time of his death,” Staubus said.

The shots fired outside of the vehicle hit Brown in the forehead, upper right arm and twice in the chest, Melinek said. The fatal shot to the top of Brown’s head indicates he was falling forward or in a lunging position toward the shooter, she said. The fact that a sixth shot hit his forearm and traveled from the back of the arm to the inner arm shows Brown’s palms could not have been facing Wilson, as some witnesses have said, Melinek said.

The findings could be at odds with those of a private autopsy arranged by Brown’s family, conducted by former New York City Chief Medical Examiner Michael Baden and made public Aug. 18. Baden said none of Brown’s wounds appeared to have been from shots fired at close range, noting a lack of stippling, or pattern of tiny blood spatters. However, Graham told the Post-Dispatch, "Sometimes when it’s really close, such as within an inch or so, there is no stipple, just smoke."

A third autopsy has been ordered by federal officials as part of their investigation into whether Brown's civil rights were violated. Results of that one have not been revealed.

The New York Times, citing government officials briefed on the federal civil rights investigation into the matter that, while the federal investigation was continuing, the evidence so far did not support civil rights charges against Wilson. The officials told the Times the forensic evidence supported Wilson’s version of events, which was that he was trying to leave his vehicle when Brown pushed him back in and sparked the struggle for the gun.

Surveillance video from a nearby store allegedly showed the 6-foot, 4-inch Brown committing a strong-arm robbery minutes before the confrontation, stealing a box of cigars from a shopkeeper who he pushed out of his way.

A grand jury has been hearing testimony in the case since Aug. 20, but has not yet returned an indictment or a no-bill against Wilson. If the police officer is not indicted, supporters of Brown have vowed to resume demonstrations that began immediately after the shooting and became violent, with looting, arrests and the imposition of a curfew. President Obama consoled Brown's family in the immediate aftermath, and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder went to Ferguson and announced a separate federal investigation.
 
I really don't think this could be said enough times:

The fact that a sixth shot hit his forearm and traveled from the back of the arm to the inner arm shows Brown’s palms could not have been facing Wilson, as some witnesses have said, Melinek said.
 
Bomma's consoling the family of dead thugs while we have military coming home in caskets. ******* *******.
 
I hope this shuts everyone the hell up about this, all these people that "know" what happened...but don't know **** apparently.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/10/2...ortedly-reveals-teen-was-shot-at-close-range/

Autopsy, toxicology report on Michael Brown reportedly reveal marijuana, cast doubt on witness claims he was running away

Michael Brown, the 18-year-old black man whose fatal shooting by a white police officer in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson in August touched off weeks of racially-charged rioting, had marijuana in his system, was initially shot at close range and does not appear to have been killed while running away, according to experts who reviewed the official autopsy and toxicology report.

The documents, obtained by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and analyzed by two experts not directly involved in the case, appears to contradict witness accounts that claimed Brown was running away from Police Officer Darren Wilson, 28, when he was killed on Aug. 9. The new information comes on the heels of reports that Wilson told authorities Brown had reached inside Wilson’s police SUV and struggled for his gun, resulting in Wilson firing twice, hitting Brown once in the hand. Moments later and outside of the vehicle, Wilson fired the fatal bullets that sparked a national controversy.

The newspaper had St. Louis medical examiner Dr. Michael Graham, who is not part of the official investigation, review the autopsy report, and he determined that it “does support that there was a significant altercation at the car” including a shot that hit Brown’s right hand. Dr. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco who also reviewed the documents, concurred that the autopsy “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun" and that it did not support claims Brown was shot while running away from Wilson, or with his hands up.

The toxicology test. also obtained by the newspaper and performed by a St. Louis University laboratory, revealed marijuana in Brown’s blood and urine. Alfred Staubus, a consultant in forensic toxicology at The Ohio State University College of Pharmacy, told the newspaper THC could impair judgment or slow reaction times but that there was no reliable measurement to make those conclusions.

“The detection of THC in the postmortem blood of Michael Brown really indicates his recent use of marijuana (within a few hours) and that he may or may not have been impaired at the time of his death,” Staubus said.

The shots fired outside of the vehicle hit Brown in the forehead, upper right arm and twice in the chest, Melinek said. The fatal shot to the top of Brown’s head indicates he was falling forward or in a lunging position toward the shooter, she said. The fact that a sixth shot hit his forearm and traveled from the back of the arm to the inner arm shows Brown’s palms could not have been facing Wilson, as some witnesses have said, Melinek said.

The findings could be at odds with those of a private autopsy arranged by Brown’s family, conducted by former New York City Chief Medical Examiner Michael Baden and made public Aug. 18. Baden said none of Brown’s wounds appeared to have been from shots fired at close range, noting a lack of stippling, or pattern of tiny blood spatters. However, Graham told the Post-Dispatch, "Sometimes when it’s really close, such as within an inch or so, there is no stipple, just smoke."

A third autopsy has been ordered by federal officials as part of their investigation into whether Brown's civil rights were violated. Results of that one have not been revealed.

The New York Times, citing government officials briefed on the federal civil rights investigation into the matter that, while the federal investigation was continuing, the evidence so far did not support civil rights charges against Wilson. The officials told the Times the forensic evidence supported Wilson’s version of events, which was that he was trying to leave his vehicle when Brown pushed him back in and sparked the struggle for the gun.

Surveillance video from a nearby store allegedly showed the 6-foot, 4-inch Brown committing a strong-arm robbery minutes before the confrontation, stealing a box of cigars from a shopkeeper who he pushed out of his way.

A grand jury has been hearing testimony in the case since Aug. 20, but has not yet returned an indictment or a no-bill against Wilson. If the police officer is not indicted, supporters of Brown have vowed to resume demonstrations that began immediately after the shooting and became violent, with looting, arrests and the imposition of a curfew. President Obama consoled Brown's family in the immediate aftermath, and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder went to Ferguson and announced a separate federal investigation.


tumblr_n952gs8gsn1rr883co1_500.gif
 
Somewhere, PoloCommunist is poking her eyes out with a stick over the results of this autopsy.
 
The documents, obtained by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and analyzed by two experts not directly involved in the case.

Boys and girls, today's word is "bias". It means, "not objective".

Thanks for playing.
 
biased? how so?
if they're removed from having direct involvement, then how could they have a bias in the case?
 
The documents, obtained by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and analyzed by two experts not directly involved in the case.

Boys and girls, today's word is "bias". It means, "not objective".

Thanks for playing.

Ha ha. Yes, the experts obtained by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch are obviously biased, as is the guy who did the autopsy and made up that part about his hand having a bullet wound and the entrance and exit wounds on his arm. It's all a giant conspiracy, between police, the medical examiner, the newspaper, everyone's in on it. Everyone.
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...964-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html?hpid=z2

Because Wilson is white and Brown was black, the case has ignited intense debate over how police interact with African American men. But more than a half-dozen unnamed black witnesses have provided testimony to a St. Louis County grand jury that largely supports Wilson’s account of events of Aug. 9, according to several people familiar with the investigation who spoke with The Washington Post.
 
The coroner's report is bullshit.

It is obvious that Brown was simply reaching to shake the racist cop's hand and the bigoted mo-fo shot Mike's hand.

Oh, and the consultants hired by the newspaper are clearly biased, while the private coroner hired by the family to help them sue for millions is a paragon of truth and credibility.
 
Ha ha. Yes, the experts obtained by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch are obviously biased, as is the guy who did the autopsy and made up that part about his hand having a bullet wound and the entrance and exit wounds on his arm. It's all a giant conspiracy, between police, the medical examiner, the newspaper, everyone's in on it. Everyone.

It's just a hype story. Anyone can be called an "expert" by merely having a degree in any given subject.

Paid experts are hardly objective. The prosecution has people they pay to give favorable testimony. This is not news to anyone who knows anything about criminal law. So whomever these two people are, there's no reason to believe they are being objective. You give them credence because you're in the tank for the cop. I have no position on this case because no nearly enough evidence has been released to the public (that hasn't been washed through some biased analysis) to make a fair judgement as of yet.

The bullet through the forearm is a perfect example. If it went from outside in it could mean Brown had his hands up with his back to the officer, which would be supported by some reports. Meaning: the officer shot an unarmed man, with his hand in the air, in the back. That conclusion does not bode well at all for the cop.

But again, not enough information is available to get that far. We're all just guessing, some with agendas, without actually knowing. I don't claim to know what the agenda of these so called "experts" is, but I do know that most paid legal experts are biased one way or another.
 
Top