Ferguson: Police Kill 18yo Black Male; Fire Gas/Rubber Bullets Into Protesting Crowds

Status
Not open for further replies.
mre said:
So whatever is reported in the autopsy is irrelevant and inconsequential, but the "fact" that everyone defending the police is racist is proof that Brown was unjustly murdered?

That's some thinking.
Click to expand...

It's not some thinking, it's the way these things work.
 
mbmonk said:
The quote from the article:


First he is an ex-cop. He isn't serving on any force at this time. So he isn't out working the streets. Just to be accurate.

It's an analogy. So comparisons are kind of the nature of the tool. But the comparison is limited in scope. If people intentionally disregard the limited scope of the analogy, then it's no longer an analogy.

I understand why some would interpret it that way, but I am not 100% it's fair to do so.
Click to expand...

An analogy is still figurative language, the same as metaphor. People should always choose analogies that not only prove their point but are also careful not to accidentally make any further points in the process. Especially when they're speaking at a time when there are folks rioting because of the actions of those peoples' colleagues.
 
mbmonk said:
The quote from the article:


First he is an ex-cop. He isn't serving on any force at this time. So he isn't out working the streets. Just to be accurate.

It's an analogy. So comparisons are kind of the nature of the tool. But the comparison is limited in scope. If people intentionally disregard the limited scope of the analogy, then it's no longer an analogy.

I understand why some would interpret it that way, but I am not 100% it's fair to do so.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying, but he's saying they have to be conditioned to not be violent, much like how you do the same to dogs. Yeah, it could've been put in a nicer way.

Edit: Never mind, he probably didn't mean for it to come off sounding like he did.
 
FiggyCal said:
I see what you're saying, but he's saying they have to be conditioned to not be violent, much like how you do the same to dogs. Yeah, it could've been put in a nicer way.
Click to expand...
That'd be a hell of a metaphor if he was talking about the over-aggressive police instead of the protesters...
 
DragonSworne said:
With the little information he had, his report perfectly matches eye witness accounts. It strengthens them, not weakens them. Since we, the public, know both the eye witness reports and the autopsy report results it's easy to construct the how Mr. Brown died, and that is with his hands up in the air in a surrender position gunned down from a distance.
Click to expand...

I hate commenting on things like this because it triggers some people to them label you, but your post is incorrect to an extent.

First off, at least one eye witness report has been proven possibly incorrect now. One stated he was shot while facing away from the officer. Now as I've mentioned several times, and everyone should know this, eye witness testimonies are almost always off. It's not that the report was a lie, or intentionally incorrect, it's just that our memories, especially in stressful situations are not always correct. It's also possible the officer shot while he was facing away just never hit him. It should also be mentioned the police officers report is obviously going to be biased.

Second, in no way does the preliminary autopsy support he was shot with his arms up. If I missed that I apologize and will edit this.

Third, the Dr performing the autopsy said he could not suggest he was not shot in close proximity because he did not examine the clothes Brown was wearing which could have gunpowder residue on them. While it's just me, I think I got the feeling that he did expect there to be residue on his body if there was a close proximity shot.
 
Stet said:
An analogy is still figurative language, the same as metaphor. People should always choose analogies that not only prove their point but are also careful not to even accidentally make any further points in the process. Especially when they're speaking at a time when there are folks rioting because of the actions of your colleagues.
Click to expand...

That is why the limiting clause of analogy exists.
 
ced said:
I hate commenting on things like this because it triggers some people to them label you, but your post is incorrect to an extent.

First off, at least one eye witness report has been proven possibly incorrect now. One stated he was shot while facing away from the officer. Now as I've mentioned several times, and everyone should know this, eye witness testimonies are almost always off. It's not that the report was a lie, or intentionally incorrect, it's just that our memories, especially in stressful situations are not always correct. It's also possible the officer shot while he was facing away just never hit him.

Second, in no way does the preliminary autopsy support he was shot with his arms up. If I missed that I apologize and will edit this.

Third, the Dr performing the autopsy said he could not suggest he was not shot in close proximity because he did not examine the clothes Brown was wearing which could have gunpowder residue on them. While it's just me, I think I got the feeling that he did expect there to be residue on his body if there was a close proximity shot.
Click to expand...


The autopsy report isn't going to say that since the Dr lacked a lot of detail about the crime scene, and for good reason; you want the examiner to be unbais as possible.

You have three options for Mr. Brown's arm position during his death, one is with his arms up, one is with his arms extended to the sides, the other is pointing down.

There are numerous eye witness reports stating that his arms were up in a surrender position. Given that he also has headshot wounds also makes this arm position most likely because you'll have your arms closer to your head in a surrender position than any other arm position. If the gunman is aiming for the head it's likely he hit the arms first before correcting his aim to the head.
 
mbmonk said:
That is why the limiting clause of analogy exists.
Click to expand...

That's why choosing your words is important when you're discussing a highly charged situation. Maybe an analogy isn't the best way to explain how you feel about a riot in the first place.
 
DragonSworne said:
The autopsy report isn't going to say that since the Dr lacked a lot of detail about the crime scene, and for good reason; you want the examiner to be unbais as possible.

You have three options for Mr. Brown's arm position during his death, one is with his arms up, one is with his arms extended to the sides, the other is pointing down.

There are numerous eye witness reports stating that his arms were up in a surrender position. Given that he also has headshot wounds also makes this arm position most likely because you'll have your arms closer to your head in a surrender position than any other arm position. If the gunman is aiming for the head it's likely he hit the arms first before correcting his aim to the head.
Click to expand...

Cops aim for center mass, not the head.
 
DragonSworne said:
Yes, that's why this is a murder/execution like the eye witness reports have stated. Bullets would be found in the center mass instead of the arms and head if was do I g what he was trained to do.
Click to expand...

He'd have to be a pretty good shot to deliberately hit the head.
 
DragonSworne said:
The autopsy report isn't going to say that since the Dr lacked a lot of detail about the crime scene, and for good reason; you want the examiner to be unbais as possible.

You have three options for Mr. Brown's arm position during his death, one is with his arms up, one is with his arms extended to the sides, the other is pointing down.

There are numerous eye witness reports stating that his arms were up in a surrender position. Given that he also has headshot wounds also makes this arm position most likely because you'll have your arms closer to your head in a surrender position than any other arm position. If the gunman is aiming for the head it's likely he hit the arms first before correcting his aim to the head.
Click to expand...

While we don't know what this officer was thinking or doing, they are trained to aim for the torso, the biggest target.

Looking at the diagram, the officer shoots to the left a bit. It's also a pretty consistent pattern to be from a long ways, but that's just speculation.

As you mentioned though, one explanation for the left arm wounds could be that they were up in the air parallel to the head wounds.

We're just speculating either way.
 
Unfortunately I don't think the eye witnesses testimony will mean anything if this goes to court (which is probably won't either at this point). With it being the worst form of evidence, that's doubly so with everyone so emotionally invested, I imagine even a first year law student would be able to combat that.
 
ced said:
While we don't know what this officer was thinking or doing, they are trained to aim for the torso, the biggest target.

Looking at the diagram, the officer shoots to the left a bit. It's also a pretty consistent pattern to be from a long ways, but that's just speculation.

As you mentioned though, one explanation for the left arm wounds could be that they were up in the air parallel to the head wounds.

We're just speculating either way.
Click to expand...

I'm not speculating, you are. I'm going g by what the eye witness reports say and the autopsy supports. You are speculating other scenarios that contradict eye witness reports.
 
vas_a_morir said:
Well, GAF generally thinks the same way due to the culling of people who express opinion viewed by mods as offensive being removed. Used to, people would talk about _______ defenders as being necessarily racists. However, we've got to the point now where people talk about 'devil's advocates' as being villains with racist agendas. This means that anyone who explicitly and repeatedly offers support for the predominant viewpoint in a thread, but happens to at one time present a logical argument that does not perpetuate the emotional fervor, is necessarily a racist. GAF is a good example of what would happen in a country if Free Speech was disallowed. As the more radical opinions get culled, the threshold for what is considered to be a radical opinion gets lowered.
Click to expand...

Why the hell do you even need to know that?
Hit the library, it's chock full of books with countries that were like that anyway.
 
vas_a_morir said:
GAF is a good example of what would happen in a country if Free Speech was disallowed. As the more radical opinions get culled, the threshold for what is considered to be a radical opinion gets lowered.
Click to expand...

You might find yourself more comfortable with the freedom within livestream chat boxes.
 
Mr.Awesome said:
Unfortunately I don't think the eye witnesses testimony will mean anything if this goes to court (which is probably won't either at this point). With it being the worst form of evidence, that's doubly so with everyone so emotionally invested, I imagine even a first year law student would be able to combat that.
Click to expand...

Eye witness testimony is always compelling, though. However, according to my family members who work as defense attorneys, as forensics becomes more advanced and accurate, people come to rely more on scientific evidence more and more.

As far as I can see, it looks like his hands could have been up to get those wounds. However, I don't know if that's what it means. I listened to eye-witness testimony, but I can't recall if they ever explicitly said that he was shot in the back. Did they?
 
vas_a_morir said:
Eye witness testimony is always compelling, though. However, according to my family members who work as defense attorneys, as forensics becomes more advanced and accurate, people come to rely more on scientific evidence more and more.

As far as I can see, it looks like his hands could have been up to get those wounds. However, I don't know if that's what it means. I listened to eye-witness testimony, but I can't recall if they ever explicitly said that he was shot in the back. Did they?
Click to expand...

the twitter account didn't
 
DragonSworne said:
I'm not speculating, you are. I'm going g by what the eye witness reports say and the autopsy supports. You are speculating other scenarios that contradict eye witness reports.
Click to expand...

No we both are.

There are three that state he was shot while holding up his hands, and two that state he was rushing the officer when he was shot.

The autopsy supports both of those scenarios, and it's mentioned about the top of the head entry wound can support either as well.
 
vas_a_morir said:
Eye witness testimony is always compelling, though. However, according to my family members who work as defense attorneys, as forensics becomes more advanced and accurate, people come to rely more on scientific evidence more and more.

As far as I can see, it looks like his hands could have been up to get those wounds. However, I don't know if that's what it means. I listened to eye-witness testimony, but I can't recall if they ever explicitly said that he was shot in the back. Did they?
Click to expand...

I don't know about the others, but Dorian Johnson said that it was only when he had felt the second bullet hit him as he was running away did he turn around.
 
FiggyCal said:
I see what you're saying, but he's saying they have to be conditioned to not be violent, much like how you do the same to dogs. Yeah, it could've been put in a nicer way.

Edit: Never mind, he probably didn't mean for it to come off sounding like he did.
Click to expand...

So black people are inherently violent similar to dogs? Cool....
neither are true
 
vas_a_morir said:
Eye witness testimony is always compelling, though. However, according to my family members who work as defense attorneys, as forensics becomes more advanced and accurate, people come to rely more on scientific evidence more and more.

As far as I can see, it looks like his hands could have been up to get those wounds. However, I don't know if that's what it means. I listened to eye-witness testimony, but I can't recall if they ever explicitly said that he was shot in the back. Did they?
Click to expand...

Reports said he was shot at while running, froze/flinched, turned around and put his hands up. Many eyewitnesses assumed he was hit in the back, but the report showed no entry wounds. So, it's still up for debate, but the prevailing theory is he was running away, the cop shot at him but missed. After that, he turned around, and given that entry wounds were on the interior side of the arm, it makes more sense to say he was shot with his hands up, rather than shot charging at the officer.
 
mre said:
And just for clarity's sake, here's the relevant statute:

Johnson took an affirmative step to prevent the commission of the offense by placing the cigarillos back on the counter.
Click to expand...

My use of the word accomplice was based on the last article posted. If it is true that Johnson returned the cigars, my use of yhe word is extremely unjustified.

Based on what I interpreted from the video, the item was stolen by Brown which is why I used accomplice to describe Johnson.

I still dont buy the story that the officer discharged his weapon numerous times while brown fled, only for him to turn around and get 6 low percentage shots to the arm and head at face value. Ill wait on GSR tests on the clothing to tell me otherwise.
 
mernst23 said:
My use of the word accomplice was based on the last article posted. If it is true that Johnson returned the cigars, my use of yhe word is extremely unjustified.

Based on what I interpreted from the video, the item was stolen by Brown which is why I used accomplice to describe Johnson.

I still dont buy the story that the officer discharged his weapon numerous times while brown fled, only for him to turn around and get 6 low percentage shots to the arm and head at face value. Ill wait on GSR tests on the clothing to tell me otherwise.
Click to expand...

GO WATCH THE VIDEO
 
Zoe said:
He'd have to be a pretty good shot to deliberately hit the head.
Click to expand...

No kidding. Considering Wilson's reactions at the start of these events, it would seem to me that he doesn't know how to handle anything too heated and probably has never fired his gun at a human target. It took him at least five shots to hit the head and we don't know how many missed him entirely. I think he was just squeezing the trigger in browns direction until he was empty. This is a guy who managed to shoot the inside of his own car like in a bad cop comedy and now he is intentionally pulling off a headshot at 35 feet? I guess it's possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

UK police arrest woman after immigrant walks into her home
15 16 17 18 19
926
3K
Dr.Morris79 replied
Will Smith accused of using AI to fake crowds in concert video
2 3
115
947
Toots replied
British Police Arrest Cosplayer
2
85
592
calico replied
  • Poll
Do you have an electric or gas stove?
2
50
1K
Barrier Island Dweller replied
Avatar: Fire and Ash | Official Trailer
2
56
962
EverydayBeast replied
Top Bottom