Reply With Quote
Because it demonstrates that Wilson was doing his job.
Because it demonstrates that Wilson was doing his job.
That would make it relevant.
It is not relevant to the grand jury's decision to not indict him.
You just showed how it would be relevant.
Do you think the grand jury's decision would have been to indict him if he had not pursued?
what do you think?
I don't know any of those people.
You didn't already know?
Should I have?
So Why did you say he was shot at 150 ft?
Right. I think you know the answer to my question.
The testimony said he did.
I believe it.
I didn't. I asked a question. RIF.
The answer is I don't know.
Because I don't.
lol THE TESTIMONY
I don't know, that's why I'm asking if you already knew and, if not, why would you ask a political forum something that readily available from more direct sources.
Here, knock yourself out: http://hosted.ap.org/specials/intera...uson-shooting/
It's all in there.
And the forensic evidence, sure.
All of it.
No reason not to believe it.
Who testified that Michael Brown was shot from 150 feet away?
No one.
I believe I misread that other question. I'm fielding a bunch at once.
Sorry.
Well I do, and it wouldn't have.
Actually I didn't misread the question.
I was asked if I thought Wilson pursued Brown that 150 feet.
I said yes.
It's great that you have an opinion.
I seriously never got the argument that just because the shooting was 150 feet from the car it must have been a bad shoot. Even the hostile witnesses confirmed that Brown had scuffled with the officer in the car and a shot was fired in the car. Forensic evidence found powder burns on Browns hand and browns blood on the officers gun, the officers clothes, and inside the door of the car. (the tip of Browns finger had been grazed by the bullet when the gun discharged)
So there had already been an attack on the officer, a shot had already been fired...
So the officer was just supposed to let Brown leave the scene?
So, let's try again, without all the coy back and forth. This is what started this asinine exchange.
To which you interjected,
To which I attempted to check my understanding of what you were suggesting
And, it went downhill from there.
If you're sincerely asking if Michael Brown was shot from 150 feet away; the answer is no and, to my knowledge, no one has ever suggested that.
If you're sincerely asking if Officer Wilson pursued Brown for 150 feet, before the altercation that resulted in his shooting took place, the answer appears to be yes (as suggested by witness statements corroborated by forensic evidence at the scene). It appears Officer Wilson made it about 150 feet from his patrol vehicle and Michael Brown made it another 20 feet beyond that before the final sequence of events that resulted in his death began.
Again, why are you unable to discern these facts on your own?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions