0
Anvilbrother

Riots over a shoting turn into free jordans and 40's

Recommended Posts

SkyDekker

************Untrue and inaccurate.
"No bill"



If not taken to trial he can not be found guilty

period

Now you are getting it.

which in this country, under our justice system means inocence, UNLESS PROVEN GUILTY

Which means you cannot object to the statement that the officer shot and killed an unarmed, innocent man.

(And no, I don't believe Brown was innocent)

In self defense
Therefore the cop committed no crime as the shooting was justifiable
but you like to omit little details dont you
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
airdvr

******IMO, cops shootings need to NOT be investigated by local authorities.
We must see outside, non-biased investigations into shootings.



Absolutely.

As soon as one of those panels doesn't find to your liking then you'll cry unfair or not good enough.



Hey, can you also predict next year's winner of the Kentucky Derby?
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen

Hi rush,

Quote

therefore he is inocent



Do you believe that OJ Simpson is innocent regarding the murder of two people?

Just asking,

Jerry Baumchen



Not that it matters but, no
But that does not mean he should be treated as guilty nor should thugs get approval to riot
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BillyVance

Is this Michael Brown beating and robbing an old man? I'm not all that sure... Where's the outrage over stuff like this? :|

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sn2eDyaq3mQ



I'm upset at that video and any time I see evidence of this level of anger, violence, and disregard of others. But I'm not sure there's an action left against MB. Can't arrest him and try him for clear assault, now, can we? He's not in a position to do it to another.

There might be evidence to arrest a couple of the others for participating.....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker


Hmmmm
MULTIPLE witnesses stated the same as she did
But, in your "desire" to turn this into something it is not, you seem to wish to focus on things that have no bearing

You are wrong
get over it
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

Some more interesting reading:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/Ferguson-toilet-tale-687543

Interesting choices in "witnesses" to bring to the Grand Jury.



and if they had not brought her?
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

So far witness 40 and witness 41 should simply not have made it to the grand jury. It calls into question the quality of the other witnesses presented. It also should make you wonder why witnesses like that were presented in the first place.



Since you and I can only speckulate, I wonder if they were covering their asses
Because should they keep a witness out then the questions arise around why, what are they trying to hide?
The typical bs

For me, the phone video with the people talking at the scene. those who stated they saw what most of the witness told the jury, make the decision pretty solid for me
But the race industry has to question the motives and process to keep the followers in line
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

So far witness 40 and witness 41 should simply not have made it to the grand jury.



unless you can prove they are lying, I don't see how one can exclude them

however, I would think their testimony is less than complete unless the other side also gets to put forth the 'rest of the story'

it's why there is a prosecution and a defense - and both need to do their jobs

(that said, I don't know how a grand jury proceeding might have different rules than what I'd expect from a jury trial proceeding)


What I'm more interested in, is whether all this stuff in those two links....was it presented to the grand jury also? AND, were any of the counter arguments also vetted as thoroughly and completely presented?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, that doesn't make any sense.

Why include an eye-witness who wasn't even there? One who has previously obviously lied to get involved in a police investigation. One who is so obviously racist? Even though those parts did not get presented at the Grand Jury.

Why include witnesses whose story is so unbelievable, that it likely will get dismissed instantly?

And not sure how Thesmokinggun.com is part of the "race industry"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

Sorry, that doesn't make any sense.

Why include an eye-witness who wasn't even there? One who has previously obviously lied to get involved in a police investigation. One who is so obviously racist? Even though those parts did not get presented at the Grand Jury.

Why include witnesses whose story is so unbelievable, that it likely will get dismissed instantly?

And not sure how Thesmokinggun.com is part of the "race industry"?



Hey
for the most part I agree with you
The smoking gun is just the messanger so I am not talking about them
I am talking about those in the court system that brought those people forward and why they may have done that
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rehmwa

***So far witness 40 and witness 41 should simply not have made it to the grand jury.



unless you can prove they are lying, I don't see how one can exclude them

however, I would think their testimony is less than complete unless the other side also gets to put forth the 'rest of the story'

it's why there is a prosecution and a defense - and both need to do their jobs

(that said, I don't know how a grand jury proceeding might have different rules than what I'd expect from a jury trial proceeding)


What I'm more interested in, is whether all this stuff in those two links....was it presented to the grand jury also? AND, were any of the counter arguments also vetted as thoroughly and completely presented?

There is no defence on a grand jury....just a prosecutor. There simply isn't anybody else to provide "the other side" of the story. It is assumed the prosecutor actually wants to get the indictment.

It is very rare for a prosecutor not to get the indictment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

******So far witness 40 and witness 41 should simply not have made it to the grand jury.



unless you can prove they are lying, I don't see how one can exclude them

however, I would think their testimony is less than complete unless the other side also gets to put forth the 'rest of the story'

it's why there is a prosecution and a defense - and both need to do their jobs

(that said, I don't know how a grand jury proceeding might have different rules than what I'd expect from a jury trial proceeding)


What I'm more interested in, is whether all this stuff in those two links....was it presented to the grand jury also? AND, were any of the counter arguments also vetted as thoroughly and completely presented?

There is no defence on a grand jury....just a prosecutor. There simply isn't anybody else to provide "the other side" of the story. It is assumed the prosecutor actually wants to get the indictment.

It is very rare for a prosecutor not to get the indictment.

OK, so what is your issue with the outcome?
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtlespeed

*********So far witness 40 and witness 41 should simply not have made it to the grand jury.



unless you can prove they are lying, I don't see how one can exclude them

however, I would think their testimony is less than complete unless the other side also gets to put forth the 'rest of the story'

it's why there is a prosecution and a defense - and both need to do their jobs

(that said, I don't know how a grand jury proceeding might have different rules than what I'd expect from a jury trial proceeding)


What I'm more interested in, is whether all this stuff in those two links....was it presented to the grand jury also? AND, were any of the counter arguments also vetted as thoroughly and completely presented?

There is no defence on a grand jury....just a prosecutor. There simply isn't anybody else to provide "the other side" of the story. It is assumed the prosecutor actually wants to get the indictment.

It is very rare for a prosecutor not to get the indictment.

OK, so what is your issue with the outcome?

If the outcome was influenced by very questionable witnesses like this, witnesses who would have never stood up in court, then there should have been court proceedings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coreeece

******Welcome to the second annual Ferguson riots!



Think anyone will have a cross lighting to mark the date as well ??

No...but I heard they had a pig roast

That is for Saturday Afternoon...... but once the sun sets... they will break out the satin sheets... its a tradition for some folk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amazon

*********Welcome to the second annual Ferguson riots!



Think anyone will have a cross lighting to mark the date as well ??

No...but I heard they had a pig roast

That is for Saturday Afternoon...... but once the sun sets... they will break out the satin sheets... its a tradition for some folk.

Let me get this straight; you think what happened last weekend is okay.
Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0