An inconvenient truth

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oh, and where is your evidence that Wilson is a racist? It's probably with the evidence you wanted to use to lynch Wilson. It dot exist.

The Fergust PD is a other issue. It was very apparent from day one Ferguson PD had some very serious problems. But that doesn't mean Officer Wilson did any thing wrong in this case.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yeah, lynch Officer Wilson. Before the investigation had been completed you had tried and convicted Officer Wilson and found him guilty. You have consistently ignored evidence which exonerated Officer Wilson, including this recent finding by the US Department of Justice.

When did I say Turkey couldn’t “save” Kobane? I didn’t. You have created a straw man. You argued for the immediate intervention of Turkish troops because they were there. Just because troops are present, it doesn’t mean it is wise to use them. And in any case, this thread isn’t about Turkey. It is about Officer Wilson’s guilt or innocence.

Well that makes for nice demagoguery, but do you have any evidence to back up that claim? No you don’t. As, I said before and have said consistently, there are well documented cases of police abuse of power. But not in recent history and not on the scale you claim, and the Brown case isn’t one of them.

The fact is The Department of Justice (DOJ) found Officer Wilson innocent. The DOJ specifically exonerated Officer Wilson and in excruciating detail. Just because the Ferguson Police Department was found guilty of racial discrimination, it doesn’t mean Officer Wilson murdered Brown as you have asserted since day one.

So are Attorney General Holder and President Obama prejudice against their own race? They are both black men. Do you think they are racists too? Because the investigation and report which exonerates Officer Wilson was completed and written by people who work under their direction and control.

Yeah, an unarmed young man was shot dead. But news flash Bells, people have been killing people long before firearms. People have been killing people with and without weapons since the dawn of mankind.

And yes one person lied on the witness stand to support Officer Wilson’s account and was a racist. And multiple witnesses lied on the stand to indict Officer Wilson. People lie on both sides, but most witnesses support Officer Wilson’s account. All credible witnesses support Officer Wilson’s account, and more importantly, so does the physical evidence. You focus so much on one racist who lied to support Officer Wilson and ignore multiple wittneses who lied to indict Officer Wilson.

Ad hominem really isn’t a convincing argument. So are Attorney General Holder and President Obama racists too because both they and I have reached the same conclusions in this case? Attorney General Holder and President Obama are both “black people”.

Here is one of the things you leave out of your narrative, Brown and Johnson weren’t just walking down the street. They were walking down the middle of the street presenting a public safety hazard and violating the law. That’s why Officer Wilson initially engaged them. Officer Wilson found Brown actively engaged in a violation of the law and creating a public safety hazard. Brown subsequently assaulted Officer Wilson and attempted to get Officer Wilson’s gun. Those are among the inconvenient details you are leaving out. The picture your painting of Brown isn’t as innocent as you would have it be. At some point facts and reason need to account for something.

One racist bigot lied before the grand jury in order to support Officer Wilson, multiple witnesses lied in order to indict Officer Wilson. It is telling you focus so much on one discredited witness and ignore the other discredited witnesses. Unfortunately, this case has become a cause célèbre for racists of every sort and of every color. Grand jurors saw all the evidence, they heard all the witnesses and they evaluated all the evidence. They made a decision you didn’t like. The Department of Justice independently investigated the case and came to similar conclusions. There is ample evidence; you just don’t like the conclusions because those conclusions are not consistent with your beliefs. It is good and a testimony to the US system of justice that truth and reason ultimately prevailed in this case.

 

because the reason he ended up getting the job in fereguson was he was let go from another PD that was disbanded due to rampant racism? and in a job previous his former supervisor stated he shouldn't be a police officer

 

So he stole his ideas from a woman, Rosalind Franklin, and then used them to attack Africans.
That fits.

 

Could it be that there are more white officers than black, and more black people being shot than white?

 

"Incredible"? Have you ever watched old Tarzan movies?

 

It is also apparent in the officer's testimony; the underlying problem affecting so many officers in so many departments is simply this: As one assesses an individual to determine risk and threat, being black is a threat criterion.

And that, pure and simple, is racism.

Let us consider a parallel:

• You shoot someone to death, and claim self-defense. Not only does the evidence fail to support your account and, in fact, reinforce accusations that you just killed someone for no reason, you also leave signs that you tampered with the physical evidence in order to support your account of what happened.​

What would happen to you?

What if you're a cop?

Well, if you're a cop, the department might fire you if the situation brings enough of a political headache. But a crime?

There is no reason to charge such an officer with a crime. We must presume his good faith in shooting. We must also presume his good faith in manipulating the physical evidence. And we must also presume his good faith in perjuring himself. No reason to charge the officer, said state and federal officials.

And it is this sort of outlook that licenses what we saw in Missouri, New York City, and have seen for so long in many communities across the country.

And it is this sort of outlook that our neighbors must depend on in order to cry about lynch mobs and celebrate another white guy getting away with never even having to answer for killing an unarmed black person.

For many of us, the law is the law, and the problems exist therein.

For others, that the law is the law and brings this sort of outcome is something to celebrate.

Then again, the overlap between those people and paranoid tinfoil racists who expect the guv'mint to grind them beneath its bootheel any day might seem curiously paradoxical insofar as here they are celebrating that very outcome, but we should not find the common cause surprising―such paranoia has always been driven by bigotry.

And, frankly, one would not blame you for wondering at the priorities and values of those who celebrate such lethal bigotry.

 

Nothing in the report as quoted by you exonerates Wilson.

It does not even exonerate the Ferguson prosecutor, for rigging the grand jury hearing.

It exonerates the Justice Department for failing to bring Wilson to trial, as a Federal endeavor. But that is old news here - agreed and set aside early in this thread.

 

While that maybe true my point was that we very seldom see any white on white killings by police even if what you say is true. I would also add that the media very rarely waits to understand the entire story and posts what they think happened instead of waiting until all of the investigations are finished to report the truth not something they spin it to be.

 

If you are black rather than white, the officer is somehow more likely to think that your key ring/belt buckle/shiny wallet is a gun and shoot you.
The anticipated threat is greater.

 

I can only conclude you are lying.
“ST. LOUIS (KMOX) - Former Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson’s attorney is reacting to the findings of the Justice Department investigation saying there will be no federal civil rights charges filed against Wilson.
Attorney Neil Bruntrager says Wilson is pleased with what amounts to an “exoneration” from the DOJ.” - http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2015/03/04/darren-wilson-relieved-at-no-charges-from-feds/

Only in your mind Bells….

Hmm, when did I interject race into this discussion? Oh, that’s right I didn’t. Black people weren’t the only ones on the streets of Ferguson seeking Wilson’s blood.

And that bothers you…seriously? At the time this event occurred Officer Wilson was employed as a police officer. Further, in this country, one carries the title even after they exit public employment.

Yeah, the link was provided mostly citing data which was more than 130 years old. That is hardly convincing. I’ll help you out a bit. This afternoon NPR cited a new study which indicated 800 people are killed every year by police in this country. That includes whites, blacks, yellow and brown skinned people. It’s includes everyone. And considering the population of this country is more than 320 million people, that is really far from the epidemic your are trying to represent.

Either you haven’t read the report issued by the Department of Justice or you are lying. Below is the DOJ conclusion. It’s the same conclusion the grand jury arrived at.
“As discussed above, Darren Wilson has stated his intent in shooting Michael Brown was in response to a perceived deadly threat. The only possible basis for prosecuting Wilson under section 242 would therefore be if the government could prove that his account is not true – i.e., that Brown never assaulted Wilson at the SUV, never attempted to gain control of Wilson’s gun, and thereafter clearly surrendered in a way that no reasonable officer could have failed to perceive. Given that Wilson’s account is corroborated by physical evidence and that his perception of a threat posed by Brown is corroborated by other eyewitnesses, to include aspects of the testimony of Witness 101, there is no credible evidence that Wilson willfully shot Brown as he was attempting to surrender or was otherwise not posing a threat. Even if Wilson was mistaken in his interpretation of Brown’s conduct, the fact that others interpreted that conduct the same way as Wilson precludes a determination that he acted with a bad purpose to disobey the law. The same is true even if Wilson could be said to have acted with poor judgment in the manner in which he first interacted with Brown, or in pursuing Brown after the incident at the SUV. These are matters of policy and procedure that do not rise to the level of a Constitutional violation and thus cannot support a criminal prosecution. Cf. Gardner v. Howard, 109 F.3d 427, 430–31 (8th Cir. 1997) (violation of internal policies and procedures does not in and of itself rise to violation of Constitution).
Because Wilson did not act with the requisite criminal intent, it cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt to a jury that he violated 18 U.S.C.§ 242 when he fired his weapon at Brown.
VI. Conclusion
For the reasons set forth above, this matter lacks prosecutive merit and should be closed.”

It’s more than Fox News. It’s NPR, it’s CNN, and it’s CBS.

It’s not a “fallback”. It’s the truth. You rest your entire argument on what you perceive to be a tainted grand jury process. The fact is the Department of Justice which is under the direct control of President Obama and Attorney General Holder both of whom are black have concluded the Ferguson grand jury whose decision you hate was indeed the correct decision. That is the simple fact of the matter and it isn’t racist. It is just a fact. The Department of Justice conducted a thorough independent investigation and reached the same conclusion as the grand jury you claim was tainted. So are President Obama and Attorney General Holder racists?

You are being more than a little disingenuous Bells. The DOJ report does exonerate Officer Wilson. If Officer Wilson didn’t commit the crime you allege, there would be no evidence. If you read the DOJ report, it does find Officer acted reasonably and within the law and cites the physical evidence and credible eye witness testimony as the basis for their conclusion.
Your reasoning is reminiscent of witch trials where accused witches were submerged in water and if they didn’t die they might be dead but they were not witches and if they lived they were witches and executed for same.

 

No, they didn't.

There is no exoneration of Wilson visible in the DOJ report. It does not, for example, deal with the various inconsistencies between Wilson's grand jury testimony and his earlier statements, the eyewitness testimony, or (especially) several items of forensic evidence.

It doesn't even try. It instead explains why the DOJ is not indicting Wilson, or pressing lawsuit. And that is old news here.

1) Not true - they concluded there was no basis for the DOJ to overrule the grand jury, or take Wilson to court in the wake of the grand jury testimony and findings. Not the same thing as concluding the grand jury made the right decision in the first place.
2) So? The only thing the Ferguson grand jury decided was that there was no point in indicting Wilson, given the evidence that would be brought to the trial. Lots of people would agree with that assessment. That does not exonerate Wilson.

It is not, however, the report itself - we can all read it, and if NPR has taken some kind of official position that it exonerates Wilson then so much the worse for NPR.

 

Denial isn't a river in Egypt.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Well not for a long time now. As with your Kos reference you have to go back more than a century to find substance for that argument. There are undoubtedly departments like Ferguson. But that doesn’t mean they are commonplace. And it is unfair to taint Officer Wilson for the offenses of others. Because some people in the Ferguson Police Department were and are racists, it doesn’t mean everyone in the department are racists. If you have evidence of Officer Wilson’s racism, now is the time to show it. The DOJ report certainly didn’t find it.
Officer Wilson certainly did pay a price for protecting his life. He lost his job and his career. The evidence shows Officer Wilson was just protecting his life. That is a fact you find unpleasant but it has been validated by the grand jury and now the Department of Justice.

Oh, now where did I say or insinuate that? The fact is I have never said or even insinuated anything of the sort. If you had a case Bells you could make a cogent argument with facts and free of illogical argument, but you can’t. And that is why you rely so heavily on these straw man arguments and do all this cherry picking.

Facts aren’t racist, they are just facts. The fact is you have been playing the race card. You have accused everyone who disagrees with you of racism. Obama and Holder have issued a report which agrees with me. So are they too racist?

You are being ridiculous…argument absurdum. Brown crossed the line when he assaulted Officer Brown and threatened Officer Wilson’s life.

Oh yes you did. You aren’t being honest Bells.

Oh, and how is it Officer Wilson is responsible for Brown’s behavior? Nothing Officer Wilson did can justify Brown’s assault on Officer Wilson. This case wasn’t in anyway similar to the Garner case in New York. The NYPD officers were not assaulted. Officer Wilson was.

Much that is rooted in the fact you refuse to acknowledge that the grand jury isn’t a trial body, but an investigative body. Further the items you brought up were inconsequential and some were just not true (e.g. prosecutor was somehow culpable in lies told on the witness stand, fake evidence).
In addition to the grand jury’s decision, now you have to contend with the Department of Justice Report which validates the conclusions of the grand jury. You are just on the wrong side of the evidence Bells. If truth favored your position you could make a cogent argument with real facts and without all the illogical argument. But you can’t.

 

just to put it in prospective for the people either to pigheaded or racist to get it
http://news.yahoo.com/ferguson-gran...-to-discuss-darren-wilson-case-230013040.html

yes that's right on of the jurors from the grand jury that failed to indict wilson for murdering brown is suing the prosecuter saying he tried to mislead them