why are you ok with 99.99% of all grand juries being done improperly? you never did answer that question. nor did you address the vast differences an indictments for cops and non cops. what people wanted was justice for wilson it was a show peace to cover up is own incomptence. justice requires everyone be bound by the same rules. your just a shill for cronyisms. i ask again why are you ok with different standards for police than everyone else. why are you ok with different rules for different people. because at the end of the day this isn't about mich brown or darren wilson. its about how cops get lets off the hook for the same shit that put some one else away for life. i've said it once i'll say it again supra omnem legem, above all the law. the moment someone like you demands different standards for different people the law becomes meaningless. so spares you whiny bullshit and spare us the lies. at the end of the day your just another self indulgent prick defending a thug who killed when he didn't have to. and don't be trying to push that 99.9% on me. thats the logical conclusion of your beliefs of your statements. own your shit. don't like being called on it don't say it.
? I was the one emphasizing the distances between the shell casings. I was the one who first specified exactly how the weapon used ejects them (up and to the right). I have posted links to diagrams of the scene, and pointed out to you where the shell casings were found and how their locations apparently (pending actual trial testimony cross-examined for clarity) conflict with Wilson's account. Meanwhile, you are the one who doesn't seem to know what an "automatic weapon" is. That is false. Example please. The only possible hint of anything like that to appear so far was a reference you made to someone claiming Wilson shot Brown in the back - and that is very easily explained by the physical evidence (Wilson missed with half his shots, including most or all of the first few in the ten - the ones that would have been aimed at Brown's back ). At least one, and by subsequent inference of the prosecutor others, have been demonstrated to be fabrications. The least credible one was the one most consistent with Wilson, and the most steadfast in her wholly imaginary account. Meanwhile, in response to my specific and evidence supported short (and partial) list of apparent conflicts between Wilson's account and the physical evidence we have before us, you have posted nothing except repeated claims that these conflicts do not exist. You have not addressed any of them. You have been ignoring the physical evidence, almost completely, in your posting. This fits the tenor of the OP, btw: supposed "liberal/conservative" disagreements in the US these days quite often feature a general agreement of the physical facts with the "liberal" side of things, and this event follows that pattern.
cute a personal attack. i'm sorry you dislike being called out on your mind boggling illogical your the one claiming the uniqueness of the wilson grand jury was proper therefore implying the vast majority of grand juries aren't conducted properly not me. that i simply ask you to defend the logical conclusions drawn from your own statements doesn't mean i'm on meds. its just makes you a hack to lazy and dishonest to defend your positions. so for the third time i ask you why are you ok with with the gross mishandling of this grand jury and the wildly different percentages of indictments. your the one arguing the outlier is the norm not me. if you are unwilling to defend YOUR position that stop arguing. but don't attack me since you lack the basic courage to stand by your convictions.
Then stop posting nonsense, and lying about someone isn't a personal attack? If you want to be taken seriously, then stop the nonsense.
