Author Topic: "Poll: Should officer Darren Wilson, who shot Michael Brown, be arrested?"  (Read 69003 times)

well theres always this bit (which is sourced to msnbc)

whatever, brown started it either way
Likely story but:
http://sfbayview.com/2014/08/mike-brown-appears-to-have-paid-for-those-cigars/
see how he gets out money and pays for them?

so yeah I guess they were taken the same way you take some groceries from the grocery store?

And your article is old as stuff. Wasn't updated since before evidence piled up
« Last Edit: November 27, 2014, 07:19:22 PM by Aces »

Or the fact that Darren Wilson stopped him for jaywalking and not because he was a suspect at the time?
Clearly you don't know your facts either. He wasn't stopped for [just] jaywalking because a description of the suspect had been sent out over police radio beforehand, even Wilson confirmed this.

Mike Brown didn't steal anything.


yeah that's totally not him......

Likely story but:
http://sfbayview.com/2014/08/mike-brown-appears-to-have-paid-for-those-cigars/
see how he gets out money and pays for them?

so yeah I guess they were taken the same way you take some groceries from the grocery store?

And your article is old as stuff. Wasn't updated since before evidence piled up
Even if he didn't steal them it doesn't justify the fact that he attacked the store owner.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2014, 07:29:19 PM by Blake1 »

Even if he didn't steal them it doesn't justify the fact that he attacked the store owner.
smh


Okay now you're being handicapped because I just gave 2 SOURCES which show that the man attacking that clerk was not Mike Brown.
Clearly you don't know your facts either. He wasn't stopped for [just] jaywalking because a description of the suspect had been sent out over police radio beforehand, even Wilson confirmed this.
the police chief HIMSELF said that Mike being stopped was not related to the robbery at all
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/15/us/missouri-teen-shooting/

That was not Mike Brown in the footage though so what are we on about?

Ignorance at it's loving finest, right here folks.
no like, do you actually not see the issue with what you wrote?

just read it over like 2 or 3 more times and see if you can figure it out


no like, do you actually not see the issue with what you wrote?

just read it over like 2 or 3 more times and see if you can figure it out
"omg he said felonies when its not a felony!!!1!"


forget off.

"omg he said felonies when its not a felony!!!1!"
forget off.

Clearly you don't know your facts either. He wasn't stopped for [just] jaywalking because a description of the suspect had been sent out over police radio beforehand, even Wilson confirmed this.
That's weird, I thought in his interview he said he didn't realize they could've been involved in the store theft until he seen brown slip the cigarettes to guy #2.


"omg he said felonies when its not a felony!!!1!"
Uh, that's not what I was going for.

If the store owner confronted that guy for shoplifting, and Brown did not shoplift, that means that the guy confronting the shopkeeper couldn't have been Brown.

To those who are saying Brown was being stopped for jaywalking:

Wilson noticed Brown was walking in the street and told him to walk on the sidewalk. Brown was ignoring Wilson's orders and began to aggressively resist him without reasonable provocation. The reason that Wilson turned the confrontation into something more was due to the aggressive resistance. He didn't just fly out of his car with a spray of bullets on an innocent apologetic boy who wasn't on the sidewalk.

Wilson noticed Brown was walking in the street and told him to walk on the sidewalk. Brown was ignoring Wilson's orders and began to aggressively resist him without reasonable provocation. The reason that Wilson turned the confrontation into something more was due to the aggressive resistance. He didn't just fly out of his car with a spray of bullets on an innocent apologetic boy who wasn't on the sidewalk.
I don't think anybody believes that. What people are angry about is the use of lethal force in a scenario where non-lethal force would have been more appropriate. As far as I know, lethal force is only supposed to be used when an officer's life is in danger, and the fact that Michael Brown was unarmed and Darren Wilson was almost completely uninjured is what has people riled up.

To those who are saying Brown was being stopped for jaywalking:

Wilson noticed Brown was walking in the street and told him to walk on the sidewalk. Brown was ignoring Wilson's orders and began to aggressively resist him without reasonable provocation. The reason that Wilson turned the confrontation into something more was due to the aggressive resistance. He didn't just fly out of his car with a spray of bullets on an innocent apologetic boy who wasn't on the sidewalk.
Pursuing someone from jaywalking across a street that isn't even busy is a pretty unjustifiable reason to provoke someone even if you are a cop. That's something you just tell someone not to do, considering Brown was already making his way to the sidewalk.

And I'm wondering just what aggressive resistance an unarmed person could be capable of from a distance away.

There's quite a history of Darren Wilson's aggression in the past that would influence excessive force.

To those who are saying Brown was being stopped for jaywalking:

Wilson noticed Brown was walking in the street and told him to walk on the sidewalk. Brown was ignoring Wilson's orders and began to aggressively resist him without reasonable provocation. The reason that Wilson turned the confrontation into something more was due to the aggressive resistance. He didn't just fly out of his car with a spray of bullets on an innocent apologetic boy who wasn't on the sidewalk.

Because if someone throws a punch, you should shoot them 6 times!!!

Look at Wilson's injuries, he wasn't even that injured. Seriously, it looks like he got the stuff slapped out of him, not beat the forget up like he claims.