Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Officer Wilson goes free with no charge
Comments
-
Grand Jury superiority guyBlackie said:
The defense didn't prove/disprove anything. No defense attorneys are involved in a grand jury proceeding.greenblood said:The coverage by the media was a big reason the prosecution lost the case. Everyone was so desperate to paint the cop guilty, that misinformation was delivered by the media, which the defense used against the prosecution. It also didn't help that many of the witnesses for the prosecution exaggerated the facts or blatantly lied on the stand, which the defense proved. That really doesn't help the prosecution build a strong case.
-
I read Officer Wilson had Demon eyes in the court room.
-
If Obama had a son...
-
Yeah... No defense is a Grand Jury makes it very easy to get an indictment. So when there is no indictment, you can be confident the evidence is shit.greenblood said:The coverage by the media was a big reason the prosecution lost the case. Everyone was so desperate to paint the cop guilty, that misinformation was delivered by the media, which the defense used against the prosecution. It also didn't help that many of the witnesses for the prosecution exaggerated the facts or blatantly lied on the stand, which the defense proved. That really doesn't help the prosecution build a strong case.
-
If it were a white person that was shot, there would have been no Grad Jury. The prosecutor just would have said no evidence of murder and moved on. Barely made the news. Since the person shot was black, it spun out of control and the prosecutor was forced to take it to the next step so there could be no accusation of a cover up or special treatment. The black family received a much more thorough examination of the facts that a white family would have. Everyone should feel confident that justice was served in this case. If you don't, then you are letting prejudice and racism cloud the facts of this case. Throwing an innocent person in prison to appease and angry mob is not justice. As MLK said: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"
-
Passion hates facts:MikeDamone said:If it were a white person that was shot, there would have been no Grad Jury. The prosecutor just would have said no evidence of murder and moved on. Barely made the news. Since the person shot was black, it spun out of control and the prosecutor was forced to take it to the next step so there could be no accusation of a cover up or special treatment. The black family received a much more thorough examination of the facts that a white family would have. Everyone should feel confident that justice was served in this case. If you don't, then you are letting prejudice and racism cloud the facts of this case. Throwing an innocent person in prison to appease and angry mob is not justice. As MLK said: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"
-
From the reports I've read about his wildly aggressive actions, it kind of sounds like Brown smoked real chronic (weed laced with crack or coke) or had his blunt dipped (in PCP or embalming fluid).
Maybe I'm crazy and especially if I'm 6'5" 285 lbs, but I wouldn't expect to strong-arm rob a minimart of Swishers (for my blizzies), disregard and then confront an officer of the law, escalate the situation further by assaulting the officer in his own vehicle, and finally expect to survive it all.
While somewhat off point, Rudy does have a point about this outrage and what the fundamental problem is. If black Americans are responsible for 93% of the deaths of other black Americans, then where are the protests demanding better from their own community? dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2846928/Rudy-Giuliani-wants-focus-black-black-crime-not-police-brutality-saying-white-cops-wouldn-t-needed-weren-t-killing-other.html
This cult of victimization and woe-is-me attitude only perpetuates the underlying problem which is black on black crime. They could make the whole Ferguson police force (or Chicago's) black and it still wouldn't solve any problems.
Of course the jaded part of me thinks losers like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson don't want solutions because then they wouldn't be able to raise money to fund their lifestyles as they pretend to actually address the real issues. -
That's pretty much happened with my friend and the millions of other guilty white liberals and race baiters. They aren't seeing the facts objectively because they don't want to. I didn't bother responding to the text because a) it wasn't worth dignifying with a response and b) he has a history of throwing hissy fits over things like these.CuntWaffle said:
Are you surprised his liberal white guilt is making his vagina bleed profusely? If so you may need to PMgreenblood said:Passion,
What are your thoughts?SATANS_FAGGOTIrishDawg22 -
Posted without comment:
"PassionPassion 2:54PM I hate PMs, but why should I post an explanation of how the prosecutor completely manipulated and misused the grand jury process in a way that almost guaranteed there would be no indictment? As an attorney (which I am), why should I bother explaining how the presentation of "facts" to the grand jury was completely one-sided and skewed? I love all these arm-chair Perry Masons who don't understand (or who don't want to understand) how the prosecutor ensured that the grand jury would receive the "facts" in the most favorable light to darren wilson. wilson basically was able to give a speech about his side of the story, but there was NO cross-examination of him, his background, or his version of the facts. Why should I bother posting FBI statistics showing that police officers are 21 times more likely to kill black men than their white peers? Why should I bother citing examples of armed white men NOT getting shot by police, but countless armed AND unarmed black men getting blown away because white police were "in fear?" Considering the intelligence and social views of people on this website, my efforts would be pointless, so fuck it." -
Hahahahahaha
-
Actually, if you listen to any legal scholar or law professor or prosecuting professional or defense professional that has commented today (after they reviewed the transcripts of the grand jury)... the vast majority of them say the main reason the prosecution didn't get charges... was because the prosecution handled this like a "cover your ass" case, not like a case in which he was actually trying to get charges. He did not subject the officer to anything close to the normal rigorous cross examination to his testimony. The grand jury was a white wash (yes... pun intended).greenblood said:The coverage by the media was a big reason the prosecution lost the case.
Not saying the cop was guilty of anything, just saying the prosecutor running the grand jury didn't do his job. He covered his ass. He is a politician... and he probably didn't want the police union pissed at him. -
He probably found it hard to counter the following facts:Your_Mom said:
Actually, if you listen to any legal scholar or law professor or prosecuting professional or defense professional that has commented today (after they reviewed the transcripts of the grand jury)... the vast majority of them say the main reason the prosecution didn't get charges... was because the prosecution handled this like a "cover your ass" case, not like a case in which he was actually trying to get charges. He did not subject the officer to anything close to the normal rigorous cross examination to his testimony. The grand jury was a white wash (yes... pun intended).greenblood said:The coverage by the media was a big reason the prosecution lost the case.
Not saying the cop was guilty of anything, just saying the prosecutor running the grand jury didn't do his job. He covered his ass. He is a politician... and he probably didn't want the police union pissed at him.
Kid stole
Kid tried to steal the cops gun
Kid punches cop in face
Kid got shot
Kid ran towards the cop like he was going to tackle him -
washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/25/legal-scholars-praise-ferguson-grand-jury-fairness/Your_Mom said:
Actually, if you listen to any legal scholar or law professor or prosecuting professional or defense professional that has commented today (after they reviewed the transcripts of the grand jury)... the vast majority of them say the main reason the prosecution didn't get charges... was because the prosecution handled this like a "cover your ass" case, not like a case in which he was actually trying to get charges. He did not subject the officer to anything close to the normal rigorous cross examination to his testimony. The grand jury was a white wash (yes... pun intended).greenblood said:The coverage by the media was a big reason the prosecution lost the case.
Not saying the cop was guilty of anything, just saying the prosecutor running the grand jury didn't do his job. He covered his ass. He is a politician... and he probably didn't want the police union pissed at him.
Your turn. -
You can tell Passion lost the war when all he can do is send hilarious PMs and flag posts that prove his worthlessness in this discussion.
-
The way I think this played out (FWIW I work in a courthouse)... The DAs have discretion on what charges they want to bring. They looked at the evidence and didn't find that there was enough evidence to get a conviction on any of the crimes that went to grand jury, well, because there wasn't. At best, there was probable cause, but that's ignoring the obvious self-defense aspect and all the other evidence that basically shows that the grand jury made the right decision. DAs/Prosecutors don't generally take it to a grand jury unless there's a lot more than probable cause because the burden for a conviction is so much higher and nobody wants to waste time and money. Still, if they don't seek any indictment or take it to grand jury they know they are fucked. So, they do a CYOA for political reasons and give everything to the grand jury while not recommending a finding. I'm fine with it. All the evidence suggests that Michael Brown was a dumbass at best and this isn't some thing where he got killed only because of his skin color. Not letting a cop out of their SUV and then punching them or grabbing their gun is FS.Your_Mom said:
Actually, if you listen to any legal scholar or law professor or prosecuting professional or defense professional that has commented today (after they reviewed the transcripts of the grand jury)... the vast majority of them say the main reason the prosecution didn't get charges... was because the prosecution handled this like a "cover your ass" case, not like a case in which he was actually trying to get charges. He did not subject the officer to anything close to the normal rigorous cross examination to his testimony. The grand jury was a white wash (yes... pun intended).greenblood said:The coverage by the media was a big reason the prosecution lost the case.
Not saying the cop was guilty of anything, just saying the prosecutor running the grand jury didn't do his job. He covered his ass. He is a politician... and he probably didn't want the police union pissed at him. -
I would like him to know what he sees we don't.whatshouldicareabout said:You can tell Passion lost the war when all he can do is send hilarious PMs and flag posts that prove his worthlessness in this discussion.
I have posted pictures of a cop who was beat.
I have posted articles that show blood was in the car, the kids blood.
I have posted an article that says the grand jury was fair.
He does hilarious PMs and flag posts.
-
That noted cop-hater Damone doesn't see the problem with militarized, trigger-happy cops speaks volumes.
-
What makes you think that I dont see a problem with militarized trigger happy cops? I've said that I do several times As always, fuck the police. But that opinion dues not affect the facts of this specific case.doogsinparadise said:That noted cop-hater Damone doesn't see the problem with militarized, trigger-happy cops speaks volumes.
-
Oh I agree that this case was legally not going to result in a conviction. The institutional issues were much more important.
-
The WashingtonTimes? You might as well be quoting Rush Limpdick.topdawgnc said:
washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/25/legal-scholars-praise-ferguson-grand-jury-fairness/Your_Mom said:
Actually, if you listen to any legal scholar or law professor or prosecuting professional or defense professional that has commented today (after they reviewed the transcripts of the grand jury)... the vast majority of them say the main reason the prosecution didn't get charges... was because the prosecution handled this like a "cover your ass" case, not like a case in which he was actually trying to get charges. He did not subject the officer to anything close to the normal rigorous cross examination to his testimony. The grand jury was a white wash (yes... pun intended).greenblood said:The coverage by the media was a big reason the prosecution lost the case.
Not saying the cop was guilty of anything, just saying the prosecutor running the grand jury didn't do his job. He covered his ass. He is a politician... and he probably didn't want the police union pissed at him.
Your turn.
-
The War on Drugs is pretty much the main culprit plaguing the black community. When you throw people in violent jails for violence-less crimes and the vast majority of them are a minority that breeds big time resentment from the community and allows for the violence that follows that perpetuates racial stereotypes.
It's not the whole solution, but it's a start. The numbers are ridiculous, and i think enough people on this bored have smoked weed, racked lines, talked shit, and got away with it to understand it's bullshit. -
-
Note to YourMom: this is a far more effective argument that Rush!!!111!!!!Doogles said:The War on Drugs is pretty much the main culprit plaguing the black community. When you throw people in violent jails for violence-less crimes and the vast majority of them are a minority that breeds big time resentment from the community and allows for the violence that follows that perpetuates racial stereotypes.
It's not the whole solution, but it's a start. The numbers are ridiculous, and i think enough people on this bored have smoked weed, racked lines, talked shit, and got away with it to understand it's bullshit.
Please try to do better in the future. You must be a conservative troll trying to make real liberals look bad -
Seriously! Just pull something from FAUX news! ROFL!!1Your_Mom said:
The WashingtonTimes? You might as well be quoting Rush Limpdick.topdawgnc said:
washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/25/legal-scholars-praise-ferguson-grand-jury-fairness/Your_Mom said:
Actually, if you listen to any legal scholar or law professor or prosecuting professional or defense professional that has commented today (after they reviewed the transcripts of the grand jury)... the vast majority of them say the main reason the prosecution didn't get charges... was because the prosecution handled this like a "cover your ass" case, not like a case in which he was actually trying to get charges. He did not subject the officer to anything close to the normal rigorous cross examination to his testimony. The grand jury was a white wash (yes... pun intended).greenblood said:The coverage by the media was a big reason the prosecution lost the case.
Not saying the cop was guilty of anything, just saying the prosecutor running the grand jury didn't do his job. He covered his ass. He is a politician... and he probably didn't want the police union pissed at him.
Your turn.
-
“I’ve represented top officials in the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, and they’ve told me that for the past 25 years, every single cop-shooting case has resulted in a presentation — just like this one — of every shred of evidence that’s available — even when the prosecutor thinks it’s a justifiable shoot,” said legal analyst Paul Callan.Your_Mom said:
The WashingtonTimes? You might as well be quoting Rush Limpdick.topdawgnc said:
washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/25/legal-scholars-praise-ferguson-grand-jury-fairness/Your_Mom said:
Actually, if you listen to any legal scholar or law professor or prosecuting professional or defense professional that has commented today (after they reviewed the transcripts of the grand jury)... the vast majority of them say the main reason the prosecution didn't get charges... was because the prosecution handled this like a "cover your ass" case, not like a case in which he was actually trying to get charges. He did not subject the officer to anything close to the normal rigorous cross examination to his testimony. The grand jury was a white wash (yes... pun intended).greenblood said:The coverage by the media was a big reason the prosecution lost the case.
Not saying the cop was guilty of anything, just saying the prosecutor running the grand jury didn't do his job. He covered his ass. He is a politician... and he probably didn't want the police union pissed at him.
Your turn.
newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/11/25/legal-experts-weigh-in-on-evidence-testimony-presented-to-ferguson-grand-jury/
Not sure if you want to continue to stand by your "any legal scholar comment" ... -
Passion November 25topdawgnc said:
I would like him to know what he sees we don't.whatshouldicareabout said:You can tell Passion lost the war when all he can do is send hilarious PMs and flag posts that prove his worthlessness in this discussion.
I have posted pictures of a cop who was beat.
I have posted articles that show blood was in the car, the kids blood.
I have posted an article that says the grand jury was fair.
He does hilarious PMs and flag posts.
Obviously you didn't read my first message. I didn't just say, "I know because I'm an attorney" and 2) blacks get shot by the cops more often." I explained how the St. Louis prosecutor manipulated and morphed the grand jury process to produce "facts" in the greatest light to darren wilson. Plus, wilson was simply allowed to give a lengthy speech to the grand jury about his version of the event, and what a great guy he is. There was no cross examination.
And YES, the cop DID do something wrong. He shot an unarmed guy MULTIPLE times. That BY ITSELF warrants a trial so that a jury can hear both sides of a case.
Your comment that blacks should "focus on not shooting each other" is also misleading. Yes, 93% of black Americans are killed by other black Americans. But guess what - 84% of white Americans are killed by white Americans. But of course, the media (and racially biased people) don't bother to throw out that statistic.
Here is a news story that discusses this and other issues (including a complete refutation of rudy guiliani's stupid comments): news.yahoo.com/police-brutality-rudy-giuliani-says-black-black-crime-223043538.html
MikeDamone November 25
Your stats are misleading in that you neglect to include that about 50% of the deaths of young black men are by homicide vs about 10% of young white men in the same age group.
You didn't explain anything in any detail other than saying the prosecutor manipulated the grand jury. And yes, you certainly implied that since you are an attorney you have more authority to comment than us "Perry Masons".
Are you saying that every time a cop shoots and unarmed person the cop should always stand trial for murder? Or just if the person shot is black? What if a black cop shoots an unarmed person? Are you outraged that an unarmed person was shot by a cop in Utah and won't go trial?
You're not about justice for all. Your about race baiting. Simple fact. -
Surprised he hasn't pmed you "link?" yet. Then after you submit the link you won't receive another reply or the classic "that's your source?" Rebuttle.
-
When's the next clan meeting at the Taki?
-
Burn!RoadHarv55 said:When's the next clan meeting at the Taki?
