Says the guy who has never backed up any of his beliefs in this thread with hard evidence. Just because all of the evidence you once believed in turned out to be horseshit, doesn't mean the remainder of evidence is the same.
Lol! I thought so. You are just another idiot willfully sucking from the opinions of others because you are unable to form your own opinion. It's why when asked to back up your claims with real evidence you divert and runway like the little bitch you are
Says the guy who has never backed up any of his beliefs in this thread with hard evidence. Just because all of the evidence you once believed in turned out to be horseshit, doesn't mean the remainder of evidence is the same.
Giuliani said, "I find it very disappointing that you're not talking about the fact that 93 percent of blacks [killed] in America are killed by other blacks." He added later, "The white police officers wouldn't be there [in black communities] if you weren't killing each other."
I only care about the evidence to simply point out people's bias and to show them their beliefs are faith based. I care more about the process and that the process was fair and just, so far it's not looking so good and it that should concern everyone, not just brown supporters or wilson supporters. The fact that cops get special treatment when facing the same justice system ordinary citizens face should be sounding alarm bells in everyone's ears.
The minute people accept an unfair justice system is the time when there is no justice.
Ok I am starting to question things again.
The National Bar Association released a statement.
http://www.nationalbar.org/
http://us7.campaign-archive1.com/?u=b493e6c4d31beda32fdaf8e2d&id=73514e334b
I put the two links because I wasn't sure if the second one was authentic but you'll see that it is on their front page.
Special treatment?
There was *NO* fucking way the DA was going to get a conviction, none. He knew it, the FBI likely knew it. *ALL* forensic evidence supports Wilson's story. Several eyewitness accounts support his story which is supported by forensic evidence. The eyewitnesses that don't support his account have all been discredited by the physical evidence and other eyewitnesses that do agree with Wilson *AND* the physical evidence.
There was no special treatment except he saved the taxpayers millions of dollars and society the agony of another sham trial for political purposes.
Special treatment?
There was *NO* fucking way the DA was going to get a conviction, none. He knew it, the FBI likely knew it. *ALL* forensic evidence supports Wilson's story. Several eyewitness accounts support his story which is supported by forensic evidence. The eyewitnesses that don't support his account have all been discredited by the physical evidence and other eyewitnesses that do agree with Wilson *AND* the physical evidence.
There was no special treatment except he saved the taxpayers millions of dollars and society the agony of another sham trial for political purposes.
Lol! What evidence? How many times do I have to ask before you will provide the evidence that brown attacked wilson? You keep making the claim and yet you can't provide the evidence. Don't you find it odd that the two key situations that would make or break the case is absent of any evidence except for eye witness testimony? You don't find it odd at all that in order for the prosecutor to win the indictment and have the case go to trial all he would have to do is provide the eye witness testimony that supports darrions version of events and instead the prosecutor sabatoged his own case and provided testimony from witnesses that support Wilson's version of events? You don't find it odd that the prosecutor didn't cross examine any testimony that supported wilson that didn't match previous accounts the witness gave? You didnt find it odd that a prosecutor, whose sole responsibility in a grand jury hearing is to provide evidence for the prosecution, let wilson himself testify? Nothing odd about that at all huh? I guess you also didn't find it odd that the prosecutor didn't question Wilson's testimony when it contradicted Wilson's original accounting of what happened.
Nope, you don't question anything, so long as you got the result you wanted. All that education you paid for, apparently for nothing. Congrats
Aren't you tired yet, fatass?
Lol! I thought so. You are just another idiot willfully sucking from the opinions of others because you are unable to form your own opinion. It's why when asked to back up your claims with real evidence you divert and runway like the little bitch you are
Where's Londo with some butthurt cream for you?
You and DCal430 are the one's in need of the Boudreaux's butt paste. You can't accept the fact that you were taken by the media darling tour and most of all by a known liar.
Why would I be tired, I don't have to run around deflecting and making shit up to prove my point. Are you tired yet or is living on unemployment/disability rather relaxing for you?
Your key witness (Dorian Johnson) is a known liar from a previous case where he provided falsified information to the police, yet you take his story as being the gospel. The forensic evidence and other witness statements blow his claim of what happened out of the water.
M. Brown's mom was on CBS morning show and whined about her son, gave excuses after excuses about her son behavior at the store. At least she did not repeat the lies such as he was "a gentle giant" and "about to start college" and "shot from behind". Uh huh. If her son did not behave to Wilson as he did at the store, he would be still alive. Period.
I think the Brown attorney is an amateur. That was incredibly embarrassing to watch.
This is another problem we have here. Trying to deflect blame and not take responsibility for a persons actions.
1. Robbed a store
2. Told a cop to fuck off
3. Attacked a cop
Then they try to say he shouldn't have been shot and the cop is bad. That the cop said mean things about the community. Oh no!
People need to face reality.
it's confirmed in the evidence from GJ that mike brown's body was 153ft. 9 in. from the police cruiser. NOT the 35 ft. that everyone has been quoting.
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370491-grand-jury-volume-2.html#document/p145/a189484
given that this is stated as fact... if you read darren wilson's account of the story from the grand jury evidence... how can both of these things be true?
Facts don't matter nor does Wilson's conflicting statements.
Do you even hear yourself? You basically want the prosecutor to discredit his own witness, what sane prosecutor would do that? Mcculloch did! But that's besides the point because discrediting the witnesses was done and yet it wasn't done against Wilsons conflicting testimony in yet another stunningly unusual move by the prosecutor (which you have yet to acknowledge).
I'm still curious as to what this forensic evidence you have that backs up the claim that brown attacked wilson.
I'm curious to know what evidence you have that shows Wilson was the aggressor. Grabbed Brown by the neck, why is there no evidence of such?