Witness 40: Exposing A Fraud In Ferguson

[TechBoyJK]

lol yeah I just got back in and caught up on this thread, reading through it. Amazing how someone cannot understand something so clearly stated.

We'll all be talking on one level that dude just doesn't understand or can't comprehend, and since he doesn't understand, he proceeds to tell you why you're wrong by explaining it at some completely lower level. So not only does he announce, quite clearly, he doesn't understand, he proceeds to do so in a condescending manner that simply explains exactly why he doesn't understand it.

It's like arguing with your doctor about metabolism then proceeding to tell him he doesn't understand what a calorie is, and you show him the wikipedia page with a 'gotcha' attitude.

You're not impressing your doctor. In fact, he know realizes you didn't understand a word he said, because if you did, it would have been quite clear to him he does know what a calorie is.

This is just like ivwshane correcting us about grand juries and trial juries.

Dude just needs to sit in the corner for a while.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

There's no evidence that Wilson committed a crime, the evidence corroborated Wilson's sequence of events that occurred that day, and the grand jury got it right with their "No bill" decision. I'm sorry you're so blinded by race that you can't see the truth.

That's mighty white of you. You feel better now? White cop is good and safe, anotehr black kid is dead, and no one is punished. High fives for you and your ilk all around I guess? DA is unethical, but again, that's OK with you. Glad to see you have no racism or bias, LOL.

Just like the white man with a loaded rifle doesn't get shot, but black people with fake guns not doing anything illegal get executed in 2seconds. And that is Ok with you too. Yup, no racism seen. Another high five for you?

Lets look at Dorian Johnson's story:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/14/justice/ferguson-dorian-johnson-statements/

According to an examination of the transcripts of Johnson's two accounts -- delivered 28 days apart -- Brown's friend had roughly the same recollection of what he saw on the afternoon of August 9. He was consistent on many of the broader points:

His story didn't change. And contradicts what Officer Wilson said. Gee, go figure, right?

Let's look at Wilson's story:

Link

Wilson told the first officer to question him on the death that he did not know about a radio call about two teenagers being wanted for robbery
But he later told St Louis detectives that he had matched Michael Brown to the description of wanted suspects
He also did not initially reveal that he backed up his car towards Michael Brown and his friend, which he said subsequently
Grand jury evidence from his squad supervisor who was first to ask him about shooting discloses discrepancy

Hmm...someone's story changed totally. Go figure huh? Now, he wouldn't lie right? Cops that kill people never lie to make themselves look better right? (Hint: read the story about the SC trooper that shot a black man for getting his wallet. Note how he 100% lied and made up a story to justify his shooting, only the fact that his dash cam was recording saved that man's life)

Gee, looks like the two primary people involved (that were not killed already of course) have conflicting stories.

Now one of these people story stayed the same, one did not. Yup, no reason for a trial with that kind of confusion. Especially since it was the cop that did the killing that changed his story, no reason to try to cover his ass right? But he's white, so it's all good in your mind I guess.

But like you said, the only thing that matters to you is that the Wilson got off, so none of this matters right? Good shoot, another thug dead in your mind.

 

[TechBoyJK]

That's mighty white of you. You feel better now? White cop is good and safe, anotehr black kid is dead, and no one is punished. High fives for you and your ilk all around I guess? DA is unethical, but again, that's OK with you. Glad to see you have no racism or bias, LOL.

Just like the white man with a loaded rifle doesn't get shot, but black people with fake guns not doing anything illegal get executed in 2seconds. And that is Ok with you too. Yup, no racism seen. Another high five for you?

Lets look at Dorian Johnson's story:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/14/justice/ferguson-dorian-johnson-statements/



His story didn't change. And contradicts what Officer Wilson said. Gee, go figure, right?

Let's look at Wilson's story:

Link



Hmm...someone's story changed totally. Go figure huh? Now, he wouldn't lie right? Cops that kill people never lie to make themselves look better right? (Hint: read the story about the SC trooper that shot a black man for getting his wallet. Note how he 100% lied and made up a story to justify his shooting, only the fact that his dash cam was recording saved that man's life)

Gee, looks like the two primary people involved (that were not killed already of course) have conflicting stories.

Now one of these people story stayed the same, one did not. Yup, no reason for a trial with that kind of confusion. Especially since it was the cop that did the killing that changed his story, no reason to try to cover his ass right? But he's white, so it's all good in your mind I guess.

But like you said, the only thing that matters to you is that the Wilson got off, so none of this matters right? Good shoot, another thug dead in your mind.

Again, there's no evidence that Wilson committed a crime. This is a case that should have never went to Grand Jury, because it has zero chance of winning at trial. The DA gave it to the GJ as a courtesy, and it returned the result as expected.

Do you not agree that Brown got himself killed? Or are you still buying the false narrative that Wilson killed Brown because of some racist motive?

And believe it or not, you're making this about race. White this.. white that.

You're the one being racist. Your entire argument stems on the concept of this being about race, which you keep affixing to the argument.

"But he's white, so it's all good in your mind I guess."

He didn't say that. YOU DID. You're putting racism into people's mouths. That's your only argument. This has to be corrupt BECAUSE RACISM. If you can remove the 'THATS RACIST' goggles, and learn a little bit about the dynamic in St. Louis, maybe you'd understand. But it's clear you don't.

 

[TechBoyJK]

and wait, there's more

 

[OutHouse]

Man, you really must love that DA to let him get away with so much unethical activity.

He lets white cops off for lying to the GJ? No problem for you. Only killed some black bums.

Admits to letting known liars testify? No problem as well. You got the result you wanted.

Your post is quite telling and speaks to what is important to you...white cop gets off, so it's all good. Everything else is irrelevant.

you sound like a racist and bigot, care to focus on the facts or is skin color too much for you to overcome?

 

[TechBoyJK]

you sound like a racist and bigot, care to focus on the facts or is skin color too much for you to overcome?

He's arguably the most racist person in the thread.

 

[werepossum]

The DA determines whether or not to bring the case before the grand jury. If the DA is pretty sure that the prosecution cannot win a conviction in the case, the case won't be brought before the grand jury.

In the Ferguson case - given the physical evidence and the conflicting eyewitness testimony, it's pretty clear that a finding by a jury of "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt" was a pipe dream. And under normal circumstances the DA would simply have decided not to proceed with the case. But given the incredible anger and media attention surrounding this case, can you imagine what would have happened if the DA had done that?

So it's abundantly clear that the DA brought the case before the grand jury in order to be "transparent." Unfortunately, that's resulted in it own problems. Really, there was no good way of handling a case like this.

The existence of one more "liar eyewitness" does nothing to alter the conclusion that there is simply too much exculpatory hard evidence and too much exculpatory testimony to allow a verdict of "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." No reasonable jury on Earth would convict. So why on earth should this case have been brought to trial?

Well said.

The takeaway from this shooting should be the need for a system for treating police shootings that removes those working with them, but otherwise preserves customary rules and procedures. A data dump to the Grand Jury is better than simply refusing to indict (which rationally had to be the DA's conclusion absent the rioting) but as we've seen, presents its own problems.

Lying to a grand jury is perjury. A DA knowingly allowing someone to lie to a grand jury is called suborning perjury and is a felony.

He admitted knowing that a witness lied to the grand jury, the only question right now is when he knew. If he knew beforehand then he committed a crime.

Not a lawyer but I believe suborning perjury requires the DA to encourage and actively participate in the perjury. On principle I agree this woman should have been excluded and in fact prosecuted, but there are several witnesses on Brown's behalf with the same lack of provenance, and eliminating their testimony would have caused even more rioting.

Holy fuck you're dense.

This is intentional density. He's not normally stupid, but when race comes into it best buy him an airline ticket so that the points going over his head are at least in the same atmospheric layer.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

That's mighty white of you. You feel better now? White cop is good and safe, anotehr black kid is dead, and no one is punished. High fives for you and your ilk all around I guess? DA is unethical, but again, that's OK with you. Glad to see you have no racism or bias, LOL.

Just like the white man with a loaded rifle doesn't get shot, but black people with fake guns not doing anything illegal get executed in 2seconds. And that is Ok with you too. Yup, no racism seen. Another high five for you?

Lets look at Dorian Johnson's story:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/14/justice/ferguson-dorian-johnson-statements/



His story didn't change. And contradicts what Officer Wilson said. Gee, go figure, right?

Let's look at Wilson's story:

Link



Hmm...someone's story changed totally. Go figure huh? Now, he wouldn't lie right? Cops that kill people never lie to make themselves look better right? (Hint: read the story about the SC trooper that shot a black man for getting his wallet. Note how he 100% lied and made up a story to justify his shooting, only the fact that his dash cam was recording saved that man's life)

Gee, looks like the two primary people involved (that were not killed already of course) have conflicting stories.

Now one of these people story stayed the same, one did not. Yup, no reason for a trial with that kind of confusion. Especially since it was the cop that did the killing that changed his story, no reason to try to cover his ass right? But he's white, so it's all good in your mind I guess.

But like you said, the only thing that matters to you is that the Wilson got off, so none of this matters right? Good shoot, another thug dead in your mind.

The autopsy clearly shows no shots from behind or the under side of the arms. So Dorian's story is debunked on both shot in the back or shots fired with hands up as all shots from the front. Shell casings beyond the place where Brown ended up. This corroborates Wilson's story that Brown was charging towards him as he fired a volley, retreated, and fired another volley. Dorian never described the gun shots as they occurred, based on the witness in the Black Conseco video Dorian was running away so he couldn't/didn't see/hear what he claims, this witness described the gun shots to a "T". Also there's another video that shows Dorian coming down from a wooded area behind the apartments several minutes after the incident again showing he left the area. However, keep on believing it's about race/in the false narrative rather than looking at the real evidence.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

The autopsy clearly shows no shots from behind or the under side of the arms. So Dorian's story is debunked on both shot in the back or shots fired with hands up as all shots from the front. Shell casings beyond the place where Brown ended up. This corroborates Wilson's story that Brown was charging towards him as he fired a volley, retreated, and fired another volley. Dorian never described the gun shots as they occurred, based on the witness in the Black Conseco video Dorian was running away so he couldn't/didn't see/hear what he claims, this witness described the gun shots to a "T". Also there's another video that shows Dorian coming down from a wooded area behind the apartments several minutes after the incident again showing he left the area. However, keep on believing it's about race/in the false narrative rather than looking at the real evidence.

No such thing, but I guess you sleep better at night reading the breitbart to reassure yourself you aren't a closet racist.

Like you said, Wilson got off, that's all that matters. If laws need to be bent or broken, so be it. Nice philosophy you got there.

Wilson clearly changed his story, Dorian didn't. Somehow in your mind that still means Dorian lied and Wilson is totally truthful. Impressive cognitive dissonance. Maybe you and Spidey should hang out together more, you seem to have similar viewpoints. You can reinforce each others beliefs.

Do you deny that Wilson changed his story? Funny how you always cherrypick peoples responses and only try to focus on one little part of a post.

And you still support the DA despite his history of letting police off from lying under oath, as well as (at a minimum) conducting himself unethically with allowing people to testify that are lying. Once again, doesn't matter to you as long as Wilson got off. Mighty white of you to be so forgiving to some (white) people.

 

[TechBoyJK]

No such thing, but I guess you sleep better at night reading the breitbart to reassure yourself you aren't a closet racist.

Yep. You went there in your first sentence. And yes, there is such thing. There's plenty of evidence that shows there's no case to win at trial. You just don't want to believe it.

Have fun forever misunderstanding the reality of this situation and why things turned out the way they did.

GarfieldTheInjectorofRacismintoEverything

 

[MagickMan]

Every GJ hearing has at least 2-3 funky, untrustworthy witnesses, not sure how this is news.

 

[soundforbjt]

Every GJ hearing has at least 2-3 funky, untrustworthy witnesses, not sure how this is news.

It's news because the DA's office knew it and let them testify anyway.

 

[TechBoyJK]

It's news because the DA's office knew it and let them testify anyway.

They let them testify because if they didn't, the story would have been how the DA didn't let the star witnesses testify.

They just threw it all on the table so that at the end of the day, nobody could say they hid evidence.

 

[soundforbjt]

They let them testify because if they didn't, the story would have been how the DA didn't let the star witnesses testify.

They just threw it all on the table so that at the end of the day, nobody could say they hid evidence.

If the DA had ANY balls at all, he would have done his job correctly no matter what the outcome.
If he felt the officer was innocent he should have had the balls and conviction to not call for a GJ, instead he makes a sham of the GJ procedure and causes more lack of faith in the justice system.
He should resign since he's incapable of doing his job ethically and effectively.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

They let them testify because if they didn't, the story would have been how the DA didn't let the star witnesses testify.

They just threw it all on the table so that at the end of the day, nobody could say they hid evidence.

The DA was unethical and possibly broke the law. Since you are so tough on crime, why aren't you supporting an investigation of the DA?

Of course, this is the same DA that let white cops off the hook for lying under oath to a GJ, when they shot and killed two black men. The DA's comment when he found out that the officers lied? The dead black men were "bums".

Yup no racism or bias there, no sir, totally on the up and up. But Londo was OK with it, since the white cops got off, so nothing to see there.

Do you support the DA allowing cops to lie under oath with no legal repercussions? Yes or no?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

No such thing, but I guess you sleep better at night reading the breitbart to reassure yourself you aren't a closet racist.

Like you said, Wilson got off, that's all that matters. If laws need to be bent or broken, so be it. Nice philosophy you got there.

Wilson clearly changed his story, Dorian didn't. Somehow in your mind that still means Dorian lied and Wilson is totally truthful. Impressive cognitive dissonance. Maybe you and Spidey should hang out together more, you seem to have similar viewpoints. You can reinforce each others beliefs.

Do you deny that Wilson changed his story? Funny how you always cherrypick peoples responses and only try to focus on one little part of a post.

And you still support the DA despite his history of letting police off from lying under oath, as well as (at a minimum) conducting himself unethically with allowing people to testify that are lying. Once again, doesn't matter to you as long as Wilson got off. Mighty white of you to be so forgiving to some (white) people.

Let me know when you can disprove the physical evidence that debunks the stories of the witnesses you want so badly to believe.

 

[TechBoyJK]

The DA was unethical and possibly broke the law. Since you are so tough on crime, why aren't you supporting an investigation of the DA?

Of course, this is the same DA that let white cops off the hook for lying under oath to a GJ, when they shot and killed two black men. The DA's comment when he found out that the officers lied? The dead black men were "bums".

Yup no racism or bias there, no sir, totally on the up and up. But Londo was OK with it, since the white cops got off, so nothing to see there.

Do you support the DA allowing cops to lie under oath with no legal repercussions? Yes or no?

Wow, it's obvious you are drinking up the media fabrications like it's koolaid and you've been in the desert for a month. Your perspective is so skewed there's no chance of you seeing things for what they are. Everything's racist and everyone is a bigot.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Wow, it's obvious you are drinking up the media fabrications like it's koolaid and you've been in the desert for a month. Your perspective is so skewed there's no chance of you seeing things for what they are. Everything's racist and everyone is a bigot.

LOL. You are free to read the articles about the DA letting the cops off for lying. It's a matter of public record, I have posted links to it before.

Also, his calling the dead men "bums" is also a matter of record.

Guess you don't like hearing the truth.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Oh, and one of the jurors is now sueing to be allowed to talk about this case.

http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/grand-juror-sues-mcculloch-says-he-mischaracterized-wilson-case

“In [the grand juror]’s view, the current information available about the grand jurors’ views is not entirely accurate — especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges,” the lawsuit says. “Moreover, the public characterization of the grand jurors’ view of witnesses and evidence does not accord with [Doe]’s own.”

From [the grand juror]’s perspective, the investigation of Wilson had a stronger focus on the victim than in other cases presented to the grand jury,” the lawsuit states. Doe also believes the legal standards were conveyed in a “muddled” and “untimely” manner to the grand jury.

Gee, so once again, the DA looks to be either incompetent or throwing the case. Go figure?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Let me know when you can disprove the physical evidence that debunks the stories of the witnesses you want so badly to believe.

Hate to break it to you, but of the two people most involved (and still alive), one didn't change their story, adn one did.

And the one that changed his story was the cop. Fact.

Brown's friend didn't change his story. And the fact he was wrong about the shooting is not a big deal, and not lying. Anyone not a racist or authoritarian will admit to it, but if someone sees someone running away with a cop shooting at them, it would be easy to think he was shot when he stopped running abruptly.

Multiple news articles all pointed this out (I guess Breitbart doesn't, so no wonder you don't believe it). From his viewpoint, that is what he thought he saw. And he didn't later change his story either.

But Wilson certainly did. So explain why he lied and changed his story?

It's odd that the cop lied and changed his story, but you still believe him. Hmmm. To bad Merg bailed out so he could remind us how cops never lie right?

 

[SMOGZINN]

The takeaway from this shooting should be the need for a system for treating police shootings that removes those working with them, but otherwise preserves customary rules and procedures. A data dump to the Grand Jury is better than simply refusing to indict (which rationally had to be the DA's conclusion absent the rioting) but as we've seen, presents its own problems.

I agree with you about us needing to find some way to remove the support system that surrounds police when they are accused of a serious crime. That support system is needed in their day to day dealings with the public, but when there is serious allegations of misconduct within the force, we need a third party to take over.

But I think that this has a bigger takeaway then that, I think the thing we should really learn from this is that a large portion of our population has lost faith in our justice system.

Decades of a mostly useless war on drugs, ever increasing 'touch of crime' tactics that created unreasonable penalties for minor crimes, 'Three Strikes' laws that along with 'mandatory sentence' that has created ludicrous and highly publicised judgments for silly infractions, along with perpetrators of some of the largest and most outrageous crimes in the history of our nation getting away with comparatively minor punishments along with the courts bending over backwards to not 'inconvenience' the convicted, but still very wealthy, criminal has eroded our trust in the system to the point that even solid middle class white men like me have to agree that it is broken.

The very concept of Guilt and Innocence are judgement calls, they are at their essence opinions. It does not matter if someone is innocent or guilty based on the laws as written if we don't trust the people that are enforcing and judging those laws. The justice system works on the trust of the people that it is just and fair. If that is lost, the entire system crumbles.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

That's mighty white of you.

Wow...just wow.

 

[TechBoyJK]

LOL. You are free to read the articles about the DA letting the cops off for lying. It's a matter of public record, I have posted links to it before.

Also, his calling the dead men "bums" is also a matter of record.

Guess you don't like hearing the truth.

What's the DA's record for prosecuting cops? You know it's greater than 50% right? For every instance you can skew into making the DA out to be racist or corrupt, there's many more than show he actually will throw the book at corrupt cops. But don't let that history alter your racist bias.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Oh, and one of the jurors is now sueing to be allowed to talk about this case.

http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/grand-juror-sues-mcculloch-says-he-mischaracterized-wilson-case





Gee, so once again, the DA looks to be either incompetent or throwing the case. Go figure?

You're an idiot.

The DA just listened to what the GOV and DOJ wanted him to do to appease the public. That's why he bowed out of making the call in the first place. He could have just denied indictment, but imagine how you'd feel about that right now, eh?

 

[TechBoyJK]

Hate to break it to you, but of the two people most involved (and still alive), one didn't change their story, adn one did.

And the one that changed his story was the cop. Fact.

Brown's friend didn't change his story. And the fact he was wrong about the shooting is not a big deal, and not lying. Anyone not a racist or authoritarian will admit to it, but if someone sees someone running away with a cop shooting at them, it would be easy to think he was shot when he stopped running abruptly.

Multiple news articles all pointed this out (I guess Breitbart doesn't, so no wonder you don't believe it). From his viewpoint, that is what he thought he saw. And he didn't later change his story either.

But Wilson certainly did. So explain why he lied and changed his story?

It's odd that the cop lied and changed his story, but you still believe him. Hmmm. To bad Merg bailed out so he could remind us how cops never lie right?

You should read more about Dorian Johnson and his history.. but you won't because you don't want to realize why he has zero credibility.