The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie

@giujohn,

I've answered all your questions. I've not evaded anything you've asked.

You haven't answered mine.

@Frank Apisa,

Probably because he doesn't understand them. Don't expect miracles.

@izzythepush,

Apparently he has decided that the best way to evade any of my questions...is to pretend that I have not been answering his.

My guess is, if he were being honest, most of his answers would be almost identical to mine, because I am answering his questions as logically as possible.

But maybe I AM expecting miracles, Izzy, and maybe he does NOT understand the answers.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Clearly you're becoming a lot more religious in your old age.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Thanks, Iz. I needed a laugh this morning. Got knocked out of a major poker tournaments last night...early! I hate when that happens...and usually am not able to smile for a full day.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

I'm sorry to hear that. Next time use a good solid poker.

http://www.blackcountrymetalworks.co.uk/product_images/FG1144_poker_0000315361.jpg

This should see you right.

I'm in a brilliant mood, Southampton beat Manchester United at Old Trafford yesterday, last time we did that was 27 years ago.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Were you rooting for the Saints...or just against the Devils?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Of course I was rooting for The Saints. 3rd in the table 7 points out of last 3 games, drew Chelsea, beat Arsenal, beat Manchester United. We're all on a high right now and are talking Champions League.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

You would make a good drinking buddy frank!

0 Replies

@giujohn,

Quote:

I SPECIFICALLY asked you if the evidence was exculpatory or inculpatory...your answer? None. You did a little dance. So maybe your definition of specifically is different from the rest of us...IDK

And "sneer"?? Can you really see me Frank? Im going to put on my bathrobe just in case.

He did answer, he said the evidence would be examined by the members of jury and they would decide if it would have been evidence favorable to Wilson or evidence not favorable to Wilson after a professional like a forensic expert or autopsy expert would explain to the jury what the evidence indicates. Unless a person is trained in such it would be hard to know if the evidence of the body is exculpatory or not.

People post in a sneer all the time which just means they are smart elects in their responses.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

NO...I asked Frank if HE thought it was exculpatory or inculpatory...I already know what the jury thought!

2 Replies

@giujohn,

You only know the grand jury decided not to indict. You do not know if the grand jury thought the evidence of the body was exculpatory or not.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

Quote:

You only know the grand jury decided not to indict. You do not know if the grand jury thought the evidence of the body was exculpatory or not.

Can't you Wilson haters be honest?

To bring a true bill all the grand jury would needed to do is reached the conclusion that the evidence in total supported that there was probable cause that a crime had been committed.

A hell of a lower standard then a trial jury would need to meet to find him guilty so yes indeed the GJ came to the conclusion that the evidence in total did not indicate any crime had been committed.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Quote:

You only know the grand jury decided not to indict. You do not know if the grand jury thought the evidence of the body was exculpatory or not.

Well now...First, the conversation was regarding the NUMBER of shots NOT the body...two different pieces of evidence.
Second, by it's very definition, exculpatory is evidence of a nature that will exonerate a potential defendant (wilson) and a true bill means there was no inculpatory evidence, or that which shows guilt, ipso facto the jury thought the evidence was exculpatory. (this anit rocket surgery)

1 Reply

@giujohn,

I repeat, you do not know if the grand jury in Missouri thought the evidence exculpatory or not. You only know they decided to return no bill of indictment. And it's "ain't" not "anit" and "science" not "surgery." I have to admit I am not the smartest around here by a long shot, but really.

Professors Fagan and Harcourt Provide Facts on Grand Jury Practice In Light of Ferguson Decision

1 Reply

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

NO...I asked Frank if HE thought it was exculpatory or inculpatory...I already know what the jury thought!

And I told you what I think.

Let me sum it up again:

By itself...the shots are not exculpatory or inculpatory evidence...they are only evidence. The ONLY way a decision can be made about whether it is exculpatory or inculpatory is to view it in conjunction with other evidence that may (or may not) be allowed.

You know that as well as I.

And you do not know what the jury thought...because the case was never brought before a jury. That fiasco with the grand jury was an absurdity...a trial without the safeguards...and without the chance for the other side to question what is being presented.

The Grand Jury does not have the necessary rules of evidence...or the cross examination feature necessary to the kind of decision you are asking about.

I HAVE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION.

So I ask you...do you disagree with what I have said about it? And in what way?

Now why don't you grow the spine needed to answer that question.

3 Replies

@BillRM,

I think we wrapped this one, and so did the jury. There isn't anything on Wilson strong enough to warrant an action, and the actions taken by the town only hurt themselves and their neighbors. The rioters should look around at the values of their homes and the mess they made around them. Than figure out how to do what is right and clean that mess up, rather than blame police for all of their problems

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Perhaps start by teaching better values to the following generations, such as robbing stores and fighting cops is bad.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

Quote:

science" not "surgery."

NO... wrong again...it's Rocket Surgery

Maybe you're a brain donnor?

URBAN DICTIONARY
Rocket Surgeon:
A hybrid of the terms Rocket Scientist and Brain Surgeon. "It is not that difficult, it doesn't take a rocket scientist or a brain surgeon to figure out."
As in, "you dont have to be a rockect surgeon to figure out that the jury found the evidence to be exculpatory."

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

And you do not know what the jury thought...because the case was never brought before a jury

Au contraire mon ami, it was a jury and it was exculpatory evidence!

1 Reply

The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know