14
   

Fergusonj shooting, autopsy in, all shots from front

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 12:17 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

Quote:
Actually, the powder burns from the shot in the car would most likely be on Brown's clothing...


Which is what I said.


Great. Then we agree on that.

Quote:
So you are saying Brown was more than a few feet away...when he was shot through the eye...yet the trained police officer continued to fire into him...with a shot to the top of his skull apparently while Brown was falling from the first five shots..including the one through his eye.


Quote:
I can tell you know nothing about guns.


Really! Rolling Eyes



Quote:
Do you think they take one shot at a time to see where it hits before firing again? No they take quick successive shots at the target until they are no longer in danger.


Who, may I ask, is this "they" of whom you speak?


Quote:
If you had talked to any of this supposed family you have in LE you would know this. Your making me doubt you Frank.


I am not concerned about your doubts, Baldimo...although there are moments where I am concerned about your sanity.

Quote:
And you still do not think that SEEMS excessive???

You probably wouldn't acknowledge it as excessive if the officer reloaded his gun and fired the new batch into the dead body.


Quote:
Fantasy Frank. Nice try. No I don't, I know how the police are trained and if you have family in LE like you say you do, you would know this. My dad is a federal cop, my brother was an MP and my nephew is currently an MP in the Airforce. I've asked most of my family because they are the experts on LE procedure. I think you take your own advice as expert.


And you are absolutely sure that they are not prejudice in favor of the police officer?

I do have all those cops...street cops and detectives in my family, Baldimo...and I would bet my life that several of them would defend the actions of the cop no matter what.

Your argument in this respect is an absurdity...whether you can see it as an absurdity or not.


Quote:
Quote:
Why should we "keep that in mind" when the only report of that is from a highly questionable source. Several conservative sources have also reported the report of the questionable source...but none, so far, has independently confirmed it.


Questionable source? I guess Browns thief buddy who already has a warrant out for his arrest for lying to the cops, on another theft case is a better source? Please...


No, I would not trust the buddy.

But I do not trust your source, Baldimo.

The Chief of Police of the subject force says it was a minor injury.

We may find out otherwise...but for now...we do not know the extent of any injuries.

Name all the media sources that have reported that they eye was broken. (Do not include sources that simply report that THE GATEWAY PUNDIT (!!!) reported it.


Quote:

Quote:
Here is what the Chief of the Ferguson Police Department says:

There was no immediate confirmation of the injury from Ferguson authorities. Ferguson police chief Thomas Jackson has said that Wilson sustained a minor injury to his face but did not provide details.


Speaking of sources, got any for this quote?
[/quote]

Here's one from the Washington post. They also report that a "friend" of the cop says that they eye socket was broken. But the Chief of Police has not confirmed...and instead says "minor injury to face."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/police-officer-who-shot-michael-brown-suffered-fractured-eye-socket-friend-says/2014/08/21/177524ea-293c-11e4-958c-268a320a60ce_story.html
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 12:21 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
If Brown was running toward the cop and the last shot was the one to the head, then there would most likely be powder residue on the body but there wasn't. That means either Brown was much farther from the officer or he wasn't running. Either would reduce the threat you are attempting to create.

According to a forensics expert I heard interviewed on MSNBC a few days ago, "no powder residue" means that the shot was certainly fired more than 30 inches, and probably more than 60 inches, from its intended target. (I didn't find the interview online, but Wikipedia corroborates the distances for what it's worth.) So when you say "much farther from the officer", all that the evidence supports is "farther than a yard and a half". That needn't be far at all.
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 12:41 pm
@Thomas,
Quote:
So when you say "much farther from the officer", all that the evidence supports is "farther than a yard and a half". That needn't be far at all.


Parados only advances views of his superiors(employers). He says what he is told to say. That he has the where-with-all to complete sentences is due to our wonderful education system. Not in anyway associated with an open mind or welcoming input.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  3  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 12:41 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Who, may I ask, is this "they" of whom you speak?


Don't be daft... The trained police officers, as you like to point out.

Quote:
And you are absolutely sure that they are not prejudice in favor of the police officer?

I do have all those cops...street cops and detectives in my family, Baldimo...and I would bet my life that several of them would defend the actions of the cop no matter what.

Your argument in this respect is an absurdity...whether you can see it as an absurdity or not.


You only find it absurd because you don't want to talk to people that would be experts in LE procedure, it would blow your whole argument out of the water and that scares you. Why wouldn't you talk to an expert about such things? As I said, you seem to be taking your own word as an expert. Which you have no experience in LE.

OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 12:42 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:
You know why? We were told a gentle giant from the get go and so far nothing I have seen shows him to be a gentle giant. He ruffed up a store clerk while in the commission of a possible robbery. No one wanted to think he "could" be capable of attacking a cop, but 10 minutes prior to the shooting he was doing just that to a civilian.
It shows a pattern
of personal brutality.

I wonder whether he was high on anything? PCP??
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 12:58 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
It shows a pattern
of personal brutality.


It is a socially accepted lifestyle. Victimshttp://www.acidpulse.net/images/smilies/rofl1.gif who victimize.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 01:02 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

Quote:
Who, may I ask, is this "they" of whom you speak?


Don't be daft... The trained police officers, as you like to point out.


Ahhh...so you are talking about trained police officers.

Aren't they trained NOT to shoot unless absolutely necessary?

Aren't they trained not to allow situations to get so out of control that shooting is necessary at all?

But if you want to think they are trained to think that "if you are in danger from someone you stopped for jaywalking...you should shoot and continue to shoot until the offender drops over from the weight of the bullets"...well...you have the right to think that.


Quote:
Quote:
And you are absolutely sure that they are not prejudice in favor of the police officer?

I do have all those cops...street cops and detectives in my family, Baldimo...and I would bet my life that several of them would defend the actions of the cop no matter what.

Your argument in this respect is an absurdity...whether you can see it as an absurdity or not.


You only find it absurd because you don't want to talk to people that would be experts in LE procedure, it would blow your whole argument out of the water and that scares you.


I notice you never answered the question.

Wonder why?

And since my argument is that I think six bullets in the young man seems excessive...I doubt my whole argument would be blown out of the water. It definitely is what I think.

But it is enjoyable watching you claim that sort of victory. It is cute.



Quote:
Why wouldn't you talk to an expert about such things? As I said, you seem to be taking your own word as an expert.


What "expert" would argue that I am wrong when I say that it seems excessive to me?

And where would I find someone more an expert in what I think...than me?

You are not making any sense any more, Baldimo.




Quote:
Which you have no experience in LE.


Is that actually a sentence...or just some words left over from your last thought?

Would you mind explaining it?

And if it means that I, Frank Apisa, have no experience in law enforcement...could you tell me how you know I have no experience in law enforcement.

And since you mentioned earlier that I know nothing about guns...could you tell me if I own any guns...how many...and what kind they are?
CoastalRat
 
  4  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 01:31 pm
I think we all agree that if the officer executed this guy, he should go to prison. And if he killed Brown because Brown was attacking/charging him, then he should be exonerated.

Fact of the matter, with all the contradictory info being reported, nobody who was not there has any idea what really happened. I for one am content to let the justice system play out.

But I have one comment Frank on your point about the 6 shots being excessive. IF I had a 6' 2'' person coming at me and believed he meant to harm me, I am going to empty my weapon into him. I am not going to fire one shot at a time and see wait to see if that shot deterred him before I fired another. And I think anyone who says they would do otherwise is a liar. So in that respect, I don't have any qualms about the officer firing 6 times, as long as his use of his weapon was justified. And that is the question that needs to be answered.

(Personally, I cannot see him killing Brown in cold blood with witnesses, including Brown's friend, standing around watching. But then, people have done dumber things than that, so who knows. It is possible he did. )

0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 01:47 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
I wonder whether he was high on anything? PCP??

I'm sure there will toxicology reports as part of all the autopsies. If they come up clean, juries will have a hard time believing the police's version of the story. Who their right mind would attack an armed cop?
CoastalRat
 
  2  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 01:49 pm
@Thomas,
Quote:
Who their right mind would attack an armed cop?


As I said above about the police officer killing the man while his friend watched, people have done dumber things than that.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 01:55 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Aren't they trained NOT to shoot unless absolutely necessary?

That would depend on your definition of "absolutely necessary", but to my sense of language the answer is "no". Police officers have broader leeway than that.

For example, if Ferguson police told the truth about Brown attacking Wilson in his car, Brown would have been a fleeing felon (the felony being assault on a police officer.) The fleeing felon rule of the Common Law allows law-enforcement officers to use force, including deadly force, to stop a fleeing felon. I'm not saying that's what happened here; all I'm saying is that the standard is broader than "no shooting unless absolutely necessary".

Frank Apisa wrote:
And since my argument is that I think six bullets in the young man seems excessive...

I don't understand the relevance of the six bullets to you. If Wilson had killed Brown with only two bullets, would that make you happier?
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 01:55 pm
I haven't been following this thread, but I saw a few posts that make me think none of you has seen this video of the actual shooting.

It's on youtube

Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 02:04 pm
@edgarblythe,
Actually, Edgar, this shooting is of an entirely different man --- Kajeme Powell. The video's headline states it clearly. In the future, could you please check your facts before you post such bogus 'evidence'? There is already too much heat and too little light in this thread, and your video gratuitously aggravates both.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 02:09 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Aren't they trained NOT to shoot unless absolutely necessary?

That would depend on your definition of "absolutely necessary", but to my sense of language the answer is "no". Police officers have broader leeway than that.

For example, if Ferguson police told the truth about Brown attacking Wilson in his car, Brown would have been a fleeing felon (the felony being assault on a police officer.) The fleeing felon rule of the Common Law allows law-enforcement officers to use force, including deadly force, to stop a fleeing felon.


I have no idea of what has happened to you, Thomas...but the change is definitely not for the better.

An officer is trained to shoot to kill...(aim at the body mass)...IF shooting is necessary.

To shoot as often as the officer did at Brown...SEEMS excessive to me. If it doesn't to you...then it doesn't. There are people who think the Nazi treatment of Jews was NOT excessive; there are people who think the Israeli treatment of Palestinians is NOT excessive.

Fine...that is their right.

However, I disagree in all those instances.

Anyway, here is a piece that explains what you were suggesting even more clearly than you did:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/19/police-deadly-force_n_5693020.html



Quote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
And since my argument is that I think six bullets in the young man seems excessive...

I don't understand the relevance of the six bullets to you. If Wilson had killed Brown with only two bullets, would that make you happier?


Sorry you are unable to appreciate why I think six bullets in the young man (perhaps more fired) is relevant, Thomas....but in my opinion it is...and it is on the face of it.

I have no intention of trying to explain why I feel that way, because like Bill Murray, you would probably joke this abomination away.

And yes...two bullets would have made more sense...although I doubt it would have made me happier.
gungasnake
 
  2  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 03:26 pm
According to all available reports, this one has turned into a very obvious case of a police officer defending himself. I mean, Eric Holder, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and the other professional troublemakers, yeah, I can only fault them so much, that's what they get paid to do. But the libtards (and you fuckers know who you are...)?????

Question is, are libtards capable of feeling remorse or shame? What I mean is that, sooner or later, I'd like to think that I'd hear just one voice in the wilderness shouting something like:

Quote:
You know, gee, I'm really tired of being a stupid, shit4brains libtard, always shilling for and getting used by those assholes Obunga, Holder, Jackson, Sharpton and all them and now this thing with that innocent cop is gonna have to be the last straw, I repent, I'm sorry for all the ignorant **** I've been saying.....


What about you, Apisa, are you man enough to own up to reality and say something like that??

Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 04:05 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:

According to all available reports, this one has turned into a very obvious case of a police officer defending himself. I mean, Eric Holder, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and the other professional troublemakers, yeah, I can only fault them so much, that's what they get paid to do. But the libtards (and you fuckers know who you are...)?????

Question is, are libtards capable of feeling remorse or shame? What I mean is that, sooner or later, I'd like to think that I'd hear just one voice in the wilderness shouting something like:

Quote:
You know, gee, I'm really tired of being a stupid, shit4brains libtard, always shilling for and getting used by those assholes Obunga, Holder, Jackson, Sharpton and all them and now this thing with that innocent cop is gonna have to be the last straw, I repent, I'm sorry for all the ignorant **** I've been saying.....


What about you, Apisa, are you man enough to own up to reality and say something like that??




Gunga...you ought to print out this post of yours...shred the paper it is printed on...and work it into the soil around any rose bushes you have in your yard.

An investigation is going on...and the investigation will determine whether or not the police officer acted properly or improperly. From that point on...the guy will either walk...or stand trial.

Let's wait for that.

Good luck with your rose bushes. If you do what I suggested...they should be big time winners.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 04:32 pm
@Baldimo,
So, if they were fired at a distance then that would mean Brown was NOT charging the police officer or it means he was much farther away before he turned to charge. Both seem to contradict part of the story.

Quote:
Keep in mind the cop more than likely has a broken eye socket from getting punched by the gentle giant
Keep in mind you have no evidence to support this.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 04:36 pm
@Thomas,
Quote:
So when you say "much farther from the officer", all that the evidence supports is "farther than a yard and a half". That needn't be far at all.

That is the final position for the final shot. If Brown was charging at the officer and the officer had time to fire 6 shots it raises the question of distance when Brown started charging.
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 04:48 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
That is the final position for the final shot. If Brown was charging at the officer and the officer had time to fire 6 shots it raises the question of distance when Brown started charging.

With a semiautomatic pistol that cops are likely to carry, you can shoot rounds very quickly. But yes, that's a fair point.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2014 05:07 pm
@Thomas,
parados wrote:
That is the final position for the final shot. If Brown was charging at the officer
and the officer had time to fire 6 shots it raises the question of distance when Brown started charging.
Thomas wrote:
With a semiautomatic pistol that cops are likely to carry,
you can shoot rounds very quickly. But yes, that's a fair point.
Has the gun used been identified ?
Pistol or revolver ?
Model? Caliber ?

27 rounds discharged within 3.7 seconds, using a 1911:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFoM8S3JwZU

Ergo: 6 shots woud have been discharged
within a fraction of 1 second, at that speed Mr. Parados
.
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 12/25/2024 at 02:05:19