Ferguson 'victim' has rap sheet, robbed store same morning

[tonymctones]

if johnson is telling the truth it should be very obvious in my opinion from the autopsy. If the cop stood over him while brown was on the ground and shot him the bullet wounds will show that.

If not I think its more likely this guy is full of shit.

If you were a betting man skip, which one are you putting your money on?

[Skip8282]

the guy on the video is no cop skip he is just some random guy for the area who happend to be there at the time it all went down.

I think we're in agreement if we assume everything pans out at a trial, this would probably make for a more credible witness.

[tonymctones]

I think we're in agreement if we assume everything pans out at a trial, this would probably make for a more credible witness.

Ill be honest I dont think it makes it to trial.

[tonymctones]

interesting, you can hear the supposed eye witness in the background saying that brown was advancing towards the cop when he opened fire and brown just kept advancing.

He said he thought the cop was missing b/c he kept going toward the cop.

Did you listen to the video skip?

[Skip8282]

if johnson is telling the truth it should be very obvious in my opinion from the autopsy. If the cop stood over him while brown was on the ground and shot him the bullet wounds will show that.

If not I think its more likely this guy is full of shit.

If you were a betting man skip, which one are you putting your money on?

As a betting man, I think it's going to be hazy and there will be tons to put our time to waste arguing about and discussing on GB - intellectual legal center of the world.  

[tonymctones]

I think we're in agreement if we assume everything pans out at a trial, this would probably make for a more credible witness.

not would make a more credible witness if it goes to trial, he is a more credible witness when deciding whether or not to go to trial

listen to the video

[tonymctones]

As a betting man, I think it's going to be hazy and there will be tons to put our time to waste arguing about and discussing on GB - intellectual legal center of the world.   

lol but i thought thats what the getbig politics board was for.

[2Thick]

how is telling the truth character assasination?

Agreed. The truth may be better, but at the end of the day it always tastes better than bullshit.

That's a huge problem in our country these days. People would rather be able to lie and be lied to because sometimes the truth "hurts".

[240 is Back]

you know that the cop was assaulted in his vehicle first and choose to leave that out of your scenario saying that if youre running from a criminal towards a cop he shouldnt gun you down.
How about if you just assaulted him and tried to take his gun and then ran at him?
youre such a fucking twat.
I agree they need to start releasing information on this. At the end of the day though it wont matter what they release the protestors and idiots like yourself are never going to be satisfied.

I don't "know" anything about what happened - if the police force CHANGED their position on what the officer knew when he fired the gun, then I already distrust them.  I trust the bullet hole much more. 

And don't lump me in with the protesters, I've already said if it's a shot to the font, belly, from below or straight on, then yes, I absolutely believe legal shoot.

What I'm saying is, if that bullet hole went into his back when he was on his knees lol, well, then yes, that cops needs to be facing investigation in a big way. 

[240 is Back]

“It looked as if Michael was pushing off and the cop was trying to pull him in,” Tiffany Mitchell told CNN on Wednesday night.


http://fox2now.com/2014/08/14/witnesses-to-michael-browns-shooting-detail-his-last-minutes/

Is there a dash cam for this incident?   The cop trying to pull him into the car sounds very odd.   No doubt the kid was trying to get away, but if he did assault a cop in the car, then yes, you shoot him full of bullets.  If he fought to FLEE, and was shot in back, well, that cop could have handled it differently. 

If he was running at police, and it's clear they're yelling to stop, and he's not... yes, he gets shot for that and everyone goes home.  He's a deadly weapon at that size.  I'm okay with that.  Just release the bullet hole already.  If it's to the front, then yeah, he created that situation and paid the price.  If he was trying to flee, and was shot in back, then the cop needs to leave the job.

[tonymctones]

I don't "know" anything about what happened - if the police force CHANGED their position on what the officer knew when he fired the gun, then I already distrust them.  I trust the bullet hole much more. 

And don't lump me in with the protesters, I've already said if it's a shot to the font, belly, from below or straight on, then yes, I absolutely believe legal shoot.

What I'm saying is, if that bullet hole went into his back when he was on his knees lol, well, then yes, that cops needs to be facing investigation in a big way. 

LMFAO Illl lump your dumb ass in with any other idiots b/c thats what you are.

where did the police force change their story?

They have let information out at idiotic times and have given incomplete accounts of the event but where did they change their story?

[240 is Back]

LMFAO Illl lump your dumb ass in with any other idiots b/c thats what you are.

where did the police force change their story?

They have let information out at idiotic times and have given incomplete accounts of the event but where did they change their story?

I thought they changed whether or not the officer knew he was dealing with the robbery suspect.  Like the shooting was more justified because the cop knew who he was dealing with or something. 

They have rioters and they're taking a week to do a report on the body?  Come on.  Just clear it up.

[Archer77]

I thought they changed whether or not the officer knew he was dealing with the robbery suspect.  Like the shooting was more justified because the cop knew who he was dealing with or something. 

They have rioters and they're taking a week to do a report on the body?  Come on.  Just clear it up.

Didn't the feds seize the body

[tonymctones]

I thought they changed whether or not the officer knew he was dealing with the robbery suspect.  Like the shooting was more justified because the cop knew who he was dealing with or something. 

They have rioters and they're taking a week to do a report on the body?  Come on.  Just clear it up.

not to my knowledge they never said that he stopped them as a robbery suspect. They released the video of the robbery and then said the officer didnt know when he made contact that the guy was a suspect.

could be wrong but if so please post a link

[240 is Back]

not to my knowledge they never said that he stopped them as a robbery suspect. They released the video of the robbery and then said the officer didnt know when he made contact that the guy was a suspect.

could be wrong but if so please post a link

That's one account.  Another is that he DID realize the dude was the robbery suspect from the cigars in his hand.  BOTH versions have been released by the police.

Things like that matter.

[240 is Back]

tony, you really WANT me to be with the rioting idiots on this.  but i'm not.

I think it was probably a justified shoot.  However, I dislike police changing stories on something so big, and I dislike when they won't release the autopsy showing where the bullet went in.  or dashcam footage would be nice too.

 

[tonymctones]

That's one account.  Another is that he DID realize the dude was the robbery suspect from the cigars in his hand.  BOTH versions have been released by the police.

Things like that matter.

the version I cited goes hand in hand with yours...fucking idiot...

he didnt know he was a suspect before the stop and and then saw the box of cigars and put 2 and 2 together...

do you have a police statement saying that he was stopped b/c he was a suspect?

[tonymctones]

tony, you really WANT me to be with the rioting idiots on this.  but i'm not.

I think it was probably a justified shoot.  However, I dislike police changing stories on something so big, and I dislike when they won't release the autopsy showing where the bullet went in.  or dashcam footage would be nice too.

 

you havent shown any links to prove that the police changed stories. I agree with you about them if they are changing stories but right now we are just going of your credibility and heres some help boss you have none.

There was no dashcam and the cop did not have a camera on him. I agree they should have them.

The FEDS are doing another autopsy, I am guessing they are going to wait until thats done before they release it.

[240 is Back]

again, you want me to back the lib rioters.  I think ANY rioter should beaten and locked up.

If it's a bad shoot, then go after the cop.  Shouldn't take a week to figure this out, as buildings burn.
If it's a good shoot, let the world know and call it a day.  

police incompetence/indecision shuoldn't be tolerated.

[tonymctones]

again, you want me to back the lib rioters.  I think ANY rioter should beaten and locked up.

If it's a bad shoot, then go after the cop.  Shouldn't take a week to figure this out, as buildings burn.
If it's a good shoot, let the world know and call it a day. 

police incompetence/indecision shuoldn't be tolerated.

so no statements from the police then that show them changing their story?

[240 is Back]

Tony, I'm only going to post this once.    The police told BOTH versions of the story.  They slightly evolved it while releasing the video because, well, they hoped it would diffuse rioting, right?   They made that simple little fudging of the truth "the cop DID actually know he was facing a robbery suspect..."   That's bullshit right there.  

I think the shoot was LEGAL (barring any bullet in the back in the autopsy)
But I think police changing story about such an item (in order to quell rioting?) is BULLSHIT.
I thought we'd agree on both of these points, tony.  It's completely possible to hate rioting idiots AND hate lying cops.

so no statements from the police then that show them changing their story?

Ferguson Police Chief: Cop didn't know unarmed teenager was a robbery suspect when he killed him
VERSION 1 - The officer didn't know
Jackson says the officer who stopped Brown did not stop him in connection with the alleged robbery. Brown was stopped, Jackson says, “Because he was walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic. That was it.”



http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/usanow/2014/08/15/ferguson-missouri-police-michael-brown-shooting/14098369/

Wilson stopped Brown and a friend because "they were in the middle of the street, blocking traffic," Jackson said.
VERSION 2 - The officer did know

Hours later, however, Jackson told a slightly different story to CNN and NBC, saying that Wilson noticed Brown was carrying a box of cigars that had been reported stolen. Wilson, he said, initially stopped Brown for blocking traffic, but as he began driving past Brown, he noticed Brown was holding cigars.

At that point, Wilson "made the connection" that Brown might have been involved in a theft that had just been broadcast on police radio, Jackson said.

[polychronopolous]

again, you want me to back the lib rioters.  I think ANY rioter should beaten and locked up.

If it's a bad shoot, then go after the cop.  Shouldn't take a week to figure this out, as buildings burn.
If it's a good shoot, let the world know and call it a day.  

police incompetence/indecision shuoldn't be tolerated.

Rob, what would you say the "minimum" reason would be that warrants a police officer taking out the strap and shooting a person?

[240 is Back]

Rob, what would you say the "minimum" reason would be that warrants a police officer taking out the strap and shooting a person?

the officer would fear for his life, or the life of others.  Be in a position to stop a forcible felony.  Be unable to use alternative non-lethal means.  And he would have to show investigators, DA, IA, etc that he legit had no other options.

Police have a HIGHER standard of use of deadly force.  They're trained.  They have BP vests.  They have tazers and batons and other means. 

I don't know the exact circumstances - if the cop just had dude running at him and felt he NEEDED to shoot, well, he can explain that to his superiors.  I'm sure they're doing what they did to zimmerman - let him retell the story over and over.  If the story changes, as zimmermans did (getting more embellished each time), then there may be lies there.  If it stays the same, and he was legit scared, well, it means the shoot would be legal.

Honestly, I think the cop just say big dude jaywalking and yelled something at him, like "d'fck out the street, man!".  Big dude was amped up after a robbery, and rushed the cop... probably not knowing what to do, but knowing a radio call means his ass is going to jail.  After a few seconds of struggle, big man drops back for a moment of indecision, and copper draws and fires.  Most likely guess, but only a guess.  legal shoot.  It would be ideal to go for tazer, but for a smaller cop against a big dude, it was already a life/death struggle.   

I don't think an equally big/strong copper pulls the trigger.  Ronnie coleman 1998 probably doesn't shoot him.  But this cop did, and if you rush a cop, you run that risk.

getbiggers want me to be the poster boy for the rioters lol... hardly the case.  shoot looks legal but I want to see bullet holes.

[tonymctones]

Tony, I'm only going to post this once.    The police told BOTH versions of the story.  They slightly evolved it while releasing the video because, well, they hoped it would diffuse rioting, right?   They made that simple little fudging of the truth "the cop DID actually know he was facing a robbery suspect..."   That's bullshit right there.   

I think the shoot was LEGAL (barring any bullet in the back in the autopsy)
But I think police changing story about such an item (in order to quell rioting?) is BULLSHIT.
I thought we'd agree on both of these points, tony.  It's completely possible to hate rioting idiots AND hate lying cops.

Ferguson Police Chief: Cop didn't know unarmed teenager was a robbery suspect when he killed him
VERSION 1 - The officer didn't know
Jackson says the officer who stopped Brown did not stop him in connection with the alleged robbery. Brown was stopped, Jackson says, “Because he was walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic. That was it.”



http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/usanow/2014/08/15/ferguson-missouri-police-michael-brown-shooting/14098369/

Wilson stopped Brown and a friend because "they were in the middle of the street, blocking traffic," Jackson said.
VERSION 2 - The officer did know

Hours later, however, Jackson told a slightly different story to CNN and NBC, saying that Wilson noticed Brown was carrying a box of cigars that had been reported stolen. Wilson, he said, initially stopped Brown for blocking traffic, but as he began driving past Brown, he noticed Brown was holding cigars.

At that point, Wilson "made the connection" that Brown might have been involved in a theft that had just been broadcast on police radio, Jackson said.

the link you provided says this...Wilson stopped Brown and a friend because "they were in the middle of the street, blocking traffic," Jackson said. not

Brown was stopped, Jackson says, “Because he was walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic. That was it.”

a small but very important distinction...which one is it 240?

[240 is Back]

dude, stop being a police lapdog.  THEY MODIFIED THE REPORT, and it BENEFITED THEM.

they shifted their statement on what happened to try to cover themselves on profiling after all the race shit popped off.  

the shoot was legal, but POLICE CHANGING ANY DETAILS ABOUT THEIR STATEMENT is a very bad thing.

Why did they change this?  Maybe they thought it'd look like cops opened fire on dude for being big and scary while jaywalking.  Adding in the "Oh, he was ACTUALLY pursuing a suspect in a robbery..." makes it look better that he shot a dude who didn't have a weapon, and I"m pretty sure the cop was still in good shape, right?  

I can see why the police dept would change it - to cover their asses "How many OTHER "jaywalkers" did this policeman pull over this month, and what color were they?" and "oh, what is the ferguson PD history of violence, oh it's pretty bad huh?"



Now, I don't know NOR DO I CARE about race in this issue.  I dont give a shit why the cop stopped him, I dont give a shit why he shot him, he will face music if it's a bad shoot.   I DO have a big problem with police "adding" this little detail, changing entire motive for entering a confrontation where civilian is dead and a cop is uninjured.