The whole concept of a Grand Jury is not even legit. Which is why the place which came up with the idea of Grand Juries (Great Britain) abolished them years ago.
Reading the Grand Jury evidence does little.
Have you ever been to Ferguson MO? Perspective here…
Have you ever experienced dealing with courts, police, authority figures as a black person? Perspective here…
Are you aware that the prosecutor gave false evidence to the grand jury for Michael Brown?
See, you’re doing it again. Let me refocus you
My point in this thread was to discuss these three cases that are making everyone riot and look and as it turns out, murder cops and white people.
At no time did I say there’s not a problem
At no time did I say I base my opinions on the news and trust them (I said the opposite and you’re falling apart here because you’re not reading)
All I wanted to discuss was the facts around these three cases which appear to have been manipulated by the news and rights groups to promote discussion of what is invariably a problem…just unfortunate they’re using these cases to do so. I deliberately referenced ONLY these cases because they’re the ones where the media and the rioting element of the country have it wrong. If you want to discuss the other cases you are making my point for me lol.
errm no editing capability. Not false evidence… I should have said… a false interpretation of law.
Obviously yes the news media is manipulating. That is its purpose.
The news is not making people riot. A problem with white power structures is making people riot.
Like I said… have you ever been to Ferguson Missouri? Or even Missouri at all?
If not… you lack the perspective required to even have a relevant conversation about that scenario.
You can’t possibly understand because as you pointed out… you’re looking at facts in a vacuum. Problem is… facts do not exist in a vacuum. Facts have to coexist with other less tangible things like “intent”
Do you mean the prosecutor allowed a liar to testify?
The white racist lady?
Yes
Just as I am aware he allowed three black liars to testify (Brown’s partner in crime, and the two girls who all said he was shot in the back, one of whom said he was executed with a shot to the back of the head while on his knees…all complete fabrication as born our by the physical evidence including that presented by the Brown family’s own medical examiner)
He allowed everyone who believed they had evidence to testify. Then he let the Grand jury decide what was credible.
Speaking of credibility… You’re losing yours with statements like that.
I should visit Ferguson? For what? To hear that the cops are assholes and they pick on black people? No shit sherlock… I referenced the black r8 owner in the OP and that shit is ridiculous. A mild version but I am not some ignorant fool who doesn’t know what the broader issues are.
That’s the thing…you are doing what CNN is doing… You are trying to make this a discussion about race in America and are attempting to cloud the facts with performed statements and comments. You have however given no evidence to support your argument (which I can only assume is that all 3 cops are racist, targeting killers and should be tried for manslaughter, first or second degree murder? ). No you have only supplied emotionally fuelled rants, misdirection , misinterpreted virtually everything I have presented, and for some reason are correcting people’s grammar.
Why not make your argument with facts and dispute what I posted in the op? Much less antagonistic and angry that way. You're inches away from calling me a racist aren't you. Why? Because I am a white guy who is reading facts and making a judgement that doesn't align with your emotional opinion? Ironically, that makes you a racist.No. I am talking about directly misleading the jury on what is legal use of deadly force.
Still not answering about having been to Ferguson or Missouri.
I have. I lived in STL at the time this happened. I spent time documenting some of what I saw there, walking around, talking with people. And also time dealing with the police in St. Louis and in Ferguson.
But continue to show much you know about the context of that situation. Because context does matter, as much as you wish it did not.
You really need to read the full article, and not the headline.
Nowhere in the facts does it state they deliberately or directly misled anyone. You’re listening to a slanted ‘news’ source and being manipulated. Seems to happen to you a lot.
Here’s what the facts say. When addressing the jurors, the ADA said that all that was required for an officer to use deadly force is their “reasonable belief that his life was in danger” when the proper wording is that he must have a “reasonable belief with probable cause that his life was in danger”
Probable cause is the legal standard to which a police officer must abide.
If you think leaving out the term probable cause is ‘directly misleading’ I think your tinfoil hat is on too tight. That website is trying to create (another ) conspiracy theory out of a minor element. A national prosecutor and the attorney general of the United states (a black guy appointed by a black guy) decided there was no need to proceed federally…not surprising after the Trayvon Martin embarrassment.
Stick to the facts, and stop getting your information from slanted news sources. See what I did there?
I have addressed it. I said I am not discussing being black in Ferguson, so I’m not sure why it’s relevant. I am discussing how Mike Brown tried to kill a cop, and got shot to death.
I chose to read the evidence instead of ‘daily chaos online’.
Never did I say it was deliberate.
It would take some assumption to come up with it be deliberate.
I don’t have an argument here at all. Except that forming an opinion on these matters requires perspective. Perspective which you do not have.
You are discussing Michael Brown so… you are discussing being black in Ferguson.
He was, and in that place.
And again, you lack the contextual perspective to figure it out.
And you are not sure why it is relevant. Of course you are not sure why it is relevant. How could you understand its relevance if you lack the understanding of how context matters?
Ok you have trouble focusing or discussing the elements of my argument. Understandable. I’m a nightmare to debate with.
Let’s see where you stand. Answer please.
Yes or No
-
Was Mike brown a criminal?
-
Did Mike brown initiate an assault and battery on the police officer?
-
Did Mike brown charge at the police officer whose weapon was drawn after a short pursuit?
If you answered yes to any of these, do you feel Mike brown was justified in doing so? That feels like your argument…laws go out the window because violence against blacks by police is so prevalent so Mike brown’s attack on the officer was justified in anticipation of his own need to defend himself.
Now answer this
- Did the police officer shoot Mike brown in the back , or in the back of his head while Mike brown was surrendering with his hands up?
What did I say to indicate any of what you said here?! (The highlighted part) You drew those conclusions in your own mind.
Those are not yes or no questions.
Particularly Point #2
I was not there. You were not there (right?)
So trying to make a judgment call on who initiated contact is moot.
Further. I have already stated "I don’t have an argument here at all. Except that forming an opinion on these matters requires perspective. Perspective which you do not have. "
I’m asking based on the facts you have read, what you believe. You’re all of a sudden not very opinionated.
Yes or no. 4 of them.
As for my guess on your hypothesis, it’s the only thing I could think of that would lead you to say it’s different in Ferguson 6 times. As if the laws there need rewriting or something. Because everywhere else in America the facts say that Mike brown tried to kill a cop and got shot justifiably, because he did so. A group of black and white people read and listened to all of the facts for a month and agreed. You disagree.
Your comment on nobody having grand jury hearings is funny. You do know what a grand jury does…right ?
The reason America still has them is because America loves to freak out and say the corrupt government officials are getting away with everything…so rather than leaving it to the District or Federal attorney to decide if someone should stand trial on a contentious issue , they have a group of impartial and randomly chosen citizens decide if someone should go to trial.
Ironic isn’t it?
Further, the prosecution in this case had access to all of the facts and knew that the case would never hold water against the cop, but they decided to allow a grand jury to make that determination and to hear all of the evidence before they did…because they knew people would scream racism and corruption if they brought no charges.
Also ironic…youre implying racism and corruption and unfairness because they DID go through the Grand jury process.
It is however a matter of perspective.
I have plenty of opinions. Hopefully they are informed by perspective and context as well as fact.
You are in Canada… but you have a better perspective on events happening in the states than someone from here… someone who lived both in Canada and the states, who has also lived in the area where one of these scenarios unfolded. Right.
You still haven’t answered. That’s pretty weird.
You’re so plugged in and informed (although we know you haven’t read the evidence because you’re avoiding discussion of any of it) but you won’t answer. Just inciting race riots, on a forum scale. Sad.
Law is only as productive as its equitable application. I did not indicate I thought the laws need rewritten. Only that the context of the environment does play a big factor.
Wanna talk about funny? A white canadian being so sure of ANYTHING that happens to black people in the states.
You’re so far removed from having the perspective required for a grip on what happens here or to black people here, how, or why.
What part of being not a black person and not in the states is hard to grasp? You are so certain of what you “know”
But do you know that you are in another country? Do you know you were not there for any of this?
So how can you “know” that it’s a criminal thing and not a race thing. As you stated.
I don’t know if it was about that or not. I wasn’t there. Neither were you.