RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson

RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson

Officer Wilson WILL be charged with a crime

2% (1)

Officer Wilson will NOT be charged with a crime

38% (14)

I could not care less

11% (4)

Who is officer Wilson

16% (6)

Regardless of the decision Wilson is guilty

19% (7)

Regardless of the decision Wilson is innocent

11% (4)

Total Votes : 36

(last vote on : 12/8/2014 3:18:50 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

Musicmystery -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/6/2014 12:38:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: You really think the people at Mother Earth are all American Indians? You mean Mother Jones? I have no idea. I'm just trying to learn what this unfamiliar pejorative means. Tree huggers "Save the planet" types What's wrong with trees? Most Americans live in stick houses, after all... I have heard the term tree huggers since I was young. This is the first time I have ever heard anyone suggest it meant there was something wrong with trees. I suppose anything to start an argument right? Dunno. You'll have to ask Sanity...first time I've ever heard anyone claim liking trees or the earth was a sign of inferior intelligence. [sm=dunno.gif] Or used as a derogatory term. But then, he says a lot of things that make no sense.

truckinslave -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/6/2014 4:24:18 PM)
What, exactly, do you imagine a grand jury proceeding to be if not a "judicial hearing"/

DomKen -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/6/2014 6:26:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD No, you say any killing is a criminal act and "I was only following orders" is not a defense. The first cop on the scene of a mass shooting has to go on trial by your standard if he shoots the shooter, for that matter, if he just subdues him he should go on trial for assault, and can explain at the trial the need. When the investigation shows self defense the is no trial and you know it. That is what happened here and you have do be smart enough to know that, you dress yourself. Wrong! This case is not cut and dried. The witnesses contradict and the physical evidence says that it was not self defense. You simply believe what the prosecutor says about the evidence rather than actually looking at the physical evidence which contradicts every claim Wilson made about the circumstances of the fatal shots which all by itself should be enough to bring him to trial even by your standards.

BamaD -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/6/2014 6:54:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD No, you say any killing is a criminal act and "I was only following orders" is not a defense. The first cop on the scene of a mass shooting has to go on trial by your standard if he shoots the shooter, for that matter, if he just subdues him he should go on trial for assault, and can explain at the trial the need. When the investigation shows self defense the is no trial and you know it. That is what happened here and you have do be smart enough to know that, you dress yourself. Wrong! This case is not cut and dried. The witnesses contradict and the physical evidence says that it was not self defense. You simply believe what the prosecutor says about the evidence rather than actually looking at the physical evidence which contradicts every claim Wilson made about the circumstances of the fatal shots which all by itself should be enough to bring him to trial even by your standards. So the prosecutor, the grand jury, and pretty much everyone who doesn't stand to gain from unrest is lying to let him get away with it and you in your infinite wisdom can see through it. I see you have stopped your stupid probable cause argument. quite the contrary the evidence supports Wilson's story and the people who contradicted themselves were the ones against Wilson.

BitYakin -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 1:24:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery This place gets dumber every day, both in the made up "facts" and the bullshit things people choose to argue about. Many, many structures in cities are built of wood, including houses. 90% of American homes are made from wood. http://continuingeducation.construction.com/article.php?L=5&C=645 that article is pretty big, but maybe you could high light the part of it that supports your claim that 90% of US homes are made from wood? opps pardon me I found it... I didn't make up and facts, unless you dispute that the majority of the population lives in the cities... not sure about the newer more western cities, but here in St Louis, in the actual city, you'd be hard pressed to find a wooden frame house not saying there are NONE, MY own house is actually wood, but it was the farm house (from the mid 1800's) here before the city engulfed the area, but you'd have to go miles from my house to find another one and I will also admit most newer homes are made from wood now, it is cheaper

BitYakin -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 1:45:01 AM)
brick houses [image]local://upfiles/183945/9D611B836F8C4FA58635C2563DA0513A.jpg[/image] I could probably snap 100 pics within a 5 mile radius of my house and not find a single wood house

eulero83 -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 2:23:28 AM)
I don't know how it is related to not prosecuting darren wilson but... I'd not live in a brick or concrete house in california nor in a wood house in the gulf of mexico or southern east coast, in other areas I suppose it's just a matter of what materials are easier to find locally.

thishereboi -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 4:37:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD No, you say any killing is a criminal act and "I was only following orders" is not a defense. The first cop on the scene of a mass shooting has to go on trial by your standard if he shoots the shooter, for that matter, if he just subdues him he should go on trial for assault, and can explain at the trial the need. When the investigation shows self defense the is no trial and you know it. That is what happened here and you have do be smart enough to know that, you dress yourself. Wrong! This case is not cut and dried. The witnesses contradict and the physical evidence says that it was not self defense. You simply believe what the prosecutor says about the evidence rather than actually looking at the physical evidence which contradicts every claim Wilson made about the circumstances of the fatal shots which all by itself should be enough to bring him to trial even by your standards. Interesting. and yet the people who actually heard the witnesses and actually saw the evidence don't agree with you. Perhaps from now on we should have the jury sit at home on their computers and decide from there. After all you seem to think it's makes you a better judge of things than the people who where actually present.

thishereboi -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 4:48:48 AM)
While I find it really hard to believe this is the first time you have ever heard it, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But it's not a new term. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tree%20hugger http://www.treehuggersofamerica.org/

DomKen -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 6:51:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD No, you say any killing is a criminal act and "I was only following orders" is not a defense. The first cop on the scene of a mass shooting has to go on trial by your standard if he shoots the shooter, for that matter, if he just subdues him he should go on trial for assault, and can explain at the trial the need. When the investigation shows self defense the is no trial and you know it. That is what happened here and you have do be smart enough to know that, you dress yourself. Wrong! This case is not cut and dried. The witnesses contradict and the physical evidence says that it was not self defense. You simply believe what the prosecutor says about the evidence rather than actually looking at the physical evidence which contradicts every claim Wilson made about the circumstances of the fatal shots which all by itself should be enough to bring him to trial even by your standards. Interesting. and yet the people who actually heard the witnesses and actually saw the evidence don't agree with you. Perhaps from now on we should have the jury sit at home on their computers and decide from there. After all you seem to think it's makes you a better judge of things than the people who where actually present. You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job properly in this case right?

Hillwilliam -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 8:20:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin brick houses [image]local://upfiles/183945/9D611B836F8C4FA58635C2563DA0513A.jpg[/image] I could probably snap 100 pics within a 5 mile radius of my house and not find a single wood house I spotted one in your picture. The tan condo/row house in the background has siding (vinyl or composite from the looks of it) In 17 years as a Real Estate Broker in 2 states, I never saw siding put onto a house over brick. Ergo, it is probably wood. Also, so called "Brick houses" are actually a vast majority of the time brick veneer over, you guessed it, a wooden frame. Homes that are made of 100% brick masonry are quite rare. The interior finish is problematic as it is difficult to run plumbing and electricity to the various rooms of a home that is of 100% masonry construction.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 11:53:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin brick houses I could probably snap 100 pics within a 5 mile radius of my house and not find a single wood house psst your town isn't the entire US (and as others noted, you'll probably find a LOT of wood)

DomKen -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 7:33:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD No, you say any killing is a criminal act and "I was only following orders" is not a defense. The first cop on the scene of a mass shooting has to go on trial by your standard if he shoots the shooter, for that matter, if he just subdues him he should go on trial for assault, and can explain at the trial the need. When the investigation shows self defense the is no trial and you know it. That is what happened here and you have do be smart enough to know that, you dress yourself. Wrong! This case is not cut and dried. The witnesses contradict and the physical evidence says that it was not self defense. You simply believe what the prosecutor says about the evidence rather than actually looking at the physical evidence which contradicts every claim Wilson made about the circumstances of the fatal shots which all by itself should be enough to bring him to trial even by your standards. Interesting. and yet the people who actually heard the witnesses and actually saw the evidence don't agree with you. Perhaps from now on we should have the jury sit at home on their computers and decide from there. After all you seem to think it's makes you a better judge of things than the people who where actually present. You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job properly in this case right? That should read You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job improperly in this case right?

BitYakin -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 7:36:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD No, you say any killing is a criminal act and "I was only following orders" is not a defense. The first cop on the scene of a mass shooting has to go on trial by your standard if he shoots the shooter, for that matter, if he just subdues him he should go on trial for assault, and can explain at the trial the need. When the investigation shows self defense the is no trial and you know it. That is what happened here and you have do be smart enough to know that, you dress yourself. Wrong! This case is not cut and dried. The witnesses contradict and the physical evidence says that it was not self defense. You simply believe what the prosecutor says about the evidence rather than actually looking at the physical evidence which contradicts every claim Wilson made about the circumstances of the fatal shots which all by itself should be enough to bring him to trial even by your standards. Interesting. and yet the people who actually heard the witnesses and actually saw the evidence don't agree with you. Perhaps from now on we should have the jury sit at home on their computers and decide from there. After all you seem to think it's makes you a better judge of things than the people who where actually present. You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job properly in this case right? That should read You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job improperly in this case right? which experts would those be, I asked for a quote of any experts that said that, so far seen NONE!

BitYakin -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 7:45:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin brick houses [image]local://upfiles/183945/9D611B836F8C4FA58635C2563DA0513A.jpg[/image] I could probably snap 100 pics within a 5 mile radius of my house and not find a single wood house I spotted one in your picture. The tan condo/row house in the background has siding (vinyl or composite from the looks of it) In 17 years as a Real Estate Broker in 2 states, I never saw siding put onto a house over brick. Ergo, it is probably wood. Also, so called "Brick houses" are actually a vast majority of the time brick veneer over, you guessed it, a wooden frame. Homes that are made of 100% brick masonry are quite rare. The interior finish is problematic as it is difficult to run plumbing and electricity to the various rooms of a home that is of 100% masonry construction. ever see siding put on an ADDITION? OOOOOPPPS what you mistook for a sided frame house is a second floor addition on top of a brick house also across the alley from the house you pointed out a large section of the wall was falling away from the house, so the new owner had the wall torn down, replaced with frame and plywood and sided, but 80% of that building is still brick believe what you like! yes I know my city isn't the WHOLE of the usa, matter of a fact as I said, newer cities further west wood house are more the norm and I promise you every building you saw in that pic is two layered red brick, and I could show you tons more [image]local://upfiles/183945/CCFC668088EC41CF86D46534378CA5D5.jpg[/image] PS out west rare, back east common as dirt!

BamaD -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 7:45:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD No, you say any killing is a criminal act and "I was only following orders" is not a defense. The first cop on the scene of a mass shooting has to go on trial by your standard if he shoots the shooter, for that matter, if he just subdues him he should go on trial for assault, and can explain at the trial the need. When the investigation shows self defense the is no trial and you know it. That is what happened here and you have do be smart enough to know that, you dress yourself. Wrong! This case is not cut and dried. The witnesses contradict and the physical evidence says that it was not self defense. You simply believe what the prosecutor says about the evidence rather than actually looking at the physical evidence which contradicts every claim Wilson made about the circumstances of the fatal shots which all by itself should be enough to bring him to trial even by your standards. Interesting. and yet the people who actually heard the witnesses and actually saw the evidence don't agree with you. Perhaps from now on we should have the jury sit at home on their computers and decide from there. After all you seem to think it's makes you a better judge of things than the people who where actually present. You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job properly in this case right? That should read You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job improperly in this case right? which experts would those be, I asked for a quote of any experts that said that, so for seen NONE Those experts who think that racial strife and widespread disorder are good things.

BamaD -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 7:46:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD No, you say any killing is a criminal act and "I was only following orders" is not a defense. The first cop on the scene of a mass shooting has to go on trial by your standard if he shoots the shooter, for that matter, if he just subdues him he should go on trial for assault, and can explain at the trial the need. When the investigation shows self defense the is no trial and you know it. That is what happened here and you have do be smart enough to know that, you dress yourself. Wrong! This case is not cut and dried. The witnesses contradict and the physical evidence says that it was not self defense. You simply believe what the prosecutor says about the evidence rather than actually looking at the physical evidence which contradicts every claim Wilson made about the circumstances of the fatal shots which all by itself should be enough to bring him to trial even by your standards. Interesting. and yet the people who actually heard the witnesses and actually saw the evidence don't agree with you. Perhaps from now on we should have the jury sit at home on their computers and decide from there. After all you seem to think it's makes you a better judge of things than the people who where actually present. You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job properly in this case right? That should read You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job improperly in this case right? You were right the first time.

cloudboy -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 8:12:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen That should read You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job improperly in this case right? The Washington Post had a long article today reconstructing all the events of the encounter between Wilson and Brown. It seems established that there was an altercation at the police car. The specifics are a little murky (did brown go for the gun or try to prevent Wilson from drawing it, did Brown hit Wilson (not clear), and YES shots were fired in the vehicle. This event triggered Wilson's lawful right to defend himself and use force to subdue / arrest Brown. The next issue is whether or not Brown posed a threat to the community so that his escape was something that had to be stopped by force. After that is whether or not Brown surrendered before being shot or after he was hit after stopping and turning around. Witness accounts are mixed about the surrender and / or the hands being up. Even if the prosecutor had gotten an indictment, it seems unlikely any charges would stick in CT b/c once a citizen challenges or threatens a police officer -- all the legal protections pretty much swing to the officer. He's also allowed to make mistakes in the heat of the moment and jurors would believe the moment was quite heated. http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/in-three-minutes-two-lives-collide-and-a-nation-divides-over-ferguson-shooting/2014/12/06/b78b878e-7983-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html

DomKen -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 9:03:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen That should read You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job improperly in this case right? The Washington Post had a long article today reconstructing all the events of the encounter between Wilson and Brown. It seems established that there was an altercation at the police car. The specifics are a little murky (did brown go for the gun or try to prevent Wilson from drawing it, did Brown hit Wilson (not clear), and YES shots were fired in the vehicle. This event triggered Wilson's lawful right to defend himself and use force to subdue / arrest Brown. The next issue is whether or not Brown posed a threat to the community so that his escape was something that had to be stopped by force. After that is whether or not Brown surrendered before being shot or after he was hit after stopping and turning around. Witness accounts are mixed about the surrender and / or the hands being up. Even if the prosecutor had gotten an indictment, it seems unlikely any charges would stick in CT b/c once a citizen challenges or threatens a police officer -- all the legal protections pretty much swing to the officer. He's also allowed to make mistakes in the heat of the moment and jurors would believe the moment was quite heated. http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/in-three-minutes-two-lives-collide-and-a-nation-divides-over-ferguson-shooting/2014/12/06/b78b878e-7983-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html That story relies heavily upon Wilson's testimony and not upon the physical evidence of the scene which directly contradicts his testimony. I'll stick to the physical evidence.

BamaD -> RE: The Grand Jury has decided in Ferguson (12/7/2014 9:45:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen That should read You are aware that experts think the prosecutor did his job improperly in this case right? The Washington Post had a long article today reconstructing all the events of the encounter between Wilson and Brown. It seems established that there was an altercation at the police car. The specifics are a little murky (did brown go for the gun or try to prevent Wilson from drawing it, did Brown hit Wilson (not clear), and YES shots were fired in the vehicle. This event triggered Wilson's lawful right to defend himself and use force to subdue / arrest Brown. The next issue is whether or not Brown posed a threat to the community so that his escape was something that had to be stopped by force. After that is whether or not Brown surrendered before being shot or after he was hit after stopping and turning around. Witness accounts are mixed about the surrender and / or the hands being up. Even if the prosecutor had gotten an indictment, it seems unlikely any charges would stick in CT b/c once a citizen challenges or threatens a police officer -- all the legal protections pretty much swing to the officer. He's also allowed to make mistakes in the heat of the moment and jurors would believe the moment was quite heated. http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/in-three-minutes-two-lives-collide-and-a-nation-divides-over-ferguson-shooting/2014/12/06/b78b878e-7983-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html That story relies heavily upon Wilson's testimony and not upon the physical evidence of the scene which directly contradicts his testimony. I'll stick to the physical evidence. You mean like Browns blood and DNA being on Wilson's firearm and proof of it being fired inside the car? You do realize that you are now including The Washington Post in the vast right wing conspiracy?

Page: << < prev 14 15 [16] 17 18 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.0625