Darren Wilson's Side of the Story

[piece-itpete]

Originally Posted by nailer

Might one not say that politics is a symptom of aphasia?

That's awesome One of the books I've read about the Soviet system of oppression had a guy in the later years after Stalin - late 70s perhaps? Say (paraphrased from memory) 'These insane people! [still locking up dissidents as insane] Running around, organizing, forming parties!'

Pete

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by nailer

Might one not say that politics is a symptom of aphasia?

It was too weird, man. I make a fairly simple statement about the endless torrent of conjecture (it's been conjected* a thousand times, but we just keep on conjecting*) regarding this shooting...and it's out my fingertips and before I can take a wizz and come back to the terminal, it's two more conjectures.

It just felt like there was this clinical, maybe even pathological failure to communicate. Thus the aphasia.


*As a Chicago guy, I enjoy using Daleyspeak as often as I find the opportunity. As Richie once babbled, "Scrutiny? What else do you want? Do you want to take my shorts? Give me a break. How much scrutiny do you want to have? You go scrutinize yourself! I get scrootened every day, don't worry, from each and every one of you. It doesn't bother me."

Scrootined...conjected. It's almost poetic.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

I am very suspicious about the circumstances of the final shooting that killed Wilson, and I've explicitly called for a trial. I have doubts about the ability of the grand jury process to provide adequate assurance of justice, in this case, if there is no indictment. But I explicitly said I'll be satisfied if there is a trial, whatever the outcome.

Can you point to a post on this board where anyone has called for Brown to be punished without a trial? I think not.

I'm so confused. Did you mean "Brown" where you said "Wilson" and Wilson where you said "Brown"? Brown's the dead guy and Wilson's the living breathing guy...right?

Anyway...yes...I think there's plenty of suggestions (none by you) that a trial isn't necessary to determine Darren Wilson's guilt. OK...OK...a trial has been called for. But it appears that the new blood evidence suggests to many that a trial would acquit Darren Wilson. And then what happens? Then what we have another 15 page thread on how the fix was in from the start.

It's beyond nuts. How many goddamn times are we gonna say the same shit to each other...over and over again.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by Ike Bana

But it appears that the new blood evidence suggests to many that a trial would acquit Darren Wilson.

I don't see how this clears Wilson at all. If anything it makes the argument that Brown was charging Wilson even less credible. Why would anyone who had been shot, then run away, and then turn around and charge a loaded gun?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/18/justic...unt/index.html

FBI forensic tests showed the gun was fired twice in the car, with one bullet hitting Brown's arm while the second one missed, the newspaper said.

In addition to Wilson's uniform and gun, forensic tests found the teen's blood on the interior door panel of his car, The Times said.

His account did not include an explanation on why he shot at Brown even after they got out of the car, according to The Times. A preliminary autopsy showed the teen was shot at least six times, including twice in the head.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by Ike Bana

I'm so confused. Did you mean "Brown" where you said "Wilson" and Wilson where you said "Brown"? Brown's the dead guy and Wilson's the living breathing guy...right?

Anyway...yes...I think there's plenty of suggestions (none by you) that a trial isn't necessary to determine Darren Wilson's guilt. OK...OK...a trial has been called for. But it appears that the new blood evidence suggests to many that a trial would acquit Darren Wilson. And then what happens? Then what we have another 15 page thread on how the fix was in from the start.

It's beyond nuts. How many goddamn times are we gonna say the same shit to each other...over and over again.

I don't get you Ike. Why are you on the side of the Cops after having one bust your head open to the tune of 13 stitches just for shits and grins?

Is is some kind of weird variation of the Stockholm Syndrome?

Or are you like one of those battered women that keep going back with the guy that beats the shit out of them?

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

I don't get you Ike. Why are you on the side of the Cops after having one bust your head open to the tune of 13 stitches just for shits and grins?

Is is some kind of weird variation of the Stockholm Syndrome?

Or are you like one of those battered women that keep going back with the guy that beats the shit out of them?

I don't get you TJ. Why would you suggest I'm on the side of the coppers. The only side I'm on is identifying that we're beating a whole herd of dead horses on this fucking thing.

Do I really need to hear how a bullet went in the top of Mikey's head, down his neck, and lodged in his chest 35 times? No...I don't. Nobody does. Do I need to hear you bleating about how Darren Wilson is a murderer anymore? No TJ...I really don't. Darren Wilson is a murderer when a jury of his peers says he's a murderer.

We're pretty goddamn specific about what's murder and what ain't when it comes to conservatives calling a doc in a women's clinic a murderer. Maybe we oughta give Darren Wilson the same benefit...don'tcha think? Murder is a legal term. Darren Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown. He's not a murderer until he's found guilty of murder.

[donquixote99]

He either is or isn't a murderer depending on what he did in what circumstances. Whichever he is, he's been it since the incident, and it will never change no matter what. Sometimes murderers are found not guilty; sometimes innocent persons are convicted. Doesn't change what they are.

He's not a convicted murderer unless and until he is convicted.

[barbara]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

I don't see how this clears Wilson at all. If anything it makes the argument that Brown was charging Wilson even less credible. Why would anyone who had been shot, then run away, and then turn around and charge a loaded gun?



http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/18/justic...unt/index.html

Considering the fact that Brown already assaulted the cop in the police car, I don't think we can assume Brown had enough common sense NOT to charge at the officer who had a loaded gun.

I can easily see how he could have done something that stupid.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by barbara

Considering the fact that Brown already assaulted the cop in the police car, I don't think we can assume Brown had enough common sense NOT to charge at the officer who had a loaded gun.

I can easily see how he could have done something that stupid.

Obviously the kid doesn't deserve to be dead. But there are circumstances around this incident. Wilson may loose his job, but if he was assaulted, I don't see how they can convict him of anything more severe than voluntary manslaughter. Maybe not even that.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by barbara

Considering the fact that Brown already assaulted the cop in the police car, I don't think we can assume Brown had enough common sense NOT to charge at the officer who had a loaded gun.

I can easily see how he could have done something that stupid.

I couldn't agree with you less.

I find the idea that Brown, after being shot and then fleeing, would then turn around a charge a loaded gun to be absolutely ridiculous.