|
Lord Windy posted:Shooting someone from fleeing the police isn't a cruel and unusual punishment? Shachi posted:Wait, what? He wasn't shot in the back. I assume that is what Lord Windy was referring to.
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 11:07 |
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:It would help if you specified what evidence you meant.
With that being said, the question I'm addressing is, "Did Wilson fire on Brown as Brown was fleeing?". I believe he did, because of three corroborating pieces of evidence: The Witness Testimony Eleven witnesses testified that Wilson shot at a fleeing Brown, while only 3 witnesses testified otherwise. (Excluding one witness who testified to both  )http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/newly-released-witness-testimony-tell-us-michael-brown-shooting/ The Audio Recording  This audio recording - which started after the fight at the police car - shows a flurry of shots were fired, followed by a three second pause, followed by the final shots. Wilson claims that all of these shots were fired after Brown stopped fleeing and turned to "charge" Wilson. Assuming Wilson's story is true, what could explain the pause and resumption of firing? If Brown truly charged at Wilson, you would expect a fearful Wilson to fire without pause until Brown was definitively stopped. Therefore, it is very hard to believe that all those shots were fired after Brown turned. What seems much more plausible is that the first flurry of shots were fired as Brown fled (all missing), the shots paused as Brown turned and Wilson reassessed the situation, and the final shots were fired with Brown facing Wilson (some of which struck Brown). The Fact That Brown Stopped Fleeing in the First Place Assuming you believe Wilson's account, why would Brown stop fleeing from Wilson in the first place? If Wilson wasn't firing at Brown as he fled, why wouldn't Brown continue running and try to escape? Wilson's account would have you believe that Brown ran a good distance away from Wilson, only to stop, turn, and charge at an armed officer that had already shot him once, all without Wilson firing a shot as Brown fled. What seems much more plausible is that Wilson shot at a fleeing Brown, and that Brown stopped after considering the odds of getting shot again to be too high to warrant an escape attempt. Whether Brown stopped to attack Wilson or stopped to surrender to Wilson is beyond the scope of what I'm covering here. I'm simply trying to explain why I believe Wilson shot at Brown as Brown fled. I'm also not weighing in on the legality of firing on a fleeing Brown, as IANAL. Tibeerius fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Dec 22, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Thanks for the clarification! My understanding is that initial witness interviews are just as accurate (if not more so) than testimony given months after the fact, but your point that key witnesses might be missing is well taken. It would be nice if there were a similar chart including all statements. It gets very difficult to debate this case without one or both parties handwaving toward "testimony" supporting their point, but (understandably) no one wants to wade through months of testimony to see who's actually correct. Tibeerius fucked around with this message at 19:31 on Dec 25, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2014 17:21
|
|