I wouldn't exactly call Wilson cold-blooded. Brown did assault him, after all. If Wilson was a normal citizen, I could imagine self-defense being a reasonable argument against criminal prosecution. However, as an officer, he is held to a higher standard to lawfully apprehend criminals. I think it was wrong to fire the last few rounds at Brown after he had surrendered.
CNN is incredibly irresponsible by sharing this type of conjecture and opinion and presenting it to the uneducated and emotional supporters of Brown. We live in a civilized nation -- not one where a mob rules and not one where justice is determined by who causes chaos in the streets. CNN is just stoking the fire for ratings. The justice system needs to handle this -- just like Obama said. If these protestors, our justice system would be set back to tribal days.
I wouldn't say unloading your pistol into a teenager with his hands up is losing your composure. That's just murder.
Or CNN had statements of potentially credible witnesses and aired it since it was about a news story that's been happening recently. The two witnesses have nothing to do with mobs of looters or set our justice system back in any way.
Our system allow protests. Our system allow news to show "news". Our system allow people to see them and think whatever they want of them. The fundamentals of our system of freedom is pretty great but the execution of it isn't at all perfect. If you want to roll those freedom back.... if we want news to just "show" what we like, protesters to protests only things we don't like.... we would be back to the pre-America days.
I don't disagree with the right to protest or show news. We are also free to judge irresponsible news reporters and ignorant protesters who don't wait for the facts to come out and don't allow the justice system to perform its job.
He went to the emergency room. At some point, when there is a trial (and unless there is evidence not disclosed, there will be a trial) the emergency room records of the officer will be released. At this point, we have an "excited utterance" caught on tape from people that did not know they were being video taped and did not even live in the area. While it is still circumstantial evidence, it is damning, especially when combined with the audio of the shots fired. The long pause in the audio always bothered me, but it could be explained if Brown charged him. Now, that idea is out the window. Of course Fox News says there are many eyewitnesses that support the officer's story. I want to know what exactly they saw and who they are. Seems that everyone is that damn town saw the shooting if you believe the media.
"wait for fact" Fact - "don't allow the justice system to perform its job" Fact - the justice system hasn't done anything yet Let's wait, ok
Fox News? Yet I have not heard or seen any EVIDENCE You are SUPPOSING evidence. . .but there is none as of yet Rocket River now. . they might manufacture some .. . but as of now .. . there are not even photos of him injured in any way
did police interview the construction workers? will it become part of the investigation by the Justice Department? if so, their eyewitness testimony can be used as evidence. far from opinion or conjecture. need more facts. wouldn't an official autopsy show if he was shot in the back of the head?
No, not supposing evidence. It is documented he went to the ER. The degree of injuries? I don't know. As for Fox News.... they are loving this... fanning the flames for a race war. The video comes out today and their response is "we have been told there are lots of witnesses that support the officer."
Well we know for a fact that he wasn't shot in the back of the head, he was shot in the top of the head and down through the eye socket. The only possible time he could have been shot in the back is one of the shots in the arm. So far the "evidence" that has been produced has been inconclusive and it's very unlikely that anything will come out until there is a trial....if there is a trial.
The police didn't need to interview the construction workers for them to be witnesses at trial or used in an investigation. There have already been 3 autopsies.
Wow. Just wow. The very day the name of the officer was released the Ferguson police released a grainy video that may (or may not have) shown the victim "strongarm/rob" a convenience store. Were you worrying about how the release of that video was perceived? Did you criticize the release of that video? [note: that video, and what transpired in that store has since been called to question] No, you protest what appears to be videotaped commentary from multiple witnesses that appear to corroborate earlier witness statements as to what happened. Witnesses that seem to be unbiased and believable. Why?
