It's still going because NS Storm still has some sand in his vagina. This case is pretty cut and dry. I linked to the evidence so that anyone who wanted to could see that. Some don't want to see it.
I think you've lost the plot with the "your team" stuff. seriously. And the feeling sorry part. You and others in this thread seem to have a view that the way legal proceedings were conducted were exemplary and fair-minded---something Texxx alluded to with his one Washington Times article, and you kept on talking about. I wanted to counter that notion. I don't really care if you "feel sorry" about anything---because you've clearly taken this to be a "us vs them---your team vs my team" issue, so your thinking will be delineated that way. But it's an absolute loss for ALL sides of the conflict if you think what happened here was a good course of action, or fair-minded, or not improper in any way. That's a dangerous thought to carry forward because you might just have a strong emotional attachment to what happens here. You might think this process was entirely right. You might be willing to accept a flawed proceeding that increased tensions, and injected unnecessary risk. It's important for you or anybody else to have a more complete sense of why it could be flawed, so you do not advance from this with the belief that what happened here could serve as inspiration or example for anything in the future.
I don't understand why this is being debated as much as it is.Attack an officer of the law and you will most likely get shot. Just because you are some unarmed punk kid doesn't make you immune. But whatever, I'll let you pro black people keep on trying to justify yourselves. It's hilarious. There's a reason officer Wilson got acquitted and rightly so.
Yeah that was pretty bad, probably time for them to change their name on here and try again. Perhaps they can blame that comment on a cousin or something.
Simply amazing, isn't it? Why bother trying to dialogue with people who are not even intelligent enough to mask their racism? Or were they not trying at all?
That's what it is with these protesters. Trying to justify a petty thug. I would never think about striking a police officer. Would you?
Pardon if i come off as racist but I've been around (ghetto) blacks long enough to be tired of their ****. The worst attitudes ever.
I see you still refuse to address the actual evidence in the case. This does not surprise me at all. There is no case, and you have essentially no argument if there is no case. But of course rather than admit that your position is wrong, you will still try to play lawyer, throw articles from thinkprogress.com and dailykos, as if they were respectable sources. I gave you all of the evidence that was presented at the grand jury proceedings. You ignored it. You give not one crapola about justice. If you did then you would actually LOOK at the evidence and make a judgement - but you can't even be bothered to do that. You are in it for the Cause. You are a social justice warrior - truth be damned. The Narrative is all important. Who cares if a whitey cop and his family have to live in hiding for the rest of their lives as a result? You are gonna get yer pound of flesh. because THAT is true justice, eh? You CANNOT get past the fact that the grand jury saw all of the evidence - which you also have access to, but have chosen to avoid - and concluded that Wilson committed no crime. But that FACT remains. No matter how much you complain about the process, the substance remains what it has always been: there is no case, and there never was. But damned if that's gonna stop you from trying your best to put an innocent man in jail, eh? Justice demands its pound of flesh...
You see? You only came in here to continue your weird stalking of me. You don't contribute anything to the topic at hand, then come in and say I shouldn't tell someone to shut up while that person is allegedly contributing and I am allegedly not. Pot. Kettle. Black. (Plus, unprovoked personal insults from you. Twice.) And in fact, I have contributed to the topic at hand, in contrast to you. So just go away.
This I support. While I don't think that there is evidence that Darren Wilson did anything illegal, IMO he escalated the situation resulting in someone's death, likely counter to his training, and losing his job is punishment enough.
Also, like I said, I don't think the evidence points to a future guilty verdict. However, if you are going to choose to have a grand jury it should be run like a grand jury and the ADAs should be reprimanded for the way they handled the proceeding. I think the right conclusion was reached, but process DOES matter and they did a **** job of upholding the process. End doesn't justify the means.
Well, let's face it, he did nothing at all wrong, but he had no choice but to resign and move. You can't be a cop on the streets when there is a lynch mob out to get you. If he stayed on as a cop, he'd be dead in less than 6 months and probably have to shoot several more idiots along the way. It's just not worth it. I'm sure people are sending his family money so that they can move to somewhere better and start a new life somewhere more civilized.
Rich Lowry gives basic advice on how not to get shot by the cops (don't rob a convenience store, don't try to beat up a cop, don't try to take his gun, etc.), panel of lefty elites gasps in outrage <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/YEGxAcM0JcM?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
You still don't get it. well, at least you and others aren't running around saying this was a fair-minded or exemplary process anymore. I suppose that's progress.
This WAS a fair process, and that's what some are claiming was unfair because they wanted it to be a rigged process.
It was not fair for a number of reasons--- 1) It violated, if not in the letter of the law, the spirit of open criminal proceedings, a constitutional right afforded to Americans, something that would have been critical in this case. 2) It was headed by a prosecutor whose impartiality was questioned by the community with a 70,000 strong petition. 3) There were examples that indicated bias by said prosecutor---an example being how Missouri state law allowing for the shooting of "fleeing felons" was prominently presented in a handout---the Supreme Court ruling negating that law only being mentioned vaguely two months later. 4) The prosecutor had previously misrepresented grand jury testimony in other cases. 5) The grand jury proceedings gave exceptions to this case that are not seen in others---allowing the defendant to present exculpatory evidence is something Justice Scalia notes is not done "here or in England". In a case that steamed over a system of law that treated people unequally, this was the worst thing to do: creating new, different legal proceedings. 6) The governor himself pointed out that there was a well-established route that was ignored in favor of a set of legal proceedings that injected additional legal risk and increased tensions on both sides. 7) If indeed, the prosecutor was under-zealous, a closed grand jury proceeding with no accountability to the public or media and a rubber-stamp process was the worst way to go about "demonstrating justice".
Grand Juries are always closed proceedings....there's nothing new about that, it doesn't violate anything. I think you've been listening to people who misled you. So what? Those people had a weak at best case, and petitions are ignored all the time when they are stupid like that. I could get 70k people to sign all kinds of things, it wouldn't mean that those things would have to or should happen. Okay, well he wasn't shot while fleeing, so it isn't relevant to this case. Cite specific examples. They chose to give the grand jury all of the information making it remarkably fair....which is why some people are upset, they didn't want it to be fair, they wanted to put an innocent man on trial. The Governor is attempting to blame others because his foolish actions allowed the town of Furguson to be burned by the upset lynch mob when they found out they weren't going to get their way. There was no case here so there's no reason for the state to waste money on a trial of an obviously innocent man.....even if some try to claim that it would have made the criminals who burnt the town happier.
1) If you're going to conduct a grand jury like you would conduct a pre-trial proceeding which is what happened in this case, and if you knew it was likely to be the last proceeding in this case, rigging a grand jury like setup that functioned more like a trial than a grand jury, all to keep it closed---is very much gaming the system. 2) Can you argue why you have a better case than 70,000 people within the Ferguson community? 3) Yes, it was relevant to this case, because the definition of what Michael Brown did would have fallen under those laws, which is exactly why they were brought up. 4) I've posted it numerous times, but once again--- 5) You think it's remarkably fair diverging from legal precedent to create new standards of fairness depending on the case? What happened to nation of laws, and not nation of men? 6) Right, so now you're questioning the governor, a host of legal experts, and the community. What case do you have?
