T1B

99% of the time, prosecutors use the grand jury to convince the grand jury to bring charges. The prosecutor in Ferguson used the grand jury process to find reasons to NOT charge Wilson. Pretty fucking perverse, and just another reason why the rest of the world got rid of the ridiculously corrupt grand jury process years ago.

Probably because the evidence didn't support a prosecution, you shit-smeared dumbfuck.

I wish I was up against milquetoast DAs like that dude everyday. I would win every case.

Some dumb ass at the Brown family presser, might be e father, has a shirt on the says: "No Justice No Peace."


Someone needs to help him out. Maybe start with a dictionary. Then ask him were is the justice for the store owners and employees who have only burned shells of businesses.

Why would he need a dictionary? You were the only one that spelled anything incorrectly.

Moving Sale wrote:Why would he need a dictionary? You were the only one that spelled anything incorrectly.

Ah the joys of posting on a phone.

LS,
I, unlike dimsdale, have no problem with mispelled words or typos becuase I'm not selfloathing ditchdigger, but I would like to know what about "no justice no peace" needs a dictionary reference from you?

Again if the DA in all my cases acted that way I would win almost every case. I doubt you would be calling that justice.

Moving Sale wrote:LS,
I, unlike dimsdale, have no problem with mispelled words or typos becuase I'm not selfloathing ditchdigger, but I would like to know what about "no justice no peace" needs a dictionary reference from you?

Pretty simple. I am guessing that the guy is stating with his shirt that until some sort of charges, or civil suit, or physical harm comes to the officer who shot MB there will be continued violence. A pretty straightforward interpretation of his shirt. If last night is any indication of the type of violence we will be seeing moving forward as threatened on dudes shirt, there will be little to no justice for business owners and employees in the area.

Dude wants a "fair" or "just" outcome to his liking regardless of the facts while threatening others with unfair and unjust acts as a result. Hence, he might want to understand the word himself.

Left Seater wrote: Dude wants a "fair" or "just" outcome to his liking regardless of the facts while threatening others with unfair and unjust acts as a result. Hence, he might want to understand the word himself.

One of the definitions is tantamount to equal. Nobody can make the argument that is process was equal to any other indictment in recents years. It was done inside the justice system, that is about as close to justice as it got.

Moving Sale wrote:Again if the DA in all my cases acted that way I would win almost every case. I doubt you would be calling that justice.

Instead of puffing out your chest, why don't you explain where he fucked up?

mvscal wrote:Probably because the evidence didn't support a prosecution, you shit-smeared dumbfuck.

That's for the grand jury, not the prosecutor, to decide, pole smoker.

Moving Sale wrote:Why would he need a dictionary? You were the only one that spelled anything incorrectly.

Killian wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:Again if the DA in all my cases acted that way I would win almost every case. I doubt you would be calling that justice.

Instead of puffing out your chest, why don't you explain where he fucked up?

He never addressed the central point that's all. No big deal, other than it is well, the central point.

I guess we see the central point as being different, because he repeatedly made it clear that the grand jury thought there was no basis to bring charges.

Some are saying it should have gone to trial regardless, maybe you agree as well. I would disagree with that but you have repeatedly told us what the outcome would be against this DA.

I have no doubt you would have had the officer walking away with zero charges after said trial if you were his defense attorney. You and every other attorney that was half way competent would have made that trial a laughing stock for the prosecution.

So what is the central point?

Left Seater wrote:I guess we see the central point as being different, because he repeatedly made it clear that the grand jury thought there was no basis to bring charges.

I know they returned a no true bill, but he never addressed why this homicide was justified. What justified the 12th shot which he seemed to say was the fatal shot? I heard the word charging and a few other like words, but nothing as to why that equated justifiable homicide.

Let me turn it around, show me one jurisdiction where a person reaching inside an officers vehicle and punching an officer and likely reaching for his gun doesn't equate justifiable homicide?

Left Seater wrote:Let me turn it around, show me one jurisdiction where a person reaching inside an officers vehicle and punching an officer and likely reaching for his gun doesn't equate justifiable homicide?

We'll there is your problem. That's not what happened. If big mike is killed with one of those first 2(?) shoots, we never hear about this. The central question is what justified the last shot, not the first or second.

Roach wrote:So what, he dodged the bullet then? He didn't have to address justification, so rack him I guess for passing off the hot potato.

Yea the DA did a shitty job so rack him. You are dumber than you are ugly.

Somebody calling what big mike did charging doesn't justify killing him. It COULD justify it if accompanied by other evidence but not by itself. Especially given the fact that he was killed 150 feet* from the car.


*I got that from Fox News so it might not be correct.

There's one problem, it's grammatical.

No justice, no peace.

COMMAS MOTHERFUCKERS. Use them.

Moving Sale wrote:

Left Seater wrote:Let me turn it around, show me one jurisdiction where a person reaching inside an officers vehicle and punching an officer and likely reaching for his gun doesn't equate justifiable homicide?

We'll there is your problem. That's not what happened. If big mike is killed with one of those first 2(?) shoots, we never hear about this. The central question is what justified the last shot, not the first or second.

What justified the last shot? The officer was pretty clear. MB was 8-10 feet away and advancing so the officer shot again.

But to back up for a second, after MB retreated a few yards from the officer's car was the officer just supposed to sit back and let him go? Of course not. He got out of his car to apprehend MB and then was charged.

Big Mike has been shot 5 times. What justifies the last shot?

Moving Sale wrote:

Left Seater wrote:Let me turn it around, show me one jurisdiction where a person reaching inside an officers vehicle and punching an officer and likely reaching for his gun doesn't equate justifiable homicide?

We'll there is your problem. That's not what happened. If big mike is killed with one of those first 2(?) shoots, we never hear about this. The central question is what justified the last shot, not the first or second.

Witnesses, Wilson's face & throat, a bullet in the vehicle's door, and MB's gsw in his thumb with powder burn say you're an idiot.

Moving Sale wrote:Big Mike has been shot 5 times. What justifies the last shot?

As I've explained to you before, officers are trained (per department policy) that if there is a deadly threat to them or another person they are to shoot in bursts of two to three rounds at a time until the threat is stopped.

Why can't you keep that in your tiny mind?

Diego in Seattle wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:

Left Seater wrote:Let me turn it around, show me one jurisdiction where a person reaching inside an officers vehicle and punching an officer and likely reaching for his gun doesn't equate justifiable homicide?

We'll there is your problem. That's not what happened. If big mike is killed with one of those first 2(?) shoots, we never hear about this. The central question is what justified the last shot, not the first or second.

Witnesses, Wilson's face & throat, a bullet in the vehicle's door, and MB's gsw in his thumb with powder burn say you're an idiot.

I didn't say he wasn't shot at the SUV, I said he wasn't fatally shot at the SUV. Try and follow along.

Diego in Seattle wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:Big Mike has been shot 5 times. What justifies the last shot?

As I've explained to you before, officers are trained (per department policy) that if there is a deadly threat to them or another person they are to shoot in bursts of two to three rounds at a time until the threat is stopped.

Why can't you keep that in your tiny mind?

And again, that's not what happened, but I guess since you are 6'7" and I'm not that you should probably just call me short a few more times and then yell 'bode.

WTF is with the shit lawyers and shit wanna be lawyers that think it is the DA's job to try to convict people, no matter what the fact say.

The DA's job is to see that justice is done. He is no one's advocate. He doesn't get paid by the conviction.

Did it ever occur to you, moving fail that the reason the DA's you go up against provide a more vigorous prosecution, is because your vermin clientel are fukking guilty?

Do you think that DA's should prosecute people when there is clearly no case? Wait, a minute, of course you do. There is a paycheck in it for you, you fukking leech.

smackaholic wrote:
The DA's job is to see that justice is done. He is no one's advocate. He doesn't get paid by the conviction.

Wrong. He advocates for the state, dumbfuck.

molly wrote:There's one problem, it's grammatical.

No justice, no peace.

COMMAS MOTHERFUCKERS. Use them.

Holy hell... still trying to get my head around this profound, self-asskicking.

No need for a comma when e-screaming.

Moving Sale wrote:Big Mike has been shot 5 times. What justifies the last shot?

The fact that he is still advancing towards the officer.

molly wrote:No need for a comma when e-screaming.

Wasn't aware of that loophole for self ass-covering. Whew. K- good. You're not a self-asskicker after all.

No wonder Mike Brown was a thug and criminal. Look at the role models he had in his life. Skip ahead to 1:30 mark.

Clearly his mother's words about wanting peace were bogus since she didn't say a single thing to the step father nor did she ask the No Justice, No Peace shirt guy to remove it at the presser.

Thousands of people marching through Downtown Portland right now (99% white, I'm sure). Protests in Portland are generally peaceful, but when they go bad, they usually go very bad.

My guess is some DB will break out windows at a Starbucks, for some latent WTO reason.

Lots of yelling around the hotel here in ATL. Also a crap ton of security, ie "rent a cops" in a banquet room off of the lobby. I guess they are here to prevent damage to the hotel if the shit hits the fan or other buildings downtown.

Yep. Planning on room service tonight instead of going out to dinner.

Doubt the protesters will be vertical when I head out about 4:45 tomorrow morning.

Rain check on that drink.

Just saw the family presser in full.

Shame on Al Sharpton and the Brown family attorney. Both asked why the discredited eye witnesses were presented to the Grand Jury. What a fraud. Had they not been presented they would have bitched and moaned and claimed there was a cover up.

Left Seater wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:Big Mike has been shot 5 times. What justifies the last shot?

The fact that he is still advancing towards the officer.

The 12th shot was in rapid secession after the 11th. At 6 shots per second with big mike advancing at one mile per hour that's 1.7 inches. At four shots per second and big mike advancing at 20 mph is 40 inches, a little over 3 ft. Do you know what numbers to plug into that equation?

And Wilson is 150 ft away at the time right?