|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tophatcat
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Location: under the hat
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2014 11:22 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
sirius black |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm responding to Steelrails but its really a rsponse for those who don't buy this grand jury decision.
1.The vide of the constructiion workers.
2. The police in Ferguson are racits. That's a fact and a given.
3.THe prosecutor knowingly threw the case. Witness 40 wasn't there. His assisstant gave jury instructions from an outdated law that helped Wilson.
4. The actions of the Ferguson law enforcement from the start used tactics to taint public opinion, even to the point of trying to incite a riot (I posted the video).
5. The prosecutor has never indicted a cop. He is biased having a cop father killed by a cop.
6. Steelrails. C'mon, its rare for some unarmed kid with no background as such to arbitrarily attack a cop. Just because it has happened doesn't mean its probaby the case in this one. Its straw grabbing. TO beleive the rare occurance is PROOF of your bias instead of believing the probable. You can find a rare exception to anytihng. Clinging it to it shows desperation and intelectual dishonesty at the very least. In matters like this its grasping at it to cover bigotry.
7. Wilson is a racist cop with a history of racial issues from a prior job. Now, tell me which is more likely? You're straw grabbing.
8. The cops and the system in Ferguson is obviously racist. And they are in charge of the crime scene and the gathering of facts but you still try and accept their findings as if its impartial. KNowing it isn't. That's why I'm using the bigotry word. If fair and impartial methods are used, I have no problem with it. Tens of blacks are shot each year by law enforcement. You don't hear a peep as a collective by Blacks because they were justified. So, its not like blacks are out marching every time someone Black gets shot.
9. The initial eyewitness accounts of those from the scene. There were vidoes, texts, etc. immediately from people who saw what happened. That is conclusive and powerful. I'm not talking about way after the fact, the initial one and two of them were white and they all corroborated Wilson arbitrarily killing him. You can't get around that video.
10. I posted about the powder burns. Read it. A scenario in which Wilson tried to pull a gun to shoot him while in the car would corroborate Brown trying desperately to save his own life.
11. The Grand Jury was obviously tainetd. you keep saying 'after the Grand jury', knowing its tainted. Fox News legal analysts heavily criticized the Grand jury. You know very well the process was bullshit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candy bar
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sirius black wrote: |
I'm responding to Steelrails but its really a rsponse for those who don't buy this grand jury decision.
1.The vide of the constructiion workers.
2. The police in Ferguson are racits. That's a fact and a given.
3.THe prosecutor knowingly threw the case. Witness 40 wasn't there. His assisstant gave jury instructions from an outdated law that helped Wilson.
4. The actions of the Ferguson law enforcement from the start used tactics to taint public opinion, even to the point of trying to incite a riot (I posted the video).
5. The prosecutor has never indicted a cop. He is biased having a cop father killed by a cop.
6. Steelrails. C'mon, its rare for some unarmed kid with no background as such to arbitrarily attack a cop. Just because it has happened doesn't mean its probaby the case in this one. Its straw grabbing. TO beleive the rare occurance is PROOF of your bias instead of believing the probable. You can find a rare exception to anytihng. Clinging it to it shows desperation and intelectual dishonesty at the very least. In matters like this its grasping at it to cover bigotry.
7. Wilson is a racist cop with a history of racial issues from a prior job. Now, tell me which is more likely? You're straw grabbing.
8. The cops and the system in Ferguson is obviously racist. And they are in charge of the crime scene and the gathering of facts but you still try and accept their findings as if its impartial. KNowing it isn't. That's why I'm using the bigotry word. If fair and impartial methods are used, I have no problem with it. Tens of blacks are shot each year by law enforcement. You don't hear a peep as a collective by Blacks because they were justified. So, its not like blacks are out marching every time someone Black gets shot.
9. The initial eyewitness accounts of those from the scene. There were vidoes, texts, etc. immediately from people who saw what happened. That is conclusive and powerful. I'm not talking about way after the fact, the initial one and two of them were white and they all corroborated Wilson arbitrarily killing him. You can't get around that video.
10. I posted about the powder burns. Read it. A scenario in which Wilson tried to pull a gun to shoot him while in the car would corroborate Brown trying desperately to save his own life.
11. The Grand Jury was obviously tainetd. you keep saying 'after the Grand jury', knowing its tainted. Fox News legal analysts heavily criticized the Grand jury. You know very well the process was bullshit. |
1. video of dude robbing mart
2. dude attacked white cop
3. black and white witnesses who backed Wilson's side of the story
4. dude robbing store caused pubic fact; riots, fact
5. prosecutor never indicted a man who has been up in orbit, cop on cop not biased
6. dude with no background on a video earlier robbing a mart
7. dude robbed a mart that wasn't owned by same race, he is racist
8. blacks aren't out marching every time a black shoots a white
9. initial eyewitnesses gave different accounts of the story
10. cop trying to save his own life; dude shouldn't have been reaching inside car
11. serious black's story is tainted
sirius black, your posts are STUPID! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is for the rest of you, because Candy Bar could be shown a video of Wilson committing the murder and he'll applaud it quietly.
In any event for those who are more civil minded. Brown did NOT rob the store. The store did NOT report a robbery. Brown paid for his purchase:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maA1FUJqhew
If he had, this is what bigots hang on to reason that he would arbitrarily go to a cop unarmed to fight him and take his gun. This kind of supposition is what a scary percentage of Americans hang on to to justify their bigotry. Even with time to intimidate and threaten witnesses, the Ferguson cops could only get a few people to go along with the story and one of them weren't even there. CB (can I call you that Candy Bar?), hangs on desperately to these so called witnesses. Notice how no one who supports Wilson can reason away the eyewitness accounts AS IT HAPPENED and even by white eyewitnesses. 43 milllion blacks and millions of whites, and we see the marches around the nation are multicultural and the international community has seen it and has supported the Brown was murdered reality but CB, Steelrails and Fox News can suss out something that the rest of us can't see, They cling to the narrative that the lie stole some cig thingies is more than enough proof he is capable of attacking a cop unarmed. Something hardened criminals don't even do mind you. Just realize how preposterous the narrative he is pushing on us. Occams razor doesn't apply. They totally disregard Wilson's racist past and the racism of the Ferguson police as well as the fact since day one they have been trying to change the narrative by hook or crook.
The good thing is the people are not buying it and we can tell by the protests and the various ones by groups as diverse as a girls basketball team.
Again, CB's view on Trayvon Martin, Brown, Garner mirrors the Fox News view of things just to put it all in perspective. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candy bar
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I will always be the boss and sirius black will always be working for me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Translaton: I'm a slave to the elite 1% and have been fooled into thinking I have some sort of power. It gives my lie meaning to think I'm better than others.
PS:
to the rest. I absolutely guarantee without even knowing a thing about CB that I am doing better than he is. Not that it matters, but to him it does. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guavashake
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sirius black wrote: |
Translaton: I'm a slave to the elite 1% and have been fooled into thinking I have some sort of power. It gives my lie meaning to think I'm better than others.
PS:
to the rest. I absolutely guarantee without even knowing a thing about CB that I am doing better than he is. Not that it matters, but to him it does. |
Your slip is showing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sirius black wrote: |
I'm responding to Steelrails but its really a rsponse for those who don't buy this grand jury decision.
1.The vide of the constructiion workers.
2. The police in Ferguson are racits. That's a fact and a given.
3.THe prosecutor knowingly threw the case. Witness 40 wasn't there. His assisstant gave jury instructions from an outdated law that helped Wilson.
4. The actions of the Ferguson law enforcement from the start used tactics to taint public opinion, even to the point of trying to incite a riot (I posted the video).
5. The prosecutor has never indicted a cop. He is biased having a cop father killed by a cop.
6. Steelrails. C'mon, its rare for some unarmed kid with no background as such to arbitrarily attack a cop. Just because it has happened doesn't mean its probaby the case in this one. Its straw grabbing. TO beleive the rare occurance is PROOF of your bias instead of believing the probable. You can find a rare exception to anytihng. Clinging it to it shows desperation and intelectual dishonesty at the very least. In matters like this its grasping at it to cover bigotry.
7. Wilson is a racist cop with a history of racial issues from a prior job. Now, tell me which is more likely? You're straw grabbing.
8. The cops and the system in Ferguson is obviously racist. And they are in charge of the crime scene and the gathering of facts but you still try and accept their findings as if its impartial. KNowing it isn't. That's why I'm using the bigotry word. If fair and impartial methods are used, I have no problem with it. Tens of blacks are shot each year by law enforcement. You don't hear a peep as a collective by Blacks because they were justified. So, its not like blacks are out marching every time someone Black gets shot.
9. The initial eyewitness accounts of those from the scene. There were vidoes, texts, etc. immediately from people who saw what happened. That is conclusive and powerful. I'm not talking about way after the fact, the initial one and two of them were white and they all corroborated Wilson arbitrarily killing him. You can't get around that video.
10. I posted about the powder burns. Read it. A scenario in which Wilson tried to pull a gun to shoot him while in the car would corroborate Brown trying desperately to save his own life.
11. The Grand Jury was obviously tainetd. you keep saying 'after the Grand jury', knowing its tainted. Fox News legal analysts heavily criticized the Grand jury. You know very well the process was bullshit. |
1. The video of construction workers shows their reaction and perception of events. It does not show the crime in question. Also, their testimony did not match the physical evidence and they were some distance away.
2. Whether the police in Ferguson are racist or not is a separate issue from the facts in a case of self-defense. As I stated, this is why I'm more supportive of a Civil Rights violation charge. It is a separate issue from self-defense.
3. Witness 40 was likely damaging to the prosecution's case as her testimony was supportive of Officer Wilson's story, yet was exposed as a lie to the grand jury.
4. Your story presented a very flimsy, hearsay claim that the cops were instigating the riots. Yes, there were plain clothes officers. No, there is no solid evidence of them instigating a riot. There is solid evidence of Michael Brown's stepfather saying "Let's burn this b down" and the mood of the crowd changing after that.
5. The prosecutor is a mainline Democrat and Obama supporter who has enjoyed wide public support. Whether to recuse himself or not was a difficult decision as a high-profile case like this is expected to have the full weight of the Prosecuting Attorney's office behind it. If it didn't and the indictment failed, people would be second guessing that as well.
6. Are you seriously suggesting that juveniles are incapable of committing crime? They are capable of murder, rape, fights, theft, fraud, etc. As someone who has witnessed an unarmed juvenile with my own eyes and the eyes of 1000 other people, it is certainly possible. In Detroit recently, we had a high-profile case of Michigan State recruit Jayru Campbell body slamming a security officer that was caught on video. It was his first offense. It is not common, but that does not make it impossible, nor does it mean that it did not take place here. I think you are being biased in dismissing it as a possibility. There is lots of juvenile crime. School shooters usually have no criminal record. And getting into a tussle with the cops is minor compared to murder.
7. No major media outlet, including left-leaning publications like Slate or Salon have accused Officer Wilson of being racist or having racist incidents at a prior job. That would be major news and we all would have heard about it. His prior department WAS disbanded over racial concerns, but Officer Wilson was never named in any complaint. You are the one grabbing at straws.
8. The Ferguson PD may or may not be racist. It certainly has some troubling tendencies, and again, this is why I am much more supportive of a civil rights charge. But there is zero evidence of any evidence being tampered with. An independent autopsy was conducted that confirmed what the state said. The crime scene was in plain view and no one claimed that the PD messed with it. What do you think Ferguson has some kind of Men in Black clean up crew ready to go at a moment's notice? And again, the cops are biased, but the witnesses have their own community biases as well. It's a wash. That's why we look at the physical evidence because it gets beyond those biases. Hundreds of journalists and legal experts have scrutinized this case. They would easily be able to pick out any inconsistencies.
9. Eyewitness testimony is not conclusive. In fact in those situations, it has been shown that rumor and popular consensus can affect people's perceptions of events. And not all witnesses saw the same thing. Some said he was running away when he was shot. Some said he was kneeling. Some said he had his hands up. Some said he was running at Officer Wilson. All of those contradict each other, even those that have the common connection that Officer Wilson did something wrong. That's why we have physical evidence- to shift through conflicting eyewitness testimony.
10. A scenario in which a police officer is in some kind of a struggle in a vehicle and goes for his gun is what the situation confirms and what some witnesses saw. The wound was to Brown's thumb and in close proximity to the weapon. Now the reasons for this struggle are not shown, nor is anyone's state of mind. There are limitations to it. But the wound is there.
11. Well, the issue of the grand jury is a separate one. Unfortunately we cannot disband the grand jury and bypass it. That would be unconstitutional. Certainly there is a case to be made for reform to the grand jury system. In the end, the grand jury was given the maximum amount of evidence possible. If they had not and refused to indict, people would be upset over that too. It was a no-win scenario for the prosecutor.
Again, I would like to ask you- Did you make up your mind before or after all the evidence that the grand jury saw was released to the general public? I did.
Also, you are calling me bigoted, but I have repeatedly stated that I am supportive of the notion that Officer Wilson violated Michael Brown's civil rights, a serious charge. But that is a separate issue from self-defense. Just because he is guilty of one, does not make him guilty of the other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candy bar
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sirius black wrote: |
Translaton: I'm a slave to the elite 1% and have been fooled into thinking I have some sort of power. It gives my lie meaning to think I'm better than others.
PS:
to the rest. I absolutely guarantee without even knowing a thing about CB that I am doing better than he is. Not that it matters, but to him it does. |
You absolutely guarantee that without even knowing a thing about CB that you are doing better than he is?
That's impossible. You could be doing better or you could be doing worse. That kind of buffoonery statement is what makes you completely non-credible. Even a moron wouldn't make a statement like that.
You would make a statement like, "hey judge, yoe dawg, I don't even know what happened in the Wilson incident but I can guarantee without even knowing a thing about the incident that the cop was in the wrong in the incident." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Steelrails, there are some things you see and its fairly one sided, others aren't. The initial eyewitness accounts say murder. After the fact all kinds of witness statements are taken even in cut and dry murder trials you will have discrepency in accounts. Its common. Grand juries are a preponderance of evidence and the overwhelming preponderance is Wilson murdered him. Taken in the whole context of things. The cops and the pepole who are supposed to be fair and impartial (such as the legal system) are dirty in Ferguson. That's obvious but you still don't admit it. The timing and release of the photo. Undercover Ferguson cops infiltrating and instigating a riot so they had cause to shoot at protesters. Wilson's racist background at another department. Cops at Ferguson linked to the KKK. A prosecutor who knowingly put a lying witness and gave wrong instructions. He having a history of neverindicting cops and he had a cop dad killed by a black guy. Fact is you are looking for an excuse. When you have Fox News crticizing it, it says it all. The mood of the country has changed where you can't reason away this thing. Its not just aberation, this country has a history of this type of behavior. Youtube is litered with it. So, yes, its a bigoted response to side with Wilson. This is the same Wilson whose fundraising site had to have the comments withdrawn because they were giving money thanking him for murdering the kid. Not defending himself mind you, they were at least honest about why they were giving him money. You may not even know it. I've seen your responses to various things. They cling to anything that goes against the victim in such cases. Everyone is supporting Garner so of course you can't be seen against that. There was a black kid killed by cops soon after in Ferguson, seems like suicide by cop. No protests, etc. Why? It was fair. There is a lot of injustrice that you and others ignore. Its common. My friends do the same. Anyway, to accept so called evidence when its obvious the whole Ferguson machine is corrupt and racist and not even acknowledge that says a lot also.
We'll put Candy Bar in the time out room. He wants to play who has the bigger dick. So, he goes on ignore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sirius black wrote: |
| The initial eyewitness accounts say murder. |
| Quote: |
| you will have discrepency in accounts. |
Those discrepancies are major discrepancies. There is a MASSIVE difference between shooting Brown in the back when he is running away vs. kneeling on the ground vs. surrendering with his hands up while standing.
They aren't saying the same thing. If they all say "he murdered Brown", but they all substantially differ on what was going on, that means the testimony of those involved is unreliable.
If their testimony was reliable, they would have all said that Officer Wilson shot Brown when he was kneeling. They didn't. That's why we have physical evidence. It wasn't an overwhelming majority of people said the same thing and that Wilson was guilty. It was 4-5 different versions of the story, none of which had a solid majority.
| Quote: |
| The cops and the pepole who are supposed to be fair and impartial (such as the legal system) are dirty in Ferguson. |
Again, I keep making this point- The cops may be dirty yes, but those witnesses can be as well. Both have issues with the other.
But there is no evidence that the cops tampered with the crime scene nor Michael Brown's body.
Saying "The cops are all racist, so Wilson must be guilty" is the same logic as saying "blacks are all gangbangers, so Michael Brown must be guilty".
| Quote: |
| Wilson's racist background at another department. |
Link please. From a reliable media source please. No major media outlet has released any claim that Wilson had incidents of racism at his prior job.
| Quote: |
| He having a history of neverindicting cops and he had a cop dad killed by a black guy. |
He is also a mainline Democrat and Obama supporter. And if he didn't participate in the case, people would blame him for that as well. They'd say "The prosecutor stepped aside rather than carry out his duty to secure an indictment".
| Quote: |
| So, yes, its a bigoted response to side with Wilson. |
Bigoted eh?
I'll ask you this question again, for the third time- DID YOU DECIDE THAT OFFICER WILSON WAS GUILTY BEFORE OR AFTER THE GRAND JURY EVIDENCE WAS RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC?
| Quote: |
| Fact is you are looking for an excuse. |
How am I looking for an excuse or ignoring the systemic racial problems that plagues Ferguson by supporting a Civil Rights violation charge against Wilson/the Ferguson PD?
But that is a separate issue from self-defense.
A Nazi can start a shoving match with a Jewish guy for no reason other than race. The Jewish guy pulls a knife and tries to stab him. The Nazi kills him with a bar stool and claims self-defense. In spite of his racism, legally the Nazi was acting in self-defense. Drawing a knife and trying to kill someone during a shoving match is not legal, even if the Nazi started it. The Nazi was acting in justifiable self-defense. HOWEVER, the Nazi started this whole thing by attempting to violate the Jewish guy's Civil Rights- attacking him on the basis of religion and ethnicity. So while he is guilty of a Civil Rights violation, he is not guilty of murder because he acted in justifiable self-defense.
What you aren't getting sirius black, is that this is a serious and complex legal issue. The issue of self-defense is separate from Civil Rights. You are arguing both as being part of the same thing, which is fine from a sociological standpoint. However, as a legal issue, they are separate matters. Just because Officer Wilson is guilty of one thing, does not mean he is guilty of every thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candy bar
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 4:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| candy bar wrote: |
| sirius black wrote: |
Translaton: I'm a slave to the elite 1% and have been fooled into thinking I have some sort of power. It gives my lie meaning to think I'm better than others.
PS:
to the rest. I absolutely guarantee without even knowing a thing about CB that I am doing better than he is. Not that it matters, but to him it does. |
You absolutely guarantee that without even knowing a thing about CB that you are doing better than he is?
That's impossible. You could be doing better or you could be doing worse. That kind of buffoonery statement is what makes you completely non-credible. Even a moron wouldn't make a statement like that.
You would make a statement like, "hey judge, yoe dawg, I don't even know what happened in the Wilson incident but I can guarantee without even knowing a thing about the incident that the cop was in the wrong in the incident." |
candy bar 1
sirius black 0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2014 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nester Noodlemon wrote: |
| sirius black wrote: |
| Nester Noodlemon wrote: |
| sirius black is running a one-man-campaign. Everyone is laughing at him. |
When you can't accept or argue the truth. Ridicule. LOL...lets all laugh at so and so. Childish. One of the old tactics of bullies. Laughable. Go back to Fox news son. |
Scientific facts have popped your argument. Stop using victim mentality and playing the racial card. |
They haven't at all, really.
The forensic evidence does not resolve the central question of whether Darren Wilson was authorized by the law to use lethal force against Michael Brown under the circumstances. And even if you thought it did, those who presented the forensic evidence were not cross-examined. So, again, show proceedings, same thing I've been saying for several pages, etc. etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2014 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
I'll ask you this question again, for the third time- DID YOU DECIDE THAT OFFICER WILSON WAS GUILTY BEFORE OR AFTER THE GRAND JURY EVIDENCE WAS RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC? |
That's an unfair question - I'm going to quote myself from earlier in the thread in the hope you read it and stop asking that question.
| Plain Meaning wrote: |
Fox wrote:
Plain Meaning wrote:
Fox wrote:
| Fox wrote: |
| Needless to say, the possibility that he wasn't indicted because based on the evidence there was no reason to indict him wasn't seriously considered; |
| Plain Meaning wrote: |
| I don't think that's an accurate nor a fair statement, not as applied to many of the knowledgeable people who have been critical of this grand jury process. |
| Fox wrote: |
| That particular statement was intended to describe that particular article. That said, it very much seems to me that it also describes the article you've posted here, which is odd given you seemed to have posted it intending the opposite. Not only does he not consider the possibility that perhaps Officer Wilson should not have been indicted, he seems mildly irritated that the prosecutor didn't simply bypass such proceedings and "prosecut[e] Wilson by fiat." He even says, "But in deciding to take the case to the grand jury, the lie was born." The fact that he uses the word "lie" twelve times in less than two pages -- sometimes even capitalizing it as if it were a proper noun! -- is something the implications of which I'll leave others to consider for themselves. |
Of course the officer should have been indicted. The bar for probable cause is extraordinarily low.
Any one of these things provides probable cause:
(1) the number of shots fired;
(2) suspect was unarmed;
(3) a single witness says something which does not match with the officer's account;
or
(4) dispute between medical examiners.
There was probable cause. Instead of looking for probable cause, McCulloch conducted a trial by grand jury. That's wrong because there is no cross-examination of witnesses permitted in a grand jury proceeding. The entire dog and pony show display was a miscarriage of justice. And I will continue to post more legal analyses which make the same point. Its not important that our defense lawyer blogger uses the word "lie" multiple times, he is simply calling a spade a spade.
http://www.newsweek.com/ferguson-prosecutor-robert-p-mccullochs-long-history-siding-police-267357
Quote:
“Bob McCulloch is a very experienced prosecutor, and he’s knows how to manipulate the system so that when it’s done, it will appear the grand jury did the no true bill and that it was their decision,” Christmas said.
Christmas knows this because he used to do it himself when he was a prosecutor. “They knew my cues, whether or not I liked a case or didn’t like a case. I trained them on how to evaluate these cases,” he said. “If I didn’t like a case and felt like there should have been no true bill, I knew how to present the witnesses and give the cues to the grand jury, and they would vote to no true bill it.”
That article is from August. |
There should have been an indictment, Steelrails.
| Quote: |
| What you aren't getting sirius black, is that this is a serious and complex legal issue. The issue of self-defense is separate from Civil Rights. You are arguing both as being part of the same thing, which is fine from a sociological standpoint. However, as a legal issue, they are separate matters. Just because Officer Wilson is guilty of one thing, does not mean he is guilty of every thing. |
Are you saying that there should be no indictment but that there should be a 1983 civil suit? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2014 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Plain Meaning wrote: |
That's an unfair question - I'm going to quote myself from earlier in the thread in the hope you read it and stop asking that question.
|
That question is not unfair if we are discussing bias and its nature. Sirius black was accusing me of being bigoted. I pointed out that I waited until the grand jury information was released as there clearly wasn't enough evidence at the time for anyone to leap to conclusions considering that there was conflicting testimony. If sirius black made up his mind before that grand jury testimony and forensic evidence was released to the public, then he is the one being biased.
| Quote: |
| There should have been an indictment, Steelrails. |
Even if there was, a conviction was not going to happen. Even center-left journalists and legal-analysts who sifted through the evidence knew that an indictment was a long-shot.
| Quote: |
| Are you saying that there should be no indictment but that there should be a 1983 civil suit? |
No, a federal criminal civil rights violation case against Wilson and/or the Ferguson PD would be appropriate. It's a little different that a state case of self-defense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
