Ferguson Megathread

[Gauthier]

Grand jury didn't decide guilt.

Right, they just decided there was no reason to bother charging him. If he'd been acquitted you'd say well they didn't find him innocent. If evidence came out conclusively proving Wilson acted reasonably you'd say it was insubstantial. You decided guilt when you learned the races of the people involved and that is terrible.

Hey, get out of my head!

You conveniently ignored the part where I've said over and over that an actual indictment and trial would have settled it for better or worse,

But I'm glad you're telling me how I would react.

[Gauthier]

Grand jury didn't decide guilt.

No, but they did decide that there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute. If the Grand Jury has made a conclusion like that, one has to wonder from what evidence "Officer Wilson is a dangerous man who needs to be locked up forever" comes from.

The purpose of a trial would have been to determine if he needed to be locked up or not. The Grand Jury pretty much said "Not even going to bother to find out, obviously the thug had it coming."

[Des-Bal]

Hey, get out of my head!

You conveniently ignored the part where I've said over and over that an actual indictment and trial would have settled it for better or worse,

But I'm glad you're telling me how I would react.

No, it absolutely wouldn't have. Zimmerman's acquittal was just treated as even more evidence that everything is racist.

You're welcome.

[Gauthier]

Hey, get out of my head!

You conveniently ignored the part where I've said over and over that an actual indictment and trial would have settled it for better or worse,

But I'm glad you're telling me how I would react.

No, it absolutely wouldn't have. Zimmerman's acquittal was just treated as even more evidence that everything is racist.

You're welcome.

But there was no rioting and looting.

You're welcome.

[Des-Bal]

The purpose of a trial would have been to determine if he needed to be locked up or not. The Grand Jury pretty much said "Not even going to bother to find out, obviously the thug had it coming."

Which is exactly what you would say in the event of a trial.

[Jamzmania]

No, but they did decide that there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute. If the Grand Jury has made a conclusion like that, one has to wonder from what evidence "Officer Wilson is a dangerous man who needs to be locked up forever" comes from.

The purpose of a trial would have been to determine if he needed to be locked up or not. The Grand Jury pretty much said "Not even going to bother to find out, obviously the thug had it coming."

You're annoyed when someone else makes assumptions about how you think, but you find it acceptable to make assumptions about the jurors' line of thought?

[Des-Bal]

But there was no rioting and looting.

You're welcome.

And there's no reason to believe that the trial had anything more to do with that then than whether or not you wore your lucky socks that morning.

[Gauthier]

The purpose of a trial would have been to determine if he needed to be locked up or not. The Grand Jury pretty much said "Not even going to bother to find out, obviously the thug had it coming."

Which is exactly what you would say in the event of a trial.

There you go again talking about what I would do. How many fingers am I holding up?

[Des-Bal]

There you go again talking about what I would do. How many fingers am I holding up?

You're completely transparent. You decided the grand jury deciding there weren't grounds to indict was effectively writing off the case based on the victims character. That is crazy. Nothing your saying holds water until you look at it as a smokescreen for the fact that you REALLY want this to be a tragic tale institutional racism.

[Gauthier]

There you go again talking about what I would do. How many fingers am I holding up?

You're completely transparent. You decided the grand jury deciding there weren't grounds to indict was effectively writing off the case based on the victims character. That is crazy. Nothing your saying holds water until you look at it as a smokescreen for the fact that you REALLY want this to be a tragic tale institutional racism.

Um, no. I based on how the DA went completely off the norm and argued on behalf of the defense rather than trying to present evidence for an indictment. Which just happens to be an instance of institutional racism. And there you go again insisting mental illness on my part.

[Jamzmania]

You're completely transparent. You decided the grand jury deciding there weren't grounds to indict was effectively writing off the case based on the victims character. That is crazy. Nothing your saying holds water until you look at it as a smokescreen for the fact that you REALLY want this to be a tragic tale institutional racism.

Um, no. I based on how the DA went completely off the norm and argued on behalf of the defense rather than trying to present evidence for an indictment. Which just happens to be an instance of institutional racism. And there you go again insisting mental illness on my part.

He didn't make any mention of mental illness. And you seem to think that the Grand Jury being provided with too much evidence, which all, in the end, did not hold grounds for indictment, as an example of "institutional racism."

God forbid Grand Juries be provided with too much evidence

[Des-Bal]

Um, no. I based on how the DA went completely off the norm and argued on behalf of the defense rather than trying to present evidence for an indictment. Which just happens to be an instance of institutional racism. And there you go again insisting mental illness on my part.

Which is utter baseless bullshit. You're crying racism because you don't like the way a case turned out and that's kind of big deal because there is still ACTUAL racism in the world. Nothing about this was normal in the least, none of these documents would normally be published. The DA knew damn well a conviction was impossible and used his discretion to present the full body of evidence rather than drag the spectacle on.

[Gauthier]

Um, no. I based on how the DA went completely off the norm and argued on behalf of the defense rather than trying to present evidence for an indictment. Which just happens to be an instance of institutional racism. And there you go again insisting mental illness on my part.

Which is utter baseless bullshit. You're crying racism because you don't like the way a case turned out and that's kind of big deal because there is still ACTUAL racism in the world. Nothing about this was normal in the least, none of these documents would normally be published. The DA knew damn well a conviction was impossible and used his discretion to present the full body of evidence rather than drag the spectacle on.

Oh right, you mean the part about where he told the grand jury that it's legal for an officer to shoot a fleeing suspect while omitting that that part had been struck down? Fair and Balanced, just like FOXNews.

[Geilinor]

Which is utter baseless bullshit. You're crying racism because you don't like the way a case turned out and that's kind of big deal because there is still ACTUAL racism in the world. Nothing about this was normal in the least, none of these documents would normally be published. The DA knew damn well a conviction was impossible and used his discretion to present the full body of evidence rather than drag the spectacle on.

Oh right, you mean the part about where he told the grand jury that it's legal for an officer to shoot a fleeing suspect while omitting that that part had been struck down?

If true, it shows incompetence, but not necessarily racism.

[Costa Fierro]

Oh right, you mean the part about where he told the grand jury that it's legal for an officer to shoot a fleeing suspect while omitting that that part had been struck down? Fair and Balanced, just like FOXNews.

Because being shot in the top of the head clearly indicates that a suspect is "fleeing".

[Gauthier]

Oh right, you mean the part about where he told the grand jury that it's legal for an officer to shoot a fleeing suspect while omitting that that part had been struck down? Fair and Balanced, just like FOXNews.

Because being shot in the top of the head clearly indicates that a suspect is "fleeing".

Clearly it's evidence Michael Brown was bullcharging Wilson and that was the only way to stop him.

[Des-Bal]

Oh right, you mean the part about where he told the grand jury that it's legal for an officer to shoot a fleeing suspect while omitting that that part had been struck down? Fair and Balanced, just like FOXNews.

Yeah I think Greed and Death explained why that wasn't true moments after it was brought up but still, that's just not an accurate account of what happened.

[The Carlisle]

Oh right, you mean the part about where he told the grand jury that it's legal for an officer to shoot a fleeing suspect while omitting that that part had been struck down? Fair and Balanced, just like FOXNews.

Because being shot in the top of the head clearly indicates that a suspect is "fleeing".

It indicates he turned around to surrender, got hit in the chest, caved in, then got shot on the top.

[Costa Fierro]

Clearly it's evidence Michael Brown was bullcharging Wilson and that was the only way to stop him.

When you don't have access to a non-lethal means of stopping someone because your police department isn't funded enough, yes, resorting to a firearm is the only thing you have left.

But go ahead and tell me why Wilson is clearly a racist for shooting someone who happened to be black.

[West Aurelia]

Don't know if this has been posted already, but Darren Wilson has resigned effective immediately.

Also: Amid Ferguson tension, emotional hug goes viral.

[Toronina]

Clearly it's evidence Michael Brown was bullcharging Wilson and that was the only way to stop him.

When you don't have access to a non-lethal means of stopping someone because your police department isn't funded enough, yes, resorting to a firearm is the only thing you have left.

But go ahead and tell me why Wilson is clearly a racist for shooting someone who happened to be black.

Because for his version of events to make sense, Michael Brown would have had to been the stupidest person ever. Look over the whole thread, and you will see a lot of convincing arguments for what I'm saying. Officer Wilson is a racist, who shot an innocent person, who looks not all that much like the man who stole the cigarillos, because the man was black. Officer Wilson is dangerous, and I don't want a man like him patrolling the streets.

[Des-Bal]

Because for his version of events to make sense, Michael Brown would have had to been the stupidest person ever. Look over the whole thread, and you will see a lot of convincing arguments for what I'm saying. Officer Wilson is a racist, who shot an innocent person, who looks not all that much like the man who stole the cigarillos, because the man was black. Officer Wilson is dangerous, and I don't want a man like him patrolling the streets.

I think you'll find equally convincing evidence that Brown was murderous child molester who was impervious to nonlethal techniques. It's ludicrous, it's completely unsubstantiated nonsense.

[Costa Fierro]

Because for his version of events to make sense, Michael Brown would have had to been the stupidest person ever.

People who have adrenaline pumping through their body do not make rational decisions. I'm not saying Michael Brown willingly decided to attack Wilson and therefore deserved everything that came at him. But I understand that Brown would have been full of adrenaline when he robbed the store and got into a scuffle with the clerk. It only exasperated the adrenaline when Wilson arrived to apprehend Brown and was attacked himself. Add to that perhaps a splash of pepper spray or at least one gunshot and you have someone so pumped that they aren't thinking straight.

Look over the whole thread, and you will see a lot of convincing arguments for what I'm saying.

Yes. "Hurr racism".

Officer Wilson is a racist

Bingo.

Who shot an innocent person

Who robbed a convenience store.

Who looks not all that much like the man who stole the cigarillos, because the man was black. Officer Wilson is dangerous, and I don't want a man like him patrolling the streets.

Because you disregarded the evidence and jumped straight on the racism bandwagon. Seriously, it's one thing to have a differing opinion. It's another to be willfully ignorant of the facts.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Um, no. I based on how the DA went completely off the norm and argued on behalf of the defense rather than trying to present evidence for an indictment. Which just happens to be an instance of institutional racism. And there you go again insisting mental illness on my part.

Which is utter baseless bullshit. You're crying racism because you don't like the way a case turned out and that's kind of big deal because there is still ACTUAL racism in the world. Nothing about this was normal in the least, none of these documents would normally be published. The DA knew damn well a conviction was impossible and used his discretion to present the full body of evidence rather than drag the spectacle on.

Actually, white officers shooting unarmed black people is becoming quite normal. What kind of prosecutor intently cross-examines witnesses giving testimony favorable to the prosecution while lobbing softballs at the ones favorable to the defense?

[Des-Bal]

Actually, white officers shooting unarmed black people is becoming quite normal. What kind of prosecutor intently cross-examines witnesses giving testimony favorable to the prosecution while lobbing softballs at the ones favorable to the defense?

Especially when they grab at their guns and charge them. One that's quite aware there's no possibility of conviction and is concerned that ending things quickly and transparently is probably the best possible course of action?