I am really looking forward to this analysis. He is very detailed. There is the car, my car, my seat, my vehicle. There is my gun, the gun, my firearm, it fired. Then the order of importance with "He said you're too much of a fuckin' pussy to shoot me" and grabbed my gun." When he called for more help, he didn't indicate his life was in danger, but said "Shots fired. Send me more cars." But his channel had been switched to channel 3, the liar's number? When he got to the station he "had to wash off the blood."
OT Cosby Update:EXCLUSIVE: The one woman who Bill Cosby admits he cheated with says 'he drugged and raped me too - and got me PREGNANT'Shawn Brown, then known as Shawn Byers, became Bill Cosby's lover But the last time they were together he slipped something in her glass and urged her 'Drink, more, drink more'She woke up naked in his bed and knew she had been violated 'Sex with Bill just wasn't mind-blowing because I wasn't really into him 100 percent'Cosby admitted the affair with Shawn during a 1997 interview with Dan Rather Shawn has no doubt that her daughter Autumn Jackson is Cosby's Cosby denied it but 'every Tuesday a FedEx would come with a check for $750'Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2848073/The-one-woman-Bill-Cosby-admits-cheated-says-drugged-raped-got-PREGNANT.html#ixzz3KCAHnj8q
OT straight after a new topic is very RUDE!
A young man was killed by a police officer who has changed his story and couldn't seem to look the interviewer in the eye. @ John - Cosby gossip???? Really?
Anonymous said...I am really looking forward to this analysis. He is very detailed. There is the car, my car, my seat, my vehicle. There is my gun, the gun, my firearm, it fired. Then the order of importance with "He said you're too much of a fuckin' pussy to shoot me" and grabbed my gun." When he called for more help, he didn't indicate his life was in danger, but said "Shots fired. Send me more cars." But his channel had been switched to channel 3, the liar's number? When he got to the station he "had to wash off the blood." --------------------------------LMAO. You do know that police departments use different channels for different communications, right? The fact that his station utilized a "Channel 3" makes him a liar? What if he had to go to the third floor of the police station? Would he still be a liar. You Peter kool aid drinkers need to realize that 3 actually is a number and not necessarily indicative of a liar. P.S. I ate three pieces of bacon this morning. Am I lying?
Go away u lieng hog!
A young man who had stolen from someone moments before, refused to get out of the street, and whose DNA was found in the vehicle and the facts reinforce the main points of officer Wilson's story? Yeah, he was killed. If he hadn't had a physical altercation with a police officer he would still be alive. The grand jury was predominantly black and they weighed the evidence. But hey, if you want to find a case that is a true case of a young innocent man being killed by a police officer... http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/3/justice-dillon-taylor-after-white-utah-man-fatally/Where are the protests, the riots, the demands for justice? Why bash John? Has Peter not been covering Cosby?
If you read the statement you will see why Channel 3 is significant. It was not a police channel but "maybe" a country radio station, which appears to mean the call he said he made was not placed or heard by police. Was it really on channel 3 as he says? That is the question for starters on that one.
Anon @ 1:00Thank you.To others who think i'm "rude". I understand that the OP is a very provocative subject, and i too, wait in anticipation to read Peter's analysis on said subject. If, you are a regular reader/visitor to "Peter's" blog, then you will find that we always "update" on topics, cases etc when they are available. You will also find that, Peter welcomes topics, be they updates or something that has not been previously covered.There is a very high % of cases/topics dealt with here, that do come from members, visitors, and even people who have stumbled across this blog.We are not here to argue, or say who should post this or post that. We are, imo, here to learn, well, the majority are anyway.Just remember this is an S/A blog ?Thank you.John
I can't get the above documents to come up so I'm covering some points by memory.1. My first impression is that Darren Wilson is a much better trained officer than I would have guessed. Hes no George Zimmrrman. He thought how to get back control. Going through his weapon choice was exactly, exactly! what to do. Constant telling the subject what you want is protocol. 2. I find his account of the "tussle" at the car truthful. It also matches witness accounts and DNA. MB's DNA was found on the gun. 3. Dorian Johnson gave an interview last night. When asked if Micjhael Brown hit Darren Wilson with his fist, Dorian said "his hands were open through it all." Hmmm.4. "the hop" He has not introduced "hop" yet he uses "the" as it will be recognized by the interviewing detective. In his later grand jury testimony I believe he called it a flutter step. It is pushing off to charge, and by using "the" Darren Wilson is certain of it. 5. "Hands in waistband" Several witnesses corroborate this. MB's body was lying with his hand below him. A policeman has to assume for his safety the subject may be reaching for a weapon. 6. I had a strong suspicion from Dorion Johnson's original media interviews that a weapon or threat of one played into this. Dorian Johnson went on too long about how they never said they had a gun, " or nothin" 7. I don't like how Darren Wilson included "I never touched him." I don't know what to make of it.8. I also don't like how he said he HAD to clean off the blood. Unless the whole incident was so traumatic for him that he wanted to wash his hands of it after. 9. In his later grand jury testimony, he switches from past to present. He states some things passively. That was probably given in early September. I do wonder if he suffered from PTSD.
I understood it to be the COUNTY site, not a country music station.
off topicFormer Canadian Broadcasting Corporation presenter Jian Ghomeshi has been arrested and charged with sexual assault, Toronto police say.Mr Ghomeshi, 47, has been accused of violently attacking women during sex.He was the host of the CBC's hugely popular radio show Q and sacked by the broadcaster shortly before the allegations became public.He denies the allegations, saying in an earlier statement the actions were consensual.He is set to appear in court on Wednesday afternoon.On Tuesday, Mr Ghomeshi dropped a Canadian $55m (£31m) lawsuit against the CBC for wrongful termination.In a statement, Toronto Police said the former presenter surrendered himself to officials on Wednesday.He is charged with four counts of sexual assault and one of "overcoming resistance - choking".Nine women have spoken to Canadian media accusing Mr Ghomeshi of physical and sexual assault. At least three women have filed complaints to policehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-30213944
By the way, many have made a fuss about Michael Brown passing off the cigarillos. Saying it is unrealistic. Dorian Johnson corroborated it in his testimony. Michael Brown was in enough control of the situation to say, "Take these, Bro.", and free his hands. Think about it. Is a police officer choking him and trying to pull him in the car? Or is he freeing his hands to hit the officer? He could get free to pass off the cigarillos. Who had control?
Sus, you are right, it says County radio. But It still seems the question is if his call he said he made was ever heard, because Channel 3 (SA) and he makes the point the channel was changed. Why?The link takes me to Scribed. Maybe you need to make an account?...Can't wait for Peter's analysis.
I cant remember what interview insinuates that the radio got hit in the scuffle. I have to read better to see if it's the walkie talkie on his left shoulder or the the one on the dash that he had pulled out and was on his lap from making the original call.
Thanks. I have the entire grand jury docs saved on my phone. It's just hard to jump back and forth. I should make notes. :-)
if the first few lines we learn he got a lawyer BEFORE he sought medical treatment.
I only read to page 9 for now. it's just so painfully unbelieveable for so many reasons. and so sad that he hasn't been charged. I SUSPECT - Wilson tried to apprehend Mike Brown - possibly for talking back - but not for suspicion of robbery that he could not have known about at that point - and when Wilson tried to force Brown into the cop vehicle -- or something like that, Brown perhaps did injure Wilson - very slightly as seen in pics - to get himself free. this angered Wilson so much that he pulled his gun - shot Brown in cold blood as Brown was some 150 feet away. Brown likely turned around when he was that distance when told by Wilson to turn around, and that Wilson had a gun on him. it's just a guess, but I do not believe for a second Wilson's helpless victim story. Brown was shot at 120 feet from Wilson's car. there's no possability Wilson's story is factual.
in my old neighborhood, which was what you might call very urban - teenagers LOVE to walk in the middle of the street. and walk slowly. i used to yell out at them "do you want me to manslaughter you?" I can't see you in the dark you know." -- they did nothing different and luckily I never hit them. it did make me mad as hell tho. I didnt want ot hit them and I didn't want then to get hit! and it was sooo anoying how much they refused to care about the danger they were posing to both of us. but remembering what it's like to be a teen -- I think it's just part of human development coupled with the specific environment or something, teens have some kind of bioligical need for testing boundaries. proving their confidence, not comprehending risks, something like that. but it is a "thing" for teens to walk in the middle of the street, slowly, not moving out o f the way for cars. esp in urban neighborhoods. instead of being the relatively nice girl that I am. -- for a cop with a gun -- and a lack of moral code -- I could see this walking in the middle of the street and refusing to move to the sidewalk as all Mike Brown was doing --- and all it took for Darren Wilson to spark his need to take control of Mike Brown until murder wa his untimate solution.
to summarize - in case any of that should temt misintrepretation -- I think Darren Wilson Murdered Mike Brown, I suspect Mike Brown did refuse to get out of the middle of the street or perhaps Wilson never even actually asked him to, but was annoyed by the fact that the boys were not moving out of the way for him. I think it was feeling of wanting power over a teenger who did not obey his instructions that was Wilsons motive for murder - not actually a fear for his own safety. where is the statement of the friend who "held the cigarillo's ???/??
I don't find it rude at all.
Hardly consider someone's experience with cocky teen jay walkers as a "reasoned argument" for what Officer Wilson actions. Law Enforcers have a different rule of engagement book. Michael Brown may have acted out of character that day, he did have drugs in his system....drugs and 'depression' may have influenced his behavior. He did push the store owner he robbed from around. Michael 6'4" 230 lbs - more of a man than a "teen."
not "reasoned argument" but possibly what the motive was. just saying I bet that was the whole motive, the possibly -defiant jaywalking. I bet that was the only crime Mike Brown was being "punished"/apprehended for when Darren Wilson shot him. i bet it was that unjustified.
Good thing our judicial system doesn't bet on motives or anything else. The grand jurors listened to testimony and looked at evidence, and then made a rational decision. Hey, you can go read that testimony and evidence now and not bet!
Country music station! That is absolutely hilarious. Oh my, no wonder we have any Obama president, and people believing that the thugs did nothing wrong despite all evidence pointing to the contrary. Statement analysis is very dangerous in the mind and one the lips of people like this
Personally, I absolutely hate every article having off-topic comments, especially when I'm trying to scan the comments to see other opinions on the article and all I can see are OT! I wish there were a separate area to post them, and leave the comments section exclusively for...comments pertaining to the actual article. Like on Facebook you can post on someone's wall or reply to something they write. This place needs a wall
Wilson tried to force him into the front seat of the squad car? Really? Cause that's where the struggle took place. You think maybe he wanted Brown to drive the car for him and got mad when Brown said no? Three (3) autopsies concluded UNEQUIVOCALLY that Brown was not shot in the back. Ugh there are so many things wrong with your reasoning I just can't even.
Read/watch crime dramas much? That sounds like the makings of an Ann Rice murder myself
I'll look forward to the full analysis, but one thing I found strange is his denial of knowing how many rounds he shot. How can he say he doesn't know when he is the one who emptied the last round from his gun at the station. Why avoid answering that question?
Sus, I like your points. I also found it odd when he mentioned the "hop." The first time he mentioned it, he asked them if they knew what type of hop he meant. He asked them the question... that confused me.
I notice Wilson changes from past tense to present in his account and that the interviewer does too. Any significance to that?Also if he was attacked with two "solid blows" by this "hulk" of a man he describes, why were his injuries so minor?
People want to believe what the media has kept harping at: that this was a racist action. Could race have played a part? Yes. However, people that are saying that Michael Brown was murdered are delusional and haven't read the FACTS.
Media likes to keep people glued to their tv's....so they go off half cocked with a narrative.....If it bleeds, it leadsif it burns, it earns.....The evidence.....FACTS.... given can show where each party was when the events went down. LE is trained on how to respond to certain situations. You never want to reach for an officer's gun. If you are experienced with the use of a knife and are within 6-10 ft of someone who has a gun, you could literally slice them to pieces by the time they aim and shoot. That is why LE shoots anyone wielding a knife. With the right training, or size/weight you can kill someone with your bare hands.
I read Wilson's testimony and studied it at length. I'm no expert at statement analysis, so I'm looking forward to the analysis here. But some of the things I think I understand make me think Wilson isn't being entirely truthful about what exactly led to the struggle over the gun to begin with. I wonder of Wilson didn't draw his gun as he tried to exit his vehicle while Brown was blocking his door. I think there's missing information in his narrative, and I think that may be what is missing. It would make him more culpable in the altercation escalating to gunfire, so I think he is modifying his story to hide his actions. Picture the scenario with the verbal exchange Wilson reports and picture it with the "you ain't gonna shoot me you pussy" as Brown's response to pulling out his gun as Brown walks up to the car. It just makes more sense. I've been squarely of the opinion Brown forced Wilson to defend himself through this whole thing. After reading his testimony, however, I'm having doubts about what really happened. Did Wilson escalate the confrontation beyond reason? Possibly. Very possibly.
But....john is a twat,jts always yapping on and on!!! Lol
Shut up john.Stop "grabbing the microphone"zzzz
I haven't read this whole thing, but one thing that leaped out at me was Wilson saying, "I told 'em, hey guys, why don't you walk on the sidewalk."SA says that "told" is authoritative, but then Wilson frames what he "told" them as asking a question rather than giving a direction.
I drink sperm xxxxxxx
@ anonymous at 1:00 p.m.The grand jury was not predominantly black. There were three blacks on it.
Now see, this is very interesting.Back in August, the police chief said Wilson wasn't even aware of Brown's role in the cigarillo theft.Quote:But Darren Wilson, the officer who stopped Brown, wasn’t even aware that Brown was a suspect in the robbery, Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson said Friday afternoon. The officer initially stopped Brown and his friend, Dorian Johnson, because the pair was walking in the middle of a residential streetSource: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ferguson-police-name-michael-brownThis is a total contradiction to Wilson's testimony that he saw the cigarillos in Brown's hand and he knew that this what was stolen from the Market Store.
Wilson says that early on Brown puts his hands on the windowsill of the police car.This is BEFORE Brown hands the cigarillos off to the other "subject." Not much further down, first Wilson is blocking with his right hand, then his left.SA isn't even needed here. I'm only up to page 6 and the contradictions show the guy is lying through his teeth.
msnbc - reliable news? That's a good laugh.
re: Anon at November 26, 2014 at 6:37 PM: "Also if he was attacked with two "solid blows" by this "hulk" of a man he describes, why were his injuries so minor?"Exactly!
http://nypost.com/2014/11/26/the-inconvenient-and-tragic-truths/"Instead, the credible evidence suggests that Michael Brown — after a petty act of robbery at a local business — attacked Wilson when the officer stopped him on the street. Brown punched Wilson when the officer was still in his patrol car and attempted to take his gun from him.The first shots were fired within the car in the struggle over the gun. Then Brown ran. Even if he hadn’t put his hands up, but merely kept running away, he would also almost certainly be alive today. Again, according to the credible evidence, he turned back and rushed Wilson. The officer shot several times, but Brown kept on coming until Wilson finally killed him."
http://nypost.com/2014/11/26/the-inconvenient-and-tragic-truths/"Liberal commentators come back again and again to the fact that Michael Brown was unarmed and that, in the struggle between the two, Officer Wilson sustained only bruises to his face. The subtext is that if only Wilson had allowed Brown to beat him up and perhaps take his gun, things wouldn’t have had to escalate.There is good reason for a police officer to be in mortal fear in the situation Officer Wilson faced, though. In upstate New York last March, Police Officer David Smith responded to a disturbance call at an office, when suddenly, a disturbed man pummeled the officer as he was attempting to exit his vehicle and then grabbed his gun and shot him dead. The case didn’t become a national metaphor for anything.Ferguson, on the other hand, has never lacked for media coverage, although the narrative of a police execution always seemed dubious and now has been exposed as essentially a fraud.“Hands up, don’t shoot” is a good slogan. If only it was what Michael Brown had done last August.
Points of interest: 1) Officer Wilson claims he knew of the robbery where the cigarillos were stolen, even details how Browne passed off the cigarillos to his buddy Johnson, but in the statement by the police chief he specifically states that Wilson was unaware of the theft at the time he warned Browne and Johnson to get on the sidewalk. So did Wilson know of the robbery or didn't he? If Wilson lied in this instance he could be lying in other statements he made above. 2) Either way, Wilson warned Browne & Johnson to get out of the middle of the street and onto the sidewalk. They didn't and back-talked to Wilson like thugs do. This angered Wilson. Now p'ssed and cruising for a bruising, Wilson backed up his patrol car until he was abreast of the two thugs. Browne threw his large body against the side of the patrol car, blocking Wilson inside. Browne reaches into the car window and physically attacks Wilson, trying to get his gun away from him. Browne the thug, DID struggle with and punched Wilson, whether he inflicted great injury or not.Wilson may have exaggerated his injuries; on the other hand, WHO among us has the right to reach into a patrol car and attack an officer, provoked or otherwise? None, that's who. As an officer of the law, Wilson was within his rights to apprehend Browne, either dead or alive. 3) Whether Browne was walking away or attempting to charge back towards Wilson is technically irrelevant as to whether Wilson was within his rights to shoot Browne; Wilson was under provocation and in his anger got out of the car at his first opportunity and fired shots at Browne after he had already left the scene, whether Browne was ten feet away or a hundred and ten feet away is irrelevant. You don't want to die? Don't resist or attack an officer. It is irrelevant whether Wilson fired one shot or twelve, he intended to shoot Browne dead and did. 4) HOWEVER, Wilson did not 'have' to shoot Browne dead now that Browne was no longer up in his face and attacking him. I don't buy Wilsons story that he feared Browne might have a gun inside his waistband; if Browne had a gun (or knife) he would have already killed Wilson when he was up in Wilsons face and with his arms inside Wilsons' car. The fact that Browne tried to take Wilsons gun proves that Browne had no gun or other weapon he could have used against Wilson other than his fists. On the other hand, Wilson had no help there to assist him in apprehending thug Browne for the several charges he had violated against Wilson. If an officer can't defend his bodily person, what is left to do? Wilson was within his rights to shoot Browne in an attempt to apprehend him, but to deliberately shoot him dead, when by this time Browne had left the scene? There's where the line is drawn. Was it murder? Under the law, probably not. The grand jury should probably have returned an opinion of manslaughter under duress. IMO, an officer cannot act as judge, jury and executioner, and should not have the right to shoot to kill someone just because they have been physically violated and are angry at losing control of the situation, which is what Wilson did to thug Browne.
Anon said 1) Officer Wilson claims he knew of the robbery where the cigarillos were stolen, even details how Browne passed off the cigarillos to his buddy Johnson, but in the statement by the police chief he specifically states that Wilson was unaware of the theft at the time he warned Browne and Johnson to get on the sidewalk. So did Wilson know of the robbery or didn't he? If Wilson lied in this instance he could be lying in other statements he made above. He said that initally he spoke to Briwn cause he was walking down the middle of the road then later heard on his police radio the description and he then realized.
The problem is, the timeline Wilson presents between confronting Brown for walking in the middle of the street and the altercation that followed leaves no time for him to hear about the cigarillos on the radio, unless he heard it and it registered while he was fighting off Brown.And there's no getting around the fact that in early days, his own police chief went on the record saying that Wilson didn't even know that Brown was a suspect in the cigarillo theft.If the police chief recanted that statement then never mind, I missed it.
Officer Wilson heard about a robbery in progress as he left an earlier call. He didn't make out all the details because he heard it on his walkie talkie. He heard black male wearing a black shirt and took cigars. It wasn't his call and he wasn't searching for the suspect.He initially spoke to Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson because they were in the street. Michael Brown's attitude made him look twice at him, notice he was wearing a black shirt and had what looked like cigarillos in his hand. He then reversed to question them and well, you know...The Ferguson chief was correct in saying the initial contact was not about the robbery as far as he knew. And remember, the investigation was immediately turned over to St Louis County. Darren Wilson stated he knew about the robbery when questioned the first day, the next day and in his grand jury testimony. More importantly Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson knew they had just robbed a store. They're the ones that would very likely be defensive about being stopped by police.
Hogwash. This is not about what Browne and Johnson knew about the robbery they had just committed and walked away from. There is a fine line here between what Officer Wilson knew and when he knew it. At the time Wilson approached Browne & Johnson it was for walking down the middle of the street and had nothing to do with the convenience store that had just been robbed of the cigarillos by these two. Had he known THEN that these were the two criminals involved, he would have attempted to apprehend them THEN for the robbery. When Wilson backed up his patrol car to pursue the two thugs it was for their failure to follow his directive to get out of the middle of the street and onto the sidewalk. THOSE words clearly indicate that Wilsons' beef against these two was for their taunting of him by ignoring his orders and continuing on their walk in the middle of the street. He couldn't have known during the altercation that ensured either, since he states that his dispatch radio was on a country western station and not on his direct line to dispatch, as he states this is why his calls for back up assistance were not heard by dispatch and other officers. Wilson also knew that Browne was unarmed when Browne started walking back towards him with his hand in his waistband as he states, since Browne had already attempted to overpower Wilson in a struggle to take his revolver away from him while in his patrol car; knowing that if Browne had been armed he would have already shot, or knifed Wilson if he'd had a knife or gun. Wilson was hot under the collar and PO'ed when he fired twelve shots at and into thug Browne for blatantly disobeying his orders and physically attacking him. Who can blame him for his anger; HOWEVER, he still didn't have the right to play judge, jury and executioner of thug Browne whether he knew that Browne was one of the robbery criminals or not.
Post a Comment