Fed Gov't Autopsy Finds Michael Brown Not Shot in Back

bryant.coleman

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1217

Quote from: Mr.Bitty on September 04, 2014, 12:38:27 PM

we're supposed to believe that in spite of the fact that two other witnesses besides Browns companion corroborated his story?

All of the witnesses said that Brown was shot from behind, while he put his hand over the top of his head in a "surrender mode". The autopsy proves that this version was entirely inaccurate. None of the shots were fired from behind. Do you have any reasons now to trust the so called "eyewitnesses", especially the guy who was Brown's robbery companion?

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Do we know for certain he was shot in the struggle in the car, though? I honestly don't know. I think there's a theory that he was, but I am not aware of that as a certainty.

And the position he'd have had to be in is not odd. Baden said it could be consistent with charging. What are you relying on to tell you that it wouldn't be?

noviapriani

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

And, no it does not put the whole thing to rest. You're right on that point. But an investigation is ongoing and I'm sure we'll know more soon. What it does put to rest is the theory that gentle giant Michael Brown was shot in the back while begging the officer to stop firing.

Mr.Bitty

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: noviapriani on September 04, 2014, 12:41:02 PM

Quote from: Mr.Bitty on September 04, 2014, 12:38:27 PM

Quote from: bryant.coleman on September 04, 2014, 11:36:08 AM

If this is true, then the eyewitness should be charged with inciting violent riots and put behind bars. He has caused tens of millions of $$ worth of damage to various businesses in the Ferguson region. And the American public owes an apology from those xenophobes who went ballistic after the Brown shooting, such as Eric Holder and Barack Obama.

I'm trying desperately to see how this puts the whole thing to rest. OK, so he was not shot in the back. We're still supposed to believe that after running away from the cop after being shot initially, he turned, bent way over at the waist and charged the officer, resulting in being shot twice on the top of the head? Really? Is that what we're supposed to believe - and we're supposed to believe that in spite of the fact that two other witnesses besides Browns companion corroborated his story?

First, we don't know that he was shot initially before turning to charge the officer. For all we know, all shots that struck Brown were fired after he charged, if that is indeed what happened. Secondly, why act as if people never act irrationally like what you described above? You think nobody has ever charged at a cop before, even knowing cops are armed. C'mon.

I think we do know he was initially shot - in the struggle at the car. I believe even the officer's account said the gun was discharged during that part of the encounter. It's not just a question of charging the cop - it's the position he'd have to have been in during the supposed charge. And not one of the witnesses said he charged the cop.

noviapriani

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: Mr.Bitty on September 04, 2014, 12:38:27 PM

Quote from: bryant.coleman on September 04, 2014, 11:36:08 AM

If this is true, then the eyewitness should be charged with inciting violent riots and put behind bars. He has caused tens of millions of $$ worth of damage to various businesses in the Ferguson region. And the American public owes an apology from those xenophobes who went ballistic after the Brown shooting, such as Eric Holder and Barack Obama.

I'm trying desperately to see how this puts the whole thing to rest. OK, so he was not shot in the back. We're still supposed to believe that after running away from the cop after being shot initially, he turned, bent way over at the waist and charged the officer, resulting in being shot twice on the top of the head? Really? Is that what we're supposed to believe - and we're supposed to believe that in spite of the fact that two other witnesses besides Browns companion corroborated his story?

First, we don't know that he was shot initially before turning to charge the officer. For all we know, all shots that struck Brown were fired after he charged, if that is indeed what happened. Secondly, why act as if people never act irrationally like what you described above? You think nobody has ever charged at a cop before, even knowing cops are armed. C'mon.

Mr.Bitty

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: bryant.coleman on September 04, 2014, 11:36:08 AM

If this is true, then the eyewitness should be charged with inciting violent riots and put behind bars. He has caused tens of millions of $$ worth of damage to various businesses in the Ferguson region. And the American public owes an apology from those xenophobes who went ballistic after the Brown shooting, such as Eric Holder and Barack Obama.

I'm trying desperately to see how this puts the whole thing to rest. OK, so he was not shot in the back. We're still supposed to believe that after running away from the cop after being shot initially, he turned, bent way over at the waist and charged the officer, resulting in being shot twice on the top of the head? Really? Is that what we're supposed to believe - and we're supposed to believe that in spite of the fact that two other witnesses besides Browns companion corroborated his story?

bryant.coleman

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1217

If this is true, then the eyewitness should be charged with inciting violent riots and put behind bars. He has caused tens of millions of $$ worth of damage to various businesses in the Ferguson region. And the American public owes an apology from those xenophobes who went ballistic after the Brown shooting, such as Eric Holder and Barack Obama.

noviapriani

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Wasn't it Holder who, after the Zimmerman jury handed him his ass, went nationwide with the same civil rights bullshit as he is now doing in Ferguson?

Know what I think? I think Ferguson ought to be entirely dealt with by blacks, since they are the majority population. Let the entire fire and police department, and all levels of local government be black controlled. If they can't find enough people who are actually qualified, do it by damned lottery, because, you know, it's only fair.

Let them sink or swim by their own hands.

Personally, I no longer care.

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: Mr.Bitty on September 04, 2014, 10:24:16 AM

The DoJ has initiated an investigation of the entire Ferguson police force and it's history for civil rights violations (today's news). Long overdue. So much for Holder 'backing off'.

Well, if you didn't get your wish to arrest, convict, and execute this officer so I guess a civil rights investigation will have to do. It is so much nonsense and you know it .

sana8410

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Of course I got ripped by some but you can see the lefties avoid this thread and its hard to believe that they actually care about the case and the truth and instead jumped on the story so they could play the race card and use it as proof of how evil white America is and why all blacks should be democrats.

umair127

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: Mr.Bitty on September 04, 2014, 10:24:16 AM

The DoJ has initiated an investigation of the entire Ferguson police force and it's history for civil rights violations (today's news). Long overdue. So much for Holder 'backing off'.

They also initiated a second investigation of gz because they didn't like the results of the first one, what does that tell you? And does that somehow change the results of the autonpsy? Does it somehow make the shooting a racist killing like the left has implied? Considering the jury tampering and evidence rigging the doj conducted in the NOLA case does that threat to investigate really mean that much? It seems that just like the NOLA case because the doj is using its power to drive the end rather than using the truth and letting the cards fall where they may. But that seems ok with you because you want the same thing as the doj regardless of what the truth is.

sana8410

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Quote from: zolace on September 04, 2014, 10:19:48 AM

Quote from: sana8410 on September 04, 2014, 10:17:25 AM

Then we have Badens initial statement that the shot to the lower arm came while he had his arm across his forehead, not out to the side an up in the air, and that shot entered the forehead and then exited thru the chin and went back in thru the chest area. And as Baden said, that shot would have caused him to fall forward which is when the fatal shot entered the top of the head at an angle. So he wasn't on his knees and he didn't have his hands up in surrender mode, anyone surprised by that?

Where's Al Sharpton? He's gone strangely silent.

I have the feeling the autopsy report including entry wounds of bullets didn't go his way and I doubt the rest of the evidence did either. And I would venture to say that holder tried like hell to cite evil wrongdoing by the Ferguson LE and couldn't find any. And I suspect that once holder saw the evidence he backed off because he knows he can't rig the case as a win for crump and sharpton.

Mr.Bitty

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

The DoJ has initiated an investigation of the entire Ferguson police force and it's history for civil rights violations (today's news). Long overdue. So much for Holder 'backing off'.

sana8410

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Now we need the angle of entry for the bullet wounds, the blood pattern from MB's wounds and the location(s) of DW's spent casings, that will tell the whole story and prove which witnesses were seeing with a clear mind and a straight view and which ones were seeing thru their emotions.

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: sana8410 on September 04, 2014, 10:17:25 AM

Then we have Badens initial statement that the shot to the lower arm came while he had his arm across his forehead, not out to the side an up in the air, and that shot entered the forehead and then exited thru the chin and went back in thru the chest area. And as Baden said, that shot would have caused him to fall forward which is when the fatal shot entered the top of the head at an angle. So he wasn't on his knees and he didn't have his hands up in surrender mode, anyone surprised by that?

Where's Al Sharpton? He's gone strangely silent.

bigtimespaghetti

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1057

bigtimespaghetti.com

Quote from: Rigon on September 04, 2014, 10:10:44 AM

It doesn't matter.

When we learned that Trayvon Martin was on top of George Zimmerman beating him, just as Zimmerman claimed and after all the denials from liberals, they just moved the goalposts. If it becomes a fact that Brown did assault Wilson and break facial bones, and it becomes a fact that when told to freeze, Brown taunted and then charged Wilson, the liberals will just move the goalposts again.

It's not just liberals, but this is the case with most propaganda (make it fit the program), it has a very specific agenda. Truth or ethics be damned.

sana8410

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Then we have Badens initial statement that the shot to the lower arm came while he had his arm across his forehead, not out to the side an up in the air, and that shot entered the forehead and then exited thru the chin and went back in thru the chest area. And as Baden said, that shot would have caused him to fall forward which is when the fatal shot entered the top of the head at an angle. So he wasn't on his knees and he didn't have his hands up in surrender mode, anyone surprised by that?

Rigon

sr. member

Activity: 994

Merit: 441

It doesn't matter.

When we learned that Trayvon Martin was on top of George Zimmerman beating him, just as Zimmerman claimed and after all the denials from liberals, they just moved the goalposts. If it becomes a fact that Brown did assault Wilson and break facial bones, and it becomes a fact that when told to freeze, Brown taunted and then charged Wilson, the liberals will just move the goalposts again.

spazzdla

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1000

LOL of coarse they'll find evidence to prove the slavers never do anything wrong.

zolace

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Uh-oh, this doesn't fit the agenda. No wonder it's buried deep within the paper. Nor, have we seen the race baiter Eric Holder talking about this autopsy report. Truth is not the desired outcome in this case.

Report: Fed Gov´t Autopsy
Also Finds Michael Brown
Not Shot in Back
It took the Washington Post 2,017 words and 59 paragraphs in a feature about Dorian Johnson, who initially said that his friend Michael Brown was shot in the back, to reveal that the federal government's autopsy also reportedly did not find that to be the case. As the Post noted in its profile of Dorian Johnson, Brown's "body had been autopsied three times — once each by St. Louis County police, a pathologist hired by Brown’s family and federal authorities. All found that Brown had been shot at least six times, including twice in the head but not in the back." The New York Times reported two weeks ago that the autopsy that the Brown .
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/02/Report-Fed-Gov-t-Autopsy-Also-Finds-Michael-Brown-Not-Shot-in-Back

Topic: Fed Gov't Autopsy Finds Michael Brown Not Shot in Back (Read 937 times)