LIFamilies.com - Long Island, NY


RSS
Articles Business Directory Blog Real Estate Community Forum Shop My Family Contests

Log In Chat Index Search Rules Lingo Create Account

Quick navigation:   

Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted By Message
Pages: << 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11

LeeCR7
LIF Infant

Member since 5/08

138 total posts

Name:
Laura

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by SlurpeeDad

Posted by LeeCR7



Posted by MandJZ
Funny, the DIRECT QUOTE from the testimony given by Wilson says he did NOT back up his car to block Brown, but rather that Brown CHARGED the car.

So which is it?

This is why there should have been an indictment. If the evidence is unclear, confusing, or contradictory, a trial is in order to clarify and sort it out.



Chat Icon

That is exactly right. What people seem to forget is that this was not a trial. This was simply to determine whether there was enough evidence to go to trial. The bar for that is so much lower. Because there was so much confusion (conflicting witness statements, police reports that were never written, and much more) it should have gone to trial. If he was found not guilty after a trial, I would have no problem with that. But that didn't happen.

This, by the way, transcends this particular situation. Grand juries almost always believe police officers' version of events. I read an article that said out of something like 400 cases brought against police officers (in 2012, I think), only 30 were indicted. Ultimately, only half of those are convicted. I have nothing but respect for cops (my sister is NYPD) but they, like all of us, must be held accountable. They may deserve of little leeway, but not a free pass.

I am astounded by people's dismissal of how the black residents of Freguson feel. Of course they should not be looting or setting fire to things (I did read it was mainly people from out of town, but have not read any confirmation about that). That is ridiculous and completely ineffective. But, luckily, most of us will never know how it feels to be part of a system that you don't trust, that doesn't seem invested in protecting you. They have completely justifiable anger, even if they are expressing it in an unacceptable way.

And at the end of the day, when Officer Wilson is sitting down to Thanksgiving dinner with his new wife, the family of Michael Brown will have an empty seat at their table. Our anger and fear seem to be obscuring basic compassion.



I don't know about you, but I am going to believe a police officer over a known criminal every day of the week. It makes sense that most grand jury's will believe the cop.

You want to talk about compassion. How about compassion for the man that he robbed and shoved to the side while walking out of his store. How about that same man that doesn't have a store anymore because animals (yes, I said animals) looted and destroyed his. Let's have compassion for him. Let's have compassion for the Officer Wilson, and his family, he was just doing his job and happened to be the police man that was near Brown. He was the one that was attacked and punched while in his car. And, for everyone that says Brown was unarmed, it was was brought to my attention that the second an officer is attacked, the attacker is no longer unarmed. He has the potential to grab the officer's gun and use it against him and others.



Can't you have compassion for both? Do you have to choose one?

I don't believe a person's story based on who they are. I believe it based on common sense and evidence. We will never know Michael Brown's story because he is dead. As much as I feel for Officer Wilson if his story is true (I am not saying it isn't--I am saying we don't know and will not get a full trial to decide), ultimately, he is alive and gets to have a life. He absolutely has it better than the teenager he killed, justly or not.

Posted 11/26/14 2:38 PM
 
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource

MandJZ
Time for Baby #2!

Member since 8/10

4194 total posts

Name:
M

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

This. All this.


Robert Reich
Here's what I hope we've learned from the debacle in Ferguson, Missouri:

(1) When there’s conflicting evidence about whether an unarmed person has been murdered by a police officer, a public jury trial is the appropriate process for determining guilt or innocence, not a grand jury in which there’s no opportunity to cross examine the accused.

(2) The role of the media isn’t to guess whether someone is guilty or innocent, or to give the accused free airtime to explain his side of the story (as did ABC this morning). It is to report the news.

(3) Poor, minority communities deserve community policing that builds trust, including minority police officers, rather than law enforcement that’s viewed by a community as repressive.

(4) Armed law enforcement personnel should be equipped with body cameras of the sort now used in many communities to assure responsible behavior.

(5) There is no excuse for looting, burning, or other forms of violence. Innocent people are harmed or killed. Communities may not recover for years. Trust is further destroyed.

Other lessons?

Posted 11/26/14 2:45 PM
 

luckyinlove
I love my baby girls!

Member since 12/06

2441 total posts

Name:
Lauren

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Obviously everyone who is questioning why Wilson did what he did does not understand two things. First, when you are threatened by a perp, armed or unarmed, you must defend yourself. Once Brown went for his gun (and forensic evidence proved that this was in fact the case), he was no longer an unarmed man. It is very easy for some of you to judge why he did what he did, working in jobs where your life isn't on the line on a day to day basis, but the reality is you can't even begin to know what it was like to be Wilson that night. It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job. He did not do or say anything to make it about race, he simply wanted to go home at the end of the night, not end up in a bodybag. Cops are taught to use deadly force if their lives are in jeopardy and Wilson believed that his was. He had never used his weapon before that night, but he felt that in this situation, he had to. I am sorry that many of you cannot understand what it must have been like to be in his situation, but I think any cop would have done the same thing. Darren Wilson is not guilty of any crime. If you want cops who let criminals run loose for fear of confrontations, then we will live in a dangerous scary world. Cops are here to protect us against people who do the same things that Michael Brown did that night. It is a shame that he decided to get high, rob a store, and then attack a police officer. If only he made better choices, he would still be alive today and Darren Wilson's life would not be in shambles.

Posted 11/26/14 3:29 PM
 

Sonervous
LIF Infant

Member since 1/13

184 total posts

Name:

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by luckyinlove

Obviously everyone who is questioning why Wilson did what he did does not understand two things. First, when you are threatened by a perp, armed or unarmed, you must defend yourself. Once Brown went for his gun (and forensic evidence proved that this was in fact the case), he was no longer an unarmed man. It is very easy for some of you to judge why he did what he did, working in jobs where your life isn't on the line on a day to day basis, but the reality is you can't even begin to know what it was like to be Wilson that night. It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job. He did not do or say anything to make it about race, he simply wanted to go home at the end of the night, not end up in a bodybag. Cops are taught to use deadly force if their lives are in jeopardy and Wilson believed that his was. He had never used his weapon before that night, but he felt that in this situation, he had to. I am sorry that many of you cannot understand what it must have been like to be in his situation, but I think any cop would have done the same thing. Darren Wilson is not guilty of any crime. If you want cops who let criminals run loose for fear of confrontations, then we will live in a dangerous scary world. Cops are here to protect us against people who do the same things that Michael Brown did that night. It is a shame that he decided to get high, rob a store, and then attack a police officer. If only he made better choices, he would still be alive today and Darren Wilson's life would not be in shambles.




Chat Icon Chat Icon

Posted 11/26/14 3:32 PM
 

DaniJude
You're My Home <3

Member since 11/06

14815 total posts

Name:
Danielle

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by luckyinlove

Obviously everyone who is questioning why Wilson did what he did does not understand two things. First, when you are threatened by a perp, armed or unarmed, you must defend yourself. Once Brown went for his gun (and forensic evidence proved that this was in fact the case), he was no longer an unarmed man. It is very easy for some of you to judge why he did what he did, working in jobs where your life isn't on the line on a day to day basis, but the reality is you can't even begin to know what it was like to be Wilson that night. It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job. He did not do or say anything to make it about race, he simply wanted to go home at the end of the night, not end up in a bodybag. Cops are taught to use deadly force if their lives are in jeopardy and Wilson believed that his was. He had never used his weapon before that night, but he felt that in this situation, he had to. I am sorry that many of you cannot understand what it must have been like to be in his situation, but I think any cop would have done the same thing. Darren Wilson is not guilty of any crime. If you want cops who let criminals run loose for fear of confrontations, then we will live in a dangerous scary world. Cops are here to protect us against people who do the same things that Michael Brown did that night. It is a shame that he decided to get high, rob a store, and then attack a police officer. If only he made better choices, he would still be alive today and Darren Wilson's life would not be in shambles.



Exactly. And anyone who knows an ounce about law enforcement and their training, would see this, plain and simple. Every officer I know puts their lives on the line everyday and a lot of them tell me, I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.

I keep thinking of my brother's colleague Artie Lopez, who simply walked up to a man to question why he left the scene of a basic fender bender... He approached with his taser. Man, I wish he had approached with his gun. But who would have thought?? It was just a simple fender bender. But that piece of utter shit turned around before Artie could even mutter a hello and he shot him directly in the heart. FOR NO EFFING REASON. He just didn't want to get locked up that day for leaving the scene of a fender bender. Artie was 29 years old. He showed restraint by approaching with his taser. That's the thanks restraint got him.

Posted 11/26/14 4:30 PM
 

MrsA1012
love my little girl !

Member since 9/10

5777 total posts

Name:
Me

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by luckyinlove

Obviously everyone who is questioning why Wilson did what he did does not understand two things. First, when you are threatened by a perp, armed or unarmed, you must defend yourself. Once Brown went for his gun (and forensic evidence proved that this was in fact the case), he was no longer an unarmed man. It is very easy for some of you to judge why he did what he did, working in jobs where your life isn't on the line on a day to day basis, but the reality is you can't even begin to know what it was like to be Wilson that night. It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job. He did not do or say anything to make it about race, he simply wanted to go home at the end of the night, not end up in a bodybag. Cops are taught to use deadly force if their lives are in jeopardy and Wilson believed that his was. He had never used his weapon before that night, but he felt that in this situation, he had to. I am sorry that many of you cannot understand what it must have been like to be in his situation, but I think any cop would have done the same thing. Darren Wilson is not guilty of any crime. If you want cops who let criminals run loose for fear of confrontations, then we will live in a dangerous scary world. Cops are here to protect us against people who do the same things that Michael Brown did that night. It is a shame that he decided to get high, rob a store, and then attack a police officer. If only he made better choices, he would still be alive today and Darren Wilson's life would not be in shambles. [/QUOTE. Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon

Posted 11/26/14 4:31 PM
 

sunnygirl
loving life

Member since 1/07

5413 total posts

Name:
D

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by ginapie08

Posted

Yes, i think all those WHITE people who engaged in that behavior are animals. I think anyone of ANY race, creed or nationality who takes part in violent looting or rioting is an animal. I am a firm believer in peaceful protest and passive resistance in the model of Ghandi and Martin Luther King. Yes, King's death was an awful tragedy, but it in no way diminishes the beauty and truth of his message to avoid violence and demonstrate with peace and love.



The vast majority of protestors have been doing so peacefully for the past 100 days, but the media insists on repeatedly showing the same images of the few bad seeds in the crowd as opposed to whats really happening there. I truly believe the media is the biggest instigator in provoking racial tensions in America. Blacks and whites need to stop buying into it and start viewing what they see and read critically.


I have to agree that I think the media is a huge problem nowadays they instigate a lot of problems, they give out information they don't yet know to be true and are the biggest race baiters of all

Posted 11/26/14 4:47 PM
 

LizD
LIF Adolescent

Member since 4/06

763 total posts

Name:
Liz

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by luckyinlove

Obviously everyone who is questioning why Wilson did what he did does not understand two things. First, when you are threatened by a perp, armed or unarmed, you must defend yourself. Once Brown went for his gun (and forensic evidence proved that this was in fact the case), he was no longer an unarmed man. It is very easy for some of you to judge why he did what he did, working in jobs where your life isn't on the line on a day to day basis, but the reality is you can't even begin to know what it was like to be Wilson that night. It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job. He did not do or say anything to make it about race, he simply wanted to go home at the end of the night, not end up in a bodybag. Cops are taught to use deadly force if their lives are in jeopardy and Wilson believed that his was. He had never used his weapon before that night, but he felt that in this situation, he had to. I am sorry that many of you cannot understand what it must have been like to be in his situation, but I think any cop would have done the same thing. Darren Wilson is not guilty of any crime. If you want cops who let criminals run loose for fear of confrontations, then we will live in a dangerous scary world. Cops are here to protect us against people who do the same things that Michael Brown did that night. It is a shame that he decided to get high, rob a store, and then attack a police officer. If only he made better choices, he would still be alive today and Darren Wilson's life would not be in shambles.



AMEN!!! Well said and so true!!!

Posted 11/26/14 5:49 PM
 

LeeCR7
LIF Infant

Member since 5/08

138 total posts

Name:
Laura

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by luckyinlove

It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job.



If you read the documents released by the grand jury, you will see that there are conflicting witness testimonies. Some agree with Wilson's account while others do not. All agree there was a struggle in the car, Brown ran away, then stopped and came back. Some say he was charging (well, one witness says that) while others just saw the movement; still others said he was stumbling forward, hurt.

The forensic evidence does prove there was a shot in the car and the Michael Brown was not shot in the back (as some witnesses originally claimed). It proves that Brown did come back (again, all witnesses agree with this). However, it does not prove that he was "antagonistic and threatening." That is an interpretation of the evidence, which should be left up to a jury at trial, which this wasn't. Again, the conflicting testimony warranted a jury trial. Both Brown and Wilson deserved that. Now Wilson is not vindicated nor found not innocent; it was simply found that there was not enough evidence to go to trial.

We should respect our police officers. But we should also question them when needs be. That is our responsibility as citizens. And we certainly don't have to demonize either Michael Brown or Officer Wilson in pursuit of either of those things.

Posted 11/26/14 5:50 PM
 

MC09
arrrghhh!!!!

Member since 2/09

5674 total posts

Name:
Me speaks pirate!

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by LeeCR7

If you read the documents released by the grand jury, you will see that there are conflicting witness testimonies. Some agree with Wilson's account while others do not. All agree there was a struggle in the car, Brown ran away, then stopped and came back. Some say he was charging (well, one witness says that) while others just saw the movement; still others said he was stumbling forward, hurt.

The forensic evidence does prove there was a shot in the car and the Michael Brown was not shot in the back (as some witnesses originally claimed). It proves that Brown did come back (again, all witnesses agree with this). However, it does not prove that he was "antagonistic and threatening." That is an interpretation of the evidence, which should be left up to a jury at trial, which this wasn't. Again, the conflicting testimony warranted a jury trial. Both Brown and Wilson deserved that. Now Wilson is not vindicated nor found not innocent; it was simply found that there was not enough evidence to go to trial.

We should respect our police officers. But we should also question them when needs be. That is our responsibility as citizens. And we certainly don't have to demonize either Michael Brown or Officer Wilson in pursuit of either of those things.




Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon
Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon

Posted 11/26/14 6:09 PM
 

MandJZ
Time for Baby #2!

Member since 8/10

4194 total posts

Name:
M

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by MC09

Posted by LeeCR7

If you read the documents released by the grand jury, you will see that there are conflicting witness testimonies. Some agree with Wilson's account while others do not. All agree there was a struggle in the car, Brown ran away, then stopped and came back. Some say he was charging (well, one witness says that) while others just saw the movement; still others said he was stumbling forward, hurt.

The forensic evidence does prove there was a shot in the car and the Michael Brown was not shot in the back (as some witnesses originally claimed). It proves that Brown did come back (again, all witnesses agree with this). However, it does not prove that he was "antagonistic and threatening." That is an interpretation of the evidence, which should be left up to a jury at trial, which this wasn't. Again, the conflicting testimony warranted a jury trial. Both Brown and Wilson deserved that. Now Wilson is not vindicated nor found not innocent; it was simply found that there was not enough evidence to go to trial.

We should respect our police officers. But we should also question them when needs be. That is our responsibility as citizens. And we certainly don't have to demonize either Michael Brown or Officer Wilson in pursuit of either of those things.




Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon
Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon



This so much.

I'm not sure when supporting the need for a trial, for a more thorough look at the situation, and mourning and condemning the loss of a young life became a negative thing. A thing worth attacking. It certainly doesn't mean that Officer Wilson is a bad person, a bad man, or a murderer. It also certainly doesn't mean that the looting and violent rioting is okay. It simply means that the confusing and somewhat mysterious death of a young man deserves to be tried by a jury who are permitted to hear, evaluate and decide on the evidence.

Posted 11/26/14 6:13 PM
 

Goobster
:)

Member since 5/07

27557 total posts

Name:
:)

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by DaniRella

Posted by luckyinlove

Obviously everyone who is questioning why Wilson did what he did does not understand two things. First, when you are threatened by a perp, armed or unarmed, you must defend yourself. Once Brown went for his gun (and forensic evidence proved that this was in fact the case), he was no longer an unarmed man. It is very easy for some of you to judge why he did what he did, working in jobs where your life isn't on the line on a day to day basis, but the reality is you can't even begin to know what it was like to be Wilson that night. It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job. He did not do or say anything to make it about race, he simply wanted to go home at the end of the night, not end up in a bodybag. Cops are taught to use deadly force if their lives are in jeopardy and Wilson believed that his was. He had never used his weapon before that night, but he felt that in this situation, he had to. I am sorry that many of you cannot understand what it must have been like to be in his situation, but I think any cop would have done the same thing. Darren Wilson is not guilty of any crime. If you want cops who let criminals run loose for fear of confrontations, then we will live in a dangerous scary world. Cops are here to protect us against people who do the same things that Michael Brown did that night. It is a shame that he decided to get high, rob a store, and then attack a police officer. If only he made better choices, he would still be alive today and Darren Wilson's life would not be in shambles.



Exactly. And anyone who knows an ounce about law enforcement and their training, would see this, plain and simple. Every officer I know puts their lives on the line everyday and a lot of them tell me, I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.

I keep thinking of my brother's colleague Artie Lopez, who simply walked up to a man to question why he left the scene of a basic fender bender... He approached with his taser. Man, I wish he had approached with his gun. But who would have thought?? It was just a simple fender bender. But that piece of utter shit turned around before Artie could even mutter a hello and he shot him directly in the heart. FOR NO EFFING REASON. He just didn't want to get locked up that day for leaving the scene of a fender bender. Artie was 29 years old. He showed restraint by approaching with his taser. That's the thanks restraint got him.



Exactly.

Or my dad, a now retired PO, who pulled a man (not white, but not black) over for rolling through a stop sign. Something small like that. Well, the man had a WOMAN tied up in the trunk (who he KIDNAPPED and CARJACKED). The man had BOMBS wrapped all over his body and wrestled with my father to BLOW him up. Yes. All 100% true. I am lucky my dad had the strength to control this animal so that he didnt DIE because of some crazy person. And that he was able to control the man to prevent the man from taking his gun during the struggle. So ANY criminal can be armed quickly when struggling with a PO. So as Slurpee dad said, I will believe any officer ANY day over a CRIMINAL and coincidentally, BROWN WAS A CRIMINAL. Well look at that. Sometimes where there is SMOKE there is FIRE.

Dear GOD, have some concept of what OFFICERS face daily. They PUT THEIR LIVES on the LINE for THUGS who disregard the law, disregard THEIR authority and yep, steal packs of cigarettes. LIFE ON THE LINE.

Anyone defending this criminal apparently does NOT have any idea of what a POs life is like. The danger they face everyday and the fact that they are HUMANS faced with the prospect of death DAILY.

Chat Icon Chat Icon

Message edited 11/26/2014 6:39:56 PM.

Posted 11/26/14 6:26 PM
 

MC09
arrrghhh!!!!

Member since 2/09

5674 total posts

Name:
Me speaks pirate!

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by Goobster

Exactly.

Or my dad, a now retired PO, who pulled a man (not white, but not black) over for rolling through a stop sign. Something small like that. Well, the man had a WOMAN tied up in the trunk (who he KIDNAPPED and CARJACKED). The man had BOMBS wrapped all over his body and wrestled with my father to BLOW him up. Yes. All 100% true. I am lucky my dad had the strength to control this animal so that he didnt DIE because of some crazy person. So as Slurpee dad said, I will believe any officer ANY day over a CRIMINAL and coincidentally, BROWN WAS A CRIMINAL. Well look at that. Sometimes where there is SMOKE there is FIRE.

Dear GOD, have some concept of what OFFICERS face daily. They PUT THEIR LIVES on the LINE for THUGS who disregard the law, disregard THEIR authority and yep, steal packs of cigarettes. LIFE ON THE LINE.

Chat Icon Chat Icon



Police officers are absolutely 100% to be respected (as is every other human being on this earth) and the sacrifices they make on a daily basis and putting their lives on the line on a daily basis is incredibly admirable and not something most people can do. That's why we trust and respect our law enforcement officials to protect us and do what most of us can't on a daily basis. But, does that mean a police officer is NEVER to be questioned? His/her actions are NEVER to be questioned? Has there NEVER been an incidence of a police officer who misuses his/her authority or makes a bad judgment call? Police officers are human and make mistakes just like the rest of us do. They are charged with enforcing the law, but they are certainly not above it. All anyone in this case is asking for is the right to go to trial and question the conflicting reports, testimonials and evidence. Should Officer Wilson be found not guilty, then so be it.

ETA: It is actually more frightening to me that a few posters on this thread seem to be suggesting that they prefer a police state that gives law enforcement full authority to exercise their power, where a police officer is never to be questioned and ambiguous reports and testimonials are never to be clarified and brought to trial and given due process... is that really what you prefer in a democratic country???

Message edited 11/26/2014 7:01:16 PM.

Posted 11/26/14 6:48 PM
 

jellybean78
:)

Member since 8/06

13103 total posts

Name:
Mommy

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by luckyinlove

Obviously everyone who is questioning why Wilson did what he did does not understand two things. First, when you are threatened by a perp, armed or unarmed, you must defend yourself. Once Brown went for his gun (and forensic evidence proved that this was in fact the case), he was no longer an unarmed man. It is very easy for some of you to judge why he did what he did, working in jobs where your life isn't on the line on a day to day basis, but the reality is you can't even begin to know what it was like to be Wilson that night. It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job. He did not do or say anything to make it about race, he simply wanted to go home at the end of the night, not end up in a bodybag. Cops are taught to use deadly force if their lives are in jeopardy and Wilson believed that his was. He had never used his weapon before that night, but he felt that in this situation, he had to. I am sorry that many of you cannot understand what it must have been like to be in his situation, but I think any cop would have done the same thing. Darren Wilson is not guilty of any crime. If you want cops who let criminals run loose for fear of confrontations, then we will live in a dangerous scary world. Cops are here to protect us against people who do the same things that Michael Brown did that night. It is a shame that he decided to get high, rob a store, and then attack a police officer. If only he made better choices, he would still be alive today and Darren Wilson's life would not be in shambles.



Chat Icon

Posted 11/26/14 7:03 PM
 

DaniJude
You're My Home <3

Member since 11/06

14815 total posts

Name:
Danielle

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Alright. I hear what some are saying about the "need for a trial" to further examine the, in some opinions, "conflicting witness testimony"... I read the above posts of "all said there was a struggle at the car but not all said they could see Brown later charge the officer". So what is being said is, since it's not 100% crystal clear we need to examine it further at trial. Here's the thing though - the bar for indictment is much lower than the bar for a conviction at a trial. I have sat on a jury in both a grand jury and a criminal case jury. I have also testified as a witness in both a grand jury and a criminal case before a state Supreme Court justice. The requirements to obtain an indictment are much less than once that indictment goes through, what is needed at trial to convict. If there are all these "conflicting reports" and what some are viewing as inconsistencies in the testimony that they are reading HOW (and I'm not trying to be nasty) but HOW ON EARTH do you think they will get a conviction -- remember, a conviction needs to be BEYOND THE SHADOW OF A DOUBT. Not, wellllllll there's a chance.... Or welllllllll that doesn't really add up 100%. There needs to be NO room for reasonable doubt. If there's uncertainty in witness statements and evidence then you cannot, according to the law, convict.

When a judge charges a jury -- which means, at the end before they go deliberate and make their decision, when he charges the jury he explains this in such detail that it's like he is talking to four year olds. I know, I've been there. And he goes out of his way to say IF you have ANY doubt in the evidence presented you CANNOT render a guilty verdict.

So I'm not sayin what's the point of going to trial but I'm kind of saying, if there wasn't enough evidence to indict there sure as hell is not enough concrete evidence to convict. And that's a fact regardless of if you hate the cop or love Brown or whatever your opinion is. Opinions cannot factor in when sitting on a jury. That's another thing they tell you so many times, it's like a broken record.

So, I mean I'm confident he would have been acquitted at trial so I almost wish he went so then people would stop harping on this --- however, I think the outcome would have been the same, only instead it would be not guilty followed by rioting and it's not fair and hang him high, etc.

Posted 11/26/14 7:07 PM
 

Sash
Peace

Member since 6/08

10312 total posts

Name:
fka LIW Smara

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by MC09

Posted by Goobster

Exactly.

Or my dad, a now retired PO, who pulled a man (not white, but not black) over for rolling through a stop sign. Something small like that. Well, the man had a WOMAN tied up in the trunk (who he KIDNAPPED and CARJACKED). The man had BOMBS wrapped all over his body and wrestled with my father to BLOW him up. Yes. All 100% true. I am lucky my dad had the strength to control this animal so that he didnt DIE because of some crazy person. So as Slurpee dad said, I will believe any officer ANY day over a CRIMINAL and coincidentally, BROWN WAS A CRIMINAL. Well look at that. Sometimes where there is SMOKE there is FIRE.

Dear GOD, have some concept of what OFFICERS face daily. They PUT THEIR LIVES on the LINE for THUGS who disregard the law, disregard THEIR authority and yep, steal packs of cigarettes. LIFE ON THE LINE.

Chat Icon Chat Icon



Police officers are absolutely 100% to be respected (as is every other human being on this earth) and the sacrifices they make on a daily basis and putting their lives on the line on a daily basis is incredibly admirable and not something most people can do. That's why we trust and respect our law enforcement officials to protect us and do what most of us can't on a daily basis. But, does that mean a police officer is NEVER to be questioned? His/her actions are NEVER to be questioned? Has there NEVER been an incidence of a police officer who misuses his/her authority or makes a bad judgment call? Police officers are human and make mistakes just like the rest of us do. They are charged with enforcing the law, but they are certainly not above it. All anyone in this case is asking for is the right to go to trial and question the conflicting reports, testimonials and evidence. Should Officer Wilson be found not guilty, then so be it.

ETA: It is actually more frightening to me that a few posters on this thread seem to be suggesting that they prefer a police state that gives law enforcement full authority to exercise their power, where a police officer is never to be questioned and ambiguous reports and testimonials are never to be clarified and brought to trial and given due process... is that really what you prefer in a democratic country???



Yea I am flabbergasted. I respect all authority and admire the hard job that they do to protect us. However, I would not automatically take an officers side. I want to hear facts, evidence and formulate an opinion. It scares me that people would formulate an opinion solely based off of someones words because he is a policeman.

Message edited 11/26/2014 7:10:25 PM.

Posted 11/26/14 7:09 PM
 

SlurpeeDad
LIF Adolescent

Member since 1/11

713 total posts

Name:
SlurpeeDad

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by MC09

Posted by Goobster

Exactly.

Or my dad, a now retired PO, who pulled a man (not white, but not black) over for rolling through a stop sign. Something small like that. Well, the man had a WOMAN tied up in the trunk (who he KIDNAPPED and CARJACKED). The man had BOMBS wrapped all over his body and wrestled with my father to BLOW him up. Yes. All 100% true. I am lucky my dad had the strength to control this animal so that he didnt DIE because of some crazy person. So as Slurpee dad said, I will believe any officer ANY day over a CRIMINAL and coincidentally, BROWN WAS A CRIMINAL. Well look at that. Sometimes where there is SMOKE there is FIRE.

Dear GOD, have some concept of what OFFICERS face daily. They PUT THEIR LIVES on the LINE for THUGS who disregard the law, disregard THEIR authority and yep, steal packs of cigarettes. LIFE ON THE LINE.

Chat Icon Chat Icon



Police officers are absolutely 100% to be respected (as is every other human being on this earth) and the sacrifices they make on a daily basis and putting their lives on the line on a daily basis is incredibly admirable and not something most people can do. That's why we trust and respect our law enforcement officials to protect us and do what most of us can't on a daily basis. But, does that mean a police officer is NEVER to be questioned? His/her actions are NEVER to be questioned? Has there NEVER been an incidence of a police officer who misuses his/her authority or makes a bad judgment call? Police officers are human and make mistakes just like the rest of us do. They are charged with enforcing the law, but they are certainly not above it. All anyone in this case is asking for is the right to go to trial and question the conflicting reports, testimonials and evidence. Should Officer Wilson be found not guilty, then so be it.

ETA: It is actually more frightening to me that a few posters on this thread seem to be suggesting that they prefer a police state that gives law enforcement full authority to exercise their power, where a police officer is never to be questioned and ambiguous reports and testimonials are never to be clarified and brought to trial and given due process... is that really what you prefer in a democratic country???



I have read most of this thread and haven't seen anyone saying that they want the law enforcement to have full authority to exercise their power. What I said, and I think others have said, is that I will believe what a Police Officer says over a known criminal and therefore understand why most grand jury's side with the officer.

Posted 11/26/14 7:12 PM
 

KevinNKristin8-15-08
Welcome to the world Chase

Member since 9/08

6162 total posts

Name:
Kristin

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by luckyinlove

Obviously everyone who is questioning why Wilson did what he did does not understand two things. First, when you are threatened by a perp, armed or unarmed, you must defend yourself. Once Brown went for his gun (and forensic evidence proved that this was in fact the case), he was no longer an unarmed man. It is very easy for some of you to judge why he did what he did, working in jobs where your life isn't on the line on a day to day basis, but the reality is you can't even begin to know what it was like to be Wilson that night. It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job. He did not do or say anything to make it about race, he simply wanted to go home at the end of the night, not end up in a bodybag. Cops are taught to use deadly force if their lives are in jeopardy and Wilson believed that his was. He had never used his weapon before that night, but he felt that in this situation, he had to. I am sorry that many of you cannot understand what it must have been like to be in his situation, but I think any cop would have done the same thing. Darren Wilson is not guilty of any crime. If you want cops who let criminals run loose for fear of confrontations, then we will live in a dangerous scary world. Cops are here to protect us against people who do the same things that Michael Brown did that night. It is a shame that he decided to get high, rob a store, and then attack a police officer. If only he made better choices, he would still be alive today and Darren Wilson's life would not be in shambles.

Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon Chat Icon

I wasn't even going to bother commenting on this post but this is the best response I've seen!!!!!! So so true.

Here's something to take into account and luckyinlove post here reminded me of it-

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-California/2014/08/30/57-Police-Officers-were-Fatally-Shot-by-Unarmed-Suspects

Message edited 11/26/2014 7:21:06 PM.

Posted 11/26/14 7:15 PM
 

MC09
arrrghhh!!!!

Member since 2/09

5674 total posts

Name:
Me speaks pirate!

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by SlurpeeDad

Posted by MC09

Posted by Goobster

Exactly.

Or my dad, a now retired PO, who pulled a man (not white, but not black) over for rolling through a stop sign. Something small like that. Well, the man had a WOMAN tied up in the trunk (who he KIDNAPPED and CARJACKED). The man had BOMBS wrapped all over his body and wrestled with my father to BLOW him up. Yes. All 100% true. I am lucky my dad had the strength to control this animal so that he didnt DIE because of some crazy person. So as Slurpee dad said, I will believe any officer ANY day over a CRIMINAL and coincidentally, BROWN WAS A CRIMINAL. Well look at that. Sometimes where there is SMOKE there is FIRE.

Dear GOD, have some concept of what OFFICERS face daily. They PUT THEIR LIVES on the LINE for THUGS who disregard the law, disregard THEIR authority and yep, steal packs of cigarettes. LIFE ON THE LINE.

Chat Icon Chat Icon



Police officers are absolutely 100% to be respected (as is every other human being on this earth) and the sacrifices they make on a daily basis and putting their lives on the line on a daily basis is incredibly admirable and not something most people can do. That's why we trust and respect our law enforcement officials to protect us and do what most of us can't on a daily basis. But, does that mean a police officer is NEVER to be questioned? His/her actions are NEVER to be questioned? Has there NEVER been an incidence of a police officer who misuses his/her authority or makes a bad judgment call? Police officers are human and make mistakes just like the rest of us do. They are charged with enforcing the law, but they are certainly not above it. All anyone in this case is asking for is the right to go to trial and question the conflicting reports, testimonials and evidence. Should Officer Wilson be found not guilty, then so be it.

ETA: It is actually more frightening to me that a few posters on this thread seem to be suggesting that they prefer a police state that gives law enforcement full authority to exercise their power, where a police officer is never to be questioned and ambiguous reports and testimonials are never to be clarified and brought to trial and given due process... is that really what you prefer in a democratic country???



I have read most of this thread and haven't seen anyone saying that they want the law enforcement to have full authority to exercise their power. What I said, and I think others have said, is that I will believe what a Police Officer says over a known criminal and therefore understand why most grand jury's side with the officer.



It's saying the same thing. The statement is implied. I prefer to reserve my judgment based on EVIDENCE rather than emotion or solely because someone carries a badge or because my uncle is a cop putting his life on the line to do his job and, therefore, NO ONE understands what it's like to be a cop, etc.

Posted 11/26/14 7:30 PM
 

Poppyseed79
LIF Adult

Member since 10/14

935 total posts

Name:
"Reg"

Officer Wilson not indicted....

This footballer has the best take on everything I've seen so far...if anyone's interested.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2850926/NFL-player-s-heartfelt-Facebook-reaction-Ferguson-decision-aftermath-goes-viral.html

Posted 11/26/14 7:32 PM
 

SlurpeeDad
LIF Adolescent

Member since 1/11

713 total posts

Name:
SlurpeeDad

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by MC09

Posted by SlurpeeDad

Posted by MC09

Posted by Goobster

Exactly.

Or my dad, a now retired PO, who pulled a man (not white, but not black) over for rolling through a stop sign. Something small like that. Well, the man had a WOMAN tied up in the trunk (who he KIDNAPPED and CARJACKED). The man had BOMBS wrapped all over his body and wrestled with my father to BLOW him up. Yes. All 100% true. I am lucky my dad had the strength to control this animal so that he didnt DIE because of some crazy person. So as Slurpee dad said, I will believe any officer ANY day over a CRIMINAL and coincidentally, BROWN WAS A CRIMINAL. Well look at that. Sometimes where there is SMOKE there is FIRE.

Dear GOD, have some concept of what OFFICERS face daily. They PUT THEIR LIVES on the LINE for THUGS who disregard the law, disregard THEIR authority and yep, steal packs of cigarettes. LIFE ON THE LINE.

Chat Icon Chat Icon



Police officers are absolutely 100% to be respected (as is every other human being on this earth) and the sacrifices they make on a daily basis and putting their lives on the line on a daily basis is incredibly admirable and not something most people can do. That's why we trust and respect our law enforcement officials to protect us and do what most of us can't on a daily basis. But, does that mean a police officer is NEVER to be questioned? His/her actions are NEVER to be questioned? Has there NEVER been an incidence of a police officer who misuses his/her authority or makes a bad judgment call? Police officers are human and make mistakes just like the rest of us do. They are charged with enforcing the law, but they are certainly not above it. All anyone in this case is asking for is the right to go to trial and question the conflicting reports, testimonials and evidence. Should Officer Wilson be found not guilty, then so be it.

ETA: It is actually more frightening to me that a few posters on this thread seem to be suggesting that they prefer a police state that gives law enforcement full authority to exercise their power, where a police officer is never to be questioned and ambiguous reports and testimonials are never to be clarified and brought to trial and given due process... is that really what you prefer in a democratic country???



I have read most of this thread and haven't seen anyone saying that they want the law enforcement to have full authority to exercise their power. What I said, and I think others have said, is that I will believe what a Police Officer says over a known criminal and therefore understand why most grand jury's side with the officer.



It's saying the same thing. The statement is implied. I prefer to reserve my judgment based on EVIDENCE rather than emotion or solely because someone carries a badge or because my uncle is a cop putting his life on the line to do his job and, therefore, NO ONE understands what it's like to be a cop, etc.



You want it to say the same thing, but it isn't. There is a reason that 100% of officers involved in grand jury's don't end up avoiding indictment; evidence must be heard, and take priority. That being said, prior to hearing evidence, it has been my experience to trust the officer over the KNOWN CRIMINAL. Brown was a known criminal, not Johnny Good Samaritan.

Posted 11/26/14 7:48 PM
 

JME78
LIF Adult

Member since 11/09

3672 total posts

Name:

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by SlurpeeDad

Posted by MC09

Posted by SlurpeeDad

Posted by MC09

Posted by Goobster

Exactly.

Or my dad, a now retired PO, who pulled a man (not white, but not black) over for rolling through a stop sign. Something small like that. Well, the man had a WOMAN tied up in the trunk (who he KIDNAPPED and CARJACKED). The man had BOMBS wrapped all over his body and wrestled with my father to BLOW him up. Yes. All 100% true. I am lucky my dad had the strength to control this animal so that he didnt DIE because of some crazy person. So as Slurpee dad said, I will believe any officer ANY day over a CRIMINAL and coincidentally, BROWN WAS A CRIMINAL. Well look at that. Sometimes where there is SMOKE there is FIRE.

Dear GOD, have some concept of what OFFICERS face daily. They PUT THEIR LIVES on the LINE for THUGS who disregard the law, disregard THEIR authority and yep, steal packs of cigarettes. LIFE ON THE LINE.

Chat Icon Chat Icon



Police officers are absolutely 100% to be respected (as is every other human being on this earth) and the sacrifices they make on a daily basis and putting their lives on the line on a daily basis is incredibly admirable and not something most people can do. That's why we trust and respect our law enforcement officials to protect us and do what most of us can't on a daily basis. But, does that mean a police officer is NEVER to be questioned? His/her actions are NEVER to be questioned? Has there NEVER been an incidence of a police officer who misuses his/her authority or makes a bad judgment call? Police officers are human and make mistakes just like the rest of us do. They are charged with enforcing the law, but they are certainly not above it. All anyone in this case is asking for is the right to go to trial and question the conflicting reports, testimonials and evidence. Should Officer Wilson be found not guilty, then so be it.

ETA: It is actually more frightening to me that a few posters on this thread seem to be suggesting that they prefer a police state that gives law enforcement full authority to exercise their power, where a police officer is never to be questioned and ambiguous reports and testimonials are never to be clarified and brought to trial and given due process... is that really what you prefer in a democratic country???



I have read most of this thread and haven't seen anyone saying that they want the law enforcement to have full authority to exercise their power. What I said, and I think others have said, is that I will believe what a Police Officer says over a known criminal and therefore understand why most grand jury's side with the officer.



It's saying the same thing. The statement is implied. I prefer to reserve my judgment based on EVIDENCE rather than emotion or solely because someone carries a badge or because my uncle is a cop putting his life on the line to do his job and, therefore, NO ONE understands what it's like to be a cop, etc.



You want it to say the same thing, but it isn't. There is a reason that 100% of officers involved in grand jury's don't end up avoiding indictment; evidence must be heard, and take priority. That being said, prior to hearing evidence, it has been my experience to trust the officer over the KNOWN CRIMINAL. Brown was a known criminal, not Johnny Good Samaritan.



He was an 18 year old kid who stole cigarillos.

Last time I checked that wasn't an executable offense.

It troubles me that people are so quick to put a dead kid on trial to justify his being killed.

Posted 11/26/14 8:14 PM
 

LeeCR7
LIF Infant

Member since 5/08

138 total posts

Name:
Laura

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by JME78

He was an 18 year old kid who stole cigarillos.

Last time I checked that wasn't an executable offense.

It troubles me that people are so quick to put a dead kid on trial to justify his being killed.



Chat Icon Chat Icon

So true.

It doesn't matter what kind of person the victim was when determining whether there was a crime. That shouldn't come into play. Only what happened that day should matter. The only exception is if either of them had a violent history, which would show a pattern of behavior. That is not the case, as far as I know. Stealing cigars once, while clearly wrong and punishable, is not enough to establish that.

And it's not a choice between believing Brown or Wilson. Brown is dead, and so has no version of events. It is seeing whether the evidence bears out Wilson's story. He clearly has a strong motivation to lie or at least present things favorably to him. I'm not saying he is lying, but a trial, with cross examinations, exhibits and witnesses, would allow a jury to make a fully informed decision.

Dismissing anybody's side by calling them a "thug" or "criminal" is just as bad as believing everything a police officer says just because he is a cop. If things were that simple, we wouldn't need trials or evidence. We could just look at the character of the people involved and judge from that.

Posted 11/26/14 8:26 PM
 

NervousNell
Just another chapter in life..

Member since 11/09

54919 total posts

Name:
..being a mommy and being a wife!

Re: Officer Wilson not indicted....

Posted by DaniRella

Posted by luckyinlove

Obviously everyone who is questioning why Wilson did what he did does not understand two things. First, when you are threatened by a perp, armed or unarmed, you must defend yourself. Once Brown went for his gun (and forensic evidence proved that this was in fact the case), he was no longer an unarmed man. It is very easy for some of you to judge why he did what he did, working in jobs where your life isn't on the line on a day to day basis, but the reality is you can't even begin to know what it was like to be Wilson that night. It has been proven that Brown was antagonistic and threatening, both by forensic evidence and witness testimonies and Wilson was simply doing his job. He did not do or say anything to make it about race, he simply wanted to go home at the end of the night, not end up in a bodybag. Cops are taught to use deadly force if their lives are in jeopardy and Wilson believed that his was. He had never used his weapon before that night, but he felt that in this situation, he had to. I am sorry that many of you cannot understand what it must have been like to be in his situation, but I think any cop would have done the same thing. Darren Wilson is not guilty of any crime. If you want cops who let criminals run loose for fear of confrontations, then we will live in a dangerous scary world. Cops are here to protect us against people who do the same things that Michael Brown did that night. It is a shame that he decided to get high, rob a store, and then attack a police officer. If only he made better choices, he would still be alive today and Darren Wilson's life would not be in shambles.



Exactly. And anyone who knows an ounce about law enforcement and their training, would see this, plain and simple. Every officer I know puts their lives on the line everyday and a lot of them tell me, I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.

I keep thinking of my brother's colleague Artie Lopez, who simply walked up to a man to question why he left the scene of a basic fender bender... He approached with his taser. Man, I wish he had approached with his gun. But who would have thought?? It was just a simple fender bender. But that piece of utter shit turned around before Artie could even mutter a hello and he shot him directly in the heart. FOR NO EFFING REASON. He just didn't want to get locked up that day for leaving the scene of a fender bender. Artie was 29 years old. He showed restraint by approaching with his taser. That's the thanks restraint got him.



But it's ok that Artie was killed. It's ok because he was just a cop. They are expendable. If Artie had approached that scumbaag pos with his gun drawn and killed that waste of life instead, he would have been scruntized and judged.
So instead he went in with non deadly force like all the Monday morning quarterbacks who have never been on the front lines preach about. And he paid with his life. Where were the riots for him though?

You know what...at the end of the day, better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. If you don't like it, don't break the law. And if a cop tells you to put your hands up, put them up. Period.

Posted 11/26/14 8:44 PM
 

MrsA1012
love my little girl !

Member since 9/10

5777 total posts

Name:
Me

Officer Wilson not indicted....

Can attorneys on here speak to the need for a trial if there is one piece of conflicting information in a grand jury setting? Also, what is the standard to indict ? Preponderance of the evidence ? Personally, my reading has led me to believe that the evidence clearly exonerated the cop of any wrong doing. It was quite compelling and one small contradiction does not negate extensive forensic evidence and eye witness accounts that point to one conclusion.

Posted 11/26/14 8:53 PM
 
Pages: << 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11
 
Quick navigation:   
Currently 79701 users on the LIFamilies.com Chat
New Businesses
1 More Rep
Carleton Hall of East Islip
J&A Building Services
LaraMae Health Coaching
Sonic Wellness
Julbaby Photography LLC
Ideal Uniforms
Teresa Geraghty Photography
Camelot Dream Homes
Long Island Wedding Boutique
MB Febus- Rodan & Fields
Camp Harbor
Market America-Shop.com
ACM Basement Waterproofing
Travel Tom

      Follow LIWeddings on Facebook

      Follow LIFamilies on Twitter
Long Island Bridal Shows