Well, this is what I mean. Does a poor decision by a grand jury mean we should have to live in fear of a bunch of thugs?

Hopefully is right. But the Darren Wilson's are happy. They get to either stay on their jobs, or leave, and then they let the city (taxpayers) pay out the multimillion dollar wrongful death judgements while their fellow cops are shot at in retribution. That's screwed up because I have actually met some very nice guys that were cops.

Sounds like the same line of BS about the bloods declaring war on the cops in Newark a few months ago. And I pretty much expect the same thing to happen, nothing.

Well I never heard of the BGF if they are real.

If they are going after cops they should just do it, and stop talking about it. That news won't make cops even more trigger happy then they already are right? What, did they run out of bullets?

Tell them to get a cop named Vitaly, and do us all a favor. I promised my daughter I would not give him a drive by if others want to do it be my guest.Happy hunting.

Maybe those are agents provocateur making the threats.

The police are known to operate using them.

Alfa dont take this the wrong way. But you remind me of a certain poster on another forum....you wouldnt happen to be a halfa fag would you?

What were you doing posting on a forum like that?

Haha thats funny. No its another OC forum, you just seem like some1 who posts over there.

well,the feds are coming in both cases,[ ferguson, staten island ] be interesting to see what conclusions they draw from their investigations.

The article i read kind of implied it was shaky info. Why kill a cop when they can keep looting.

You mean, let me understand this cause, ya know maybe it's me, I'm a little fucked up maybe, but I'm funny how, I mean funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? I make you laugh, I'm here to fuckin' amuse you? What do you mean funny, funny how? How am I funny?

No, no, I don't know, you said it. How do I know? You said I'm funny. How the fuck am I funny, what the fuck is so funny about me? Tell me, tell me what's funny.

One thing's for sure. There is a deep discord between the public and the police right now. That affects good cops who do their jobs and people who do their communities good service. In other words a recipe for more Ferguson's.

John Kasich, the Republican governor from Ohio has some good ideas on this subject to repair this bad feeling that's going around in the country right now

When I see what's happening now I thing everyone has taken this train.

Check out this video on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCxIPDErjT8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Nothing for Ferguson cause Wilson was justified in protecting himself when Brown went for the officers sidearm. A lot of people seem to forget that. As for this Staten Island, I am shocked, cause it is right there on video. Once down and restrained, the cop should have let go right away. All this for some loose cigs.

Giacomo, if I didn't like your posts to begin with, I wouldn't challenge your assertions here.

If Officer Wilson is in his car, sitting down, and his firearm is holstered on his right side, how does a person on his left side window standing up outside of his vehicle reach into the car for his undrawn weapon?

Because Wilson opened the door of his vehicle and Brown apparently shoved him back in it and a scuffle ensued. That's how. You have been following this case right?

rockstar, the grand jury was presented with evidence from officer wilsons gun right? like fingerprints, or dna. proving that brown went for the cops gun.

Derrick Rose wore this shirt during warm ups on Saturday night before da Bulls game.

According to this article, Wilson's gun was never tested for fingerprints...

Gun Not Tested for Fingerprints

If the gun was never tested for fingerprints, how do you prove that Brown went for the gun and wrestled the officer for it?

The article also states that no written notes were taken after the killing by other interviewing officers who later claimed that Wilson never contradicted himself between his first story and the final version of his alibi. So everything is covered up and it is his word against Brown's.

Because no notes were taken, Wilson was basically given time to get his story straight and have it jibe with whatever forensic evidence would come out later.

alpha.. forget the fingerprints, dna would be even better.
im sure the grand jury was presented with dna evidence that shows Michael browns dna on wilsons gun.... that's concrete evidence so they most assuredly had that.

Courtesy of a friend of mine from Philly. Short and to the point.

I looked it up Binnie. They are not sure where the DNA came from. It could have come from blood spatter. The evidence is inconclusive...

Brown DNA on Wilson's Gun

Thats great.

alpha.... but browns thumb had a injury on it and also powder indicating that his thumb was 6 to 9 in away from Wilson's pistol. ive never heard that before, but, that's the evidence that the grand jury heard, and, that headline in your post said
that the physical evidence supported the officer.

You're looking for something that isn't there. Forensic evidence shows there was clearly a struggle inside Wilson's vehicle

yes, ive just read where that is correct. alpha posted a link
that confirms this.

Gun residue only means that the kid was shot at close range. Blood spatter could account for the DNA on the gun.

When you flush a toilet with the lid up, water is sprayed several feet in all directions through a process called aerosolization. Wilson's gun could have been contaminated with Brown's DNA via aerosolization of Brown's blood as a result of Brown being shot at close range.

Let's put it like this. If I was looking for conclusive proof that Brown went for the cop's gun, I would be looking for something that possibly isn't there with what we presently know. But it is an absolute that it is impossible to prove a lie.

Inconclusive. His hand was near the gun is all it means. His whole body was near the officer's gun. As a matter of fact, his whole body was much closer to the officer than 6 to 9 inches because the two of them came into contact with one another. So the hand being 6 to 9 inches from the gun is impressive. It shows that even though the two of them struggled and touched each other in some way, Brown may in fact have never touched the officer's gun. It's clear that when the officer pulled out and started shooting, Brown turned and ran.

No fingerprints on the gun. No sweat or bodily fluids on the gun. Aren't forensic scientists able to determine things like that?

Also, the title of the article doesn't concern me. I pulled up the article to shine light on a specific fact we were debating, the DNA on the gun. I don't claim to know everything that happened that day so I have no interest in censoring the truth by picking articles based on whether their title agrees with my viewpoint.

well said alpha, well said.

As for Staten Island, I can understand why people would be upset. But Ferguson is murky and you can't just say one or the other. I personally believe Darren Wilson was justified in his use of force. When someone inflicts bodily harm or even attempts to do physical harm (even taking the gun which jammed as a result of Brown's grabbing it), the police get a wide berth.

Because there was a video and a clear showing of what happened, for the life of me I can't figure out why they indict. I'm hoping we see the records made public so we can see what happened with the grand jury that made them say no indictment