Tweet
It is said that they acted on forensic evidence in the decision not to pursue charges against officer Wilson.
That forensic evidence being blood was on his gun and in his car ,and that witnessess saw Micheal brown as the instigator.
My issue is forensic evidence doesnt prove cause of incident only the outcome.i.e blood splatter, be it in the car or on the officer ,which leads to witnesses verifying Brown was the instigator,none gave a verbal account of the incident which would be key as to whom was th instigator ,that said you had ample amount who stated he was not .Then you have those who stated he was fleeing the officer .
So when did he become a threat ,again witnessess ! One ,only one said it looked as if he was attempting to charge at officer Wilson,others said he was shot and attempting to surrender.
Would it be unfair to conclude that the impact of the gunshots made him unable to control his body ,that it was a jerking motion.
I must conclude that the grand jury had ample reason to recommend an indictment and the prosecutor basically lead the grand jury not to charge Officer Wilson.
The fact that the autopsy found he was shot from the front not the back and discredits his friend Wilson ,is here nor there, they were both fleeing ,whatever view he has of the incident is that of a fleeing man,his views of anything would be of a split secound.Hearing gunshots and seeing your friend twist to turn and stop,would lead anyone to conclude a shot might have struck your friend as to where ,it would be a calculated guess,it was the back.
The grand jury procedure was a farce,i doesnt mean he isnt guilty to me ,more like he got away
X
Venting !
That forensic evidence being blood was on his gun and in his car ,and that witnessess saw Micheal brown as the instigator.
My issue is forensic evidence doesnt prove cause of incident only the outcome.i.e blood splatter, be it in the car or on the officer ,which leads to witnesses verifying Brown was the instigator,none gave a verbal account of the incident which would be key as to whom was th instigator ,that said you had ample amount who stated he was not .Then you have those who stated he was fleeing the officer .
So when did he become a threat ,again witnessess ! One ,only one said it looked as if he was attempting to charge at officer Wilson,others said he was shot and attempting to surrender.
Would it be unfair to conclude that the impact of the gunshots made him unable to control his body ,that it was a jerking motion.
I must conclude that the grand jury had ample reason to recommend an indictment and the prosecutor basically lead the grand jury not to charge Officer Wilson.
The fact that the autopsy found he was shot from the front not the back and discredits his friend Wilson ,is here nor there, they were both fleeing ,whatever view he has of the incident is that of a fleeing man,his views of anything would be of a split secound.Hearing gunshots and seeing your friend twist to turn and stop,would lead anyone to conclude a shot might have struck your friend as to where ,it would be a calculated guess,it was the back.
The grand jury procedure was a farce,i doesnt mean he isnt guilty to me ,more like he got away
X
Venting !