Let's argue about Mike Brown!

How the hell did we NOT get physical evidence on whether or not Brown touched Wilson's gun? I didn't even hear anything about that in the prosecutor's report on Monday Night, and today I hear Wilson saying the kid did?!

If Darren Wilson says the kid grabbed it out of his holster, I would also find that hard to believe. Because I learned from watching a Frontline documentary about a cop killing his wife, that you have to be trained to take out the gun out of the holster, because those things are designed to be dummy proof.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
damn, some of the videos from cities around the country of the protests, looks like a scene out of the movie the purge

 
detectiveconan16 said:
The kid who was killed over a weekend for open carrying an airsoft gun was killed without a warning from the cops. http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/local/cleveland/2014/11/26/tamir-rice-shooting-video-released/19530745/
Click to expand...
Things this kid did wrong:
1-remove the orange safety cap from the tip of the barrel of the air soft gun

2-walk around a park brandishing the gun and pointing it at people

3-when the police arrive he walked right at the car with the gun pointed outward toward the cop car from waist height

It's tragic whenever a child dies but let's be real here, the police may have been impetuous but based on the information they had and the situation as it was presented to them left them withr little options. A person moved toward their car brandishing a weapon, there's no warning shot and as the officer would see it they could have been opened fire on the second they pulled up.

How many officers are killed each year because they couldn't or didn't act fast enough in a situation or traffic stop?

Finally, if anyone should be blamed it should be the dispatcher that failed to relay to the responding officers that the caller stated that they thought the gun may have been fake.
 
detectiveconan16 said:
The kid who was killed over a weekend for open carrying an airsoft gun was killed without a warning from the cops. http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/local/cleveland/2014/11/26/tamir-rice-shooting-video-released/19530745/
Click to expand...
Tragedy for sure, where were the parents? What accountability do they shoulder for this? The cops say they told him to put his hands up, but instead he reached for the gun. Seems awful quick....perhaps they could have staged a bit farther away and use the speaker system to ask the kid to cooperate. The kid probably was just going to show them it was fake, but how the hell is the cop supposed to know? Lesson to parents, know what your kids are doing at all times.

 
klingon666 said:
I don't care about race color creed he was a thief
Click to expand...
CZf19jL.png


 
detectiveconan16 said:
The kid who was killed over a weekend for open carrying an airsoft gun was killed without a warning from the cops. http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/local/cleveland/2014/11/26/tamir-rice-shooting-video-released/19530745/
Click to expand...
Tragedy for sure, where were the parents? What accountability do they shoulder for this? The cops say they told him to put his hands up, but instead he reached for the gun. Seems awful quick....perhaps they could have staged a bit farther away and use the speaker system to ask the kid to cooperate. The kid probably was just going to show them it was fake, but how the hell is the cop supposed to know? Lesson to parents, know what your kids are doing at all times.

 
detectiveconan16 said:
The kid who was killed over a weekend for open carrying an airsoft gun was killed without a warning from the cops. http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/local/cleveland/2014/11/26/tamir-rice-shooting-video-released/19530745/
Click to expand...
Tragedy for sure, where were the parents? What accountability do they shoulder for this? The cops say they told him to put his hands up, but instead he reached for the gun. Seems awful quick....perhaps they could have staged a bit farther away and use the speaker system to ask the kid to cooperate. The kid probably was just going to show them it was fake, but how the hell is the cop supposed to know? Lesson to parents, know what your kids are doing at all times.

 
detectiveconan16 said:
How the hell did we NOT get physical evidence on whether or not Brown touched Wilson's gun? I didn't even hear anything about that in the prosecutor's report on Monday Night, and today I hear Wilson saying the kid did?!

If Darren Wilson says the kid grabbed it out of his holster, I would also find that hard to believe. Because I learned from watching a Frontline documentary about a cop killing his wife, that you have to be trained to take out the gun out of the holster, because those things are designed to be dummy proof.
Click to expand...
Um...where did Wilson ever say Brown removed the gun from his holster? He clearly answers that his holster is on his right hip (ie. away from the driver's side window) and then states that as he was blocking punches with his left arm, HE took his gun out, pointed it at Brown and told him "Stop. I'm going to shoot you."

Now, a question of Brown's fingerprints on the gun is valid though. That's a good point. But I guess depending on how he grabbed it, he could have had his fingers on Wilson's hand...or the struggle could have mucked everything up too much to pull anything clean anyway. But that is a fair question to raise.

 
Oh wait AGAIN cause Wilson has absolutely no reason to lie right....

You saying that Brown who could of attacked the shopkeeper but instead just push him off, decided to go ape-shit and attack a cop who decided to ask him to get off the street

I wonder why Wilson couldn't look George in the eyes during the interview, I mean he was looking down the entire time...

But hey he's the cop and cops never lie, all those blacks are so damn dangerous.  

 
Show me Wilson's history of racism, hate speech, prejudice, anything...and I'll listen to you. Brown's history supports breaking the law. Wilson's history does not support attacking innocent people.

 
n8rockerasu said:
Show me Wilson's history of racism, hate speech, prejudice, anything...and I'll listen to you. Brown's history supports breaking the law. Wilson's history does not support attacking innocent people.
Click to expand...
Wilson has a history of lying to a grand jury.

But that's all good because you read some blaze report which told you Brown was a "thug" and hey, despite everything the constitution and the justice system is supposed to stand for, people you judge as "bad" don't deserve a fair shake anyway.
 
Ok so explain why Brown didn't beat up the shopkeeper but decided to attack and beat someone who was armed with a GUN?  

Again the justification for killing Brown lies on the arugement that Brown tried to steal Wilson's gun, now without that reasoning Wilson killing Brown would be UNJUSTIFIED..  Again show me absolute proof that Brown did tried to steal Wilson's gun, if not you are just eating up the shit Wilson is pooping from his behind.

And again the LAW makes it clear that we are a NATION OF LAWS and we have a system of justice, not hired executioners with badges. 

You cannot justify stealing = death.  Unless you believe in Sharia Law

 
The stupidity in this thread is astounding. Do you think the shop keeper was going to arrest Brown? Because Wilson was. Which would explain why he was attacked more. Not to mention that Wilson was more of a threat.
 
usickenme said:
Wilson has a history of lying to a grand jury.

But that's all good because you read some blaze report which told you Brown was a "thug" and hey, despite everything the constitution and the justice system is supposed to stand for, people you judge as "bad" don't deserve a fair shake anyway.
Click to expand...
lol...where did I say any of those things? All I said is somebody with a history of negative behavior is going to have less credibility. That's basically a factual statement. Did you mean to quote somebody else?

Purple Flames said:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/darren-wilson-part-force-disbanded-racial-tension-report-article-1.1914982

Now move that goal post.
Click to expand...
I have no interest in "moving goal posts". That's an interesting article, I guess it proves an association...by way of working at the same place. The article does state outright that Wilson was never involved in any of that and he was even given the chance to reapply for his position after the department was disbanded...but instead, he chose to go to Ferguson.

There could be something there. But considering even that article makes it clear that Wilson was never found guilty of any wrongdoing, it's certainly not enough to convict him of anything. Keep digging.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well since Brown was sooooo thug-ish and violent, he should be like that to everyone....

For a guy who has no history of actual violence, it's funny how someone can assume. just cause he came upon Wilson he would attack... 

Normally people with no history of violence do not lash out at the one person who is far capable inflicting more violence

Until you prove that Wilson's account is actually factual and not what "he just said"  don't you dare accuse people of questioning Wilson's honesty

Most people don't eat the shit that comes out of another ass like yourself so blatantly

Apparently everyone in the world is capable of lying except police in your mind...........LOL 

Who fed you that b.s was most likely a badder parent and/or teacher :)

 
If you want to say that the prosecutor purposefully and with pure intent overloaded the grand jury with so much information that they didn't know which side to side with, and it got so confusing that they couldn't figure/agree on anything that lead to them just throwing out the case, that can be agreed on

To say that Officer Wilson's account was nothing but honest and that his facts were facts is BULLLLLLSHIIIIIT

There has also never been a grand jury whose sole key witness was the accused him/herself and without a contrary opposition to argue against said accuse.  It was almost like they gave Wilson the floor to speak his mind and no one to contradict or point out questionable parts of his statement ( instead they focus on questioning the witnesses against Wilson...instead of Wilson himself ).   If the prosecutor was doing his job, he would let the accused speak and then make sure that every word was nitpicked and picked over to raise doubt about Wilson credibility. 

Nope the prosecutor just left the grand jury to hear Wilson, see evidence and presented no attempts to question the account of Wilson.  The prosecutor was working for the accused then against the accused which should be unheard of professional ( but in fact is always a scratch my back in the criminal justice world when it comes to prosecutors and police ) 

Now if we removed the Officer from Officer Wilson and it would just be Wilson, sure as can bet the prosecutor would of made a far greater attack on the person credibility and push for hard for a trial

 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name="Finger_Shocker" post="12276043" timestamp="1417087341"]Well since Brown was sooooo thug-ish and violent, he should be like that to everyone....

For a guy who has no history of actual violence, it's funny how someone can assume. just cause he came upon Wilson he would attack...

Normally people with no history of violence do not lash out at the one person who is far capable inflicting more violence

Until you prove that Wilson's account is actually factual and not what "he just said" don't you dare accuse people of questioning Wilson's honesty

Most people don't eat the shit that comes out of another ass like yourself so blatantly

Apparently everyone in the world is capable of lying except police in your mind...........LOL
Who fed you that b.s was most likely a badder parent and/or teacher :)[/quote]
No history of violence? Are you fucking kidding me? Are you blind? I mean, STRONG ARMED ROBBERY isn't violent... right? Just because his family (who just told a mob to "burn this place down", along with attacking and robbing their own family) said it, doesn't make it true. We have video evidence of it!

Then we have forensic evidence backing Wilson's statements. And eyewitness testimony.

And you want to question ALL of that? There's being a skeptic, and then there's being blind. You're falling under the latter.
 
[quote name="Finger_Shocker" post="12276062" timestamp="1417088201"]If you want to say that the prosecutor purposefully and with pure intent overloaded the grand jury with so much information that they didn't know which side to side with, and it got so confusing that they couldn't figure/agree on anything that lead to them just throwing out the case, that can be agreed on

To say that Officer Wilson's account was nothing but honest and that his facts were facts is BULLLLLLSHIIIIIT

There has also never been a grand jury whose sole key witness was the accused him/herself and without a contrary opposition to argue against said accuse. It was almost like they gave Wilson the floor to speak his mind and no one to contradict or point out questionable parts of his statement ( instead they focus on questioning the witnesses against Wilson...instead of Wilson himself ). If the prosecutor was doing his job, he would let the accused speak and then make sure that every word was nitpicked and picked over to raise doubt about Wilson credibility.

Nope the prosecutor just left the grand jury to hear Wilson, see evidence and presented no attempts to question the account of Wilson. The prosecutor was working for the accused then against the accused which should be unheard of professional ( but in fact is always a scratch my back in the criminal justice world when it comes to prosecutors and police )

Now if we removed the Officer from Officer Wilson and it would just be Wilson, sure as can bet the prosecutor would of made a far greater attack on the person credibility and push for hard for a trial[/quote]
Except for the part where the grand jury questioned him. And fielded ask the evidence and other testimony. They could ask him anything, but they believed his testimony. I wonder why...? Could it be the overwhelming evidence backing him that you continually ignore and pretend isn't there?

Once again, read the reports in their entirety.
 
Fearia said:
No history of violence? Are you fucking kidding me? Are you blind? I mean, STRONG ARMED ROBBERY isn't violent... right? Just because his family (who just told a mob to "burn this place down", along with attacking and robbing their own family) said it, doesn't make it true. We have video evidence of it! Then we have forensic evidence backing Wilson's statements. And eyewitness testimony. And you want to question ALL of that? There's being a skeptic, and then there's being blind. You're falling under the latter.
Click to expand...
Really, Really, point to one part of that video that show any actual violence

And yet he came out like a BLACK DEMON with fist flying and turned into a raging DEMON bull when confront by Wilson...LOL

Ok you sure convince me that Wilson didn't include that tidbit to prejudice the jury

 
The proof of violence in the video is him shoving the clerk out of the way as he's trying to leave the store. In most jurisdictions any use of force elevates theft to robbery. Essentially what makes a robbery a robbery is a theft with the use of force or the threat of force. It's a use of force, not violence. And it is relevant evidence because it establishes the reason for the stop by Wilson as well as the fact that Brown was suspected of a violent felony (robbery does not require violence but it is considered a violent felony) which comes into play for use of force. See, there are instances in which violent felons can have lethal force used against them even if they are fleeing. If that came into play during deliberations, I'm not sure but it almost certainly would have been an issue at trial. And furthermore, despite the evidence standards that tape of the robbery would have almost certainly made it into evidence for the jury to see.

Then again, what do I know? I only went to school for 3 years for my law degree instead of everyone else on the internet these days who seem to have gotten theirs from Wikipedia.

Please, just stop with the Brown deifying. Whether he should have died as a result of his actions is up for debate but the simple fact is that he is very clearly seen on video committing a robbery. Had he not been shot and killed this he would have almost certainly been convicted of robbery based almost entirely on the video evidence alone. He didn't deserve to die for that crime but he wasn't a completely innocent angel walking down the street, either.



Have we completely ruled out the possibility that both Brown and Wilson were assholes and both men approached the situation the wrong way?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Open carry never works if you're not White.

This is indeed another sad story. Those cops didn't even warn the kid to put the gun down. They just drove up and shot him in less than half a minute. Saying that the minor looked like a 20 year old is not a good excuse at all. It was lucky that a FBI Agent was there at all to give any concern about the boy.

BTW. The cops stopped Brown for causing a traffic disturbance, not the robbery. They said that back in August, and the prosecutor said it on tv.  You'd have to be a fool to deify or demonize anybody who acted like a stupid kid, regardless of whether or not they knew the consequences of their actions.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh god whether Brown was an asshole or not largely irrelevant. That doesn't give a cop a right to kill a guy nor does it excuse the systematic racism of the system in SL.

If you are such a fabulous lawyer, you would recognize the BS in Wilsons statement. Please tell us you do tax or real estate law.

On thing I find funny are the dopes trying to demonize Brown by bringing up his moms criminal history. But the truth is, out of Wilson and Brown, only one has a mom convicted of crimes and it's not Brown.
 
n8rockerasu said:
lol...where did I say any of those things? All I said is somebody with a history of negative behavior is going to have less credibility. That's basically a factual statement. Did you mean to quote somebody else?
Click to expand...
Nah you're the one who posted this completely asinine crap

n8rockerasu said:
Even if there's no evidence at all, why should you get the benefit of the doubt if you have a history of getting into trouble?
Click to expand...
 
detectiveconan16 said:
Open carry never works if you're not White.

This is indeed another sad story. Those cops didn't even warn the kid to put the gun down. They just drove up and shot him in less than half a minute. Saying that the minor looked like a 20 year old is not a good excuse at all. It was lucky that a FBI Agent was there at all to give any concern about the boy.

BTW. The cops stopped Brown for causing a traffic disturbance, not the robbery. They said that back in August, and the prosecutor said it on tv. You'd have to be a fool to deify or demonize anybody who acted like a stupid kid, regardless of whether or not they knew the consequences of their actions.
Click to expand...
The original stop was for traffic disturbance, during the course of the interaction Wilson realized he might be a suspect for the convenience store robbery.

If no one is going to acknowledge that both people were in the wrong then there's nothing left to discuss for me personally. My belief is Wilson's initial approach and contact were guided by Brown's race and age. I don't entirely believe Wilson's story but I also don't believe Brown was an innocent person picked at random for execution by Wilson. They both fucked up, the simple fact is that there just isn't enough evidence to pin a crime on Wilson. Sorry, but that's the end of the story. Guilty (if he was guilty) people unfortunately go free all the time for lack of evidence.

The fact that a grand jury examining more evidence than would be presented to a criminal jury (evidentiary rules are mostly lax during grand jury proceedings whereas they are much higher for criminal trial) couldn't even piece together enough evidence for a finding of probable cause means a criminal jury would have never found beyond a reasonable doubt.

Sorry to bring up OJ, but it's essentially the exact same situation legally. It's very possible that Wilson was guilty of murder but we don't have enough evidence to prosecute him. It happens every day across America and just because this case has become such a heated debate doesn't mean we should sacrifice someone by railroading them through the criminal justice system on insufficient evidence.


usickenme said:
If you are such a fabulous lawyer, you would recognize the BS in Wilsons statement. Please tell us you do tax or real estate law.
Click to expand...
I practiced criminal law for 6 months in addition to taking criminal law, 2 semesters of criminal procedure, and evidence. No, my resume isn't F Lee Bailey but my experience and eduction carries a little more weight than "I read this on Wikipedia".

And for the record I practice in business litigation and dabble in employment law now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But RvB, even the police chief way back in the original press conference said Wilson had no clue about the convenience store robbery. I have no clue why he'd have reason to lie about something like that. If anything he'd have said the opposite to bolster their claims. If that's the case (which I'm betting on) then Mike Brown essentially got killed for jaywalking.

 
Purple Flames said:
But RvB, even the police chief way back in the original press conference said Wilson had no clue about the convenience store robbery. I have no clue why he'd have reason to lie about something like that. If anything he'd have said the opposite to bolster their claims. If that's the case (which I'm betting on) then Mike Brown essentially got killed for jaywalking.
Click to expand...
See, I think that's where we diverge. We don't know why Brown was killed. The only thing we know for certain is that a grand jury couldn't find enough evidence to find a murder had occurred. Like I said, just like OJ. It's not that Wilson is innocent, it's that there isn't enough evidence to find him guilty (or in this case, even find probable cause).

Personally, I think Wilson used excessive force and shouldn't be able to hide behind lethal force as an officer. I don't think race had much to do with it, aside from Wilsons's initial approach of e situation. I think if it had been a white kid it may have ended up very similar. Wilson's another thrill seeking cop who's in it for all the wrong reasons. Racist? Maybe, but not to the point that race was the reason he was killed, in my opinion.
 
Again 6'4 vs. 6'6 , It was like I was fighting Hulk Hogan

If that is the threshold set, all the little guys in the world need to carry not only guns but full arsenals

What would you call a 5'4 guy vs a 6'6 guy, fighting a bear or a god?

 
Accidentally killing or killing without regards to life without premeditation is called manslaughter, for the grand jury to not even acknowledge that it is a slap in the face

 
Since i live right by this disaster one of the things pointed out on newscasts is there are just too many witnesses with different stories. Pretty much makes it impossible to get a conviction at a trial from what i saw on the news. Reasonable doubt would be easy to prove. Its a sad case really and people have burned the city to the ground because of it.

Today the protestors shut down 3 area malls with a "die in" chanting not one dime. Right now they are at the Scottrade Center where the Blues are playing. None of these are violent in any way but they are making it impossible for people to live normal lives here.shutting down highways closing malls standing in the streets.

I really think both mike brown and darren wilson effed up. Unfortunately mike brown cannot speak for himself anymore.
 
Kezmer said:
Since i live right by this disaster one of the things pointed out on newscasts is there are just too many witnesses with different stories. Pretty much makes it impossible to get a conviction at a trial from what i saw on the news. Reasonable doubt would be easy to prove. Its a sad case really and people have burned the city to the ground because of it.

Today the protestors shut down 3 area malls with a "die in" chanting not one dime. Right now they are at the Scottrade Center where the Blues are playing. None of these are violent in any way but they are making it impossible for people to live normal lives here.shutting down highways closing malls standing in the streets.

I really think both mike brown and darren wilson effed up. Unfortunately mike brown cannot speak for himself anymore.
Click to expand...
I just came from the game and didn't see any of them there. I'm really surprised they even went there. The police were thankfully all over the place. This has gotten all out of hand. Hell one dumb ass even burned down his own home and then got mad when he was told the fire department was spread too thin to help.

http://dailycurrant.com/2014/11/26/ferguson-protester-accidentally-burns-down-own-house/

 
Wow, I guess you can't fix stupid people. I hope they charge him with arson, I love his quote in the article.

“They told me they were too busy with other fires to come help,” he lamented. “I couldn’t believe it. I mean we pay these people’s salaries! What do you mean you're too busy?

“A black person’s house burns down and suddenly you’re ‘too busy’ to put the fire out? This is what racism in America looks like.”

I wonder what he did for a living that entitled him so much to the fire departments services. I wonder how that home owners insurance conversation is going to go...

 
UncleBob said:
Errr... I'm not sure how much seriousness is in those last two posts...
Click to expand...
LOL. For those that are confused:

About
The Daily Currant is an English language online satirical newspaper that covers global politics, business, technology, entertainment, science, health and media. It is accessible from over 190 countries worldwide - now including South Sudan.

Our mission is to ridicule the timid ignorance which obstructs our progress, and promote intelligence - which presses forward.



Q. Are your news stories real?

A. No. Our stories are purely fictional. However they are meant to address real-world issues through satire and often refer and link to real events happening in the world
 
I wish this was satire . . .

"As Officer Smith arrived at the scene the employee ran out of the building waving his arms, and attacked Officer Smith before he was able to exit his patrol car or radio for help. The subject was able to disarm Officer Smith and shot him while he was still in the patrol car."

http://www.odmp.org/officer/22056-police-officer-david-w-smith

Anyone see any similarities?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not to mention, all it does is hammer home the point several of us have been trying to make. "Not all cops are the same." It's incredibly moronic to just paint them with a broad brush and not make an effort to consider the actual facts of the case.

Furthermore, I hate quotes like this:

Victoria Rutherford of Ferguson said she believed Wilson should have not only resigned, but been convicted of a crime.

"I'm upset. I have a 16-year-old son. It could've been him. I feel that he was absolutely in the wrong," she said.
Click to expand...
Could have been your kid. Totally. So, your 16 year old robs convenience stores and physically assaults police officers? If so, then fuck you for being a shitty parent.

And for anyone who doesn't believe that Michael Brown attacked Wilson with literally no evidence to prove your case (and please don't say "u has no evidents eithr!!!!"...seriously, blood in car, GSR on hand, autopsy report), you have a negative bias toward law enforcement. Now, that's your God given right to feel that way. But you will not win a court case built on a biased opinion and absolutely nothing to back it up.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
n8rockerasu said:
Not to mention, all it does is hammer home the point several of us have been trying to make. "Not all cops are the same." It's incredibly moronic to just paint them with a broad brush and not make an effort to consider the actual facts of the case.
Click to expand...
If only we could apply that same mentality towards people that dress like "thugs." Nah, saggy pants make the man right?

Furthermore, I hate quotes like this:
Could have been your kid. Totally. So, your 16 year old robs convenience stores and physically assaults police officers? If so, then fuck you for being a shitty parent.
Click to expand...
Given the fact that we KNOW that black men are disproportionately targeted by law enforcement and that they experience worse treatment than their non-black socio-economic counterparts, it's pretty obvious to anyone with a fucking brain that the quoted statement refers to the above facts. Or maybe you're just the perfect fucking parent and have kids that will never do anything wrong or break any laws. The more obvious answer is that you're not black or have any kids that won't pass the paper bag test, so you'll/they'll never have to experience what it is to be black in the country.

And for anyone who doesn't believe that Michael Brown attacked Wilson with literally no evidence to prove your case (and please don't say "u has no evidents eithr!!!!"...seriously, blood in car, GSR on hand, autopsy report), you have a negative bias toward law enforcement. Now, that's your God given right to feel that way. But you will not win a court case built on a biased opinion and absolutely nothing to back it up.
Click to expand...
LOLZ...you're making the thinnest of semantic arguments here with a healthy dose of rhetoric. I don't know how many times it needs to be said, but the only things we have definitive proof of is that there was a struggle in the car and that someone was shot and killed. We have a VERY rough idea of the distances involved, but we have no proof of who initiated physical contact or the when the gun was drawn. To say that Brown attacked the cop is to imply that Wilson's various conflicting accounts are true.

As for your statement about a court case, a prosecutor could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich and almost NOBODY thinks OJ didn't murder two people, but at least it went to trial.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dohdough said:
LOLZ...you're making the thinnest of semantic arguments here with a healthy dose of rhetoric. I don't know how many times it needs to be said, but the only things we have definitive proof of is that there was a struggle in the car and that someone was shot and killed. We have a VERY rough idea of the distances involved, but we have no proof of who initiated physical contact or the when the gun was drawn. To say that Brown attacked the cop is to imply that Wilson's various conflicting accounts are true.

As for your statement about a court case, a prosecutor could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich and almost NOBODY thinks OJ didn't murder two people, but at least it went to trial.
Click to expand...
Ok, using your argument that that's "all we know", how can you assign blame either way? Doesn't that ultimately make it a case of "shit happens"? If there's no real proof who started it or whose fault it was, don't we arrive at the same outcome?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top