Police Lied -- Mike Brown Was Killed 148 Feet Away from Darren Wilson's SUV

Sure, if Brown continued to flee the shell casings would be farther away from the car. Yes; it appears from grand jury testimony that Brown fled from the police car after Brown was seen with half his body in the police car.

Whether or not he was fleeing at some point is irrelevant. Was he fleeing at the time he was shot? It is all below.

test9_zpsf2173430.png

test10_zpse9364184.png

Yes, we see that you can draw circles. That's good. Next we'll try zig-zags.

Now as to the fleeing part, it was and is, in brief, unconstitutional to fire at someone who is fleeing (with the qualifications you provided). Whether Brown was shot as he was fleeing, i.e., in the back, is irrelevant. If he was shot AT, that's all that matters with regard to the law.

I know you can get this if you try real hard.
 
Yes, we see that you can draw circles. That's good. Next we'll try zig-zags.

Now as to the fleeing part, it was and is, in brief, unconstitutional to fire at someone who is fleeing (with the qualifications you provided). Whether Brown was shot as he was fleeing, i.e., in the back, is irrelevant. If he was shot AT, that's all that matters with regard to the law.

I know you can get this if you try real hard.

BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!

If someone is at some point in time "fleeing", that doesn't mean they are in a perpetual state of fleeing. According to the legal definition of fleeing, a person is running away. If that person is not RUNNING AWAY AND THEN RUNS TOWARDS, THEY ARE NO LONGER IN THE ACT OF FLEEING.
 
BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!

If someone is at some point in time "fleeing", that doesn't mean they are in a perpetual state of fleeing. According to the legal definition of fleeing, a person is running away. If that person is not RUNNING AWAY AND THEN RUNS TOWARDS, THEY ARE NO LONGER IN THE ACT OF FLEEING.

True. However, Wilson fired at Brown while he was fleeing AND FURTHER when he turned around.
 
Distance is essential to the defense and how Darren Wilson must demonstrate that he "reasonably feared for his safety."

Darren Wilson doesn't need to demonstrate anything. For a conviction to occur, the state must prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant does not need to prove a thing. Go back to school and get a clue.

By the way, how does it feel to know that Obama thinks the people who supported him are dumb?
 
Darren Wilson doesn't need to demonstrate anything. For a conviction to occur, the state must prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant does not need to prove a thing. Go back to school and get a clue.

By the way, how does it feel to know that Obama thinks the people who supported him are dumb?

Actually he has to demonstrate that he didn't violate the Constitution. But I guess we'll have to wait for that until he's cross-examined.
 
Actually he has to demonstrate that he didn't violate the Constitution. But I guess we'll have to wait for that until he's cross-examined.

I thought you libtards thought the constitution was an old antiquated document that was no longer applicable in modern times. So confusing.
 
Back
Top