MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #13

[reedus23]

And if I saw that report, I might very well consider it credible. I would have other info (about the witness, their location, their background etc.) to consider so I could accurately make that determination.

Here's what's funny about the whole dang thing. We're talking about the credibility of someone who we really don't even know what he's going to say. I would hope that everyone that has already made a judgment about credibility will stick by their opinions if, when he puts his statements into context, it actually tends to support MB. Bottom line is, while we might have a good idea of what he's saying, we really don't know.

 

[aa9511]

(First time posting, some thoughts IMO and hope to contribute to peoples questions)



I do like you thoughts on this, my only addition might be that objectively it might show that he is not one to shy from physical force when a confrontation arises, which does run contrary to the “gentle giant” narrative. IMO when confronted with a being up to no good as a child I would usually try to talk my way out of it before resorting to physical force.


Well I know in Canada its center of mass, but given the amount of shots fired in the frame of time we have (based on the video when the gunshots in the background) I would suspect muzzle jump would be a factor, basically the recoil from firing your shots, more shots fired would reduce your accuracy significantly (based on my own experience with firearms)
Darren Wilsons sidearm was suggested as being a Sig Saur P229 .40 Caliber. According to a post from the S&W forum.
http://smith-wessonforum.com/lounge/390340-darren-wilsons-sidearm-missouri-police-officer.html
Listening to the video it sounds more like it then a Glock .45, which is very common in law enforcement these days.
To show some idea of muzzle jump I got a link of someone firing a Sig .40 at a shooting range, note the recoil, granted the person firing the firearm is likely a novice based on how sloppy her grip is, but still unless OW is a hulk of a man, and considering he was supposedly injured, the recoil would likely have not been negated
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKbYUc7S5Y0

By Comparison a Glock .45 which is common in law enforcement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ly5UnR7pPtk




Too close together to be casings IMO, also given the # of shots it would seem odd there are not more casings in that spot if it were.

Sorry for the long post, was a lot of things I wanted to touch on.

WELCOME!!!!

WOW, you are very knowledgeable!!

 

[reedus23]

I have made no comments about DJ, his charges or his credibility. Therefore,if I learn more about him I could change my opinion on his credibility.

Fair enough. For those that have though, I would like to think they hold the same standards to each.

 

[gramcracker]

It wouldn't be surprising to learn that witnesses who saw what's considered to be OW version of what happened, would be fearful to go public with their story---everything considered.

been wondering how much, if any, of that the FBI came across during their door-knocking? IIRC it was said that they spoke with about 400 peeps. then, how is that handled? can someone be forced to make an official statement? if it meant they would be called as a witness in open court to substantiate their statement?

as Grace Adler is fond of saying: better him than me

 

[reedus23]

It has zero to do with what anyone wants to believe. It is the most logical conclusion that one should come to with the facts, evidence and actual laws of this case.
(With what is known so far)

Better go read the post I quoted again.

 

[RANCH]

I would hope so. But that still doesn't change the fact that it's difficult to judge the credibility of the person. For example, do you know if the guy was under the influence of anything at the time that might have affected his ability to accurately perceive events or his ability to accurately relate them? I have no idea either way, but neither does any one else and that is why judging his credibility at this juncture is simply premature. I could make a guess that he seems credible, but it's really just a guess.

I agree. I don't give eyewitness testimony much weight in most cases. I like multiple sources of indirect evidence like ballistics, autopsy reports, crime scene investigation, phone and computer records, dispatch recordings, video from witness's and surveillance cameras.

Those multiple sources of indirect evidence can tell us what really happened much better than direct (eyewitness) evidence. At this point, almost all of our information is from media interviews of witness's. I would like to see some of the indirect evidence before I can be more certain about what happened in this case. JMO.

 

[Apollo]

It has been said just as much the other way that those whose version tends to support MB are afraid to come forward for fear of the cops. That stuff might have some credence but it flows both ways. Yet another sign of those issues they have to work through in Ferguson and elsewhere.

I'm going to have to disagree with your assessment there, Lou (Fargo). Personally, I'd be far more afraid for myself and my family of those protesters---from all over the country, not just Ferguson---than I would be of the cops and what they might do if I testified on behalf of what I saw that supported MB's version.

 

[reedus23]

I agree. I don't give eyewitness testimony much weight in most cases. I like multiple sources of indirect evidence like ballistics, autopsy reports, crime scene investigation, phone and computer records, dispatch recordings, video from witness's and surveillance cameras.

Those multiple sources of indirect evidence can tell us what really happened much better that direct (eyewitness) evidence. At this point, almost all of our information is from media interviews of witness's. I would like to see some of the indirect evidence before I can be more certain about what happened in this case. JMO.

And what it will also do is help us in determining if any of the eye witness testimony is unlikely.

 

[jmcgladr]

I'm going to have to disagree with your assessment there, Lou (Fargo). Personally, I'd be far more afraid for myself and my family of those protesters---from all over the country, not just Ferguson---than I would be of the cops and what they might do if I testified on behalf of what I saw that supported MB's version.

Does MB even _have_ a version? I mean, we'll never even GET his version of events, given the circumstances. Unfortunately.

 

[SStarr33]

Looks like the blood is on the pavement on the other side of the car to me. JMO

It's an orange cone.

 

[CoolJ]

Why is witness in quotes? Is his credibility in question?

I don't think his credibility is necessarily in question but do we even know he saw it? That's what would make him a witness, to me it is quite possible that he was just repeating something he think he heard.... Maybe none of the witnesses are out right lying, it could be possible they all saw it a different way, from different angles, distances , some seeing bits and pieces and some maybe filling in the missing pieces with what they think people want to hear. The fact we still don't know 100% what happened, first we must figure that out as accurately as possible , and then it can be decided if what we know tells us this was a justifiable killing... However it still may not be that clear cut because from what I can tell there is a very fuzzy area in the law regarding shooting a fleeing felon.

 

[reedus23]

I'm going to have to disagree with your assessment there, Lou (Fargo). Personally, I'd be far more afraid for myself and my family of those protesters---from all over the country, not just Ferguson---than I would be of the cops and what they might do if I testified on behalf of what I saw that supported MB's version.

I don't doubt you would be.

 

[reedus23]

Does MB even _have_ a version? I mean, we'll never even GET his version of events, given the circumstances. Unfortunately.

Hell, we don't even have an OW version at this point and yet we're judging witness credibility.

 

[aa9511]

Re: Witnesses

I don't think we can discount every single one of the witnesses due to credibilty issues. <modsnip>
But looking at it from the point-of-view of a juror....if many witnesses are saying things along the same lines, I don't think I could easily just discount them all. I think that a basic narrative will be drawn once the witnesses go on the stand one after another and are fully questioned. IMO.

Of course, the biggest and most important witness will be Dorian. IMO, the background witnesses will draw a general narrative, and then Dorian (IF he tells the whole truth), will fill in the details.

Then it is up to the jury to decide what they believe really happened.

JMO.

 

[Apollo]

Does MB even _have_ a version? I mean, we'll never even GET his version of events, given the circumstances. Unfortunately.

Even though MB is no longer with us, we still have 'his version' just like we have ' OW version' even though he hasn't spoken publicly. JMO

 

[JLSChook]

Better go read the post I quoted again.

Trust me, I have been reading your posts all day. I read everything.

 

[tlcya]

Here's the thing for me. We have all sorts of witnesses known and unknown. All or some of them may have witnessed varying things with varying accuracy depending on at what point they became aware and began watching, vantage point, distance from the action, etc.

DJ who was RIGHT there has zero credibility in my book because he lied and omitted very (to me) key factors and has altered and changed his story since (IMO). Then you have others who have alleged to have seen varying things with surety and their stories do not support those of other alleged witnesses.

So for me, excited utterances and those who were unaware they were even giving accounts on the record (video unidentified male voice) seems most credible. More so than people who saw bits and pieces and drew their own conclusions about what did or did not happen in those moments between (running from room to room to fetch cell phone, change vantage points, etc such as Paiget).

I agree with member upthread who said that many of their accounts will vary because of their differing vantage points, when they began watching, etc. So bits and pieces will be accurate and others not because they are mostly conclusions they reached based on what they saw coupled with what they heard others say they saw. Then you have to add in the usual issues with consistency and credibility of eye witness testimony in general. Eye witness testimony is notoriously fallible.

I agree it will be interesting to see what the physical evidence supports and what it does not. Also key for me will be OW's own account of what happened and not as retold by alleged friend and radio show caller "Josie"

 

[reedus23]

Trust me, I have been reading your posts all day. I read everything.

Then I take it you read the portion I quoted. It certainly wasn't meant to apply to everyone, but for those that share the same belief that that witness is credible for the mere fact that he supports OW.

 

[jmcgladr]

Even though MB is no longer with us, we still have 'his version' just like we have ' OW version' even though he hasn't spoken publicly. JMO

I disagree. We have Dorian Johnson and Ferguson Police accounts, as well as witness accounts from the community. We don't actually have OW or MB accounts because, as you say, one has not spoken publicly and one cannot ever speak publicly again.

 

[RANCH]

And what it will also do is help us in determining if any of the eye witness testimony is unlikely.

I'm sure that the evidence, when it is made public, will show that some of the eyewitness accounts are "off" in some way or another. And then the debate will begin in what the evidence shows.

If it goes to trial, officer Wilson's defense will use it to show that their client is not guilty and the State will use it to show that he's guilty. That's what makes crimminal trials so interesting and at the same time frustrating for me to follow.