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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
RANCH said:
Since we don't have evidence that shows us what happened I left it open about whether this is a justifiable shooting. I think it is but I don't know that it is.

However, if officer Wilson suffered facial injuries consistent with an assault and further evidence (blood trails) shows that MB was moving towards him at the time of the fatal shot, I would have to say that this was a justifiable shooting. JMO.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't argue with that.
 
Linda7NJ said:
The likelihood Brown was running backwards or running, walking or strolling with his arms backwards...IMO is nil.

Btw ...on Fox...Dr Baden also was asked about other things the pot could have been laced with...he bantered on about that and mentioned another "unauthorized leak"

( I took it to mean the completed toxicology is now complete and it shows more than just weed IMO )
Take that for what it's worth....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
You also should go back a couple pages and read the post by reedus. When I was trying to show you how MB could have been shot from behind it was Badens quotes that were used to discredit me. Now that he explains it the way I have been explaining it... what he said isn't credible anymore? How does that work?
 
reedus23 said:
So true Ranch. We're not likely to have an "Aha" moment where everything all of a sudden becomes crystal clear. Each side will continue to attack the other and at the end of the day it will probably still be a muddy mess. Which, by the way, if it's not cleared up, means that DW (if indicted) should be acquitted. The prosecution won't get past their burden without it clearing up.
Click to expand...

Well I had my aha moment when the tape of the robbery came out. And the. Another one when I heard about the injured eye. And another when learning MB was shot in the front. I can go on all day but this case passed aha quite some ago IMO a d has entered into are you kidding me territory.
 
TheDuchess said:
Well I had my aha moment when the tape of the robbery came out. And the. Another one when I heard about the injured eye. And another when learning MB was shot in the front. I can go on all day but this case passed aha quite some ago IMO a d has entered into are you kidding me territory.
Click to expand...
I think that there's room for doubt about whether or not this is a justifiable police shooting or a crimminal homicide.

The robbery is indisputable and important evidence. We don't have clear evidence yet about officer Wilson's injuries. The direction of the bullets that struck MB seem to be from the front but some question that.

I'd like to see some more evidence myself.
 
CoolJ said:
You also should go back a couple pages and read the post by reedus. When I was trying to show you how MB could have been shot from behind it was Badens quotes that were used to discredit me. Now that he explains it the way I have been explaining it... what he said isn't credible anymore? How does that work?
Click to expand...

I've read every post. Thank you very much.

I don't need Dr. Baden's words to find it incredible....I can look at his signed autopsy and come to that conclusion.

Brown was not shot in the back. Period.

1. There are no such things as boomerang heat seeking bullets.

2. Have you looked at the size of Browns arms?

3. Have you seen a man that size running? Watch his arms.

That's my rational and my opinion.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
CoolJ said:
You also should go back a couple pages and read the post by reedus. When I was trying to show you how MB could have been shot from behind it was Badens quotes that were used to discredit me. Now that he explains it the way I have been explaining it... what he said isn't credible anymore? How does that work?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not Linda7NJ, but I have to say that Michael Baden's autopsy #2 is far from what I would consider authoritative as to the evaluation and trajectory of the wounds.

We have not yet heard from Dr. Mary Case, the county ME who did autopsy #1. As an example, Dr. Baden in his interview with Megyn Kelly says there was "no gunshot residue on the body." And he certainly knows what occurred between the body being processed and arriving at the ME's office, and when he and Parcells and the funeral home director received the body a week later. There may be no stippling of the wounds, which he didn't say, and maybe should have if it's true, but a comment that there was "no" gunshot residue present is deflection and misdirection, IMO, at this point. Dr. Baden's comments are only half a story (or less) until we have autopsy #1 to add to them and compare. Personally, I will give FAR more weight to autopsy #1 than #2, even owing to Baden's celebrity. The GJ will hear about autopsy #1, not autopsy #2. And from Baden's little "slip" about the toxicology, I think there are likely more "positives" there than the marijuana that was leaked. JMO.

IMO, Dr. Baden is now backpedaling in a very conscious and careful way from what he originally said about his and Parcell's autopsy #2.
 
K_Z said:
Well, I'm not Linda7NJ, but I have to say that Michael Baden's autopsy #2 is far from what I would consider authoritative as to the evaluation and trajectory of the wounds.

We have not yet heard from Dr. Mary Case, the county ME who did autopsy #1. As an example, Dr. Baden in his interview with Megyn Kelly says there was "no gunshot residue on the body." And he certainly knows what occurred between the body being processed and arriving at the ME's office, and when he and Parcells and the funeral home director received the body a week later. There may be no stippling of the wounds, which didn't say, and maybe should have it it's true, but a comment that there was "no" gunshot residue present is deflection and misdirection, IMO, at this point. Dr. Baden's comments are only half a story (or less) until we have autopsy #1 to add to them and compare. Personally, I will give FAR more weight to autopsy #1 than #2, even owing to Baden's celebrity. The GJ will hear about autopsy #1, not autopsy #2. And from Baden's little "slip" about the toxicology, I think there are likely more "positives" there than the marijuana that was leaked. JMO.

IMO, Dr. Baden is now backpedaling in a very conscious and careful way from what he originally said about his and Parcell's autopsy #2.
Click to expand...

Like the body was washed, disinfected and embalmed removing any GSR at the time Dr. Baden conducted his autopsy.

We are pretty darn sure one of those gunshots WAS at close contact, the one in the SUV. Yet Baden said there was no evidence of that and none were closer than two feet.
In his next breath he goes on about needing Browns clothing....

All IMO




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Linda7NJ said:
Like the body was washed, disinfected and embalmed removing any GSR at the time Dr. Baden conducted his autopsy.

We are pretty darn sure one of those gunshots WAS at close contact, the one in the SUV. Yet Baden said there was no evidence of that and none were closer than two feet.
In his next breath he goes on about needing Browns clothing....

All IMO




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Stippling from a close gunshot wound cannot be wiped off. The 1st autopsy will be the most accurate one.

http://www.pathologyexpert.com/boards/forensics/gsw.htm
 
Did anyone else catch the phrase that Dr. Baden used this evening, "the arms are mobile" kind of wording?

Gee, I wonder who else used that phrase with the media interviews? Maybe Shawn Parcells, lol? Not going to look for the link for that at this moment, but it occurs to me that Dr. Baden has participated in some, uh, let's call them "strategy sessions"....and been persuaded to entertain ideas that he didn't hold at the time of the release of autopsy #2. IMO.

IMO, there is a "strategy" with keywords, and talking points, being deliberately advanced that is designed to support "MB was shot in the back", when it is patently obvious that there are no entry wounds in the back, or "posterior" of MB. They have to create some kind of doubt or possibility to support the initial witness reports that MB was "shot in the back". Since it isn't true, with no GSW evidence, now they have to carefully transplant and nurture the seedling idea that someone can indeed be actually shot in the back, without being shot in the back. Lather, rinse, repeat. Spin, spin, spin.
 
UdbCrzy2 said:
I know. I'm surprised Baden didn't mention it though.
Click to expand...

Oh he did mention that there wasn't any GSR, but failed to explain why his "search" for it would prove fruitless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
K_Z said:
Did anyone else catch the phrase that Dr. Baden used this evening, "the arms are mobile" kind of wording?

Gee, I wonder who else used that phrase with the media interviews? Maybe Shawn Parcells, lol? Not going to look for the link for that at this moment, but it occurs to me that Dr. Baden has participated in some, uh, let's call them "strategy sessions"....and been persuaded to entertain ideas that he didn't hold at the time of the release of autopsy #2. IMO.

IMO, there is a "strategy" with keywords, and talking points, being deliberately advanced that is designed to support "MB was shot in the back", when it is patently obvious that there are no entry wounds in the back, or "posterior" of MB. They have to create some kind of doubt or possibility to support the initial witness reports that MB was "shot in the back". Since it isn't true, with no GSW evidence, now they have to carefully transplant and nurture the seedling idea that someone can indeed be actually shot in the back, without being shot in the back. Lather, rinse, repeat. Spin, spin, spin.
Click to expand...

I find it all just so disgusting ....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Linda7NJ said:
I just heard Dr. Baden state on Fox that Browns arms could have been backwards....

Facepalm...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Does this mean we have to start over? WTF? Ok I give, ....waiting.... nope, I can't get a visual. Backwards? AS in bass ackwards?
 
Oceans said:
I agree. But in defense of Dr. Baden I have to say that he is quite honest in that interview, pointing out it would be important to have MB's t-shirt for further clarification what happened that day etc.
Click to expand...

I don't know how the family attorneys would have spun the findings if it wasn't for the questionable shot. Why would they take a chance on the autopsy if they didn't have an idea there would be a q about it?

Anyway, I think this is a simple way of visualizing the arm shot. With your arms to your sides, touch the outside of your arm. Now bend your arm up at the elbow, now the shot would be received from the "back"

I think it's valid for Dr B to say it could have come from the back, even though with those shots all on the left side, it makes more sense that they were in a line. IMO
 
Phoebeb said:
I don't know how the family attorneys would have spun the findings if it wasn't for the questionable shot. Why would they take a chance on the autopsy if they didn't have an idea there would be a q about it?

Anyway, I think this is a simple way of visualizing the arm shot. With your arms to your sides, touch the outside of your arm. Now bend your arm up at the elbow, now the shot would be received from the "back"

I think it's valid for Dr B to say it could have come from the back, even though with those shots all on the left side, it makes more sense that they were in a line. IMO
Click to expand...

Don't worry, any lawyer worth a dime can spin ANYTHING!
IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Elley Mae said:
Does this mean we have to start over? WTF? Ok I give, ....waiting.... nope, I can't get a visual. Backwards? AS in bass ackwards?
Click to expand...

Yes, we are expected to believe Brown was running away ....backwards...with his arms above his head....after pirouetting ....on point ...after being hit in the back.

;)

IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 85 more.
Total: 282 (members: 86, guests: 196)

Online statistics

Members online
86
Guests online
196
Total visitors
282
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,709
Messages
18,244,410
Members
234,434
Latest member
ProfKim
Back
Top