In his TV interviews Johnson said that Wilson shot Brown in the back at which point he turned round with his hands up saying: ‘I don’t have a gun, stop shooting!’...If Johnson lied, he did horrible damage. What is the (nonpatronizing) argument for not holding him accountable?
November 26, 2014
"Close friends of Darren Wilson have called for the star witness in the Michael Brown shooting to be charged for lying about what he saw."
"They say that [Dorian Johnson] made up the claim that Brown had his hands up which kickstarted the ‘Hands up, don’t shoot’ protest movement."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
221 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 221 of 221Dorian's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
200 comments, and Bruce Hayden (9:39) is the first to come up with the nitty-gritty?
Of course, the DA may just be waiting until the media leave town. Dorian Johnson is not necessarily out of the woods yet.
----Any moderate or left voices on this blog are routinely shouted down by a gaggle of obnoxious whack jobs --
Oh, you precious flower!
Its a market place of ideas and yours is vastly inferior product.
Michael above said it very well.
Your ignorance is your problem, not ours. It's too bad you're so invested in your left-wing fiction that you can't be bothered to do a little research on your own, and insist it must be spoon-fed to you and then insist it doesn't exist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpsQwl_19M4#t=128
The whole point is to keep black voters from peeling away from the Democrat Party. The riots are supported by the Obama Administration and the Democrat MSM because they are using fear to cover for their policy betrayal of their constituents.
That is why the lemmings are here defending criminal behavior.
The forensic evidence says that 16
"witnesses" are all liars.
Yes garage, every last one of them is a liar who wants to put the white cop in jail out of racial solidarity.
This is genuinely, if inadvertently, funny. Any moderate or left voices on this blog are routinely shouted down by a gaggle of obnoxious whack jobs who appear to have nothing else going on in their lives.
Some of us are simply having breakfast.
iowan2,
"There is no forensic evidence that supports Johnson."
Bobber Fleck,
"@Crack
It's science. You wouldn't understand."
See how easily y'all are misled - by white people:
A Fair Process? Wilson Washed Blood From His Hands
Michael K,
"OK. How about the fingerprints on the gun. The blood on the gun and in the car ?
How about all gunshot wounds in the front?
I'm waiting."
Wilson was allowed to bag his own evidence. The authorities didn't wait for fingerprints - or DNA - before the grand jury met.
Just like in the old days: I think y'all done really "took our country back" this time.
Back to Jim Crow, that is - but he's not racist,...
Nothing The Crack Emcee wrote can be taken to make it more likely that the officer acted improperly. Notice the careful parsing! The grand jury met before any DNA evidence was available and then met for months. During that time DNA evidence became available. Therefore, while not obviously lying, what The Crack Emcee said was meant to mislead. And I am sure that careful parsing came from some another website. Marching orders!
And the whole point is to mitigate the loss of the black vote that is inevitable as so many blacks recognize the policies of President Obama have actively hurt Democrats' most faithful demographic. It is a scam.
Birkel,
"The grand jury met before any DNA evidence was available and then met for months. During that time DNA evidence became available."
Prove it - the prosecutor released everything to the public.
Put up or shut up,...
The New York Times published the information, you ignorant little bitch.
Crack, whats your point? Officer Wilson washing his hands alters what conclusion? If you have an accusation, make it. If you have an opinion state it.
I'll stand corrected if there is forensic evidence that supports Johnson, and others whose testimony disagrees with officer Wilson's testimony.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/25/us/evidence-released-in-michael-brown-case.html?_r=0
Scroll down, The Crack Emcee. Don't be such an easy mark for those who mean to mislead you, prick
Yes - Wilson washed his hands of what he thought of blood. And, in normal situations that would be a good idea. Blood is a bio hazard. But, it would also have been evidence. Likely evidence to support Wilson's story. But nevertheless, evidence. Instead, they were left with Brown's blood on the inside of the Tahoe and on Wilson's gun and uniform. And, the only possible source of blood was Brown, and the wound to his right hand caused by the discharge of Wilson's firearm inside his vehicle. It didn't come from Wilson (no open wounds). Nor Johnson (who took off running at the first shot). Which most likely leaves Brown. So, it really comes down to how much evidence was lost when Wilson washed his hands, and I would suggest very little that was relevant.
Now that I've 'put up' I want your fucking apology, you ignorant shit stain.
You're a coward, The Crack Emcee.
Forensics is a science,garage. You know. That field of knowledge that you claim to admire, but know nothing about.
The lefty narrative doesn't need facts. They create their own myths.
Luckily they have incredibly stupid, but blindly loyal foot soldiers like Garbage to do their dirty work.
Revenant: "There is conflicting witness testimony; any DA who wasn't actively avoiding an indictment would have gotten one for that reason alone."
If I understand this statement correctly, you imply that conflicting testimony strengthen the case for indictment.
That is incredibly stupid!
So all the Left has got here is a conspiracy that reaches all the way up to the Governor's office?
I mean, that's the only explanation I can think of for their insistence that Wilson is a murderer.
Lemme make sure I've got it all straight: They(TM) called for a Grand Jury, in order to make it appear as if due process was being followed. But in fact the fix was in. All the forensic evidence and testimony which is available online (!!) is all Lies, in order to cover up Wilson's true crimes.
I mean, that's got to be the bottom line, right? All these sinister allegations about hand-washing, and "lack of forensic evidence", and "cops always f*cking lie, every f*cking time" ... it can only lead to one conclusion, and that's that the entire process is one big lie.
Right? Am I missing something?
(Conspiracy theorists fascinate me, BTW. It always amazes me how all new facts, no matter how they disrupt the Conspiracy, can be molded and shaped to FIT the Conspiracy. "That's just what THEY WANT YOU TO THINK, dude!")
Post a Comment