Really? Forensics showed what happened and where they came from and how far away, Just because it doesn't fit with the eyewitness who had a history of lying to law enforcement and in open court and doesn't back the race baiting theory of what you and the Dishonorable Al imagined happened doesn't mean the forensics is wrong, faulty or bad.

based on the forensic evidence and ALL eyewitness testimonies.


The forensic evidence proves Mr. Brown was shot in/at the car; his body tissue was found inside the car and outside the car door. The forensic evidence proves he WAS moving away; the drops of blood show a clear trail for a distance. The officer has testified Brown WAS going away and then turned back and charged at him. Guess what? The forensic evidence backs up the officer's and other eyewitnesses' claims: the trail of blood indicates a doubling back and THEN the pool of blood formed when Officer Wilson shot him for the final times.


By the way, Missouri's laws allow for a person to use lethal force even if they just think a person is GOING to commit a felony. Striking an officer IS a felony in the state of Missouri.


More bad news: even if your preferred-fairy-tale-version of the events WAS correct (that Officer Wilson shot Mr. Brown while he was running away), Missouri law allows police officers, while in the line of duty, TO shoot fleeing suspects.


You want to be upset about something? DON'T be upset with the Grand Jury who followed the law, as it's currently written, when deciding if an officer worked within the law while enforcing the law when stopping a (now-confirmed guilty) suspect who broke the law.

Work to CHANGE the current laws which allow the police to use deadly force in far too many situations which WILL be used disproportionately against non-whites within their jurisdiction.

http://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/p843x403/1496612_748886885198910_7276872061542320650_n.jpg?oh=1e89ed4846101e03e09b23406c5e6180&oe=551A7506&__gda__=1427277684_efb7687c3acf38297e1251230a767f2b

Too big to post as an Image!

I'm choosing this quote as a way to step up my soapbox. I agree with you here and in other comments you've made about Ferguson.




Many are, yes. And many of them would not want this vengeance IF they had formed their opinions based on facts, rather than lies.

I was one of those people who was initially furious and wanted the officer's blood, because I naively believed the very public testimony of a very few people, who, it turns, out, were lying.

The news sites and the naive social network participates who helped build up this fact-adverse narrative bear some of the moral responsibility, in my opinion, for the riots and destruction of property.


As mrld_ii said:

They'll probably stick Wilson with a trumped up Federal charge anyway.

Op it did seem to get out of hand in a lot of states ...
some arrest but they can't arrest everyone they don't have the rm ... and those for Brown just standing back taking pictures of how others are being treated with some of the peaceful protest...




now I am disappointed in the system like others not finding him guilty
3 of the evidence I saw was ... wow and of course the jury did not heard all of the testimony... when brown was supposedly beating the cop in the car nothing show of force ...no blood or bruises like that said ...just look like is own pigmentation if u pinch someone it will get a little red...

2 ...the witness omgoodness and as the only witness change his story a few times 1 they thought could help this policeman that was suppose to be credible change his story one told to police other told to the jury... two different ways of seeing it and a lot of I am not sure ... what made the jury so convince this person was that creditable... becouse they did not know he change his story a few times ... and was lead by the lawyer to say something different or in a different way ...
... not his fault just those trying to cover this up ... now for the


omg no they didn't but yes they did ... they gave the jury two sets of laws to follow in a grand jury decision the first ... they made a mistake and then gave them the right new ones ... how can they call this a fair trial leading the jury in confusion of theses laws ... an them ably to make a reasonable conviction ... I don't blame any of those that are peacefully rioting ... this decision was outrageous in the eyes of the law... nor the grand jury with all the bad judgements made from this court ... nor the 1 wittiness



this is just my opinion and I am not changing it ...not after hearing all of that ...