Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (802660)	8/19/2014 12:01:19 PM
From: d[-_-]b	3 Recommendations Recommended By FJB tbolding TideGlider Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580419

Brown was charging Supported by the fact each shot got more accurate assuming the two closed distance and were facing each other - unless Brown runs backwards. Was Williams chasing Brown? If so, why? Because he was just assaulted and it's his job.

To: combjelly who wrote (802660)	8/19/2014 1:09:28 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 1580419

"First and foremost that Brown was charging. If he was running away, and the fact that he was 35 feet away strongly supports that, why would he stop, turn around and charge? That makes no sense. Especially in the light that he was being shot at." Seems like a conflict but only because you have parsed certain aspects out of the scenario. Ran away (after violent altercation at or in the police car). Officer in pursuit (after violent altercation). Brown turns and at this point the scenario is disputed. Does he turn and surrender or turn and charge. The autopsy may provide evidence... we don't know yet. But if the distance shortened (as evidenced by bullet forensic evidence or by the spot where he fell this supports the "charging" claim. All the evidence isn't in but your "strongly supports that" running away claim is unsupportable. Brown either turned and surrendered and the officer shot him as the officer approached him or Brown turned and charged, and was shot in motion. He had persisted with violence earlier when the store keeper had attempted to stop the robbery. The autopsy may reveal he was under some substance abuse that stimulated this kind of aggression. Again with the possibility of much more evidence to come it is reasonable to expect a reasonable explanation. Parsing this information out just makes you look unreasonably biased and to be deliberately presenting flawed judgements. Why do you do that? "Was Williams chasing Brown? If so, why?" Yes, according to all accounts and the question of why has been answered. 1) refused to follow officer's direction, 2) confronted officer violently, verbally and physically. "He can't reasonably claim he feared for his life if he was chasing Brown." Any reasonable person would be afraid in that situation, that should not stop an officer of the law from holding his position, or pursuing a culprit. "These two things alone makes Williams claims very suspect." Until all the relevant facts are flushed out each version is suspect by your position is just as suspect because you have more information than you are using in your considerations.