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 (820294)	12/2/2014 12:12:00 PM
From: i-node	6 Recommendations Recommended By Brumar89 D.Austin locogringo one_less Taro and 1 more member Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1586285

>> No it wasn't conclusively proven. It was pretty damned conclusive. Exceptionally compelling is the finding of "soot" in the wound on Brown's thumb which the ME determined was indicative of the gun that fired the bullet causing the wound having been placed 6 to 9 inches away. The ME's report specifically described the soot as "consistent with the products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm." Placing Brown's right hand 6-9" from the barrel of the gun is big in that it is 100% consistent with Wilson's testimony as well as that of other eyewitnesses. At the same time it shoots down the testimony of those who claimed that Brown didn't assault Wilson in the car. The Brown family's independent autopsy, conducted by Baden, supported this claim even strongly in that Baden put Brown's thumb at only a "few inches" from Wilson's weapon. Brown's DNA was found on Wilson's weapon and on the inside panel of the car door. This evidence is overwhelming. You have eyewitness testimony, the testimony of the accused, and the physical evidence all perfectly aligned. Totally contrary to what you have claimed. And had this gone to court, the worst defense lawyer in St. Louis would have clearly been able to get an acquittal based on this evidence alone. Thus, "conclusive" is the correct word. BTW - there is far more evidence than just this, pretty much all of which supports Wilson's account. These are just the most relevant and glaring points. It is important to note that eyewitness testimony is usually unreliable, but particular so when you have a white cop killing a black man with almost all onlookers being black. You WILL get varying stories. But the physical evidence matches up with Wilson's account, which matches up with MOST of the witnesses' testimony. You don't try, let alone, convict someone on that basis.