(08-19-2014 05:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Based on the accounts of named witnesses who have publicly made their statements, and the family's autopsy, yes, it looks like 1st degree murder to me.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Couldn't possibly be first degree murder.
Doesn't even meet the basic criteria.

FIT, how so?

Please back up your statement this time.

Also, you realize that the witnesses have been discredited with the autopsy a findings at this point right?!


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(08-19-2014 05:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Based on the accounts of named witnesses who have publicly made their statements, and the family's autopsy, yes, it looks like 1st degree murder to me.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

First Degree Murder- although it varies from state to state, it is generally a killing which is deliberate and premeditated (planned, after lying in wait, by poison or as part of a scheme), in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child, a police officer, a prison guard, a fellow prisoner), or with certain weapons, particularly a gun. The specific criteria for first degree murder are established by statute in each state and by the United States Code in federal prosecutions. It is distinguished from second degree murder in which premeditation is usually absent, and from manslaughter which lacks premeditation and suggests that at most there was intent to harm rather than to kill.

Baden's report basically is on the fence, it could be used for argument on either side, but it is clear that Michael Brown was not shot at point blank range or in the back per several witnesses.

(08-19-2014 07:34 AM)gdunn Wrote:  First Degree Murder- although it varies from state to state, it is generally a killing which is deliberate and premeditated (planned, after lying in wait, by poison or as part of a scheme), in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child, a police officer, a prison guard, a fellow prisoner), or with certain weapons, particularly a gun. The specific criteria for first degree murder are established by statute in each state and by the United States Code in federal prosecutions. It is distinguished from second degree murder in which premeditation is usually absent, and from manslaughter which lacks premeditation and suggests that at most there was intent to harm rather than to kill.

Baden's report basically is on the fence, it could be used for argument on either side, but it is clear that Michael Brown was not shot at point blank range or in the back per several witnesses.

So, wouldn't that be where "reasonable doubt" comes into play?

(08-19-2014 05:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Based on the accounts of named witnesses who have publicly made their statements, and the family's autopsy, yes, it looks like 1st degree murder to me.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Damn, talk about "speculation".

We get it, Fitbud. You desperately want this officer to be found guilty of murder of Saint Brown. Your seething prejudice is palpable in the posts you make. All the emphasis on the young man being shot six times, the casual inference that Brown robbing the store shouldn't matter to the officer since the officer wasn't aware of it, Brown having marijuana in his system is irrelevant, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Now you throw out the 1st degree murder postulation. Your contention is that this officer carefully planned ahead of time with full malice and intent to seek out this young man and kill him in broad daylight.

You're wrong. Big time wrong. You really shouldn't get so entangled emotionally that you overstep and blatantly expose your agenda.

Your hatred of law enforcement is seriously shining through. You acknowledged it in a previous post. I'm just straight up informing you it just jumps out in your posts. Your absolute lack of fair analysis and evaluation is stunning.

I don't think Fitty knows what 1st degree murder is.

(08-19-2014 07:37 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 07:34 AM)gdunn Wrote:  First Degree Murder- although it varies from state to state, it is generally a killing which is deliberate and premeditated (planned, after lying in wait, by poison or as part of a scheme), in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child, a police officer, a prison guard, a fellow prisoner), or with certain weapons, particularly a gun. The specific criteria for first degree murder are established by statute in each state and by the United States Code in federal prosecutions. It is distinguished from second degree murder in which premeditation is usually absent, and from manslaughter which lacks premeditation and suggests that at most there was intent to harm rather than to kill.

Baden's report basically is on the fence, it could be used for argument on either side, but it is clear that Michael Brown was not shot at point blank range or in the back per several witnesses.

So, wouldn't that be where "reasonable doubt" comes into play?

All Baden's report showed was that Brown was shot six times, 4 in the arm, twice in the head. He also estimated the angle of where the shots came in.

Witnesses claimed Brown was shot in the back. Even the family's attorney stated that. That's not what Baden's report shows. All shots were in the front. The 4 in the arm do raise question in my mind. So you take the report and you listen to witness testimony.. Dorian (which was his buddy that was with him) stated Brown was shot in the back several times. As did several people days after Dorian's testimony hit the airwaves.. Baden's report shows he wasn't hit in the back, so I think that would prove those testimonies inaccurate.

(08-19-2014 07:37 AM)boss man Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 05:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Based on the accounts of named witnesses who have publicly made their statements, and the family's autopsy, yes, it looks like 1st degree murder to me.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Damn, talk about "speculation".

We get it, Fitbud. You desperately want this officer to be found guilty of murder of Saint Brown. Your seething prejudice is palpable in the posts you make. All the emphasis on the young man being shot six times, the casual inference that Brown robbing the store shouldn't matter to the officer since the officer wasn't aware of it, Brown having marijuana in his system is irrelevant, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Now you throw out the 1st degree murder postulation. Your contention is that this officer carefully planned ahead of time with full malice and intent to seek out this young man and kill him in broad daylight.

You're wrong. Big time wrong. You really shouldn't get so entangled emotionally that you overstep and blatantly expose your agenda.

Your hatred of law enforcement is seriously shining through. You acknowledged it in a previous post. I'm just straight up informing you it just jumps out in your posts. Your absolute lack of fair analysis and evaluation is stunning.

I think his hatred isn't of law enforcement. I think Fit hates white people.

I dunno, Gdunn.. I get the oposite feeling. Everything he's posted has been aimed at the cops. To me, it seems that Fit hates LEO and will argue anything that discredits the police. (he's never gone the racial route in his debate point, which is why I Have that feeling)

(08-19-2014 07:53 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 07:37 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 07:34 AM)gdunn Wrote:  First Degree Murder- although it varies from state to state, it is generally a killing which is deliberate and premeditated (planned, after lying in wait, by poison or as part of a scheme), in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child, a police officer, a prison guard, a fellow prisoner), or with certain weapons, particularly a gun. The specific criteria for first degree murder are established by statute in each state and by the United States Code in federal prosecutions. It is distinguished from second degree murder in which premeditation is usually absent, and from manslaughter which lacks premeditation and suggests that at most there was intent to harm rather than to kill.

Baden's report basically is on the fence, it could be used for argument on either side, but it is clear that Michael Brown was not shot at point blank range or in the back per several witnesses.

So, wouldn't that be where "reasonable doubt" comes into play?

All Baden's report showed was that Brown was shot six times, 4 in the arm, twice in the head. He also estimated the angle of where the shots came in.

Witnesses claimed Brown was shot in the back. Even the family's attorney stated that. That's not what Baden's report shows. All shots were in the front. The 4 in the arm do raise question in my mind. So you take the report and you listen to witness testimony.. Dorian (which was his buddy that was with him) stated Brown was shot in the back several times. As did several people days after Dorian's testimony hit the airwaves.. Baden's report shows he wasn't hit in the back, so I think that would prove those testimonies inaccurate.

Incorrect. The man who assisted with the autopsy is on the record that the shot to the right forearm is consistent with eye witness reports that say he was shot while facing away from the shooter.

I"ve never seen that comment, Fit.. got a link to that one? (It definitely hasn't been a comment to make the local news, so I'd assume it'd have to be an online report?)

(08-19-2014 08:48 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I"ve never seen that comment, Fit.. got a link to that one? (It definitely hasn't been a comment to make the local news, so I'd assume it'd have to be an online report?)

I don't have a link. I saw it on TV he did two interviews that day. The initial one was carried by all the national news outlets and the second I saw with an interview on the Lawrence O'Donald show.

(08-19-2014 08:55 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 08:48 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I"ve never seen that comment, Fit.. got a link to that one? (It definitely hasn't been a comment to make the local news, so I'd assume it'd have to be an online report?)

I don't have a link. I saw it on TV he did two interviews that day. The initial one was carried by all the national news outlets and the second I saw with an interview on the Lawrence O'Donald show.

If you saw it on TV, there must be a link. If not, it is all speculation because you can't back up your statement.

(08-19-2014 08:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 07:53 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 07:37 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 07:34 AM)gdunn Wrote:  First Degree Murder- although it varies from state to state, it is generally a killing which is deliberate and premeditated (planned, after lying in wait, by poison or as part of a scheme), in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child, a police officer, a prison guard, a fellow prisoner), or with certain weapons, particularly a gun. The specific criteria for first degree murder are established by statute in each state and by the United States Code in federal prosecutions. It is distinguished from second degree murder in which premeditation is usually absent, and from manslaughter which lacks premeditation and suggests that at most there was intent to harm rather than to kill.

Baden's report basically is on the fence, it could be used for argument on either side, but it is clear that Michael Brown was not shot at point blank range or in the back per several witnesses.

So, wouldn't that be where "reasonable doubt" comes into play?

All Baden's report showed was that Brown was shot six times, 4 in the arm, twice in the head. He also estimated the angle of where the shots came in.

Witnesses claimed Brown was shot in the back. Even the family's attorney stated that. That's not what Baden's report shows. All shots were in the front. The 4 in the arm do raise question in my mind. So you take the report and you listen to witness testimony.. Dorian (which was his buddy that was with him) stated Brown was shot in the back several times. As did several people days after Dorian's testimony hit the airwaves.. Baden's report shows he wasn't hit in the back, so I think that would prove those testimonies inaccurate.

Incorrect. The man who assisted with the autopsy is on the record that the shot to the right forearm is consistent with eye witness reports that say he was shot while facing away from the shooter.

Wrong. Read the reports.. He never says that. I'd go with the man who wrote the report vs the assistant.

last night, the police outnumbered the media, who outnumbered the protesters. as one talking head said, "the dignified protesters went home at dusk". they people left were either there to cause trouble, or get themselves on television.

if the MSM took their sorry a$$es home, this entire thing would instantly evaporate.

FIT,
The professor and Baden both said in the news conference that the shots came from the front. If you would watch the entire presentation by Baden and the Prof they clearly say this at the end of the news conference.\

Once they say that, Crump immediately stops the interview and discussion and does not entertain any more questions.

Another buttbud hijacked thread. bud never knows what he is talking about, never. wrong always. The police are likely withholding the report pending the grand jury. With bud, you might as well be talking to a rock.

You would figure that they would get a better attorney than Crump after he lost the Travyon Martin case.

Ha..ha agreed. But to each his own.

I made that same comment last night. 0-1 for Bubba Gump and Co.