Bullcrap.
You tell me in what training manual for police, where you say you are afraid of someone, you approach them seated at a tactical disadvantage?
Wilson's approach is what caused it. If he a had been that afraid of Brown he would have stopped further away and been out of his car at a distance in a standing defense position.
Wilson simply got pissed and grabbed for Brown. He went into that with a cop's mentality to be the boss. You chose to believe him, and not Brown's friend who said his first verbal approach was abusive. You cuss someone out, which is what Wilson did, and I believe Brown's friend, anyone is going to get an attitude. It was a bait by Wilson to insure no matter what Brown did Wilson could justify what he wanted, which is what he did.
Now again, I would bet my life that that grand jury was not 12-0 and I would also bet my life in a regular trial he would be convicted of something.
You are cherry picking what you want to call evidence.
Oh and only ONE witness put in front of that jury said it was a rush. But your "prosecutor" never cross examined him because even then he said " I'm not sure" and the distance that witness claimed was "50-75" yards which was not what he told cops that day. That day it was "100 yards", and that day he said he could not be sure where Brown's arms were when he turned around.
The only disagreement from the other witnesses was when he had his hands up, but the other witnesses said when you overlap them was at best it was a "stumble forward".
Your "prosecutor" had a bias even before the grand jury heard the first word. He had a close connection to a cop being murdered. So for you to claim none of that played into how he set things up, is absurd.
You wont get this following video, but blacks in America would not get away with this. There is a separate attitude you don't want to face.
You tell me in what training manual for police, where you say you are afraid of someone, you approach them seated at a tactical disadvantage?
Wilson's approach is what caused it. If he a had been that afraid of Brown he would have stopped further away and been out of his car at a distance in a standing defense position.
Wilson simply got pissed and grabbed for Brown. He went into that with a cop's mentality to be the boss. You chose to believe him, and not Brown's friend who said his first verbal approach was abusive. You cuss someone out, which is what Wilson did, and I believe Brown's friend, anyone is going to get an attitude. It was a bait by Wilson to insure no matter what Brown did Wilson could justify what he wanted, which is what he did.
Now again, I would bet my life that that grand jury was not 12-0 and I would also bet my life in a regular trial he would be convicted of something.
You are cherry picking what you want to call evidence.
Oh and only ONE witness put in front of that jury said it was a rush. But your "prosecutor" never cross examined him because even then he said " I'm not sure" and the distance that witness claimed was "50-75" yards which was not what he told cops that day. That day it was "100 yards", and that day he said he could not be sure where Brown's arms were when he turned around.
The only disagreement from the other witnesses was when he had his hands up, but the other witnesses said when you overlap them was at best it was a "stumble forward".
Your "prosecutor" had a bias even before the grand jury heard the first word. He had a close connection to a cop being murdered. So for you to claim none of that played into how he set things up, is absurd.
You wont get this following video, but blacks in America would not get away with this. There is a separate attitude you don't want to face.
