PDA

View Full Version : Ferguson grand jury papers full of (testimony) inconsistencies



SVPete
11-26-2014, 11:05 PM
Ferguson grand jury papers full of inconsistencies (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/078c82ad45ff4ec6aa1c7744dfa7df14/grand-jury-documents-rife-inconsistencies)
By HOLBROOK MOHR, DAVID A. LIEB and PHILLIP LUCAS
Nov. 26, 2014 8:08 PM EST

An Associated Press review of thousands of pages of grand jury documents reveals numerous examples of statements made during the shooting investigation that were inconsistent, fabricated or provably wrong. For one, the autopsies ultimately showed Brown was not struck by any bullets in his back.
...
"Many witnesses to the shooting of Michael Brown made statements inconsistent with other statements they made and also conflicting with the physical evidence. Some were completely refuted by the physical evidence," McCulloch said.
...
Another witness had told the FBI after the shooting that he saw Wilson shoot Brown in the back and then stand over his prone body to finish him off. But in his grand jury testimony, this witness, acknowledged that he had not seen that part of the shooting, and that what he told the FBI was "based on me being where I'm from, and that can be the only assumption that I have."

The witness, who lives in the predominantly black neighborhood where Brown was killed, also acknowledged that he changed his story to fit details of the autopsy that he had learned about on TV.
AP is covering this, 3 months late. Will the MSM acknowledge that the physical evidence disproved the claims that Wilson murdered/executed Brown? Not turning blue here!

NJCardFan
11-27-2014, 03:53 AM
The prosecutor said that some of the witness testimony didn't even jibe with what they first told the police which is incredibly stupid considering both their testimony and the written statements to police would be entered into evidence. Even if an indictment was handed down, chances are the prosecution didn't have a strong enough case to win at trial. Hell, judging by the evidence and testimony given, even a public defender could destroy the prosecution in this case.

marv
11-27-2014, 04:27 PM
The prosecutor said that some of the witness testimony didn't even jibe with what they first told the police which is incredibly stupid considering both their testimony and the written statements to police would be entered into evidence. Even if an indictment was handed down, chances are the prosecution didn't have a strong enough case to win at trial. Hell, judging by the evidence and testimony given, even a public defender could destroy the prosecution in this case.

I suspect that most of the "witnesses" never expected that they would ever be called to account for what they claimed to have seen.

Retread
11-27-2014, 10:09 PM
The truly scary part? Read the headline. Then see how that is in direct contradiction to the story. The headline implies that the GJ was inconsistent and improper rather than the witnesses and their lies.

Lanie
11-27-2014, 11:15 PM
I was doing more research on it last night thanks to a family member of mine falling for a lot of the leftist bazooka.

Here's what I was finding.

The main autopsy report (done by the county, which has a self-interest) says he was shot completely in the front.

The autopsy report from the Brown family (which has a self interest to it) says that one of the bullets went in from behind in regards to the head and then I think somehow went out the eye. That would actually go contrary to one of the witnesses saying he was shot in the arm or back from the back.

I think that when you go through a dramatic experience such as seeing somebody be shot to death, and you already have ideas that the person who did it did it for hatred, you might see what isn't there. I'm not sure if certain people are meaning to "lie." I think the experience is just hard for them to process. I wish we could hear more from the witnesses who said he was trying to charge Wilson (but they're probably afraid).

One thing I'm not getting is that the reports seem to say that Brown was shot about 35 ft away from Wilson or his car. How can Brown be trying to grab his gun? Did the grab attempt happen at the car before he ran or something else? I can believe the account that Brown might have gotten cocky and decided to go toward Wilson saying he wouldn't shoot.

I wanted to see last night if I could actually find if somebody videotaped the shooting. All videos appear to be after the shooting. One of them specifically was a guy narrating saying they shot that n*gger for no good reason. He didn't see it, but he said it happened for no good reason. From there, you can see the neighborhood screaming and going nuts. THAT is what's got the country wounded up. If it's all that video, then it's based on emotion. I'll admit it is emotional, but that tape really proves nothing. Sad.

Retread
11-27-2014, 11:58 PM
The family autopsy was not done by a dr but by a "specialist" for sale to the highest bidder who has been caught before finding what his client wanted to be found in direct opposition to the ME (who had no dog in the fight - he ain't a member of the LE community)

The scumbag was shot in the hand inside the car and left DNA on the firearm

Brown charged because he was a thug. He didn't have the brains to think about it.

marv
11-28-2014, 09:37 AM
Brown charged because he was a thug. He didn't have the brains to think about it.

Brown was high on marijuana according to the toxicology report.

SVPete
11-28-2014, 11:56 AM
The truly scary part? Read the headline. Then see how that is in direct contradiction to the story. The headline implies that the GJ was inconsistent and improper rather than the witnesses and their lies.

Bingo! The content of the article is a devastating summation of the "case" against Officer Wilson, devastating to the accusations against him, devastating to his accusers, devastating to the race-baiters, race-hustlers, and their MSM shills. The title utterly belies the article content, which is why I inserted "(testimony)" into the thread title, to make it reflect the actual content of the article.

Putting it more simply, the AP editor who composed the article title lied, and probably did so to conceal the import of the article.