Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Pathology expert hired by Brown family is a fraud

Pathology expert hired by Brown family is a fraud

+3
Markle
2seaoat
Joanimaroni
7 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:

I see you are skipping over the confrontation at the police car.

I think that qualifies as disrespecting the cop's authority.

Slamming the car door on the officer and reaching into the car qualifies as disrespect?

Good God , Sal.  

Did he do that; has that been established?  Do we know exactly what happened at the officer's car?  Does what happened justify shooting him as he's running away?


Orbital blow-out fractures are not spontaneous. Shooting him, while he is running away, would defy the autopsy report.....he was not shot in the back.

I wonder how many read all the reports and how many pick and choose what supports their theory.

Sal

Sal

Joanimaroni wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:

I see you are skipping over the confrontation at the police car.

I think that qualifies as disrespecting the cop's authority.

Slamming the car door on the officer and reaching into the car qualifies as disrespect?

Good God , Sal.  

Did he do that; has that been established?  Do we know exactly what happened at the officer's car?  Does what happened justify shooting him as he's running away?


Orbital blow-out fractures are not spontaneous.  Shooting him, while he is running away,  would defy the autopsy report.....he was not shot in the back.

I wonder how many read all the reports and how many pick and choose what supports their theory.

Says the queen of cherry picking.

Why do you insist on ignoring the fact that five eyewitnesses ALL agree that Michael Brown had turned to face the cop when the fatal barrage was unleashed?

nadalfan



Joanimaroni wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:

I see you are skipping over the confrontation at the police car.

I think that qualifies as disrespecting the cop's authority.

Slamming the car door on the officer and reaching into the car qualifies as disrespect?

Good God , Sal.  

Did he do that; has that been established?  Do we know exactly what happened at the officer's car?  Does what happened justify shooting him as he's running away?


Orbital blow-out fractures are not spontaneous.  Shooting him, while he is running away,  would defy the autopsy report.....he was not shot in the back.

I wonder how many read all the reports and how many pick and choose what supports their theory.

That's a good question, because you're stating reports as facts that came from an anonymous source, but you don't believe the testimony of several witnesses

Regarding being shot in the back, once again, the medical examiner said the shot to the forearm could have hit him when he was running away or do you just not accept that that could have happened?

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:

I see you are skipping over the confrontation at the police car.

I think that qualifies as disrespecting the cop's authority.

Slamming the car door on the officer and reaching into the car qualifies as disrespect?

Good God , Sal.  

Did he do that; has that been established?  Do we know exactly what happened at the officer's car?  Does what happened justify shooting him as he's running away?


Orbital blow-out fractures are not spontaneous.  Shooting him, while he is running away,  would defy the autopsy report.....he was not shot in the back.

I wonder how many read all the reports and how many pick and choose what supports their theory.

That's a good question, because you're stating reports as facts that came from an anonymous source, but you don't believe the testimony of several witnesses

Regarding being shot in the back, once again, the medical examiner said the shot to the forearm could have hit him when he was running away or do you just not accept that that could have happened?


Given what has been said so far I agree with this last statement. I believe I said somewhere that the first shot may have struck him as he was running away.

Being shot from behind (in the arm) is not the same as being shot in the back. At that point, realizing that the officer was shooting, he turned to face the cop at which point he received the rest of the wounds.

It remains to be seen what he was doing at that point. Most reports I've heard say he raised his hands and said don't shoot.

Guest


Guest

I heard the first shot was in the car? That the officer had been shoved back into the car... hit repeatedly... and then there was a struggle for the gun and the first shot took place. That's simple disrespect in your book sal? Lol... it's like a game of twister.

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:I heard the first shot was in the car? That the officer had been shoved back into the car... hit repeatedly... and then there was a struggle for the gun and the first shot took place.

Where'd you hear that?

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:
PkrBum wrote:I heard the first shot was in the car? That the officer had been shoved back into the car... hit repeatedly... and then there was a struggle for the gun and the first shot took place.

Where'd you hear that?

Had to have been on npr yesterday I think... it was an interview with some representative of the police. It went on to say that the officer almost lost consciousness. I'll look for the story.

Sal

Sal

I read where law enforcement authorities in Ferguson are now publicly admitting that the cop fired at Brown and his friend as they were attempting to flee.

Maybe that's legal, but it shouldn't be.

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:I read where law enforcement authorities in Ferguson are now publicly admitting that the cop fired at Brown and his friend as they were attempting to flee.

Maybe that's legal, but it shouldn't be.

It certainly isn't legal. Thirty some odd years ago the scotus ruled that cops could not shoot a fleeing suspect.

There must be an imminent threat... to include bodily injury.

Edit: I recall that the report I described was from the bbc and was the police chief making the statement. Not able to look for it now... but it should be easy enough to find if it really matters to you. The police lie often enough that I'm sceptical.



Last edited by PkrBum on 8/21/2014, 12:42 pm; edited 1 time in total

Guest


Guest

None of you idiots can read. The fraud is Parcells.

Sal

Sal

PACEDOG#1 wrote:None of you idiots can read. The fraud is Parcells.

Excellent work, PeeDawg.

You've conclusively proven that the guy who assisted in the autopsy is not a doctor - which he never claimed to be - and that he doesn’t have a degree - which he never claimed to have.

Case closed.

lmao

Markle

Markle

Sal wrote:
Markle wrote:
Sal wrote:Yeppers.

There's pretty much a consensus from the eyewitnesses that the cop fired on Michael Brown as he was running away, and when he turned to surrender, the cop fully ventilated him.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Cute try.  You're supporting the statement of the individual who took part in a strong armed robbery just minutes before the death of Brown.  Yeah, that is a reliable statement.

Keep up the good work!

Give it up, Markie.

There are five eyewitnesses who corroborate that account.

Including a woman who watched from her apartment and another who isn't even from Ferguson but just happened to be parked on the street when this went down.

But, they're all liars cause they're black.

Amirite??

Meanwhile, two autopsies say that is not what happened. A third will say the same. Maybe they can keep on having autopsies done until they find one they like.

Me, I'm going against the tide and am still waiting for all the facts to come out. Of course, like 2seaoat, most Progressives, for some reason, just don't care about the facts.

Sal

Sal

Markle wrote:

Meanwhile, two autopsies say that is not what happened.

What didn't happen?

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:

I see you are skipping over the confrontation at the police car.

I think that qualifies as disrespecting the cop's authority.

Slamming the car door on the officer and reaching into the car qualifies as disrespect?

Good God , Sal.  

Did he do that; has that been established?  Do we know exactly what happened at the officer's car?  Does what happened justify shooting him as he's running away?


Orbital blow-out fractures are not spontaneous.  Shooting him, while he is running away,  would defy the autopsy report.....he was not shot in the back.

I wonder how many read all the reports and how many pick and choose what supports their theory.

Says the queen of cherry picking.

Why do you insist on ignoring the fact that five eyewitnesses ALL agree that Michael Brown had turned to face the cop when the fatal barrage was unleashed?

You are leaving out the part where he taunted and then charge at the officer.

Sal

Sal

Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:

I see you are skipping over the confrontation at the police car.

I think that qualifies as disrespecting the cop's authority.

Slamming the car door on the officer and reaching into the car qualifies as disrespect?

Good God , Sal.  

Did he do that; has that been established?  Do we know exactly what happened at the officer's car?  Does what happened justify shooting him as he's running away?


Orbital blow-out fractures are not spontaneous.  Shooting him, while he is running away,  would defy the autopsy report.....he was not shot in the back.

I wonder how many read all the reports and how many pick and choose what supports their theory.

Says the queen of cherry picking.

Why do you insist on ignoring the fact that five eyewitnesses ALL agree that Michael Brown had turned to face the cop when the fatal barrage was unleashed?

You are leaving out the part where he taunted and then charge at the officer.

Oh, you mean the part where after a shot had already been fired, he ran away and taunted the cop that he wouldn't shoot after he had already fired a shot and the authorities have acknowledged that the cop continued to fire at him as he ran away, and then he decided, "what the hell", and bum-rushed a cop who had been shooting at him?

That part??

Because it's fucking nonsense, that's why.

Markle

Markle

Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:

I see you are skipping over the confrontation at the police car.

I think that qualifies as disrespecting the cop's authority.

Slamming the car door on the officer and reaching into the car qualifies as disrespect?

Good God , Sal.  

Did he do that; has that been established?  Do we know exactly what happened at the officer's car?  Does what happened justify shooting him as he's running away?


Orbital blow-out fractures are not spontaneous.  Shooting him, while he is running away,  would defy the autopsy report.....he was not shot in the back.

I wonder how many read all the reports and how many pick and choose what supports their theory.

Says the queen of cherry picking.

Why do you insist on ignoring the fact that five eyewitnesses ALL agree that Michael Brown had turned to face the cop when the fatal barrage was unleashed?

You are leaving out the part where he taunted and then charge at the officer.

Oh, you mean the part where after a shot had already been fired, he ran away and taunted the cop that he wouldn't shoot after he had already fired a shot and the authorities have acknowledged that the cop continued to fire at him as he ran away, and then he decided, "what the hell", and bum-rushed a cop who had been shooting at him?

That part??

Because it's fucking nonsense, that's why.

To you maybe, when you're clean and sober.

I didn't know the toxicology reports came back yet. That could make a monumental change in the dynamics of this case.

The fact that he was just minutes from having committed a strong arm robbery in a neighborhood shop also plays a huge part. Mr. Brown had adrenalin flooding into his body and was itching for a fight. He had no clue if the shop keeper had reported the robbery and was being questioned and detained because of that robbery and assault.

Sal

Sal

Markle wrote:Mr. Brown had adrenalin flooding into his body and was itching for a fight.


Yeah, you're just waiting for the FACTS, amirite??

rotflmao

Sal

Sal

Just to recap ....

There is no dispute that Michael Brown and the cop were involved in some sort of struggle at the police vehicle.

There is no dispute that a shot was fired in the vehicle during that struggle.

There is no dispute that Michael Brown attempted to flee.

There is no dispute that the cop fired at Michael Brown as he was fleeing.

Now, here is Markie's and Joannie's contention.

After Michael Brown had been shot at multiple times and ran away, he stopped and taunted the cop who shot at him multiple times that he "wouldn't shoot", and then decided to bull rush a cop who had shot at him multiple times.

In what world does any of that even make a modicum of sense?

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

Sal wrote:Just to recap ....

There is no dispute that Michael Brown and the cop were involved in some sort of struggle at the police vehicle.

There is no dispute that a shot was fired in the vehicle during that struggle.

There is no dispute that Michael Brown attempted to flee.

There is no dispute that the cop fired at Michael Brown as he was fleeing. running backwards?

Now, here is Markie's and Joannie's contention.

After Michael Brown had been shot at multiple times and ran away, he stopped and taunted the cop who shot at him multiple times that he "wouldn't shoot", and then decided to bull rush a cop who had shot at him multiple times.

In what world does any of that even make a modicum of sense?


No dispute Brown assaulted the officer causing a facial fracture.

No dispute Brown was ordered to freeze.

No dispute Brown charged the officer.

No dispute Brown was facing the officer when shot.

Markle

Markle

Sal wrote:Just to recap ....

There is no dispute that Michael Brown and the cop were involved in some sort of struggle at the police vehicle.

There is no dispute that a shot was fired in the vehicle during that struggle.

There is no dispute that Michael Brown attempted to flee.

There is no dispute that the cop fired at Michael Brown as he was fleeing.

Now, here is Markie's and Joannie's contention.

After Michael Brown had been shot at multiple times and ran away, he stopped and taunted the cop who shot at him multiple times that he "wouldn't shoot", and then decided to bull rush a cop who had shot at him multiple times.

In what world does any of that even make a modicum of sense?

Sorry, there is dispute over all of it since none of us have heard or seen any sworn testimony and the only facts we have seen is the autopsy.

How is there "no dispute" when he was shot in the front.  He was running backwards?

Please don't profess to know what my contention is since, like all the other information in your post, you have no clue.

Markle

Markle

Sal wrote:
Markle wrote:Mr. Brown had adrenalin flooding into his body and was itching for a fight.


Yeah, you're just waiting for the FACTS, amirite??
rotflmao

Do you NOT believe that is a FACT? PLUS we don't know what or what combination of drugs he was on at the time of the shooting.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Markle wrote:
Sal wrote:
Markle wrote:Mr. Brown had adrenalin flooding into his body and was itching for a fight.


Yeah, you're just waiting for the FACTS, amirite??
rotflmao

Do you NOT believe that is a FACT?  PLUS we don't know what or what combination of drugs he was on at the time of the shooting.

Q: Was the cop's blood taken and analyzed? What combination of drugs had he been taking?

By the way, Herr Markle, do you agree that the city of Ferguson's primary source of income is traffic and other misdemeanor fines -- levied against the mostly black population?

Maybe this is the real reason the cop couldn't resist stopping two black teenagers for jaywalking? The Ferguson PD already released a statement claiming that Wilson was unaware of the convenience store robbery at the time he stopped Brown and Dorian .. .

Markle

Markle

othershoe1030 wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:
Sal wrote:
Joanimaroni wrote:

I see you are skipping over the confrontation at the police car.

I think that qualifies as disrespecting the cop's authority.

Slamming the car door on the officer and reaching into the car qualifies as disrespect?

Good God , Sal.  

Did he do that; has that been established?  Do we know exactly what happened at the officer's car?  Does what happened justify shooting him as he's running away?


Orbital blow-out fractures are not spontaneous.  Shooting him, while he is running away,  would defy the autopsy report.....he was not shot in the back.

I wonder how many read all the reports and how many pick and choose what supports their theory.

That's a good question, because you're stating reports as facts that came from an anonymous source, but you don't believe the testimony of several witnesses

Regarding being shot in the back, once again, the medical examiner said the shot to the forearm could have hit him when he was running away or do you just not accept that that could have happened?


Given what has been said so far I agree with this last statement. I believe I said somewhere that the first shot may have struck him as he was running away.

Being shot from behind (in the arm) is not the same as being shot in the back. At that point, realizing that the officer was shooting, he turned to face the cop at which point he received the rest of the wounds.

It remains to be seen what he was doing at that point. Most reports I've heard say he raised his hands and said don't shoot.

Dr. Baden also said that the one shot in the arm could have come from the front as he may have held his hands in front of him the bullet could have gone through his arm and penetrated his body as well.

Markle

Markle

Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:
Sal wrote:
Markle wrote:Mr. Brown had adrenalin flooding into his body and was itching for a fight.


Yeah, you're just waiting for the FACTS, amirite??
rotflmao

Do you NOT believe that is a FACT?  PLUS we don't know what or what combination of drugs he was on at the time of the shooting.

Q: Was the cop's blood taken and analyzed?  What combination of drugs had he been taking?

By the way, Herr Markle, do you agree that the city of Ferguson's primary source of income is traffic and other misdemeanor fines -- levied against the mostly black population?  

Maybe this is the real reason the cop couldn't resist stopping two black teenagers for jaywalking?  The Ferguson PD already released a statement claiming that Wilson was unaware of the convenience store robbery at the time he stopped Brown and Dorian .. .  

I have no clue, never been to Ferguson and, my guess is that it will be a ghost town in 1-2 years. Who's going to move here after this?

What I know is that of the 60 or 70 member police force fewer than six are black. Could be a lot of reasons unrelated to racism or it could be racism.

Pathology expert hired by Brown family is a fraud - Page 2 Hitlers-train-Amerika_zpseebd91bd

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Pathology expert hired by Brown family is a fraud

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum