Darren Wilson's Side of the Story

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Rex E.

OK...I won't go into all or the pro Wilson assumptions (you all keep saying he knew he was dealing with a "Felon Thug" If I'm to believe this then I'd also believe that Brown knew Wilson had Klan ties)

So, the only witness aside from Wilson that could have seen or heard anything close by is Brows friend Jones who tells a very different story from what Wilson tells......why has he been dismissed completely?

Because his testimony did not line up with what McCulloch wanted to hear?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Accomplice to a felony? How so?

He was with Michael Brown when he assaulted the cop. Assaulting a cop is considered aggravated assault in most states, as is attempting to disarm a police officer. He was also with Brown when he shoplifted and committed battery against the store owner. So, in a matter of minutes, he was with Brown in the commission of a couple of misdemeanors and two felonies. Whether this meets the legal definition of accomplice is certainly debatable, but continuing to hang out with a guy who does these things don't paint a particularly flattering picture of his character. Moreover, it taints his testimony in that downplaying the severity of Brown's actions reduces the likelihood of his own implication in the matter.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Because his testimony did not line up with what McCulloch wanted to hear?

No, because it didn't comport with the physical evidence. Plus I read that he changed his story several times. Neither helps his credibility.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Rex E.

Shoplifting is now a felony?

It became a felony on Brown's part when he shoved the storekeeper in the video. imo.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by finnbow

He was with Michael Brown when he assaulted the cop. Assaulting a cop is considered aggravated assault in most states, as is attempting to disarm a police officer. He was also with Brown when he shoplifted and committed battery against the store owner. So, in a matter of minutes, he was with Brown in the commission of a couple of misdemeanors and two felonies.

Accomplice implies a willing participant, see my edit.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by bobabode

It became a felony on Brown's part when he shoved the storekeeper in the video. imo.

Simple battery (the storeowner) is a misdemeanor. Had he done significant bodily harm, it would have been aggravated battery, a felony.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Accomplice implies a willing participant, see my edit.

He didn't split from Brown after the store incident, so he willingly accompanied Brown while he committed two felonies (assaulting an officer, trying to disarm an officer). Whether he is criminally culpable is debatable (probably not). Whether he used bad judgment in hanging out with Brown after the theft isn't. Birds of a feather ...

And when such a person offers inconsistent testimony, both in terms of contradicting previous statements and not comporting with physical evidence, the veracity of his testimony is highly suspect.

[Rex E.]

Originally Posted by finnbow

He was with Michael Brown when he assaulted the cop. Assaulting a cop is considered aggravated assault in most states, as is attempting to disarm a police officer. He was also with Brown when he shoplifted and committed battery against the store owner. So, in a matter of minutes, he was with Brown in the commission of a couple of misdemeanors and two felonies. Whether this meets the legal definition of accomplice is certainly debatable, but continuing to hang out with a guy who does these things don't paint a particularly flattering picture of his character. Moreover, it taints his testimony in that downplaying the severity of Brown's actions reduces the likelihood of his own implication in the matter.

The only person close enough but not directly involved in the altercation says Wilson grabbed Brown. That is hardly assault.....

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Rex E.

The only person close enough but not directly involved in the altercation says Wilson grabbed Brown. That is hardly assault.....

I guessed you missed my whole point about his lack of credibility and the reasons therefor.

[Rex E.]

Originally Posted by finnbow

He didn't split from Brown after the store incident, so he willingly accompanied Brown while he committed two felonies (assaulting an officer, trying to disarm an officer). Whether he is criminally culpable is debatable (probably not). Whether he used bad judgment in hanging out with Brown after the theft isn't. Birds of a feather ...

And when such a person offers inconsistent testimony, both in terms of contradicting previous statements and not comporting with physical evidence, the veracity of his testimony is highly suspect.

The Klan is known for murdering black men, Wilson has ties to the Klan......birds of a feather.......this logic thing is fun......