Parents of Michael Brown sue Ferguson MO but refuse to release school records of son

Guille said:
Physical evidence leaving the chain of custody is the problem.
Click to expand...

So what are you saying occurred, that would have changed the outcome or are you saying that his sidearm wasn't collected, prior to his departure?
If you have something, other then conjecture, please present it.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So what are you saying occurred, that would have changed the outcome or are you saying that his sidearm wasn't collected, prior to his departure?
If you have something, other then conjecture, please present it.
Click to expand...

I'm not offering conjecture, it's a fact Wilson left the scene before the investigators got there and took evidence with him.
 
It's been how long since Brown was shot, and it's still a current event? The incident should have remained a local issue.

But not in Obama's America.
 
What is their case? Our son assaulted a police officer, and was shot. Now pay us money..?

What argument is that? Fucking idiots. Maybe you shouldn't let him go around smoking weed, and robbing convenience stores.
 
Guille said:
I'm not offering conjecture, it's a fact Wilson left the scene before the investigators got there and took evidence with him.
Click to expand...

So he left the body on the street, with no one watching it or are you saying he didn't have permission to leave?
 
aloysious said:
That's the purpose of a countersuit. When a party files a frivolous lawsuit the other party files an equally frivolous suit and they both get thrown out. Isn't there a lawyer on this board to confirm that?
Click to expand...

THINK!!!!! what you're advocating is to give a government entity, with unlimited taxpayer resources, power to sue individuals that they feel filed a frivolous lawsuit. knowing governments, as we do, EVERY suit filed against them will be frivolous and ALWAYS filing countersuits, then eventually they'll file suits as pre-emptive strikes to intimidate citizens from filing their own.

again, don't be a douchebag moron.
 
Guille said:
Physical evidence leaving the chain of custody is the problem.
Click to expand...

Which means if Wilson were convicted, it would be based on a technicality.

Brown's blood in the vehicle is a slam dunk for assault of a police officer, by the victim.

Lesson being: don't assault an armed police officer. Or if you want to assault one with the hope of getting away with it, at least wait till he steps out of the cruiser.
 
evince said:
blood on his hands can transfer to his car
Click to expand...

Even WashPO thinks Wilson is innocent:

"The significance of this wound and related physical evidence is that it places Brown’s right hand within 6 to 9 inches of the barrel of Wilson’s firearm. This physical evidence is thus quite consistent with Wilson’s testimony that Brown was trying to get hold of Wilson’s weapon, creating a fear in Wilson that he was going to get shot. It also creates a problem for those who view Brown as having been somehow accosted by Wilson and was just trying to escape. At least in the theories that I have seen sketched out, no explanation is offered for why Brown (who weighed around 300 pounds) had been forced by Wilson to have his right hand in a position where it was close to the gun and inside Wilson’s police car."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...the-michael-brown-case-supported-the-officer/
 
SmarterthanYou said:
THINK!!!!! what you're advocating is to give a government entity, with unlimited taxpayer resources, power to sue individuals that they feel filed a frivolous lawsuit. knowing governments, as we do, EVERY suit filed against them will be frivolous and ALWAYS filing countersuits, then eventually they'll file suits as pre-emptive strikes to intimidate citizens from filing their own.

again, don't be a douchebag moron.
Click to expand...
Anybody can sue anybody else at any time for any reason. It's part of our dysfunctional legal system.
In countries with a more advanced legal system the lawyer and/or the plaintiffs would be forced to pay the court fees and punitive fees for filing a frivolous lawsuit.
Until we get to that point (never) countersuing a frivolous case is one option.
Besides if you can't recognize my comment was tongue in cheek you may want to get an examination to rule out a TARD affliction.
 
aloysious said:
Anybody can sue anybody else at any time for any reason. It's part of our dysfunctional legal system.
In countries with a more advanced legal system the lawyer and/or the plaintiffs would be forced to pay the court fees and punitive fees for filing a frivolous lawsuit.
Until we get to that point (never) countersuing a frivolous case is one option.
Click to expand...
great, lets go to a system that allows the ones with unlimited resources to use attrition tactics to defeat citizens with grievances.
aloysious said:
Besides if you can't recognize my comment was tongue in cheek you may want to get an examination to rule out a TARD affliction.
Click to expand...
you're barking up the wrong tree
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top