Balta1701

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 10:42 AM) ? They had live witness testimony from these witnesses. Which is the exact opposite of what a Grand Jury is supposed to do. There was no one to cross examine any of the witnesses. You guys say that they changed their story and yet they were still presented to the grand jury. In the case of an actual trial, these sorts of witnesses would be judged as unreliable and likely not even put on the stand because they wouldn't stand up to cross examination. But, a prosecutor attempting to do a decent job would put together a story of what details actually made sense, appeared in most people's stories, and could have actually been seen by those witnesses. A majority of witnesses who could have seen the fatal shots disagreed with the statement that he was charging towards him, several describe it as him turning around after being grazed by a bullet, stumbling, and moving his arms out. One used the phrase "he started to stagger forward" and "couldn't hardly stand up". But there's no evaluation of that, instead we have the officer's version of him growing larger and turning into the Hulk. Crazy or incorrect statements in other witness testimony are enough to invalidate their stories, yet crazy, statements about adrenaline-fueled memories from the police officer are taken as fact.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 10:37 AM) Someone really needs to see what the witnesses said in their grand jury testimony, because you keep relying on this but supposedly most of those witnesses changed their story later. Which is exactly why there needed to be an actual prosecution and not a document dump to a grand jury. Witness testimony is inherently fraught with difficulty, and the same standard should have been applied to the police officer, whose story you folks take as gospel even where it doesn't make sense.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 10:34 AM) The same witnesses who said that also said he wasn't moving forward, which is disproved by the physical evidence. Same with the witnesses who said he was shot in the back. Which is why there ought to have been an actual prosecution to sort through these issues.

QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 10:31 AM) Victorino would be a great number 2 hitter. And if he gave 133 PA's like he did last year? Or the .303 OBP he put up during that stint last year? Victorino "if healthy" would be a great #2 hitter.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 10:31 AM) Going for a gun sure does though. With his amazing 30 feet long arms.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 10:30 AM) No, not solely on the officer's story. The officer's story which happens to be corroborated by physical evidence and several witnesses. And several witnesses also say that the deceased had his hands up and was surrendering, but you discount them.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 10:18 AM) If Brown would have stopped and gave up. It wouldn't have happened. He continued to advance toward the officer and the officer had every right to feel threatened. if he had his hands up and was yelling something like "I give up" and the cop continued shooting, an entirely reasonable response would be to slowly walk towards him with his hands up so that he could hear him.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 10:20 AM) Yeah, there have been way worse instances of police killing civilians, yet they are protesting one where the victim physically attacked the officer first. Based solely on the officer's story, once again.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 09:26 AM) Just trying to be smart, back-to-back (games), fatigue, and didn't want to take any steps back," said Rose, who scored two points. "So, take these couple of days off, head to Boston." I really don't know what taking more time off does to help that. If he is fatiqued, he is going to have to push himself. There is very little he can do outside of the games to improve his wind during an NBA season. He's just sat out for a week, if it's legit fatigue on the 2nd night of a back to back, fine.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 09:06 AM) That's what was reported by witnesses. He continued to walk toward the officer with his hands up as the officer was shooting him. Was he slowly walking towards the guy with the gun 30 feet away or was he charging like the Hulk? These are the kind of details that could be hashed out in an actual trial, or at least by an investigation from an independent prosecutor. Which witnesses were in the appropriate place to see that behavior? How rapidly was he moving at the end. How many agree that his hands were up? How long would it have taken him to take the steps required based on the position he reached? How have the witnesses stories, including that of the shooter, changed with time? Are either of those inconsistent with the autopsy results? The grand jury with a "witness dump" simply is in no position to evaluate these issues. In the process of putting together an actual case, a prosecutor would have to answer questions like that in order to tell their side of the story of what actually happened. Because this was a trial with no prosecutor, none of that ever happened, there was no effort to evaluate how these witness statements fit together or to paint a coordinated picture on behalf of the deceased.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 06:31 PM) Castro. With his performance the last couple years, he's a decent player but he's sitting on a long term guaranteed contract and doesn't sell me very hard on being a centerpiece.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 05:30 PM) George Ofman Just now · Twitter · Let me clarify. Interesting to NOTE Cubs reported offer to Redsox..told it is six years between $130-$135 Huh? The Cubs are trying to buy the Red Sox?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 06:09 PM) See, you keep downplaying prospects, and then selecting only prospects. Why not include someone with a little more certainty in terms of performance? Do the Cubs have anyone who meets that standard other than Rizzo?

Note that the name of the twitterer is "Ken_Rosenthall" while Ken_Rosenthal is a different person with the "verified" check mark on his account?

Needs more feathers.

I'll be surprised if he's not back.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:53 AM) So basically any case involving a cop should have a special prosecutor? Is that what you're saying? Because 100% of SA's offices in this country are buddy-buddy with the cops. That doesn't seem unreasonable at all to me, particularly in the case of a homicide investigation.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:50 AM) Right, and the statemetns of the friend who started this whole surrender thing would have been attacked and his entire credibility for having just committed a crime with this guy would have been at issue for the jury. You're pointing to one statement out of 70 hours of testimony as if that was the smoking gun that would have killed Wilson's credibility. 1) I don't think it would have, because I still see nothing wrong with that. 2) All of the pro-State witnesses would have to undergo the same cross. I say again - you couldn't get a jury to find probable cause, but you think a jury with a standard of guilty beyond reasonable doubt is going to come to a different conclusion because some witnesses would be cross examined? We couldn't get a jury to find probable cause in a trial without a prosecutor. I have no idea how things would have gone had there been an actual attempt at a prosecution and neither do you.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:48 AM) Right, because that would have appeased you. I guarantee you if he had done that you would be b****ing that he should have at least presented the facts to a grand jury or a judge in a prelim hearing. That guy, mistakes and all, was damned if he did, damned if he didn't. Which is why a guy with a clear partnership and bias in favor of the police department due to being the prosecutor who works with that police department should not have been the one making the decision. You just outlined exactly, to the letter, why there should have been a special prosecutor making that decision.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:44 AM) But if a jury of people couldn't find probable cause from mere factual statements of witnesses without lawyers picking them apart, what makes you think a trial, with a more stringent standard of guilty beyond reasonable doubt, is going to be anything more than a complete waste of time and money? Do you believe that is a statement that would have gone unchallenged in court? Would a jury wind up finding that credible after a cross examination? Because right there is an example of why we have an adversarial system, so that foolish statements like that aren't the basis for whether or not a person goes to jail.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:40 AM) A 6'4 300 pound man that you stop starts a physical altercation with you and then tries to take your service weapon. Tell me exactly how you disarm that situation with your training and tactics. There is a difference in acting impolite and a violent altercation. An officer grabs at your throat, you hit him to get him to release, he pulls his weapon and fires hitting you in the hand, you flee, he continues firing after he stands up, you turn and put your hands up and he blows your head off. How does the officer avoid that situation? I'm not certain this is how things went down, but I also don't know why I should believe the officer's version of events as you just did there.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:13 AM) Do you really want Ethier now, after we just added a left handed hitter who rakes against RH pitching but who can't hit lefties? Depends on if we had a right handed backup OF to go with him. If the backup OF is Jordan Danks, there's no solid way to make that work. If we're talking about a Moises Sierra or better, then ok, that could actually work.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:37 AM) The same could be said of all of the witnesses though. Which is why we have an adversarial system with advocates on both sides who argue cases like this in front of a group of as-close-to-impartial people as we can find known as a "jury trial" where the people are compelled to evaluate such claims against each other.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:19 AM) Eh, at least we know he was there when it happened. But once again there should be another officer, a camera and audio to back all of this up There's lots of things that should happen but conveniently didn't on the way to where we got last night.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 11:18 AM) I can't prove this to you in any way, but it is a regular occurrence where "witnesses" give false information at crime scenes. You can have a person shot dead in the street by another civilian, and some will feed you incorrect descriptions to help a criminal they don't even know escape. So, forgive me if I don't believe the people in the video you're describing. These 2 are standing by a car about a football field's length away from the shooting, away from a crowd, and they're yelling "he had his f***ing hands up" and putting their hands up. It's on tape as their original reaction to the shooting. At the very least, people who say things about how the witnesses were coached in a crowd to say he had his hands up or that it was just a creation of the media are completely inconsistent with that bit of tape. It doesn't prove he had his hands up, but it proves to me that's what some people said the instant after it happened. There's a reason why this case caught attention.