cabiness42

Not every single person that spoke to the issue was so specific to mention the distance of 20+ feet, but some did. The distance of 20+ feet doesn't really matter in the sense that there isn't really a cutoff for a specific distance Brown had to be moving towards Wilson before self-defense becomes justifiable. It's not like self-defense is less justifiable if he had only moved 10 feet, given that he was within 12 feet when the fatal shot was fired. Given the previous confrontation, once Brown turns around and takes his first few steps directly at Wilson, Wilson has gained the right to self-defense. Brown had the option to either keep running away or to stop and get down on the ground, yet he chose the action that forced Wilson to defend himself.

Dozens of people = analysts on CNN, Fox News, ABC News, newspapers, websites who have all directly read all/most of the grand jury documents and agree that it's clear from the documents that Brown had moved and was still moving towards Wilson when the fatal shot was fired. I didn't write down all the names or the links. Even some of the ones who think Wilson should have been indicted have agreed to that particular fact, which is quite unbelievable to me but whatever.

If I thought it would make a difference, I'd take the time over the weekend to find it, but you probably already have a way to explain away any evidence you are presented with. You've got your mind made up and nothing will change it, and that's exactly why things aren't getting any better in this country. Nobody is willing to give an inch from either side.

So you don't actually have any citations, haven't bothered to read it yourself, but you know with absolute certainty that charges should have been brought. At least I have listened to the words of dozens of people who HAVE read it and have no doubt what it says.

The citation is the big-ass document that the county released. I don't have time to dig through it and find it for you. Everybody else has accepted the word of those who have actually read it that it's in there, if that isn't good enough for you, then read it yourself.

You're not taking anybody's word other than your own, so why the f*** are you even still here?

I haven't had time to read everything. My uncle, a retired forensic chemist, has read a very good chunk of it, and he is certain that Brown had been moving forward for at least 20 feet when shot and was shot from a range of 8-12 feet. Wilson and others testimony is given higher weight because it isn't at all in conflict with the forensic evidence. That's pretty standard in any case.

Combination of the forensic evidence and the testimony of Wilson plus several others. EDIT: On top of that, the forensics do confirm that the fatal shot was fired from 8-12 feet away, so Brown was 1-2 strides away from getting his hands on Wilson.

I've never been to Soxfest, but now that Geoff Blum will be there I'm going to order tickets today!

It wasn't immediate. Brown moved 20+ feet before falling. Wilson had a pretty clear reason to believe he was in serious danger if he didn't shoot.

That is a fact that can't be explained away regardless of what else you believe. Brown knows that he has a gun pointed at him. He chooses to move directly towards the officer with the gun. There is no outcome that can be reasonably expected other than he's going to be shot. The officer has 100% right to defend himself, and once Brown starts coming directly at him it becomes self-defense. There are dozens of cases all over the country where officers had far less clear cases of self-defense than this one, but people can't let this one go. People had their minds made up and are too prideful and stubborn to admit they were wrong. All it takes is one influential leader to come out and say, "You know what, I looked at the evidence, and I now believe that the officer was justified in self-defense, so we need to let this case pass but continue to focus on the larger issue of reducing the number of times we end up in this situation." It could do wonders for the nation.

Given the physical altercation that had already happened, it doesn't really matter how quickly Brown is moving towards Wilson. Once he gets that close, self defense is fully justified. The prosecuting attorney during his press conference mentioned witnesses who initially said the fatal shots were fired from behind. I haven't yet verified that in the transcript.

If I'm taking on Victorino, the Red Sox are paying at least half his salary, and they aren't getting much of a prospect in return. The Red Sox need to unload him more than the White Sox need to acquire him.

More conclusive? Blood pattens plus several witnesses show that Brown was moving towards Wilson. You have to be awfully stubborn in your position not to accept that. There were witnesses who claimed that Brown was shot from the back and had never turned around, and once confronted with the physical evidence, changed their story.

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.

No, not solely on the officer's story. The officer's story which happens to be corroborated by physical evidence and several witnesses.

No, and to go further, if the initial witnesses don't lie by claiming that Brown had his hands up and/or his back to the officer when he was shot, and they admit that he was charging the officer, the story doesn't reach anywhere near this level. There were protests (mostly peaceful) in cities all over the US last night with people chanting "Hands up, don't shoot" which is all based on the initial lie that Brown had his hands up when he was shot.

Fine, then bat Jose second. 18 (or 36) plate appearances is nothing to sneeze at.

You can't have a talent like Jose batting 4th. Every spot lower in the order gets you fewer plate appearances per season.

Calling anybody animals isn't productive and doesn't help anybody. Last night, criminals committed felonies in response to the grand jury decision.

A real jury trial would require the prosecutor to create an absolutely ridiculous theory of the crime to try and wedge into the facts of physical evidence. I don't see that benefiting anybody.

Splattered back 20+ feet in a narrow, straight line? You don't need to be a blood spatter expert to know that is pretty much impossible. If a prosecutor tried to use that as his theory in prosecuting the officer, he'd be laughed out of the courtroom.

No argument from me on that, based on the evidence, it never should have gone to a grand jury. The state mistakenly believed that a no true bill from a grand jury would have created less outrage than a unilateral decision by the prosecutor.

He was already bleeding when he ran away from Wilson, yet where he ends up dead is 20+ feet closer than the farthest blood trail, so at some point he had to turn around and head back towards Wilson. If he was never coming right at Wilson, there couldn't be blood farther away.

Of course it was a sham, the physical evidence + witnesses made this a case that the prosecutor should have simply decided that there would be no charges, but he was pressured politically to send it to a GJ. At least he didn't compound the problem by leading the GJ to indict and end up with a sham trial on top of it.