I know I've been a one trick pony lately regarding the issue of policing in this country, but it bears highlighting that despite all the protestations of LE, whether justified or not, we have a policing problem in this country, specifically when it comes to deadly force.  The Salt Lake Tribune analyzed shootings and found that aside from domestic shootings, citizens are more likely to be shot and killed by police than any other category.

He ran up and stuck that hatchet in a rookie cop's head .  

Yes, you stop your insanity of pointing out that the police, whom police Democratic cities. Which are under the control of Democratic policy. Have more police involved shootings due to the Democratic, anti-gun laws which the police are attempting to enforce.

You used that up and tossed that away because it no longer fits your needs I see and now, like Sharpton, it's onto Cleveland, right?

I can expect a response like this from tweedle-dee And tweedle-dumbass.

Which means his argument should be VERY easy to refute. Ok, lets see someone refute it. DA, tear him a new asshole, and show us all just how wrong he is.

What do they say about ignorance is bliss.  You have plenty of it in spades...dumbass

My opinion has not changed one iota....I believe that excessive force was used.  And I also correctly predicted that the officer would not be indicted.
 

Here's some stats for you...from a conservative rag you might believe regarding the number of officers actually charged with criminal offenses in shootings.  I spout facts while you ignoramuses shoot off your mouths with empty thoughts and rhetoric.

I'm only stating the facts, that the places where the majority of police shootings occur have the most stringent anti gun laws. Police officers are not going to enforce policy which does not exist.

Clean Shooting by the Ferguson cop are dumbass Uncle Toms right ?

How'd that turn out? Your hatred won't let you see the facts.

When Darren Wilson defense attorney spoke tonight.

The one sided things that are coming out of your mouth is beyond stupid.

if Ferguson is on fire it's because the police has been systematically abusing its minority citizens for years and they are frankly tired of the abuse.  

The big states have more instances than the small states. I am sure that is relevant somehow, but just how it's relevant is beyond me.

I guess it should be some kind of huge surprise that a state that is thirty times bigger than another is going to have more deaths, but it's NOT. It's simple common sense, your bottom 13 states have a combined population less than either the "cities" of LA or NYC, Please don't tell me this is the best you've got, I would hate to think one of our leading SPOTY candidates is about to make you look dumb.

Unfortunately, Official government statistics at the federal level on this subject is spoty at best.  The official stat of 410 justified shootings last year by police is widely criticized as under-reported.  However there are a few blogs that have compiled such information and there are a few organizations like deadspin are trying to collect more accurate statistics.  Deadly and excessive force shooting happen everywhere.

Sharpton is hiring. Ask RR for a job application. He goes into the office every day.

When I asked him what evidence he had that excessive force was used in the Ferguson case, you can see his dumbass reply attached.

The question your favorite SPOTY I ploed was that police killings occur more in Democratically run states and cities.  And if you bothered to even read my response throughly, there are no reliable statistics collected on this issue at the federal level.  The conspiracy theorist in me would state that the govt doesn't want its citizens to know how many citizens are killed by police.  There have been efforts by private organizations one good source is on Facebook, where I have provided a link.  This effort is run by private citizens that have determined that there have been almost 1000 citizens killed by police thus since 2014.  

How whites cops are to blame for it?

with one hell of a defense team on his side. The threshold of guilt required to be proven in a murder trial is many times what is needed to get a grand jury to indict.

The grand jury was not there to pass judgment on his guilt or innocence, only to contemplate if there is/was enough evidence to bring it to trial.

Also keep in mind that OJ was "convicted" in civil court where the threshold is only a "preponderance of the evidence" not "beyond a reasonable doubt" A grand jury doesn't even need a "preponderance of the evidence" to indict. The threshold is even lower than that and there was not enough evidence to indict. I think it's pretty plain that the cop did not commit a criminal act.

BTW I am not really a "law and order" kind of guy like Jack, I grew up with criminals as a youth, not cops, and I fully believe that cops abuse their authority on a regular basis, but this case isn't/wasn't about "all cops" this was one cop and one thug. I think Tini summed it up best, this kid "lived stupid and died stupid"

Yet, he was acquitted. I don't know what the evidence is against Wilson, or how it was resented, nor can I say what was in his mind when he shot Brown; was he in fear of his life, was he just pissed, would he have shot a white man or woman under the same circumstances, I can't say. So, I'm just saying that just because a jury or grand jury does not hold someone liable for a crime does not mean they didn't do it. I would not be surprised if Wilson's legal and occupational problems are far from over.

This wasn't a trial where the threshold is reasonable doubt. There burden is "preponderance of the evidence", i.e. only 51% sure he committed a crime to send it to a jury for trial.

A grand jury process is different than a jury process. However, they both rely on evidence, how it's presented and how it's interpreted. My point is just because there is no evidence to convict, or for a grand jury to conclude that a case should go to trial, doesn't guarantee that the person is innocent. I've seen cases where there was a high probability that the person was guilty, but because the evidence was sufficiently gotten rid of, tainted or misconstrued, the case never went to trial. Again, I'm not say I know anything about whether Wilson's shooting Brown was justified. The fact that the grand jury did not send it to trial increases, in my mind, the probability that he's innocent of wrong doing, but again, in my mind, does not guarantee it.

There was apparently no cross examination by the ADA of Wilson’s grand jury testimony. He was just allowed to tell his version of the story – and much of what I have heard sounded carefully rehearsed to meet the no culpability standard – “I considered all my options when Brown  reached into the car.”

that he was convicted in civil court. And, I'm quite aware of how grand juries, and criminal vs civil courts operate. My main point is that, which ever process you're in, what evidence is available, what evidence is entered in to the case, what evidence that is withheld, how the evidence is presented, and how it is interpreted influences the outcome of the case. And, that process can be perverted. I have no emotional investment in whether Wilson is guilty of not. I have not been following the story. And, in my mind, the fact that the grand jury decided not to send the case up to be prosecuted in criminal court increase the probability that Wilson did not do anything worth prosecuting, but does not make it an absolute. Just like in many car accidents, there is usually one person deemed 'at fault', when in reality both people may have done something different to prevented it. Inattentiveness, speed, etc. is difficult to factor in as proof of culpability. However, if the other person deemed 'not at fault' is going the appropriate speed, is obeying traffic laws and rules of the road, and is fully attentive to his or her driving, that accident can often be avoided. Yep! It seems Brown was an accident ready to happen. We don't know why, and we don't absolutely know if Wilson could have done anything different to avoid the outcome.

I thought you liked watching L&O, most of been SOE.