Originally posted by Robtard
It's a crappy camera and it's at an angle where you can't see Brown's hands when they're on the counter. The general consensus is that Brown had and used money; some versions of the story say he just didn't pay in full.
True, however if you see he has his hands behind his back before he puts them on the counter, and there was nothing in them.
Cheers.
Originally posted by Bardock42
So, you do not have a source for your numbers. Surely you must see how an alleged, random Facebook post, written in the early days after the incident, not to be found anymore, is very weak support for your claim, which was so authoritatively delivered.Contrary to what you posted, it seems evident that it is still unclear what, if anything, was stolen, what, if anything, was paid for, and who actually reported this as a robbery, when the store owner, the alleged victim, denies that he, or any of his employees, reported it as such.
This is a bit of a red herring. In my initial post in August, which I quoted, I stated that someone else present assumed it was a robbery and called the police. I never stated that the store clerk did. Moreover, the video of the Store Owner's lawyer stating that neither he (the store owner) nor any of his employees called in the robbery has been posted both here in this thread and on CNN. Mike Brown's actions in the store allegedly caused some third party, who may or may not have been an employee or proprietor of that business, to call the police and report the situation as a robbery. When Officer Wilson, per his account, initially approaches Mike Brown and Dorian Wilson in the street he did so due to the duo walking in the middle of the street, but then surmised that they fit the description of the suspects on the APB for the store 'robbery' due to their physical description and possession of a large quantity of cigars. Whether or not Brown paid for or stole the cigars (though the evidence and court records state this as a theft), the altercation with Wilson at the police truck and subsequent fleeing of the crime scene that occurred is what prompted his death. The situation in the store, whether a theft or just unnecessary aggression during a legal transaction occurred, is what initially made Brown a suspect, as some party present at the scene reported his actions in the store as a crime.
I called your numbers into question, and as far as I can see you have not brought any evidence to support them. I find it weird that you present them as fact, when it is obviously tenuous hearsay and conjecture. That's the only aspect I have addressedin my post.
I am aware of Darren Wilson's account and the many flaws with it as well. The situation is by no means as cut and dry as TI (and to some extent you) try to make it seem.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I called your numbers into question, and as far as I can see you have not brought any evidence to support them. I find it weird that you present them as fact, when it is obviously tenuous hearsay and conjecture. That's the only aspect I have addressedin my post.I am aware of Darren Wilson's account and the many flaws with it as well. The situation is by no means as cut and dry as TI (and to some extent you) try to make it seem.
There is nothing but cold hard facts of the video in which he did not pay for anything and assaulted the clerk and robbed the store.
Try harder to keep ignoring video evidence and worry about adding up coin change, retard.
Originally posted by Bardock42
MF DELPH claimed very specific numbers. Numbers that I have not heard previously anywhere, and wasn't able to corroborate independently with Google searches. I was asking him to provide a source for his very clear claims. The video does not prove anything in regards to numbers either way. However, contrary to your opinion, MF DELPH's account, that you celebrated in your infantile manner, also states that Mike Brown payed at least partially.
The video, sworn statements in court and evidence prove he did not pay for anything.
Ignoramus.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I called your numbers into question, and as far as I can see you have not brought any evidence to support them. I find it weird that you present them as fact, when it is obviously tenuous hearsay and conjecture. That's the only aspect I have addressedin my post.I am aware of Darren Wilson's account and the many flaws with it as well. The situation is by no means as cut and dry as TI (and to some extent you) try to make it seem.
The cost of a 5 pack of Swishers Sweets Cigarillos is $4.50 to $4.99 + tax, and a single cigarillo costs $0.69 to $1.49 + tax depending on which flavor/size you are attempting to purchase and which convenience store you go to (they are typically cheaper at 7-Eleven). Swishers are sold as singles, boxes of 5, boxes of 25 (5 boxes of 5), or boxes of 60 (12 boxes of 5). I take it you are either not a weed smoker or have never purchased a pack of blunts, or both, which is fine, not everyone smokes weed or uses blunts. That's not hearsay or conjecture, those are the actual price and quantity of the product which Mike Brown handed to Dorian Johnson in the video (the box of 5, which Johnson places back on the counter), and the singles which he grabbed a large quantity of in the video. I'm sure the grand jury evidence has an exact figure of the number of cigars which Mike Brown had in his possession. Either of us can probably actually look that up for a definitive answer. As a matter of fact, I'm going to Google the Grand Jury evidence which has been made public and see if it includes an accounting of the actual quantity of cigars Brown had in his possession rather than us sparring over it. That should put this tangent to rest. For the record, I personally prefer Strawberry or Banana Phillies.
Here's a link to the Grand Jury Evidence for all of those interested:
http://apps.stlpublicradio.org/ferguson-project/evidence.html
I'm going to look through it momentarily.
Originally posted by MF DELPH
Note:If you read the radio traffic document (beginning at Track 349) it appears that it was a woman at the scene that called in the robbery and claimed Brown walked off with a whole box of cigars. Still looking for the quantity of cigars.
*edit
I'm not taking any jabs. I have no issue with Bardock.
My only issue is the assuredness with which some people interpret the video, when it is so clearly not certain at all what happened in the store.
Nothing I could find on Google or through other sources makes a clear statement about what was taken from the store, what was paid for in the store, what Mike Brown had on him, etc. Hence why I asked for a source of your claims, as they are the most specific ones I have heard yet.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Bardock will run from court based evidence just like he runs from video evidence, and rely on his "credible" 3rd party internet sources.
EDIT: Also, stop being a damn cheerleader. You'd have a point if you posted the link to the grand jury evidence but you're not. The only links/sources you post are unreliable agenda-fests which support whatever claim you're trying to make. You seem to be a constant perpetrator of confirmation bias, so again, stop cheerleading and stop being hypocritical.
Still searching the docs for info on the robbery. There's a whole lot of information in all of these records but it deals primarily with the shooting, not the 911 call that preceded it. Gonna keep digging.
I can assure you, though, that a box of Swisher Sweets Cigars (which is a pack of 5) costs $4.99, not $0.49. The cheapest Swisher is a single mini flavored Cigarillo (which is approximately 1.5 times the size of a cigarette), which sells for $0.69-$0.79, and is not ideal for rolling marijuana blunts. For marijuana blunts you want the full sized cigarillos as you need all the paper to roll (you dump the tobacco and replace with weed). I also believe, though can't confirm, given the video and contents of Mike's hands as he's walking out the store, that when the woman on the 911 call told the dispatch operator that he walked off with a box she was referring to the entire box on the counter which contained all the cigars for sale, not just the 5 pack, as Mike walked off with far more than the single 5-pack box that Dorian Johnson placed back on the counter. He didn't take ALL the cigars, but he took more than a single 5 pack.
Originally posted by MF DELPH
Still searching the docs for info on the robbery. There's a whole lot of information in all of these records but it deals primarily with the shooting, not the 911 call that preceded it. Gonna keep digging.I can assure you, though, that a box of Swisher Sweets Cigars (which is a pack of 5) costs $4.99, not $0.49. The cheapest Swisher is a single mini flavored Cigarillo (which is approximately 1.5 times the size of a cigarette), which sells for $0.69-$0.79, and is not ideal for rolling marijuana blunts. For marijuana blunts you want the full sized cigarillos as you need all the paper to roll (you dump the tobacco and replace with weed). I also believe, though can't confirm, given the video and contents of Mike's hands as he's walking out the store, that when the woman on the 911 call told the dispatch operator that he walked off with a box she was referring to the entire box on the counter which contained all the cigars for sale, not just the 5 pack, as Mike walked off with far more than the single 5-pack box that Dorian Johnson placed back on the counter. He didn't take ALL the cigars, but he took more than a single 5 pack.
Even if we take your calculation for what he took at face value. Where is the evidence that he paid 5$ and not 10 or 20 or nothing?
Originally posted by Bardock42
I am aware of Darren Wilson's account and the many flaws with it as well.
Wait...
The many flaws in it?
Okay, in that case, I need to check what I thought was accurate against those many flaws.
Here's how I thought the situation went down (I will be skipping tons of crap):
Wilson approached the duo walking in the middle of the street. Yelled at them to get on the side-walk. They bitched back at him.
Wilson left but then doubled back because he either realized that they were the ones talked about in that 911 call or thought they looked suspicious or something.
Some more words were had, Brown started to attack Wilson in his car, Johnson walked to the other side of the car (passenger side) while Wilson was attacked. Brown reached for his gun and Wilson got it out, got a shot off, and shot Brown's thumb. Another shot went off but didn't hit anyone.
Brown started to run and got quite a bit away. Wilson got out of his car, fired several shots, all of which missed, and Brown stopped, turned around, put his hands up, and walked 25 feet back towards Wilson. Something happened and Wilson started to fire again. Brown dropped his arms and leaned forward either to charge or was collapsing, and Wilson shot him through the top of the head, killing him. Also, I should note that Wilson said he backed up as Brown approached/charged him and the place where the casings fell supported that claim (because some were by the door and some were back a bit behind the car/door area, indicating he had backed up while firing more shots).
Is my understanding accurate? How closely does my understanding of the situation match up with Wilson's account?
Please, don't hold back: I'd rather get the situation correct without having to read hundreds of grand jury documents like Delph.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Even if we take your calculation for what he took at face value. Where is the evidence that he paid 5$ and not 10 or 20 or nothing?
To which I could counter if he had the money to pay for the 5 pack box of cigars he would have had no reason to steal more. Logically, that's not the case. However, for the sake of moving this conversation along, let's say, hypothetically, Mike Brown DID pay for those cigars in full and the allegations of theft are completely false. For the sake of argument I will concede that Mike Brown paid for the cigars. All the cigars he snatched, not just the box of 5. Let's put what happened in the store aside.
The incident in the store, which was erroneously, as conceded, called in to the police as a robbery is not an actual robbery, only perceived as a robbery, and the police are now acting under a false pretense that Mike Brown is a suspect in a crime that was not actually a crime, but appeared to be a crime.
When an officer approaches him after this non-crime and asks him to get out of the street, completely unrelated to the incident in the store, Mike Brown is non-compliant. When the officer begins to exit his vehicle to detain these non-compliant, but non-cigar stealing citizens, who are engaging a misdemeanor traffic violation, Mike Brown (who did not just steal cigars from a store, but acted in such an aggressive manner towards the store clerk and merchandise that a witness to the store incident thought it was an actual robbery and reported it as a robbery to the police), now gets into a physical altercation with the officer approaching him for a non-violent, unrelated jaywalking citation, and fights with him so violently that the officer's firearm is discharged twice, one round going through the driver's side armrest of the vehicle, the other through the windshield. After this incident of fighting with the officer, Mike Brown runs away from the scene and the cop pursues.
What relevance to the above sequence of events does the exact quantity and purchase history of the cigars play?