1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Ferguson / Staten Island Decisions -- No Indictments

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Boom_70, Nov 16, 2014.

  1. PW2

    PW2 Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    Because Bill Cosby was not a polarizing political figure.

    But it was my recollection that there was some excitement when the President called out his own.
     
  2. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    It's because they already hated Obama for being Kenyan and/or Muslim, while they already loved Cosby for being a cool black guy for so many decades.
     
  3. PW2

    PW2 Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    Which post are you responding to? It can't be mine.
     
  4. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    [​IMG]

    White man's porn
     
  5. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    Am I missing something? Nothing I've read even suggests Michael Brown's dad was a deadbeat.
     
  6. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    No, it's that a black man is/was NOT MAKING EXCUSES for the disturbingly high percentage of black men who happen to be deadbeat dads.

    There is a difference.

    You can be a pretty crappy human being, and still be correct about something. As Cosby was.
     
  7. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    So, I've heard how great Federal prosecutors are at getting their grand juries to return indictments.

    And, the consensus seems to be that the cops and prosecutors in Ferguson and St. Louis County are a bunch of local yocals who are willing to cover up for a cop involved in bad shooting.

    So, how do they compare to the Feds?

    How often do the Feds indict federal law enforcement officers involved in a bad shooting?

    When's the last time an FBI agent was involved in a shooting that was determined to not have been justified?
     
  8. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    Stop with the bullshit. There was never a comparison to say the feds are better than states. Silver used the federal numbers because state-by-state numbers are very difficult to come by, and he talked to people saying it was extremely rare for non-indictments in state cases too.

    You aren't this fucking stupid to mischaracterize information like that. You're just being an asshole.
     
  9. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    Is there any record anywhere of the grand jury even attempting to address with Wilson the contradictions in his own testimony?

    Because there sure is a record of the grand jury and prosecutors doing exactly that with every other non-police eyewitness.
     
  10. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    It's not bullshit.

    It's apples to oranges, and anyone who knows anything knows this.

    The Feds charge a case when they have an overwhelming evidence. And, they prosecute cases where they have financial documents, and/or the testimony of a co-conspirator.

    They don't prosecute the same kind of messy he said/she said cases that local prosecutors have to bring, where they have to rely on eye-witness testimony, that is often in conflict.

    Silver, and the folks that are regurgitating his post, are engaging in propaganda designed to convince the uninformed. Sadly, it's working on them, and some that should know better.

    And, the FBI's run of justified shootings defies all logic. It makes the Giants post season clutchness pale in comparison.

    Every one of the FBI's shootings has been good? For years? Really? You believe that?

    How about the Chechen kid in Florida who knew the Boston bombers? Look at that case and tell me it shouldn't have been brought to a grand jury.

    The bitching about the Brown/Wilson case has nothing to do with the facts. It has to do with effecting social change. People think this case can -- or could have -- helped to create social change, so it got a lot of attention.

    The FBI blowing away an unarmed Chechen kid was not a potential for social change, so no one gives a shit. And, the FBI agents involved are still working. I'm not even sure if their names were ever released.
     
  11. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    Yeah, if they had quizzed him just a little more, maybe it would have turned out that Wilson wasn't even there that day. Maybe he was just repeating what others had told him about the case.
     
  12. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Re: Ferguson Decision -- No Indictment

    No, I don't believe that about the FBI either, that their shootings are justified.

    I don't even know where that became part of the conversation. But they are part of the same overzealous law-enforcement machine.

    I seriously don't know where the fuck that comparison came from.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page