Thursday, November 27, 2014

The Famous "Hulk Hogan" Quote



“When I grabbed him, the only way I can describe it is I felt like a five-year-old holding Hulk Hogan," Wilson said in the testimony that has been released by the St. Louis County Prosecutor's Office. "The face that he had was looking straight through me like I wasn’t even there … He started to lean forward as he got that close, like he was going to just tackle me, just go right through me.”

So said the 6 foot 2 inch, 210 pound officer armed with a gun, talking about a fat teenager acting aggressively. 

I call bullshit on that one.  Like any defensive shooting, the shooter will say anything afterwards to make his actions seem more justified. 

35 comments:

  1. Dead men tell no tales.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When Zimmerman had some weight on his assailant you weren't making it sound like he was just "fat".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I bet if we go back, we'll see references to how fat Zimmerman got before the trial. But, so what. Could you find a pettier point to make?

      Delete
    2. My point is you guys kept saying Zimmerman should have been able to handle Martin without a gun because he out weighed him. Now you turn on a dime and say Wilson should have no problem handling Brown because he was more fit. It obvious that you use this as a rationalization, not a normal logical train of thought.

      Delete
    3. TS, you're really getting loose with your memory of what I've said in the past.

      Delete
    4. Really TS? That is a total distortion (lie) of what has been said in defense of Martin.,

      Delete
    5. I presume TS spent a good hour researching my archives and came up empty.

      Delete
  3. Mike I wonder what your wording would be if you had been physically assaulted by someone out weighing you buy a substantial amount? And during the assault what would you be thinking about the animal attacking you intentions toward you were?

    Anyone who knows me even my friends in law enforcement know I am no fan of law enforcement .Living in Las Vegas where the LVMPD regularly murder and assault people and get away with it I am keenly aware of law enforcements misuse of authority in this country and have been on the receiving end of it several times in my life. However there are times when police are falsely accused of using excessive force and this may or may not be one of them,we were not in Darren Wilson's mind at the time to know what he was thinking or feeling and like it or not Michael Brown was assaulting him and is now dead so we dont know his thoughts or feeling either.My personal belief is any officer involved in a shooting should never work the streets again.

    MBIAC......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You really have a difficult time agreeing with me don't you? By the end of your rambling comment you were almost there.

      Delete
  4. Mike Brown was flabby at best.

    Darren Wilson is also 6'4" - as usual, Laci is correct. He weighed less, but was more muscular.

    Presumably ALL police, regardless of their size, are - like those in the military - trained to deal with people larger than themselves. After all, not all cops are 6'4".

    So this was a feeble excuse at best.

    Add to that, that apparently Darren Wilson has affiliations with the KKK -- as do it appears, other officers in the Ferguson PD.

    And add to that the last job as a cop that Darren Wilson had was in Jennings MO, where the cop shop was shut down and disbanded because of corruption and racially motivated violence towards black people. Wilson does not appear to be the only cop who came to Ferguson from that PD, suggesting a pattern of racially motivated violence.

    Then add to all this that Darren Wilson himself had a history at around the same age as Mike Brown of criminal activity -- reportedly very SIMILAR activity. So, you would expect someone who had been on the bad guy side of this kind of stop to be a bit more understanding of how a kid can turn their life around, and why a cop should NOT be violent the way this guy was.

    Wilson's version of events is implausible at best, and perjury at worst.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DG, You brought up the Jennings PD thing before. It seems hard to believe that a nearby department would be willing to risk the grief associated with taking on any cop who's record or behavior would come back to bite them. Do you perhaps have anything specifically naming Wilson as engaging in corrupt practices in Jennings? Or is this the guilt be association thing?
      And now there is the claim that the Ferguson PD and/or Wilson is a hotbed of KKK activity. I'm assuming your referring to the claim released by Anonymous. (Not to be confused with the Anonymi who comment here.)
      At one point Brown's friend and partner in crime claimed that Brown was shot in the back while surrendering with his hands up, and that turns out to be sort of untrue. At least it seems not to jive with the physical evidence.
      Any documentation to back up the KKK claim?

      Delete
    2. Too bad the lying witnesses haven't been charged with obstruction of justice. And too bad the step-dad wasn't charged with inciting to riot. And especially too bad Officer Wilson wasn't charged with at least manslaughter.

      Delete
    3. From what I learned of the Grand Jury system, compliments of Laci, the only thing keeping charges from being brought is the Prosecutor.
      However, if the grand jury fails to indite using a preponderance of evidence standard, how exactly would the outcome be any different using a beyond a reasonable doubt standard?

      Delete
    4. However, if the grand jury fails to indite using a preponderance of evidence standard, how exactly would the outcome be any different using a beyond a reasonable doubt standard?

      Especially since, if I remember correctly, it takes only nine of the twelve grand jurors to indict--and even that low standard could not be met in this case.

      Delete
    5. "And too bad the step-dad wasn't charged with inciting to riot." I agree with you on this Mike.

      "Too bad the lying witnesses haven't been charged with obstruction of justice." what evidence is there that anyone is lying Mike people remember events in very different ways all the time. Or is it possible that there is a racial component at play here and some witnesses have lied to support the Michael was a gentle giant theory or to support Wilsons account of events But i haven't read all the transcripts to be able to form an unbiased opinion on weather or not witnesses lied...Have you Mike?

      MBIAC......

      Delete
    6. To bad SS and these other gun loons don't even know enough to know what a bad job the prosecution did. Just idiots spewing and proving their idiocy.

      Delete
    7. "what evidence is there that anyone is lying Mike people remember events in very different ways all the time. "

      The evidence was presented to the grand jury of just what happened. This proved the witnesses were in some cases lying through their teeth.

      Delete
    8. Mike it proves nothing

      MBIAC.......

      Delete
    9. Oh really. When DNA evidence shows that Mike Brown was not retreating with his hands raised over his head, it proves nothing about those who said he was?

      Delete
    10. In traumatic situations people can see a single event very differently..or as i said before "Or is it possible that there is a racial component at play here and some witnesses have lied to support the Michael was a gentle giant theory or to support Wilsons account of events But i haven't read all the transcripts to be able to form an unbiased opinion on weather or not witnesses lied...Have you Mike?" HAVE YOU MIKE?

      MBIAC..........

      Delete
    11. But i haven't read all the transcripts to be able to form an unbiased opinion on weather or not witnesses lied...Have you Mike?" HAVE YOU MIKE?

      Ascertaining the facts before reaching his preferred conclusion, which we are to treat as Holy Writ, isn't Mikeb's style.

      Delete
    12. Well Kurt he would not want to be seen as a "Traitor to the cause" as Flying Junior put it..It is the same reason he is so willing to support the crimes of the current president and condemn those of the previous one. Criminal politicians are Criminals period

      MBIAC.............

      Delete
    13. "which we are to treat as Holy Writ, "

      I really can't imagine where you get that from. I don't think I ever demanded any such thing, any more than you have. We're all just expressing our opinions on a blog.

      This sounds like another example of your misreperesentating what I say, lying in other words, unless of course this was irony again.

      Delete
    14. I said exactly what I meant. When you make an assertion and rather than back it up with facts and logic, but instead say we should believe it because it's "commonsense," you are, in effect, telling us to take it on faith. It's far closer to religious dogma than to informed, data-driven logical analysis.

      Delete
    15. Care for an example?

      When SSG asked you for some evidence supporting your contention that "shall issue" concealed carry laws somehow increase criminal behavior on the part of those who do not have a carry permit, your answer was that he should, "Just use [his] imagination a bit."

      Suddenly, it's not incumbent on you to prove your contention--or even merely provide compelling evidence (or any evidence)--it's incumbent on us to "imagine" that your claim is true.

      Wow--can you "imagine" how happy it would make attorneys if they could just tell jurors to "imagine" that their favored interpretation of the case was true, or how great it would be for doctoral candidates if they could just tell the dissertation committee to "imagine" that the dissertation has truly expanded knowledge in the field?

      Alas, though--the real world doesn't work that way. What does work that way is religion. In religion, believing something without any evidence is a virtue, and proof of one's strong, unshakeable faith.

      Yep--engaging in debate with you is a lot like asking you to "Give Me That Old Time Religion."

      Delete
    16. Kurt, I'll try to respond to your double comment now. Your bizarre twisting of my suggestion about "using your imagination" is typical mendacious bullshit on your part. Many things we discuss on this blog cannot be proven with evidence because for some things no evidence exists. For example, my hidden criminal thing. You like to pretend the world is simple and divided between criminals and law abiding people. My response is to use your imagination and honesty and estimate how many of the never-convicted-of-a-felony gun owners are other than law-abiding. There's no proof. But anyone who's the least bit honest should be able to admit that there are many hidden criminals out there.

      But, I guess this is where we part. You're not honest enough to argue fairly. You want to win the argument at any cost.

      Delete
    17. Thank you for your attempted response to my nearly-four-hour-separated "double comment."

      Many things we discuss on this blog cannot be proven with evidence because for some things no evidence exists.

      You're using the non-existence of evidence as a substitute for evidence. When confronted with the fact that you cannot back up your assertion with evidence, you say "no evidence exists," as if that is an argument for accepting your assertion as true: "There is no evidence, so evidence cannot be fairly demanded of me, therefore, you must accept what I say, or you're being 'dishonest.'"

      Keep preaching your dogma, Brother Mikeb.

      Delete
    18. " My response is to use your imagination and honesty and estimate how many of the never-convicted-of-a-felony gun owners are other than law-abiding. There's no proof. But anyone who's the least bit honest should be able to admit that there are many hidden criminals out there." Are you including yourself in that Statement Mike..

      MBIAC...............

      Delete
    19. Yeah, I guess the one-strike-you're-out policy would apply to me too. But, other than a snipe in my direction, what's your point?

      Because there's no evidence for something, do you insist it does not exist? Kurt tried, I would call it a bumbling attempt but I know that word bothers him, to turn it around on me. But that doesn't really fly for two reasons. I'm the one putting out the possibility of certain things for which there's no proof and asking if you can accept them. I'm certainly not using the lack of proof as a reason to demand anything of you, as the mendacious Kurt said. And secondly, the challenge to use some honesty and imagination is yours not mine.

      Delete
    20. Because there's no evidence for something, do you insist it does not exist? Kurt tried . . .

      I "tried" nothing of the sort. My point is that without evidence, we have only our faith in your honesty, knowledge, and logic to support our ability to take your assertions seriously. That's some shaky support.

      . . . I would call it a bumbling attempt but I know that word bothers him . . .

      Not at all. Pray continue to serve your urgent need to use that word as often as possible, and to provide your helpful constant demonstrations of just how one "bumbles."

      Delete
  5. "Like any defensive shooting, the shooter will say anything afterwards to make his actions seem more justified."

    It seems there were many people who as you put it were saying anything to further their individual agenda regarding the shooting. Here is an article which seems to list a fair number of people whose stories didn't add up one way or other.
    Of course, Wilson's version of events seems to be backed up with corresponding physical evidence. The other stories listed, not so much.

    "Prosecutors exposed these inconsistencies before the jurors, which likely influenced their decision not to indict Wilson in Brown's death.
    Bob McCulloch, the St. Louis County prosecutor, said the grand jury had to weigh testimony that conflicted with physical evidence and conflicting statements by witnesses as it decided whether Wilson should face charges.
    "Many witnesses to the shooting of Michael Brown made statements inconsistent with other statements they made and also conflicting with the physical evidence. Some were completely refuted by the physical evidence," McCulloch said."

    http://news.yahoo.com/ferguson-grand-jury-papers-full-inconsistencies-161011644.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wilson's story may have matched, more or less, the physical evidence, but that doesn't help us with his mindset and whether or not he really feared for his life. In many DGU situations that's the sticking point.

      Delete
    2. The dead man didn't get to tell his tale, but that's the old saying; make sure he's dead so he can't tell his side.

      Delete