Mike Brown Grand Jury decision thread. DECISION: NO CHARGES AGAINST DARREN WILSON!!
- Thread starter newarkhiphop
- Start date
Haven't really spoke on this too much but still, and will forever anger me.
Last night I was watching End of Watch w/ my brother, and there was a scene where the cops went to this mans car. The man took a gun out on the cops and the cops got their gun back and successfully apprehended the main w/o incident. That put shivers down my spine.
Last night I was watching End of Watch w/ my brother, and there was a scene where the cops went to this mans car. The man took a gun out on the cops and the cops got their gun back and successfully apprehended the main w/o incident. That put shivers down my spine.
DaRealness
I think very deeply
Rapmastermind
Superstar
Haven't spoken on the verdict cause honestly I'm not surprised. Black America can keep being in denial but it's clear the message they are sending. Darren Wilson will get his one way or another.
jesus isn't a real person breh....
New York City Congressman Adam Clayton Powell warned that if Kennedy did not move quickly on civil rights in Birmingham, as well as nationally, then riots would spread throughout the country, including to Washington DC.[36] Malcolm X affirmed Powell's warning, as well as his criticism of the president.[37] Malcolm cited the federal response to the Birmingham crisis as evidence of skewed priorities:[38]
President Kennedy did not send troops to Alabama when dogs were biting black babies. He waited three weeks until the situation exploded. He then sent troops after the Negroes had demonstrated their ability to defend themselves. In his talk with Alabama editors Kennedy did not urge that Negroes be treated right because it is the right thing to do. Instead, he said that if the Negroes aren't well treated the Muslims would become a threat. He urged a change not because it is right but because the world is watching this country. Kennedy is wrong because his motivation is wrong.
Malcolm X later said in his well-known Message to the Grass Roots speech:
By the way, right at that time Birmingham had exploded, and the Negroes in Birmingham —— remember, they also exploded. They began to stab the crackers in the back and bust them up ’side their head —— yes, they did. That’s when Kennedy sent in the troops, down in Birmingham. So, and right after that, Kennedy got on the television and said “this is a moral issue.”
Malcolm X's evaluation is largely confirmed by modern scholarship. Nicholas Bryant, author of the most comprehensive study of President Kennedy's decision-making on civil rights policy, notes that during the predominantly nonviolent Birmingham campaign, Kennedy refused to make a commitment to forceful intervention or new legislation. Not even the internationally publicized photograph of a police dog tearing into a black youth was decisive for the president. "The legislative situation was hopeless, he claimed, and he did not think the events in Birmingham would influence the voting intentions of a single lawmaker...While Kennedy recognized the potent symbolic value of the [police dog] image, he was unwilling to counteract it with a symbolic gesture of his own." [39] Bryant concludes:
It was the black-on-white violence of May 11 - not the publication of the startling photograph a week earlier – that represented the real watershed in Kennedy’s thinking, and the turning point in administration policy. Kennedy had grown used to segregationist attacks against civil rights protesters. But he – along with his brother and other administration officials – was far more troubled by black mobs running amok.[40]
Timothy Tyson affirms this position, writing that “The violence threatened to mar SCLCs victory but also helped cement White House support for civil rights. It was one of the enduring ironies of the civil rights movement that the threat of violence was so critical to the success of nonviolence.” [41] This relationship has been noted by numerous other historians, including Howard Zinn,[42] Clayborne Carson,[43] Glenn Eskew [44] and Gary Younge.[45] Often cited in support are declassifed recordings of a White House meeting on May 12, 1963:
Robert Kennedy: The Negro Reverend Walker...he said that the Negroes, when dark comes tonight, they’re going to start going after the policemen - headhunting - trying to shoot to kill policemen. He says it’s completely out of hand....you could trigger off a good deal of violence around the country now, with Negroes saying they’ve been abused for all these years and they’re going to follow the ideas of the Black Muslims now...If they feel on the other hand that the federal government is their friend, that it’s intervening for them, that it’s going to work for them, then it will head some of that off. I think that’s the strongest argument for doing something...
President Kennedy: First we have to have law and order, so the Negro’s not running all over the city... If the [local Birmingham desegregation] agreement blows up, the other remedy we have under that condition is to send legislation up to congress this week as our response...As a means of providing relief we have to have legislation.[46]
Oh gee I wonder what modern city's situation reminds me of the entire Birmingham situation..........Oh gee what President's mindset reminds us of Kennedy's mindset....hmm I cannot put my finger on his name
anyone know?
President Kennedy did not send troops to Alabama when dogs were biting black babies. He waited three weeks until the situation exploded. He then sent troops after the Negroes had demonstrated their ability to defend themselves. In his talk with Alabama editors Kennedy did not urge that Negroes be treated right because it is the right thing to do. Instead, he said that if the Negroes aren't well treated the Muslims would become a threat. He urged a change not because it is right but because the world is watching this country. Kennedy is wrong because his motivation is wrong.
Malcolm X later said in his well-known Message to the Grass Roots speech:
By the way, right at that time Birmingham had exploded, and the Negroes in Birmingham —— remember, they also exploded. They began to stab the crackers in the back and bust them up ’side their head —— yes, they did. That’s when Kennedy sent in the troops, down in Birmingham. So, and right after that, Kennedy got on the television and said “this is a moral issue.”
Malcolm X's evaluation is largely confirmed by modern scholarship. Nicholas Bryant, author of the most comprehensive study of President Kennedy's decision-making on civil rights policy, notes that during the predominantly nonviolent Birmingham campaign, Kennedy refused to make a commitment to forceful intervention or new legislation. Not even the internationally publicized photograph of a police dog tearing into a black youth was decisive for the president. "The legislative situation was hopeless, he claimed, and he did not think the events in Birmingham would influence the voting intentions of a single lawmaker...While Kennedy recognized the potent symbolic value of the [police dog] image, he was unwilling to counteract it with a symbolic gesture of his own." [39] Bryant concludes:
It was the black-on-white violence of May 11 - not the publication of the startling photograph a week earlier – that represented the real watershed in Kennedy’s thinking, and the turning point in administration policy. Kennedy had grown used to segregationist attacks against civil rights protesters. But he – along with his brother and other administration officials – was far more troubled by black mobs running amok.[40]
Timothy Tyson affirms this position, writing that “The violence threatened to mar SCLCs victory but also helped cement White House support for civil rights. It was one of the enduring ironies of the civil rights movement that the threat of violence was so critical to the success of nonviolence.” [41] This relationship has been noted by numerous other historians, including Howard Zinn,[42] Clayborne Carson,[43] Glenn Eskew [44] and Gary Younge.[45] Often cited in support are declassifed recordings of a White House meeting on May 12, 1963:
Robert Kennedy: The Negro Reverend Walker...he said that the Negroes, when dark comes tonight, they’re going to start going after the policemen - headhunting - trying to shoot to kill policemen. He says it’s completely out of hand....you could trigger off a good deal of violence around the country now, with Negroes saying they’ve been abused for all these years and they’re going to follow the ideas of the Black Muslims now...If they feel on the other hand that the federal government is their friend, that it’s intervening for them, that it’s going to work for them, then it will head some of that off. I think that’s the strongest argument for doing something...
President Kennedy: First we have to have law and order, so the Negro’s not running all over the city... If the [local Birmingham desegregation] agreement blows up, the other remedy we have under that condition is to send legislation up to congress this week as our response...As a means of providing relief we have to have legislation.[46]
Oh gee I wonder what modern city's situation reminds me of the entire Birmingham situation..........Oh gee what President's mindset reminds us of Kennedy's mindset....hmm I cannot put my finger on his name
anyone know?
Prosecutors repeatedly stressed Brown's pot use
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_71a79204-ff00-5070-9d1e-96098250e723.html
When St. Louis County Police conducted a followup interview of two construction workers who witnessed the Michael Brown shooting, a detective focused not on what they had seen but on a single word one of the men had said to Brown: “wax.”
Pot smokers use the term to describe a process that concentrates marijuana’s most active ingredient — tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) — into a highly potent sticky tar.
The worker told police he had made an offhand remark that Brown should try waxing to get a better high. But he said Brown told him he had never heard of it.
Waxing became a theme in a three-month long St. Louis County grand jury investigation.
Throughout months of prosecutors questioning witnesses, marijuana use, which may have involved waxing, was frequently presented as a potential explanation for why an unarmed 18-year-old attacked a police officer and then charged head first into a barrage of bullets, as Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson has testified.
But investigators did not present a single witness to the grand jury who said they saw Brown wax or saw him use marijuana the day of the shooting.
Even expert witnesses told jurors it was impossible to say how marijuana would have affected Brown.
Earlier this week, the grand jury decided not to indict Wilson for fatally shooting Brown on Aug. 9, and as promised St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch released thousands of pages of transcripts and investigative reports.
The documents reveal that a toxicology report showing Brown had marijuana in his system — along with testimony about an encounter Brown had with two construction workers shortly before Wilson shot him — played a significant role in the investigation.
One of the workers told the grand jury that Brown had approached him as he was trying to cut through some tree roots. He noticed Brown had a small amount of marijuana on him.
“You ought to try this wax stuff,” the worker said he had told Brown.
Investigators and the prosecutors would latch on to that suggestion to account for Brown’s combative behavior as described by Wilson.
Wilson told investigators that Brown initially attacked him in his car, punching him repeatedly and trying to grab his gun. Then, Wilson said, Brown fled, only to stop, turn around and charge back at him. Fearing for his life, Wilson shot Brown multiple times, killing him, the officer said.
Wilson described Brown as a “demon,” and testified that Wilson felt “like a 5-year-old holding onto Hulk Hogan” during Brown’s initial attack.
Early in the investigation, Dorian Johnson, Brown’s friend who was with him when he died, told detectives about the conversation Brown had had with the worker about waxing. In his testimony, Johnson denied that Brown had consumed any marijuana at all that day.
A detective told jurors the term “waxing” didn’t mean much to him at first. Then the results of Brown’s toxicology reports came back on Aug. 15 showing he had high levels of THC.
The detective testified that the medical examiner’s office told him the level in Brown’s system “could have potentially caused a loss in perception of space and time and there was also the possibility that there could have been hallucinations.”
Those comments, in light of Johnson’s statement, caused investigators to suspect that the workers may have sold Brown a wax form of marijuana, a detective told the grand jury.
For his part, the construction worker told the grand jury that he and Brown had a rambling conversation about Jesus and anger management. He said he saw that Brown had a small amount of marijuana in a piece of paper. Brown said he planned to smoke it. The worker said he then suggested that Brown try waxing.
Then Brown and Johnson went to Ferguson Market & Liquor where a video captured Brown stealing cigarillos and shoving a clerk.
St. Louis County police brought the construction workers in for questioning and advised them of their rights. Neither admitted to giving Brown the substance.
But prosecutors still pursued the waxing angle.
The jurors first heard the term from a police chemist Oct. 7, as he was being questioned by Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Kathi Alizadeh.
“If one were to ingest that, you would be consuming a higher level of THC than you would if you were to have smoked or ingested the plant material?” Alizadeh asked.
The chemist answered, “Yes, you would.”
The questions did not lead to any mention of Brown’s waxing, though, leaving it unclear why they had been raised.
In the coming weeks, jurors would hear 44 other references to waxing, from prosecutors and other expert witnesses, whose testimony never seemed to provide a clear answer as to whether it had played a role.
According to a toxicology report, Brown had 12 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood in his system. There were no other drugs detected.
In testimony before the grand jury on Nov. 4, the chief toxicologist for St. Louis County said it was clear Brown had consumed a lot of marijuana because it would take a lot to get a 300-pound person to the level of 12 nanograms of the compound THC in his bloodstream.
“In a small person, say like 100 pounds, to get to 12 nanograms wouldn’t take a lot,” the toxicologist said. “A single joint could easily do that. But when you talk about a larger body mass, just like drinking alcohol, larger persons can drink more alcohol because they have the receptacle to hold it.”
The toxicologist said it was impossible to conclude if Brown was a chronic marijuana user or had a single acute dose within hours of his death — or how either would have affected Brown.
Alizadeh then asked, “But you cannot draw any conclusions that he was suffering or that he was experiencing hallucinations or having a psychotic break?”
The toxicologist answered: “That is correct.”
Alizadeh asked if the toxicologist was familiar with “waxing.”
The toxicologist said it was a process of using gases such as butane to concentrate the intoxicants in the marijuana for “a lot more bang for the buck.”
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Sheila Whirley asked the toxicologist, if Brown had been “waxing,” would there be traces of butane in his system?
The toxicologist said no: Butane was too volatile.
So there was no way to tell if Brown was waxing? she asked.
No, the toxicologist said.
Dr. Michael Baden, the private pathologist retained by the Brown family, disputed that Brown had a large amount of THC in his body. In fact, Baden told jurors Brown had a “relative small amount, and how it affects somebody varies.”
“It doesn’t make people go crazy,” he said. “So toxicology, everything it has and everything it doesn’t have has significance, and in this instance, I think marijuana is significant that he smoked marijuana, but 99 out of 100 people taking marijuana aren’t going to get in a fight with a police officer over it, in my experience.”
Alizadeh then asked Baden three times if he was a toxicologist, twice if he was a pharmacologist, twice if he has been certified as an expert in toxicology and once if he has been certified as an expert in pharmacology.
Baden said he wasn’t a toxicologist but had expertise in interpreting toxicology reports as a medical examiner.
In fact, he said, he ran a toxicology lab in New York City for five years.
On the final day of testimony, Nov. 21, prosecutors again brought up waxing, acknowledging through questioning of a homicide detective that police had found no evidence that Brown had gotten wax from the workers.
why would that idiotic construction worker even bring it up in the first place....i don't know the race of either but if they gonna agree he had his hands up and verify what others said...why in the hell would you bring up Mike smoking pot and your conversations with him? How in the hell is that relevant....
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_71a79204-ff00-5070-9d1e-96098250e723.html
When St. Louis County Police conducted a followup interview of two construction workers who witnessed the Michael Brown shooting, a detective focused not on what they had seen but on a single word one of the men had said to Brown: “wax.”
Pot smokers use the term to describe a process that concentrates marijuana’s most active ingredient — tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) — into a highly potent sticky tar.
The worker told police he had made an offhand remark that Brown should try waxing to get a better high. But he said Brown told him he had never heard of it.
Waxing became a theme in a three-month long St. Louis County grand jury investigation.
Throughout months of prosecutors questioning witnesses, marijuana use, which may have involved waxing, was frequently presented as a potential explanation for why an unarmed 18-year-old attacked a police officer and then charged head first into a barrage of bullets, as Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson has testified.
But investigators did not present a single witness to the grand jury who said they saw Brown wax or saw him use marijuana the day of the shooting.
Even expert witnesses told jurors it was impossible to say how marijuana would have affected Brown.
Earlier this week, the grand jury decided not to indict Wilson for fatally shooting Brown on Aug. 9, and as promised St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch released thousands of pages of transcripts and investigative reports.
The documents reveal that a toxicology report showing Brown had marijuana in his system — along with testimony about an encounter Brown had with two construction workers shortly before Wilson shot him — played a significant role in the investigation.
One of the workers told the grand jury that Brown had approached him as he was trying to cut through some tree roots. He noticed Brown had a small amount of marijuana on him.
“You ought to try this wax stuff,” the worker said he had told Brown.
Investigators and the prosecutors would latch on to that suggestion to account for Brown’s combative behavior as described by Wilson.
Wilson told investigators that Brown initially attacked him in his car, punching him repeatedly and trying to grab his gun. Then, Wilson said, Brown fled, only to stop, turn around and charge back at him. Fearing for his life, Wilson shot Brown multiple times, killing him, the officer said.
Wilson described Brown as a “demon,” and testified that Wilson felt “like a 5-year-old holding onto Hulk Hogan” during Brown’s initial attack.
Early in the investigation, Dorian Johnson, Brown’s friend who was with him when he died, told detectives about the conversation Brown had had with the worker about waxing. In his testimony, Johnson denied that Brown had consumed any marijuana at all that day.
A detective told jurors the term “waxing” didn’t mean much to him at first. Then the results of Brown’s toxicology reports came back on Aug. 15 showing he had high levels of THC.
The detective testified that the medical examiner’s office told him the level in Brown’s system “could have potentially caused a loss in perception of space and time and there was also the possibility that there could have been hallucinations.”
Those comments, in light of Johnson’s statement, caused investigators to suspect that the workers may have sold Brown a wax form of marijuana, a detective told the grand jury.
For his part, the construction worker told the grand jury that he and Brown had a rambling conversation about Jesus and anger management. He said he saw that Brown had a small amount of marijuana in a piece of paper. Brown said he planned to smoke it. The worker said he then suggested that Brown try waxing.
Then Brown and Johnson went to Ferguson Market & Liquor where a video captured Brown stealing cigarillos and shoving a clerk.
St. Louis County police brought the construction workers in for questioning and advised them of their rights. Neither admitted to giving Brown the substance.
But prosecutors still pursued the waxing angle.
The jurors first heard the term from a police chemist Oct. 7, as he was being questioned by Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Kathi Alizadeh.
“If one were to ingest that, you would be consuming a higher level of THC than you would if you were to have smoked or ingested the plant material?” Alizadeh asked.
The chemist answered, “Yes, you would.”
The questions did not lead to any mention of Brown’s waxing, though, leaving it unclear why they had been raised.
In the coming weeks, jurors would hear 44 other references to waxing, from prosecutors and other expert witnesses, whose testimony never seemed to provide a clear answer as to whether it had played a role.
According to a toxicology report, Brown had 12 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood in his system. There were no other drugs detected.
In testimony before the grand jury on Nov. 4, the chief toxicologist for St. Louis County said it was clear Brown had consumed a lot of marijuana because it would take a lot to get a 300-pound person to the level of 12 nanograms of the compound THC in his bloodstream.
“In a small person, say like 100 pounds, to get to 12 nanograms wouldn’t take a lot,” the toxicologist said. “A single joint could easily do that. But when you talk about a larger body mass, just like drinking alcohol, larger persons can drink more alcohol because they have the receptacle to hold it.”
The toxicologist said it was impossible to conclude if Brown was a chronic marijuana user or had a single acute dose within hours of his death — or how either would have affected Brown.
Alizadeh then asked, “But you cannot draw any conclusions that he was suffering or that he was experiencing hallucinations or having a psychotic break?”
The toxicologist answered: “That is correct.”
Alizadeh asked if the toxicologist was familiar with “waxing.”
The toxicologist said it was a process of using gases such as butane to concentrate the intoxicants in the marijuana for “a lot more bang for the buck.”
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Sheila Whirley asked the toxicologist, if Brown had been “waxing,” would there be traces of butane in his system?
The toxicologist said no: Butane was too volatile.
So there was no way to tell if Brown was waxing? she asked.
No, the toxicologist said.
Dr. Michael Baden, the private pathologist retained by the Brown family, disputed that Brown had a large amount of THC in his body. In fact, Baden told jurors Brown had a “relative small amount, and how it affects somebody varies.”
“It doesn’t make people go crazy,” he said. “So toxicology, everything it has and everything it doesn’t have has significance, and in this instance, I think marijuana is significant that he smoked marijuana, but 99 out of 100 people taking marijuana aren’t going to get in a fight with a police officer over it, in my experience.”
Alizadeh then asked Baden three times if he was a toxicologist, twice if he was a pharmacologist, twice if he has been certified as an expert in toxicology and once if he has been certified as an expert in pharmacology.
Baden said he wasn’t a toxicologist but had expertise in interpreting toxicology reports as a medical examiner.
In fact, he said, he ran a toxicology lab in New York City for five years.
On the final day of testimony, Nov. 21, prosecutors again brought up waxing, acknowledging through questioning of a homicide detective that police had found no evidence that Brown had gotten wax from the workers.
why would that idiotic construction worker even bring it up in the first place....i don't know the race of either but if they gonna agree he had his hands up and verify what others said...why in the hell would you bring up Mike smoking pot and your conversations with him? How in the hell is that relevant....
True Blue Moon
Superstar
With their obsession on trying to prove this narrative, you know they leaned on him a little bit or at least lead him into that line of questioning, knowing he's under oath. I refuse to believe dude just happened to offer that up with no dirty tricks being used.
in any case whoever made that 911 call in the store...and i think i have an idea of which customer in the video made it.,,,i bet they must feel really stressed that they got themselves involved in something that wasnt their business over simple shoplifting...i can understand a serious crime that severely injured or killed someone....but something like this? you see how people being nosy always end up causing problems?
like years ago with Professor gates getting arrested cause some old cac lady couldn't mind her business
True Blue Moon
Superstar
Especially cuz the store owner wasn't stressing it. Calling the emergency line over a box of dutches? I don't even know man...
Huey Shootin
Banned
Blown away because of what? Although Blacks of our age are only just now awakening to this phenomenon, history is scarred with multiple examples of whites murdering innocent Black men without fear of legal reprisals. In fact, just 50 years earlier, Kennedy's justice department did just as Holder's has done in response to Mike Brown's murder, intervening in a state where glaring inequities of "justice" are visible. This has been occurring for as long as Blacks have been "emancipated" and convinced of equal representation under the(ir) law.
And it will continue until we face reality: We are not citizens of this nation. We are the descendants of slaves, living remnants of a system that regarded us as less than human. Whites painfully labor under a sick pretense of equality, but evidence of how farcical that claim is exists at every institutional level. It is time to bust back. Mumia is a soldier and now a political prisoner.
let me say it like this....look at this example
once at my supermarket job this dude was at my line... ...and asked the price on the big pack of paper towels he picked up...told him and said it was too expensive....so i walked up and put it on top of the garbage bin next to the rack where we put things back...the garbage bin is right next to the rack and we just put big things on there that cannot fit in the small racks...
dude paid for the rest of the stuff and started packing hsi stuff...im dealing with the next customer and I see this dude walk right up to the paper towels and the managers who are supposed to be up front by the phone or not by it and i'm ringing the phone to tell them to stop before anyone else sees and i get in trouble...
they didn't answer the phone and i didn't bother bringing it up because once he is out the store...as long as my job is secure i don't care....
but could you imagine someone else saw that...went outside and took his license plate down or something and called the cops
and then I end up on the news because a customer got a Black man who stole some paper towels get murked by the cops 
like u said i don't even know...people really need to think before they act...
btw watch the robbery video.....i think it was the Black lady in the green shirt he stared at when he picked up the loose cigars dropped......wish i was wrong and that it was a cac but my gut says it was her...
you know that person that talks to much and brings up things that fukk up something? some people are just that dense....i don't know how someone could get tricked into that so easily...i honestly can just see it was he himself that gave unnecessary info...
and if he was tricked...it would have stopped right at "waxxing"...dude went on to talk about how they discussed jesus and anger management,,,,
just some straight stupidity...especially saying "anger management"...a cac could then easily follow that up with so did you and mike discuss anger management often? Would you say it was likely his anger management issues is why he grabbed Officer Wilson's gun and ran aat him?I can get misspeaking and being nervous so you say something wrong....but there is a difference between that and giving unnecessaary details that could be used against him..
Huey Shootin
Banned
let me say it like this....look at this example
once at my supermarket job this dude was at my line... ...and asked the price on the big pack of paper towels he picked up...told him and said it was too expensive....so i walked up and put it on top of the garbage bin next to the rack where we put things back...the garbage bin is right next to the rack and we just put big things on there that cannot fit in the small racks...
dude paid for the rest of the stuff and started packing hsi stuff...im dealing with the next customer and I see this dude walk right up to the paper towels and the managers who are supposed to be up front by the phone or not by it and i'm ringing the phone to tell them to stop before anyone else sees and i get in trouble...
they didn't answer the phone and i didn't bother bringing it up because once he is out the store...as long as my job is secure i don't care....
but could you imagine someone else saw that...went outside and took his license plate down or something and called the cops
like u said i don't even know...people really need to think before they act...
btw watch the robbery video.....i think it was the Black lady in the green shirt he stared at when he picked up the loose cigars dropped......wish i was wrong and that it was a cac but my gut says it was her...
Man, shut the fukk up. I've read your posts in here and come to the conclusion that you are
There was no robbery. Secondly, nothing Mike Brown did justifies his murder. You're not slick.
Man, shut the fukk up. I've read your posts in here and come to the conclusion that you are
There was no robbery. Secondly, nothing Mike Brown did justifies his murder. You're not slick.
trolling about what...and my bad i mean shoplifting not robbery...your right abotu that....i usually was saying shoplifting so i dont' know why i got off the mark in that post..
and have you read my posts in here breh
i ain't a troll like clowns like @Biscut I've made supportive posts about the movement and nowhere have I said what Mike did justified his murder....where do you even get that from? Actually i was getting more mad that the customer was a factor in causing his death because they could not mind their business........yes my avatar is evidence that i'm trying to say mike's murder was justified