[Vision2020] Challening issues

Tom Hansen thansen at moscow.com
Sun Nov 30 17:51:43 PST 2014 

The matter is, Mr. Ramalingam, the dispatcher recordings would have strongly substantiated Officer Wilson's claims.

In my opinion, Officer Wilson's credibility suffered severely at various points both before the grand jury and during his "testimony".  The audio recordings of his calls for "backup" would have strongly supported his suggested course of events.  But, then, there wasn't any cross examination, was there?

Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .

"Moscow Cares"
http://www.MoscowCares.com
  
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
  

> On Nov 30, 2014, at 5:34 PM, Sunil <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> At what point would Wilson's attorney have subpoenaed the recordings? At what point would s/he have presented them? And to whom, the general public? And why? Events show how unnecessary that was.
> 
> Sunil
> 
> From: thansen at moscow.com
> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2014 15:26:06 -0800
> To: paul.rumelhart at gmail.com
> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Challening issues
> 
> I seriously doubt those "backup" calls ever happened.  To prove his claim, Officer Wilson's attorney should have subpoenaed the dispatcher's recordings of those calls.  
> 
> Otherwise, all they/we have is Officer Wilson's claim, similar to . . .
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> 
> Courtesy of National Public Radio at:
> 
> http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/11/25/366519644/ferguson-docs-officer-darren-wilsons-testimony
> 
> <image1.jpeg>
> 
> Now, tell me . . .
> 
> Does Officer Wilson look like he has suffered "two [punches] to the face" from Brown (3-4 inches taller and 50-60 pounds heavier than Officer Wilson)?
> 
> <image2.jpeg>
> 
> (Not even a blemish)
> 
> --------------------------------------
> 
> For this, Wilson shot and killed (unarmed) Brown.
> 
> Any time, Mr. Rumelhart.
> 
> Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
> 
> "Moscow Cares"
> http://www.MoscowCares.com
>   
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
>  
> 
> On Nov 30, 2014, at 2:52 PM, Paul Rumelhart <paul.rumelhart at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Both backup calls are described in this article from Newsweek:  http://www.newsweek.com/darren-wilsons-grand-jury-testimony-286908?piano_d=1
> 
> You're welcome.
> 
> Paul
> 
> On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:
> Mr. Dredge -
> 
> Do you have ANYTHING, beyond your imagination, to substantiate your claim (a linked citation would be appropriate) that Officer Wilson, an armed police officer (in a car) in pursuit of an unarmed (and on foot) 18-year-old, called for backup?
> 
> Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
> 
> "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> http://www.MoscowCares.com
>   
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
> 
> 
> On Nov 30, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> He did radio for backup Tom.  Twice.  Once as he was backing up to the suspects and again after shots were fired.
> 
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Challening issues
> From: thansen at moscow.com
> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2014 04:18:14 -0800
> CC: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
> To: scooterd408 at hotmail.com
> 
> Question . . .
> 
> Why didn't Officer Wilson use his police radio to contact other police units in the area when it became evident that Brown (an unarmed 18-year-old) was fleeing, instead of drawing his gun and firing it several times at Brown?  
> 
> Until that question is answered satisfactorily . . . in my opinion . . . Officer Wilson should have been indicted and charged with "criminally negligent homicide".  Thusly, fulfilling the purpose of a grand jury . . . that there is probable cause that Brown was unjustly killed . . . and that Officer Wilson may be the perpetrator of that crime . . . or a lesser-included offense.
> 
> But, I guess that question will neither be asked nor answered.
> 
> Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
> 
> "Moscow Cares"
> http://www.MoscowCares.com
>   
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
> 
>   
> 
> On Nov 29, 2014, at 11:08 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Sunil, what crime would you have charged him with and what supporting evidence would back this charge?
> 
> From: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 21:40:35 -0800
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Challening issues
> 
> Scott,
> 
> You asked, 'would it disappoint you if they made the decision not to indict solely based on the information presented to them and didn't consider present or historical race issues at all?'
> 
> No, it wouldn't disappoint me if the grand jury didn't consider present or historical race issues at all. That was not their job. I did not expect them to indict for a racially related charge, and that shouldn't have been on the list of possible offenses. There were other charges for which they could have indicted without adding that element.
> 
> Sunil
> 
> From: scooterd408 at hotmail.com
> To: donaldrose at cpcinternet.com; vision2020 at moscow.com; paul.rumelhart at gmail.com
> Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 20:01:57 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Challening issues
> 
> I know this is aimed at Paul, but I'm going to chime in all the same.  To specifically answer your questions to Paul as if they were asked to me:
> - do you acknowledge the existence of institutional racism? Yes
> - If so, what criteria do you use to evaluate whether or not it is present in a situation?  Statistics of the category of institutionalized racism that applies coupled with specifics of the present situation
> - Do you admit that white privilege exists? Yes.  Here is a summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege
> 
> Now since you've previously written that you were 'hoping that the majority of the white members of the jury would overcome a long standing history of racisim in Missouri and bring an indictment that would have facilitated a public trial', would it disappoint you if they made the decision not to indict solely based on the information presented to them and didn't consider present or historical race issues at all?
> 
> -Scott
> 
> 
> From: donaldrose at cpcinternet.com
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com; paul.rumelhart at gmail.com
> Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 17:58:58 -0800
> Subject: [Vision2020] Challening issues
> 
> Paul, do you acknowledge the existence of institutional racism?  If so, what criteria do you use to evaluate whether or not it is present in a situation?  What  is the history of institutional racism in the U.S.  Do you admit that white privilege exists?  Have you ever experienced prejudicial treatment based on skin color?  I ask because these questions not to criticize but in the hope that you will reflect upon them and perhaps consider that it is likely that you have not had wide experience with the concept.  You may want to seize the opportunity to learn from others who have first-hand experience on the topic.
> Rose 
>  
> 
> 
> ======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================
> 
> ======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================
> 
> ======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
> 
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
> 
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
> 
> ======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20141130/2381c2ac/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list