Does this guy look like he’s just 250 miles away from turning a fire hose on a protestor or what?
This guy’s still allowed to speak in public?
4 Likes
THAT’s why these events came to a head and exploded in their faces, these people seem unrepentant and totally divorced from reality, You wonder if they were ever able to solve the most rudimentary of cases given a curious proclivity to jump to conclusions,
3 Likes
I was thinking the same thing. 125 yards with a handgun? Can he throw a football with the same accuracy? Cause if he can, Mizzou will probably sign him
1 Like
This was the St. Louis County police chief, not the Ferguson police chief. But I know, hard to tell the difference, right?
3 Likes
I see I’m not the first to notice, but if their best guess is a 125 yard pistol shot, maybe they should call in the FBI for ballistics help. Just saying.
2 Likes
Its this kind of crap that erodes the public’s faith in the police. He has zero proof but will shoot his mouth off anyway. Asshat.
5 Likes
This guys a chief of police? making that kind of rudimentary assumption based on nothing. I thinks more complicated than that…like the shooters used the cover of the protesters to shoot the cops hoping that as a result the cops would open fire on the protesters
2 Likes
If we have the shell casings, can’t we trace those to the shop that sold them?
No we cannot. Because the ability to do so is one of an endless list of sane regulatory ideas shot down by NRA nutjobs and their spineless political allies, who feverishly imagine (hope?) they will one day have to fight for their “freedom” against “government jack-booted thugs” by doing exactly what this psycho did in Ferguson.
2 Likes
Only on CSI.
Didn’t this same guy earlier claim that the shooter was “embedded” with the protestors? How big was the crowd that you could be 125 yards away and still be a part of it? Or was his earlier speculation about the shooter being “embedded” in the crowd simply incorrect? And if so why hasn’t he retracted that previous speculation? Further, given his now established history of inaccurate speculation why is he continuing to speculate on this, minus new supporting evidence? Is it really that important to him to show off how bad he is at his job?
3 Likes
Can someone please explicitly ask him if it’s possible this shooting could be the work of an agent provocateur?
It’s days like this that make me want to set the caps lock and start typing an endless stream of swear words.
3 Likes
If he’s sure the shooter had an association to the protest why hasn’t he arrested that person or person’s ?
Thank you johnrm!
If they have the bullets from the victims and if we kept track of the ballistics, or whatever the proper term is for the impressions that the rifling from a barrel makes on a bullet, from different guns, which we don’t because NRA, couldn’t they match the bullets to the gun that fired them? And if we could match them to the gun that fired them and if we kept records on what shops sold what guns to who, which we don’t because NRA, again, couldn’t they track down where the gun that fired them was bought and by who? Or am I misunderstanding how accurate those sorts of ballistics, or whatever the proper term is, are in identifying the gun of origin?
The shooter had a KKK association…and I have as much proof as the Chief.
1 Like
Belmar’s assertion that the shooters had an ‘unfortunate association’ with
the protesters is not valid. It would be just as valid to assume it was
an inside job on the cops part (someone trained, to get attention and
lightly wound, but not kill the 2 officers) who may have volunteered for
the duty just to gain sympathy from the citizenry at large. My theory
that it’s an inside job (Like 9/1!!!??) is about as valid as Belmar’s.
2 Likes
Since this guy needs a job, he might put in an application with Putin’s people. Being able to know important things about a perpetrator in high profile cases before you even identify them them is a valuable law enforcement tool over there.
1 Like
It means the Chief is still intent on reminding people that he’s a mean, stupid cracker.
1 Like
Trying to equate this officer’s “excuses” for his words with the same words that were used as defense for the original action that caused this mess makes my head spin.