>>>>>>So I guess tonight they will announce if the cop is going to be charged or not. My guess is that they won't and the whole town will erupt. Hopefully I'm wrong on both counts.
>>>>>I don't see why the cop should have been charged based on the evidence provided.
>>>>I disagree. Based on the initial evidence (and I have not read; no will I read all the evidence released to public last night) I believe the cop should have been charged.
>>>>But even if he were charged; and even if he were convicted, I don't think it would make a difference in the lives of Ferguson people. No would it stop those who burned the buildings and looted businesses last night. No would it stop other crimes in Ferguson.
>>>
>>>Care to share the source of the "initial evidence" you mention?
>>
>>I meant all that we all saw on tv; mostly the "testimonies" of witnesses. I know that a lot of what was reported was BS but I believe that a cop with the proper training should have avoided shooting Michael Brown.
>
>You might want to look at some of the evidence that came out during the trial. I think you have a lot of misinformation. Michael Brown was charging the officer after assaulting him. The burden of whatever-you-want-to-call-it for a law enforcement to shoot a perp is much less than the circumstances in this case. It's unfortunate that he died, but if you assault a police officer, attempt to steal his gun, and then charge him after all of this I'm not sure what you expect to happen.

The cop may have been justified to use the deadly force; or maybe not. But he didn't have to use deadly force. He could have stayed in the car when Michael Brown was walking away and wait for the backup. Darren Wilson knew that Michael Brown didn't have a gun; otherwise, why would he try to grab the officer's gun. I don't believe much to what Darren Wilson said last night in the interview with George Stephanapoulos; it was BS (just like testimonies of the "witnesses"). This case should have gone to court.