Racism on parade part 2- cops, thugs, looting, Obama,& more

[EVT1]

Aug 17, 2014 20:54:53 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Aug 17, 2014 20:34:44 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Bundy is a criminal- and all of his supporters pointing guns at law enforcement are criminals as well.  But I think I have the answer:

Thug:

Second amendment supporters:

Notice your "Second Amendment Supporters" all have their guns pointed towards the ground AND their fingers off the triggers?

Notice where your "thug" has his gun pointed? Notice where his finger is?

Are you fucking serious? I took ten seconds to make a point and you want to analyze it?  Have not seen black people walking through Target with weapons. 

Know what the real shitty part of this is- I carry my gun in certain places because of the large population of fucking morons that carry theirs- like Florida.  The NRA won- paranoid stupid people can buy whatever dangerous shit they want- so here we are.  I arm myself because of other fucking idiots- and Smith and Wesson wins.  What a paradise. 

[EVT1]

Aug 17, 2014 21:31:46 GMT -5 Malarky said:

Aug 17, 2014 21:06:40 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Well so far it is three flawed accounts vs. one- and the only one with a motive to lie is the cop. 

You really believe this?  Again, I don't have all the facts and am not willing to jump to any conclusions.  

I see that as flawed reasoning.  Both sides could potentially protect themselves by lying.  

How is it flawed reasoning?  There is the shooter- who has a reason to lie- self interest.  And then there are three witnesses that have no reason to lie at all.  Not a single witness faces jail- what is there to protect? 

[Malarky]

Aug 17, 2014 21:42:22 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Aug 17, 2014 20:54:53 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Notice your "Second Amendment Supporters" all have their guns pointed towards the ground AND their fingers off the triggers?

Notice where your "thug" has his gun pointed? Notice where his finger is?

Are you fucking serious? I took ten seconds to make a point and you want to analyze it?  Have not seen black people walking through Target with weapons. 

Know what the real shitty part of this is- I carry my gun in certain places because of the large population of fucking morons that carry theirs- like Florida.  The NRA won- paranoid stupid people can buy whatever dangerous shit they want- so here we are.  I arm myself because of other fucking idiots- and Smith and Wesson wins.  What a paradise. 

I don't speak for Richard, but yes, I am fucking serious.  There is a huge difference between those two images.  The fact that you may not see it is why we are so far apart in our world views.  

[EVT1]

Aug 17, 2014 21:49:30 GMT -5 Malarky said:

Aug 17, 2014 21:42:22 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Are you fucking serious? I took ten seconds to make a point and you want to analyze it?  Have not seen black people walking through Target with weapons. 

Know what the real shitty part of this is- I carry my gun in certain places because of the large population of fucking morons that carry theirs- like Florida.  The NRA won- paranoid stupid people can buy whatever dangerous shit they want- so here we are.  I arm myself because of other fucking idiots- and Smith and Wesson wins.  What a paradise. 

I don't speak for Richard, but yes, I am fucking serious.  There is a huge difference between those two images.  The fact that you may not see it is why we are so far apart in our world views.  

Really? What's the difference? Should I have pulled similar images of white gang members pointing guns at the camera on Facebook? Yeah- I know your world view.

[Tennesseer]

Aug 17, 2014 21:46:02 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Aug 17, 2014 21:31:46 GMT -5 Malarky said:

You really believe this?  Again, I don't have all the facts and I am not willing to jump to any conclusions.  

I see that as flawed reasoning.  Both sides could potentially protect themselves by lying.  

How is it flawed reasoning?  There is the shooter- who has a reason to lie- self interest.  And then there are three witnesses that have no reason to lie at all.  Not a single witness faces jail- what is there to protect? 

EVT-with all due respect, the three witnesses may have a reason not to tell the truth-a total collapse of trust with the police around the nation.  Right now I do not know who is telling the truth.

I don't have all the facts to determine who is at fault.  But the feeling in many black communities is too many young, innocent black men have died at the hands of the police.  Or died while being manhandled by the police.  Maybe in this latest ìncident, these witnesses finally said enough is enough.  Pin the blame on the officer.  I don't know.

As I said, I will wait for the official independent report to make a decision.  But I do know the police have a major public relations problem on their hand in Missouri and around the country.  The police in Ferguson really blew it when, and at the same time, and after a week's time, released the name of the officer while also relessing the video of a young man, allegedly the victim in the shooting, shoving the clerk in the store.

The blacks in Ferguson and around the country felt releasing the video at that the same time as the name was a slap to their faces.  It's as if the police said, "You forced our hand in making us releasing the name of the officer.  For that, we will make your son look like bad and to offer evidence to justify the shooting."  Both the name of the officer and releasing the video should have happened immediately.  

The handling of this incident by Ferguson police and the governor of Missouri has been a disaster.

[Malarky]

Aug 17, 2014 21:46:02 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Aug 17, 2014 21:31:46 GMT -5 Malarky said:

You really believe this?  Again, I don't have all the facts and am not willing to jump to any conclusions.  

I see that as flawed reasoning.  Both sides could potentially protect themselves by lying.  

How is it flawed reasoning?  There is the shooter- who has a reason to lie- self interest.  And then there are three witnesses that have no reason to lie at all.  Not a single witness faces jail- what is there to protect? 

And there is a dead person, who may or may not have done something that initiated the altercation.  WE DON"T KNOW.  He won't be weighing in on this conversation.  

Then we have history.  Yes, white people have treated black people really unfairly in the past, to say the least.  That is absolutely a fact.  

So, do the people from that community skew their testimony to support their own?  Maybe.  Perhaps they only saw what they wanted to see.  And people will lie for far less than jail time.  

I don't even begin to think I know what happened.  To flat out say that the police were wrong and the deceased was blameless is disingenuous at best.

 
 


 

[Malarky]

Goodnight all. It may be days before work and real life allow me to check back into the thread, so feel free to argue on without me.

[EVT1]

That's the thing- I have not taken a position.Lots of angry people out there with their minds made up.

[Malarky]

Aug 17, 2014 22:34:16 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

That's the thing- I have not taken a position.Lots of angry people out there with their minds made up.

I interpreted your responses as being anti police.  My apologies if I misinterpreted.  

[Green Eyed Lady]

Not completely sure, but isn't one of those 3 "witnesses" the guy that was with him in the robbery (if it was, indeed, the kid)?  Yeah.  He smacks of credibility. 

If this police officer used unreasonable force, he should be prosecuted just like any other citizen.  Hopefully, more facts will emerge that will prove what happened one way or the other. 

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 12, 2014 21:27:19 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

news.yahoo.com/renewed-rioting-killing-black-missouri-teen-023503888.html

I stayed away from this because nobody knows for sure what went down- there is the police version, the eyewitness versions, the unreleased and unprocessed evidence, etc. etc. 

But one thing I noticed rather quickly- this case split into two camps before fact one- and on one side it is the same old shit that went down in other cases where unarmed black kids were shot.  I see 2 main arguments from these losers:

1) Unsubstantiated talk that the victim was a criminal, had a record, robbed a store, was on drugs, etc.  Purple drank maybe.

2) Deflection to wondering why black on black crime isn't investigated as much

The commentary is disgusting- and I had no idea ngrs was shorthand for something.  My fault- you should never read the comments but I just had to see- what I already knew I guess. 

This is just another reason police should be required to wear lapel cameras- no more he said she said bullshit.  Time to fire any of these assholes that have a problem being filmed doing their job.  This situation could have been resolved in 5 minutes.

The first thing you stated in this thread after the less than helpful thread title, is spot on:  you acknowledge that nobody knows for sure what went down.  The second observation is correct as well- that the case quickly split into two camps before fact one.  I think you've misidentified the two camps.  I think it's very clear the two camps (meaning those looking on- not those involved-- I expect the police to be defensive, and I expect the alleged victim's family to cry foul-- regardless of fact one) are those living in reality and patiently waiting for the facts to make a judgment, and those who jumped right to the defense of the alleged victim before they knew what had happened.  

It bears remarkable similarity to the Trayvon Martin case which I think you've alluded to in that now that the facts are coming out and they appear (APPEAR-- I'm not saying for sure one way or the other) to contradict the black victim of white racism template, rather than admit it may just be time to slow down, take a breath, and look at this more objectively-- they're calling raw video of the alleged victim's actions, and his public criminal record "character assassination".  In my opinion, it definitely strikes me as ridiculous to be so committed to a position, that no matter what comes out, some people simply will never be able to accept the truth-- and the back tracking and explaining-as-they-go (like when they had to call Zimmerman a "White Hispanic") are laughable.

So, to directly address your two points (1) Is well substantiated.  There's little point arguing it.  and (2) Irrelevant-- which I think you're saying?

In my opinion, we've got a long way to go to find out what happened.  A couple things I'd like to know:

Why did the police officer stopped him in the first place- they've already admitted it was NOT in connection with suspicion for the earlier strong-arm robbery, so what was the purpose of the stop?

When and where was the alleged victim shot?  I believe the autopsy is out now, but I haven't seen it.  I'd like to know if shots were fired INSIDE the police car?

Was there one suspect, or two?  Two on one would be considered 'armed' to me.  In other words, any time an officer is outnumbered, deadly force is justified.  

Early indications are that the lone "witness" whose inflammatory account incited the racially-motivated black mob in Ferguson was one of two suspects.  We need to know if this is true?

Highlighted in RED above-- TOTALLY, 1000% AGREE!  Enough is enough- and I agree the police will resist this because they don't want to lose the edge that their account is gospel truth and cannot be challenged.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 15, 2014 17:13:36 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Not that it will make a difference to the masses who have made their minds up, but the cop who shot him did not stop him for that.

It is really irrelevant to the issue- whether or not a police officer shot an unarmed person with their hands up.

But we know where this goes- the 'anti-thug' people will feel vindicated by this video, but all it is going to do is muddy the water.

And strong-arm robbery- that sounds scary- sounds a lot like some kind of armed robbery.    An arm robbery maybe.

Looks like a misdemeanor situation- otherwise known as a death penalty level offense to the 'anti-thug' crowd.

     
 

I think it's highly relevant to the alleged victim's family and friends account of him as a "gentle giant". Looks more like a great big bully now.  

The only eyewitness to the alleged shooting of an unarmed person with their hands up-- turns out to have been one of the two suspects in the robbery.  Kinda blows his credibility.

I will agree with you on this point-- we still don't know what happened, and the police admit the confrontation with the alleged victim was not related to the robbery.  I'd like to know what it was about?  I suspect the alleged victim didn't KNOW he wasn't being pursued ("the wicked flee, though no one pursues them"), and he thought he could get the drop on the cop, disarm him, and get away?  These facts are NOT ESTABLISHED, but under the circumstances it's as reasonable as any of the rest of the speculation in this case.  I came up with it on the principle that the simplest explanation is usually the explanation.  And thought there may have been misconduct on the part of the police officer, I have ZERO DOUBT that the officer DID NOT simply execute Mr. Brown.  Period.  It didn't happen.  We'll find out what did happen, but the idea that the police execute suspects is the stuff of movies.  Not saying it 'never' happens-- it has, and it does.  But this guy? This suspect?  This evening?  No.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 17, 2014 3:39:20 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

So far 3 witnesses have stated he was running away from the officer when shot a second time after the incident at the car, turned around with hands up and was shot more. I would assume an autopsy would show an entry wound in the back and would show at least a range of distances as well.  That would be damning evidence supporting the witnesses' version of events.  Guess we will see what it turns up.

If it is a fat goose egg then it is the cop vs. the witnesses- or one liar vs. three if you will.  Either party could have lost their cool if not both.  Cops lose it sometimes- that is a fact- doesn't have to be a shred of racism involved for it to happen either.

I agree completely that it will present some serious problems for the officer involved if, in fact, it can be established that the alleged victim was fleeing and shot in the back while running away.  Remember, one of the "eyewitnesses" is a suspect in the robbery- and he states the alleged victim was on his knees with his hands up in surrender, and the officer shot him execution style.  I think rational people can rule that out.  Nevertheless, we'll see what the autopsy reveals.  I suspect it will raise more questions than it answers.  I'm interested in learning about WHERE the shots were fired, vs. where the victim was struck by the bullets.  I'm really interested in that "inside the police car" shot that was allegedly fired.  It's going to be very difficult to explain how an alleged victim had surrendered or was running away and yet was struck by a bullet inside the police car?  That would corroborate the story that the alleged victim shoved the police officer back into his car and went for his gun.  It's EXTREMELY likely that this is what happened- not saying for sure.  Just saying that I don't believe stories of police executions motivated by race.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 17, 2014 21:31:46 GMT -5 Malarky said:

Aug 17, 2014 21:06:40 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Well so far it is three flawed accounts vs. one- and the only one with a motive to lie is the cop. 

You really believe this?  Again, I don't have all the facts and am not willing to jump to any conclusions.  

I see that as flawed reasoning.  Both sides could potentially protect themselves by lying.  

I agree with EVT1 that cops lie all the time- and never more than when they've royally f'd up.  But to say the alleged victim's family has no motive to claim their cuddly little strong-arm robber with a criminal record was actually a 'gentle giant'?  It's being generous to call that flawed reasoning.  It's biased wishful thinking that a situation is going to fit a prefabricated template of a white racist world where cops 'routinely' execute black suspects.  Once you've decided that in advance- and many people have-- hopefully EVT1 hasn't and the post was a passionate over-reach-- there'll be no convincing them anything else happened no matter what the facts reveal.  I refer us all again to the Trayvon Martin case.  While it was clear that Zimmerman used poor judgment, it is equally clear that he was attacked, threatened with death, and the victim of an MMA-style "ground and pound" batter by Trayvon Martin, and that Mr. Martin was shot while astride Mr. Zimmerman while attempting to kill him by bashing his head on the sidewalk.  There are people that still cannot deal with this in spite of eyewitness accounts, physical evidence, and yes- evidence of Trayvon Martin's well established bad character, psychosis-inducing drug use, and intoxication at the time of the incident.

I want to know how this officer came into contact with the alleged victim in this case-- that is highly important.  We know it was not for the robbery, so what was it that prompted the contact?  Was it the paranoid first contact initiated by a guilty suspect, or was it something else that prompted the officer to make first contact?

I want to know where-- physically, geographically-- where those shots were fired, and where the victim was struck?

And if the officer is guilty of misconduct, if the officer made an error in judgment of failed to follow procedure, or something worse...then yes, let's hold him accountable.  Burning down stores, stealing, and being unnecessarily confrontational with police and neighbors isn't helpful.  Folks in Ferguson need to go home, go to work, and just generally stop being a**holes.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 17, 2014 21:42:22 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Aug 17, 2014 20:54:53 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Notice your "Second Amendment Supporters" all have their guns pointed towards the ground AND their fingers off the triggers?

Notice where your "thug" has his gun pointed? Notice where his finger is?

Are you fucking serious? I took ten seconds to make a point and you want to analyze it?  Have not seen black people walking through Target with weapons. 

Know what the real shitty part of this is- I carry my gun in certain places because of the large population of fucking morons that carry theirs- like Florida.  The NRA won- paranoid stupid people can buy whatever dangerous shit they want- so here we are.  I arm myself because of other fucking idiots- and Smith and Wesson wins.  What a paradise. 

Are YOU fucking serious?  You're comparing the glorification of the thug / gangsta activity as a 'lifestyle' which involves drug dealing, drug use, gratuitous violence, theft, murder, rape, forced prostitution, and sex trafficking as something to be 'proud' of, and to brag about with the peaceful demonstration in favor of the right to bear arms?  I'm not going to bother pointing out to you that down here, the 'paranoid' people that carry don't pose a threat to you, and you-- and we-- enjoy a far lower rate of violent crime than places where innocent people are deprived of their right to defend themselves with deadly force.

[Tennesseer]

The first of the autopsy reports released to the press:

A preliminary private autopsy report found that Michael Brown, the black teen killed by a police officer in the suburban St. Louis city of Ferguson, was shot at least six times, the New York Times reported on Sunday night.

Citing Dr. Michael M. Baden, former chief medical examiner for the City of New York who was hired to perform the autopsy by Brown's family, the newspaper reported that Brown, 18, was shot twice in the head, and that the bullets that hit him did not appear to have been fired from very close range.

The bullets, some of which left as many as five wounds, did not appear to have been fired from very close range, the Times reported, because no gunpowder was detected on his body. That conclusion could change, however, if gunshot residue is found on Brown's clothing, the newspaper said.

The autopsy was in addition to one performed by Missouri officials, as well as one that Attorney General Eric Holder said the Department of Justice would perform.

Autopsy finds unarmed teen killed by police was shot six times: NYT

[Tennesseer]

[Green Eyed Lady]

I just read another account, Tenn, that said the other four shots hit him in the arm.  I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the results that are coming out now.  I have an issue with "at least" six times.  This was an autopsy.  Shouldn't they know EXACTLY how many shots there were?  I understand that a shot may enter and exit and it might be difficult, at first glance, to determine which are exit wounds and which are entrance wounds, but these are trained people.  "At least" bothers me.  Of course, I fully admit I know nothing about this kind of thing so perhaps there is a reason for this.

[Tennesseer]

Aug 18, 2014 8:52:04 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I just read another account, Tenn, that said the other four shots hit him in the arm.  I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the results that are coming out now.  I have an issue with "at least" six times.  This was an autopsy.  Shouldn't they know EXACTLY how many shots there were?  I understand that a shot may enter and exit and it might be difficult, at first glance, to determine which are exit wounds and which are entrance wounds, but these are trained people.  "At least" bothers me.  Of course, I fully admit I know nothing about this kind of thing so perhaps there is a reason for this.

GEL-ìn the graphic above, I see four shots to the arm and two to the head.  It appears to me the shot to the upper arm exited ìt and then entered his chest.   At least that is what it appears to be to me.

[Value Buy]

One answer we do have.

He was not shot running away from the officer.

ALL frontal shots.

I would say five to six shots would be excessive.

And this comes from the parent's private autopsy report?

[Tennesseer]

Aug 18, 2014 9:23:45 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

One answer we do have.

He was not shot running away from the officer.

ALL frontal shots.

I would say five to six shots would be excessive.

And this comes from the parent's private autopsy report?

Do you have any reason to doubt the private autopsy report?  

[zibazinski]

Perhaps, like statistics, it can be interpreted a lot of ways.

[Value Buy]

Aug 18, 2014 9:27:09 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Aug 18, 2014 9:23:45 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

One answer we do have.

He was not shot running away from the officer.

ALL frontal shots.

I would say five to six shots would be excessive.

And this comes from the parent's private autopsy report?

Do you have any reason to doubt the private autopsy report?  

No. Just want to be sure that is the one that was released for my clarification.

Just commented all shots were from the front, and five to six shots seem excessive, as I stated.

Looking at the entry points, it would seem he might have had his hands in the air. All frontal shots

If his arms were at his side, the shots might have been on the side of the arms, or on the opposite side of his arm

Surprisingly, it does not look like there were any exit wounds on the arm?

those WOULD HAVE SHOWN ON THE OPPOSING VIEW FROM THE BACKSIDE PERSPECTIVE.

[Value Buy]

Also, one would think the top head shot would have exited or shown damage to the top of the back of the head.

None of the shots showed exit through the back of the person?

What caliber gun was used?

[Green Eyed Lady]

Aug 18, 2014 9:36:11 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Aug 18, 2014 9:27:09 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Do you have any reason to doubt the private autopsy report?  

No. Just want to be sure that is the one that was released for my clarification.

Just commented all shots were from the front, and five to six shots seem excessive, as I stated.

Looking at the entry points, it would seem he might have had his hands in the air. All frontal shots

If his arms were at his side, the shots might have been on the side of the arms, or on the opposite side of his arm

Surprisingly, it does not look like there were any exit wounds on the arm?

those WOULD HAVE SHOWN ON THE OPPOSING VIEW FROM THE BACKSIDE PERSPECTIVE.

I'm not sure I agree with that.  If his hands (arms) were in the air - a police office is not going to aim to hit him in his raised arms.  If he was trying to execute him, he'd aim for the body.  Makes no sense that he'd be shooting at arms in the air.  I'd be more apt to believe there was a struggle and the shots to the arm were a result of that struggle. 

In addition, the shot to the bicep area seeems to have exited into his chest.  Doesn't appear that could happen if his arms were in the air.  Nope.  He wasn't standing there with his arms in the air - at least for those arm shots.  I'm betting the hand shot came about in the struggle for a gun.

Crap.  I watch too many Criminal Minds episodes.   I have no idea what I'm talking about but that's what Morgan would have said.

[mmhmm]

Aug 18, 2014 9:50:18 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

Aug 18, 2014 9:36:11 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

No. Just want to be sure that is the one that was released for my clarification.

Just commented all shots were from the front, and five to six shots seem excessive, as I stated.

Looking at the entry points, it would seem he might have had his hands in the air. All frontal shots

If his arms were at his side, the shots might have been on the side of the arms, or on the opposite side of his arm

Surprisingly, it does not look like there were any exit wounds on the arm?

those WOULD HAVE SHOWN ON THE OPPOSING VIEW FROM THE BACKSIDE PERSPECTIVE.

I'm not sure I agree with that.  If his hands (arms) were in the air - a police office is not going to aim to hit him in his raised arms.  If he was trying to execute him, he'd aim for the body.  Makes no sense that he'd be shooting at arms in the air.  I'd be more apt to believe there was a struggle and the shots to the arm were a result of that struggle. 

In addition, the shot to the bicep area seeems to have exited into his chest.  Doesn't appear that could happen if his arms were in the air.  Nope.  He wasn't standing there with his arms in the air - at least for those arm shots.  I'm betting the hand shot came about in the struggle for a gun.

Crap.  I watch too many Criminal Minds episodes.   I have no idea what I'm talking about but that's what Morgan would have said.

From what I've read, some of the shots have more than one entry and exit wound. We're going to have to wait for a full analysis to know what actually happened.

[Green Eyed Lady]

Yep.  And some of the shots could have come from anywhere.  I'm sure a trained forensic team will do their best to determine exactly what happened. 

[djAdvocate]

Aug 17, 2014 21:49:30 GMT -5 Malarky said:

Aug 17, 2014 21:42:22 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Are you fucking serious? I took ten seconds to make a point and you want to analyze it?  Have not seen black people walking through Target with weapons. 

Know what the real shitty part of this is- I carry my gun in certain places because of the large population of fucking morons that carry theirs- like Florida.  The NRA won- paranoid stupid people can buy whatever dangerous shit they want- so here we are.  I arm myself because of other fucking idiots- and Smith and Wesson wins.  What a paradise. 

I don't speak for Richard, but yes, I am fucking serious.  There is a huge difference between those two images.  The fact that you may not see it is why we are so far apart in our world views.  

explain the difference, if you don't mind.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 18, 2014 8:52:04 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I just read another account, Tenn, that said the other four shots hit him in the arm.  I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the results that are coming out now.  I have an issue with "at least" six times.  This was an autopsy.  Shouldn't they know EXACTLY how many shots there were?  I understand that a shot may enter and exit and it might be difficult, at first glance, to determine which are exit wounds and which are entrance wounds, but these are trained people.  "At least" bothers me.  Of course, I fully admit I know nothing about this kind of thing so perhaps there is a reason for this.

i'm fairly bothered by that autopsy sheet.  there are no exit wounds, and this is a very wide spray of bullets.  it seems like they couldn't have been fired at a range that would allow positive ID or threat status.  but what do i know?

[djAdvocate]

Aug 18, 2014 9:50:18 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

Aug 18, 2014 9:36:11 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

No. Just want to be sure that is the one that was released for my clarification.

Just commented all shots were from the front, and five to six shots seem excessive, as I stated.

Looking at the entry points, it would seem he might have had his hands in the air. All frontal shots

If his arms were at his side, the shots might have been on the side of the arms, or on the opposite side of his arm

Surprisingly, it does not look like there were any exit wounds on the arm?

those WOULD HAVE SHOWN ON THE OPPOSING VIEW FROM THE BACKSIDE PERSPECTIVE.

I'm not sure I agree with that.  If his hands (arms) were in the air - a police office is not going to aim to hit him in his raised arms.  If he was trying to execute him, he'd aim for the body.  Makes no sense that he'd be shooting at arms in the air.  I'd be more apt to believe there was a struggle and the shots to the arm were a result of that struggle. 

In addition, the shot to the bicep area seeems to have exited into his chest.  Doesn't appear that could happen if his arms were in the air.  Nope.  He wasn't standing there with his arms in the air - at least for those arm shots.  I'm betting the hand shot came about in the struggle for a gun.

Crap.  I watch too many Criminal Minds episodes.   I have no idea what I'm talking about but that's what Morgan would have said.

without exit wounds, i can't say that i agree with that assessment.