Evidence supports officer’s account of shooting in Ferguson
Source: Washington Post
Ferguson, Mo., police officer Darren Wilson and Michael Brown fought for control of the officer’s gun, and Wilson fatally shot the unarmed teenager after he moved toward the officer as they faced off in the street, according to interviews, news accounts and the full report of the St. Louis County autopsy of Brown’s body.
Because Wilson is white and Brown was black, the case has ignited intense debate over how police interact with African American men. But more than a half-dozen unnamed black witnesses have provided testimony to a St. Louis County grand jury that largely supports Wilson’s account of events of Aug. 9, according to several people familiar with the investigation who spoke with The Washington Post.
Some of the physical evidence — including blood spatter analysis, shell casings and ballistics tests — also supports Wilson’s account of the shooting, The Post’s sources said, which cast Brown as an aggressor who threatened the officer’s life. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity because they are prohibited from publicly discussing the case.
The grand jury is expected to complete its deliberations next month over whether Wilson broke the law in confronting Brown, and the pending decision appears to be prompting the unofficial release of information about the case and what the jurors have been told.
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-evidence-supports-officers-account-of-shooting-in-ferguson/2014/10/22/cf38c7b4-5964-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html
Well folks, the whitewash is almost complete. Disgusting.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
bravenak
(34,648 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)philosslayer
(3,076 posts)You go the wrong tech-titan
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)annotation. Leaving my original post unedited for thread integrity purposes.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I prefer other sources. The mainstream news is so tilted.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)expose recently about how Ferguson and other communities in St. Louis County are running an extortion racket on people of color there, so that whites don't have to pay higher taxes to fund municipal operations.
This article, imo, deserves a Pulitzer:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/09/03/how-st-louis-county-missouri-profits-from-poverty/
bravenak
(34,648 posts)They have some good writers, but they are still corporate media. And i hate their righty columns. They shouldn't exist.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)I can't imagine it will be an improvement.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)It's about money.
marym625
(17,997 posts)seveneyes
(4,631 posts)Trying to keep the conspiracies sorted out here.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)seveneyes
(4,631 posts)And once they are sorted, a divide and concur, or divide and conquer can be preformed. 
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I usually try to keep them secret. They'd be dangerous to spread around to libertarians.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)in a country where black men, with their hands shackled behind their back, commit suicide by shooting themselves in the chest?
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 22, 2014, 05:44 PM - Edit history (1)
Why did Wilson leave his car if he was afraid of Brown?
Our intrepid reporters at the Post fail to address any of these obvious questions.
Lawrence O'Donnell did a great segment on this last night on The Last Word. He completely ripped apart the NY Times Story on this (the NY Times story said the same thing as the Post).
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Chakab
(1,727 posts)told him to get out of the street, how could the weapon have come out of the retention holster unless Wilson deliberately pulled it out? Retention holsters are designed so that the weapons cannot be pulled out at angle by somebody other than the person who's wearing the holster.
And why would Wilson deliberately release his firearm when somebody was trying to grab it out of the holster?
And even if any of this nonsense were true, how does it change the fact that the kill shots were fired when Brown was nowhere near Wilson?
BTW the only way to debunk this "he went for my gun" bullshit is make dash and body cams mandatory for police officers.
marym625
(17,997 posts)If we want to include lairs and the story of VonDerritt Myers and his weapon, we can look to this for answers
Watch "Man fFlms St. Louis Cops Trying to Plant Gun on H…" on YouTube
Man fFlms St. Louis Cops Trying to Plant Gun on H…:
EEO
(1,620 posts)Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Not all departments choose to go with the most secure retention, many try to find a balance between secure and still being able to draw the firearm without too much difficulty.
I'd be curious to find out what brand and model of duty holster he was using
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)wore their duty sidearm on the weak side, which would require either a cross draw or shoulder holster. What you will see sometimes is an officer that carries a taser carrying it on the weak side and sometimes they resemble a firearm in a holster.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)But apparently Ferguson does not have tazers.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)"The Post’s sources said the (THC) levels in Brown’s body may have been high enough to trigger hallucinations."
This says something about the quality of the Post's sources.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)
Scairp
(2,749 posts)About a big plate of brownies maybe, not grabbing for a cop's gun. This pot in his system has no weight as far as finding out what happened. It's not helpful they have gotten off track making a big deal out of this fact.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)It's not a technical hallucination, in that the brain is not manufacturing fake sensory input, just wrongly interpreting what it gets. That takes a shit-ton of THC for most people, though.
That said, the idea of acute paranoia while high is hardly new...
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Possibly in a limited fashion.
In all fairness, the whitewash occurred on both sides of this incident. The police closed ranks to portray their guy in the best light possible, and the folks in Ferguson tried to portray their guy in the best light possible. That's human nature. With witnesses, members of the grand jury and uncounted others involved in the "conspiracy", it seems an actual successful conspiracy is rather unlikely.
The only good that may come of this is that the problems of race, domestic militarization of the police and police abuse of power are visible to everyone.
I wonder what was the racial demographic of the grand jury.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)for which the jury was convened. So more white than Ferguson specifically, since it covered a larger and more heavily white area as a whole.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)could construct to ease the conflict in ones mind that the facts create so that one could go forward with an nonconflicting version of events that suits his tastes.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)Frankly, anytime you fire more than 6 shots, you are risking othe rpeople, AND, your own skill comes into question.
Let's ignore the 41 shots fired at Amadou Diallo. Focus on the ten here. How this cop felt his life wa sin such danger he needed to fire TEN SHOTS should be called into question itself. If the fight happened at point blank range, are you going to say he needed TEN shots to disable someone?
madville
(7,408 posts)Until the threat stops. I say, IF, Brown was indeed advancing towards Wilson, his training would dictate he pull the trigger until Brown was no longer advancing.
The news today says the blood splatter evidence, wounds and several eyewitnesses indicate Brown was moving towards Wilson with his hands down when he was shot, the last bullet entering through the top of the skull as he was "falling/lunging" forward (their words). His training would tell him to continue firing until Brown stopped advancing.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)madville
(7,408 posts)Whatever happens he will never work in law enforcement anywhere again, I would bet pretty good money on that.
marym625
(17,997 posts)otohara
(24,135 posts)they weren't mulling around the street for 4 hours for nothing while that boy lay dead.
Had to get their stories straight.
tom_kelly
(958 posts)but I saw the aftermath video of Brown laying in the street nowhere near a cop car. No matter what the cop claims, whether Brown grabbed for the his gun, cursed at him, poked him in the eye or punched him in his balls - he wasn't in any shape to get that far from the cops car after taking a head shot, period.
I was on a VA bus today and the driver had fucking hannity on the radio talking horseshit about this. I was disgusted. It took everything I had to keep my mouth shut.
proReality
(1,628 posts)At the bottom of the full autopsy report it says: "Manner of Death: Homicide"
http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/stltoday.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/c/e0/ce018d0c-5998-11e4-b700-001a4bcf6878/5447202ea9b4e.pdf.pdf
According to the dictionary, the definition of "homicide" is the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder.
Is it normal on autopsy reports to call it homicide when death is caused by the police?
Abnredleg
(669 posts)Homicide is either criminal or non-criminal. Non-criminal homicide (also known as justifiable homicide) includes instances such as self-defense by citizens or legitimate use of deadly force by police. Wilson did commit a homicide - the question for the grand jury is whether it was criminal or justifiable.
proReality
(1,628 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)As if 'news accounts' have any meaning whatsoever in what happened? And as if the 'physical evidence' says anything at all as to motives, or supports only one specific speculation as to 'what happened'? We already knew Brown was first shot at the window of Wilson's car. Nothing in the physical evidence actually tells us whether Brown was shot while 'trying to grab the gun' or while 'trying to shove a gun pointed at him out of line'. Indeed, even Wilson can't really know what was going on in Brown's mind. Only Brown can, and he's conveniently dead, thanks to an additional half dozen shots pumped into an unarmed and already injured man.
bl968
(360 posts)I have always given the officer the benefit of the doubt as to what happened in the police car, it's what happened after they exited the vehicle that is inexcusable. Nothing they can say or offer gives the officer the right to shoot a fleeing unarmed suspect down like a dog in the streets. Nothing can change that fact.
Shemp Howard
(889 posts)For the sake of argument, let's assume that the cop was telling the truth about what happened inside of the car. And let's assume that the cop was telling the truth with what happened later as well. Brown fled, then turned and began walking towards the cop.
The cop knew Brown was unarmed. Why didn't the cop use his taser?
Why didn't the cop back off and call for help?
Nowhere have I seen an answer to those two questions.
Agalbraith
(52 posts)well, there had already been a tussle over the officers firearm... so this is a life or death situation. Tasers are less than lethal weapons. At the point that the suspect tried for the officers weapon OR that the situation came to the point where the officer felt he needed to draw and fire his weapon in the first place the use of a Taser is pretty much a non issue.
madville
(7,408 posts)They have a firearm, pepper spray, and a baton from what I have read.
Agalbraith
(52 posts)except for the part wherein the suspect was not "fleeing" when he was shot.
The autopsies showed that the suspect was shot from the front and did t have his "hands in the air" when shot.
how is it "excusable" to shoot an unarmed suspect? Well, lets look at the situation... and this is taking everything from the police story of how things went down, not saying that is the truth of the matter or not, but lets just look at it form that angle for right now.
Suspect attacks officer in police vehicle and grabs for officers weapon.
Officer or suspect discharges weapon IN the police vehicle
Suspect breaks contact and flees
Officer peruses in order to affect arrest of suspect that just attacked him
Suspect stops running, but does not comply with officer commands
Suspect approaches officer with intent to disarm/harm officer and will not obey commands
Officer discharges weapon in order to stop suspect
now... one needs to look at the evidence to see if it supports that story, or if it supports the story that has come out from the suspects side of things.
Is if likely that the officer grabbed the suspect, with his left hand, by the neck and dragged him through the open window of the police SUV as the suspect's partner claimed? No. The suspect was 6'3" tall, 290lbs and an ex football player. It is VERY, VERY unlikely that the officer could do this. The autopsies did not reveal any damage to the neck of the suspect that srely would have been present had this happened. Finger marks, bruising, something. But yet to date this has not been reported.
Is it likely that an experienced officer would WANT to drag a suspect head first through an SUV window? No. Why on earth would you? You have no control over the suspect and you have put him in arms reach of the one thing that the suspect can use to kill you, your gun. When an officer is close to a suspect weapon retention and control is paramount. Many police each year are killed with their own weapons, many more injured and many many more have suspects attempt to take their weapons. This would be on the last things an officer would do.
Why did the officer get out of the car if he "feared for his life"? Well, there had just been an altercation (not disputed by either party and supported by the evidence at hand) and possibly an attempt on the officers life if the suspect had tried to get the officers weapon, or at least the officer felt threatened enough to draw his weapon. So at this point an arrest of the suspect is warranted, no matter which scenario occurred in the police SUV. You dont get to assault an officer and then just get let go. You are going to get arrested at that point.
How did the suspect end up shot dead? Well, here is the crux of the whole issue. There is basically one thing that the suspect could have done to warrant the officer using deadly force... presenting a threat to the life of the officer. Can an unarmed suspect do that? Absolutely. Remember the officers getting killed with their own weapons? It happens. IF, and again, IF the suspect didnt not follow commands, and IF the suspect lead the officer to believe that he was going to attack the officer... the deadly force is indeed justified. This is the part of the story that we really dont know. The evidence that has been leaked gives us a peak at what may or may not have happened, but its not the whole story. The evidence does NOT support the suspect's friends story that he was shot while trying to run away from the officer. All of the bullets entered form the front. So the suspect was facing the officer. Nor were the suspects hands in the air, as the entry/exit configuration of the wounds in the arm make that impossible. So that story is a little more than suspect.
Does it make sense that the suspect tried to attack the officer? Hmmm.. tough one. Certainly there is evidence that an altercation took place at the SUV and its very unlikely that the officer was the aggressor in that altercation. That doesnt automatically lead to the suspect being the aggressor in the altercation outside the SUV, but it kinda sets the stage for it.
bl968
(360 posts)Multiple witnesses including several white construction workers have all testified that he turned with his hands in the air that he was saying ok ok. When the officer shot him.
It makes absolutely no difference if the hands are held out to the side or up above his head as long as they were empty, and he was out of physical reach of the officer. I would definitely say 30-60' qualifies as out of physical reach; and so the officer had no further cause to fear for his life removing the lethal force option.
The officer had no further justification for shooting him from the moment he started fleeing, he murdered this kid in cold blood.
Agalbraith
(52 posts)As has been said... an unarmed suspect can offer a deadly threat. If you have a gun and the unarmed person is hell bent on taking it from you and using it on you... then they are indeed a threat to your life.
this is indeed the crux of the issue... what, if anything lead the officer to feel his life was threatened.
we can look to the prior actions of the suspect. Reaching inside the police officers vehicle and getting his hands VERY near the officers weapon. As has been stated, the officer would not have put the suspects hands there.. at least its very, very unlikely. Not saying that its impossible that the officer would put the suspects hands near his gun, just saying its VERY unlikely. If its unlikely, then other explanations must be considered.
Taking into consideration that the suspect likely reached for the officers weapon, and the situation became so dire that the officer felt the need to discharge his weapon... it increases that likelyhood that officer could have felt that the suspect intended to do him harm if the suspect got close to him again.
again... not saying that IS what happened. Saying that there are indeed scenarios in which deadly force against an unarmed suspect is warranted.
bl968
(360 posts)Not when the person is running away and most certainly not when he's 60' away. The fastest runner in the world could not cover 60' before the officer could fire the gun, and so there was no threat. Then the witnesses said that Brown turned towards the officer and appeared to stumble, not turned and ran at the officer. There was no threat and the officer murdered this kid.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
erpowers
(9,350 posts)If this information is true how did Michael Brown's body end up feet away from Officer Darren Wilson's body? Also, is there any physical evidence that Mochael Brown reached for Officer Wilson's gun? Were his fingerprints found anywhere near the gun, the holster, or the police officer's uniform?
Agalbraith
(52 posts)There is evidence that shows that Micheal Browns hands were inside the police car. The officers firearm was discharged inside the car and Michael Brown's had was hit by that bullet at VERY close range. So his hand was indeed very near the weapon. His blood was found ON the gun, on the officers uniform and on the inside of the car. No statement has been made as to if his fingerprints were or were not found on the gun.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Agalbraith
(52 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)keep trying.
Agalbraith
(52 posts)There is evidence that shows that Micheal Browns hands were inside the police car. The officers firearm was discharged inside the car and Michael Brown's had was hit by that bullet at VERY close range. So his hand was indeed very near the weapon. His blood was found ON the gun, on the officers uniform and on the inside of the car.
the citation:
Forensic tests have found the blood of Michael Brown on the gun, uniform and police cruiser belonging to Officer Darren Wilson, who fatally shot the unarmed teen two months ago in Ferguson, Missouri, The New York Times reported.
FBI forensic tests showed the gun was fired twice in the car, with one bullet hitting Brown's arm while the second one missed, the newspaper said.
same same. The citation absolutely supports my contention.
brown's hand/arm were VERY close to the gun when it went off. The gun was inside the car when it went off. That was my contention,that is what the report says.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)I missed that. Thanks for pointing that out.
Happy?
But this does not support your implication that this evidence supports Wilson's account of a 'struggle' for his gun.
Travelman
(708 posts)If Brown's hand was very near the gun when it was fired, how was it not a struggle for the gun?
Note: there's a big difference between "a struggle for the gun" and "Brown grabbed the gun," which is specifically what Wilson said. It's entirely possible that there was indeed a struggle for the gun but Brown wasn't attempting to shoot Wilson or whatever. It can just as easily mean that Brown was trying to deflect the muzzle away from himself.
But one way or another. Brown's hand was very close to that gun when it fired, and that can only mean that he was in some way reaching towards the gun when it discharged.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)But one way or another. Brown's hand was very close to that gun when it fired, and that can only mean that he was in some way reaching towards the gun when it discharged.
that is definitely not the only scenario that can be drawn.
it is the only one that law 'enforcement' wants you to believe because it supports the 'scary black man' meme.
Travelman
(708 posts)Emphasis on "plausible." Lawrence O'Donnell laid one out in which someone could be asleep when the gun was fired near their hand. That very obviously was not the case here.
So name it.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Here is one:
Wilson grabs Brown by the neck and pulls him into the car.
Brown tries to pull/push away enraging/scaring Wilson, who draws his gun to further threaten Brown.
Brown tries to get the fuck away from Wilson who deliberately/accidentally fires off a couple of shots, one of which hits Brown.
Brown manages to get away at this point and is then gunned down by Wilson.
See? Just as plausible, based on these selective 'leaks.'
rgbecker
(4,826 posts)Or are you making it up as you go?
Agalbraith
(52 posts)I dont need to make anything up. I have not vested interest in this story one way or another. I dont make stuff up to support any position. I'm just forming my opinions of the situation based on what has been reported.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/18/justice/michael-brown-darren-wilson-account/
pampango
(24,692 posts)determined is whether the investigation done by the coroner's office was done objectively. If not, then the 'evidence' is not really 'evidence'. IF the findings are legitimate, I have to accept them, not reject them because they don't fit my world view.
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)However, I applaud your attitude.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)but then I'm one of those "wait for all the evidence trolls" someone posted about.
madville
(7,408 posts)Forensic and physical evidence along with eye witness testimony is not going to change anyone's mind either way since there is evidence and eye witness accounts supporting both versions of the incident.
I still think it's possible that he gets charged and there is a trial, but with everything we know so far I think a conviction will be impossible.
There should be video recording in every car and on every cop, without it this will continue to happen.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)because I think it would be good for everyone to hear the witnesses on both sides.
Otherwise, each side will believe without any evidence.
CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)YES folks the WHITEWASH is in full swing. BS stories such as this from the Post are designed to lay the groundwork for the Whitewash. Totally expected by Corp Nation and predictable by most objective observers. The failure to appoint a Special Prosecutor set the stage for the failure to indict. If you do the research you will see that police officers can do pretty much as they please when it comes to gunning down members of the public irrespective of race. The FBI has not prosecuted an agent in decades if ever for similar incidents. Let's hear it again... "No JUSTICE... NO P____!" This ain't your Daddy's America. 
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Some of the physical evidence — including blood spatter analysis, shell casings and ballistics tests — also supports Wilson’s account of the shooting, The Post’s sources said, which cast Brown as an aggressor who threatened the officer’s life.
So, he was threatening the officers life by charging him with his hands up? What kind of 'splatter analysis could they do after hours of of contamination of the crime scene? There is so much wrong with this case I don't even know where to begin.
Agalbraith
(52 posts)No, he was not charging with his hands up. Every autopsy done and who's results have been leaked so far says that he did NOT have his hands up.
What kind of 'splatter analysis could they do after hours of of contamination of the crime scene?
Where on earth do you get the idea that forensic examination of the scene wasnt done until hours later and that somehow it had been contaminated? I mean seriously... please answer that. Where did you hear about a time line and where have you heard about contamination?
BTW, the blood evidence that has been mentioned so far was found inside the police officers SUV.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)In fact you have no evidence other than 'leaked' info that supports only Wilson's account, while ignoring the valuminous amount of info that has been public for months that indicates that Wilson gunned Brown down while his hands were 'up' or clearly visible, showing that he was unarmed.
My idea about the crime scene relies on video of officers walking around the crime scene for hours afterward with no regard for potential contamination. As far as the 'evidence' in Wilson's vehicle, how many times did Wilson re-enter the vehicle? What did he touch? Etc. There are so many holes in the cop account it is laughable.
But you already knew that. Enjoy your stay.....
Agalbraith
(52 posts)so you saw officers walking around the crime scene? Wow... was that before or after the forensics had been done?
I'll ask you your same questions. As far as the 'evidence' in Wilson's vehicle, how many times did Wilson re-enter the vehicle? What did he touch?
You have no clue as the facts behind these questions, but yet somehow you've reached conclusions none the less.
brilliant.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)But please proceed, governor....
Agalbraith
(52 posts)I'm waiting to hear what you used to reach you conclusions.
How long did it take forensics to show up?
How many times did the officer re-enter his vehicle after the incident?
you have made authoritative statements that the crime scene WAS contaminated due to the hours it took for forensics to show up. I'm just wondering where you got that info from. Did you make it up? Or is there some report that indicates a timeline.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Jesus might just show up!
chervilant
(8,267 posts)On Thu Oct 23, 2014, 05:53 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
keep waiting.....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=925933
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
obvious trolling
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Oct 23, 2014, 06:06 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not obvious to me.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Grow a thicker skin. That's pretty mild for this place.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This whole exchange reeks, but it's the other DUer who seems to be trolling, AND supporting the cop who shot an unarmed teen who was WWB.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Is this alert a joke? Trying to get a post hidden
in order to make points is a cowardly way out IMO. LEAVE IT
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)cumulative weight of the eyewitness testimony, most of which has Brown with his hands up or at least raised in a surrender posture. Do you discount eyewitness testimony based on those eyewitnesses' skin color?
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)There were so many eyewitness reports of this crime.
Now, we supposedly have some "unnamed" witnesses that support the cop's story.
It's incredible.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Agalbraith
(52 posts)I am discounting the eye witness testimony those statements are not supported by the autopsies.
again, this is what has been leaked. Not official by any means, but it would seem as though the leaks are pretty reliable, since they are in line with what Brown's families attorney has stated about the results of the families private autopsy.
I have no idea of the skin color of the eye witnesses. Do you have their names and reports of their ethnicity?
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)say Brown was 'charging' Wilson.
So I think everyone is entitled to ask why you continue to propagate that particular unsupported allegation and why you claim that 'reason' supports your efforts.
To me it seems you're not using reason but instead using prejudice.
Agalbraith
(52 posts)The witnesses say that Brown was shot in the back while his hands were in the air.
the autopsies do not support this, so their statements must be suspect.
none of the witness statements say that Brown was "charging"... true enough... but as we have just established, their statements are suspect as they are 180 degrees (in this case literally) from what the physical evidence shows.
Why in your mind that equals some sort of racial prejudice is completely beyond any sort of reason.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)witnesses are not forensic examiners and to them it may have looked as if Brown was shot in the back. Dorian Johnson actually said it looked "like Michael Brown was shot in the back" and not that MB actually was shot in the back.
That said, the fact that eyewitnesses mistake being shot at with actually being hit does nothing to discredit the other details of their testimony.
You need to stop your lies and misrepresentations.
Agalbraith
(52 posts)Yes, to the witnesses it may have indeed looked like Brown was shot in the back. But according to the autopsies, he was not.
so if their account of the situation is that flawed and not supported by the physical evidence, their testimony is not credible.
they can say "he was shot in the back" all day long, but in fact he wasnt.
thats not me "lying".
I'm guessing you dont get the irony of your statements... You accuse me of "lying" (which I never have), so all of my other statements should be disregarded, but yet the witnesses statements are not supported by the evidence, but that does not discredit their statements. Irony, you dont getz itz.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Brown was fleeing Wilson's vehicle?
Are you going to maintain that Wilson saved all of his ammunition until Mike Brown turned to face him???
No witness testimony supports that. None at all, your misrepresentations and lies notwithstanding.
I think we're done.
Agalbraith
(52 posts)Brown was not hit in the back by bullets.
all of the autopsies performed state very clearly that Brown was hit in the front while facing the shooter.
if you have any proof to the contrary, please cite it.
I have not lied. If you think I have please quote what you feel is a lie and cite any evidence that shows it to be such.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Brown's back as Brown fled Wilson's vehicle, missing him. That's why Dorian Johnson could say it looked "like Brown had been hit in the back."
There is no proof, and no witness statements, that Brown 'charged' Wilson, your many lies and misrepresentations notwithstanding.
Agalbraith
(52 posts)Still waiting for you to actually quote what you think is a "lie". Its been asked 3 times now.
What proof is there that Wilson shot at Brown as he was fleeing? Please give a cite for that.
"There is no proof, and no witness statements, that Brown 'charged' Wilson" where did I say there was?
Travelman
(708 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Wilson.
What a crock of unmitigated, unsourced bullshit.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)IF the incident went down this way, then why hide it as long as they did? Why no official statement BEFORE things got to nightly protests and military population suppression?
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)It will be swept under the rug in any case.
But there will be a next time.
Tick tock.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over--
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)He had his hands up. He was murdered. He was no threat to the officer when he was killed.
