What we know about Michael Brown's shooting

[bill5]

A Witness Conversation Unknowingly Captured at the Scene of the Ferguson Shooting is a Game-Changer

oops

Well cmon, it's probably all fabricated by the cops or the KKK (heck they're white, so they're probably all in the KKK down there anyway). You know how them whiteys are. That's how they get all those black in jail - it's a conspiracy!

 

[HannahT]

Yikers. That is going to twist some things around.

 

[Nithavela]

So, the eyewitness reports that were incriminating the cop are doubtfull, but this one is just accepted?

 

[HannahT]

So, the eyewitness reports that were incriminating the cop are doubtfull, but this one is just accepted?

From what I have seen they are not done interviewing the the eyewitnesses.

I realize many media outlets, and those that don't trust authority figures will tell you different. Yet, from the FBI themselves they only started a day ago...and have given no reports.

No doubt this audio will start something new. Sigh.

 

[bhsmte]

So, the eyewitness reports that were incriminating the cop are doubtfull, but this one is just accepted?

It just means others may have seen it differently, or at least, are saying different things.

This is why, the forensics and the autopsy will be so important, because it will tell a story that either matches up with one eye witness recollection or another.

 

[Vylo]

This just keeps getting better. If you want the truth, flip a coin, you have about the same odds .

Maybe they will finally get dash cams.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Forensics can't tell us if the shooting was justified in itself - frankly the more I think about it, the more I doubt this will ever be able to be known.

But hey, white guy shot black guy, so the cop MUST be guilty, right?

It can tell a few things. If the first shot happened at close range inside the police car, gunpowder residue will confirm that. If Michael Brown was shot in the back while fleeing, clearly forensics will be able to determine that as well. Depending on where he was shot andhow his arms were at the time, forensics might even be able to determine if his hands were indeed "up in an attempt to surrender" or not. There is one thing about this case that is increasingly bothering me though...

The media, family members, friends, and the family lawyer were all clamoring for this cop's name since this incident began for one unspoken reason since this whole thing began....and since the police released that name, I haven't heard one peep out of any of them regarding this issue. That's issue is... the cop's professional reputation. This is a community where they complain that their police force is racist, abusive, and unprofessional. I've heard accusations that the cops regularly engage in profiling, use excessive force, and generally harass the black community of Ferguson. Though they may not have said it, I believe the media, family, friends, and the lawyer all wanted this cop's name so they could dig up his career record to look for dirt to use to smear his name in the public's mind before the investigation is ever completed. I don't doubt for a moment that if they found that dirt, his career record would've made headlines within the hour. Headlines like, "Killer cop once used the n-word." or "Michael Brown killer has record of racial profiling" or even "Teen slayer had been reported for excessive force against blacks".

As it turns out though, this cop has a stellar record of professionalism amidst a police department known for exactly the opposite. He may not be the most senior officer on the force, but six years means he's no rookie either...he's likely been in very dangerous situations before, probably had to pull his gun many times, and all without incident. If his record can be used to smear him in the public eye, why doesn't it seem to work in the other way as well? I haven't heard anyone mention the fact that this cop appears to be the last guy on the force who's likely to just decide to gun down a kid for any reason...let alone that reason being that Brown was black. Everyone still seems to be talking about racist cops even though it seems fairly obvious racism doesn't have anything to do with this situation.

 

[Vylo]

Having a stellar record means nothing when those keeping the records are corrupt. The silence about him speaks more to the fact that the people of the town probably personally respect him in a town full of crooked cops.

In my town cops were selling drugs to kids, harassing people, general shenanigans. The ones that weren't like that were known and respected. People would approach and greet them on the street.

Chances are this guy had a rep with the people as being fair and friendly. Which makes it more likely the shooting was either completely legit or just a terrible mistake with no malice behind it.

 

[mpok1519]

Have you ever heard of collusion?

And how is the government immune from doing the same?

 

[mpok1519]

of course it can. Although it should be noted they do have training that assits in being more accurate than the average person

They also can forsake that training and just do what's necessary to protect one if their own.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It was reported on CNN (this past evening) that the coroner's report revealed that Brown was shot six times, four in the arm (or arms) and two in the head, all from the front.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

By your thinking, whatever a person did in the past, automatically makes them guilty for something that happens in the future. I know that makes it easy for you to judge, but each issue should be handled on it's own merits.

We need evidence and it will likely be the forensic evidence, that tells the story of whether the shooting was justified or not and that evidence, will have zero to do, with what the cop or the kid did before hand.

Hey, we're all having a little fun with this. I say this because the majority of comments so far are pretty funny (yours are pretty level headed though).

That said I've spun the wheel and am ready to solve the puzzle:

I believe that the evidence will show that the officer shot Brown in self-defense, and he will be fully exonerated.

 

[Vylo]

Hey, we're all having a little fun with this. I say this because the majority of comments so far are pretty funny (yours are pretty level headed though).

That said I've spun the wheel and am ready to solve the puzzle:

I believe that the evidence will show that the officer shot Brown in self-defense, and he will be fully exonerated.

Not too much spinning the wheel when all the shots are from the front. Backs up his story, and flies in the face of the other witnesses who said brown was running away. One witness said Brown charged the cop after running a distance, that looks to be the case now.

How it got to that point is a bit cloudy, but its hard not to find it self defense with the kid rushing the cop.

 

[TheDag]

Not too much spinning the wheel when all the shots are from the front. Backs up his story, and flies in the face of the other witnesses who said brown was running away. One witness said Brown charged the cop after running a distance, that looks to be the case now.

How it got to that point is a bit cloudy, but its hard not to find it self defense with the kid rushing the cop.

although there is media footage of either a friend or family member saying he was in the process of getting down on the ground. Does cast doubts over their side of the story when they can't decide if he had stopped and was getting on the ground or running away. Now this claim.

 

[TheDag]

They also can forsake that training and just do what's necessary to protect one if their own.

of course they could. Do you have evidence of that to support your already formed view that no matter what the cop is guilty?

 

[Ana the Ist]

It was reported on CNN (this past evening) that the coroner's report revealed that Brown was shot six times, four in the arm (or arms) and two in the head, all from the front.

Well...aside from showing he didn't get shot in the back, this basically supports that he wasn't surrendering either. Cops are trained to shoot for center mass, same as anyone who's been trained to shoot (center mass is the upper-middle of the torso for the uninitiated). It's gonna be very difficult (and pointless) to hit the arms of someone surrendering if they've got their hands up over their head. If they're running towards the shooter though...they would be pumping in front of the body about chest high.

I wouldn't be surprised if these initial eyewitnesses decided not to testify in person. It's ok though, I'm sure if this poor cop is acquitted of all crimes...the Brown family will be the first to apologize for all the accusations and threats of violence.

 

[mpok1519]

of course they could. Do you have evidence of that to support your already formed view that no matter what the cop is guilty?

History showing cops routinely covering up their wrong doing because they have no reason not to.

 

[mpok1519]

Well...aside from showing he didn't get shot in the back, this basically supports that he wasn't surrendering either. Cops are trained to shoot for center mass, same as anyone who's been trained to shoot (center mass is the upper-middle of the torso for the uninitiated). It's gonna be very difficult (and pointless) to hit the arms of someone surrendering if they've got their hands up over their head. If they're running towards the shooter though...they would be pumping in front of the body about chest high.

I wouldn't be surprised if these initial eyewitnesses decided not to testify in person. It's ok though, I'm sure if this poor cop is acquitted of all crimes...the Brown family will be the first to apologize for all the accusations and threats of violence.

Yes because when you're shot, or you think you're about to be shot when you have your hands up, your first instinct might to be to try covering your chest and head with your arms as a means of defense.

Because if one is surrendering with their hands up, their hands automatically stay up the whole time during the process of being riddled with bullets.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

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

"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."

If Brown was indeed rushing the officer and the officer was emptying his firearm at him Browns clothing will be awash in gunpowder residue even though his wounds showed no evidence of close-range shots.

 

[HannahT]

This story is getting even more complicated.

According to the friend that was with him during this whole thing? He was shot at close range, and then in the back.

The family had a private autopsy done, and none of what he said happened came to the surface in the report.

No shots in the back, and all shots were from a distance.

In the world's RUSH to have answers? Speculation seems to be the name of the game. I'm sure parts of what the witness/friend said were true - although they didn't point those out - all these other stories that made people SO MAD were not the case.

I'm sorry, but his family must be reeling right now. Everyone throwing these awful stories at them about what happened to their son, and now a different version comes to the surface. I can't imagine the confusion over this during their time of mourning. At least now they can have SOME answers, because this private autopsy was hired by them.

I really hate how these stories get played out today. Everyone wants the story - any story - and meanwhile the family and their emotional place doesn't matter. We still don't know what happened totally, but at least now SOME of the stories out there have been proven false.