• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Michael Brown Shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
I remember hearing witness reports that Brown had been shot in the back:

"The second time he says, 'I'll shoot,' a second later the gun went off and he let go. That's how we were able to run at the same time," Johnson said. He said he ran behind a car while the officer fired at them, shooting Brown in the back.

Johnson continued, "[Brown’s] hands immediately went into the air and he turned around to the officer. My friend started to tell the officer that he was unarmed and that he could stop shooting. Before he could get his second sentence out, the officer fired several more shots into his head and chest area. He fell dramatically into the fatal position. I did not hear once he yell 'freeze,' 'stop' or 'halt.' It was just horrible to watch."
Click to expand...

http://www.ibtimes.com/dorian-johns...witness-meeting-fbi-county-prosecutor-1657892

Johnson also says that the officer had tried to pull Brown through the car window. Given Brown's size and strength that seems unlikely.
 
newyorkguy said:
b) can the forensics establish whether Brown was running or standing still when hit.
Click to expand...

I hear the Jeffersonian Institute in Washington, D.C. has a holographic 3-D forensic reconstruction imager and a really talented team of forensic specialists. There's an anthropologist, an entomologist, a really smart kid... Their FBI liaison is even an ex-special forces sniper! I bet if they press the "enhance" button enough times, they can totally establish that.
 
Last edited:
William Parcher said:
It's not shocking to me at all. I saw no blood on the back of his tee shirt. There is a reason why there is no blood on the back of that shirt.
Click to expand...

A quick trip to the laundromat and the blood-removing formula of Wisk?
 
Last edited:
Cylinder said:
It was a hugely irresponsible editorial decision to release this information at night. They could have waited six hours.
Click to expand...

It's a morning paper. It hits the streets between 11 pm and 12 am. They're in the business of disseminating news and it's a very competitive business. I don't fault them for this.
 
Was just looking at the image again, take note:

oY15172.png


The only bullet hole on his entire body which is shaped in that long, drawn out way is the one on his palm. Every other hole is bullet sized, as in direct head on hit or something close to it.

So, the only reason the palm hole is a big long oval instead, is that his palm was hit while it was perpendicular to the officer, NOT flat facing him as it would be if he was surrendering and holding his hands up.

The palm hit is consistent with charging the officer.

If I'm thinking wrongly about this, someone help me out.
 
Cylinder said:
Right. I should have said, if the injuries are associated, it supports the notion that his arms were down. Know is a pretty drastic overstatement. The wound channels will be as important as the placement. Looking at the overall grouping, though, does support in my opinion his arms being down - keeping in mind the aim point is the center of mass.
Click to expand...
Four bullets to the arm, two to the head. That leaves the chest wound from one of the bullets, but which one we don't know.

It's also possible, given Johnson said he saw blood after the first shot from within the car, that the arm/chest wound was the first one that hit Brown. That the shot hit the arm, regardless of which wound if any was the first shot from the car, explains how Brown was not impeded from running.
 
newyorkguy said:
It's a morning paper. It hits the streets between 11 pm and 12 am. They're in the business of disseminating news and it's a very competitive business. I don't fault them for this.
Click to expand...
It might also be a reaction to frequent criticisms that they have been taking too long to release info ( like the officers name ). Perhaps they have tried to accommodate by releasing things as they become available.
It might also be passive-aggressive. " you want the info right now?, here you go then "
 
newyorkguy said:
It's a morning paper. It hits the streets between 11 pm and 12 am. They're in the business of disseminating news and it's a very competitive business. I don't fault them for this.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that in the internet age they might be scooped by Matt Drudge.
 
newyorkguy said:
It's a morning paper. It hits the streets between 11 pm and 12 am. They're in the business of disseminating news and it's a very competitive business. I don't fault them for this.
Click to expand...

Distracted1 said:
It might also be a reaction to frequent criticisms that they have been taking too long to release info ( like the officers name ). Perhaps they have tried to accommodate by releasing things as they become available. It might also be passive-aggressive. " you want the info right now?, here you go then "
Click to expand...

I don't think so. The information came from the New York Times. No one has been criticizing them for taking too long to release information. The Times didn't get the information from the officials in Missouri. They got it from Dr. Michael Baden the medical examiner the Brown family hired.
 
casebro said:
That was Zimmerman, who was not indicted by a grand jury by by a politically appointed "special prosecutor". And O.J, who was probably found innocent exactly like you say.
Click to expand...

OJ was acquitted, appropriately, because the investigators did a massively ****** job. Zimmerman was also acquitted appropriately.

Alan Dershowitz pointed out, correctly, that while people may say that it is better to let a hundred guilty go free than convict one innocent, that people don't really think that way for a minute.

As a mind exercise, since I met someone who runs a newspaper who might want to hire me (for next to nothing) as a new writer, I've been thinking about what I'd write about this case. At first, I thought that I'd put it in a historical context. Now I think I'd talk about this, which I think is everywhere.

Some people seem to be arguing that this was race-inspired murder, no matter what. Others seem to be arguing that the cops are justified, no matter what. Very few seem to be observing that the fact that such an incident could not only occur but inflame people to the point of riots indicates long-standing, systemic problems with the way these incidents are handled in general. Instead, we seems to have gotten used to the idea that the police and the citizens are naturally opposed camps. Most of the opinions, here and elsewhere, seem to take this completely for granted, and the only difference seems to be the side you are on in the warfare.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
So, the only reason the palm hole is a big long oval instead, is that his palm was hit while it was perpendicular to the officer, NOT flat facing him as it would be if he was surrendering and holding his hands up.

The palm hit is consistent with charging the officer.

If I'm thinking wrongly about this, someone help me out.
Click to expand...


I agree. If it really is as long as it is drawn, then a palm-forward position shouldn't result in a wound like that.

BTW, that part of the hand is called the thenar. (Yes, I had to look that up.)

Steve S
 
steve s said:
I agree. If it really is as long as it is drawn, then a palm-forward position shouldn't result in a wound like that. Steve S
Click to expand...

I don't buy that as being conclusive. It would still be possible if his arms were up but his fingers were bent forward.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I thought other witnesses heard "FREEZE!"...
Click to expand...

Which helps Wilson, IMO.

If he had decided to "murder' Michael Brown because he was upset with him doing things which were over and done with at that point, and knew Brown no longer posed a threat... why yell "Freeze!" ?

Unless we want to start thinking he's so evil that he did it to help set up his alibi or something.

"It's comin' right for us!"
 
Skeptic Tank said:
.....
I am starting to think the "he started bumrushing Wilson" thing is seeming pretty credible. It would fit with the 6'4" 290+lb hormonal teen who thinks he is completely invincible, and that's the person I saw on the security tape too.
Click to expand...

Add in some street drug and you have an attacking unstoppable loco-motive.

PCP? 'Roid rage? Cocaine rage? Tox report ought to show it.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
Was just looking at the image again, take note:

If I'm thinking wrongly about this, someone help me out.
Click to expand...

What it proves is that this cop was a terrible shot. He was apparently trying to execute Brown, but hit one of the hands the kid had raised high above his head (and at an angle).
 
newyorkguy said:
You mean Wilson, right?

I have said before, I have known a lot of cops. It's just my impression would be, once Wilson regained control of the firearm and Brown is no longer attempting to wrest it away than he's got to take Brown into custody. At that point Wilson no longer has the right to shoot him. I'm familiar with cases in New York where officers have claimed the suspect tried to take their gun. I don't remember any of them being shot once they stopped trying to wrestle for the gun. Unless it went off or was fired in self defense during the struggle.

One factor may be, maybe Wilson was physically afraid of Brown. Maybe he felt if Brown tries to come back and take my gun maybe this time he'll get it. Ferguson Missouri isn't New York. Wilson was alone. Backup may have been minutes away. Maybe Wilson felt if I try and fight this kid I'm going to get my butt kicked and he'll take my gun. So Wilson decided to kill Brown.

Is that within the law? In New York I would say no, in Missouri I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

I think this could be correct. But I'm not sure if there was as much thought process involved as you believe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom