Michael Brown shooting II

[Skeptic Ginger]

Let's talk about the recording as if it were authentic:

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/michael-brown-audio-recording-shooting-ferguson-110343.html

Wilson shoots six times, and then there's a three second pause, and then more shots.

How does the recording prove anything? Wilson shoots six times, and hits Brown in the arm. Brown stumbles for a second, continues to rush Wilson, Wilson pauses for two seconds, and continues firing.

There is not time for Brown's head to get into the position in which the final two head shots occurred given your scenario. Brown would have had to start going down during the three second pause that Wilson wasn't firing in. Meaning after Brown began to fall, then Wilson who was not firing fired the last four shots.

Keep in mind the four witnesses who saw the final shots all witnessed Wilson shooting Brown after Brown was down or going down. Three of them were sure Brown was trying to surrender.

It's an inconvenient bit of evidence that the audio of the shooting corroborates.

If you completely ignore those witnesses (which apparently a lot of people in this thread insist on doing) then you can make up a scenario where Brown charges at Wilson trips in those 3 seconds but Wilson can't react fast enough to stop himself shooting after those 3 seconds.

 

[Fudbucker]

The recording is authentic. This has been confirmed by the company who created it, using both timestamps and geolocation.

Again, No.

"The news is big news for CNN, which subjected itself to some doubts about the integrity of the recording. It surfaced the tape on Monday night without having authenticated it. Haas* confirms that, even though the service has verified the creation of the tape, that doesn’t mean that the sounds in the background are conclusively those of the Brown shooting."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...rvice-verifies-timing-of-cnn-audio-recording/

*Head of Glide Communications.

We will know the audio has been authenticated when it enters a court of law as evidence. Until then, we're speculating.

Second, Brown was running AWAY from Wilson during those six shots. This is confirmed by four witnesses and the police themselves.

The police confirmed Brown was running away? Source?

I know people want to say that the six shots are from Brown facing towards Wilson, but witnesses all say the same thing, and police have confirmed that Wilson was shooting at Brown as he was turned away from him.

Again, source for this? And the autopsy shows Brown was shot in the front.

So.

To me, this proves that from the time Wilson fired those six shots, to the time Wilson fired his next four, there was no time in which Brown could have turned, taunted, and rushed him before he started shooting again. This confirms what the witnesses say and is very bad for Officer Wilson. People want to concoct fantasy scenarios wherein this is not the case, but to do that you have to wave away all of the eyewitnesses who say exactly what I just wrote.

The eyewitnesses have been thoroughly discredited by the fact that Brown was not shot from behind.

And the recording can just as easily confirm what I wrote earlier- Brown starts running at Wilson. Wilson fires, injuring Brown, pauses to see what Brown will do, Brown continues charging and is shot in the head.

IMO, the idea that the six shots WERE NOT while Brown was running away is completely unsupported by any evidence.

Except that Brown wasn't shot from behind.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

"Mr. Brown, 18, was also shot four times in the right arm, he said, adding that all the bullets were fired into his front."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html

Has there been some new information showing he was shot in the back, as Brown's friend claimed?

Apparently you are not keeping up. The medical examiner who actually did the autopsy corrected the misinformation that occurred when he said the NYTs reporter drew a false conclusion about the diagram.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The recording is authentic. This has been confirmed by the company who created it, using both timestamps and geolocation.

Second, Brown was running AWAY from Wilson during those six shots. This is confirmed by four witnesses and the police themselves. I know people want to say that the six shots are from Brown facing towards Wilson, but witnesses all say the same thing, and police have confirmed that Wilson was shooting at Brown as he was turned away from him.

So.

To me, this proves that from the time Wilson fired those six shots, to the time Wilson fired his next four, there was no time in which Brown could have turned, taunted, and rushed him before he started shooting again. This confirms what the witnesses say and is very bad for Officer Wilson. People want to concoct fantasy scenarios wherein this is not the case, but to do that you have to wave away all of the eyewitnesses who say exactly what I just wrote.

IMO, the idea that the six shots WERE NOT while Brown was running away is completely unsupported by any evidence.

I hilited the lie.

No one has confirmed Brown was running AWAY from Wilson during those six shots.

Go read the witness statements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown#Accounts

Who confirms it ?
Dorian Johnson:
ollowing the initial gunshot, Johnson said Brown was able to free himself, at which point the two fled. According to Johnson, Wilson exited the vehicle, after which he fired a second shot, striking Brown in the back. At that point, according to Johnson, Brown turned around with his hands in the air and said, "I don't have a gun. Stop shooting!" Wilson then shot Brown several more times, killing him

No, that doesn't confirm it.

James McKnight
James McKnight said he witnessed the shooting and that Brown held his hands in the air just after he turned to face Wilson. "I saw him stumble toward the officer, but not rush at him. The officer was about six or seven feet away from him," McKnight said

No, that doesn't confirm it.

Michael Brady
he did not hear a gunshot or see what caused them to run. He also said that he saw Wilson get out of the patrol car and "start walking briskly while firing on Brown as he fled."[55]


No, that doesn't confirm it. But at least it does claim wilson shot at brown as he fled. Then again, the FPD claimed that as well.

Piaget Crenshaw
Piaget Crenshaw said that, from her vantage point, it appeared that Wilson and Brown were arm wrestling before the former shot Brown from inside his vehicle. Wilson then chased Brown for about 20 feet before shooting him again. Crenshaw stated, "I saw the police chase him ... down the street and shoot him down."[79] She added that when Brown then raised his arms, the officer shot him two more times, killing him.[80]

No, that doesn't confirm it.

Tiffany Mitchell
After the shot, the kid just breaks away. The cop follows him, kept shooting, the kid's body jerked as if he was hit. After his body jerked he turns around, puts his hands up, and the cop continues to walk up on him and continues to shoot until he goes all the way down," she said.[83]

No, that doesn't confirm it. But at least it does claim wilson shot at brown as he fled. Then again, the FPD claimed that as well.

So 2 out of 5 witnesses claim Wilson shot at brown from behind, but nothing on the number of shots.

And of course, the "fantasy scenario" is that wilson shot brown at the car, got out of the car, shot at him, chased him, and then brown stopped and faced wilson, then wilson shot him.

Which witness above make that impossible ?

 

[Fudbucker]

There is not time for Brown's head to get into the position in which the final two head shots occurred given your scenario. Brown would have had to start going down during the three second pause that Wilson wasn't firing in. Meaning after Brown began to fall, then Wilson who was not firing fired the last four shots.

Or Brown put his head down to charge....

Keep in mind the four witnesses who saw the final shots all witnessed Wilson shooting Brown after Brown was down or going down. Three of them were sure Brown was trying to surrender.

And they also said he was shot from behind. Eyewitness testimony is just about the worst testimony you can use. Isn't this a skeptic's forum?

It's an inconvenient bit of evidence that the audio of the shooting corroborates.

1. We don't know it's authentic

2. It corroborates many different theories.

If you completely ignore those witnesses (which apparently a lot of people in this thread insist on doing) then you can make up a scenario where Brown charges at Wilson trips in those 3 seconds but Wilson can't react fast enough to stop himself shooting after those 3 seconds.

I have no problem completely ignoring witnesses when other witnesses have already been shown to be either lying or totally mistaken.

Do you believe aliens exist because "witnesses" have claimed to have been abducted?

"According to Johnson, the officer pursued Brown and fired another shot. which struck Brown in the back. He said Brown turned and faced the officer with his hands raised."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...uson-missouri-teen-shooting-witness/13992387/

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I'm really astounded by the emphasis on a recording that doesn't really prove jack **** about what anyone was doing.

Perhaps when it's put in actual context, it might be useful then

 

[Fudbucker]

Apparently you are not keeping up. The medical examiner who actually did the autopsy corrected the misinformation that occurred when he said the NYTs reporter drew a false conclusion about the diagram.

"Baden, who also spoke at the news conference, said Brown, 18, was shot at least six times, including twice in the head. None of the bullets entered from the back, and three were recovered from Brown's body, he said."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...e-department-autopsy-brown-ferguson/14196559/

 

[tsig]

Would Wilson ever resort to physical aggression? Why is everybody talking about Brown? Wilson is the perpetrator; he pulled the trigger. Why isn't anybody asking questions about him or digging through his past?

He's a cop. He wears the badge for all of us and is the only thing standing between us and utter chaos. Without Wilson violent, felonious strong arming thugs would soon overwhelm us peaceful, law-abidin', responsible citizens so far from condemning him we would like to give him a medal for ridding society of this threat. (summary of many posts here)

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Who wants to bet that when his records are released, there will be other brushes with the law?

I will, if you take the contrary position.

It seems likely given these two incidents just after he turned 18.

 

[Fudbucker]

I will, if you take the contrary position.

It seems likely given these two incidents just after he turned 18.

What kind of odds you giving me, if I were to bet he has a clean record when this all comes out?

 

[Mumbles]

Again, No.

"The news is big news for CNN, which subjected itself to some doubts about the integrity of the recording. It surfaced the tape on Monday night without having authenticated it. Haas* confirms that, even though the service has verified the creation of the tape, that doesn’t mean that the sounds in the background are conclusively those of the Brown shooting."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...rvice-verifies-timing-of-cnn-audio-recording/

*Head of Glide Communications.

We will know the audio has been authenticated when it enters a court of law as evidence. Until then, we're speculating.

In that case, since we have no way of stating what has been entered into a court as evidence, we have no evidence, and you, similarly, have no data to work from.

ETA: any reasonable person would accept that Glide has authenticated the recording time, and the lawyer the address of the person recording it. At this point, it should be accepted unless we're given a reason *not* to - and no, some CNN expert saying "I bet it's one of those Howard Stern punks!" will not cut it, especially since their MO for over a decade has been prank calls.

 

[Unabogie]

The police confirmed Brown was running away? Source?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...s-Officer-Wilson-Shot-at-Brown-as-He-Ran-Away

Again, source for this? And the autopsy shows Brown was shot in the front.

No, it did not. It showed that one of the shots could have been from behind or from the front. This fits with what witnesses saw. They saw Wilson shooting at Brown as he ran, and Brown stopped as if shot. It's possible he was shot in the arm, and that's why he stopped. The witnesses may have been mistaken but your next claim...

The eyewitnesses have been thoroughly discredited by the fact that Brown was not shot from behind.

He was shot AT from behind, just like they said. The police confirm this, and the autopsy does not refute this in any way.

And the recording can just as easily confirm what I wrote earlier- Brown starts running at Wilson. Wilson fires, injuring Brown, pauses to see what Brown will do, Brown continues charging and is shot in the head.

Except that Brown wasn't shot from behind.

Except we know he was. Police confirm it, all witnesses agree on it.

 

[Unabogie]

More on this:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_f9904f19-dba5-58b4-ac4b-56b9bda29646.html

“While the shot could have come from the back,” Parcells said. “The arm is a very mobile part of the body, so it also could have occurred when he was putting his hands up ... We don’t know.”

So they did NOT rule out a shot from behind, contrary to what people keep claiming.

 

[Fudbucker]

In that case, since we have no way of stating what has been entered into a court as evidence, we have no evidence, and you, similarly, have no data to work from.

No, we do have data to work from. For example, the Brown family has admitted he was stealing cigars. We have a preliminary autopsy report that no one is disputing. We have Wilson's police record.

We also have a recording that has not been authenticated, and supports both sides, so it cannot count even as preliminary evidence. The preliminary evidence so far, is not helping Brown's side of the story.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...s-Officer-Wilson-Shot-at-Brown-as-He-Ran-Away

No, it did not. It showed that one of the shots could have been from behind or from the front. This fits with what witnesses saw. They saw Wilson shooting at Brown as he ran, and Brown stopped as if shot. It's possible he was shot in the arm, and that's why he stppped. The witnesses may have been mistaken but your next claim...

He was shot AT from behind, just like they said. The police confirm this, and the autopsy does not refute this in any way.

Except we know he was. Police confirm it, all witnesses agree on it.

Except for the fact the bullets are all grouped on the same side. And if brown was facing away, that would make that one shot on the other side. Not likely.

 

[Unabogie]

I have no problem completely ignoring witnesses when other witnesses have already been shown to be either lying or totally mistaken.

Except your evidence contradicting these witnesses seems to be based on your erroneous reading of the autopsy. Furthermore, and I feel like we just doubled back on the last thread, stop telling people they're not True Skeptics. Four separate witnesses are in close agreement on the general outline of what happened. They were there in close proximity to what happened. The autopsy is consistent with what they say happened, even if we assume that all of Wilson's shots from behind missed. The people there had no way of know that was the case since Brown jerked to a stop. Maybe they thought he was hit, but he was just scared? Who knows? But there's no reason that this makes them liars. Again, police confirm this part of the story. At that point, Wilson (allegedly) claims Brown turned around and then taunted and then charged. The audio recording makes this impossible, which is why all of Wilson's defenders have created an alternate universe in which there was no shooting from behind. But there was. It's not controversial. The cops admit it.

 

[Mumbles]

No, we do have data to work from. For example, the Brown family has admitted he was stealing cigars. We have a preliminary autopsy report that no one is disputing. We have Wilson's police record.

That has not, as far as we can tell, been said under oath - and how can his *family* admit it, when we're also told that none of them were on the scene? Nor has anything but the family's autopsy report been presented, which will likely not be presented to the court, since the state has performed their own autopsy. And, frankly, given that the past two weeks have shown a great deal of illegal behavior from this same police department, their records are of no value.

So, nothing.

 

[Unabogie]

That has not, as far as we can tell, been said under oath - and how can his *family* admit it, when we're also told that none of them were on the scene? Nor has anything but the family's autopsy report been presented, which will likely not be presented to the court, since the state has performed their own autopsy. And, frankly, given that the past two weeks have shown a great deal of illegal behavior from this same police department, their records are of no value.

So, nothing.

Well it's my opinion that this will NEVER go to a criminal court, so I'm thinking that we know about how much we'll ever know.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

"Baden, who also spoke at the news conference, said Brown, 18, was shot at least six times, including twice in the head. None of the bullets entered from the back, and three were recovered from Brown's body, he said."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...e-department-autopsy-brown-ferguson/14196559/

Except your evidence contradicting these witnesses seems to be based on your erroneous reading of the autopsy. Furthermore, and I feel like we just doubled back on the last thread, stop telling people they're not True Skeptics. Four separate witnesses are in close agreement on the general outline of what happened. They were there in close proximity to what happened. The autopsy is consistent with what they say happened, even if we assume that all of Wilson's shots from behind missed. The people there had no way of know that was the case since Brown jerked to a stop. Maybe they thought he was hit, but he was just scared? Who knows? But there's no reason that this makes them liars. Again, police confirm this part of the story. At that point, Wilson (allegedly) claims Brown turned around and then taunted and then charged. The audio recording makes this impossible, which is why all of Wilson's defenders have created an alternate universe in which there was no shooting from behind. But there was. It's not controversial. The cops admit it.

Who do you believe is claiming there was "no shooting from behind." ?

Lots of posters are claiming brown was not shot from behind, which is consistent with the states autopsy, and badens autopsy.

But why don't you actually quote posters saying these things, instead of attacking made up straw-men ?

 

[Fudbucker]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...s-Officer-Wilson-Shot-at-Brown-as-He-Ran-Away



No, it did not. It showed that one of the shots could have been from behind or from the front. This fits with what witnesses saw. They saw Wilson shooting at Brown as he ran, and Brown stopped as if shot. It's possible he was shot in the arm, and that's why he stopped. The witnesses may have been mistaken but your next claim...



He was shot AT from behind, just like they said. The police confirm this, and the autopsy does not refute this in any way.



Except we know he was. Police confirm it, all witnesses agree on it.

The link is to a New York Times article, which states the following:

"However, law enforcement officials say witnesses and forensic analysis have shown that Wilson did suffer an injury during the struggle in the car.

As Wilson got out of his car, the men were running away. The officer fired his weapon but did not hit anyone, according to law enforcement officials."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/u...er-as-holder-schedules-visit.html?ref=us&_r=1

I could not verify it with any other news source. Do you have another source that confirms this? Who were the Ferguson officials who confirmed this? Why are they leaking forensic reports?



And if we're going by this, then Wilson was assaulted by Brown, who injured him. The police can, under certain circumstances, legally shoot a fleeing suspect:

http://www.vox.com/2014/8/13/5994305/michael-brown-case-investigation-legal-police-kill-force-murder