Michael Brown Shooting

[William Parcher]

Interesting. And that caused damage on Wilson's face but not on Brown's fist?

When Baden didn't report a ruptured eardrum we all knew that there was no gunshot inside the cop car.

We know that Brown had good shaving technique and good razors because Baden would have reported any visible shaving nicks.

We know that Brown wasn't an IV drug user because Baden would have reported any needle marks.

As an aside, do you have a pick for next year's Kentucky Derby?

 

[Distracted1]

Does it honestly matter to those that have already made up their minds what Wilson's account is? It won't be believed or will be hand-waved away, as is already occurring.

The lynch mob has been out for 8 days already.

 

[Cylinder]

The idea that the ratio of damaging fist strikes to knuckle injury is anywhere near 1 is just plain silly.

 

[Mike!]

Did you bother to look?


If you are talking about Baden, yes he did. He specifically answered the question about evidence of any altercation and his reply was "none".

No, I didn't, but I watched the press conference, sort of.

Thanks.

 

[Kaosium]

It could.

It could also be a lineman's charge. Both of which observers from different angles might mistake for the other.

If he had his hands in the air, or outforward palms up, or was on his knees, other scene evidence and wound tracks will hopefully show that. Brown was 6'4". Where the rounds went after hitting those spots on his body are going to be massively different for all these positions, especially if the officer is significantly shorter. To me it looks very much as hits from a charge, arms or arm out (but not fully extended) reaching for the target. Six shots all about the same area in rapid succession where Brown feel forward into the path of the last few shots, either from shock of being shot or simply tripping (like on those very, very low shorts). That would be consistent with the final position of the body in the photographs as well, which to me all but disprove the 'hands in the air/on his knees' scenario.

Thank you for your input, I am interested in the position of the casings as well. As for the latter, I didn't think the version told in that Youtube video was likely to be accurate, but what I found interesting was that he told it that way and he knew about what happened at the Ferguson Market, including the detail about Dorian Johnson putting the cigarillos back. I wonder if he's the guy in the white shirt that was holding the door for a while, or he had talked with Dorian Johnson and the story 'grew in the telling of it?'

Note how much of that could change with just a little bit more evidence though. If the officer is the same height or taller, then it will be much harder to tell the difference through the wounds. If the body had been moved to search for a weapon, well in that case the body would have not been in the position it was in the photos either, but perhaps staging. If the shots were not in quick order, then it also becomes murky quickly. Six shots was not excessive if only the last one or two ended a charge, but were all unneeded if he was surrendering.

I agree that forensic information is subject to interpretation and it can easily become murky and subject to disturbances not related to the event. Personally I enjoy speculation on limited evidence simply because it's a puzzle in a sense but am well aware of how additional evidence or mistaken evidence can change the whole character of it thus it's best not to rush to premature conclusions. I have a few different scenarios I'm considering and looking for the best 'fit' with the available evidence, that which can be inferred to be forthcoming and of course don't think it wise to go to any absolutes with so little being known.

None of that excuses the police forces poor choices in response. And those poor choices don't excuse the rioting, looting, and burning of businesses. Nor would the shooting turning out to be justifiable excuse the obvious distrust and faults of the police in the past.

A pattern of poor policing and disconnect between the force and the community leads to many poor outcomes. The people end up not trusting the police even when the police are in the right. They end up with the 'snitches get stitches' attitude. This attitude is very obviously enforced by some in the community, as shown by the burning of the market with graffti and the fear the liquor store owner had in calling the police. It's an understandable reaction to a feeling of having no agency in the protection of community, a parallel pseudo-structure evolves. Even if that is outright corrupt as well, and it inevitably is (mafia), the people feel at least they have input in it. Obviously to the credit of this community many are not supportive of riots, looting, burning, and attacks. They're not happy with the police, but they don't take that objection into support of lawlessness and violence. This is something I have seen and understand but object to strongly. Many observers have been condoning, excusing, or even cheering the destruction and violence as sticking it to the police. It's not the police's gas station, and even attacks against the police themselves aren't justified. All that does is help the police justify their heavy-handed tactics. Way to prove them right.

It's a mess of interrelated issues, and it's inevitable that people will confuse which causes and affects which and in what ways. The oversimplification of these issues does a disservice to all of them. It's not simply 'police bad/good' or 'community bad/good'. Some of these actions are bad, and some of these individuals have problems, and some of these organizations are maladaptive, but that isn't reason for broad brushes.

I agree and thank you for the insightful post. I have little patience with rioters, especially those which are not one night events. Instigators need to held to account for that in my opinion.

 

[Mumbles]

Again, I am reserving judgment until more evidence is available. It is clear that Ferguson is a city fraught with race-based tension between the citizens and the police force.

That's true of most major US cities. The difference here is that were talking about a relatively calm suburb.

It is also clear that its citizens will lie to discredit police officers (as Johnson did, at the very least lying by omission when he carefully avoided mentioning the robbery Brown committed) and it is not unreasonable to suppose, given past history, that the police might lie to protect their own.

In this case, there are well-founded doubts about both stories. Sometimes "I just don't know" is the only truly skeptical thing to say.

Regardless of where you lean, this is all correct.

 

[Giz]

In other words, not whether or not he shot in self-defence, but whether a gun should be the first weapon for self-defence when facing even a large unarmed person.

It's not as simple as that... if the officer had opted not to use his gun as Brown came forward then what could have stopped (the vastly bigger) Brown taking his gun from him?

If Brown re-engaged Wilson, then Wilson would have been justified in shooting. If Brown had clearly surrendered (or was running off into the distance with hands held high and clearly weaponless) then Wilson was not justified.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

I hope the guy that did the first autopsy had enough sense to install a zipper when he put Brown back together. That would make the next three autopsies much easier.

 

[Mumbles]

Well, while I agree with you that Brown was thuggish, if your characterization of him as 'low-life scum' etc, one would have expected him to have beaten the clerk to a pulp. Someone earlier joked about the 'little guy starting it'--but in response to a view as extreme as yours it's actually a vaild point--Brown was pushing/strong-arming the clerk out of the way, it was meant as intimidation for sure, but if Brown was as violent as you claim, he could have easily knocked the clerk to the ground with one swat. Thug? arguably. Robber? By definition. Violent aggressor? I don't think the video supports that conclusion.

"Thug" is the new way of saying "the N-word" without actually saying "the N-word". That's been true for decades, and every time it's brought out, I'll point it out. The end.

 

[Nick Terry]

Does it honestly matter to those that have already made up their minds what Wilson's account is? It won't be believed or will be hand-waved away, as is already occurring.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys, not to mention a fair-minded jury, are going to place enormous weight on when the various witnesses, including Wilson, made their claims, and be asking hard questions of the Ferguson and St Louis County PDs regarding the efforts they went to in order to ensure that relevant testimonies were taken down as promptly as possible before battle lines became drawn with the outbreak of rioting.

Consistency will also matter; if bystanders who saw part of the scene change their stories in any way, they'll be crucified, ditto if Wilson has changed his story. Also, corroboration: a credible account will likely have some backup from forensics including where shell casings ended up, where stray bullets ended up, etc.

There will also be questions as to why details were not released earlier. If details could not have been released earlier because the police needed to speak to other witnesses, then that should be made clear. Michael Brown's friend Dorian Johnson was not apparently interviewed that quickly, but was obviously the key witness who might corroborate or refute Wilson's story, assuming he told it on the day of the shooting. If so then it becomes clear why the police couldn't release what appears from the CNN-reported version to be a clear-cut story of a police officer shooting in self-defense.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Audio of Josie calling in the radio station.

 

[dudalb]

The lynch mob has been out for 8 days already.

It's not a Lynch Mob, It is a People's Court Of Revolutionary Justice with The Scarecrow presiding ....

 

[casebro]

Guns eject their empties pretty uniformly. Probably to the right, though we haven't heard what gun Wilson was using. So a cartridge beyond the body might indicate that Wilson was backing away as Brown was charging.

Lots of possibilities for more evidence that has not been leaked yet.

 

[Kaosium]

Brown committed a violent felony. It's admitted by all the relevant parties and well evidenced on video. That some people don't consider him a violent felon isn't relevant to anything. Objecting to what his actions show and what is an accurate label would be like objecting to calling him a teenager, wouldn't it? It's kind of like the joke, "You have sex with women all your life, but you have sex with one goat and all of a sudden you're a goat-******." Yes, you commit one violent felony and you're a violent felon. You have an age that ends in 'teen' and you're a 'teenager'.

I think this needs to be put in perspective. I cannot contest that Michael Brown was literally a violent felon, however there's degrees of that too. Consider for a moment the story from last week where, without any valid justification at all, those officers arrested the reporters in the McDonalds. Here's an article from Leonard Pitts that I post simply to refresh everyone's memory:

It seems two reporters, Ryan Reilly of the Huffington Post and Wesley Lowery of the Washington Post, were working at a McDonald's, which has been used as a staging ground by reporters covering the ongoing unrest following the Aug. 9 police shooting of an unarmed African-American man. According to their accounts, the two were accosted by police, some in militaristic riot gear, demanding identification and ordering them out. These officers refused to provide their badge numbers or names or a reason for the order and grew angry when one of the men attempted to take a video.

Both reporters were arrested. Reilly says a cop intentionally banged his head against the glass on the way out of the restaurant, then gave him a facetious "apology."

The two were transported to a lockup. No mug shots were taken, no fingerprints collected, no paperwork done. After some minutes, they were released. The men were told they'd been arrested for "trespassing."

At a McDonald's. Where they were customers.

"Apparently, in America, in 2014," tweeted Lowery, "police can manhandle you, take you into custody, put you in cell and then open the door like it didn't happen."

​

These two officers wrongfully arrested two reporters, they used violence and the threat of it to do so, moreso than Michael Brown did to the store clerk. Should they be considered violent felons, or perhaps even jackbooted thugs? Their offense goes against a far more important principle than a couple boxes of cigars in my opinion. Should they be facing 5-10 years in prison for their actions? Has anyone referred to them as the armed violent thugs they behaved as?

 

[William Parcher]

The ones that are sometimes called 'black block' (not in reference to race) anarchists?

Black Bloc. I don't know of it's them but they tend to be conspicuous in a crowd because of what they wear.

Or perhaps the New Black Panthers who've been seen there?

Maybe, I don't know. I suspect that there are FBI operatives there whose job is only to watch individuals in the violent crowd and how they associate with others in the crowd. They may be able to identify certain people and know if they have been involved in violent anarchy on other cities.

We might see arrests if this continues with relation to domestic terrorism. Arrests of people who are not locals and not black.

 

[Lerxst]

It matters in that is has to be evaluated. His narrative taken at face value seems to support a reasonable use of force, both in a criminal sense and in a police response sense.

There's the level of Wilson as a potential criminal defendant. There's a level of even if Wilson did not commit a crime was it a legitimate use or display of the power we give to government.

It matters to me, and it clearly matters to you. I don't think it will matter to some. We've known the basic details of his account from the beginning, I don't think having the details available is going to change the minds of those people.

Even if video were to surface that clearly shows Brown charging at Wilson it would not surprise me if we hear "yeah, well, he still didn't have to shoot him in the head, he could have shot him in the leg or something and not killed him".

 

[Lerxst]

Prosecutors and defense attorneys, not to mention a fair-minded jury, are going to place enormous weight on when the various witnesses, including Wilson, made their claims, and be asking hard questions of the Ferguson and St Louis County PDs regarding the efforts they went to in order to ensure that relevant testimonies were taken down as promptly as possible before battle lines became drawn with the outbreak of rioting.

Consistency will also matter; if bystanders who saw part of the scene change their stories in any way, they'll be crucified, ditto if Wilson has changed his story. Also, corroboration: a credible account will likely have some backup from forensics including where shell casings ended up, where stray bullets ended up, etc.

There will also be questions as to why details were not released earlier. If details could not have been released earlier because the police needed to speak to other witnesses, then that should be made clear. Michael Brown's friend Dorian Johnson was not apparently interviewed that quickly, but was obviously the key witness who might corroborate or refute Wilson's story, assuming he told it on the day of the shooting. If so then it becomes clear why the police couldn't release what appears from the CNN-reported version to be a clear-cut story of a police officer shooting in self-defense.

I agree all points, except I'm talking about the court of public opinion, which he's already been tried and convicted in.

 

[steve s]

Interesting. And that caused damage on Wilson's face but not on Brown's fist?

If that's in Wilson's report, he better be hoping the county autopsy found more on Brown's knuckles than Baden found.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but the fact that Brown died quickly after this punch took place means that there wouldn't be any bruising or swelling on his hand. Blood needs to keep flowing for those things to occur.

Steve S

 

[Cylinder]

It matters to me, and it clearly matters to you. I don't think it will matter to some. We've known the basic details of his account from the beginning, I don't think having the details available is going to change the minds of those people.

Yea, changing minds is generally going be a low-return investment.

 

[casebro]

Hmm, another prospective detail- Brown charges, Wilson goes 6 to center of mass, Brown goes down. Wilson advances, lifts head to check assailants condition, gun still in hand,- wah-la, "He's EXECUTING HIM !!!!!"