BADEN: Well, the autopsy itself counted as consistent with police or witnesses. There are many different witness testimonies. Many of them seem to line up in one direction, some in another direction. Right now, till we get more information, till we get from a forensic science point of view, can't distinguish -- can't make a definite judgment.
Now, the lawyers who've interviewed witnesses -- we haven't interviewed, we don't interview witnesses -- may be impressed with some witnesses who seem more -- more trustworthy than others, and as the police are doing too. This is what juries are supposed to do. Juries are supposed to look at the witnesses and tell who is telling the truth and who isn't, but lawyers do that all the time. And so they have more information than we have.
But right now, from the science point of view, we can't determine which witness, and there are all different kinds of observations made, is most consistent with all of the forensic findings. ...
PARCELLS: I don't think we can -- we cannot speculate exact order of gunshot wounds. Forensically, that's impossible. However, Dr. Baden and I do feel that, because of the two gunshot wounds to the head, indicating that Mr. Brown was bending over as they were coming down, that those two shots were most likely the last two to occur to him.
And then a very important point is that this boy, 6'3 with a shot coming around the eye and moving downward, exiting in the jaw and entering above the right clavicle, that clearly is downward. You have someone who is falling. If you want to conjecture, what if he was charging like a mad bull toward an officer with a gun, I find that unlikely. Most likely he was already toppling and his head was pitched forward when that shot was fired and moved in a downward trajectory. That all has to be taken into consideration.
