Looting in Missouri after cops shoot 18 year old (4 Viewers)

[Jim11]

The lack of logic by those trying to show that Mr. Brown was shot in the back or shot at from the rear, then turned around, or whatever excuse one can come up with for Mr. Brown not being at fault is truly amazing.

The autopsy show that he was NOT shot in the back. Maybe this or maybe that is pure conjecture.

 

[Henry Ford]

The lack of logic by those trying to show that Mr. Brown was shot in the back or shot at from the rear, then turned around, or whatever excuse one can come up with for Mr. Brown not being at fault is truly amazing.

The autopsy show that he was NOT shot in the back. Maybe this or maybe that is pure conjecture.

Which is not the same thing as "not shot from behind."

 

[Gary Coal Man]

Has the Indian dude who works at the gas station that Mike Brown Robbed and assaulted spoke out yet?

Yep. Indian dude spoke out via his attorney to make it known he didn't snitch in a vain attempt to save his business and himself:

Lawyer: Store didn't call cops on Michael BrownFERGUSON, Mo. - The Ferguson Market where Brown allegedly stole from Saturday says it remains committed to the community and it hopes the community will remain committed to it. The market's attorney says it has been in the Ferguson community for many years and is the type of place where customers and employees all know one another. Friday, the market's attorney said the owners intend to keep it that way.

Former Ferguson resident Shaneis Hubbard used to work just a couple of doors down from the market and would visit it almost every day. She stopped by Friday to see for herself what the market would say about the surveillance video that allegedly caught Michael Brown stealing from the store, not long before he was killed.

"Regardless of the petty crime he was allegedly involved in, nobody deserves to be gunned down like that, nobody; white, black, other, nobody," she said.

The store's owners, through their attorney, sent the message that they want to stay as far away from the situation as possible. In fact, he said, even after the initial alleged theft, it was a customer who called police.

"It's not about them. They didn't call the police, they didn't ask the police to come and take the video," said attorney Jay Kanzler.

Now, the Ferguson Market owners are hoping the video won't make them a target.

"They would hope that the people of this community, who have consistently supported them, would continue to support them, and realize that whatever the police are looking at on the surveillance tapes has nothing to with what went on in the streets," said Kanzler.

Plan didn't work, though.

 

[[icon]]

Sooo.... what do the protestors/looters resort to when it's announced that charges won't be pressed..... or that he's acquitted (if charged)?

 

[BigJohn]

Anybody that thinks a robbery that occurred 10 minutes before is completely irrelevant is obviously biased.

I disagree. I think those same people would find a video of the cop abusing his powers 10 minutes earlier irrelevant as well. Unfortunately, there's only the one video at this point.

I seriously doubt that. A video of that nature would absolutely be just as relevant as this one.

 

[Jim11]

The lack of logic by those trying to show that Mr. Brown was shot in the back or shot at from the rear, then turned around, or whatever excuse one can come up with for Mr. Brown not being at fault is truly amazing.

The autopsy show that he was NOT shot in the back. Maybe this or maybe that is pure conjecture.

Which is not the same thing as "not shot from behind."

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[jonessed]

Has the Indian dude who works at the gas station that Mike Brown Robbed and assaulted spoke out yet?

Yep. Indian dude spoke out via his attorney to make it known he didn't snitch in a vain attempt to save his business and himself:

Lawyer: Store didn't call cops on Michael Brown

FERGUSON, Mo. - The Ferguson Market where Brown allegedly stole from Saturday says it remains committed to the community and it hopes the community will remain committed to it. The market's attorney says it has been in the Ferguson community for many years and is the type of place where customers and employees all know one another. Friday, the market's attorney said the owners intend to keep it that way.

Former Ferguson resident Shaneis Hubbard used to work just a couple of doors down from the market and would visit it almost every day. She stopped by Friday to see for herself what the market would say about the surveillance video that allegedly caught Michael Brown stealing from the store, not long before he was killed.

"Regardless of the petty crime he was allegedly involved in, nobody deserves to be gunned down like that, nobody; white, black, other, nobody," she said.

The store's owners, through their attorney, sent the message that they want to stay as far away from the situation as possible. In fact, he said, even after the initial alleged theft, it was a customer who called police.

"It's not about them. They didn't call the police, they didn't ask the police to come and take the video," said attorney Jay Kanzler.

Now, the Ferguson Market owners are hoping the video won't make them a target.

"They would hope that the people of this community, who have consistently supported them, would continue to support them, and realize that whatever the police are looking at on the surveillance tapes has nothing to with what went on in the streets," said Kanzler.

Plan didn't work, though.

They were pissed he assaulted that poor black man with his neck.

 

[lod01]

Sooo.... what do the protestors/looters resort to when it's announced that charges won't be pressed..... or that he's acquitted (if charged)?

If you went to looter school and became a pro looter you would know what the answer to that question is. I'd guess that right now the pros are analyzing the situation and selecting targets. your scenarios, looting is a guarantee. Pros don't waste opportunities like that.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Yeah, at this point I'm going to pretty much completely dismiss the friend's account of how this went down. That guy has no credibility whatsoever now.

Unless the cop shot at Brown while he was running away before he turned back to the cop and the friend thought he had been shot in the back, right?

Yes. This is indeed possible.

But a few days ago, you and several others were of the strong belief that Michael Brown was murdered by a police officer, while those that argued in defense of the police appeared to be grasping at straws.

Now, as a result of all the new information (most importantly, the autopsy), those in defense of the police have the strong belief that the shooting was justified, while you're the one who appears to be grasping at straws.

I get that "not shot in the back" makes it less likely that it was a straight up murder, but you go waaaaay too far with the bolded. The only thing that changed is that there's gunshot wounds from the front. You've still got 6 to 8 shots, none from close range, including a head shot. You've still got several eyewitnesses saying he had given himself up and was not confronting the police at all- the angle of the shooting doesn't change that. And just as importantly, you've got a police department that's spent the last week acting like it's got something to hide and has a history of racial injustice. You hardly have to "grasp at straws" to conclude that something ain't right here.

Fair enough. I am probably going overboard.

My main problem is this: I based my initial thoughts about this on Johnson's story, which I thought was credible. Then it turns out that he was involved in a robbery with Brown (something he forgot to mention.) While I didn't care that it made Brown out to be a bad dude (even bad dudes don't desrve to be shot without cause), it did cause me to question Johnson's credibility. However, there were two other witnesses who confirmed Johnson's story, so based on that I still assumed that the cop did something wrong here.

But now we learned that Brown was shot in the front, not in the back. That alone wouldn't bother me; like you, I would still be suspicious, based on the amount of gunshots and the history of the police and their weird actions afterward, that something ain't right here. What bothered me is that it completely negates the testimony of the other two witnesses and makes them out to be mistaken or lying. (Actually lying is much more probable, since it seems unlikely that 2-3 people would all be mistaken.) So now we have NO witnesses that can be trusted. And if that's the case, what do we have left? Show me some evidence that proves wrongdoing here and I'll charge the policeman with a crime. But I'm not sure, in the end, that there is any.

What if Brown, already shot at the car, is running away from the officer who shoots at his back and misses, and then Brown stops and turns raising his hands and is shot 5 more times? Would that help explain some of the eyewitness accounts?

Not really. If I were an eyewitness and Brown stopped running, turned around, and raised his arms, I think I'd remember that, and testify it. You'd think at least one of the 3 witnesses would testify to that. But they all said he was shot in the back.

I might buy into your explanation more if it was one witness, but with three it doesn't seem plausible to me that they'd all be that confused.

Are you dense? The friend and the other two eyewitnesses all testified that he was running away and was shot in the back and then turned around and raised his hands. Are you so anal that you are hung up on the idea that people seeing a guy getting shot at have to be absolutely certain he was hit before turning or they are just dead wrong?

You know your history of misunderstanding, misrepresenting, and misinterpreting everything is very very strong, right?

Like I said, too bad Brown didnt have the body of a 20 year old girl because you would feel very differently about him then.

 

[lod01]

Has the Indian dude who works at the gas station that Mike Brown Robbed and assaulted spoke out yet?

Yep. Indian dude spoke out via his attorney to make it known he didn't snitch in a vain attempt to save his business and himself:

Lawyer: Store didn't call cops on Michael Brown

FERGUSON, Mo. - The Ferguson Market where Brown allegedly stole from Saturday says it remains committed to the community and it hopes the community will remain committed to it. The market's attorney says it has been in the Ferguson community for many years and is the type of place where customers and employees all know one another. Friday, the market's attorney said the owners intend to keep it that way.

Former Ferguson resident Shaneis Hubbard used to work just a couple of doors down from the market and would visit it almost every day. She stopped by Friday to see for herself what the market would say about the surveillance video that allegedly caught Michael Brown stealing from the store, not long before he was killed.

"Regardless of the petty crime he was allegedly involved in, nobody deserves to be gunned down like that, nobody; white, black, other, nobody," she said.

The store's owners, through their attorney, sent the message that they want to stay as far away from the situation as possible. In fact, he said, even after the initial alleged theft, it was a customer who called police.

"It's not about them. They didn't call the police, they didn't ask the police to come and take the video," said attorney Jay Kanzler.

Now, the Ferguson Market owners are hoping the video won't make them a target.

"They would hope that the people of this community, who have consistently supported them, would continue to support them, and realize that whatever the police are looking at on the surveillance tapes has nothing to with what went on in the streets," said Kanzler.

Plan didn't work, though.

They were pissed he assaulted that poor black man with his neck.

Speaks volumes for that area. What a ####hole. I'd be for calling in air strikes.

 

[Henry Ford]

The lack of logic by those trying to show that Mr. Brown was shot in the back or shot at from the rear, then turned around, or whatever excuse one can come up with for Mr. Brown not being at fault is truly amazing.

The autopsy show that he was NOT shot in the back. Maybe this or maybe that is pure conjecture.

Which is not the same thing as "not shot from behind."

Thanks for proving my point.

Is your point that you don't understand English?

 

[Reegus]

Isn't this whole scenario how planet of the apes started?

 

[Jim11]

Yeah, at this point I'm going to pretty much completely dismiss the friend's account of how this went down. That guy has no credibility whatsoever now.

Unless the cop shot at Brown while he was running away before he turned back to the cop and the friend thought he had been shot in the back, right?

Yes. This is indeed possible.

But a few days ago, you and several others were of the strong belief that Michael Brown was murdered by a police officer, while those that argued in defense of the police appeared to be grasping at straws.

Now, as a result of all the new information (most importantly, the autopsy), those in defense of the police have the strong belief that the shooting was justified, while you're the one who appears to be grasping at straws.

I get that "not shot in the back" makes it less likely that it was a straight up murder, but you go waaaaay too far with the bolded. The only thing that changed is that there's gunshot wounds from the front. You've still got 6 to 8 shots, none from close range, including a head shot. You've still got several eyewitnesses saying he had given himself up and was not confronting the police at all- the angle of the shooting doesn't change that. And just as importantly, you've got a police department that's spent the last week acting like it's got something to hide and has a history of racial injustice. You hardly have to "grasp at straws" to conclude that something ain't right here.

Fair enough. I am probably going overboard.

My main problem is this: I based my initial thoughts about this on Johnson's story, which I thought was credible. Then it turns out that he was involved in a robbery with Brown (something he forgot to mention.) While I didn't care that it made Brown out to be a bad dude (even bad dudes don't desrve to be shot without cause), it did cause me to question Johnson's credibility. However, there were two other witnesses who confirmed Johnson's story, so based on that I still assumed that the cop did something wrong here.

But now we learned that Brown was shot in the front, not in the back. That alone wouldn't bother me; like you, I would still be suspicious, based on the amount of gunshots and the history of the police and their weird actions afterward, that something ain't right here. What bothered me is that it completely negates the testimony of the other two witnesses and makes them out to be mistaken or lying. (Actually lying is much more probable, since it seems unlikely that 2-3 people would all be mistaken.) So now we have NO witnesses that can be trusted. And if that's the case, what do we have left? Show me some evidence that proves wrongdoing here and I'll charge the policeman with a crime. But I'm not sure, in the end, that there is any.

What if Brown, already shot at the car, is running away from the officer who shoots at his back and misses, and then Brown stops and turns raising his hands and is shot 5 more times? Would that help explain some of the eyewitness accounts?

Not really. If I were an eyewitness and Brown stopped running, turned around, and raised his arms, I think I'd remember that, and testify it. You'd think at least one of the 3 witnesses would testify to that. But they all said he was shot in the back.

I might buy into your explanation more if it was one witness, but with three it doesn't seem plausible to me that they'd all be that confused.

Are you dense? The friend and the other two eyewitnesses all testified that he was running away and was shot in the back and then turned around and raised his hands. Are you so anal that you are hung up on the idea that people seeing a guy getting shot at have to be absolutely certain he was hit before turning or they are just dead wrong?

You know your history of misunderstanding, misrepresenting, and misinterpreting everything is very very strong, right?

Like I said, too bad Brown didnt have the body of a 20 year old girl because you would feel very differently about him then.

So sez the top dog of illogic in this thread.

 

[Jim11]

The lack of logic by those trying to show that Mr. Brown was shot in the back or shot at from the rear, then turned around, or whatever excuse one can come up with for Mr. Brown not being at fault is truly amazing.

The autopsy show that he was NOT shot in the back. Maybe this or maybe that is pure conjecture.

Which is not the same thing as "not shot from behind."

Thanks for proving my point.

Is your point that you don't understand English?

Thanks for proving my point again.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

So, if I've got this right, the laws of physics were temporarily suspended and...what?

Brown teleported from the side of the police car to a nearby spot? Stopped time and used the break in the continuum to calmly move 35' from the car?

If he didn't run while the cop was getting out of the car how was he that far away when he got shot?

 

[lod01]

So, if I've got this right, the laws of physics were temporarily suspended and...what?

Brown teleported from the side of the police car to a nearby spot? Stopped time and used the break in the continuum to calmly move 35' from the car?

If he didn't run while the cop was getting out of the car how was he that far away when he got shot?

Expressing logic will get you nowhere.

 

[lod01]

CNN is gold right now.

 

[Henry Ford]

So, if I've got this right, the laws of physics were temporarily suspended and...what?

Brown teleported from the side of the police car to a nearby spot? Stopped time and used the break in the continuum to calmly move 35' from the car?

If he didn't run while the cop was getting out of the car how was he that far away when he got shot?

Obviously, he was charging forward in such a way as to move a couple dozen feet away while getting shot on the inside of his right arm and right side of his face, including his right eye, without putting a graze on his nose, by a right-handed officer whose radio stopped working solely for the moment he was trying to call and report the shooting.

Pretty open and shut.

 

[Henry Ford]

The lack of logic by those trying to show that Mr. Brown was shot in the back or shot at from the rear, then turned around, or whatever excuse one can come up with for Mr. Brown not being at fault is truly amazing.

The autopsy show that he was NOT shot in the back. Maybe this or maybe that is pure conjecture.

Which is not the same thing as "not shot from behind."

Thanks for proving my point.

Is your point that you don't understand English?

Thanks for proving my point again.

No problem. Any time you need to understand the difference between two concepts, I'll be happy to explain.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Should cops have the right to shoot a person who is charging at them - presumably with no weapon in sight?

If you think cops have that right, should that extend to any citizen? If not, why not?

It seems like we give too much leeway to police officers in this situation, and the situation in Utah, where we accept the use of deadly force in situations where we would not accept it from an ordinary citizen.

Which raises another question - do armed patrol officers really help?

Assume facts: You're a cop and suspect tries to take your gun, goes off, suspect runs, you yell freeze and to hit the deck, suspect turns, but does not drop but starts walking towards you, you yell freeze, you wing him three times, he starts running towards you. What do you do, wait for him to tackle you and take your gun again?

Assume other facts as you like, and it all depends on the facts, but obviously there are situations where a cop feels compelled to protect himself.

Why do we allow police to "protect themselves" from non-lethal threats?

Should we extend that "right" to anyone?

As for the second part, that was why I asked whether it is even a good idea for a regular patrol police officer to carry a weapon - does that weapon really help?

It helped in this case.

Define "helped in this case"

If we play the events out that we are assuming that the police officer was preventing with gunfire, do you not think that this kid would have beat the cop severely, maybe even to death? The kid was 6'4" and 250+. You think the cop should have holstered his gun and try to fight this kid? Really?

And black. Don't forget black.

But the answer to your question depends on what alternatives were available. It seems to me, that in a civilized society, we should have the means to deal with non-lethal threats beyond simply shooting suspects by aiming at center mass.

A 6-5 250lb male is a lethal threat. When police do try to use non-lethals they get highly criticized too. Simple devices like acoustic hailers are spun up as sound cannons and their effects are highly exaggerated. In many cases using tear gas or teasers are often spun as torture or inhumane. The police are in a can't win situation.

Especially if you`re name is MATUSKI

 

[Jim11]

The lack of logic by those trying to show that Mr. Brown was shot in the back or shot at from the rear, then turned around, or whatever excuse one can come up with for Mr. Brown not being at fault is truly amazing.

The autopsy show that he was NOT shot in the back. Maybe this or maybe that is pure conjecture.

Which is not the same thing as "not shot from behind."

Thanks for proving my point.

Is your point that you don't understand English?

Thanks for proving my point again.

No problem. Any time you need to understand the difference between two concepts, I'll be happy to explain.

That might work if you didn't invent concepts.

Maybe Mr. Brown was standing on his head and the officer tried to shoot him in the foot, but right then Mr. Brown jumped up and got shot in the head. That's about the level of "logic" that you & your ilk are putting forth in this thread.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Yeah, at this point I'm going to pretty much completely dismiss the friend's account of how this went down. That guy has no credibility whatsoever now.

Unless the cop shot at Brown while he was running away before he turned back to the cop and the friend thought he had been shot in the back, right?

Yes. This is indeed possible.

But a few days ago, you and several others were of the strong belief that Michael Brown was murdered by a police officer, while those that argued in defense of the police appeared to be grasping at straws.

Now, as a result of all the new information (most importantly, the autopsy), those in defense of the police have the strong belief that the shooting was justified, while you're the one who appears to be grasping at straws.

I get that "not shot in the back" makes it less likely that it was a straight up murder, but you go waaaaay too far with the bolded. The only thing that changed is that there's gunshot wounds from the front. You've still got 6 to 8 shots, none from close range, including a head shot. You've still got several eyewitnesses saying he had given himself up and was not confronting the police at all- the angle of the shooting doesn't change that. And just as importantly, you've got a police department that's spent the last week acting like it's got something to hide and has a history of racial injustice. You hardly have to "grasp at straws" to conclude that something ain't right here.

Fair enough. I am probably going overboard.

My main problem is this: I based my initial thoughts about this on Johnson's story, which I thought was credible. Then it turns out that he was involved in a robbery with Brown (something he forgot to mention.) While I didn't care that it made Brown out to be a bad dude (even bad dudes don't desrve to be shot without cause), it did cause me to question Johnson's credibility. However, there were two other witnesses who confirmed Johnson's story, so based on that I still assumed that the cop did something wrong here.

But now we learned that Brown was shot in the front, not in the back. That alone wouldn't bother me; like you, I would still be suspicious, based on the amount of gunshots and the history of the police and their weird actions afterward, that something ain't right here. What bothered me is that it completely negates the testimony of the other two witnesses and makes them out to be mistaken or lying. (Actually lying is much more probable, since it seems unlikely that 2-3 people would all be mistaken.) So now we have NO witnesses that can be trusted. And if that's the case, what do we have left? Show me some evidence that proves wrongdoing here and I'll charge the policeman with a crime. But I'm not sure, in the end, that there is any.

What if Brown, already shot at the car, is running away from the officer who shoots at his back and misses, and then Brown stops and turns raising his hands and is shot 5 more times? Would that help explain some of the eyewitness accounts?

Not really. If I were an eyewitness and Brown stopped running, turned around, and raised his arms, I think I'd remember that, and testify it. You'd think at least one of the 3 witnesses would testify to that. But they all said he was shot in the back.

I might buy into your explanation more if it was one witness, but with three it doesn't seem plausible to me that they'd all be that confused.

Are you dense? The friend and the other two eyewitnesses all testified that he was running away and was shot in the back and then turned around and raised his hands. Are you so anal that you are hung up on the idea that people seeing a guy getting shot at have to be absolutely certain he was hit before turning or they are just dead wrong?

You know your history of misunderstanding, misrepresenting, and misinterpreting everything is very very strong, right?

Like I said, too bad Brown didnt have the body of a 20 year old girl because you would feel very differently about him then.

So sez the top dog of illogic in this thread.

What if he was running away and was shot in the arm or hand ...then stopped and turned around ...raised his hands and was moving towards the cops and the cop kept shooting

 

[lod01]

What if he was running away and was shot in the arm or hand ...then stopped and turned around ...raised his hands and was moving towards the cops and the cop kept shooting

You can toss that theory. Doesn't fit the exit wounds of the eye shot and top of the head shot.

 

[Todd Andrews]

This woman is an eyewitness who seems to have witnessed almost the entire incident.

 

[Daywalker]

This woman is an eyewitness who seems to have witnessed almost the entire incident.

Was she asked anywhere if she heard a shot during the struggle at the car window?

 

[lod01]

Doubt this goes to trial but if it does, it will be something to watch as the defense shreds these so-called witnesses as their stories don't match. That's one thing about lying is that when you get liars together, their stories fall apart. The friends story will prove to be a disaster for any prosecution. At the same time the officers story will match that of a witness's story.

 

[jamny]

What do these protesters want?

 

[Todd Andrews]

This woman is an eyewitness who seems to have witnessed almost the entire incident.

Was she asked anywhere if she heard a shot during the struggle at the car window?

I dont know--not in this interview. Other witnesses said that happened.

 

[jonessed]

What do these protesters want?

The officer arrested I guess, but that obviously won't happen until the investigation is complete.

 

[mr roboto]

What do these protesters want?

TVs.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

This woman is an eyewitness who seems to have witnessed almost the entire incident.

Was she asked anywhere if she heard a shot during the struggle at the car window?

I dont know--not in this interview. Other witnesses said that happened.

the friend of M.Brown said the gun went off in the car as well as the friend of the cop....so im guessing thats true

 

[Lutherman2112]

For those of you relying on the version from the "friend" of the cop, please understand that the version she tells is from the wife of the cop.

Link to original audio.

From the website:

The woman said that she came by the details via Wilson’s significant other. After I hung up she called back and told my programming direction that her relationship to the named officer is legitimate. I haven’t personally vetted the association, but wanted to post the audio for comparison to the pending results of the investigation.

 

[timschochet]

Tobias- thanks for your description. if everything you described is correct (and I have no reason to doubt it) then you're right such behavior is inexcusable. I'm not sure how to rectify this but there surely has to be some mechanism- say a committee appointed by the governor- who can study what the police have done and get rid of whoever are the culprits, from the chief on down. Hopefully that's what will happen; we'll see.

Henry Ford- Thanks for posting that autopsy analysis/ I know it was posted before but I missed it. Now I agree with you that everyone should take a deep breath and wait two weeks for the final autopsy. I still think that, based on the what we know now, Brown was shot in the front and the witnesses likely fabricated their story, but based on what you posted I'm more open to alternative explanations.

Todd Andrews- I just want to say...nah forget it.

 

[lod01]

What do these protesters want?

To be in position to loot once all hell breaks loose. You don't let an opportunity like that just go by. You stand out in the sun all day if you have to.

 

[jonessed]

For those of you relying on the version from the "friend" of the cop, please understand that the version she tells is from the wife of the cop.

Link to original audio.

From the website:

The woman said that she came by the details via Wilsons significant other. After I hung up she called back and told my programming direction that her relationship to the named officer is legitimate. I havent personally vetted the association, but wanted to post the audio for comparison to the pending results of the investigation.

I would have to be someone close if they know what's in the police report.

 

[lod01]

CNN currently has someone talking logic as far as the eye and head shots. That logic points to Wilson's story being correct.

 

[jonessed]

Tobias- thanks for your description. if everything you described is correct (and I have no reason to doubt it) then you're right such behavior is inexcusable. I'm not sure how to rectify this but there surely has to be some mechanism- say a committee appointed by the governor- who can study what the police have done and get rid of whoever are the culprits, from the chief on down. Hopefully that's what will happen; we'll see.

Henry Ford- Thanks for posting that autopsy analysis/ I know it was posted before but I missed it. Now I agree with you that everyone should take a deep breath and wait two weeks for the final autopsy. I still think that, based on the what we know now, Brown was shot in the front and the witnesses likely fabricated their story, but based on what you posted I'm more open to alternative explanations.

Todd Andrews- I just want to say...nah forget it.

The chief is an elected official. No governor appointed committee can fire him. He's likely going to have to step down. If he's so inclined anyway. They could buy out his retirement I suppose.

 

[PatsWillWin]

One of the bullets entered the top of Mr. Brown’s skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when it struck him and caused a fatal injury, according to Dr. Michael M. Baden, the former chief medical examiner for the City of New York, who flew to Missouri on Sunday at the family’s request to conduct the separate autopsy. It was likely the last of bullets to hit him, he said.

The toxicology will be the other half of this puzzle. But right now it sounds like the cop purposefully winged him 4 times and he kept coming. How does that happen unless Brown was either crazed or on something?

I think the dude was leading with his right arm when going at the cop. Thus most hit the arm but 2 got past and took him out.

That sounds like a possibility.

So he was running sideways? How do you lead with an arm and rush at the same time?

In my view there are two ways to look at this.

1. Brown is like 10 yards / 30 feet away. Turns around. Whether he has his hands up or not he starts running at some point, but at any rate does not get down as instructed. Cop fires warning shots, some missing, maybe hitting him in the arm, kid keeps running towards cop, cop finally has to shoot him in the head as he is just getting near him, head lowered to tackle cop or take his weapon, maybe 5-10 feet away.

- Now it's also possible the kid's head was lowered because he was already going down.

- There was also a second shot to the head, but from a forward direction.

2. Brown full on rushes Wilson, has his arm in front of him, and cop fires several shots at once, which to me is what LOD was suggesting. I guess that's possible. Can't draw a picture of course.

The gun residue results were not available. I'm not sure if there's gun powder at 5-10 feet (as opposed to at arm's length). So I'm not sure if they will be able to verify the actual distance of the shots at any point.

The coroner also suggests there were other bullets which were not provided to him which suggests misses or warning shots to me.

Cops don't fire "warning shots" into arms. That's absurd.They aim for center mass.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

What if he was running away and was shot in the arm or hand ...then stopped and turned around ...raised his hands and was moving towards the cops and the cop kept shooting

You can toss that theory. Doesn't fit the exit wounds of the eye shot and top of the head shot.

why? Was M.Brown incapable of lowering his head as hes being shot at? It seems it would be an instinctive reaction ....we have to figure this all happened in mere seconds....witnesses state they heard a flurry of gun shots ...a pause...then another flurry of shots....so IMO im saying Brown was shot at in the car during a struggle ...ran ...was shot at and hit in the hand or arm...jerked like he had been shot in the back...turned ...stated he wasnt armed and said dont shoot...raised his hands while moving towards the cop...the cop started firing again...was shot in the arm and the kid flinched and lowered his head ...was struck twice in the head rapidly and hit the ground dead

 

[jamny]

What do these protesters want?

The officer arrested I guess, but that obviously won't happen until the investigation is complete.

Would that end the protests? I don't see what else there is to be protesting. I can see the days after it happened with spontaneous anger and whatever but now, more than a week later, I don't see what people are expecting. You just have to wait it out at this point.

 

[jonessed]

What do these protesters want?

The officer arrested I guess, but that obviously won't happen until the investigation is complete.

Would that end the protests? I don't see what else there is to be protesting. I can see the days after it happened with spontaneous anger and whatever but now, more than a week later, I don't see what people are expecting. You just have to wait it out at this point.

I doubt it.

 

[Gary Coal Man]

What do these protesters want?

The officer arrested I guess, but that obviously won't happen until the investigation is complete.

I'll take it that the "now" responses from the protestors in the below video means "arrest".

The other response for what the protestors want takes less decoding.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwJrG2AMghw

 

[Greggity]

Sooo.... what do the protestors/looters resort to when it's announced that charges won't be pressed..... or that he's acquitted (if charged)?

Should be a ho-down in ol Ferguson then

 

[Bucky86]

What if he was running away and was shot in the arm or hand ...then stopped and turned around ...raised his hands and was moving towards the cops and the cop kept shooting

You can toss that theory. Doesn't fit the exit wounds of the eye shot and top of the head shot.

why? Was M.Brown incapable of lowering his head as hes being shot at? It seems it would be an instinctive reaction ....we have to figure this all happened in mere seconds....witnesses state they heard a flurry of gun shots ...a pause...then another flurry of shots....so IMO im saying Brown was shot at in the car during a struggle ...ran ...was shot at and hit in the hand or arm...jerked like he had been shot in the back...turned ...stated he wasnt armed and said dont shoot...raised his hands while moving towards the cop...the cop started firing again...was shot in the arm and the kid flinched and lowered his head ...was struck twice in the head rapidly and hit the ground dead

Maybe it was like this.

 

[Henry Ford]

CNN currently has someone talking logic as far as the eye and head shots. That logic points to Wilson's story being correct.

As I previously said, it's logical. It's not the only logical explanation, but it's a likely one.I very much want to compare and contrast these reports she they are finalized.

 

[Lutherman2112]

Sooo.... what do the protestors/looters resort to when it's announced that charges won't be pressed..... or that he's acquitted (if charged)?

Should be a ho-down in ol Ferguson then

Totally off topic. Are you with the guy or the fat chick in you avatar?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

One of the bullets entered the top of Mr. Brown’s skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when it struck him and caused a fatal injury, according to Dr. Michael M. Baden, the former chief medical examiner for the City of New York, who flew to Missouri on Sunday at the family’s request to conduct the separate autopsy. It was likely the last of bullets to hit him, he said.

The toxicology will be the other half of this puzzle. But right now it sounds like the cop purposefully winged him 4 times and he kept coming. How does that happen unless Brown was either crazed or on something?

Winging somebody is a myth of T.V. and Movies. Trained shooters shot center mass. He missed, and happened to catch the guy in the arm. Under the circumstances that is not bad shooting. Stats tell us most police shootings occur inside of 15 feet and that the hit rate even at that distance is under 50%. The arm wounds represent nothing other than close misses.

 

[Fennis]

CNN currently has someone talking logic as far as the eye and head shots. That logic points to Wilson's story being correct.

WIlson doesn't have a story that has been released. How do you know what his story is?

 

[Fennis]

Tobias- thanks for your description. if everything you described is correct (and I have no reason to doubt it) then you're right such behavior is inexcusable. I'm not sure how to rectify this but there surely has to be some mechanism- say a committee appointed by the governor- who can study what the police have done and get rid of whoever are the culprits, from the chief on down. Hopefully that's what will happen; we'll see.

Henry Ford- Thanks for posting that autopsy analysis/ I know it was posted before but I missed it. Now I agree with you that everyone should take a deep breath and wait two weeks for the final autopsy. I still think that, based on the what we know now, Brown was shot in the front and the witnesses likely fabricated their story, but based on what you posted I'm more open to alternative explanations.

Todd Andrews- I just want to say...nah forget it.

The chief is an elected official. No governor appointed committee can fire him. He's likely going to have to step down. If he's so inclined anyway. They could buy out his retirement I suppose.

he has lost the support of the people, the city council, the governor, and probably the police force. Even if what you say is accurate, he won't be chief much longer.

 

[Henry Ford]

Addictinginfo and DailyKos now reporting that the video shows him paying for the cigars. And the store owner says through an attorney he didn't call the police or offer the video. That's odd.