How do you guys interpret the autopsy report of Mike Brown?

[MavsSuperFan]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/20/opinion/melinek-michael-brown-autopsy/index.html


After the shooting in Ferguson, Michael Brown's family hired Dr. Michael Baden, a former New York State Police medical examiner, to conduct a second autopsy, and the federal Department of Justice instructed the Armed Forces Medical Examiner to conduct a third.
What you can tell from a second or third autopsy is limited by autopsy artifact -- changes to the evidence caused by the performance of the first autopsy.
In the course of the first, legally mandated autopsy, the forensic pathologist will have taken the organs out and sliced them apart for examination. The gunshot wounds will have been probed, and sometimes even cut into.
More importantly, any pathologist hired by the family, regardless of expertise, does not have access to the crime scene and other evidence. Even Baden, in the report he prepared for the Brown family, concluded that without the clothing, evidence or scene information, he had "too little information to forensically reconstruct the shooting."
Why weren't the St. Louis medical examiner's autopsy findings made public immediately? Because releasing preliminary information when the investigation is still ongoing is premature and potentially inflammatory.
Already the results of Baden's limited investigation are being used to support the contention that Brown was surrendering, and that the wounds were distant range, even though Baden himself said neither.
To a forensic pathologist, the body diagram Brown's attorneys released tells a different story. The wound at the top of the head, the frontal wounds and angled right hand and arm wounds suggest that the victim was facing the officer, leaning forward with his right arm possibly extended in line with the gun's barrel, and not above his head.



The image of a person standing upright with his hands in the air when he was shot does not appear compatible with the wounds documented on that diagram. Whether a forward-leaning position is a posture of attack or of surrender, however, is a matter of perspective.


that is a professional opinion of Judy Melinek.

Editor's note: Judy Melinek, MD, is a forensic pathologist who served as a medical examiner at the Manhattan Office of the Chief Medical Examiner for two years. She is the co-author of "Working Stiff" (Scribner). The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

http://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/michael-brown-autopsy-copy.jpg?w=640&h=863

http://images.dailykos.com/images/100664/large/Autopsy_diagram.jpg?1408370350
personally based on the diagram depicting the gunshot wounds, I think it helps support wilsons version of the events.
http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/xMichael-Brown-shot-in-front.png.pagespeed.ic_.u88qipYnV8-550x402.jpg

The shots to the upper torso/neck/face/head (killshots) imo have to be fired after the shots that hit brown in the arm. to me its evidence that wilson shot at browns arm initially in an attempt to wound brown, perhaps because brown was moving forward and wilson was trying to dissuade forward movement. the killshots to me have to be fired after the arm shots because brown would be on the ground for the kill shots. Perhaps wounding brown in the arm wasnt enough to stop his advance.

Alternatives:
dorian johnsons version is where they do nothing wrong and the cop shoots at a running brown and after brown is hit in the back brown turns around and begs not to be shoot again (eg hands up, dont shoot). According to johnson despite no provocation, wilson in cold blood shoots at brown for running away and after being begged not to shoot by a surrendering brown, wilson finishes brown off.

Giving the benefit of the doubt to johnson, perhaps he saw wilson shooting at a fleeing brown, and assumed brown was hit in the back, when in reality brown turned around once he heard the gun shots that missed him. That is possible imo.

If johnson's version is true though, wilson is a complete psychopath. First shooting at a fleeing suspect for the crime of jaywalking (in the cops mind, he didnt know about the robbery) is insane. Second, shooting to kill a surrendering person, when they have done nothing except run away (johnson's version) is also insane. Thirdly according to the medical reports if johnson's version is true the cop would have had to shoot brown in the arms first (the kill shots would have dropped brown), before killing brown for no reason. So we are to believe not only is wilson a person that kills a surrendering man for no reason, but also the type to wound that man's arm, thus inflicting pain, before killing him?

I find it more believable the arm wounds were to dissuade forward movement.

[Lebron23]

Call him Michael Brown. I thought Coach Brown passed away.

[NumberSix]

It's probably a hoax. Darren Wilson will mysteriously disappear and meet up with Michael Brown in Cuba to split the money from the big heist that this rioting/protesting is a smoke screen for to keep us distracted while Wilson and Brown make off with the millions. Classic diversion.

[MavsSuperFan]

Call him Michael Brown. I thought Coach Brown passed away.
Done

[MavsSuperFan]

Bump. Agree with me, or am I stupid

[MMM]

No cop is trained to wound while shooting so I doubt that connection to the arm wounds.

[Godzuki]

this is all basically what i surmised in the big thread.

and no Boozehound, these cops go to shooting ranges weekly. he was a 7 yr veteran. he is not missing a fatboy and hitting his arms first with his hands up if he's getting freebie shots. no, guns do not tend to misfire in different directions not intended either, only if the shooter is panicked obviously.

but a situation where Mike Brown had his hands up, and the officer supposedly guns him down like target practice.....no way he's going to shoot the arms first with such a big body to hit. its ridiculous to say that.

even then the head down shot is a lot more ridiculous from far away hands up gunned down hypothetical....

[GOBB]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/26/us/michael-brown-ferguson-shooting/

Why didn't he unload some more into the unarmed individual

[MavsSuperFan]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/26/us/michael-brown-ferguson-shooting/

Why didn't he unload some more into the unarmed individual
interesting,
imo either

1.
But if the gunfire heard on the audio is indeed from the Brown incident, the pause doesn't automatically suggest wrongful intent by the officer.
"To be fair, there could be other explanations for that pause," said attorney Van Jones, co-host of CNN's "Crossfire." "Maybe the officer will say, 'Well I fired, and he kept advancing, so I fired again.' "

wilson gave a chance for brown to stop advancing, brown didnt stop advancing and wilson finished him off.

or

2. johnson's account was accurate and wilson shot at a running brown and the pause was when brown turned around and surrendered and wilson decided to kill brown for running away, despite now surrendering.

[DukeDelonte13]

multiple autopsies aren't uncommon in police/co related homicides. America is somewhat unique in that our facilities that perform these autopsies and do other types of scientific evidence testing are tied in w/ law enforcement and are not truly independent.


Anyone ever been watch one? I got to be in the room while one was being performed. Pretty gross but interesting to say the least. Kinda unbelievable how nonchalant some of these people are slicing organs up like it's roast beef on a buffet.

[DonDadda59]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/26/us/michael-brown-ferguson-shooting/

Why didn't he unload some more into the unarmed individual

Brown took a breather while he was charging at Wilson obviously. That's why there's that gap in between the shots. Then once he started charging again, Wilson defended himself.

:oldlol:

And this may or may not be relevant, but it was just reported that Officer Wilson got his start in a police unit that was disbanded because of racial tensions and corruption in Jennings, MO:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/darren-wilsons-first-job-was-on-a-troubled-police-force-disbanded-by-authorities/2014/08/23/1ac796f0-2a45-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html

[MavsSuperFan]

Brown took a breather while he was charging at Wilson obviously. That's why there's that gap in between the shots. Then once he started charging again, Wilson defended himself.

:oldlol:

And this may or may not be relevant, but it was just reported that Officer Wilson got his start in a police unit that was disbanded because of racial tensions and corruption in Jennings, MO:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/darren-wilsons-first-job-was-on-a-troubled-police-force-disbanded-by-authorities/2014/08/23/1ac796f0-2a45-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html
definitely is relevant. character evidence on wilson is definitely relevant. Being a virulent racist is one possible explanation for how he reacted according to dorian johnson's version of events. A normal person would not have shot at a fleeing person who you had no inclination of committing a crime more serious than jaywalking and further would not have shot that person while that person was surrendering. Being a racist is one possible explanation of dorian johnsons account.

I dont understand the argument against looking into the character's of either wilson or brown. Wilson, because he is the shooter, and brown because wilson is claiming self defense.

[NumberSix]

definitely is relevant. character evidence on wilson is definitely relevant. Being a virulent racist is one possible explanation for how he reacted according to dorian johnson's version of events. A normal person would not have shot at a fleeing person who you had no inclination of committing a crime more serious than jaywalking and further would not have shot that person while that person was surrendering. Being a racist is one possible explanation of dorian johnsons account.

I dont understand the argument against looking into the character's of either wilson or brown. Wilson, because he is the shooter, and brown because wilson is claiming self defense.
Why didn't Johnson get shot?

[DonDadda59]

definitely is relevant. character evidence on wilson is definitely relevant. Being a virulent racist is one possible explanation for how he reacted according to dorian johnson's version of events. A normal person would not have shot at a fleeing person who you had no inclination of committing a crime more serious than jaywalking and further would not have shot that person while that person was surrendering. Being a racist is one possible explanation of dorian johnsons account.

I dont understand the argument against looking into the character's of either wilson or brown. Wilson, because he is the shooter, and brown because wilson is claiming self defense.

To be fair, although the department he started with was rife with corruption and had legal issues and complaints levied against them (ie: beating an unarmed woman, shooting at a car that had a female and her child in it), there hasn't been any specific complaints or issues found yet that specifically named Wilson.

But that department's record was so atrocious that they had to be disbanded. No wonder the people in that general area are so incensed. Hopefully the Justice Department looks further into the records and conduct of local Police departments in Ferguson and neighboring cities.


Why didn't Johnson get shot?

He hid behind a car after he and Brown took off running. Very possible Wilson didn't see him. One of the recent witnesses who came forward on CNN backs this up.

[MavsSuperFan]

Why didn't Johnson get shot?
its also possible thats not how it went down. The point is looking into wilson's character is perfectly legitimate and completely relevant

[Godzuki]

i think its really messed up how all of the statements by media are based around the attorney and reps for Michael Brown, and not nearly as equally for Wilson. Its so one sided in everything i've read in terms of how its spun, i swear they're just trying to incite the public.

It makes me sick actually knowing how much of a shitty person this Mike Brown was....normal people, or even somewhat thugs don't act the way he did at that convenience store but now he's being martyr'd by the black community :facepalm

they pick the worst heroes to rally behind.


anyways Wilson is already fukked in the court of public opinion, even if he's justified he can't win period. he's already guilty, and will live the rest of his life like Zimmerman. its impossible for him to redeem himself no matter what at this point.

[GOBB]

It makes me sick actually knowing how much of a shitty person this Mike Brown was....normal people, or even somewhat thugs don't act the way he did at that convenience store but now he's being martyr'd by the black community :facepalm .

You know nothing about mike brown. That is a fact. You saw a video and came to a conclusion how he is as a person. And again still don't know the kid.

The issue is an unarmed teenager gunned down by a cop. You
Seem to think, imply that based on the video mike brown is a disgrace of a ham being therefore excessive force used against him is ok. You're a nitwit. Go hang yourself.

[JohnFreeman]

I interpret that I don't care

[nathanjizzle]

its highly unlikely an officer would intentionally shoot at a persons arm to disable them.

What it looks like is brown was charging at the officer and had his arm reached out over his face as a natural instinct to being shot at.

[Godzuki]

You know nothing about mike brown. That is a fact. You saw a video and came to a conclusion how he is as a person. And again still don't know the kid.

The issue is an unarmed teenager gunned down by a cop. You
Seem to think, imply that based on the video mike brown is a disgrace of a ham being therefore excessive force used against him is ok. You're a nitwit. Go hang yourself.


thats why your IQ is low and only good at stuffing envelopes in boxes :lol

the issue is u idiiots making heroes out of sorry thug mf'ers exaggerating EVERY FUKKING THING....talking about he was about to go to college...trade school is not college lmao :oldlol:

a great kid turns into strong arm robbery while sorry agenda nikka's like u pretend all he did was pinch some candy :oldlol:

everything is anti cop generalizations of the whole police force, and when mf'ers do it to you you're playing the race/generalization card so quick its pittiful the double standards u sorry mf'ers play constantly :facepalm

now every black person is playing the race card against cops or white people. that nikka who robs a store with a BB gun that looked real and his ghetto parents are citing Ferguson.....that USC football player calling the coach racist for screaming on him for being a poosee. all race card plays...even here anyone that speaks out against Mike Brown being a sorry ghetto thug society is better off without is a racist. At some point and its coming soon, that race card play isn''t going to work like it used to thx to yourselves :cheers:

keep wearing it out fgts, refusing to listen to reason or reality since every white person must be a racist...own the fukk up to the nikka's shooting each other every day, innocent people, burning down businesses, etc. like we're all supposed to sit there and take these double standards u stupid ass's who don't read or follow shit but sports play...like every race is so equally guilty to kill, rob, or riot...only idiots buy that politically correct reality u mf'ers want to paint :facepalm

its also pretty funny to me how high horse black rights people here can pretend to justify burning down the korean liquor stores in LA talking about its good for the community, and they want to play race cards on other people. i swear its so double standard one sided with how these racial guilt trips are played its not even right.

all y'all do is blame everyone else but yourselves.

[GOBB]

Not reading none of that. You typed too much. Get a job.

[Godzuki]

Not reading none of that. You typed too much. Get a job.


thats why your IQ is low and only good at stuffing envelopes in boxes

[Lebowsky]

thats why your IQ is low and only good at stuffing envelopes in boxes :lol

the issue is u idiiots making heroes out of sorry thug mf'ers exaggerating EVERY FUKKING THING....talking about he was about to go to college...trade school is not college lmao :oldlol:

a great kid turns into strong arm robbery while sorry agenda nikka's like u pretend all he did was pinch some candy :oldlol:

everything is anti cop generalizations of the whole police force, and when mf'ers do it to you you're playing the race/generalization card so quick its pittiful the double standards u sorry mf'ers play constantly :facepalm

now every black person is playing the race card against cops or white people. that nikka who robs a store with a BB gun that looked real and his ghetto parents are citing Ferguson.....that USC football player calling the coach racist for screaming on him for being a poosee. all race card plays...even here anyone that speaks out against Mike Brown being a sorry ghetto thug society is better off without is a racist. At some point and its coming soon, that race card play isn''t going to work like it used to thx to yourselves :cheers:

keep wearing it out fgts, refusing to listen to reason or reality since every white person must be a racist...own the fukk up to the nikka's shooting each other every day, innocent people, burning down businesses, etc. like we're all supposed to sit there and take these double standards u stupid ass's who don't read or follow shit but sports play...like every race is so equally guilty to kill, rob, or riot...only idiots buy that politically correct reality u mf'ers want to paint :facepalm

its also pretty funny to me how high horse black rights people here can pretend to justify burning down the korean liquor stores in LA talking about its good for the community, and they want to play race cards on other people. i swear its so double standard one sided with how these racial guilt trips are played its not even right.

all y'all do is blame everyone else but yourselves.
What does any of this rambling drivel have to do with the matter at hand?

[KevinNYC]

This "strong arm robbery" that people keep mentioning was not reported to the police by the store owner.

[wakencdukest]

I interpret it as self defense by the cop until proven otherwise.

[KevinNYC]

I interpret it as self defense by the cop until proven otherwise.

Just because?

[edb33]

http://images-kitup.military.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Pistol-shooting-chart.jpg

The police are taught shoot to kill which were clearly his intentions. He was shooting for center mass but instead was hitting Brown's arm which either hints

A. He was standing still with a poor grip which generally stems from being rushed, regroups himself and sends the kill shot.

B. Cop was moving towards Brown which gave him bad aim, stops and gets a kill shot

C. Just straight sucks at shooting

IMO finding out if the cop was moving or standing still is crucial in this case, it will explain the pause and sets the tone for if the cop was shooting to protect his life or because he's a douche

[wakencdukest]

Just because?




Based on what I've read. At first there was so much racial bias in the reporting, I wasn't sure, but as the details slowly leak out, I am leaning towards self defense. The media has done great job covering this story from only one side of the spectrum.

[KevinNYC]

Based on what I've read. At first there was so much racial bias in the reporting, I wasn't sure, but as the details slowly leak out, I am leaning towards self defense. The media has done great job covering this story from only one side of the spectrum.

What do you make of the hinky stuff the police have been doing?

Have you seen the incident report for the shooting? The police release it and it's virtually blank.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/237504285/CARE-Incident-Report


Earlier when they released the report on the robbery of a box of cigars, they released 16 pages of documents and then came out later that afternoon and said it had nothing to do with the shooting.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/236914260/Michael-Brown-Police-Report

[Raymone]

This "strong arm robbery" that people keep mentioning was not reported to the police by the store owner.

It most certainly was reported. I love how there's ****ing video of the incident, and people are still acting like it never happened. :oldlol:

Maybe that Indian guy wasn't blocking the door because Brown was stealing, but because he just wanted an autograph. Perhaps he mistook Brown for an NFL lineman, given his size. This offended Brown and caused him to forcefully shove the Indian fellow out of the way.

[KevinNYC]

It most certainly was reported. I love how there's ****ing video of the incident, and people are still acting like it never happened. :oldlol:

Maybe that indian guy wasn't blocking the door because Brown was stealing, but because he just wanted an autograph. Perhaps he mistook Brown for an NFL lineman, given his size.

Maybe you should reread what I wrote which is factual.

http://fox2now.com/2014/08/15/store-owners-talk-about-surveillance-released/

[wakencdukest]

What do you make of the hinky stuff the police have been doing?

Have you seen the incident report for the shooting? The police release it and it's virtually blank.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/237504285/CARE-Incident-Report


Earlier when they released the report on the robbery of a box of cigars, they released 16 pages of documents and then came out later that afternoon and said it had nothing to do with the shooting.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/236914260/Michael-Brown-Police-Report


I haven't followed the case to that extent. What I know is that the early reports were that he was shot in the back, then he was shot in the front while standing still with his hands up. The witness stories keep changing, and the path of the bullet wounds don't support any of the early statements. I haven't actually heard any of the new witness statements they claim to have, but I keep hearing that he was rushing the cop and trying to get the gun, and that he actually attacked him when he tried to get out of the car. Until all the evidence is laid out on the table, we can't really be sure, but it looks to me like self defense.

[Raymone]

Maybe you should reread what I wrote which is factual.

http://fox2now.com/2014/08/15/store-owners-talk-about-surveillance-released/

I don't care who was first to actually make the call. It was reported. The police found out about it. We have the surveillance tape. Brown used force to secure property that did not belong to him. Those crazy Jewish lawyers call that a "strong-arm robbery."

If his use of force had included a weapon, it would have been "armed robbery." Wild, huh?

[KevinNYC]

I haven't followed the case to that extent. What I know is that the early reports were that he was shot in the back, then he was shot in the front while standing still with his hands up. The witness stories keep changing, and the path of the bullet wounds don't support any of the early statements. I haven't actually heard any of the new witness statements they claim to have, but I keep hearing that he was rushing the cop and trying to get the gun, and that he actually attacked him when he tried to get out of the car. Until all the evidence is laid out on the table, we can't really be sure, but it looks to me like self defense.

This from the NY Times says he did start firing as they were running away, he just missed (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/us/shooting-accounts-differ-as-holder-schedules-visit.html?ref=us&_r=3)

law enforcement officials say witnesses and forensic analysis have shown that Officer Wilson did sustain an injury during the struggle in the car.

As Officer 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.

The way I look at this case, if the police had solid evidence on their side, they would have given it to the media early. Especially as rioting was going on. In one of the other threads here, a poster who is a police officer in Texas, said it highly unusual that a cop would have to file a detailed report on an incident like this if not once he got to the station house, then within 24 hours, so that blank report sticks out like sore thumb

[DonDadda59]

http://images-kitup.military.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Pistol-shooting-chart.jpg

The police are taught shoot to kill which were clearly his intentions. He was shooting for center mass but instead was hitting Brown's arm which either hints

A. He was standing still with a poor grip which generally stems from being rushed, regroups himself and sends the kill shot.

B. Cop was moving towards Brown which gave him bad aim, stops and gets a kill shot

C. Just straight sucks at shooting

IMO finding out if the cop was moving or standing still is crucial in this case, it will explain the pause and sets the tone for if the cop was shooting to protect his life or because he's a douche

That is how witnesses describe the action. After the scuffle at/in the car, a round goes off, Brown and Johnson take off running with Johnson hiding behind a car, Brown continuing down the middle of the street. Wilson jumps out the car and immediately starts shooting at Brown as he's running away with his back turned (Wilson is running after him). Then Brown stops and turns to put his hands up in surrender (and possibly because he was hit while running), and Wilson finishes him off.

Interesting note- the video recording/chat service that was used to record the possible gun fire confirmed that it occurred at the time of the shooting. So we have audio of the sequence of rounds. You hear 6 shots in rapid succession, then a pause of 3-4 seconds, then 4 more shots.

Wilson claims he didn't start shooting until Brown was 'bumrushing' him (contrary to many witness statements). Yet how does he explain the pause in between firing? There wasn't that much distance between he and Brown, who didn't get farther than 35 ft from the car. If Brown is running at him non stop at full speed... how is there such a separation between rounds going off?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiL-E5WAaUU

^That fits more with witness statements that Wilson fired on Brown as he ran, then when he stopped to turn/surrender, Wilson finished him off.

[edb33]

Which was basically my point. If there truly was a scuffle Wilson was in his legal right. The casing placement on the ground will help prove if he was standing still, moving forward or moving backwards. The bullet placement in Brown using that chart mixed with the casing evidence will prove if their was truly a scuffle.
If Wilson is proved to be standing still it suggests a scuffle happened, the second Brown took off Wilson got out of the car and rushed to fire proven by poor grip
If Wilson is proved to be moving forward it suggests no scuffle just chase and Wilson was the aggressor chasing Brown leading to poor aiming
If Wilson is proved to be moving backwards it proves Brown was coming towards him which makes Wilson legal to shoot and a bad shot

[KevinNYC]

I don't care who was first to actually make the call. It was reported. The police found out about it. We have the surveillance tape. Brown used force to secure property that did not belong to him. Those crazy Jewish lawyers call that a "strong-arm robbery."

If his use of force had included a weapon, it would have been "armed robbery." Wild, huh?

Crazy Jewish Lawyers?

First to make the call? Only to make the call. The store clerk or owners didn't call anything in at all. The police are trying to make these two incidents connected and they are not legally. Missouri and Federal law have a high hurdle that the prosecutor would have to jump over to get this admitted at trial. (http://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3153&context=mlr)


Evidence of prior misconduct, when used to demonstrate the defendant's propensity to commit a crime, is inadmissible.

Evidence of misconduct that is not the subject of the present action is admissible to prove the present crime charged if it establishes 1) motive; 2) intent; 3) absence of mistake or accident; 4) a common scheme or plan; or 5) identity

Given that the victim of the misconduct didn't report it to authorities would give this evidence much less weight in my non-lawyer opinion. I don't think a $49 theft gives you motive to go for a cop's gun, but that's just me.

[KevinNYC]

That is how witnesses describe the action. After the scuffle at/in the car, a round goes off, Brown and Johnson take off running with Johnson hiding behind a car, Brown continuing down the middle of the street. Wilson jumps out the car and immediately starts shooting at Brown as he's running away with his back turned (Wilson is running after him). Then Brown stops and turns to put his hands up in surrender (and possibly because he was hit while running), and Wilson finishes him off.

Interesting note- the video recording/chat service that was used to record the possible gun fire confirmed that it occurred at the time of the shooting. So we have audio of the sequence of rounds. You hear 6 shots in rapid succession, then a pause of 3-4 seconds, then 4 more shots.

The audio released does not have the initial shot

So you wonder if that is the entirety of the audio the guy made. I suspect it is not. I suspect there's some embarrassing parts in the beginning of it that they didn't release to the public.

[DonDadda59]

Which was basically my point. If there truly was a scuffle Wilson was in his legal right. The casing placement on the ground will help prove if he was standing still, moving forward or moving backwards. The bullet placement in Brown using that chart mixed with the casing evidence will prove if their was truly a scuffle.
If Wilson is proved to be standing still it suggests a scuffle happened, the second Brown took off Wilson got out of the car and rushed to fire proven by poor grip
If Wilson is proved to be moving forward it suggests no scuffle just chase and Wilson was the aggressor chasing Brown leading to poor aiming
If Wilson is proved to be moving backwards it proves Brown was coming towards him which makes Wilson legal to shoot and a bad shot

Obviously it would be nice to get the ballistics report, but all we have to go on is witness statements made in the media (including a 3rd hand account of Wilson's story) and things like the recorded shots, etc. And ALL of the witness testimony thus far has said basically that there was some sort of struggle through the police squad car window, a round goes off inside, Brown and Johnson run away, Wilson gets out and immediately starts shooting at the fleeing Brown who stops, turns and makes gestures that indicate surrender and Wilson responds by emptying his clip in him.

Another interesting question is what kind of gun did Wilson have? There's 10 shots heard in the recording and there was a purported round that went off in the car. That's 11 rounds. Did he have a weapon that holds 12 rounds or did he have to reload at some point?

[edb33]

If the struggle is truly accurate then the case is closed and Wilson is completely free. Obviously that will be the main focus in court so was just alluding to what will be the hot topic then. If Brown stopped after being shot it won't matter as they teach anywhere from concealed handgun classes to police to the military, you only point your weapon to kill. It's inhumane, unsafe and sets you up for personal lawsuits to do otherwise.

I don't remember what report I read but it said Wilson had a sig sauer 40 S&W, it holds 12 in the magazine and a 13th in the chamber, meaning either the video didn't get it all, the mag wasn't full or Wilson didn't empty it. Highly doubt it wasn't a full mag though

[dude77]

I don't think a $49 theft gives you motive to go for a cop's gun, but that's just me.

you're being dishonest :no:

[KevinNYC]

you're being dishonest :no:
Please explain

My point is that it's illegal use evidence of past misconduct in court, unless it establishes one of the 5 points below. I don't think 4 of them applys. I think only motive would apply and that is going to be gigantic reach

Evidence of misconduct that is not the subject of the present action is admissible to prove the present crime charged if it establishes 1) motive; 2) intent; 3) absence of mistake or accident; 4) a common scheme or plan; or 5) identity

[dude77]

Please explain

My point is that it's illegal use evidence of past misconduct in court, unless it establishes one of the 5 points below. I don't think 4 of them applys. I think only motive would apply and that is going to be gigantic reach

Evidence of misconduct that is not the subject of the present action is admissible to prove the present crime charged if it establishes 1) motive; 2) intent; 3) absence of mistake or accident; 4) a common scheme or plan; or 5) identity

well I'm not arguing whether it's admissible in court .. I'm just saying .. the way you phrase it makes it seem like it was an innocent shoplifting .. that's not what we see in that video .. shows us someone who seems to not have a problem stepping on people when he's challenged which is relevant especially considering how they were trying to portray him as someone who would not do that .. however to be fair, we don't have a lot of character references about the cop .. not that I've seen anyways

[Raymone]

He uses force to commit a robbery. Officer Wilson's alleged story is that there was a struggle for his gun. I think we'll be seeing this surveillance tape entered into evidence should this go to trial.

And if the prosecution tries to focus more on who called in the robbery rather than the robbery itself, I'll conclude that they're as dopey as the prosecution in the Zimmerman trial.

[Raymone]

Up for an avy bet, KevinNYC? I say we'll see this tape during the trial. If it doesn't go to trial, it's a push.

[KevinNYC]

well I'm not arguing whether it's admissible in court .. I'm just saying .. the way you phrase it makes it seem like it was an innocent shoplifting .. that's not what we see in that video .. shows us someone who seems to not have a problem stepping on people when he's challenged which is relevant especially considering how they were trying to portray him as someone who would not do that .. however to be fair, we don't have a lot of character references about the cop .. not that I've seen anyways

Well the fact, that is likely to be inadmissible in court and the hinky way the cops released this information that they claimed the press was asking for, yet how did the press even know about this incident? The cops didn't mention anything about this prior to the release makes me think this is just bad faith on behalf of the police. They released this info claiming they had to while withholding the information that press was actually asked for like the autopsy report and the incident report. When the ACLU gets the incident report, there is nothing from Officer Darren Wilson because he never gave his version of the story.

Look at the shooting of the mentally disturbed man with the knife in St. Louis. Facts were on the cops's side and they came very quickly. Here they are still withholding and then they release something that within three or four hours admit is not material to the shooting incident.

[KevinNYC]

He uses force to commit a robbery. Officer Wilson's alleged story is that there was a struggle for his gun. I think we'll be seeing this surveillance tape entered into evidence should this go to trial.

Yeah, this is exactly what is prohibited by Missouri Law.

[DonDadda59]

well I'm not arguing whether it's admissible in court .. I'm just saying .. the way you phrase it makes it seem like it was an innocent shoplifting .. that's not what we see in that video .. shows us someone who seems to not have a problem stepping on people when he's challenged which is relevant especially considering how they were trying to portray him as someone who would not do that .. however to be fair, we don't have a lot of character references about the cop .. not that I've seen anyways

The department he originally joined out of the academy was disbanded because of rampant corruption and lawsuits claiming abuse, racism, etc:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/darren-wilsons-first-job-was-on-a-troubled-police-force-disbanded-by-authorities/2014/08/23/1ac796f0-2a45-11e4-8593-da634b334390_story.html

There's no info about Wilson personally though, thus far.

[Raymone]

Yeah, this is exactly what is prohibited by Missouri Law.

Then you ought to take the bet confidently.

[KevinNYC]

I might be......hit me closer to the trial.