It wasn’t clear why that observation is relevant to what you were responding to.
steronz mentioned that he didn’t think prosecutors asked enough questions of the witnesses. That is a valid complaint in a court proceedings setting, but in the Grand Jury setting since the jurors can ask the questions themselves if something is not clear to them, that’s much less of a problem.
Grand Jury Volume 15
They’re playing a recording of an FBI interview. I’m not sure which witness this is, it’s a woman who had stopped to get out of her car at the QT. Her story doesn’t seem familiar with the other transcripts I read. She describes Brown slamming the door shut with his gut. Brown was punching Wilson through the window, and at times had his entire upper body inside the car.
Wilson got out of the car looking confused and wobbly, like he’d just been hit. Brown turned and had his hands forward, palms up, “with attitude.” Then he clenched his fists like a football move. At this point, Wilson was focused, pointing the gun at Brown, with his finger on the trigger. Then Brown bent down and charged at Wilson head first. Wilson fired in two groups, 4 shots and then 2. She doesn’t have them 150 feet from the truck, she has them basically right next to it.
This recording was made 5 weeks after the shooting. She says she came forward after seeing her dead dad, I don’t think literally but her dad would have wanted her to do the right thing. She says kids these days aren’t held accountable for their actions, essentially. She didn’t want to come forward at first because she didn’t want to get involved.
The FBI are skeptical. There are details about where she went afterwards that are impossible. “You have a tremendous level of detail in some respects, but then very little detail in very simple things that I’m not quite understanding.” She says she was visiting a friend in the neighborhood, and the FBI is asking if they could go through her email and search history to see if her story matches up.
Man, this is a good read. The FBI don’t buy her story, they say it matches up too closely with what was in the news, and the route she supposedly took to leave the area looks like it would work on a map but when you’re actually there you see that it’s blocked off. She has no explanation for that, and insists she got out that way. Her car is not in any of the photographs or videos from right after the shooting, even though it should have been based on her timeline.
Holy shit. The FBI asks what kind of comments she made on facebook about the case. “Word for word?” Uh-huh. “They need to kill the fucking niggers. It is like an ape fest, and then, it just, it just not right. It is just not right. So I put my, focused my energy into with a couple of Wilson supporters and we made <redacted> and we have been collecting donations and we have schools making homemade Christmas cards.” You are doing what you can to help Darren Wilson? “Right, I quite posting on any, you know.” Jesus. Fuck. Why is the grand jury listening to this garbage?
If elucidator’s theory that the prosecution presented obviously discredited pro-Brown testimony (the “he was executed in the back” sort) in order to discredit all pro-Brown testimony, playing this recording certainly does the same thing for the pro-Wilson side.
Holy fuck, they actually brought this lady in to testify in person! The grand jury is asking her all about her racist stuff and her inconsistencies. This must be Witness 40, she asks if she can read the stuff she wrote down the day of the incident. Journal entry my ass.
End of file.
This post probably belongs in the MPSIMS-version of this thread. I read this testimony yesterday and again today, and I think I understand something today that makes me feel better about it. It comes from vol 1. This vol. is the testimony of the investigator from the Medical Examiner’s Office. On page 72, line 12, someone asks … actually, lets’s back up to line 8. Q: “Where was he in conjunction [sic] to that dividing line, was he right on it?” A: [Yes]. Line 12 Q: “Was it bisecting him or dissecting him?” A: “Dissecting”.
Given the investigators 3 choices of bisecting, dissecting, or a response that corrects the questioner, I guess he can’t chose the last one, but I wish he/she had at least picked “bisecting”.
On the second reading it seems clear that these questions were asked by a Grand Juror, not the attorneys, right?
My impression from that journal entry was that it was bullshit. It felt false to me, like the writer was attempting to paint themselves as a neutral party who happened to be there to gain a better understanding of black people just in time to see one justifiably shot. The whole racist element seemed to be an attempt to crowbar in a reason for being in a place that he/she would not have had any reason to be. I disregarded it entirely.
Yes, it appears that way. The redactions aren’t always the best but it does appear that that exchange was with a juror.
Very good job steronz
It seems witness 48 (post 33) closely follows Officer Wilson’s account of the incident. It also appears that at least half of the witnesses have personal agendas or are confusing what they have heard with what they really saw.
And I see that you are essentially in agreement with me, if this was the same “journal” lady from before.
You haven’t gotten there yet, but the physical evidence from the medical examiner is consistent with the story that Brown had his hands on/near the weapon. His hand had powder burns and a bullet wound through the flesh between the thumb and index finger.
Yes, I was skeptical of her testimony as I was reading it… too precise where it needed to be precise, like it was gift wrapped for Wilson. And then when the FBI started calling her on it, it was such a relief.
In general, I’d say the FBI interviews are very good, very impartial. They maintain a healthy skepticism regardless of what the witness is saying, but are still able to pull the information they want. The St. Louis County interviews are of a lower quality; often needlessly combative, leading questions, skipping over important points. Not terrible, but when you compare the two side by side, the FBI does a better job.
I actually skipped over that because that’s been previously reported in the news, but thank you for bringing it up, as it’s an important piece of evidence.
Grand Jury Volume 16
First witness heard 4 shots, went out and saw Brown on his knees with his hands above his head. Wilson shot him again and he fell face forward.
Next witness sees Brown and Wilson running down the street, Wilson fires a shot and Brown turns around with his hands up. He starts walking toward Wilson with his hands up and Wilson just keeps firing. He says it wasn’t justifiable, and lots of people (including two construction workers) all saw the same thing. This witness apparently told the FBI that he saw Wilson standing over Brown, emptying his clip. He’s clearly changed his story to match up with the autopsy reports. He’s having a hard time explaining himself. Not a good witness.
Next witness says Wilson fired a taser at Brown during the altercation. He fired a second shot with a gun while getting out of his vehicle and Brown was towards the back of the vehicle. Brown took off running and the witness went back to what they were doing, didn’t see anything. Obviously this person got some details wrong (taser) and isn’t particularly useful, but I don’t see them as lying. It’s amazing to me that you can watch a police officer fire a gun at a guy and then go back to playing YouTube videos on your PS3. As an aside, a shocking number of these witnesses have mentioned that they know what it’s like to be shot, including Dorian Johnson. I really cannot imagine living in this neighborhood.
I’d like to get on the, Thank You **Steronz **Bandwagon™. This thread is awesome.
I have looked at the area with google maps. I don’t know if the maps accurately show the area as it was on Aug. 9 2014, but it looks to me like the witness in Vol 15. could have returned to the QT market on W. Florissant Ave. either by going north on Glen Owen Dr., or by going south on Huiskamp or something. Starting at p. 154, the FBI investigators seem genuine in telling her it was impossible for her to return to the QT by the path she remembers driving.
I believe that Canfield Dr. west of the scene would have been blocked by the investigation. Did they also block off the eastern end of Canfield? Is that why the FBI is confused that the witness could leave?
Right, so assuming Canfield Dr is basically impassible to the west at Coppercreek Rd, you’d have to drive East down Canfield to get out. Turn left on Glen Owen Dr, then turn left on Exuma Dr. Now you’re heading towards the circle, Norlakes Dr, which the FBI suggests is the circle the witness was talking about. Except you can’t get to Norlakes Dr, because there’s a barrier at Inagua Dr (if you look at the satellite). You turn right on Inagua and you’re driving straight at another barrier. Can’t get through, the only way to get out of this neighborhood is to go back to Glen Owen and take it North. Turn left on Nemnich Rd and Vickie Pl only to find… another barrier. There’s really no way to get out of there. You have to go all the way north to Kappel Dr to get back to Florissant. The witness must have been saying she dumped back out to Florissant on Northwind Estates Dr, but that’s impossible.
Actually, you know what? Scratch that, there’s a barrier at Glen Owen and Exuma. Can’t go North. And there’s a barrier on Glenmark, going to the South. There’s literally no way out if Canfield is closed. Wow, they weren’t kidding.
Grand Jury Volume 17
First Witness, local resident, familiar story but she puts them right next to the police car, like Wilson just got out and stood right by his door. Brown had his hands up to his shoulders and then Wilson shot him. He fell face forward. She describes a negative interaction with the police. The jurors have a ton of questions for her, she does well.
Next witness, she tells a familiar story. The prosecutor pokes holes in her account. “And finally, I want to clarify when you said that you saw Michael Brown, the final shots, okay. And Sheila asked you about did you see the officer stand over him and shoot him. I’m not really sure because in a way you said, it seems like it happened that way, or something to that effect?” “It might as well.” Interesting. “But you didn’t see the officer stand–” “No, he didn’t stand over him. He was shooting as he was walking towards him. And as he was walking towards the guy, he fell down and the last shot. He didn’t stand over him like as if he walked over to him and stood over him, no, he didn’t.” But the credibility, it’s not the greatest.
Next up, Witness 46. I don’t even want to, this woman is so annoying. Worthless testimony.
Next witness, an acquaintance of Brown’s. Heard a gunshot, ran to the balcony, saw Brown holding his wounds while Wilson continued to fire. Brown fell to the ground.
As an observation, this is now Oct 28th and the individual jurors are asking a lot more questions. They’re getting better at grand juroring, I guess.
Grand Jury Volume 18
First up, they play a recording of Witness 48’s statement to the FBI on Oct 29th. Witness 48 is perhaps Wilson’s best witness – she has a friend or relative in the complex, and she describes Brown as charging at Wilson. I originally thought this must be an older woman but she lives with her mom and doesn’t know her own address.
Witness 48 is here to testify (this means I was confused about who was testifying at the end of Volume 11). There are some problems here, I’m usually not this nitpicky but the jurors are concerned as well. The witness insists Wilson’s weapon was holstered as he chased Brown. She says Brown deserved what he got because he robbed a store and fought with a cop. Did she know either of those things we she gave her first statement on the 14th? No. Both her parents gave statements, but she was hard to get a hold of. She didn’t talk to her parents at all about it, she says. She called the prosecutor’s office but didn’t have the prosecutor’s name, so nobody could get in touch with her (the prosecutor is incredulous). She says Brown only travelled 2-3 feet after turning around before falling down dead.
“You kind of described it as charging at the officer once he turned around?”
Right.
“So you’re saying he only moved a couple of feet, though, in that charge?”
Eventually she changes her mind and says it was only 2 or 3 feet before Wilson started firing, not before he fell. He kept running through the bullets.
They ask her about how he had his hands. Remember, she’s said his hands were out in front of him, like he was cradling two footballs, with his fists clenched.
“When you said it looked like he was thinking about putting his hands up or not?”
“That’s the point, it looked like he may have thought about it. Like he wanted to.”
“So was he doing it?”
“No, he like, his hands were open at first, and it looked like his arms were going to start to go up.”
“Did they go up at all?”
“He got like shoulder length like this and then he balled his hands and then he went like, folded his arms in and started charging towards him.”
“You characterize it as charge, could he have been staggering?”
“When he first started running, ma’am, he was not staggering. He was charging this officer and that’s how I feel it was, like he was running towards him. If he had got close enough, I feel like he would have tackled him up against the car.”
“Up against the car?”
“The cruiser.”
“So they were near the cruiser when he came back?”
“He was coming this way going west towards this and the cruiser was here. He was running past this actual not too far behind the cruiser and was saying stop, stop, stop and that’s when he started firing and the officer went this way instead of going back towards the cruiser, he came across the street this way.”
“This is really important.”
“I’m not, you know, really big on talking to the police or defending police or anything like that. I’m just being real honest with you.”
“That’s all right.”
“I feel like the officer was in the right, that is all I’m saying. Because other than that, I ain’t got nothing to do with them.”
“I mean, do you feel like this could have ended up any other way?”
“Yeah, it could of, if he had of just stopped running, yeah, it could have ended a different way.”
“That’s the other way it he could have ended another way, the officer had no other choice?”
“He could of had another choice, but it could have ended in him being physically hurt.”
Powerful testimony for the grand jury, I’m sure.