The detective from the previous file is up again, the county police who headed up the investigation. They pick back up locating all of the witness on diagrams and photographs. The jury asks about the duty belt – specifically, they’re concerned that there wasn’t mace on it when Wilson said he considered reaching for the mace. Wilson threw the belt in his trunk and took it home, and at some point the county PD was made aware of it and went and retreived it a month later.
A juror makes reference to the distance Brown might have advanced. He says they know from the blood spatters that it was a minimum of 21-22 feet (my math is correct, huzzah!) and from eyewitness testimony that put him at the corner of Coppercreek it was up to 48-50 feet (48 feet, 2 inches, another juror interjects). From the audio recording, they estimate the time between the first shot and the last shot to be 6-7 seconds.
There’s a discussion about when a police officer can be an “initial aggressor.” In short, it sounds like a police officer can initiate aggression during a lawful arrest. If Wilson saw Brown with the cigars and was going to arrest him for robbery, it was in his right to grab him and physical detain him. And Brown would not have a right to fight back. That’s my takeaway, at least.
He’s done now, we’re at the end. The prosecutors have prepared the instructions for the jury and are passing them around. The indictments: murder in the first and armed criminal action; murder in the second and armed criminal action; voluntary manslaughter and armed criminal action; involuntary manslaughter in the first and armed criminal action; and involuntary manslaughter in the second and armed criminal action.
The standard of proof is probable cause. Both for the shooting (which is a duh), probable cause that Darren Wilson did not act in lawful self-defense, and probable cause that he did not use lawful force in making an arrest.
The prosecutors point out the difference between MO law that allows deadly force to affect an arrest, and the supreme court decision that does not. They’re instructed to follow the supreme court ruling.
steronz, check out this link at the 6 minute mark. (Note: It goes into detail for about 7 minutes). Seems no one cross examined the police officer when he gave his testimony, a real sticky point in some minds. Others (legal), please join in on this. There’s some good points made in the clip about grand jury vs. regular jury and who should judge what.
To summarize, I am going to attempt to tell the story of the events using only the facts that are not in dispute (either from the forensic evidence or supported by multiple witnesses who otherwise disagree on the events).
Mr. Brown and Mr. Johnson were walking down the middle of the street.
Officer Wilson stopped his patrol car to ask them to use the sidewalk.
Mr. Brown and Mr. Johnson continued walking down the street.
Officer Wilson drove back to block their path.
Officer Wilson was prevented from exiting his vehicle by Mr. Brown. Officer Wilson grabbed Mr. Brown’s arm. Mr. Brown struck Officer Wilson in the face. Officer Wilson attempted to draw his pistol. Mr. Brown tried to prevent him from doing so.
The gun was fired twice, injuring Mr. Brown’s hand and damaging the patrol car.
Mr. Brown and Mr. Johnson ran down the road and Officer Wilson pursued on foot while firing his pistol.
Mr. Brown turned around and began to approach Officer Wilson.
Officer Wilson continued to fire his pistol and Mr. Brown died.
Open questions or issues which are not definitively proven:
Why did Officer Wilson attempt to detain Mr. Brown? (He says it was due to the reported robbery, but there is no way to independently confirm that.)
How quickly and in what manner was Mr. Brown approaching Officer Wilson after turning around?
Was it necessary/correct procedure/legal for Officer Wilson to fire on the retreating Mr. Brown and Mr. Johnson? Could he or should he have acted differently?
Is that a good summary or am I missing either some solid facts or some important open questions?
Seems important to me when Wilson began drawing his gun. If Brown was not expecting that the situation has escalated to lethal force, then his grabbing the arm makes sense, in the trying-not-to-get-shot sort of way. What else was he gonna do, try and outrun the bullet? Gun goes off, Brown forgets what a fearless black demon he is, and panics.
The part about Wilson firing at both of them while they flee is news to me, certainly not good. Support on that?
“Mr. Brown and Mr. Johnson ran down the road and Officer Wilson pursued on foot while firing his pistol.
Mr. Brown turned around and began to approach Officer Wilson.”
I don’t think so. There were a total of 12 shots fired. 2 were fired in the car. So 10 were fired at Brown further down the road.
There were two groups of shots. 6, then pause, then 4. Now - your hypothesis AFAIU is that Wilson fires 6 shots at Brown’s back as he flees, then Brown turns around, Brown advances at Wilson and Wilson fires 4 more. That’s impossible according to the autopsy. Brown was shot 6 times (another pathologist claims 8), all in front. None in the back.
So if we take your hypothesis as true, and even if Wilson hit Brown all 4 times from the second group of shots, 2 of the 6 bullets that hit Brown had to have come from the first group, and should have hit Brown in the back. Except all 6 were in front. So Brown wasn’t fleeing when that first group of shots was fired.
I think at least one witness claims that Officer Wilson shot at Mr. Brown before he turned around. But maybe that should not be listed as fact.
As for the other point, I deemed it solidly accepted that Officer Wilson grabbed Mr. Brown’s right arm and then Mr. Brown struck Officer Wilson with his left hand before the Officer reached for his gun.
While I am sympathetic to the tensions implicit in a white officer from the “not-quite-covering-itself-in-glory-these-days” Ferguson PD grabbing an African-American man, the escalation fault would appear to be Brown’s.
That is correct. The video refuses to play for me, but Terr is saying that it is mathematically impossible for Wilson to have shot at Brown while Brown’s back was turned.
Oh, it was a* mistake*! An oopsy, then, nothing to see here.
So, Wilson chased Brown about 175 feet, then Brown turned around and advanced upon Wilson about 21 feet, where he died. Got that about right, now? And in that time, Wilson fired ten times, hitting Brown six times. In response, Brown died.
So, when Stephanpolous talks about the distance, it only appears like Wilson agrees, because he knows he chased Brown nearly ten times that far, but…what?..figured it was too minor to mention?
Brown runs about 175 (maybe more) feet, with Brown chasing him. Then Brown turns around and advances upon Wilson 21 or more feet. Wilson, after Brown turns around (see my post above about that), fires 10 times, hitting Brown six times. Last shots fired from 8 to 10 feet away.
Again, how is the distance of the body from the car relevant? You seem to be stuck on that. Why?
Not sure if the question marks are related to the outlier mentioning use of the taser or the missing or missing. Aside from other testimony, the taser cartridge would have left physical evidence if he fired the it. When fired the cartridge spits out what’s effectively confetti along with the probes and wires. Those little pieces would have been scattered on the ground. Each piece is marked with the serial number of the module fired. The system also logs all usage.
One more time: what is the significance of the distance of the shooting from the police car?
If the shooting was closer to the SUV (as first reported), does that make it more or less likely that Wilson acted unjustifiably? Why?
If the shooting was further away from the SUV (as later reported), does that make it more or less likely that Wilson acted unjustifiably? Why?
I fear we’re getting into a series of questions here that are much like the Republican reaction to the Benghazi talking points: the talking points were based on poor initial information, which blows the lid off the scandal that the talking points were based off of poor initial information, which is evidence that this thing goes all the way to the top. A measuring tape has put us through the looking glass, people.
I’m not sure if this so called defense expert got before the grand jury or not. He’s worked with Baden on the Brown case and been on the news a lot. Whatever this so called expert did tainted Baden’s report.