Ferguson, MO

[Smapti]

She said Brown was facing Wilson when Brown took a shot to the forehead, two shots to the chest and a shot to the upper right arm. The wound to the top of Brown’s head would indicate he was falling forward or in a lunging position toward the shooter; the shot was instantly fatal.

A sixth shot that hit the forearm traveled from the back of the arm to the inner arm, which means Brown’s palms could not have been facing Wilson, as some witnesses have said, Melinek said. That trajectory shows Brown probably was not taking a standard surrender position with arms above the shoulders and palms out when he was hit, she said.

Well, so much for that “innocent young lad shot in the back with his hands up” story.

[Steophan]

@Omar_Little

ETA: …and that more rioting will ensue.

Rioting that will somehow not be the fault of the people actually doing it, no doubt, in the opinions of a lot of people here.

[JesterX]

@Smapti

Well, so much for that “innocent young lad shot in the back with his hands up” story.

That report is actually consistent with Brown holding out his arm to block incoming shots. He would be trying to protect his head area. Which would explain why some witnesses saw his hands up as if he was surrendering, and others not. As for the shots at the top of his forehead, he wouldn’t necessearily have to be lowering his head to charge. More likely he lowered his head from buckling from a previous shots.

[MOIDALIZE]

@JesterX

That report is actually consistent with Brown holding out his arm to block incoming shots. He would be trying to protect his head area. Which would explain why some witnesses saw his hands up as if he was surrendering, and others not. As for the shots at the top of his forehead, he wouldn’t necessearily have to be lowering his head to charge. More likely he lowered his head from buckling from a previous shots.

No, it’s an open-and-shut case of reefer madness. Case closed! Black people smell!

[JesterX]

@MOIDALIZE

No, it’s an open-and-shut case of reefer madness. Case closed! Black people smell!

It’s an open and shut case that you’re a nitwit. But the Brown case is far from it. Although I agree there’ll be no indictment, but not because of the facts.

[steronz]

@Smapti

Well, so much for that “innocent young lad shot in the back with his hands up” story.

From the get-go there were conflicting stories, and all that we could really say was:

• Some sort of scuffle happened near the police cruiser. At least one shot was probably fired in the car.
• Michael Brown put distance between himself and the car.
• He turned around and was killed.

Dorian Johnson said that he was shot in the back, and then turned around and was shot trying to surrender. After the first autopsy was released we learned that Brown wasn’t shot in the back, but that doesn’t preclude shots being fired at his back and missing, at which point he may have turned around voluntarily.

Is there anything in this new autopsy report that contradicts either sides’ preferred narrative? No, there isn’t. He could have been charging Wilson, or he could have had his hands up and been shot in the had after crumpling over from one of the torso shots. He could have been reaching for the gun, or he could have been trying to wrestle his hand away from Wilson’s grasp.

So no, the “innocent young lad shot [at] from behind and then killed with his hands up” story is certainly still on the table, as is the “violent reefer addict and [strong]-armed robber snaps and attacks decorated peace officer” story.

[Nars_Glinley]

@steronz

From the get-go there were conflicting stories, and all that we could really say was:

• Some sort of scuffle happened near the police cruiser. At least one shot was probably fired in the car.
• Michael Brown put distance between himself and the car.
• He turned around and was killed.

Dorian Johnson said that he was shot in the back, and then turned around and was shot trying to surrender. After the first autopsy was released we learned that Brown wasn’t shot in the back, but that doesn’t preclude shots being fired at his back and missing, at which point he may have turned around voluntarily.

Is there anything in this new autopsy report that contradicts either sides’ preferred narrative? No, there isn’t. He could have been charging Wilson, or he could have had his hands up and been shot in the had after crumpling over from one of the torso shots. He could have been reaching for the gun, or he could have been trying to wrestle his hand away from Wilson’s grasp.

So no, the “innocent young lad shot [at] from behind and then killed with his hands up” story is certainly still on the table, as is the “violent reefer addict and [strong]-armed robber snaps and attacks decorated peace officer” story.

Assuming for the sake of argument that everything that you say is true and that the grand jury reached this same conclusion (that both stories are on the table), shouldn’t Wilson not be indicted? I don’t believe that we indict someone just because it’s possible that they did something wrong.

[steronz]

@Nars_Glinley

Assuming for the sake of argument that everything that you say is true and that the grand jury reached this same conclusion (that both stories are on the table), shouldn’t Wilson not be indicted? I don’t believe that we indict someone just because it’s possible that they did something wrong.

I’d hope to fucking god that the grand jury has more information than I do. I haven’t even heard Wilson’s story from either his own mouth or a police report. We have an unarmed dead guy, and we know who killed him. If he were never to come forward and say “It was self defense,” then of course he should be indicted. I don’t think that’s actually what you’re suggesting, though, so I’m confused.

[JesterX]

@Nars_Glinley

Assuming for the sake of argument that everything that you say is true and that the grand jury reached this same conclusion (that both stories are on the table), shouldn’t Wilson not be indicted? I don’t believe that we indict someone just because it’s possible that they did something wrong.

Uhm, that’s the WHOLE POINT of an indictment. The job of a grand jury is to determine if there’s enough evidence to hold over for a full trial for a particular crime. That’s all.

[Nars_Glinley]

@JesterX

Uhm, that’s the WHOLE POINT of an indictment. The job of a grand jury is to determine if there’s enough evidence to hold over for a full trial for a particular crime. That’s all.

AIUI, a jury will only return an indictment if there is probable cause that the accused committed the crime, not merely the possibility that he did.

[JesterX]

@Nars_Glinley

AIUI, a jury will only return an indictment if there is probable cause that the accused committed the crime, not merely the possibility that he did.

Correct. And what is “probable cause”? Simply, a reasonable amount of suspicion. So if there’s a question that it’s possible someone did something wrong, as you stated in your post, that is a reasonable amount of suspicion. Or else there wouldn’t be a question of is it possible that particular someone did something wrong.

[magellan01]

@steronz

Is there anything in this new autopsy report that contradicts either sides’ preferred narrative? No, there isn’t.

Not so fast:

ERGUSON, Mo. (KMOX) – A report by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch this morning shows the official autopsy supports Ferguson officer Darren Wilson’s claim that Michael Brown struggled with him in his patrol vehicle, and that Brown did not have his hands up when he was shot Aug. 9.

[Shodan]

Also, I think the part of the preferred narrative where Brown was shot in the back has been disproven long since.

Regards,
Shodan

[magellan01]

There’s also this:

Melinek, who is not involved in the investigation, said the autopsy did not support those who claim Brown was attempting to flee or surrender when Wilson shot him in the street.

<and…>

Seven or eight African American eyewitnesses have provided testimony consistent with Wilson’s account, but none of them have spoken publicly out of fear for their safety, The Washington Post’s sources said.

But here’s the real gem:

Benjamin L. Crump, a lawyer for the Brown family, said Brown’s family and supporters will not be persuaded by the autopsy report or eyewitness statements that back Wilson’s account of the incident.

Translation: lalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalal…I can’t HEAR you…lalalalalalalalalalala…

[steronz]

@magellan01

Not so fast:

Specifically, what are you claiming here? I see where it says that it supports Wilson’s story that Brown didn’t have his hands up. Not sure that constitutes a contradiction, though. I mean, he could have raised his hands, then dropped them, and then been shot a bunch. Or been shot while his hands were up but not in a way that would leave evidence of his hands being up.

Both stories are still plausible. Sorry.

[magellan01]

But just look at what upstanding folks those Ferguson protestors are.

[magellan01]

@steronz

Specifically, what are you claiming here? I see where it says that it supports Wilson’s story that Brown didn’t have his hands up. Not sure that constitutes a contradiction, though. I mean, he could have raised his hands, then dropped them, and then been shot a bunch. Or been shot while his hands were up but not in a way that would leave evidence of his hands being up.

Both stories are still plausible. Sorry.

Oh, you want to backpedal? Fortunately we have your actual words. Here’s what you stated:

[QUOTE=steronz]
Is there anything in this new autopsy report that contradicts either sides’ preferred narrative? No, there isn’t.
[/QUOTE]

My cite directly shows that your statement was wrong. That new information does, in fact, contradict the preferred narrative of one side. Denying that is just stupid.

[JesterX]

@magellan01

Not so fast:

That’s a spin. And a BAD one, at that. When THAT particular shot was fired, Brown’s arm was not in a surrendering position. So what? When was that shot fired? Was it AFTER Brown had been shot twice in the chest? Who would think he would’ve been trying to surrender at that point? It doesn’t mean he NEVER held his arms up to surrender.

[Shodan]

[QUOTE=steronz]
Dorian Johnson said that he was shot in the back, and then turned around and was shot trying to surrender. After the first autopsy was released we learned that Brown wasn’t shot in the back, but that doesn’t preclude shots being fired at his back and missing, at which point he may have turned around voluntarily.
[/QUOTE]
I have done a little Googling, but I can’t tell.

Brown was shot six times - twice inside the car, and four times out. If WIlson’s gun was a six-shooter, there could not have been any other shots that missed, but I cann’t determine if it was. Anybody know?

Regards,
Shodan

[Smapti]

@JesterX

That’s a spin. And a BAD one, at that. When THAT particular shot was fired, Brown’s arm was not in a surrendering position. So what? When was that shot fired? Was it AFTER Brown had been shot twice in the chest? Who would think he would’ve been trying to surrender at that point? It doesn’t mean he NEVER held his arms up to surrender.

No, that’s a spin.