A Solely Factual Discussion about the Grand Jury Documents

Thanks! I've refrained from forming an opinion, because I have read how inaccurate eye witness testimony can be, so it will be interesting to read the documents.

My only comment is that there is no excuse for violence. Protest all you want but NO VIOLENCE or destruction of property.

BTW, this should be Under the Coconut Tree.

I have no idea what this following "report" means in terms of the various versions I have heard and read....or whether it more supports one side's view of the case or the other's. However, if I were ranking it for "reliability" I would say that it is based on an examination and is not inconsistent with the state's autopsy -- and I would therefore give it an 8 out of 10. That's just my scale....you can come up with your own, and also assign a reliability score to it.

The Brown Family had a private autopsy done. That private examiner stated the following regarding the three shots to the head--one of which is thought to have resulted in immediate death. I'm most interested in that after weeks of coverage, I had never heard this.

Given Mr. Brown's height, his head had to be bent downward with his face near parallel to the ground and the top of his head facing the shooter when the gun was discharged to produce the head and face tracks. In that bent over position the three bullets would have had to have travelled approximately parallel to the ground to produce the head, forehead and chest perforations only inches apart and then continue in similar trajectories downward and to the right. The exit perforation of the facial wound at the right lower jaw then lines up with the re-entrance wound through the clavicle.quote]

 

Oppps. Sorry. I PM'd Islander to ask to please move it.

Carl

I have read a lot of transcripts. I'm no Why did Wilson get to testify?lawyer but this is bugging me most.

I guess Darren Wilson is a pastrami sandwich

Alternet quoting Scalia?

Politics makes strange bedfellows...

Alternet quoting Scalia?

Politics makes strange bedfellows...

Keep things enemies closer.
I can't lie. I chucked even posting link but it is still pertinent to this case

Thanks! I've refrained from forming an opinion, because I have read how inaccurate eye witness testimony can be, so it will be interesting to read the documents.

Eye witnesses are difficult. There are two things working: (1) The mind is awfully good at filling in blanks, and (2) time and outside input make it almost impossible for even a truthful witness to distinguish between what you remember and what you have seen and heard elsewhere.

For an excellent example of this read the FBI's re-interview of Witness 16. Click here to read her interview. FBI-Wit 16

She was interviewed by the police within 2 hours. This is a re-interview. Her mom was outside the room and her lawyer was with her in the FBI re-interview. What do you think. First, what is her statement by the end of the interview as to whether she had seen the "tussle" inside the police car -- and where Michael Brown's hands were when he was fatally shot at the end? Just those two questions. Also, was she trying to change facts or simply remembering things that she didn't see? Would you, if you were a prosecutor, put her on the stand? If you were defense counsel?

Nothing dealing with witnesses and trials is simple or clear. Nothing.

I have read a lot of transcripts. I'm no Why did Wilson get to testify?lawyer but this is bugging me most.

I guess Darren Wilson is a pastrami sandwich

I understand that question. You are correct. He could have been a chicken and looking at the evidence, decided he'd rather have the GJ decide rather than him. He could have been a biased prosecutor who works with the police all of the time protecting a police officer. He could have been a saint who looked at the evidence and decided that in an inflamed situation it was best to get everything out there to avoid "coverup" claims despite that almost never happening. He could have wanted to manipulate the process to some end we don't even understand. I don't know.

But I do believe that we now know a lot about what everyone said and the content of all of the reports. Without speculating on the unknowable -- the first question still remains: what do the actual facts say. Who really testified to what? What did the two examinations of the body tell us? The tox screen? The DNA report? The radio traffic logs? Here are some questions that ARE addressed fairly clearly in the testimony and reports:

-Did Wilson and Brown know each other before the incident?
-What had Wilson been doing just prior to the confrontation?
-Had Wilson heard the report of the theft of Cigarillos and gotten a description before he rolled up on Brown and his friend?
-Were Brown's DNA and fingerprints on Wilson's gun?
-Did Wilson fire one shot that hit Brown inside the police car? Where was Brown's blood in the car?
-Did Wilson have a Taser with him that he could have or did use at some point?
-Was Brown shot in the back?
-Did Brown turn around while being chased?
-Did Wilson yell "get on the ground" before the fatal shots were fired? If so, how many times?
-Was Brown moving towards Wilson when fatally shot? And how far apart were they when the fatal shots were fired at the end?
-Did Brown raise his hands before being fatally shot?
-What was the position of Brown's head and upper body when the fatal shots were fired at the end?

No one will want to take the job of police officer soon. Then what?

No one will want to take the job of police officer soon. Then what?

That is highly unlikely. Some people will always want a job where people automatically label them heroes. Perhaps this will keep some of the jackwagon types from being cops and that is good.