Ferguson, MO is a warzone.

[Panacea]

Well, the lawyer for the Brown family just announced some findings from the independent autopsy.

Brown was shot 6 times, twice in the head. It was not close range (no powder residue).

I hope the full report is made public. I very much want to read the whole thing.

I do wish the DoJ autopsy had been done first.

[Eisa]

Speaking of that robbery, apparently the store owner doesn't believe it was Mike Brown on the surveillance video and that neither the store owner, nor the employees called the police to begin with.

(Not to mention from the surveillance video to his appearance outside, it looks like he's changed socks and shoes if that's actually him anyway.)

[Hyena Dandy]

Dorian's lawyers said it was, though, if I recall.

[KabeRinnaul]

Source please.

On the "charged him for bleeding on them" story, I originally read about that on The Daily Beast via Fark.com, but this blog article includes the court documents:

http://rt.com/usa/180680-ferguson-henry-davis-blood/

[Panacea]

On the "charged him for bleeding on them" story, I originally read about that on The Daily Beast via Fark.com, but this blog article includes the court documents:

http://rt.com/usa/180680-ferguson-henry-davis-blood/

Thanks for the link; this is better than a news article because it includes the actual court documents. Wow. Scary reading.

Of course, none of the allegations are proven fact yet, but it is disturbing to think the ER staff would refuse to photograph traumatic injuries when asked by the patient. All ERs have cameras for just that purpose (or at least, every ER I ever worked in did). I wouldn't have hesitated to take those photos. They have as much possibility protecting the officers as damning them. I'd love to see the ER record to see what actual injuries the nurses and physicians document. Head wounds by nature produce a lot of blood, so the injury may have been far less severe than the paramedics initially thought (they did the right thing by bringing him to the hospital though).

There was no reason not to give this gentleman a mat, so I don't see why the officer would refuse. I have no doubt Mr. Davis got smart with Officer Beaird and provoked a reaction. Problem is, provokation is no excuse. I'd like to know what order Mr. Davis didn't comply with, since he was already in a cell. To STFU? Not a reason to do a cell extraction.

And it begs the question: why is the FPD housing prisoners overnight? They should be going to the county jail, with trained correctional officers to oversee things. They're specifically trained in how to manage angry prisoners (and people are typically very angry right after they've been arrested, even if they are guilty as sin).

This is another situation where not all the facts are out yet (we don't have the police defense) but I do think this situation makes it very clear the FPD is in major need of reform. Their chief needs to go out the door, and the whole force may need to be replaced, since it is so small.

Speaking of that robbery, apparently the store owner doesn't believe it was Mike Brown on the surveillance video and that neither the store owner, nor the employees called the police to begin with.

(Not to mention from the surveillance video to his appearance outside, it looks like he's changed socks and shoes if that's actually him anyway.)

Yeah, I don't believe this story. They make a claim that is not supported by their own video evidence (a local news report); they say the owners claim it was not Brown. The news report never makes that claim. The owners are only saying that it was a customer who called 911; not that a customer was assaulted rather than an employee.

The owners are talking through their lawyers; they want to stay in business in the local area so they are trying to stay out of the whole mess but they can't because of the situation. What they're saying is trying to placate the angry customer base. and their lawyer didn't claim that it wasn't Michael Brown in that video.

I looked at the pics of the body and the C store video. It's Brown, no question about it. The shoes are EXACTLY the same. His pants have fallen down a bit, which makes it look like he's wearing slacks not shorts, but that's an optical illusion.

Dorian's lawyers said it was, though, if I recall.

Exactly. It's about the only truthful thing Dorian Johnson has said in this whole business.

I was able to read the NYT article on this; some things that weren't in the initial CNN report I posted about last night.

Dr. Baden (the independent pathologist) didn't have access to the clothing. So there could still be gunpowder residue indicating the shots were fired at close range. Baden admits the head shots could indicate either a surrender posture, or that Brown was charging the officer.

What Baden said next blew my mind; he claims Wilson fired too many times. Police officers are trained to bring the suspect down. Most of the shots hit his arm (not surprising, most shots actually miss). If Brown really were charging Wilson, those shots to the arm would not have stopped Brown. The head shots were the last shots fired according to Dr. Baden, and were instantly fatal.

So what does this tell us? Well, it tells us Brown was facing Wilson. He was not running away at that point.

And that's about all it tells us for now. There are equally plausible explanations for why the bullets entered the body where they did, and this preliminary report (probably because it's missing the review of the X Rays and waiting for a tox screen to see if Brown was on something; those take awhile to come back) is only part of the picture.

[siead_lietrathua]

So what does this tell us? Well, it tells us Brown was facing Wilson. He was not running away at that point.

that fits perfectly with the witness statements that he was shot at, ran, shot at again, and turned around with his hands raised in surrender to face the cop before being killed.
what's the conflict? what in the autopsy is so different from the witness statements that it might have been dramatically different?

also, the witnesses said the first shot took place at the car before the kid ran. any GSR on his clothes could be from that shot, and wouldn't conflict with the witnesses at all either. the lack of GSR embedded in the skin around the fatal wounds implies that he would have been head-shot from a distance. which also fits statements.

[Gravekeeper]

He didn't "skip town." He fled for his life, and took his family with him. Unless he's not keeping in touch with the authorities about his wherabouts, he is not a fugitive.

A) I acknowledged that in the first sentence.
B) "Skip town" doesn't mean he's a fugitive. If you're going to keep deriving a hidden meaning whenever I use a specific word or figure of speech I'm going to just start linking you to a dictionary website.

Dorian Johnson says Wilson reached through the open window of his vehicle and grabbed Brown by the throat. I call BS on that.

As do I. No other witness aside from Dorian made his claim.

Not so. The cop who killed a man with a chokehold is going to be held accountable for what he did; a blatant violation of use of force policies that led to a man's death.

That's the exception, not the rule. The NYPD especially has a long, proud tradition of excessive force and harassment of minorities.

Don't assume that because it was broad daylight that light isn't a factor. The direction of sunlight can blind or partially blind people so as to partially obscure vision. Bending of light through windows can distort what you see.

While I would be wary of witness perception being altered by the crowd's perception or statements of initial witnesses. I think you're stretching on the light thing.

Oh, please! You're splitting hairs. Malice is what you implied through your use of the word.

You're the one splitting hairs.

Going over the rest of your post I think we're honestly at the point where we need to agree to disagree now.

[Gravekeeper]

The two that raise questions are the shot to the palm and the angled shot to the top of the head, which sounds like the fatal on. But yeah, the still need his clothes for residue testing.

In other news the police have lost it again and the national guard has been called in. The police claim hundreds of protesters marched on and attacked their command center. Which led to a surprise crack down without warning on protesters in another area. Resulting in them shooting and teargassing everyone again. Including children and, yet again, the press. They even fired tear gas into the cordoned off press area forcing the media there to flee. Press were also told to turn their cameras off.

They threatened to shoot one media crew because their camera lights were too bright and threatened to mace MSNBC. They even rounded up the guy from Sports Illustrated.

Amnesty International has sent in a team to monitor the situation. This is the first time in history Amnesty International has been on the ground in the US.

This is insane. ><

[s_stabeler]

can we all agree, regardless of the truth of if Brown deserved to be shot, that this is officially the worst job of controlling riots shorty of shooting them with actual bullets?

[Greenday]

can we all agree, regardless of the truth of if Brown deserved to be shot, that this is officially the worst job of controlling riots shorty of shooting them with actual bullets?

I don't know what they are supposed to do anymore. Where's all the outrage at these dumbasses throwing molotov cocktails and shooting guns and stuff? But no, violent protesters get arrested and people flip out. People get tear gassed and people flip out. But it's the cops using non-lethal force who are getting shit. Not the violent criminals wondering the streets at night trying to kill cops and loot the entire town.

[s_stabeler]

yes, and nobody disagrees that violent protesters should be arrested.What has happened, however, is that a) Ferguson PD released claims about Brown robbing a store. That, to be frank, is irrelevant. He was, AFAIK, unarmed when he was shot- and obviously so. Even if someone shot the President, if you ran into them a few streets over, having ditched the weapon? you can't shoot them. NOTE- I'm commenting on the information about the alleged robbery, NOT on if him being shot was justified.b) the cops are using various less-lethal (they are NOT non-lethal)weapons against peaceful protesters too.

also, if I may be blunt? they're dealing with a riot. how you do that is to CONTAIN the violent protesters- NOT blindly attack any protesters. All that achieves is causing the peaceful protesters to decide they might as well be violent.

[Greenday]

also, if I may be blunt? they're dealing with a riot. how you do that is to CONTAIN the violent protesters- NOT blindly attack any protesters. All that achieves is causing the peaceful protesters to decide they might as well be violent.

Ok, so they tried to contain them. They requested people stay off the streets from 12am-5am. Extremely reasonable.

So what do you suggest the police do when these people ignore that and are shooting guns off and looting stores? You're the head of the local police. Go ahead, what measures do you take then?

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

can we all agree, regardless of the truth of if Brown deserved to be shot, that this is officially the worst job of controlling riots shorty of shooting them with actual bullets?

I don't think they're entirely separable. If the allegations proved untrue, it simply demonstrates the level of vitriol that actually exists in that community with that police force (who was also going to have to control it). It was always going to perpetuate. If the allegations proved true, well that just sort of amplifies it.

The problem here is the cops here don't represent order in service of another system. The cops are both the law and order response AND the target.

It just doesn't lend itself to an endgame and I do think at some point this may become self sustaining since going home might look like backing down. But if no one goes home, public opinion will eventually turn and the actual military might show up. It's the last thing Holder and Obama will want, but it needs to wind the fuck down.

Protests OK. Riots, not so much.

[Hyena Dandy]

Woah, Obama, out of nowhere! Where'd he come from? Son of a bitch is everywhere!

And what does Eric Holder have to do with it. He's the Attorney General. Is he trying to sue the protestors into submission?

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

AG is going to be responsible if the Feds go after the PD. I'm not sure how that jurisdiction's going to work, but just spitballing it might have to do with the Federally donated equipment that got used.