The shot that killed #MikeBrown entered the top of his head UPDATED

Monday, August 18, 2014

Good morning:

The results of the independent autopsy arranged for the Brown family by Benjamin Crump have been announced.

Dr. Michael Baden, 80, conducted the autopsy, assisted by Professor Shawn Parcells. Dr. Baden is a famous board certified forensic pathologist who has conducted more than 20,000 autopsies.

Dr. Baden reported that Mike Brown was shot at least 6 times, including twice in the head. He also was shot multiple times in the right arm with one shot causing five wounds by entering, exiting and reentering the body.

With the exception of the fatal shot that entered through the top of his head and the entry wound in the inner part of his forearm below the elbow, the rest of the wounds are located in the front part of the body.

Depending on the position of his right forearm, Professor Parcells said the shot could have come from behind MB as he was walking or running away from the police vehicle or it could have come as he was raising his hands or it could have been a defensive wound.

The fatal shot entered the top of MB’s head, killing him. The other bullet entered through the forehead above his right eye, exited immediately below it after shattering it, reentered his face immediately below the eye, exited though his jaw line and reentered his body in the area where his collar bone is located. These two shots were the last shots fired. They were not fired from close range since no gunshot residue, stippling or starring was detected.

He suffered the two head wounds where his body was found because they would have dropped him to the ground and he would have lost consciousness immediately fro the shot to the top of his head.

That location has variously been reported as 33 to 35 feet from the officer’s parked patrol vehicle.

The autopsy results are described as “preliminary” because they are based on an examination of Mike Brown’s body at the funeral home. His clothes and police investigation reports, including witness statements, were not available.

Regarding the fatal wound to the top of Mike Brown’s head, Dr. Baden said,

This one here looks like his head was bent downward. It can be because he’s giving up or because he is charging forward at the officer.

This shooting still looks like an execution to me, given the distance of Brown’s body from the patrol vehicle. The results rule out a theory that the officer was in close proximity to Brown when he fired the two shots that struck him in the head.

I need additional information to definitively confirm or deny my opinion.

Meanwhile, the peaceful protest turned violent after sundown causing the governor to call in the National Guard.

If you appreciate what we do, please make a donation.

Thank you,


339 Responses to The shot that killed #MikeBrown entered the top of his head UPDATED

  1. Malisha says:

    If you look at Scott Olson’s “iconic picture of Ferguson,” and you know the date but not the location of the photograph, you can find yourself thinking it is in GAZA.

    • texad says:

      And in what alternate universe are we living in where the “friend” of the killer’s wife is allowed to tell “his side” and mainstream media starts reporting that as fact. And totally discounts eyewitness testimony of residents who were there.

      And where is it written that in a protest march you can be ordered to only stop moving for 5 seconds at a time?

      I know how Dred Scott felt. It is both sad and disheartening at the same time. As a grandmother of 19 year old and 22 year old AA grandsons, what can we tell them to assure they survive if they have interactions with police?

      • Malisha says:

        According to the common knowledge, young Black males really cannot count on surviving interactions with police (see “Police versus dangerous jaywalker”), or with non-police (see “Fogen versus bad guys”) or with other young Black males either (see “Presence of young Black males puts persons in fear for their life”). Damn! That just about covers it!

  2. JJ says:

    I know this has been discussed before, but I have been trying to figure out the bullet wounds and MB’s hands raised while been shot. I looked at the bullet wounds in the arms while in anatomical position (person facing forward).
    When I raise my hands up above my head, my palms and the position of the wounds are facing forward [same as anatomical position facing forward]. Those wounds could not have occurred from an officer’s shooting MB from behind.
    The other figure (back) of anatomical position shows only a grazed wound – which indicated to me it could be from the back or front. This could have been a near miss from a shot – shot from behind.
    If MB was running away, there probably wouldn’t be any shots in the portion of the arm below the elbow – as his arms would be flexed.
    If MB was facing the cop with his arms above his head, that would explain to me – the bullet wounds in his arm – and above his eye. Although I would raise my hands high, I presume MB had his arms in surrender position at the height of the head. That would explain a bullet wound above MB eye.
    The image in my mind of a person in surrender position, facing a cop and being shot in the head and nearby arm does not make me willing to vote “not guilty” for the cop – unless more info comes in that changes that image.
    How did the shot occur at the top of the head? While MB was falling down – and the cop was still aiming at the head.

    • Malisha says:

      If a man is running, his hands and lower arms will be positioned in various ways depending upon his particular gait, his size, his speed, whether he has just started or is up to stride, etc. An exercise physiologist would have to use LOTS OF DATA to figure out where a person’s hands and lower arms might most likely be found as he ran. I have seen some awkward runners and some graceful ones. Some of the most practiced runners are actually ungraceful. Also, a person can change the position of his hands based on things besides his direction and stride. Say a stitch in his side or a pain somewhere in his body caused him to make a hand gesture, or perhaps he was trying to signal to someone for some reason.

      He could have sustained an injury to hand and/or arm in lots of ways from lots of directions. He was, however, gunned down in the street. THAT part is not terribly complicated.

      • PhillyBoyRoy says:

        The FPD should recruit several gangs of bum-rushing blacks teens to quell the violent protests. The best thing would be if they were shot four or five times first, too, because as we know, that is when they are most dangerous.

        Clearly one of the most life-threatening situations in life is a bum-rushing black who has been shot five times and is also slumped over.

  3. J4TMinATL says:

    Just a warning – media are stating that police sources say more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s story on the events of shooting.
    They don’t want to release his story or any supposed dozen witnesses because they don’t want witnesses trying to match their story with his.


    • Nef05 says:

      I’m with you. I’ll believe it when I see it. If that was the case, they wouldn’t have needed to release that store video. They wouldn’t now be “leaking” info that the toxicology report allegedly says MB had THC in his system.

      It occurs to me that the FPD is also not very bright. If you claim there are more than a dozen witnesses support the officer’s story, and you have different witnesses who tell the story of MB surrendering, AND you have the forensic evidence of a bullet retrieved from a nearby home, you have an officer who essentially shot a man who was in the midst of a veritable crowd of people for JAYWALKING.

      In MO, murder one is a possible death penalty case. If the death penalty is submitted the judge is instructed to have the jury consider several aggravating circumstances, among them is this:

      (3) The offender by his act of murder in the first degree knowingly created a great risk of death to more than one person by means of a weapon or device which would normally be hazardous to the lives of more than one person;

      While I realize that is jumping FAR ahead, it seems stupid for the police dept to lay such a firm foundation for an aggravating circumstance, in advance. I’m not a lawyer, and if I could find the statute, surely any competent prosecutor knows it. Assuming said prosecutor is actually interested in a prosecution. Nevertheless, it seems like a stupid thing for the police to do – but hey, is there anything they’ve done that isn’t stupid?

      • Malisha says:

        Strange that the allegation that a cop said, “Get the fuck off the street [or onto the sidewalk]” wasn’t met with hasty and indignant denials. So…we’re to believe that it is possible an officer spoke like that to a citizen who was walking in the street? No suggestion of “please” or “sir” or “I need you to” or any of those little courtesies you might expect? So we’re not to think that there’s anything amiss with police saying to someone: “Get the fuck off the street”?

        I was in Library of Congress once when for some reason the police decided to clear the building. They came into the public reading room and said, “Move, people, let’s go.” We thought it was rude, and of course it was, but nothing like “Get the fuck off the sidewalk.”

        We’re really much too complacent about misconduct.

    • J4TMinATL says:

      Recording of call to radio station and video bystander at the scene I posted above.

    • Malisha says:

      Oh I’m sure they have their dozen witnesses. They’ll have 19 or more by the time this gets inexorable. And every one will work precisely with the Wilson story itself but none of them will really work out (by the application of physics) with the physical evidence. BTW where are Mike Brown’s clothes? Chain of custody there? How much money was on his person? Where were and how many cigars? Fingerprints on the squad car?

      • girlp says:

        I don’t trust right wing reports they tend to lie but I would not be surprised if they put together 12 or more people to say Michael bumrushed the cop.

        • J4TMinATL says:

          I agree. Don on CNN said same. All of them suck.

          • Michelleo says:

            I don’t watch CNN or other mainstream news anymore. They missed the importance of this story at the beginning, because they dismissed the lives of Black people. I’ll never look at them the same. They can prattle on all they want, nothing they say is worth very much.

  4. bettykath says:

    From New Orleans August 14

    An officer who was involved in a Monday shooting that left a man hospitalized turned off her body camera just before the incident.

    Officer Lisa Lewis fired a weapon during a traffic stop Monday, striking suspect Armand Bennett, 26, in the head. Serpas the shots were fired following a scuffle between the two. However, the NOPD did not disclose the shooting to the public until Wednesday evening.
    Continue reading >>

    New Orleans police said Officer Lisa Lewis got into a fight with a man during a traffic stop on Mimosa Court in Algiers. During the altercation, she shot 26-year-old Armand Bennet in the forehead.

    Bennet’s attorney, Nandi Campbell, said her client never resisted, and she claims the officer fired a second shot at her client as he ran away.

    The officer’s attorney countered that Lewis had turned her body camera off because her shift was about to end and she was on her way back to the Fourth District station when she initiated the traffic stop that led to the shooting.

    “What good is the camera if officers are able to take them off and just put them on the side?” Campbell asked. “There’s supposed to be some sort of checks and balances, so if we have an officer who has no problems shooting at a man two times. Why should I be surprised that she took the camera off? I’m not surprised at all.”

    It’s unclear yet if there’s any other video from the scene.

    “We want the officers to wear body cameras when they’re engaged with somebody in the public, and we know many times that is going to happen and sometimes things happen very fast and they might not be able to,” according to NOPD Chief Ronal Serpas. “But I don’t know yet. I haven’t seen this case.”

    Serpas said Lewis and the suspect had gotten into a scuffle a week before Monday’s incident, and Bennett got away. He said that prompted the NOPD to issue four different warrants for Bennet, which led to Monday’s stop.

    The shooting and the events that led up to it are under investigation.

    Serpas apologizes for late release of officer-involved shooting information

    New Orleans Police Superintendent Ronal Serpas said the late release of information about an officer-involved shooting was a “snafu” and mistake on the part of the police department, for which he accepts full responsibility.

  5. YQ says:

    I saw something else from another eye witness that suggested that MB “bumrushed” the cop. Why are all these witnesses talking to the media. Doesn’t this jeopardize their testimonies in court?

    • girlp says:

      I don’t believe it, I don’t believe anyone saw Michael Brown bumrush the cop; they are going from cops account. The woman who is backing up Darren Wilson’s account is his wife’s friend, she was not there.

      • YQ says:

        IDK, it seems like this woman claims to have seen it. She was AA and they were presenting her as an eyewitness. Are we referring to the same woman? If what she says is true, IMO it doesn’t change my stance – that the officer shot the kid and denied him a fair trial. I hope that MB will not be on trial like TM was.

      • YQ says:

        Okay, I checked the reports again and it does say that she is Wilson’s friend. Where is Wilson and why isn’t he giving any statements to the press? The location of where he is doesn’t have to be revealed. We would like to know what’s going with him.

  6. girlp says:

    “The alleged witness tells the man that Brown apparently had a confrontation with Wilson near to or in his vehicle and ran away.

    ‘Then the next thing I know he doubled back towards him cus (sic) the police had his gun drawn already on him,’ according to blog, Conservative Tree House.

    What is it with the nut tree house and doubling back???????

    • YQ says:

      Fear is a relevant emotion to the subjective-minded. “The angry black guy ran towards me” although he was just running away a split second ago. Trayvon also supposedly “doubled-back”. I definitely caught the similarities of the narrative s between the two. Jordan Davis also held an invisible shotgun to Michael Dunn. These are lies IMO.

    • J4TMinATL says:

      It’s a video recorded by male at scene. Someone picked up the bystander on the video talking to another bystander that stated a couple of things.

      Have you listened to video?

      Also watch the witness Piaget Crenshaw video I brought up early yesterday in this thread. I mentioned her name and described what was in video.

  7. Malisha says:

    You know, I was just thinking of something. Playing it out in my mind the way I would have written it if there were no Ferguson MO and if I were just dealing with some characters in a scenario.

    You don’t go to the register and make yourself known to the store owner if you’re intent on theft, even petty theft. Something happened in the store. We cannot tell what happened in that store. It ended with Mike Brown leaving WITHOUT a call going from the store-owner to the police, though; we do know that. Certainly there was no “armed and dangerous robber leaving store” call was made. So let’s just say Mike Brown walks away irritated.

    Then, according to ALL reports, a cop says to him, “Get the fuck out of the road.” Do YOU think the retort to that was “we’re just going to gramma’s house and it’ll only be a few minutes”? I don’t. I think the companion didn’t want to describe the whole conversation because of several factors. I see Big Mike’s words as more likely being closer to, “Man, if you don’t leave me the fuck alone this gonna be some sorry day for yo mamma.”

    THEN there’s pull-him-into-the-car-slam-door-cuss-him-out-kill-that-bastard-right-now kinda stuff going on. Predictable enough stuff but perhaps this just wasn’t Big Mike’s day to put up with it. It’s possible he did nothing illegal IN the store or AFTER the store but he ran into that level of irritation and obnoxiousness that just was one straw (that broke the camel’s back) too much and he “mouthed off” at the cop; remember Bill Lee saying Trayvon shouldn’t have “mouthed off” at Fogen?

    I think Mike Brown got killed for mouthing off at an angry armed man who was armed not only with his service revolver but with the knowledge that cops are allowed to kill one or two African Americans in their career and they’ll skate.

    • bettykath says:

      yea, all things considered, it’s possible that Micheal mouthed off. It seems that sassing a cop has become a capital offense, one not needing a formal charge, or jury, just an execution.

  8. Malisha says:

    They set up “command HQ” in small black-run businesses in town, totally shutting them down and essentially running them out of business. They COULD set up their “command HQ” in businesses like Target where business could continue in spite of the LE presence in the parking lot but guess what? That’s not the idea. They’re showing the town that if they protest they will suffer.

  9. Bill Taylor says:

    a weapon that is illegal for our military to use against enemies in war is being used on law abiding citizens.

  10. Sophia33 says:

    Someone just got shot!!! Don Lemon putting on bullet proof vests. Gas mask. Marc Lemont Hill wasn’t given a bullet proof vest. This is crazy.

  11. Sophia33 says:

    Why is there a disconnect between what I am SEEING and what the CNN is SAYING. I am SEEING police in all of their militarized glory. I am SEEING people with their hands up and doing nothing wrong. Howevever, I am HEARING the media say that they are instigating this. What am I missing?

    • towerflower says:

      I was watching and at least one reporter for CNN was saying the police was instigating it. Some of the protesters are saying there are a few instigators starting the trouble within the crowd and they are pointing them out to the police. So far the only thing thrown is some water bottles.

  12. towerflower says:

    It just occurred to me, IF, MB had charged the officer as it is being claimed, then where is the blood trail. You have a man with 4 shots to his arm with possible reentry wounds to his chest and is running….yet there is no blood trail? Not one drop of blood marked with cones?

    • Bill Taylor says:

      and once again the person giving the officer side of it clearly says the furthest brown got away from the car was 35 FEET……she places him where he DIED and then claims he bumrushed the officer from that spot…….total and utter NONSENSE………but i have seen a very similar story work in court in florida USA.

  13. J4TMinATL says:

    On CNN live Omara just has to speak…..gag

    • Nef05 says:

      Thanks for the head’s up. He’s got nerve talking about releasing information is not good for the case. Really????

      Ditto on the…gag!

  14. Nef05 says:

    These arbitrary strictures, being represented as laws, by police are beyond belief. It is really difficult (for me) to process that reality of being a citizen of the USA includes an actual occupation of an American city by a militarized force, and I’m not speaking of the National Guard.

    I kept hoping and thinking that Capt. Johnson was going to be able to maintain/restore the community policing efforts he began last Thurs, when he took over. Unfortunately, it appears that, as many have been saying, he is simply a cypher. A black face, and native son to put a (very) thin veneer of respectability over an American occupying force, inside the continental USA.

    It’s simply mind-boggling.

  15. Michelleo says:

    Didn’t I see these police tactics somewhere before? In the 1970s movie “Solent Green?” Where they use ear piercing sirens to contain the populace? I don’t understand their reasoning behind antagonizing a peaceful crowd.

  16. Michelleo says:

    Uh, oh! Arrest or “other” actions. They are purposely riling up a peaceful crowd.

  17. Two sides to a story says:

    Photographer prepared for the night. : /

  18. Sophia33 says:

    Even Jake Tapper is saying that this doesn’t make any sense.

  19. MichelleO says:

    Some of these speakers……

  20. Bill Taylor says:

    PLEASE help me understand what “targets” these clowns with the rifles and M16’s are aiming at???????? this is 100% wrong by the police.

  21. Sophia33 says:

    What is causing such force? This is crazy!!!!!!

  22. Bill Taylor says:

    these arbitrary “rules” are total BS i just reread the 1st amendment and nowhere in it does it say the citizens may assemble IF THEY KEEP MOVING…………BTW one does NOT have to live near that area to SEE what is happening.

  23. Bill Taylor says:

    now they are about to start gassing citizens that again are NOT breaking any law.

  24. Sophia33 says:

    Reporters now being told to get their gas masks out.

  25. Sophia33 says:

    Dear lord, the police have their toys again. Big ass tank. Can someone please tell them that these are American citizens?

  26. Thank you for welcome me,my apologies for shouting. You are a good observer 🙂 I remember others playing Devil’s advocate during
    Martin Trayvon but it’s your place and you deserve respect.

    I’m not an attorney but I believe he will need a defense but I’m hoping his defense won’t be mounted against his victim as happened with Trayvon.

    Remember,I never disputed his( Darren W) rights to counsel.

    My apologies again,ho hard feelings,case closed.

  27. Kate88 says:

    Jeez Louise, are you guys hearing the statement from this woman that called into the radio station? Her words must be right because hearsay is always so much more believable. The Chief of police had already stated in a press conference that Officer Darren Wilson had no knowledge of the alleged robbery, so now this “ear-witness” is saying that Darren Wilson says he “heard on the radio about the robbery and saw something in their hands” and so rightfully assumed that something in their hands means they were suspects?? The bottom line is this kid had his hands up, eye-witnesses discount her hearsay account and so does the very chief of police. They are being extremely messy.

  28. Nef05 says:

    Is anyone watching Shawn Parcells on “The Last Word”? He just said that the bicep wound was a through and through, in the upper arm; but the graze laceration just below it, the forearm entry wound and the deep graze on the palm could any or all have come from behind. The only one of the arm wounds that, without any doubt, must have come from the front is the bicep wound, that has a front entry and an armpit exit.

  29. “I was, and as I said, I don’t have enough facts yet to make a truly honest judgment of the guilt of the police officer”



    You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.



    • You are welcome to post here, but Crusty is a long time poster who tends to play the Devil’s advocate from time to time challenging our thinking.

      Use of all caps is shouting and unwelcome.

      As a former criminal defense attorney, I do take exception to your negative remark about defending the officer.

      If he is charged, and I sincerely hope that he will be given the evidence I have seen, he will be entitled to counsel.

      That’s a good thing.

      So is civility.

  30. PhillyBoyRoy says:

    Even if he grabbed the gun in the car, he clearly didn’t TAKE it, thus, from 35 feet away, he posed ZERO threat to Darren “Racist Scum” Wilson, ESPECIALLY after already being shot five times.

    Yep, that final shot to the head as Michael Brown was slumping over and dying will do this guy in.

    For some reason I have faith that this scum will go to jail for murder.

  31. Two sides to a story says:

    Four white guys with guns. Did the 2nd amendment militia finally decide to ride? Or the KKK?

  32. elizbowe says:

    The word “lynching” means a vile and brutal way of death that African Americans suffered in the US. Many died from lynching. They were lynched and died, to relate it a police officer being lynched is not a good example of the true facts of the United States history.

    Refresh my memory and remind me of how many police officers were lynched in our US history. No one is lynching anyone at this time, but a homicide did happen, whether justified or not. A homicide is on the death certificate.

    Let us come to some facts. Yes, we are expecting forensic evidence, specifically any of Michael Brown’s DNA in the car, any of Michael Brown’s DNA on the gun, the DNA should should be there; he allegedly grabbed it. However, we do not have a police statement yet, so maybe he did not touch it. Yes, let us wait for some forensics evidence, it will be coming.

  33. MichelleO says:

    Ferguson Police Training Video

  34. Annie Cabani says:

    I wonder if the National Guard is armed with tear gas. The irony would be rich, indeed. I’d guess that many of them served in Iraq – and, apparently, tear gas is a banned chemical agent in warfare.

    Despite its ubiquity across the globe and in United States, tear gas is a chemical agent banned in warfare per the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993, which set forth agreements signed by nearly every nation in the world — including the United States. The catch, however, is that while it’s illegal in war, it’s legal in domestic riot control. That means Turkey got to use it on its protesters last year. That meant Bahrain got to the do the same. And now, in Ferguson, cops are likewise blasting residents protesting the police for the killing of an unarmed teen named Michael Brown.

    [S]ome scientists and international observers contend the tactic of spraying people with tear gas, which commonly uses the chemical agent 2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile (CS), can pose serious dangers. “Tear gas under the Geneva Convention is characterized as a chemical warfare agent, and so it is precluded for use in warfare, but it is used very frequently against civilians,” Sven-Eric Jordt, a nerve gas expert at Yale University School of Medicine, explained to National Geographic. “That’s very illogical.”

    How ’bout that? We’re right up there with Turkey and Bahrain in how we treat our own citizens! Let’s spread THAT freedom and democracy, eh?

    • MichelleO says:

      Demoralizing. They are using their tactics on the poor and minority communities first.

      • Malisha says:

        Not “first.” Exclusively. If a bunch of rich white people from the “top” zip code in St. Louis were to gather, they would not be gassed; they would be served champagne. The tactics we see now aimed at minorities are the method of enabling the richest among us to rule unchallenged. Neofeudalism demands it. You cannot keep down the poor and exploit them without terror.

  35. Two sides to a story says:

    Also, a possible major discrepancy with the cigar incident at the store.

    • Michelleo says:

      Stop the presses! If this is true, why did Michael Brown’s friend concede to the robbery? According to a statement by his attorney, the friend did say that he and Michael Brown were together when Michael supposedly robbed the store that day? What is going on here?

      • YQ says:

        I do recall Johnson saying this, but I don’t recall him actaully admitting to the incident. But as far as I see, that does not look like a robbery. Wouldn’t a robbery involve a weapon of some sort?

        • MichelleO says:

          But the Ferguson Police chief said that Officer Darren Wilson did not know of the theft at the time, but that it was called in by someone.

          • YQ says:

            Maybe no robbery was reported, just a misdemeanor charge but FPD exaggerated the incident to smear MB. If the product was received from the clerk, how could this be proof of robbery?

          • Taking property from a person by using force or threatening to use force is robbery.

            But the officer did not know or reasonably suspect that MB had committed a robbery.

            Therefore, he had no lawful basis to stop MB, much less arrest him for a crime.

            Jaywalking isn’t a crime.

      • J4TMinATL says:

        His parents admitted it was Brown on the tape.

    • YQ says:

      Err, that’s not a robbery…. at all.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Yeah, it’s all kinda weird. Maybe he both bought some and stole some – ???

    • Sophia33 says:

      I can’t get the link. It didn’t work.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Same video as above, but links directly to YouTube.

    • Annie Cabani says:

      See also, local St. Louis station KTVI, which has posted the following poorly written article, but also a video clip from Friday, 8/15/2014.

      It might make you doubt how genuine the local police’s concerns about local businesses is. The market doesn’t want to lose its clientele as a result of Ferguson police exploiting whatever happened at the market on 8/9/14.

      FERGUSON, MO (KTVI) – The surveillance tapes allegedly showing Michael Brown robbing a Ferguson market. Friday, for the first time, the owners are speaking out through an attorney about the surveillance video.

      The owner of the store dispute the claim that they or an employee called 911, saying a customer inside the store made the call. They also say St. Louis County issues the warrants for the hard drive of surveillance video Friday.

      When asked how Ferguson police ended up with the video that the Ferguson police chief issued Friday morning. The attorney said during the course of Ferguson’s investigation they came to the store and asked to review the tape. But it wasn’t until Friday that St. Louis County investigators issued a warrant for the video many of you have already seen.

      The attorney for the owners of the store says the owners do not wish to be wrapped up in the middle of this. They are simply complying with police orders and again the attorney wanted to emphasize the 911 call did not come from the owners or an employee.

      The attorney says this market has been in the community for a long time and they hope to continue serving this community.

    • Annie Cabani says:

      I look forward to others’ takes on this audio. I couldn’t make much out of it, especially with all the police lingo, but I hope others can!

  36. MKX says:

    The cops need some tunes to chill out:

  37. Two sides to a story says:

    Pictures now of local officers without their badges or nametags. : /

  38. Two sides to a story says:

    90-year-old Holocaust survivor among arrested in #Ferguson

  39. YQ says:

    Cops have gone mad. That guy that got choked out by NYPD, the CHP that beat down that lady on the side of the road, and that homeless guy are clearly victims of their wrath. This is becoming a serious problem.

  40. girlp says:

    The powers that be in Ferguson do not want the eyes of the world on them, so they are trying to shutdown the press.

  41. Sophia33 says:

    Another journalist arrested.

  42. Sophia33 says:

    Don Lemon was just pushed back by excessive force by the police. He is pointing out how the police are doing a lot of provoking and saying how he is happy that he was caught live on television.

  43. Bill Taylor says:

    another point there are many WHITE people in these crowds.

    • Sophia33 says:

      I just saw a WHITE man arrested. Yes, it is important to note. And white people should be out there. The militarization of our police is something that concerns them too. I don’t agree with the NRA on much, but one of their arguments against gun control is the militarization of the police. Now mind you, they didn’t feel that way in the 70’s and 80’s when they worked with Reagan to get many of the gun laws we have because they opposed the Black Panthers.

    • crustyolemothman says:

      Mr. Taylor, from you up close view of the crowds, is the number of “WHITE” people in the crowd roughly equal to the percentage of “WHITE” people that live in the area? If so that would be a great sign of unity….

  44. MKX says:

    Anyone in the military who has had live rounds fired close to them will tell you that a near miss creates a reaction.

    • bettykath says:

      In the shooter or the target? or both?

    • crustyolemothman says:

      MKX, But we were taught back in the early 1960’s a near miss by you would probably cause you to die, so we were careful to not miss… But then again the VC very seldom missed their targets…

      • MKX says:

        You know guns way better than I do. All my info is second hand. I was told that a near miss makes a snapping sound due to the sonic boom that is startling to one who hears it. The closest I got was being on the other side of a gun range in the Huron Forest.

        It is weird.

        You here that PPPPT and then the report of the gun. It does not sound like what Hollywood does.

        Note that the shots were across my line of hike, not at, so I quickly retreated 🙂

  45. MKX says:

    IMO, this autopsy goes along with the testimony of the eye witness.

    The eye witness stated that he saw Brown flinch and turn around to give up with his hands raised. He interpreted to flinch the be the result of getting hit by a shot. My opinion is that the flinch was a response to a shot that missed but was close. At that point, Brown probably thought that turning around and surrendering was his only hope to stay alive – which it sadly was not.

    The head angle of the head wound could have been the result of Brown either sagging or ducking in response the hail of fire that was impacting his arms.

    My first read on this is that the officer got hit in the scuffle and let his anger get revenge on Brown.

    In a just world, the officer should do time.

    However, this one will go down like the Zimmerman trial, IMO.

    Just back from vacation and bringing myself up to speed on this tragic event.

    • girlp says:

      MKX, I thought about a bullet whizzing past him causing him to turn around and surrender. One bullet was found in a structure (I think) of the apartments maybe this bullet came very close to hitting him.

      • MKX says:

        That’s my line of thinking. Brown thought he could run and the officer would not shoot and, after a bullet passed close, Brown decided to surrender.

        I also think it is careless and dismissive of the lives of the locals who this officer swore to protect and serve to be shooting at a suspect who is fleeing during noon on a summer day when children are likely to be out playing.

      • Malisha says:

        He could have been trying to get prone on the ground to avoid being killed when he was shot twice in the head.

    • crustyolemothman says:

      MKX, Finally an explanation that makes sense… I suspect your theory is closer to the truth than most of what has been alleged thus far… I’m still having a hard time with why all the shots were so far off center and apparently high? Was this officer that poor of a shot? Michael was pretty big in the center mass and to miss that large a target that short of a distance ( somewhere from 2-35 feet) seems difficult to accept.. If in fact it is proven that the officer did intentionally shoot to kill in an unprovoked situation then he does deserve to be tried in a court of law and if found guilty (by an unbiased court) and sentenced to a long time in prison… But could an unbiased jury be found?

      • MKX says:

        Fear or rage tends to detract from aim. Maybe the officer snapped?

        We have that case of the homeless guy who turned and was gunned down wherein the officers were found not guilty. I feel the same will happen here, not that I agree. The argument will be that the turn to surrender could be reasonably construed as a renewed threat – and given how the jury in the Zimmerman trial thought – it would be accepted hook, line and sinker.

        For whatever reason, police are held to a lower standard of behavior than J Q Public and that, IMO, needs to be changed.

        Those who uphold the law should be held to a higher standard.

        Of course, any politician who tries to float my idea will be soundly thrashed by our media.

        • crustyolemothman says:

          MKX, I agree that there has been too many cases where justice was not served properly especially in cases involving the police. I want justice served in this case but only based on factual truth and not on emotion as we saw in the Zimmerman case. If the facts prove that this officer did in fact murder Michael as many contend, then he should be tried and convicted and sentenced to a much harsher sentence than a normal citizen due to his position of authority. Many on here “assume” that I am defending this officer, but they assume wrong, I simply refuse to convict him in a court of public opinion with out sufficient facts to do so… Any politician that does not support the laws that they have passed need to be gone from office…. The very idea that anyone is above the law because of their job, their skin tone, or gender, should never be a factor in application of the law…

          • MKX says:

            I understand that you are playing a devil’s advocate role to properly analyze testimony.

            I agree that the eye witness in question has a vested interest in the outcome of any possible trial and that is why it is the duty of an investigator or juror to compare the statements with forensic evidence in order to make a determination of veracity. IMO, he passes well and I would give his statement weight in a trial.

            The right wing has a vested interest in debasing this eye witness so they are creating the meme that he saw Brown shot in the back, thus twisting “he saw Brown flinch in response to shots and assumed Brown was hit”.

            What is interesting is that Zimmerman clearly had a vested interest in not telling the truth and his story, when compared to forensic evidence, was so full of holes that it could have been served as fine Swiss Cheese. And the jury ate it.

            When trials become “us” vs. “them”, there is very little possibility of getting an objective jury.

            Look at the non-logic applied to the testimony of the so-called bests witness in the Zimmerman trial – John Goode.

            He stated that he told both of them to “cut it out…. and … “was calling the cops”.

            Yet, we are to believe that a 150lbs Trayvon Martin would continue to try to kill Zimmerman with his fists of steel {sarcasm} or by taking the gun, knowing full well there are witnesses and the police are on the way, thus guaranteeing a long stint in prison for him.

            IMO, there might have been a tussle wherein Zimmerman got a few boo boos that caused him to get mad and pull out his gun to shoot Martin. And the coward made up more “facts” to save his ass.

            There are men, wee men and ZimmerMEN. And the last applied to the entire family.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            MKX, I will respond to your post, however this will probably be my last response in this discussion. This mornings news had a video in which an eye witness dispels several of the rumors that have been so popular, the first is, as I had pointed out yesterday that the officer was indeed running after Michael, and the second was that, per her view he was not shot in the back. The third and final comment she made that dispelled another rumor was when she pointed out the officer in the video and stated that he looked distraught at what had occurred, does that somewhat dispel the rumor that he was busy contacting his attorney and or concocting a story in an effort to “lie” his way out of the problem? Hopefully this case, when it reaches trial will not be decided by a jury using emotion (or possibly racial bias) but instead be tried based on the facts of the case. The real problem will be finding a jury that is not biased toward either position, unfortunately as we are seeing (even on here) there are many people that are unwilling to accept that they may not possess adequate information at this point in the investigation to make a truly factual assessment of the case, of course it is far easier to disparage the person that points out the potential problems in ones favorite theory than it is to actually take an honest look at the rumors and ask how much truth is it based upon. IMO, there was an initial scuffle, words were exchanged, possibly a minor altercation, anger and emotion over rode the officers training and a death occurred. If my opinion proves to be correct, then an honest and non biased jury should convict the officer for the death of Michael Brown.. The real question is will that be enough to satisfy those amongst us that IMO are not seeking justice but instead seek revenge?

          • crustyolemothman says:

            For some reason the link to the story mentioned did not make it, I will try it again, sorry…..


          • J4TMinATL says:


            Your witness you bring up NOW was already discussed on this thread and I talked about the video of Darren staying on scene.

            Anything else.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            J4TMinATL, Sorry, I can’t take claim to the witness, but I had also mentioned this witness yesterday, but did not have a link to her video. The words that I mentioned about the officer remaining on the scene were from her, not me. I had mentioned to MKX that I was removing myself from this discussion but responded to his post directed to me, as I am to your post directed to me. You ask do I have anything else? I think that at this point I could offer nothing that would be well received and out of respect for you and all the other posters on the Professors site that it is best that I refrain from any farther participation in this discussion. I feel sure you will understand and respect that decision. Hopefully true justice will be found for all involved in this tragic event…

    • Welcome back. Hope you had a good time.

  46. Bill Taylor says:

    no reply option open for a question posed to me…….to stop the looting i would as i said position armed officers at every business and then announce ALL LOOTERS WILL BE SHOT ON SIGHT……and that would be legal because they are being caught IN THE ACT of violent CRIME and do pose an imminent danger to all citizens………….

    • Sophia33 says:

      I think that is a good solution. But I have to wonder if the local police really want to control the agitators. As I said last night, it is not above law enforcement to plant agitators. He have cursory historical reference for it with COINTELPRO and the black power movements of the 1970’s. I have to wonder how much the Ferguson police department wants to have EFFECTIVE solutions to the agitators. Many of them are not even from the state of Missouri. If there are agitators, they make the news and they help the police department justify their actions. It goes along the lines of, “well, these people are animals hence the reason we must shoot them”. So for me, I have to wonder Bill if they really want to effectively and safely handle the issue. I admit I may be wrong.

    • crustyolemothman says:

      While that would be a legal option, I wonder how the community would respond to the death of more citizens at the hands of the police, legal or not? Would those deaths inflame the situation even more? I remember the other night it was mentioned that the crowd prevented the police from getting to the area that the person had been shot during the demonstration, that would cause me to wonder how the people would respond to another shooting or a series of shooting to prevent looting and other illegal activities? I can’t say for sure, but I suspect it would escalate the situation beyond control, but that is simply my opinion…

      • Bill Taylor says:

        the local community does NOT support the gang bangers they would be happy to see the ones that are breaking into the homes gone……the criminal element is a TINY portion of our population, most folks are law abiding and want everyone to follow the laws, nobody likes having their homes broken into.

        • crustyolemothman says:

          Mr. Taylor, I did not realize you were a member of the community in Ferguson. Perhaps because you live there your perspective is much better than those of us who do not live there. I’m glad you told us that the looters were breaking into homes as well as business properties, the news has neglected to tell us that. How many homes have they broken into and destroyed or burned down? I will agree that the majority of people in this entire nation are law abiding and want and expect people to follow the law. Now I understand why you think that you folks that live there would like to have this criminal element off the streets. How close to your home is all this taking place, are you in a position of safety as you write to this blog? It is good that we now know where to get first hand hones reporting from the area…

          • Annie Cabani says:


            Don’t know about Mr. Taylor, but I’ve been keeping my drone surveillance of the area secret until now. (Oops! Now I’ve let the out of the bag!)

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Hmmmm….. Drone….. disguised as a pigeon?

          • Bill Taylor says:

            i think we are finished or at least this is my last comment to you since you chose the tone you just used….NO i dont live there and NO i did NOT report any homes being broken into…i DID ise common SENSE and say law abiding folks DONT like having criminals break into their homes and DONT support criminals…….those things do NOT require living there to understand… is OBVIOUS your intent is some kind of lame attempt to start some silly argument and simply put you lack the intellect to engage me, dismissed.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Mr. Taylor, You weren’t satisfied with simply calling me a liar, now you wish to say I lack the “intellect” necessary to have a discussion with you? You sir, are the person that implied you lived in the area with “your” words, not my words… I suppose that anyone that questions your thoughts is stupid and not up to your level of intellect, or am I again miss reading your words. One thing I learned many years ago is that when a man gets as defensive as you have here they are pretty insecure in their core beliefs. Trust me, your not responding to me will not break my heart nor will it surprise me in the least. You have felt the need to insult me by intent to make your point and that sir was your choice. Have a good evening…

          • J4TMinATL says:


            I understand you’re upset as we all are. Sleep on it. You’ve rubbed me the wrong way today. Appears others too.

            I came back to a rally march in Atlanta in the pouring rain. I needed that for my soul. I get home and read your comments and tone and feel deflated.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            J4TMinATL, Because my words have offended you, I will offer you an apology, for that was not my intent. I do, and always have respected your view points and would never intentionally offend you. I will simply cease to post on this topic and not comment farther out of respect for you and others that feel my comments are not proper or acceptable. I do hope you take this post in the way it is intended. Have a good evening.

          • J4TMinATL says:


            Thank you. I appreciate yours too. Like Fred say I know you play devil’s advocate. It opens up room for deeper thought. I just think we all are frustrated and heartbroken with this situation. I’m not asking you to stop posting. No one is. Tomorrow is a new day for all of us.

    • Malisha says:

      I’m sorry, but “ALL LOOTERS WILL BE SHOT ON SIGHT” is, in my book, something out of Zimbabwe. NOT something out of Missouri. ARRESTED on sight? I can get behind that. SHOT on sight? NOT.

      • MKX says:

        I agree.

        Why is property so important that any threat to it should be summarily executed?

        Such a view really drives home that fact that the USA is a hierarchy wherein the “propertied” enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of property and the un-propertied masses are commodities to be exploited.

        I mean what was a big reason that Trayvon Martin was assaulted and killed?

        “Those people” were a threat to property values. And the HOA ran cover for the “good guy” till he went totally whacko.

        Phillip Marley: “Mankind was our business”

        It seems we have not progressed a whit in 200 years.

  47. Sophia33 says:

    Now the “officer” is now taking a claim from the Fogen playbook. Teen runs away and then after running away decides to get courage mid-run to turn around and charge the attacker? It’s BS. Trayvon Martin ran away and supposedly turned around. Now this “officer” is saying that Mike Brown ran away and then turned around and came back to attack him from 35 feet away. In fact, he went further than Fogen. He is saying that he ran and charged toward him as he continued to be shot. It makes no sense.

  48. Sophia33 says:

    When I think of my anatomy classes, my experiences at a shooting range and the actual gun shot wounds, the wounds point to the officer shooting in a target area. If, as witnesses say, Mike Brown’s hands were up his right palm would have been next to his head. Next to his right eye, which was shot. Arms raised represents the target area (i.e. bulls-eye) that would include the right eye, the upper arm, the forearm and the eye. My initial thoughts were that his hands were raised. Anything other than arm raised points to an officer who was an extremely bad shot.

    • Bill Taylor says:

      exactly, the police are taught to shoot at “center mass” and he didnt come close to that with any shot.

      • bettykath says:

        where would center mass be if he were bent forward for the kill shot?

        • Sophia33 says:

          Baden states that the wound at the top of the head was probably the last one since it was the fatal one. So my inclination is to believe that Michael Brown was shot in the other areas and then bent down or started to bend down in response to being shot and then the shot came to the top of the head. It would be natural to look down at the area you have been shot at. It would be instinctual. I’m not claiming to know what happened. I’m just saying that kind of makes sense.

    • crustyolemothman says:

      Sophia33, I have a question.. If the normal training for a police officer would be to shoot in the center mass (target area?), would the impacts being well to the left be and indication of extremely poor shooting skill or is it possible that it was an attempt to wound and not kill? Please try to understand that this is an “HONEST” question, and not an effort to excuse the actions of the police officer…

      • Anything is possible, but police officers are trained to shoot to kill, not wound.

        • crustyolemothman says:

          Professor, So then it would seem that if that were the case that this man shooting skills were extremely poor to have been at least 16 inches off center at a range of somewhere between 35 (33?) feet to as close as possibly 2 feet (per the autopsy). Wow this man must be related to Dick Cheney… That is the only other man I know of that has that poor of aim after extensive training…

          • bettykath says:

            You think Cheney hit the man by accident? I think Cheney hit his target.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            bettykath, IMO the only accidental part about the Cheney shooting is the man did not die… and again IMO that was Cheney’s intent… Sorry, but the reference to that shooting was a bit of sarcasm on my part…

      • Sophia33 says:

        I can’t answer that. As the Professor said, they are trained to shoot to kill. That said, Brown having his arms up shows a better target area than him having his arms down. It’s hard to explain, and I wish I could draw it, but arms raised with hands above the head or near the head show a general target area versus arms being down, especially since all impact was on the right side. Also, left and right don’t mean much. It depends on stance of the shooter and position of the person being shot.

        • crustyolemothman says:

          Sophia33, If his hands and arms were indeed in the air as claimed then the police officer not only shot off center quite a bit, but high as well? Can we expect that his training was that poor? Could he have an eye sight problem causing his shots to be that far off? I do understand you statement about the angle of the stance of the victim but I would think ( I know, I’m not supposed to do that..) that unless he was standing relatively square to the shooter the shots to the arm would have been thru the bone preventing him from raising his arms? Or is my thinking flawed as to the ability to raise ones arm with the bone shattered by a bullet? I am simply guessing due to not having full access to the autopsy and the full description of the angle of impact by the Dr. that did the autopsy, so it is possible that I am totally wrong…

          • Sophia33 says:

            I would hypothesize that he shot high. But again, the cluster of shots would be better explained by hands up. His arms may have already been up BEFORE the shooting. That would explain the cluster. With arms raised, there is a cluster or target area that can be seen.

          • Annie Cabani says:

            I haven’t heard about any shattered bones.
            Has anything like that come out yet?

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Annie Cabani, Actually if you re-read my post you might realize we were talking hypothetically, and wondering if perhaps there were bones hit by the bullets that impacted on his arms. No, we don’t have any definitive information that bones were shattered. Sorry for the confusion… Perhaps when all the documentation on this case is released we will know what actually happened.

          • BTW, the cop failed to inform dispatch about the shooting.

            They found out when the news media called them.

            Guess he was talking to his lawyer.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Professor, Are we basing that statement on the reporting from the hackers? Perhaps my memory has gone wacko again, wasn’t it found that the recording that they ended up with was the St. Louis County dispatch and not the Ferguson dispatch? I’m sure if I’m wrong someone will quickly point out my error… That is like the statement that the body was simply loaded into a SUV, it was but that SUV was the coroner’s transport vehicle. There were a lot of rumors and speculation the first few days. How much is true is yet to be seen…

          • Don’t forget that both bullets that hit the head followed a similar trajectory from top to bottom, not front to back. That means the head may have been low enough to be the center of mass.

            That suggests he may have been on the ground or looking down and dropping to the ground.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Professor, I agree that your theory is quite possible and makes a lot of sense, that is if anything in this entire case could make any sort of sense. Is it even remotely possible that the shots that hit him in the head were made during a wild charge toward the officer? Again that is not to be considered a statement, but as a question… Would you consider it fair to the officer if any and all possibilities are not considered? If you were the defense attorney would you not want to explore all avenues of defendable action on the part of the officer? My question are not an effort to exonerate the officer, as some seem to think, but to ensure that we fairly discuss all the various theories about how this incident occurred. Only after we establish the factual truth can we truly find justice or we can as some seem to wish use emotion instead, personally, I prefer facts over emotion…

          • Annie Cabani says:

            Crusty, Crusty, Crusty…! Actually, it appears that the only one having a “hypothetical conversation” about broken bones was you … all by yourself!

            It looks like you abandoned your famously-supercilious, objective analytical skills in favor of throwing out random non-facts to jumble up a genuine conversation based on facts that have actually arisen to date.

            Admittedly, I was overly optimistic and indulgent in considering the possibility that you might actually be debating based on something relevant. Turns out you were just trying to muddy the waters with BS, as usual.

            Not to worry, though. I won’t be granting you any presumption of validity or credibility going forward!

            Thanks for clarifying.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            While it is your choice to not grant me any presumption of validity or credibility in the future. I feel obligated to try to clarify my comment on the broken bones. The statement was about the angle of Michael’s body in relation to the shooter or the gun specifically. If you will notice the wounds are to the inside of the arm, if he was turned any more to the right and the wounds were positioned where they are the angle of the shot would have caused the bullet to hit the bone in the arm instead of the fleshy portion. I was not attempting to say his had shattered bones, but simply explain that the angle he was shot from appears to be from directly in front rather than from the side. I also consider the statement that he was able to raise his arms as a good indicator that the bones were not damaged. Obviously I did not explain it properly, that was my fault. If I offended you (and I obviously did) regardless of what you now feel about me, I will still offer a sincere apology for doing so, that was not my intent… Have a good evening, I will now, after one more necessary post cease to participate in this discussion out of respect to those the balance of the posters on this site…

    • I suspect you may be right about the connection between the deep graze wound to the right palm at the base of the thumb and the shot that entered his forehead above the right eye.

  49. bettykath says:

    I wonder what happened to Ron Johnson. The militarized police force was replaced by the state cops with a reasonable and respected leader, now he seems to have been replaced by the National Guard, the real military. Did Johnson quit?Speculation: I think, from some body language, that Johnson was given the job of front man and was taking orders, ultimately, orders that became unacceptable to him.

    • crustyolemothman says:

      bettykath, Ron Johnson is still there and still in charge, if you had read the reports he is even in charge of the national guard unit that has been deployed. The problem is that most people do not realize his job is not to protect the rioters or the looters or the thieves that are causing problems. His job is to maintain peace and to “enforce the law” and unfortunately that includes preventing looting and rioting and crowd control…

      • Bill Taylor says:

        then he is NOT doing his job of protecting the citizens as some have been falsely arrested today……

        • crustyolemothman says:

          Mr. Taylor, because you seem to know exactly how to police and control the area, perhaps you should go there and take over the duties from Mr. Johnson? I am curious however, how would you handle this problem, how would you handle the crowd control? How you respond to the looting and theft? I know one thing, I don’t think I could do a better job considering the situation, but at least I’m honest enough to admit to my short comings. At this point do you honestly think anyone would be able to satisfy everyone in dealing with this problem?

          • Bill Taylor says:

            easy, i would station armed officer in front of all the businesses in the area, and i would allow the peaceful folks to protest as long as they desire………seems to me from SEEING what is being done with my own eyes the police are NOT worried about any looting or rioting they are focused on trying to find any reason to go after those peaceful folks………last night as prime example the peaceful folks got gassed when they hadnt done anything wrong……and i TY for noting indeed i am very intelligent and well informed.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Mr. Taylor, That would seem to be a pretty good way of dealing with the problem, but I am curious, what would be your response against the looter, the thieves and the people burning the business down? How would you allow these armed officers to respond? Or is it your thought that due to the presence of the armed officers the problem would self cure? I thought part of the problem that keeps being mentioned here is the armed police officers being present?

          • Two sides to a story says:

            There are many articles online showing townspeople blocking doorways of businesses and deflecting would-be looters.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Two sides to a story, I realize that, I read the stories as well, however even that did not stop the looting of the hair supply business or the Domino’s pizza, that incidentally have stated they will not re-open in that area. I was really shocked to see the picture of the young woman leaving the hair supply with her arms full of merchandise, and the photo’s of the young men with cases of alcohol in their arms, the local folks were powerless to prevent it from happening, but I must give them credit for at least trying… The attack on the store that Michael was alleged to have strong arm robbed was an act of revenge (IMO).

          • Annie Cabani says:

            Crust, Crusty, Crusty….

            I thought part of the problem that keeps being mentioned here is the armed police officers being present?

            Say what?? Sounds like you’re either unable or unwilling to comprehend Bill Taylor’s (very rational) response to you in particular or the discussions here in general.

    • Nef05 says:

      The minute I saw his face as he described the curfew, I felt the same way, Bettykath. He may still be the face, whether he has any actual authority remains to be seen. Interviews with black elected officials (the few they have) have indicated their “sources” have told them he does not.

  50. Bill Taylor says:

    quite simply the police in missouri are TRYING everything they can to START a riot…….FALSE arrests already happening today in broad daylight.

    • Malisha says:

      And take note: DOJ has not sent anybody in there. RED CROSS has not sent anybody in there. One person has been killed, many others wounded, and NOBODY has been sent in there. Federal government? United Nations? Hello Hello?

      • Michelleo says:

        That would be seen as aiding and abetting and sympathizing with the black pea-poles—-and we don’t want that! Remember, black people were relabeled “refugees” during Katrina. They are refugees, thugs, criminals—-anything but American citizens or human beings.

      • bettykath says:

        I saw a report that showed FBI agents questioning neighbors, so maybe the feds are involved.

      • Two sides to a story says:

        Amnesty International has observers. It’s my understanding that the National Guard are there, and have less equipment and arms than the local police.

    • Michelleo says:

      Yes, I was shocked at last night’s live coverage showing a Ferguson police officer threatening to shoot a reporter if he didn’t shut his lights off. It was the way he came at him—-straight disrespectful and thuggish—-like this is the way things are always done in that town. That there were numerous shocked people around him witnessing this threat, seemed to be of no consequence to him at all. He did not back down nor de-escalate his threatening behavior and words, even in the face of an appalled crowd.

  51. Kenyatta Coleman aka YQ says:

    And also what bothers me is that we haven’t heard a story from the officer that might be a blueprint to his defense. But there way too many witnesses on the other side coming out in my opinion. It would seem like Team Wilson is waiting on more stories to wrap their defense around, and that the DOJ is too transparent. I would be investigating every single cop in there. Emails, phone calls, anything that suggest questionable activity.

    • bettykath says:

      The officer’s story will be in his and other police reports. You know, the Official story of what happened. All others don’t count. [sarcasm]

      • Nef05 says:

        Yep! I have doubts that I will believe anything they saw at this point. How will we know physical reports aren’t backdated to fit with the physical evidence? As Malisha (I believe) has previously mentioned, leaving in the vehicle, in which the chief claimed there was a shot fired, and Tiffany Mitchell has claimed MB’s hands were on the outside pushing away, which would leave fingerprints to show where his hands were, is inexcusable.

        I’d bet next month’s house note there will be no report showing MB’s fingerprints on the outside of that SUV where he was pushing away.

  52. Kenyatta Coleman aka YQ says:

    Here we go again… Just saw the autopsy report. 6 wounds, including one to the eye that tumbled and one to the top of the head. As I read some of the posts here, I was able to make sense of 100% of what you guys are saying. According to what I read about the incident, Brown shut the police car door after the struggle and tried to flee. Several witnesses confirm. What doesn’t make sense (again) is that the kid was said to have turned around and suddenly tried to charge the cop again. Of course this is the police statement. This is also similar to another case in which the victim was said to have turned around immediately after running from his assailant. Initial reports showed that the kid was shot 7 times and not six. Did one bullet NOT hit Brown from behind and he “jerked” like one witness claimed? No way a kid being shot at would suddenly turn around from 35 feet and begin a charge from there. And if so, other wounds would be estimated at around 40-45 feet?? This is overkill.

  53. crustyolemothman says:

    This account seems to call into question some of the allegations that are being made about the shooting… Which version is true this one or the popular one being espoused on so many blogs? Can we pick the one that best represents our opinions about the shooting and ignore facts that don’t totally agree with them? Could it be that because of imbedded emotion and opinions will cause us to refuse to accept any version of events that does not fit our needs? I fear that the words and deeds of a few will ultimately set the quest for equality back for a long time. But then again, I am beginning to wonder if that is not the ultimate goal of some people… It seems like if you don’t swim with the fish, you suddenly are the guest in a feeding frenzy…

    • J4TMinATL says:

      All this piece meal evidence being released and story from police and media will do that. There’s a lot of questions that will be answered through forensics. The question is was this a justified killing. That’s always been the question. Unarmed kid shot six times at least and a PD acting like fools.

      • crustyolemothman says:


        “The question is was this a justified killing. That’s always been the question. Unarmed kid shot six times at least and a PD acting like fools.”

        No disrespect meant, however there is no “questioning”, if you read even this blog, there are post after post that are all but calling for a public lynching of the police officer! I’ll admit, I don’t know the truth about this shooting, and quite frankly IMO all the experts on this site and other are shooting with biased opinions instead of waiting for the fact to come out, and even then unless the facts that come out agree with their opinions I would suspect they will claim that the facts are not true! Not one person here has questioned the truthfulness of Dorian Johnson in his narrative of what happened that day, think for a moment, it is pretty obvious due to his own admission the he and Michael had been in the store and Michael had strong armed the owner while stealing, now place yourself in that position, a police officer stops you, would you meekly comply with his request or would you take defensive action to cover up your prior crime? I won’t pretend to know that this was the case, but can you say honestly that it is not a possibility? Is it even remotely possible that Michael was actually attempting to attack the officer, the allegation that the distance between the officer and he was 35 feet, but it was also stated that the officer had left his car and was in pursuit, so how far were they apart? could Michael have possibly turned to attack the officer? Is that even remotely possible? I don’t know if he did, do you? My whole point is the same as it was from the first day, too many people are jumping on a bandwagon of hate toward this man and will never let any facts stand in the way of their public lynching of him… The question still remains, did he murder Michael, and until we get the facts to prove he did, I refuse to join the mob with the rope looking for a tree… Mob justice seldom works out to be true justice…

        • Bill Taylor says:

          nobody here has called for any when you start off by LYING about everyone here indeed YOUR credibility is GONE.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Mr. Taylor, I suspect you know I did not mean lynching in a literal sense. And as far as my credibility being gone, if one has to agree with you to be credible, then you show your own bias to be in place. If you chose to make a judgment about the facts based on what you assume then that is your privilege. However I will wait until we have the enough facts before I jump on your band wagon.

          • Michelleo says:

            Thank you, Mr. Taylor.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Mr. Taylor, If you had read my words as written you would have quickly understood that I did not state that anyone had actually called for a lynching. Here, I’ll post them for you again, maybe this time you might actually read them?

            “there are post after post that are all but calling for a public lynching of the police officer!”

            Now, there were other question in that post, care to respond to them? Now, before you do, try to remember they are question and not statements of fact… I don’t have all the facts and despite that you seem to assume that you do, it is very unlikely that you do. However at some point it is very possible that we all will know the truth and some of our assumptions will prove to be false. I wonder how many on here will be willing to admit they were wrong if the facts don’t prove their desired story line? Feel free to check my history on this site, I have been here since almost the beginning, and there have been several times when I was wrong, but I have had enough honor to publically admitting here on this site when I was, and as I said, I don’t have enough facts yet to make a truly honest judgment of the guilt of the police officer….

        • Bill Taylor says:

          based on the officers own story it is NOT possible, the officer claims brown was 35 feet from his vehicle when brown started charging him full speed and continued after multiple shots……his body remained 35 feet from the vehicle…….the officers claim defies the physical evidence that IS KNOWN.

        • Mob, what mob?

          I thought we were discussing what happened.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Professor, Is it a discussion when someone points out that we don’t have all the facts necessary to make a truthful fact filled analysis of what happened that they are called a liar? I realize that to many on here anyone that does not agree with their opinion of what the truth is does not count. Who among the posters on this site actually knows all the facts of this incident? I’ll freely admit that it is very possible that Michael Brown was murdered by the police office, but unlike some, I refuse to lynch him in a proverbial sense without having sufficient facts to prove his guilt without a doubt.. No, it is not a discussion when dissenting view points are not treated with at least a small amount of respect. Now if you wish to ban me from this site for not agreeing with the view points that seem to be so popular at this time, then so be it… I will state, however, and you know it to be true, that even when I have disagreed with another poster, I have never stooped to the level of calling that poster a liar! But this is your site, and your rules. Have a good afternoon.

          • I think we all realize we weren’t there and we are hypothesizing about what happened.

            I’ve been corrected and changed my opinion about how this shooting occurred, but I believe it was still an execution and the officer should be charged with premeditated murder.

            I agree with Bill Taylor that there is no evidence to support the theory that MB bull-rushed the officer, since his body was found 35 feet from the vehicle.

            You don’t have to agree or disagree.

            You don’t even have to have an opinion.

            Of course I’m not going to ban you. I don’t even understand why you think I would do that.


          • crustyolemothman says:

            Professor, This is a question and not a statement, is it possible (it was stated at some point by one of the witnesses that the officer followed Michael out of the car) that the distance between Michael and the police officers was much closer? Could the shots actually been from only a few feet and Michael had actually turned toward the officer in an aggressive manner? Is there any possibility with his own knowledge of the crime he allegedly committed he did not want to go to jail and was willing to fight for his freedom? Remember these are questions, not claims, but is there not a small possibility that the officer was being threatened by Michael? Now I will agree even if he was threatened the shooting was not justified, and it would not excuse the actions of the officer, but it would “explain” his actions…

          • Anything is possible, but why would he take off on foot in hot pursuit, instead of following with his vehicle or getting out of it, ordering them to stop and shooting, if they didn’t?

            At 30-35 feet, he was close enough and he could use his vehicle for cover, in case one or both were armed and returned fire.

            Of course, no matter what he did, he had no legal justification to use deadly force.

            He not only did not request backup, he never even bothered to inform dispatch about the shooting.

            Dispatch found out from the media.

            Sounds like he knew he was in deep you-know-what and he wanted to get a story together before calling it in.

            Actions consistent with guilty knowledge and inconsistent with innocence.

          • crustyolemothman says:


            “Dispatch found out from the media.”

            Again, that is simply a rumor at this point, much as the misinformation about the initial report as to the officers name was.
            Correct me if I am wrong, was not the second officer on the scene in less than a minute after the time that the shooting is alleged to have occurred?
            Once again, we are dealing with assumptions that while quite feasible have not yet been confirmed as true. We actually don’t know the distance from the gun to the victim, and probably won’t until that information is released by an agency that can be trusted (if such an agency exists?) along with the rest of the investigative data that has been collected. I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but we seem to be hung up on the 35 foot (or is it 33?) shooting distance with out having knowledge that it is the actual distance yet, we can assume all we want, but would our assumptions stand up in a court of law? I realize we are dealing with a court of public opinion at this point in time, and the proof requirements are not strict and assumptions are the rule, but unfortunately as you are well aware of, many times what we think we know is not true. Have you considered that the officer that did the shooting was not trying to “get a story together” but was instead in a state of shock at what happened?

          • No, it’s not a rumor. I have listened to the dispatch tape.

          • Have you considered that the officer that did the shooting was not trying to “get a story together” but was instead in a state of shock at what happened?

            Is that a serious question?

            I don’t mean to suggest that you shouldn’t ask questions. You should.

            That way we get to consider all possibilities in formulating our theories.

          • crustyolemothman says:

            Professor, Yes that was indeed a serious question! Do we know what his mental condition was immediately after the shooting? Are we to automatically assume he was formulating a story to explain his actions? I asked before and I will again, if you were his lawyer would you not want to try the case on facts instead of assumptions? Again, I was not there and I don’t know what happened other than Michael Brown was shot and killed (or murdered as some have said) by a police officer. I have heard the same stories that most of the people here have, but instead of simply assuming that they were true, I have chosen to wait for facts to surface. I have asked questions that are an attempt to encourage people to actually question what happened and not to simply assume because we were told a version that suited our opinions it was true… Perhaps since I have offended so many people by questioning their assumptions that it would be better if I now fade into the sunset and simply wait for the truth to come out.. With that said I think that it would be a good time for me to close for the night. Thank you for your patience and hopefully some on here will actually start questioning all sides of the story instead of just one side, for the truth probably lies somewhere in between. Have a wonderful evening..

          • Good night.

            See you tomorrow.

            Same bat time.

            Same bat station.

        • Malisha says:

          Nobody called for a lynching. Characterizing it as “calling for a lynching” is problematic. REAL investigation rather than comfortable cover-up? Yes, we call for that. HONEST answers rather than smearing the dead man? Yes we call for that. Respecting the First Amendment rights of citizens peaceably to gather and petition their government for redress of wrongs? Yes, we call for that. Tear gas? Did not call for that. Shooting into a crowd because they were “encroaching” or because someone was “intending” to do something violent? Did not call for that. Hostility from officers who are supposed to protect and serve? We did NOT call for that.

          Nobody called for a lynching.

          • crustyolemothman says:


            ” there are post after post that are all but calling for a public lynching of the police officer!”

            Those were my words… Perhaps much as you failed to understand the context of my words, I have misunderstood the calling of arrest and conviction of the police officer by some people. One thing about this case that seems to be happening is when one does not agree with the common opinions and suggest that more evidence is necessary to reach a fair conclusion, it seems as if you suddenly are swimming in a shark tank full of hungry sharks… It would be much simpler to sit back and allow people to pass half truths and assumptions around as fact then to post a dissenting opinion. So far I have been called a liar and for all practical purposes stupid for not being in agreement, but that seems to be the typical response by some who do not like to be questioned.
            I fully support the call for real investigations to take place, I fully support the right of the people to assemble peacefully to protest. I even posted the order of emergency from Gov. Nixon, which stated the right of the citizens was to assemble to peacefully demonstrate. I have yet to support the police actions that have infringed upon the rights of the citizens to assemble! My entire point of posting is to attempt to get people to wait for facts and not to assume without full knowledge of the facts…

          • I understand what you are attempting to do and support it, but equating lynching to hypothesizing about what happened and requesting the officer be charged and accorded due process of law is a false equivalency that is offensive.

            It strikes a chord in much the same way that false equivalencies about the Holocaust do.

          • Malisha says:

            Crusty, was Fogen lynched?
            We called for him to be arrested and charged.
            It turned out that there was a prima facie case for him to be charged and tried.
            AND THEN there was a context for the development of more evidence.
            Among the evidence: Trayvon Martin had MMA interest; Fogen had MMA training but was weak and incompetent; Fogen’s uncle could recognize screams because of Vietnam; experts couldn’t recognize screams because they were not long enough.

            Etc. No lynching. Just “law.” Hey, gimme somma THAT.

        • J4TMinATL says:

          You’re misreading my comment. I’m on no bandwagon. I’ve said time again we have to wait until there is more information. If this goes to trial, the question is was the officer justified in deadly force. That is the question.

          I also commented above in another post about fleeing suspect law.

          Officer’s can use deadly force of someone fleeing if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. I suspect that the officer will claim that Mike advanced towards him after warning him to stop and he shot until dead. I’m not saying that’s what happened but just what police and the officer will say.

  54. J4TMinATL says:

    I said above to TF:

    I just think if there were shots to back and front it matches all eyewitness accounts and would be the slam dunk as any threat officer claims would be removed and Michael could be apprehended at that point; therefore, making deadly force less reasonable.

    They are using the reported injuries to officer’s face to IMO set up probable cause to justify shooting someone who was running away. Officer’s can use deadly force of someone fleeing if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. I suspect that the officer will claim that Mike advanced towards him after warning him to stop and he shot until dead. I’m not saying that’s what happened but just what police and the officer will say.

    Officer telling two black teens to get the f out of the street is ridiculous. Clear racial profiling. None of this (telling them to get out of road in their own neighborhood to killing to everything that has happened after) should have ever happened.

  55. girlp says:

    There are so many problems with this shooting, I believe Michael Brown was attempting to surrender. I also read that the officer left the scene -what was that about.

    • J4TMinATL says:


      He stayed around, talked to another officer and was pacing at the scene. Tape had been put up and officer was there. Piaget Crenshaw released her cellphone video of scene. She said her phone was confiscated and she received it back on Tuesday.

      • girlp says:

        Confiscating the phones bothers me as well, I get the feeling that they intend to delete anything that shows the police officer breaking policy or the law.

        • Malisha says:

          It would seem to me that confiscating a witness’s cell phone is deprivation of property without due process of laws. Innt?

          • J4TMinATL says:

            She may have willfully handed it over.

          • Malisha says:

            If she willingly handed it over, why would it be referred to as “confiscated”?

          • J4TMinATL says:

            Media. I think when asked by interviewer, interviewer used the term. I’d have to rewatch. I cannot remember. .

            She could have felt pressured to hand over phone because she told police she witnessed aftermath and had video.

  56. bettykath says:

    From the Center for Constitutional Rights

    Update from CCR staff on the ground in Ferguson: Last night, several hundred peaceful protesters in Ferguson—including families with young children, elders, and people in wheelchairs—were tear-gassed without warning three hours before the 12 am curfew. The tear-gassing occurred during a community march down Florissant Ave., a main street where protesters have been gathering on a daily basis since Michael Brown was killed. As protesters neared the cordoned off end of the street, police indiscriminately and without warning fired tear gas and smoke bombs upon the protesters. Many people quickly turned back, running to escape the tear gas. However, the police advanced down the streets so quickly that hundreds of people, including CCR staff, were caught in the tear-gas. We were given no warning, and even running from the gas, it was impossible to escape the falling canisters. Areas that were considered safe, such as the press area, were hit repeatedly. Soon after, we attempted to deliver supplies like milk, water, and antacid for the victims who had been tear-gassed. As we attempted to do so, tear gas was being fired all around us, without warning, including into an intersection where people were crossing. The town of Ferguson is under siege. Huge areas of the city have been made inaccessible—and inescapable, and the community has absolutely no place to safely assemble.

    • Annie Cabani says:

      Holy cow. SMH.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Today the police are shooing protestors around – they have to stay in motion and are told to move on if they gather. I did see a livestream with a prayer circle that didn’t seem to be close to police and those people stood in one place for a quite awhile.

  57. Malisha says:

    I want to hear the videocam from inside the patrol car.

    • bettykath says:

      There isn’t one! Can you believe it? They have all kinds of SWAT armaments but the dashcams aren’t installed!!

    • Michelleo says:

      Ha! You know that has been destroyed or scrubbed, Malisha! Or for some reason, it was not in operation at the time…….

  58. Annie Cabani says:

    Has anyone heard anything in any gunshot wound discussions about the very first shot – the one that was apparently fired when the cop was still inside the car? (Dorian Johnson told about it and I think he said he saw Mike Brown bleeding from it before they both ran away from the police car.)

    I would have thought that the very first shot wound would have indications of close range. But I understood Dr. Baden and his partner as saying that all the wounds looked like the shots were more than a couple of feet away – with the caveat that examination of Brown’s clothing could possibly reveal otherwise.

    Any thoughts or insights about which wound might have been incurred at or in the police car? My guess is that it would be one of the arm wounds (that’s what Dorian Johnson described, IIRC).

    I guess I was expecting that the autopsy would be able to distinguish that initial wound from the later wounds, but I didn’t hear anything in that regard during the news conference. Maybe I missed it?


    • Malisha says:

      I thought there was a tussle at the car but no blood.

      • bettykath says:

        I’ve read nothing that says anything about that shot except there was one.

      • Annie Cabani says:

        You might be right. I just seem to recall Dorian Johnson saying that he saw Mike Brown bleeding before they both ran. But my memory does fail me “on occasion.” 😉

    • bettykath says:

      They offered no information as to sequence except the two to the head were last. One of the them was the fatal shot, the other was at the same trajectory, indicating closeness of the time of shot. There is no information that would indicate the order of the other shots.

    • bettykath says:

      I’m inclined to believe that the shot from behind is one of those on his arm and that’s what made Michael decide to stop running.

    • chris1ny says:

      In the video I just watched of Johnson he says that Michael was shot at the car and he was bleeding but he didn’t say where he was bleeding from.

      • J4TMinATL says:

        It’s not in dispute that shot or shots were fired at or from the officer’s SUV.

        Do you have link of which video of Dorian. There are several. He did several interviews. Been consistent.

      • Annie Cabani says:

        Thanks, Chris. I was just about to track it down, but now I don’t need to. That detail/distinction is bugging me for some reason.

        Now I’m wondering if he could have been shot in the CHEST at the police car? Thus, the residue could have been filtered by his t-shirt, as the pathologists said….

      • chris1ny says:

        I just watched another video and Johnson says mike was shot at the car in the chest or upper region cause he saw blood splatter on his right side.

        • Annie Cabani says:

          Well, thank you again, Chris! You are full of answers to my questions today.

        • J4TMinATL says:

          No one is disputing the shot. I’m not sure what the question is.

        • Kenyatta Coleman aka YQ says:

          That’s a good question, how many times was he shot? One guy says 10, (4 while he was running, 4 as he surrender and 2 killshots) the autopsy showed six, close range inconclusive. Johnson saw him get hit before he ran.

      • Mike says:

        Yes he did he said he saw blood comming down his right arm

    • J4TMinATL says:

      Until reconstruction and more info we don’t know. There was shot (s) fired from or near police SUV.

    • Nef05 says:

      I believe it’s the graze (laceration) wound in the arm above the elbow. If, as Tiffany Mitchell stated, both of his hands were on the outside of the truck, pushing against it to get free of the cop’s hold, when the gun went off, it is the highest wound on his arm, above the bottom of the car window that is not a reentry wound.

  59. Bill Taylor says:

    CNN just read a statement from a friend that claimed to know the officers story and it again clearly says brown got away and was 35 feet from the police car when he stopped and turned, then taunted the officer saying you wont shoot me, and THEN brown ran full speed at the officer who then started shooting and brown kept on running until he was stopped…….FACT the body was found exactly where they claim he started his bumrush of the officer…….the physical evidence shows that story to be pure BS!

    • Malisha says:

      Oh it went like this: The officer shouted, “I am afraid for my life,” when suddenly from 35 feet, Brown yelled, “You better be because you won’t shoot me and I’m gonna run in place until you do” and commenced running in place until the officer did.

      So there.

    • Malisha says:

      More likely Brown turned, from 35 feet away, and shouted: “Don’t shoot me.”

      Like Eric Garner, “I can’t breathe.”

    • MKX says:

      That story is definitely pure BS.

      Brown was in a close combat struggle with the officer in the car wherein he has a chance to get the gun and decides to flee to an area with no cover, think happy thoughts {sarcasm}, and charge back over open ground at the officer who now has no worry about the gun being taken or deflected.

      Quite similar in stupidity to Trayvon running away and then deciding to leap out from the cover of a two foot high shrub and kill Zimmerman with his MMA fists of steel that leave no marks.

    • girlp says:

      This may be coming from the conservative treehouse at least according to the daily guardian UK which I understand to be a tabloid . of course it could be anyone from a close friend to an officer.

    • Trisha0620 says:

      Well that information came from talking with the Girl friend on Facebook,

  60. Nef05 says:

    And so it begins…. Not one of the major outlets is accurately reporting the findings. Additionally, to the error by the AP reporter noted above, CNN is reporting that “all shots came from the front” with no mention of ambivalence on the forearm wound. I don’t even want to turn on FOX to see what they have to say.

    The cop apologists have seized on all reporting to cast doubt on ALL the witnesses, mostly Dorian’s story, by saying “thought they all said he was “shot in the back”‘.

    While we know that “shot in the back” could have been “shot from behind” or even that the witnesses may have assumed that MB was shot in the back from the way his body jerked; the cop apologists, are grabbing this to reframe the narrative (as they always do) that “none” of the witnesses are credible, because MB did not sustain a wound in his back or even from the back – because none of the major networks are reporting it. I fear this will be used as a basis for a no bill by a grand jury, since I have no confidence that the prosecutor will bother to explain the difference.

    I greatly fear the only justice Mike Brown may ever receive will have to come from the feds. And, since the people of Ferguson are fully aware of the nuance between “shot in the back” and “shot from the back” – I fear they may destroy their town in their righteous fury, if the officer is not arrested, charged and taken to trial. I am greatly disheartened already.

    • Malisha says:

      There should be new Miranda warnings, to be read to witnesses:

      You have the right to remain silent;
      anything you say may be used against you,
      against the victim, or against anyone seeking justice;
      you do not have the right to an attorney;
      if you say anything tending to make the cover-up more difficult
      you may be singled out for victimization, marginalization, arrest, railroading or general loss of constitutional rights across the board.

      Now, is there anything you’d like to tell us about the evil person who had to be killed by the great defenders of the American Way?

    • Disappointed says:

      IMO and I am no doctor but I would think the shot to the brow which basically took out his eye would cause him to bend forward. Then that would explain shot to top of head. Michael would have to be super human to lose an eye have four shots to 1 arm and still be trying to go after the officer.

      • I disagree.

        Because of the downward trajectory of the shot, which emerged from the jaw, his head had to be in substantially the same position as it was when he was struck by the fatal shot to the crown of head.

        The trajectories of both shots are similar.

    • J4TMinATL says:


      When the autopsy was revealed late last night there was no bright red marking on his arm because it’s not a gunshot wound. Baden held press conference and his Ass’t ME brought it up. All gunshot entrance and exit wounds were in front. That laceration wound is inconclusive.

      Regarding eyewitness accounts in any situation – they are found to vary and be the least reliable especially when identifying someone. Dorian witnessed his good friend being shot right in front of him in his own neighborhood. That is traumatic. I can’t imagine what he’s going through. This wasn’t a 5 min event. It was seconds and Dorian had to run to save his life.

      It just means he was not shot in the back while running. It doesn’t mean that the officer didn’t fire his weapon while Mike was running. No bullets fired entered his back. It doesn’t make Dorian or any eyewitness a liar. It just means he was facing officer when bullets entered.

      There are many unanswered questions. But don’t give up yet.

      • Nef05 says:

        I’m not going to give up, and thanks for the encouragement. I understand what you’re saying about the “back” but, I disagree. The wound on the forearm is shown palm forward. The ME was very specific in that they do it that way for anatomical reasons. You do not walk or run with your palms forward. Your palms and your forearms face behind you, which was why the ME and his asst stated they couldn’t be sure if it was inflicted from behind, or with his hands up. It is not a laceration wound. The forearm wound is an entry wound. The laceration is above the elbow.

        I’m not sure if in any one specific interview any of the witnesses said MB was shot “in the back”. The only interviews I saw indicated he was shot “from the back” or “from behind” – but all agreed his body “jerked” when he was hit and it was then that he turned to surrender.

        What bothers me is the right wing is willfully not seeing the difference. While they are mostly using it to discredit D. Johnson, they are extending the literal “in the back” meaning to attempt to discredit all the witnesses, despite them never having said it. That is what bothers me. It is the attempted loss of credibility based on something they never said to begin with. They said he was shot from behind while he was running, his body jerked and he turned to surrender. There is a wound on the autopsy that fits that description, but because it’s on his arm, and not his back – suddenly it doesn’t count? That kind of thinking they use to frame the narrative, to discount any credible info that doesn’t support the narrative that the white cop was justified in gunning down an unarmed black kid, drives me nuts!

        • You are correct. The absence of an entry wound in MB’s back does not disprove that MB was shot from behind.

          The professor said the wound to the forearm could have come from behind causing MB to jerk his arm up, as described by Dorian Johnson.

          He illustrated the point by placing the red mark on the forearm of the other figure showing the back side of a male person.

          He also said that, because of the human ability to rotate the lower arm, the shot also could have come from the front.

          It also could have happened when MB raised his hands to surrender. The wound above the right nipple could be a reentry wound from that shot to the forearm.

          • MKX says:

            The lack of a back entry would also does not mean that shots were not fired at Brown as he tried to flee. See my other comment about “flinching” due to a near miss.

    • MKX says:

      The witness saw Brown “flinch” in response to a shot and then turn around and surrender. So the “flinch” could have been a shot as Brown was fleeing that missed close. And anybody in the military who had live rounds fired at them will tell you that a close miss cause a primal reaction. And the rest of the testimony states that the surrendering Brown with hands up was brought down in a hail of fire.

      So I see the autopsy as making the witness very credible.

      It is about 10 orders of magnitude more credible than an unarmed Brown charging into a hail of gun fire.

      • Nef05 says:

        Absolutely! That makes perfect sense, and as you state it is exponentially more sensible than an unarmed Brown charging an officer with a drawn gun who had already shot at him, multiple times. That they claim he did it with head down, as many others have pointed out is also unreasonable.

        They are so intent on dehumanizing Mike Brown, they literally attribute the posture of a charging bull to him, rather than human behavior. I dislike people who think that way more than I could ever adequately describe.

  61. At the end, Ben Crump said Mike Brown was ‘kneeling or bending forward” when he sustained the fatal shot to the crown of his head.

    Dr. Baden said the trajectory of the wound was downward with a slight deviation forward and to the right.

    He also said this wound would have caused an instantaneous loss of consciousness and death.

    All of the other wounds were treatable.

    Other findings:

    MB was shot “at least 6 times.”

    The ME removed three bullets from the body.

    The wound to MB’s right forearm just below the elbow is a laceration that is on the inside of the arm and visible from the front and back. He could have been shot from behind or from in front or his arm could have been raised in a defensive position in front of his body.

    The wound to the palm of his right hand is a laceration, not an entry wound.

    The wound above the right nipple is most likely a re-entry wound.

    The wound in the collar bone area of his upper chest is a re-entry wound.

    The bullet to his right eye entered just above the right eye and exited the right jaw.

    • Bill Taylor says:

      which raises the point, each shot needs to be justified, claiming the officer was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm AFTER he had pumped so many shots into his victim, is rather silly… that time brown already had been shot in the head and had his eye destroyed, he was NOT a threat on any level at the moment the fatal shot was fired.

    • Nef05 says:

      My apologies, I don’t mean to be rude, but that’s not quite accurate. There are four wounds on the arm. The laceration (graze) wound is #2 and is above the elbow. I suspect this is the wound that Dorian Johnson is referencing when he states that MB was hit with the bullet from inside the truck, before they ever ran.

      The forearm wound #3, that may have been inflicted from behind or while his hands were up is an entry wound. It is marked on the report both front and back, which was why I called it a through and through. I was mistaken. It appears they also marked it from the back because you could see the entry from both positions. Hands are shown as palms forward on the autopsy sheet, but naturally they face back, as do the forearms. Seems it caught him on the outside of the forearm, but enough of the forearm to be full entry.

      The upper bicep (re)entry wound #1, that is on line with the right nipple, is (I suspect) a result of putting his hands up and is a (re)entry of the same bullet that gives him the deep graze on the fatty pad under the right thumb #4. If you bend your elbows as you are raising your hands (not arms straight up) it puts that fatty pad right in line with the bicep’s (re)entry wound.

  62. chris1ny says:

    I’ve been having trouble commenting on blogs something about my WP acct. let’s see if this goes through. I’ve been on vacation, and am aware of what’s been going on in Furgeson, but just started getting real familiar with the shooting. I’m having a hard time with Johnson’s story. Granted I haven’t watch or read every interview he has given, but I read this: About 20 minutes before the shooting, Johnson said he saw Brown walking down the street and decided to catch up with him. The two walked and talked. That’s when Johnson says they saw the police car rolling up to them.

    Isn’t it Johnson in the convenience store with Michael Brown? It looks like him.

    And if Michael Brown was over 6ft tall and weighing 250+ Lbs how did the officer reach out through the window of his car and get a hold of Michaels neck and keep a hold of it with one arm pulling him into the vehicles window? This isn’t making logical sense to me.

    I am very fond of all commentators here and hope that none of you get upset with me having trouble with this. Remember, I am not as informed as everybody yet and will hopefully be there soon.

    • chris1ny says:

      Well, in trying to get on WP I have created a new acct and my name is changed to chris1ny. It’s close to my other username though. I used to be ChrisNY~Laurie. Don’t know if anybody remembers me since it’s been a while.

      • Yes, I remember. Welcome back.

        Incidentally, I also have been having problems signing on to word press and had to change my password.

        • chris1ny says:

          It wouldn’t even let me change my password. It was like my old username and email didn’t exist anymore. At least my new one works.

          • Two sides to a story says:

            WordPress made me sign in with my password each time I commented for about two months. Then suddenly stopped recently.

          • I have been having trouble signing in too. For example, I could not edit my article today without being diverted to a weird site that demanded I sign in again. I refused to do it because I thought someone might be attempting to steal my password.

            Crane and I are concerned about this problem, so we’re going to check with wordpress and ask them to fix it.

          • Two sides to a story says:

            I was concerned about that too, and kept changing my password each time I posted. The making me sign in stopped soon after after I made a long, complex password.

            David Piercy comes to mind, for some reason, but could be anyone, of course. Or some glitch in WordPress.

            By the way, DP is now posting as @P4R4L3G4L on Twitter, but mercifully closed his page to all but his followers, but you can see his tweets retweeted from time to time with other racists.

    • J4TMinATL says:

      Officer was in a truck aka SUV.

      Re-watch video of Dorian’s testimony.

      • chris1ny says:

        I did re watch the one where Johnson is outside giving his side of events and he says truck once but all other times says car. That’s why I assumed it was a police car.

        • J4TMinATL says:

          It was definitely an SUV. I was wondering same thing but had to keep reminding myself it was police SUV. It was a marked police vehicle.

    • bettykath says:

      Chris, There is no penalty for asking questions. They help sort things out.

    • girlp says:

      It’s been reported on some blogs that the theft happened 2 months earlier I cannot verify if this is true or not the date is always covered by a label. However Dorian Johnson say’s they took the cigars and that Michael Brown was with him.

  63. The Houston Chrinicle is reporting,

    Forensic pathologist Shawn Parcells, who assisted former New York City chief medical examiner Dr. Michael Baden during the autopsy, said a bullet graze wound on Brown’s right arm could have occurred in several ways. The teen may have had his back to the shooter, or he could have been facing the shooter with his hands above his head or in a defensive position across his face or chest, Parcells said.

    “But we don’t know,” he added.

    Witnesses have said Brown had his hands raised above his head when he was repeatedly shot in a street.

    Baden said one of the bullets entered the top of Brown’s skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when he suffered that fatal injury. The pathologists said Brown, who also was shot four times in the right arm, could have survived the other bullet wounds.

    • Nef05 says:

      Their reporting is inaccurate, Prof. They are probably reporting the same AP report that our local Fox affiliate here in Detroit is reporting from. The report here says the same.

      Nevertheless, the video of the press conference is clear. It is the forearm wound, not the graze, that the professor indicated could have come from the front or back. The graze wound is above the elbow.

      Start at app. 17mins for beginning of autopsy specific info.

  64. Skeptical says:

    How does a bullet to the top of the head at a 90 degree angle come forward toward the face if the shooter is in front of the victim? The only way that is possible I would think would be if the shooter was overtop the victim.

    • No, that possibility is excluded because Brown and the officer were not in close proximity when the shot was fired, due to the absence of gunshot residue around the wound (i.e., stippling).

      Since that shot would have immediately dropped him to the ground, he must have been within inches of where his body was found when he was shot. That location was 33 to 35 feet from the officer’s vehicle and there is no evidence that he pursued Brown before firing the shot. Therefore, they were separated by approximately that distance.

      Considered together with the gunshot to his right eye that also had a downward trajectory exiting his jaw and entering his chest at the collar bone, Brown must have had his head down.

      • FWIW, in my mind’s eye, I see Brown looking down and dropping to his knees with his left arm down, possibly touching the ground for stability, and his right arm extended toward the officer with the palm open when he gets hit by three shots in close succession.

        • MKX says:

          IMO, this autopsy goes along with the testimony of the eye witness.

          The eye witness stated that he saw Brown flinch and turn around to give up with his hands raised. He interpreted to flinch the be the result of getting hit by a shot. My opinion is that the flinch was a response to a shot that missed but was close. At that point, Brown probably thought that turning around and surrendering was his only hope to stay alive – which it sadly was not.

          The head angle of the head wound could have been the result of Brown either sagging or ducking in response the hail of fire that was impacting his arms.

          My first read on this is that the officer got hit in the scuffle and let his anger get revenge on Brown.

          In a just world, the officer should do time.

          However, this one will go down like the Zimmerman trial, IMO.

          Just back from vacation and bringing myself up to speed on this tragic event.

  65. Bill Taylor says:

    one shot, the one to the forearm could ONLY have come from behind or from the front with browns arms raised……….

    • Malisha says:

      yeah, damn, when you shoot somebody there’s all this technical stuff that “they” can use to blame you for a death, so unfair…

  66. For me, the most important gunshot would was the one to his palm. To me, this means his hands were up, as at least two very credible witnesses said.

    • I meant to say the most important gunshot “wound”.

      I actually feels that the autopsy told us quite a bit. In addition to the palm shot, It also reinforces that he was shot from a distance.

    • I see gunshot 4 wounds to his right arm and one to his right upper chest, just above the nipple.

      If I’m correctly understanding Dr. Baden, he is saying all 5 wounds may have been caused by one shot, with the bullet lodging in the upper chest or back.

      He hasn’t seen an X-ray that would confirm the presence of a bullet there (i.e., the bullet would have been removed at the “official” autopsy).

      The entry wound for that shot would be in the palm of his right hand near the base of his thumb.

      That suggests he is leaning forward toward the officer with his right arm extended and his hand open in a defensive position, as if to ward off a shot.

      • towerflower says:

        The one above his nipple was a re-entry from another shot, they are marked by X’s on the diagram. I didn’t get the impression that one shot caused 5 wounds.

        • towerflower says:

          I stand corrected, The shot above the eye caused 5 separate wounds….entry above eye, exited and reentered eye area, came out by jaw and reentered near collar bone.

          One of the things the mother of MB wanted to know was he in pain, Dr. Baden said no, but to me he was in pain and suffering until that last shot.

      • chris1ny says:

        Could the bullet wound to his right palm near thumb be caused by trying to grab the gun in the car? Assuming there was indeed a gunshot while in the police car.

        • Bill Taylor says:

          no, because they found no residue on his hand, if he was shot while grabbing at the gun there would be residue……..the shots came from further away.

          • J4TMinATL says:

            Body had been cleaned before Baden got body. I wouldn’t expect him to find any gun residue even if there were any.

          • Cleaning does not eliminate gunshot residue because it consists of particles of unburned gunpowder that are embedded in the skin around the entry wound.

            Whenever it’s present, you know the muzzle of the gun must have been within 1 or 2 feet of the wound.

        • towerflower says:

          Dr. Baden said every shot was from 2′ or more. No GSR in or around wounds. He did say though that they did not have access to any evidence….xrays, clothing, etc., they only had the body of MB.

          • J4TMinATL says:


            I was talking about residue from suggestions that he grabbed gun and there would be residue. I wasn’t referring to the wounds.

        • Malisha says:

          None of his blood in the car.

          • chris1ny says:

            Yeah I was wondering what they found in the car. I haven’t read anything yet about it. It’s hard to find things I’m looking for on google because there are pages and pages. Thanks

      • J4TMinATL says:

        There were at least six entry wounds, possibly seven. It’s hard to know anything without clothing and without pictures taken by original med examiner. The body is cleaned and organs removed before Baden looked at body. He needs the clothes.

        This does tell us that officer kept shooting until he was dead. I’m not sure if the arm wound is strong enough to say he was shot while running away. I expected to see shots in his back from Dorian’s account. It would have been a slam dunk if there were. I think we all have many questions and they aren’t being answered.

        • towerflower says:

          J4TMinATL: in the news conference the professor that assisted Dr. Baden explains that the forearm wound could have come from behind which backs up witnesses. It also could have come from the front with his arms raised….which also backs up witnesses.

          • chris1ny says:

            What was the angle of the bullet wound on forearm? Could it have happened if he was running toward the officer? People do move their arms up and down while running. I know it could’ve happened from the two scenarios given, but I’m just thinking of all possibilities. Wish they would release more info.

          • J4TMinATL says:


            I watched the press conference and you’re right that it could be from side, front, back, arm across chest, etc. I do agree it does fit eyewitness accounts. I just felt that since he gave multiple scenarios on the arm shot that it is inconclusive. I just think if there were shots to back and front it matches all eyewitness accounts and would be the slam dunk as any threat officer claims would be removed and Michael could be apprehended at that point; therefore, making deadly force less reasonable.

            They are using the reported injuries to officer’s face to IMO set up probable cause to justify shooting someone who was running away. Officer’s can use deadly force of someone fleeing if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. I suspect that the officer will claim that Mike advanced towards him after warning him to stop and he shot until dead. I’m not saying that’s what happened but just what police and the officer will say.

            Officer telling two black teens to get the f out of the street is ridiculous. Clear racial profiling. None of this (telling them to get out of road in their own neighborhood to killing to everything that has happened after) should have ever happened.

    • Susan says:

      Really? For me, the most importants shots were to the front of his arms. That suggests his arms were down

      • The injury to his right forearm just below the elbow is a laceration caused by a bullet, but not an entry wound. It’s on the inside part of the arm closest to the body and visible from in front or behind. Depending on the position of the arm, the shot could have been fired from behind or in front or he may have had it raised in a defensive position to protect his face or body.

        • Annie Cabani says:

          I wonder if that laceration is the initial wound that happened at or near the police car, before Brown and Johnson ran away from the car….

        • Bill Taylor says:

          just saw the guy the testified in the fogen trial claim that wound could ONLY come from being shot from the front……to add to your point the placement of that wound would be on the BACK of the foreman in a normal standing position because the autopsy picture shows the arms in a position with the palms facing up, in a normal stance the palms face in and that part of the forearm is in the BACK and could not be hit from a frontal shot with the arms at the sides……… amazes me how these folks are considered “experts” when they lack basic common sense even………..the forearm wound could come from behind or the front as you described and the paid experts opinion is nonsense.

  67. Disappointed says:

    I just watched some of a press conference with Dr Baden. He said the wound on the lower arm could have been shot from behind or if arms were raised. I still have questions. The results have not answered much. Other than over kill.

    • Malisha says:

      I was thinking, about the gunshots to the arm, that likely his arms were raised in a posture of surrender so that he was shot in the arm because the cop was aiming at his head. It doesn’t seem that he could have been “charging forward” with his head down; you don’t lower your head (for what, a head butt at 33 feet?) when you charge; you need to see where you’re going.

        • Bill Taylor says:

          as an athlete we were trained to run with your head UP…….football players are taught to play with their heads UP…the SEE what you are hitting…….basketball run with the head UP…….in baseball the common saying is “heads UP”…….athletes run with their heads UP…..NOT down looking at the ground.

      • Nef05 says:

        I see what you’re saying and since there were multiple wounds I agree on most. I, however, respectfully disagree with that scenario, regarding the one through and through wound on the mid forearm. That is the specific one the Dr. said could not be determined whether entry was from front or back.

        The reason I disagree is because we have heard multiple witness accounts that indicated MB was hit once, from the back, while he was running, which caused his body to jerk – and after which he turned and surrendered.

        That wound, by virtue of the fact the Dr. cannot differentiate entry from exit is the only one that fits that scenario. I’m willing to conceed my interpretation is full of confirmation bias. That said, my belief in the witnesses veracity requires that one of those wounds entered from the back, though it is possible the deep graze wound, just above the through and through, might fit the scenario, as well. JMO

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: