Was the story about Mike Brown’s blood in Darren Wilson’s vehicle selectively leaked

October 20, 2014

Monday, October 20, 2014

Good morning:

Questions surfaced yesterday regarding the sources of the New York Times article on Saturday that has been used to portray Mike Brown as the aggressor in his encounter with Officer Darren Wilson of the Ferguson Police Department. I wrote about the article, Michael Brown’s blood found on officer’s gun, uniform and interior panel of driver’s door.

I suspect the tip about Mike Brown’s blood may be true, however, I think it is a good example of selective leaking motivated by a desire to portray Mike Brown as the aggressor and discredit Dorian Johnson’s statement about the shooting.

As I pointed out yesterday, even if this information is true, it is consistent with Dorian Johnson’s statement that Wilson grabbed Mike Brown’s arm through the open window, pulled him to pin him against the door, drew his gun and shot him in the arm during the ensuing struggle.

Not only is the forensic evidence consistent with Dorian Johnson’s statement, it does not address the fundamental issue in the case; namely, did Darren Wilson shoot and kill Mike Brown after he stopped fleeing, turned around and raised his hands in the universally understood gesture of surrender?

Nevertheless, that did not stop the right-wing-message-machine from claiming that the forensic evidence proves Mike Brown was the aggressor and exculpates Darren Wilson.

The sources of information referenced in the article are not identified, except for this statement in the first paragraph, “according to government officials briefed on the federal civil rights investigation into the matter.”

The second paragraph refers to “forensic tests conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

The eighth paragraph states that, “the account of Officer Wilson’s version of events did not come from the Ferguson Police Department or from officials whose activities are being investigated as part of the civil rights inquiry.”

Sometimes, you have to look at what is not said in order to discern the truth.

What was not said is whether the unnamed officials may be biased by virtue of relationship or continued employment by the “officials whose activities are being investigated as part of the civil rights inquiry.”

Given the absence of awareness that the forensic evidence is consistent with Dorian Johnson’s statement, I think we are seeing an example of selective leaking motivated by a desire to influence public opinion by portraying Darren Wilson as the victim.

I suspect the leak was planned and is a good example of what the grand jury is being told and how it will be manipulated to conclude that Darren Wilson should not be charged with a crime.

No indictment would be a crime because none of the eyewitness statements can be reasonably interpreted to support a conclusion that Officer Darren Wilson was in imminent danger of death or serious injury when he fired the fatal shots.

We continue to wait for justice in Ferguson and we are losing patience.

If you appreciate what we do, please consider making a donation.


Officer Darren Wilson should be charged with first degree murder for executing #MikeBrown

August 16, 2014

Saturday, August 16, 2014

Good afternoon:

Officer Darren Wilson should be charged with first degree murder for executing Mike Brown.

We need to focus our attention on what happened before the officer pulled out his gun in order to determine what, if any, crime he committed.

According to Brown’s friend, Dorian Johnson, the officer suddenly backed up positioning his vehicle so that it was parked perpendicular to the curb and directly in front of them blocking their way.

This was an unexpected and unnecessarily aggressive response by the officer to a jaywalking situation in which the two young men did not respond quickly enough when he ordered them to stop walking in the street. I am not aware of any evidence that there was any vehicular traffic on the street when he ordered them to the sidewalk.

This was the officer’s first mistake.

The vehicle was so close to the two young men that the officer struck both of them with his door when he opened it to get out. This was his second mistake.

Mike Brown reacted by pushing the door back and the upper part of the frame apparently hit the officer in the face as he was attempting to get out of the vehicle.

Brown’s reaction may have been nothing more than an instinctive defensive reaction with his hands to the door hitting his lower body. Doors are curved inward toward the top and the officer’s head would have come in contact with the frame as he turned his body and leaned forward to get out of his vehicle and stand up.

We do not know how much force Brown applied to the door, but I am not aware of any claim by police officials that the officer is claiming that Brown was attempting to prevent the officer from getting out of his vehicle. They do claim that the officer sustained a bump on his face, which is consistent with an instinctive defensive reaction by Brown to being struck by the door.

The officer reacted by pulling out his gun, which was a grossly inappropriate reaction to a situation he created by his sudden and unexpected use of his vehicle to stop the two young men.

If I were a black male in Mike Brown’s situation, given common knowledge in the black community that white cops regularly harass and kill young black males all over this country with little or no justification because they hate blacks and can get away it, I would have assumed the officer intended to kill me and I would have attempted to take the gun away from him.

Brown reached through the open window grabbing the officer’s arm and I believe that he acted reasonably in self-defense. That is, he reasonably believed he was in imminent danger of being killed or seriously injured.

We know that he was in imminent danger of being killed or seriously injured because the officer killed him.

Brown did not get control of the gun.

The gun went off wounding Brown during the struggle precipitated by the officer’s conduct. This shot may or may not have been intentional.

Brown and Dorian Johnson fled. The officer got out of his vehicle and shot at Brown hitting him in the back.

This shot was intentional, unnecessary and unjustifiable.

Brown stopped, raised his hands and surrendered.

The officer fired more shots, hitting Brown and killing him.

These shots were intentional, premeditated, unnecessary and unjustifiable.

The officer, whose unexpected and unreasonable use of his vehicle precipitated the incident, executed Brown and he should be charged with first degree murder.

Finally, as I wrote yesterday, the strong-arm robbery in the convenience store involving the Swisher Sweet cigarillos is not relevant because Wilson contacted the two young men for walking in the street and he did not suspect them of being involved in the robbery.

The racist right-wing-hate-machine fails to comprehend that, even if Wilson had known about the robbery, he would not have been justified in executing Brown.

Why?

Because Brown was unarmed and had surrendered.

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

Thank you,

Fred


%d bloggers like this: