Forensic evidence supports Officer Wilson's version of events in Michael Brown shooting

Not only does the evidence support the officer's version of events in the Michael Brown killing, it also places the idea that Brown had his hands up when he was shot in grave doubt.

Washington Post:

Some of the physical evidence — including blood spatter analysis, shell casings and ballistics tests — also supports Wilson’s account of the shooting, The Post’s sources said, which casts Brown as an aggressor who threatened the officer’s life. The sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are prohibited from publicly discussing the case.

The grand jury is expected to complete its deliberations next month over whether Wilson broke the law in confronting Brown, and the pending decision appears to be prompting the unofficial release of information about the case and what the jurors have been told.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch late Tuesday night published Brown’s official county autopsy report, an analysis of which also suggests that the 18-year-old may not have had his hands raised when he was fatally shot, as has been the contention of protesters who have demanded Wilson’s arrest.

Experts told the newspaper that Brown was first shot at close range and may have been reaching for Wilson’s weapon while the officer was still in his vehicle and Brown was standing at the driver’s side window. The autopsy found material “consistent with products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm” in a wound on Brown’s thumb, the autopsy says.

Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco who reviewed the report for the Post-Dispatch­, said it “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.”

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

Victor W. Weedn, chairman of the George Washington University Department of Forensic Sciences, said the autopsy report raises doubts about whether Brown’s hands were raised at the time of the shooting but is not conclusive.

“Somebody could have raised their hands way above their head and lowered their hands and then be shot,” Weedn said. “So an autopsy will never rule out that the hands were above the head. It can only say what happened at the time of the shooting. . . . With the graze to the right arm, it appears the arm was in a vertical position, suggesting that it was closer to down by his side, but it could have been higher.”

But the racialists who are stoking the outrage in Ferguson refuse to accept the scientific evidence:

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

“The family has not believed anything the police or this medical examiner has said,” Crump said. “They have their witnesses. We have seven witnesses that we know about that say the opposite.”

Those seven witnesses should be arrested and charged with lying to police and inciting a riot. Some of those witnesses said that Brown was shot in the back while running away. That's clearly a lie. Forensics can easily determine how far away Brown was when he was shot and there is zero evidence he fleeing the scene when shot.

The "Hands up don't shoot" meme has swept the protest world. It showed up in Hong Kong during protests there as well as in Thailand during the unrest in that country. It turns out to be as bogus and as useless as the "#Bring Back Our Gilrs" hashtag diplomacy that made liberals feel so good about themselves when 300 Nigerian girls were kidnapped by Boko Harum.

But narratives die hard and those who refuse to see the mountain of evidence that contradicts that narrative will go right along, stoking hatred, so that when the grand jury refuses to indict officer Wilson, they will feel themselves justified in rioting and looting.

 

Not only does the evidence support the officer's version of events in the Michael Brown killing, it also places the idea that Brown had his hands up when he was shot in grave doubt.

Washington Post:

Some of the physical evidence — including blood spatter analysis, shell casings and ballistics tests — also supports Wilson’s account of the shooting, The Post’s sources said, which casts Brown as an aggressor who threatened the officer’s life. The sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are prohibited from publicly discussing the case.

The grand jury is expected to complete its deliberations next month over whether Wilson broke the law in confronting Brown, and the pending decision appears to be prompting the unofficial release of information about the case and what the jurors have been told.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch late Tuesday night published Brown’s official county autopsy report, an analysis of which also suggests that the 18-year-old may not have had his hands raised when he was fatally shot, as has been the contention of protesters who have demanded Wilson’s arrest.

Experts told the newspaper that Brown was first shot at close range and may have been reaching for Wilson’s weapon while the officer was still in his vehicle and Brown was standing at the driver’s side window. The autopsy found material “consistent with products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm” in a wound on Brown’s thumb, the autopsy says.

Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco who reviewed the report for the Post-Dispatch­, said it “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.”

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

Victor W. Weedn, chairman of the George Washington University Department of Forensic Sciences, said the autopsy report raises doubts about whether Brown’s hands were raised at the time of the shooting but is not conclusive.

“Somebody could have raised their hands way above their head and lowered their hands and then be shot,” Weedn said. “So an autopsy will never rule out that the hands were above the head. It can only say what happened at the time of the shooting. . . . With the graze to the right arm, it appears the arm was in a vertical position, suggesting that it was closer to down by his side, but it could have been higher.”

But the racialists who are stoking the outrage in Ferguson refuse to accept the scientific evidence:

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

“The family has not believed anything the police or this medical examiner has said,” Crump said. “They have their witnesses. We have seven witnesses that we know about that say the opposite.”

Those seven witnesses should be arrested and charged with lying to police and inciting a riot. Some of those witnesses said that Brown was shot in the back while running away. That's clearly a lie. Forensics can easily determine how far away Brown was when he was shot and there is zero evidence he fleeing the scene when shot.

The "Hands up don't shoot" meme has swept the protest world. It showed up in Hong Kong during protests there as well as in Thailand during the unrest in that country. It turns out to be as bogus and as useless as the "#Bring Back Our Gilrs" hashtag diplomacy that made liberals feel so good about themselves when 300 Nigerian girls were kidnapped by Boko Harum.

But narratives die hard and those who refuse to see the mountain of evidence that contradicts that narrative will go right along, stoking hatred, so that when the grand jury refuses to indict officer Wilson, they will feel themselves justified in rioting and looting.