Follow-Up on Ferguson Witness 40

In an American Thinker article Friday, “The Strange Case of Ferguson Witness 40,” I speculated that the diary entries of this witness might well be fraudulent as she seems to have pulled key details on the case from the Conservative Treehouse blog. It turns out I was right, both on the fraud and the source of her details. Kudos to the “treeper” who unearthed Witness 40’s grand jury testimony (begins about page 90). For whatever reason, the New York Times did not post it along with the diary entry.

The prosecutors grilled Witness 40 at length and forced her to concede that she pulled a detail I had cited -- Dorian Johnson’s dropped bracelet -- -from the Internet. Although she did not name the source, the Treehouse uniquely reported that detail.

The prosecutors thoroughly discredited Witness 40’s testimony. They left the grand jurors with the impression that the witness was never at the scene. As to her motive, I suggested yesterday the possibility of a left-wing agent provocateur. Using Occam’s Razor as a guide once more, I would suggest that a simpler explanation is that Witness 40 is mentally unstable, deeply so. Given the woeful state of media reporting on this subject, I would encourage readers to make up their own minds.

In an American Thinker article Friday, “The Strange Case of Ferguson Witness 40,” I speculated that the diary entries of this witness might well be fraudulent as she seems to have pulled key details on the case from the Conservative Treehouse blog. It turns out I was right, both on the fraud and the source of her details. Kudos to the “treeper” who unearthed Witness 40’s grand jury testimony (begins about page 90). For whatever reason, the New York Times did not post it along with the diary entry.

The prosecutors grilled Witness 40 at length and forced her to concede that she pulled a detail I had cited -- Dorian Johnson’s dropped bracelet -- -from the Internet. Although she did not name the source, the Treehouse uniquely reported that detail.

The prosecutors thoroughly discredited Witness 40’s testimony. They left the grand jurors with the impression that the witness was never at the scene. As to her motive, I suggested yesterday the possibility of a left-wing agent provocateur. Using Occam’s Razor as a guide once more, I would suggest that a simpler explanation is that Witness 40 is mentally unstable, deeply so. Given the woeful state of media reporting on this subject, I would encourage readers to make up their own minds.