It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What Michael Brown's autopsy tells us

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 11:18 AM
link   



What you can tell from a second or third autopsy is limited by autopsy artifact -- changes to the evidence caused by the performance of the first autopsy.

What Michael Brown's autopsy tells us

This is what I have been saying all the long. That the second and even third autopsy have limited value. I was asking about the chain of custody to the second and third autopsies; but this expert is telling us that the evidence can change due to the prior autopsy. This makes the second autopsy's report on the gunshot residue to be questionable. Unfortunately for all, the autopsy from the St. Louis County Medical Examiner should be the most accurate due to being performed first. The conclusion drawn from the later autopsies are questionable due to prior handllings and examinations of the body.
edit on 20-8-2014 by feldercarb because: needed comna




posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: feldercarb
Of course, the only way "multiple autopsies" should be done, is at the same time. Meaning having them all do the autopsy together, to make sure no funny business goes on.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: feldercarb

Michael Brown's autopsy tells me that there is only one effective way to stop a violent criminal.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: FalcoFan

Violent criminal? You do mean unarmed cigar thief don't you.




posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: ispyed

So someone that physically assaults a store clerk in the act of theft and then breaks a cop's face while resisting arrest is not a violent criminal?



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: FalcoFan

Serious question here, where can i find the story and proof that the officer had is orbital bone broken?



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: dukeofjive696969


You have obviously already seen it-since I never referenced the breaking of his orbital bone-only that the cop's face was broken.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: FalcoFan

No your the second poster ive seen post that the officer was hit, im not trying to pick a fight im finding it hard to get the info.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Sorry double post
edit on 20-8-2014 by dukeofjive696969 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: ispyed

Unarmed in hindsight, maybe. The officer would have been a complete idiot to assume that anyone was unarmed. I've seen knives hidden in tennis shoes. No gun is unloaded until you check it yourself, no suspect is unarmed until you check it yourself.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: dukeofjive696969

Let me suggest that for tough questions like that, you use your search engine. This was the second entry in my search:

www.thegatewaypundit.com... own



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: feldercarb

His autopsy tells me that if he wasn't a thug and behaving in a violent manner then there would not be an autopsy, let alone 3. Either way, I think the report tells the story of what the officer says happened. Not to mention his accomplice changing his tune as well.......



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 04:31 PM
link   
So he had bruises on his hands from said fracturing of the officers face ? Just asking cause a simple slap can mark the human skin.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join