Autopsy results enough to charge officer, Brown family attorney says

Not sure where to post this.

Ferguson, Missouri (CNN) -- An independent autopsy into the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, provides "ample" evidence to support the arrest of the police officer who shot him, family attorney Daryl Parks said Monday at a news conference.

Parks was particularly concerned about gunshots that medical examiners hired by the family indicate came from behind and above.

"Why would he be shot in the very top of his head, a 6-foot-4 man?" Parks asked. "Makes no sense."

CNN

There is a video at the link. The attorney representing the Brown family claims that this leaked autopsy evidence is enough to charge the officer who killed Michael Brown.

He focused on 2 shots one on the top of his head that is the kill shot in a man who was 6 ft 4. Its apparent that he was not upright when he was shot there. He also claims the other shots support the claims that his arms were raised.

The attorney makes a good point that he claims that Brown's head was bowed in a effort to surrender with the officer shooting him last in the head and the bullet exiting near his right eye.

Of course the family attorney will say this. Unfortunately for him, the results will actually work against him and the witness testimony, as he was more than likely NOT running away as all the shots entered from the front. This contradicts the people saying he was running away when he was shot. The arm wounds probably came from when Brown was struggling for the officers weapon or during a struggle.

a reply to: thesmokingman
Autopsy found no evidence of a struggle..It gets interesting from here on.

a reply to: vonclod

Does not mean there was not a struggle. Brown was sure involved in a struggle with a local shop owner just before the shooting. This is on video, how did the autopsy not find evidence of that struggle? Point being, that not always does a struggle cause marks.

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: thesmokingman
Autopsy found no evidence of a struggle..It gets interesting from here on.

Not to mention no gun powder residue found on Brown.....

If he'd have been wrestling for the gun when it went off there would be gunpowder residue on him. Forensics do NOT lie.

originally posted by: HandyDandy

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: thesmokingman
Autopsy found no evidence of a struggle..It gets interesting from here on.

Not to mention no gun powder residue found on Brown.....

If he'd have been wrestling for the gun when it went off there would be gunpowder residue on him. Forensics do NOT lie.

I don't think that information has been released yet, we are debating the information that was leaked.

As far as how does a 6'4" man get shot on the top of the head? Well that is also consistent with a struggle. The suspect comes at the officer, his head is shoved down and the bullet is fired from a downward position. So how could him being shot on the top of the head have happened while he was "running away" or just had his arms in the air? Sorry, but this does not support the "family attorney" very well in my opinion.

originally posted by: thesmokingman
Of course the family attorney will say this. Unfortunately for him, the results will actually work against him and the witness testimony, as he was more than likely NOT running away as all the shots entered from the front. This contradicts the people saying he was running away when he was shot. The arm wounds probably came from when Brown was struggling for the officers weapon or during a struggle.

This is what the witnesses and protesters are claiming what happened

"Hands up don't shoot!"

originally posted by: HandyDandy

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: thesmokingman
Autopsy found no evidence of a struggle..It gets interesting from here on.

Not to mention no gun powder residue found on Brown.....

If he'd have been wrestling for the gun when it went off there would be gunpowder residue on him. Forensics do NOT lie.

That is not always true. He was definitely shot, there is no denying that, yet he has no gunpowder residue on him. I would expect him to have residue on his arms or hands if he were the one to pull the trigger.

a reply to: thesmokingman

I thought you may find this a relevant read,

scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu

Section 563-031 Use of Force...

And this as both sources are before the inflated news and media circus about the facts and laws surrounding what happened both of these sources are legal in nature and therefore unbiased. The first source is about the constitutionality of officers using lethal force and the second is the actual Missouri law regarding lethal force I am not agreeing or disagreeing with your stand point but thought you would find interesting and relevant information in these two documents. I am not going to list my opinion but rather share these reliable and credible facts/ information.


I Also wanted to add this here as it defines what the legal terms mean in context with MO statutes I have linked above chiefly this section as it applies to the officer and the suspect:

(3) "Forcible felony", any felony involving the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual, including but not limited to murder, robbery, burglary, arson, kidnapping, assault, and any forcible sexual offense;

Chapter 563 Defense of Justification

a reply to: thesmokingman
Personaly I think the shot to the top of the head occured as he was dropping from the other 4-5 shots..gravity
As for the struggle or not your right that there may not be any evidence of it if it happened..I did hear the officer had to go to the hospital but could be complete B.S.

If you were shot 5 times would you be attacking or surrendering?

If you were shot 5 times are you a threat?

The officer didn't report a officer involved shooting nor did he call a ambulance, but he did call in the need for back up.

Hmmm

And Brown was unarmed.

a reply to: vonclod

Could be, but still does not prove anything.

a reply to: thesmokingman
Im not convinced of anything at this point, other than there is a policing problem in America.

I'm glad this is finally getting national attention. (Police Murder).

I hope the officer is charged. It will lead to other police officers thinking twice before murdering again.

I'm also glad we're having a national discussion about the over militarization of our police forces. that is a good thing. Too bad there is no support on this from the right? Just like too bad there was no support about the overzealous tactics of the BLM from the left? why do we always have to be divided like this.

a reply to: amazing

So, you have already convicted this man without knowing ANY of what actually happened? One day, one of these "murderers" may be there to "murder" someone to protect you or your family. Not ALL cops need to be regulated and charged, just because there are a few bad ones out there. It is pretty unfair of you to convict this man without knowing the facts, but that is your right I guess.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
If you were shot 5 times would you be attacking or surrendering?

If you were shot 5 times are you a threat?

The officer didn't report a officer involved shooting nor did he call a ambulance, but he did call in the need for back up.

Hmmm

And Brown was unarmed.

Ever shot a semi-auto? You can pop off six in nothing flat.

originally posted by: HandyDandy

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: thesmokingman
Autopsy found no evidence of a struggle..It gets interesting from here on.

Not to mention no gun powder residue found on Brown.....

If he'd have been wrestling for the gun when it went off there would be gunpowder residue on him. Forensics do NOT lie.

Does that include residue on his clothes???
And if gun residue is found on his clothes,, what then?

originally posted by: thesmokingman
a reply to: amazing

So, you have already convicted this man without knowing ANY of what actually happened? One day, one of these "murderers" may be there to "murder" someone to protect you or your family. Not ALL cops need to be regulated and charged, just because there are a few bad ones out there. It is pretty unfair of you to convict this man without knowing the facts, but that is your right I guess.

No... it's far to often that these thugs in uniform kill, maim, torture, harass and violate our rights. Usually there is no justice. Paid leave of absence for a couple of weeks. I'm happy that there is finally some outrage and national media attention to this. There was no need to shoot him. this was Murder. The problem is that the legal process for officer involved shooings is so far in the balance and favor of the police that there can never be Justice until we change our system. if this makes one officer think twice before murdering one of us, then it's a good outcome.

originally posted by: thesmokingman
a reply to: vonclod

Does not mean there was not a struggle. Brown was sure involved in a struggle with a local shop owner just before the shooting. This is on video, how did the autopsy not find evidence of that struggle? Point being, that not always does a struggle cause marks.

yup but, if brown was trying for his gun inside the car, and he was that close, there should be some gun powder residue on brown, otherwise brown had walked away from the patrol car and the officer pulled out his gun and unloaded 6 shots.