Witness adds new perspective to Ferguson Shooting

originally posted by: Witness2008

Do you live in Ferguson, or near by somewhere?

As a matter of fact, I do at the moment. Why do you ask?

a reply to: xuenchen

According to most use of force policies the officer would be at fault if this was the only testimony. However we need to hear it all to make a decision.

you can use deadly force if you are preventing great bodily harm or deadly force....seems to me the officer had several choices by this testimony alone...he could have used a taser/pepper spray/baton...if he was losing the fight or extremely exhausted or had already tried these and lost then I would say it is ok to increase the level of force. Once again just off this testimony id put the officer at fault but...you know there is more out there...and the officer may have a reason why he chose to go deadly force that I haven't read yet.

There'll be no indictment in Ferguson for the Brown shooting, book it. The city will burn.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: xuenchen
How does being 20 feet away with his arms out to his side and staggering forward push you to say no indictment?

I'm no witness to the event, but think about this: If someone is brazen enough to "scuffle" with a police officer while he is in his patrol car, then advance toward the officer while he's telling you to stop, the officer could easily have felt his safety and/or life was in danger and had every right to pull the trigger of his service firearm.

And to top that off, if you "scuffle" with a police officer in his cruiser and advance toward him when he's telling you to stop (presumably while his firearm was pointing at you or at least having his hand on the weapon, ready to draw it), I'm doubting that his hands out to his side was a gesture of surrender. If I recall correctly, his friend or another witness said he was taunting the cop, asking if he was going to shoot him--hands out to his sides would be an accurate description of how most men taunt someone else while asking a provoking question.

Plus, advancing toward an officer from only 20 feet away only gives the officer 3-4 seconds before someone can reach running speed and be within striking distance of a person. LEOs, military, self-defense folks, etc. are not trained to wait and see if the (supposed) aggressor is going to stop to shake their hand--they are trained to react and subdue the aggressor.

So, yeah--given what this one witness says, there should be no charges filed. BUT, this is only one witness, so that testimony must be weighed accordingly when compared to others and to how consistent this individual's story has remained over time.

a reply to: UnBreakable

I call that Natural Selection. If a city full of ignorance decides to destroy itself, I'm not quite certain that is a tragedy to society. I do, however, feel for the level-headed people in that town being negatively affected by all of this. I was just in Missouri last weekend and had plans to stop by the Arch on my way home on Monday--that plan got cancelled because these idiots decided to march to St. Louis and have civil-disobedience sessions.

My point: I sure wish these folks would just relax, do some research into the case, and be more level-headed about things. What they are doing will not affect citizen-LEO relations in a positive way at all.

Yup the city will burn their own houses and businesses down and never recover. Happened here and it's been 12 years and the only change is less people and more empty lots. Rather peaceful anymore except the druggies and scrappers destroying anything left standing.

Every spring the bids go out to tear down more burnt out houses 50- 80 a year so it doesn't take long for a small town to die by cannibalism.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Agian, look up what staggering means, it does not mean that he was running at full speed or walking in a threatening manner.
And your entire position rest on what josie said happened who was the friend of the wife of the cop who was just regurgitating what she was told by the wife.
This witness calls it murder, maybe you didn't read the whole article.
Also this witness describes his hands being up bent at the elbows and palms facing out, not out to the side like you are describing as if in a taunting manner.

Let this case be a lesson. If you assult the police and they draw weapons then if you do not freeze you will be shot.

a reply to: deadeyedick

So you know the officer was assaulted how?
Nothing has been released besides a false report of him having an orbital fracture.
And does it not matter that your are moving cause you were just shot? Would you be able to stay completely still after getting shot possibly 3 times?

a reply to: Sremmos80

How do you know that the orbital fracture report was false. All I have heard is that someone claimed to work for the hospital where the X-Ray was taken saying that there was no fracture. Did the person who made this conclusion have the medical training to "read" an X-Ray? Please produce more information before labeling this fracture as false. Also, X-Rays are not that good at determining fractures. X-Rays will show gross or substantial fractures but may not show hairline or small fractures. You usually get an MRI or other scan which are more reliable.

Here is MY question to all you awesome ATS Members.

How many of you have ever been shot at? No really, have ANY of you ever had a round headed downrange AT you???


I have been shot at, a few times (once in Atlanta while waling across a bridge, got shot at as a car passed) My reaction to getting shot at, every single time, was to hit the ground as fast as I could and make as small a target as possible.


Maybe I'm not as brave as some folks but I LIKE my skin intact.

but then I had not just (allegedly) roughed up an Officer or pushed anyone before I was shot at.....

a reply to: deadeyedick

I suppose some folks need to have the facts spoon fed to them.

There is no proof that Brown assaulted the officer. The story of his injured jaw was proven a false one.

a reply to: Witness2008

I had not heard that his jaw had been hurt but his eye. Like I asked Sremmos80, could you provide a link to this evidence. Note, Like I said to Sremmos80, all I had heard was that someone at the hospital where the X-Ray was taken said there was no fracture. There was no information given that the person making that determination had the medical background to "read" an X-Ray. I have also stated that an X-Ray is not the definitive test for a fracture but an MRI or other scan. I have not heard anything about those test being conducted but I suspect that they have been conducted and we the public have yet to hear the results.

originally posted by: Witness2008
a reply to: deadeyedick



I suppose some folks need to have the facts spoon fed to them.



There is no proof that Brown assaulted the officer. The story of his injured jaw was proven a false one.

Facts are facts and do not change by way of opinion. There is very much proof that he assulted the officer and that is the fact that he is dead and never before has this officer been out shooting people that he comes into contact with.

a reply to: feldercarb

All the fake news about the fractured orbital was put to rest just days after the incident. Then the story was he had swelling in his face or jaw. Again, nonsense, as the witnesses that watched him mull around Browns dead body testified to reporters that they had seen no injuries on Wilsons face.

How about this...members that have proof of the injuries that are claimed Wilson had provide some proof.

a reply to: Witness2008

I disagree. The orbital fracture issue has not been resolved. No physician or trained medical personnel has yet to officially comment on Officer Browns eye socket. The only information that I have heard is that someone anonymously stated that the X-Ray did not show a fracture. Like I said, I have yet to hear that the person who determined that had the medical training to accurately "read" an X-Ray. Also, for a fracture you get additional testing in the form of an MRI or other more comprehensive test. I broke a bone in my elbow three months ago. I got an X-Ray taken immediately. Before a specialist would see me, the specialist required that I get an MRI first. The MRI is much more definitive.

Also, swelling depends on the person. It can take some time for swelling to occur. My father once cut his thumb. He showed it to me without blood a few hours later. You could see muscle groups and tendons. I had to tell him to get stitch. Still he did not bleed. A freak of nature but it did occur. Strangest thing I ever saw. My mother on the other hand could bleed at a moment's notice. She bopped her nose helping my father. Two weeks later I took her to get the gauze shoved up her nose removed. Guess what. She started bleeding again immediately. New gauze had to be reshoved up her nose and I had to take her back to remove the gauze after another two weeks. There is too much variation in human reaction to injury to go with just the initial report. Thus, this "nonsense" has not been clearly resolved. Need the full medical report that I don't believe the public will see until the end due to HIPPA laws.

a reply to: feldercarb

Provide information that it is true.
My point was that nothing official was released, including the false official report of him having a fracture. Not saying he didnt, just that it hasn't been proven he did

Dp

a reply to: deadeyedick

What undeniable proof is there that he was assaulted?

a reply to: Sremmos80

Brown got shot. Clearly by a cop that followed the rules. Brown was a known criminal.