The media articles today are pretty nutty. Some say "autopsy supports Police's story" some say "autopsy supports witnesses." I read a headline that uses a quote from a radio station saying "Dorian Johnson admits Brown attacked, officer won't be charged" but doesn't say when or how he attacked, and it's unconfirmed so I don't know why they would print it. Same with that radio call in "witness" the other day which contradicts the Chief of Police's statements regarding the awareness of Wilson to the robbery. The store owner never even called the cops. Then I see this video. I think it's safe to say that SHHTF in the media frenzy.
The thing is, with the INCOMPLETE evidence that's been officially released so far, you really could draw a conclusion either way. About all we've gotten so far is witness testimony and incomplete autopsy data. There simply hasn't been enough evidence presented to the public to draw an educated conclusion. Certainly not enough to convict
anyone of murder. My
guess is that the incomplete release of information is intentional.
Most/all of the wounds, based on the data we have, could have occurred either if he was stationary or if he was running at Wilson.
Consider this: The guys that did the second autopsy said they thought the chest wound was possibly/likely a re-entry wound. Assuming that's correct, What did it hit first? What COULD it have hit first? Hold your right arm in front of your chest in a position that it could
possibly end up in if your arms were 'pumping' while running. You'll probably note that the approximate location of the wound on his forearm could
possibly line up with the approximate location of the chest wound. Now, the data that could either connect those two wounds or rule out that possibility is missing (at least from what we've been told so far). Was there an exit wound on his forearm? If there was (I find it unlikely, although not impossible, that a bullet would not pass through his forearm), what was the path, and could that path line up with the wound on his chest? What was the path of the bullet that entered his chest? Does that path line up with the path through his forearm? If those paths do all line up, is it a realistic possibility that his arm was in a position consistent with someone that was running? We don't have that info, so without it, it's pure speculation.
Assume for a second that the forearm wound DOES line up with the chest wound (among other details we don't have). Consider the reaction if these two guys that were called out by the family to prove that Brown was shot while standing still, with his hands up in surrender, came out with something to the effect of 'Based on the entry and exit wounds on Mr Brown's forearm, the wound lines up with the re-entry wound on his chest, indicating a high probability that his arm was in front of him in a motion consistent with someone that was running, and the wounds to his forearm and chest were from the same bullet. Furthermore, the abrasions on his face are consistent with someone hitting the ground while running, not someone that collapsed forward while stationary. In our professional opinion, Mr Brown was running in the direction of Officer Wilson when he was shot'. I imagine some would accept it, grieve and move on, while others, such as the troublemakers that are coming in from out of town, would likely rile up more rioting, looting and violence, saying there's no way that's correct.
