Photo of Attorney General delivering apology to Darren Wilson
From The Washington Post:
Here is a key part of the conclusion of DOJ’s report:
As discussed above, Darren Wilson has stated his intent in shooting Michael Brown was in response to a perceived deadly threat. The only possible basis for prosecuting Wilson under section 242 would therefore be if the government could prove that his account is not true – i.e., that Brown never assaulted Wilson at the SUV, never attempted to gain control of Wilson’s gun, and thereafter clearly surrendered in a way that no reasonable officer could have failed to perceive. Given that Wilson’s account is corroborated by physical evidence and that his perception of a threat posed by Brown is corroborated by other eyewitnesses, to include aspects of the testimony of Witness 101, there is no credible evidence that Wilson willfully shot Brown as he was attempting to surrender or was otherwise not posing a threat. Even if Wilson was mistaken in his interpretation of Brown’s conduct, the fact that others interpreted that conduct the same way as Wilson precludes a determination that he acted with a bad purpose to disobey the law. (p. 86).
Audio Exclusive: Eric Holder’s Apology to Officer Wilson
Hopefully this report will put to rest some of the outlandish claims that have been made about Michael Brown’s death. For example, the report convincingly rebuts the “hands up, don’t shoot” account:
[T]here are no witnesses who could testify credibly that Wilson shot Brown while Brown was clearly attempting to surrender. The accounts of the witnesses who have claimed that Brown raised his hands above his head to surrender and said “I don’t have a gun,” or “okay, okay, okay” are inconsistent with the physical evidence or can be challenged in other material ways, and thus cannot be relied upon to form the foundation of a federal prosecution. Read the rest of this entry »
Redacted screenshot I took from the NY Times article (that we won’t link to):
UPDATE: In a related note…
Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting #Ferguson
— Christine Byers (@ChristineDByers) August 19, 2014
Retracted: The reporter who tweeted out that 12 witnesses confirmed the cops’ accounting of events has now retracted her tweet — and announced that she’s currently on a Family and Medical Leave Act departure from work.
On FMLA from paper. Earlier tweets did not meet standards for publication.
“We cannot allow this movement to be destroyed — we’re here for justice.”
From The Corner, Andrew Johnson reports: “Intentional provocateurs” and “outside infiltrators” are responsible for the eruptions of violence during the protests of peaceful marchers in Ferguson, Mo., according to Black Lawyers for Justice president Malik Shabazz.
“I don’t know who he’s planted by, but he’s not with us — he’s here to make this look bad, and we don’t want to make it look bad.”
[VIDEO] Game-Changer: Witness Conversation Unknowingly Captured at the Scene of the Ferguson ShootingPosted: August 17, 2014
IJReview reports: A previously unnoticed detail in a background conversion of a video taken minutes after the Ferguson shooting could change the course of the investigation into Mike Brown’s death.
The original video [below] poster appears sympathetic to the narrative that Mike Brown was shot unarmed with his hands in the air. But he unknowingly picks up conversation between a man who saw the altercation and another neighbor.
An approximate transcription of the background conversation, as related by the “Conservative Treehouse” blog:
@6:28/6:29 of video
#1 How’d he get from there to there?
#2 Because he ran, the police was still in the truck – cause he was like over the truck
#2 But him and the police was both in the truck, then he ran – the police got out and ran after him
#2 Then the next thing I know he doubled back toward him cus – the police had his gun drawn already on him –
#1. Oh, the police got his gun
#2 The police kept dumpin on him, and I’m thinking the police kept missing – he like – be like – but he kept coming toward him
#2 Police fired shots – the next thing I know – the police was missing
#1 The Police?
#2 The Police shot him
#2 The next thing I know … I’m thinking … the dude started running … (garbled something about “he took it from him”)
This is terribly important because if Mike Brown had been shot, and he advanced towards the cop instead of surrendering, it would substantiate the narrative that the policeman shot in self-defense due to the fact that he was being threatened with severe bodily harm. Read the rest of this entry »