he police officer who fatally shot Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., two months ago has told investigators that he was pinned in his vehicle and in fear for his life as he struggled over his gun with Mr. Brown, according to government officials briefed on the federal civil rights investigation into the matter.
The officer, Darren Wilson, has told the authorities that during the scuffle, Mr. Brown reached for the gun. It was fired twice in the car, according to forensics tests performed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The first bullet struck Mr. Brown in the arm; the second bullet missed.
The forensics tests showed Mr. Brown’s blood on the gun, as well as on the interior door panel and on Officer Wilson’s uniform. Officer Wilson told the authorities that Mr. Brown had punched and scratched him repeatedly, leaving swelling on his face and cuts on his neck.
This is what y'all are marching for?
Never, Mr. Johnson said, did Mr. Brown reach for the officer’s weapon.
This is not the first time Johnson was caught lying.
This is what y'all are marching for?
“What the police say is not to be taken as gospel,” Mr. Crump said, adding that Officer Wilson should be indicted by the grand jury and his case sent to trial. “He can say what he wants to say in front of a jury. They can listen to all the evidence and the people can have it transparent so they know that the system works for everybody.”
And Mr. Crump is absolutely correct. We don't have to take what the police say as gospel. We do however get to look at the evidence and see how it lines up with witness testimony. And the witness testimony is largely supportive of the police story. And given THAT, a grand jury is likely to not indict.
He added: “The officer’s going to say whatever he’s going to say to justify killing an unarmed kid. Right now, they have this secret proceeding where nobody knows what’s happening and nobody knows what’s going on. No matter what happened in the car, Michael Brown ran away from him.”
The "secret proceeding" is what we call a grand jury. As a lawyer he knows this. What he is trying to do is get the public to think that this is some kind of legal anomaly. That somehow the grand jury is illegitimate. Shame on him. I'd actually think he deserves some kind of censure from the bar for his implication.
Secondly, having just committed a felony assault on a peace officer. That officer is not required to "not shoot" just because the assailant decided to run. Crump knows this. Crump also knows that whether Brown ran away is also irrelevant because he wasn't hit while running away. He was hit while approaching the officer (who he had just assaulted and tried to kill).
But I know Crump is only doing his job. Like Wilson's lawyer will be doing his. And how, I hope, everyone else involved is doing. So I won't slight Crump for that. His liberties with the facts? They should be pointed out by journalists when they report.
