Image 01 Image 03

#Ferguson – Latest Developments Open Thread

#Ferguson – Latest Developments Open Thread

Events moving quickly, the truth lags behind.

Things have moved so fast in the shooting of Michael Brown and the subsequent riots, that it’s hard to keep pace.

Andrew likely will have a post later with some legal analysis, but for now I’m just going to post some links, and readers can update in the comments.

Does this make it more likely Brown was charging at or engaging the police officer at the time of the shooting? Autopsy Shows Michael Brown Was Struck at Least 6 Times:

Michael Brown, the unarmed black teenager who was killed by a police officer, sparking protests around the nation, was shot at least six times, including twice in the head, a preliminary private autopsy performed on Sunday found.

One of the bullets entered the top of Mr. Brown’s skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when it struck him and caused a fatal injury, according to Dr. Michael M. Baden, the former chief medical examiner for the City of New York, who flew to Missouri on Sunday at the family’s request to conduct the separate autopsy. It was likely the last of bullets to hit him, he said.

Mr. Brown, 18, was also shot four times in the right arm, he said, adding that all the bullets were fired into his front.

Chaos, violence in Ferguson; National Guard called in:

Another night of chaos and violence gave way to an uneasy quiet Monday as residents cleaned up from looting and vandalism and awaited the arrival of the National Guard.

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon ordered the Guard into Ferguson hours after police cited “pre-planned” acts of aggression by protesters. Sunday night and early Monday morning, protesters shot at police, threw Molotov cocktails at officers, looted businesses and carried out a “coordinated attempt” to block roads and overrun the police’s command center, Nixon’s office said in a statement.

Journalists should not be arrested or threatened for doing their job, but at least in some cases they seem to try to make themselves the issue and become part of the event. WaPo reports, Police in Ferguson arrest and threaten more journalists:

Overnight, several journalists reported being detained, threatened or otherwise prevented from covering the unfolding story. The arrest late Sunday night of three reporters — Robert Klemko of Sports Illustrated, Chicago-based Financial Times reporter Neil Munshi and Rob Crilly, a foreign correspondent for the Telegraph (and no stranger to war zones) — reportedly came as the journalists attempted to gather more information while police faced off with protesters.

Tweets via the WaPo article:

Apparently Brown had marijuana in his system, although the amounts are not known:

In addition, Brown had marijuana in his system when he was shot and killed by a police officer on Aug. 9 in Ferguson, according to this person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation….

In anticipation that Brown could be vilified by the results of the drug test, conducted as a routine part of the autopsy, protesters have consistently insisted that Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Brown, should be required to submit to one as well.

“What was in the system of that cop when he was pumping bullets into that boy’s body?” asked a protest leader, shouting into a megaphone, during a rally on Friday afternoon.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



I think that Capt. Johnson has disqualified himself from any further role in this matter, and should be reassigned immediately.

    clafoutis in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 11:08 am

    You can’t make this stuff up . . .

    ” . . . When this is over,” he told the crowd, “I’m going to go in my son’s room. My black son, who wears his pants sagging, who wears his hat cocked to the side, got tattoos on his arms, but that’s my baby.”

    Johnson added: “We all need to thank the Browns for Michael. Because Michael’s going to make it better for our sons to be better black men.” . . .”

      Ragspierre in reply to clafoutis. | August 18, 2014 at 11:37 am

      I also noted with disgust that he connected his MHP uniform with shame.

      He should, if he had any integrity, resign and refuse his pension.

        His overwhelming assumption of guilt of his fellow officer does irk me.

          Valerie in reply to JBourque. | August 18, 2014 at 2:00 pm

          C’mon, the optics for the local police have been, and are, awful. He is acknowledging that. I though his statement was very well done. This is someone who can calm the situation down so that the facts can come out.

          It could turn out that things become better by demonstrating that the dead man’s accomplice is a liar and slanderer, and the cop was rightly in fear of his life. Further, grown-ups of all types might wake up to the fact that we are all in this, together, and that the grievance mongers and the criminals they bring with them, aren’t solving our problems.

          Ragspierre in reply to JBourque. | August 18, 2014 at 2:50 pm


          Screw your “optics”. I’m disgusted with a lot of what people have written about cops. Simply disgusted. Monday morning quarterbacks are one thing, but second-guessing cops in a situation like this is outrageous.

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to JBourque. | August 18, 2014 at 5:05 pm

          Valerie, the bad “optics” for the police you whine about are manufactured, in part, by the person you are praising and others just like him. He’s no better than Holder or Sharpton. He’s just wearing a uniform. Do you think that’s just a coincidence?

          Bad optics, Valerie? You may as well be looking through a kaleidoscope.

          Valerie, Johnson is inflaming the situation with such remarks. He should be telling people to go home and let justice take its course.

Calypso Facto | August 18, 2014 at 10:47 am

Why did DOJ suppress the video and autopsy evidence until this was a full-blown riot? Some early truth interjected in the conversation might have helped diffuse the situation. Orchestrated racial “crisis” or just willful negligence?

    It seems strange to me, too. A little “openness and transparency” on the part of the State, from the start, would have been helpful. But now, they’ve left it to simmer so long that they have to call in the military? That’s just bad crisis management.

      Char Char Binks in reply to Amy in FL. | August 18, 2014 at 2:47 pm

      The rioters didn’t want openness and transparency, they wanted any exculpatory evidence suppressed, and they wanted to complain about a lack of transparency. They’re not even protesting the shooting, they’re protesting, and rioting, to hinder the investigation, and the US DOJ is helping them.

    Ragspierre in reply to Calypso Facto. | August 18, 2014 at 11:03 am

    I’ve heard that Justice lobbied against release of the store video.

    But where do you get the information you relate? Not attacking, just asking, since this was not my understanding.

      Calypso Facto in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 11:39 am

      NBC News: “The Department of Justice urged Ferguson police not to release surveillance video purporting to show Michael Brown robbing a store shortly before he was shot and killed by police…The Department of Justice, which is conducting its own investigation into Brown’s Aug. 9 death, has had a copy of the footage all along and never considered releasing it to the public”

      Obviously, they’ve also known since August 9 that he was shot exclusively from the front, yet the public is just finding that out yesterday and today after a week’s worth of hearing on the news about how he’d been shot in the back and a week’s worth of confrontation and destruction.

      Some protesters feel snookered: (via Breitbart) “”What upsets me is that it should have been all over the news,” said Tatinisha Wheeler, a protester who lives in St. Louis. She said she was confused why the police wouldn’t have immediately said Mr. Brown had been allegedly involved in a crime.”

        Ragspierre in reply to Calypso Facto. | August 18, 2014 at 11:55 am

        OK. So would it be more accurate to say the DOJ tried to suppress the store video?

        I have strong reservations about anybody making statements they are not equipped to make authoritatively. Like the police chief saying, “Well, I’ve seen the body and he was shot from the front”. Especially giving out partial information when an autopsy is still pending.

        But that’s me.

          Calypso Facto in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 12:13 pm

          An official state autopsy was performed within the first 24 hours. That type of coroner’s report is generally considered “authoritative”. DOJ has those results, so at this point you’re really just quibbling over whether not releasing information in their possession is “suppression” (and I’d still argue it is, in a media-fueled incident like this).

        JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Calypso Facto. | August 18, 2014 at 5:31 pm

        Tatanisha should be asking herself why she was so willing to believe the worst before hearing from the other side. Was it so imperative in her life that she form a conclusion IMMEDIATELY?

        The left is taking advantage of the fact that the cops have to be thorough, take their time and re-check certain work before finalizing an investigation report, which will be supplemented later anyway. During this part of the investigation, the left is putting their narrative out there in the vacuum necessitated by this process.

        The Tatanishas of this country should stick to American Idol, rhinestone-embedded plastic fingernails and keep their mouths shut about things they know nothing about.

    Who knows why the DOJ wanted to suppress the video … clearly it would come out eventually. It must be depressing to be a liberal this morning.

    The gentle giant myth … a LIE.
    The bullets were fired in his back … a LIE.

    Think I’ll sit back, get some popcorn, and enjoy the show.

    They shouldn’t be involved at all. Holder should shut the hell up and let the state deal with it. There’s no federal issue here.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Sanddog. | August 18, 2014 at 5:55 pm

      Holder and the feds are furtively manufacturing one as we speak. If they can’t find proof that Wilson was a racist (e.g. over forty DOJ and FBI agents have been going door-to-door asking about Wilson, asking do they want a civil rights investigation, do they think Michael Brown’s civil rights were violated), then they can also approach it from a non-racial ‘color of authority’ angle.

      Stories about Wilson indicate a non-racial, quiet, unassuming type of person given to low-key behavior and demeanor. So DOJ may strike out on the racist angle unless they can find enough viable liars to say otherwise.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Calypso Facto. | August 18, 2014 at 5:13 pm

    What autopsy? The county autopsy or Baden’s autopsy? DOJ is just now doing or about to do their own autopsy, obviously in anticipation of charging Wilson for civil rights violations. It’s against the law to shoot black perps under color of authority now, no matter what they’ve done. In fact, it’s a crime for anybody to shoot any black any time for any reason, no matter how justified. Whites are expected to let the black take their life rather than defend themselves.

      Yet you had aproblem with Black Detective Joseph Walker defending himself from larger intoxicated white criminal Joseph Harvey from trying to take his life.

        JackRussellTerrierist in reply to m1. | August 18, 2014 at 6:35 pm

        Joseph Walker is a cold-blooded murdered who suckered redneck idiot Harvey into walking up close enough to him to shoot Harvey to death within a range he could get away with as ‘self-defense’.

        That you are too stupid to figure this out is your problem, not mine.

    Good point. It was the DoJ who wanted the tape suppressed and Holder is furious that the robbery tape was released. They wanted this rioting to take place.

The autopsy report contradicts the eyewitnesses’ accounts (that Brown was shot in the back); the store robbery surveillance video contradicts the friend’s account (“walking down the street minding our own business”); and the photos of the cop’s facial injuries and his report are most likely going to contradict the rest of the popular versions of this event. But it won’t matter to the mobs, because the myth of Brown as a “gentle” innocent who was “executed” while attempting to surrender will never die. It will grow and expand and become the basis for a new “racial justice” foundation, just like the ones created in memory of that other “victim” Trayvon Martin.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Observer. | August 18, 2014 at 5:23 pm

    The black power holders in this country would like to build on that list in order to instigate enough pent-up wrath and frustration among ignorant blacks that a huge, multi-city riot ensues for which obamullah can institute martial law and start busting whitey head with all the military toys now commissioned for domestic use when whitey tries to protect himself, his family and his property.

    Tin-foil hat time? Are you sure?

I have a question for Rags or Andrew. Is it legal for the family to put out a news conference with “their” autopsy findings? Doesn’t this influence the jury pool who do not get to hear the other “autopsy” evidence.

This seems to be very much like the Trayvon Martin case where the family/their lawyers/complaisant media tried the case in the media before it ever went to a real trial.

I had seen where the family was trying to insert young pictures. I saw one story where the only picture of M Brown was when he was about 11 years old and in a picture with a younger girl (looked like a studio family picture).

Fortunately, the public is a bit wiser this time and this time it is law enforcement so they are releasing real time pictures (no more three years old and holding a teddy bear).

Maybe it is just me but the whole innocent small black child executed by the evil white man while doing nothing but getting some candy or walking in the street is getting a bit old.

Last time it ended up as large teenager walking back from store with items that may have drug use relationship but even if not feels disrespected and jumps/beats/pounds head into concrete small Hispanic neighborhood watch guy who screamed like a girl for help and then finally shot the teenager to get him stop beating him.

This time it is starting to look sort of the same. 6’4″ nearly 300 pound man rob store (beats and tosses little Indian clerk)walks out with cigars (to make blunts?) and gets stopped by police for walking in middle of street holding up traffic. Argues with police, fights with police, (police says goes for gun), then ends up shot 6 times from front (so not a good angle if he was really running away), man ends up dead and cop has to go to hospital for head/face wounds. M. Brown’s friend in one interview said the cop looked dazed (concussion?).

I am not pro shooting anyone and agree this has to be investigated and tried. However, I don’t agree with lying and stacking the deck on either side.

    Ragspierre in reply to Sunlight78. | August 18, 2014 at 11:34 am

    To briefly answer you question, yes. It is perfectly legal for anybody to say anything about this case, so long as it doesn’t rise to the level of inciting a riot.

    There are no charges, so there is no issue (yet) of polluting a potential jury pool. Nobody has issued any gag orders, because no judge is involved (that I know of).

      tarheelkate in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 11:51 am

      Can you tell me what authority the Justice Dept. has to order a third autopsy in a local criminal case? Can Justice do what it wants wherever it wants to? Is it simply that the family asked? Since the second autopsy was done by a private specialist, presumably any problems with the first, official autopsy would be covered.

        Ragspierre in reply to tarheelkate. | August 18, 2014 at 11:59 am

        Nope. Sorry. WAY out of my field of practice.

        But by many accounts, this is not out-of-line.

        What IS out-of-line is the very public injection of the Obami into this mess, IMNHO. Just like we’ve seen before, and I suspect for the same cynical reasons of stirring the base.

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 5:45 pm

          I think the federal contingency of race whores is much more rapidly, deeply and overtly injected into this than we saw in Zimmerman. I think they thought they didn’t do enough to taint the process quickly enough and that failure resulted in or contributed to the acquittal.

          I think they don’t want to make the same mistake twice. Plus, Zimmerman was Hispanic and not a cop. Wilson is white and a cop. Perfect storm, perfect patsy.

        First, forgive an accidental thumbs down as cursor tried to find “reply”! My bad. Second, the action suggests the Dept. of Justice views the entire Ferguson police establishment as racist and unable to conduct an objective investigation, so this ongoing violation of civil rights requires federal review even as it is occurring in real time. That’s the message being sent to the mob, the NAACP and the general public.

        tigercpa in reply to tarheelkate. | August 18, 2014 at 1:58 pm

        Good question, and I’ll ask the board: Does the autopsy by the family’s ME carry any legal weight?

      Valerie in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 2:09 pm

      The lawyers involved in the case are supposed to keep their mouths shut. So are the police, except for the bare, authoritative facts. There is no restriction on what the family can say. The general idea for the restrictions is to avoid exactly what has happened: trial by fury, based on an ugly combination of lying and fantasy.

      The reason why the riots occurred immediately is because the perpetrators knew that, once the facts started coming out, they would have less excuse for outrage.

      I think the store owners should join together as plaintiffs to sue the agitators and any organization they say they represent.

        Ragspierre in reply to Valerie. | August 18, 2014 at 2:23 pm

        Your statement about the lawyers is not necessarily true.

        Look up the Missouri ethics code. MAYBE they should be more careful. That does not bind Crump, who is not a member of that bar.

        JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Valerie. | August 18, 2014 at 6:42 pm

        Lawyers write the laws. Lawyers don’t write laws that can get their own asses into a sling. To the extent that they are expected to write any laws and rules overseeing their own conduct, it is usually vague enough to provide plenty of discretionary interpretation as to the conduct itself and its degree of severity.

      Char Char Binks in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 2:55 pm

      Almost all the initial words from witnesses an agitator incited the riots.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Sunlight78. | August 18, 2014 at 5:41 pm

    “tried”? Why should anyone be tried if there was no wrongdoing by anyone (still alive)?

    Are you aware on this website that a Black police officer named Joseph Walker was deemed wrong for using deadly force,against a white criminal who outweighed the black cop by 89 lbs? The white criminal who was intoxicated, hyped on monster drinks,pursued the black cop,racially slurred the black cop,threatened the black cop( verbally and in a fighting stance getting out of a van with an accomplice ). Refused to stop even when ordered to. Refused to stop even when shot.

VetHusbandFather | August 18, 2014 at 11:21 am

When will these friends and family members learn to not give statements that are easily contradicted by physical evidence. We really still know very little about what happened, we still can’t be sure that there was no wrong doing in this incident. But right now we have accounts given by the police, and by the witness/friend. But when it becomes clear that several parts of the friends story are directly contradicted by physical evidence, we really have no choice but to give more credibility to the police’s side of the events. All I’m trying to say is that there are situations when lethal force is not justified, that would still be consistent with physical evidence. If any of those happened, I would want to know. But by embellishing this into some kind of execution that could not have even been possible, then I have no choice but to believe the police officer’s account of the incident. You help nobody with your lies.

The Autopsy report that came out pretty much verified what the witnesses said. The officer pretty much gunned him down like a dog. The last and fatal wound was to the top of his head from behind. the angle was such is that the officer had to be towering over the 6 foot 4 victim.

I think probably the reason why people are rioting over there, is the mountain of abuses that pile up. I can say that over my life, I have not once had a run in with an officer that was not crooked or unprofessional. I routinely see them breaking the law and engaging in shady conduct. Things that are just bad like speeding the wrong way down a one way street in front of a school. The government is just crooked. Every last person in the government should be required to wear a camera at all times.

    tarheelkate in reply to imfine. | August 18, 2014 at 11:53 am

    All shots were into Brown’s front, no shots from behind, according to news reports. This directly contradicts eyewitness reports that he was shot from behind while running away.

    Sanddog in reply to imfine. | August 18, 2014 at 11:53 am

    The autopsy report actually does serious damage to most of the witnesses stories. This report doesn’t help the Brown family at all.

      imfine in reply to Sanddog. | August 18, 2014 at 12:10 pm

      “One of the bullets entered the top of Mr. Brown’s skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when it struck him and caused a fatal injury, according to Dr. Michael M. Baden, the former chief medical examiner for the City of New York, who flew to Missouri on Sunday at the family’s request to conduct the separate autopsy. It was likely the last of bullets to hit him, he said.”

      and then

      “The bullets did not appear to have been shot from very close range because no gunpowder was present on his body. ”

      That all does not add up to an innocent cop. I think after all is said and done, cops are going to be wearing cameras all day everyday everywhere in the country. If they have a problem with it, just say “If your not doing anything illegal, you’ll have nothing to worry about”

        Sanddog in reply to imfine. | August 18, 2014 at 12:51 pm

        The average person can run 21 feet in 1.5 seconds. Brown was allegedly about 35 feet away. Let’s give him a generous 3 seconds. If he starts to run towards the officer, or if he’s already on the move, Wilson had very little time to stop him. The officer appears to have tried 4 center mass shots which instead of hitting his chest, hit his right arm. The two head shots were used because Brown did not stop. That’s pretty much what I would consider a failure drill. Center mass and then head or groin. If Wilson waited until he was 10 feet away, he would have had less than a second to stop Brown. That’s why you engage when they become a threat and that’s NOT when they’re standing right in front of you.

        All of the shots, except the last were on the right side of the body. I would speculate that either Wilson shots were pulling left (needs more range time) or Brown was coming in at an angle and leading with one side. The preliminary information would seem to indicate Brown was charging Wilson with his arms up and close in to his body.

        Valerie in reply to imfine. | August 18, 2014 at 2:15 pm

        “The bullets did not appear to have been shot from very close range because no gunpowder was present on his body. ”

        I will hazard a guess that you did not bother to read the caveat immediately thereafter, that the person performing the autopsy did not have access to the clothing of the victim, Powder burns on the clothing would change this result.

          Sanddog in reply to Valerie. | August 18, 2014 at 3:06 pm

          I think the focus on powder burns is unimportant unless the officer is claiming the victim was right in front of him, within a few feet. A self defense shooting can occur from further out and still be legitimate.

        a response that is as thick as two planks.

    I think probably the reason why people are rioting over there, is the mountain of abuses that pile up.

    Voting them out would probably be a more effective way to effect change in their community. Among other things. Seriously. It’s a majority-black, majority-democrat area. If they want to point their collective fingers at “the man” who keepin’ them down, and who put him there, they only need to look in the mirror.

    Also, as to the cameras, reportedly the police department had them. They just don’t (or won’t) use them. That’s maybe something worth protesting, but apparently the citizen activists are too busy breaking into beauty supply outlets and stealing bags of hair. Because nothing says “police accountability now!” like running amok and stealing bags of hair in the night.

      imfine in reply to Amy in FL. | August 18, 2014 at 12:18 pm

      The conduct of the police dept after the incident does lend to the belief that they are a crooked department and are indeed guilty. No tags, wearing masks, dismantling cameras, abusing reporters. That says to me they are of a criminal mind. If they are innocent and are just doing their jobs, why are they so afraid of displaying their identity?

      the city is dysfunctional, the society is dysfunctional, and most of the policies that make it so are imposed from the state or from washington. Who they vote for doesn’t matter.

      genes in reply to Amy in FL. | August 18, 2014 at 12:25 pm

      The story the chief is sticking with is that the fed grants for cameras didn’t cover installation. The monthly maintenance bill on the MRAP, which they might not have needed if they had the cameras, would have covered installation.

        Ragspierre in reply to genes. | August 18, 2014 at 12:36 pm

        1. Does Ferguson have an MRAP?

        2. What is the maintenance cost on a garaged MRAP?

          I looked it up just now. It’s a different animal: a vehicle called a BearCat, sold by Lenco Armored Vehicles. It’s explicitly for SWAT purposes. I had been wondering myself; those vehicles didn’t quite look like MRAP that I’d previously seen.

          As for a 53 man department having SWAT vehicles, well, in the first place, it’s not just the Ferguson PD that was involved in restraining civil disturbances. Many, many other departments do have MRAPs now. The army was paying 60k a year, but that’s with heavy use in a war zone with contractor support. At home police departments would rarely use them and National Guard bases would have mechanics bouncing around with personal experience from service overseas. Maintenance should be far less.

        MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to genes. | August 18, 2014 at 4:05 pm

        Any MRAPlike vehicles were provided by the Saint Louis County SWAT team.
        The cameras would be inserted into Ferguson police department police cars.
        Even if Chief Jackson wanted to forgo an MRAP for a year to install the cameras, he couldn’t do it. He probably doesn’t even have access to the money from SWAT.

          How much has NOT having dashcams installed cost the city, county and state? No guarantee that the dashcam would have stopped this, but a strong likelihood that had they had vid showing him charging the cop there would be fewer involved and purely local. And shorter as the media would have a harder time stirring things up.

    The man who performed the second autopsy for the Brown family specifically said he found no gunpowder residue on the body, though he had no access to the deceased’s clothing. This is irrelevant regarding the head. To not find gunpowder residue for a top-down, point-blank range execution-style killing defies belief, and certainly science.

    Observer in reply to imfine. | August 18, 2014 at 1:18 pm

    “The Autopsy report that came out pretty much verified what the witnesses said. The officer pretty much gunned him down like a dog.”

    Utter b.s.

    The witnesses said Brown had been shot in the back. The autopsy report completely disproved that. Furthermore, the family’s own hand-picked ME, Dr. Baden, admitted the kill shot could have been rendered when Brown put his head down into a “charging” position (which would be completely consistent with the cop’s purported account of the events, as reported by one of his friends).


    The Baden autopsy that has been performed only on the body and not the clothing shows that Dorian Johnson is a liar.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to imfine. | August 19, 2014 at 12:53 am

    At the very least, you need to take an in-depth remedial reading comprehension course before you type one more word anywhere about anything.

“The last and fatal wound was to the top of his head from behind. the angle was such is that the officer had to be towering over the 6 foot 4 victim.”

That’s meant as parody right? Right?

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 18, 2014 at 12:00 pm

What exactly does calling in the National Guard mean?

OK, I get that these guys wearing military uniforms show up, but doesn’t it also mean martial law?

In the 50’s and 60’s, I know what that meant. “Sarge we found this guy breaking into a store.” “OK take him out back and shoot him.”

But what exactly does it mean now?

    Ragspierre in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | August 18, 2014 at 12:19 pm

    Calling out the Guard does not necessarily mean martial law.

    The Guard reports to the governor, and can be called out after a state of emergency is declared, which is way short of martial law in my mind.

    I had a chance to go over the legal ins and outs regarding Gov. Perry deploying the Texas national guard. Some things depend on the way the order was written, and I haven’t looked closely at it, but a governor can give National Guard troops police powers a president cannot due to Posse Comitatus. Also unlike a president, a governor is still a civilian; true martial law is a suspension of civil authority, basically a declaration the courts are silent, and all governing authority belongs to the Army. That wouldn’t be the case here. People can still be arrested – by someone – and the courts are still permitted to try cases when and where they can.

    It’s a state of emergency deployment to “restore peace and order”. It’s not Bagdhad 2003 and it’s not West Germany after the German surrender ending WWII. Having said that, shooting at the troops would be stupid. Really stupid.

    Update: I’m hearing a) the curfew has been lifted, b) the National Guard troops have been placed under the command of the State Patrol i.e. Captain Johnson. So they won’t be operating independently.

If only Joseph Harvey was as vilified as Michael Brown here.
If only Detective Joseph Walker got the same support as Officer Daniel Wilson here.

I’m still waiting for more facts before making up my mind about this. This autopsy seems to contradict not only the “shot from behind” claim but also the first shot in or near the police car. That would have been a close shot and yet the autopsy says none of the wounds were point-blank. We need to know if the shots were all from the 35-ft range as has been claimed or whether any, including the fatal shot, came from closer and therefore might support the claim that Brown was charging at the officer.

I’m not automatically assuming this officer was justified, but I also don’t want him essentially lynched with the automatic assumption it was a cold-blooded killing.

    Ragspierre in reply to tarheelkate. | August 18, 2014 at 12:58 pm

    There’ a common wrong assumption that’s leading to a lot of wrong conclusions (potentially).

    Many are assuming six shots were fired. We don’t know how many times the LEO fired.

    This has led some to assume that the LEO was NOT firing at a fleeing gentle giant, but missed.

    It has also led some to assume there was no discharge in the car. What if it just missed Brown, but made him decide he needed not to follow his course? What if it was fired by Brown?

    So. As before we should wait for the investigation.

    Observer in reply to tarheelkate. | August 18, 2014 at 1:23 pm

    The first shot in/near the car didn’t hit anybody (according to what has been reported).

    MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to tarheelkate. | August 18, 2014 at 1:26 pm

    The first shot supposedly happened while the gun was pinned against Wilson’s leg. The bullet probably discharged harmlessly into the car.
    I don’t know if the cops found the bullet.

    Phillep Harding in reply to tarheelkate. | August 18, 2014 at 3:03 pm

    First shot in or near the car could miss everything and everyone if they were fighting over possession of the firearm.

    That’s making several assumptions.

    Better to wait and see what comes out that can be supported.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to tarheelkate. | August 19, 2014 at 1:08 am

    The “shot in the back” statement came from Brown’s co-felon. Why are we still talking about it? Just because a bunch of black protestors, looters and vandals want it to be that story?

    I’m sure they appreciate people continuing to accommodate them by even raising the point.

Has anyone found information about the other (non-fatal) shootings during the aftermath (riots). I’m wondering if whites or family of officers are being targeted.

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 18, 2014 at 1:13 pm

The whole autopsy is quite curious.
First the wounds on the arm, are they separate shots?
Or one shot along the arm ( certainly the hand wound indicates that with the slashing ) made by a bullet skipping along the arm like a stone skips along a pond? It’s hard to see how the “execution” narrative survives if it’s multiple shots. OTOH the one shot hypothesis suggests that Brown had his arm out. Also inconsistent.

Also it kind of makes me want to wish that they would indicate trajectories on the sheet.

The top head wound. Where exactly is it? Top front, top center top back?
Makes a big difference.

One thing is clear he was standing. Apparently there are abrasions on his head which indicates he fell.

I just can’t get a clear picture of what happened.

    Right now, the information being released is all about controlling the narrative. The family claims the autopsy vindicates their story. I think it harms it but they understand their target audience far better than I do.

      Chump and Parks are in charge of the narrative. The family are going along with what the Chump is saying in the hope of getting a large sum of compensation.

Midwest Rhino | August 18, 2014 at 1:14 pm

It all seems to fit with Brown turning, not freezing, and then coming back at the officer. The reports of “bull rush” would be like a football player with head down, about to tackle the officer. Somewhere I saw that Brown went down only a few feet from Wilson. (that may have been the audio from the scene with the apparent first hand witness talking in background)

So it seems plausible the first shots were not kill shots. (as the autopsy doctor confirmed) I’m not sure if it is police protocol to wound rather than shoot to kill, if possible. Certainly they are aware of the consequences of shooting an unarmed black “kid”, but after the earlier confrontation, he can’t let this big guy tackle him, and he can’t just run away.

The last shot was to the head, with head down, about to tackle. That shot I believe, exited at the eye and reentered in the face … (I think, from the family’s press conference, the autopsy doctor). So from say 8′, the final shot was to the top of the head, from the front, which I guess can tumble/deflect and exit at the eye.

The one shot to the arm could conceivably have been with arms up, but also as easily with arms in front, like he was running at the officer.

The witness in background of the one video said a couple times “I’m thinkin’ he missin'”, about the shots fired as Brown was approaching the officer.

They had not examined the clothing yet, so it seems possible the shot in the car left some powder on the clothes … not sure if that shot grazed the officer, but Officer Wilson did have injuries.

The only thing that doesn’t make sense is why this info was withheld so long, and why the Ferguson police are being assaulted by other government and political agencies. Of course with the election approaching, certain circles may feel they found their new Trayvon, and can build on that theme/propaganda.

    Ragspierre in reply to Midwest Rhino. | August 18, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    The issue(s) I have with your points are that the ME explicitly identified entry wounds.

    Here, we get into a ripe field for interrogation by deposition or on the witness stand.

      Midwest Rhino in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 1:46 pm

      I’m not clear what you are saying? You mean the ME should NOT identify entry wounds? Some (around the arms) they were not sure of, and stated they were speculating on the reentry.

      But the ME seemed certain of the one on top of the head, as the only kill shot, coming from the front, (unless Brown was completely arched backwards).

      Anyway, that seems to fit with the 2nd or 3rd hand officer account, and the guy caught in background at the scene. I’m not going to attempt to say what holds up in court.

        Ragspierre in reply to Midwest Rhino. | August 18, 2014 at 2:03 pm


        Looking at the Brown family ME report, it is just about as ambiguous as it could be. “Enty, re-entry, and exit wounds”.

        So the NYT was just lying about Brown being shot “at least six times”.

        The Baden autopsy is totally confusing.

          Midwest Rhino in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 2:35 pm

          I didn’t say (or remember) how many shots struck Brown, according to Baden. NY Times never lies, they massage and caress the story, till it says what they want. lol

          On review, Baden did say six times … but as I recall, he was rather sure the last was the only fatal one, through the brain.

          They keep saying that is “five shots too many”, so “excessive force”, but it would seem (if the background had no people in the line of fire) … it would be better to shoot him in the arm to get him to stop, rather than shooting to kill on the first shot. But Brown didn’t take the clue. It doesn’t seem excessive to not kill on the first shot.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 2:43 pm

          My read of Baden is that he’s the Brown family expert whore, but he’s a very good, dangerous expert whore.

          He has no business speculating about police practices, like “shooting too much”.

          You shoot until you don’t need to shoot any longer. Period.

          You don’t shoot three times and just let an assailant kill you.

          There are recorded histories of cops shooting a criminal’s thorax to hamburger, and the thug still managing to kill a cop. Just like you can kill a Cape Buffalo, and it will still manage to kill you from a couple of hundred yards away.

          Midwest Rhino in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 3:50 pm

          It was a CBS “expert” I heard say that (“five shots too many, police are trained to stop … blah blah”), not Baden. The CBS guy was analyzing what Baden had reported, about the six shots.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 4:08 pm

          “In my capacity as the forensic examiner for the New York State Police, I would say, ‘You’re not supposed to shoot so many times,’ ” said Dr. Baden, who retired from the state police in 2011. “Right now there is too little information to forensically reconstruct the shooting.”

          Sanddog in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 4:38 pm

          You’re supposed to shoot however many times it takes to stop the assailant. And unlike the NYPD, at least no bystanders were injured.

Rep. Amash (R-MI) writes:
I voted yes on the Grayson of FL Amendment to ‪#‎HR4870‬, which prohibits funding in the bill from being used to transfer aircraft, grenade launchers, toxicological agents, missiles, and other weapons from the federal government to state and local law enforcement. This is military-grade equipment that shouldn’t be used on the street by state and local police. The amendment was not agreed to 62-355.
Rep. Reed voted NAY.

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 18, 2014 at 1:54 pm

Pot was found in Browns body.
It would be interesting to see if nicotine was also found, but I’m not holding out hope for the trox screen to even show that. We’ve seen that tox screens nowadays show presence or absence of drugs, they don’t generate a list of subsstances found like in the good ole days.

    Pot is persistent, and moreso in regular users. It gets into the body fat and stays at detectable levels for at least about 6 weeks. These tests often give no indication of when last use occurred

    Char Char Binks in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | August 18, 2014 at 3:02 pm

    Why test for nicotine?

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Char Char Binks. | August 18, 2014 at 3:50 pm

      Good question.
      What people have recently pointed out to me is that what many in the rap community do is smoke blunts. Blunts are made by hollowing out a tobacco product and placing marijuana back in. But they mix it with the tobacco.

      Pot alone will make most people less aggressive.
      Pot+tobacco will make most people more aggressive.

      Thus the test for nicotine.

        It hardly sounds like it’s just a “rap community” thing. And I’m not aware of any evidence it makes people unusually aggressive. Of commonly used drugs, it’s alcohol that seems to be the worst offender for that effect.

          excessive alcohol mixed with other drugs makes people aggressive.

          On the other hand: ICE and amphetamines make people aggressive. Another one is PCP…

          People coming off their high from pot can also end up being aggressive.

        I haven’t seen any studies that show Pot + Tobacco makes a person more aggressive. There is evidence that Pot can increase anxiety and paranoia.

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 18, 2014 at 2:42 pm

The governor recinds the curfew.
A big mistake in my humble opinion.
I can’t detail why now, but will be back soon and explain why.

    Ragspierre in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | August 18, 2014 at 2:45 pm

    Haven’t we defined Nixon as an idiot by now?

    But…one good thing…

    he OWNS this now.

      I also noticed Captain Johnson has been placed in direct command of the National Guard troops according to the governor. So he owns this too.

        Ragspierre in reply to JBourque. | August 18, 2014 at 3:02 pm

        Well Capt. Johnson is Nixon’s handpicked point-man.

        The Guard is directly responsible to Nixon, and so is Johnson.

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Ragspierre. | August 18, 2014 at 6:09 pm

      Well since I promised.
      I followed the situation via a reddit live feed.

      I also listened to video live feeds.

      The impression I got was that a bunch of people intent on doing bad, ie wanting to “rip and destroy”, call them the rioters, were carrying out planned traps for the police. Staging some fake accidents, starting fires, looting all over the place. To try and force the cops to keep redeploying hoping someplace they can find a few stragglers to “bag”.

      It was reported that the LEA in the area issued a callup for all available off duty cops.

      The rioters are becoming an organized force now. If you are to ever get control you have top break them up. You are not going to do that by lifting the curfew.

    tarheelkate in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | August 18, 2014 at 3:39 pm

    Well, since rioting and looting have continued even after the alleged “bad cops” of Ferguson have been replaced by the “good cops” of the State Patrol under Johnson, it seems the problem wasn’t really the Ferguson police response after all.

      Ragspierre in reply to tarheelkate. | August 18, 2014 at 7:27 pm

      Here’s another think…

      I don’t think that the police out on the first several nights were under Ferguson command necessarily.

      I think that tactical commanders…like the police themselves…were coming in from the greater St. Louis area, and the tactical commanders were…you know…COMMANDING the responses to riot and looting.

      Could be quite wrong, but it makes sense.

      Just to get this off my chest, I RARELY disagree with Mark Steyn, but I don’t think riots or looting are provoked by a left-footed fashion statement by police. And some of the desert drab seen being worn by police was very likely dragged out of a footlocker where the young officers had put it after serving in the military a few years ago. If they’d been wearing bell-bottoms and beads, I doubt the conduct of the bad actors would be even slightly different.

      But there is a fat grant application waiting to test that hypothesis.

Humphrey's Executor | August 18, 2014 at 4:00 pm

Call me old fashioned, but I think the press only gets special privileges if they are wearing a felt fedora with their press card stuck in the hat band.

The Panderer in Chief is now sending Holder to Ferguson.

If their Governor had brains or balls, he’d be asking why this is a Federal issue.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Sanddog. | August 18, 2014 at 6:28 pm

    He’s a ‘rat. He’s happily playing ball with whatever obamullah and Eric “My people” Holder want.

    MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Sanddog. | August 18, 2014 at 8:52 pm

    “If their Governor had brains or balls”

    No No No No.
    The lyric from Rubber Bullets

    “We’ve all got balls and brains.”

“The DOJ has launched independent, federal civil rights investigation into death of Michael Brown, Obama says.” (Reuters)

Holder is heading to Ferguson. (Drudge)

Bet Obama is hoping to stir black voters before 2014 election and to salvage his poll numbers, plus distract from border crisis, ISIS crisis and IRS investigation and a thousand other administration abuses, high crimes and misdemeanors.

To Ragspierre,
How can you be disgusted against the things written about cops, when you wrote several negative posts against Detective Joseph Walker?

    Ragspierre in reply to m1. | August 18, 2014 at 6:43 pm

    How can you be so stupid as to confuse the individual with the general?

    Did you see my post was about “optics”? Think of Israel and Gaza.

    I’ve never said cops can’t be bad…even criminal. Quite the contrary, I know they can be, as I believe Walker was. Yes, he was acquitted, but so are a lot of people who are in fact guilty.

    And I’ve never said the LEO in this killing was justified, either. I’ve said that we should WAIT for the FLUCKING PROCESS to run.

    Read, honey.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to m1. | August 18, 2014 at 6:51 pm

    What a colossally dumbass question.

    Uh, gee…..hmmmm…..duh…..uh………duh… not all cops are the same.

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 18, 2014 at 7:45 pm

Another interesting picture,
if the press thought they saw a “militarized force” before wait until they get a look now.

So, today this Piaget chik re-emerges from the Crump Witness Factory with a worthless after action video and a story that Wilson was firing shots at Barack Jr. while chasing him, before BJ turned back towards Wilson.

Since the ‘shot in the back’ narrative collapsed, the Scheme Team has fallen back to a narrative of “well, he tried to shoot BJ in the back” with the implication that Wilson had murderous intent and BJ turned back on Wilson more or less in self defense.

Problem is, the male voice of the eye witness recorded on the ‘Black Canseco’ video, and I assume its not Piaget’s video, doesn’t mention anything about shots fired during the pursuit, only that Wilson had his gun drawn when BJ turned on him and started firing after that.

Big Difference.

And its no mystery why BJ turned back on Wilson. It wasn’t because he was being fired on.

He may well have been hopped on dust, but really what choice did he have?

This cloven hoofed beast had no chance whatsoever of outrunning even an injured, but young and fit Wilson.

Sure, he could and should have just hit the deck and spread ’em, but after committing at least two felonies in the last half hour, charging Wilson represented the last act of a desperate, depraved fool.

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 18, 2014 at 8:12 pm

Interview with St. Louis police rep for their union.

BannedbytheGuardian | August 18, 2014 at 9:09 pm

Tatanisha f**ckin wow . She be on the witness stand . I be waitin for that . That be up with the lady witness called Piaget .

Someone called Darren Wilson sounds like he be from another planet.

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 18, 2014 at 9:14 pm

Oh wow. The black reenslavement industry has created a monster they no longer control:

Lot of people seriously unimpressed with Nelly. “You got options,” he tells crowd. “YOU got options – you’re rich,” a guy shouts back.

FYI, because I’ve tried to keep abreast of events every couple of hours, it seems that the curfew was lifted because (and I had heard of this) the neighboring communities were seeing “overflow” since the curfew was only in Ferguson, and their leaders had made loud complaints to the governor about it.

Combined with dropping the curfew, a designated protest zone (First Amendment zone?) is being created. It’s intended to be a safe zone where people can protest at night without being molested or being at risk. Eh, we’ll see how that works out.

MouseTheLuckyDog | August 18, 2014 at 9:22 pm

Where is the federal jurisdiction for having DOJ become involved or justification for 40 or more FBI agents on the ground? Deprivation of civil rights requires proof of intent to discriminate based on race. Other than fact that Officer was white & Brown was black, no one has alleged any racial intent or history of racial animus by the Officer.

Churchill said “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”

This is why Holder, Al, and Jesse are there defining the narrative “their way” right now. They are experts at race baiting, and all the while the wheels of true justice will move slowly, very slowly.

The false narrative will always be ahead of the truth. It’s the way things work. Sadly.

It’s breaking around the web that Officer Wilson suffered an orbital blowout fracture when Brown attacked him.

Gateway Pundit guys seem to be first with the info.