cOoTeR

Just because he moved away at one point does not mean he was away from the cop when shot. We know he had turned to face the cop who was likely still pursing him. Just because he walked ran or skipped 30-35 ft from the cruiser does not mean that he was in no way a threat. The cop had to arrest him so most likely was attempting that. Distance from the cruiser is not = to the distance from the cop. Your argument is invalid.

^^^^here you said that he was not a threat based on the distance from the police cruiser to where he died.

Also if he had made an attempt to take the officer's gun that has to weigh into the totality of the circumstances. If he already attempted to take the gun. Then after initially moving away began approaching back towards the officer who had his gun drawn and not listening to what the cop says. How would the cop not feel like his life was in danger.

I was unclear in what I ment. Just because he left the scene of the initial incident at the car does not mean that there was no way he could do something else threatening. As in he could have left the car but then turned around (according to the shot placement he did turn around) and become threatening at that time away from the car. Just because he was not shot at the car doesn't mean he was not being a threat.

If you think it is ok to reach for a cops gun regardless of the situation you should expect to be shot. Just because Brown left the scene of the initial contact does not mean he was no longer a threat. Trying to claim self defense because you were fleeing a cop is not a valid defense.

It seems you're assuming the cop never left the car. Which doesn't seem logical even if he was trying to "kill" brown no matter what like you seem to believe. Why wouldn't he get closer and make a sure shot if Brown was giving up? How many shots were fired at Brown from behind? We know none hit him in the back. If your being shot at and unarmed why would you stop running if you haven't been hit? I would stick to what's working. Mainly I would stick to what has worked my entire life and not screw with the cops and not resist them at all. Seems to work pretty far.

Some more Facebook "information". Found this article on Facebook from a friend posting it up. It is obviously a political news site so I wouldn't take it for 100% accuracy. If it is true this will make things interesting. http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2014/08/19/breaking-report-dorian-johnson-recants-media-statement-tells-authorities-big-mike-did-try-for-officers-gun-acquittal-probable/

It could only take 1 punch to break an eye socket. One punch isn't necessarily going to tear up your knuckles. The cop could have had his head slammed into something in the cruiser. There is a lot of hard stuff in there. No signs of a struggle could be no hits landed on Brown hard enough to bruise him. Shots being fired further than 2-3 feet says nothing. 2-3 feet is perfect striking range for someone 6'+

The police aren't going to make the mistake the media did and release information until they figure it all out. They need to take their time to go through all the information they gave and interview several witness to get a clear picture. The media just ran in and interviewed a guy that's starting to look like he's an accomplice to the events leading up to Brown being shot. Do you really think the media is out looking for people that will contradict the "news" they released that caused all the current issues? Why would they do that the rioting and looting is giving them all kinds of stuff to cover.

I can't vouch for the source that's why i didn't link to it. The first place i saw it was rightwingnews.com. I saw it on another site along with the claim that 12 people had similar witness statements to the story told by police.

So I just saw an article that said the officer in the Brown shooting suffered orbital fractures. Pretty sure that counts as serious bodily harm.

There's quite a few issues that would come with that. First where is the money for that going to come from? Most law enforcement agencies are already having trouble paying for gas to patrol with and ammo to train with. It could be argued that filming could violate 4th amendment rights. People don't want to be filmed every time they interact with police. Some places have laws against filming people without their consent. Changing the law to allow police to do it would open all kinds of issues with general publics ability to film people without their consent. If the cops can do it why can't everyone else? Also Miranda rights issues can come from it. It would be quite a pain in the ass to film all day. Making sure the battery hasn't died or the memory card isn't full. If you say they fire it up every time the cop interacts with someone that's not feasible. Cops often have to make instant reactions to situations. Fucking around with a camera doesn't need to be an issue added into it.

The experts said they will need to examine the original autopsy conducted by officials before they can make final conclusions The world would be a much peaceful place right now if we all could do this. Especially the media and and other celebrities who have jumped to conclusions and put them out as being facts before knowing the whole story.

Life isn't like the movies people don't go flying backwards when shot and the don't stop dead just because they are shot. Especially when they are close to 300 pounds and full of adrenaline.

http://bearingarms.com/autopsy-shows-michael-brown-shot-front-consistent-claims-charged-officer/?utm_source=bafbp&utm_medium=fbpage&utm_campaign=baupdate

Rushed and panicked shots often go left for a right handed shooter from "slamming" the shot. Followup shots often climb up to the right for right handed shooters when fired in quick succession. If the cop was being charged and felt he had to fire in a hurry the shot placement seems to start in Browns right arm and climb up to the right. Possibly causing Brown to stumble causing the last shot to hit him in the top of the head. Or the shot hit him in the top of the head as he attempted to tackle the cop. That's the two most logical explanations I can think of with my limited knowledge and limited information we have. If the cop shot him while kneeling the witnesses would have pointed that out. A couple of things are for sure though the cop did not shoot him for simple j-walking and we can't say the cop was wrong without having all the details. It has gone from how evil police are to looking like the cop may have just finished fighting for his life and shot Brown because he felt Brown had the ability and intention to kill the cop.

Or running at the officer in a manner consistent with tackling someone.

The cop can't go to the media about what happened. So the "friend" is as close as your going to get to the cops side of the story until the investigation reports are released. Like you said he wasn't shot in the back which calls the "witness" credibility into question. Shots could have been fired at him from behind but the number of rounds fired has not been released yet. If every round that was fired hit him in the front then that will show none were fired while Brown was fleeing. It just sucks media puts speculation out as if it were facts and people jump to conclusions. Now it's becoming a far cry from the original picture painted that some innocent teen was murdered while crossing the street.

http://eaglerising.com/7996/breaking-story-friend-missouri-cop-shot-teen-tells-officers-side-story/#ku4W8aAbdMYUS3FI.01 Here's a different side of the story.

I'll have to talk to my buddy but I think he only has a 2 bike trailer and we're going to tow with his rav 4. So I dont know if that can tow 3 bikes. The other option would be I put a hitch on my corvette but that's not happening. If we get another person with a truck we might be able to help you out. I'll know more by the end of the year.

I bet there is more to the story than j-walking. But if the cop just rolled up and shot him for j-walking the cop is crazy as shit and a murderer and will face the same punishment as anyone else. But does that justify all the rioting reaction from the community? Do they riot anytime someone is murdered? What if cops acted like that every time a cop gets shot by a thug?

If it happened that way it shouldn't be to hard to prove especially if there was a dash cam going in the car. It should have the audio of what happened. Also the statement said a round was fired inside the cruiser. Which shouldn't be to hard to prove. Unless there is a huge conspiracy that all police are evil and out committing genocide and now the other police men are currently acting out a bs scenario to make a cover up like you seem to assume is the way it works. I still stand by the oponion for the police to stay off the street, not bring in another police force and let the riots play out. Then all these people saying how evil police are will see why they need to be around breaking up the riots. There are a lot of what ifs in the situation and when the whole truth comes out I wouldn't be surprised if people who automatically jumped to conclusions based on race realize they are wrong. Jumping to the conclusion that the cop is automatically wrong just because he is a cop and most cops are liars is as immature as racism.

With all the complaining about how the police are handling this I think they should take a night off and do what the people complaining want, nothing. Let them see how it will play out giving the rioters free rein to do what ever they want.

The statement I read from the police was Brown and another subject had shoved the cop back into the cruiser and we're trying to take his weapon. One round was fired in the cruiser according to their statement. If the statement is true and accurate it contradicts the witness statements put out by the press. I have a feeling that this will play out the same as the Trayvon/Zimmerman case and the cop will be found to be justified in shooting. But jumping to the conclusion that the cop pulled up and jumped Brown for j-walking then shot based on only the accounts of witnesses who could be dishonest would be irresponsible. The riots and protests are not helping anything just distracting from other issues around the world. If it actually went down as the witnesses say then I agree the cop should and will be punished. But if it shakes out that the witness statements are untrue or inaccurate then I think there should be an eye opening for the media to quit stirring the pot until the whole story is told. If you really think about it why in the world would a cop just roll up to somebody and shoot them without any reason? It really doesn't make sense.

Nevermind the way i read it here makes it seem like you need another prior conviction or mental history. http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2923.13v2