<p>The problem is, as with the Trayvon Martin case, it CAN’T be one person’s word against the other’s. And the shooters know this and will use it to their advantage. The media has already planted the seeds of doubt about the kind of person Michael Brown was, and he is not here to defend himself or tell his side of the story.</p>
<p>sally - That is a hypothetical scenario posed by someone else also involving assault and battery on an officer. along with the robbery. Notice, I asked a question. Some people seem not to be comfortable with questions for some reason. Anyway, I really expect the best witness in this case to be the autopsy. He was either shot in the back multiple times or he wasn’t. We don’t know yet. </p>
<p>Way to make huge assumptions tonyk. The friend/witness was cleared of any charges. He is not a credible winess because of what?</p>
<p>Interestingly, residents are now asking why police don’t shoot the looters.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is what is sometimes known as a leading question if/when posed during trial and the opposing side/judge would have the right/duty to object to it and the judge to order the offending attorney to cease such lines of questioning. </p>
<p>Moreover, sometimes the types of questions one asks reveals much about the questioner…including biases. </p>
<p>Whatever, Cobrat. This is a discussion not a trial. </p>
<p>GA2012MOM,</p>
<p>Because ten minutes earlier he participated in a store robbery, but even though he didn’t take anything himself, he never once brought this up when being interviewed. An attorney’s job is to cast doubt on a witness’s credibility. Their first question to him when he testifies will be “Where were you right before you were walking down the center of the street?” </p>
<p>Do you know for a fact that he has a clean record and has never been dishonest? Yet your assumption is he must be a credible witness. I say wait and see what new details come out about him. Like Flossy I am a Doubting Thomas who will wait before I make up my mind. </p>
<p>Tony, the witness just saw his friend shot to death. That is the key point about what he might have to discuss in court. He was being interviewed after the incident, not sworn to testify.</p>
<p>Yeah, this cop is gonna walk if this ever makes it to trial. </p>
<p>I don’t know if he has a clean record or not…I don’t have a clean record…does that make my POV invalid?</p>
<p>To some jurors it might.</p>
<p>TonyK, et al, there are dozens and probably hundreds of people in jail right now who were convicted on the basis of testimony from jailhouse snitches who have been convicted of felonies. Jurors weigh the evidence and witness credibility, but that doesn’t mean they automatically throw out testimony from 18year olds with some minor infraction. </p>
<p>Besides which, there are now multiple witnesses who don’t know each other who can also testify. </p>
<p>There are some things we do apparently know. MB did indeed rob the convenience store of cigars. Merchandise valued at 45 dollars does not meet the criterion of felony theft. The person who was with him has not been accused as an accomplice by the police, no matter how many times certain active posters to this thread wish to call him “Brown’s accomplice.” The extent of MB’s assault on the store clerk appears to be limited to a shove, according to store surveillance footage. A shove does not meet the standard of felony assault by the majority of people’s definitions (unless, apparently, a black man is the one doing the shoving). The Ferguson PD’s Chief is on record as having stated that Officer Wilson knew nothing of the store robbery, or that Brown was a suspect at the time of the shooting. Officer Wilson said he stopped Brown and his companion because they were walking in the middle of the street, and ordered them to move to the side. Michael Brown was unarmed. his friend was unarmed. Officer Wilson shot Michael Brown Multiple times, killing him. Multiple, unrelated witnesses have given startlingly consistent statements about what they witnessed. The Ferguson PD has at least one very well documented history of having seriously assaulted a suspect (whom they falsely arrested), and then trumping up outrageous charges against him for the crime of “bleeding on them” after they beat the crap out of him. The same posters who seem hell bent on accusing someone of robbery whom even the Ferguson PD says is not guilty of robbery, also steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that, like Michael brown, the Ferguson PD can’t exactly be called exemplars of moral and ethical decency.</p>
<p>A personal observation: Behaviors often dismissed as mere “youthful exuberance” in young white males, are more often labeled “thuggery” when demonstrated by young black men. </p>
<p>If the autopsy (or autopsies) are ever released, would it be able to prove or disprove whether he was shot with his hands up or not? How detailed could they be? In the same vein, would the results show whether he was shot first in the front, or first in the back?</p>
<p>Actually Flossy, the telling questions which the autopsy will answer are:</p>
<ol>
<li>How many times was Brown shot from the front? </li>
<li>From how far away were those shots fired? (The shell casings will also tell us that)</li>
<li>Were Brown’s hands raised when those shots were fired? </li>
</ol>
<p>Well good. That will be very helpful. I have no idea what the “Actually Flossy” is for. It sounds snarky.</p>
<p>Sally, just a heads-up on nit covering the body:</p>
<p>A year or so ago I drove past the scene of a hit-and-run in downtown Denver. Police cars with lights flashing, ambulance, the whole nine yards. </p>
<p>As we passed the intersection (very slowly given all the rubbernecking), we clearly saw the man who’d been hit, lying there dead.</p>
<p>He was not covered up by a sheet.</p>
<p>Well that ticked me off – that perceived lack of dignity – and I emailed the Denver Police about it. By the time we rolled past, he had been lying dead for all the world to see for at least 20 minutes… and still no sheet. Countless children doubtless witnessed him, exacerbating my sense of indignation.</p>
<p>The response from the police was essentially this:</p>
<p>We cannot cover the body as long as we are investigating it and the scene. Because a sheet might mess with the validity/usefulness of any evidence that might be on it.</p>
<p>…which makes sense.</p>
<p>So I do understand why Brown was not yet covered up. It was still a live scene and presumably, the cops were not finished investigating it.</p>
<p>The MO governor is holding a news conference. They’re imposing a curfew.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It looks like it is a felony under Missouri law. In many states assaulting a police officer is a felony.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5650000082.htm”>http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5650000082.htm</a></p>
<p>Missouri is in the Eight Fed Circuit not the First. </p>
<p>Hayden, yes, the autopsy can show where (if) there is stripling, gun shot residue on the victims arms, and where it is will show what position his arms were in.</p>