This contradicts everything I heard today and the weekend. Everything I heard, all shots were from the front not the back.
That was from the autopsy done by the parents lawyer which of course differs from the local ME. A federal autopsy has been ordered. The parent ME is also saying the shot in the top of the head shows he was surrendering but if he was running full speed as the officer claims then that could also explain it. They can possible determine by scrapes on his self or clothes if he was moving at any rate of speed to determine which version is closer to the truth.
The big defense is reaching for officer weapon and assault and battery of uniform officer. The big persecution is excessive use of a firearm. Exceeding the measures that would be needed to restrain the perpetrator. Wilson, will be indicted. The amount of times Wilson pulled the trigger and hit Brown will be a major focus in the case.
If Brown is still moving toward Wilson then training tells him to keep pulling the trigger until the subject is stopped. The number of times his weapon was discharged will not be a factor if Brown was determined to still be a threat. Both autopsies had already determined the last shot is the one that stopped him.
I feel bad for the store owner. First he gets assaulted and robbed by the kid. Then when the kid gets killed by police and video is released of the robbery, looters destroy his store. He didn't even do anything
Exactly, where is the fucking outcry on that!!! These fucking low-lives were stealing and looting so many stores...This poor guy who owned the store got screwed over by idiots and thugs
If any of the shots hit Brown in the back of the head the officer is probably going to be convicted. If they were all shots from the front and at close range he will probably walk.
I don't see the point in this. Once the officer feels deadly force is necessary he's going to pull the trigger as many times as necessary, especially with a big dude. I have no clue if deadly force was in fact necessary, but I'm sure that's what any potential investigation/lawsuit will center on, not how many times he fired.
Clearly, something that should be changed in training. I think an officer should be there to restrain; killing or taking another's life in self defense is last/worst case scenario. Aim low; a bullet to the leg should be sufficient to restrain most individuals. Officers should also have a camera on their chest, to keep all parties readily aware they are being recorded.
Seems like at some point the cop decided he was going to kill brown. This wasn't a police officer trying to restrain a perp. It was a police officer with clear intent to kill.
Indeed it was. Would be nice to know what exactly went down as to why the officer made that decision but that's never going to happen.
So this individual assaulted a police officer (he pushed him back into the car right?) and the officer shot him? I have to side with the police here, it might have been an overreaction but these guys have to go home every night to and honestly they dont know who they are dealing with...
Officers are trained to aim at center mass, shooting for a hand or leg is for the movies, it is too hard to do to ensure the officer is kept safe.
What do you do with a 300 lb man running at you with intent to at the very least injure you or if the police officers versions is correct kill you? I say kill you because Brown attempted to grab his weapon once already according to the officer.
It's tough man. I hear you, your point is taken. As a trained officer, I think every attempt has to be made to restrain the individual.
Do we have any police officers that can comment? I was always under the impression they were taught to shoot to kill.
