Michael Brown was 148 feet from Wilson as he was shot to death

[PredFan]

From the reams of grand jury testimony and police evidence, here are some key points that, if this case had gone to trial, could have been highlighted by prosecutors (not including the witnesses who appeared to contradict Wilson’s testimony):

1. Wilson washed away blood evidence.

In an interview with police investigators, Wilson admitted that after the shooting he returned to police headquarters and washed blood off his body -- physical evidence that could have helped to prove or disprove a critical piece of Wilson’s testimony regarding his struggle with Brown inside the police car. He told his interrogator that he had blood on both of his hands. “I think it was his blood,” Wilson said referring to Brown. He added that he was not cut anywhere.



A photo of Wilson's injuries taken at the hospital after his altercation with Brown, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney's Office.

2. The first officer to interview Wilson failed to take any notes.

The first supervising officer to the scene, who was also the first person to interview Wilson about the incident, didn’t take any notes about their conversation. In testimony more than a month after the incident, the officer offered his account from memory. He explained that he hadn’t been equipped with a recorder and hadn’t tried to take any written notes due to the chaotic nature of the situation. He also didn’t write up any notes soon after the fact. “I didn’t take notes because at that point in time I had multiple things going through my head besides what Darren was telling me,” the officer stated.

The same officer admitted during his grand jury testimony that Wilson had called him personally after they both had been interviewed by investigators. Wilson then went over his account again with the officer. The officer told the grand jury that there were no discrepancies between Wilson’s first account in person and his second account on the phone. But the call raises questions about whether Wilson may have influenced witness testimony.

3. Investigators failed to measure the likely distance between Brown and Wilson.

An unnamed medical legal examiner who responded to the shooting testified before the grand jury that he or she had not taken any distance measurements at the scene, because they appeared “self-explanatory.”

“Somebody shot somebody. There was no question as to any distances or anything of that nature at the time I was there,” the examiner told the jury.

The examiner also noted that he or she hadn’t been able to take pictures at the scene -- as is standard -- because the camera's batteries were dead. The examiner later testified that he or she accompanied investigators from the St. Louis County Police Department as they photographed Brown’s body.



A photo of the Aug. 9 crime scene in Ferguson, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney's Office.

4. Investigators did not test Wilson’s gun for fingerprints.

Talking with police investigators and before the grand jury, Wilson claimed that Brown had grabbed at Wilson's gun during the initial incident in the police car and that Brown's hand was on the firearm when it misfired at least once. Wilson also told police that he thought Brown would overpower him and shoot him with his own gun. “I was not in control of the gun,” Wilson said. Eventually he regained control of the weapon and fired from within the car.

Investigators could have helped to prove or disprove Wilson’s testimony by testing his service weapon for Brown’s fingerprints. But the gun was not tested for fingerprints. An investigator argued before the grand jury that the decision was made not to test the weapon because Wilson “never lost control of his gun.”

5. Wilson did not immediately turn his weapon over to investigators after killing Brown.

A detective with the St. Louis County Police Department, who conducted the first official interview of Wilson, testified to the grand jury that Wilson had packaged his own service weapon into an evidence envelope following his arrival at the police station in the wake of the shooting. The detective said the practice was not usual for his department, though he was unclear on the protocol of the Ferguson Police Department. He said he didn’t explore that aspect further at the time.

According to the detective’s testimony, standard practice for the St. Louis County Police Department would be for an officer involved in a shooting to keep his or her weapon holstered until it can be turned over to a supervisor and a crime scene unit detective. While that clearly didn’t take place in Wilson’s case, the detective also testified that he believed the firearm was handled in a way that preserved the chain of custody.



A photo of Wilson's service weapon, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney's Office.

6. An initial interview with investigators was delayed while Wilson traveled to the hospital with his superiors.

The same St. Louis County Police Department detective also testified that while he had intended to conduct his initial interview with Wilson at the Ferguson police station, a lieutenant colonel with the Ferguson Police Department decided that Wilson first needed to go to the hospital for medical treatment. The detective said that while it is common practice to defer to any medical decision of this nature, Wilson appeared to be in good health and didn’t have any notable injuries that would have prevented an interview from being conducted at the station. Wilson would also testify that he didn’t believe he needed to go to the hospital.

But that day, Wilson got into a vehicle with the lieutenant colonel and another Ferguson police official and went to the hospital, while the St. Louis County detective traveled in another vehicle.

7. Wilson’s initial interview with the detective conflicts with information given in later testimony.

In his first interview with the detective, just hours after Brown’s death, Wilson didn’t claim to have any knowledge that Brown was suspected of stealing cigarillos from a nearby convenience store. The only mention of cigarillos he made to the detective was a recollection of the call about the theft that had come across his radio and that provided a description of the suspect.

Wilson also told the detective that Brown had passed something off to his friend before punching Wilson in the face. At the time, the detective said, Wilson didn’t know what the item was, referring to it only as “something.” In subsequent interviews and testimony, however, Wilson claimed that he knew Brown’s hands were full of cigarillos and that fact eventually led him to believe Brown may have been a suspect in the theft.

Lol, the breadth and depth of your ignorance is astounding! You actually think, actually believe, that you found something that the prosecutors didn't? Your stupidity is a never ending source of amazement.

 

[orogenicman]

He was 148 feet away and Wilson managed to get two head shots on the boy with a police issue Glock? Wow, that's amazing. Oh wait...

You've been fooled by a photo/meme, and a bad one at that. Officer Wilson was carrying a .40 caliber Sig-Sauer P239 handgun at the time of the shooting. I've also seen several photos and other images depicting a Glock, but from what I've read that is not the firearm he was carrying.

Glock, Sauer, whatever. Doesn't matter. He simply did not shoot the man twice in the head rapid fire from 148 feet with a handgun. Didn't happen.

 

[PredFan]

3 bullet casings found close to browns body

evidence the distance between the two which was much MUCH less then 148 feet

Or that Wilson picked up his brass and moved it.

With 40 onlookers, at noon on a residential street and none of the witnesses reported seeing this movement.

Delusional much?

Delusional a LOT.

 

[jon_berzerk]

3 bullet casings found close to browns body

evidence the distance between the two which was much MUCH less then 148 feet

Or that Wilson picked up his brass and moved it.

quit lying liar

 

[jon_berzerk]

3 bullet casings found close to browns body

evidence the distance between the two which was much MUCH less then 148 feet

Lefties have made up their minds, facts won't deter them.

yeah like joe

and make up their own facts

 

[jon_berzerk]

The dolts on the left watch too much crime TV!!


Mental cases........shit should never even gone to the grand jury.

"The community" demanded a grand jury since they were not allowed to lynch Darren Wilson.

they wanted a grand jury because they didnt trust the prosecutor

now that the grand jury returns in favor of the officer

they want the prosecutor to go into action

--LOL

3 bullet casings found close to browns body

evidence the distance between the two which was much MUCH less then 148 feet

Or that Wilson picked up his brass and moved it.

With 40 onlookers, at noon on a residential street and none of the witnesses reported seeing this movement.

Delusional much?

much

--LOL

 

[mudwhistle]

We already know that lefties are NEVER interested in the truth.

No the fucking truth asshole is that no kid should be shot down in the street for stealing cigs and punching a cop.

Nope, he should instead be beaten severely about the head and shoulders......

 

[JoeB131]

The forensic evidence supported Darren Wilson's version of the events. You disagree, forensics says your wrong. Why do you lefties hate science anyway? Is it because facts are unfeeling? Facts can't be coerced into changing due to skin color? Facts tell the truth?

the Forensics only proved he wasn't shot in the back.

they don't show if he had his hands up when the bullet went through his skull. there's no way to tell that, forensically.

How simple minded you are.

Pointing out he obvious. Which "Forensic" test proved his hands weren't up when the last bullet entered his brain?

Oh, wait. YOu don't have one of those.

What you did have were 16 witnesses who said his hands were up.

 

[JoeB131]

I bet you think anyone that has had a family member killed by a black should be excluded from police work, law school, or elective office, don't you?

No, but they should recuse themselves from cases involving race. Such a person WOULD have been excluded from a jury.

 

[JoeB131]

[
"The community" demanded a grand jury since they were not allowed to lynch Darren Wilson.

No, the community demanded a trial. Not the farce we got.

 

[Roadrunner]

I bet you think anyone that has had a family member killed by a black should be excluded from police work, law school, or elective office, don't you?

No, but they should recuse themselves from cases involving race. Such a person WOULD have been excluded from a jury.

Get over it, your "hero" was a thug who brought on his own death.

 

[Roadrunner]

[
"The community" demanded a grand jury since they were not allowed to lynch Darren Wilson.

No, the community demanded a trial. Not the farce we got.

You have never explained how you get to a trial without a Grand Jury first.

Or, did Obama issue an executive order voiding the 5th Amendment, and I missed it?

 

[JoeB131]

With 40 onlookers, at noon on a residential street and none of the witnesses reported seeing this movement.

Delusional much?

You mean the crime scene that the cops left the body in the street for hours, where they didn't file an incident report, where the coroner took no pictures because his camera battery was dead, where Wilson was allowed to drive his vehicle back to the station and enter his own gun into evidence, after being allowed to wash up without being photographed?

 

[JoeB131]

I bet you think anyone that has had a family member killed by a black should be excluded from police work, law school, or elective office, don't you?

No, but they should recuse themselves from cases involving race. Such a person WOULD have been excluded from a jury.

Get over it, your "hero" was a thug who brought on his own death.

Non-responsive. McCollough had a bias and should have recused himself. and if a special prosecutor came to the same conclusion he did, it would have had more credibility

 

[Roadrunner]

I bet you think anyone that has had a family member killed by a black should be excluded from police work, law school, or elective office, don't you?

No, but they should recuse themselves from cases involving race. Such a person WOULD have been excluded from a jury.

Get over it, your "hero" was a thug who brought on his own death.

Non-responsive. McCollough had a bias and should have recused himself. and if a special prosecutor came to the same conclusion he did, it would have had more credibility

If IF were a skiff, we could all take a boat ride.

 

[JoeB131]

From the reams of grand jury testimony and police evidence, here are some key points that, if this case had gone to trial, could have been highlighted by prosecutors (not including the witnesses who appeared to contradict Wilson’s testimony):

1. Wilson washed away blood evidence.

In an interview with police investigators, Wilson admitted that after the shooting he returned to police headquarters and washed blood off his body -- physical evidence that could have helped to prove or disprove a critical piece of Wilson’s testimony regarding his struggle with Brown inside the police car. He told his interrogator that he had blood on both of his hands. “I think it was his blood,” Wilson said referring to Brown. He added that he was not cut anywhere.



A photo of Wilson's injuries taken at the hospital after his altercation with Brown, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney's Office.

2. The first officer to interview Wilson failed to take any notes.

The first supervising officer to the scene, who was also the first person to interview Wilson about the incident, didn’t take any notes about their conversation. In testimony more than a month after the incident, the officer offered his account from memory. He explained that he hadn’t been equipped with a recorder and hadn’t tried to take any written notes due to the chaotic nature of the situation. He also didn’t write up any notes soon after the fact. “I didn’t take notes because at that point in time I had multiple things going through my head besides what Darren was telling me,” the officer stated.

The same officer admitted during his grand jury testimony that Wilson had called him personally after they both had been interviewed by investigators. Wilson then went over his account again with the officer. The officer told the grand jury that there were no discrepancies between Wilson’s first account in person and his second account on the phone. But the call raises questions about whether Wilson may have influenced witness testimony.

3. Investigators failed to measure the likely distance between Brown and Wilson.

An unnamed medical legal examiner who responded to the shooting testified before the grand jury that he or she had not taken any distance measurements at the scene, because they appeared “self-explanatory.”

“Somebody shot somebody. There was no question as to any distances or anything of that nature at the time I was there,” the examiner told the jury.

The examiner also noted that he or she hadn’t been able to take pictures at the scene -- as is standard -- because the camera's batteries were dead. The examiner later testified that he or she accompanied investigators from the St. Louis County Police Department as they photographed Brown’s body.



A photo of the Aug. 9 crime scene in Ferguson, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney's Office.

4. Investigators did not test Wilson’s gun for fingerprints.

Talking with police investigators and before the grand jury, Wilson claimed that Brown had grabbed at Wilson's gun during the initial incident in the police car and that Brown's hand was on the firearm when it misfired at least once. Wilson also told police that he thought Brown would overpower him and shoot him with his own gun. “I was not in control of the gun,” Wilson said. Eventually he regained control of the weapon and fired from within the car.

Investigators could have helped to prove or disprove Wilson’s testimony by testing his service weapon for Brown’s fingerprints. But the gun was not tested for fingerprints. An investigator argued before the grand jury that the decision was made not to test the weapon because Wilson “never lost control of his gun.”

5. Wilson did not immediately turn his weapon over to investigators after killing Brown.

A detective with the St. Louis County Police Department, who conducted the first official interview of Wilson, testified to the grand jury that Wilson had packaged his own service weapon into an evidence envelope following his arrival at the police station in the wake of the shooting. The detective said the practice was not usual for his department, though he was unclear on the protocol of the Ferguson Police Department. He said he didn’t explore that aspect further at the time.

According to the detective’s testimony, standard practice for the St. Louis County Police Department would be for an officer involved in a shooting to keep his or her weapon holstered until it can be turned over to a supervisor and a crime scene unit detective. While that clearly didn’t take place in Wilson’s case, the detective also testified that he believed the firearm was handled in a way that preserved the chain of custody.



A photo of Wilson's service weapon, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney's Office.

6. An initial interview with investigators was delayed while Wilson traveled to the hospital with his superiors.

The same St. Louis County Police Department detective also testified that while he had intended to conduct his initial interview with Wilson at the Ferguson police station, a lieutenant colonel with the Ferguson Police Department decided that Wilson first needed to go to the hospital for medical treatment. The detective said that while it is common practice to defer to any medical decision of this nature, Wilson appeared to be in good health and didn’t have any notable injuries that would have prevented an interview from being conducted at the station. Wilson would also testify that he didn’t believe he needed to go to the hospital.

But that day, Wilson got into a vehicle with the lieutenant colonel and another Ferguson police official and went to the hospital, while the St. Louis County detective traveled in another vehicle.

7. Wilson’s initial interview with the detective conflicts with information given in later testimony.

In his first interview with the detective, just hours after Brown’s death, Wilson didn’t claim to have any knowledge that Brown was suspected of stealing cigarillos from a nearby convenience store. The only mention of cigarillos he made to the detective was a recollection of the call about the theft that had come across his radio and that provided a description of the suspect.

Wilson also told the detective that Brown had passed something off to his friend before punching Wilson in the face. At the time, the detective said, Wilson didn’t know what the item was, referring to it only as “something.” In subsequent interviews and testimony, however, Wilson claimed that he knew Brown’s hands were full of cigarillos and that fact eventually led him to believe Brown may have been a suspect in the theft.

Lol, the breadth and depth of your ignorance is astounding! You actually think, actually believe, that you found something that the prosecutors didn't? Your stupidity is a never ending source of amazement.

How about addressing the points he brings up.

You guys claim up and down the "Forensics" back Wilson, and then ignore the fact that the investigation and evidence gathering was sloppy.

 

[JoeB131]

[
"The community" demanded a grand jury since they were not allowed to lynch Darren Wilson.

No, the community demanded a trial. Not the farce we got.

You have never explained how you get to a trial without a Grand Jury first.

Or, did Obama issue an executive order voiding the 5th Amendment, and I missed it?

Actually, he totally had the option to get charges without a grand jury. He just wanted someone else to share the blame.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The evidence was put in front of the Grand Jury.
Many witnesses were involved.

The Grand Jury found Wilson was innocent of wrong doing.

No. False.

The Grand Jury claims to not have enough evidence to indict.

There is a HUGE difference.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I see nothing that says that a 239 cannot shoot 50 yards. In fact, most pistols can. Easily.

In fact, it would be a shitty pistol, or in this case, semi-automatic handgun, if you cannot fire a decent shot for at least 100 meters.

WOW. You have shown your absolute lack of knowledge of firearms very clearly. First off, the term "pistol" covers both semi-automatic handguns and revolvers. It's a more general term, as in this case neither revolvers nor semi-automatic handguns are EFFECTIVE at the range of 50+ yards. Then there's that word again "effective"; which means at what distance the firearm (even long guns) can be expected to be capable of easily hitting a target and providing sufficient stopping power to put the target down more often than not. A .40 caliber handgun is not EFFECTIVE at 50 yards. The probability of hitting the target and the stopping power at that range are very low. Especially with adrenaline running through the body. You asked for a link.... how about 15+ years of competitive action pistol shooting? Hell, standing at 50 yards and shooting at a man-sized target without the adrenaline and split-second decision making is incredibly difficult. Know what you're talking about before you open your mouth

Or, it can also mean that Williams lied about his position when he fired the shots.

I honestly don't care. Officer Wilson did the wold a service by removing Mike Brown from it. He should have gotten a commendation, not an inquisition.

Then why is this pistol used by the US navy, including navy seals?

And where is the link that specifies the range of said pistol?

 

[Statistikhengst]

It's really simple to measure the distance, and quite accurately:




Those who measured started at the fire-hydrant that was near the police car from which officer Wilson fired the deadly shots:

Distance from the driver's side door (when officer Wilson claims he fired the shots) to the fire hydrant: 17 feet.

Distance from the fire hydrant to the spot where Michael Brown was standing when he was shot: 131 feet.

131 +17 = 148.

Now, there is an angle involved between the cop car and the hydrant, which means that actual distance of 17 feet, calculated as a straight line, will be somewhat less, maybe one third less. So, the true distance may be 140 to 141 feet. The angle represented by the yellow line looks to be about 35 degrees to the plain, if you consider the straight path of the sidewalk next to the hydrant to be the plain.

The police report says 35 feet. And a police officer said TWICE in a press conference that the distance was 35 feet:



(1:13 and 6:01)

35 feet and 148 are nowhere close to each other in terms of distance. 148 feet = 49 yards, or just about one-half of a football field.

The film clearly documents the start and end points, and they can be confirmed by police photos and photos shot by witnesses on that day.

35 feet could be an argument for immediate danger for a police officer. But 148 feet? No way.

Why did the Ferguson police lie about this detail?

And if the Ferguson police have lied about this, then we must ask what else they have lied about?

You know, sometimes it's all about simple math. The Ferguson police can lie for a while, but they cannot change geography and they cannot undo so many photos and videos.



Discuss.

Does a suspected perpetrator who is 148 feet away from an officer represent a danger to that officer's life?

That is not 130+ feet.

-Geaux

They just measured it. Did you not see the numbers?