Interesting but certainly not in a dispositive fashion.
Cop sees two men walking in the middle of the street and tells them to get on the sidewalk.
The men know that they've just committed a crime and then this cop pulls up. That's got to freak them out. They behave accordingly.
The cop can't make sense of why they're behaving as they are. He senses something isn't right.
This goes to explaining Brown's behavior, wrestling for the cop's gun and fleeing. He's not trying to kill the cop because he's mad about jaywalking, he's trying to kill the cop because he fears he's going to be arrested within a minute or so.
All the cop knows is that this jaywalker is suddenly trying to kill him.
Really? How exactly do you know this for a fact? At least THREE eyewitnesses say otherwise.
Do you understand the concept of
parsimony.
Is it an everyday, or even a regular, occurrence in Ferguson for cops to pull their guns while in their car and fire the gun? Can we agree that this is irregular?
Can we agree that cops encounter a lot of uncooperative and belligerent people and don't flip out and assassinate every who gives them a hard time?
A cop encountered two mouthy men who are jaywalking is not very likely to flip out and want to kill one of them.
So, assuming that the cop is the one who flipped out for no reason strains credulity.
Brown though, knew that he had just robbed a store. This means he actually has a reason to be combative with the cop. He has reason to go for the cop's gun. He has reason to want to kill the cop. He has reason to flee.
The first witness who set the narrative admitted to robbing the store with Brown. He has every reason to lie, slant or shade the story to the benefit of himself and Brown. Once that story is out, other witnesses fit their story to the established narrative - this is human nature.
I don't believe the accomplice and I believe subsequent witnesses accounts of what was happening during the struggle are not independent observations.
The cops story makes the most sense and is simplest to believe with the fewest leaps of faith required.
To believe Brown requires us to accept a robber who physically assaulted a store owner was an angel and model of good behavior AFTER the cop asked him to get on the sidewalk and after he refused. So rebellious to the cop when it starts but then a choir boy after the cop stopped the car. What we're being asked to believe if behavior at crucial moments which is directly opposite of the defiant behavior actually exhibited only minutes before.
