Frankly, all we have are forensics. Statements that Michael Brown pushed the officer or he ran away or had hands up are all hearsay, yet the internet sleuths have determined “cased closed” based on some opinions that jive with preconceived notions, judgements, and biases.
This is the autopsy report: http://www.stltoday.com/online/pdf-autopsy-report-for-michael-brown/pdf_ce018d0c-5998-11e4-b700-001a4bcf6878.html
Was lethal force justified? That’s the question. Same as if any law abiding citizen protected her or her own life in such a circumstance facing an unarmed opponent. Maybe, maybe not. Also, while character matters, whether or not you were a boy scout helped the blind or just did a rape 10 minutes prior doesn’t mean squat in a specific separate instance determining justifiable self-defense.
Autopsy questions remain in regards to 2 downward trajectory kill shots to Michael Brown’s head for a tall individual who has to be bent down or on the ground for that to happen, and lacerations only on right side of face and back of left hand from hitting ground. Also shots to the right arm, was it moving, was there a struggle? No soot or stippling for close range gunshots, and no report here of gunshot residue on clothing.
Inconclusive or wait for more info? Interesting to see how each expert will skew the findings. Maybe the police dept. can have cameras in car next time since it is 2014.
While I will agree with you that the evidence is not all in yet, from early days there has been evidence in support of Wilson’s position. The BlackCanseco youtube video was up with in a few days; while people directly interacting with the guy filming tell the usual “cop just shot him for no reason” story, in the background there’s another conversation going on, where one guy who didn’t see what happened is asking another guy who did, and the guy who saw the shooting says that Brown was approaching the officer when shot. I put more faith in the version by people who didn’t realize they were being filmed than I do in the one people told the camera.
And, yes, if someone has already assaulted you, generally the law will support shooting that person if they keep approaching after you’ve told them to back off (varies some by state, but I would guess Missouri allows it). All Wilson had to show is that he reasonably feared for his life, which would not be difficult. As Mythbusters has shown, you CAN “bring a knife to a gunfight,” and win, if you’re close enough, and cops know that first hand. More people get killed in a year with someone’s bare hands than with a rifle; cops don’t buy into the whole, “unarmed equals not dangerous” thing.
The shot to Michael Brown’s head is completely consistent with someone falling through the line of fire. Wilson either ran out of bullets or was cooler than a lot of people shooting at someone; plenty of people who initially looked to be shot in the back, were actually facing the shooter to start with, it’s just that the shooter kept on shooting as they fell.
According to what’s been leaked, the shot to Michael Brown’s hand and maybe arm — one shot may have caused more than one wound, depending on his position at the time — is likely the result of the fight in the car. Various experts (the St. Louis M.E., forensic pathologist Judy Melinek) have said that the wounds are consistent with someone shot at extremely close range, which is consistent with Wilson’s claim that Brown was at times blocking him from shooting in the altercation when Brown was first shot.