Brown Autopsy Report Leaked by NYT

originally posted by: weirdguy
Neck, jaw, eye and crown? Are they all bullet wounds? A shot to the arm or leg could be justified but those shots are meant to kill. You'd also have to assume that the victim was shot multiple times once he was already down.

No one ever shoots to wound, so there is no such training to shoot in the leg or arm since no one can actually pull that off outside of the movies.

Bottom line is if you are going to shoot you hit center mass, or you will most likely never hit anything. One side note, Most training is done with 2 taps to the chest and one tap to the head, military style since under those circumstances you are most likely shooting someone with a vest on. A volley of many bullets means the cop was freaking out at that point and was out of control. Was that because he was bum rushed, we do not know.

Add:

One side note...when should a cop go from lethal force back to controlled force. In a situation of where a cop is bum rushed and then the person tries to flee, does that still mean the cop has all justification to continue to use lethal force when he is actually out of that situation when he needs to use it?

One thing that just came to my mind. This autopsy was preformed on request from the family. The report states that all of the bullet wounds came from the front. There is no mention of any of the bullets being fired from above. The report only mentions that the head was in a downward position when the last bullet hit. The medical examiner hypothesizes that the head was lowered in either surrender or due to charging. Is it safe to assume that Michael was standing when all bullets were shot?


Add:

Another thought that came into my head. The DOJ is still going to do a third autopsy. It would really look weird if the DOJ autopsy did not concur with the previous two autopsy (assuming that both autopsies have similar findings.) The only evidence that could be in difference would be the powder burns on Michael's clothing. But the clothing could have been contaminated during the transfer from St Louis county to the DOJ if the reports are not consistent.

So does it matter at all that this is a 'leaked' report? Could there still be more to this that we still do not know or since changed since this is preliminary?
I have not read all 4 pages as I am more involved in another thread, will read all of it tomorrow, this just my holder i guess.
And yes i know about the subscribe button

Here's the body face down in road

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: VoidHawk

originally posted by: Bilk22
This big dude just assaulted you inside your cruiser and apparently tried to grab your gun.

Are either of those two events confirmed? Just wondering because I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere?

Here's a link with a video and transcript. Pertinent info at about 6:30

Link

Here's another link for the video.

Yeah, that's not a witness statement. That is a woman calling into a radio show and saying that she is a friend of Darren Wilson and his wife and that she is relaying what was told to her by Mrs. Wilson who was told this by Darren Wilson.

? It's the original cellphone video in both links. The first link has more than one video.

There's nothing about leaning in the window or "bull rush" in the cellphone video. Have you listened to listened to what's overheard in the video yourself? I don't think that the transcript in your source is accurate.

#2 But him and the police was both in the truck, then he ran – the police got out and ran after him

I've listened to this part numerous times and I'm not getting "But him and the police was both in the truck." The audio is very low and garbled.

I think the next part is also wrong.

#2 Then the next thing I know he doubled back toward him cus

It sounds a lot more like "The next thing I know he's coming back toward the truck" (truck being what the witness is referring to the police vehicle as — possibly an SUV?) I know that's a trivial difference, but continuing on.

#1. Oh, the police got his gun

I'm not sure this is correct. It *could* be, but it doesn't sound like it. My first thought was "Oh, the police officer?" but I wouldn't stake my life on it.

2 The police kept dumpin on him, and I’m thinking the police kept missing – he like – be like – but he kept coming toward him

There was something said in between the "he like" "be like" bit and that "but he kept coming toward him" doesn't seem to be right at all. The person taking the video happens to talk right at this point and you can only hear parts of it but it sounds more like "but he was like (pissed off on him?), dumpin' at him."

Give it a listen and let me know what you think.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
...There was something said in between the "he like" "be like" bit and that "but he kept coming toward him" doesn't seem to be right at all. The person taking the video happens to talk right at this point and you can only hear parts of it but it sounds more like "but he was like (pissed off on him?), dumpin' at him."

...

IMO - the part that fits between "he like" and "be like" and "but he kept coming toward him"...are physical actions...which would fit with someone demonstrating the "impacts" or apparent pauses/hesitations that result from being hit by the officer's gunfire...
Thus - "he like" ...shows/demonstrates a body movement... "be like" ...shows/demonstrates another body movement... "but he kept coming toward him"...
And - that would seem to fit with the "second/third-hand" testimony of the friend of the officer's wife...being - that the officer shot - and hit the victim...but, the victim kept coming...which convinced the officer (or - sent him into a heightened state of panic) that Brown was high on something...that might enable him to press-on through the already-inflicted wounds.

a reply to: feldercarb

One thing that just came to my mind. This autopsy was preformed on request from the family. The report states that all of the bullet wounds came from the front. There is no mention of any of the bullets being fired from above. The report only mentions that the head was in a downward position when the last bullet hit. The medical examiner hypothesizes that the head was lowered in either surrender or due to charging. Is it safe to assume that Michael was standing when all bullets were shot?

I don't think it's safe to assume anything except that it's unlikely he was standing fully erect and shot in the top of the head. You have to figure that it barrel of the gun had to be in line with or above the top of the head. It could have been that Michael Brown was coming in for a tackle with his head really low.

In the cellphone video, there is a man shouting @ about 2:37. He says, "The police fired on that boy for no reason! He had his hands up. How he hit the ground and he still fired on him?"

Was this man an eye witness or was he repeating something that somebody had said in the few minutes between the incident and the start of the video?

a reply to: WanDash

It of course could fit, but I don't actually hear it. I've listened to those few seconds a few dozen times now and I'm not hearing anything that I could honestly construe as "but he kept coming toward him." Give it a few listens yourself if you haven't already, it's right around the 7 minute mark.

What Tiffany Mitchell has said, in at least three interviews, was that Michael Brown appeared to jerk as if hit by one of the shots she's claiming the cop fired after exiting the vehicle. She said he stopped then and turned and put his hands up as Darren Wilson walked toward him and continued firing. Tiffany Mitchell's statement was taken by the police in the immediate aftermath and it would be interesting to read it and compare it to her later statements.

Human memory is a very mutable thing though. If Michael Brown was indeed shot in the shoulder before running up the street, there should be a trail of splatter that leads as far from the vehicle as he progressed. The distance from this splatter to where he died should be a good indicator of how far back toward the vehicle he'd come. If this distance is a few feet, this wouldn't seem to support a "bum rush" or "bull rush." On the other hand, if he came 15 feet or more back toward the car, it might point towards this scenario.

Another thought that I had was that according to all accounts, including the Darren Wilson/FPD account, there was only a single shot fired from inside the car. That means that at least 5 of the entrance wounds occurred after Darren Wilson exited the vehicle, including two shots to the head, one being to the top of the head and the other one more or less through or just above the right eye (this one going through his face, exiting his jaw and entering his collarbone).

Thinking this through, if he was shot in the top of the head first (during a charge), would he have then raised his head in order for another shot to hit him in the eye? I think a more likely scenario is that he was shot in the eye, his head came down and he was shot again in the top of the head.

EDIT:

In another thread, Kali74 also makes an interesting observation:

From what I can see in the diagram, the rest of the bullets struck the inside of the right arm. To ME, that is strongly suggesting that Brown had his arms up

Has anyone noticed anything that Mike Brown might have seen, causing him to turn around and start running back to the police truck? Like another police car coming down the street in the distance from the direction he was running? Does anyone remember the timeline of when the next police car or the ambulance from the preceding "sick call" came onto the scene? This would make sense with the part about the cop drove past them, then backed up...

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: weirdguy
Neck, jaw, eye and crown? Are they all bullet wounds? A shot to the arm or leg could be justified but those shots are meant to kill. You'd also have to assume that the victim was shot multiple times once he was already down.

How do you make the assumption that he was shot when on the ground?

I'm just guessing that, because that is a lot of bullet wounds to inflict upon someone before they hit the ground especially when 2 are head shots. But then I have never shot anyone before so I am just guessing here.

I don't buy the bullrushing scenario. I don't think anyone would run toward a gun unless he wanted to commit suicide.

I wish I could find it, however there is a video that was just posted on Facebook earlier today, or yesterday. The video was recorded on a smartphone, and it clearly showed Brown's body, the person recording it, could be heard siding with the family, HOWEVER, this is critical, there were two people, one a neighbor who witnessed it, explaining to the other person that Brown was taunting and charging the police officer when he was shot. What makes this key is they did NOT know they were being recorded. This whole situation on blaming the police is turning stupid, the "peaceful" protesters are anything but, and people like Al Sharpton are just making it worse.

Here is the link: LiveLeak

This race baiting, anti-police stupidity needs to stop.

Grim

originally posted by: MOMof3
I don't buy the bullrushing scenario. I don't think anyone would run toward a gun unless he wanted to commit suicide.

Or a lunatic.
Or under the influence of drugs.
Or just under the influence of testosterone and thinking that he was invincible, like some 18 year old males are apt to be.

ETA:
Anyone else see evidence of surplus testosterone in the Quiktrip video, where he assaulted the employee?

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: rickymouse
Well, the body has six holes minimum in it from what I read in another article, two of which were in his head. Now no matter what, the six bullets in this unarmed guy are enough to put this cop away for something. The people in that town have to settle down already. The vandalism and hateful protesting are uncalled for. There are people high up overlooking this to make sure justice is served, it is not a local issue that can be covered up anymore.

I'm not big fan for LEOs, but put yourself in that cops shoes. This big dude just assaulted you inside your cruiser and apparently tried to grab your gun. So you have to assume he is either on meth or just crazy. After running he decides to turn and rush you even when you have your gun drawn. Are you going to stand there and get taken out or are you going to shoot? And, after you shoot, you're not even sure you hit him because he keeps coming at you. What do you do brave boy?

What you are saying is an assumption of the cops statement. I haven't actually seen a released official statement from the cop yet. It is in major conflict with eye witnesses statements. This sounds more like an opinion.

You've already convicted the cop in the many posts I've seen from you, so your "let's wait and see" is BS.

Yup, the cop did not act appropriately. At minimum he should lose his job and face some charges.
The link you posted to show your evidence showed no video that backed anything and the witness was a friend of the cop who was not at the scene. I don't know what kind of a news thing the brenner brief is, looks like some people got together and decided to get an online paper together to voice their beliefs.

No. You're completely wrong about the voice in the video. You're obviously not paying enough attention in this important matter and just see and hear what you want.

The voice in the video, was a person in the neighborhood that saw the entire event. They were speaking and probably now knowing they were being recorded. It's probably the best testimony one can get. Sort of like "Candid Camera".

originally posted by: weirdguy

originally posted by: Bilk22

originally posted by: weirdguy
Neck, jaw, eye and crown? Are they all bullet wounds? A shot to the arm or leg could be justified but those shots are meant to kill. You'd also have to assume that the victim was shot multiple times once he was already down.

How do you make the assumption that he was shot when on the ground?

I'm just guessing that, because that is a lot of bullet wounds to inflict upon someone before they hit the ground especially when 2 are head shots. But then I have never shot anyone before so I am just guessing here.

Never shot anyone either. The video I posted has a person claiming that the cop shot and missed. I guess he surmised he missed because Brown didn't hit the ground after a few went off. The cop probably thought the same and that's why he kept firing.

originally posted by: MOMof3
I don't buy the bullrushing scenario. I don't think anyone would run toward a gun unless he wanted to commit suicide.

Well we've all heard 'suicide by cop" before, but I don't think that's the case here either. I think we have a madman that was enraged and wanted to teach the cop a lesson.

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
This is the evidence of poor training. Too many bullets. None to the lower extremities to keep him put and a top of the head shot?



This shows serious issues on the police officers value of this mans life.

The top of the head shot is consistent then with what some witnesses say was Brown bumrushing the officer with his head down after he was originally shot in the torso. Also, the autopsy shows he wasn't shot in the back while fleeing, as some other witnesess suggested.

"And Michael taunts him… And then all the sudden he just started bumrushing him. He just started coming at him full speed".

www.ijreview.com...

come on he was blatently high on drugs to bull rush a policeman and to still keep coming at you after three shots,drugs drugs drugs ,,

originally posted by: skunkape23
The only way a bullet could enter his eye, exit his jaw, and reenter his collar bone, is if he was shot while he was down.
There is no excuse for that.

You watch too much television.

a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

I agree whole heartedly with your post. Most all precincts have community affairs departments and I'm pretty sure I saw one on the Ferguson police web site.

If people living in these areas want to take control of their communities, they should stop allowing the crime to occur and demand it from within. The video posted a few days ago by a black guy who was enraged by the actions of the looters said a lot towards that.

The PTB want to take guns away from the people, they should start in the inner cities where kids are being killed by kids every day with illegal weapons. No one in those communities are calling for that. None that i've seen anyway. None of the leaders such as Sharpton or Jackson are doing that. Why? Because incidents such as with Michael Brown keep them relevant and put cash in their pockets. These are the true criminals and they should be held accountable.