Over a period of 100 days, 12 jurors heard more than 70 hours of testimony from 60+ witnesses and produced more than 1,000 pages of evidence. Their decision was not to charge officer Darren Wilson with a crime. A decision reached by 9 whites, 3 blacks, 7 men and 5 women. A decision reached in the face of extraordinary public pressure and media bias.
The members of this particular grand jury (which was formed long before Michael Brown was killed on August 9th 2014) were asked to determine if Darren Wilson acted within the parameters of his duties as a police officer when he shot and killed Michael Brown. In light of irrefutable forensic evidence that either proved or disproved the varying eye witness accounts, the members of the grand jury concluded that Officer Wilson had not committed a crime.
That is a hard pill to swallow for many people. For more than three months they watched the media exploit this tragedy to bolster their ratings. They heard anchors irresponsibly report half truths and rumors as if they were facts so as to create a narrative that pandered to their viewers. I’m not surprised though, this is what the news media does now; It doesn’t matter if you’re on the Right or the Left, if you watch CNN, FOX or MSNBC your preferred media outlets reports the news through a lens that speaks directly to you, for you. I digress.
Here are some pretty irrefutable scientific facts about the Michael Brown shooting that should (if you’re someone who is willing to base your opinion on fact and common sense rather than allegiance to an organization or pride) tell you all you need to know about why the grand jury didn’t decide to bring charges against Darren Wilson:
- Michael Brown had just committed strong-arm Robbery and was being now being questioned by a police officer who had recently heard his description over the radio (this goes to state of mind and motive to attack an officer).
- There was an altercation at/inside the police vehicle where two shots were ultimately fired, one of which struck Michael Brown in the thumb.
- Michael Brown was never shot in the back.
- There was a trail of blood that ran 25ft past where Michael Brown finally came to rest in the middle of the street.
Why are these important facts ?
The fact that Michael Brown had recently committed a crime that he thought he might go to jail for begins to explain why he decided to be confrontational with a police officer. Had he not recently broken the law, and as a result feared going to jail, it is likely that this situation never would have escalated to a shooting and certainly wouldn’t have escalated as quickly as it. Without such an expedited escalation, other officers what have been able to arrive on the scene and (presumably) better control the situation.
The fact that there was an altercation at/in the police vehicle leads any rational thinker to conclude that Michael Brown was the aggressor. Ask yourself these questions: How could a man, not looking for a confrontation possible get into a fight with someone sitting inside of a vehicle ? Couldn’t that man simply stay at a safe distance from the car ? Wouldn’t that force the person in the car to exit the vehicle in order to proceed with a fight ? Of course it does. Physical evidence of an altercation taking place at/inside the police vehicle clearly suggests that Michael Brown reached inside the vehicle to engage Officer Wilson in a physical confrontation. Two shots were fired from inside the car, one of them striking Michael Brown in the hand. It was this shot that (presumably) caused Brown to back away and even run from the vehicle.
Conflicting eye witness accounts leave us with only speculation as to what happened while Michael Brown was running from the police vehicle. Was he being shot at ? Was Darren Wilson ordering him to “freeze” or “get on the ground” ? Only Darren Wilson knows the answer to that question. What we do know (from forensic evidence) is that Brown was never shot in the back. We know that at some point he stopped running, turned around, and started making his way back toward Officer Wilson. Some have described this as a “charge” others as a “run” (both of those accounts came from anonymous african-american witnesses who were too scared/intimidated to speak to the media).
However the action is being described, evidence proves that Brown was moving toward Officer Wilson, prompting Wilson to shoot Brown several times in the chest, arms, and finally the head which presumably caused Michael Brown’s death. We know this because there is a trail of blood that leads 25ft + beyond where Michael Brown eventually came to a rest in the street.
These are facts. These are not things that can be refuted. They can however, and surely will be argued. Those arguments would be unfounded by facts and should not be taken seriously nor should the people making those arguments. If I hear (or read) an argument founded on facts that alters my opinion I’ll be the first one to edit this text to reflect such a change.
Until then, I encourage people to look at the facts. If you don’t have the time or inclination to look at the facts, I encourage people to tune into a news cast that doesn’t reflect their already strongly-held views. Listen to an apposing opinion, don’t just hear it, actually listen to it and try to understand it. You don’t have to agree with it, but at the very least understanding the apposing viewpoint will bring even more clarity to your beliefs.