Michael Brown Murder: The Official Police Narrative

[JJChambers]

Well it looks like it only took a week for the police to come up with their official story. It is pretty simple:

1. Brown robbed a convenience store minutes before the shooting
2. Officer Wilson, on routine patrol, spotted Brown and Johnson jaywalking
3. Unbeknownst to Officer Wilson, Brown had just committed the robbery when he confronted them about the jaywalking
4. Brown viciously batters Officer Wilson because he thought Wilson was going to arrest him for the robbery

That will be the official line from here on out.

[Cali_Democrat]

1. For #4

It appears there are a number of witnesses including someone who live-tweeted the whole thing.

So far none of the witnesses have said that Brown battered the cop.

[morningfog]

2. So many problems with that. First, it doesn't comport with what the witnesses say happened.

Second, there is no excuse to "confront" anyone for jaywalking.

It was an attack that ended with a dead unarmed teenager shot in the back.

[JJChambers]

5. The police are well on their way to trashing the credibility of the witnesses

They're setting the stage for another Trayvon Martin case. Just watch. The narrative is being cemented as we speak.

[FarPoint]

3. Lists and rules are handy tools.....I like the new DU rule...

Where if a poster has 5 threads or post deleted by the jury, one is suspended from posting crap for 90 days... A vacation of sorts. Smart Administrator.

[Warpy]

4. ROBBERY? Call it shoplifting because that's what it was

and it was an alleged shoplifting unless that dollar packet of cheap cigars was found on either kid.

The jaywalking was on a back street with little to no traffic.

Maybe Brown raised his hands too fast and the breeze shifted a hair of Wilson's coif. That's about all the battery there could have been.

The cops are just digging themselves deeper and deeper with this hyperbolic language.

[Spider Jerusalem]

6. Nope, the video clearly shows physical intimidation and force against the store clerk

that's robbery, by definition.

[Warpy]

8. He pushes the storekeeper out of his way

That might be simple assault, but it still doesn't raise it to the level of robbery. It's still shoplifting.

[Spider Jerusalem]

10. Assault combined with theft = robbery, under the law.

[Cali_Democrat]

7. Your post had me thinking

The cops claim that Michael Brown was belligerent/combative after the officer told him to stop jaywalking and get on the sidewalk.

Well, if someone just robbed a store and they were confronted about jaywalking, wouldn't the alleged suspect do everything he can to avoid confrontation and get on the sidewalk like the officer demanded?

[JJChambers]

9. I wouldn't think so

I would expect someone who just committed a robbery to display a fight or flight reaction. And I think that expectation is what the police are building their bullshit narrative on.

[Cali_Democrat]

11. No

If he's only confronted about jaywalking and told to get on the sidewalk, there's no need to be combative.

Besides, had the officer known about the alleged robbery, he probably would have drawn his gun immediately and/or called for backup if he knew those were the suspects. But the cop didn't even know a robbery had taken place.

[JJChambers]

12. I doubt the confrontation ever got to the point of the officer explaining the reason for the stop

In the officer's mind, it was jaywalking; in Brown's mind, the robbery. Fight or flight is a common reaction to a high stress situation. Do you not think that the police are laying the groundwork for this claim?

I'm not saying that it is justified -- clearly not -- simply that this is what they're doing.

[morningfog]

18. Wilson made it clear. He told him to get the fuck back on the curb.

It was obviously about jaywalking.

Trying too hard.

[VanGoghRocks]

13. Even if we accept the logic of their narrative through step 4, I think there needs to be a step #5:

Mr. Brown puts his hands up in the air in a universally accepted sign of surrender. The shooter fires at Mr. Brown repeatedly, after Mr. Brown has tried to surrender.

Is there still some dispute over whether Mr. Brown had his hands in the air without a weapon?

[JJChambers]

14. This thread is about the police narrative, not the truth.

[VanGoghRocks]

15. Understood, and don't mean to be argumentative, merely to point out that,

once a suspect has signaled his or her compliance with an LEO's lawful demands, the LEO isn't supposed to continue using deadly force.

So, even if Mr. Brown thought he was about to be busted for the robbery, while Mr. Wilson thought he was warning\threatening Brown about jaywalking, at a certain point Mr. Brown signaled his compliance by raising his arms in surrender, but Mr. Wilson continued to use deadly force.

It's like the police narrative can be accurate as far as it goes. But that narrative stops short of capturing the full sequence. After a certain point, it doesn't matter what each may have thought or feared.

[wandy]

16. This is todays official narrative. It will do for now............

A simple story that will become more complicated. I suspect that as parts of the tail are found to be improbable or just plain outright lies the plot will thicken. New facts will be relieved (written/made up) to support the seasons thrilling finally. Sooner or later we will see the new RW star entering the police station bashed and bloodied by injuries he sustained from a beating at the hands of an evil thug using his own service weapon. A possible sub plot will evolve as to how this wasn't about cigars but a drug deal gone bad.
It will end with a cliffhanger leading up to season two. The trial.

I think I have seen this show before.

[TrollBuster9090]

17. They'll probably modify #4 to claim that Brown 'struggled' with Wilson in an attempt to get his gun.

Since I'm willing to bet that Wilson didn't have any injuries.

However, the case will still hinge on the fact that Brown was shot several times from a distance. They'll probably claim that Wilson 'thought' Brown was pointing a weapon at him. (Which obviously makes no sense if you're going to claim that Brown was trying to get Wilson's gun. No need to do that if you're already armed. In which case they'll have to switch to the argument that Brown still had to get Wilson's gun away from him so Wilson couldn't shoot him.)

Yadda yadda.... I'm sure it will make no difference to a skitterish, spineless jury of non-blacks who would rather ere on the side of having a few innocent black teens dead on the sidewalk than run the 'risk' of having non-innocent black teens come through their bedroom window one night. That's the way things have worked for as long as I can remember.