General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Strong Evidence That Brown Was Executed [View all]indivisibleman
(482 posts)that O'Donnell points out that the Times prints none of the words of the witnesses.
This is a regular occurrence in reporting on this case. I still read statements like, "there were conflicting accounts made by eyewitnesses", "after the cigars were stolen from the convenience store", "all the shots were from the front" and "Brown was never shot in the back as witnesses reported".
The eyewitness accounts are by far more corroborative than they are conflicting. In fact most accusations of conflicts reside in a twisting of what was said so claim it is in conflict.
The cigars were not stolen from the convenience store.
Since arms turn toward the back and the front and have different backs and front whether raised or by a person's sides it is presumptuous to say that all shots were from the front. (we also as yet do not have information on the entry and exit points of each shot, where bullets were found in the body and at what angle the shots followed. What if the head shot enters the top of the head and follows a line toward the front of his face or chin?)
Brown is said to have been shot while he was running away. I don't recall anyone say he was shot "in the back" but that it looked as though he had been struck while he ran away. Two very different things and if he had been struck in the arm as he ran away it is supported by the autopsy. But the media keeps saying the statement that he was "shot in the back" isn't true.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):