This is not how I remember the micheal brown shooting. From wiki

[pintobean]

116. From the DOJ report

The results of copy/paste from a pdf make this difficult to read. The text is easier to read from the pdf. It begins on page 58, here:
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/doj_report_on_shooting_of_michael_brown_1.pdf

xii.
Witness 122
Witness 122 is a 46-year-old
white male. He was laying dr
ain pipe on Canfield Drive
with Witness 130 on the morning of the shooting.
Witness 122 gave six statements, including
testimony before the county gra
nd jury. SLCPD detectives a
nd an FBI agent twice jointly
interviewed him, and SLCPD detectives once in
dependently interviewed
him. Witness 122 and
Witness 130 authored one-page
written statements on advice of
a former boss. Witness 122 and
Witness 130 claimed that they did not discuss what they witn
essed, though Witness 130 admitted
that they read each other’s statements after th
ey were written. Witness 122 gave a media
interview on the condition of anonymity. As
noted throughout this memorandum, federal
prosecutors interviewed many potential witnesses in
an effort to assess credibility and reconcile
internal inconsistencies a
nd inconsistencies with physical evidence,
as is necessary to make a fair
prosecutive decision. Witness 122 ag
reed to meet with federal pr
osecutors only after assurances
that he would not be held against his will at the FBI office, claiming that he had heard of
instances where individuals go to the FBI o
ffice and do not emerge
for days.
According to Witness 122, W
itness 122 and Witness 130 (colle
ctively, “the contractors”)
twice encountered Brown during the morning of
the shootings, first when Brown was alone and
then when Brown was with Witness 101. Witn
ess 122 and Brown did most of the talking, and
the topics included God and smoking marijuana. About 20 minutes after their last conversation
with Brown, the contractors heard a loud bang.
Witness 122 saw Brown running, staggering, or
falling forward. Contrary to th
e autopsy results, Witn
ess 122 described Brow
n being shot in the
back and “knew he had gotten hit.” In fact, bot
h contractors claimed to
have witnessed bullets
go through Brown and exit his bac
k, as evidenced by his shirt
“popping back” and “stuff coming
through.” However, in his interview with fede
ral prosecutors, Witness
122 explained that he
thought that Brown was shot in the back and
stumbled until he saw media reports about the
autopsy commissioned by Brown’s family. After
learning about that autopsy, he realized that
Brown was not shot in the back
and admittedly changed his account.
Witness 122 also claimed that Brown put
his right hand to the ground to regain his
balance when he was hit and as he turned ar
ound. According to both contractors, Brown then
turned around with his hands up and repeatedly
screamed “Okay!” as many as eight times, an
exclamation heard by no other witness. When Witness 122 demonstrated the position of
58
Brown’s hands for federal prosecutors and agen
ts, he wavered from a position of surrender to
one indicative of a person tr
ying to maintain balance.
Contrary to the autopsy results establishing
that the shot to the
top of Brown’s head
would have incapacitated Brown almost immedi
ately, both contractors
insisted that Brown
continued to move toward Wilson as far as 20, 25, or even 30 feet
after the final shots. Witness
122 described Brown as walking “dead on his feet, a
nd then he just fell forward.” Later, both
contractors admitted that they di
d not actually see Brown fall to
the ground, because their view
was obstructed by the co
rner of a building.
Witness 122 insisted that
there were three officers
present during the shootings,
demonstrating the inaccuracy of
his perception. Witn
ess 122 described three uniformed police
officers engaged with Brown in a
“triangle formation” at the time
of the shootings. Witness 122
described a heavyset, older officer, and two “skinny, little people,
” one of whom was possibly a
female and the other with dark hair and a mousta
che, who was a head shorter than the heavyset
officer. Witness 122 described th
e shooter as the heavyset offi
cer. Witness 122 explained that
the heavset officer shot until he ran out of bullets
, and then the shorter officer with the moustache
trained his gun on Brown, but did not shoot. These
statements cannot be rec
onciled with the fact
that Wilson was the only officer present when Brow
n was shot and that Wils
on has a slim build.
Witness 122 also explained that he did not
see Witness 101 at all during the shooting
itself, and did not understand how Witness 101 coul
d claim to see everything if he was hiding
behind a car. Witness 122 also sa
id that contrary to what was
reported in the media, Brown did
not say, “Don’t shoot.”
The contractors, apparently unw
ittingly, were captured on a wi
dely circulated video taken
several minutes after the shooting
while responding officers were
securing the scene with crime
scene tape. That video depict
s another individual yelling, “He
wasn’t no threat at all,” as
Witness 122 put his hands up and stated, “He had
his fucking hands in the air.” As detailed
below, two other witnesses, Witness 128 a
nd Witness 137, each took credit for making the
statement, “He wasn’t no threat at all.”

Both of those witnesses have since acknowledged to
federal agents and prosecutors th
at they did not, in fact, know
whether Brown was a threat.
According to the Brown family, Witness 122 cal
led them after the shooting and told them
that he had seen Wilson shoot Brown execution-
style as Brown was on his knees holding his
hands in the air. However, Witn
ess 122 denied making any statem
ents about the nature of the
shooting to the Brown family. As mentioned,
despite his earlier st
atements, Witness 122
recanted the claim that he actually
saw Brown fall dead to the ground.
Witness 122 has no criminal history. As deta
iled above, material
portions of Witness
122’s accounts are irreconcilable wi
th the physical and forensic
evidence. These accounts are
also inconsistent with each other and inconsistent with credib
le witness accounts. Accordingly,
after a thorough review of all of the evidence, federal prosecut
ors determined this witness’s
accounts not to be credible and therefore do not support a
prosecution of Darren Wilson.

Witness 130
Witness 130 is a 26–year-old white male. As
previously noted, he was laying drain pipe
on Canfield Drive with Witne
ss 122, on the morning of the s
hooting. Witness 130 gave five
statements, including testimony be
fore the county grand jury.
SLCPD detectives and an FBI
agent twice jointly interviewed h
im, and SLCPD detectives once independently interviewed him.
Like Witness 122, Witness 130 authored a one-pag
e written statement on
advice of a former
boss. Witness 122 and Witness 130
claimed that they did not
discuss what they witnessed,
though Witness 130 admitted that they
read each other’s statements
after they were written. Like
Witness 122, Witness 130 ga
ve a media interview on th
e condition of anonymity.
As noted, Witness 122 and Witn
ess 130 twice encountered Brown during the morning of
the shootings, first when Brown was alone a
nd then when Brown was with Witness 101.
Witness 122 and Brown did most
of the talking, and Witness 130 ad
mitted that at times, Brown
seemed paranoid and aggressive, clenching hi
s fists and causing Witn
ess 130 some concern.
Witness 130 thought Brown “was not in his ri
ght mind,” based upon how
paranoid he seemed.
About 20 minutes after their
last conversation with Brow
n, Witness 130 heard a loud
bang. Witness 130 stepped around the corner of an apartment building that was obstructing his
view, and saw Brown “fast walk[ing]” east on Canf
ield Drive. Accordin
g to both contractors,
Brown then turned around with his hands up and
repeatedly screamed “Okay!” as many as eight
times, an exclamation heard by no
other witness According to
Witness 130, after Brown turned
around, he continued to stumble
or otherwise approach Wils
on, although he did not know
whether Brown was speeding up to come after
Wilson, or whether his momentum was carrying
him forward. Wilson then fired at least seven
shots, but as Witness 130 told the grand jury,
Wilson only fired when Brown moved forward.
Witness 130 describe
d Wilson “unloading his
clip” into Brown, although Witn
ess 130 acknowledged that Brown
put his arms down after the
third shot.
Witness 130 explained that Wilson backed up as
Brown approached him.
Contrary to the
autopsy results establishing that the shot to th
e top of Brown’s head w
ould have incapacitated
Brown almost immediately, like Witness 122, W
itness 130 insisted that
Brown continued to
move toward Wilson as far as 20, 25, or even 30 feet
after the final shots.
Contrary to his initial
account, Witness 130 admitted that he did not actu
ally see Brown fall to the ground because his
view was obstructed by the
corner of a building.
Witness 130 has no criminal history. Federal prosecutors attempted to meet with Witness
130 to evaluate inconsistencies in his various
statements. Witness 130 refused to meet with
federal prosecutors, making reliance on his accoun
t problematic because his statements are
inconsistent with each other,
inconsistent with the physical and forensic evidence, and
inconsistent with credible witness accounts. Th
erefore, federal prosecutors could not rely on
Witness 130’s account
to support a prosecution of Darren Wilson.