Do you know the reason we didn’t see witnesses who saw what the cop said happened on TV? BECAUSE THEY FEARED THE COMMUNITY WOULD HURT THEM!”Seven or eight African American eyewitnesses have provided testimony consistent with Wilson’s account, but none have spoken publicly out of fear for their safety , The Post’s sources said.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-evidence-supports-officers-account-of-shooting-in-ferguson/2014/10/22/cf38c7b4-5964-11e4-bd61-346aee66ba29_story.html
Take a look how the media misrepresented this case and were reluctant to cover news that supported the cop’s account.
what about Johnson and Piaget, the two media stars? Arguable the tow witnesses given the most media coverage? How can you think these witnesses who claimed that Brown didn’t move toward the officer (or maybe “a step” or “a centimeter” are credible when the blood evidence proves they are wrong?
Now we learn Johnson is now saying ” his hands were not that high , and that one was lower than the other.”
And here is what Piaget Crenshaw now says about Brown’s hands, “um, they were just slowly going up. It probably didn’t get a chance to get all the way up there before he was struck.” And in a recent interview Piaget is backing away from her initial claims as she says she thinks the cop is telling the truth in that he believes he saw and that “hands up” really isn’t that important.
… CUOMO: Would it be something that – could it be explained that way that, yes, his hands may have been like this or however you say you saw them, but that he was moving towards the officer?
CRENSHAW: And that’s the part that I don’t understand. That’s why – that’s why I really thought it wouldn’t — might have just been an indictment and taken to trial just because of the hands (inaudible), whether they were anywhere, they were visible, it doesn’t matter.
So now “hands up” really “doesn’t matter,” she now thinks that whether “they were visible” is the issue!
You buy Johnson’s ridiculous story that Wilson would try to “pull Mike into the car through the window?!” The more thought you put into that, the more you may be able to see how absurd the idea is. How could anyone think it makes would make sense for a seated police officer to try to pull a nearly 300 pound man through a car window and onto his lap?! How can anyone thing that is close to making sense? Why in the world would a cop attempt to do that? (which is not physically possible and makes no sense at all) You can’t look at it objectively and realize that Mike was reaching in through the window and punching the cop and reaching fro the gun? You buy Johnson’s fantasy (a guy who has lied to cops before) about a weird scenario of a cop trying to pull a huge guy onto his lap?!
And what about witnesses with whom the physical evidence corroborates? Here is another example:https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1371077-grand-jury-volume-11.html#document/p181
A: When I heard the gunshots and saw him firing his weapon,he was, Michael had stopped, he had stopped. He threw his hands up and then he put his hands down, Michael turned around and then he started running, he kind of shuffled back and forth a little bit like he was confused or something. And then he started running towards my car, he started running back towards us.
The officer had ran, he was running after him. He had stopped, I heard him say get down about two or three times and he kind of veered off to the side a little bit, but he still was aiming his gun at the guy, at Michael. And he after, he held his gun out at him, he was aiming the gun at him, he was telling him to get down. And like I said, Michael was shuffling back and forth like he was confused and then he started running and that’s when I started hearing him shoot.
Q: While he was running toward the officer?
A: Kind of towards the officer. I couldn’t be sure if he was running exactly towards the officer or just trying to run past him.
Q: But he was running in the officer’s direction?
A: He was running pretty much our direction. The officer was pretty much between us and Michael.
Q: And the officer was saying stop or get down?
A: Get down.
The very fact that there are witnesses who are giving the same account as Wilson gave should be evidence that this is what happened because where would they even get the idea about the sequence of events which matches the audio and blood evidence plus what Wilson said? You could never get a conviction if it had gone to trial because there is no physical evidence which contradicts what Wilson said, the evidence is consistent with what he said. You have to be able to PROVE Wilson did something wrong. And, given the evidence, cannot be done. One of my next videos will show how CNN misleads the public about this case by stating false info about it.