0 Shares By Soopermexican 2 months ago
A previously unnoticed detail in a background conversion of a video taken minutes after the Ferguson shooting could change the course of the investigation into Mike Brown’s death.
The original video poster appears sympathetic to the narrative that Mike Brown was shot unarmed with his hands in the air. But he unknowingly picks up conversation between a man who saw the altercation and another neighbor.
An approximate transcription of the background conversation, as related by the “Conservative Treehouse” blog, who originally discovered the conversation:
[there is dispute here whether he says "doubled back" or "coming back."]
This is terribly important because if Mike Brown had been shot, and he advanced towards the cop instead of surrendering, it would substantiate the narrative that the policeman shot in self-defense due to the fact that he was being threatened with severe bodily harm. This corroborates an account of the event given by a friend of Officer Darren Wilson:
Well, then Michael takes off and gets to be about 35 feet away. And, Darren’s first protocol is to pursue. So, he stands up and yells, “Freeze!” Michael and his friend turn around. And Michael taunts him… And then all the sudden he just started bumrushing him. He just started coming at him full speed. And, so he just started shooting. And, he just kept coming. And, so he really thinks he was on something.”
It’s far too unlikely that these two accounts are similar accidentally, having been from such disparate sources. The apparent witness in the background conversation is speaking with detail about the tragic shooting, and in a manner that runs contrary to the widespread version. Those who watch the video need to judge for themselves if the witness sounds reliable (but he would seemingly have nothing to gain by telling such a story.)
A third piece of the puzzle would be the toxicology report. If there happens to be anything found that might explain how Mike Brown might have been shot and kept advancing toward the officer, then the defense becomes even more believable. Unless someone is emotionally invested in an alternative narrative to the extent that one might ignore plain facts.
We shall see.
Co-Authored by Kyle Becker
Editor’s note: This article was edited after publication.