 |
Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson: Looks like he'll be free to enjoy that $500,000-plus
that the white supremacists donated to him (via crowd funding) for the killing of Michael
Brown. He'll likely be treated like a hero and rewarded with job opportunities throughout
the United States. |
_________
 |
Prosecutor Robert P. McCulloch: Everyone who understands the grand jury system
knows "you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich" if you wanted to. McCulloch
was the man responsible for presenting a weak case to the grand jury so that Darren
Wilson would not be indicted for the murder of Michael Brown. During the grand jury
proceedings McCulloch illegally leaked secret grand jury testimony to the media in an
attempt to assassinate the character of the victim, Michael Brown — proof he wasn't
serious about getting an indictment of killer cop Darren Wilson. The black citizens of
Ferguson wanted McCulloch to recuse himself from the case because he has many
family members who work for the police and his policeman father was killed in the
line of duty by a black person. McCulloch insisted on staying on as prosecutor - some
believe he was seeking revenge for his father's death. |
____________________
Cop Who Killed Michael Brown Had No Visible Injuries After the Shooting — New Videos Show: Propaganda About Darren Wilson's Injuries Proven False
Not only does the newly released video show Darren Wilson had no facial
injuries (and certainly no bandages on his face), but Wilson seemed to
have no injuries at all. He shows no injuries or bandages
on his face, arms, wrists, or hands either going to the hospital or coming from the hospital.
 |
Darren Wilson returns from hospital (left), Darren Wilson on way to hospital (middle, right).
Screen captures from newly released video shows that, contrary to earlier reports,
Darren Wilson appears to have suffered no injuries whatsoever. |
 |
This was the photograph provided to the grand jury which was supposed to "prove"
the existence of the facial injuries suffered by Darren Wilson's at the hands of Michael
Brown: Apparently jury members were supposed to stare at the photo and imagine the
injuries. |
By Ronald David Jackson
Soon after Michael Brown was killed by officer Darren Wilson, tt was reported that Darren Wilson suffered a "fractured eye socket" after a "scuffle" with Michael Brown. The
Washington Post said their source was a family friend of Wilson's. ABC reported that a "
source" claimed Wilson suffered a "serious facial injury". NBC suggested Wilson suffered injuries when they reported that Wilson was "
taken to the hospital" after his encounter with Michael Brown. There was even some psychological warfare, when a
bogus photograph of Darren Wilson severely injured in a hospital bed went viral.
CNN labeled reports of a fractured eye socket false.
ABC News report of Darren Wilson's 'Serious Facial Injury'
_______________
Darren Wilson leaves the police station for the hospital after he shot Michael Brown and appears to be free of the injuries he reportedly suffered
at the hands of Michael Brown
- - - -
Darren Wilson arrives back at police station from the hospital and appears to be free of the "severe facial injuries" he reportedly suffered at the hands of Michael Brown
____________________
Did Cop Who Killed Michael Brown Have History of Lying & Abuse?: Video Suggests He Lied in Police Report About Arrest of Man Who Video Taped Him (Video)
 |
| Darren Wilson doesn't like to be video taped. |
- - - -
Darren Wilson: "...Take a picture of me one more time, I'm a lock your ass up."
Mike Arman: "Sir, do I not have the right to record?" — Darren Wilson: "No you don't."
- - - -
The video seems to tell a different story from what Darren Wilson
provided in his police report
 |
| Excerpt from Darren Wilson's police report of the incident leading to arrest of man who video taped him. |
1) Darren Wilson did not advise the individual that a voice recording would be acceptable.
2) The individual did not have his camera in Darren Wilson's face.
3) The individual was not ordered to get off the porch and place his hands behind his back before he was arrested.
Read the Entire Police Report
____________________
Hysteria Over Ferguson Grand Jury an Indictment of America
Michael Brown, Sr. - Discusses Moving St. Louis Forward
By
Derrick Z. Jackson
The national hysteria over the Ferguson grand jury is a fresh indictment of America. The core issue is a charge of police brutality by a white officer shooting an unarmed black 18-year-old man. Yet all around the country, the talk is about black violence.
Here in
Boston, police are sending out robocalls to public school students and sending messages to college students to stay calm. In Oakland, California,
businesses are putting steel plates on their doors. In Los Angeles, Police Chief Charlie Beck said he hopes to get advance notice from Missouri authorities about whether or not the grand jury indicts Ferguson officer Darren Wilson for Brown’s shooting. And in Ferguson, some schools are already closed in anticipation of the decision, gun sales have skyrocketed and a state of emergency was declared by Missouri Governor Jay Nixon.
To be sure, Attorney General Eric Holder and many black clergy have also asked for police restraint for any protests after the grand jury decision is announced. But such balanced pleas have been drowned out by the drama of an
FBI warning that the grand jury’s decision “will likely be exploited by some individuals to justify threats and attacks against law enforcement and critical infrastructure.” The memo said people “could be armed with bladed weapons or firearms, equipped with tactical gear/gas masks, or bulletproof vests to mitigate law enforcement measures.”
Meanwhile, police restraint is hard to come by.
Read More
____________________
The New York Times Assassinates Michael Brown: Publish Prosecutor's Leaks They Know Is Propaganda
“Good police reporters know when they’re being used by the police. Bad
police reporters also know when they’re being used by the police but
they eagerly report whatever the police want them to report."—Lawrence O'Donnell, MSNBC
The Ferguson prosecutor and his enablers at CNN and the New York Times would fail a lie detector test.
By Margaret Kimberle,
BAR
Eighteen year old Michael Brown man was shot to death by police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri on August 9, 2014. Because the people of Ferguson rose up in protest, his death did not disappear as is often the case with black victims of police violence. Newspapers and television networks from all over the world cover the continuing protests as a grand jury deliberates Wilson’s fate.
The coverage has varied greatly in quality, with the New York Times faring the worst among the major corporate media outlets. The Times alternately casts aspersions on Brown’s character and relies on law enforcement leaks which make it appear that Wilson acted appropriately when he shot a fleeing, unarmed young man. The result is justification for racist murder.
One of the newspaper’s African American reporters, John Eligon, began a profile of Brown by stating that he was “no angel” who performed “vulgar” rap music lyrics, “dabbled in drugs and alcohol” and got into scuffles. Even the Times public editor conceded that the words “no angel” were “a
regrettable mistake.” In another profile, Wilson was called “
well mannered”, “relatively soft spoken” and “bland.” There was no mention of his musical tastes or recreational activities, and no judgments made about his character.
But the worst case scenario has happened not once, but twice with New York Times reporters reporting law enforcement leaks as if they are factual and making the case that Wilson was justified in shooting Brown. An August 19, 2014 Times headline claimed that eyewitnesses to the shooting gave accounts which conflicted with another and which also implied
Brown threatened Wilson after he fled.
That headline is easily proven to be untrue. Every witness to the shooting has been consistent. All say that Brown and Wilson had a physical altercation through the patrol car window. They all say that a shot or shots were fired inside the car. They all say that Brown fled while Wilson continued to shoot at him. They all say that Brown turned towards Wilson while already wounded and that Wilson continued to shoot him as he fell. One bullet struck Brown in the top of his skull and another in one of his eyes.
“The Times headline claimed that eyewitnesses to the shooting gave accounts which conflicted with another and which also implied Brown threatened Wilson after he fled.”
These accounts and Brown’s autopsy were all public by the time the August article appeared. Witnesses spoke on air to MSNBC and CNN and to the New York Times as well. It should not have been difficult to give a clear and accurate account of their words. There was a justifiable uproar over this story which led to the Times
public editor again agreeing with critics because reporters made claims they couldn’t verify and that they didn’t emphasize enough their reliance on interested parties.
Did reporters Frances Robles and Michael S. Schmidt speak to Wilson, Wilson’s attorney, the Ferguson police department, the justice department, local prosecutors, or all of the above? MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell gave
this assessment of the Times article. “Good police reporters know when they’re being used by the police. Bad police reporters also know when they’re being used by the police but they eagerly report whatever the police want them to report.”
Not content to happily be used in the cause of injustice, on October 17, 2014 reporters Michael S. Schmidt, Matt Apuzzo and Julie Bosman continued to flack in Darren Wilson’s interest. This time they repeat Wilson’s account without analysis or the information already made public which casts doubt on his story. According to the Times, Wilson says he believed his life was in danger as he and Brown struggled in the patrol car. It isn’t news that Wilson and Brown struggled, nor is it newsworthy that the officer would claim to feel endangered. But the story made it appear that the old information was new, and didn’t make it clear that Wilson fired ten more shots after Brown fled.
The net effect of the pro-Wilson bias is very simple. Schmidt, Apuzzo and Bosman conclude erroneously that there will be a “high bar” in proving a federal civil rights case against Wilson. That statement is highly debatable but it is now more likely to be true because the most powerful newspaper in the country says that it is true. Journalist
Milton Allimadi points out the obvious. “Pre-attacking the federal case is the strategy. That's why the Times is being fed the information, which upon careful analyses, are not as impactful as Wilson's supporters believe and the Times' story implies.”
“Reporters made claims they couldn’t verify and that they didn’t emphasize enough their reliance on interested parties.”
The Obama administration has no interest in taking on the civil rights violations committed by police and vigilantes across the country. They may invite Trayvon Martin’s parents to the White House and show them off for effect, but they have made no effort to prosecute George Zimmerman, who is a free man. If the paper which represents the interests of the powerful says that Wilson was justified, then he will be called justified and Brown’s family will get no more justice than Martin’s did.
The Times is not alone in acting as Wilson’s defense team. As previously reported in Black Agenda Report,
Charles Blow and Van Jones disgracefully made the case for Wilson on CNN and acted as a defense team for him and for all of white America. No one inside or outside of the New York Times should think they can get away with defending America’s injustice system without repercussion or comment.
The odds of the legal system bringing justice to Michael Brown’s family were always slim. They are even slimmer if the New York Times, the so-called paper of record, gives license to killer police officers. Already the poorly reported story is being repeated as gospel truth, and righteous anger is made to appear suspect.
Michael Brown was running away and already wounded when he was shot in the head and in the eye. Until the New York Times makes that clear their
coverage is worthless journalistically and gives aid and comfort to American lynch law, which has never been repealed.
______________________
Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com.
Reprinted with permission from Black Agenda Report
.____________________
Autopsy Findings Leaked By Ferguson Prosecutor Was 'Taken Out of Context' and 'Misquoted'- Says Expert Who Did The Autopsy (Video)
While the pro-police media has gone wild publishing the autopsy leaks from the Ferguson prosecutor, they have been almost silent about the forensic pathologist who says her findings were taken out of context.
 |
Judy Melinek suggested the Ferguson prosecutor's interpretation of her
findings was biased. (Screen capture from MSNBC video) |
By
Dylan Scott
Judy Melinek, one of the forensic experts who was
quoted by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Tuesday about the Michael Brown autopsy report, is taking issue with how the newspaper portrayed her comments.
The key piece of Melinek's analysis, according to the Post-Dispatch's original report, was that the report of Brown's autopsy "supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound. If he has his hand near the gun when it goes off, he’s going for the officer’s gun.”
That would be consistent with Ferguson, Mo., police officer Darren Wilson's version of events, as reported by the New York Times and others. Melinek was also paraphrased by the newspaper saying that the autopsy was inconsistent with witness accounts of Brown having his hands up in surrender when he was shot by Wilson.
But Melinek told MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell on Wednesday that her comments had been taken "out of context" and that she believed the findings could be explained by other scenarios as well.
Read More
.
