Except he did. He knew Brown's description and saw the stolen merchandise in Brown's hand. The idea that he didn't comes from the media. Before the grand jury evidence was released they could latch on to whatever story or rumor supported the "Brown was a gentle giant shot down by racist white officer" narrative. Since then of course they just ignore the facts and make shallow meaningless comments that things are unclear and then try and make vague accusations to slander the prosecutor and cast doubt on the facts that don't support their chosen narrative.

It really is shameful the lengths that mainstream media is willing to go to defend a lie they started.

And he was not shot for that so what is your point?

What a delusional view. You obviously have chosen to believe the discredited story of Brown's accomplice.

Do you honestly believe that while seated Wilson grabbed 6'4" 300lb Brown by the back of the neck and drug him into the police car? Sorry but that is just stupid.

What you simply brush off as a "few punches thrown" like this was some barroom brawl is more accurately described as felony assault on a police officer. An assault where Brown tried to take Wilson's weapon and was only stopped when Wilson was able to regain enough control to fire two shots at Brown.

There reason to believe this instead of the fantasy spun out by Brown's friend is the physical evidence all supports Wilson's account and discredits the thief with a history off lying to police. IS your world view or the facts driving to such a conclusion. If you have actual facts please share but witnesses whose testimony is disproven by the evidence really don't qualify as facts.

Funny how the brain of the left works. You rule this false despite the fact the physical evidence supports it with the powder burns and blood evidence that show Brown's hand was very close to the weapon when it was fired. How do you get the ruling of false out of that. Do you have a credible witness who saw something different?

Here you again run afoul of actual facts. The blood evidence clearly shows that Brown came back 25 feet towards Wilson. Two of those 12 shots clearly took place inside the vehicle and while you can find some supposed witnesses that claim Brown has had his hands in the air you can also find witnesses that claim Wilson stood over Brown when he shot him. When you throw out the witnesses whose stories do not match the physical evidence it is clear Brown had a least one hand at his waist and he was moving back towards Wilson at rate somewhere between a stumble and charge.
The whole Hands up don't shoot is simple propaganda based on unreliable claims of people looking to get on CNN an CNN looking to sell a narrative regardless of the facts.

6053">

Yawn.

How does any of this have any bearing on the this case? I would suggest actually reviewing the evidence in this case and spend less time looking at what happens in Germany.

In the case of the 12 year old (a true tragedy) I find it shocking that you can tell from the video that the police were not using their PA system to tell boy to show his hands. Obviously things should have gone differently since a boy who was never a true threat ended up dead. In Brown's case he was violent criminal who was shot while attacking a police officer, less of tragedy.

I don't know enough about the Walmart case to have an opinion but using this as evidence that Wilson murdered Brown makes no sense but feel free to read this account of an unarmed man acting and taking the weapon from unarmed man then using it kill police officer.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2014/07/man_who_killed_jersey_city_police_officer_is_identified.html

The idea that Brown was not dangerous simply because he didn't have a weapon yet is so ludicrous as to make anyone who uses of questionable mental capacity and intellectual honesty.