That was 'shorthand' for the officers version, which includes the forensics, and their corroborating witnesses. In the MB case. the police version is going to be, in my opinion, corroborated by things like MB's prints on the gun, injuries to the officers face, AND eye witnesses who saw the struggle, up close. Thus the term 'officers version' includes forensics and eye witnesses.
So because a few people, who huddled together AFTER the incident, and took video AFTER the shooting was well over, then come forward to tell their story, it does not mean they are credible.
I don't always automatically take an officers word as gospel. They have been known to lie and to cover and deflect. But it is not a racial thing, imo.
Your hypothetical seemed to be implying that we were discounting these witnesses on a racial bias. jmo
I got ya. That makes more sense and why I asked. I read it as only meaning OW's statement of events, which I probably mistakenly read into it. I agree about the forensics and the crime scene analysis though.
And no, quite honestly, race never crossed my mind when asking. I'm sure there will be witnesses that are black that are for MB and for OW. I'm sure there will be witnesses (maybe not eye witnesses, but witnesses) that are white that are for MB and for OW. Truly wasn't thinking race at all.