First, I apologize for misinterpreting/ misattributing the statement about the hospital xrays-- I was reading too fast, and the double negatives were confusing. I just wanted to clear up a misconception-- and with all of the other comments-- mission achieved!
As to your comment here, about the swollen face, I'm having a very, very hard time understanding why this is such an issue for you? Spokepeople say things all the time without personally being involved in whatever message they are delivering. Why is it so unbelievable that the officer was taken to a hospital with a swollen face?? Do you think he was somehow "faking" the swollen face?? Do you think OW assaulted himself in the heat of the moment, just so he could "pin it on MB?" Where exactly are you going with this line of thought?
I am extremely confused as to why this is even an issue. I can understand if you don't believe MB assaulted OW, but the fact of going to the ER with a swollen face? I don't get at all why that is a sticking point for you. It will so very easily be proven once evidence is released. What possible reason would the police chief have to make that up? Especially if he knew it was false, and would be "discovered"?
We both know swollen can describe anything from a few fractures to a mosquito bite. And the chief (who has been the source of other misinformation already) carefully distanced himself from any direct knowledge of the injury itself.
The big sticking point- as I said before- we did not see pics of him injured. Yet people talk here as if they had. It will be interesting to see good pics if and when they show up, but in the meantime referring to the injuries as if we had seen them is misleading, IMHO.
Same as referring to a preliminary autopsy or police report. Anonymous leaks of vague information do not constitute a detailed police report- yet people are linking to those as "proof".
MOO