MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #8

[bettybaby00]

I just hope this witness is not afraid to talk to LE. I'm just remembering that the store employee who was strong armed robbed by MB shortly before LE arrived did not call 911. A witness in the store phoned 911. I also hope this witness is not afraid to tell the truth.

BBM she probably did make a statement b/c she called it in, and the 911 dispatcher probably informed her that she needed to stay at the scene.

I recently had to call local police over a suspicious car left parked in the lot where I work. I work in a small consignment shop and the parking lot is around back. I pulled in to open the shop one morning, and there was a car randomly parked in the middle of the lot. I waited a few hours to see if anyone came back, thinking maybe someone had car trouble or something. I finally called the police b/c I started to think, "what if the car was involved in some sort of crime?" "What if there was a dead body in the trunk?!!"(I hang out here too damn often!)

They asked that I stay on the scene, and when the officer arrived he took my name, address and
telephone # along with my "statement."

While he was looking up the plate 2 older ladies came into the shop wondering why the police were there. Turns out they had met in the parking lot to shop, and when the realized we weren't open yet, they decided to take just one car, while leaving the other and went out for lunch!!!!!

:facepalm:

 

[Phoebeb]

I don't think so because there's no THC in the synthetic. they'd have to be testing for MDPV because the screens are specific as to which/how many substances they look for

http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/mdpv/mdpv_effects.shtml

I don't know if a person would smoke synthetic marijuana, but it seems common for people to use the swisher cigarellos to smoke pot. I'm not up to date on the synthetic stuff... Haha

 

[Phoebeb]

I think I found something! A presser from Friday August 15th. . Very poor audio but seemingly Crump is asked about the autopsy and he replies "its done but we will talk about that later".



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85pgpVDlIqE

He wasn't talking about the first autopsy, was he?

 

[KEVINinTO]

This is a press conference from Friday, Aug 15.

Beginning at 11:06 Attorney Parks says: (my transcription)

"The family, we have had, participated in the second autopsy.. for our purposes, in terms of, as civil lawyers, in this case...We've asked the Department of Justice to consider doing their own autopsy....."

http://fox2now.com/2014/08/15/live-...-the-media-from-ferguson-police-headquarters/

And at about 13:00 Parks referring to the autopsy states "its done, completed".

I hope the msm will pick up on this glaring inconsistency. How could the autopsy be "done , completed" on Friday August 15th. when Dr. Baden didn't arrive until Sunday?

 

[K_Z]

I think I found something! A presser from Friday August 15th. . Very poor audio but seemingly Crump is asked about the autopsy and he replies "its done but we will talk about that later".



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85pgpVDlIqE

Thank you, KEVIN in TO! That's actually Attorney Parks, same as in the presser I found. So, we have him saying TWICE on Friday Aug 15 that the second autopsy is "done". And Dr. Baden himself saying he didn't fly in until Sunday, Aug 17.

I think that confirms in my mind that this was a "remote" autopsy conducted by an "assistant". Perhaps Dr. Baden did indeed visit the funeral home and look at the body himself. But these comments by Parks are troubling, especially since he stressed in the presser I linked that they are "civil attorneys". That implies that they are already moving toward civil litigation. So, a couple years from now if a civil suit is filed, I certainly hope the defense attorneys for whomever might be sued, remember this. I think both Dr Baden, and Shawn Parcells, should have a LOT of very direct questions asked about exactly what each of them did, and when.

I know that Parcells/ Baden CLAIM the autopsy was completed Sunday Aug 17. Again, as I stated upthread, the truth of that will be determined by what criteria Dr. Baden says "completed" means. Does that mean he did anything hands on? Did he just review the work of the "assistant" and complete/ sign his name to a report? Does Dr. Baden interpret "completing" an autopsy as making DECISIONS, and not necessarily DOING the dissection work personally? This will be the kind of a battle where there are verbose arguments over what does "is" mean, IMO!

 

[K_Z]

Ok... Is this the one?
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-teen-Michael-Brown-8&p=10885068#post10885068

I'm just late to the party (again). Apologies to SStarr33 for stealing thunder!

 

[Muffet]

Still don't see anywhere where browns lawyer is saying MB assaulted Wilson and took his gun.... Keep digging

Nah. No reason to. People are free to interpret objectively, subjectively, and move their goalposts all over the place.

To me, jmo, ymmv, the public announcements from the chief of police, and the begrudged admissions of the Brown Family attorney gives plenty of reasonable basis to believe.... well, that the chief of police has not been lying and we aren't all just "making assumptions" .

Bedtime. Goodnight everyone.

 

[AuburnTxTiger]

Thank you, KEVIN in TO! That's actually Attorney Parks, same as in the presser I found. So, we have him saying TWICE on Friday Aug 15 that the second autopsy is "done". And Dr. Baden himself saying he didn't fly in until Sunday, Aug 17.

I think that confirms in my mind that this was a "remote" autopsy conducted by an "assistant". Perhaps Dr. Baden did indeed visit the funeral home and look at the body himself. But these comments by Parks are troubling, especially since he stressed in the presser I linked that they are "civil attorneys". That implies that they are already moving toward civil litigation. So, a couple years from now if a civil suit is filed, I certainly hope the defense attorneys for whomever might be sued, remember this. I think both Dr Baden, and Shawn Parcells, should have a LOT of very direct questions asked about exactly what each of them did, and when.

I know that Parcells/ Baden CLAIM the autopsy was completed Sunday Aug 17. Again, as I stated upthread, the truth of that will be determined by what criteria Dr. Baden says "completed" means. Does that mean he did anything hands on? Did he just review the work of the "assistant" and complete/ sign his name to a report? Does Dr. Baden interpret "completing" an autopsy as making DECISIONS, and not necessarily DOING the dissection work personally? This will be the kind of a battle where there are verbose arguments over what does "is" mean, IMO!

I think it was Monday when Dr Baden was making his rounds to all the news talk shows concerning the autopsy. I saw a phone interview with him on Fox News Network. It seems strange/unusual to me that Dr Baden has not said much since the day he spoke about his initial findings. Usually when Dr Baden is involved in a case, he will talk to anybody who will listen about his autopsy report.

 

[Ladylub]

He wasn't talking about the first autopsy, was he?

In the video posted above the question that was asked was if the second autopsy had been completed he said that he had been done.

 

[KEVINinTO]

He wasn't talking about the first autopsy, was he?

I viewed the video again and it is clear that he is talking about the second autopsy

Reporter: Sir, did you say that you have completed the second autopsy

Parks: Oh yes!

Reporter: Its completed?

Parks: well its done and we'll talk about that later - we're not answering any questions about the second autopsy at this time - we will at a time to be designated.

 

[bettybaby00]

Ok... Is this the one?
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-teen-Michael-Brown-8&p=10885068#post10885068

Oh yea, he definitely states, "oh yes, it's completed. We'll talk more about that at a later time."

Around th 10:00minute mark. I'm thinking the we'll talk about it later to mean, they knew they would be holding a press conference to announce the results.

Also, I didn't remember the details of this, maybe the major news outlets didn't show the whole thing. But they used a number of pretty provocative comments. His cousin even getting on the ground with his hands raised to demonstrate how MB surrendered. And by provacative, I'm referring to this is how the "this cop shot an unarmed kid while he begged for his life" narrative that the protestors believe in so strongly.
JMO

 

[gramcracker]

08-19-2014, 07:51 AM
Isabelle said:

Seems I heard on CNN or HLN that the body was already washed and embalmed and that the second autopsy was performed at the funeral home. I would think this is a possibility.

08-19-2014, 08:13 AM
popsicle said:

Thinking about this... how could that be. The family stated they were getting a 2nd autopsy earlier in the week and DOJ corrected their statement to say their autopsy would actually be a 3rd and not the 2nd one. I think DOJ pulled rank and did the 2nd and then Baden did his at the funeral home, before embalming. jmo

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...teen-Michael-Brown-5/page27&highlight=autopsy

 

[K_Z]

And we can't forget that what was reported/ released from Parks, Baden, and Parcells, was NOT a complete AR. Much was omitted, and only time will tell just how relevant the omissions are.

I am particularly interested in hearing more about the condition of MB's hands. I think there could be evidence in AR #1 that could be extremely significant. Particularly if there were powder burns, or residue. I also think we haven't heard the last of the toxicology report. There may be more substances than the marijuana that was reported, and the tox report will have very specific information that will indicate just how recently the marijuana was used, among other info.

Officer Wilson's injuries will be extremely well documented, and I'd bet a stack of cash he was required to have drug tests also. IMO.

I think it will all come out, but it will be months before we have accurate information. Right now, it's all just spin, smoke, and mirrors. And verbal gymnastics. Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

[Peliman]

I've always found it interesting following cases how certain compelling videos will just disappear from the net.

 

[bettybaby00]

He wasn't talking about the first autopsy, was he?

No. Listen to the vid for yourself. states it clearly 3 times. First he just throws it out there as part of an answer to another question. Then another asked him to clarify, and he said, " oh yea, it's done. Completed."

 

[bettybaby00]

08-19-2014, 07:51 AM
Isabelle said:


Seems I heard on CNN or HLN that the body was already washed and embalmed and that the second autopsy was performed at the funeral home. I would think this is a possibility.
08-19-2014, 08:13 AM
popsicle said:
Thinking about this... how could that be. The family stated they were getting a 2nd autopsy earlier in the week and DOJ corrected their statement to say their autopsy would actually be a 3rd and not the 2nd one. I think DOJ pulled rank and did the 2nd and then Baden did his at the funeral home, before embalming. jmo


http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...teen-Michael-Brown-5/page27&highlight=autopsy

I don't think so, he says clearly. The fed will do their thing, I don't know yet what that is. And then he then discusses their own independent autopsy.

 

[aa9511]

This tragedy makes me realize how important trials are. Right now, we are hearing so much conflicting information and misinformation. In the trial, hopefully, all the facts will be laid out. It seems to me that the forensic evidence cannot possibly line up with both of the current stories we have from each side. This means that one side will have to "change" their story quite a bit should it reach a trial. Then, of course, good prosecutor or good defense attorney will challenge these changes from the stories now and then. Let's see.

 

[bettybaby00]

Just an observation.

Baden's name is always linked to the OJ case so I google to see the circumstances of his participation on wiki. I actually didn't notice his name on the page I was reading, but what I found interesting was the section "evidence not introduced by the prosecution."

Most of the things related to deciding not to call certain witnesses, b/c they felt ultimately their testimony could be impeached, and therefore not worth the risk of putting them on the stand.

Needless to say I believe, for a number of reasons, their witnesses are not that strong. No one it seems except DJ saw the whole incident. I wonder if aggressively crossed examined it might reveal that when he was crouched down, hiding behind the parked car, he actually didn't see as much as he says he did.

 

[aa9511]

If it's just one person, then yes, it will be very easy for the defense to poke lots of holes in his account and/or damage his credibility. The issue will be, IMO, whether the forensics support what he says and in addition, if there are other ear witnesses and other partial eye witnesses (for example, first witnesses after the killing). If these witnesses are consistent with what DJ says and they are all more or less consistent with one another, I don't think the defense will be able to get by on character assasination. I've heard bits and pieces about some witnesses on CNN.

 

[gngr~snap]

I've always found it interesting following cases how certain compelling videos will just disappear from the net.

I have started playing them on my tablet and recording them on my cell phone if I think it might disappear... that way I have it!
(for my own sanity)

All posts are MOO