Michael Brown

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by MrSparkle001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

and that doesn't mean the cop was correct in using deadly force. Apparently the autopsy shows that he was shot at a distance (something about gunpowder residue, which I remember from the Trayvon case). So how can deadly force be used appropriately vs someone unarmed at a distance?

Apparently you didn't go directly to the source of the info. All they could determine so far was that he was at least 2 feet from the officer. Could be 2, could be 30, could be a quarter mile. I think if someone who was 300 lbs was charging at you, you'd be right to shoot even from 30 feet.

As for eyewitnesses changing their stories to match the facts, nobody is going to buy it. We now can discount any eyewitness who claimed he was shot while running away (does such a person exist?) That's how an investigation works. Forensic science can help us determine which eyewitnesses are most credible in order to determine things that can't be determined through forensic science alone.