YOU can see Dorian Johnson’s description of the Michael Brown shooting here. In my opinion, he appears to be telling the truth.

— Comments —

Bert Perry writes:

One thing that strikes me about the tragedy in St. Louis is that the young men were approached by police while walking down the middle of the street.  Not quite sure what this means–just a urban or black thing, rebellion, or possibly because walking in the middle of the street might get you out of pistol range from a gang-banger with a John Woo grip (sideways so the gun jams; it’s saved countless lives in the ‘hood).  So the deceased had a touch of the rougher neighborhood in him for sure.

Not that that makes him worthy of death, of course. But it’s worth noting.

On the flip side, I recently saw a police/black interaction at work. Two young black ladies had decided to go into the building where I work, and someone had apparently reported “people don’t belong here.” Fair enough. I was actually walking out of the building with them when an officer came into the parking lot at about 30mph, skids to a halt, and runs towards the ladies.

Now here’s the weird thing; they knew exactly what to do. They immediately got down on their knees while he talked with them, as if they’d seen it or even done it a few times before. I’d have been utterly clueless.  I know they weren’t carrying any weapons in their skintight short shorts, though.

So it does seem plausible to me that many police do seem to presume a touch of guilt and aggression on the part of blacks, and that may quite frankly inflame the situation.  If indeed the officer screamed “get the f***…..”, that would qualify in my book.

Anti-Globalist Expatriate writes:

‘In my opinion, he appears to be telling the truth.’

Really?

Laura writes:

He gives a detailed account and does not stumble with his words or hesitate as if he were making it up. He left out, however, what they said to the officer.

That was my initial impression.

Neil writes:

I tend to believe him.

Unfortunately the Brown family hired Benjamin Crump, who came up with Rachael Jenteal who created a pro-Trayvon narrative weeks after the shooting.

Buck writes:

No intelligent person can honestly argue that there are no bad cops; no dishonest, lying, thieving, criminal, killer cops, black and white. Likewise, no intelligent person can honestly argue that every young black man in St. Louis is a lying gang-banging thug looking for trouble.

Is there any evidence that the only eye witness to speak, the only one who immediately and has repeatedly offered his version of the event and has yet to stumble or contradict himself, or to even show a hint of a liar’s tell, who was literally within arms length of the shooting, is lying? Are we “really” going to reflexively deem him a liar just because he is a young black man? Are we “really” going to pretend that there are no criminal or unstable cops?

Why have the police still not interviewed Dorian Johnson?

I also find the young man believable. There were two armed cops and two unarmed young black men in the middle of a wide-open street in broad day light. I look forward to the facts.

 Laura writes:

I don’t know that the police have not interviewed Johnson. Also, I believe there was only one policeman involved, not two.

Matthew H. writes:

I have no idea what really happened during the Michael Brown shooting, but when I lived in New York City several years ago I noticed a strange phenomenon.  Whenever the police would shoot someone, one of the bystanders who witnessed the incident would almost always come forward to say that the police shot the deceased in cold blood.  In such cases, the deceased invariably had a long rap sheet — six prior felony convictions, just released from prison six weeks ago, etc. — and would be caught beating a baby mama, burglarizing an apartment, dealing drugs, etc.  But somehow, according to the witnesses who lived in the communities where such incidents were common, the police always murdered the deceased in cold blood.  Whenever you would hear the witnesses interviewed on the radio they’d speak with great passion and sincerity — “the deceased was unarmed and had his hands in the air — it was murder, man — cold-blooded murder.”

At first, this sounded serious. Were the police out of control?  Was racial profiling going on?  But over time, I noticed that EVERY SINGLE SHOOTING in the ghetto seemed to be witnessed by someone who would claim that it was a senseless, unprovoked murder. The reporters always seemed to find someone who would tell them “it was murder.”  After a while, I became suspicious.  Really?  EVERY SINGLE police shooting was cold-blooded murder?  Did the NYPD simply go around shooting unarmed, defenseless people?  (All of whom just happened to have long criminal histories?)  Every time I heard another “eyewitness,” I became more skeptical. Eventually I started disbelieving the witnesses.

I don’t know why the reporters could always find a different “eyewitness” to claim that the police shot someone in cold blood.  But I didn’t believe, and don’t believe, that the police simply go around murdering people.  On the other hand, what I am suggesting is equally strange — that all of the eyewitnesses, who presumably did not know one another because they witnessed different shootings in different places, were lying.  But I think they were lying.  I am not suggesting that there is some kind of coordinated campaign in certain communities to accuse the police of murder.  But I think that there may be some sort of informal convention.   Or maybe people are so consumed by hatred for and distrust of the police that they react to a traumatic event like a shooting by “seeing what they want to see,” so to speak, and honestly believe that it was murder.  All I know is that “eyewitnesses” who accused the police of shooting the deceased in cold blood seemed to be quite common.

Laura writes:

I have no doubt that lying is common, but Dorian Johnson does not appear to be lying.

TK writes:

The part about the cop grabbing him by the throat while the cop was still in the car is not believable. He wouldn’t have been close enough unless he was threatening the cop. Must have really been the long arm of the law.

Buck writes:

If Brown and Johnson were simply walking down their own quiet street, just as I and everyone of else does in my neighborhood at all times of the day and night, one-two-three wide, they were clearly entitled if they were not impeding traffic. The street views of Canfield Drive reveal an empty, non-descript road with no parked cars and no visual impediments. Nothing is hidden from view. If the cop came up behind them as they walked down the street, then a simple toot of the horn could have moved them. It is said that he drove up beside them on that street and told them to move to the sidewalk. The police chief said that one obeyed, while one did not. That is the cop’s version, the chief was not there. The witness, Dorian Johnson says that he remained in arm’s length of his friend and the cop still in his vehicle. So, the cop puts Dorian at a greater distance, not at arm’s length.

Why did the cop open his vehicle door? Was he attempting to exit the vehicle in order to apply law and order to the situation of two young men strolling and talking in the middle of a largely empty residential street? Or, was the cop looking to apply law and order to one or two defiant and unruly thugs who were clearly in the throws of that kind of criminal activity? Why does the cop stop? Why not just move on?

TK writes: “The part about the cop grabbing him by the throat while the cop was still in the car is not believable. He wouldn’t have been close enough unless he was threatening the cop. Must have really been the long arm of the law.”

Since we’re just speculating: If the cop backed his vehicle up to Brown, as Johnson says, with his door nearly brushing them, he could very well have reached out to grab Brown. A suddenly crazed or unhinged Brown could just as easily have leaned in to grab the cop’s gun. Is that plausible? That the 18-year-old, who was to begin college in two days, flew off the handle at an overbearing white cop who seems to have had nothing better to do, and tried to grab his weapon? To do what? To kill the cop? Would Brown really have attempted to grab the holstered weapon of a cop sitting in his police vehicle? Assuming that the cop was right-handed, how would Brown have been able to reach in, across the cop’s body and access and remove the cop’s holstered hand gun without the cop grabbing him and resisting his effort? It would have been somewhat easier if the cop was holstered on his left. But, un-holstering a cop’s weapon against the cop’s wishes would not be easy or wise

Either way. Aren’t cops trained to deal with that kind of effort?

Is it possible that Brown was not afflicted with a fit of reckless rage or insanity, and that he was not so motivated by that, that he would attempt such a life-altering, criminal and stupid thing? Is it possible that, if in fact he was reaching in to struggle physically with an armed cop, that the cop had already drawn his weapon, and as Dorian put it, said that he was going to shoot him? Which one of the two of them can’t be reckless? Wouldn’t it then be a prudent thing to do for Brown to try to stop the cop from shooting him? Brown could have, in this scenario, backed away and pleaded “don’t shoot.” It has been said that that is what he eventually did after already taking two rounds from the cop to his bleeding body. A snap decision in the face a verbal threat to shoot and a drawn weapon can’t be easy. You can’t know how it will end.

I had a gun quickly pulled on me, at less than arm’s length. I had less than a second to react. I did react, and a bullet ended up in my assailant. Had I stopped to think or to negotiate or to plead for mercy, I would probably be dead. My assailant took the round well, and though it entered at his heart, he lived. Brown, according to Johnson and another witness, took two rounds before the subsequent fatal rounds were fired into him, well up in the middle of the empty street away from the police car. The other witness says that she saw him run and turn with his arms up in surrender. She says that the cop put a round into his chest and then into his head. She said that she watched him fall dead.

Karl D. writes:

Buck said:

No intelligent person can honestly argue that there are no bad cops; no dishonest, lying, thieving, criminal, killer cops, black and white. Likewise, no intelligent person can honestly argue that every young black man in St. Louis is a lying gang-banging thug looking for trouble.

Absolutely true. As a young man I was assaulted by a cop for no other reason that he was either a Sadist or had some kind of a chip on his shoulder. After he sucker punched me out of the blue I turned around in disbelief as to what had just transpired to look at him. He just looked at me with cold dead eyes and said, “You want some more f***o!?” What do you do with that? I just walked away angry and in pain. One of my best friends is a retired Sergeant from the NYPD. He admitted to me that there are some real hard cases on the force. Luckily they are weeded out pretty early on. Although todays NYPD is a basket case under DeBlasio for numerous reasons.

Mr. Perry writes:

One other note regarding the apparently conflicting testimony about the death of Mr. Brown; this kind of thing is why cruisers in Minnesota have dashboard cameras that record sound and video at every stop.  I would hazard a guess that the probability of having one’s abusive demeanor broadcast around the world may have a calming effect.

And I think it’s long past time for ALL police forces to stop spending on armored vehicles and put this into practice.  Instead of arguing and rioting, you just “roll tape”.

Please follow and like us: