The Justice Department Outraged?

It was announced today that the official autopsy of the Michael Brown was leaked to the press.  It is not known who leaked it, but the report states that Brown had a wound on his hand that is consistent with Officer Wilson’s version of what happened which contradicts what Brown’s friend’s version.

After the leak, people in Ferguson clashed with the police again.  It was also released to the press that Eric “I Have An Agenda” Holder’s cronies at the Justice Department were outraged that the official autopsy came out before the grand jury decided whether or not to hand down an indictment.  If I were on a grand jury, I would want all the information available before deciding whether or not I supported and indictment.  If the Justice Department is outraged, then a rational person would be led to believe that they aren’t interested in the evidence or truth.

This also brings into question that if there is evidence that Michael Brown was not the innocent teen that his parents presented him to be, why are people still clashing with police on this?  Is it because someone from the community that, even though it was not known at the time of the shooting, had robbed a store and even posted pictures depicting himself as a street thug had to pay the price?  Is it because now they have to either keep up the ruse or admit that they looted, burned and rioted all based on a lie?  Or are they once again being enflamed by people in the background like Holder and Sharpton to promote themselves?

When people who are sworn to uphold the law like Holder turns their back on the evidence because it does not support their agenda, the system is no more than gangsters enforcing their own laws instead of the law of the land.

This post was inspired by a report from MSNBC that was so biased and painted Officer Darren Wilson who has not even been charged as a “killer” while depicting Michael Brown as completely innocent. 


About The Rural Iowegian

I am the Rural Iowegian of a published author and an award winning photographer. I use this space to speak my mind. God Bless.
This entry was posted in General Rantings, Politics, Sociology, Writing. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to The Justice Department Outraged?

  1. I don’t know the truth of this case, because both sides have been trying so hard to manage the story. The police there have only revealed details that support their version, and only under public or outside pressure. That smells, but I can’t prove anything.

    Michael Brown can have been a criminal, and assaulted the officer, and it might still be adjudicated that there was an inappropriate use of force. The key issue is not whether Brown was a model citizen, or even whether he was at one point a threat to the policeman, but whether the perception of threat was reasonable when the later shots were fired outside of the vehicle.

    I don’t know the limits of local law there, so I have no informed opinion. I’m willing to assume both that the DOJ understands Civil Rights law better than I do, and that judges there understand the limits of force allowable to an officer.

    • I’ll suggest that if one side tells the truth, there might not be any evidence to the contrary. What we do know is Officer Wilson’s weapon was fired in the car twice (and he reported there was a struggle while he was still in the vehicle). We know Officer Wilson suffered injuries to the face and neck which he reported happened while he was still in the vehicle; once again evidence supporting Officer Wilson’s story. Officer Wilson also reported that Brown charged him in the street. Brown’s propensity to use his size and charge people to get them to flee was told by friends of his. Once again, a fact that Officer Wilson did not likely know, but also supports the reported events by Officer Wilson. A few people in the community claimed as Brown’s friend stated that Brown was surrendering and had his hands up. Others in that same community testified that Brown charged at Wilson. Section 563 of the Missouri Code states “A person may not use deadly force upon another person under the circumstances specified in subsection 1 of this section unless: “He or she reasonably believes that such deadly force is necessary to protect himself, or herself or her unborn child, or another against death, serious physical injury, or any forcible felony.” Brown, who was a very large man, charging at the officer after what happened at the patrol car would fall under deadly force necessary to protect himself.

      In this case, there has been an overwhelming amount of evidence to support the officer’s statements and no reputable evidence from a single person claiming Brown’s innocence.

      As far as the DOJ, where were they for this one:

      White unarmed teenager shot by a black police officer. Not one peep from the DOJ.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s