What fucks me up about the Darren Wilson fundraiser is that he hasn’t been charged with a crime. He doesn’t have to hire a lawyer. He’s on paid leave, so he’s not losing wages. This is not covering his expenses, because he…
jean-luc-gohard is why we can’t have nice things. Did you even bother to read your sources?
1. Yes, Wilson had to go to the hospital. The Examiner, Fox News, Washington Post, and the St Louis Prosecuting attorney’s office all confirmed Wilson suffered an orbital blowout. You claim a rightwing pundit photoshopped an image and claimed it was Wilson but this isn’t the case. Go to the link you posted. Never does that link say the image is from Darren Wilson. In fact, it says “File Image” under it, suggesting it is a stock photo of an orbital blowout. Your outright lying here just shows your cognitive dissonance.
2. We don’t know for certain whether Brown reached for his gun or not, but just because a scuffle happened and the gun went off in the car does not mean Brown would have gunpowder on his skin. We still do not have information on residue on his clothing. All gunpowder residue on the skin suggests is how far from the muzzle Brown was. If the gun went off in a direction opposite of Brown then there would be no residue. You aren’t a pathologist and seem to not understand the basics of pathology or ballistics. Talking out your ass and linking “sources” as if they support your position (they don’t) makes you seem infantile and dishonest.
3. OP is referencing an anonymous report o St Louis Radio saying Brown’s friend Johnson has changed his story. There is no other evidence to suggest this, but it is worth noting Johnson had a warrant out for his arrest for theft and has made false police reports in the past. Seeing as how the autopsy evidence suggests Johnson was untruthful about Brown being shot in the front (not the back, as Johnson suggested) and how Brown had his arms down, not up, Johnson’s account doesn’t seem very credible. The link you posted suggesting Brown paid for the cigars shows him knocking stuff off the counter, grabbing a big box of swisher sweets, and leaving with multiple of them. The other videos go on to show the clerk confronting him and Brown assaulting the clerk. No reputable source or major news outlet seems to be saying the video shows Brown paying for his cigars. The pro-Brown crowd has changed their narrative a few times on this. First it was Brown didn’t steal anything and the robbery never happened. Then it was Brown isn’t the guy in the video. Now it is okay it is Brown but he didn’t steal anything (despite both videos showing him stealing the cigars.) It is a classic sign of motivated reasoning.
4. On self defense, Wilson did go to the hospital for facial swelling, we know that much. The evidence and accounts seem to suggest it was a facial fracture, but if you are so confused that you can’t accept that then just know that it suggests Brown violently attacked Wilson. The autopsy shows four shots to the arm and two to the head. The last round would have been the one to enter the top of Brown’s head. The four shots at Brown’s right arm were from the front, so no, he wasn’t shot from behind. Also, the ones that penetrated through were front to back, one entering his abdomen, meaning his hands were not up. As for the shot in the top of the head, that exited above his eye, there are numerous explanations. One is that having been shot five times he stumbled. Another is that he could have been leaning forward and running towards Wilson. Another is that he was ducking to try and dodge the bullets.
Given the injury sustained by Wilson, Brown’s violent habit throughout the day, and the autopsy, Wilson will likely end up not being charged or as a not guilty verdict.
The real question is why are you clinging to this narrative that Wilson killed Brown because he is racist when the evidence suggests that is was Brown’s actions that led to his death? Because you want to highlight racism? There are plenty of examples of racist actions by police and racist practices within our justice system. Why cling to a lie to do something when you could nearly as easily use facts to do the same thing?