Michael Brown Shooting

Michael Brown Shot at Least 6 Times, Autopsy Reveals

Preliminary report from an independent inquiry

|

FERGUSON, Mo. — Michael Brown, the unarmed black teenager who was killed by a police officer, sparking protests around the nation, was shot at least six times, including twice in the head, a preliminary private autopsy performed on Sunday found.

One of the bullets entered the top of Mr. Brown's skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when it struck him and caused a fatal injury, according to Dr. Michael M. Baden, the former chief medical examiner for the City of New York, who flew to Missouri on Sunday at the family's request to conduct the separate autopsy. It was likely the last of bullets to hit him, he said.

Advertisement

NEXT: The More Time and Money the Government Spends Finding and Filling Drug Tunnels, The Bigger and More Elaborate They Get

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I read that his hands were in the air; was that gossip? Anyone know?

    1. No, it was lying to make the police bad, just like the reports he was shot in the back.

      1. It does wonder me: don’t people realize anybody who knows anything about terminal ballistics, like an ME, can tell which direction a bullet was traveling when it entered the body, and thus the orientation of the body relative to the bore of the weapon?

      2. It doesn’t necessarily mean witnesses were lying, but mistaken. The officer may have fired at his back, missed. Brown goes on his knees, surrendering or cowering, and witnesses assume this means he was hit from behind.

  2. Shot in the top of the head? Are they going to say, he was charging them like a bull?

    1. That’s what the police officer apparently says what happened, and seems to be backed up a conversation between a witness and someone showing up at the scene asking what happened.

      But hey, it must be a conspiracy. Or a magic bullet. Or maybe a drone?

    2. There’s video of witnesses saying Brown was running toward the Police officer. How fast he was running would need further study, I’m sure.

  3. It seems odd that anyone wouldn’t drop after the first bullet strike. Why did the officer pump five more bullets into Michael Brown?

    Since the officer stood at distance from Brown, couldn’t the officer pause to see the effect after the first bullet? Why didn’t the officer seek cover in his car until assessing the effect of the first bullet?

    Why do cops have guns at the ready anyway? Why aren’t all guns locked within the trucks of cop cars? Why shouldn’t watch commanders decide if guns need to be drawn?

    We’re living in the 21st century, not the Wild West 19th.

    Do cops really need access to lethal force guns at their ready? Don’t they have Taser? guns for self-defense? Didn’t Taser? guns replace beat-you-over-the-head truncheons?

    Are cops IQs a paltry 104, on average? Should anyone with IQs of 104 on average even have access to kill guns as a work tool?

    1. First, the Wild West wasn’t nearly the murderfest portrayed in movies and many history textbooks.

      Second, just from selectively released bits of an autopsy report you cannot judge what actually happened. We do know he wasn’t shot in the back. We can probably deduce his hands weren’t raised in a surrender gesture. We can’t deduce how many shots were fired after he was going down.

      I’m with you on the over reliance cops have on readily accessible firearms. IMO, the cops and state have embraced violence as a measure to combat violence which creates more violence as a reaction. The more force you put into a system the more reactive force is released. IOW, Michael Brown may well have attacked the cop and the behavior of cops may well have helped create Brown’s violence. It’s possible, I’d say likely, that Brown and the police are the bastards.

      1. First, I’m glad you are with me.

        If these cops have Tasers, why not use those first, especially on an unarmed man. Cops don’t seem to mind torturing the weak with Tasers when the weak merely question why cops have stopped them.

        As to the Wild West, no one has claimed the Wild West was a Hollywood murderfest. Of course the actual history is rich and deep.

        Third, no one is judging. Judgement requires the power of decision condemnation.

        Those who say “stop judging me” and akin phrases simply don’t understand English.

        The word you might want is ascertain and not judge.

        I know that Old French words into English is tricky for many and that leads many into poor expression.

        1. Thanks, for the correction on “judge”. The Taser angle is tricky. If they rely on non lethal tactics and ONE cop winds up dead they will use it as justification for ramping up the use of deadly force again. Catch 22. Of course that could be mitigated with a media that provided info which leads people to believe non lethal force is an overall net gain for society. But if it bleeds it leads. Oh and we’d have to stop the shield licking.

      2. “We can probably deduce his hands weren’t raised in a surrender gesture.”

        There is a wound to his hand. Is it unreasonable to think the wound to the hand, and top of the head, came from him being on his head being down, and hands/arms in front of his face in a defensive stance?

        1. That’s why I wrote “surrender gesture” not “defensive stance”. I have a feeling the eyewitness accounts are going to turn out to be implausible. But we will see.

          1. But the two are not mutually exclusive. Gun on him, he could be surrending with his head down, face up to protect himself from the weapon.

            1. I’m assuming you’re doing these gestures yourself like I am to see which one feels most natural. My wife is looking at me like I’m having a seizure. If we knew the exit and re entry points it would be much more clear.

              1. Yes, my co-workers probably think I’m terrified of this morning’s reports…

          2. How is your feeling holding up, straffinrun, in light of this?

            Forensics expert found “no evidence of a struggle.” Rather he found four entry wounds in the right arm, one in the chest and one at the top of the head.

            Brown appears to have been shot at least six times from a safe distance.

    2. I wouldn’t be bringing up anyone’s IQ if I were you. Questions like “Why shouldn’t watch commanders decide if guns need to be drawn?”, are pretty fucking stupid.

      1. And yet you wrote one question while you use the plural of question, referring to one question as “questions”.

        And what is with unneeded the progressive tense, “I wouldn’t be bringing”? Try I wouldn’t bring up or better I wouldn’t talk about…

        So who has the diminished IQ problem?

    3. Why didn’t the officer seek cover in his car until assessing the effect of the first bullet?

      Cops always shoot to kill, and they will usually shoot half a dozen shots before reassessing: http://www.pfoa.co.uk/110/shooting-to-wound

      Why do cops have guns at the ready anyway?

      We do have unarmed peace officers as well, but they aren’t generally called “cops”.

      Are cops IQs a paltry 104, on average?

      That’s a normal IQ, and police are pretty much in the middle among occupations:

      http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/occupations.aspx

      And it’s a labor market; there are many better jobs than police, and those get filled by smarter people.

      We’re living in the 21st century, not the Wild West 19th.

      The rules on the use of deadly force have been getting stricter over the years (i.e., police can use it less), but they are similar pretty much everywhere: police shoot to kill, and they shoot both to defend themselves and others, and to stop felony suspects from escaping.

      1. That’s a normal IQ, and police are pretty much in the middle among occupations:

        In argument, that is known as red herring. It’s irrelevant what are the average IQs of other occupations or where the occupation of police falls within in a table of other occupations.

        That said, the IQ range for cops runs about the same as that for clerical workers.

        How can anyone believe that is good enough when split-second decisions of life and death arise. Look what happened to Michael Brown.

        Arguing that cops always do X isn’t an argument. NAZIs always gassed the Jews once they started gassing them.

        As to your peace officers comment, your comment provides a false answer for an asking taken out of context.

        The connected questions were thus:

        Why do cops have guns at the ready anyway? Why aren’t all guns locked within the trucks of cop cars? Why shouldn’t watch commanders decide if guns need to be drawn?

        Cops should be deprived of the decision to use guns rather than other means. Cops lack suitable intellects to decide life and death matters for others.

        By your table, the average of the range is 97.5. The average for cops working has been reported as 104. That is far too low for serious decision-making.

    4. “It seems odd that anyone wouldn’t drop after the first bullet strike.”

      Only if you don’t know anything about guns or shooting incidents, does that seem odd.

      1. Because you are an expert, right, and so you can make such flippant comments without proving such, right?

        So no one ever gets dropped after a striking shot?

        Good luck living in fantasy land!

  4. We should all cower in our homes and let thugs do whatever they want.

    And we should bribe the police and their political masters through taxation and direct payoffs to leave us alone.

    Hey! It worked for tens of thousands of years, and still does in most parts of the world.

    1. Police is a local matter. You don’t like the militarization of your police force? You don’t like their use-of-deadly-force policy? Get involved in local politics and change it. It’s both the easiest to get involved in and the most important for your daily life. Local decision making is libertarian, democratic, and effective, if people actually bother to get off their asses and get involved.

      1. Totally agree with this.

    2. When do cops prevent crime? Cops show up after-the-fact, after crimes have been committed, almost always.

      It’s rare when cops engage in shoot outs taking on criminals in the act.

      The cops who work seven days a week engaging with bad guys in shoot outs are those who work on TV dramas.

  5. When police shoot, they shoot to kill. And they will usually fire at least half a dozen shots.

    http://www.pfoa.co.uk/110/shooting-to-wound

  6. When police shoot, they shoot to kill. And they will usually fire at least half a dozen shots.

    http://www.pfoa.co.uk/110/shooting-to-wound

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.