Michael Brown Shooting

Did Ferguson Cop Darren Wilson Suffer Broken Eye Socket in Struggle With Michael Brown? Apparently No.


Two days ago, FoxNews ran an anonymously sourced story claiming that Darren Wilson, the Ferguson, Missouri police officer identified as the shooter of Michael Brown, suffered "severe facial injuries" including a broken eye socket during the altercations.

Now, CNN is saying that story is false. Here are tweets by producer Julian Cummings:

Among other things, this is a strong reminder to remember that it takes time for the actual truth to out in these sorts of situations. The FoxNews story may be wrong, the CNN account may be contravened, etc.

Which also suggests that it's good news that the grand jury investigating the death of Michael Brown will take its time looking at evidence, possibly taking until October before returning any indictments. Justice delayed is no easy thing to take, but it's also true that Gov. Jay Nixon's calls for a "vigorous prosecution" in the case veer close to mob rule.

NEXT: Friday A/V Club: Avant-Garde ACLU Ads of the 1970s

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. Prosecutors and cops are all part of the same club. Grand jury or not, prosecutors are not likely to be enthusiastic about pursuing charges against a cop.

    1. Just like skittles1, skittles2 is all about getting a charge filed so that Crump(same lawyer in both) can file a civil suit with threat of more riots for a multimillion dollar payday.

  2. Not necessarily to defend what the cop did, and we still don’t know exactly what that was, but in addition to debunking the broken eye socket story, CNN is confirming that there was a physical struggle before the shooting. That’s significant too.
    Nick Gillespie’s point about it taking time for the truth to come out is a great truth that we should all take to heart. Especially when a big story is breaking there are always false stories about and you have to be skeptical.
    Consider the eyewitness reports that he was shot while running away. The autopsy stories say he was shot in the front, so unless he was running backwards he wasn’t running away.

    1. Or the shots that hit him in the back of the arm came from behind him, or Wilson shot at him from behind and missed, and that’s what Brown was reacting to when he turned around. Unfortunately for everybody, the autopsy didn’t rule any part of either story out.

      1. Or he was doing handstands and cartwheels like those ducks in the shooting gallery at the circus. Or he was grabbed by aliens, turned upside down as they anal probed him and he just happened to get shot right at the wrong time as the cop was trying to shoot the probe out of the aliens hands.

    2. Even if video evidence would not be 100% conclusive, this case should lead to legislation that will require all LEOs to be equipped with devices that record all their interactions with the public. If they don’t like it, then don’t be a cop.

      1. If they don’t like it, then don’t be a cop.

        Law of unintended consequences;

        Like exerting authority, enforcing freedom and peace, but hate persecution and and oversite? Join the U.S. Intelligence Services!

      2. Agreed. If they do nothing wrong they’ve got nothing to worry about.

        1. No disrespect sir, but this is the same argument ” if they do nothing wrong…” that has led to massive draconian surveillence and anti-liberty rules being imposed on us. Just because someone is a cop does not exclude them from Constitutional protection. I agree with Nick, lets not rush to judgement. I only wish some of his Reason colleagues would head that advice

          1. *heed that advice. autocorrect is fun!

          2. That is the reason I used that phrase.

            It should have been used on Diane Feinstein.

          3. The difference is that the cameras would follow the job, not the person.

            They have a responsibility because they’ve been given power (yeah I know paraphrase of a cliche line, but it is true.) Problem is, they have been abusing that power for a long time. Cameras would go a long way to at least heavily reduce those abuses of power. I wouldn’t ask for them to constantly wear them like off the job, but anytime they use that power of the police, they should be under supervision. It’s sad, it’d be great if we could trust the police, but the problem with that is that no matter the job and no matter the person, there is always that temptation.

            1. Cameras can also lead to overthinking each situation in fear that every single action will be scrutinized. When this happens, overthinking can lead to delayed reaction on part of the police officer, placing himself or herself in danger while also potentially placing others in the vicinity of crime in harm’s way as well.

    3. It doesn’t really confirm anything. If I were a cop and I just murdered someone and came to my senses; I would probably ask my partner to punch me in the face, smack my face into a door etc. Then it might look believable that a guy rushed me before I gunned him down in cold blood.
      With the multiple autopsies I’ve heard nothing about Brown having broken/damaged hands which would certainly happen had he punched anyone in the eye region.

    4. CNN is now saying that the porno recording of the shots fired is a hoax.

  3. Don’t rush to judgment and take necessary precautions to avoid destroying the life of an innocent. Sound advice. I wonder if ANY of that mindset is applied toward the 600 or so citizens cops kill every year.

    1. Strange, that’s exactly the formula on would think cops would apply to suspects. Only, it’s actually the cops JOB to do that, since he’s not a casual commenter, but someone actively involved in the situation.

      1. The irony. it burns.

      2. Oops, sorry, I read that as “citzen cops killed every year”.

    2. Should, but doesn’t. There is weak advocacy at best in the system for citizens, compared to the bureaucracy that protects and defends the JBTs.

  4. The real issue! Why 14 years into the 21st century is there no “non-lethal” way for police to subdue someone. Wildlife experts routinely bring down Elephants and Rhinos with no lasting harmful effects. What ever happened to the use of Tasers?

    1. Don’t tase me bro.

    2. How do you know there are no lasting effects? Would any news ever make it to the public if, say, half the tranquilized animals died as a matter of course?

      There’s also the size factor affecting the dose. I imagine almost all wild animal tranquilizations provide enough time to work up the correct dose. That’s not the case for a universal emergency use. They’d better err on the side of caution, which means you’d need several shots for someone like Michael Brown. And that brings up another problem, missed shots or panic rapid fire. Either your tranquialization guns allow multiple rapid shots or it won’t be any good in emergencies, but that means there will be missed shots. Do you want to risk hitting bystanders? Do you want to leave missed shots lying around for kids to pick up?

      1. Perhaps it’s just best if the State Mafia doesn’t mow down civilians anymore.

        1. Maybe the civilians can fire up some synapses and stop trying to wrest weapons from policemen?

          1. There is no evidence to support the story that Brown tried to take the weapon from Wilson. And there is no reason to take that claim at face value.

      2. “Do you want to risk hitting bystanders?”

        With non-lethal weapons? As opposed to the current lethal weapons that might hit a bystander?

        In a word, Yes.


      3. So bullets have none of those consequences?

    3. A police stun gun failed to affect Rodney King when he got out of his car and started swinging at cops. Elephants and Rhinos don’t do drugs themselves so there is little possible drug interaction. If you show up in a toxicology hospital loaded up with street drugs and a broken femur you will not get pain meds.

  5. Wow.

    It’s really rich getting lectured from this bunch about waiting until all of the facts come out. Other than the usual race charlatans, nobody pre-judged this mess as much as Reason writers.

    My irony meter is now broken beyond all repair…

    1. *Other than the usual race charlatans, nobody pre-judged this mess as much as Reason writers.*

      Reason commenters were pretty damn quick to judge, too. Because ‘all cops are bad, that’s why’.

      1. Cops are proving that maxim themselves.

        It’s pretty easy to judge that the cop already went out of the line of duty by harassing two boys for jaywalking down a residential street, then nearly striking them with his own vehicle. No bias required there.

        It’s also fairly easy to judge, without bias, that had the cop just stayed in his car, not approached the two boys in an aggressive manner over such a trivial matter, that there would have been no contact, regardless who initiated it, and nobody would have lost their life.

        The cop was a pig. Plain and simple.

        1. You sound a bit porcine yourself.

        2. Actually it was more than 2 boys look at the video of the liquor store robbery they participated in less than 10 min prior. Jabberwalking is blocking traffic. Eric “with” Holder wanted the liquor store robbery tape suppressed as skittles2 did the same walk away and charge to the Asian clerk that the cop stated he did at the stop.

  6. if the broken orbital socket story turns out to be a lie, the reporters of that lie need to out their source. if the source is a cop, someone needs to decide if a lying police officer is acceptable.

    1. Perhaps the reporter just made it up.

      It certainly wouldn’t be the first time.

      1. Perhaps it’s true and CNN is just distracting the simple minded public with a lie.

        It certainly wouldn’t be the first time.

  7. Seems like the friends of Officer Wilson and “sources” within the department have told at least a couple of fibs regarding Officer Wilson’s side of the story.

    1. Why should we believe anything this department says?

      1. Why should we believe anything the government says? Regardless of who is in charge at the time?

        1. And why should we give CNN the benefit of the doubt?

      2. it could still be true. the original reporter has doubled down. but in his world police officer automatically =integrity.

        1. PRX — It’s more likely, in that reporter’s world, an officer’s integrity is determined by who or what the criminal is.

    2. Seems like the friends of Officer Wilson and “sources” within the department have told at least a couple of fibs regarding Officer Wilson’s side of the story.

      And friends of Mike Brown have been spinning things in his favor, too. I’m not justifying any of it, but let’s acknowledge that there’s a lot of it going around.

      1. Nobody has been making any false claims about Michael Brown in his favor. If you can name one, do it. Cops do this routinely for themselves and their gang members, especially after they’ve just killed someone.

        1. Some people were claiming he was shot in the back, which the autopsy does not support.

          1. That’s untrue. The autopsy said one shot could have been from behind or could have been while his hand was raised. (i.e. like someone who was raising their hands in the air)

        2. He’s just an innocent gentle giant, which was a bit contradicted by his casual use of violence against someone less than half his size and 3 times his age in a strong arm robbery just before he arrogantly sauntered down the middle of the street blocking traffic like he owned those roads with a box of stolen cigars in his hand in plain view like it was a badge of honor just before he attacked a cop just before someone said he was shot in the back while giving up after he was shot in the front. You mean other than that?

          1. This version may not be true from the store footage either. DID he steal the cigars? Maybe he had paid for them but the owner accused him of something else and they fought? You are jumping to conclusions here too.

            Witnesses said the police were shooting and that he turned with his arms up and surrendered and then was shot and killed. This is way more believable than he was attacking a cop, ran away, and then turned around again and charged. He’d either turn around to surrender or keep running.

  8. But wait…
    I have it on good authority that 6’9″, 500 lb Mike “Thug” Brown, hopped up on angel-chronic-bath salts dust beat that poor police man within an inch of his life with the officer’s own patrol car!


    [/cop dick riding]

    1. I heard that he was 8 feet tall, 600 pounds, a multiple-time world strongman champion, who beat the officer and then used force powers to make the officer shoot him.

      1. I heard that he was 12, carrying a picnic basket to his grandma’s, wearing an orange safety vest, blowing bubbles, skipping, and singing Christian hymns, when that big bad Gestapo agent in a KKK hood just emptied a magazine on him FOR NO APPARENT REASON OR ANYTHING.

        Hurr, durr.

        1. I heard the picnic basket was where he hid his bath salts, Uzi, and pictures of white virgins.

          And besides, he was a black dude, he had to be guilty of something, amiright?


    2. I heard he was convicted of 2 felonies in November of last year, and the cop was recently given an award for exemplary service. Oh wait you probably are using sarcasm and saw the lamestream edited liquor store tape that stopped before he even touched the Asian.

  9. I’m not here to defend FOX but what “Proof” did CNN give to disprove FOX. We all know most Media hate FOX with a passion and it would not be the first time they lied about what FOX said. Now that i think about it when I do watch MSNBC I’ve never seen them not comment on how awful or taken something out of context to claim FOX lied. it almost like news wars on TV who can trash who the most.

    1. You make a good point: We often believe what we want to believe. Facts are often secondary and sometimes get in the way of our worldview.

    2. From the tweets, maybe they saw hopsital records. When he is charged (not if, this is worse than Zimmerman got, no way he gets out of an idictment) and the case goes to trial, those records will eventually come out. Til then, it’s nothing but speculation from everyone.

  10. Anonymous source v. anonymous source. We have to look at context to see which is more credible.

    And the context of the “blown orbit” leak was, as we discussed in exhaustive detail, really, really inconsistent with that leak being true.

    I’m giving CNN the benefit of the doubt on this one. Because context.

    If you look at many of the regulars here, you will find fairly, if not perfectly, consistent hedging around whether we really have the facts, and reactions to the current versions being touted flagged as “if this holds up”, etc.

  11. At least we can all rest assured that no one will learn any valuable lessons from any of this.

  12. Among other things, this is a strong reminder to remember that it takes time for the actual truth to out in these sorts of situations.

    Maybe you should tell Steve Chapman. Just sayin.

  13. Anonymous source versus anonymous source.

    There’s no ‘benefit of the doubt’ here. It’s anonymous source versus anonymous source.

    Which means that no new information has been imparted at all.

    We have two conflicting rumors.

  14. Well, democrats need STL to win Missouri because no other districts in Missouri vote democratic. Better serve up Barney Fife to the mob to make you look like a good guy.

  15. I think you are missing the point.

    The point of the orbital-fracture story was not that “Oh, Brown is such a bad guy, he deserved to be shot”; the point was, “Brown hit the cop in the face before being shot.”

    The nature of the injury is irrelevant. Even if Brown had thrown a punch and missed, he is freaking HUGE. He had to know that if he started something with an armed man, he was risking being shot.

  16. Without the mob, what does Nixon have in an increasingly ‘red’ state?
    His actions aren’t going to make it any ‘bluer’.

    1. Don’t forget, the purpose of a political campaign is not to convince people to agree with you; it’s to convince people who already agree with you to turn out and vote. This kind of demagoguery can go a long way toward that end.

  17. Some advice for all you unarmed cigar stealing people: do what the nice policeman asks you do to and, above all, do not attack him or her. You might get hurt or even killed.

    Policepersons are, for some strange reason, paranoid when they are facing enraged, high on drugs, 300 pound people who seem to want to kill them and might do something most of us seemingly disagree with, protect themselves. You probably aren’t paranoid and have warm friendly feelings toward such potentially violent people but you do not have to face people like that every day either.

    1. Yeah, so maybe he didn’t ‘deserve’ to be killed, but he was stupid, and stupid will get you killed every now and then.

  18. By “veer close to mob rule,” I take it you mean “is leading and inciting the mob while waving a torch.”

  19. I love how the goal posts have moved in a few short weeks. From “Michael was a good, gentle kid that was shot in the back as he fled the mean old white power cop”, to “Well, after strong-arm-robbing the convenience store, Michael didn’t actually break any BONES when beating the cop that happened upon him”…

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.