Ferguson Grand Jury Evidence Reveals Mistakes, Holes In InvestigationSoon after Officer Darren Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old, law enforcements handling of the case was already being criticized as callous and sloppy. Residents of Ferguson, Missouri, looked on in horror as police officials failed to cover and later to remove Browns body from the street for hours. Now that the grand jury evidence, including forensic records and testimony from Wilson and those investigating the fatal shooting, has been released, its clear that other mistakes were made in attempting to figure out what happened on that August afternoon. The best physical evidence and testimony might not have been as ironclad in Wilsons favor as prosecutor Robert McCulloch characterized it on Monday night. From the reams of grand jury testimony and police evidence, here are some key points that, if this case had gone to trial, could have been highlighted by prosecutors (not including the witnesses who appeared to contradict Wilsons testimony): 1. Wilson washed away blood evidence. In an interview with police investigators, Wilson admitted that after the shooting he returned to police headquarters and washed blood off his body -- physical evidence that could have helped to prove or disprove a critical piece of Wilsons testimony regarding his struggle with Brown inside the police car. He told his interrogator that he had blood on both of his hands. “I think it was his blood,” Wilson said referring to Brown. He added that he was not cut anywhere.A photo of Wilsons injuries taken at the hospital after his altercation with Brown, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorneys Office.2. The first officer to interview Wilson failed to take any notes. The first supervising officer to the scene, who was also the first person to interview Wilson about the incident, didnt take any notes about their conversation. In testimony more than a month after the incident, the officer offered his account from memory. He explained that he hadnt been equipped with a recorder and hadnt tried to take any written notes due to the chaotic nature of the situation. He also didnt write up any notes soon after the fact. “I didnt take notes because at that point in time I had multiple things going through my head besides what Darren was telling me,” the officer stated. The same officer admitted during his grand jury testimony that Wilson had called him personally after they both had been interviewed by investigators. Wilson then went over his account again with the officer. The officer told the grand jury that there were no discrepancies between Wilsons first account in person and his second account on the phone. But the call raises questions about whether Wilson may have influenced witness testimony.3. Investigators failed to measure the likely distance between Brown and Wilson. An unnamed medical legal examiner who responded to the shooting testified before the grand jury that he or she had not taken any distance measurements at the scene, because they appeared “self-explanatory.” “Somebody shot somebody. There was no question as to any distances or anything of that nature at the time I was there,” the examiner told the jury. The examiner also noted that he or she hadnt been able to take pictures at the scene -- as is standard -- because the cameras batteries were dead. The examiner later testified that he or she accompanied investigators from the St. Louis County Police Department as they photographed Browns body.A photo of the Aug. 9 crime scene in Ferguson, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorneys Office.4. Investigators did not test Wilsons gun for fingerprints. Talking with police investigators and before the grand jury, Wilson claimed that Brown had grabbed at Wilsons gun during the initial incident in the police car and that Browns hand was on the firearm when it misfired at least once. Wilson also told police that he thought Brown would overpower him and shoot him with his own gun. “I was not in control of the gun,” Wilson said. Eventually he regained control of the weapon and fired from within the car. Investigators could have helped to prove or disprove Wilsons testimony by testing his service weapon for Browns fingerprints. But the gun was not tested for fingerprints. An investigator argued before the grand jury that the decision was made not to test the weapon because Wilson “never lost control of his gun.”5. Wilson did not immediately turn his weapon over to investigators after killing Brown. A detective with the St. Louis County Police Department, who conducted the first official interview of Wilson, testified to the grand jury that Wilson had packaged his own service weapon into an evidence envelope following his arrival at the police station in the wake of the shooting. The detective said the practice was not usual for his department, though he was unclear on the protocol of the Ferguson Police Department. He said he didnt explore that aspect further at the time. According to the detectives testimony, standard practice for the St. Louis County Police Department would be for an officer involved in a shooting to keep his or her weapon holstered until it can be turned over to a supervisor and a crime scene unit detective. While that clearly didnt take place in Wilsons case, the detective also testified that he believed the firearm was handled in a way that preserved the chain of custody.A photo of Wilsons service weapon, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorneys Office.6. An initial interview with investigators was delayed while Wilson traveled to the hospital with his superiors. The same St. Louis County Police Department detective also testified that while he had intended to conduct his initial interview with Wilson at the Ferguson police station, a lieutenant colonel with the Ferguson Police Department decided that Wilson first needed to go to the hospital for medical treatment. The detective said that while it is common practice to defer to any medical decision of this nature, Wilson appeared to be in good health and didnt have any notable injuries that would have prevented an interview from being conducted at the station. Wilson would also testify that he didnt believe he needed to go to the hospital. But that day, Wilson got into a vehicle with the lieutenant colonel and another Ferguson police official and went to the hospital, while the St. Louis County detective traveled in another vehicle.7. Wilsons initial interview with the detective conflicts with information given in later testimony. In his first interview with the detective, just hours after Browns death, Wilson didnt claim to have any knowledge that Brown was suspected of stealing cigarillos from a nearby convenience store. The only mention of cigarillos he made to the detective was a recollection of the call about the theft that had come across his radio and that provided a description of the suspect. Wilson also told the detective that Brown had passed something off to his friend before punching Wilson in the face. At the time, the detective said, Wilson didnt know what the item was, referring to it only as “something.” In subsequent interviews and testimony, however, Wilson claimed that he knew Browns hands were full of cigarillos and that fact eventually led him to believe Brown may have been a suspect in the theft.More On Ferguson From HuffPost: Photographic Evidence Reveals | First Year Law Student Could Have Done Better Job | 61 Arrested | Ferguson Smolders After Night Of Fires | Protest Locations | Americans Deeply Divided | Police Chief: Worse Than The Worst Night We Had In August | What You Can Do | Darren Wilson Interview | Darren Wilson Could Still Face Consequences | Timeline | Students Protest | Photos Of Darren Wilsons Injuries Released | Shooting Witness Admitted Racism In Journal | Peaceful Responses Show The U.S. At Its Best | Reactions To Ferguson Decision | Prosecutor Gives Bizarre Press Conference | Notable Black Figures React | Jury Witness: By The Time I Saw His Hands In The Air, He Got Shot | Thousands Protest Nationwide | By Jason Cherkis Soon after Officer Darren Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old, law enforcements handling of the case was already being criticized as callous and sloppy. Residents of Ferguson, Missouri, looked on in horror as police officials failed to cover and later to remove Browns body from the street for hours. Now that the grand jury evidence, including forensic records and testimony from Wilson and those investigating the fatal shooting, has been released, its clear that other mistakes were made in attempting to figure out what happened on that August afternoon. The best physical evidence and testimony might not have been as ironclad in Wilsons favor as prosecutor Robert McCulloch characterized it on Monday night. From the reams of grand jury testimony and police evidence, here are some key points that, if this case had gone to trial, could have been highlighted by prosecutors (not including the witnesses who appeared to contradict Wilsons testimony): 1. Wilson washed away blood evidence. In an interview with police investigators, Wilson admitted that after the shooting he returned to police headquarters and washed blood off his body -- physical evidence that could have helped to prove or disprove a critical piece of Wilsons testimony regarding his struggle with Brown inside the police car. He told his interrogator that he had blood on both of his hands. “I think it was his blood,” Wilson said referring to Brown. He added that he was not cut anywhere.A photo of Wilsons injuries taken at the hospital after his altercation with Brown, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorneys Office.2. The first officer to interview Wilson failed to take any notes. The first supervising officer to the scene, who was also the first person to interview Wilson about the incident, didnt take any notes about their conversation. In testimony more than a month after the incident, the officer offered his account from memory. He explained that he hadnt been equipped with a recorder and hadnt tried to take any written notes due to the chaotic nature of the situation. He also didnt write up any notes soon after the fact. “I didnt take notes because at that point in time I had multiple things going through my head besides what Darren was telling me,” the officer stated. The same officer admitted during his grand jury testimony that Wilson had called him personally after they both had been interviewed by investigators. Wilson then went over his account again with the officer. The officer told the grand jury that there were no discrepancies between Wilsons first account in person and his second account on the phone. But the call raises questions about whether Wilson may have influenced witness testimony.3. Investigators failed to measure the likely distance between Brown and Wilson. An unnamed medical legal examiner who responded to the shooting testified before the grand jury that he or she had not taken any distance measurements at the scene, because they appeared “self-explanatory.” “Somebody shot somebody. There was no question as to any distances or anything of that nature at the time I was there,” the examiner told the jury. The examiner also noted that he or she hadnt been able to take pictures at the scene -- as is standard -- because the cameras batteries were dead. The examiner later testified that he or she accompanied investigators from the St. Louis County Police Department as they photographed Browns body.A photo of the Aug. 9 crime scene in Ferguson, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorneys Office.4. Investigators did not test Wilsons gun for fingerprints. Talking with police investigators and before the grand jury, Wilson claimed that Brown had grabbed at Wilsons gun during the initial incident in the police car and that Browns hand was on the firearm when it misfired at least once. Wilson also told police that he thought Brown would overpower him and shoot him with his own gun. “I was not in control of the gun,” Wilson said. Eventually he regained control of the weapon and fired from within the car. Investigators could have helped to prove or disprove Wilsons testimony by testing his service weapon for Browns fingerprints. But the gun was not tested for fingerprints. An investigator argued before the grand jury that the decision was made not to test the weapon because Wilson “never lost control of his gun.”5. Wilson did not immediately turn his weapon over to investigators after killing Brown. A detective with the St. Louis County Police Department, who conducted the first official interview of Wilson, testified to the grand jury that Wilson had packaged his own service weapon into an evidence envelope following his arrival at the police station in the wake of the shooting. The detective said the practice was not usual for his department, though he was unclear on the protocol of the Ferguson Police Department. He said he didnt explore that aspect further at the time. According to the detectives testimony, standard practice for the St. Louis County Police Department would be for an officer involved in a shooting to keep his or her weapon holstered until it can be turned over to a supervisor and a crime scene unit detective. While that clearly didnt take place in Wilsons case, the detective also testified that he believed the firearm was handled in a way that preserved the chain of custody.A photo of Wilsons service weapon, released by the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorneys Office.6. An initial interview with investigators was delayed while Wilson traveled to the hospital with his superiors. The same St. Louis County Police Department detective also testified that while he had intended to conduct his initial interview with Wilson at the Ferguson police station, a lieutenant colonel with the Ferguson Police Department decided that Wilson first needed to go to the hospital for medical treatment. The detective said that while it is common practice to defer to any medical decision of this nature, Wilson appeared to be in good health and didnt have any notable injuries that would have prevented an interview from being conducted at the station. Wilson would also testify that he didnt believe he needed to go to the hospital. But that day, Wilson got into a vehicle with the lieutenant colonel and another Ferguson police official and went to the hospital, while the St. Louis County detective traveled in another vehicle.7. Wilsons initial interview with the detective conflicts with information given in later testimony. In his first interview with the detective, just hours after Browns death, Wilson didnt claim to have any knowledge that Brown was suspected of stealing cigarillos from a nearby convenience store. The only mention of cigarillos he made to the detective was a recollection of the call about the theft that had come across his radio and that provided a description of the suspect. Wilson also told the detective that Brown had passed something off to his friend before punching Wilson in the face. At the time, the detective said, Wilson didnt know what the item was, referring to it only as “something.” In subsequent interviews and testimony, however, Wilson claimed that he knew Browns hands were full of cigarillos and that fact eventually led him to believe Brown may have been a suspect in the theft.More On Ferguson From HuffPost: Photographic Evidence Reveals | First Year Law Student Could Have Done Better Job | 61 Arrested | Ferguson Smolders After Night Of Fires | Protest Locations | Americans Deeply Divided | Police Chief: Worse Than The Worst Night We Had In August | What You Can Do | Darren Wilson Interview | Darren Wilson Could Still Face Consequences | Timeline | Students Protest | Photos Of Darren Wilsons Injuries Released | Shooting Witness Admitted Racism In Journal | Peaceful Responses Show The U.S. At Its Best | Reactions To Ferguson Decision | Prosecutor Gives Bizarre Press Conference | Notable Black Figures React | Jury Witness: By The Time I Saw His Hands In The Air, He Got Shot | Thousands Protest Nationwide | ift.tt/1gB4pon
Posted on: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 01:09:36 +0000