Are New Disclosures in Michael Brown Case Significant?

Print More

More than 2½ years after the fatal shooting of Michael Brown by Ferguson officer Darren Wilson, new theories continue to surface claiming that everything you thought you knew was wrong, reports the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Despite grand jury and Justice Department findings, a cloud of out-of-context information, assertion, and overreach has suddenly descended on Ferguson. Its origin can be traced to records and documents involving Brown that mostly have been part of the public record for some time. They are now being billed as significant discoveries.

For example, the Washington Post posted a statement made by Wilson in a civil suit by Brown’s parents against the city of Ferguson, Wilson and former Ferguson police chief Tom Jackson. Wilson says, “I have repeated a racist remark made by someone else, but I have not made a racist remark against another individual while on duty as a police officer.” The Root online magazine interpreted several of Wilson’s answers as a reversal. Its headline was “Everything You Think You Know About the Death of Mike Brown Is Wrong, and the Man Who Killed Him Admits It.” While Wilson told the grand jury that Brown assaulted him and tried to take his gun, the Root suggests that Wilson’s newer statements proved Brown never assaulted him and never tried to take the officer’s gun. That’s not what the records show, says the Post-Dispatch. In the lawsuit, Wilson says only that Brown didn’t try to take the gun out of the holster.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


You have Free articles left this month.

Want access to all our reporting? Subscribe for unlimited access or login.