Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
Its very likely the officers version of the story is accurate...but there are plenty of unanswered questions and abnormal procedure that will keep the critics unsatisfied. A trial would have brought all the testimony and evidence to light. The prosecutor did himself and his city a massive disservice by not taking the case to trial.
My opinion is that Michael Brown was a dirtbag and it seems clear he assaulted a police officer. The initial shots fired at close range seem justified based onthe known evidence. But then there were several other shots fired from a distance. Could the officer have shot him in the legs? Did he need to shoot him again? Multiple times? Maybe....maybe not. It would have been worth letting that play out in court....even if a lesser charge of manslaughter was pursued. Now those unanswered questions are left to the court of public opinion...and public opinion is not very favorable in Ferguson right now. It would really suck to be a cop there now.
Its not easy to defend a dirtbag but defending dirtbags sets the precedent for defending the rest of us.
PJ,
If the civilian cops are taught to shoot the same way I was, it was center of mass. Legs are quite a bit lower than the chest. Also, you are taught NOT to maim a person, shooting someone in the legs can maim a person if shot in the right place.
In any event, the cop is in dire need of some gun practice as he missed way too much. He may need to consider a change in caliber for his duty firearm.
FYI if a 300 lb man was running at me with the intent of doing bodily harm, the shots would not be in the torso...they would be just south of the top of his head and north of the shoulders.
