Opinion Filler Photo

Jury of Brown Shooting Made the Right Call

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.” This phrase rings as true today as it did back when Abraham Lincoln said it 150 years ago.

This played out quite evidently when the jury of the Michael Brown versus Darren Wilson case released its decision on Nov. 25.

The Grand Jury composed of nine members found officer Darren Wilson not guilty on all accounts. Immediately, those who opposed as well as supported made their thoughts known.

Peaceful protestors and rioters filled the streets of Ferguson, Mo. the evening the news had been released. These people claim there was a lack of justice and misuse of power fueled by race-driven bias.

Among the evidence collected were 28 eyewitness accounts all claiming to have seen the incident transpire. PBS collected and did a breakdown of the interview responses. Unfortunately, there is a strong lack of any consistency.

One interviewee claims Wilson fired three shots, while another claims they heard 10 or 11. About half say Brown was kneeling when shot, while the other half disagrees.

None of the questions asked were answered clearly yes or clearly no. The only known fact is that there was an altercation between Brown and Wilson. This makes the evidence from the autopsy so important.

Much of the outrage over the ruling is derived from the belief Michael Brown had turned to face officer Wilson and raised his hands before being shot and killed. If this were the case, it would be an inexcusable act of violence.

But the autopsy of Brown, released in the New York Times, shows the entry angle of the bullets — specifically the one that entered directly on top of Brown’s skull — are comparative to someone who would be charging. These are not the wounds of someone who surrendered before being gunned down.

On social media, Brown is being depicted as an unarmed kid who was murdered was racially driven. Yet legally Brown was an adult. He was 6-feet-4-inches tall and 292 pounds according to medical examiner’s report.

If he had committed shoplifting, as what was believed by Officer Wilson, he would have been tried as an adult, not a juvenile.

Officer Wilson had the injuries to confirm he and Brown had engaged in a physical conflict. After 0ver three months of deliberation and examining the evidence, the Grand Jury ruled Wilson had been acting in self-defense.

This decision was not made flippantly. The evidence indicates the jury made a sound ruling given the facts present.

Regardless of the ruling, it is tragic to see how many have taken to the streets and rioted. They take away from those who look to protest the ruling peacefully.

Even though Officer Wilson acted in self-defense, it is still unfortunate a person who had a full life ahead of them is no longer with us.


Leave a Reply