CBS just paraded out two "experts" who claimed that the autopsy results show that Michael Brown could not have been shot while he was fleeing, because all the bullets hit him in the "front."
I beg to differ.
It is not even clear that the autopsy says that the arm shots specifically hit him in the "front." I thought I had heard something different on one of the news networks last night (either CNN or MSNBC).
But even if the first shot did hit the "front of his arm" does that prove he was facing the officer? When I run, my arms tense up, and the inside or front of my upper arms may well be facing the back.
If the first shot was to his arm, than Tiffany Mitchell's account would be consistent with the autopsy.
Michael would have been initially shot in the arm. Turned around, and the officer kept firing, even as Michael was falling head first.
On another note, anyone who tries to claim the officer was acting responsibly, or that Michael Brown "brought it on himself" should be reminded that Wilson was firing so indiscriminately that at least one bullet had to be retrieved from a neighboring home. If someone in that home had been hit would they have "deserved it as well?
4:23 PM PT: Dr. Ceril Wecht, forensic pathologist, just stated on Hardball, "you can bring that arm in many directions so you cant be sure what is 'front' and 'back.'"