In recent reports on the Michael Brown case, new evidence of Michael Brown’s blood on Officer Darren Wilson’s uniform as well as in his vehicle have been documented. Popular belief argues that the evidence works in Officer Wilson’s favor.
However, I elect to disagree. It appears evident at some point Michael Brown approached Officer Wilson’s vehicle although the purpose of his approach can be disputed. For whatever reason, the struggle ensued and ended with at least six shots killing the young man.
Considering the circumstances, it’s very difficult to understand how a young man can pose a threat powerful enough for a man to fear for his life from inside a vehicle, without a weapon. It is even more difficult to understand how, after defending himself from the eminent threat which Brown supposedly put him in, he would need to fire at least six shots at Brown, who was running away. Cases such as these where self-defense is claimed, but one of the parties is deceased and cannot tell his/her side of the story are very hard to evaluate – I’m no expert, though.
But looking at the evidence already presented it does not appear that Wilson’s firing of the shots or more can be justified as self-defense. While the evidence does support the officer’s rhetoric of a struggle, this new evidence only proves Wilson used excessive force in his “self-defense” as it shows Brown’s blood on Wilson, and not the other way around. Previous evidence shows at least one wound Brown received was synonymous with a struggle. So, clearly Brown had already been hit in a manner that drew blood, which could have possibly even given him a reason to fear for his own life. If Brown was truly intent on causing deadly harm to Wilson, I hardly believe he would retreat, nor do I believe that to subdue him in order to take him in for assault to an officer or attempted murder it takes six shots; two of which hit Brown in the head.
What would help in Wilson’s case would perhaps be evidence of his own blood on Brown’s clothing or some of his DNA underneath Brown’s nails to signify that Brown had indeed given Wilson a need for his use of his firearm. Even in that case, the number of times Wilson shot as Brown fled still needs to be questioned. Unless Wilson can come up with some astounding justification for his need to have used the force he used on Brown, evidence such as the evidence recently released will not work in Wilson’s favor.
Erynn Williams is a junior majoring in interdisciplinary studies. Her column runs biweekly.
