I don’t know if Darren Wilson is innocent or guilty. But I am stunned at the questions the prosecuting attorney did not ask. Wilson suggested that he had no choice but to kill Brown because Brown was a demon that was unafraid of being shot and killed. Even a first year law student could come up with questions to test Wilson’s statement.
The prosecutor could have asked: “In the car, when you tried to point the gun at Brown, what did he do?” Wilson would have answered that Brown tried to keep the gun from being pointed at him. “So Brown, in that instance, was afraid of being shot?” Maybe Wilson would have suggested that he couldn’t speculate on what Brown was thinking. At which point the prosecutor would have noted that in other parts of his testimony Wilson did speculate on what Brown was thinking, and maybe ask “So you’re unwilling to speculate on Brown’s state of mind when you pointed the gun at him in the car, but you knew what he was thinking when charged you?”
Maybe the prosecutor would have gotten clever. “If someone was trying to point a gun at you, what would you do?” Wilson would have answered that he would try to keep the gun from being pointed at him. Maybe the prosecutor would ask “Do you consider yourself a rational person?” And Wilson would have answered yes. And then the attorney would have asked “Was it rational of Michael Brown to believe that you might shoot and kill him?” Who knows how Wilson would have answered. The prosecutor would have continued: “You said that Brown seemed like Hulk, and you felt like a five year old when you started struggling. Have you ever taken anything out of the hand of a young child?” Wilson might or might not have answered, but the next question would have been “Did you still feel as if Michael Brown was the Hulk after he was unable to pull the gun from your hand? Or did this make you view him as a normal human”?
The prosecutor would continue: “You stated that Brown said you were too much of a pussy to shoot him. So at that moment, he wasn’t afraid of being shot?” Wilson would have agreed. “But then you shot him and he started running away. In your opinion, was Brown now afraid of being shot?” Wilson might have said yes, or just not answered. The prosecutor would have continued. “You say that while he was running away, you fired at him, and this caused him to stop. Do you think at this instance, Brown stopped because he was afraid of getting shot?” Again, who knows how Wilson would have answered.
The prosecutor would have continued. “You say that after stopping as you were firing at him, Brown turned around to face you. And then he started running towards you and your drawn gun. At this point do you think Brown was afraid of being shot?” Wilson would have acknowledged that if Brown was running towards him he must not have been afraid of getting shot. And the prosecutor would have continued: “So he is running towards you, and the bullets start hitting him and he stopped. Do you think he stopped because he was afraid you would continue shooting him?” Wilson would either agree or dodge the question. And the prosecutor would have said: “But after stopping, after being afraid, you said he seemed to steel himself, and then he began running at you again, clearly unafraid of being shot, until you had no choice but to shoot and kill him.”
The prosecutor would then sum everything up: “So if I understand what you are saying, Brown was not afraid of getting shot when he tried unsuccessfully to pull the gun from your hands, but was afraid of being shot as he ran away from you while you fired at him until he stopped, but unafraid of being shot when he charged at you the first time, but then afraid again of being shot when he stopped his charge, and then unafraid of being shot when he charged at you the second time, leaving you no choice but to shoot and kill him?”
Who knows what Wilson would have said to any of these questions. We don’t know because the prosecutor never asked them. I don’t know if Wilson was lying or telling the truth. But clearly the prosecuting attorneys believed Wilson was telling the truth and innocent. They challenged nothing he said, no matter how fantastical or far-fetched. My wife asked me why I was writing this, since it won’t change anything and it won’t help us move forward. I wrote this because reading the Grand Jury transcripts made me sick to my stomach. The Grand Jury fell far short of its promised impartiality.