|
|
The
views expressed
on this page are soley those of the author and do not
necessarily
represent the views of County News Online
|
 |
Townhall
Opinions Versus
Facts
Thomas Sowell
Dec 02, 2014
Everyone seems to have an opinion about the tragic events in Ferguson,
Missouri. But, as Daniel Patrick Moynihan used to say, "You're entitled
to your own opinion but you're not entitled to your own facts."
Soon after the shooting death of Michael Brown, this 285-pound young
man was depicted as a "gentle giant." But, after a video was leaked,
showing him bullying the owner of a store from which he had stolen some
merchandise, Attorney General Eric Holder expressed displeasure that
the video was leaked. In other words, to Holder the truth was
offensive, but the lie it exposed was not.
Many people who claimed to have been eyewitnesses to the fatal shooting
gave opposite accounts of what happened. Some even gave accounts that
contradicted what they themselves had said earlier.
Fortunately, the grand jury did not have to rely on such statements,
though some in the media seemed to. What the grand jury had, that the
rest of us did not have until the grand jury's decision was announced,
was a set of physical facts that told a story that was independent of
what anybody said.
Three different medical forensic experts -- one representing Michael
Brown's parents -- examined the physical facts. These facts included
the autopsy results, Michael Brown's DNA on the door of the police car
and on the policeman's gun, photographs of the bruised and swollen face
of policeman Darren Wilson and the pattern of blood stains on the
street where Brown was shot.
This physical evidence was hard to square with the loudly proclaimed
assertions that Brown was shot in the back, or was shot with his hands
up, while trying to surrender. But it was consistent with the
policeman's testimony.
Moreover, the physical facts were consistent with what a number of
black witnesses said under oath, despite expressing fears for their own
safety for contradicting what those in the rampaging mobs were saying.
The riots, looting and setting things on fire that some in the media
are treating as reactions to the grand jury's decision not to indict
the policeman, actually began long before the grand jury had begun its
investigation, much less announced any decision...
Read the rest of the article at Townhall
|
|
|
|
