Good evening and thanks for your patience. I'm a little late getting up here so I have a statement at the very beginning here and then we'll be happy to answer some questions when we're finished with that. But first and foremost I'd like to again extend my deepest sympathies to the family of Michael Brown. As I've said in the past, I know that regardless of the circumstances here, they lost a loved one to violence. And I know that the pain that accompanies such a loss knows no one else.
no bounds. On August 9th, Michael Brown was shot and killed by police officer Darren Wilson. Within minutes, various accounts of the incident began appearing on social media, accounts filled with speculation and little, if any, solid, accurate information.
Almost immediately, neighbors began gathering and anger began growing because of the various descriptions of what had happened and because of the underlying tension between the police department and a significant part of the neighborhood. The St. Louis County County Police conducted an extensive investigation at the crime scene, at times under very trying circumstances interrupted at least once by random gunfire. Beginning that day and continuing for the next three months, along with the agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation at the direction of Attorney General Eric Holder, located numerous individuals and gathered additional evidence and information.
Fully aware of the unfounded but growing concern community that the investigation and review of this tragic death might not be full and fair I decided immediately that all of the physical evidence gathered all people claiming to have witnessed any part or all of the shooting and any and all other related matters would be presented to the grand jury grand jury of 12 members of this community selected by a judge in May of this year long before this shooting occurred I would like to briefly expand upon the unprecedented operation between the local and the federal authorities. When Attorney General Holder first announced the federal investigation just days after the shooting, he pledged that federal investigators would be working with local authorities as closely as possible at every step of the way and would follow the facts wherever they may take us. As General Holder and I both pledged, our separate investigations follow that trail of facts with no preconceived notion of where that journey would take us.
Our only goal was that our investigation would be as investigation would be thorough and complete to give the grand jury, the Department of Justice and ultimately the public all available evidence to make an informed decision. All evidence obtained by federal authorities was immediately shared with St. Louis County investigators. Likewise, all evidence gathered by St. Louis County Police was immediately shared with the federal investigators. Additionally, the Department of Justice conducted its own examination of all the physical evidence and performed its own autopsy. autopsy.
Another autopsy was performed at the request of the Brown family and all of this information was also shared. Just as importantly, all testimony before the St. Louis County grand jury was immediately provided to the Department of Justice. So although the investigations are separate, both the local and the federal government have all of the same information and evidence.
Our investigation and presentation of the evidence to the grand jury in St. Louis County has been completed. The most significant challenge encountered in this investigation has been the 24-hour news cycle and its insatiable appetite for something, for anything, to talk about, following closely behind with the nonstop rumors on social media. I recognize, of course, that the lack of accurate detail surrounding the shooting frustrates the media and the general public and helps breed suspicion among those already distrustful of the system. Yet those closely guarded details, especially about the...
physical evidence give law enforcement a yardstick for measuring the truthfulness of witnesses. Eyewitness accounts must always be challenged and compared against the physical evidence. Many witnesses to the shooting of Michael Brown made statements inconsistent with other statements they made and also conflicting with the physical evidence.
Some were completely refuted by the physical evidence. As an example, before the results of the private autopsy were released, witnesses on social with the media and even during questioning by law enforcement claimed that they saw officer Wilson stand over Michael Brown and fire many rounds into his back. Others claimed that officer Wilson shot Mr. Brown in the back as Mr. Brown was running away.
However once the autopsy findings were released showing that Michael Brown had not sustained any wound to the back of his body no additional witnesses made such a claim. And several witnesses adjusted their stories in subsequent statements. Some even admitted that they did not witness the event at all, but merely repeated what they heard in the neighborhood or assumed had happened. Unfortunately for the integrity of our investigation, almost all initial witness interviews, including those of Officer Wilson, were recorded.
The statements and the testimony of most of the witnesses were presented to the grand jury before the trial. the autopsy results were released by the media and before several media outlets published information and reports that they received from a DC government official. The jurors were therefore prior to the time that released information going public and what followed in the news cycle the jurors were able to have already assessed the credibility of the witnesses including those witnesses whose statements and testimony remain consistent throughout every interview and were consistent with the physical evidence in this case.
My two assistants began presenting to the grand jury on August 20th. The evidence was presented in an organized and orderly manner. The jurors gave us a schedule of when they could meet. All 12 jurors were present for every session, and all 12 jurors heard every word of testimony and examined every item of evidence. Beginning August 20th and continuing until today, tirelessly to examine and re-examine all of the testimony of the witnesses and all of the physical evidence.
They were extremely engaged in the process, asking questions of every witness, requesting specific witnesses, requesting specific information, and asking for certain physical evidence. They met on 25 separate days in the last three months, heard more than 70 hours of testimony from about 60 witnesses, and reviewed hours and hours of recording. of media and law enforcement interviews by many of the witnesses who testified.
They heard from three medical examiners and experts on blood, DNA, toxicology, firearms, and drug analysis. They examined hundreds of photographs, some of which they asked be taken. They examined various pieces of physical evidence.
They were instructed on the law and presented with five indictments ranging from murder in the first degree to involuntary manslaughter. The burden was to determine, based upon all of the evidence, if probable cause exists to believe that a crime was committed and that Darren Wilson is the person who committed that crime. There is no question, of course, that Darren Wilson caused the death of Michael Brown by shooting him, but the inquiry does not end there. The law authorizes a law enforcement officer to use deadly force in certain situations. The law also allows all people to use deadly force to defend themselves in certain situations.
So the grand jury considered whether Wilson was the initial aggressor in this case or whether there was probable cause to believe that Darren Wilson was authorized as a law enforcement officer to use deadly force in this situation or if he acted in self-defense. I detail this for two reasons. First, so that everyone will know that as promised by me and Attorney General Holder, there was a full investigation and presentation of all evidence. evidence and appropriate instruction of law to the jury, to the grand jury.
Second, as a caution to those in and out of the media who will pounce on a single sentence or a single witness and decide what should have happened in this case based on that tiny bit of information. The duty of the grand jury is to separate fact from fiction. After a full and impartial and critical examination of all the evidence in the law and decide if that evidence supported the filing of any criminal charges against Darren Wilson.
They accepted and completed this monumental responsibility in a conscientious and expeditious manner. It is important to note here and say again that they are the only people, the only people who have heard and examined every witness and every piece of evidence. They discussed and debated the evidence among themselves before arriving at their collective decision.
After their exhaustive review of the evidence the grand jury deliberated over two days, making their final decision. They determined that no probable cause exists to file any charge against Officer Wilson and returned a no true bill on each of the five indictments. The physical and scientific evidence examined by the grand jury, combined with the witness statements supported and substantiated by that physical evidence, tells the accurate and tragic story of what happened.
A very general synopsis of the testimony. and the physical evidence presented presented to the grand jury follows. Please note that as I have promised, the evidence presented to the grand jury, with some exceptions, and the testimony of the witnesses called to the grand jury will be released at the conclusion of this statement.
At approximately 1145 a.m. on Saturday the 9th of August, Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson was dispatched to the Northwinds apartment complex for an emergency involving a two-month-old infant having trouble breathing. At approximately 1153, while still at the Northwinds call, Wilson heard a radio broadcast for a stealing in progress at a market on West Florissant. The broadcast also included a brief description of the suspect, a black male wearing a white T-shirt who took a box of Swisher cigars. Other officers were dispatched to that store.
Officer Wilson remained with the mother and the infant until EMS arrived to transport them to the hospital. Officer Wilson... left Northwinds complex in this Ferguson police vehicle, a Chevy Tahoe SUV, and drove west on Canfield towards West Florissant.
An additional description of the stealing suspect was broadcast about that time, wearing a red hat, yellow socks, khaki shorts, and he was with another male. As Officer Wilson was attending to his emergency call on Northwinds, Michael Brown and a companion were in the local convenience store on West Florissant. Michael Brown's activity The activity in that story was recorded by the store security cameras. The video, often played following its release in August by the Ferguson Police Department, shows Michael Brown grabbing a handful of cigarillos and heading toward the exit without paying. As Michael Brown and his companion left the store, someone inside the store called the police.
After crossing West Florissant, the two walked east on Canfield in the middle of the street, Mr. Brown directly behind his companion. As Officer Wilson continued west on Canfield, he encountered Michael Brown and his companion still walking in the middle of the street. As Wilson slowed or stopped as he reached Mr. Brown, he told them to move to the sidewalk.
Words were exchanged and they continued walking down the middle of the street. As they passed, Wilson observed that Michael Brown had cigarillos in his hand and was wearing a red hat and yellow socks. At approximately 12.02 p.m., Wilson radioed that he had two individuals on Canfield and needed assistance.
Officer Wilson backed his vehicle at an angle blocking their path and blocking the flow of traffic in both directions. Several cars approached from both east and west but were unable to pass the police vehicle. An altercation took place at the car with Officer Wilson seated inside the vehicle and Mr. Brown standing at the driver's window.
During the altercation two shots were fired by Officer Wilson while still inside the vehicle. Mr. Brown ran east on Canfield and Officer Wilson gave chase. Near the corner of Canfield and Copper Creek, Mr. Brown stopped and turned back towards Officer Wilson. Officer Wilson also stopped.
As Michael Brown moved toward Officer Wilson, several more shots were fired by the officer and Michael Brown was fatally wounded. Within seconds of the final shot, the assist car arrived. Less than 90 seconds later, the assist car arrived. seconds passed between Officer Wilson's first contact with Michael Brown and his companion and the arrival of that assist car.
During the investigation, many eyewitnesses were interviewed by various media outlets. Several others chose not to talk to the media but contacted law enforcement directly. Witnesses were interviewed by local and federal law enforcement, sometimes together, sometimes separately, but all statements were provided to the other party. All previous statements of witnesses who testified before the grand jury were also presented to the grand jury, whether they were media interviews or whether they were interviews by the FBI or by the county police department.
The statements of all witnesses, civilian, law enforcement, and experts were challenged, of course, by other law enforcement, by the prosecutors, and by the grand jurors themselves. A common and highly effective method of challenging a statement is to compare it to the previous statement. of the witness for consistency and to compare it with the physical evidence.
Physical evidence does not change because of public pressure or personal agenda. Physical evidence does not look away as events unfold, nor does it block out or add to memory. Physical evidence remains constant and as such is a solid foundation upon which cases are built.
When statements changed, witnesses were confronted with the inconsistencies and conflicts between their statements and their statements. and the physical evidence. Some witnesses admitted they didn't actually see the shooting or only saw a part of the shooting or only repeating what they had heard on the street.
Some others adjusted parts of their statements to fit the facts. Others stood by original statements even though their statements were... completely discredited by the physical evidence.
Several witnesses described seeing an altercation in the car between Mr. Brown and Officer Wilson. It was described as tussling, wrestling, a tug of war, or just some movement. Other witnesses described Mr. Brown as punching Officer Wilson while Mr. Brown was partially inside the vehicle. Many of the witnesses said they heard a gunshot while Mr. Brown was still partially inside the vehicle. At least one witness said that no part of Mr. Brown was ever inside the vehicle and that the shot was fired through an open window while Mr. Brown was standing outside.
The vehicle and Officer Wilson's clothing and equipment were examined by various technicians and scientists. scientist. Mr. Brown's blood and or DNA were located on the outside of the driver's door.
His blood and DNA were also found on the outside of the left rear passenger door of the police vehicle. Mr. Brown's blood or DNA was found on the inside of the driver's door. The upper left thigh of Officer Wilson's pant leg, the front collar of Officer Wilson's shirt, and on Officer Wilson's weapon. Additionally, a bullet fired from Officer Wilson's weapon was located inside the driver's door. The shot was fired from inside the vehicle, striking the door in a downward angle at the armrest.
The second bullet was not recovered. Regarding the gunshot wound to Mr. Brown, it should be noted that the three separate autopsy results were conducted. One by St. Louis County Medical Examiner's Office, one by a private pathologist, and one by the Department of Defense Armed Forces Medical Examiner.
The results of all three autopsies are consistent with one another in all significant respects. Mr. Brown has a gunshot graze wound of the right hand of the right thumb. The path of that bullet is away from the tip of the hand, soot consistent with a close up, close close range.
gunshot is present inside that wound. Officer Wilson also had a medical examination which indicated some swelling and redness to his face. Almost all witnesses stated that after they heard the shot fired while Mr. Brown was at the car, he hesitated and then ran east on Canfield. Most stated that almost immediately, Officer Wilson got out of his vehicle and chased after him. Some witnesses stated Wilson fired at Mr. Brown as he chased after him, striking him.
At least one witness saying he struck or one of those shots struck Mr. Brown. Others stated that he did not fire until Mr. Brown turned and came back toward the... toward Officer Wilson. At least one witness stated that as Officer Wilson got out of his vehicle, he shot Mr. Brown multiple times as Mr. Brown stood next to the vehicle.
Yet another witness stated that Officer Wilson stuck his gun out the window and fired at Mr. Brown as Mr. Brown was running. One witness stated there were actually two police vehicles and four officers present, but only one officer fired a weapon. Most witnesses agreed that near the corner of Canfield and Copper Creek, Mr. Brown stopped and turned around facing Officer Wilson.
Some said Mr. Brown did not move toward Officer Wilson at all, but was shot multiple times as he stood near the corner with his hands raised. In subsequent interviews with law enforcement or their testimony before the grand jury, many of the same witnesses acknowledged that they didn't actually see the shooting. Some were running for cover, some were relating what they heard from others, or as I said, said what they assumed happened in that case.
Several other witnesses maintained their original statement that Mr. Brown had his hands in the air and was not moving toward the officer when he was shot. Others said that he was shot, excuse me, Several witnesses stated that Mr. Brown did not raise his hands at all or that he raised them briefly and then dropped them and turned toward Officer Wilson, who then fired several rounds. Other witnesses stated that Mr. Brown stopped for a very brief period, then moved toward Officer Wilson again. One describes his movement toward Officer Wilson as a full charge.
According to some witnesses, Officer Wilson stopped firing when Mr. Brown stopped moving toward him and resumed his work. zoom firing when Mr. Brown started moving toward him again. These witnesses did not make any statements to the media. The description of how Mr. Brown raised his hands or the position of his hands is not consistent among the witnesses.
Some described his hands as being out to his side. Some said in front of him with his palms up. Others said his hands were raised near his head or were by his shoulders.
Still others said they were in front of his chest or down by his stomach. Others described his hands as being in a running position or in fists. There are also various... witness statements regarding Mr. Brown's movement after he stopped and turned back toward Officer Wilson.
Several witnesses said Mr. Brown never moved toward Officer Wilson and was shot where he stood at the corner. Most said that the shots were fired as he moved toward Wilson. Mr. Brown's movements were described as, they said, on one, walking, moving fast, stumbling, or full charge. Like other aspects of this case, the varying descriptions were sometimes provided by the same witnesses in subsequent statements or testimony.
The entire area was processed by the St. Louis County Crime Scene Unit. A total of 12 rounds were fired by Officer Wilson. Two shots at the car, 10 more shots farther east on Canfield.
Mr. Brown sustained a grazed wound to his thumb while standing next to the vehicle. He sustained six or seven more gunshot wounds, depending upon whether one of the shots was an entry or a re-fire. entry wound. Mr. Brown sustained a second graze wound, another graze wound, to his right bicep.
He also sustained wounds to his right forearm, upper front right arm, lateral right chest, upper right chest, forehead, and top of the head. The top of the head, forehead, and perhaps the upper right chest were consistent with his body being bent forward at the waist. Except for the first and last wounds, the medical examiners are unable to determine the order of the shots.
The grazed wound to the thumb sustained at the vehicle is likely the first wound. It was the only close-range shot. The shot to the top of the head was most likely the last.
It would have rendered him immediately unconscious and incapacitated. incapacitated. Mr. Brown's body was located approximately 153 feet east of Officer Wilson's car. Mr. Brown's blood was located approximately 25 feet farther east past his body.
A nearby tenant during a video chat inadvertently captured the final 10 shots on tape. There was a string of several shots, followed by a brief pause, followed by another string. of several shots.
As I stated earlier, the evidence and the testimony will be released following this statement. I'm ever mindful that this decision will not be accepted by some and may cause disappointment. others.
But all decisions in the criminal justice system must be determined by the physical and scientific evidence and the credible testimony corroborated by that evidence, not in response to public outcry or for political reasons. expediency. Decisions on a matter as serious as charging an individual with a crime simply cannot be decided on anything less than a complete critical examination of all available evidence. Anything less is not justice. It's my sworn duty and that of the grand jury is to seek justice and not simply obtain an indictment or conviction.
I do want to say that look during this extremely tense and painful time that we have the that this community should be, and I know are, very mindful of the fact that the whole world is watching and watching how we respond and how we react. And I would urge each and every one of them that with the loss that was suffered by the Brown family, no young man should ever die. This is a loss of a life and it's a tragic loss regardless of the circumstances.
But it's opened old wounds and it's given us an opportunity now to address those wounds as opposed to in the past where they just fade away. For how many years have we been talking about the the issues that lead to incidents like this, and yet after a period of time, it just sort of fades away. So I urge everybody who's engaged in the conversation, who's engaged in the demonstrations, to keep that going, to stay with that, not to let that go, and to do it in a constructive way, a way that we can profit from this, a way that we can benefit from this by changing the structure, by changing some of the issues, by solving some of the issues that lead to these sorts of things.
things. I join with Michael Brown's family and with the clergy and with anyone else and everyone else, the NAACP and the, excuse me, the Urban League and every government official and every private citizen that you've heard in urging everyone to continue the demonstrations, continue the discussion, address the problems, but do so in a constructive way and not in a destructive way. So I... I have time for a few questions now.
I'll just kind of start over here. Yes, sir. Gentleman in the black sweater.
The grand jury made this decision unanimously.