Head to Head: Bringing justice to Michael Brown and his family

Darren Wilson, 28, shot Michael Brown, 18, on Aug. 9; the action sparked protests, riots and an enormous amount of controversy that rippled throughout the nation.

Wilson was not indicted, meaning he did not receive a trial. This decision of the grand jury could not be further from justice. The evidence is extremely vague, from what can be read from the official documents, and the interviewers and investigators were not being professional. Wilson should have been indicted, for Brown and his family’s sake. He might not have been found guilty, but he should have a least received a trial.

The evidence presented seems to be unreliable to draw a proper conclusion. The gun used to shoot Brown allegedly had some of Brown’s blood cleaned off prior to the trial examination, according to the original crime laboratory analysis report. A murder weapon that is tampered with before the examination is a federal offence; however, nothing is being done about the tampering in this case.

Next, the medical investigators did not take pictures of the crime scene because the battery of the camera had died, according to CNN. They also reported that the investigators also did not take any measurements of anything at the scene, because they felt that they did not need to do so. Both of these actions are extremely important in an investigation. The medical examiners did not follow proper protocol, and thus any information they could have found invalid.

“Taking photographs is a crucial piece of evidence,” junior and junior FBI agent Mikayla James said. “It shows exactly what position your victim was in and exactly where the entry and exit holes of bullets are. Taking measurements is also very crucial because there’s a chance that something isn’t right at the crime scene.”

The interrogation documents also show more about the interviewers and Wilson. Several times in their interviews and even in Wilson’s testimony, the interviewers call Brown, a human being, an “it,” showing how they attempted to dehumanize Brown by not using the proper pronoun.

“The only way I can describe it, it [Brown] looks like a demon, that’s how angry he looked,” Wilson said in his testimony.

“Okay, and from what you can tell it–he appeared to be mad?” an anonymous investigator asked in an interview with a witness.

The decision not to indict Darren Wilson, to not even give him a trial, is injustice in itself. The evidence that has been presented establishes enough reasonable doubt that should have led to an indictment. The result is disrespectful towards Brown, towards his family and towards many of the people in Ferguson. Michael Brown deserved to at least have his killer in court. Whether he would be proven innocent or guilty is unknown, but it does not matter. Wilson’s actions should have led him to be indicted at least, to give him a fair trial by the justice system. Without the trial, the people might not be safe; a murderer could be loose and no one would know.