Ferguson: When Race Really Doesn’t Matter

   Michael Brown, an unarmed 18 year old man was shot six times by officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson Missouri. On this we can all agree. There are numerous versions of events being offered and repeated in the media, but they all come down to that one sentence. 

   The law regarding the use of deadly force is clear, both for an average citizen, and the police. Deadly force is authorized when the individual (or in some cases, another individual) is being threatened with possible death, or they have a reasonable belief that their life is being threatened. So now we need to ask ourselves, regardless of which version of events you accept, did Officer Wilson have the legal authority to use deadly force? My answer is a resounding NO, and the race of each individual is not relevant to that opinion. Michael Brown was unarmed. Did Darren Wilson have a reasonable belief that his, or anyone else’s life was threatened?

   Let’s suppose that events transpired exactly as Officer Wilson is supposed to have told it.  He saw Brown and his friend walking up the middle of the street and told them to get out of the street. He drove a short distance further, became aware that the young man he just saw might be the suspect in the “strong-arm” robbery of a store, and backed the patrol car up. When Wilson attempted to get out of the car, Brown forced him back twice by pushing at the door, struck him in the face and then, after Wilson pulled his gun out, they tussled for the gun, it went off in the car and Brown began to run away, Wilson got out of the car at that point and yelled for Brown and his friend to “freeze!” Brown stopped, turned around and, according to this account, began to “Bum Rush” Wilson, who fired six rounds into Brown, the final being the deadly shot through the head. Let’s even assume that Wilson did not mean to shoot Brown in the head; that it occurred accidentally because Brown ducked his head forward (that’s not part of the story, but I’m giving Wilson every benefit of the doubt).

   None of the above is sufficient to authorize the use of deadly force. Brown was unarmed. His hands were clearly visible with no weapon in them. He may have been running at Wilson to tackle him, head butt him, or fight, and Wilson certainly had a right to defend himself, but NOT WITH DEADLY FORCE. If he had drawn a TASER and stopped Brown that way, we would not be where we are today. If he had taken out his night-stick and knocked Brown out, we would not be where we are at today. If he had simply used his police academy training (I assume he was trained) to stop and arrest Brown, we would not be where we are today. Instead, Wilson simply shot Brown at least six times when he was not known to have committed any crime except (possibly) fighting with a police officer; perhaps even resisting arrest. The last I heard, that was not a capital offense. 

   Ultimately, no matter what Wilson’s motives, no matter how prejudiced he may or may not have been, and no matter what their respective races were, Wilson’s inappropriate and most likely legally unjustified use of deadly force when other means were available to subdue an unarmed 18 year old man, ended a young man’s life and brought racial tensions bubbling to the surface. Wilson may not be guilty of murder but he is, by any story yet told, guilty of an unjustified homicide and needs to be brought to trial so that justice, not vengeance, can prevail.