Quote:
Originally Posted by Knalus
In this case, however, the officer is given a good look at the evidence before giving his eyewitness, and has been trained for years to know what is believable and what is not in a court of law. The officer can make his eyewitness statement look the most credible of the bunch, and should be inadmissible as a matter of course.
Physical evidence may not lie, but lies can be made to fit nearly any set of physical evidence available.
|
Also, posters who have been repeating that the physical evidence corroborates the officer's account (based on the brief article posted earlier) are, I think, vastly overstating the corrobative value of the physical evidence. It only corroborates the collateral elements of the officer's account. I haven't seen any physical evidence that corroborates the most contested and most important elements of the officer's account: what was said and done by the officer and Michael Brown in the moments before the fatal shooting (in particular, whether Brown had his hands up or was approaching the officer).