Report: Darren Wilson's Key Witness Lied About Everything
Options
1CK1S
Members Posts: 27,471 ✭✭✭✭✭
In a damning new report by the Smoking Gun, a crucial witness in the grand jury deciding whether to indict former Ferguson, Mo. police officer Darren Wilson is revealed as having fabricated her eyewitness account of the altercation between Wilson and unarmed 18-year-old Michael Brown on Aug. 9. "Witness 40," identified as 45-year-old Sandra McElroy, has a documented history of racist remarks, criminal behavior, and mental illness.
"Witness 40": Exposing A Fraud In Ferguson
DECEMBER 15--The grand jury witness who testified that she saw Michael Brown pummel a cop before… Read more thesmokinggun.com
McElroy's testimony has been latched on to by Wilson defenders because of how closely her report matched the embattled police officer's. But as the Smoking Gun points out, the timing of McElroy's interviews with authorities is suspicious: Both her statement to St. Louis police on Sept. 11 and another to Justice Department prosecutors on Oct. 22 immediately followed stories detailing Wilson's account of the day:
McElroy provided the federal investigators with an account that neatly tracked with Wilson's version of the fatal confrontation. She claimed to have seen Brown and Johnson walking in the street before Wilson encountered them while seated in his patrol car. She said that the duo shoved the cruiser's door closed as Wilson sought to exit the vehicle, then watched as Brown leaned into the car and began raining punches on the cop. McElroy claimed that she heard gunfire from inside the car, which prompted Brown and Johnson to speed off. As Brown ran, McElroy said, he pulled up his sagging pants, from which "his rear end was hanging out."
But instead of continuing to flee, Brown stopped and turned around to face Wilson, McElroy said. The unarmed teenager, she recalled, gave Wilson a "What are you going to do about it look," and then "bent down in a football position…and began to charge at the officer." Brown, she added, "looked like he was on something." As Brown rushed Wilson, McElroy said, the cop began firing. The "grunting" teenager, McElroy recalled, was hit with a volley of shots, the last of which drove Brown "face first" into the roadway.
"I know what I seen," she apparently told skeptical investigators. "I know you don't believe me." Her story of how she wound up in Ferguson that day doesn't sound convincing, either:
When asked what she was doing in Ferguson—which is about 30 miles north of her home—McElroy explained that she was planning to "pop in" on a former high school classmate she had not seen in 26 years. Saddled with an incorrect address and no cell phone, McElroy claimed that she pulled over to smoke a cigarette and seek directions from a black man standing under a tree. In short order, the violent confrontation between Brown and Wilson purportedly played out in front of McElroy.
But when she testified before the grand jury charged with deciding whether to indict Wilson, her story changed:
McElroy, again under oath, explained to grand jurors that she was something of an amateur urban anthropologist. Every couple of weeks, McElroy testified, she likes to "go into all the African-American neighborhoods." During these weekend sojourns—apparently conducted when her ex has the kids—McElroy said she will "go in and have coffee and I will strike up a conversation with an African-American and I will try to talk to them because I'm trying to understand more."
McElroy also brought a highly-touted journal with alleged entries penned in the days surrounding Michael Brown's killing. The entry dated Aug. 9 starts, "Well Im gonna take my random drive to Florisant. Need to understand the Black race better so I stop calling Blacks ******s and Start calling them People."
No Justice: Darren Wilson Walks Free as Grand Jury Fails to Indict
If McElroy's testimony in Darren Wilson's grand jury proves to have been made up, this will not have been the first eyewitness report she fabricated:
McElroy's devotion to the truth—lacking during her appearances before the Ferguson grand jury—was also absent in early-2007 when she fabricated a bizarre story in the wake of the rescue of Shawn Hornbeck, a St. Louis boy who had been held captive for more than four years by Michael Devlin, a resident of Kirkwood, a city just outside St. Louis.
McElroy, who also lived in Kirkwood, told KMOV-TV that she had known Devlin for 20 years. She also claimed to have gone to the police months after the child's October 2002 disappearance to report that she had seen Devlin with Hornbeck. The police, McElroy said, checked out her tip and determined that the boy with Devlin was not Hornbeck.
In the face of McElroy's allegations, the Kirkwood Police Department fired back at her. Cops reported that they investigated her claim and determined that "we have no record of any contact with Mrs. McElroy in regards to Shawn Hornbeck." The police statement concluded, "We have found that this story is a complete fabrication."
According to the Smoking Gun, McElroy was diagnosed with bipolar disorder at age 16 and has gone untreated for the condition for 25 years. She also has a history of posting racist comments on social media:
An examination of McElroy's YouTube page, which she apparently shares with one of her daughters, reveals other evidence of racial animus. Next to a clip about the disappearance of a white woman who had a baby with a black man is the comment, "see what happens when you bed down with a monkey have ape babies and party with them." A clip about the sentencing of two black women for murder is captioned, "put them monkeys in a cage."
McElroy's YouTube page is also filled with a variety of anti-Barack Obama videos, including a clip purporting to show Michelle Obama admitting that the president was born in Kenya. Over the past year, McElroy has subscribed to three channels devoted to mystery and real crime shows, as well as a "We Are Darren Wilson" video channel.
McElroy has rarely used her Twitter account, though she did post a message in late-October in response to a news report that several Ferguson drug cases had to be dropped because Darren Wilson failed to show up for court hearings. "drug thug will be arrested again who cares," wrote McElroy.
And her behavior on Facebook indicates a bias toward Wilson's story:
In the weeks after Brown's shooting—but before she contacted police—McElroy used her Facebook account to comment on the case. On August 15, she "liked' a Facebook comment reporting that Johnson had admitted that he and Brown stole cigars before the confrontation with Wilson. On August 17, a Facebook commenter wrote that Johnson and others should be arrested for inciting riots and giving false statements to police in connection with their claims that Brown had his hands up when shot by Wilson. "The report and autopsy are in so YES they were false," McElroy wrote of the "hands-up" claims. This appears to be an odd comment from someone who claims to have been present during the shooting. In response to the posting of a news report about a rally in support of Wilson, McElroy wrote on August 17, "Prayers, support ? Bless Officer Wilson."
Comments
-
That ? looks racists. she looks like a poor mans John Lennon
-
Oh and I'm not reading all that
-
-
If you read the whole report, there are a lot of eye witnesses, and many of them ain't say ? about chargin, they said he came back walking, leaning at a 45 degree angle not with his hands up, but with his hands bracing to fall because he was hit. There was no charge, and wilson even said something about reaching in his waistband in an interview, that's ? . We can do a million of these threads about inconsistencies but the fact remains, America took our food right in front of us again. The whole thing was ? up from the jump when they were referencing an outdated law, which I thought was wierd, because he was shooting at him while he was running away. That got press for like 3 days but that's a major, major oversight, we can't depend on the media to get us right, we gotta stand for ourselves, and we doin it, and a ? proud. I just hope we keep up the momentum.
-
If you read the whole report, there are a lot of eye witnesses, and many of them ain't say ? about chargin, they said he came back walking, leaning at a 45 degree angle not with his hands up, but with his hands bracing to fall because he was hit. There was no charge, and wilson even said something about reaching in his waistband in an interview, that's ? . We can do a million of these threads about inconsistencies but the fact remains, America took our food right in front of us again. The whole thing was ? up from the jump when they were referencing an outdated law, which I thought was wierd, because he was shooting at him while he was running away. That got press for like 3 days but that's a major, major oversight, we can't depend on the media to get us right, we gotta stand for ourselves, and we doin it, and a ? proud. I just hope we keep up the momentum.
Exactly, we have to make sure people don't forget about the injustices of Ferguson and the Eric Garner case. Thankfully, everyone I know hasn't forgotten. If crooked, punk cops think we're just gonna forget about all this, they better think again. -
I can't be the only one flabbergasted that they didn't bother to take prints on his gun when he claimed that Brown tries to take it from him
His entire defence is hinged on that claim and they didn't even think of trying to establish it as true
It was deemed fact without a single afterthought -
I can't be the only one flabbergasted that they didn't bother to take prints on his gun when he claimed that Brown tries to take it from him
His entire defence is hinged on that claim and they didn't even think of trying to establish it as true
It was deemed fact without a single afterthought
They said his DNA was on the pistol, but that still don't justify wilson shooting while he was runnng. -
I can't be the only one flabbergasted that they didn't bother to take prints on his gun when he claimed that Brown tries to take it from him
His entire defence is hinged on that claim and they didn't even think of trying to establish it as true
It was deemed fact without a single afterthought
They said his DNA was on the pistol, but that still don't justify wilson shooting while he was runnng.
Print are not DNA though
I'm also skeptical as to how true that claim is as they let Wilson go home with his gun and clean it himself
Tmk they didn't even test it for anything and all that was present was Brown's blood -
he entered his own gun into evidence anyhow.
-
I can't be the only one flabbergasted that they didn't bother to take prints on his gun when he claimed that Brown tries to take it from him
His entire defence is hinged on that claim and they didn't even think of trying to establish it as true
It was deemed fact without a single afterthought
They said his DNA was on the pistol, but that still don't justify wilson shooting while he was runnng.
Amazing how most of the witnesses said Darren Wilson was firing at Brown as he was running away and the prosecutor still chose to play his defense lawyer. That on its own should be enough for an indictment, especially if 16 of those witnesses said Brown had his hands up at one point or another
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/16-witnesses-testified-michael-brown-had-his-hands-when-darren-wilson-fired
16 Witnesses Testified Michael Brown Had His Hands Up When Darren Wilson Fired
PBS created a chart that compares witness testimonies to Wilson's testimony.
More than half of the witness statements said that Brown was running away from Wilson when the police officer opened fire on the 18-year-old, while fewer than one-fifth of such statements indicated that was not the case. -
if nothing else, one thing you should take away from this is "eyewitness testimony can be SO BAD"
-
Weren't you one of the ones saying "there isn't enough evidence for a trial"? The irony. I TOLD YOU the stories weren't adding up and that i wouldn't put much into the media fed propaganda. You also said Zimmerman was innocent too smhif nothing else, one thing you should take away from this is "eyewitness testimony can be SO BAD" -
if nothing else, one thing you should take away from this is "eyewitness testimony can be SO BAD"
That should include Darren Wilson then too, right? But the defense attorney I MEAN fake prosecutor Mccoluch didn't even bother to cross examine him.
-
What really grind my gears is the fact that the multiple witnesses that sewn the whole event go down was mostly black. The night of the verdict, whoever the man was talking said that this case was not about the eye witnesses that seen anything but more on the evidence at hand (if any). This was clearly a racial divide. They refused to listen to what the black people but took the words of a bipolar racist woman. The system was made to keep black people down, rather it's face down in the streets or down in society. Let's wake up my people.
-
it actually seems like you have no idea what i did or did not say (hence the random-ass Zimmerman remark that you seem more sure of than the topical remarks). but i'll give you a hint: i said "eyewitness testimony sucks and shouldn't be the sole basis for decreeing what happened."blackamerica wrote: »
Weren't you one of the ones saying "there isn't enough evidence for a trial"? The irony. I TOLD YOU the stories weren't adding up and that i wouldn't put much into the media fed propaganda. You also said Zimmerman was innocent too smhif nothing else, one thing you should take away from this is "eyewitness testimony can be SO BAD"
this presumes, of course, that that was a real post and not some poorly-veiled feelings.
Darren Wilson wouldn't be "eyewitness testimony." however, he clearly has reason(s) to provide biased testimony regardless. why they didn't cross-examine him might be a different issue.kingblaze84 wrote: »That should include Darren Wilson then too, right? But the defense attorney I MEAN fake prosecutor Mccoluch didn't even bother to cross examine him.
-
it actually seems like you have no idea what i did or did not say (hence the random-ass Zimmerman remark that you seem more sure of than the topical remarks). but i'll give you a hint: i said "eyewitness testimony sucks and shouldn't be the sole basis for decreeing what happened."blackamerica wrote: »
Weren't you one of the ones saying "there isn't enough evidence for a trial"? The irony. I TOLD YOU the stories weren't adding up and that i wouldn't put much into the media fed propaganda. You also said Zimmerman was innocent too smhif nothing else, one thing you should take away from this is "eyewitness testimony can be SO BAD"
this presumes, of course, that that was a real post and not some poorly-veiled feelings.
Darren Wilson wouldn't be "eyewitness testimony." however, he clearly has reason(s) to provide biased testimony regardless. why they didn't cross-examine him might be a different issue.kingblaze84 wrote: »That should include Darren Wilson then too, right? But the defense attorney I MEAN fake prosecutor Mccoluch didn't even bother to cross examine him.
Why do you think the "prosecutor" did not bother to cross examine Darren Wilson....? -
A lawmaker in Missouri wants to have an investigation of the crooked prosecutor of Ferguson, Bob Mccoluch.....this is very welcome news
http://news.yahoo.com/prosecutor-ferguson-witnesses-clearly-lied-192804844.html
ST. LOUIS (AP) — A Missouri lawmaker is calling for an investigation of St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch, saying he "manipulated" the grand jury in the Ferguson case. McCulloch said in a radio interview on Friday that some witnesses obviously lied to the grand jury.
State Rep. Karla May is pushing for a state investigation, saying she believes McCulloch helped sway the grand jury into the decision not to indict Ferguson officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown, who was black and unarmed
-
it's entirely possible he is, in fact, biased or incompetent. i suppose he might also have thought Wilson's testimony would undermine the case he was presenting somehow. or that he never wanted to indict him and thus didn't feel compelled to do a good job.kingblaze84 wrote: »Why do you think the "prosecutor" did not bother to cross examine Darren Wilson....?
-
Don't have to read to tell you that the whole grand jury process is wrong and tilted towards the government getting what they want which is protection for there preferred people.
-
it's entirely possible he is, in fact, biased or incompetent. i suppose he might also have thought Wilson's testimony would undermine the case he was presenting somehow. or that he never wanted to indict him and thus didn't feel compelled to do a good job.kingblaze84 wrote: »Why do you think the "prosecutor" did not bother to cross examine Darren Wilson....?
Wow, reason from you! REASON!!!! Good, a decent post from you on this subject. Now it's time for Bob Mccoluch to resign and step the ? down from his position. And next, the head of the Ferguson PD. -
*rolls eyes*kingblaze84 wrote: »Wow, reason from you! REASON!!!! Good, a decent post from you on this subject. Now it's time for Bob Mccoluch to resign and step the ? down from his position. And next, the head of the Ferguson PD.
...please tell me how that post is in any way inconsistent with anything else i have said about this case -
That prosecutor is FAR from incompetent. He knew exactly what he was doing all along. We knew the evidence of the case was being misrepresented from the jump. My question to you is, what in your thought process had you thinking this cop/prosecutor would tell the truth? Especially when it was OBVIOUS they were lyingit's entirely possible he is, in fact, biased or incompetent. i suppose he might also have thought Wilson's testimony would undermine the case he was presenting somehow. or that he never wanted to indict him and thus didn't feel compelled to do a good job. -
my question to you is, when did i argue the cop/prosecutor was telling the truth?blackamerica wrote: »My question to you is, what in your thought process had you thinking this cop/prosecutor would tell the truth? Especially when it was OBVIOUS they were lying
-
But you talked as if the evidence presented by police was justifiable (like you normally do) before the non indictment announcement. You defended the cop like the make believe witness's cosigning Wilson's fairytale were credible (as if racist prosecutors don't tamper with witness testimony) Here were your words a few months ago:my question to you is, when did i argue the cop/prosecutor was telling the truth?
Lolso i take it you did not actually want to look up the number of witnesses that support the officer's story? let's go right back to the Washington Post:
This witness 40 ? is just more fuckery from Ferguson. EVERYBODY saw the fuckery coming except you. Im not sure what goes into your thought process in situations like these smh -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dAthWB_7QA