Two legal guests tell CNN their Brown shooting audio might be a hoax « Hot Air
Not to mention, CNN admitted the audio can't be verified AND the audio didn't follow the rules of evidence.
Like I said. Witness testimony must be backed up with other evidence.
Unless you have interviewed the witness, your explanation is opinon.
Wait for the investigation report to come out.
(your example reminds me of stuff on the CT sites where a witness said they heard an explosion in a building fire. To the CT people explosions = explosives).
I wonder when CNN is going back to their obsession over the missing airplane, Nancy Grace will go back to snorting about "Tot Mom", and they will be calling Presidential races early and incorrectly.
Has anyone mentioned the fact that Dorian Johnson's account that Brown "was struck in the chest or upper region [by the first shot in the car] because I saw blood splatter down his side, his right area" is completely consistent with a number of the wounds shown on the autopsy sketch? Or does the fact that Johnson had committed a petty theft a few years ago and gave police a false age and slightly different first name mean that we throw out his entire testimony, in spite of evidence that supports it?
We need more evidence to determine this stuff.
"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt
Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.