http://nypost.com/2014/08/19/witnesses-say-ferguson-teen-attacked-cop-before-shooting/
Isn't it interesting that you challenge the witnesses? "You'd like to read up on it" so you can attempt to discredit the witnesses. You immediately dismiss any potential witnesses that may have been with law enforcement (as if their testimony would have to be tainted). Yet, on the other hand, you're willing to accept witnesses that knew Brown, were with Brown, or simply sympathize with Brown that also have motive to lie.
To this point every witness can be discredited, on both sides, for "guilt by association". Dorian Johnson, like Michael Brown, was a common street thug, with a record, with a warrant out for his arrest, and had previously been caught lying. He's also admitted to lying in this instance. HIS words led to the rioting and looting. His lies. But...somehow he's to be believed over a police officer? Got ya.
Every witness that says Brown was shot in the back has been discredited by the autopsy...not a single entry wound from Brown's back.
So go on...try to discredit these witnesses who support the police because they have an agenda. And I'll point to Dorian and Michael's friends, and everyone in the hood that has an agenda as well. That tactic of yours, to discredit witnesses, has to be used EQUALLY (you're favorite word), not selectively.
On another note, how do you discredit the background audio in the YouTube video taken by the "brother" with Brown lying dead in the street? The one where another brother's heard discussing Michael charging the officer, he kept coming...
You appear to want to be viewed as objective, yet you will only accept witness accounts and evidence that support the theory that Brown was innocently murdered.
So many wanna believe the original story, the passive, church-going, poor innocent Michael Brown was murdered in cold blood by the cops. Instead, stories like this make me believe the officer with the perfectly clean record shot in self defense against the accused murderer and Crip.
I may still be proven wrong, but if one had to deduce, the "likely" story is the Officer's at this point, not Brown's...not when you consider their characters and records, the characters and records of the witnesses, and the plausibility of the two stories, one which is very far fetched (dragging a 300lb man into your car), one which is believable self defense. Again, I could be wrong, but logic doesn't stack at this point on Brown's side.