CNN Runs Alleged Audiotape of the Shooting Without Confirming It's Audio of the Shooting

Errrm...

Supposedly the as-of-yet-unidentified man who made the recording did so during a video chat with "a friend." The gunshots were captured inadvertently in background, and only recently did he realize he had an audio record of the shooting.

I'm a little skeptical of this.

My problem is that the gunshots sound pretty clear in the audiotape. If they're clear in the audiotape, they would have been, I assume, even clearer in real life. Loud noises sound more real in real life than they do on audio. If they're loud enough, you can even physically feel them.

I don't think gunshots at a distance can be felt, but I do think they'd capture one's attention.

This guy doesn't seem to acknowledge them at all.

Thinking about it again: Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the gunshots aren't so punctuated to seize the guy's attention, and so maybe it's more plausible that he just finished what he was doing before noticing them.

Sometimes people see or hear things before they actually perceive them, if you know what I mean.

I guess I could see that, maybe.

Another thing: I don't hear the other background noises I'd expect. Screaming, I mean. Maybe not during the shooting, but soon after, shouldn't there have been all sorts of shrieks of confusion and panic? My experience of other videos of sudden violence is that first comes the event, then the shocked silence, and then, seconds after, the shrieks and wails.

The audio stops as soon as the gunshots do, so you don't hear that. But why not? Did he cut the audio at exactly that second?

I guess I just sort of want CNN, and Don Lemon, to be embarrassed by a hoax. Honestly I think I just want this to be fake, to teach Our Incompetent Media a lesson about hyping a story and rushing out claims.

I want the man's voice on this tape to be linked to Don Lemon and CNN forever:

"You are pretty. You're so fine. Just goin' over some of your videos. How could I forget?"

On the other hand, I can't think of any good motive for a hoax. I don't think something like this is going to fetch money. (But who knows-- we don't know how this audio came to light, or why the man who made it has retained a lawyer.)

I don't hear anything very important on the audio as far as proving anything about the shooting, except that there were 10 (or 11, the lawyer says) shots, which is about the number I figured, given that Brown had been hit six times and of course Darren Wilson must have missed some shots.

So I don't see a motive for a hoax as regards influencing public perception of the case, either.

Eh. I guess I just have no idea.

posted by Ace at 11:45 AM

| Access Comments