Documentary Purports to Challenge the Established Facts About Michel Brown's Death

This "documentary," reported on by John Sexton, changes nothing.

First up, the documentary is given the hucksterish hysterical name of "Stranger Fruit." This is of course a reference to the song "Strange Fruit," about lynchings. The main lyric goes that trees in the south bear a strange fruit -- the bodies of black men hanged by the neck.

That's terrible. That's incendiary racial provocateurism. That's agitating for violence.

Which they got-- there was in fact renewed violence and unrest after the release of this "documentary."

The clip they're promoting shows, they claim, Michael Brown buying the cigarillos at an earlier stop by that bodega where he later strong-armed the owner. They're claiming he already paid for those cigarillos, but apparently didn't take them the first time. For whatever reason.

They say this casts a new light on his later visit to the joint, when he took the cigarellos, exited without paying, and then strong-armed the owner when the owner tried to stop him from leaving without paying.

The New York Times apparently buys into this fully-- but strangely its account does not mention the inconvenient fact that Michael Brown attacked Officer Wilson and grabbed his gun.

Is there new video that disputes that? Apparently not! But the racewar agitators have a very ambiguous video and some cockadoodle Loose Change-style conspiracy theories so I guess it's time to burn and loot in Ferguson again.

Even if the "documentary's" claim is right -- that Michael Brown paid for the cigarillos with pot -- 1, how does that buttress the character of Michael Brown, and 2, how does being a penny-ante drug dealer who got rough with a customer change the fact he attacked and tried to kill a cop?

America is so racist that a black man can't even transact a drug crime, walk down the middle of the street impeding traffic, refuse a white officer's lawful order to clear the street, then physically attack that white officer and attempt to wrestle his gun away from him in order to execute him without being arrested and then shot when he resists arrest.

Have we learned nothing?

Sexton notes this quote from the New York Times' "report:"

Regardless of what happened at the store in the early-morning hours, the new security footage does not resolve long-simmering questions about Mr. Brown's encounter with Officer Darren Wilson along a Ferguson street that day.

Sexton wants to know in which questions still need resolving, and why Eric Holder's report did not put to rest these "long-simmering questions."

Is the New York Times saying that Eric Holder lied? Are they Michael Brown Truthers?

Do they disbelieve all government reports, or only those prepared and published by a black man?

I have some "long simmering questions" about the whitebread New York Times myself.

posted by Ace at 02:35 PM

| Access Comments