Lab tests back cops in St. Louis shooting; reaction indicates dangerous race war ahead

Gunshot residue on the body of a man shot to death by an off-duty police officer Oct. 8 near St. Louis back up the officer’s story that the man fired first, but anti-cop activists are already calling the lab results a lie.

Lab results on tests from the body and clothing of 18-year-old Vonderrit Myers showed gunshot residue on his hands, his T-shirt and his pants, according to a KDSK report.

Police said Myers, who had a history of weapons possession and run-ins with the law, had fired at the officer three times before being shot to death. A Ruger was found on his body.

The results indicate the officer fired in self-defense, a police union spokesman said at a news conference Tuesday, according to CNN.

He also said the union would not stand by and let another police officer be vilified for doing his duty – as Ferguson, Mo., police officer Darren Wilson has been targeted by activists after the Aug. 9 shooting of Michael Brown, also 18.

“We’re done as a police union standing in the shadows in these cases. We are actively defending the officer involved in the shooting,” Jeff Roorda, business manager of the St. Louis Police said at a news conference Tuesday.

“We saw in the wake of the Michael Brown-Ferguson shooting that there was a public outcry, fueled largely by agitators in Ferguson where they demanded that police immediately release details,” Roorda said.

“That happened in this case. Police immediately, as information became apparent and known to them, released these facts. … Even with that, we still saw violence in the street,” he said.

And might still again, given the reaction to the release of Tuesday’s results.

In an interview with CNN Tuesday, Pastor Willie Kilpatrick, representing the Myers family, called the police version “absolutely untrue.”

“It’s very difficult for us to accept the ending of the story when the beginning and the middle of the story are very inconsistent and factually not true — what the police have said about their son.”

In a Twitter posting, Jamila Lemieux, digital editor for the iconic black magazine Ebony, dismissed the results out of hand.

And she had plenty of company.

That doesn’t bode well for a grand jury that fails to indict Wilson in the Michael Brown shooting.

If scientific tests results done by an outside agency — the Missouri State Highway Patrol instead of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department — gets a skeptical reaction from those in a position to shape public opinion, what kind of backlash could be coming if a subjective grand jury decides Wilson was justified in the shooting?

The Al Sharptons, the Jesse Jacksons, the Nation of Islam and so forth — including the digital editor of Ebony — will have no problem calling any results a lie if they don’t like them.

They’re everywhere.

It suits their world view that way.

 

Powered by Topple

Comments

Latest Articles