Tuesday, December 15, 2015

Trayvon Martin waited for darkness before casing homes to burglarize

I have interrupted this blog for several months because I have been busy with some personal business. In the meantime, I have been inserting four articles about the case of Trayvon Martin being killed by George Zimmerman in February 2012.

* The first article reported that Martin was paranoid because of his addiction to Purple Drank, an intoxicating concoction of codeine, juice and candy.

* The second article reported that Martin's addiction made him paranoid and belligerent.

* The third article reported that Martin paid for Purple Drank by burglarizing homes. 

This here is my fourth and final article in this series. Soon I will resume writing about the Ferguson incident. 


On February 26, 2012, the day of Martin's death, the sky began dark in southern Florida at the following times:

* Sunset = 6:21 p.m.

* Civil twilight = 6:44 p.m.

* Nautical twilight = 7:11 p.m.

The sky was cloudy, and rain was falling. 

The expressions civil twilight and nautical twilight are defined as follows:
Civil twilight is defined when the sun is 6 degrees below the horizon. ....  in the evening it is called dusk.  
This is the limit at which twilight illumination is sufficient, under good weather conditions, for terrestrial objects to be clearly distinguished .... the horizon is clearly defined and the brightest stars are visible under good atmospheric conditions in the absence of moonlight or other illumination.  
.... in the evening after the end of civil twilight, artificial illumination is normally required to carry on ordinary outdoor activities. 
Nautical twilight is defined when the sun is 12 degrees below the horizon.  
At the ... end of nautical twilight, under good atmospheric conditions and in the absence of other illumination, general outlines of ground objects may be distinguishable, but detailed outdoor operations are not possible, and the horizon is indistinct.

In order to make another mixture of Purple Drank, Martin walked to a store to buy Skittles candy and Arizona Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail, his favorite additives to the main codeine ingredient. 

The store's closed-circuit camera recorded him paying the cashier for the candy and juice at 6:24 p.m. 

Instead of walking directly home to make his Purple Drank, however, he waited until the sky became dark. 

First, he stayed right in front of the store and asked three men to buy him a cigar that he could use to make a marijuana blunt. (Martin was too young to buy the cigar himself.) By the time the three men bought the cigar and gave it to Martin and then he walked away from the store's front, the time had become 6:30. 

The distance from the store to the apartment complex was about a half-mile, so Martin could have reached the complex by about 6:40 -- a normal walking pace is three miles an hour, so a half-mile is ten minutes. 

However, Martin apparently found a nearby place, covered from the rain, and smoked his blunt for a half-hour. He did not enter the apartment complex until about 7:05 p.m. A few minutes later, Zimmerman saw Martin casing homes there to burglarize.  

The main reason why Martin dawdled for that half-hour was that he was waiting for the sky to turn dark enough for him to case homes without being seen. When Martin entered the apartment complex at 7:05, the sky was turning from civil twilight into nautical twilight. The sky turned dark a few minutes earlier than normal because of the clouds and rain   

Right after the sky turned dark and Martin entered the apartment complex, events developed as follows:

7:09:34 – 7:13:41 — George Zimmerman calls the Sanford Police Department from his truck.

7:11:33 — Zimmerman tells the police dispatcher that Trayvon Martin is running. .....

7:13:10 — Zimmerman says he does not know Martin's location.

7:13:41 — The end of Zimmerman's call to Sanford police.

7:16:11 — First 911 call from witness about a fight, calls for help heard.[16]

7:16:55 — Gunshot heard on 911 call.

Because Martin was addicted to Purple Drank, he was chronically paranoid, and he attacked Zimmerman murderously. Fortunately, however, Zimmerman was armed and was able to shoot Martin in self-defense. 

Trayvon Martin paid for Purple Drank by burglarizing

I have interrupted this blog for several months because I have been busy with some personal business. In the meantime, I am inserting four articles about the case of Trayvon Martin being killed by George Zimmerman in February 2012. In the first of the four articles, I described Martin's addiction to Purple Drank, an intoxicating concoction of codeine, juice and candy.

The most expensive ingredient was Promethazine Codeine. The cash price for a 240-millimeter bottle was around $23. The juice and candy to accompany such a bottle would raise the cost to, say, $30. So, sipping Purple Drank all day, every day, is a habit that costs some money.

Martin was a high-school student who did not have a known wage-earning job. Martin earned money by burglarizing homes. In late October 2011 -- the exact date is unknown -- he was detained because he had vandalized lockers in a restricted room in his high school. The School Resource Officer searched Martin's backpack and found at least 12 items of ladies jewelry, a man’s watch, and a flat-head screwdriver described as “a burglary tool”.

When Trayvon was questioned about who owned the jewelry and where it came from, he claimed he was just holding it for a “friend”, whom he would not name.

On October 21 -- before Martin was detained in the school -- a home was burglarized a few blocks from the high school. The items found in Martin's backpack, as described in School Police Report 2011-11477, match the items stolen from the home, as described in Miami-Dade Police Report PD111021-422483. The below image shows that the locations of the burglarized home and Martin's high school.

The red star is the location of Trayvon Martin's high school
The red line indicates the home that Martin burglarized.
The image can be seen at a larger size here
However, because the school district was trying to minimize the disciplining of African-American students, the school police report was not forwarded to the local police department. Instead, the items in Martin's backpack were classified as merely "found items" and were placed in a lost-and-found property room.

After Martin was killed in February 2012, the incident involving his backpack was investigated and was revealed to the public. Eventually the items found in Martin's backpack were located in the property room and returned to the family whose home had been burglarized.

This story is told in much more detail in this Conservative Tree House webpage.

My key points:

* Trayvon Martin was addicted to Purple Drank, a codeine concoction.

* One consequence of his addiction was that he became paranoid, which made him belligerent.

* Another consequence of his addiction was that he burglarized homes in order to earn the money to buy the Purple Drank ingredients.

* The final consequence of his addiction was his paranoia and belligerence caused him to attack George Zimmerman, who had noticed him casing homes to burglarize.

Monday, December 14, 2015

Trayvon Martin's paranoia made him belligerent

I have interrupted this blog for several months because I have been busy with some personal business. In the meantime, I am inserting four articles about the case of Trayvon Martin being killed by George Zimmerman in February 2012. In the first of the four articles, I described Martin's addiction to Purple Drank, an intoxicating concoction of codeine, juice and candy. One common side-effect of such an addiction is paranoia.

By the end of June 2011, Martin became obsessed with Purple Drank. In that first article, I wrote:
Martin's fascination with Purple Drank began seriously at about the end of June 2011, when he subscribed to the YouTube log of Purple Drank addict Andy Milonakis. 
Martin’s subscription coincided roughly with Milonakis’s upload, on June 21, 2011, of a rap-music video that Milonakis himself had created. Milonakis's video is titled "Red Lean Purple Lean" and is illutrated by photographs of bottles full of Promethazine Codeine and drinking cups full of Purple Drank (aka Red Lean Purple Lean).
By November 2011, Martin became remarkably suspicious and belligerent. The contents of his cell phone's text messages provided a series of text messages, in which he explained to a female friend why he was engaging in various fights with other students, with a teacher and with a school bus driver.
[January 21, 2011] 
MARTIN: Cause man dat nigga snitched on me 
FRIEND: Bae [Babe] y you always fightinqq man, you got suspended? 
MARTIN: Naw we thumped [fought] afta skool in a duckd [duck-taped] off spot 
FRIEND: Ohh, Well Damee [damn me]
MARTIN: I lost da 1st round :( but won da 2nd nd 3rd . . . . 
FRIEND:  Ohhh So It Wass 3 Rounds? Damn well at least yu wonn lol but yuu needa stop fighting bae Forreal 
MARTIN: Nay im not done with fool..... he gone hav 2 see me again 
FRIEND: Nooo... Stop, yuu waint gonn bee satisified till yuh suspended [from school] again, huh? 
MARTIN: Naw but he aint breed [bleed] nuff 4 me, only his nose 
[Nov 22, 2011] 
MARTIN: My mom just told me I gotta mov wit my dad
FRIEND: So what does that mean? 
MARTIN: She just kicked me out :( 
MARTIN: Da police caught me outta skool 
FRIEND: So you just turning into a lil hoodlum 
MARTIN: Naw I'm a gangsta 
FRIEND: Boy don't get one [a bullet] planted in ya chest 
MARTIN: Lol Im scared 
FRIEND: You should be 
[January 4, 2012] 
FRIEND: What school you at today? 
MARTIN: Krop [Michael M. Krop High School] cause my dad outta town 
FRIEND: Wyd? [What you do?] 
MARTIN: In csi"/ [a school-intervention program?]
FRIEND: Lol for what? 
MARTIN: Caus I was watch a fight nd a teacher say I hit em 
[February 14, 2012] 
FRIEND: Why you not in school? 
MARTIN: Suspended 
MARTIN: Fightn 
FRIEND: What you fighting fa?

On or before February 21, 2012, Martin received a tweet from his cousin, who remarked about Martin trying to hit a bus driver. The tweet said: “yu ain’t tell me yu swung on a bus driver”.

Perhaps this “swung on a bus driver” incident had coincided with Martin's suspension from his high school on or about February 14 (see the last text message, above). If so, then Martin tried to hit a school bus driver.

I think that Martin's paranoia -- about other students "snitching" on him and about being disrespected by teachers and school staff -- was caused basically by his addiction to Purple Drank.

Wednesday, October 14, 2015

Trayvon Martin was paranoid because of Purple Drank

I have not written this blog for a couple months because I have been busy with other, more urgent matters in my life. I will resume writing this blog soon.

In the meantime, I am posting the below article, which I wrote last year about the case of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. That was another case in which the supposed victim brought his death upon himself by launching an intoxicated, irrational, murderous attack on an armed person.

This is the first time I have published the below article.

In May 2014, the pharmaceutical company Actavis decided to stop selling Promethazine Codeine cough syrup, which often was mixed with juice and candy to concoct an intoxicant that is called variously “Purple Drank”, “Lean”, “Sizzrup” and other slang names.

Tragically, Actavis’s decision came too late for Trayvon Martin, who died in February 2012 while walking home from a convenience store, where he had purchased his favorite mixes -- Watermelon Juice Cocktail and Skittles -- for making Purple Drank.

Martin's fascination with Purple Drank began seriously at about the end of June 2011, when he subscribed to the YouTube log of Purple Drank addict Andy Milonakis. Martin’s subscription coincided roughly with Milonakis’s upload, on June 21, 2011, of a rap-music video that Milonakis himself had created. Milonakis's video is titled Red Lean Purple Lean and is illutrated by photographs of bottles full of Promethazine Codeine and drinking cups full of Purple Drank (aka Red Lean Purple Lean).

To understand the video song's lyrics, the following explanation are useful:

* Purple Drank must be sipped very slowly in order to avoid an overdose.

* The word “Activist” refers to the Actavis pharmaceutical company –  which the song calls“better than all the rest”.

* Milnakis evidently prefers to mix in jelly beans and Tootsie Rolls as the candy (Martin preferred Skitttles and Bieber’s prefers Jolly Ranchers).

The song’s lyrics:
Lean with it, lean with when I take a sip
Codeine ho clean off my dick
With your pretty red lips bitch, take off your lipstick
Put some purple syrup on it then suck my dipstick

I walk with a wobble and I wobble when I walk
New York City bitty, this is how I talk
I’m too slow to spit it fast
Got the microwave oven and I’m cooking up crack

Got hoes by the dozen and I’m hitting up that
These bitches like sports because they all love my bat
So I hit the bitch I hit the bitch with my big erection
I ruin that pussy like the comment section

I’m world star hiphop,
And I got a big Glock
I am Andy Milonak
I sell candy, on the block

I’m big, I’m bad, I might beat up your dad
I’d say I’d fuck your sister but I already have
I’m sipping like Scotty, pimping up in the lab
So ho don’t text me unless you want a stab

Red lean, red lean, purple purple lean
Got the red on lock but the purple’s too clean
Red lean, red lean purple purple lean
Them codeine dreams sweet like my 16

I, I, hate, hate, quali- quali- test test
Activist is better than all the rest rest
Cousin X is cool though, cooler than my new dough
You ask me for a sip I’ll kick your dick to Pluto

Or maybe Mars, because Mars ain’t too far
I’ll kick your ass to Mars than I’ll have a Mars Bar
Or a Zany Bar, because I got the xan with the lean
That codeine sweeter than a million jelly beans

And a tootsie roll, a tootsie roll, fuck you with a tootsie roll
Got 19 bitches on the block on their pussy stroll
Houston Texas, hold me down
Screwing Pimp C, I love the sound

Got a double cup, a double cup, some H/R puffing stuff
Big bad wolf lungs, that’s why I huff and puff
I’ll blow your house down, real real quick
Unless that shit’s built with codeine bricks
Inspired by Milonakis’s anthem, which was uploaded on June 21, Martin conducted the following Facebook conversation with a friend named MacKenzie six days later, on June 27. Martin asked MacKenzie to help him obtain prescription-strength Codiene to make Lean (i.e. Purple Drank).

I will quote this Facebook conversation exactly and then translate it into normal English.
MARTIN: unow a connect for codine?MACKENZIE: why nubian
MARTIN: to make some more

MACKENZIE: u tawkin bout the pill codeine
MARTIN: no the liquid  its meds. I had it b4
MACKENZIE: hell naw u could just use some robitussin nd soda to make some fire ass lean
MARTIN: codine is a higher dose of dxm
MACKENZIE: I feel u but need a prescription to get it

MARTIN: dats y I asked if u know someone dat has, but ima stop burning
MACKENZIE: ohh I doubt it nd why?

MARTIN: is to roped and u can get the same vibe off lean

Translated into normal English, the conversation can be understood as follows:
MARTIN: Do you know a source of Codeine?
MACKENZIE: Why, Negro?
MARTIN: To make some more [Purple Drank, aka Lean]

MACKENZIE: Are you talking about codeine pills?
MARTIN: No, the liquid – the prescription-strength form.  This form I already have tried.
MACKENZIE: Hell, no. But you could just use some Robitussin [non-prescription cough medicine] and soda [cola drink] to make some fire-ass Lean.
MARTIN: Codeine is a higher dose of dxm [Dextromethorphan Hydrobromide, DXM, the active ingredient of some cough-suppressant medicines].
MACKENZIE: I sympathize with you, but you need a prescription to get it.

MARTIN: That’s why I asked if you know somewhat who has it [prescription-strength Codeine], because I have stopped smoking marijuana.
MACKENZIE: Oh, I doubt that. Why have you stopped?

MARTIN: I’ve been caught too often, and you can get the same sensation from Lean [as you can get from marijuana].

A webpage titled DXM Basics depicts the psychological effects of DXM abuse:
The DXM experience varies by dose ….. Moderate doses generally produce intoxicating effects that are sometimes compared to alcohol or cannabis use. High doses are dissociative in the sense of causing a separation from one’s body and are sometimes compared to the effects of other dissociatives such as PCP or ketamine.
DXM causes … psychological effects that may be frightening …. Psychological effects can include profound disorientation, depression, a feeling of personal disintegration, or a feeling of “unreality” and disconnection that may persist for days. Chronic use may cause depression, psychological dependency, and possibly brain damage. Large doses may be associated with psychotic breaks. …

There has been concern that DXM, like some other dissociatives, causes vacuoles (small holes) in the brain – a syndrome called Olney’s Lesions. ….
 Another webpage, titled The Dextromethorphan FAQ about DMX lists some consequences of “regular use and binges:
Neurotoxicity (Olney’s Lesions)

Mania ….

Violent ideations

Antisocial behavior

Paranoia ….


Another webpage, titled Electric Cough-Syrup Acid Test, reports the sensations of a professional writer who overdosed on DXM on one occasion:

…. Last night I drank about eight ounces of DM [DXM] cough syrup. I was feeling kind of achy and wanted to see if it would kill pain. After a couple of hours all my pain had gone away, and I went to bed. It was midnight, but I felt neither awake nor asleep. It was like a typical narcotic high--mildly content, kind of nodding--but not as pleasant.

At four o'clock in the morning I woke up suddenly and remembered that I had to go to Kinko's copy shop and that I had to shave off about a week's worth of stubble from my face. These ideas were very clear to me. That may seem normal, but the fact was that I had a reptilian brain. My whole way of thinking and perceiving had changed. I had full control over my motor functions, but I felt ungainly. I was detached from my body, as if I were on laughing gas.

So I got in the shower and shaved. While I was shaving I "thought" that for all I knew I was hacking my face to pieces. …..

The world became a binary place of dark and light, on and off, safety and danger. I felt a need, determined it was hunger, and ate almonds until I didn't feel the need anymore.

Same thing with water. It was like playing a game. I sat at my desk and tried to write down how this felt so I could look at it later. I wrote down the word "Cro-Magnon." I was very aware that I was stupid. ….

I thought I would have trouble driving but I had none. I only felt "unsafe" in the dark street until I got into the "safe" car. Luckily there were only a couple of people in Kinko's and one of them was a friend. She confirmed that my pupils were of different sizes. One wasn't quite round. I knew I was fucked up.

I knew there was no way I could know if I was correctly adhering to social customs. I didn't even know how to modulate my voice. Was I talking too loud? Did I look like a regular person? …

The whole world was broken down into elemental parts, each being of equal "value" to the whole--which is to say, of no value at all.

I sat at a table and read a newspaper. It was the most absurd thing I had ever seen! Each story purported to be a description of a thing or an event, or was supposed to cover "news" of reality in another place. This seemed stupid. …. I laughed out loud. ….

At one point I ventured across the street to a hamburger place to get something to eat. It was closed and yet there were workers inside. This truly confused me, and I considered trying to find a way to simply run in, grab some food, and make off with it. Luckily, the store opened (it was now 6 A.M.) and I entered the front door like a normal customer.

It was difficult to remember how to perform a money-for-merchandise transaction and even more difficult to put it into words, but I was eventually successful. I ate the hamburger slowly and deliberately. If I had become full before I finished the hamburger, I think I would have simply let it fall from my hands. ….

Martin's fascination with abusing DXM began in June 2011, and he was killed in February 2012, so his abuse might have continued for more than a half year. By mixing DXM with watermelon juice cocktail and Skittles and sipping it addictively, he was chronically consuming up to 25 times the recommended maximum dosage.

Martin viciously attacked George Zimmerman, a neighborhood-watch volunteer because Martin perceived bizarrely that Zimmerman was a "creepy-ass cracker" (a creepy White person) or a "creepy ass-cracker" (a creepy homosexual).

Martin ambushed Zimmerman, pushed him to the ground and repeatedly punched his face and beat the back of his skull into a concrete sidewalk.

Fortunately, however, Zimmerman was carrying a pistol and so was able to save his own life by shooting the Purple-Drank-crazed Trayvon Martin to death.

It can be said that Martin's trip to an early death began on about June 21, 2011, when Andy Milnakas uploaded the video Red Lean Purple Lean on YouTube. A mere six days later, Martin was on Facebook, talking to his friend MacKenzie about buying perscription-strength DXM Codiene in order to make some more Lean (aka Purple Drank).

Sunday, August 9, 2015

My Article in "American Thinker"

Today, on the first anniversary of the Ferguson incident, the American Thinker website published my article titled What Would Have Happened in a Trial of Darren Wilson.

I have read American Thinker every day for many years. I am happy that I was able to contribute an article to that excellent website.

In the article's first paragraph is a link from the words 5,000 pages. The link should have gone to this website. The error was my own fault.

Saturday, August 8, 2015

Indications of Hacking

Recently I have become aware that someone else has accessed my blog account. Now I have improved my security.

If you find inappropriate text or links or other sabotage in this blog, inform me with an e-mail to MikeSylwester@gmail.com.

An Article About Wilson in "The New Yorker" Magazine

The New Yorker magazine has published an informative and fair-minded article, titled The Cop, about Darren Wilson, written by Jake Halpern. Wilson allowed Halpern to interview him over the course of several days. Halpern describes Wilson's life in detail and with sympathy.

Halpern does not challenge the US Justice Department's report about the Ferguson incident. He writes that Wilson has been exonerated.
Wilson has twice been exonerated of criminal wrongdoing. In November, after a grand jury chose not to indict him, the prosecutor, Robert P. McCulloch, was widely accused of having been soft on him, in part because McCulloch’s father was a police officer who had been killed in a shootout with a black suspect. In March, the U.S. Department of Justice issued two official reports on Ferguson. One was a painstaking analysis of the shooting that weighed physical, ballistic, forensic, and crime-scene evidence, and statements from purported eyewitnesses. 
The report cleared Wilson of willfully violating Brown’s civil rights, and concluded that his use of force was defensible. It also contradicted many details that the media had reported about the incident, including that Brown had raised his hands in surrender and had been shot in the back. The evidence supported Wilson’s contention that Brown had been advancing toward him. 
Halpern summarized the incident as follows.
According to Wilson and several witnesses deemed credible by the Justice Department, Brown reached into the Tahoe’s open window, grabbed Wilson, and punched him. This narrative, the report says, is supported by bruising on Wilson’s jaw and samples of Brown’s DNA found on Wilson’s collar, shirt, and pants. It’s not known why Brown did this, and many have speculated that Wilson provoked Brown somehow. 
At this point, Wilson told investigators, his training kicked in and he reviewed his options. He did not carry a Taser, so the weapons at his disposal were mace, a retractable baton, and his gun. The only one readily accessible, Wilson said, was the gun. When he unholstered it, he told investigators, Brown reached for it. He told the grand jury that Brown said to him, “You are too much of a pussy to shoot me.” In the ensuing struggle, Wilson shot Brown in the hand. This sequence of events has factual support. Brown’s DNA was detected on the inside of the driver’s-side door, and soot from the gun’s muzzle was found in Brown’s wound, indicating that his hand was within inches of the weapon when it fired. It was the first time that Wilson had used his gun in the line of duty. 
Wilson told the grand jury that Brown, upon being shot, had “the most intense, aggressive face,” and looked “like a demon.” Brown retreated, running east. Wilson chased him. Brown ran at least a hundred and eighty feet down Canfield Drive—his blood was found in the roadway—and then headed back toward Wilson. According to the Justice Department, eyewitnesses claiming that Brown raised his hands in surrender proved unreliable. (One of these witnesses, Dorian Johnson, continues to insist that Brown’s hands were raised.) Witnesses deemed credible offered varying accounts of Brown’s movement—“charging,” “slow motion,” “running”—but concurred that he was approaching Wilson. According to Wilson, he repeatedly ordered Brown to stop and get on the ground. Brown, who was unarmed, kept moving. At one point, Wilson told investigators, Brown put his right hand into his waistband, as if reaching for a weapon. 
Sometime after the chase began, Wilson shot ten bullets at Brown. A few missed him, but he was hit in the chest, the forehead, and the arm. Autopsy reports indicate that, contrary to initial media reports, no bullets hit Brown in the back. It is possible that Wilson fired some of the errant bullets before Brown turned around, and the Justice Department report says that “the autopsy results alone do not indicate the direction Brown was facing when he received two wounds to his right arm.” Yet the report repeatedly underscores that eyewitness accounts describing Brown being shot from behind were unreliable.
I recommend reading the entire article.

Saturday, August 1, 2015

The Monte Carlo driver's statements about the incident were confused and dubious

MC Owner told her story three times. 

1) On the late afternoon of August 9, unknown to her, a casual acquaintance tipped off a detective that MC Owner had seen the incident. The detective showed up five minutes later and surprised her with a request to tell her story. MC Owner consented to tell her story to a detective in an interview that lasted only 8½ minutes.

2) After ignoring and evading investigators for two months, MC Owner consented to tell her story on October 12 or 13* to an FBI special agent.

3) She told her story on October 13 to the grand jury (beginning on page 102).   

The FBI special agent just rehashed the August 9 interview. MC Owner was not questioned critically and at length until the grand-jury hearing, which lasted more than two hours. 

MC Owner's story was false, which is why she didn't want to tell it to investigators. She was asked questions she did not expect and so had to concoct answers on the spot. 

The truth (I have argued in my previous articles) was that her Monte Carlo was the get-away car for Brown and Johnson after the robbery of the Ferguson Market and Liquor store. Later, on Canfield Drive, she made a U-turn and drove back west to Wilson's police vehicle. There, her Monte Carlo again served as a get-away car for Johnson. She had to tell a story that was completely different.  

MC Owner was concerned that she and her Monte Carlo had been seen by bystanders during the incident. She had to concoct a story that would explain what those bystanders might have reported to investigators about her actions. 


When the detective showed up unexpectedly on August 9, MC Owner was in a group situation. She was staying in the home of an acquaintance of her mother. The acquaintance and the mother were present. At least one neighbor -- the one who called the detective -- was present, and they all were discussing the incident. MC Owner could have answered the detective's questions in the group's presence, but a decision was made that she and the detective drove alone to a nearby barbecue restaurant

It would have made much more sense for them to drive to the killing scene, which was just as close in the opposite direction, so that MC Owner could have pointed to all the exact places for the detective. I have suggested that MC Owner worked at the restaurant and was supposed to begin working there at 7 p.m. 

I suggest also that MC Owner did not want to tell her false story to the detective in front of her mother and all the other acquaintances. 


The story that MC Owner told the detective on August 9 is remarkable for two omissions. 

1) She did not mention that she had a passenger in the Monte Carlo. (In the transcript, the detective did not ask her whether anyone else was in the car.) 

2) She did not mention that Wilson's police vehicle drove backward to block Johnson's and Brown's path. This omission is especially remarkable because she estimated that her following distance did not exceed ten feet. Her story indicated that the struggle between Wilson and Brown through the vehicle's window took place in the same spot as the initial encounter. (I have suggested that MC Owner was making her U-turn when Wilson drove backward.) 


By the time of her interviews on October 13, she had watched a lot of television reporting and engaged in a lot of personal conversations with MC Passenger about the incident. Nevertheless, her final story suffered from several inconsistencies. 

1) She seemed to say that she initially stopped far behind -- in the area where eventually Brown fell dead, between two apartment buildings -- and did not explain why and when she drove closer to the police vehicle. 

2) She contradicted herself about her car's situation when Wilson backed his vehicle up. First she said that she had to swerve out of his way, and then she said she already had stopped when Wilson backed up. 

3) She said she never opened her car door during the incident, although MC Passenger had insisted repeatedly that she did so. 


In her grand jury testimony on October 13, MC Owner abandoned her initial idea that she followed Wilson's police vehicle at a distance of no more than ten feet. Now to the grand jury she indicated that she stopped on Canfield Drive far behind the police vehicle, almost as soon as she saw Brown and Johnson in the distance. 
Prosecutor At some point the officer's car stopped ... Were you behind the officer when the officer's car stopped?
MC Owner  Yes, ma'am, I sure was [behind the officer's car] -- probably right in between the apartment complex. Just like right actually [where] he [Brown] fell out is actually where I stopped. 
Prosecutor  So when you first saw the officer stop, what did you observe? 
MC Owner  I just observed there are two gentlemen walking down the street. They was walking my direction, going back towards Northwinds.
BF = Where Brown "fell out"
Red lines = "Right in between the apartment complex"
BJ = Brown and Johnson's position when Wilson initially stopped
PV = Police vehicle's position after it backed up 
I interpret MC Owner's explanation of her stopping point to be somewhere around the east side Building 5, which is where Brown "fell out". I think that her expression "right in between the apartment complex" meant between Building 5 and Building 18, an area marked by the red lines in the above photograph. 

In the above photograph, I put the label "BJ" in the area where Wilson initially stopped and asked Brown and Johnson to walk on the sidewalk. After Wilson backed up his police vehicle to block their path, he stopped in the area labeled "PV". 


In her August 9 interview, MC Owner seemed to say that Wilson stopped only once -- omitting Wilson's backward drive and second stop. In her October 13 testimony to the grand jury she now did say that Wilson drove backward. 
Prosecutor  When you saw that [police] car stopped, was the car just driving in the natural [right lane], down the lane, or did it stop some other way?
MC Owner  It was straight down the lane.
Prosecutor  And what happened at that time when you saw the car stop? Did he [Wilson] appear to be talking to anybody?
MC Owner  Yes, ma'am, but I didn't hear anything. 
After the actual stop -- quick seconds, it wasn't really a long period of time -- I saw the SUV go in reverse. I saw the reverse lights on, and it came to the two guys, and they jump back. He [Wilson] put it in reverse, [and] it went back.
And that's when it [the police vehicle] went to an actual stop. The truck shook just a little bit. You could tell that somebody pressed down on the brake really hard. ....
As the two suspects start to actually keep walking. It looks like he [Wilson] is trying to stop them from walking away from the truck.
Prosecutor  I see. They're walking away, so he has to go in reverse to get up to them?
MC Owner Yes, ma'am.
[Pages 111 - 112]
To dramatize her false story that she had seen Wilson back up, MC Owner began to tell the grand jury that she even had to swerve out of Wilson's way as he backed up. Apparently, though, she immediately decided not to continue along those lines and instead said that she already had stopped well before Wilson's vehicle back up close to her car.  
Prosecutor  When the officer drove back at the diagonal and hit the brake real hard, was he close to hitting you, your car?
MC Owner  Actually, he was close enough, but he was, like, right there to where I couldn't even move. I thought as it [the police vehicle] was coming -- I was kind of shocked -- he would have hit my car, but he didn't.
Prosecutor  Were you concerned that he was going came back?
MC Owner  Yes, ma'am, I had to swerve over.
Prosecutor  You swerved over?
MC Owner  No, ma'am, I was [already] there.
Prosecutor  You stopped?
MC Owner  Yes, ma'am.
[Pages 113 - 114] 
In sum, MC Owner's testimony about how she found herself stopped close to Wilson's police vehicle was confused. She evidently had not thought through that part of her story adequately beforehand, and so she had to make it up as she went along during her testimony. 


MC Owner's (and MC Passenger's) determination to lie to investigators and to the grand jury is illustrated by her insistence in October that she did not know MC Passenger's last name, although she had socialized with him often for more than a year. 

MC Passenger told investigators that he and MC Owner discussed the incident whenever they watched the CNN reports.
FBI Special Agent  Have you talked to her since then [the incident]?   
MC Passenger  Yeah, this morning. ....
FBI SA Have you and [MC Owner] talked about this? 
MC Passenger  Yeah, when we look at CNN.  
FBI SA  Okay. So  you were watching TV and then started talking? 
MC Passenger  Yeah. 
[Pages 27 and 29]  
MC Passenger remarked to the grand jury that they had talked about the incident "basically every day" and had been a close friend for about a year. 
Prosecutor  Did you ever, after [MC Owner] dropped you off [right after the incident], have you ever had a conversation with her about what the two of you witnessed?   
MC Passenger  Yeah, basically every day, from when we see it on TV.  
[Pages 199 - 200]
Prosecutor  I guess you two have a pretty close friendship. 
MC Passenger  Uh-huh, yes.
Prosecutor How long have you known her?
MC Passenger  Since approximately about a year.
Prosecutor  About a year?
MC Passenger  About a year. 
[Page 203]
Nevertheless, MC Owner told the FBI special agent on October 12 or 13 that she still did not know MC Passenger's last name:
FBI SA  Who else was in the car with you? 
MC Owner   One of our friends.
FBI SA  And who is that?
MC Owner  His name is [MC Passenger's first name]. I don't know his last name. 
[Page 6]
MC Passenger likewise insisted as late as August that he did not know MC Owner's last name. 
Detective  Who were you with?
MC Passenger  A girl named [MC Owner's first name]. 
Detective  You know [MC Owner's] name?
MC Passenger  Huh uh [no].
[Page 5]

In general, MC Passenger told a story that was much more coherent and consistent than MC Owner did. He also was much less emotional during the incident itself. I had the impression that he told her what to do during and after the incident. 


* The grand-jury questioning of MC Owner began a few minutes at 11:03 a.m. on October 13 (page 102). Earlier that morning, the transcript of the FBI interview was read aloud to the grand jury (page 70). However, the FBI interview is dated October 13 at 6:26 p.m. Somehow the FBI transcript is misdated and should be October 12 at 6:26 p.m. or else October 13 at 6:26 a.m. 

Friday, July 31, 2015

Investigators searched for the Monte Carlo and its driver

On August 22, MC Passenger was interviewed by law-enforcement investigators for the first time. The local NAACP office had identified MC Passenger, convinced him to provide information, and arranged for the investigators to interview him in the NAACP office.

In this interview, MC Passenger claimed that he knew MC Owner only by her first name and knew that she lived somewhere in Northwinds Apartment Complex.

MC Passenger I was leaving from a young lady's apartment. I guess it was about 11:55 [a.m.]. 
FBI SA  Whose apartment was it? Was it someone in Canfield Green? 
MC Passenger  I think it was the other one -- Northwinds. In the back area. I came from that way. ..... From where I came, from her house, an officer came that way, hopped in front of us, real quick. We was behind him.  He got a fair lead, so we were behind kind of far. 
As we approached him, he was talking to Mike and his friend. 
FBI SA  What kind of car were you driving? 
MC Passenger  I wasn't driving. I was in the passenger [seat]. It was a white Monte Carlo .... 
Detective  Who were you with? 
MC Passenger  A girl named [MC Owner's First Name].
Detective  You know [MC Owner]'s last name? 
MC Passenger  Huh uh [no]. 
Detective  Okay. Was anyone else in the car beside you and [MC Owner]? 
MC Passenger  Huh uh [no]. 
Detective  Whose car was it? 
MC Passenger  Hers. 
[Pages 3 - 6]
MC Passenger's description of the car as a white Monte Carlo matched descriptions given to investigators previously by Dorian Johnson, Piaget Crenshaw, Michael Brady and other witnesses. 

On August 27, five days after the Passenger interview, investigators began to search for a particular automobile. The search was recorded in the investigation report, which later was released to the public with many words whited out. Therefore many details about the search and about the automobile remain secret or at least obscure. In the excerpts below, I have marked the whited-out words with brackets, into which I have written my guesses. (In this post I will write as if it were a certainty that the sought car was the Monte Carlo.) 

The investigators were looking for an automobile that was "captured on video surveillance on Canfield Drive at the approximate time of the incident". Because the Canfield Green Apartment Complex's property owner told investigators that the Complex did not have any video surveillance (investigation report, page 96), the automobile must have been photographed by a video camera that was placed along Canfield Drive but outside the Complex.

At the east edge of Canfield Green Apartment Complex, Canfield Drive changes its name to Windward Court as it enters the neighboring Northwinds Apartment Complex. Therefore, the video camera must have been placed on Canfield Drive somewhere west of Canfield Green Apartment Complex. At the went end of Canfield Drive, at its intersection with West Florissant Avenue, there are businesses on the north and south sides of the street. The video camera must have been placed at one of those businesses.

The vertical street on this photograph's left side is West Florissant Avenue. Perpendicular to it is Canfield Drive. At the intersection, there are two businesses (one is Quick Trip Mart) along the north and south sides of Canfield Drive. A video camera at one of those businesses photographed a particular automobile "at the approximate time of the incident".
Canfield Green Apartment Complex is the upper-right part of the photograph.
This complex did not have any surveillance cameras.
A short distance past the photograph's right margin, Canfield Drive changes its name to Windward Court,
as the street enters the neighboring Northwinds Apartment Complex.
The Monte Carlo's driver lived in Northwinds Apartment Complex.
Although a detective had interviewed MC Owner on August 9, that interview's transcript does not include a description or identification of the automobile. Only in later interviews of other witnesses was the automobile identified as a white Monte Carlo. It seems that the investigators then studied film from a surveillance camera and found such a car driving west on Canfield Drive a short time after the incident.

The surveillance camera's location can be deduced from the investigation report. On August 12, investigators identified, at a business on West Florissant Avenue, a video camera that looked south. That camera is the only one specified in that passage of the report. 
At approximately 10:00 [on August 12] at Detective [Name's] direction, Detective [Name] and Detective [Name] drove to the [address] block of West Florissant Avenue. After arriving, they conducted a canvass of area businesses.  
Detective attempted to make contact with an employee at [address] West Florissant Avenue, a business identified [as Business Name]. She spoke with [Employee, who] said the business was equipped with several exterior video surveillance cameras, one of which was focused on the drive-thru located on the south side of the building.  
Detective requested video surveillance footage from 11:00 am. through 12:30 pm. on August 9, 2014.  [Employee] provided the footage on a CD. Detective later packaged the video footage on CD as evidence and released it to the Saint Louis County Property Control Unit. 
[Pages 76 - 77]
This business must be the one that is located on the north side of Canfield Drive near its intersection with West Florissant Avenue. The only camera that interested the investigators was the that looked south onto Canfield Drive. In the above photograph, this is the business that is north of Quick Trip Mart (labeled on the photograph). 

The Quick Trip Mart was destroyed by rioters after the incident, so the investigators could not obtain any surveillance film from its facilities. 
Detective [Name] attempted to make contact with an employee at  [address number] West Florissant Avenue, a business identified as [Quick Trip Mart].  She spoke with [QTM Employee, who] said the business was equipped with video surveillance cameras; however, they had been destroyed during the rioting on Sunday, August 10, 2014. 
[Pages 77-78]
Therefore, the video camera that filmed or photographed the Monte Carlo after the incident must have been placed on the business on the north side of Canfield Drive. Because Johnson said he had stood next to a white Monte Carlo and talked with its occupants, the investigators studying that camera's film looked for and found such a car. 

The interview of Passenger on August 22 stimulated the investigators to search for MC Owner in the following days. 

The transcript (page 1) of the August 9 interview of MC Owner specified her name, birthday and Social Number. However, the interview took place at her acquaintance's home, not MC Owner's own home, and so the transcript does not record MC Owner's home address or telephone number. Also, the transcript does not describe her car.

It seems from the following excerpts of the investigation report that the investigators found in traffic-ticket records a white Monte Carlo whose male owner and female co-owner lived in Northwinds Apartment Complex. As we will see, the co-owners were son and mother. Passenger had told investigators that the car was owned by a woman who lived in that complex.  
On Wednesday, August 27, 2014, at approximately 8:30 a.m., Detective [Name] conducted a law enforcement computer check on [all white Monte Carlo cars in the traffic-ticket database]. 
Detective [Name] observed that on [a particular date, a white Monte Carlo] was ticketed in a [location] bearing Missouri license plate [number] by the Police Department. Detective [Name] noted this matched the description of the [Monte Carlo] captured on video surveillance on Canfield Drive at the approximate time of the incident. 
[Page 151]
Based on that traffic-ticket record, a detective went to the car owners' address. The detective learned from a neighbor that the car owners had moved out a few days earlier. This departure still was unknown to the apartment complex's property manager.
At approximately 10:00 Detective [Name] and Detective [Name] drove to the Northwinds Apartment Complex just east of the Canfield Green Apartment Complex. There, detectives contacted Property Manager [Name, who] was provided the names of [the the Monte Carlo's owner] and [co-owner] and asked if these people were listed as tenants. [Property Manager] stated [the owner] was listed as living at [a particular address] within the Northwinds Apartment complex. 
Detective [Name] and Detective [Name] drove to and knocked at the [next] door. At the door, a neighbor, who wished to remain anonymous, stated a male and female did live at this apartment, but moved a few days prior. Detectives [Name and Name] asked this anonymous neighbor what type of vehicle they drove, and she stated an older [Monte Carlo]. 
This concluded the investigation at the Northwinds Apartment Complex,  
A source of information who wished to remain anonymous indicated a more recent address for [MC Owner's son] was possibly [another particular address].  
[Page 153] 
This anonymous source might be MC Owner's neighbor or might be Passenger or his friend (who told his father, who told the NAACP) or might be MC Owner's acquaintance (at whose home a detective found MC Owner on August 9) or the young man who tipped the detective to come to the the acquaintances' home.

I speculate that MC Owner fled her home because she learned that Passenger had been interviewed on August 22 by law-enforcement investigators. When detectives came to MC Owner's home on August 27, a neighbor said that MC Owner had "moved a few days prior".

When detectives went to the address that they had received from the anonymous source, they learned that MC Owner indeed was living there. They learned also that MC Owner's car was "being worked on" (being painted a different color?).

At approximately 12:10 pm, Detective [Name] and Detective [Name] drove to [the address provided by the anonymous source] in an attempt to contact [MC Owner]. They arrived at the residence at approximately 12:30 pm. There, detectives knocked at the front door and were contacted by a female who identified herself as [Resident].
Detectives [Name and Name] asked [Resident] if they could speak with [Driver's son]. [Resident] stated [that Driver's son] was not home because he was at work. [Resident]  said she and [Driver's son] and [Driver] reside at [this address] with her [husband?]. [Resident] stated she and [Driver's son] recently moved from [the apartment in Northwinds Apartment Complex]. 
[Resident] also confirmed [that MC Owner and her son owned a Monte Carlo] but the [Monte Carlo] was being worked on. Detectives provided [Resident] with a telephone contact number for [MC Owner] to call when [MC Owner] got home. [Resident] stated she would give [MC Owner] the message to call detectives. 
Detectives departed at approximately 12:20 pm. 
[Pages 155-156]
Although the detectives wanted to talk only with MC Owner, the person who subsequently called was some other male. I will guess here that he was Resident's husband, although he might be a boyfriend, male relative or simply a male apartment mate. 
At approximately 1:00 pm, Detective [Name] was contacted via telephone by [Resident's husband, who] indicated [he] could meet with detectives at [Resident's home].
At approximately 1:55 pm, Detective [Name] and Detective [name] arrived at [Resident's home].  
[Resident's son] contacted [Resident] who invited detectives inside the residence. Detectives [Name and Name] explained to [Resident's husband] that AUSA [Assistant US Attorney Name] and [FBI] Special Agent [Name] were also driving to [Resident's home] to contact [Driver]. 
Detective [Name] asked [Resident's husband] if he owned a [white Monte Carlo]. [Resident's husband] stated [that Driver] and [her] son owned the [Monte Carlo] and drove the [Monte Carlo] for work. Detective [Name] asked if [Driver and her son] lived at [the Northwinds address] and [Resident's husband] stated [Driver and her son ] did, but they recently moved to the residence at [where Resident and her husband lived] from the [the Northwinds address]. 
AUSA [Name] and Special Agent [Name] arrived at at approximately 2:00 pm. Special Agent [Name] served [Resident's husband] with a Federal Grand Jury Subpoena, and all parties departed the residence. 
[Page 156]
I speculate that because investigators were sure that MC Owner was evading them, they applied pressure on her indirectly, through her host (Resident's husband), by issuing a subpoena to her host. This subpoena then compelled MC Owner to provide her phone number to investigators and to move back to her own apartment in the Northwinds Apartment Complex. However, she continued to evade through September by not answering any phone calls that investigators made to her number.

When Passenger testified to the grand jury on September 25, the prosecutor mentioned that MC Owner never answered investigators' phone calls. 
Prosecutor  Did you ever -- after [MC Owner] dropped you off [on August 9] -- have you ever had a conversation with her about what the two of you witnessed?
Passenger  Yeah, basically every day from when we see it on TV. I mean, you know, not trying to put things together, but seeing things on the TV that is just crazy stuff going on just back and forth, and back and forth. 
Prosecutor  I'm not trying to suggest you were trying to get your stories together, the reason I ask is [MC Owner] hasn't been returning calls. Do you talk to her about that we would like her [to respond]? You ever talk about coming in and talking about this? 
Passenger  Yeah, but you know, she works every day, deal with kids every day. 
Prosecutor  Do you think if we could have her come in at a time that it didn't interrupt her work? Do you think she would come in or is she just not wanting to be involved? She doesn't return calls
Passenger  I guess, I don't know how she really feels about it now. I haven't just straight up and down asked her. 
[Pages 199 - 200]
MC Owner did not appear to be re-questioned by law-enforcement officials until October 13 -- more than two months after her brief August 9 interview. 

The Monte Carlo's driver and passenger evaded investigators

MC Owner was interviewed by a detective of the Saint Louis County Police Department on August 9, 2014, from 6:40 to 6:49 p.m., less than seven hours after Michael Brown was killed.  

She herself did not contact investigators. Rather, without her knowledge or approval, a casual acquaintance informed the police that she had witnessed the killing. The detective contacted her five minutes after the acquaintance provided the tip. The detective described the circumstances of that interview. (I have filled in the whited-out space.)

At approximately 6:35 pm, Detective [Name] was re-contacted by [MC Owner's acquaintance] who indicated he had located another person who claimed to have witnessed the entire incident. [MC Owner's acquaintance] directed Detective [Name] to [3000 block] Canfield Drive where he contacted a witness who identified herself as [MC Owner].  
At approximately 6:40 pm, Detective Moore spoke with [MC Owner] who indicated she was a witness to the incident. ..... 
[MC Owner] agreed to complete an audio recording of her account of the incident. A department-issued digital recorder was used to capture the statement. [MC Owner]'s audio statement was later transferred from the digital recorder to a CD which was packaged as evidence and released to the Saint Louis County Property Control Unit. .... 
The interview with was completed at approximately 6:49 pm. 
[Page 46-47]
The transcript of that brief interview, which lasted only 8½ minutes, is here

The next time MC Owner was interviewed by investigators was more than two months later, on October 13. The reason so much time passed was that she evaded the investigators' attempts to question her again. 

MC Passenger likewise did not want to provide information to investigators. He feared that someone ("they") might assume he knew "much more" about the incident. 

Almost two weeks passed, until August 22, when he was convinced by the local NAACP office to provide information to investigators. Later, MC Passenger told the grand jury how he reluctantly, eventually agreed to be interviewed:

Prosecutor  You actually spoke to the police for the first time on August 22nd.  What was going on between August 9th and August 22nd? As far as you knew, there were people saying "hands up", and you'd seen it. What was going on in your mind about why wouldn't you come forward and tell the police what you saw?
MC Passenger  I don't know. Just the thought, I guess, just being there really. I didn't want to get into it, you know.
Prosecutor  Didn't want to be involved? 
MC Passenger  Yeah, just be involved, you know. Just seeing what was going on on TV every day ..... You never know how people react to certain things. Did you know this?  
Or you might know much more, so they could be after you. People are crazy out here, so they might come for you first if you say something.
Prosecutor  Sure. But at some point you got together with the police. So how is it that the police knew to contact you? 
MC Passenger  Well, a friend of mine, his name is [Friend] -- his daddy knows Mike Brown's people, and they wanted to talk to me ... His daddy got in contact with some guy, and he knew some guy from the NAACP. I guess they gave him my number, and then they contacted me.
It took me a couple days from then to even go talk to them. ....
Prosecutor  Your friend's dad arranged for that [the NAACP office] to be a meeting place for you?
MC Passenger  I guess he just wanted me to talk to them. I told them [his friend's dad and the dad's friend] I didn't want to get into it, so I didn't tell them either. .... I still didn't say nothing to them. And he ended up giving my number to somebody [at the NAACP], and they ended up calling me.
Prosecutor  You didn't give him a detailed statement of what happened, did you? 
MC Passenger  ... I ended up giving them [the NAACP] a statement because that's where I was going to -- the NAACP. 
Prosecutor  Did you give them [the NAACP ] a statement before you talked to the police or after you talked to the police?
MC Passenger  Before.  
Prosecutor  I wanted to know if you felt pressured in some way to come forward and say something? 
MC Passenger  No, I didn't want to just not say nothing ... [not] talk to the NAACP, because I know that [organization]. 
It [remaining silent] didn't feel right no more. I know people are looking for statements out here. So I just felt after the stuff started calming down is when I calmed down. I realized [I had] to say something.
[Pages 193 - 198]

MC Passenger testified to the grand jury on September 25. At the testimony's end, the prosecutor asked him to help persuade MC Owner to answer more questions. The prosecutor complained that MC Owner never answered investigators' phone calls. 
Prosecutor  Did you ever -- after [MC Owner] dropped you off [on August 9] -- have you ever had a conversation with her about what the two of you witnessed?
MC Passenger  Yeah, basically every day from when we see it on TV. I mean, you know, not trying to put things together, but seeing things on the TV that is just crazy stuff going on just back and forth, and back and forth. 
Prosecutor  I'm not trying to suggest you were trying to get your stories together, the reason I ask is [MC Owner] hasn't been returning calls. Do you talk to her about that we would like her [to respond]? You ever talk about coming in and talking about this? 
MC Passenger  Yeah, but you know, she works every day, deal with kids every day. 
Prosecutor  Do you think if we could have her come in at a time that it didn't interrupt her work? Do you think she would come in or is she just not wanting to be involved? She doesn't return calls
MC Passenger  I guess, I don't know how she really feels about it now. I haven't just straight up and down asked her. 
[Pages 199 - 200]
Then in response to a grand juror's question, MC Passenger confirmed that he likewise had not wanted to be interviewed by law-enforcement investigators.  Passenger hinted that he feared eventual "judgments" against himself.   
Grand Juror You said earlier that you really didn't want to get involved because you felt -- I know what you mean -- there are crazy people out there. 
MC Passenger  Uh-huh [yes]. 
Grand Juror  Were you afraid of the people, other witnesses, or afraid of the police or both? Whatever was your main concern holding you from coming forward? 
MC Passenger  No, this stuff is just the stuff that was going on every day -- how your mind back and forth, hopefully. 
Grand Juror  But you were concerned because your story may have been different than somebody else's and you were afraid that they may have been judgmental towards you? 
MC Passenger  Right -- judgments -- yeah, yeah. 
[Pages 200 - 201]
On October 13, three weeks after MC Passenger testified to the grand jury, MC Owner finally agreed to be interviewed by an FBI special agent. In that interview, she described the circumstances of the previous interview, which had taken place on the August 9, the day of the incident. 

Although MC Owner's own apartment was near Canfield Green, the neighborhood where the incident took place, she was staying in the home of an acquaintance who lived in another building near Canfield Green. The acquaintance was a friend of her mother. That acquaintance phoned MC Owner's mother, who then came to see MC Owner in the acquaintance's home. 

I speculate that MC Owner did not return to her own home because she feared that someone had seen her Monte Carlo at the incident. She feared that her license plate number had been recorded and that the police thus would find her at her own home. 

As it turned out, without her knowledge or agreement, a young man at the acquaintance's home, perhaps a next-door neighbor, called a detective to come interview MC Owner. When the detective arrived, he found MC Owner in front of the home of the neighbor of the acquaintance. Surprised by the detective's arrival, MC Owner assumed that someone indeed had recorded her license plate number at the scene and then had given that number to the detective. 

FBI SA  How did it come to you that you then met with the Saint Louis County Police detective?
MC Owner  Actually, I stay in that area at the time, and my Mom basically got the news. So, she came to see: was her daughter okay? So, in the process of seeing was her daughter okay, I was up in the house. The house is right before you get to Canfield Green. 
And one of the young men -- like I said, I don't know nobody over there -- he was the one that brought the police to me. .... Somebody was out there and probably remember my car or something, because he [the detective] came directly to me. 
I was on the front of the neighbors. I don't even know the people, but they stayed in the house right there. 
FBI SA  You said something about "brought him [the detective] to you"?
MC Owner  Actually, a young man. .... I didn't know him exactly. I've probably seen him around the complex, but I don't know him -- as talking to him on a daily basis. 
[Pages 25 - 26]

Although MC Owner and MC Passenger, both African-Americans, had been in the middle of the incident, which immediately became a national controversy about Whites' treatment of Blacks, neither of them wanted to identify themselves or provide their information to law-enforcement investigators. 

MC Owner and MC Passenger evaded investigators persistently for weeks. 


All the occupants of all the other vehicles that eventually appeared behind the Monte Carlo likewise evaded the investigators. They ducked down in their cars while police officer Darren Wilson was chasing and shooting at Michael Brown. After the shooting, they drove away immediately, and they still have not reported to investigators, to the present day.