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.