Reposted lest any try to confound the issue further by saying that this is a somehow ill-chosen battle -- and implying (or stating outright) that common sense, armed with the facts, would find that Wilson's use of undue and lethal force ending the life of Brown without cause, was in some way arguable or justified
BROWN WAS KILLED
FROM WILSON'S SUV
When the police came out the morning after Mike Brown was killed and deliberately included the distance between the SUV and the shooting, it successfully created a very particular narrative. The arc of their initial story, magnified in importance by the absence of even one official report, is that Darren Wilson shot and killed a young man who, in a short distance from the SUV, posed him grave harm. How far Mike Brown actually fled, how far Darren Wilson chased him, and where each of them were in relation to each other and to the SUV, are facts of paramount importance. If Mike Brown fled over 148 feet away from Darren Wilson, it clearly suggests that Brown—unarmed, shot, missing a shoe, in lounge clothes—feared for his life and not the other way around.
Excellent analysis of photo evidence, and video (h/t Daily Kos), as well as police, autopsy, and ballistic reports. Let's not get confused here.