I don't think anyone views are changing over this "strong arm robbery" besides maybe a select few. And we can assume who those people are. It still doesn't justify the officer shooting an unarmed teenager at broad daylight 8-10x.
The fact that they have to imply he was a robber at the same time they gave out the officer's name was a nasty and slick strategy from the police to make the GP percieve Brown as anything less than innocent. But in reality it made them look alot worse. I was disgusted.
They could've provided those details days ago. And both at seperate times when the press was asking for them. But no, they thought today, the day they stated they would announce the police officer's name, would have been more lovely.
Now they are saying that the robbery has nothing to do with the shooting and that the police officer who shot Michael Brown did not know he had even robbed the store. The chief also stated in his second conference that Michael Brown and his friend were stopped because "they were blocking traffic".
What kind of sick twisted statements?