it's secondhand. much as I appreciate your efforts to find a useful source corroborating the other side of the story, it'd really hold a lot more weight if it came at least from a member of the police department - I understand why the officer in question isn't available for comment. it's not that I automatically disbelieve her, it's that by nature of the source it's no more inherently credible than any other third-party accounts. I don't think we're going to get anything more reliable from that camp until after the investigation simply because otherwise the process would be contaminated.
I agree that the ability for the officer or his department to respond is restrained until the investigation is completed, for precisely the reasons you stated.
And that "Josie", the anonymous caller is a second-hand source who wasn't there (i.e., hearsay).
My point is that while officer Darren Wilson is restrained from responding to a media court of public opinion that has already convicted him, there
is a counter-argument that the shooting was justified.
