CNN’s Audio Hoax?

On Tuesday a new development on the Ferguson case came to the surface by the news network, CNN.  An apparent audio recording of the shooting of Michael Brown.

However, the recording soon had several questions surrounding it.  indeed, by the next morning even CNN hosts were skeptical of the recording they received.  Michaela Pereira speaking to two law experts, both of whom stated they felt the audio was fake.

However, this is not the first time CNN has been caught with a modified, or fake tape to incite a group to their point of view.  If one recalls, they heavily edited the Zimmerman/Martin tape to make it appear Zimmerman was a racist.  That was easily and quickly debunked leaving CNN with egg on its face.

Now they faced the problem of an audio, which they hoped to be real, to be fake.

One question, which should have been asked right away, why did the tape take so long to be uncovered?

Of course people on the left will overlook such things, and point to FOX News saying Wilson had a fracture eye socket, which ahs been retracted.  The difference so far is Wilson was taken to the hospital for swelling and bruising to the face, as reported by CNN ironically.

Former FBI assistant director Tom Fuents summed up the recording best:

 “The engineers in the laboratory at Quantico will be trying to determine if there was a dubbing — did we have an original recording of this guy having a conversation no one wants to talk about, and then the shots then dubbed over it,” Fuentes said. “Was it the complete tape? All accounts from Brown’s side and the officer’s side say there was a single shot fired initially at the door of the police car. So that shot, followed by Brown trying to flee and then the officer exiting the car and pursuing him and then firing the series of shots — so we’re missing that first shot. Now, I don’t know. CNN got this tape first. Did they censor it because the guy said something obscene over the first shot and they didn’t want to air that? I mean, we just don’t know all that … When I heard this yesterday, I thought the exact same thing — It’s a hoax. But maybe not. Maybe we’ll be able to authenticate it.”

While it might be a hoax, it still has to be looked at.