This morning I was watching CNN and as Nancy Grace was discussing the case, Don Lemon interrupted with this revelation:

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/...

Don Lemon describes a source close to the investigation saying that Darren Wilson did have x-rays done, had a swollen face, but x-rays for a broken or torn eye socket came back negative. Watch the video above.

This falls in line with my point that nobody should be giving the Ferguson Police Department or Darren Wilson the benefit of the doubt in this case. A swollen face could have resulted from a scuffle, but it could also have resulted from a variety of things not related to a scuffle.

The autopsy report already shows that there was no sign of a scuffle on Michael Brown, and the witnesses interviewed so far have said that they saw Michael Brown at officer Wilson's SUV, but it appeared as if he was trying to get away. One witness, Tiffany Mitchell, who was directly next to the officer's vehicle said Brown never once lifted his hands off of the SUV.

Michael Brown's friend, who has questionable credibility at this point, said that the officer tried to open the vehicle door and it hit him and his friend and slammed back in on officer Wilson from his own doing. That could have resulted in the swollen face, but without video evidence that will be up for debate. If you leave it to forensics and not the he-said, she-said, you have to realize that there has been no sign of a scuffle on Michael Brown's body from the autopsy report. This means no marks on his hands, as I'm sure that would have come out. How did Darren Wilson then get a swollen face? We may never know, but I am also not willing to simply believe the officer's account. He needs proof to back up his story, and so far the only rock solid proof we have that goes against his story is there is no sign of a scuffle on Michael Brown's body.

You have to ask why certain media outlets like FOX News are purposely running with a false narrative that this officer's eye socket was fractured.