I'm not being facetious, I'd actually like his expert opinion, he probably knows more than any of us how the situation might have gone down. But I'm highly doubtful that a "he was charging the officer" ISN'T an attempt to portray Brown as a thug.
I have no take on what happened. I am not willing to defend the police account given the overall circumstances and other questionable behaviour surrounding this police force, nor am I willing to condemn Wilson when I do not know the truth. I am not saying that I have faith that justice will be served or the truth to be definitively revealed with the passage of time.
Either Brown charged him and was killed in a series of shots while charging, or he wasn't.
BUT it is not a valid argument or a fatal blow to the police account to say that six shots is excessive because 1 or 2 shots would be enough to stop an aggressor. That is wrong. It has no basis in reality, and flies in the face of countless examples of justified shootings that required multiple hits to stop a threat.
It is simply a fact, that in a hypothetical "justified " shooting, a determined, motivated subject can fight through multiple gunshots from a pistol before being stopped by the shots.
If you believe that the Ferguson PD are out to lunch with bullshit, great. Counter their story with logic, evidence and sound arguments. But don't break out "1 or 2 shots are enough to stop just about anyone." That argument is not open to you. It has no basis in reality.