The witness said he thoughts the shots were missing because Brown kept moving forward. I imagine he thought if Brown was being hit buy bullets, Brown would have stopped moving forward, fell down, or something to that affect.
The witness in the video never mentions hands up or walking, but I didn't mentioning running because when the witness was speaking about that it was vague. The witness said running but it was hard to determine exactly what he meant in the context of the conversation plus other noised and conversation.
Watch the video and hear it for yourself so you don't have to take a second hand account of what was said.
Even after listening to the audio, that is the strangest thing about this. The witness does talk about the officer having his gun trained on Brown and Brown still approaching. He does mention that he thought the cop was missing then, but as you mentioned, shots were fired and the witness
still thought they were missing because he still kept coming towards him.
Possible account, but if it is determined that he really was shot in the back, that would blow apart that entire version of the events.
The bigger problem, again, is that this narrative is the path of least resistance for an officer in a situation like this. "He was charging for me, I had to shoot" is literally an open and shut case. I find it very, very hard to believe that Ferguson PD could be so incompetent that this wouldn't have been their
first depiction of the events.
Edit: Oh man, regardless on whether or not he had ID, if he at least left the money for it, that may change things on whether or not this was robbery in connection with the cigs or assault, especially depending on what the store owner actually asked him about (if he asked him about taking the cigs or requiring ID, that is one thing; if he asked him about something else entirely, then from a technical standpoint, he did not forcibly steal the item).