Michael Brown & Ferguson, MO

[Judge Jude]

Toobin said it was very unlikely that a federal prosecution case could go anywhere. but obviously the family is going to file a civil suit here if it hasn't already.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Toobin said it was very unlikely that a federal prosecution case could go anywhere. but obviously the family is going to file a civil suit here if it hasn't already.

Depends on how much the powers that be want to further politicize this issue, but I'd read that as well.

[gcstomp]

I am not so sure that we would be looking at such anger if there had been a jury trial, and the victim had his side represented, but judgement came back as not guilty. This case demands a trial, the anger to me is that the victim was not given a voice, it was in effect a 1 sided trial. And when only 1 side presents a viewpoint, its easy to shape the narrative as you like.

[Judge Jude]

ok, but what would you do if you are a prosecutor convinced, in my scenario, that a trial could lead to jury nullification - so then either the judge sets it aside to Not Guilty, which I don't think solves the problem of the angry locals, or he doesn't (and then a perceived Not Guilty by law man, to him, goes to prison).

Whatever one thinks of the special circumstances of the grand jury, if my scenario is accurate, you can't just sit back and have a ham sandwich indictment.

and if there is no grand jury at all, wouldn't that have produced even more violence? we'll never know, but I believe so.

[GwynnInTheHall]

ok, but what would you do if you are a prosecutor convinced, in my scenario, that a trial could lead to jury nullification - so then either the judge sets it aside to Not Guilty, which I don't think solves the problem of the angry locals, or he doesn't (and then a perceived Not Guilty by law man, to him, goes to prison).

Whatever one thinks of the special circumstances of the grand jury, if my scenario is accurate, you can't just sit back and have a ham sandwich indictment.

and if there is no grand jury at all, wouldn't that have produced even more violence? we'll never know, but I believe so.

I agree, but don't you think it was somewhat odd in this case that not only was McCullouch a horrible choice to present Brown's case but the very person who intentionally tampered with a prospective jury pool by releasing a totally unrelated video of Brown suggesting a validated motive on Wilson's part? This is only one reason why people are up in arms about the decision. Had there at the very least seemed to be due process, in it's purest sense, I believe there would have been less violent reaction. there would still have been violence. you cannot escape the fringe element of any argument, but those in the middle would have been less likely to join the fray. And again, I truly believe we have yet to see the worst of it.

[Judge Jude]

interesting thought, GITH. I don't see any escape from the maze I presented, but you are not accepting that the maze had to be entered, necessarily. I wonder what alternative there was, from a practical standpoint.

[GwynnInTheHall]

interesting thought, GITH. I don't see any escape from the maze I presented, but you are not accepting that the maze had to be entered, necessarily. I wonder what alternative there was, from a practical standpoint.

I've read several opinions that state Wilson had to be vindicated in this case and NOT indicted for any true change to be made in the ills of the system. We indeed do need to enter the maze if only to finally realize how trapped we really are.

[onejayhawk]

This seems like a clear case of the system working as it should. Why anyone would think it was an example of a broken system is baffling.

One thing seems clear. Governor Nixon is going to take a big hit.

J

[The Feral Slasher]

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...on-grand-jury/

re why Wilson was testifying at the grand jury

"Embracing the Ferguson model, prosecutors will hereinafter represent the defendant in the grand jury. That is all." -informative quote I ran across on the interwebs.

Below are two links to articles that explaining what was wrong with the Ferguson grand jury. Basically it was McCulloch trying to legitimize his decision not to indict. Ignoring for a moment the guilt or innocence of Wilson, I don't see how anyone can defend McCulloch or the process that was followed. It was all orchestrated to fool the public who don't understand the process and won't bother to learn.

http://blog.simplejustice.us/2014/11/25/the-ferguson-lie/

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120422/bob-mcculloch-abused-grand-jury-process-ferguson

[Moonlight J]

"Embracing the Ferguson model, prosecutors will hereinafter represent the defendant in the grand jury. That is all." -informative quote I ran across on the interwebs.

Below are two links to articles that explaining what was wrong with the Ferguson grand jury. Basically it was McCulloch trying to legitimize his decision not to indict. Ignoring for a moment the guilt or innocence of Wilson, I don't see how anyone can defend McCulloch or the process that was followed. It was all orchestrated to fool the public who don't understand the process and won't bother to learn.

http://blog.simplejustice.us/2014/11/25/the-ferguson-lie/

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1...ocess-ferguson

You clearly didn't follow the story closely enough and just aren't well-informed like others here....

[chancellor]

You clearly didn't follow the story closely enough and just aren't well-informed like others here....

Of course, because the fact that virtually every eyewitness changed their stories significantly under oath and, as elD accurately noted, many "just made shit up" had nothing to do with it. I'm still waiting for all y'all to explain how those 10 bullets in his back disappeared. I mean, that had to be an act of "the man", right?

[Moonlight J]

Of course, because the fact that virtually every eyewitness changed their stories significantly under oath and, as elD accurately noted, many "just made shit up" had nothing to do with it. I'm still waiting for all y'all to explain how those 10 bullets in his back disappeared. I mean, that had to be an act of "the man", right?

The .... was to note sarcasm

Here's a chart noting how each witness answered questions. Note the amount who said the witness had his hands up when fired upon, including the white construction workers that were on site when it happened

[Moonlight J]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/seemingly-unorthodox-police-procedures-emerge-in-grand-jury-documents/2014/11/25/48152574-74e0-11e4-bd1b-03009bd3e984_story.html

Facts:
-Wilson drove himself back to the station, unescorted
-Wilson washed blood off his hands
-Wilson placed his own weapon into an evidence bag

Each of these is against standard police protocol

“An officer driving himself back? Wrong. An officer booking his own gun into evidence? Wrong,” said David Klinger, an expert on police shootings with the University of Missouri at St. Louis who is also a former police officer. “The appropriate investigative procedures were not followed.’’
A 2013 Justice Department manual on processing crime scenes, designed in conjunction with police departments across the country, addresses what experts said was perhaps the most serious breach of protocol after Brown was killed: Wilson washing the blood off his hands.

Ryan Braun walked from PED testing charges based on a lesser breakdown of chain of custody...

[nots]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...984_story.html

Facts:
-Wilson drove himself back to the station, unescorted
-Wilson washed blood off his hands
-Wilson placed his own weapon into an evidence bag

Each of these is against standard police protocol



Ryan Braun walked from PED testing charges based on a lesser breakdown of chain of custody...

So he should be indicted for murder or manslaughter because he didn't follow standard police protocol for handling evidence?

[The Feral Slasher]

So he should be indicted for murder or manslaughter because he didn't follow standard police protocol for handling evidence?

No, this just adds another reason to question whether the prosecutor was doing his job and whether the investigation was handled properly. So do you think the way the entire investigation and grand jury proceedings were handled (along with McCulloch's history) would make a reasonable person question if the "prosecution" was biased in favor of the police ? And what about the next event that happens in Ferguson ? Do you think McCulloch will be fair and unbiased ?