Discussion: Ferguson Grand Juror Sues Prosecutor Over Michael Brown Case

Discussion for article #231626



Color me surprised by these revelations.


Sorry, McCulloch. You aren’t the Lorax, and the jurors aren’t trees.

Another stupid lawsuit clogging courts. Whether the allegations are true or not, prosecutors have absolute immunity from suits over actions they take as prosecutors. Period.

I’m sure a difficult decision for this person and a difficult and personally disappointing experience witnessing hidden corruption and public manipulation so directly. I hope America can prove herself to this brave person.


This is awesomely awesome and you couldn’t be more wrong. The lawsuit will play out in the court of public opinion and we need hundreds of suits like this forcing true reform in prosecution. And seems like Mike Nifong might disagree with your assertion about absoluteness.


The legal standards that were “muddled” and presented in an “untimely manner” clearly refers to the law regarding police use of deadly force presented to the grand jury by the prosecutors that was, in actuality, ruled unconstitutional 20 years before. But the prosecution let the unconstitutional law stand throughout Darren Wilson’s testimony and only admitted the law was incorrect days later, when, I assume, someone who actually knows the law pointed it out to them. At that point, the grand jury asked what was unconstitutional about the law but was told to simply ignore the previous information, even though it was printed on a piece of paper distributed to every grand juror, and had been the prevailing information during the entirety of Wilson’s testimony.

“Just fold the paper over,” the grand jury was told by Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Kathi Alizadeh when they objected to having the wrong information. “If you want to fold that in half just so that, you know, don’t necessarily rely on that because there is a portion of that that doesn’t comply with the law.”



That info might just throw a little wrench in MrC’s unwavering support of McCulloch and the cry of “read the transcripts” that have echoed in the comments these past months. But probably not.


Your statement is true but it misses the point of the plaintiff’s action. The juror is not seeking damages from the prosecutor either personally or from his office. The Juror just wants a court to release him from the gag that is imposed by MO law on grand jurors so that the juror can talk about what happened in that jury room.


FWIW, here’s my theory: McCulloch is covering up for the Ferguson PD. Though it’s likely that Wilson wouldn’t have been convicted of a crime under Missouri law if he was indicted and faced a trial, it’s very likely that an actual criminal trial would have revealed shoddy or outright illegal behavior by the Ferguson PD in terms of tampering with evidence or just gross negligence, likely ending in a mistrial and a huge embarrassment for the city of Ferguson. Rather than face additional scrutiny of how this investigation was handled and risk the kind of public exposure that would “put the system on trial”, McCulloch, as the Prosecutor, went out of his way to make sure the case never moved beyond a closed grand jury.


The point of the lawsuit is the Grand Juror wants to be able to talk to the press. Right now he is gagged.


Hey John Cardillo, aren’t you the poster-boy for the following cartoon?
There sure is a strong resemblance you and the thumb-sucking guy in that cartoon!



When are white people going to knock it off?

Hopefully this will lead to McCullogh’s resignation. But I sort of doubt it.


Love the cartoon but I think you posted it in the wrong thread.


Good… May this be the first of many!

1 Like

He let a witness who lied under oath, testify under oath twice, even knowing that she was a liar.

There should be a lawsuit for that as well.


The lawsuit asks for an injunction that would allow the juror to speak publicly about the Brown case.

Reading Comprehension 101.


Don’t you think that whole Grand Jury process was a bit odd?