Discussion: Report: Ferguson Grand Jury Witness Admitted Racist Views In Journal

Discussion for article #230562

Anyone surprised, please raise your hand. Then take that hand and smack yourself upside the head.

22 Likes

Who gets to decide what choices the GrandJury have in coming to a conclusion?

The prosecutors office gives the grand jury a list of possible charges. In this case, the Grand Jury was given the choice of all three degrees of murder and the 3 degrees of manslaughter. According to the Grand Jury votes contained in the information packet, the grand Jury unanimously voted “No True Bill” on each of the 6 options

2 Likes

I can’t help but notice that this description of the event from a self-admitted racist eye-witness is more sympathetic to Brown than some, many, of the posts from Wilson’s defenders I have seen on this site and others.

4 Likes

Note the passive “the gun went off” voice. All by itself, apparently!

8 Likes

True, but there’s nothing about Brown lunging at the cop before he was shot. This guys testimony shouldn’t have helped Wilson avoid prosecution. It was the prosecutor that seems to have been helping him the most.

5 Likes

"Cop took a couple steps forward "

Is that what you do when a demon is charging at you?

5 Likes

Prosecutor got what he needed to get reelected.

2 Likes

Yeah, this guy may be a racist, but one can hardly accuse him of biased testimony.

There are 40 witnesses. This guy was a racist. The ones that made stuff up about Brown being shot in the back are also racist obviously, or delusional. So that’s why it’s important to hear ALL the witnesses. We also have “witnesses” who now way they did not actually see anything, they just repeated what they heard. And a lot of that made it into the news. Meanwhile those people should be charged with making false statements.

The Prosecutor. Usually it’s one charge, but this prosecutor actually gave them leeway to charge on anything they wanted. The Grand Jury could have indicted Wilson for reckless use of a firearm if they wanted. Based on all the evidence they saw, and they saw a ton of it, they felt an indictment was not warranted.

Where did it say this witness saw the whole altercation? Those that did say Brown was charging Wilson. One called it a “football” type of charge with his head down. And those witnesses never changed their stories, unlike the ones who said Brown was “shot in the back”, etc.

Exactly, they were not restricted by the Prosecutor to a certain charge, it was “do whatever you want”. They could have simply charged him with reckless use of a weapon. But the Grand Jury saw all the evidence and felt charges were not warranted. And based on what is being released, they appear to have made the correct decision, and they were VERY deliberate about it, they went over evidence for a long time. And they saw a ton of evidence, as we see here there were 40 witnesses. What is real telling is that the witnesses who back Wilson never changed their stories, and several of them are black. Meanwhile we have some witnesses who had said Brown was surrendering, are now saying they did not actually see the incident, they were just repeating “what they heard”. These people should be charged with making false statements.

1 Like

You teaBow…D’OH!

/s

The grand jury were told they saw all the evidence…

5 Likes

So I’ve got to ask what is it that motivates you to counter EVERY opinion that runs counter to yours on EVERY thread on this topic with the SAME set of repetitive points?

I know I’ve read your SAME opinions a dozen times today-- and over the last 2 weeks.
Are you unsure that WE’VE ALL READ THEM over-and-over?

Are you somehow invested in this?
Just by sheer number and repetitiveness?
It’s taking on that tinge.

Or simply obsessive?

jw1

16 Likes

Why not both?
I was actually thinking the exact same thing as you when I saw your post. It started well before last night’s announcement too. Reminds me of trolls of yore who seemed to have “guns” and/or “global warming” keywords set up for reminders. That’s some dedication.

5 Likes

No grand jury can substitute for the police, nor for a prosecuting attorney. All a criminal grand jury can do is agree or disagree with the police or prosecuting attorney that there is enough probable cause to try someone for a felony. In this case, there was no police report, and the prosecutor did not give them that agree/disagree choice. All the prosecutor did was dump a vast amount of information on them, which may have been selected to omit anything that would lead to an indictment, and sit back and see what would happen. This was an abuse of the grand jury system.

7 Likes

Charged for making false statements to the press?

1 Like