Topic: Ferguson Grand Jury Reaches Decision (Read 1853 times)

The list of things you ignore is a lot longer than that, so suffice it to say that I'm not interested in a story that justifies your pre-conceived opinion of what happened, but what actually happened. Your speculation as to what happened therefore has very little value to me.

You forgot to mention the time between each time that Brown was shot. You also forgot to mention that up until Brown was shot for the 7th time that he was still actively moving and attempting to attack a police officer. 

jaysabi, were you born yesterday?

The militarization of the police will not be allowed to be challenged nor be brought to the light of a public trial.

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/07/25/st-louis-county-police-officer-charged/

This is also troubling. The same prosecutor had no problem filing charges against a black cop who struck a metro rider on the hand with his baton during an argument earlier this year. I wouldn't draw a conclusion from this alone, but with everything else, this is worth taking into consideration. The contrast is stark: prosecutor fails to win a slam dunk indictment against white cop for shorting black teen 7 times, files criminal charges against black cop for hitting someone on the hand with a baton. It doesn't seem right to me in the context of the other legitimate questions raised.

Yes, the grand jury is not a trial to determine guilt, just a procedure to determine if a trial should be had. The thing is, the bar is incredibly low to indict because the important question of guilt or innocence is determined by a trial. Fivethirtyeight.com published a statistic that shows just how low the bar is: in 2010, US attorneys prosecuted 162,000 cases, and only 11 times did a grand jury NOT return an indictment. These things are a slam dunk, so much so that if a grand jury does not return an indictment, you really have to wonder if the prosecutor didn't want them to.

Fivethirtyeight's article is really worth reading, but take it in context:  http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ferguson-michael-brown-indictment-darren-wilson/

Also, I'm loathe to quote MSNBC or Fox News because of how blatantly partisan they are, but MSNBC's legal expert has a valid point about how the St. Louis County prosecutor did not Officer Wilson on cross examination, and his testimony was rife with inconsistencies that should have been explored if the prosecutor was interested at all in taking this case seriously. (read the tweets here: http://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/11/25/7285265/darren-wilson-grand-jury)

These two things together are starting to make me think that the prosecutor wasn't interested in getting an indictment, he was prosecuting this case out of political necessity. Perhaps that's why he did such a poor job. Indictments are easy. Either he's completely incompetent or he didn't want an indictment. Not sure that one is better than the other.

Interesting. The grand jury is not there to decide whether or not someone is innocent or guilty. They are judging whether or not there is enough evidence or a case to be made such that it should go to trial.

When I was on a grand jury there were 21 of us, a yes vote by 18 people was required to send it on to trial. Of all of the cases presented to us only one did not reach the 18 vote (I voted against many drug related crimes). The only case that did not get the 18 votes was when the attorney general actually said "I don't feel confident about this one, I think I should probably go back and rework this case before bringing it forward again", basically telling us to vote against it.

The thing is, the attorney general can come back and present the case later to another grand jury. This is not a double jeopardy thing. And when it comes to the grand jury, the attorney general basically decides whether it should go to trial or not.

With 6000 pages of evidence, I would have ruled that there was enough evidence to have a trial. It is not up to the grand jury to decide guilt, just if it is worth the taxpayer money necessary to find out.

You think this is just purely a 'liberal' issue? This is why people think Americans are stupid, are you lot only ever capable of thinking in two party systems? Oh wait, Democrats vs Republicans, Apple vs Windows, Xbox One vs Playstation 4, Halo vs Call of Duty, marijuana legalisation vs the war on drugs, gay marriage vs the church. Yes, I just realised you guys really are only capable of two sided thinking, if you vote in somebody who isn't different in the slightest to the usual presidents you've had in the past and then proceed to bitch about it on here I will have absolutely no sympathy.

You morons bring everything upon yourselves purely because of how simple minded and arrogant you are, it's not just the fact that you're simple minded that pisses me off, but the fact that you're actually proud of it!

It's amazing how many morons there are in this country. 90% of the celebs speaking out and the morons protesting have no idea what a grand jury is. If there was any chance at all they could bust the cop they would of sent to trial.
Simply for the fact they are worried about what people will do. The evidence was so clear that the grand jury couldn't bother wasting tax payers time bringing to trial.  Yet every moron liberal who has no idea how the law works is setting cars on fire and talking out of their ass.

#chimpout

Americans, British and most of the rest of the world act like they do because of the media. Fluoride has nothing to do with it - there's no fluoride in the water where I live and the majority of people are just as dumb. Some hippies I know don't even use fluoride toothpaste and they're dumb as fuck - keep talking about "making a stand", then just watch shit like X factor and Ancient Aliens on TV all day, loving it.

There are over 6,000 pages of evidence released to the public now. All I'm asking is that unless you have reviewed it all (not you personally, but anyone), at least be open to the idea that perhaps your opinion of what transpired is based on incomplete and media-manipulated information. And you're right, both sides just want to use this to prove their political points, without regard for the truth.

People are more interested in scoring political points and getting free electronics. A review of the evidence in order to form a reasoned opinion sounds too much like work.  

Thanks for posting the link though.

For anyone interested, here is a link to the released evidence. It is voluminous.

http://apps.stlpublicradio.org/ferguson-project/evidence.html

What is frightening is the girl who support the cop, what the fuck, she can have what ever opinions she wishes, the fact that anyone that support the cop, is threatened is not good at all... what is happening to A1... ahh there is A2... yes, we need them. sorry anti guns...

The prosecutor said that all the evidence presented to the grand jury would be released to the public at the conclusion of his statement. I haven't seen anything yet.

Meanwhile, fivethirtyeight breaks down the statistical improbability of a grand jury not returning an indictment, except in cases involving police:  http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ferguson-michael-brown-indictment-darren-wilson/. It's interesting to read to take in context.

For now, all I know is that the only people who heard all the evidence decided there was not enough to file charges. Until I can review the evidence myself when it's made public, I'm reserving judgment on whether they were right or wrong.

It's called evidence, something you need to have when making those kind of claims, speaking of which, you didn't do that in a thread you made either.

The physical evidence merely confirms that he was facing forward, which is consistent with the witness who said he was falling forward with his hands under his belly as he had already been shot. The audio recording confirms there was a pause, then more shots fired.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown

It is clear that Brown caused his own demise and was at fault. However, it is also very likely that the officer proceeded to murder him after he was already sufficiently wounded and falling to the ground.

Police officers are dealing with the following statistic.

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6160


I agree with the non-indictment because this officer is a product of the training and culture of the militarized "peace" officers we have now in the USA. It is not his personal doing, but rather an outcome of how he has been trained to act and the culture of the system we have now.

As the USA economy turns down after 2015.75, we are going to see in the USA an increase in violence, police killings, and rioting. This will escalate and not be a one-time event.

Americans are too docile, fluoridated sheep

Would be pretty great if we had our own maidan, but it won't happen. The people are not united enough.

No. People are being lied to and manipulated. The black witnesses were lying to the police and to the media about what happened. Once the physical evidence is examined it will be clear that the protestors are protesting about nothing

Is this it?  Is this America's Arab Spring?  Is this where it all ends?!