MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #16

[Oceans]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ec6ffe-339b-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html

Grand jury getting all the available Ferguson case info.

"McCulloch declined to step aside, but he is not presenting evidence to the grand jury, which usually means he won’t try the case himself, Magee said. But he is supervising the two attorneys in his office — Sheila Whirley and Kathi Alizadeh — who are presenting to the grand jury. Whirley has been with the office since 2001 and is the highest-ranking African American among the five black attorneys in the 57-member office. Alizadeh has been with the office since 1988 and is supervising the sex crimes unit. She is white. Alizadeh is also presenting evidence to the grand jury and will prosecute the case if they decide to indict Wilson."

This is an excellent article and it's worth it to read it in it's entirety, IMO.

Here is the part which caught my attention:

The St. Louis County prosecutor’s office is taking an unusual approach with grand jury members who are weighing evidence against the police officer who shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown last month, experts and county officials said.

Instead of telling grand jury members what charges they believe police officer Darren Wilson should face, they are leaving it open-ended for now and involving the grand jury as co-investigators.

The prosecutor’s office is also presenting evidence to the grand jury as soon as it receives it, rather than waiting until the St. Louis County Police Department and the FBI have completed their investigations. Police probes are typically completed before a case is presented to a grand jury, county officials said.

As a result, jurors in the Wilson case are hearing from every eyewitness, seeing every telling photo, viewing every relevant video and reviewing all DNA, ballistics and other test results from county and FBI labs, said Ed Magee, a spokesman for county prosecutor Robert McCulloch. They will hear testimony from Dorian Johnson, the friend who was with Brown when he died, but it is unclear yet whether they will hear testimony from Wilson.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ec6ffe-339b-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html

 

[LambChop]

Enough about the Attorney General. He has promised justice and that is his job. From this time forward discuss what has been reported because if your opinion is a political one it will be deleted.

You are all lucky the thread is still up because if I were had been on today I would have shut it down to do a major cleanup. As it is, it looks like the remains of the "Running of the Brides" Basement Sale at Filene's in Boston.

:maddening:

We need to step away from the racial discussions and our opinions regarding the AG and give it a rest. Get back to discussing the case. Thanks, Lambchop

 

[SStarr33]

Enough about the Attorney General. He has promised justice and that is his job. From this time forward discuss what has been reported because if your opinion is a political one it will be deleted.

You are all lucky the thread is still up because if I were had been on today I would have shut it down to do a major cleanup. As it is, it looks like the remains of the "Running of the Brides" Basement Sale at Filene's in Boston.

:maddening:

LOL, I wish I knew what that meant.

 

[LambChop]

LOL, I wish I knew what that meant.

Sorry, I was ranting. It's an expensive department store in Boston that twice a year has a basement sale with bridal dresses marked down to a fraction of their original costs. Hundreds of future brides line up for the sale and actually fight over dresses. I imagine once the sale is over there are pieces of dresses scattered all over the store's floor, plus clumps of hair that may or may not have been pulled out of someone's head (exaggerating). LOL

 

[SStarr33]

Sorry, I was ranting. It's an expensive department store in Boston that twice a year has a basement sale with bridal dresses marked down to a fraction of their original costs. Hundreds of future brides line up for the sale and actually fight over dresses. I imagine once the sale is over there are pieces of dresses scattered all over the store's floor, plus clumps of hair that may or may not have been pulled out of someone's head (exaggerating). LOL

OMG, that is hilarious. I have been to Filenes many times, but did not know about the bridal dress (or the hair) situation.

 

[Dana]

Does this mean I have to give some of the posters here pieces of their hair and or clothes back?

 

[LambChop]

Just a reminder. Please do not post other cases in this thread. If it is new information about a shooting please start a new thread in the Crimes in the News, Crimes - Spotlight on Children, or Up to the Minute News threads.


Thanks, Lambchop

 

[sorrell skye]

This is an excellent article and it's worth it to read it in it's entirety, IMO.

Here is the part which caught my attention:

The St. Louis County prosecutor’s office is taking an unusual approach with grand jury members who are weighing evidence against the police officer who shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown last month, experts and county officials said.

Instead of telling grand jury members what charges they believe police officer Darren Wilson should face, they are leaving it open-ended for now and involving the grand jury as co-investigators.

The prosecutor’s office is also presenting evidence to the grand jury as soon as it receives it, rather than waiting until the St. Louis County Police Department and the FBI have completed their investigations. Police probes are typically completed before a case is presented to a grand jury, county officials said.

As a result, jurors in the Wilson case are hearing from every eyewitness, seeing every telling photo, viewing every relevant video and reviewing all DNA, ballistics and other test results from county and FBI labs, said Ed Magee, a spokesman for county prosecutor Robert McCulloch. They will hear testimony from Dorian Johnson, the friend who was with Brown when he died, but it is unclear yet whether they will hear testimony from Wilson.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ec6ffe-339b-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the evidence/testimony being presented to this Grand Jury was exculpatory evidence.


9-11.233

Presentation of Exculpatory Evidence

In United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735 (1992), the Supreme Court held that the Federal courts' supervisory powers over the grand jury did not include the power to make a rule allowing the dismissal of an otherwise valid indictment where the prosecutor failed to introduce substantial exculpatory evidence to a grand jury. It is the policy of the Department of Justice, however, that when a prosecutor conducting a grand jury inquiry is personally aware of substantial evidence that directly negates the guilt of a subject of the investigation, the prosecutor must present or otherwise disclose such evidence to the grand jury before seeking an indictment against such a person. While a failure to follow the Department's policy should not result in dismissal of an indictment, appellate courts may refer violations of the policy to the Office of Professional Responsibility for review.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/11mcrm.htm

 

[LambChop]

Does this mean I have to give some of the posters here pieces of their hair and or clothes back?

I think that would be a nice gesture that might promote harmony in this thread.

 

[reedus23]

It is ridiculous that race has been allowed to be such a driving force in this case.

It's funny. About a week ago I posted a challenge for any person on here to provide one shred of any proof that race has anything to do with this case. I am not talking anecdotal evidence that racism exists, or even that perhaps racism exists on the FPD. I am talking of ONE SHRED of proof that OW is a racist. I don't care if he shot MB dead for no reason. I don't care if OW turns out to be the devil himself and MB was a perfect angel.

One shred of evidence that race had anything to do with this shooting. One.

Crickets.....:waiting:

I hear what you're saying because some are barking about it and I don't know either which way at this point. I would say, though, that if charges are ever brought, the jury instruction will not reference race at all in determining if DW is guilty or not. At least as far as the state charges go, even if MB supporters want to claim race is involved and DW supporters want to deny race is an issue, it won't have one bearing on guilt/innocence at a trial.

 

[reedus23]

Wow. Wherever you were the last few days you sure came back rested & fired up.

lol college visits and all. I only ask because I happened to be talking to an officer who works somewhere in St. Louis County and that statement was made. So I got to thinking about the statement and thought I'd get everyone else's thoughts.

 

[katydid23]

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the evidence/testimony being presented to this Grand Jury was exculpatory evidence.


9-11.233

Presentation of Exculpatory Evidence

In United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735 (1992), the Supreme Court held that the Federal courts' supervisory powers over the grand jury did not include the power to make a rule allowing the dismissal of an otherwise valid indictment where the prosecutor failed to introduce substantial exculpatory evidence to a grand jury. It is the policy of the Department of Justice, however, that when a prosecutor conducting a grand jury inquiry is personally aware of substantial evidence that directly negates the guilt of a subject of the investigation, the prosecutor must present or otherwise disclose such evidence to the grand jury before seeking an indictment against such a person. While a failure to follow the Department's policy should not result in dismissal of an indictment, appellate courts may refer violations of the policy to the Office of Professional Responsibility for review.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/11mcrm.htm

I bet it is too. And they get to ask questions of the witnesses. So I imagine they will have a few questions for Dorian. Like 'why' do you think the officer was trying to pull MB INTO the car through the window? Could MB have been leaning in and punching him?

 

[reedus23]

I hope we do get a thread for the Ferguson investigations. I have a few thoughts about this article. It sounds like LE is going to be forced to 'ignore' drivers who are unlicensed, unregistered and uninsured. jmo

I think that that is probably a bit of an overstatement. Some things will change though. For example, a circle that I have seen play out more often than not is Jane Doe gets a traffic ticket. Jane Doe is given a Court date of 9/7/14. Jane Doe has a baby and can't find a babysitter but knows she has a Court date so, not wanting to create further problems, appears at the Courthouse on 9/7/14 but is turned away at the door because she brought her baby. Jane Doe now is charged with failing to appear even though she did appear and not just that but now Jane Doe has a warrant issued. Also, in Missouri, because she "failed to appear" for her Court date, the same Court that turned her away at the door can also turn in the failure to appear to Jefferson City and now Jane Doe not only has a warrant for "failing to appear" but also has a compliance suspension of her license for "failing to appear". Now Jane Doe, who was breaking no laws at the time, is pulled over simply because a cop was following behind her and decided to run her plates, which comes back showing a suspended license. Maybe she's actually taken to jail. Maybe not. Now, what was going to be an $80 fine for speeding has turned into $80(underlying ticket) plus $100(FTA) plus $250(driving while suspended) plus $20(reinstatement fee) equals $450 all because she was turned away at the door and told she failed to appear when she did, in fact appear. Not everyone can then afford the $450 and guess what. The circle goes on and on and on. The system guarantees it won't end.

 

[reedus23]

He is supposed to be representing JUSTICE FOR EVERYONE. But when he rolls into Ferguson, announces he is a black man , and he has been unfairly treated by cops before, what does that say to the Ferguson Police? He is heading up a federal investigation of their force. And he begins by criticizing white policeman and how he has been treated as a black man? He does not sound very unbiased or impartial, imo.

Thoughts on County PD expressing public support for DW when County PD is investigating DW?

 

[reedus23]

That is a lovely way to look at it. But what about the Law Enforcement officers? The ones who put their very lives on the line, for very chitty pay? Is it fair for them to hear that the man who is leading the investigation of their force, is AUTOMATICALLY assuming that they are mistreating the public?

People do LIE when they describe their interactions with the police, right? So how do the law abiding, well meaning cops feel now, knowing that Holder already has taken sides in the matter. he has publicly described being treated unfairly as a black man, as incentive for his visit there.

So what does that mean for the officers? Are people going to be able to come forward now and make up stories as revenge? Seems like that happened already with the arrest OW made and was given a medal for. Now the guy is claiming mistreatment. Not a peep before.

Edited out my thoughts after seeing Lambchop's post.

 

[katydid23]

I think that that is probably a bit of an overstatement. Some things will change though. For example, a circle that I have seen play out more often than not is Jane Doe gets a traffic ticket. Jane Doe is given a Court date of 9/7/14. Jane Doe has a baby and can't find a babysitter but knows she has a Court date so, not wanting to create further problems, appears at the Courthouse on 9/7/14 but is turned away at the door because she brought her baby. Jane Doe now is charged with failing to appear even though she did appear and not just that but now Jane Doe has a warrant issued. Also, in Missouri, because she "failed to appear" for her Court date, the same Court that turned her away at the door can also turn in the failure to appear to Jefferson City and now Jane Doe not only has a warrant for "failing to appear" but also has a compliance suspension of her license for "failing to appear". Now Jane Doe, who was breaking no laws at the time, is pulled over simply because a cop was following behind her and decided to run her plates, which comes back showing a suspended license. Maybe she's actually taken to jail. Maybe not. Now, what was going to be an $80 fine for speeding has turned into $80(underlying ticket) plus $100(FTA) plus $250(driving while suspended) plus $20(reinstatement fee) equals $450 all because she was turned away at the door and told she failed to appear when she did, in fact appear. Not everyone can then afford the $450 and guess what. The circle goes on and on and on. The system guarantees it won't end.

I didn't know they turned away people with children. I have seen babies and children in our local traffic court. They should change that regulation for sure.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I bet it is too. And they get to ask questions of the witnesses. So I imagine they will have a few questions for Dorian. Like 'why' do you think the officer was trying to pull MB INTO the car through the window? Could MB have been leaning in and punching him?

I'm sure they'll have access to all his many versions...IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

I think that that is probably a bit of an overstatement. Some things will change though. For example, a circle that I have seen play out more often than not is Jane Doe gets a traffic ticket. Jane Doe is given a Court date of 9/7/14. Jane Doe has a baby and can't find a babysitter but knows she has a Court date so, not wanting to create further problems, appears at the Courthouse on 9/7/14 but is turned away at the door because she brought her baby. Jane Doe now is charged with failing to appear even though she did appear and not just that but now Jane Doe has a warrant issued. Also, in Missouri, because she "failed to appear" for her Court date, the same Court that turned her away at the door can also turn in the failure to appear to Jefferson City and now Jane Doe not only has a warrant for "failing to appear" but also has a compliance suspension of her license for "failing to appear". Now Jane Doe, who was breaking no laws at the time, is pulled over simply because a cop was following behind her and decided to run her plates, which comes back showing a suspended license. Maybe she's actually taken to jail. Maybe not. Now, what was going to be an $80 fine for speeding has turned into $80(underlying ticket) plus $100(FTA) plus $250(driving while suspended) plus $20(reinstatement fee) equals $450 all because she was turned away at the door and told she failed to appear when she did, in fact appear. Not everyone can then afford the $450 and guess what. The circle goes on and on and on. The system guarantees it won't end.

And it's a system we ALL live under.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[katydid23]

Thoughts on County PD expressing public support for DW when County PD is investigating DW?

That was the hockey team expressing their support for him. The hockey players have much less influence on this case then the AG does, overall. But I guess it is a similar thing.

 

[momrids6]

I think that that is probably a bit of an overstatement. Some things will change though. For example, a circle that I have seen play out more often than not is Jane Doe gets a traffic ticket. Jane Doe is given a Court date of 9/7/14. Jane Doe has a baby and can't find a babysitter but knows she has a Court date so, not wanting to create further problems, appears at the Courthouse on 9/7/14 but is turned away at the door because she brought her baby.

rsbm: Every traffic ticket I have ever gotten (or someone else has I've seen) has a pay by mail, in person, or online options, along with a court date if one desires to challenge it.