MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #18

[Klood-N]

St. Louis grand jury weighs charges in Ferguson shooting

..... McCullough, whose office has prosecuted more than 700 murder cases since 1991, has overseen 33 prosecutions of police officers during his 23-year term but has never pressed charges against an officer accused of killing a suspect.

......said prosecutors review several police shootings each year but rarely pursue charges, largely because laws give police a broad latitude to defend themselves and use deadly force if they believe they are in imminent danger.

..... there were four cases of police shootings he has brought to a grand jury. None resulted in criminal charges, including a much publicized 2000 case of two law enforcement officers who shot and killed two unarmed black men during a drug bust.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0H62LJ20140911?irpc=932

In a process much different from a trial, a grand jury is guided by the prosecutor, who determines what evidence to present and instructs members on what charges may apply.

Two attorneys at the prosecutor's office, Kathi Alizadeh and Sheila Whirley, are presenting the evidence to the grand jury, Magee said. Alizadeh, with 26 years on the job, including 22 murder cases, is leading the presentation.

The prosecutor's office is asking for patience as forensics and autopsy evidence are presented to the grand jury, which is meeting four to eight hours each Wednesday. Witness testimony is still being gathered, Magee said.


"People just need to wait," Magee said. "People are still coming forward and we are still waiting for the investigation to be completed."

 

[sonjay]

Nothing I've seen shows these rioters as afraid of the police. Just as Darren did according to the workers, you retreat when you fear someone. If they feared the police, the mob would not aggressively advanced on the police in the videos that very night (linked last night). I did notice they were already calling LE the "Klu Klux Klan" that very night, so the comments in the city council meeting weren't anomalous. You don't shoot at police cars if you fear they're going to fire back.

MB & JD certainly didn't seem to fear the police..... walking down the middle of the street (in broad daylight, no less!) mere minutes after robbing a store, seeing the cop car approach, not moving out of the street, and then refusing to move out of the street when told to. Do those actions strike anyone as the behavior of 2 young men who actually fear the police?

 

[Klood-N]

MB & JD certainly didn't seem to fear the police..... walking down the middle of the street (in broad daylight, no less!) mere minutes after robbing a store, seeing the cop car approach, not moving out of the street, and then refusing to move out of the street when told to. Do those actions strike anyone as the behavior of 2 young men who actually fear the police?

Exactly!

And, according to Lesley, neither she nor Michael have ever had any trouble with Ferguson PD.

 

[reedus23]

Further to that question...anyone know if the GJ requested the records, would they be entitled to them?

This may have already been answered as I keep reading, but even if the juvenile records themselves are not able to be presented to a GJ, would those involved in the underlying actions still be able to testify about those events without reference to the juvenile court proceeding. For instance, and this is completely hypothetical, let's say MB assaulted a cop as a youth. That would seem relevant to me. But if it didn't meet the criteria for obtaining or presenting the actual juvenile records, wouldn't that officer still be able to testify about the events themselves. In other words, drawing a distinction between reference to anything juvenile court related versus reference to the acts themselves. It would seem to me they could/should/would at a minimum still be able to talk about the facts.

I think that was clear as mud. I guess I'm saying wouldn't the evidence of prior bad acts still be able to be brought before the GJ even if evidence of prior criminal record/crimes could not?

 

[Klood-N]

And in broad daylight!

Eta: oops you beat me Klood-N

Great minds.

 

[Klood-N]

LambChop's right.

If anything, I think the police and shopkeepers had more fear of the community than vice versa. Continuously violating the law, acting out of control, ignoring officers' instructions and warnings all displayed for the cameras does not lend itself to LE being the problem.

 

[sonjay]

This may have already been answered as I keep reading, but even if the juvenile records themselves are not able to be presented to a GJ, would those involved in the underlying actions still be able to testify about those events without reference to the juvenile court proceeding. For instance, and this is completely hypothetical, let's say MB assaulted a cop as a youth. That would seem relevant to me. But if it didn't meet the criteria for obtaining or presenting the actual juvenile records, wouldn't that officer still be able to testify about the events themselves. In other words, drawing a distinction between reference to anything juvenile court related versus reference to the acts themselves. It would seem to me they could/should/would at a minimum still be able to talk about the facts.

I think that was clear as mud. I guess I'm saying wouldn't the evidence of prior bad acts still be able to be brought before the GJ even if evidence of prior criminal record/crimes could not?

I understand what you're saying, and that's a good question. To which I don't know the answer, but would be interested to learn. My guess would be that in a trial (not GJ) the legal arguments for/against admissibility would be very similar, but the legal barriers would be different. As for GJ, I have no idea. They do have wider latitude than trials, so quite possibly.

I've also wondered why media haven't been inundating us with information about both MB and OW from those kinds of interviews with family, friends, teachers, police officers, coaches, etc. We've gotten a few snippets here and there, but usually in a high-profile case such as this one, the media would be swarming the area talking to anyone they could find. Often, people who can't speak officially and on the record will talk unofficially as unnamed sources. MB's teachers & coaches? The family of the sick-child call OW responded to immediately before the shooting? Other people OW has arrested or has helped? Neighbors & friends of MB & OW? There's been a tiny bit here & there, but really very very little in comparison to most high-profile cases.

 

[Klood-N]

Michael's credit recovery instructor, Kennedy, has been quoted in a few articles, and I think one of his teachers from when he was small commented somewhere.

I'd like to hear from his juvie officer mentor.


I'm guessing getting to know these two is not what the media is interested regarding this shooting.

 

[Trident]

BBM-this statement is so important and so true. Say what you want about the police, but at the end of the day...they ARE, in fact, the "good guys."

"Good guys" or not, they are the only ones who stand between us and mobs like the one in Ferguson.

 

[bettybaby00]

Found this vid posted on another site. It's the first few seconds that are interesting...

The vid starts with Brady being interviewed and holding his cell phone up toward the cameras showing what he saw. It's interesting b/c the MSNBC tv interview states there is no audio of the recording, and in this bit, there is clearly audio as the camera is picking it up. 2nd what you hear is Brady say twice, "he ran back to the car, he ran back to the car."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/us/recording-may-capture-shots-fired-at-michael-brown.html

Eta: not sure if had already been posted. Remainder of vid very sad, comments from MBs friends and family.

 

[Elley Mae]

I understand what you're saying, and that's a good question. To which I don't know the answer, but would be interested to learn. My guess would be that in a trial (not GJ) the legal arguments for/against admissibility would be very similar, but the legal barriers would be different. As for GJ, I have no idea. They do have wider latitude than trials, so quite possibly.

I've also wondered why media haven't been inundating us with information about both MB and OW from those kinds of interviews with family, friends, teachers, police officers, coaches, etc. We've gotten a few snippets here and there, but usually in a high-profile case such as this one, the media would be swarming the area talking to anyone they could find. Often, people who can't speak officially and on the record will talk unofficially as unnamed sources. MB's teachers & coaches? The family of the sick-child call OW responded to immediately before the shooting? Other people OW has arrested or has helped? Neighbors & friends of MB & OW? There's been a tiny bit here & there, but really very very little in comparison to most high-profile cases.

IDK But I think the (no snitch/stop snitch) could be at play as far as the residents/witness's and as far as the media not going in and knocking on doors for comments about who saw what, guess they<(media) would have to be asked that. idk jmo

 

[Klood-N]

@antoniofrench
The current policy gives police virtually complete discretion over use of deadly force and whether they "reasonably feared for their life".
6:59am - 12 Sep 14
https://twitter.com/AntonioFrench/status/510397163201757184

He states it. I hope he and his followers began to comprehend it.

 

[SStarr33]

Are GJ members allowed to watch news and read about the case online?

 

[Klood-N]

@antoniofrench
@Bizzabobby As far as we know. And in both cases, the victims were given toxicology tests but the officers were not.
https://twitter.com/AntonioFrench/status/510403663341568000

Almost 100% sure he's got this wrong. That's usually standard, iirc and with Darren treated at hospital, I bet they did screen him. This sort of disinformation from the rioters' leaders only fuels the fire. Maybe purposefully.

 

[sonjay]

I'm guessing getting to know these two is not what the media is interested regarding this shooting.

Based on the amount of biased reporting I've seen, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they've talked to a lot of those people, but what they've learned doesn't support the narrative, so they've elected not to make it public. IMO, MOO, etc. I have no evidence whatsoever to back up this speculation. Just saying it wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Sonya610]

"Good guys" or not, they are the only ones who stand between us and mobs like the one in Ferguson.

The folks in St. Louis should NOT depend on the police to protect them, they need to be ready to protect themselves (and many probably are).

 

[LambChop]

Because some people don't have many choices and believe it or not, there are areas worse.

But I was not talking about some people. I was talking about MB who had a mother and father who he could have lived with. And MB's grandmother had a son she could live with. I would never, ever let my Mom live in an environment that was in such a high crime area. Options are available to keep crime from neighborhoods. Low income should never be equal to high crime. jmo

 

[Klood-N]

"Good guys" or not, they are the only ones who stand between us and mobs like the one in Ferguson.

Excellent point! The dangerous rioting helps us see their value all the more.

 

[TexanMom]

Normandy Middle School Principal temporarily kicked out 20 students.

"One middle school teacher sought medical treatment after being hit in the head by a textbook lobbed by a student."

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_dd9f1f26-06cb-5326-bcfa-3eec77e6f9c1.html

 

[Sonya610]

Excellent point! The dangerous rioting helps us see their value all the more.

It also shows their limitations. The fact that the c-store was looted right AFTER the police released the store's location says a lot. Anyone that was paying any attention would KNOW the store would be looted! The owner is darn lucky he didn't get killed.They just burned down the QT a few nights earlier, yet the authorities did NOT provide police protection to that store owner after releasing the location AND the video?

I am still amazed that they did that.