Some more interesting info from this link:
Evidence is being presented to a grand jury that was empaneled before the shooting, with a term recently extended at the prosecutor’s request to Jan. 7. At one point, McCulloch had predicted a decision in October.
The pace remains uncertain, but Tiffany Mitchell, a witness to the shooting who has spoken publicly about what she saw, has not yet been subpoenaed, her attorney, Peter Cohen, said Wednesday.
McCulloch took the rare step of having audio recordings and a transcript made of the secret proceedings, with a promise to release them publicly if there is no indictment. McGee acknowledged that opening the material would require an order from a judge, who could say no.
Jim Cohen, an associate professor of law at Fordham University, told the Post-Dispatch last month that
grand jury material had rarely been made public anywhere, even to scholars researching historical cases. He also worried that fear of being publicly identified might inhibit witnesses.
Magee said McCulloch’s office had talked about the potential effect on witnesses “a little bit” and “it’s still being discussed.” He said prosecutors could decide to withhold witness names, especially those who are not police officers and may have particular safety issues.
He said the names of the grand jurors would not be made public, and it was unclear whether documents would be released that necessarily would carry the foreperson’s signature.
Magee said the timing of the announcement of the grand jury’s decision, once it’s made, was “still being discussed.”
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...icle_74022ab8-756f-5e1d-81b3-3c577f1e9208.htm
So, the prosecutor promises to make the GJ material public but a judge could still say no? :waitasec: