Can that prosecutor be charged with incitement?

[Ken Burch]

It's all been made MUCH much worse because of the way he announce the decision tonight.

Clearly, he wanted all of this to happen.

[GGJohn]

1. NO.

[Travis_0004]

2. no.

Why dont we blame the people actually causing the violence.

[LawDeeDah]

3. yes, I blame the police. some of them might be people.

[Ken Burch]

5. The prosecutor was ONE of those people.

Once he took that arrogant, "screw you" tone, he KNEW all of this had to happen.

[Travis_0004]

11. The prosecutor is an asshole, lets burn our community down

Makes sense to me.

[Ken Burch]

14. Not that...it was "this decision means it's all hopeless".

Hard to argue that POC in Ferguson and Missouri SHOULDN'T see all hope as lost in their state.

Besides, it's likely that it's police incendiaries actually started the fires. The people themselves wouldn't have been that insane.

[onecaliberal]

4. And clearly Wilson was told weeks ago even though the Browns were not

[blkmusclmachine]

6. Being an arrogant, smug asshole is not a crime.

Especially if you're already well off financially.

[ScreamingMeemie]

7. The whole time he was spewing his "social media" garbage I was

thinking that this was going to get bad.

[R B Garr]

15. Exactly! The social media comments were so condescending and sounded

retaliatory, imo.

[Nye Bevan]

8. This is the sort of brilliant, perceptive legal insight that I always appreciate on DU. (nt)

[Ken Burch]

9. It was a question, not an "insight".

No reason for snark, unless you're on the side of the white power structure in Ferguson.

[Dreamer Tatum]

16. There is room between sheer idiocy and complicity with white power, I assure you. nt

[Ken Burch]

18. No idiocy is happening tonight, other than from the cops.

It will likely turn out that the fires were caused by tear gas canisters and police indenciaries.

What you don't seem to understand is that hope is now dead in Ferguson, and in all of Missouri, for justice for all.

Those places are just going to stay like this forever now, and white cops there will just keep murdering black kids forever.

That's why you're seeing the anger.

There's no honest way to believe that anything can ever change in that state.

But then, you're writing from somewhere in safety, comfort, and privilege tonight, so to you have nothing at stake. It isn't your life and it isn't your home. It's easy to judge from the sidelines when it's never going to reach you in your comfortable white suburb that will just stay comfortable for the rest of eternity.

[Dreamer Tatum]

19. You asked if someone saying things you don't like can be changed with incitement

while YOU'RE sitting high and dry nowhere near the action, prattling on about "no hope" for people
you've never met and never will.

Your hyperbole is embarrassing.

[Ken Burch]

20. The difference is, I'm not judging the people in the streets, or condemning them.

Because I know that no one who isn't there, especially no white person who isn't there, has any right to do that.

I asked a valid question. The prosecutor clearly chose his words to be inflammatory and toxic, so it's reasonable to wonder if he can be held accountable for the consequences of his word choices.

It might have helped if he'd at least admitted that it was a tragedy that the young man was killed.

[B Calm]

10. Just like the police, he is above the law.

[Agschmid]

12. No.

[ctaylors6]

13. legally, no

IMHO, not even close. incitement is one of the most difficult 1st amendment cases to show

[Recursion]

17. Generally no; he has full immunity for his actions as a prosecutor

And his discretion is absolute. I understand the desire here, but that's a dangerous Pandora's box to open.

[backscatter712]

21. Maybe malfeasance.

He's certainly guilty of that.