It is incredibly rare for a grand jury to do what Ferguson's just did

[gollygee]

Let's stop pretending that this is how it's supposed to work.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ferguson-michael-brown-indictment-darren-wilson/

A St. Louis County grand jury on Monday decided not to indict Ferguson, Missouri, police Officer Darren Wilson in the August killing of teenager Michael Brown. The decision wasn’t a surprise — leaks from the grand jury had led most observers to conclude an indictment was unlikely — but it was unusual. Grand juries nearly always decide to indict.

Or at least, they nearly always do so in cases that don’t involve police officers.

Former New York state Chief Judge Sol Wachtler famously remarked that a prosecutor could persuade a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich.” The data suggests he was barely exaggerating: According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them.

Wilson’s case was heard in state court, not federal, so the numbers aren’t directly comparable. Unlike in federal court, most states, including Missouri, allow prosecutors to bring charges via a preliminary hearing in front of a judge instead of through a grand jury indictment. That means many routine cases never go before a grand jury. Still, legal experts agree that, at any level, it is extremely rare for prosecutors to fail to win an indictment.

[Logical]

1. Great post. And it was number 16,000!! nt

[gollygee]

2. Woooo

didn't notice that.

[RiverLover]

3. A black man in a Dayton Walmart holding a water gun was shot & killed by police

And there was no indictment there either.

No one paid attention, either.

I don't know how black people can even be nice to us whites. I'm amazed & grateful they are. At least that's been my experience.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/cops-shoot-and-kill-man-holding-toy-gun-walmart

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/news/crime-law/family-of-man-shot-at-walmart-wants-answers-survei/ngzT4/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/09/24/no-indictments-after-police-shoot-and-kill-man-at-an-ohio-wal-mart-justice-dept-launches-investigation/

[yeoman6987]

20. Thank goodness the loud music guy was sent

To jail. That is the only one I can think of that had justice for the victims.

[Enthusiast]

27. Yup.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

51. loud music guy wasn't a cop, I think?

I might be remembering that wrong.

He's definitely the only one who got what he deserved...what they all deserve.

[Enthusiast]

26. That was simple murder.

[RiverLover]

30. Yes it was. Blatant & undeniable. Yet no indictment.

That is where we should have had a riot. Justifiable riot. No blurring lines for the police to twist around in the grand jury.

I don't understand why this isn't a bigger deal. It makes me want to cry whenever I think about it. A guy goes shopping, in America, and died. Murdered. And its ok because of the color of his skin. It makes me want to puke too.

[Stellar]

47. That reminds me of the guy that had the b.b. gun

(I think it was in a Targets), and somebody called the police on him. When the police came they were telling him to drop the gun but he didn't hear them because he was on his cellphone. When the guy turned around he was shot to death.

I don't know how black people can even be nice to us whites. I'm amazed & grateful they are. At least that's been my experience.

Not all white people are bad. I've seen quite a few marching with those picketing in Ferguson and all over the country. They want things to change for the better too.

[RiverLover]

52. I know, I'm one of them. And I'm grateful blacks see that. Very much so. ~nt

[rtp]

50. How long will blacks & Hispanics "be nice" if killings continue ?

The injustice "those people" feel is beyond my ability to understand,I do know if it were me,at least I would want to stop.The midterm elections
Show Democrats in Congress don't stop "those people" who keep imprisoning the poor,the black,
the Hispanics, women & anyone who tries to make
a better life for themselves,in the Economic Prisons of everyday life in america,except the well
Connected.TALKING about the problems is never
What fixes the problems,killing our future successful americans because they are not like us
Shows the intent to hold onto all the power.

[ReRe]

54. They know that all people aren't like that.

Jose' Diiaz-Balart just showed a tweet chart from last night and I couldn't believe my eyes. The tweets were shown with yellow lights. Everything from the Mason-Dixon Line down throughout the entire southeast (including Texas) was solid yellow. Solid. Yellow. Yes, there were other yellow dots in a few other places. Did anyone else see it? I don't know what to make of that.

[blackspade]

4. There was no attempt at a 'win' here.

A corrupt DA supporting a corrupt PD.
Would have thunk it?

[truth2power]

10. That's what I'm thinking, too....

I figured from the very first that the DA likely didn't want an indictment. End of story.

[Enthusiast]

24. Me too.

[freedom fighter jh]

5. 2 exceptions to the ham sandwich rule

I speak partly from my limited experience on a grand jury in New York State some decades ago. I don't know how modern-day Missouri compares.

A grand jury had 23 members. An indictment required 12 votes, even if there were abstentions. A juror who had missed testimony could not vote. There were always a few absences -- people who just could not miss work that day -- so if testimony was given over the course of several days, there could be a lot of jurors who could not vote. A defendant who had any real defense (this was the exception) usually had his/her trial stretched out over several days. Thus there fewer jurors to vote for such a defendant and a high ratio of yes votes was needed for an indictment. The only people that I saw get off in my jury duty (and there were a lot of cases, because a typical case took just a few minutes) were those that mounted a defense. With barely more than 12 jurors voting, you needed just a few no votes to get no indictment.

Also, prosecutors are used to working with police. Prosecutors depend on police for the information they need to indict and convict. They may be hesitant to prosecute a police officer vigorously, for fear of losing cooperation.

[Logical]

23. Your last paragraph is the biggest issue, they don't want to piss of the cops. Nt

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

31. Last paragraph indeed.

It's being said this prosecutor has a 0 for 5 record on taking to a grand jury and indicting police who shoot civilians. (I don't know if that 5 includes Brown, or he's now 0 for 6.)

[annabanana]

6. I tell this to everyone who mentions the results to me.

The vast majority of Americans have been paying little attention to the details.

And then I tell them WHY the prosecutor should have rescued himself

McCulloch's decision not to charge officers who murdered two unarmed African-American men in 2000 by shooting into their car 20 times, especially in the face of the U.S. Attorney's independent investigation finding that those officers lied about their actions, gives us no confidence that his office can provide a fair and impartial investigation into this current matter. 


That failure, coupled with McCulloch's recent participation in one of the most racially polarizing elections in the history of St. Louis County, means that his office's continued oversight of this tragedy will only sow further distrust and discord in our community. 


http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/appoint-a-special-prosecutor

[lovemydog]

11. And if he didn't recuse himself, someone should have stepped in

and removed him and replaced him with someone less biased.

And I agree, appoint a special prosecutor. It's really sad and it won't bring back Mr. Brown. But from what I can tell, the Ferguson prosecutor's office is as corrupt as the day is long.

If it's not corrupt, then it is suffering from incredible insensitivity toward its citizens whom it is supposed to serve and protect. And a really skewed version of authoritarianism in which the police are always correct, no matter what the hell they do.

[KingCharlemagne]

28. Weirdly enough, the St. Louis County DA is an elected official who cannot be 'replaced'

by someone less biased unless he or she first recuses him- or herself.

Nixon kept saying he had no power to remove McCulloch - TRUE!
McCulloch kept saying Nixon had to remove him - FALSE!

Does anyone care about how McCulloch 'gamed' the system? Well, I do. But it's 6 in the morning here in L.A. and I'm on DU.

[lovemydog]

29. Wow, that's interesting to me too.

You have a good day in L.A., KingCharlemagne.

[Adrahil]

7. It's incredibly rare for a prosecutor to tank a case like this one did. n/t

[Lurks Often]

8. The flaw in your argument is that the prosecutor would not have brought this

to the Grand Jury in the first place if it weren't for the public outrage and probably some political pressure as well.

Depending on what you believe, either the prosecutor was covering for the police officer or he had examined the evidence and didn't feel it warranted an indictment. Bowing to public pressure he apparently gave the Grand Jury ALL of the available evidence and left it to them to determine if an indictment was warranted.

[gollygee]

9. It isn't his job to give them all available evidence

it's his job to be a prosecutor.

[ColesCountyDem]

12. No, it's his job to see that justice is done.

He's an officer of the court, and ALL officers of the court have an ethical obligation to see that justice is done.

[lovemydog]

14. Is justice done if the prosecutor abandons the way he addresses every

other grand jury, and makes up new rules for this one case alone?

[ColesCountyDem]

39. I didn't say whether or not I believed he had discharged his duty.

I happen to believe he didn't. I was merely addressing the misconception and misstatement about what a prosecutor's duty is.

[gollygee]

15. Not by circumventing the system

That isn't justice. It's his job to be a part of the justice system, where he works as prosecutor.

[ColesCountyDem]

40. I didn't say whether or not I believed he had discharged his duty.

I happen to believe he didn't. I was merely addressing the misconception and misstatement about what a prosecutor's duty is.

[lovemydog]

13. Exactly.

I can't think of another case in which the prosecutor instructed a grand jury to consider all the evidence on all sides. That's supposed to occur at a trial. Not during grand jury hearings.

[Lurks Often]

16. Not quite, a prosecutor brings charges when he feels and the evidence supports

that a crime has taken place.

Do you really want prosecutors bring charges every single time, regardless of what they think or what the evidence shows?

[gollygee]

17. I think this prosecutor didn't want to bring charges for other reasons

and I don't think prosecutors should prosecute cases involving police officers from within their own county because there's a conflict of interest.

[Lurks Often]

19. Quite possibly

and as to the second part of your statement, I am not particularly happy sometimes with how cozy prosecutors and the police can be at times.

It might be interesting to try and make sure that cases involving the police are viewed by a prosecutor in another county, but being cynical, I'm pretty sure not much would change.

[justiceischeap]

18. At the time he concluded that he (initially) wasn't going to seek an indictment, all the evidence

hadn't been acquired yet, so I don't see how he could have concluded that there wasn't enough evidence to take the case to trial. This particular Prosecutor has a long history of "losing" police involved grand jury decisions.

IMO, local DA's should never be involved in the grand jury process of a police-involved shooting and here's why I say this: Local prosecutors rely on local police to build successful cases. There will always be a bias towards the local police community because of this. He or she doesn't want to possibly lose the support of the local police in other cases being brought. Plus, this particular Prosecutor is a friend of the police. If I remember correctly, his father was a police officer, his mother works for the police and the only reason he isn't a police officer himself is because of his bad leg.

If McCulloch was really interested in transparency, he would have pulled himself from the case and asked Gov. Nixon to appoint a special prosecutor.

[Lurks Often]

21. You're presuming things would have been different under a special prosecutor

I'll also note that both the MO state police and the FBI are being very quiet and have been the entire time.

[justiceischeap]

25. Things would have been different even if the outcome hadn't.

You don't seem to understand or you don't want to understand the history this community has with this Prosecutor--here's a hint, it's not good. This community has long felt that their interests have not been served by the Prosecutor and by the local police. There's more going on here than just the Michael Brown case.

[Lurks Often]

32. I'm aware of the history

McCullough seems to have dumped all the evidence on the Grand Jury's desk and walked away and let them make up their own minds. After reviewing the evidence at least 9 of the Grand Jurors felt there was sufficient evidence to warrant an indict for wrong doing.

That seems far more fair then allowing prosecutors to cherry pick the evidence and only bring what they want to a grand jury

[justiceischeap]

33. The reason Prosecutors can cherry pick

is so they can actually prepare a case later on. It's not as though the defense isn't going to get a chance to see all that evidence and refute it in a public trial. Instead, we have McCulloch's word that some eyewitness testimony was more credible than other eyewitness testimony even though some of those eyewitnesses refused to change their testimony in the face of "facts." Yet, the testimony given by those that support Wilson's narrative was given full credence by McCulloch. IMO, he acted as a terrific defense attorney for Darren Wilson.

Has anyone asked if all the evidence was presented to this grand jury or just the evidence the "Prosecutor" deemed worthy? We don't really know if all the evidence was actually presented because there was a trial here but it wasn't public--which is another problem in and of itself. We only have McCulloch's word at this point that there was transparency. With his history, his word isn't good enough for me.

[Lurks Often]

36. Not asking you to take his word for it

I'm not taking his word for it either, for that matter, I'm not taking Wilson's word for it, but neither am I taking the word of people who have their own agendas and/or biases or the word of reporters who are more interested with getting air time and ratings then reporting responsibly.

When I look at these cases, I look at the physical evidence, the testimony of those involved that are NOT related or friends with either party involved and the testimony of the expert witnesses.

I may decide to wade through the 1000 pages that was reportedly released if I have the time, only then might I post that it was a justifiable use of force or a miscarriage of justice.

[gollygee]

35. That's how grand juries are supposed to work

They are supposed to give their best case - prove they have a case. They are prosecutors. It isn't a trial, it's a requirement for prosecutors to prove they have any case at all. They prove they have anything, then it goes to trial and THEN a jury sees all the evidence.

[Lurks Often]

37. Yes, when the prosecutor feels an actual crime has taken place

if he doesn't feel a crime has taken place, it doesn't go to a grand jury and it doesn't go to a jury trial.

McCullough did not intend to take this to a grand jury, either because he believed it was a justifiable shooting or because he was covering for the police. In either case, he certainly isn't going to make an effort to see that the Grand Jury returns an indictment.

[gollygee]

38. Then he should have stepped aside

and let someone else do it. He shouldn't have manipulated the grand jury in this way.

[Enthusiast]

22. K&R! It was a miscarriage of justice all the way.

[Borchkins]

34. I am so disappointed.

I would like to see Wilson's initial report from immediately after the murder and compare it with his testimony. He had an awfully long time to prepare his testimony.

[jeff47]

43. You mean the report that's blank?

He rather famously filed a blank report.

[Borchkins]

53. I hadn't heard it was blank.

I thought he never turned one in.
B

[samsingh]

41. good post. something smells.

[1StrongBlackMan]

42. Well, here's the thing ...

U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them.

...

legal experts agree that, at any level, it is extremely rare for prosecutors to fail to win an indictment.

In this case, the "prosecutor" decided, early in the process NOT to prosecute this case; rather, he decided to lead a GJ investigation.

[jeff47]

44. Close

He decided to tank a GJ investigation.

[1StrongBlackMan]

45. I thought it better to leave the obvious, unsaid. n/t

[HoosierCowboy]

46. They misplaced their Rubber Stamp

Prosecutor announced that they had found it late last night. Business as usual resumes today. What they should really fear is that there's an actual video recording of the incident out there held in reserve that hits the media today.

[Old Codger]

48. Actually was an indictment

They managed to indict the entire Ferguson justice system

[noiretextatique]

55. +1000

that's the best way to look at this travesty.

[Old Codger]

56. First time

I have seen a prosecutor spend that much time indicting himself...

[lonestarnot]

49. Cops usually never indicted. No matter what the fuck they do, they never have to pay. The

prosepig didn't want an indictment.