General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGrand Jury Indicts Darren Wilson For Murder Of Michael Brown
A Black Peoples Grand Jury in St. Louis, Missouri, last weekend delivered a true bill of indictment for first degree murder against former Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson in the death of Black teenager Michael Brown. Black people can and must take matters into our own hands, said Omali Yeshitela, one of four prosecutors that presented evidence, not only of Wilsons personal guilt, but the institutional culpability of the entire regional criminal justice system in the murder and subsequent whitewash of the crime.
Darren Wilson is a killer, and hes out there, but hes not out there by himself, said Yeshitela. He was doing what U.S. police have done historically and traditionally to African people in this country. It wasnt Wilsons decision to leave Browns uncovered body on the asphalt roadway for nearly four and a half hours in 100 degree heat a collective insult and threat to the victims community that harkens back to the ritual public displays of mutilated and burned Black corpses in the time of lynch law. Wilson was later rewarded for his crime with almost one million dollars in contributions by white people.
http://www.mintpressnews.com/black-peoples-grand-jury-indicts-darren-wilson-murder-michael-brown/200644/
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,699 posts)sheshe2
(83,898 posts)http://www.mintpressnews.com/black-peoples-grand-jury-indicts-darren-wilson-murder-michael-brown/200644/
It is a start.
Cha
(297,650 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)I wonder why one of the Black Grand Jurors would vote not to indict?
NBachers
(17,136 posts)It makes me think that they didn't just round up a bunch of similar-thinking individuals who had their minds made up already.
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)"People's Grand Jury" indictments of Barack Obama. Both B.S.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)NoGOPZone
(2,971 posts)they should first present a convincing legal argument that a sitting President CAN be indicted. Somehow I doubt any of its members were even aware that this would be an issue.
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)The legal concept is flawed. A waste of time. You can't just form a "grand jury" with your friends to indict people, no matter how much evidence you collect (or how many TV reports you watch, as I doubt this "grand jury" called witnesses).
NoGOPZone
(2,971 posts)The issue of whether a sitting President can be indicted makes even the symbolic gesture represented by Obama "indictment" questionable.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Pop Quiz: Can a President Be Indicted?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/legal020198.htm
This is from the Clinton era.
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)a strawman?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
I'm not misrepresenting the "people's grand jury" with something easier to defeat. I'm saying what it is -- it's bullcrap libertarian feel-good clickbait trash based on a gross misunderstanding of English common law and its implementation in America which has no place on this board or anywhere else. The sad part is people take it seriously. And it's easy for somebody who is unbalanced to take it too far.
BTW, to the OP, anyone posting "Grand Jury Indicts Darren Wilson" to go to this link (which the title on the page states " Black Peoples Grand Jury Indicts Darren Wilson For Murder Of Michael Brown," not "Grand Jury Indicts..." Completely different things) is being disingenuous at best.
NoGOPZone
(2,971 posts)Again, no one said either action has the force of law. However, as impossible as it may be to believe given recent events, it's NOT against the law to indict a police officer. It MAY be against the law to indict a sitting President, if you're not aware of that then read the link given in the other reply to me. The group that "indicted" Obama wants to jump to the desired conclusion that he SHOULD be indicted without addressing the vital issue of whether he CAN be indicted, so the actions of the two groups do differ in that important respect, although again both are symbolic. The other vital difference is that regardless what Obama detractors think, there is no valid reason to begin a criminal inquiry into his behavior, while the episode in Ferguson had to be looked into. However, this distinction isn't important to the point I made in my initial reply, so I hadn't mentioned it before
Response to NoGOPZone (Reply #19)
GGJohn This message was self-deleted by its author.
NoGOPZone
(2,971 posts)GGJohn
(9,951 posts)bobclark86
(1,415 posts)The whole "people's grand jury" idea is bullcrap, no matter if they're white people indicting the president or black people indicting a cop. The point I'm making is they can't indict ANYONE with any actual authority. It doesn't matter if a president cannot be indicted by a real grand jury, because these groups aren't grand juries, they are bullcrap (I don't want to dignify them with the word BULLSHIT, which is too good for them, IMHO).
You going off about the legality of a real grand jury indicting a president has NOTHING to do with what I said or the original post, and you arguing about indicting the president is a deflection (trying to show the two groups as different, even though they use the same bullcrap reasoning for their existence) ... You know, a straw man.
NoGOPZone
(2,971 posts)Then it's hardly unfair to ask that they show it CAN be done
The fact that they, or you, may not have been aware that this is an issue is no excuse to continue to ignore it. The point you, by your own admission, keep making that these groups have no authority has never been argued by anyone on this thread, so if anything is not relevant it's that. I seriously doubt either of these groups thinks anyone believes their actions have any validity, they simply are trying to bring attention to their issues. The group that thinks Obama should be indicted is conveniently ignoring a major issue that would attach to his indictment. So no, the two actions aren't directly comparable
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Shades of the 'Sovereign Citizens' movement.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)If this was a RW militia people would be screaming about insurrection and demanding Obama send in the flying gunships.
bobclark86
(1,415 posts)i.e.: None.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)That's the difference.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)"The mock grand jury compiled just the testimony they felt was needed to find probable cause for an indictment. After two days, the group came back with an 11-1 decision to indict on first-degree murder charges."
7962
(11,841 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)to the fund raising which was a huge conflict of interest and if he had any sense of honor, he would have recused himself.
THAT ALONE requires that the GJ verdict he presided over should be thrown out.
Great that Black people are taking matters into their own hands.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)It carry's no weight of law, it was a pre-determined outcome and nothing more than Kabuki Theatre.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)led by Wilson's supporter, McCullough which hopefully will be overturned considering the conflict of interest I just mentioned, and now some of the Grand Jurors themselves stating they were lied to, AND they want to be allowed to speak, for which one of them is suing.
Not to mention the lying witness who we know now, WAS NEVER THERE.
How does THAT GJ verdict 'carry the weight of law'?
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)has the weight of the law behind it, however flawed it was, the Black People's Grand Jury has zero weight of law behind it.
And how does a bogus Grand Jury make a powerful statement?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)That verdict has been rendered bogus and if we have any respect for the law, it will soon be vacated.
If you can't see the power of a statement like this, I can't help you.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)render verdicts.
If and until a legal authority rules that the Grand Jury no bill was illegal, highly doubtful, then it does carry the weight of law.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)There's no need to make up shit about him; he's bad enough
malaise
(269,157 posts)We the people includes black people - this is great
robinlynne
(15,481 posts)Response to AngryAmish (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed