Posted on 11/26/2014 1:38:31 PM PST by Jim Robinson
A number of commentators have argued tonight, with no challenge by their media interviewers, that even if the evidence was insufficient to indict Officer Darren Wilson, justice would have been better served if the grand jury had indicted anyway. That way, the reasoning goes, we could have had a public trial in the light of day where everyone could have seen that the case was insufficient. That, we are to believe, would have made it easier for the community to accept the result.
The interests of the community, however, are not the only ones in the equation, much less the most important ones. What about the interests of the suspect? Those are the interests the Constitution addresses.
The Fifth Amendment states: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury.
The Constitution does not consider the grand jury to be a rubber stamp. It is a core protection. It stands as the buffer between the government prosecutor and the citizen-suspect; it safeguards Americans, who are presumed innocent, from being subjected to the anxiety, infamy and expense of a trial unless there is probable cause to believe they have committed a serious offense.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
As a general rule, exactly right.
In the case of Officer Wilson, he's already being subjected to the maximum possible anxiety, infamy and expense.
So it's difficult to see how skipping a trial helps him much.
If there were an indictment and subsequent trial, Mike Brown’s attorneys would twist and spin everything, with the MSM support, and make a worse situation than what occurred. The prosecutor turning evidence over to a grand jury was the correct thing to do, in order to have a fair outcome for all.
No, no! said the Queen. Sentence first verdict afterwards.
Stuff and nonsense! said Alice loudly. The idea of having the sentence first!
Hold your tongue! said the Queen, turning purple.
I wont! said Alice.
Off with her head! the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.
WELCOME TO WONDERLAND! Enjoy your stay.
I rather doubt an indictment, followed by a trial and then an acquittal would appease people who are acting purely on emotion, people who have abandoned reason.
This was coming from attorney Crump who NEEDED an indictment to sustain a civil suit. A civil suit and probable cause have fairly close standards of proof.
Without the probable cause finding the civil suit circus is over before it started. This means CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC’s jobs are at an end here. This means no more brown family t-shirt sales.
This means no money for shaprton’s brawley II media frenzy.
“some say” is just code for reporters left wing mind view.
The PHYSICAL evidence suggests that of a thug who could not control himself and assaulted a uniformed police officer.
The media indicted him, not the facts and evidence, which proved Wilson innocent of media and liars’ claims.
No, perverting justice can not serve justice.
Oh, for crying out loud. The police officer committed no crime. His constitutional rights are guaranteed and should not be trampled!
it worked out so well for the first Rodney King trial.....
Actual laws no longer matter.
It’s now “feelings” and crap like that.
So it's difficult to see how skipping a trial helps him much.
He avoids the risk of decades in prison. That seems pretty helpful.
Criminal trial: "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Civil suit: "preponderance of the evidence."
At least, that's what I recall from the OJ civil case brought by the parents of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman. True in California, at any rate.
Some reasons:
Totally intimidate all LEO with a long, drawn-out trial that discusses their vulnerabilities for hours/day over months
Provide ready-made programming for network news for months
Destroy the police officer’s life with smears, allegations, what-ifs, memes, hashtags, t-shirts that will live on after the trial is concluded
Allow rioting no matter what the verdict
Enrich a select group of lawyers
Establish precedent to seek damages from municipal police departments
Destroy Constitutional protections for whites in any case involving non-whites.
Not necessarily in that order and not limited to the above.
No disagreement, sir. I was merely noting that in his case not standing trial is not going to shield him from the infamy, etc. mentioned as the reasons for requiring a grand jury indictment before trial.
IOW, in his case, as in Zimmerman’s, a very large percentage of the population, and almost all of the media, have already convicted him anyway.
We don’t negotiate for our God-given freedom. Ever!!
If there was insufficient evidence to justify holding a trial, there was presumably little chance of his being convicted.
If there is evidence for a potential conviction, then the GJ should have indicted.
All I’m saying is that in his case the grand jury protection has failed, largely because the media did not do their job.
B/S. He’s constitutionally protected from a lynch mob! Deal with it.
He's a veritable martyr ... to DUTY
I feel a Poem coming on ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.