Posted on 07/30/2020 4:25:54 PM PDT by rwa265
” “one of the most difficult things I’ve had to do as an elected official.”
He should have been asked what was wrong with the previous investigation, findings and trial? Why was he showing favoritism towards the family of the deceased-criminal?
if he ‘quietly’ re-opened the case on request of the family, why didn’t he just as ‘quietly’ let the family know, nothing had changed; the officer acted within the law?
Why the very public announcement at a time when St. Louis is somewhat cooling down?
There has to be a way to charge these Soros DA’s with conspiracy to violate Constitutional rights under some federal racketeering laws?
Don’t they remember when Obamas Justice Department came in and investigated and found nothing? I just heard about it a few hours ago and was dumbfounded. What a waste of taxpayer money.
Must be!
Of course, they could just have relied on this work by federal investigators and the Attorney General of the United States:
Pages 79 and following
IV. Legal Analysis The evidence discussed above does not meet the standards for presentation of an indictment set forth in the USAM and in the governing federal law. The evidence is insufficient to establish probable cause or to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242 and would not be likely to survive a defense motion for acquittal at trial pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29(a). This is true for all six to eight shots that struck Brown. Witness accounts suggesting that Brown was standing still with his hands raised in an unambiguous signal of surrender when Wilson shot Brown are inconsistent with the physical evidence, are otherwise not credible because of internal inconsistencies, or are not credible because of inconsistencies with other credible evidence. In contrast, Wilson’s account of Brown’s actions, if true, would establish that the shootings were not objectively unreasonable under the relevant Constitutional standards governing an officer’s use of deadly force. Multiple credible witnesses corroborate virtually every material aspect of Wilson’s account and are consistent with the physical evidence. Even if the evidence established that Wilson’s actions were unreasonable, the government would also have to prove that Wilson acted willfully, i.e. that he acted with a specific intent to violate the law. As discussed above, Wilson’s stated intent for shooting Brown was in response to a perceived deadly threat. The only possible basis for prosecuting Wilson under Section 242 would therefore be if the government could prove that his account is not true – i.e., that Brown never punched and grabbed Wilson at the SUV, never struggled with Wilson over the gun, and thereafter clearly surrendered in a way that no reasonable officer could have failed to perceive. Not only do eyewitnesses and physical evidence corroborate Wilson’s account, but there is no credible evidence to disprove Wilson’s perception that Brown posed a 78
threat to Wilson as Brown advanced toward him. Accordingly, seeking his indictment is not permitted by Department of Justice policy or the governing law
Will they investigate every time a new dem DA comes aboard?????
“””Has his family run out of settlement money already?”””
They were probably jealous that Saint Michael didn’t get to ride around the country in a golden hearse like Saint Floyd did.
“This is one of the most difficult things I’ve had to do as an elected official,”
What’s so hard about making up evidence to get the results you want?
It must be difficult to defy BLM.
Sounds like they’re digging up red meat for the peaceful protesters to peacefully protest, with peaceful weapons and projectiles.
A big bully punk did a strong armed robbery on a mini mart, it was reported along with his description. An officer observed a suspect matching that description and attempted to interview the individual.
At that point in time the suspect reached inside of the officers car and tried to take the officers handgun away causing the officer to engage the suspect with lethal force.
After the suspect had put significant distance between himself and the officer the suspect refused to surrender or obey the lawful commands of the officer and charged at the officer.
The officer responded correctly by utilizing his handgun to stop the charge protecting his own life.
A PUNK ASS MORON STRONG ARMED ROBBER WHO DISPLAYED MASSIVE STUPIDITY IN RUSHING AN OFFICER WITH A GUN GOT DRT’D, DEAD RIGHT THERE, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HE DESERVED.
What is it with people not accepting that Law Enforcement officers have a right to protect themselves as they go about doing their job.
The Gentle Giant’s family is obviously looking for $$$.
Sounds like a good reason to riot
Bell is black. I imagine he was under tremendous pressure to bring about the “right” decision.
Attack an armed man, expect to get shot.
Michael Brown and Saint Skittles learned that the hard way.
This right here is the key issue. Brown initiated the conflict.
He'd robbed a store.
HE, and he alone is responsible for the insuring events.
The whole thing was a hoax.
*****
I'm sure he's about to find out.
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.