Posted on 12/15/2014 8:06:55 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Since the night St. Louis Country prosecutor Bob McCullough announced that police officer Darren Wilson would face no charges in the death of unarmed black teen Michael Brown and released thousands of documents in connection to the case, many interested parties have combed through the pages and analyzed them, trying to get a sense of why the grand jury decided not to indict.
CNN recently did a comprehensive breakdown of Ferguson witness reports which showed how witnesses on both sides presented conflicting information, changed their stories, and some lied under oath.
Some witnesses testimony, like that of Dorian Johnson, the young man who was with Brown the day he lost his life, was not initially released by prosecutors the night that Ferguson burned. And the question many are asking is why. Why did the prosecutor do what he did and how he did it? Was it to derail the case against Officer Wilson?
Given the untraditional nature of the grand jury and grand jury proceedings, many analysts from CNN questioned the motivation of prosecutor McCullough in both including witnesses that were not credible, and dumping all of the information at once.
Sunny Hostin, a former federal prosecutor, believes the state wanted to avoid presenting a clear-cut case that would have led to an indictment. “Prosecutors generally present very streamlined cases to the grand jury,” she says. “As a prosecutor you should not present witnesses in front of the grand jury that you wouldn’t present at trial.”
Says CNN,
Analysts differ over why prosecutors called witnesses with questionable credibility. Some say the prosecution wanted to present a jumbled case, to help Wilson. Others say the intense scrutiny and likelihood of a separate federal probe make it common in some places to toss anything and everything at a grand jury probing a controversial police killing — even witnesses who prosecutors believe aren’t likely to tell the truth.
Some witnesses told fantastical stories with no basis in reality, and some admitted to straight lying. Some, you’d have to read their testimony to believe it.
One particular witness, Witness 40, who supported Wilson’s version of events, was most likely not even in Ferguson on the day of Brown’s murder. She also posted a racist rant on Facebook the day of Brown’s death, saying, “They need to kill the f—ing n—–s. It is like an ape fest.” Witness 40 also organized a small group helping raise money for officers, including Wilson.
Witness 40 admitted to being bipolar, taking medicine for migraines, and having memory problems.
“Is it possible, do you think, that you dreamed about this after it happened and it feels real to you that you were up there?” a prosecutor asked. The witness insisted she knew it was real.
On the other side of the fence, there was another witness, 37, whose story did not seem credible either, but he pointedly asked prosecutors an interesting question.
From the testimony:
“If none of my stuff is making any sense, like why do y’all keep contacting me?” the witness asked.
And yet, all of this information, as well as dozens of others was included in grand jury testimony that ultimately resulted in Wilson’s non-indictment.
“The prosecutors didn’t want to indict,” Hostin says. “That’s why they conducted it that way.”
Or Sunny, is it at all possible that they declined to issue an indictment because there was no “there”, there?
CC
Sunny, you can indict a ham sandwich we have heard ad nausueum so perhaps since no indictment it was a meatless sandwich meaning there is nothing there.
Look at it another way...if a thug fights a cop for his service weapon he is likely to get his head blown off.
Freegards
LEX
Story Line:
All the witnesses that supported Wilson lied.
Oh, to hell with it.
They called them so now it’s, ‘Why did you call them?’
If they hadn’t called them it would be, ‘What are you trying to hide?’
The medical evidence that backs up all of those witnesses that support Wilson must have been fabricated!
Present a streamlined case - and be accused of “withholding vital evidence”
Present mass quantities of relatively organized information - and be accused of manipulating presentation of evidence to bias the outcome.
Present unorganized info dump of all available info - and be accused of intentionally confusing jurors with invalid, unorganized information.
From the moment Brown died, there seemed to be a large segment of the black community, at least as they are featured on the nightly news, who demanded a summary execution and failing to get one has enraged them yet again. Now they want vengeance, again.
Had they presented “a streamlined case” and no indictment followed, they would have been accused of not presenting all the evidence.
The ONLY thing that would satisfy these folks is indictment, conviction and execution.
And they wouldn’t really be happy with that. After all, we’ve executed one of James Byrd’s killers, one is on death row, and the other is serving a life sentence. And the case is still held up as an example of how racist Texas, the South and America are.
“Had they presented “a streamlined case” “
The streamlined case they wanted to present would have been only the facts that would have Wilson charged with murder.
Yes, you can readily “indict a ham sandwich” but IT IS DIFFICULT TO INDICT A “BALONEY” SANDWICH.
And the whole Ferguson business was nothing more than a bunch of baloney.
You’re right that critics of the decision would find fault no matter what.
CC
Exactly. This analyst is an idiot.
To be fair, that’s exactly the way most presentations to a grand jury are handled. The prosecutor is under no legal obligation to present evidence that damages his case.
So the protestors are essentially correct that the prosecutor did deviate from “standard procedure” to get the no bill he wanted.
Personally, I believe that was the right thing to do.
“Personally, I believe that was the right thing to do.”
If the ‘victim’ was white, it would have never gone to a grand jury.
There is no way you can deal with irrational beings. The only thing they understand is being accused of a worse crime.
For example, someone who supports abortion on demand is a child molester. Drilling a hole in a child’s brain and sucking it out, burning its body and then dismembering is the ultimate child abuse.
Another example, amnesty supporters are accessories to murder. The murder of all the people killed by illegals with no licence, no insurance and driving while impaired.
These are things they understand. Too bad we somehow can’t find it within ourselves to fight the only way to fight - to win. We bemoan the “rules of engagement” that hamper our troops. Why do we impose “rules of engagement” on ourselves.
You ever notice the racist liberals always put nice-looking female light-skinned Blacks with long, straight hair on TV.
You hit the nail on the head. It isn’t about “justice”, it is about vengeance.
Officer Wilson was tried and convicted by the media and race hustlers before all the facts of the case were known. This was the second unfairness to Officer Wilson.
The race hustlers are what caused Ferguson to burn. The race hustlers are the winners in this tragedy. They have succeeded in further dividing the races. This is all about political power and money.
The reason the prosecutor released all the information from the Grand Jury was to show the truth about what happened.
And the corollary: all the witnesses for St Cigaro were honest as choir boys.
And the evidence? Who cares about THAT???
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.