Darren Wilson's Side of the Story

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I think hyperbole is a suitable rhetorical response to those who wish to impugn the DA and criticize a grand jury before it completes its work (FWIW, none of you on this "virtual lynch mob" would have been allowed to sit on this grand jury (or a subsequent petit jury) having expressed the views you have on this case). Criticism of a DA and grand jury is perfectly warranted if and when they do not charge him in the face of sufficient evidence supporting an indictment.

In the meantime, I don't support subverting the legal process at the expense of Wilson's rights in order to preclude possible mob action in Ferguson. At this time, Wilson could be a cold-blooded murderer or pure as the driven snow. We just don't know yet.

In a democracy, one is not expected nor allowed to challenge the transparency of the legal system? Since there has been no transparency in this case, why wouldn't some of us speculate? And that's what is going on in this forum. Fairness of LE and the legal system is also under scrutiny here.

[sheltiedave]

Isn't releasing grad jury testimony a felony?

[sheltiedave]

Is there anyone else here who has been to the ferguson protests, or lives in St. Louis, so they can accurately speak about the mob and mob behavior here?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by sheltiedave

Isn't releasing grad jury testimony a felony?

There are rules about disclosure of grand jury proceedings, both Federal and state. Here are the Fed rules:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...ies/rule6e.htm

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by BeamOn

In a democracy, one is not expected nor allowed to challenge the transparency of the legal system? Since there has been no transparency in this case, why wouldn't some of us speculate? And that's what is going on in this forum. Fairness of LE and the legal system is also under scrutiny here.

Grand jury proceedings are not supposed to be transparent.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Grand jury proceedings are not supposed to be transparent.

I had already alluded to the disclosure of Grand Jury testimony as illegal in an earlier post. Where is the police report?

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by nailer

Good catch, but he'll never acknowlege it.

Most of what separates Finn and I at this point is our attitudes toward the grand jury as it is operating in this case. I'm suspicious, he's supportive.

[piece-itpete]

If the cop is found guilty I will accept that. If not, I will accept that.

Let's see what happens if he's not charged/found guilty.....

Pete

[donquixote99]

He'll never be found guilty or not guilty if the grand jury doesn't indict him and he never stands trial. A 'no bill' from a grand jury is not a finding of 'not guilty.'

As I said before, my assessment of grand juries is that they are tools of prosecutors. The DA can generally get the indictments he wants, and almost certainly avoid the ones he doesn't want. In this case, i think he should want one, but I strongly suspect he does not.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

He'll never be found guilty or not guilty if the grand jury doesn't indict him and he never stands trial. A 'no bill' from a grand jury is not a finding of 'not guilty.'

As I said before, my assessment of grand juries is that they are tools of prosecutors. The DA can generally get the indictments he wants, and almost certainly avoid the ones he doesn't want. In this case, i think he should want one, but I strongly suspect he does not.

Your assessment may or may not be true. We'll see. However, the DA is probably acutely aware of the DOJ looking over his shoulder on this case and that his professional reputation is at stake.