Michael Brown

[baub]

Originally Posted by Faron [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Guy robs. Guy resists arrest. Guy gets shot. Sympathy factor hovering steady around zero

[Faron]

This would have never happened on red.

[San]

He was a 300lb adult bully that was a criminal not worried about committing a felony. Doesn't bother me what happened.

[Duckwalk]

Originally Posted by San [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

He was a 300lb adult bully that was a criminal not worried about committing a felony. Doesn't bother me what happened.

It should concern you that there is so much potential for abuse within our criminal justice system. Prosecutorial control over the Grand Jury is just one example of it.

[Duckwalk]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/a...lt-in-charges/

[Fael]

Originally Posted by Duckwalk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If this was a private citizen, the indictment would have taken an hour or two as there is easily enough evidence indict based on witness testimony alone. The Grand Jury can literally ask the Prosecutor what to do. .

It does seem odd, but would you rather have a prosecutor just deciding it himself?

Plus I'm not sure I agree that the officer was treated so differently. First, on the face of it, an armed officer is put into this situation by society. We ask them to stop criminals such as Mr Brown.

Why this matters is that the situation that occurred is not a normal situation. The situation indicates that self defense is a likely factor. The same is true if a private citizen killed a man in his house. The da would not just automatically charge a person, even absent castle doctrine statutes.

Zimmerman is an example of this, and it didn't even occur in the house. It took a few weeks if I recall correctly for the Florida da to bring the charge.

I think it's apples and oranges to compare the above situation to a case where crack is found in the car of a regular citizen, or if a man/woman is stabbed By his significant other, etc etc.

dolic

[Patriam1066]

I have one question about this. Why is this such a big deal but the killings in Chicago aren't. Why does no one care about the white kid (name eludes me but Kaga, if you'd be so kind, remind everyone) shot down by the black cop? Why does no one care about the thousands dying in Iraq, Syria, and Ukraine.

I understand outrage, and there is certainly a problem. But why is it so selective? Makes absolutely zero sense to me. This appears to be more an issue of black / liberal outrage being projected throufh michael brown than an actual concern about black lives. If people cared about black lives, they'd be in Chicago trying their damnedest to educate children and give them a chance at something better. I guess it's just easier to blame whitey for everything....

That said I think everyone is wrong in this situation. The grand jury spoke, what can you do. Certainly rioting and looting doesn't make anyone empathize with michael brown or your position, if you claimed to care about him. At the same time, even if michael brown was a complete lunatic, the cop should've used a taser or a night stick instead of killing him. That's just my $.02. Unfortunately, we'll never have an actual discussion about this, because the liberals are more concerned with being professional victims than solving problems, or addressing why an 18 year old black kid KEPT WALKING AT A COP EVEN AS HE WAS FIRING AT HIM. I mean seriously, how enraged do you have to be for your survival instinct to stop working. He was willing to die just to get at the cop. Everyone in this case sucks, and all involved are why I own a gun

[indiscriminate_hater]

Originally Posted by Faron [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This would have never happened on red.

[Lictor]

Originally Posted by Duckwalk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

God damn iPhone.

Witness testimony is available to the Grand Jury. Those eye witness reports are available to the Grand Jury. I think you're missing the point I'm making.

The Prosecutor controls the inquiry and although the Grand Jury can ask to speak to people it's the Prosector who decided which evidence to present.

If this was a private citizen, the indictment would have taken an hour or two as there is easily enough evidence indict based on witness testimony alone. The Grand Jury can literally ask the Prosecutor what to do.

However, this was not the case here. The potential defendant was afforded numerous rights essentially never given out to private citizens. The DA basicslly put on the defenses case for them.

The issue is that a Grand Jury is not adversarial. There is a reason so few police officers are indicted.

This is essentially the problem. It is hard to explain it to someone not familiar with the legal system. Unless MO is vastly diff than texas criminal procedure it is not hard to see why this is the result.

In dallas county (TX) alone last fiscal year, 81 officer involved shootings were brought to a grand jury, only one was indicted.

[Duckwalk]

Originally Posted by Fael [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It does seem odd, but would you rather have a prosecutor just deciding it himself?

Not sure what your talking about. I felt I was pretty clearly referening criminal procedurr rules regarding prosecutorial direction of grand jurys.

It's is not an adversarial mechanism.

Defendants have very few rights.

The Prosecutor decides what evidence to show to Grand Jury with the goal to be nonbiased.

The Grand Jury is actually encouraged to ask the Prosecutor their option or for guidance.

It is very easy to secure indictments should the DA want it, however in this case we have the Grand Jury taking far longer than normal, much more evidence was presented, the defendant was allowed to testify which normally never happens, etc...