Michael Brown

[iruinedyourday]

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

We need to disband all grand juries and have Duckwalk take over. He clearly knows what's what without the pesky requirement of actually sitting through the case presented to the grand jury.

haha yea cus the grand jury is surprised of super human individuals incapable of doing their jobs poorly.

What I don't understand is the hypocrisy of the Conservative (or the right or whatever you want to call them) party.

Yes to guns! because the government cant do its job because 1984! Vs. No to police being held accountable! because for some reason this portion of the government is infallible 1984 is just a book!

[Lictor]

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

haha yea cus the grand jury is surprised of super human individuals incapable of doing their jobs poorly.

What I don't understand is the hypocrisy of the Conservative (or the right or whatever you want to call them) party.

Yes to guns! because the government cant do its job because 1984! Vs. No to police being held accountable! because for some reason this portion of the government is infallible 1984 is just a book!

Rabble rabble rabble!! It has been explained to me why these results occur bc of how our legal system is set up, but it is actually race and the damn conservatives!!

[iruinedyourday]

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

Rabble rabble rabble!! It has been explained to me why these results occur bc of how our legal system is set up, but it is actually race and the damn conservatives!!

Im not talking about why or where the results come from. I'm talking about how the conservatives are fucking stupid hypocrite liars.

[AnOldEnemy]

It is a good thing this case did not go to trial because if it had the cop would most certainly have been let off which would have wasted even more taxpayer dollars in debt ridden NYC and the public outrage would have been even worse. As much as people don't like it this is the system in NYC.

This may sound like I am being a square by the crime culture many find acceptable and even admirable which many youth try to emulate is a problem. I was at recent Nets basketball game in Brooklyn and they had Bobby Shmurda's song "Hot *****" playing over the PA. Look at the lyrics to that song and you can see how crime culture is celebrated and welcomed, especially since apparently that song is very popular. You would never have heard that song played a sports venue a generation or two back. Just look at how many communities where the norm is "don't snitch" and this is one of the most frustrating mentalities there are. Most of the murders are committed in minority neighborhoods and even though someone knows something that could help bring a rapist or murderer to justice they won't come forward because of this silly "code," yet there is no outrage over that. Oh, the media....the real problem.

Also, almost every media outlet sensationalizes everything because they all have agendas. Anytime something happens in this country mob outrage gets fueled by this and tries to get knee-jerk reactions to everything. How about being proactive about something if you want changes and not wait until something happens?

Kony 2012 never forget......

[Lictor]

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

Justice Antonin Scalia, in the 1992 Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, explained what the role of a grand jury has been for hundreds of years.

"It is the grand jury’s function not ‘to enquire … upon what foundation [the charge may be] denied,’ or otherwise to try the suspect’s defenses, but only to examine ‘upon what foundation [the charge] is made’ by the prosecutor. Respublica v. Shaffer, 1 Dall. 236 (O. T. Phila. 1788); see also F. Wharton, Criminal Pleading and Practice § 360, pp. 248-249 (8th ed. 1880).

As a consequence, neither in this country nor in England has the suspect under investigation by the grand jury ever been thought to have a right to testify or to have exculpatory evidence presented."

The evidence presented in both the Brown and Garner cases easily rise the the level of probable cause. The exculpatory evidence and affirmative defenses are for a trial jury to decide.

DAs have too much of a vested interest in not prosecuting local law enforcement.

You are going to need to chop that up and throw in a couple of 'ya feels?' for these clowns to understand that post.

[Raev]

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

The evidence presented in both the Brown and Garner cases easily rise the the level of probable cause. The exculpatory evidence and affirmative defenses are for a trial jury to decide.

Hmm, thats actually fairly interesting. I suppose the logic is that the grand jury is somehow faster and less thorough than a full trial? (IANAL)

[Duckwalk]

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

Hmm, thats actually fairly interesting. I suppose the logic is that the grand jury is somehow faster and less thorough than a full trial? (IANAL)

The Grand Jury is not an adversarial process and it's even then the prosecutor has a vested interest in not prosecuting people he works with on a daily basis.

There really needs to be a special Prosector appointed for this kind of situation.

[Duckwalk]

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...on-grand-jury/

[Duckwalk]

Actually my sarcasm probably flew right over your head so before you get to involved in self congratulations for what you consider a witty and intelligent post, let me spell my point out for you very simply.

As Superme Court Justice Scalia suggests and as happens in the vast majority of other cases ( 99% of the time in federal cases), the prosecutor would have presented only the evidence suggesting that a crime may have taken place, the grand jury would have asked his opinion of the evidence and he would have stated that the evidence was strong indication that a crime had taken place. They would have indicted in both cases.

The end.

The defendants would not have been given the opportunity to testify for multiple hours. The grand jury would not have been presented with contradictory evidence.

That's how it works for private citizen and I can tell you that's the way it works because I witnesed if first hand numerous times as. A law clerk for the DA's office.

[Lictor]

And whatever side your political views fall on is not hypocritical? Please