• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Grand Jury Could Hear Michael Brown Case Evidence Wednesday

Lutherf said:
It's the latter. Under the circumstances there is no way in hell there won't be an indictment. If the grand jury no bills what happened last week will look like a 4 year old's tea party.
Click to expand...

Hope to hell that the proceedings are broadcast all across the country.

Other than that....WTH is Holder doing going down there? Not his place or authority.
 
Lutherf said:
And who is going to riot over something like that?
Click to expand...

In this grandstanding, look-at-me, everybody's-a-reality-star nation we live in right now, it'll get uglier as it moves on.

If there's genuinely good cause to indict, then he should be. But nobody seems the least bit interested in the truth right now.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Hope to hell that the proceedings are broadcast all across the country.

Other than that....WTH is Holder doing going down there? Not his place or authority.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be the least bit surprising that one of the goals of this administration is to federalize the criminal code. How else are they going to mete out "social justice" and ban guns?
 
Erod said:
In this grandstanding, look-at-me, everybody's-a-reality-star nation we live in right now, it'll get uglier as it moves on.

If there's genuinely good cause to indict, then he should be. But nobody seems the least big interested in the truth right now.
Click to expand...

The entire concept of "truth" has changed in this country. The only "truth" that really seems to matter any more is the one that the people who speak loudest say is the truth.
 
Lutherf said:
The entire concept of "truth" has changed in this country. The only "truth" that really seems to matter any more is the one that the people who speak loudest say is the truth.
Click to expand...

The "truth" is too often what most conveniently distracts from facing the real truth. People really avoid looking in the mirror these days.
 
Lutherf said:
It shouldn't be the least bit surprising that one of the goals of this administration is to federalize the criminal code. How else are they going to mete out "social justice" and ban guns?
Click to expand...

This is the second time where Obama and Holder have interjected themselves in a State Matter where they had no business sticking their noses in. Both times openly for the person who got shot and regardless of the circumstances or evidence or even common sense (that last part imo). Both times also have relatively the same theme, both shooters were considered "white" (even though we don't even know the race of the cop this time last I heard) and both off the dead people were black.

Perhaps someone could refresh my memory. Has this ever happened or even something similar happened with any President and DOJ with in the last 40 years?

anyways...back to work for me...lunch is over.
 
Lutherf said:
It's the latter. Under the circumstances there is no way in hell there won't be an indictment. If the grand jury no bills what happened last week will look like a 4 year old's tea party.
Click to expand...

There in lies the catch 22. Either they don't proceed based on the evidence (if its solid in Wilson's defense, the FBI will come to the same conclusion), Ferguson is gonna burn. Or, the go forward knowing he'll be acquitted down the road, Ferguson is gonna burn when the verdict is reached. Either way, violence is likely. Frankly, National Guard in position, FBI there in full force, might be better off just yanking the band-aid off now.

Orrrr, the evidence is there to counter Wilson's version and he is charged and sent to prison. In the mean time, Ferguson burns. Frankly, those that are stirring up trouble (not the peaceful protestors) don't really give a crap about this issue, they view it as an opportunity to get away with vandalism, robbery and other crimes.
 
Fishstyx said:
There in lies the catch 22. Either they don't proceed based on the evidence (if its solid in Wilson's defense, the FBI will come to the same conclusion), Ferguson is gonna burn. Or, the go forward knowing he'll be acquitted down the road, Ferguson is gonna burn when the verdict is reached. Either way, violence is likely. Frankly, National Guard in position, FBI there in full force, might be better off just yanking the band-aid off now.

Orrrr, the evidence is there to counter Wilson's version and he is charged and sent to prison. In the mean time, Ferguson burns. Frankly, those that are stirring up trouble (not the peaceful protestors) don't really give a crap about this issue, they view it as an opportunity to get away with vandalism, robbery and other crimes.
Click to expand...

That assumes Wilson isn't convicted....or even indicted. I don't see ANY chance that there won't be an indictment.
 
Lutherf said:
That assumes Wilson isn't convicted....or even indicted. I don't see ANY chance that there won't be an indictment.
Click to expand...

If the evidence doesn't support the indictment and politics doesn't interject, than he shouldn't be indicted. It all will depend on the evidence and there should be enough to go one way or the other.
 
Erod said:
And if they indict him without proper cause, you've got a true race riot in the making. Because without cause, the one and only reason he'll be indicted will be because he's white.
Click to expand...

He shot an unarmed man. That's why the grand jury is hearing evidence.
 
GhostlyJoe said:
He shot an unarmed man. That's why the grand jury is hearing evidence.
Click to expand...

I agree.... In any shooting like this with the police, there should be a GJ hearing to identify evidence and justify the foundation for formal charges to be brought.
 
Ockham said:
I agree.... In any shooting like this with the police, there should be a GJ hearing to identify evidence and justify the foundation for formal charges to be brought.
Click to expand...

The grand jury does neither of those things.

They are presented evidence by the prosecutor, which might include a couple of witnesses, and asked for a no bill or true bill (no or yes to proceed with indictments).

The prosecutor makes the decision whether or not they have sufficient evidence for a GJ true bill.

The prosecutor also can decide not to file any charges if he is comfortable that no crime has been committed at all.

All the GJ does is say yes or no.
 
SMTA said:
The grand jury does neither of those things.

They are presented evidence by the prosecutor, which might include a couple of witnesses, and asked for a no bill or true bill (no or yes to proceed with indictments).

The prosecutor makes the decision whether or not they have sufficient evidence for a GJ true bill.

The prosecutor also can decide not to file any charges if he is comfortable that no crime has been committed at all.

All the GJ does is say yes or no.
Click to expand...

Thank you for adding more detail to what I already said. I appreciate it.
 
The process in the US is far different from Canada, but I can't help but feel that the speed at which this is going before a grand jury tells me that this is far more politics talking than justice being sought. It is not possible, considering the circumstances in Ferguson this past 10 days or so, for a proper and complete investigation having been conducted. It smacks of an expeditious way to appease the mob, to hell with the truth or justice.
 
Lutherf said:
And who is going to riot over something like that?
Click to expand...
Not these folks.

anderson-cooper-ferguson.jpg

“You’ve Killed Our Kind 4 Years
But Won’t Sacrifice 1 Cop For Justice
& To Save A Community & These Businesses”​
 
GhostlyJoe said:
He shot an unarmed man. That's why the grand jury is hearing evidence.
Click to expand...
No it isn't for that reason.
It is over the public outcry.
 
Montecresto said:
Excon said:
The DA's presentation to the GJ matters, but not as much as the evidence.
Now if he goes in there with the intent to get an indictment, he will not present all the evidence, nor does he have to. Of course that would likely end up like indicting a ham sandwich. It still wouldn't old mustard in Court. And would be a travesty of Justice.
If the DA goes in there with an honest intent to let the GJ decide by presenting all the evidence, then it is highly unlikely they will return a true bill.
Click to expand...
Right. You haven't served on a Grand Jury. First of all, OF COURSE he's coming in there wanting an indictment, and believing there to be cause for one. Your second scenario never happens. And true bills are in the upper ninety percentile. So if this goes to a Grand Jury, there's a fewer than 5% chance for a no bill. Then you should know that the bar is lower for a GJ then a trial jury. The GJ needs only find probable cause while the trial jury needs to find beyond reasonable doubt. Do you know what percentage of GJ indictments end in acquittal in trial.
Click to expand...
Stop speaking about stuff you have no clue about.
The prosecutor is not always seeking an indictment when presenting the GJ with the information. You saying otherwise is ridiculous.
And this case is being motivated by public out cry, not the evidence. As the evidence clearly shows the shooting justified.
And as for these type of stats, I have introduced that information on this forum a long time ago.

So again:
If he goes in there with the intent to get an indictment, he will not present all the evidence, nor does he have to.
If the DA goes in there with an honest intent to let the GJ decide by presenting all the evidence, then it is highly unlikely they will return a true bill.​
 
Excon said:
No it isn't for that reason.
It is over the public outcry.
Click to expand...

The public outcry is going to guarantee a conviction, if not for murder, for civil rights violations by the Feds.
 
I'm seeing Brown's parents all over tv. I'd LOVE to know why their son was living with his grandmother and not them, but I don't want to be called names, so let's all just pretend that's normal and these people had, you know, actual daily interaction with their child.
 
apdst said:
The public outcry is going to guarantee a conviction, if not for murder, for civil rights violations by the Feds.
Click to expand...
I realize you think that, but that is unlikely.
 
Don't know if I'm allowed to participate in this thread. I didn't bring my tin foil hat.

MMC said:
Mornin Excon. :2wave: Yeah I heard BO peep has sent Holder who has arrived in Missouri. "What".....is he there to make sure that BO gets the ruling they want?

What do you think about the MS Media deflecting with this BS to cover BO Peep and all the Bad news coming his way?
Click to expand...
 
Excon said:
Stop speaking about stuff you have no clue about.
The prosecutor is not always seeking an indictment when presenting the GJ with the information. You saying otherwise is ridiculous.
And this case is being motivated by public out cry, not the evidence. As the evidence clearly shows the shooting justified.
And as for these type of stats, I have introduced that information on this forum a long time ago.

So again:
If he goes in there with the intent to get an indictment, he will not present all the evidence, nor does he have to.
If the DA goes in there with an honest intent to let the GJ decide by presenting all the evidence, then it is highly unlikely they will return a true bill.​
Click to expand...

So you know all the evidence that is being brought before the grand jury now? Wow... You really have an inside scoop on this. Or you're just being absurd.
 
Kal'Stang said:
This is the second time where Obama and Holder have interjected themselves in a State Matter where they had no business sticking their noses in. Both times openly for the person who got shot and regardless of the circumstances or evidence or even common sense (that last part imo). Both times also have relatively the same theme, both shooters were considered "white" (even though we don't even know the race of the cop this time last I heard) and both off the dead people were black.

Perhaps someone could refresh my memory. Has this ever happened or even something similar happened with any President and DOJ with in the last 40 years?

anyways...back to work for me...lunch is over.
Click to expand...

....er, civil rights violations are very much a federal issue...
 
poweRob said:
So you know all the evidence that is being brought before the grand jury now? Wow... You really have an inside scoop on this. Or you're just being absurd.
Click to expand...
:doh
The prosecutor will be bringing all the evidence to the GJ. Did I say I knew all of it?

But of that we do know, it is in the Officer's favor. Do you really doubt that?

Everything released or provided through other sources, except for the initial friend and cohorts statements (which not only sound, but have been proven by other evidence to be contrived), have all been in favor of the Officer.

So instead of you engaging in your ridiculous and irrelevant antics of distraction, how about we go over each piece of the known evidence?
 
upsideguy said:
....er, civil rights violations are very much a federal issue...
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with civil rights. Neither did the Z/T case. It has to do with whether one cop was in the wrong for shooting someone that either did or did not attack him. Or are you really trying to say that any and all murders/self defense cases are under the jurisdiction of the DOJ and Obama?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom