View Poll Results: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

Voters
56. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes.

    14 25.00%
  • No.

    30 53.57%
  • I don't know...

    12 21.43%
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 80

Thread: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

  1. #11
    Don't Give a Rat's Ass
    SMTA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    21,877

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    He provided the grand jury with far more information than is usually provided to a grand jury. This is referred to as a "data dump", or dumping so much data on a grand jury that it's difficult for them to sort through it all.

    He conducted the presentation of evidence to the grand jury like it was trial, without the benefit of cross examination.

    He conducted the press conference like he was a defense attorney for Wilson even though he's supposed to work on behalf of the state and the victim, Brown.

    He has not indicted a police officer in a shooting in the entire 23 years he's been the prosecutor.

    His police officer father was killed by a black man in the line of duty.

    His brother, nephew and cousin are all police officers in St. Louis.

    His mother was a clerk for the St. Louis PD for 20 years.

    Yeah, he threw it. If someone hasn't indicted a police officer for 23 years, why would he start now? There was no chance and I hope he's investigated by the federal government.
    So how many police officers were involved in shootings and not charged?
    Greatness lies not in being strong, but in the right use of strength - Henry Ward Beecher
    Baby sister, I was born game and I intend to go out that way - Rooster Cogburn

  2. #12
    Professor
    Capster78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    08-24-15 @ 02:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,253

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Simply is no evidence to even suggest that occurred. But the inference is not lost on me. Basically, your echoing the thoughts of those who, regardless of the evidence, would convict the officer of some type of crime no matter what.
    - There was never a good war, or a bad peace.
    - Idealistically, everything should work as you planed it to. Realistically, it depends on how idealistic you are as to the measure of success.
    - Better to be a pessimist before, and an optimist afterwords.

  3. #13
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Quote Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
    Keep in mind that the trial was to determine whether or not charges could be laid, not whether or not Wilson was guilty.
    Which is exactly what happened.

    The threshold to find that a crime may have happened is so low, yet this GJ did not find evidence that a crime happened.


    Quote Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
    From Justice Scalia:

    "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."
    Yeah I saw some idiot trying to pass this off as if meant something.
    There is no reason to keep it in mind as it isn't relevant.

    It comes from:
    United States v. Williams, 504 US 36 - Supreme Court 1992

    United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 (1992).


    Scalia was pointing out the historic function of the GJ.
    The prosecutor is not required to present exculpatory evidence, which is what the petitioner in that case wanted.
    It does not mean the prosecutor is prohibited from presenting, or that the GJ is prohibited from considering such information in their quest to determine if the evidence in toto is sufficient to suggest that a crime happened.

    It is nothing more than an uneducated attempt to suggest impropriety when there was none.


    The way things happened is the way they should have.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  4. #14
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Quote Originally Posted by SlevinKelevra View Post
    it is interesting however that there is still to this day-- months later--- a seeming controversy over the distance that Brown fled/died from the vehicle.
    There you go still trying to suggest such an absurdity.
    Your lack of understanding the evidence does not a controversy make.

    There is no controversy.
    Which has been pointed out to you repeatedly.





    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    He provided the grand jury with far more information than is usually provided to a grand jury. This is referred to as a "data dump", or dumping so much data on a grand jury that it's difficult for them to sort through it all.
    Bs. Data was not just summarily dumped on them, nor was anything made too difficult for them.
    Listening to each witnesses' multiple interviews to determine their credibility is hardly too difficult. or too much evidence.

    Honestly. D'oh! Someone is complaining about too much evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    He conducted the presentation of evidence to the grand jury like it was trial, without the benefit of cross examination.
    An irrelevant assertion.
    What do you think the Prosecutor and Jury asking questions is? It would be a defense that is the one who would benefit from cross.

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    He conducted the press conference like he was a defense attorney for Wilson even though he's supposed to work on behalf of the state and the victim, Brown.
    You are wrong.
    He present his press conference based on what was found by the Grand Jury.
    And no, he is not supposed to work on behalf of a supposed victim, especially as it hadn't been determined who the actual victim was. Brown or Wilson.


    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    He has not indicted a police officer in a shooting in the entire 23 years he's been the prosecutor.

    His police officer father was killed by a black man in the line of duty.

    His brother, nephew and cousin are all police officers in St. Louis.

    His mother was a clerk for the St. Louis PD for 20 years.

    All irrelevant.


    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    Yeah, he threw it. If someone hasn't indicted a police officer for 23 years, why would he start now? There was no chance and I hope he's investigated by the federal government.


    No, he didn't throw it. All you have is a dislike with no valid argument.
    Nothing more.
    Last edited by Excon; 12-02-14 at 08:41 AM.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #15
    A sinister place...
    OrphanSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    08-08-17 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,860

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Quote Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
    Just curious what the consensus is.
    I do not think he intentionally threw the case, but I do think he intentionally gave the Grand Jury an overwhelming amount of information for the purpose of covering his own ass no matter what the outcome was.

    Most of the time the function of the Grand Jury is for the DA to present a reasonable (not minimal, not everything... it is not one or the other) amount of evidence to show that a crime occurred and the person of interest should face charges for it based on what is presented. It has nothing to do with guilt or innocence, but a threshold of evidence to support that someone should be charged with a crime.

    What this DA did was show everything he had knowing that before they even got to that step there were Federal eyes watching his moves based on "civil rights" leaders locally and imported saying he was unfit to handle the case. Those same groups wanted a *minimal* amount of evidence presented to secure an indictment. I think the DA intentionally presented just about everything to avoid a potential complaint. That and presenting everything also allowed him to honestly show what everything in the evidence packet really means. There was no reason to charge Wilson with a crime. That said, if the DA did present a minimal and still did not get an indictment then those same leaders complaining today would be complaining about what he presented kicking off an even bigger mess of media & legal evaluations.

    In other words, no matter what this DA did plenty were bound to be upset. And it is mainly because few seem really interested in what happened, only what appears to have happened. Well, the Grand Jury evaluated what really happened and those that wanted action based on appearances are going to be upset.
    Last edited by OrphanSlug; 12-02-14 at 08:30 AM.
    "Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people." - Penn Jillette.

  6. #16
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Quote Originally Posted by SMTA View Post
    So how many police officers were involved in shootings and not charged?
    At least 12 shootings total and 4 shootings in which a grand jury was used. One of those shootings involved a case where the prosecutor in question made untrue statements about witness testimony and a federal investigation later revealed that the officers in the case had lied when they said that the Black men they killed were driving towards them (the reason they gave for shooting them 21 times).

    Ferguson tragedy becoming a farce - The Washington Post
    20,000 sign petitions seeking special prosecutor in Michael Brown shooting : News
    St. Louis prosecutor has faced controversy for decades : News

  7. #17
    Sage
    Lutherf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,697

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Quote Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
    Keep in mind that the trial was to determine whether or not charges could be laid, not whether or not Wilson was guilty. From Justice Scalia:

    "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."
    Keep in mind that indicting a ham sandwich means that you then have to have some basis to that sandwich guilty of something or else you have wasted your time, the jury's time, the judge's time, the taxpayer's money and your credibility.

    Angela Corey blew off the grand jury and directly indicted Zimmerman. That turned out to be an absolute fiasco. Mike Nifong rushed to prosecute the Duke Lacrosse team because of public opinion and look where that got him.

    Sometimes just because because you can do something doesn't mean that you should do it.

  8. #18
    Don't Give a Rat's Ass
    SMTA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    21,877

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    At least 12 shootings total and 4 shootings in which a grand jury was used. One of those shootings involved a case where the prosecutor in question made untrue statements about witness testimony and a federal investigation later revealed that the officers in the case had lied when they said that the Black men they killed were driving towards them (the reason they gave for shooting them 21 times).

    Ferguson tragedy becoming a farce - The Washington Post
    20,000 sign petitions seeking special prosecutor in Michael Brown shooting : News
    St. Louis prosecutor has faced controversy for decades : News
    Huh - interesting reading.

    I had not read anything about the prosecutor.

    I do find it strange that, in spite of this, that Ferguson voter turnout in November was very low.

    With all of this baggage, the prosecutor has never been voted out of office for 23 years.

    It seems, then, that they have a prosecutor that they deserve.
    Greatness lies not in being strong, but in the right use of strength - Henry Ward Beecher
    Baby sister, I was born game and I intend to go out that way - Rooster Cogburn

  9. #19
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:08 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,432

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Quote Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
    Keep in mind that the trial was to determine whether or not charges could be laid, not whether or not Wilson was guilty. From Justice Scalia:

    "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."
    "Throw" implies intent to twist or direct the outcome to a desired result. I do not believe he intended to twist or direct the outcome, though I also think he was not displeased with the outcome. I wouldn't be surprised if he secretly was hoping for this outcome. Given that, no, I don't think he "threw" it, but I do think he didn't try very hard to make it as fair and balanced as possible.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  10. #20
    Don't Give a Rat's Ass
    SMTA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    21,877

    Re: Did the prosecutor throw the Darren Wilson grand jury trial?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    "Throw" implies intent to twist or direct the outcome to a desired result. I do not believe he intended to twist or direct the outcome, though I also think he was not displeased with the outcome. I wouldn't be surprised if he secretly was hoping for this outcome. Given that, no, I don't think he "threw" it, but I do think he didn't try very hard to make it as fair and balanced as possible.
    It also maintains the positive relationship between the prosecutor's office and the cops, who both believe in co-dependence.
    Greatness lies not in being strong, but in the right use of strength - Henry Ward Beecher
    Baby sister, I was born game and I intend to go out that way - Rooster Cogburn

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •