I’ve posted a few things about this… of course, it’s me, so it’s long:

****
(Responding to a concern that it would be hard to believe that the DA had a remotely prosecutable case, but just decided to shelve it) Well, yeah, that’s pretty much what happened. As I quoted in the football thread, Justice Scalia in 1992 laid out very clearly the role of the Grand Jury and the presentation of evidence.

“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.”

I’m quoting from an article on Alternet, but there are several good articles out there on this very topic. The article goes on:

The passage was first highlighted by attorney Ian Samuel, a former clerk to Justice Scalia.

McCulloch allowed Wilson to testify for hours and made sure the grand jury was aware of every possible piece of evidence that could exculpate the cop. In his rambling press conference Monday night, McCulloch explained that the refusal to indict resulted from the combination of contradictory eyewitness testimony and other exculpatory evidence. But it was immediately obvious to legal experts that the way the prosecutor presented the evidence virtually guaranteed that there would be no indictment, and therefore no trial. As the cliche goes, a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. But, it should be added, the prosecutor has to want the ham sandwich to be indicted. (emphasis mine)

There was so much wrong with how this went down that books will be written about it. McCulloch should have recused. He didn’t. He should have actually presented the charges to the Grand Jury. He didn’t. Not in the same manner as every OTHER Grand Jury. Normally a DA will actually present the charges and then essentially make his Prima Facie (or first facts) case as to WHY the Grand Jury should indict. It’s the whole point. His office functioned as de facto defense attorneys in the Grand Jury for Officer Wilson, a breach of the duties of his office before the Grand Jury. Other than giving the Grand Jury a list of charges, the Assistant DAs, NOT the DA himself, did NOT make any case for the return of any of the charges. As the Grand Jury was not sequestered, they KNEW they were in on the biggest case in the country and for the DA to not be presenting the case for indictment sent a STRONG signal to them that he didn’t expect an indictment. DAs are political animals and you will NEVER see a DA pass up a chance to get an indictment on a high profile case before the Grand Jury because if it goes to trial, he will want to ensure that everything before the Grand Jury is perfect. As an example, if this were going to trial, there’s NO WAY Wilson goes before the Grand Jury because the DA would want to tear into his inconsistent testimony on cross examination. Why the different distances? Why was his testimony from that day so different from the subsequent testimony a week later? How does he reconcile the testimony of the other person with Michael Brown who says Officer Wilson actually opened his car door and slammed it into Brown, which also puts everyone and the DNA in the right place, but puts Wilson on the aggressive and totally contradicts his account? NO ONE has put Wilson on a stand and cross-examined him. EVER. And now, it can’t happen. Which…was pretty much the plan all along. It had to be. There are just simply too many affirmative actions (no pun intended) taken to come to any other conclusion.

The shocking part isn’t that Officer Wilson wasn’t indicted. It was that it went to the Grand Jury at all and that they went to all the trouble of trying to cover for Officer Wilson when the outcome was predetermined. There is NO WAY after the release of that information that a discerning person can say that the DA sought justice or even the unvarnished truth.

The DAs office’s intent was to ensure that Officer Brown was NOT indicted. And they ensured that successfully.

I totally agree that any looting and burning is sad, unnecessary, counterproductive and wrong. What I appreciated were folks in the crowd wearing black hoodies with “Peacekeeper” on it in white letters and phone cameras and rather than videoing the cops, they were taking footage of the people. And whenever a crowd gathered, you’d see folks get there and try to start talking to people. Didn’t always work, but there were and are a lot of people who want to see this turn into positive change. MOST (easily 99+% of the people there throughout the months of protests) are looking to see positive changes… like community policing, body cams on police and a host of other things to make their community a better place.

One thing DA McCulloch DID say that is very true. If we want different outcomes, change the laws. Don’t burn things down. Now, with gerrymandering and all the political shenanigans all over the place, that’s a tough row to hoe, but if we as a people can deal with all we’ve changed from only white landowners participating in the political process to where we are today, we can certainly move even farther toward our founding ideals where we state that all men are created equal (and thus are treated equally under the law).
****

DA McCulloch misused the Grand Jury. Plain and simple.

As Justice Scalia points out, the Grand Jury is NOT the venue for exculpatory evidence. Moreover, Officer Wilson’s testimony was RIDDLED with inconsistencies that should have been subject to cross-examination at trial.

The purpose of the Grand Jury is NOT to convict. It’s to INDICT. And there was enough to indict. There just was.

Now… especially because Officer Wilson is a Police Officer, because the eyewitness testimony was inconclusive and because the forensics were also inconclusive and there was no video evidence, it’s pretty unlikely Officer Wilson would be convicted. At least of a higher crime like murder. Depending on what happened at trial, a REALLY good prosecutor might get him on a lower charge of a lesser manslaughter if he were able to establish better about the distances because Officer Wilson’s testimony didn’t match the forensic evidence…EITHER. That part gets glossed over by his defenders.

I’m not arguing that Officer Wilson is guilty…or innocent.

I’m not arguing that Michael Brown is guilty of anything since he’s not on trial (and he shouldn’t be PUT on trial in some BS equivocation nonsense).

I’m arguing that the Grand Jury process was subverted and, thus that justice was denied.

You don’t seem to argue that fact, but seem to rationalize it.

I wholeheartedly, to the marrow of my bones, respectfully disagree. The law is the law and we should follow it for all.

Officer Wilson was denied his day in court by this and thus was denied justice as well. Not to the degree that the Brown family was, obviously, as they lost a son. My point is that in subverting the Grand Jury process for a political outcome, justice was DENIED to all involved.

And anyone pointing to the Grand Jury process in this case as a vindicatory process simply doesn’t understand what happened.
****

(regarding the contention that the evidence dump was rigging the process)
the accusation that giving the jury all the evidence is the VERY DEFINITION of rigging it.

I’m sorry if you don’t understand that.

It is NOT, absolutely NOT the job of the Grand Jury to adjudicate the merits of guilt or innocence or to exonerate a person.

I’ve posted probably half a dozen times the standard articulated by Justice Scalia. That is NOT what McCulloch did. Moreover, what McCulloch did isn’t just kinda, sorta outside the norm. It’s SO UNUSUAL that it borders on the “unheard of” and people struggled to find precedent for it…anywhere.

Further, your statement that “it means there was no evidence of a crime” is just not correct. We don’t know that because the DA never ASKED the Grand Jury for an indictment. They put the Grand Jury in a very difficult position, a position that no trial jury is in because evidence there has the benefit of scrutiny by opposing counsel. They were asked to “figure it out” when the DA essentially created reasonable doubt by presenting all of the exculpatory evidence.

And let me be clear here. The ONLY evidence the DA SHOULD have presented was that evidence necessary to obtain an indictment. The DA before the Grand Jury functions in a prosecutorial role. Many veteran prosecutors have come forward (and they tend to lean pretty conservative) and said that they’ve never seen or heard of a DA or their office NOT presenting a case, only presenting the evidence AND presenting exculpatory evidence before the Grand Jury.

So, the only evidence the Grand Jury should have seen were those pieces of evidence that supported the charges AND THAT’S IT.

That’s the function of the Grand Jury. They perform a preliminary function in the judicial process.

It’s not exactly basic civics, but we can’t conflate juries.

And what DA McCulloch did sets a potentially disastrous precedent for DAs around the country to pawn off cases where they don’t want to indict onto the Grand Jury and then subvert the Grand Jury with these tactics.

It’s just really, really bad from a process standpoint. The Grand Jury is really important for a lot of reasons and its misuse by prosecutors should be heavily scrutinized and sanctioned.
****
I wanna say one thing.

The Grand Jury not indicting Officer Wilson does NOT mean he was innocent or guilty.

The Grand Jury not indicting Officer Wilson also does NOT mean that Michael Brown was guilty of anything (he was never on trial. Remember… he was the victim and he’s a dead human being).

What it means is that the Grand Jury returned No True bills on the charges presented.

I’ve read several people post things like “the evidence exonerates Officer Wilson” and stuff like that.

Well, no, it doesn’t. While there was a LOT of evidence, much of it including Officer Wilson’s testimony was NOT subject to Cross Examination nor secondary examination AND much of it was contradictory. All the more reason it should have gone to trial, really.

My point is that there was still a lot of work left to do and that SHOULD have been done at trial. Just the fact that Officer Wilson’s testimony was so grossly inconsistent from his initial statements to his later statements and how the distances didn’t match should have been enough to indict considering that enough distance would have put his other testimony in question.

But, basically, that’s it. The Grand Jury coming back didn’t “acquit” or “exonerate” Officer Wilson.

It may have exposed a very flawed, biased system and it certainly exposed a misuse of the Grand Jury by DA McCulluch (as defined by Justice Scalia), but all the Grand Jury finding did is say that the process wouldn’t continue. It didn’t express innocence or a lack of guilt.

Of anyone.

Really? Colt McCoy?

I think this Rams D-Line would like to beat that dead horse…

CwutIdidthar?

I watch every game and root til the end. Short of the bad calls, the explanations sound reasonable for why the Rams haven’t achieved. Doesn’t mean I accept it, but if this D is complicated and young people start executing later this season, then I see serious hope for the future.

I love the trade at this point…

Barron is a hitter and this defense needs guys who can blitz and hit. McLeod can hit, but he can’t blitz worth a lick.

Right… because former players couldn’t possibly have a better clue into the pressures of being a young, angry football player.

Better leave it to some prosperity preacher who’s got an in with the owner of the club, cuz… that’s a better answer.

http://rs1img.memecdn.com/when-someone-uses-a-meme-wrong_o_325762.gif

It’s very clear that Ogletree isn’t getting this Defense…

If between Davis and Bradford we don’t go for a QB in the first round, I really hope we go for another OL in the first round if one’s worth it…

I also hope Barrett Jones gets his shot. I think he’s about due and should be ready shortly.

Where do I stand? Three feet behind and slightly to the left.

Oh. And Austin Davis is a starting caliber QB that just needs to learn more as a starter.

After the loss at home, there’s no way the Seahawks will fall 1.5 games behind in the division…to the Rams.

Not even if Kurt Warner arrived on a Lightning Bolt with Marshall Faulk and Isaac Bruce by his side…

Well, that and the blatant bias the Refs are showing.

I just can’t get past that. Quinn is held on every play including the 80yd TD. I just saw a pic showing Staley held him…badly. Almost a bad a hold as the Langford takedown on the Dez Bryant TD.

No team is going to overcome that level of bias. So, unless something changes in that regard the Rams are peeing into the wind no matter what they do.

What’s that phrase? Just because I seem paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t really out to get me…

Sure, I agree that the Rams have a fragile psyche right now. However, they may also seem to be responding to the rather obvious bias that they also see and feel that once that first really bad call comes, that they KNOW a bunch more will come that allows the opponent to score dozens of unanswered points. It’s starting to feel inevitable. And that has to SUCK to feel that inevitability as a player.

How must Robert Quinn feel to beat his guy on almost every play and KNOW that he’s not gotten a holding call in what? 300 snaps? is that even possible that he’s not been held ONCE in 300 snaps???

I agreed with him. I think he’s right on…

If ever there was a time to fire Gregg Williams and get back to fundamental Defense…NOW is it!!!

I bet that would change things in a hurry. No sacks? Really? We get no sacks because we don’t cover short routes!!! Which leads to QBs hitting all those short passes. What other D plays SO SOFT all the damn time???

Home teams were 9-3-1 this week. That includes teams like Seattle losing, but it was to Dallas.

And I wasn’t at ALL surprised to hear and read people say that the NFL “needs” teams like Dallas to be good. What a crock of shit.

So, the NFL doesn’t “need” New York to be good? It’s not a bigger media market than Dallas? Chicago doesn’t “need” to be good?

I’d be THRILLED…all caps, bolded, underlined, extra large type… with orchestral fanfare… if the Rams could pull out the win.

I don’t even really care how (other than cheating). Don’t want that.

Agree on Davis being better against pressure.

Rams need to stop the run.

Rams need to form a pocket!!! Under Williams, the DL has a HORRIBLE habit of both the DEs and DTs of getting upfield creating a big hole for the QB to step up and either throw or run. That’s DEATH against this 49er team. Our previous DL calls always had a pocket. It’s part of why Quinn was able to get to the QB. Now, Quinn has no chance because QBs have so many places to go without a pocket collapsing… So… make a damn pocket and keep Kap IN IT!!!

Rams need to run the ball. Plenty of runs up the middle to keep those LBs biting. They Rams may not gain a ton of yards, but the point is to open things up for the play action pass. 49er LBs are blood thirsty and love stuffing the run. They tend to bite, so give them bait…

Maintain lanes on returns. Whether it’s on coverage or returns, guys need to avoid penalties and maintain their lanes. Whoever is returning kicks needs to come out strong and quick with the intention of gaining yards. Everyone who’s done it has been horribly tentative and the Rams can’t lose the battle of field position with this defense.

And what coach have you ever known who came out and said “we’re going nowhere fast”? It would be absolutely the worst thing a coach COULD do under these circumstances.

Tampa Bay Buccaneer HC John McKay.

His quotes are legion and his brutal honesty will never be matched.

If you’re gonna ask a question…

After a particularly bad loss, Coach McKay was asked about his team’s execution.

Coach McKay’s response, “I’m all for it.”