HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » morningfog » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 21 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Thu Jan 12, 2012, 03:24 PM
Number of posts: 9,897

Journal Archives

Missouri v. Darren Wilson - 4799 page grand jury transcript


Highway blocked in both directions,police trying to get to the blockade


Darren Wilson, meanwhile, got married last month

Meanwhile, St. Louis County records released Monday indicate that Wilson got married last month, The New York Times first reported. He married another Ferguson Police Department officer, Barbara Spradling, on Oct. 24. He has been on paid leave since the shooting.


It’s Incredibly Rare For A Grand Jury To Do What Ferguson’s Just Did

A St. Louis County grand jury on Monday decided not to indict Ferguson, Missouri, police Officer Darren Wilson in the August killing of teenager Michael Brown. The decision wasn’t a surprise — leaks from the grand jury had led most observers to conclude an indictment was unlikely — but it was unusual. Grand juries nearly always decide to indict.

Or at least, they nearly always do so in cases that don’t involve police officers.

Former New York state Chief Judge Sol Wachtler famously remarked that a prosecutor could persuade a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich.” The data suggests he was barely exaggerating: According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them.

Wilson’s case was heard in state court, not federal, so the numbers aren’t directly comparable. Unlike in federal court, most states, including Missouri, allow prosecutors to bring charges via a preliminary hearing in front of a judge instead of through a grand jury indictment. That means many routine cases never go before a grand jury. Still, legal experts agree that, at any level, it is extremely rare for prosecutors to fail to win an indictment.

“If the prosecutor wants an indictment and doesn’t get one, something has gone horribly wrong,” said Andrew D. Leipold, a University of Illinois law professor who has written critically about grand juries. “It just doesn’t happen.”


The Wilson grand jury will reconvene Monday, no decision yet

Despite claims to the contrary, the gran jury has not made a decision and will reconvene Monday. It is not clear whether all the evidence has been presented or I they are now in final deliberations.

Again, no one knows the outcome at this point. The governor's actions speak solely to his fear, not to his knowledge.


What response would an indictment of Wilson for voluntary manslaughter elicit?

What do you think?

I don't buy the conspiracy theorists that say the fix is in or that a decision has been made or that they outcome was known and pre-determined. As of this afternoon, the grand jury was still in session and had not yet reached a decision.

It is not impossible that they will reach or have reached a decision that charges Wilson with some criminal liability but is shirt of murder.

I think there will be some exercise of the rights of association and expression regardless of the outcome. How will those marches or protests look different if there is an indictment?

This is still the call of 9 of 12 individual citizens. It is up to them. I read nothing into the local and national cops girding their loins for war. That is indicative of nothing other than their racism and itch to fight. And Wilson negotiating a separation is as consistent with a concern that he is about to be indicted as it is that he is about to be absolved.

No one yet knows the outcome. How will it look if Wilson is indicted on some theory of homicide?

Let's hope the cops and the Klan don't turn violent if Wilson is indicted.

There is the very real possibility that the grand jury will indict for second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter.

I hope the leaders of the white community can keep the cops, the Klan and the other whites from turning violent.

FBI (Stoking the fire) Warns Ferguson Decision ‘Will Likely’ Lead to Violence By Extremists

As the nation waits to hear whether a Missouri police officer will face charges for killing unarmed teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., the FBI is warning law enforcement agencies across the country that the decision “will likely” lead some extremist protesters to threaten and even attack police officers or federal agents.

Peaceful protesters could be caught in the middle, and electrical facilities or water treatment plants could also become targets. In addition, so-called “hacktivists” like the group “Anonymous” could try to launch cyber-attacks against authorities.

“The announcement of the grand jury’s decision … will likely be exploited by some individuals to justify threats and attacks against law enforcement and critical infrastructure,” the FBI says in an intelligence bulletin issued in recent days. “This also poses a threat to those civilians engaged in lawful or otherwise constitutionally protected activities.”

* * *

Within hours of the FBI issuing its bulletin, some police departments across the country issued their own internal memos urging officers to review procedures and protocols for responding to mass demonstrations.

Still, the bulletin’s conclusions were blunt: “The FBI assesses those infiltrating and exploiting otherwise legitimate public demonstrations with the intent to incite and engage in violence could be armed with bladed weapons or firearms, equipped with tactical gear/gas masks, or bulletproof vests to mitigate law enforcement measures.”


The only basis the FBI cites for this fear peddling is "a series of recent messages threatening law enforcement, including a message posted online last week by a black separatist group that offered “a $5,000 bounty for the location” of Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, who fired the shots that killed Brown on Aug. 9." Thanks for your help FBI.

No one knows what the Darren Wilson grand jury will conclude, not even Nixon

No one knows because the final vote has not occurred.

It seems that the prosecutor has either presented all the evidence or is very nearly done. Once the grand jury has all the evidence, it will be up to the jurors. It takes only 9 of the 12 for a true bill and there are four homicide charges available. The grand jury could also add charges.

The homicide charges include first degree murder, second degree murder, voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter. No one, not even the reactionary governor knows what the result will be.

It is likely that even the 12 grand jurors do not yet know what the result will be, unless they have been taking polls and votes along the way.

It is entirely possible that an indictment on something other than first degree murder is issued.

Since the national guard deployed today, it can be inferred that the prosecutor has (or will soon) closed the record and requested an indictment.

Camel's nose under tent: Obama 'Would Order' US Troops Into Combat If ISIS Got Nuclear Weapon

President Obama has been unwavering and definitive in declaring he will not deploy U.S. ground troops into combat to fight ISIS militants. Period.

But for the first time since the start of then anti-ISIS offensive dubbed Operation Inherent Resolve, the president volunteered a scenario which he said would change his mind.

“If we discovered that had gotten possession of a nuclear weapon, and we had to run an operation to get it out of their hands, then, yes,” the president told reporters at a news conference in Brisbane, Australia, on Sunday. “I would order it.”

There is no indication that ISIS currently possesses or could easily obtain a nuclear weapon, officials say.

Still, Obama’s declaration of a nuclear weapon in the hands of ISIS is a noteworthy new “red line” – and a very high bar for a U.S. offensive role on the ground.

* * *
Last week, Dempsey testified on Capitol Hill that the Pentagon is “certainly considering” whether to embed U.S. military advisers with Iraqi combat units deployed to the front lines. Obama has also maintained openness to the idea, but already rejected one recommendation to do so.


Of course this hypothetical offered by the President is absurd and would never happen. And that is what should raise eyebrows. He didn't have to offer such an hyperbolic example, unless it was offered to prep the field. Dempsey is clearly heading towards recommending combat troops on the ground. Hagel is not far behind. Obama will undoubtedly follow his chief advisers.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 21 Next »