Question for lawyers and other legal experts: What process would effect Darren Wilson's arrest?

[VanGoghRocks]

Does a grand jury have to be empaneled, hear witnesses and review evidence and then issue an indictment or could the St. Louis County DA simply issue an arrest warrant upon a finding of probable cause that a crime has been committed?

A related question: Could the U.S. Attorney ask the FBI to arrest Wilson for violation of Brown's civil rights or does the U.S. Attorney have to go before a Federal Grand Jury and secure its indictment?

I ask because I don't know and don't really even know where to go to find a definitive answer. Seems to me like the grand jury route would take a lot longer than the other way.

[FreakinDJ]

1. It doesn't look good

Due to a Supreme Court decision Brown's rights were suspended at the moment the officer decided to stop/detain/arrest him.

After that any excuse, "I was in Fear" (most commonly used) "I was in fear he would harm others" will warrant the shooting of suspect/perp/unarmed civilian

[VanGoghRocks]

2. Thanks for the response, although I think we may be mis-communicating with

one another.

I'm interested in the technical matter of how Ferguson PD Officer Darren Wilson can be arrested: would it be after a Grand Jury met or could the County D.A. issue an arrest warrant? I'm wondering how it would or could take place and I haven't really seen anyone discuss the actual process by which it would or could happen.

[FreakinDJ]

3. District Attorney would issue a warrent after reveiwing the case

Grand Juries have been particularly ineffective in the matter of Police shootings involving unarmed suspects because "By Law" they CAN NOT consider the officer's intent nor frame of mind barring of course alcohol or illegal narcotics found in his blood or urine at the time of the shooting (guaranteed no testing of this nature was performed in this case)

[VanGoghRocks]

4. Thanks. (Maybe we weren't mis-communicating after all :) So, right now, the proverbial ball is

in St. Louis County D.A. McCulloch's court?

Do you know about the U.S. Attorney(s)? Can they issue an arrest warrant or do they have to go before a Federal Grand Jury first?

[FreakinDJ]

6. U.S. Attorney stepping in would be unprecidented - (and long over due)

BTW: the press release of "the FBI is taking over the investigation" is standard operating procedure to quell the unrest. In 3 or 4 weeks they will scale that statement back to "Oh no, the FBI was only involved as an observer"

So far, State Trooper or no State Trooper this has gone down "By the Book" as a "Justified Shooting"

[cleduc]

5. I don't know the specific answers to some of your questions but

On the Federal civil rights question:
There was a 911 call and that got carried through the police radio broadcasting the cigars were stolen and a description of the suspect. Even if Mike Brown was innocent, his description matched the suspect and they recovered matching cigars from the crime scene. Chief Jackson said he thought Wilson noticed the cigars after he originally stopped to ask them to get off the road.

So Wilson appears to have had reasonable cause to try to apprehend Brown as a suspect (if what the chief said was true and it would be hard to disprove). Therefore, on that basis, there would be reasonable doubt that Wilson made his decision to try to apprehend Brown on the basis of racial profiling.

= End of civil rights case as I see it unless someone can dream up some other reasonable and plausible angle.

On the "Does a grand jury have to be empaneled?" question.

I've already heard more than once in media interviews with police that the matter is going to get referred to a grand jury. I'm not clear on what other legal options they might have had but that seems to be the path they're taking.

[VanGoghRocks]

7. Thank you so much for responding. I do seem to recall reading earlier today that the 911

call -- the one where stolen cigarillos were specifically referenced -- happened at a time when it would have been physically impossible for Wilson to have heard its broadcast. (Apparently he was at some other call and outside his vehicle at the time.)

As to the parallel federal investigation, after the 4 LAPD officers were found innocent in Simi Valley in the assault on Rodney King, the Feds then prosecuted the LAPD officers successfully on federal civil rights violations of Rodney King (after riots had convulsed LA). I don't recall 'racial profiling' entering into the prosecution of those 4 LAPD officers, so I don't think that's the only grounds for which the Feds could be running their parallel inquiry. But that was over 20 years ago and my memories have grown somewhat dim since then.

IANAL as you can probably tell, so I'm learning a lot of this material as I go, hence my questions. This discussion would be immensely helped by someone who knows the laws and is also a good writer. While I can only make faint claims to the latter, I can make none to the former.

[FreakinDJ]

8. Other then the Supreme Court stating "You can not shoot an escaping fellon in the back"

Your point is mote by the same statement of facts