Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Surprise! Missouri AG says Ferguson Grand Jury misdirected in Michael Brown case ....

Surprise! Missouri AG says Ferguson Grand Jury misdirected in Michael Brown case ....

+2
Sal
Wordslinger
6 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Which confirms that the case of Darren Wilson was a sham from the start.

Golly, whod'a thunk it ....

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/04/1349421/-Missouri-AG-Confirms-Michael-Brown-Grand-Jury-Misled-by-St-Louis-DA?detail=email


Seeing as the report of the above appeared in Daily Kos, no doubt our corporate swine will disavow what the Missouri AG stated .....

Guest


Guest

It was unusual that ALL of the evidence was presented to the grand jury... normally the state only uses the incriminating.

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:It was unusual that ALL of the evidence was presented to the grand jury... normally the state only uses the incriminating.

Correct.

The prosecutor's job is to present a narrow and focused case to obtain an indictment.

It's irregular for a prosecutor to dump a mountain of sometimes contradictory evidence on the grand jury and essentially say, "I dunno, see what you can make of it.".

It's unheard of for a prosecutor to allow the target of the indictment to testify unchallenged before the grand jury.

It's unconscionable that the prosecutor instructed the grand jury regarding a law that has been found to be unconstitutional, and omit that minor detail.

There's more, but you hopefully can see where this was going.

Guest


Guest

If the prosecutor doesn't think charges are deserved but felt pressure to do so... taking it all to the gj seems fair.

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:If the prosecutor doesn't think charges are deserved but felt pressure to do so... taking it all to the gj seems fair.

It's not fair, it's muddying the waters.

That's not the prosecutor's job.

2seaoat



You could take a prosecutor two years out of law school at my daughter's office and they would convict him on charges originated from the SA office without political interference. Not of murder, but certainly of criminal negligence. It would be a lay down. The only way to delay the same was a manipulated grand jury. I am telling you real prosecutors are shaking their heads that anybody could be stupid enough to think justice had anything to do with what happened in Furgueson.

Guest


Guest

Ya... I would say lawfulness ended when a thug robbed a store, assaulted the clerk, attacked an officer...

it was just a matter of time until he was either in prison or dead. It just happened to be sooner rather than later.

Funny how that works sometimes huh? Bad ideas fail.

Guest


Guest

Surprise! Missouri AG says Ferguson Grand Jury misdirected in Michael Brown case .... Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQgveh60r4ooZfNbQVwRup31YBVvAlc7fqzJ21eJWaHja3vD-VK

Funny how things might work both ways.

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Y-_-6sxXRI

Smile

2seaoat



So two wrongs make a right?

Guest


Guest

The second wrong you so lament... wouldn't have happened without the first.

KarlRove

KarlRove

PkrBum wrote:Ya... I would say lawfulness ended when a thug robbed a store, assaulted the clerk, attacked an officer...

it was just a matter of time until he was either in prison or dead. It just happened to be sooner rather than later.

Funny how that works sometimes huh? Bad ideas fail.

Yep saved us all a lot of money

2seaoat



The second wrong you so lament... wouldn't have happened without the first.




Well a sgt. and the chief lied or the perp lied, so which wrong are we talking about?

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:So two wrongs make a right?

Surprise! Missouri AG says Ferguson Grand Jury misdirected in Michael Brown case .... Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS-u3OMW6vjkrTWIE9y4dy9W5W0d94T9m8kYYRuhZPEyO03IrYYwA

What makes it wrong?

This is the type of justice system people like you have fought for all your life... Inadmissible evidence, deals under the table, moral vacuums, look the other way, etc...

If you don't like the end product perhaps you should be willing to admit to the wrongness of what you support.

I believe that's called truthfulness and transparency.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diOuUYcenW0

Smile

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:The second wrong you so lament... wouldn't have happened without the first.




Well a sgt. and the chief lied or the perp lied, so which wrong are we talking about?

Specifically what lies are you talking about?

That Michael Brown was totally stoned on marijuana when he and an accomplice then staged a strong armed robbery, committed assault and battery on the store owner?

Or, was it a lie that when confronted by officer Daren Wilson assaulted Daren Wilson, fought with him to get his gun, caused two shots to be fired in the car and then, at first ran from the car. He then turned and charged Wilson, where Wilson shouted several times to halt and get down on the ground. Brown kept coming and Wilson fired three volleys at Brown when Brown was finally shot and killed dropping to the ground within 10 feet of Wilson.

Michael Brown, according to sworn testimony of four black witnesses, NEVER put up his hands and NEVER said "don't shoot, don't shoot".

Which of those are the first, second or third lies or whatever?

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

http://blog.austindefense.com/2007/11/articles/marijuana-controlled-substance/government-admits-marijuana-use-does-not-cause-violence/

Although marijuana abusers generally do not commit violent crimes

2seaoat



Which of those are the first, second or third lies or whatever?




Senility.....dementia?   The Sgt who arrived at the scene put in his report that the officer did not know about the convenience store robbery connection to Brown.   The Police chief got on TV and said clearly that the officer did not know about the Brown connection to the convenience store robbery.   The officer told a different story to the grand jury.......who was lying?

Markle

Markle

TEOTWAWKI wrote:http://blog.austindefense.com/2007/11/articles/marijuana-controlled-substance/government-admits-marijuana-use-does-not-cause-violence/

Although marijuana abusers generally do not commit violent crimes

That may be true but in this case the medical examiners said that the level of THC was at a point where it could have caused hallucinations.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Which of those are the first, second or third lies or whatever?




Senility.....dementia?   The Sgt who arrived at the scene put in his report that the officer did not know about the convenience store robbery connection to Brown.   The Police chief got on TV and said clearly that the officer did not know about the Brown connection to the convenience store robbery.   The officer told a different story to the grand jury.......who was lying?


Yes, and you have never seen initial news reports to be in error? I'm sorry if the FACTS get in the way of your erroneous opinion.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

KarlRove you used to be Pacedog. Why the change?

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:Which of those are the first, second or third lies or whatever?




Senility.....dementia?   The Sgt who arrived at the scene put in his report that the officer did not know about the convenience store robbery connection to Brown.   The Police chief got on TV and said clearly that the officer did not know about the Brown connection to the convenience store robbery.   The officer told a different story to the grand jury.......who was lying?

I'd say putting his hands on a police officer was the fatal bad idea... wouldn't you?

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

I'd say putting your hands on anyone with a gun is pretty stupid...

2seaoat



Yes, and you have never seen initial news reports to be in error? I'm sorry if the FACTS get in the way of your erroneous opinion.


You really are not that bright. The police report which was written after interviews at the scene by the SGT who spoke with the officer made it clear that the officer knew nothing about the robbery, and that SGT testified to the same at the grand jury, but the SA put the officer before the grand jury and he testified he knew about the robbery. Why would a SA put somebody on the stand which clearly defeats his probable cause threshold.......and cannot be cross examined. So explain it away or run away......the fact remains.....somebody is lying.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Surprise! Missouri AG says Ferguson Grand Jury misdirected in Michael Brown case ....

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum