General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSt. Louis County grand jury: I was on it in 2007, and here's what I learned
.............
Remember: the vast majority of witnesses that McCullochs prosecuting team brings to the grand jury are police officers. He relies on them to make his cases. They are his allies. It seems clear that he has to be reluctant to piss them off by indicting a police officer for what Darren Wilson purportedly did. (By the way, unlike some people, I don't believe that the fact that McCulloch's father was a cop--killed in the line of duty--presents a conflict of interest. But I do wonder if there's a question of loyalty here, because of McCulloch's reliance on cops as witnesses in other cases.)
McCulloch has options: He can present the case against Wilson any way he wants, to get the outcome he wants. Depending on who testifies, and what evidence is brought in, he can make it look like excessive force by Wilson, or he can make it look like a justified shooting in the line of duty. He can present the case in all its nuanced details, or he can streamline it. He can bring in eyewitnessesor not. He can show the infamous convenience-store videotapeor not. The length and tone of the case is entirely up to him. [We hear, in news reports that McCullough is saying that the case will take more than one day to present. If thats true, it could mean that he is preparing a thorough and even-handed case--which is what citizens should expect.]
The grand jury can ask as many questions as it wants, and Im sure they will, if they are doing their jobs as directed. But, as it has been said many times, a good prosecuting attorney can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. However, that assertion also implies the inverse, as well: If the prosecutor doesnt want an indictment, he or she can make that happen, too.
So, Ill be watching closely. If there is no indictment in the Darren Wilson case, it could be because the prosecutor himself didnt want it and presented the weakest possible case. (We will never know, as St. Louis County grand jury deliberations are secretyoure not supposed to talk about them outside of the jury room. If there is a subsequent trial, the case presented by the prosecution will be indicative of what transpire in the grand jury hearing, as prosecutors often practice their court cases on the grand jury.)
.......
the rest:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/19/1322955/-St-Louis-County-grand-jury-I-was-on-it-in-2007-and-here-s-what-I-learned
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)happened in highly charged cases.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)after charges are filed. The investigation has already been transferred from FPD to county PD.
factsarenotfair
(910 posts)2004: After pressure from Garza's family, District Attorney Guerra brings the case before a grand jury. Presentation of the case is criticized because Feit, O'Brien and Tacheny are not subpoenaed to testify. The grand jury votes not to indict Feit.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/31/justice/garza-cold-case-timeline/
riqster
(13,986 posts)bigtree
(86,008 posts)bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)Just like in the sixties, violation of civil rights is a federal offense and is usually brought after a state fails to act.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)In a civil suit, the Fifth Amendment privilege won't apply. A defendant or other witness who might face criminal prosecution can still refuse to testify, but the difference is that the jury is permitted to draw an inference of guilt from the assertion of the privilege.
logosoco
(3,208 posts)Or McCulloch could make a weak case, defending the officer involved and the subsequent actions of the county police.
I would like to see everything come to light and start on a new direction, away from the militarization of the police. But, if Bob doesn't make the case, it won't happen here and now. Which I am thinking is not going to go well for America as a whole.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)their own officers before. I really don't see a problem here.