Michael Brown grand juror sues St. Louis County prosecutor, asking to speak out on case

[pintobean]

ST. LOUIS COUNTY • A member of the grand jury who declined to file criminal charges against former Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson in the death of Michael Brown sued St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch Monday for the right to speak publicly about the proceedings.

The plaintiff, identified in court documents only as "Grand Juror Doe," has alleged First Amendment violations in a civil suit filed in federal court in St. Louis. According to the lawsuit, Doe wants to talk publicly about the experience of serving on a grand jury, the evidence and investigation that the plaintiff believes would educate the public and "to advocate for legislative change to the way grand juries are conducted in Missouri."

The investigation of Wilson, who fatally shot Brown on Aug. 9, "had a stronger focus on the victim than in other grand jury cases," the suit claims. The suit also claims the legal guidelines presented to jurors in applying facts of the case were "muddled" and "untimely" compared to other cases.

The plaintiff claims McCulloch's characterization of the grand jury's view of the evidence was at odds with Doe's opinions of the case, that the public's understanding of the grand jurors' views is "not entirely accurate." The suit asks a judge to rule unconstitutional the Missouri law that would criminalize any of Doe's comments "about Doe's experiences as a state grand juror" and bar McCulloch from prosecuting Doe.

The rest - http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/michael-brown-grand-juror-sues-st-louis-county-prosecutor-asking/article_e88d07f3-5e9d-57d9-a7a1-cdcd85de9633.html

Eta - link to pdf of the suit that was filed:
http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/stltoday.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/d/c3/dc32f334-a7d5-500f-951b-95c17541812a/54aabd006e328.pdf.pdf#page=1&zoom=100,92,792

[Spazito]

1. Interesting...

Given what we do know from the GJ testimony released, there is much to be questioned regarding the conduct of the prosecution, imo, and allowing the Grand Juror to speak out would possibly clarify what actually happened beyond the testimony itself.

[msanthrope]

2. Will read suit later and comment. nt

[pintobean]

6. Cool, thanks

[msanthrope]

9. Having read the suit, I think this is a meritorius case. I think McCullogh can reasonably

restrict some evidence...such as the identities of other GJs. But I don't think he can reasonably restrict this juror from rendering their opinion on the proceedings.

I don't know that I would have filed the lawsuit, though.....I might just have given an anonymous interview with a foreign network. McCullough wouldn't have been able to touch either the reporter or network.

[pintobean]

10. Thanks. My concern is with the other GJs.

I doubt that McCulloch would care, other than that. My guess is, they work something out with a judge that lets this person tell their story, yet protects everyone involved.

I'm interested in hearing what this juror has to say. I wonder if they will cause others to want to do the same.

[msanthrope]

11. McCulloch is going to fight this tooth and nail. And if the other prosecutors are smart, they

are retaining their own private attorneys. I want to be really clear here....some allegations, if they can be proven, indicate federal criminal behavior that could not only lead to criminal charges against individuals, but usher in a federal takeover.

What this juror is alleging (between the lines) is that under color of law, McCullough deliberately and with purpose sought to confuse the jurors as to the nature of the law and Wilson's culpability.

McCullough cannot allow this juror to speak.

[pintobean]

12. Do those allegations have to be made publicly?

Can't the juror make the allegations to the feds? I would think that s/he already has, since the feds have been looking over the county's shoulder the whole time.

I'm not trying to be argumentative here. I honestly don't know. I respect and appreciate your expertize.

[msanthrope]

13. No---they don't. But let me tell you what I think is going on here.

I think that the juror has probably already been interviewed by the feds. And here's the thing....if the civil suit proceeds, the juror can compel testimony that the feds could not get.

Wouldn't it be a kick in the pants if McCullough takes the 5th, or otherwise tries to stay this civil proceeding because of the federal proceeding?

I'm not saying that the ACLU and the Feds are colluding, but if I were McCullough and the other prosecutors, I'd start getting nervous.

[pintobean]

14. Okay. Thanks for taking the time

to explain. I really appreciate it.

[bettyellen]

15. I wonder if they filed because just making the allegations public is a good thing?

Appreciate hearing your take on this- thanks!

[msanthrope]

16. Definitely....making the allegations public is not only a good thing, it's a siren call to the media

so that they can file as intervenors. This is a newsworthy story, and the media has a right to investigate it.

[bettyellen]

17. I felt that way about some witnesses in this case- that they might worry they would never be heard

if they did not get their story out there. Indeed the system sought to discredit them from the get go.

[Lee-Lee]

3. Odds are...

I am gonna say 50/50 shot that the juror really wants to be an advocate or he/she wants to just cash in with a book deal....

[NJCher]

4. I doubt it is about a book

If you read even the first three paragraphs of the story, you can see what this juror had to go through to file this suit. Have you ever tried convincing the ACLU to take a case? Not easy.

Furthermore, books are not the money-maker people think they are. Just for the sake of example, let's say the juror's motivation is money. There is still a great deal of time that is needed to write the book, publish it, and get a book promo tour organized. Topics are wiped off the stage in a heartbeat due to other breaking news. There is a slim, very slim shot that this would ever make much, if any, money.

All this person is asking is to be able to speak out. Nothing I've read says anything about a book deal, so that's all speculation.



Cher

[Skidmore]

7. If the system isn't working or is corrupted, I

can't for the life of me find a reason to object to having light shined on it either through advocacy or a written presentation of relevant information to the public. Neither the law enforcement or the justice systems are above the law. The exist at the pleasure of the citizenry who select the leaders and vote for policies and pay for them via taxes. This serms to have been forgotten.

[AngryAmish]

19. It does not matter her motivation

These people are forced to be grand jurors. I'll be dammed if the government can tell me what I can and cannot say outside of national security if they are forcing me, at the point of a gun, to do something.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

5. There's definitely more to see here

I just wonder how long it will take.

[Jefferson23]

8. Interesting. K&R. n/t

[spanone]

18. k&r...