Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Ferguson Prosecutor, McCullough, 'Failed' to get a GJ Indictment. How rare is this? [View all]sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)23. I was in a rush when I responded to your comment earlier. Just wanted to say that you made some good
points regarding raising Wilson's past eg.
Re probable cause, which Wilson may or may not have had, this puzzled me:
McCulloch stated that Wilson was aware that a robbery had taken place, had a description of the suspect and recognized Brown as the likely suspect. IMO, that is certainly probable cause and Wilson had an obligation to confront Brown. Given how important this point is to a federal case, I am sure that federal agents looked at it very closely.
The Ferguson Police Chief said that Wilson did NOT have that information 'in his initial contact with Brown'. See here:
Ferguson police chief Officer didn't stop Brown as robbery suspect
- The Ferguson police officer who shot Michael Brown didn't stop him because he was suspected in a convenience-store robbery, but because he was "walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic," the city's police chief said Friday.
Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson -- hours after documents came out labeling the 18-year-old Brown as the "primary suspect" in the store theft -- told reporters the "robbery does not relate to the initial contact between the officer and Michael Brown."
Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson -- hours after documents came out labeling the 18-year-old Brown as the "primary suspect" in the store theft -- told reporters the "robbery does not relate to the initial contact between the officer and Michael Brown."
So there's definitely a contradiction there. I don't know how that was handled before the GJ.
Iow, this prosecutor provided a probable cause, as you pointed out, that was contradicted by the Police Chief. This is why you need trials. Someone needs to challenge what was presented. That is just one example.
Regarding McCullough providing the evidence he presented to the GJ to the Feds, I doubt that would be a problem even if he picked and chose what to present and what not to. They are not going to try to second guess a prosecutor, there are enough problems with this case as it is. And it's likely he's willing to risk some embarrassment for what is most important to him.
Btw, he could have recused himself legitimately. His own father was killed decades ago, a cop I believe, by an African American man. And he himself is very closely associated with the police. Those are grounds for recusal imo.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
38 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The Ferguson Prosecutor, McCullough, 'Failed' to get a GJ Indictment. How rare is this? [View all]
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
OP
Wilson was fired from his last job, his whole Dept was fired. A real prosecutor would have
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#2
True, they can manipulate evidence. However, I did read that in at least one precinct, police
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#4
Yes, I think it's obvious that the Prosecutor did not want an indictment of Wilson.
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#15
That's why people say that a prosecutor, if s/he WANTS it, could indict a ham sandwich.
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#19
It's rare because prosecutors don't go to grand juries with cases that are not winnable.
badtoworse
Nov 2014
#16
I'm not sure what you are asking. But what I think is that McCullough should have recused himself
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#17
Assuming the grand jury heard everything, what difference did what McCulloch thought make?
badtoworse
Nov 2014
#18
Was there anyone there to question any of the 'evidence' presented? Why do you think he would be
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#20
I was in a rush when I responded to your comment earlier. Just wanted to say that you made some good
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#23
We know now how this was handled before the GJ. It appears that a second officer gave testimony
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#32
Wilson did not write a report, which is standard procedure for cops, until long after the shooting.
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#36
Did the GJ hear from the witness who saw everything from the beginning? The friend who
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#22
I disagree on one thing: the system *failed*, as it so often has for black folks.....
AverageJoe90
Nov 2014
#24
And hasn't it just been revealed that McCullough was raising funds for Wilson?? If that is true,
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#27