Transcripts show #DarrenWilson lied to the grand jury

[FBaggins]

46. The problem there is that it isn't "not x"

That's why hearsay isn't permitted. The inferences from the transcript are tiny compared to relying on his memory combined with his own inferences for whatever was actually said (which may or may not have been on the specific topic to begin with). Wilson may have asked about the robery and said that he didn't have any information (because he wasn't the responding officer and didn't know the specifics)... but his supervisor took that to mean that he hadn't heard the prior calls.

Or perhaps he didn't hear the first call about the robbery, but did hear the later call with the specifics of the suspect's description and that they were still looking for him. We don't know because we have to imagine the conversatsion between officer and supervisor and judge whether the supervisor interpreted the conversation correctly and remembered it correctly.

To jump from that guessed interpretation of that imagined conversation is FAR from probable cause for perjury. It wouldn't even be admissable as evidence.