OMFG: "Fake" Josie Account of Michael Brown Killing Matches Wilson Testimony!!!

[pnwmom]

39. I am saying the spokesman, whether deliberately or not,

gave the wrong impression. The most recent New York Times account was correct. And so was the article by the WA Post.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/13/us/ferguson-missouri-town-under-siege-after-police-shooting.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

The grand jury that decided not to indict Police Officer Darren Wilson operated differently from a typical grand jury in Missouri.


A typical case tends to be presented to a grand jury in about one day. The grand jurors in the Officer Wilson case met for 25 days over three months.

A prosecutor usually provides a charge or range of charges, then asks the grand jury to indict based on those options. The St. Louis County prosecutor, Robert P. McCulloch, did not recommend a charge or charges against Officer Wilson.

A grand jury generally hears testimony from a few people, often the police investigators who have interviewed witnesses and examined the physical evidence.In Officer Wilson's case, 60 witnesses were called, and the grand jury heard extensive testimony from investigators, who showed pictures of the scene and described it in detail.

The grand jury does not usually hear testimony from the individual who may be charged. Officer Wilson testified for four hours.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-bob-mccullochs-pathetic-prosecution-of-darren-wilson/2014/11/25/a8459e16-74d5-11e4-a755-e32227229e7b_story.html

What causes the outrage, and the despair, is the joke of a grand-jury proceeding run under the auspices of McCulloch, the St. Louis County prosecutor. In September, I wrote that it appeared he wasn’t even trying to get an indictment; he had a long record of protecting police in such cases, and his decision not to recommend a specific charge to the grand jury essentially guaranteed there would be no indictment.