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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Hissyspit

(45,788 posts)
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 02:34 AM Nov 2014

Ferguson Prosecutor's Idiot Speech Blames Everyone But Darren Wilson

http://gawker.com/ferguson-prosecutors-idiot-speech-blames-everyone-but-d-1662970833

Ferguson Prosecutor's Idiot Speech Blames Everyone But Darren Wilson

35,71023

Gabrielle Bluestone

Ferguson prosecutor Robert McCulloch delivered a long-winded, smirking speech blaming social media, the media, journalists, neighborhood residents, and everyone else who isn't Darren Wilson, for Darren Wilson shooting and killing 18-year-old Michael Brown.

It took McCulloch 10 minutes of hectoring before he revealed the panel had found no probable cause to indict Wilson, and the rest of the 45-minute speech, in which McCulloch seemed to be presenting evidence in Wilson's favor, felt a lot more like defense attorney's argument than a prosecutors. The very length of McCulloch's rambling statement, really, and the amount of evidence he felt compelled to argue against, was an argument that the case should have gone to trial.

But before he got to any of that, McCulloch explained all the ways the case could have been quietly shelved, had those meddling witnesses stayed off Twitter.

On August 9, Michael Brown was shot and killed by a police officer, Darren Wilson. Within minutes, various accounts of the incident began appearing on social media, accounts filled with speculation and little if any solid, accurate information. Almost immediately, neighbors began gathering and anger began growing because of the various descriptions of what had happened and because of the underlying tension between the police department and a significant part of the neighborhood.

Fully aware of the unfounded but growing concern in some parts of our community that the investigation and review of this tragic death might not be full and fair, I decided immediately that all of the physical evidence gathered, all people claiming to have witnessed any part or all of the shooting and any or all other related matters would be presented to the grand jury.

Our investigation and presentation of the evidence to the grand jury in St. Louis county has been completed. The most significant challenge encountered in this investigation has been the 24-hour news cycle and its insatiable appetite for something, for anything to talk about. Following closely behind were the nonstop rumors on social media.

I recognize, of course, that the lack of accurate detail surrounding the shooting frustrates the media and the general public and helps breed suspicion among those already distrustful of the system. Yet those closely guarded details—especially about the physical evidence—give law enforcement a yard stick for measuring the truthfulness of witnesses.

McCulloch offered Brown's gunshot wounds as an example, claiming that witnesses changed their stories after private autopsy results went public. McCulloch also appeared to suggest that the grand jurors watched TV to determine witness credibility.

"There is no question of course that Darren Wilson caused the death of Michael Brown by shooting him," McCulloch said, in an extraordinary linguistic backbend. "But the inquiry doesn't end there."

MORE
37 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ferguson Prosecutor's Idiot Speech Blames Everyone But Darren Wilson (Original Post) Hissyspit Nov 2014 OP
That's what ticks me off. Even if you give Wilson consideration for being a policeman in a tough Hoyt Nov 2014 #1
McCulloch implied that Brown attacked Wilson. Kablooie Nov 2014 #6
He did. He hit him. maced666 Nov 2014 #9
When one points a finger, 3 more fingers are pointing back AT YOU! blkmusclmachine Nov 2014 #2
McCulloch actually had the gall to say that the Grand Jury's responsibility KingCharlemagne Nov 2014 #3
Thank you. Good point! merrily Nov 2014 #13
Exactly. But he used it as an ex parte trial--with only McCulloch there to DEFEND Wilson. SunSeeker Nov 2014 #24
It's always telling when prosecution acts as defense, isn't it? Scootaloo Nov 2014 #4
+1000 Blue_Tires Nov 2014 #11
He has great respect and pity for the jurors. Kablooie Nov 2014 #5
Is it true that McCulloch is a former cop, whose cop-father was killed... AzDar Nov 2014 #7
Yes... jonno99 Nov 2014 #10
Sounds to me like this would require a fair trial to determine the truth. world wide wally Nov 2014 #8
Im not so sure a trial would have a more favorable outcome davidn3600 Nov 2014 #14
You may be right (in theory), but doesn't everyone deserve a fair trial? world wide wally Nov 2014 #15
When there is no probable cause, nobody "deserves" a trial. Nye Bevan Nov 2014 #26
It's rarely the killer's fault. They have it down to a science. merrily Nov 2014 #12
The fact that Wilson shot and killed Brown is not at issue aint_no_life_nowhere Nov 2014 #16
No. jeff47 Nov 2014 #17
You misunderstand aint_no_life_nowhere Nov 2014 #19
Didn't all the paperwork list Wilson as the victim? aquart Nov 2014 #37
This prosecuter has handled 5 cop killings and none were charged. sammy750 Nov 2014 #18
K&R...Thanks for posting, Hissyspit. red dog 1 Nov 2014 #20
As Rick Santorum would say.... czarjak Nov 2014 #21
It's Nixon's fault. He wants to be reelected by white majority in Mo. Leopolds Ghost Nov 2014 #22
He can't be re-elected loyalsister Nov 2014 #28
Well Darren Wilson's an alleged criminal, right n/t Leopolds Ghost Nov 2014 #29
They're on the same side loyalsister Nov 2014 #30
They're both criminals then, got it n/t Leopolds Ghost Nov 2014 #34
Prosecutor McCulloch keeps his job because Black people are TOO LAZY to get out and vote. sammy750 Nov 2014 #23
What are you talking about? McColluch ran unopposed. SunSeeker Nov 2014 #25
Let's Talk About The Physical Evidence DallasNE Nov 2014 #27
I suspect that they were anything but amateurish loyalsister Nov 2014 #31
interactive diagram from the WashPost BootinUp Nov 2014 #33
Drawing Is Not To Scale DallasNE Nov 2014 #35
I just listened to the gunshot recording, hadn't heard that before, BootinUp Nov 2014 #36
Worst. Lawyer. Ever. Dirty Socialist Nov 2014 #32
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
1. That's what ticks me off. Even if you give Wilson consideration for being a policeman in a tough
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 02:44 AM
Nov 2014

situation, you can't act like he did the right thing.. He shot an unarmed kid when no sane person can say it was a" good shoot." We can debate whether his actions were criminal, but Jesus there's a dead kid that should be alive. It's at least poor execution (pun might be intended) of what should he Wilson's duties.

Kablooie

(18,571 posts)
6. McCulloch implied that Brown attacked Wilson.
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 03:11 AM
Nov 2014

he didn't say it outright so it came out as weasel words but that's his defense.

 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
3. McCulloch actually had the gall to say that the Grand Jury's responsibility
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 02:52 AM
Nov 2014

is to 'separate fact from fiction.'

That is not the GJ's responsibiltiy. Its sole responsibility is to determien whether sufficient probable cause exists for an indictment to issue.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
13. Thank you. Good point!
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 03:25 AM
Nov 2014

And, the prosecutor didn't even need a grand jury for that. He could have decided to prosecute on his own. The purpose of this grand jury was to put a thin veneer between the prosecutor and public opinion. The way the grand jury was conducted was a farce.

SunSeeker

(51,367 posts)
24. Exactly. But he used it as an ex parte trial--with only McCulloch there to DEFEND Wilson.
Fri Nov 28, 2014, 05:38 PM
Nov 2014

There was no one there prosecuting against Wilson and fighting for Brown. McColluch completely upended out adversarial system of justice so he could defend Wilson without challenge. And then he blamed the witnesses and the Grand Jury for the outcome of this farce he created.

Kablooie

(18,571 posts)
5. He has great respect and pity for the jurors.
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 03:07 AM
Nov 2014

he talked quite awhile about how dedicated they were and how hard it was for them to go through this.

Poor babies. How they suffered.

 

AzDar

(14,023 posts)
7. Is it true that McCulloch is a former cop, whose cop-father was killed...
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 03:15 AM
Nov 2014

by a black man? Heard this earlier... seems pretty significant if true.

world wide wally

(21,718 posts)
8. Sounds to me like this would require a fair trial to determine the truth.
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 03:17 AM
Nov 2014

So why did they rule the opposite?

 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
14. Im not so sure a trial would have a more favorable outcome
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 03:35 AM
Nov 2014

A lot of the evidence that is presented to this grand jury would be inadmissible in a trial. Prosecutors have far more latitude in grand juries because the defense has no ability to challenge any of the evidence. There is also very loose rules on what is permitted in a grand jury. In a trial, the rules and the judge is very strict on what is allowed in.

It's also a higher burden of proof in a trial. The prosecution only has to show probable cause in a grand jury. In a trial, the prosecution has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the jury has to be unanimous.

The defense can also cross-examine witnesses in a trial. You can put on a dozen witnesses that say that Brown had his hands up and was surrendering, but those witnesses would be attacked by the defense cross-examination. If the defense can prove inconsistencies in the witnesses while putting up their own witnesses that conflict with the prosecution's witnesses, that points to reasonable doubt....and ultimately an acquittal.

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
26. When there is no probable cause, nobody "deserves" a trial.
Fri Nov 28, 2014, 06:22 PM
Nov 2014

A trial just for the sake of it, which will inevitably result in an acquittal, is a "show trial".

aint_no_life_nowhere

(21,925 posts)
16. The fact that Wilson shot and killed Brown is not at issue
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 04:24 AM
Nov 2014

Whether there was probable cause to indict Wilson did not have to deal with whether a homicide occurred at his hands at all, unlike many situations encountered by the grand jury and the evidence they must weigh. Here, the fact that Wilson killed a man does not have to be proved by evidence. The issue is whether Wilson was justified in using deadly force in self defense. Unless there is a clear videotape of the shooting, I don't think it's possible to determine that through a grand jury proceeding. Almost any shooting by non police where the shooter claimed self defense would have received an indictment and proceeded to a jury trial. If there is any probable cause, through a witness statement, through an independent forensics expert, or anything else, this is an issue best decided by a jury of Wilson's peers in a real court of law that hears all the evidence, with witnesses including forensic experts subject to cross examination, and where the rules of evidence apply such as the hearsay rule (in the event grand jurors were influenced by out of court statements they heard on TV or testifying witnesses testified on the basis of hearsay). I'm not ready to call Wilson a murderer but this should have gone to a jury.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
17. No.
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 11:46 AM
Nov 2014
Here, the fact that Wilson killed a man does not have to be proved by evidence. The issue is whether Wilson was justified in using deadly force in self defense.

No. That would be determined at a trial.

All the grand jury is supposed to do is determine if there is enough evidence to go to trial. You claim there is by saying "Wilson killed a man".

aint_no_life_nowhere

(21,925 posts)
19. You misunderstand
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 06:32 PM
Nov 2014

Last edited Tue Nov 25, 2014, 07:49 PM - Edit history (1)

The fact Wilson's homicide is not a central issue is because Wilson has apparently admitted the homicide under oath before the grand jury. A defendant who testifies before the grand jury waives immunity at trial and the prosecutor can introduce that testimony as direct evidence and not just as impeachment evidence on cross examination. I would expect Wilson's defense attorney at trial to stipulate that he shot the bullet that killed Brown. I completely agree that a trial was necessary but the central issue would be whether the homicide was justified based on self defense or whether it was an unjustified murder.

At trial the prosecution won't have to struggle to prove that Wilson did it. He admits it. At a trial, the main controversy would involve whether Wilson was justified.

What I feel you misunderstand is that I agree with you, or rather your response to my post actually agreed with it. We are in agreement on the fact that this should have proceeded to jury trial based on the fact that Officer Wilson killed a man and admitted it. This is not a mysterious who done it where the defendant denies having even committed the act of killing. Every crime involves an "actus reus" or guilty act and a "mens rea", a guilty act done with a guilty mind. The actus reus has been admitted to by Wilson. But he claims that his act was justified as reasonable self defense and he didn't have a guilty mind or mens rea while doing it. His mental state should not be determined by a grand jury. It must be determined from all the facts and evidence, Only legal evidence that had the opportunity for both attorneys to object to if inappropriate and with an actual judge ruling on the admissibility of evidence should be examined by a jury. something that just doesn't happen in a grand jury proceeding,

sammy750

(165 posts)
18. This prosecuter has handled 5 cop killings and none were charged.
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 01:27 PM
Nov 2014

I think his presentation last night was so wrong, timing was all wrong. He should have known that a nighttime press conference was not a good idea. But he does not care. He is all about himself.

red dog 1

(27,647 posts)
20. K&R...Thanks for posting, Hissyspit.
Tue Nov 25, 2014, 09:08 PM
Nov 2014

Police brutality should not be tolerated in a "free society"..
..Regardless of the color of the victim's skin.

"Man Charged With Breaking a Trooper's Fist With His face"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025851191/

Leopolds Ghost

(12,875 posts)
22. It's Nixon's fault. He wants to be reelected by white majority in Mo.
Wed Nov 26, 2014, 03:31 AM
Nov 2014

Even in MD white "Dems" in rural areas turned out to vote against a black Lieutenant Governor. (Of course the fact that liberals stayed home thanks to the right wing machine-Democratic hijacking of the Obama administration didn't help. It's telling that Obama feels liberated to take liberal stances on some issues now that the Clintons and all the conservadems are on the campaign trail or unelected, including the craven Marie Landrieu.)

But look at the bottom line: McCulloch would have had to prosecute the case had a grand jury returned an indictment. We knew from day 1 he wasn't capable of doing so. So Nixon's failure to appoint a special prosecutor is at issue here. McCulloch probably threatened to try and get Nixon's job by demagoguing the white suburban / rural law-and-order folks if he was booted off the case.

The real issue is that victims never have an advocate in the US criminal justice system. Only the state is capable of bringing a case, which is why state actors (and corporate actors) are never successfully prosecuted.

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
28. He can't be re-elected
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:43 AM
Nov 2014

He is serving his second term as governor. There were some rumors about him running for the senate, but that's about as likely as Christie running for president.

That said, this incident was a nightmare for 2016 executive branch politics. The current AG (formerly a republican state senator) is the presumed gubernatorial candidate. He will rely heavily on unions especially those for law enforcement.
Then there's that part of never meeting an alleged criminal he didn't want to execute.

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
30. They're on the same side
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 10:13 AM
Nov 2014

I have doubts that Missouri's long standing "top cop" turned governor would ever see police as criminals (alleged or otherwise). Especially in the context of chasing a potential suspect.

sammy750

(165 posts)
23. Prosecutor McCulloch keeps his job because Black people are TOO LAZY to get out and vote.
Wed Nov 26, 2014, 06:57 PM
Nov 2014

A very qualified black woman ran against him and suffered a huge lost. Only 12% of the blacks in MO vote. They are allowing themselves to be slaves to the whites and Gov. Nixon.
Voting is key to make changes. When will the blacks get educated on voting. That should be a priority in MO.
Once they get in government they can make and change the laws against the white folks.

SunSeeker

(51,367 posts)
25. What are you talking about? McColluch ran unopposed.
Fri Nov 28, 2014, 06:18 PM
Nov 2014

What "very qualified black woman ran against him"?

And where did you get that 12% stat? Isn't it 12% of all African American RESIDENTS in MO, not 12% of all MO African Americans ELIGIBLE TO VOTE? The GOP has made sure the amount of African Americans eligible to vote is the smallest it has been since Jim Crow laws were on the books, thanks to the voter-ID style poll taxes, felon disenfranchisement, and cutting down early voting. African American voter disenfranchisement will only get worse now that the Supreme Court eviscerated the Civil Rights Act.

Even if you are eligible to vote and manage to get registered, there are still the tremendous barriers presented by poverty itself. If you have two jobs and are rushing to get home to your latch-key kids (like my parents did with me), not voting is not a matter of "laziness" but a matter of poverty and being unable to get to the polls. Why risk losing your job or leaving your kids alone just to go vote when there was not even an opposing candidate to McColluch?

DallasNE

(7,392 posts)
27. Let's Talk About The Physical Evidence
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:31 AM
Nov 2014

"those closely guarded details—especially about the physical evidence—give law enforcement a yard stick for measuring the truthfulness".

Two points. The physical evidence often needs an expert to interpret the meaning but even experts frequently disagree on just what the physical evidence tells us, so what is he trying to say. Two, where were the spent shell casings found as that would tell the approximate distance Wilson was from Brown. While not exact, it would tell us whether he was 8-10 feet away or 35 feet away. Since I have not heard any discussion on this I must assume that the police did not detail what was likely the 2nd most important evidence available. How could they have been so amateurish as to bungle the handling of such significant evidence. (I think I once heard it explained as "we didn't know we were working with a possible crime scene" -- say what!)

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
31. I suspect that they were anything but amateurish
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 10:19 AM
Nov 2014

It seems that the evidence given to the GJ was selected pretty carefully.

BootinUp

(46,924 posts)
33. interactive diagram from the WashPost
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 10:26 AM
Nov 2014
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/ferguson-diagram-of-the-scene/

I think the location of the casings is hard to analyze as both the victim and the shooter were moving. Exactly how they were moving is the question. My general opinion is that Wilsons assertion that he was being charged is a fabrication, its clear that he fired many shots from many locations and not just in a straight line retreat.

DallasNE

(7,392 posts)
35. Drawing Is Not To Scale
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:17 PM
Nov 2014

Meaning it only has a marginal value. The blood spots, for instance, are roughly 45 and 52 feet beyond where Brown's body came to rest if it were to scale and that would support Wilson's account of a bull rush. Indeed, the clustered shell casings are nearly all beyond the point of Brown's body, which makes no sense for any scenario given the position of Brown's body. About the only thing that does make sense is the one video account where you can hear roughly 10 shots in the background that were recorded as 6 shots in a burst and then a very short pause followed by 4 more shots in a second burst. The location of the spent shell casings are consistent with the video recording of the shots (two debris areas) and that is about all that they indicate. But by not drawing it to scale it can be manipulated to support a given point -- it can also distort it to where it looks unrealistic.

Oh, thanks for the link because that data is something I have been looking for but had not come across.

BootinUp

(46,924 posts)
36. I just listened to the gunshot recording, hadn't heard that before,
Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:59 PM
Nov 2014

and I am trying to group the casings the first 6 and then 4. It seems to me that the 4 casings off the road must have been the last 4. Unless they were disturbed after the shooting. Looking at it that way, while firing the first six the officer must have been moving forward, and then he moved near the side of the road from around shell 18 to 21 and fired the last 4 while moving back in the direction of his vehicle along the side of the road.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Ferguson Prosecutor's Idi...