Grand Jury Indicts Darren Wilson For Murder Of Michael Brown

[AngryAmish]

A Black People’s Grand Jury in St. Louis, Missouri, last weekend delivered a “true bill of indictment” for first degree murder against former Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson in the death of Black teenager Michael Brown. Black people “can and must take matters into our own hands,” said Omali Yeshitela, one of four prosecutors that presented evidence, not only of Wilson’s personal guilt, but the institutional culpability of the entire regional criminal justice system in the murder and subsequent whitewash of the crime.

“Darren Wilson is a killer, and he’s out there, but he’s not out there by himself,” said Yeshitela. “He was doing what U.S. police have done historically and traditionally to African people in this country.” It wasn’t Wilson’s decision to leave Brown’s uncovered body on the asphalt roadway for nearly four and a half hours in 100 degree heat – a collective insult and threat to the victim’s community that harkens back to the ritual public displays of mutilated and burned Black corpses in the time of lynch law. Wilson was later rewarded for his crime “with almost one million dollars” in contributions “by white people.”
http://www.mintpressnews.com/black-peoples-grand-jury-indicts-darren-wilson-murder-michael-brown/200644/

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Good for them. Too bad it doesn't have the force of law behind it. n/t

[sheshe2]

2. KnR

Black People’s Grand Juries can be part of the process of building local self-determinationist institutions of resistance to the ruling order, particularly in bolstering demands for genuine community control of police. For these reasons, the model can help prevent Black people’s righteous anger and energies from being dissipated by diversions concocted by the matrix of elected officials, their appointees and commissions, along with the Black misleaders and accommodationists who act as agents of the Democratic Party and the rich.

http://www.mintpressnews.com/black-peoples-grand-jury-indicts-darren-wilson-murder-michael-brown/200644/

It is a start.

[Cha]

3. Thank you Black Peoples Grand Jury! thanks AA

[Nye Bevan]

4. The Black People's Grand Jury voted 11-1 to indict.

http://www.kmov.com/news/editors-pick/Mock-jury-votes-to-indict-Officer-Wilson-287558331.html

I wonder why one of the Black Grand Jurors would vote not to indict?

[NBachers]

5. Actually, that 1 makes me think that it's not just a ramrod set-up show indictment

It makes me think that they didn't just round up a bunch of similar-thinking individuals who had their minds made up already.

[bobclark86]

6. I feel the same way about this that I do about...

"People's Grand Jury" indictments of Barack Obama. Both B.S.

[GGJohn]

7. ^^^This^^^

[NoGOPZone]

9. I feel that if a "people's grand jury" is going to indict Barack Obama

they should first present a convincing legal argument that a sitting President CAN be indicted. Somehow I doubt any of its members were even aware that this would be an issue.

[bobclark86]

10. Nope, still bullcrap.

The legal concept is flawed. A waste of time. You can't just form a "grand jury" with your friends to indict people, no matter how much evidence you collect (or how many TV reports you watch, as I doubt this "grand jury" called witnesses).

[NoGOPZone]

11. Nice strawman. No one said either group had legal standing

The issue of whether a sitting President can be indicted makes even the symbolic gesture represented by Obama "indictment" questionable.

[NaturalHigh]

15. I couldn't find anything definitive.

Pop Quiz: Can a President Be Indicted?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/legal020198.htm

This is from the Clinton era.

[bobclark86]

17. How is saying that people's grand juries are a waste of time...

a strawman?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

I'm not misrepresenting the "people's grand jury" with something easier to defeat. I'm saying what it is -- it's bullcrap libertarian feel-good clickbait trash based on a gross misunderstanding of English common law and its implementation in America which has no place on this board or anywhere else. The sad part is people take it seriously. And it's easy for somebody who is unbalanced to take it too far.

BTW, to the OP, anyone posting "Grand Jury Indicts Darren Wilson" to go to this link (which the title on the page states " Black People’s Grand Jury Indicts Darren Wilson For Murder Of Michael Brown," not "Grand Jury Indicts..." Completely different things) is being disingenuous at best.

[NoGOPZone]

19. because you're addressing an argument i didnt make

Again, no one said either action has the force of law. However, as impossible as it may be to believe given recent events, it's NOT against the law to indict a police officer. It MAY be against the law to indict a sitting President, if you're not aware of that then read the link given in the other reply to me. The group that "indicted" Obama wants to jump to the desired conclusion that he SHOULD be indicted without addressing the vital issue of whether he CAN be indicted, so the actions of the two groups do differ in that important respect, although again both are symbolic. The other vital difference is that regardless what Obama detractors think, there is no valid reason to begin a criminal inquiry into his behavior, while the episode in Ferguson had to be looked into. However, this distinction isn't important to the point I made in my initial reply, so I hadn't mentioned it before

[NoGOPZone]

21. the house impeaches, not indicts. the senate convicts or acquits nt

[GGJohn]

22. Sorry, you're right, been a long day and night.

[bobclark86]

35. You are trying to differentiate between the two groups...

The whole "people's grand jury" idea is bullcrap, no matter if they're white people indicting the president or black people indicting a cop. The point I'm making is they can't indict ANYONE with any actual authority. It doesn't matter if a president cannot be indicted by a real grand jury, because these groups aren't grand juries, they are bullcrap (I don't want to dignify them with the word BULLSHIT, which is too good for them, IMHO).

You going off about the legality of a real grand jury indicting a president has NOTHING to do with what I said or the original post, and you arguing about indicting the president is a deflection (trying to show the two groups as different, even though they use the same bullcrap reasoning for their existence) ... You know, a straw man.

[NoGOPZone]

37. if a group of people thinks the president should be indicted

Then it's hardly unfair to ask that they show it CAN be done
The fact that they, or you, may not have been aware that this is an issue is no excuse to continue to ignore it. The point you, by your own admission, keep making that these groups have no authority has never been argued by anyone on this thread, so if anything is not relevant it's that. I seriously doubt either of these groups thinks anyone believes their actions have any validity, they simply are trying to bring attention to their issues. The group that thinks Obama should be indicted is conveniently ignoring a major issue that would attach to his indictment. So no, the two actions aren't directly comparable

[840high]

28. +1

[COLGATE4]

33. +1000

Shades of the 'Sovereign Citizens' movement.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

8. Is this like one of those sovereign citizens court proceedings?

If this was a RW militia people would be screaming about insurrection and demanding Obama send in the flying gunships.

[bobclark86]

18. Identical. Same legal basis...

i.e.: None.

[brooklynite]

12. As pointless as the "People's Grand Juries" in the Tea Party world...

[BlancheSplanchnik]

23. but based on a foundation of integrity.

That's the difference.

[Recursion]

13. I dislike misleading clickbait headlines (nt)

[840high]

29. So do I.

[NaturalHigh]

14. Is this some sort of parody?

"The mock grand jury compiled just the testimony they felt was needed to find probable cause for an indictment. After two days, the group came back with an 11-1 decision to indict on first-degree murder charges."

[7962]

16. That was my first thought too. nt

[sabrina 1]

24. Wilson WAS rewarded with that money AND the Prosecutor, McCullough was connected

to the fund raising which was a huge conflict of interest and if he had any sense of honor, he would have recused himself.

THAT ALONE requires that the GJ verdict he presided over should be thrown out.

Great that Black people are taking matters into their own hands.

[GGJohn]

25. How is this Black Peoples Grand Jury taking matters into their own hands?

It carry's no weight of law, it was a pre-determined outcome and nothing more than Kabuki Theatre.

[sabrina 1]

26. It makes a powerful statement. And it is far more legitimate than the farce of a GJ

led by Wilson's supporter, McCullough which hopefully will be overturned considering the conflict of interest I just mentioned, and now some of the Grand Jurors themselves stating they were lied to, AND they want to be allowed to speak, for which one of them is suing.

Not to mention the lying witness who we know now, WAS NEVER THERE.

How does THAT GJ verdict 'carry the weight of law'?

[GGJohn]

27. It's no more legitimate than McCullough's Grand Jury, actually that Grand Jury

has the weight of the law behind it, however flawed it was, the Black People's Grand Jury has zero weight of law behind it.
And how does a bogus Grand Jury make a powerful statement?

[sabrina 1]

30. Lies and conflicts of interest in any of our legal proceedings remove the 'weight of law'.

That verdict has been rendered bogus and if we have any respect for the law, it will soon be vacated.

If you can't see the power of a statement like this, I can't help you.

[GGJohn]

32. What legal authority has rendered the no bill bogus? Not verdict, Grand Juries don't

render verdicts.
If and until a legal authority rules that the Grand Jury no bill was illegal, highly doubtful, then it does carry the weight of law.

[pintobean]

31. McCulloch had nothing to do with that fundraising.

http://www.stlamerican.com/news/local_news/article_05fbf85e-3d02-11e4-bbb3-5b590397aedf.html

[Recursion]

34. No, McCullough was not in any way connected to the fundraiser

There's no need to make up shit about him; he's bad enough

[malaise]

36. +1,000

We the people includes black people - this is great

[robinlynne]

38. kick.