[niknik]

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

Travesty of the GJI? I don't look at it that way, I view it as standard protocol. GJ in most states attorney's opinions are more of a pain in the ass, rather than an asset too their cause. I'm sure if hypothetically this DA was hoping to save a cop, wishes this never went across the GJ's desk.

The GJ is privy to all evidence, and testimonies, just like (as you say) the DA is able to spoon feed the GJ, so are the opposition. The GJ's predetermined verdict has absolutely no power behind it, other than forcing the states hand in an arrest, or a case closed verdict. If they find probable cause as representatives of the civil, they will formally charge him with whatever charges fit the bill, and the cop will see his day in court, with a real jury.

I'm sure at this point, the DA is damned if he does, damned if he don't. I don't see any fowl strategy in this. I just see typical finger pointers trying to build a case in favor of their opinion that weighs heavier in the opposite direction.

If by your theory holds any truth in it, and the DA is trying to shift blame onto the GJ. What is the problem in that anyway? Isn't it better the GJ of non-biased individuals, be the deciding factor? So he essentially did the public a favor.

Quite frankly the DA knows he don't have a case, there is no guilt here. The Cop is innocent, it don't matter who represents the state, the Cop (if he even gets charged) will have a team of the best lawyers.

I agree. There's no conspiracy here. If you ask me the blacks looking to take a stand against police have had much better opportunities than Michael Brown.

[30564U]

Originally Posted by sunairco ↗

Yes it is. Except they examine evidence and hear from wittnesses along with expert testimony. This is not evidentary. The don't generally transcribe this for evidence. That's not the point to empanel a GJ. The are there to decide if this should go to trial. They also don't hear testimony of the accused. That's not typical. There is nothing about this case that couldn't have been taken before a regular jury rather then a GJ mediating it. This was all done for the officer's advantage and allowing his lawyers access to a tremendous amount of pre-trail evidence that's formally been entered into the record. The fact that he appeard before them with his script of the events and they have not been sequestered and no way can be immune from media all these months doesn't make this look too good to return true verdict. The leaks alone of the forensics and the 3rd party analysis is something they couldn't have possibly not heard about already

Yea...you're right. After all what would I know, I only worked for thirty years as a cop and detective and teach this crap at the university level...apparently you, as someone who doesn't even live in the US, would naturally have more insight than any of us stupid American cowboys. I concede to your superior foriegn ability to spot a conspiracy and help us poor illiterate Americans to see the evil growing in our own country unchecked and unencumbered. Thank God for you world citizen.

[sunairco]

Say what? Last time I checked, I was an American citizen born in Florida and still live here. I'm married to a Cherokee Native American from the mountains of TN. How the hell more American can I be?

Did you catch the part that I once was on a GJ tour? I've also been on both civil and criminal juries almost ever 2 to 3 years.

I'm hardly ignorant of the system and how the game is played. As a former LEO as you claim, I'm sure that you'd have to agree with what I've posted.

Have you bothered to take a look at the news analysis that's being posted in the press?

Seems like I'm spot on with my assessment where major pundits appear to be concurring with my observations that I made before any of this was printed in op/ed pieces.

[30564U]

Originally Posted by sunairco ↗

Say what? Last time I checked, I was an American citizen born in Florida and still live here. I'm married to a Cherokee Native American from the mountains of TN. How the hell more American can I be?

Did you catch the part that I once was on a GJ tour? I've also been on both civil and criminal juries almost ever 2 to 3 years.

I'm hardly ignorant of the system and how the game is played. As a former LEO as you claim, I'm sure that you'd have to agree with what I've posted.

Have you bothered to take a look at the news analysis that's being posted in the press?

Seems like I'm spot on with my assessment where major pundits appear to be concurring with my observations that I made before any of this was printed in op/ed pieces.

Must I defend my professional experience to every snotnosed newby that logs on to DR every fucking time I say something? Shit gets old real fast.

And no I don't agree with any of the shit you've said. I'm sorry your conspiratorial theories are so ridiculous and convoluted that I just assumed you couldn't be from America. How exactly does not being clever enough to avoid jury duty or service on a criminal grand jury make you an expert on the American Justice System? Last I saw, claiming that you'd been unable to come up a valid excuse to avoid serving on a jury was not a stellor endorsement for anything.

I see absolutely nothing wrong or out if the norm going on with the grand jury in Ferguson. The hearings were done exactly as they've been done thousands of times before...just because some dipshit news reader or retard blogger sides with your ideas is, again, not a stellor recommendation that you're on the right track. On the other hand...why the fuck do I give a rat's ass what you think or don't think? Go forth and wallow in the conspiracy and rest assure that you are correct and the rest of us are just too dumb to see the obvious that you do. You are smarter than me...congratulations, citizen.

[TheVrist]

It is simply a case of the the losing interest, fabricating whatever they can to make the opposition look at fault. Even if the DA (or the state) had't let the GJ be the deciding factor in the charges, "pundits" with opinions in favor of the brown case, would still find some fault in the proceedings.

[cortdb]

here in tennessee, ALL police shooting are brought before a grand jury to decide wether or not charges are appropriate against the officer. Not only that, but the TBI investigates them before hand to bring the evidence to a grand jury. Also im fairly certain that all cases involving a possible felony are dealt with in the same manner here in the volunteer state

[30564U]

Originally Posted by cortdb ↗

here in tennessee, ALL police shooting are brought before a grand jury to decide wether or not charges are appropriate against the officer. Not only that, but the TBI investigates them before hand to bring the evidence to a grand jury. Also im fairly certain that all cases involving a possible felony are dealt with in the same manner here in the volunteer state

It's pretty much the same everywhere in the US...that's why I'm not getting the conspiracy. Just about every officer (or citizen for that matter) involved in a shooting goes before a grand jury. It has nothing to do with the DA. It's basically just a fact finding exercise for potential liability and if an indictment is warranted (and it would take an act of God in most places for an on duty police Ofcr to be indicted) then the case will be fast tracked through the court system. I just don't get what, if anything, is happening out of th normal with the Ferguson grand jury...it's a non event. I think the grand jury thing is the most normal thing happening. What's not normal is the political posturing by the Governor and others. Let the damn cops do their jobs without political interference or prejudgement.