Looting in Missouri after cops shoot 18 year old (1 Viewer)

[Ditka Butkus]

Anybody ever hear what the racial makeup of the grand jury is?

One black man, two black women, six white men, and three white women.

Does it have to be unanimous?

Need 9 to indict.

Thanks,,,Wow broken down this could come off a little suspicious if you already feel wronged.

 

[HellToupee]

I heard they are breaking out the water cannons tonight

 

[Billy Bats]

I heard they are breaking out the water cannons tonight

Multi-tasking blasting rioters and putting out fires. Forward thinking.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

I heard they are breaking out the water cannons tonight

Yes!.....This will do the trick...32 degrees at start time.

 

[mr roboto]

I heard they are breaking out the water cannons tonight

Just like TWD a couple weeks ago!

 

[Billy Bats]

Anybody ever hear what the racial makeup of the grand jury is?

One black man, two black women, six white men, and three white women.

Does it have to be unanimous?

Need 9 to indict.

Thanks,,,Wow broken down this could come off a little suspicious if you already feel wronged.

You would think they would've selected at least a 50/50 grand jury.

 

[Billy Bats]

I heard they are breaking out the water cannons tonight

Yes!.....This will do the trick...32 degrees at start time.

Rioters on ice, a holiday special!

 

[HellToupee]

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Michael Browns stepfather last night repeatedly urged protesters to Burn this ##### down after a prosecutor announced that no criminal charges would be filed against the Ferguson, Missouri police officer who killed the unarmed teenager.

Louis Head, an ex-con who is married to Browns mother, Lesley McSpadden, was with McSpadden outside the Ferguson Police Department headquarters Monday evening as prosecutor Robert McCulloch disclosed that a grand jury declined to vote an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson in the August 9 shooting.

After consoling a weeping McSpadden, the 38-year-old Head--who was standing atop a platform in the middle of the agitated crowd of several hundred protesters--began screaming Burn this ##### down!" He did this at least ten times, and at one point yelled for a microphone so that he could broadcast his message beyond the range of his unamplified voice.

While trying to incite the crowd, Head (pictured above) was wearing a commemorative t-shirt with the words I Am Mike Brown and a beanie, both of which bore a silkscreened photo of Brown in his high school cap and gown.

In the days preceding the grand jury announcement, McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. issued statements calling for peaceful protests in the wake of the panel's decision. Head, however, counseled arson. After a night of chaos and rioting in Ferguson, at least 10 businesses and two police cars were destroyed or damaged by fire, and 61 individuals were arrested.

Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records. He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Heads release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.

Along with McSpadden, Head is at the center of an ongoing Feguson Police Department investigation of an incident last month during which three vendors selling commemorative Michael Brown merchandise were assaulted. One of the victims, Michael Brown, Sr.'s mother-in-law, identified McSpadden and Head as among the attackers who ransacked her stands and stole $400 in cash and merchandise valued at $1500.

According to USA Today, McSpadden and Head were married earlier this year, before Brown's killing.

 

[Henry Ford]

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Henry I think you are a great poster but come on. This all happened in the span of a minute or so. Brown had already showed that he was willing to engage Wilson and attempt to extricate his gun. Once he disengaged and temporarily moved away from Wilson, he had two choices - get on the ground and surrender or decide to move back toward the officer. He chose poorly.

Sit down and watch the second hand on your watch for a minute.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I don't buy Wilson's story. I think he folds like a cheap hooker when he is deposed in the civil suit.

Is that an expression, to fold like a cheap hooker, if so I do not understand it.

 

[tommyGunZ]

This is a silly argument. I think we can all agree that Brown weighed a lot more than Wilson but that Wilson also wouldn't be a helpless weakling in a scuffle with Brown.

You might want to do some reading into "Escalation of Force" training for law enforcement officers before making silly statements like the bolded. Once a criminal makes the decision to assault an officer, they essentially defer to the officer's judgement as to what is a reasonable use of counter-force. The criminal actively chose to engage the officer, thereby accepting the fact that that the officer can and will use any force necessary to ensure he minimizes risk of harm to himself and citizens around him.

And you should probably read Tennessee v. Garner.

Or just read my post. I didn't make any statement about whether the use of force was justified or not. I was just noting that the "helpless weakling" narrative presented by Wilson in his testimony (the "Hulk Hogan" line, the general narrative of him being at the mercy of Brown during the altercation by the car) doesn't really hold water.

Straw man. As soon as an individual strikes an officer and engages in a struggle for his weapon, the officer immediately is justified in using leathal force. Period.

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Henry I think you are a great poster but come on. This all happened in the span of a minute or so. Brown had already showed that he was willing to engage Wilson and attempt to extricate his gun. Once he disengaged and temporarily moved away from Wilson, he had two choices - get on the ground and surrender or decide to move back toward the officer. He chose poorly.

Henry is spot on. icon is in way over his head and is just embarrassing himself.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Henry I think you are a great poster but come on. This all happened in the span of a minute or so. Brown had already showed that he was willing to engage Wilson and attempt to extricate his gun. Once he disengaged and temporarily moved away from Wilson, he had two choices - get on the ground and surrender or decide to move back toward the officer. He chose poorly.

Sit down and watch the second hand on your watch for a minute.

My watch has mickey on it..... so now I'm thinking about Disney. And food. And princesses.......... um, what was your question?

 

[Todem]

Any federal action is unlikely. But a civil suit makes sense for the Brown family. There would be a trial. Wilson would have to testify and be cross examined. If he wrongfully killed Michael Brown they can ruin him financially, and the Ferguson police department could be exposed as well.

He was acting as a police officer. I don't see how they could ruin him financially. Any reward would come from the city.

He was not acting as a police officer when he pulled out his weapon, took aim, and unloaded his clip into the decedent. He was a cold-blooded killer, who was tired of taking crap from black youths. It was time to lay down the law.

Oh brother.

 

[Henry Ford]

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Henry I think you are a great poster but come on. This all happened in the span of a minute or so. Brown had already showed that he was willing to engage Wilson and attempt to extricate his gun. Once he disengaged and temporarily moved away from Wilson, he had two choices - get on the ground and surrender or decide to move back toward the officer. He chose poorly.

Sit down and watch the second hand on your watch for a minute.

My watch has mickey on it..... so now I'm thinking about Disney. And food. And princesses.......... um, what was your question?

Something about slipping the princess a mickey at dinner. Now I can't remember.

 

[saintfool]

link?

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement
Comments(134)
Share

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This is a silly argument. I think we can all agree that Brown weighed a lot more than Wilson but that Wilson also wouldn't be a helpless weakling in a scuffle with Brown.

You might want to do some reading into "Escalation of Force" training for law enforcement officers before making silly statements like the bolded. Once a criminal makes the decision to assault an officer, they essentially defer to the officer's judgement as to what is a reasonable use of counter-force. The criminal actively chose to engage the officer, thereby accepting the fact that that the officer can and will use any force necessary to ensure he minimizes risk of harm to himself and citizens around him.

And you should probably read Tennessee v. Garner.

Or just read my post. I didn't make any statement about whether the use of force was justified or not. I was just noting that the "helpless weakling" narrative presented by Wilson in his testimony (the "Hulk Hogan" line, the general narrative of him being at the mercy of Brown during the altercation by the car) doesn't really hold water.

Straw man. As soon as an individual strikes an officer and engages in a struggle for his weapon, the officer immediately is justified in using leathal force. Period.

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Haven't the lines been drawn by now?

I've been out of this thread for a while but it appears things are exactly as I left them.

Did Brown turn and charge the office from just feet away or did the officer have a delay and act out of cruelty and overuse of force? Each in this thread either believes the Brown side or they believe the Wilson side. Or maybe we can admit we don't know.

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

I was really pissed off at the looters last night (still am) and used words like scum and animals to describe them. What really bothered me was not just the fact that they were ruining things for the vast majority of peaceful protestors, but that this was not spontaneous: these ####ers knew what was going to happen and were eager to take advantage of it. That's why so many wore masks.

But some of the rhetoric here is way over the top. We need to keep a little perspective. It would be more accurate to say that the looters were normal people who chose to act like thugs, scum, animals, etc. If caught they should be prosecuted for their crimes. But they don't deserve to die.

They are not normal people. And not all human life is sacred or equal to other human life. Not sure why so many of you pretend or want to convince us and others that we are all the same and nothing really distinguishes us from each other except that a "few" upset individuals threw a temper tantrum.

This Ferguson crowd was filled with Marxist/Communist agitators as well. Did anyone look up RevCom.us, the url that was posted on many of the signs that were being waved around?

I'm actually starting to see a parallel here between you and these "not normal" people as you call them. You both want to resort to violence when faced with a situation where you feel you are being wronged by a segment of the population with whom you cannot relate.

 

[Todd Andrews]

I keep hearing that any time a prosecutor wants an indictment he gets one. Is it possible that the prosecutor didn't actually feel one was warranted and didn't actually want one?. Sure sounds like there was zero evidence that Wilson did anything wrong. I would like to think that prosecutors have a shred of decency and don't just go after anybody involved in a shooting. Maybe there was a grand jury simply to be able to say that there was an objective look at this thing.

If a prosecutor who brings a charge in front of a grand jury makes it sound like there's zero evidence that a potential defendant did anything wrong, there's a massive problem.

And McCulloch has a history of improperly helping accused cops in front of grand juries after they kill unarmed black men....

 

[Sabertooth]

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Michael Browns stepfather last night repeatedly urged protesters to Burn this ##### down after a prosecutor announced that no criminal charges would be filed against the Ferguson, Missouri police officer who killed the unarmed teenager.

Louis Head, an ex-con who is married to Browns mother, Lesley McSpadden, was with McSpadden outside the Ferguson Police Department headquarters Monday evening as prosecutor Robert McCulloch disclosed that a grand jury declined to vote an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson in the August 9 shooting.

After consoling a weeping McSpadden, the 38-year-old Head--who was standing atop a platform in the middle of the agitated crowd of several hundred protesters--began screaming Burn this ##### down!" He did this at least ten times, and at one point yelled for a microphone so that he could broadcast his message beyond the range of his unamplified voice.

While trying to incite the crowd, Head (pictured above) was wearing a commemorative t-shirt with the words I Am Mike Brown and a beanie, both of which bore a silkscreened photo of Brown in his high school cap and gown.

In the days preceding the grand jury announcement, McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. issued statements calling for peaceful protests in the wake of the panel's decision. Head, however, counseled arson. After a night of chaos and rioting in Ferguson, at least 10 businesses and two police cars were destroyed or damaged by fire, and 61 individuals were arrested.

Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records. He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Heads release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.

Along with McSpadden, Head is at the center of an ongoing Feguson Police Department investigation of an incident last month during which three vendors selling commemorative Michael Brown merchandise were assaulted. One of the victims, Michael Brown, Sr.'s mother-in-law, identified McSpadden and Head as among the attackers who ransacked her stands and stole $400 in cash and merchandise valued at $1500.

According to USA Today, McSpadden and Head were married earlier this year, before Brown's killing.

Hope he goes to jail. That's dangerously close to terrorism.

 

[tommyGunZ]

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Henry I think you are a great poster but come on. This all happened in the span of a minute or so. Brown had already showed that he was willing to engage Wilson and attempt to extricate his gun. Once he disengaged and temporarily moved away from Wilson, he had two choices - get on the ground and surrender or decide to move back toward the officer. He chose poorly.

Sit down and watch the second hand on your watch for a minute.

My watch has mickey on it..... so now I'm thinking about Disney. And food. And princesses.......... um, what was your question?

I think Ham knows a good website if you're thinking of planning a trip.

 

[jonessed]

I keep hearing that any time a prosecutor wants an indictment he gets one. Is it possible that the prosecutor didn't actually feel one was warranted and didn't actually want one?. Sure sounds like there was zero evidence that Wilson did anything wrong. I would like to think that prosecutors have a shred of decency and don't just go after anybody involved in a shooting. Maybe there was a grand jury simply to be able to say that there was an objective look at this thing.

If a prosecutor who brings a charge in front of a grand jury makes it sound like there's zero evidence that a potential defendant did anything wrong, there's a massive problem.

And McCulloch has a history of improperly helping accused cops in front of grand juries after they kill unarmed black men....

There's nothing in that article that indicates he did anything improper.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Michael Browns stepfather last night repeatedly urged protesters to Burn this ##### down after a prosecutor announced that no criminal charges would be filed against the Ferguson, Missouri police officer who killed the unarmed teenager.

Louis Head, an ex-con who is married to Browns mother, Lesley McSpadden, was with McSpadden outside the Ferguson Police Department headquarters Monday evening as prosecutor Robert McCulloch disclosed that a grand jury declined to vote an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson in the August 9 shooting.

After consoling a weeping McSpadden, the 38-year-old Head--who was standing atop a platform in the middle of the agitated crowd of several hundred protesters--began screaming Burn this ##### down!" He did this at least ten times, and at one point yelled for a microphone so that he could broadcast his message beyond the range of his unamplified voice.

While trying to incite the crowd, Head (pictured above) was wearing a commemorative t-shirt with the words I Am Mike Brown and a beanie, both of which bore a silkscreened photo of Brown in his high school cap and gown.

In the days preceding the grand jury announcement, McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. issued statements calling for peaceful protests in the wake of the panel's decision. Head, however, counseled arson. After a night of chaos and rioting in Ferguson, at least 10 businesses and two police cars were destroyed or damaged by fire, and 61 individuals were arrested.

Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records. He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Heads release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.

Along with McSpadden, Head is at the center of an ongoing Feguson Police Department investigation of an incident last month during which three vendors selling commemorative Michael Brown merchandise were assaulted. One of the victims, Michael Brown, Sr.'s mother-in-law, identified McSpadden and Head as among the attackers who ransacked her stands and stole $400 in cash and merchandise valued at $1500.

According to USA Today, McSpadden and Head were married earlier this year, before Brown's killing.

Hope he goes to jail. That's dangerously close to terrorism.

No it's not; he's a grieving, angry father.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Michael Browns stepfather last night repeatedly urged protesters to Burn this ##### down after a prosecutor announced that no criminal charges would be filed against the Ferguson, Missouri police officer who killed the unarmed teenager.

Louis Head, an ex-con who is married to Browns mother, Lesley McSpadden, was with McSpadden outside the Ferguson Police Department headquarters Monday evening as prosecutor Robert McCulloch disclosed that a grand jury declined to vote an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson in the August 9 shooting.

After consoling a weeping McSpadden, the 38-year-old Head--who was standing atop a platform in the middle of the agitated crowd of several hundred protesters--began screaming Burn this ##### down!" He did this at least ten times, and at one point yelled for a microphone so that he could broadcast his message beyond the range of his unamplified voice.

While trying to incite the crowd, Head (pictured above) was wearing a commemorative t-shirt with the words I Am Mike Brown and a beanie, both of which bore a silkscreened photo of Brown in his high school cap and gown.

In the days preceding the grand jury announcement, McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. issued statements calling for peaceful protests in the wake of the panel's decision. Head, however, counseled arson. After a night of chaos and rioting in Ferguson, at least 10 businesses and two police cars were destroyed or damaged by fire, and 61 individuals were arrested.

Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records. He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Heads release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.

Along with McSpadden, Head is at the center of an ongoing Feguson Police Department investigation of an incident last month during which three vendors selling commemorative Michael Brown merchandise were assaulted. One of the victims, Michael Brown, Sr.'s mother-in-law, identified McSpadden and Head as among the attackers who ransacked her stands and stole $400 in cash and merchandise valued at $1500.

According to USA Today, McSpadden and Head were married earlier this year, before Brown's killing.

Hope he goes to jail. That's dangerously close to terrorism.

Would be the icing on the cake for many, wouldn't it?

 

[Yankee23Fan]

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Henry I think you are a great poster but come on. This all happened in the span of a minute or so. Brown had already showed that he was willing to engage Wilson and attempt to extricate his gun. Once he disengaged and temporarily moved away from Wilson, he had two choices - get on the ground and surrender or decide to move back toward the officer. He chose poorly.

Sit down and watch the second hand on your watch for a minute.

My watch has mickey on it..... so now I'm thinking about Disney. And food. And princesses.......... um, what was your question?

I think Ham knows a good website if you're thinking of planning a trip.

See, if Tgunz and I can get along and find a common reference point for humor........ there is a point there but I'm really thinking about the chicks they get to be Belle at Disney World. They could literally take my wallet out of my pocket while talking to me and I don't think I would notice or care.

 

[TobiasFunke]

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

Nine out of 12 people, we have complete access to the transcripts and evidence, and they concluded only that there was no probable cause that a crime had been committed. Also, from a practical standpoint grand juries conclude whatever the prosecutor wants them to conclude. Every grand jury "decision" is really just a prosecutor's decision, which is why they almost always agree with the prosecutor when he/she decided to charge someone.

 

[Sabertooth]

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Michael Browns stepfather last night repeatedly urged protesters to Burn this ##### down after a prosecutor announced that no criminal charges would be filed against the Ferguson, Missouri police officer who killed the unarmed teenager.

Louis Head, an ex-con who is married to Browns mother, Lesley McSpadden, was with McSpadden outside the Ferguson Police Department headquarters Monday evening as prosecutor Robert McCulloch disclosed that a grand jury declined to vote an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson in the August 9 shooting.

After consoling a weeping McSpadden, the 38-year-old Head--who was standing atop a platform in the middle of the agitated crowd of several hundred protesters--began screaming Burn this ##### down!" He did this at least ten times, and at one point yelled for a microphone so that he could broadcast his message beyond the range of his unamplified voice.

While trying to incite the crowd, Head (pictured above) was wearing a commemorative t-shirt with the words I Am Mike Brown and a beanie, both of which bore a silkscreened photo of Brown in his high school cap and gown.

In the days preceding the grand jury announcement, McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. issued statements calling for peaceful protests in the wake of the panel's decision. Head, however, counseled arson. After a night of chaos and rioting in Ferguson, at least 10 businesses and two police cars were destroyed or damaged by fire, and 61 individuals were arrested.

Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records. He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Heads release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.

Along with McSpadden, Head is at the center of an ongoing Feguson Police Department investigation of an incident last month during which three vendors selling commemorative Michael Brown merchandise were assaulted. One of the victims, Michael Brown, Sr.'s mother-in-law, identified McSpadden and Head as among the attackers who ransacked her stands and stole $400 in cash and merchandise valued at $1500.

According to USA Today, McSpadden and Head were married earlier this year, before Brown's killing.

Hope he goes to jail. That's dangerously close to terrorism.

No it's not; he's a grieving, angry father.

So? Lots of terrorists have lost loved ones.

 

[Todd Andrews]

This is a silly argument. I think we can all agree that Brown weighed a lot more than Wilson but that Wilson also wouldn't be a helpless weakling in a scuffle with Brown.

You might want to do some reading into "Escalation of Force" training for law enforcement officers before making silly statements like the bolded. Once a criminal makes the decision to assault an officer, they essentially defer to the officer's judgement as to what is a reasonable use of counter-force. The criminal actively chose to engage the officer, thereby accepting the fact that that the officer can and will use any force necessary to ensure he minimizes risk of harm to himself and citizens around him.

And you should probably read Tennessee v. Garner.

Or just read my post. I didn't make any statement about whether the use of force was justified or not. I was just noting that the "helpless weakling" narrative presented by Wilson in his testimony (the "Hulk Hogan" line, the general narrative of him being at the mercy of Brown during the altercation by the car) doesn't really hold water.

Straw man. As soon as an individual strikes an officer and engages in a struggle for his weapon, the officer immediately is justified in using leathal force. Period.

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Haven't the lines been drawn by now?

I've been out of this thread for a while but it appears things are exactly as I left them.

Did Brown turn and charge the office from just feet away or did the officer have a delay and act out of cruelty and overuse of force? Each in this thread either believes the Brown side or they believe the Wilson side. Or maybe we can admit we don't know.

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

There is a major discrepancy in the facts: Brown was found 150 feet from Wilson's car, but Wilson testified that Brown only went 20-30 feet from his car before he turned and allegedly charged Wilson, who shot him multiple times. That is a pretty big difference in distance.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Michael Browns stepfather last night repeatedly urged protesters to Burn this ##### down after a prosecutor announced that no criminal charges would be filed against the Ferguson, Missouri police officer who killed the unarmed teenager.

Louis Head, an ex-con who is married to Browns mother, Lesley McSpadden, was with McSpadden outside the Ferguson Police Department headquarters Monday evening as prosecutor Robert McCulloch disclosed that a grand jury declined to vote an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson in the August 9 shooting.

After consoling a weeping McSpadden, the 38-year-old Head--who was standing atop a platform in the middle of the agitated crowd of several hundred protesters--began screaming Burn this ##### down!" He did this at least ten times, and at one point yelled for a microphone so that he could broadcast his message beyond the range of his unamplified voice.

While trying to incite the crowd, Head (pictured above) was wearing a commemorative t-shirt with the words I Am Mike Brown and a beanie, both of which bore a silkscreened photo of Brown in his high school cap and gown.

In the days preceding the grand jury announcement, McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. issued statements calling for peaceful protests in the wake of the panel's decision. Head, however, counseled arson. After a night of chaos and rioting in Ferguson, at least 10 businesses and two police cars were destroyed or damaged by fire, and 61 individuals were arrested.

Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records. He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Heads release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.

Along with McSpadden, Head is at the center of an ongoing Feguson Police Department investigation of an incident last month during which three vendors selling commemorative Michael Brown merchandise were assaulted. One of the victims, Michael Brown, Sr.'s mother-in-law, identified McSpadden and Head as among the attackers who ransacked her stands and stole $400 in cash and merchandise valued at $1500.

According to USA Today, McSpadden and Head were married earlier this year, before Brown's killing.

Hope he goes to jail. That's dangerously close to terrorism.

Would be the icing on the cake for many, wouldn't it?

Not to start another tangent.... but yelling fire in a crowded theater is not done with impugnity.

 

[HellToupee]

link?

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Smoking gun has it. Google. Story has a pic of step dad

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

Nine out of 12 people, we have complete access to the transcripts and evidence, and they concluded only that there was no probable cause that a crime had been committed. Also, from a practical standpoint grand juries conclude whatever the prosecutor wants them to conclude. Every grand jury "decision" is really just a prosecutor's decision, which is why they almost always agree with the prosecutor when he/she decided to charge someone.

Aren't grand juries bigger, this one was 12 people?

Honestly apologize for being out of the loop but being in thread: how many would have been needed to indict?

 

[Bucky86]

I keep hearing that any time a prosecutor wants an indictment he gets one. Is it possible that the prosecutor didn't actually feel one was warranted and didn't actually want one?. Sure sounds like there was zero evidence that Wilson did anything wrong. I would like to think that prosecutors have a shred of decency and don't just go after anybody involved in a shooting. Maybe there was a grand jury simply to be able to say that there was an objective look at this thing.

If a prosecutor who brings a charge in front of a grand jury makes it sound like there's zero evidence that a potential defendant did anything wrong, there's a massive problem.

And McCulloch has a history of improperly helping accused cops in front of grand juries after they kill unarmed black men....

You can't make this #### up.

 

[Henry Ford]

This is a silly argument. I think we can all agree that Brown weighed a lot more than Wilson but that Wilson also wouldn't be a helpless weakling in a scuffle with Brown.

You might want to do some reading into "Escalation of Force" training for law enforcement officers before making silly statements like the bolded. Once a criminal makes the decision to assault an officer, they essentially defer to the officer's judgement as to what is a reasonable use of counter-force. The criminal actively chose to engage the officer, thereby accepting the fact that that the officer can and will use any force necessary to ensure he minimizes risk of harm to himself and citizens around him.

And you should probably read Tennessee v. Garner.

Or just read my post. I didn't make any statement about whether the use of force was justified or not. I was just noting that the "helpless weakling" narrative presented by Wilson in his testimony (the "Hulk Hogan" line, the general narrative of him being at the mercy of Brown during the altercation by the car) doesn't really hold water.

Straw man. As soon as an individual strikes an officer and engages in a struggle for his weapon, the officer immediately is justified in using leathal force. Period.

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Haven't the lines been drawn by now?

I've been out of this thread for a while but it appears things are exactly as I left them.

Did Brown turn and charge the office from just feet away or did the officer have a delay and act out of cruelty and overuse of force? Each in this thread either believes the Brown side or they believe the Wilson side. Or maybe we can admit we don't know.

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

Twelve. And what evidence do they have that we don't? As far as I know everything was released.

 

[SIDA!]

Anybody ever hear what the racial makeup of the grand jury is?

One black man, two black women, six white men, and three white women.

Does it have to be unanimous?

Need 9 to indict.

Thanks,,,Wow broken down this could come off a little suspicious if you already feel wronged.

You would think they would've selected at least a 50/50 grand jury.

Grand juries are selected and serve for one year terms. This panel was seated long before this case.

 

[jonessed]

This is a silly argument. I think we can all agree that Brown weighed a lot more than Wilson but that Wilson also wouldn't be a helpless weakling in a scuffle with Brown.

You might want to do some reading into "Escalation of Force" training for law enforcement officers before making silly statements like the bolded. Once a criminal makes the decision to assault an officer, they essentially defer to the officer's judgement as to what is a reasonable use of counter-force. The criminal actively chose to engage the officer, thereby accepting the fact that that the officer can and will use any force necessary to ensure he minimizes risk of harm to himself and citizens around him.

And you should probably read Tennessee v. Garner.

Please do unpack the relevance of a case discussing shooting a suspect while pursuit through neighborhood yards holds bearing over shooting a suspect who's actively assaulting an officer and attempting to steal his firearm, then charging him again in a secondary engagement?

The relevance is that it is not established that the suspect was shot while actively assaulting an officer and attempting to steal his firearm. The suspect's body was nearly 200 feet from the officer. Which means that there is a dispute of material fact as to whether the suspect was, in fact, fleeing. So long as that ambiguity exists, probable cause exists.

Did you read the witness accounts? It seems that's exactly what was established. Again, simply charging an officer after already clearly displaying previous intent to do serious/lethal harm (punching and attempting to steal firearm) is a clear path to lethal force in ANY LEO use of force continuum training.

The shot that killed Brown was within ten feet. At least according to the coroner.Nobody can hit a running target at 200 feet with a pistol anyway.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Michael Browns stepfather last night repeatedly urged protesters to Burn this ##### down after a prosecutor announced that no criminal charges would be filed against the Ferguson, Missouri police officer who killed the unarmed teenager.

Louis Head, an ex-con who is married to Browns mother, Lesley McSpadden, was with McSpadden outside the Ferguson Police Department headquarters Monday evening as prosecutor Robert McCulloch disclosed that a grand jury declined to vote an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson in the August 9 shooting.

After consoling a weeping McSpadden, the 38-year-old Head--who was standing atop a platform in the middle of the agitated crowd of several hundred protesters--began screaming Burn this ##### down!" He did this at least ten times, and at one point yelled for a microphone so that he could broadcast his message beyond the range of his unamplified voice.

While trying to incite the crowd, Head (pictured above) was wearing a commemorative t-shirt with the words I Am Mike Brown and a beanie, both of which bore a silkscreened photo of Brown in his high school cap and gown.

In the days preceding the grand jury announcement, McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. issued statements calling for peaceful protests in the wake of the panel's decision. Head, however, counseled arson. After a night of chaos and rioting in Ferguson, at least 10 businesses and two police cars were destroyed or damaged by fire, and 61 individuals were arrested.

Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records. He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Heads release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.

Along with McSpadden, Head is at the center of an ongoing Feguson Police Department investigation of an incident last month during which three vendors selling commemorative Michael Brown merchandise were assaulted. One of the victims, Michael Brown, Sr.'s mother-in-law, identified McSpadden and Head as among the attackers who ransacked her stands and stole $400 in cash and merchandise valued at $1500.

According to USA Today, McSpadden and Head were married earlier this year, before Brown's killing.

Hope he goes to jail. That's dangerously close to terrorism.

No it's not; he's a grieving, angry father.

So? Lots of terrorists have lost loved ones.

So in this country a man has a right to call for vengeance for his son's death. We don't bomb people in Afghanistan because they call out for vengeance on the US just because his child was killed in an air strike, terrorism is a whole other thing. You're just talking charging him for plain incitement, and even that I don't agree with. This is a free country with free speech. I'm sure there are others who maybe we could discuss maybe getting over the line, but the father, no way, let it go.

 

[Henry Ford]

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

Nine out of 12 people, we have complete access to the transcripts and evidence, and they concluded only that there was no probable cause that a crime had been committed. Also, from a practical standpoint grand juries conclude whatever the prosecutor wants them to conclude. Every grand jury "decision" is really just a prosecutor's decision, which is why they almost always agree with the prosecutor when he/she decided to charge someone.

Aren't grand juries bigger, this one was 12 people?

Honestly apologize for being out of the loop but being in thread: how many would have been needed to indict?

You're thinking of juries bel grande. They also have sour cream.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I keep hearing that any time a prosecutor wants an indictment he gets one. Is it possible that the prosecutor didn't actually feel one was warranted and didn't actually want one?. Sure sounds like there was zero evidence that Wilson did anything wrong. I would like to think that prosecutors have a shred of decency and don't just go after anybody involved in a shooting. Maybe there was a grand jury simply to be able to say that there was an objective look at this thing.

If a prosecutor who brings a charge in front of a grand jury makes it sound like there's zero evidence that a potential defendant did anything wrong, there's a massive problem.

And McCulloch has a history of improperly helping accused cops in front of grand juries after they kill unarmed black men....

There's nothing in that article that indicates he did anything improper.

True. Try this article instead. I'd say that disregarding complaints that you failed to properly prosecute a police shooting by noting that the victims were "bums" probably qualifies as improper. Although his hilarious Axl Rose obsession kind of makes up for it.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This is a silly argument. I think we can all agree that Brown weighed a lot more than Wilson but that Wilson also wouldn't be a helpless weakling in a scuffle with Brown.

You might want to do some reading into "Escalation of Force" training for law enforcement officers before making silly statements like the bolded. Once a criminal makes the decision to assault an officer, they essentially defer to the officer's judgement as to what is a reasonable use of counter-force. The criminal actively chose to engage the officer, thereby accepting the fact that that the officer can and will use any force necessary to ensure he minimizes risk of harm to himself and citizens around him.

And you should probably read Tennessee v. Garner.

Or just read my post. I didn't make any statement about whether the use of force was justified or not. I was just noting that the "helpless weakling" narrative presented by Wilson in his testimony (the "Hulk Hogan" line, the general narrative of him being at the mercy of Brown during the altercation by the car) doesn't really hold water.

Straw man. As soon as an individual strikes an officer and engages in a struggle for his weapon, the officer immediately is justified in using leathal force. Period.

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Haven't the lines been drawn by now?

I've been out of this thread for a while but it appears things are exactly as I left them.

Did Brown turn and charge the office from just feet away or did the officer have a delay and act out of cruelty and overuse of force? Each in this thread either believes the Brown side or they believe the Wilson side. Or maybe we can admit we don't know.

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

Twelve. And what evidence do they have that we don't? As far as I know everything was released.

Didn't they hear live testimony? Do we have video of that? I would think not. Credibility determinations are a big part of things.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

Nine out of 12 people, we have complete access to the transcripts and evidence, and they concluded only that there was no probable cause that a crime had been committed. Also, from a practical standpoint grand juries conclude whatever the prosecutor wants them to conclude. Every grand jury "decision" is really just a prosecutor's decision, which is why they almost always agree with the prosecutor when he/she decided to charge someone.

Aren't grand juries bigger, this one was 12 people?

Honestly apologize for being out of the loop but being in thread: how many would have been needed to indict?

You're thinking of juries bel grande. They also have sour cream.

I actually have to get lunch at this very moment, so thank you for the reminder.

 

[Cyclones]

I keep hearing that any time a prosecutor wants an indictment he gets one. Is it possible that the prosecutor didn't actually feel one was warranted and didn't actually want one?. Sure sounds like there was zero evidence that Wilson did anything wrong. I would like to think that prosecutors have a shred of decency and don't just go after anybody involved in a shooting. Maybe there was a grand jury simply to be able to say that there was an objective look at this thing.

If a prosecutor who brings a charge in front of a grand jury makes it sound like there's zero evidence that a potential defendant did anything wrong, there's a massive problem.

And McCulloch has a history of improperly helping accused cops in front of grand juries after they kill unarmed black men....

You can't make this #### up.

Wait, so they are using a case in which a drug dealer and his buddy were surrounded by cops, knew they were surrounded by cops, chose to use their car as a weapon and were subsequently shot as evidence that this guy sides with police? WTF ever.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

This is a silly argument. I think we can all agree that Brown weighed a lot more than Wilson but that Wilson also wouldn't be a helpless weakling in a scuffle with Brown.

You might want to do some reading into "Escalation of Force" training for law enforcement officers before making silly statements like the bolded. Once a criminal makes the decision to assault an officer, they essentially defer to the officer's judgement as to what is a reasonable use of counter-force. The criminal actively chose to engage the officer, thereby accepting the fact that that the officer can and will use any force necessary to ensure he minimizes risk of harm to himself and citizens around him.

And you should probably read Tennessee v. Garner.

Or just read my post. I didn't make any statement about whether the use of force was justified or not. I was just noting that the "helpless weakling" narrative presented by Wilson in his testimony (the "Hulk Hogan" line, the general narrative of him being at the mercy of Brown during the altercation by the car) doesn't really hold water.

Straw man. As soon as an individual strikes an officer and engages in a struggle for his weapon, the officer immediately is justified in using leathal force. Period.

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Haven't the lines been drawn by now?

I've been out of this thread for a while but it appears things are exactly as I left them.

Did Brown turn and charge the office from just feet away or did the officer have a delay and act out of cruelty and overuse of force? Each in this thread either believes the Brown side or they believe the Wilson side. Or maybe we can admit we don't know.

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

We don't know. That's kind of the point. I'm reading Dorian Johnson's grand jury testimony right now. According to him, Brown never charged Wilson. Never reached in the car. Wilson initiated the confrontation. Now, I certainly understand why a jury might choose to disregard Johnson's testimony in a criminal trial. A jury is entitled to find Darren Wilson more credible than Dorian Johnson or vice versa. But at this stage, such weighing of credibility is really not the grand jury's role. Nor would an eyewitness like Johnson typically be cross-examined in the way that he appears to have been in this transcript (they continually come back to the convenience store robbery, which isn't really relevant). Maybe more grand jury proceedings should be that way. But if so, that should be a protection that isn't only enjoyed by law enforcement officers.

 

[Sabertooth]

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Michael Browns stepfather last night repeatedly urged protesters to Burn this ##### down after a prosecutor announced that no criminal charges would be filed against the Ferguson, Missouri police officer who killed the unarmed teenager.

Louis Head, an ex-con who is married to Browns mother, Lesley McSpadden, was with McSpadden outside the Ferguson Police Department headquarters Monday evening as prosecutor Robert McCulloch disclosed that a grand jury declined to vote an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson in the August 9 shooting.

After consoling a weeping McSpadden, the 38-year-old Head--who was standing atop a platform in the middle of the agitated crowd of several hundred protesters--began screaming Burn this ##### down!" He did this at least ten times, and at one point yelled for a microphone so that he could broadcast his message beyond the range of his unamplified voice.

While trying to incite the crowd, Head (pictured above) was wearing a commemorative t-shirt with the words I Am Mike Brown and a beanie, both of which bore a silkscreened photo of Brown in his high school cap and gown.

In the days preceding the grand jury announcement, McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. issued statements calling for peaceful protests in the wake of the panel's decision. Head, however, counseled arson. After a night of chaos and rioting in Ferguson, at least 10 businesses and two police cars were destroyed or damaged by fire, and 61 individuals were arrested.

Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records. He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Heads release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.

Along with McSpadden, Head is at the center of an ongoing Feguson Police Department investigation of an incident last month during which three vendors selling commemorative Michael Brown merchandise were assaulted. One of the victims, Michael Brown, Sr.'s mother-in-law, identified McSpadden and Head as among the attackers who ransacked her stands and stole $400 in cash and merchandise valued at $1500.

According to USA Today, McSpadden and Head were married earlier this year, before Brown's killing.

Hope he goes to jail. That's dangerously close to terrorism.

No it's not; he's a grieving, angry father.

So? Lots of terrorists have lost loved ones.

So in this country a man has a right to call for vengeance for his son's death. We don't bomb people in Afghanistan because they call out for vengeance on the US just because his child was killed in an air strike, terrorism is a whole other thing. You're just talking charging him for plain incitement, and even that I don't agree with. This is a free country with free speech. I'm sure there are others who maybe we could discuss maybe getting over the line, but the father, no way, let it go.

So I can order a hit on somebody and just claim "free speech?"

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Emotion always over takes logic in instances like this....just the way it is and always has been

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This is a silly argument. I think we can all agree that Brown weighed a lot more than Wilson but that Wilson also wouldn't be a helpless weakling in a scuffle with Brown.

You might want to do some reading into "Escalation of Force" training for law enforcement officers before making silly statements like the bolded. Once a criminal makes the decision to assault an officer, they essentially defer to the officer's judgement as to what is a reasonable use of counter-force. The criminal actively chose to engage the officer, thereby accepting the fact that that the officer can and will use any force necessary to ensure he minimizes risk of harm to himself and citizens around him.

And you should probably read Tennessee v. Garner.

Or just read my post. I didn't make any statement about whether the use of force was justified or not. I was just noting that the "helpless weakling" narrative presented by Wilson in his testimony (the "Hulk Hogan" line, the general narrative of him being at the mercy of Brown during the altercation by the car) doesn't really hold water.

Straw man. As soon as an individual strikes an officer and engages in a struggle for his weapon, the officer immediately is justified in using leathal force. Period.

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Haven't the lines been drawn by now?

I've been out of this thread for a while but it appears things are exactly as I left them.

Did Brown turn and charge the office from just feet away or did the officer have a delay and act out of cruelty and overuse of force? Each in this thread either believes the Brown side or they believe the Wilson side. Or maybe we can admit we don't know.

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

We don't know. That's kind of the point. I'm reading Dorian Johnson's grand jury testimony right now. According to him, Brown never charged Wilson. Never reached in the car. Wilson initiated the confrontation. Now, I certainly understand why a jury might choose to disregard Johnson's testimony in a criminal trial. A jury is entitled to find Darren Wilson more credible than Dorian Johnson or vice versa. But at this stage, such weighing of credibility is really not the grand jury's role. Nor would an eyewitness like Johnson typically be cross-examined in the way that he appears to have been in this transcript (they continually come back to the convenience store robbery, which isn't really relevant). Maybe more grand jury proceedings should be that way. But if so, that should be a protection that isn't only enjoyed by law enforcement officers.

I mentioned this to Henry but live testimony is a whole other cat - the jurors make credibility determinations. Do you not think it possible that the jurors just did not believe Johnson?

 

[skol asylum]

link?

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Smoking gun has it. Google. Story has a pic of step dad

Video on CNN a couple minutes ago.

 

[Henry Ford]

This is a silly argument. I think we can all agree that Brown weighed a lot more than Wilson but that Wilson also wouldn't be a helpless weakling in a scuffle with Brown.

You might want to do some reading into "Escalation of Force" training for law enforcement officers before making silly statements like the bolded. Once a criminal makes the decision to assault an officer, they essentially defer to the officer's judgement as to what is a reasonable use of counter-force. The criminal actively chose to engage the officer, thereby accepting the fact that that the officer can and will use any force necessary to ensure he minimizes risk of harm to himself and citizens around him.

And you should probably read Tennessee v. Garner.

Or just read my post. I didn't make any statement about whether the use of force was justified or not. I was just noting that the "helpless weakling" narrative presented by Wilson in his testimony (the "Hulk Hogan" line, the general narrative of him being at the mercy of Brown during the altercation by the car) doesn't really hold water.

Straw man. As soon as an individual strikes an officer and engages in a struggle for his weapon, the officer immediately is justified in using leathal force. Period.

For how long? Like, if the guy escapes and gets home, gets a good night's sleep, wakes up the next morning, brews his coffee, and then hears a knock at the door, when he opens the door can the officer shoot him?

Haven't the lines been drawn by now?

I've been out of this thread for a while but it appears things are exactly as I left them.

Did Brown turn and charge the office from just feet away or did the officer have a delay and act out of cruelty and overuse of force? Each in this thread either believes the Brown side or they believe the Wilson side. Or maybe we can admit we don't know.

We know this: a grand jury (of what, 23-24 people?) have heard evidence we have not heard and requiring far less than what is needed at trial have concluded that the policeman is telling the truth.

Twelve. And what evidence do they have that we don't? As far as I know everything was released.

Didn't they hear live testimony? Do we have video of that? I would think not. Credibility determinations are a big part of things.

They did, and we do not. One of the issues some people have is what witnesses were called live and what witnesses were not.

 

[Bucky86]

I have a question..

Who does the questioning of these witnesses?

 

[Todd Andrews]

I keep hearing that any time a prosecutor wants an indictment he gets one. Is it possible that the prosecutor didn't actually feel one was warranted and didn't actually want one?. Sure sounds like there was zero evidence that Wilson did anything wrong. I would like to think that prosecutors have a shred of decency and don't just go after anybody involved in a shooting. Maybe there was a grand jury simply to be able to say that there was an objective look at this thing.

If a prosecutor who brings a charge in front of a grand jury makes it sound like there's zero evidence that a potential defendant did anything wrong, there's a massive problem.

And McCulloch has a history of improperly helping accused cops in front of grand juries after they kill unarmed black men....

There's nothing in that article that indicates he did anything improper.

Come on....

But a later federal investigation showed that the car had never come at the two officers: Murray never took his car out of reverse.

An exhaustive St. Louis Post-Dispatch investigation found that only three of the 13 detectives who testified had said the car moved forward: the two who unloaded their guns and a third whose testimony was, as McCulloch admitted, “obviously…completely wrong.” McCulloch never introduced independent evidence to help clarify for the grand jury whether Murray’s car moved forward.

McCulloch lied in the Jack in the Box case:

The Post-Dispatch found that only three of the 13 detectives who testified before the grand jury in the Jack in the Box case said the suspect’s car moved forward, toward the officers who shot him and his passenger. McCulloch had insisted that “every witness who was out there testified that it made some forward motion.”

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Michael Brown's Stepfather Urged Protesters To "Burn This ##### Down" After Grand Jury Announcement

Comments(134)

Share

Michael Browns stepfather last night repeatedly urged protesters to Burn this ##### down after a prosecutor announced that no criminal charges would be filed against the Ferguson, Missouri police officer who killed the unarmed teenager.

Louis Head, an ex-con who is married to Browns mother, Lesley McSpadden, was with McSpadden outside the Ferguson Police Department headquarters Monday evening as prosecutor Robert McCulloch disclosed that a grand jury declined to vote an indictment against Officer Darren Wilson in the August 9 shooting.

After consoling a weeping McSpadden, the 38-year-old Head--who was standing atop a platform in the middle of the agitated crowd of several hundred protesters--began screaming Burn this ##### down!" He did this at least ten times, and at one point yelled for a microphone so that he could broadcast his message beyond the range of his unamplified voice.

While trying to incite the crowd, Head (pictured above) was wearing a commemorative t-shirt with the words I Am Mike Brown and a beanie, both of which bore a silkscreened photo of Brown in his high school cap and gown.

In the days preceding the grand jury announcement, McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. issued statements calling for peaceful protests in the wake of the panel's decision. Head, however, counseled arson. After a night of chaos and rioting in Ferguson, at least 10 businesses and two police cars were destroyed or damaged by fire, and 61 individuals were arrested.

Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records. He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Heads release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.

Along with McSpadden, Head is at the center of an ongoing Feguson Police Department investigation of an incident last month during which three vendors selling commemorative Michael Brown merchandise were assaulted. One of the victims, Michael Brown, Sr.'s mother-in-law, identified McSpadden and Head as among the attackers who ransacked her stands and stole $400 in cash and merchandise valued at $1500.

According to USA Today, McSpadden and Head were married earlier this year, before Brown's killing.

Hope he goes to jail. That's dangerously close to terrorism.

No it's not; he's a grieving, angry father.

So? Lots of terrorists have lost loved ones.

So in this country a man has a right to call for vengeance for his son's death. We don't bomb people in Afghanistan because they call out for vengeance on the US just because his child was killed in an air strike, terrorism is a whole other thing. You're just talking charging him for plain incitement, and even that I don't agree with. This is a free country with free speech. I'm sure there are others who maybe we could discuss maybe getting over the line, but the father, no way, let it go.

So I can order a hit on somebody and just claim "free speech?"

No, then you are a conspirator and a principal. - But as long as you're not King Henry talking about Thomas Becket you can say 'I wish someone would put a hit out on this guy, he deserves to die!'

 

[Sabertooth]

I have a question..

Who does the questioning of these witnesses?

The stepfather I think.