Ferguson grand jury documents withheld

[kpete]

Neither the audio recording nor the transcript of Johnson's FBI interview was included in the materials released.
KSDK in St. Louis has the story.

A team of investigative reporters from around the country reviewed the transcripts released by McCulloch's office, which included law enforcement interviews with 24 witnesses. Most conspicuous in its absence was the joint federal-county interview with the witness who had been closest to the deadly confrontation, Michael Brown's friend Dorian Johnson.

McCulloch's office blamed the Feds:

McCulloch's executive assistant, Ed Magee, said the office released everything it still had when the case was closed, but had "turned over and relinquished control" of some FBI's interviews conducted in connection with the shooting.

There is one problem with this story that must be noted. The KSDK piece says:

McCulloch's office labeled the witness interview transcripts it released by witness number, up to Witness #64. But only 24 different witnesses' interviews with law enforcement were included in the information released.

...............



MORE:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/08/ferguson-grand-jury-documents-withheld/20072311/


via:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/08/1350212/--Ferguson-Grand-Jury-Documents-Withheld

[Faux pas]

1. Kickin'

[brush]

16. I posted this in GD but it's not getting traction . . . let's fight to bypass the two biased DAs

I think the protests against police violence are great but need to be more targeted

Since "no true bill" was delivered in both Ferguson and Staten Island, jeopardy does not exist so reconvening the grand juries, with special prosecutors of course, would not constitute double jeopardy of Wilson or Pantaleo.

I say work to get the cases of those killers back before grand juries without the prosecutor shenanigans that went on in the first proceedings so that indictments can be reached.

Legal advisers, experienced activists and fund raisers can help with this.

I know this is the anti-thesis of the Occupy movement but there seems to be a need of an organizational structure that can formulate tactics to work towards concrete, targeted goals and not just the broad ideals of ending police violence towards people of color.

I don't think that we just have to accept that the grand juries have spoken and that there is no recourse against these two murderer cops.

Reconvening the grand juries can happen.

[GeorgeGist]

2. The lies keep coming ...

meanwhile Darren Wilson is now a millionaire.

[Flatulo]

9. Wilson has cashed in on this? No shit? What, book and movie deals?

[benz380]

12. Money from donations, not a book or movie deal yet. N/T

[aggiesal]

15. 2 posts? WOW! got you early ...

Welcome to DU

[aggiesal]

13. I heard he has a $1,000,000 defence fund ...

Also that he was paid to do interviews
http://www.alternet.org/abc-reportedly-paid-darren-wilson-six-figure-fee-interview

[Stardust]

14. Well, Wilson was paid "a high six-figure fee" for an interview.

<snip>

ABC offered Darren Wilson a “mid-to-high” six-figure payment to give his first and only public interview on the network, according to the website Got News. An unnamed source from NBC reportedly told the website that both networks engaged in a bidding war to score the first interview with Wilson but NBC backed out after its rival “upped the ante.”

http://www.alternet.org/abc-reportedly-paid-darren-wilson-six-figure-fee-interview

He hasn't amassed millions (yet), however, I personally could live quite comfortably on that.

[uponit7771]

3. McCluckCluck bout admitted to Lawrence that the GJ instructions were wrong

[logosoco]

4. K&R

I think they were hoping people really weren't paying attention.
I have been reading the transcripts (slowly!) and I am amazed at what I am seeing.

[niyad]

5. does this actually surprise anyone?

[spanone]

6. how utterly convenient.

[Chico Man]

7. Isn't the Fed investigation ongoing?

[cstanleytech]

20. I recommend

http://www.npr.org/2014/12/02/368041073/a-look-at-the-federal-investigations-into-michael-browns-death

[Chico Man]

21. Ok...

Still this is trying to make something of nothing..

"the federal government specifically asked the county not to release records that are part of the FBI's ongoing Civil Rights probe."


There you go.

[2naSalit]

8. Apparently

they were hoping that the public was dumbed down enough to not be able to notice the difference between 24 and 64.

Institutionalized corruption is what we still have after all the protesting and fudged elections. I see that we have a long, hard row to hoe for the foreseeable future if we ever expect our country to stop destroying itself.

[Chico Man]

22. Maybe the OP thought the same of us here on DU

At least, if you read the article, the reason is quite clear:

"Asked about that, Magee said the federal government specifically asked the county not to release records that are part of the FBI's ongoing Civil Rights probe."

[2naSalit]

29. Indeed

somehow I took that to be the reason yet the prosecutor seemed to think that what he released was the end of the line for any and all further prosecution attempts.

I'll have to review that, thanks.

[Omaha Steve]

10. I didn't see this coming at all

[heaven05]

11. geez!!!!

How stupid they think we all are. It's insulting and demeaning. The hit's just keep coming.

[C Moon]

17. "The batteries were dead" keeps ringing in my head. There have been coverups since the beginning.

[TeeYiYi]

19. All things considered...

...it has to be one of the most expensive coverups in history.

TYY

[Spazito]

18. McCulloch assumed no one cared, no one would actually read the transcripts...

never mind notice what was missing, the deliberate sabotaging of the Grand Jury process by giving an unconstitutional statute to the jurors and then, at the very last minute, give the correct statute without any explanation of the difference.

Racists like McCulloch assumes everyone thinks like him and doesn't care that he used the Grand Jury process to convict the victim while protecting the murderer.

[justiceischeap]

23. I think the question is wrong...

It doesn't matter what has been withheld from the public but what, if any, evidence was withheld from the grand jury and therefore the public isn't aware of it.

Since it was a grand jury, the prosecutor didn't have to provide all the evidence to them and if he didn't provide all the evidence, he didn't necessarily release all the evidence.

I still want to know what direction the bullet that ended up in that woman's apartment came from... was this bullet fired at Brown's back and miss? Without knowing where the woman's apartment is in conjunction to where Wilson was firing from, we'll never know.

[TorchTheWitch]

27. the prosecutor can do whatever they like in a grand jury proceeding

Which is why we need to be shed of them. Half the states stopped using them given that they're designed to ignore the constitutional rights of the accused and they're entirely secret in favor of the adversarial preliminary hearing that reviews all the evidence, that's presided over by a judge and where the rights of the accused are preserved and all in public. As it should be.

No other country that has a common law legal system uses grand juries except the US.

As for this alleged wayward bullet... what does that have to do with probable cause? Seeing as apparently some number of bullets were fired than that which hit Brown, they obviously went somewhere. Seeing as there is no law that requires a police officer to never miss their intended target or that every one that does hit their intended target has to stay there, what does this apparent wayward bullet have to do with anything other than curiosity? There's no evidence to suggest that Wilson was just firing around all over the place willy nilly and hit Brown by accident... we already know that he aimed at and fired at Brown with the intension of hitting him, so why would any prosecutor care what happened to any wayward bullets when should any exist they don't have anything to do with probable cause nor is there any possible charge concerning missed shots for which he could be indicted for?

Are you aware that MO law concerning use of force by police is allowed in certain circumstances when a suspect is fleeing?

563.046. Law enforcement officer’s use of force in making an arrest.

1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.

2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful.

3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only

(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or

(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested

(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or

(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or

(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.

4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.

http://lawofselfdefense.com/statute/mo-563-046-law-enforcement-officers-use-of-force-in-making-an-arrest/

[justiceischeap]

30. I am aware of Missouri's law regarding this

however, I'm also aware of the Supreme Court law that trumps this:

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)[1], was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, he or she may use deadly force to prevent escape only if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner

Which is why there was such debate around whether Michael Brown charged Wilson or not. Claiming that Brown charged the officer covers his ass and puts this ruling in play... otherwise, Wilson has broken the law.

[joeglow3]

24. On the surface, this doesn't bother me.

If the Federal government asked them to withhold info. until they were finished, that makes complete sense. What confuses me is why this was not explained up front.

[TorchTheWitch]

25. who cares when no one is reading them anyway n/t

[gollygee]

26. Obstruction of justice.

[davidn3600]

28. I dont think they can release certain things critical to the federal investigation

[YarnAddict]

31. The wingnut explanation for this--

--is that Dorian told (their version) of The Truth to the FBI, and that the transcripts and video of The Truth was available to the Grand Jury, but that he was permitted to "lie" in his testimony to protect his life.

In what universe does that even make sense???