Patterico's Pontifications

1/5/2015

ACLU Files Lawsuit On Behalf Of Ferguson Grand Juror

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:25 pm



[guest post by Dana]

The ACLU, on behalf of a Ferguson grand juror, has filed a lawsuit requesting the lifetime gag order be removed so that the juror may publicly discuss the case:

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of an unnamed juror who wants to speak about the investigation but would be in violation of Missouri law by doing so. The lawsuit also questions St. Louis County prosecutor Bob McCulloch’s characterization that “all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges.”

The suit was filed against McCulloch, who oversaw the investigation, because his office would be responsible for bringing charges against the juror, according to the ACLU. McCulloch’s spokesman, Ed Magee, said his office had not seen the lawsuit and declined immediate comment.

“Right now there are only 12 people who can’t talk about the evidence out there,” ACLU attorney Tony Rothert said. “The people who know the most — those 12 people are sworn to secrecy. What (the grand juror) wants is to be able to be part of the conversation.”

Further,

The grand juror behind the lawsuit believes “the current information available about the grand jurors’ views is not entirely accurate — especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges,” the lawsuit contends. “Moreover, the public characterization of the grand jurors’ view of witnesses and evidence does not accord with Plaintiff’s own.”

The suit does not seek to allow grand jurors in all Missouri cases to be free to discuss proceedings. But it argues that the Ferguson case was unique, and that allowing the juror to speak would benefit the national debate about race and police tactics that was sparked by the shooting.

Addressing the secrecy of a grand jury, Rothert commented:

The Supreme Court has said that grand jury secrecy must be weighed against the juror’s First Amendment rights on a case-by-case basis. The rules of secrecy must yield because this is a highly unusual circumstance. The First Amendment prevents the state from imposing a lifetime gag order in cases where the prosecuting attorney has purported to be transparent.

(emphasis added)

–Dana

73 Responses to “ACLU Files Lawsuit On Behalf Of Ferguson Grand Juror”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (8e74ce)

  2. The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of an unnamed juror who wants to be paid to speak about the investigation…

    FIFY

    Craig Mc (299f38)

  3. this will NOT end well, no matter what.

    over/under on a race war in the next two years?

    redc1c4 (a6e73d)

  4. This raises the question of what, if anything, the grand juror told the ACLU. (and some people may be thinking the grand juror has something dramatic to say)

    I noticed the words “any charges”

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  5. I question the timing.

    seeRpea (303c15)

  6. Another bum rush on the judicial system.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  7. There are eleven necessary parties missing from the lawsuit. The grand jurors who might not want this a33hole from selling their deliberations. That’s whom the secrecy statutes are designed to protect. Jurors who want to be able to discuss the case freely and comprehensively, in the jury room, and reach as fair and unbiased a decision as possible. Are you there, McCulloch?

    nk (dbc370)

  8. Craig MC has it correct…

    Money is at stake here. A tell all book, an interview on GMA, a sit down with an awesome (Patterico’s Pontifications)…

    This is not about the freedom to speak of the process; this is about cashing in because you “won” the lottery by random selection to be a juror.

    Ryan (8243d6)

  9. Ferguson is so 2014

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  10. May the fleas of a thousand camels infest the armpits of this not-so-grand juror and one Tony Rothert in perpetuity.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  11. And we know who will feel safe telling their version of things and getting paid for it,
    and those who will want to stay in hiding for fear of retribution.

    “the current information available about the grand jurors’ views is not entirely accurate — especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges,” the lawsuit contends.

    And I contend that statement is a not entirely accurate description of the current information available. Anybody who has followed things and can think knows that the Grand jury decision did not have to be unanimous, but that we do not and are not allowed by law to know what the vote was.

    I think the odds say that 1 in 12 Americans probably believe we never landed on the moon or that 9/11 was an inside conspiracy. We know more than 1 in 12 share Obama’s and Holder’s views of the world and are inclined to believe what the witnesses said who later recanted, preferring to believe they were pressured into recanting. There were 3 autopsies done, and none of them could be made to support the hands up/shot in the back meme.

    The legal profession should ostracize the ACLU and its lawyers involved in such things that “undermine the fabric of society”, instead of holding them up as the last bastion in defense of freedom.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  12. All of the testimony that was presented to the grand jury has been released, correct?
    So the fight is not over making the actual grand jury testimony available for public inspection, but to let one jury spout his opinions about the process.

    I say if that information is deemed worthy of public scrutiny, contract somebody to do private interviews with them all, publish the findings with all names held in secret, and the proceeds of the book either split equally among the jurors or to the Ferguson rebuilding fund.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  13. I think youse guys is alla wet about da ACLU. It’s a gooda thinga to know how jurors vote and watta theya say ina deliberations.

    nino korleone (dbc370)

  14. 12. Who could be trusted?

    I suppose you could have a judge commission a report from someone had previously written things that did not quote people by name – but then you’d have the issue of whether all pointsof view are getting in.

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  15. Megyn was pointing out the Maoist mantra, the menu mau mau’s are chanting is spurious, as with everything in the narrative,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  16. I recall several back and forth reports in mid December about missing or withheld testimony. Here’s an excerpt from KSDK NewsChannel 5, St. Louis dated 12/13/14. (Emphasis and parentheticals added)

    Dorian Johnson interview withheld

    …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. (Johnson was Brown’s accomplice in the convenience store strong-arm robbery and made the initial claim that Brown had his hands up and was executed by Officer Wilson.)

    Transcripts of the grand jury proceedings indicate that interview was conducted on Aug. 13, four days after the shooting, and lasted more than two hours. Transcripts of that interview were provided to grand jurors, who then listened to a recording of it in its entirety, the records show.

    While McCulloch’s office provided the public with recordings of six different television interviews Johnson conducted with local and national media, there is no record of what Johnson told law enforcement prior to his grand jury testimony. Neither the audio recording, nor the transcript of Johnson’s FBI interview were included in the materials released…

    Since then additional reports have indicated that all the testimony heard by the Grand Jury has been released. But that still doesn’t account for what Johnson might have said during interviews prior to his 8/13/14 joint federal-county interview. Nor do media accounts indicate how Johnson suddenly was able to secure employment by St. Louis government authorities.

    ropelight (ef7142)

  17. Johnson has a prisoner industry job as part of his “alternate disposition” for some crime he committed, I think.

    nk (dbc370)

  18. Sammy, I totally agree with your point about how on earth would there ever be agreement for such a thing to happen.

    In one way, if it never happened that would be just fine. Everybody already knows not everyone agrees. I don’t know how important it is to make public testimony that has been proven to be false because of the physical evidence as well as more reliable conflicting testimony.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  19. It would help the national debate? The race war must be running out of steam. Better throw more gasoline on the fire.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  20. This is Dorian Johnson’s grand jury testimony, compared with his FBI etc interview by St Louis public radio reporters:

    http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/interview-dorian-johnson-among-new-grand-jury-documents-released

    The grand jury also watched all the broadcast media interviews of witnesses that the prosecutor could get his hands on.

    ropelight (ef7142) — 1/6/2015 @ 7:22 am

    But that still doesn’t account for what Johnson might have said during interviews prior to his 8/13/14 joint federal-county interview.

    I believe that was the only interview he gave to detectives or the FBI.
    This lasted about two hours. And Johnson’s mother, his attorney, Freeman Bosley Jr., [who paid him??] and an unidentified man who said he was in charge of Johnson’s security were present, as well as a St. Louis County detective and an FBI agent.

    He spoke to various news outlets, and maybe privately, or semi-privately, but made no other official statements.

    There are a few radio interviews whose transcripts were published or put on the Internet. For example:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-wlDI6hg18

    Somebody put this together: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQTHwK_iRqs

    Here is something interesting:

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2014/11/25/forensic-and-physical-evidence-proves-dorian-johnson-participated-in-the-attack-of-officer-wilson/

    Dorian Johnson was wearing a yellow or gold bracelet on his right wrist when he and Mike
    Brown were in the Liquor Mart. Later, in interviews, he didn’t have it on. What was probably that bracelet was found near the front driver’s side tire. DNA testing showed that both Darren Wilson and Dorian Johnson’s DNA were present on the bracelet(s). Witness number 10 says in fact Dorian Johnson played a role in the initial assault – punching the mirror (as a distraction?) while Michael Brown was trying to prevent the cop from getting out of his car. And at that point something gold fell on the ground.

    Nor do media accounts indicate how Johnson suddenly was able to secure employment by St. Louis government authorities.

    Too many questions are not being asked.

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  21. From NY Daily News reporter Nina Golgowski 12/9/14.

    Michael Brown Shooting Witness Dorian Johnson Hired by City of St. Louis

    The 22-year-old was hired under a state grant through the city’s Agency on Training and Employment, or SLATE, the mayor’s chief of staff, Jeff Rainford, confirmed.

    The job, which is listed as a temporary position, pays about $8.50 an hour. It follows Johnson meeting the low income eligibility requirements, said Rainford…

    His former attorney, Freeman Bosley Jr., whose license was suspended in September for mishandling clients’ money, told the Post-Dispatch that Johnson has been looking forward to finding work and is happy to have a job.

    SLATE describes itself on its website as a federally-funded agency that offers “businesses and job seekers of all ages and socioeconomic background no-cost employment and job training services.”

    ropelight (ef7142)

  22. Somebidy is trying to cite grand jurors as authorities. And probasbly more disagreement than actually exists is being hinted at.

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  23. Maybe one or more of the grand jurors wanted to indict Dorian Johnson for perjury, or even assault or robbery.

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  24. Workfare, then? At least it’s eight hours a day when he’s not out on the street looking for crimes of opportunity.

    nk (dbc370)

  25. Forget it, Sammy. Jurors are not allowed to impeach their verdict except for 1) outside influence and 2) consideration of matters not presented in court. Dismissal of this suit should be a no-brainer even for McCulloch.

    nk (dbc370)

  26. I think the odds say that 1 in 12 Americans probably believe we never landed on the moon or that 9/11 was an inside conspiracy.

    Oh yeah:

    37% of voters believe global warming is a hoax
    6% of voters believe Osama bin Laden is still alive
    21% of voters say a UFO crashed in Roswell, NM in 1947 and the US government covered it up.
    7% of voters think the moon landing was faked
    13% of voters think Barack Obama is the anti-Christ, including 22% of Romney voters
    11% of voters believe the US government allowed 9/11 to happen

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  27. Global warming is a hoax — socialism and crony capitalism masquerading as environmentalism. There is too much evidence to ignore. From the hypocrisy of its proponents (Apple’s crap is made in soft coal factories for example), to the faked data, to the billions and billions and billions at stake ranging from such things as ethanol to the threat Keystone XL poses to Buffet’s railroads. Put me with the 37%. What part of the Bell Curve does that represent, BTW?

    nk (dbc370)

  28. What part of the Bell Curve does that represent, BTW?

    In a normal distribution, 68% of the curve is between plus one and minus one standard deviations. So 37% is just over one-half of that.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  29. #26. 13% of voters think Barack Obama is the anti-Christ, including 22% of Romney voters.

    That means about 1,164,287 voted for Obama despite thinking he was the Anti-Christ. (Removing the 22% for Romney and all 3rd party candidate votes from the 13% of total votes)

    Dejectedhead (4bfcf6)

  30. I don’t think that someone who believes in an anti-Christ would have much of a problem with cognitive dissonance. 🙂

    carlitos (0ee06d)

  31. That’s pretty interesting there, dejectedhead,

    Though I’m inclined to think maybe there was a lack of specificity over registered voters vs. those who voted. I’m guessing that “voters” meant registered voters and lots of those who thought Obama is the anti-Christ stayed home.

    But, to tell me that 1 million Americans voted for the anti-christ for president wouldn’t cause me to be too surprised…
    a few months ago I bought ice cream from a place where one of the servers/cashiers was wearing a shirt that said “pro-abortion, anti-Christ”.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  32. well what do you know:

    http://iotwreport.com/?p=269208

    narciso (ee1f88)

  33. Thank you again for your kind words, carlitos.
    Maybe it really means that people who voted for Obama have no problem with cognitive dissonance.
    And I bet there is a lot of evidence we could gather in support of my interpretation,
    and you’re welcome.

    BTW, I don’t believe Obama is “the” anti-Christ, but he is “a” anti-Christ in the sense that much of what he champions is antithetical to the teachings and examples of Christ.
    For example, it is written that one thing that The Lord hates is “one who causes strife among brothers”. Obama loves to do that if you consider all those who are Americans a version of “brothers and sisters”.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  34. My first thought was that this is a grand juror who is getting blowback from her family and friends for letting Wilson go. She may also be having second thoughts about the outcome.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  35. From the LAT:

    The grand juror hints that he or she may have voted to criminally indict Wilson and wants to advocate for reform as Missouri legislators consider whether to change the state’s grand jury process.

    The grand juror took issue with prosecutors’ “insinuation” that Brown, rather than Wilson, was the “wrongdoer.”

    Dana (8e74ce)

  36. Clearly doesn’t understand how a grand jury works,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  37. The New York report on the lawsuit

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/06/us/ferguson-grand-juror-sues-for-right-to-speak-about-case.html

    says:

    The public is left with the perception, the lawsuit said, that all of the grand jurors believed that there was not enough evidence to indict Mr. Wilson.

    But the juror would have to violated some confidence in order for them to actually know that some one to indict Darren Wilson for something or other. (if anything, more logically, it would have bene witnesses that they would have wanted to indict for perjury. Maybe Wilson too?)

    The court filing says the plaintiff “advocate for legislative change to the way grand juries are conducted in Missouri” and “contribute to the current public dialogue concerning race relations.””

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  38. We have to be careful – some of these things may come from the lawyers, not the grand juror.

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  39. As I already said, the NYT claim quoted there is nonsense. If people believe that no one on the grand jury was in favor of indicting him for something, they didn’t get that from what the DA said.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  40. I want a FOI on who is the paying the lawyer.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  41. Based on the LAT quote, where is the line between “hinting” at one’s vote and revealing grand jury room convos?

    Dana (8e74ce)

  42. #32. I bet it is a rounding error (13% could mean 12.5%) and uncertainty from the poll (=/- 2-3%) that led to the figure.

    Still a possibility that the figure is accurate though.

    Dejectedhead (4bfcf6)

  43. Ignore polls and statistics, they’re as phony as $3 bills. Results can easily be predetermined in all sorts of ways: questions asked, respondents selected, weighting, statistical model chosen, outright misrepresentation, etc.

    Opinion polls pretend individuals have independent opinions, while the truth is that when the national media wants the public to have an opinion they’ll be given one, all nice and tidy, no loose ends – all tied up with a bow on top and delivered in print and on TV ad nauseaum with a comfortable and knowing smile. All accompanied by a pat on the head for parroting it back. Such well prepared subjects are the carefully selected respondents in surveys. Thus is ambiguity limited and scientific certainty assured.

    Polls always seek to project the solid appearance of reliability, but the manufactured results are no more reliable than a lover’s words written in sand and running water, or the campaign promises of office seekers, or the assurances of used car salesmen. Polls, like slippery promises, and empty assurances are the tools of deception philistines rely on to bamboozle the gullible.

    Take them (and this) for what it’s worth.

    ropelight (ef7142)

  44. Eh, its easy to ignore things.

    I find it better to pay attention, but not take everything to heart. You’re only as independent as you want to be. With statistics, its better to know why a statistic is wrong than to simply know it is wrong.

    But, yes, no one is above being manipulated it seems.

    Dejectedhead (4bfcf6)

  45. ropelight, please enlighten us with your expertise in polling and statistics. I read the raw poll data for what I cited, and it’s fine.

    Political polling, including things like leading questions and “push” polling, is a completely different animal vs. public opinion polling.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  46. All polls have issues, including stripper poles.

    Dejectedhead (4bfcf6)

  47. You can use Lysol to clean up a stripper’s pole. An opinion poll? Not so easy to clean up all the crap.

    Russ from Winterset (30a992)

  48. It’s simple: the grand jury had nine whites and three blacks, and it takes nine votes to reach a decision. If this juror wants to talk about it, and is saying that the characterization that the grand jury reached its decision unanimously, I’d bet that:

    1. This particular juror is one of the three black jurors; and
    B. Someone wants to push the meme that the vote was 9-3 not to indict, and the three who wanted to indict were the three black members.

    In that fashion, it can be said that the grand jury was racially biased, and the whole process was illegitimate. The obvious question is: does the protection against double jeopardy prevent another grand jury from being seated, to try to indict Mr Wilson?

    The Dana who can count (f6a568)

  49. Nope. Darren Wilson will have the murder charge hanging over him all his life.

    nk (dbc370)

  50. You can use Lysol to clean up a stripper’s pole.

    If your pole is brass, you should use Brasso. If it’s one of those fancy color-coated ones, you should use Windex. I wouldn’t use Lysol except to spray the general area.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  51. seriously, what do you think of this attempt to tear the grand jury system, because the narrative must be above the facts,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  52. #52, narciso, I think it’s yet another attempt to erode the institutional protections American citizens have traditionally enjoyed in order to allow the passions of today’s Zeitgeist free reign.

    ropelight (ef7142)

  53. Grand Juries have been getting torn down for years. I think over half the states don’t even use them anymore and where they still exist, they get abused frequently because of their secret proceedings (See, Rick Perry’s indictment).

    They seem to be more of a political football these days. The secret proceedings seem to run counter to talk of transparency too.

    Dejectedhead (4bfcf6)

  54. MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/6/2015 @ 9:28 am

    If people believe that no one on the grand jury was in favor of indicting him for something, they didn’t get that from what the DA said.

    What about this quotation in the post – I don’t know where this comes from:

    The lawsuit also questions St. Louis County prosecutor Bob McCulloch’s characterization that “all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges.”

    Now maybe indeed “there was no support for any charges.”

    ….against Darren Wilson.

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  55. Grand juror: “the current information available about the grand jurors’ views is not entirely accurate — especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges,”

    That means there was support for indicting other people.

    “Moreover, the public characterization of the grand jurors’ view of witnesses and evidence does not accord with Plaintiff’s own.”

    McCulloch said he thought all witnesses were telling the truth. (and that’s why there would be no inndictments for perjury)

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  56. The grand juror, perhaps, is sticking to the oath, and not alerting the ACLU lawyers that actually they’ve got things 180 degrees wrong.

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  57. I watched the press conference. He made it clear that 9 votes were needed for a decision, that there were enough votes for a decision, but by law he was not allowed to tell what the vote specifically was. That means 1,2, or 3 of the jurors may have thought he should have been indicted for something. There was no insinuation it was a unanimous vote unless someone can’t do simple logic and math or was delusional (as in hearing things-such as dog whistles).

    No double jeopardy means can’t be tried again once found not-guilty, correct? It doesn’t protect against a retrial if a mistrial was declared, or charges later being filed and brought to trial after the charges were never filed after the initial investigation.

    In other words, a new DA could bring charges, have him arrested, and brought to trial at a whim, with no new evidence, is that correct?

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  58. So what could be so embarrassing that anyone could – or would – want to hide it. I’m intrigued. There’s that old saw about a DA could get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich, however in case after case of police shooting, the grand jury never indicts. I’m a suspicious soul, and I wonder if the fact the DA works with the police could have anything to do with the way he presents these cases to the Grand Jury.

    Mike Giles (b8b724)

  59. You called it Mike Giles. If a DA can get a ham sandwich indicted, which never killed anybody except in Mama Cass’s case, how can’t they get an indictment on accidental death, negligent homicide or at least something? Just sayin’.

    Hoagie (4dfb34)

  60. He was never fund not guilty, MD in Philly because he never went to trial. Therefore, at a later date they may try to indict again.

    Hoagie (4dfb34)

  61. So, you two are all for putting Wilson on trial?
    Or making grand jury deliberations public so people need to be prepared for vandalism and worse?

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  62. 58. MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/6/2015 @ 12:02 pm

    In other words, a new DA could bring charges, have him arrested, and brought to trial at a whim, with no new evidence, is that correct?

    I think he still needs the grand jury.

    Anyway, there is afederal investigation, which is not going to find anything, but go and wait for Presient Barack Obama and Attorney general Eric Holder (or Loretta Lyunch) to say nothing wrong happened here. (they won’t initiate a phony prosecution, either)

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  63. So…all Wilson needs to do is wait until the Dems make an all-out effort to get one of their own in that DA seat and then they can haul his butt from wherever to the county jail.

    That’s crappy.

    BTW, maybe police killings are justified the overwhelming majority of the time.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  64. I bet Grand Juries never indict cops because they usually receive cases focused on cops for political reasons rather than legal ones. I’m sure there is SOME bias in the system, but I bet most indictments towards cops fail because it was a flimsy case that the DA felt he couldn’t decline charges on without getting some backlash.

    Dejectedhead (4bfcf6)

  65. There’s an issue with Loretta Lyunch – deals she cut years ago with co-operating witnesses that prevented fraud victims in a pump and dump stock scheme from suing, because the legal proceedings against him were secret, and eventually led to the fraudster defrauding more people (according to a lawsuit – he disputes that)

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/4/loretta-lynchs-office-cheated-stock-fraud-victims

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  66. Contrary to hysterical bystander reports, and the concerted efforts by Eric Holder’s DoJ to manipulate the narrative and conceal the video tape of Mike Brown’s strong-arm robbery, the overwhelming majority, virtually all, of the reliable evidence strongly indicated Officer Wilson responded appropriately.

    It was a good shoot, Mike Brown’s unfortunate death resulted from his repeated physical attacks, and attempted attacks, on Officer Wilson. Brown essentially committed suicide by cop.

    However, the streets of Ferguson were full of angry racist savages calling for Officer Wilson’s head. So Bob McCulloch, the District Attorney, made the smart call, he sought a grand jury indictment to protect himself from false charges of covering up a racist killer cop’s crime.

    Now, so far, one grand jury member is looking to cash in.

    ropelight (ef7142)

  67. Requesting a new grand jury:

    The NAACP’s Legal Defense and Educational Fund, citing “grave legal concerns,” is asking a Missouri judge to convene a new grand jury to consider charges against the Ferguson police officer who fatally shot 18-year-old Michael Brown.

    The letter submitted Monday to St. Louis County Circuit Judge Maura McShane also asks for a special prosecutor to oversee the case and an investigation of the grand jury proceedings that ended in November with a decision not to charge Officer Darren Wilson

    McCullough’s office declined to comment.

    Dana (8e74ce)

  68. I wonder if Wilson should consider asking for a trial and getting it over with.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  69. What person in their right mind could weigh the cost of further muddying the waters with a minor detail (Was it 10, 11, or 12?) against some egotistical juror’s need to vitiate an oath freely taken? What friggin’ good comes of any of this?

    There is no allegation of misconduct. None.

    This is an all-time no-brainer.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  70. Clarifying: No person could reasonably conclude that a juror’s privilege of speech is anywhere near as important as allowing wounds to close putting this mess behind us all.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  71. 58. MD in Philly (f9371b) — 1/6/2015 @ 12:02 pm

    I watched the press conference. He made it clear that 9 votes were needed for a decision, that there were enough votes for a decision, but by law he was not allowed to tell what the vote specifically was. That means 1,2, or 3 of the jurors may have thought he should have been indicted for something.

    That means 0, 1, 2, or 3 of the jurors may have thought he should have been indicted for something.

    So the claim in the lawsuit that McCulloch said “all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges” is incorrect (if that’s what in the lawsuit)

    if that’s wrong, then what they imply the juror wants to say could also be wrong.

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)

  72. There was some new video released today of the Tamir Rice case.

    After he was shot in the stomach, the two policeman were seen chatting with each other. His 14-year old sister came barreling in, and the police arrested her and put her in the back seat of the patrol car where she stayed for the whole 30 minutes of the tape. His mother was just outside the picture frame, and the police told her that if she protested too much, or something, they’d arrest her too. EMS came after 8 minuted and worked on his for 6 minutes after which he was put on a stretcher. He died the next morning or so.

    Sammy Finkelman (6b5229)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2787 secs.