This article was published before Missouri grand jury's shameful decision to not indict Darren Wilson:
There was nothing shameful about the Grand Jury's decision in the least.
A Grand Jury is made up of a cross section of everyday citizens. The prosecution sets them.
The Prosecution (meaning the people who wanted to convict Darren Wilson) then present almost all of the evidence.
They grand jury went over this evidence for weeks.
The evidence showed that Michael Brown robbed a store before the incident. His actions constituted a felony.
In that state of mind (having just strong armed rob a store), when confronted by the officer, who at first was not aware of the robbery, Brown profaned the officer, did not get out of the street as requested and kept walking. When the officer followed and repeated the request, Brown used his weight to prevent the officer from exiting his car, and then struggled with and struck the officer while he was in his car. He attempted to get the officer's weapon. The officer ultimately fired his weapon in the car in desperation, and Brown ran. Brown had committed another felon in assaulting the officer.
The witnesses and the forensics showed this was the case.
As the office then got the reports of the robbery and exited his vehicle as Brown departed, he gave chase and with his weapon drawn ordered Brown to stop. Brown turned and charged the officer. He did not ask him to "Not shoot." He did not fall to the ground with his hands up.
The forensics and witnesses all showed these events to be the case. And the Grand Jury deliberated on all of them.
Most of the witnesses were African American. The principle witness saying something different was Brown's accomplice in the robbery, who was walking with him. Darrion Johnson's story has changed, and it is prejudiced by his own actions that day. And the other witneses, and the forensics have shown it to be in very serious question.
The Grand Jury had five crimes they could have indicted Wilson on ranging from illegal use of force up to 1st degree murder. The evidence did not support any of those. They poured over that evidence for weeks. They new the ramifications and the gravity of the situation. If there wad a shred of a reason to indict him...they would have.
But they did not.
This was because the evidence did not support it...no more than it did in the Treyvon Martin case in Florida. The whole thing, in both cases, was an emotionally created situation where politicians and activists played on people's emotion and presented an emotional false narrative which the press picked up...before any investigation...which prejudiced many people's minds. People who never saw the evidence. It was done to demand action outside of the system.
But it does not work that way.
There was nothing shameful at all about what that Grand Jury did.
The shame here was that a very big and strong young man went wrong. He made very bad decisions, committed felonies, and then suffered the consequences of those actions. A life truly wasted. That is a shame...that is sad...that is devastating to the family...but it happened and the choices were his own.
At any time...in the store, in the first meeting with the officer, at the time the officer ordered him to stop...he could have made different choices that would have resulted in him not being shot. But he did not.
As it is, this thread is about Kwaig's reports of events. It is not about the activism, is it not about the the ideologies, and it is not about the politics, Please stop interjecting it.
Thanks.
