Justice Scalia Explains What Was Wrong With The Ferguson Grand Jury

Is Justice Scalia going to be called a Liberal? I think that if anyone understands the role of a Grand Jury and a prosecutor's responsibility, Scalia does.

 

Really just more hogwash. Are we supposed to believe an officer with a spotless record decided to murder someone weeks before his wedding, in public, for all to see? The more logical scenario is the 300 pound gangster who JUST assaulted a store owner was in the right and complied and the officer with a spotless record and a bright future gunned him down ... for no apparent reason ? Really? REALLY?

 

Do you think the outcome would've been different if Wilson were not allowed to testify?

 

I'm no law expert, but I sensed that the prosecutor did not think there was enough to prosecute in this case. But, with the political pressure, invented racism, riots in the wind, etc, he took it to the grand jury anyway so that others could come to their own conclusion. Sounds sensible to me. Those who are determined to claim racism when there is no definitive proof, and the left inciting riots for no sound reason, would have hammered the prosecutor if he stood alone. The people would find it easier to digest coming from a grand jury, whatever the outcome. Prudent, sensible, and responsible.

 

Wilson testified because he was the only one there who is still breathing.

They kinda needed to know what happened.

Next.

 

Bingo! Bingo! That's it in a nutshell.......

But there you go again, Oldy! Spouting all that logic and common sense.... you know that only brings on more confusion. You oughtta hang your head in shame!

 

Whose court was it? Not yours. Not Scalias'. Officer Wilson did his job correctly.
Justice McCulloch did his job correctly.
Other people do similar jobs in different ways, but the jobs that were done by these men, in the ways they were done are legally viable, sound, and final. This is life in the world.

 

Ha ha - I was wondering how long it was going to take the libs to glom onto this.

I caught this article about two minutes after it was published last night, and reading through Scalia's explanation I was thinking to myself, "Self, I'll betcha the libs are going to take these words totally out of context and use them for political gain".

And sure enough, here we are.

 

So he presents all the evidence he has including changing witness testimony and forensic evidence for the Grand Jury to decide and its an issue now?

Has it really come to the point where we are going to have mock trials to please the rowdy crowds?

 

The kid was obviously an (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) but the fact that he was more than 100 feet away when the cop unloaded his gun and killed the young man calls into question whether or not it was necessary to kill him. It could have been handled without the resulting death. It seems to me that the young cop got pissed off and lost it instead of keeping his cool until backup arrived.

 

Please show he unloaded his gun from that distance. Testimony was he fired a few bursts as Brown was charging.

 

Spotless record... years on the force. He lost his cool ? Not the kid who just assaulted a store owner?

 

The only reason there even was a Grand Jury was to appease the Demthugs.

 

Huh? Haven't you been following? Wilson started firing when Brown was twenty five feet away and running towards him. Brown fell ten feet from Wilson. And that's after Wilson had already backpedaled to keep a safe distance. Otherwise Brown would have actually reached him.

 

Seems yet again people are going by what the media said and not testimony/evidence.

 

Scalia is 100% correct, the suspect does not have a right to testify in a grand jury. However, the grand jury has a right to question whoever they want. Grand juries interview suspects all the time. What's not to understand here?

As an example, remember Bill Clinton? He got in trouble for lying to a grand jury and got impeached for it.

 

Does Wilson have a spotless record now?

 

Robert McCulloch, always gets indictments — unless it's a cop. He's had five cop-involved killing cases and zero indictments. Again, five cases against police haven't made it to trial at all. He could get an indictment if he wanted one.
http://www.upworthy.com/the-truth-about-the-ferguson-case-that-some-people-really-cant-accept?c=fea

Also, in 2010, federal prosecutors took 162,000 cases to a grand jury. You know how many DIDN'T go to trial? Eleven.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ferguson-michael-brown-indictment-darren-wilson/

 

Yes, he does.

 

Good thing that his goal isn't to just get indictments but to seek justice.

It's rhetoric like this that lends credibility to some prisoners claims that they didn't do the crime they are convicted of, the were railroaded. PeppermintTwist seems to not care that Officer Wilson acted in self defense, as discerned by the GJ, he/she just wants to see him hang, justice be darned.

I can't understand that point of view.

 

Not at all. The officer made a mistake. Human beings make mistakes. I do not believe there was any malicious intent here. Plus, the officer had no idea what happened with the convenience store thing, unless you think he is clairvoyant.

This is not an issue of murder. This is an issue of profiling and misinterpreting a situation.

To give you an example: my best friend's BF, who is very dark skinned (and soon to be husband to my best pal) put it to me this way:

If he ever sees a white girl walking toward him on the sidewalk, he crosses the street to avoid making her uncomfortable. I asked why. He said, "If anything happens to her on that side of the street, I'll get blamed. I do not want to be anywhere near a white girl at night. I could say I'm gay, but it would not matter. I'm a black man, and she could be having a fight with her boyfriend and blame anything that happens on me. It happens a lot to people I have known." Sadly, he's right.

Think I'm wrong? Look at all the wrongful convictions. They are all based on racial profiling. But I am quite sure you don't care.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/

Most of you here automatically think that if a black person is charged, he must be guilty. Doubt me? Look through this forum.

 

Do you honestly think if a white kid was doing this very same thing that a cop would have killed him? Seriously? Come on, be honest.

I await your examples of those very things. Do you really think white kids don't knock off convenience stores?

For god's sake, Scalia- the biggest right wing (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)bag in the world gets it. But you can't?

 

You do realize that Scalia has never actually made any comments on the Ferguson case, right?

 

Oh sure:

Nope never said a thing.

BTW, still waiting for replies to this

 

Wow amazing. The American people need to act, this is just so beyond corrupt.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't want a Cop that makes mistakes policing the streets, take his badge. give him a burger king hat that's where he belongs.

- - - Updated - - -

Officer with spotless record? Or officer with no experience. One might confuse the two.

- - - Updated - - -

Officer with spotless record? Or officer with no experience. One might confuse the two.