SCOTUS Justice explains how Ferguson Grand Jury erred

[JigSaw-II]

(( being a good democrat, the prosecutor took the heat off himself and transferred it to the grand jury.))
 
 
Vary smart move. Put the case in the hands of 12 people, instead of just one person.  Personally, I believe this case was above the Prosecutors pay grade.  12 heads much better than one...

[seahooker]

jiggy, I believe you are correct. the prosecutor didn't have any evidence that would have supported an indictment and if he would have gone it alone the hell would have been a lot worse!

[1965hawks]

Eh, Scalia has made no comment one way or another regarding the Ferguson Grand Jury.....

No; he hasn't, John. But Justice Scalia's opinion in United States v. Williams (1992) points out the procedural errors committed by the Ferguson grand jury and Prosecutor McCulloch.

"Justice Antonin Scalia, in the 1992 Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, explained what the role of a grand jury has been for hundreds of years."

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/11/26/3597322/justice-scalia-explains-what-was-wrong-with-the-ferguson-grand-jury/

[1965hawks]

Kinda funny that from 1992 until now many grand juries have convened and yet this is the only one we hear is "wrong', I can't help but be entertained by so much concern over some douche bag getting his brains blown out

No. Here's what's funny, Baretta19: your laughable attempt to ignore the evidence that supports the claim of procedural errors committed by both the Ferguson grand jury and McCulloch.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/11/26/3597322/justice-scalia-explains-what-was-wrong-with-the-ferguson-grand-jury/

[JigSaw-II]

Who cares what Justice Scalia's opinion was in 1992, what is his opinion right now?  Procedures will change throughout the years.  In many cases procedures conform to circumstances.  The fact that this procedure was used by the Prosecutor and Grand Jury, means it was legal and within their rights. 
 
With the firestorm brewing on the horizon, I certainly wouldn't have wanted to make that decision alone.  Again, I think the right choices were make.  The only bad choices I see was Michael Browns'...   

[1965hawks]

How about putting the blame were the blame belongs, and that is on the black leadership, after all Africans have a tribal background and tribal leaders that thinks and decides what they do when they do it how they do it and why they  do it, in other words the vast majority are not capable enough to make their own decisions so they follow instructions.

Poor little racist don't-blameme, incapable of submitting a post without playing the race-baiting card.

[John Adams]

Brief Fact Summary.

After being indicted for false representation, John Williams (respondent) filed a Motion for Disclosure of all exculpatory portions of the grand jury transcripts. Upon finding that the prosecution did not present this exculpatory evidence to the grand jury, respondent requested that his indictment be dismissed.

[John Adams]

Synopsis of Rule of Law. There is no general rule requiring prosecutors to present exculpatory evidence.

[John Adams]

Facts.

Williams was accused of misrepresentation of his character, which was allegedly effected through two financial statements. The prosecutor did not present, however, evidence which showed that Williams was always candid with his financial information. After he was indicted, Williams sought to have that indictment overturned because the grand jury was not presented with all the information by the prosecutor. The District Court overturned the indictment and appeals ensued.

[John Adams]

Issue. Whether a district court may dismiss an otherwise valid indictment because the Government failed to disclose to the grand jury exculpatory evidence.

[John Adams]

On Monday, Prosecutor Bob McCulloch announced that a grand jury had decided not to indict Darren Wilson, the officer who killed Michael Brown. But that decision was the result of a process that turned the purpose of a grand jury on its head.

Justice Antonin Scalia, in the 1992 Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, explained what the role of a grand jury has been for hundreds of years.


It is the grand jury’s function not ‘to enquire … upon what foundation [the charge may be] denied,’ or otherwise to try the suspect’s defenses, but only to examine ‘upon what foundation [the charge] is made’ by the prosecutor. Respublica v. Shaffer, 1 Dall. 236 (O. T. Phila. 1788); see also F. Wharton, Criminal Pleading and Practice § 360, pp. 248-249 (8th ed. 1880).

As a consequence, neither in this country nor in England has the suspect under investigation by the grand jury ever been thought to have a right to testify or to have exculpatory evidence presented.

It would seem the actual facts from the case are in contradiction to what is being presented in your piece.....

Me thinks that stink progress is trying to modify reality....

[Bob Huntress]

In post number 3, John Adams mentioned if Brown had a brain. He did. It was the spot on the wall behind him.