The Grand Jury investigation of the Michael Brown shooting has been hopelessly corrupted

Thursday, October 23, 2014

Good morning:

The Los Angeles Times is reporting this morning that the United States Department of Justice has condemned the selective leaking by “unnamed officials” of information provided to the grand jury investigating the Michael Brown shooting as an attempt to improperly influence public opinion. According to Andrew Hart at the Huffington Post, Attorney General Eric Holder is ‘exasperated’ by the selective leaking.

I am more than exasperated. I am disgusted because I have never seen anything this blatant.

Yesterday, I asked who is responsible for this over-the-top effort to influence public opinion.

Only one answer makes any sense.

I accuse Bob McCulloch, the St.Louis County Prosecuting Attorney, the office that he directs and supervises and for which he is accountable, and the Ferguson Police Department and Officer Darren Wilson of conspiring to selectively leak information that is exclusively within their possession, custody and control in order to influence public opinion in favor of Officer Darren Wilson, who shot and killed Michael Brown.

The grand jury should have indicted Wilson for second degree murder two months ago because no one can credibly deny that probable cause (i.e., reasonable grounds) existed to believe that Wilson murdered Michael Brown.

Wilson’s self-defense claim revealed for the first time by the leakers is a laughable self-serving tangle of scripted nonsense designed to fit the known facts.

We have a name for that. We call it subornation of perjury and it is a felony.

Today, we need to ask the next question.

Is there any reason to believe that the blatant and shocking effort to improperly influence public opinion in favor of Darren Wilson by selectively leaking information to the print media and spinning it in his favor is not also being used to influence the grand jury not to indict him for second degree murder?

Is the nation not being groomed and conditioned to passively accept a grand jury decision not to charge Wilson?

We are witnessing such massive corruption and abuse of the grand jury that its decision next month not to indict Wilson will have no legitimacy.

The people responsible for corrupting the grand jury need to be identified, prosecuted, sentenced to prison and disbarred.

The whole world is watching this wretched perversion and it’s time to end it.

If you appreciate what we do, please consider making a donation.

Thank you.

92 Responses to The Grand Jury investigation of the Michael Brown shooting has been hopelessly corrupted

  1. GrannyStandingforTruth says:

    Hi Professor Leatherman, Crane and everyone else,

    I pray that all is well with all of you. It’s good to see you and your wife’s fonts again. 🙂 Well, looks like we’re back to the old drawing board again.

    Professor, some of the things that have been going on in Ferguson remind me of events that took place in the South during the Civil Rights Movement. Sometimes I have to pinch myself to make sure I’m not having a relapse (I’m speaking of the violation of Civil Rights that have taken place in Ferguson).

    My question is this, shouldn’t the Bar Association be investigating McCulloch for shady practices? I’ve never heard of the accused being able to testify before a grand jury before. I hope I’m not asking a question that’s already been answered, but I haven’t read all the comments yet.

    • Hi, Granny.

      Welcome back.

      I doubt the bar association is investigating McCulloch, but they should. I don’t believe the political will is there to do it because he is too powerful. And there is a lot of racial prejudice. Prejudice that believes Mike Brown got what he deserved and Wilson is a hero for killing him.

      You asked a good question that I have not specifically addressed, so I’m going to answer it with my post today.

      Thanks for asking the question that got me thinking.

  2. Nef05 says:

    OT: Justice Scalia tells Muslim petitioner/plaintiff, ‘Religious Beliefs Aren’t Reasonable’. While I agree with him, the sheer, bald-faced hypocrisy and overt bias shown in that statement, when contrasted to his opinion in the Hobby Lobby case is staggering. What happens when a (or more) Justice(s) of the highest court in the land is clearly following his personal agenda/beliefs and not the law; when he doesn’t even attempt to appear unbiased?

    This lifetime appointment and no judicial accountability at the SCOTUS level has got to go. They need term limits and to be held to the same rules as the federal judges below them.

    • MDX says:

      Scalia is an authoritarian who will find any way he can to support a corporate state.

      So the whims of Hobby Lobby, a corporation, are deemed valid when used to crush the individual rights of female peons.

      And the petty rules used by a state institution to intimidate a peon inmate are deemed valid and the religious whims of the peon are dismissed.

      I have read that about 25% of the USA is populated by authoritarians who cut across the political spectrum.

      They remind me of this line by Frank Burns from the MASH TV show:

      “It is only by blindly submitting to authority, that we can truly be free…”

      And oh how it applies to this topic:

      “If only Trayvon had done as he was told…..”

      “Well, Brown should not have sassed Wilson…”

      My line for the present state of the USA:

      “Houston, we have got a problem”

      • Nef05 says:

        Yeah, we do. 25% is huge! What worries me is that it’s no longer covert. Blatant and overt acts are committed with a “Who gon’ check me, boo?” attitude. As our ability to seek redress or to correct via ballot, the pathway for such authoritarians (sheriff’s, prosecutors, judges, legislators) to find themselves in positions to do (as I see it) irreparable harm to the republic, they become more and more emboldened. Yes, “Houston we’ve got a problem” for sure!

  3. Two sides to a story says:

    OT – Anon – and anyone can claim to be Anon of course – has warned some of our old troll friends (David Piercy, Annette Elaine Kelly, Vicki Pate, et al).

  4. bettykath says:

    OT Thought this was interesting. Judge makes a left hand turn and hits a pedestrian and both are at fault.

    A Lyons [NY] woman is in the hospital after being injured in an accident that involved the village judge. According to Lyons police, 75-year-old Alice Ames collided with 85-year-old Judge Nicholas Forgione’s vehicle as she crossed Water Street at 5:51 Tuesday morning. Police say Forgione made a left hand turn from William Street onto Water Street when he heard a thud on the side of his vehicle. Forgione told 13WHAM he thought he hit a dog until he saw Ames on the road. Lyons police say both Ames and Forgione are at fault. No one has been charged. Forgione, who has been the acting village judge for the last year, served as the town and village judge for 28 years. Dorothy Barnes at Old Lyons Hardware on William Street said it was common to see Ames around the village. “She walks around town and she feeds the squirrels, the chipmunks, and the stray cats,” said Barnes. “[She] has a couple cats of her own. [She] goes to McDonald’s every morning for coffee.” Ames remains in guarded condition at the University of Rochester Medical Center, with multiple broken bones and head trauma.

    Read More at:

    • bettykath says:

      If he had the light to make a left hand turn, wouldn’t she have the light to cross the street? Don’t pedestrians have the right of way? I guess she contributed negligence by getting in his way.

      • bettykath says:

        From a “local’: there is no light, just a stop sign on William St. So the judge had to stop, look, and listen before making the turn.

  5. Bill Taylor says:

    off topic…..a private autopsy on vonderit Myers showed he was shot in the back of the legs multiple times, one shot to the side of his leg that shattered his femur and the fatal shot to the head from the SIDE………the story was he was facing the officer and firing at him? and the gun they “found” did not have any DNA from Myers on it.

    beginning to sound like the only change in the area is business as usual but be sure to use those DROP guns.

  6. Debra Dunlap says:

    That cop should be arrested for lying and murder.. And that DA should have been gone thank you Atty Holder…

  7. SearchingMind says:

    Chillax everyone!

    The fundamentals of the case against Wilson remain the same. No one can change that. “Facts are stubborn things”.

    I am reading current affairs in this case a little differently. What if all these leaks are a sign of near-imminent indictment? It appears to me that someone is very nervous and increasingly getting agitated. Hence – the leaks that are definitely coordinated and choreographed but really does not make sense from the legal point of view.

    I am going to remain steadfast in my belief that this Prosecutor will rise to the occasion and be a Prosecutor. If he wants an indictment from a Grand Jury, he can get it very easily; it ain’t rocket science. What joy is there for him in being a Prosecutor if the letters and the spirit of the law are not Bible to him? I will probably shoot someone if I lose the faith that Wilson will be indicted for murder. So I will remain stoic and keep the faith and wait .(regardless of the Prof’s contrary view).

    • Your horoscope recommends you avoid contact with sharp objects in mid November/s

      • SearchingMind says:

        Haha, Professor. you have to show this funny side of you more often – really. Anyway, I have the feeling that the “mid November” you mentioned is ominous for both Wilson and the People of the United States. When Wilson is indicted, I will come back to you and tell you: “you owe me; time to pay up”. If Wilson is not indicted, I will ….. (I don’t know – really; I just don’t want to contemplate on that scenario, because such is just unthinkable for me)..

  8. PhillyBoyRoy says:

    Only in Amerikkka will the blood of a murder victim on a gun prove that the victim was the REAL killer.

    Just like how Trayvon Martin’s parents and Al Sharpton are the REAL racists.

  9. MDX says:

    With props to the professor, I have a new theory about how Wilson got scratches and wacked on both sides of the faced, based on the above.

    Wilson, in a rage, probably tried to violently exit the SUV wherein the bound back hit the left side of his face and the right side of his face got pushed by the door blow into the well of the SUV body. The scratches could have been as he brushed by the sharp edge of the door as he chased his prey.

    Broken glass?

    A door with a window down – keep in mind that Wilson had it down to call Brown and Johnson the F word – can break the glass, if slammed violently.

    And why of why are not the headlines screaming “AUTOPSY VERIFIES THAT JOHNSON IS TELLING THE TRUTH”

    And if Johnson saw the barrel of a gun while being outside the SUV while Brown was grabbed, then it would be very close to the hands of Brown.

    • a2nite says:

      To MDX, because black people always lie according to white people. They need their statements confirmed by white men, because.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      I’ve seen people (including cops) go into a rage, go off on other people and end up injuring themselves. Oldest trick in the book to blame it on the victim.

  10. MDX says:

    The best view of the struggle was from Johnson and, IMO, it is a farce to not give what he testified weight, seeing that it matches forensic evidence to a T.

    Key quotes from linked article:

    “The officer demanded that the two “get the f—k on the sidewalk,” Johnson says. “His exact words were get the f—k on the sidewalk.”

    After telling the officer that they were almost at their destination, Johnson’s house, the two continued walking. But as they did, Johnson says the officer slammed his brakes and threw his truck in reverse, nearly hitting them.

    Now, in line with the officer’s driver’s side door, they could see the officer’s face. They heard him say something to the effect of, “what’d you say?” At the same time, Johnson says the officer attempted to thrust his door open but the door slammed into Brown and bounced closed. Johnson says the officer, with his left hand, grabbed Brown by the neck.

    “I could see the muscles in his forearm,” Johnson said. “Mike was trying to get away from being choked.”

    “They’re not wrestling so much as his arm went from his throat to now clenched on his shirt,” Johnson explained of the scene between Brown and the officer. “It’s like tug of war. He’s trying to pull him in. He’s pulling away, that’s when I heard, ‘I’m gonna shoot you.’”

    At that moment, Johnson says he fixed his gaze on the officer to see if he was pulling a stun gun or a real gun. That’s when he saw the muzzle of the officer’s gun.

    “I seen the barrel of the gun pointed at my friend,” he said. “He had it pointed at him and said ‘I’ll shoot,’ one more time.”

    A second later Johnson said he heard the first shot go off.

    “I seen the fire come out of the barrell,” he said. “I could see so vividly what was going on because I was so close.”

    Johnson says he was within arm’s reach of both Brown and the officer. He looked over at Brown and saw blood pooling through his shirt on the right side of the body.

    “The whole time [the officer] was holding my friend until the gun went off,” Johnson noted.

    Brown and Johnson took off running together. There were three cars lined up along the side of the street. Johnson says he ducked behind the first car, whose two passengers were screaming. Crouching down a bit, he watched Brown run past.

    “Keep running, bro!,” he said Brown yelled. Then Brown yelled it a second time. Those would be the last words Johnson’s friend, “Big Mike,” would ever say to him.

    Brown made it past the third car. Then, “blam!” the officer took his second shot, striking Brown in the back. At that point, Johnson says Brown stopped, turned with his hands up and said “I don’t have a gun, stop shooting!”

    By that point, Johnson says the officer and Brown were face-to-face. The officer then fired several more shots. Johnson described watching Brown go from standing with his hands up to crumbling to the ground and curling into a fetal position.

    End of quoted text.

    My comment:

    Does that story sound like something an ethical prosecutor should consider vital in a finding of facts?

    I would say yes.

    But I guess I am wrong.

    More quotes:

    “Freeman Bosley, Johnson’s attorney, told msnbc that the police have yet to interview Johnson. Bosley said that he offered the police an opportunity to speak with Johnson, but they declined.

    “They didn’t even want to talk to him,” said Bosley, a former mayor of St. Louis. “They don’t want the facts. What they want is to justify what happened … what they are trying to do now is justify what happened instead of trying to point out the wrong. Something is wrong here and that’s what it is.”

    • lyn says:

      It is clear from the picture on the street that Brown was not in a fetal position.

      • PhillyBoyRoy says:

        That means Wilson shot in self defense and was in imminent danger, facing certain death from a bull-rushing non-fetal positioning black.

        You’ve cracked the case with your fetal forensics.

        • lyn says:

          I don’t know about fetal forensics, but know the fetal position is what the baby assumes in the womb. The back is curved, the head is bent and the limbs drown into the torso. I wish Holder and the Feds would put out their autopsy report and conclusions to refute the ME’s report and conclusions.

      • MDX says:

        I posted the video because another witness who states Brown was going down with is hand crossed in what many would describe as a fetal pose.

        Although I agree that the pictures show Brown’s final position as non-fetal, one must ask:

        How long after he fell, was the picture taken?

        Did officer Wilson move any parts of the body while checking for weapons or whether or not Brown was still alive.

        Keep in mind that I posted some of the text, but not all. And in the other text, Johnson states he ran away as the last shots were fired.

        And wouldn’t you do the same after an officer guns down your friend and must know that you are a witness?

        No, that’s right, in treehumper logicville, a black teen, when unarmed, always rushes or goes for a gun.

  11. Bill Taylor says:

    the von derit myers autopsy reports says he was shot from the back 6 times in his legs with one of the shot shattering his femur…..this means he was shot while RUNNING AWAY was brought down by one of those shots and then executed with a shot to the head as he was on the ground unable to walk even.

    • sparger says:

      I did a google search on Meyers shooting. I think this is even worse than Brown. I don’t think that kid had a gun at all. I read initially the cop was in uniform. The kids friends say he was in all black and not in a uniform. What the hell was he doing stopping anyone for any reason. This is not getting the attention it deserves.

  12. a2nite says:

    But the prosecutor won’t do it because.

    • girlp says:

      Wilson is a cop and Michael is Black

      • a2nite says:

        Murdering LE was doing a public service.
        No bill
        Gets his job back
        Gets his “kill an n***er bounty collected by his police/KKK supporters.
        Evil status quo is served and the majority white sect will ask why we get upset when all that happened was a n***er got put down.

        This is a feature not a bug of the white supremacist evil criminal injustice system.

        Evil wins again.

        • girlp says:

          The supremacist are in PD across the nation. It doesn’t help that Reagan made it harder for the DOJ to prosecute civil rights violations.

  13. Greg Beasley says:

    Some other weird information has leaked. The Washington Post supposedly has sources that say 7-8 African Americans that were witness to the shooting have testified to the grand jury in support of Officer Wilson. I find this weird because there has never been a single report of witnesses testifying in favor of Wilson and now they are just randomly coming out and saying multiple people confirmed Wilson’s account.

  14. bettykath says:

    Excellent article discusses case law.

    excerpt (part of MO jury instruction):


    One of the issues (as to Count _____) (in this case) is whether the use of force by the defendant against [name of victim] was lawful. In this state, the use of force (including the use of deadly force) by a law enforcement officer in making an arrest or in preventing escape after arrest is lawful in certain situations.

    A law enforcement officer can lawfully use force to make an arrest or to prevent escape if he is making a lawful arrest or an arrest which he reasonably believes to be lawful. An arrest is lawful if the officer (reasonably believes that the person being arrested (has committed) (or) (is committing) a crime) (is executing an arrest warrant which he believes to be valid).

    In making a lawful arrest or preventing escape after such an arrest, a law enforcement officer is entitled to use such force as reasonably appears necessary to effect the arrest or prevent the escape.

    A law enforcement officer in making an arrest need not retreat or desist from his efforts because of resistance or threatened resistance by the person being arrested.

    But in making an arrest or preventing escape, a law enforcement officer is not entitled to use deadly force, that is, force which he knows will create a substantial risk of causing death or serious physical injury, unless he reasonably believes that the person being arrested is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon or that the person may endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay (emphasis added).

    And, even then, a law enforcement officer may use deadly force only if he reasonably believes the use of such force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or prevent the escape.


    On the issue of use of force by a law enforcement officer (as to Count _____), you are instructed as follows:

    First, if the defendant was a law enforcement officer (making) (or) (attempting to make) a lawful arrest (or what he reasonably believed to be a lawful arrest) or [name of victim] for the crime of [name of crime] and the defendant reasonably believed that use of force was necessary to effect the arrest of to prevent the escape of [name of victim] and

    Second, the defendant reasonably believed that [name of victim] (was attempting to escape by the use of a deadly weapon) (or) (would endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay) [emphasis added], and the defendant reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was immediately necessary to effect the arrest of [name of victim], then the defendant’s use of force was lawful.

    The state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entitled to use force as a law enforcement officer. Unless you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entitled to use force as a law enforcement officer against [name of victim], you must find the defendant not guilty (under Count ____).

    As used in this instruction, the term “serious physical injury” means physical injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes serious disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any part of the body.

    Wilson’s Use of Deadly Force Would Be Unlawful Absent Imminent Deadly Threat

    And there we have it. Despite the plain-language reading of §563.046 that a law enforcement can use deadly force to make an arrest when he reasonably believes the person making the arrest has committed a felony, in the aftermath of Tennessee v. Garner and subsequent changes to Missouri case law and jury instructions, the use of deadly force to make an arrest of a non-dangerous fleeing felon is not permitted under Missouri law.

  15. a2nite says:

    Everyone needs to remember that there are 2 events. What happened in the car where the lying murderer is the only living witness and what happened after MB ran away.

    Don’t be distracted by the “story’ about what happened in the car. I don’t think that the murderer will get indicted because everyone of his defenders are pointing to what happened in the car to justify killing MB.

    Of course, it is justified to the white supremacist LE supporters, because LE = good, black = bad and criminal.

    Evil is winning in America.

    • Nef05 says:

      It’s hypocritical, convenient, situational ethics. Remember, the argument (excuse) that got fogen off was that he was in imminent danger in THAT moment. The jury and fogen supporters went to great lengths to claim that nothing fogen did before (profiling, stalking, “following” after being told to stand down and Trayvon’s fear) the altercation mattered, because he was in imminent danger, in the moment, of the altercation. Therefore, he was justified in murdering an unarmed black teen.

      Now, they’re saying the exact opposite for Wilson. Apparently, it is also permissible to murder an unarmed black teen, when you’re no longer in imminent danger, because of everything that HE did(allegedly) leading up to the murder.

      For me, the message is clear. It is “legal”, “justified” and “self-defense” to kill an unarmed black teen under pretty much any circumstances – but especially if you make ANY claim whatsoever to holding a position of “authoriteh”.

    • Bill Taylor says:

      your point works with something i heard today……the 6 to 8 witnesses they claim support wilson i heard the wording “essentially” support wilson…….what is being said there is 6 to 8 witnesses say there was a struggle at the car and that means they agree with wilsons version……..trouble is that is also Dorian Johnsons version and they differ in that JOhnsons makes sense wilsons makes NO sense on any level.

  16. As I believe I posted on yesterday’s thread, I conversed via Facebook with Judy Melinek after the story containing her quotes appeared in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. When I went back to her page last night following her appearance on O’Donnell’s show to see if there were any additional comments I found that she had deleted our conversation. Below is what was there before she scrubbed the page. I also replied to her response but I did not copy it before she deleted the entire post (I replied something to the effect of thanks, but I still don’t understand what you said). It never occurred to me that she would delete the post.

    Gloria S. Ross Dr. Melinek, if the quote below is accurate, I do not understand how you arrived at your conclusion that the victim had to be reaching for the gun. It seems to be the only conclusion that can be drawn is that his hand was near the gun.

    FROM THE ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH: Dr. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco, said the autopsy “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.” She added, “If he has his hand near the gun when it goes off, he’s going for the officer’s gun.”

    Dr. Judy Melinek: I did not say that the victim “had to be reaching for the gun.” What I said was that the gunpowder in the wound supports the officer’s version of events. Please read St. Louis dispatch article on officer’s version.

    • girlp says:

      O’Donnell embarrassed her she tried to back track a little while doubling down on her original analysis.

    • Talk to the hand, Dr. Melinek. You are a whore and everybody knows it. BTW, absolutely LOVE your given mailing address on the CA medical board site. Practice medicine from a strip-mall FedEx drop location on Balboa, do you? Stay classy, now.

    • Very well done!

      That’s the way the Big Dogs expose the forensic whores.

      She overreached to get her name up in lights and desperately scrubbed your legitimate question and her damning bullshit response to conceal her dishonesty.

      • racerrodig says:

        Who do I talk to about getting a TV program ‘cuz I have no problem asking hard questions at all. I have no problem messing with scum bag lawyers. (I have a side gig doing Consumer Fraud Reports & Testimony for several lawyers on auto repair fraud lawsuits)

        This country needs to stop this crap. If Robbie the Racist can talk about being a talking head, I can guarantee you all I can make them cry.

      • Thank you. Just sorry I didn’t get a screen shot after my final post. I’ll know better next time (and, unfortunately, there’s always a next time for injustice).

  17. Judy Melinek M.D.
    @NBCNews Was Dr. Baden present for Michael Brown’s autopsy? … #Ferguson #FergusonShooting


    Rachel @CraneStation · 3m 3 minutes ago
    @drjudymelinek How about you? Were you there?
    View conversation 0 replies 0 retweets 0 favorites
    Reply Retweet Favorite

  18. YQ says:

    Absolutely. And Browns blood on the gun doesn’t mean anything. Shooting Brown in the arm while he was in the car at close range could suggest why the blood was there. Geez, what is so special about this one friggin cop? Send him to jail and replace him already!!!

  19. Good morning, everyone!

    I have a question about prosecutorial misconduct. Professor, I hope you can help here.

    Charges of prosecutorial misconduct are routinely levied against prosecutors who illegally/unethically attempt to thwart constitutional rights of defendants.

    But are there any charges/claims that can be levied against prosecutors who unethically fail to professionally discharge their duty to prosecute because of bias TOWARD the defendant? In other words, lackadaisical prosecution that actually benefits the defendant, i.e. Angela Corey in Fogen’s case or what could possibly happen with St. Louis County Prosecutor McCullouch if his friend Darren Wilson is ultimately charged.

    The victim’s and the People’s rights of redress are blatantly disregarded, but can anything be done against the prosecutors?

    • The answer is “No.”

      Within the last two years, the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) ruled that prosecutors have absolute immunity from liability for anything they say or do in the course of their work as prosecutors.

      They can be bitched to their state bar associations. In a suitably egregious case, they might be suspended or disbarred, but that doesn’t happen very often.

  20. a2nite says:

    Justice is for rich people and some pretty white girls. There is no justice for the remainder of us.

  21. girlp says:

    Wilson did not stop Brown because he was a suspect in a robbery. I watched Rev. Al Sharpton last night and a criminal lawyer said Wilsons’ word were self-serving she that this is what we do, Wilson was rehearsed.

  22. racerrodig says:

    There is no doubt the only way Wilson is not convicted is if he’s not indicted.

    “Is the nation not being groomed and conditioned to passively accept a grand jury decision not to charge Wilson?”

    Fuckin’ A as we used to say. He did not have a police report that contained anything but a name, date, time and location. Now the world is to believe this is self defense ??

    Do the powers to be think everyone will be Zimmerized ?? It is painfully obvious that all a depraved mind needs to blurt out is I was in reasonable fear. Well let me set the record straight. Fogen was in a truck, Wafer was behind not 1, but two, count ’em two locked doors, Duuhhnn, was in a car, Wilson was in a car and provoked the entire event all by himself. The intent in police work is not to execute a “suspect” but to bring them in alive so the legal system can be applied.

    What was Mike Brown a suspect of ?? NOTHING……no probable cause of any kind can be applied here. I know for fact a cop needs “Probable Cause” to stop anyone. Now, the Post and the autopsy report that there was all kinds of traffic on Canfield Dr. and Brown & Johnson are being made to be creating a traffic hazard.

    Where in the police report does it say that and it must be fabricated for 2 reasons. There are no witnesses who say that and the only crime committed to that point would be reckless driving by Wilson.

    I’m 100% confident a jury will convict him as the witnesses and evidence are far to strong. The jury will not be a jury of Wilson’s peers, that is, 12 corrupt thugs wearing “I am Darren Wilson” wristbands, but the general population. At best, he’ll get hung juries, and that won’t last long. For the most part, even the extreme right and the gun NutZZ aren’t running their mouths on this because Wilson wasn’t pinned and being beaten. There is video and pictures of him walking back and forth and not once does anyone look at him for an injury.

    So the new mantra is “If we don’t indict……they can’t convict”

    • bettykath says:

      “There is no doubt the only way Wilson is not convicted is if he’s not indicted. ”

      Remember fogen? The evidence was there but it was not presented or it was presented in a manner designed for an acquittal. Remember the fogen jury? It would be a piece of cake to select a similar jury in where ever they decided to try Wilson, who for darned sure would request a change of venue and would get it.

  23. Why Fred Leatherman is the only one saying this is beyond me. Columnists in the local paper and throughout MSM should be screaming about this obvious abuse of power.

    • bettykath says:

      Lawrence O’Donnell is on it, too.

    • racerrodig says:

      This is beyond the scope of imagination. Why can’t a liar be called a liar. The witnesses alone get him convicted with an impartial jury. That’s what they’re afraid of.

      If he’s convicted, the people win one, and a major one, over the real bullies…..the armed bullies…….with cells to lock you up in……
      with Judges to convict you…….for no real reason……

      They can’t even protest peacefully there without and incredibly overreacting response. Look at the protesters walking with their hands up and all the loaded automatic weapons pointed at them.

      Gee…..just like Kent State……

      Bullies need to stack the deck and guns trump march’s

      • a2nite says:

        to racerrodig:

        The murderer won’t be indicted because the white supremacist powers that be decided to fix this thing.

        They have to reassure the majority white sect that “white is right” and “black is wrong and criminal” and all the other BS that they sell to make many white people feel superior.

        I will remind people that anything that they do to us they can and will do to anyone. No one is safe with the white supremacist shoot to murder police.

      • roderick2012 says:

        The witnesses alone get him convicted with an impartial jury

        But, but eight blah (black) witnesses confirm Wilson’s versions of events.

        Yeah I know just like those blah children Piglet and Shellie mentored.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      The Washington Post needs their azzes kicked for supporting this shizazz.

      • roderick2012 says:

        Jeff Bazos ( owner of Amazon) recently purchased WP and appointed a right-winger as the editor so go figure.

  24. I would so totally love to testify on my own self-serving behalf to a grand jury. I wouldn’t have saved just one baby, oh no. I would have discovered the cure for Ebola single-handedly. I would be the second coming, awaiting my sainthood, when suddenly, for no reason at all, I, the anointed saint, was attacked.

    They would have to hand out hankies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: