The Ferguson, Missouri thread

**archibaldcrane** · 2014-09-08 21:14

Originally Posted by NynJa

Last time i told you why, with said quotes from those immediate eyewitnesses, you merely replied "lol"

So go find that post and youll see why it takes more than those 6 "expert eyewitnesses". And dont give me the 6 people who decided to come forth a week later.

Lol

**Nephlite** · 2014-09-08 22:24

Originally Posted by archibaldcrane

Grand jury decides if he will be prosecuted, because apparently 6 eyewitnesses aren't enough for the police to bring charges.

It's never that simple, in any murder case. Things are never clean cut or dry when you investigate this type of crime. It's been said before, but witnesses don't mean a clean cut case. There's hundreds of studies and it's been ruled by the courts that eye-witness testimony isn't reliable. Why do you think so many prisoners are getting exonerated and released from prisons?

Like Dimmauk said, you remove the badge, and charges would have been brought already. The grand jury would have to look at all the facets of the case before deciding to move forward. Same thing happened in the Zimmerman trial. It took them a while before they went to gamble that he didn't have immunity from the Stand Your Ground law. If they go to take the gamble that Darren Wilson doesn't qualify for Governmental Immunity, they could easily lose the case if there's any legal loophole, and have to make sure they are careful when bringing the charges.

I praise them for taking the time to do so. If indeed Darren Wilson murdered Michael Brown, I would like the case to be airtight and not have the asshole get off because of technicalities. Our justice system is extremely flawed in some of those aspects and you never want to leave anything open for a question to linger that doesn't return an unanimous vote of Guilty. Then, you run in to Double Jeopardy if you find more shit out later (which is why they haven't retried Zimmerman).

**archibaldcrane** · 2014-09-08 23:42

Oh, I fully understand that no number of eyewitnesses will be enough for you to think a cop should arrest another cop.

It's just that you don't think that's a problem, when it's clearly a problem.

**archibaldcrane** · 2014-09-08 23:48

If you invalidate all eyewitnesses, then you're just left with the cop saying "he charged me bro" and everyone pats him on the back and says "good shoot" and everyone* goes on their merry way.

*note that blacks aren't considered "people" in this dream scenario

**kuronosan** · 2014-09-08 23:50

Stop being a cop hater* arch.

*note: cop hater in this context means anyone who points out an obvious problem with the criminal justice system.

**BaneTheBrawler** · 2014-09-09 00:56

Originally Posted by archibaldcrane

*note that blacks aren't considered "people" in this dream scenario

well their constitutional rights seem to be second-class so obviously they don't fall under "all men" which is taken to mean "all people" so yah, pretty sure that applies in the waking world too.

**Nephlite** · 2014-09-09 01:05

Originally Posted by BaneTheBrawler

well their constitutional rights seem to be second-class so obviously they don't fall under "all men" which is taken to mean "all people" so yah, pretty sure that applies in the waking world too.

Same thing that Darren Wilson is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Doesn't matter, cops shouldn't have constitutional rights or a right to a fair trial.

**chazzyphizzle** · 2014-09-09 01:09

cops are also clearly second class citizens

**BaneTheBrawler** · 2014-09-09 03:26

Originally Posted by Nephlite

Same thing that Darren Wilson is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Doesn't matter, cops shouldn't have constitutional rights or a right to a fair trial.

**archibaldcrane** · 2014-09-09 04:56

Originally Posted by Nephlite

Same thing that Darren Wilson is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Doesn't matter, cops shouldn't have constitutional rights or a right to a fair trial.

No one is arguing that he should be imprisoned without a trial. A fair trial is what everyone is asking for, get the fuck out with your strawman.

**GoggleHead** · 2014-09-09 06:23

It sounds like Neph is saying that they're simply taking more time to get all their evidence gathered because Darren Wilson could weasel out of this with his immunity so they have to make extra sure they've got everything lined up to nail him with a guilty verdict. Isn't that what we should want? That the prosecution be fully prepared so this doesn't just become another case of "cop guns down unarmed black man and gets away with it".

Seems like some people in this thread are just a little too blood thirsty to slow down and think through the information they've been provided with.

**Eurell** · 2014-09-09 06:32

Nah. Neph is obviously saying cops should be immune to everything, and are 100% allowed to just gun anyone down without question.

**Nephlite** · 2014-09-09 07:18

Originally Posted by Eurell

Nah. Neph is obviously saying cops should be immune to everything, and are 100% allowed to just gun anyone down without question.

Obviously.

For those of you who thinks it only takes the hour CSI or Law and Order shows to go to trial, check out the process for yourself. Shows like "The First 48" will show you how to catch the bad guy, but linking all that information, evidence, witness accounts, and forensics can take months to formulate enough to seal the indictment. It's also not unusual for suspected murderers to be out and about while waiting for charges.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/for...technique4.htm

**chazzyphizzle** · 2014-09-09 07:40

being condescending totally helps your surely righteous cause

**Salodin** · 2014-09-09 08:20

Ok it's neph, people won't be able to sleep well at night until the investigation is over. Just let them froth at the mouth until the grand jury is through with their thing, then they'll have their peace.

**archibaldcrane** · 2014-09-09 08:52

This isn't a "whodonit". The grand jury just gives the police cover, so that if they do come back with a true bill the police can say "our hand was forced, we HAD to arrest him." Plenty of states don't even use grand juries, so lets not pretend that they are a necessary precondition for police to do their jobs and arrest other police who are strongly suspected of murder.

**Nephlite** · 2014-09-09 10:09

Arresting people and prosecuting are totally separate things. Are you confused by this? Plus, you don't arrest someone without Probable Cause, something a police officer by themselves won't be able to make the determination without someone to determine if the police officer falls under Qualified Immunity.

Grand Juries are exaggerated Probable Cause hearings used in ALL jurisdictions to determine if a Police Officer had PC to arrest someone. Grand juries prosecute most felonies in U.S. State Court. They're the ones, with the assistance of a judge, will determine if he falls under Qualified Immunity and determine if they'll reach an Indictment on the accused or dismiss the case.

The way you're sounding, arresting him will solve everyone's problems, but have no faith in the system that's PART of that process. So why arrest him if you don't charge him or get an indictment on him? There's no point to that.

**archibaldcrane** · 2014-09-09 10:32

Originally Posted by Nephlite

Arresting people and prosecuting are totally separate things. Are you confused by this?

nope

Grand Juries are exaggerated Probable Cause hearings used in ALL jurisdictions

Nope
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...050,bs.1,d.cGE

Does every jurisdiction use a grand jury?
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires a grand jury indictment for federal criminal charges. Only about half the states now use grand juries

So why arrest him if you don't charge him or get an indictment on him? There's no point to that.

I'm saying he should be arrested and charged.

**archibaldcrane** · 2014-09-09 10:37

Now, whether they would pursue state charges or federal charges is another story, but one does not preclude the other.

**Salodin** · 2014-09-09 11:18

What's the recourse of arresting an officer who is later exonerated?

Thread: The Ferguson, Missouri thread

Thread Tools

Latest Threads

Up & Coming Threads

Hottest Threads