Sunday, January 04, 2015

On The Michael Brown And Eric Garner Grand Jury Decisions

Most middle-class whites have no idea what it feels like to be subjected to police who are routinely suspicious, rude, belligerent, and brutal ~ Benjamin Spock (5/2/1903 to 3/15/1998) an American pediatrician whose book Baby and Child Care, published in 1946, is one of the best-sellers of all time.

My view is that these decisions are bullshit. In regards to the Michael Brown case, I heard that "witness 40" - the individual who said Michael Brown charged his killer "like a football player, head down" - wasn't there and is a known racist liar. This concocted "testimony" has been cited many times on Fox Nooz (by Sean Hannity specifically) as "proof" that Darren Wilson's version of events were accurate and therefore the shooting was justified (Witness 40: Exposing A Fraud In Ferguson).

Frankly I didn't buy this "charging" baloney from the beginning. No sane person would charge someone shooting at them. It's utterly ridiculous. But now that we know Sandra McElroy (AKA "Witness 40") lied - coupled that with the fact that Brown was over 100 feet away when Wilson started firing - I'm thinking this is looking more and more like murder. As for WHY Wilson decided to murder Brown, I can't say. Either incompetence (he panicked) indicating the guy should never have been a cop to begin with, or racism. Or a combination of the two.

I do know, however, that there ABSOLUTELY should have been a trial AND that the prosecutor, Bob McCulloch, did not get an indictment because he didn't want one. According to the Washington Post, McCulloch's "father, a police officer, was killed by a black suspect... [and, during his career as a prosecutor] four times he presented evidence to a grand jury in [a police shooting] case and didn't get an indictment; now he can add a fifth". (Bob McCulloch's pathetic prosecution of Darren Wilson).

Not only that, but Bob McCulloch knew Sandra McElroy was lying BEFORE he allowed her to testify before the grand jury! McCulloch said "there were people who came in and, yes, absolutely lied under oath [but] I thought it was much more important to present the entire picture" (St. Louis prosecutor McCulloch says he knew Witness 40 lied to Ferguson grand jury).

Right. As for the Hannity-quoted Witness 40, McCulloch admitted, "this lady clearly wasn't present when this occurred". Then why the hell did he allow her to testify? A 12/17/2014 FireDogLake article asserts that McCulloch "should be investigated for conspiracy to suborn perjury"... and I agree. McCulloch is more to blame for this fabricated testimony being presented to the jury (and influencing their decision) than Witness 40 (who may suffer from some "serious mental health issues").

Hopefully this unethical misconduct by McCulloch is followed up on. And then there is the fact that Darren Wilson appears to have lied under oath.

Officer Darren Wilson testified that he knew about the theft of a box of cigarillos from the Ferguson Market, before encountering Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson. However, Officer Wilson's supervisor testified that he spoke to Wilson after the shooting, and that Wilson "did not know anything about the stealing call". In an apparent effort to turn unreasonable actions into a reasonable excuse to pull the gun out, Wilson connected the stop to the call about the in-store theft. (FDL article, "Over Easy: Transcripts show #DarrenWilson Lied to the Grand Jury" by Masoninblue, 11/26/2014).

So Wilson was not thinking Michael Brown might be the suspect who supposedly stole a box of cigs, Michael Brown didn't punch officer Wilson causing a "broken eye socket", and Michael Brown did not "charge" Wilson. Brown also wasn't 35 feet away from Darren Wilson's SUV. It was actually 148 feet (Police Lied: Michael Brown Was Killed 148 Feet Away From Darren Wilson's SUV).

So, tell me... how the hell could Darren Wilson fear for his life from someone who was SO far away AND not "charging" him? Shooting so many damn times (10 shots according to this article) suggests to me that maybe Wilson didn't want Michael Brown to survive to tell his side of the story.

As for the killing of Eric Garner by officer Daniel Pantaleo - that homicide was ON TAPE - and still no indictment. I believe the Black community has good reason to be angry - and I support them in their protests demanding change. And I also view any cop - or head of any cop organization - that speaks out against any protestor (such as the St. Louis Rams players who ran onto the field and did the "hands up, don't shoot" pose) to be a part of the problem.

In regards to the mentally ill individual who killed two NY City cops in "retaliation"... he was NOT "incited" to violence by the protestors! I've heard this meme and view anyone propagating it to also be a part of the problem. The protestors are opposed to needless killings, and the murder of these cops - officers that weren't White and had nothing to do with any unjust killings of unarmed Black males. People have a right to protest and I think those who are trying to pin this on the peaceful protesters in an effort to slime them is reprehensible (a-holes such as Rudy Giuliani and this guy).

Only a few idiots chanted about wanting dead cops (idiots who later said they didn't mean it). Those idiots are a minority and not representative of the protestors at large. In fact, Eric Garner's widow said (in regards to the officer shootings) "I know what they're going through to lose a loved one right before the holidays, and everything is so sad, and I would ask that everyone that is protesting with us, please protest in a nonviolent way. My husband was not a violent man so we don't want any violence connected to his name".

Another example a person who are a part of the problem would be Patrick Lynch, the police union president, who said Mayor Bill de Blasio has "blood on [his] hands". There will always be bad actors (on any side of an argument) - so painting all the protestors as somehow responsible for "inciting" violence - in regards to the to NY police officers who were assassinated in this case, Pat Lynch has (along with the officers who turned their backs on de Blasio when he visited the Woodhull Hospital for a press conference) is bullpuckey.

The shooter (Ismaaiyl Brinsley) who executed officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu should have been tried and sent to prison (if he hadn't killed himself) - same as Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo. The "tried" part, in any case.

Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo are bad cops who should have been charged (with at least Manslaughter). Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu were (by all accounts) good cops and the victims... quite similar to how Michael Brown and Eric Garner were victims. Although their killers got off scot-free.

Pantaleo "has been sued three times for allegedly violating the constitutional rights of other blacks he and fellow cops arrested" (USA Today 12/4/2014). As for Wilson, although it has been asserted that he was a good cop with a clean record, a blogger on the Daily Kos notes that prior to 2010 "use of force complaints were not kept in an officer's personnel file".

So we don't know if Wilson has ever been accused of using excessive force. We do know, however, that he was previously fired from the Jennings MO police force because there was "so much tension between white officers and black residents, that the city council finally decided to disband it" (Washington Post). This is hardly an indictment against Wilson, but it does mean he cut his teeth as an officer in a job where there was a "disconnect between the community and the police department".

Perhaps this explains why Wilson thought it was OK to swear at Brown and Johnson for (supposedly) jaywalking, nearly sideswipe them when backing up his vehicle, and then hit them with his door (according to witnesses). Obviously this kind of behavior is uncalled for when dealing with a minor offense such as jaywalking. Perhaps he just felt like giving two young Black men a hard time? I surely don't know. I do know, however, that his story does not add up. The Brown family lawyer described Wilson's narrative as "absurd from beginning to end" and I agree.

I think that Pantaleo, on the other hand, did not mean to kill Eric Garner. He simply didn't care he might be endangering the man's life by putting him in a chokehold and forcing him to the ground. This is evidenced by the fact that nobody listened to him when he said he couldn't breath. Apparently they didn't believe him.

In my opinion the cops involved just didn't give a shit. It was reckless endangerment and depraved indifference... and, given the past excessive force complaints against Pantaleo, it was only a matter of time before he seriously hurt or killed someone. This isn't the kind of person who should be a cop, IMO.

As for what should be done going forward, I think that special prosecutors should handle cases where cops shoot and kill civilians. When prosecutors who work WITH cops to prosecute the bad guys are called on to prosecute a cop - that creates a conflict of interest. The prosecutor doesn't want to alienate the officers they rely on to make their cases. I say AVOID the conflict of interest and have a special prosecutor handle these kind of cases.

When you work with cops every day you definitely gain more respect for their difficult work. And you need them to help you make your cases (every prosecutor has experienced having a police officer catch an attitude, sometimes in the middle of a trial, and purposely ruin your case because they don't like you).

And finally policing is like most other employment - a few people do most of the work. So prosecutors see the same cops over and over, and they bond with them. It's not so much that they excuse egregious misconduct as that they cast a blind eye. Nothing irks a cop more than an elitist prosecutor treating him or her like "some suspect".

So the problem stems from the culture of the prosecutor's office, compounded by the fact that, like most lawyers, prosecutors are competitive and ambitious and the way you move ahead is to win your cases, and the way you win cases is get your star witnesses - the cops - to go the extra mile. All that makes it really tough to try to send one of them to prison (The System Must Counteract Prosecutors' Natural Sympathies for Cops by Paul Butler. NYT Opinion Pages, 12/4/2014).

Why not let a 100 percent neutral party decide if there should or shouldn't be a trial when the suspect is a cop? Even if you disagree with EVERYTHING else I've written here, I don't see how anyone could argue that this would be a bad idea. Although, if you're the type of person who believes cops are never wrong, they always do right and there are absolutely no bad ones... not even one... then you might be strongly in favor of staying with the current system, a system that isn't as impartial as it could be.

Since the 15th century, Lady Justice has often been depicted wearing a blindfold. The blindfold represents objectivity, in that justice is or should be meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of identity, personal wealth, power, or weakness; blind justice and impartiality... Excerpt from the Wikipedia page: Lady Justice/Blindfold.

SWTD #275

14 comments:

  1. FUCK Michael Briwn, Eric Garner, Al Sharpton, and everyone else that feels sorry for those LAME Bastard Thugs.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Most middle-class whites have no idea what it feels like to be subjected to police who are routinely suspicious, rude, belligerent, and brutal"

    You have a lot of nerve to write that! Or should I say STUPIDITY!

    I personally don’t really give don't give a phlying phuck about these two Black Gansta’s, or what YOU think about them. Dimwits like you place their sympathy in the wrong place.
    I didn’t read one single word about the animals and barbaric savages that caused this entire thing, or the wild animal that MURDERED those two innocent Police Officers who were just sitting in their car, minding their own business and lost their lives. Or their families. Or maybe you missed that whole even where 25 thousand police officers and that Ass-Hole Mayor of New York attended yesterday!!

    But you would rather see the other side, those people (vicious jungle animals) were . protesting, marching, turning over police cars, burning down buildings, looting, stealing and whatever else they could do and blame it on the Police!

    Well listen Comrade, and listen good, it’s people like you and the rest of those progressive ass-holes who are responsible for the killing of these innocent policemen, destroying our country. They are destroying our economy, education system and now our judicial system. Our political system is now becoming an international joke. There was no validity to their protest and complaints; however, the left is throwing in more and more support for their lies. It’s time to wake up to what is REALLY happening in the streets of America.
    And another thing, Obama,Holder are behind what Sharpton is doing and they are all responsible for this.
    Something has to be done about these savages. Where is the shameful community organizer? Where was Al Sharpton when thos Cops were MURDERED?
    Sharpton and the backs said they were going to attack the police, and they did. And we now have our very own Black al quaeda. And trust me, this is far from over.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is "nice" to hear from a compassionate conservative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Another escapee from Shaw's snake pit.

      Delete
  4. That more then I can say about you and your ilk.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You are stuck on stupid. The THUG got just what he was asking for.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey Dervish,

    I'm wondering if you didn't go out and look for the transcript of Dorian Johnson's testimony before the Grand Jury which was released to the public like three weeks late or so. Considering Johnson seems like a fairly credible witness, at least when under oath, it seems like a decent telling of the events that led up to the shooting. Have you ever been in court and you were telling your side of the story and you thought you were making perfect sense and the judge might see it your way? But the prosecutor who knows the law far better than you just licks his lips and goes in for the kill using your own words.

    I think something like that happened to Dorian Johnson. I think he might have thought that his testimony was actually damning to Officer Wilson, but colder glaring light might actually see it as rather damning to his friend, Big Mike.

    It seems very clear that at least the first shot was shot from inside the car when the officer's left hand still had ahold of Big Mike's right arm. He got off his shot with his right hand during the struggle.

    I think that the controversy over what happened after that is what is a little more difficult to ascertain. Particularly, how many more shots were fired from what distances, what direction was Mike facing, etc.

    Let me link you a transcription of the testimony. The shooting is described beginning at page 103. My own transcription of the initial stop as well as a transcription of Johnson's testimony regarding the first shot will be published below.

    There is no html-pdf of this available, unless you have software capable of doing that.

    https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/248126858?access_key=key-dDeAfDkI2g5F2eR7YS66&allow_share=true&escape=false&view_mode=scroll

    ReplyDelete
  7. p. 49
    A. The officer pulled back. “What did you say?” Very loud, angry.
    Q. Who did he appear to be talking to?
    A. At the time I believe he was talking to both of us. Like I said, Big Mike never said anything when the officer pulled up on us. So at the time I believe that he was talking to both of us when he said, “What did you say?” And in an instant, Big Mike was finished saying something, his door was thrust open, very complex, he thrust his door open real hard. We was so close to the door that it hit mostly Big Mike, but it hit me on my left side and it closed back on him, like real fast. Just the same speed, boom, boom, that fast. And at that time, he never attempted to open the door again like to try to get back out, but his arm came out the window and that was the first initial contact that they had. The officer grabbed, he grabbed Big Mike’s shirt around the neck area.
    p. 50
    Q. So did he grab his neck or his shirt around the neck area?
    A. It was more of both because he had a real good grip on him.
    Q. Was there any warning? Did he just stick his hand out and grab, does he say anything, did he say anything?
    A. No M’am, at this time when the door had closed back on him he didn’t say anything. His arm almost in an instant came out the window, his left arm, I remember it was his left arm, came out and touched Big Mike around his neck area and his throat. I watched his hands, you know, they really tightened up, so yeah, he had a good grip on it, that’s what I saw first.
    Q. Were you still right behind Big Mike when this occurred?
    A. At this time I’m not behind him any more, we’re side to side, so I can see everything that is going on. I’m still in the window. I’m still right here in the same spot. I never moved. And at that time, Big Mike, he still has the cigarillos in both of his hands, divided evenly, he never put them down in his pocket or anything like that.
    p. 51
    Now from the beginning of the grab, it is a tug-of-war. Big Mike places his hands openly, one hand on top of the cruiser and the other hand more right up under the window, the side mirror. He’s trying to pull off the officer’s grip.
    Q. How is he doing that with the cigarillos in his hands?
    A. He placed his cigarillos on the car and his hands are on the car. He never dropped a single pack. He still has them in his hand, not dropping them, but he’s pulling away, but he still grab on. So he never could really get a good grip on the car, but he’s still really trying to pull away.
    Q. Okay.
    A. At this time the officer, I’m not hearing what the officer is saying, I’m not hearing what Big Mike is saying, so now I’m not in shock, but that’s the beginning of my shock level. That’s where I’m like, this doesn’t happen every day, something is out of order here. They are talking to each other, they are yelling and cussing, and neither one of them can calm down. They both have angry faces on while they are talking. They were both very upset and they couldn’t calm down.
    p. 52
    There wasn’t any wrestling or anything like that. Punches were thrown. It was more of a tug of war and it was very intense, very intense.
    Q. Okay, and so please tell us what happened.
    A. While the officer is grabbing ahold of Big Mike, he kind of loses his grip around his neck, that’s how I knew he had a good grip. He never fully let Big Mike go, now he has a good grasp on his shirt. So now Big Mike’s able to turn different angles while he is trying to pull away.
    And at a point he turned, now we are face-to-face, and he put his hands like, grab these, Bro. And in shock, I’m so not unconsciously, my hands open to where he could put the rillos in my hand, but I’m still standing in the same spot. …

    ReplyDelete
  8. p. 53
    At that time he turned back around facing the officer now, and now he can get a good grip on the car. So now as he is pulling away, it is with more power, with more force. The officer is trying to pull him inside the vehicle through the window, like he’s pulling him, but he’s pulling away. …
    p. 103
    Q. Let’s just go back. I understand what you are saying about seeing the shooting like that, but when Big Mike’s right hand or arm is being pulled into the car, I don’t know if you said that or not, you said that the officer had his right hand with his, the officer’s left hand had Big Mike’s right arm?
    A. Correct.
    Q. Where is it, did you see it or not, where his right, where Big Mike’s right hand was?
    A. I didn’t see Big Mike’s right hand because the officer had it, but it was up, so it may have times when the officer could have pulled his right, because his left hand never removed off the officer’s car. So there could have been times when the officer pulled him, but like I said, because of the position how Big Mike has on the officer, officer never got out of the car, he is still sitting down. He has a better way of pulling with more force, so he is just pulling. I can see more of the officer’s arm out of the window than his arm in the window.

    p. 104
    Q. From your vantage point, you can tell if Big Mike’s hand ever went inside the officer’s car?
    A. No, because at the point I’m back and forth, but when {he said}, “I’ll shoot!” my eyes locked on the officer.
    Q. So where was, where were the hands? I’m interested in the hands and the arms.
    A. At that point, when the officer says, “I’ll shoot!” now is like Big Mike, this hand is not on the car any more.
    Q. That’s the left hand?
    A. The left hand is not on the car any more, the officer still has the right hand, but he’s not inside the car. And when I look up and see the officer, the officer has his gun pointed, his left arm grabbed, he has his gun pointed, aimed at Big Mike. In my mind, it was probably pointed at both of us, but I assumed he wasn’t trying directly just to go for Big Mike. He had his gun pointed toward us. I’m still standing at the doorway and at the time he said I’ll shoot. He was going to say it again, I’ll shoot and almost, he didn’t get to finish his sentence, the gun went off.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Flying Fuck-Face, you are almost as stupid ss the imbical that writes this idiotic blog.

    ReplyDelete
  10. ah, so the "Gentle Giant" was not arrested and tried , ergo the robbery and the beating of the store owner never occurred. Are you alleging that the video of the robbery and assault was bogus, or are you posing a new variant of the "if a tree falls in the woods" question?

    ReplyDelete
  11. It won't be long til the Looters, Moochers, and Parasites will be demanding that it be rebuilt with taxpayer (our) dollars. I say screw 'em. all.... where they breath. ..

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jumping to conclusions is a favorite past time of liberals. Take for instance Flying Jerkoff,he does a cut and past to defend a dead thug only to be shown what an idiot he is when the Eric Holder DOJ releases it final report saying there is absolutely no evidence to bring charges against a hero policeman.So,I guess the case is as dead as the fat,ignorant thug and actually the would is a better place without that fat bastard in it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rusty, this post concerned the murdering policeman Darren Wilson. I never discussed any "hero policeman". DOJ decided it couldn't make a civil rights case... they dealt with that charge ONLY. There was a case to be made that Wilson was not justified in shooting Brown (with evidence to support it), but the prosecutor deliberately sabotaged that case.

      Flying Junior, I believe Johnson's version of events are likely the most accurate.

      Delete

Comment moderation has temporarily been suspended. Although I may be forced to reinstate it if the trolls take advantage.