Ferguson officer appears before grand jury on shooting of Michael Brown
By Robert Patrick rpatrick@ ~ ... and Kim Bell kbell@ ~ ...
ST. LOUIS • Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson testified for almost four hours Tuesday in front of a St. Louis County grand jury investigating his Aug. 9 shooting of Michael Brown, a source with knowledge of the investigation said Wednesday.
Wilson was not obligated to testify, and also has spoken with St. Louis County investigators twice and federal investigators once, the source said. The source said that Wilson had been “cooperative.”
[...]
Ferguson officer appears before grand jury on shooting of Michael Brown : News
Unlikely his attorney would have allowed him to testify if he thought charges were going to be brought.
And for those who do not know. Dorian Johnson has already testified also.
While I agree with the sentiment, I have no idea how you arrived at such underlined conclusions. For all we know it is exactly what his attorney wanted. :shrug:Sounds to me like Officer Wilson is an honorable man and regardless of attorney advice wanted to let his side of the story be told because he feels he acted appropriately.
While I agree with the sentiment, I have no idea how you arrived at such underlined conclusions. For all we know it is exactly what his attorney wanted. :shrug:
Correction. That was my assumption.And for those who do not know. Dorian Johnson has already testified also.
Highly unlikely.The Feds will burn him for civil rights violations.
Highly unlikely.
Didn't you say that about Zimmerman also?
Is Dorian Johnson the kid who was with Brown in the store and on the street that night?
While I agree with the sentiment, I have no idea how you arrived at such underlined conclusions. For all we know it is exactly what his attorney wanted. :shrug:
Sounds to me like Officer Wilson is an honorable man and regardless of attorney advice wanted to let his side of the story be told because he feels he acted appropriately.
Ferguson officer appears before grand jury on shooting of Michael Brown
By Robert Patrick rpatrick@ ~ ... and Kim Bell kbell@ ~ ...
ST. LOUIS • Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson testified for almost four hours Tuesday in front of a St. Louis County grand jury investigating his Aug. 9 shooting of Michael Brown, a source with knowledge of the investigation said Wednesday.
Wilson was not obligated to testify, and also has spoken with St. Louis County investigators twice and federal investigators once, the source said. The source said that Wilson had been “cooperative.”
[...]
Ferguson officer appears before grand jury on shooting of Michael Brown : News
Unlikely his attorney would have allowed him to testify if he thought charges were going to be brought.
And for those who do not know. Dorian Johnson has already testified also.
This is possible.
It is also possible that he is dishonorable and felt that he could lie well enough in person to cover up an unnecessary killing.
I cannot draw a conclusion based upon the fact that he testified.
I would be very interested to hear WHAT he said and how it compares to objective forensic evidence and other witness testimony... but everything is secret right now.
I can neither condemn nor support this man without some hard facts to scrutinize.
Is Dorian Johnson the kid who was with Brown in the store and on the street that night?
Of course, which is why this is unusual and more likely than not points to the Officer having nothing to hide.Depends greatly on the situation, I doubt most attorneys would want someone to testify in front of the grand jury given how much media and government attention this case has drawn. Appearing before the grand jury can still put someone in a position of having to take the 5th on a challenging question, which may or may not be critical in the grand jury returning a charge.
To preempt all that, particularly when his own legal counsel is not allowed to be present for the questioning, leads me to believe he's got nothing to hide. He could also be stupidly overconfident, but I'm inclined to believe otherwise.
Many a thing could be possible :doh, yet some just are not likely, like the above.It is also possible that he is dishonorable and felt that he could lie well enough in person to cover up an unnecessary killing.
That's fair comment - my position is based on the fact that officers seldom testify unless compelled to do so and if they are subject officers almost never until the matter goes to trial after charges are laid. To preempt all that, particularly when his own legal counsel is not allowed to be present for the questioning, leads me to believe he's got nothing to hide. He could also be stupidly overconfident, but I'm inclined to believe otherwise.
Sounds to me like Officer Wilson is an honorable man and regardless of attorney advice wanted to let his side of the story be told because he feels he acted appropriately.
I'm glad to see this happen - personally, I've seen far too many police officers here in Toronto refuse to cooperate with investigations into incidents where a member of the public is seriously injured or killed.
McCulloch has pledged to present every witness and every shred of evidence to let the grand jurors independently decide whether to indict Wilson, without the prosecutor making a recommendation. Magee has said that prosecutors will help witnesses navigate legal issues.
I could be wrong, but believe his lawyer was present. But, otherwise I agree with you. There are so many things about this case that make me suspect they really do not expect charges to be brought. I realize that some will claim bias, but I suspect it is far more likely that they've seen thee vidnece and are just doing this as a show to help appease a certain part of the population.
Exactly. And doing so would possibly have the effect of thwarting any bogus Civil Rights violation charge as well.Recording the entire hearing, so that they can release all information if he is not indicted. I find that interesting.. and.. again.. makes me think there is exculpatory evidence and they do not expect an indictment to be handed down.
Sounds like some wisdom has prevailed. In the "unique" US Grand Jury system, this is as close to fair as you're going to get, fairer if they're were mandated to present ALL the evidence not just that which points to guilt.
No matter the outcome, because of the initial bungling and mis-reporting, no matter what the outcome, people will still line up on their favorite side.
Yup.
It takes 9 of them to proceed with charges against him.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?