The Grand Jury in Missouri appears to have rendered its decision in the shooting investigation Michael Brown. It is expected to be announced shortly. Below is my column in USA Today.
In anticipation of the decision on whether to indict officer Darren Wilson for the killing of Michael Brown, the town of Ferguson, Mo., is a virtual armed camp. Schools are closed. The National Guard was called out when the governor declared a state of emergency. The emergency? A grand jury announcement.
While most protesters have engaged in legitimate and lawful speech, others used the shooting of the black teenager by a white police officer as justification to loot the town. State and federal forces are assembling in Ferguson in expectation that some protesters will riot unless there is a criminal charge. Those who insist that “justice” can be found only in jail for Wilson are speaking not of real justice but mob justice.
After the fatal encounter on Canfield Drive, there was good reason for many to question the shooting of Brown. The 18-year-old was unarmed, and police say he had committed a minor theft before being stopped by Wilson. Given the continuing cases of the profiling and shooting of black males by police, there was ample reason for suspicion. However, there was also ample reason for caution before declaring Wilson was a murderer.
Dueling stories
Within hours of the shooting, two clear and equally plausible narratives emerged. From the police account, Brown attacked Wilson after the officer confronted him for blocking the street. In the ensuing struggle in the patrol car, Brown was shot when he grabbed for the officer’s gun and then shot repeatedly outside of the vehicle. From the account of Brown’s friend (and others), Wilson gunned down Brown after the stop without provocation, including shooting him when he had his hands in the air. Each account has one of the men acting in an unprovoked and violent manner. If either account is true, it will be determined through investigations, not demonstrations.
Rioters, who somehow rationalized looting as acts of moral outrage, weren’t willing to wait for evidence. What is surprising is that national and local leaders showed the same impatience.
Soon after the shooting, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon referred to Brown as the “victim” despite Wilson’s insistence that Brown attacked him. Nixon denounced the police for releasing video that they say shows Brown robbing a store and threatening the clerk as besmirching the victim. Nixon also called for the pursuit of “a vigorous prosecution” for the shooting. A governor’s foremost responsibility is to demand not prosecution but the truth from an unbiased investigation.
Premature federal role
Attorney General Eric Holder was also criticized for his reaction. Holder said he shared the same experience of profiling and abuse at the hands of police. As he did in the Trayvon Martin case, Holder sent in federal civil rights investigators before the initial investigation ended. Such federal investigations are ideally launched after state trials or, at a minimum, after an investigation is complete. When the federal government steps in, it can make the process look political and ultimately fuel discontent when it too rejects charges. Even before the grand jury has rendered its decision, The Washington Post reports that Holder’s investigators failed to uncover evidence to support civil rights charges.
That’s because the evidence in this case gives Wilson a strong defense. Brown allegedly was coming from the commission of a crime where he appeared to threaten a store clerk. The forensic evidence appears to contradict those who insist that Brown was not shot in a struggle but with his hands in the air. There is evidence that Wilson was injured in a struggle, the gun was discharged in the car and Brown was shot at close quarters leaving blood on the gun. Finally, more than a half-dozen black witnesses reportedly gave testimony supporting Wilson. Other scenarios could explain the evidence, and there is still the question of why so many shots were fired. But those questions might never be answered, a reality of some criminal cases.
The law requires us to deal with facts, and when those facts do not support a criminal charge, prosecution is barred regardless of popular demand.
In the end, it rings hollow to cry “no justice, no peace” when you are rioting or looting. There can be no justice if it is merely the result of demonstrations rather than demonstrated facts. Otherwise, the scales of justice become just one more object to throw through the window of an appliance store.
Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors, has represented both protesters and police officers.
November 24, 2014
We know what to look forward to after the verdict.
Unfunded shoppers.
Why was the victim in the police car? Was he in the back seat?
Did the officer allow the victim to exit the cruiser? Is that how he came to be in the middle of the street?
Was the victim shot for Jaywalking or a similar offense?
Was the victim shot so many times because the officer felt too threatened to wait for backup units to arrive to assist him in apprehending the victim who was “fleeing” in the middle of the street…walking backwards away from the officer?
Squeeky, That is amusing because Governor Nicon just voted himself a raise and cut medicaid on mental health in Missouri and cut the funding on our own Cottonwood Center for troubled Teens in the Overflow by 1/2. I had many comments to make – well, that disappeared but I will find it when I get back. I have places to go and things to do lolol
Great article JT and I am pro Brown
If the Prosecutor had sent this case to the pre trial, we would know in black & white – no pun intended, what really took place and then let the judge decide on the merits of the proof or lack there of. Sending this case to the grand jury was a legal escape door towards injustice, in my opinion because 7 shots in an unarmed body is an intention to murder the armed one who just stole some cigars.Common sense would dictate that. But when there are only 3 black Police officers in a town that is 68% black shows a lot about the mindset of the Police force which is supposed to,’Protect & Serve’, the money spent by the citizens to post this on the Police cars.
The dangers of pure democracy can be reduced to mob rule, but remember that it was law and order under a republic and a false economy that provoked this mob rule. The question raised is not about pure and perfect law and justice here, since justice itself is on trial. The question here is about authentic representation and a process of inclusive economic democracy that has been betrayed. Race is at the center but. perhaps, the causality runs deeper.
Prof.
Thank you for your great column on the House Benghazi report that was released Friday. Swell job! Keep up the fair and balanced reporting.
The rule of law is only written words on paper unless the citizenry believes it is practiced unbiasedly in society. Unfortunately it appears that many believe that the application of the rule of law depends on what part of society you fall under. Mr. Turley and others on this blog have pointed out again and again the shoot first and coverup mentality of law enforcement. I think people are fed up with this and have taken to violence to protest these inequities. There is only so much law enforcement can do to control citizens that feel they are second class citizens and have lost all respect for their government.
In my opinion a lot of this distrust has been caused by the militarization of law enforcement that at times resembles what we see on the streets of a Latin American country operating under army control.
If a pressure cooker has been created in which the mob is demanding the lynching of a seemingly innocent man has come about, who is to blame for that creation-
Well….to quote some famous old broad: What difference at this point does it make? “
@Lester Mac
Let’s see. You said, “If a pressure cooker has been created in which the mob is demanding the lynching of a seemingly innocent man has come about, who is to blame for that creation- the black residents of Ferguson (or America, for that matter) or the unequal protection of and bias against blacks that has long been a prominent aspect of our legal system?”
Huh??? This is a multiple choice question and we only get two possible answers??? Oh, think larger! Like this!
Q. Who is to blame for the Black mob in Ferguson?
1. Black Residents in Ferguson;
2. Unequal justice;
3. The Democratic Party;
4. Race Baiters from the Democratic Party.
5. Al Sharpton, who is a Race Baiter from the Democratic Party;
6. CNN and MSNBC which are mouthpieces for the Democratic Party;
7. Free booze and tennis shoes.
See! Now isn’t that a better set of choices???
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeaky – Except for the racist tinge of your Irish poem–which may have been unintentional, I like it. Funny!
Well, this ought to be a riot!
Lyres and Lutes???
An Irish Poem by Squeeky Fromm
Some Black folks in Ferguson Town
Found a whole brand new way to get down!
If you want some free booze
And new tennis shoes. . .
Just pretend it’s about Michael Brown!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
“The law requires us to deal with facts, and when those facts do not support a criminal charge, prosecution is barred regardless of popular demand.”
You can’t separate political pressures from the law. Our law is highly politicized, and it’s managed by cynical, wealth-serving toadies with no regard for the majority of the population and a strong history of racial bias.
That being the case,since those in power use Machiavelli’s “The Prince” as their instruction manual for public service, should the public be political operatives influencing notorious trials in their best interests or should the public be the only honest, impartial and impartial participant? If the black population in Ferguson can cut down the number of unjust and illegal arrests, abuse, and murders at the hands of Ferguson police officers, should they be concerned with Wilson’s fate, or should they do what every last one of their elected officials would do- use the notoriety to pursue their best interests?
From a political standpoint, it’s less relevant whether Brown was killed justifiably than whether outrage over the incident will cause enough civil discontent to curb the ongoing and widespread tendency of cops to arrest, abuse, and kill blacks.
If a pressure cooker has been created in which the mob is demanding the lynching of a seemingly innocent man has come about, who is to blame for that creation- the black residents of Ferguson (or America, for that matter) or the unequal protection of and bias against blacks that has long been a prominent aspect of our legal system?
Isaac,
“Although society often evolves through peaceable means, following the law, and adhering to procedure, most laws that protect the ‘people’ would not be in existence if it were not for demonstrations, sometimes violent.”
—–
So true!
The Sons of Liberty
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/sons.htm
Excerpt:
The first widely known acts of the Sons took place on August 14, 1765, when an effigy of Andrew Oliver (who was to be commissioned Distributor of Stamps for Massachusetts) was found hanging in a tree on Newbury street, along with a large boot with a devil climbing out of it. The boot was a play on the name of the Earl of Bute and the whole display was intended to establish an evil connection between Oliver and the Stamp Act. The sheriffs were told to remove the display but protested in fear of their lives, for a large crowd had formed at the scene. Before the evening a mob burned Oliver’s property on Kilby street, then moved on to his house. There they beheaded the effigy and stoned the house as its occupants looked out in horror. They then moved to nearby Fort Hill were they built a large fire and burned what was left of the effigy. Most of the crowd dissipated at that point, however McIntosh and crew, then under cover of darkness, ransacked Oliver’s abandoned home until midnight. On that evening it became very clear who ruled Boston. The British Militia, the Sheriffs and Justices, kept a low profile. No one dared respond to such violent force.
Well, at least I get a chance to re-post my sonnet!
Was Ever Giant???
A Sonnet by Squeeky Fromm
Was ever Giant gentle as a lamb?
Content to smoke the beanstalk in his blunt?
Or would a Giant hard a car door slam,
And fearless and unarm’d a Knight confront?
Would ever Giant meekly, mildly cow’r?
And raise his hands serenely to the sky?
Or would a Giant summon up his pow’r?
And charge headlong with fire in his eye?
For aye, these questions often will be asked
In Courts of Law and by the talking head.
And nightly on each channel be broadcast
Until some other story takes its stead.
The injured Knight will have his chance to talk.
Meanwhile, the Giant lies outlined in chalk.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
The police and the peaceful residents of Ferguson are in a no win situation. There is nothing that the police can do now to stop violence or protect property. They will be a target and likely many people will senselessly be injured or killed. The police and the fire departments will be unable to save businesses and buildings from those who merely want to see destruction and steal. There is nothing the police can do that will make anyone happy on any side of this situation.
Frankly…..were I one of those police or fire personnel, I would not be available for work for the next week or so. My life is not worth fighting for the ungrateful.
The peaceable citizens of Ferguson, I assume there are some, are well and thoroughly screwed. I would also remove my valuables, grab my pets, round up the family, board up my business, and take a vacation for a few weeks. Return and see if there is anything left.
It is a war. The police cannot protect you in a war.
We know what to look forward to after the verdict.
http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2014/08/11/1227020/823176-984cfe4e-2121-11e4-bee2-80d82dcd29df.jpg
Turley, while I agree that the outcome should be determined through investigation and not demonstrations, history shows us that when law enforcement is involved, unless there is absolute video proof, those on the side of law enforcement more than often skate. Those that looted should be tossed in prison. Those that demonstrated have a right to demonstrate in the streets. If there had been no demonstrations there would, most likely, have been no investigation. Although society often evolves through peaceable means, following the law, and adhering to procedure, most laws that protect the ‘people’ would not be in existence if it were not for demonstrations, sometimes violent.
Regardless of the outcome, and not including the looters, the demonstrations were of as much value as the laws, that more often than not in these situations, are conveniently forgotten.
Posted w/o proofing
A lynching is a lynching is a lynching. It only matters which end of the rope your on… The wrong end never see justice, the right end never do justice.
Just heard the announcement will be after 6:00 est.