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
Nobody called Aridog a racist. Why was that accusation even made?
The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) just called it a slap in the face. That’s the same Congressional Black Caucus that won’t let conservative black congressmen and congresswomen in.
I do wonder how the CBC has had time to review the evidence that just got released?
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
squeeky – clearly the CBC is against law and order.
Now they’re throwing bricks through windows.
This is not about justice. They just wanted Wilson dead.
Hurray, the media! And those rabble rousers putting a fire under a mob!
Well, if they shoot a reporter I will feel vindicated!!!
Just heard gunfire on the live coverage.
Great.
Aridog –
In light of the evidence that was just discussed, how the witness statements that he was shot in the back, or shot while surrendering, were completely refuted by the evidence, and those witnesses later admitted to lying, it does put people who called your racist in a very bad light.
But it is hilarious for you, the father of a mixed race child, to be called a racist.
Gentleman: the verdict is in.
@Michael Haz
Yep, that was a money quote. Now, they are saying Obama has to run his mouth at 10:00 ET.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
I just watched the announcement that the grand jury has determined “no” on all 5 indictment options.
What really struck me was the announcement that multiple witness statements were completely refuted by the physical evidence. For example, some witnesses claimed Brown was shot next to the cop car. Untrue. Some claimed he was shot running away, but 3 independent autopsies showed that was also untrue. Some claimed his hands were up and he was standing there, surrendering. Again, the 3 autopsies showed the angle of the bullets were he was leaning forward.
When confronted with the evidence, many witnesses admitted that they didn’t see what happened, or weren’t even there. They were just repeating what they’d heard. People were either willing to lie just to nail a cop, or they’d managed to convince themselves.
Heck, they could have repeated what they’d heard from some posters here on this blog.
I clearly recall over the past few months pleading with people to wait for the investigation. And yet, just a few hours ago, someone claimed here that there was “no question” that he was shot surrendering, with his hands up.
This trying cops in the court of public opinion is unfair and unjust, when it goes beyond conjecture to claims that he was definitely murdered. We also saw a recent case of where a woman lied that a cop racially profiled her when she had sex with her boyfriend in a business parking lot. If it weren’t for a recording, that cop, too, would have been pilloried.
I am glad that all evidence will now be released. Hopefully, the actual evidence will teach people to wait for an investigation next time.
No matter what, Brown’s family lost their son. They will grieve for him forever. He clearly had gone down a bad path, and now he’s lost any opportunity to turn his life around.
Let this be a teachable moment for parents to talk to their kids about choosing right over wrong, and never to attack a police officer.
The foreign reporters asking McCulloch questions seem to want a hanging followed by a fair trial.
Personal agenda does not trump physical evidence.
Thanks for the historical account Aridog, very enlightening. It is great to hear about an event from someone who was there.
@NickS
I haven’t looked at the game. My BFF Fabia Sheen, Esq., and her boyfriend are in the main part of the house watching the game, but I am out in the music room watching FOX. Last night, we started doing tequila shots when Dallas got close, and that wired me up. When I finally went to sleep, oh did I ever wake up with a headache from Hell. I think I better teetotal tonight.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeeky, I think it’s going to be a long night for your Saints. You need a younger QB.
Nick…I am doing very well now. However, nothing hacks me off more than blabber mouths who assert that some of us are hiding some malfeasance in anonymity, when they themselves have no profile of record, let alone a willingness to identify themselves. You imply I am a racist by collective assumption, I’d suggest you prove it or shut up.
Aridog, I read your comment on the other Ferguson thread and I’m glad you reposted it here. You have a lotta wisdom and experience to share. I hope you’re doing OK, my friend.
@BillMcW
I was! My coach called me a “pitbull” because when I got on somebody, I got on them and wouldn’t let loose. I also did Poetry Interp in high school.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Probably, it is best to wait to see if a true bill is delivered by the grand jury and then go from there.
In this state can the evidence presented to the grand jury be released as a public record? Does an indictment matter for this question to be answered?
Inga and Fiver….Racist? I haven’t racist bone in my body and I am on this thread. My first wife was not white, my child is mixed. You do not have a clue what real racism is like, nor have you ever felt it as far as I know. Why do you assume anyone who debates the potential non-finding by a Grand Jury is racist.
I am suggest you dispose of your anonymity and tell us who you are and where you live. My name is Richard Thompson and I live in Dearborn, Michigan, 100 yards from one of the worst Detroit ghettos. I was born in and grew up in Detroit. You want to know more, email me, my email address is in my profile. I will meet you anywhere anytime to discuss your assumption about my racism. If you have the courage of your words, that is….ball is now in your court.
@DBQ
Ok, it was your turn to make me snort at the Gruber comment! Wouldn’t that be hilarious. Here’s how I imagine a Gruberish statement on Ferguson!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Debating is a traditional sport in my family. When we get together we have many debates. And……if one side is losing horribly, someone might change sides to bolster the other and keep the fun going. We rarely (won’t say never) get bent out of shape or angry, no matter how vested we are in the ideas. It is all about the process OF debating. Like a great verbal chess game.
Debating is something that everyone should participate in. The most valuable exercise is being assigned to debate the opposite side of the equation from that which you support. You need to understand the arguments from the “other” side if you want to propose effective arguments from your own side..