Ferguson police execute an unarmed 17 yr old boy (Update: Ferguson police chief to resign 3/19)
- Thread starter Canon
- Start date
blackestofpanthers
God forgives, you are forgiven.
I just thought you were on something different after seeing you call people out.
I respect you and everyone in here. always.
Pacni99a12
All Star
man wtf?
The_King_of_Everything
Yeah.
bytch should be brought up on charges if she testified.
What the hell that has nothing to do with this case at all
damn Feds are useless as well but we knew that.
oh, sh!t..
fukkyalifestyle
Superstar
good to see all these non violent protest, but this needs to lead to something bigger. like a civilian group that polices the police or something? Can't protest forever, just wished there was an end game here or something that can come from this to stop cops from doing this and not taking responsability. that's what pisses me off the most is none of these police forces take responsability.
↓R↑LYB
I trained Sheng Long and Shonuff
Video in the link. Shows how rare it is not to get an indictment 
http://www.wcnc.com/story/news/crim...-grand-juries-rarely-fail-to-indict/70113414/
CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Last September, a Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police officer named Randall Kerrick shot Jonathan Ferrell 10 times after Ferrell crashed his car on Reedy Creek Road and knocked on a stranger's door in the middle of the night, prompting a 911 call.
But when prosecutors brought their case to the grand jury, the grand jury failed to return an indictment. In fact, out of 277 cases that week, Kerrick was the only person not indicted by a grand jury.
"It's very rare, in almost any case, for a grand jury to return no true bill," says S. Frederick Winiker, an attorney not connected to the Kerrick case or to the Michael Brown case, where a grand jury in Missouri also declined to indict a police officer for shooting and killing someone while on-duty.
"Normally the evidence they hear is what the prosecutor decides to submit to a grand jury."
A grand jury is not the same as a petit jury, which is what we see during actual trials. All a grand jury has to do is determine whether there's enough evidence to proceed to trial-- to return an indictment. They typically operate in secret, and a prosecutor is the only lawyer present to question witnesses.
If a prosecutor thinks he or she has a good case at trial, they don't have to submit every piece of evidence they have. They only have to present certain the evidence they need to make their case. Obviously that changes at trial, but it's pretty much a universal sentiment among lawyers-- if prosecutors want an indictment, they can get it.
There's data to back that up. At the federal level, out of 168,000 cases brought in 2010, grand juries declined to return an indictment just 11 times. That led to a famous quote from a judge in New York state, who said a prosecutor could persuade a grand jury to "indict a ham sandwich".
In the Michael Brown case, prosecutors said they brought as much evidence as they had.
"What's very unusual in this case is that the prosecutor, apparently from August 20 until just this past Monday, submitted an awful lot of evidence to that grand jury, including what's called exculpatory evidence or evidence that might lead someone to find him not guilty if it were in a trial setting," says Winiker. "That's unusual at a grand jury stage."
In the Kerrick case, prosecutors in Charlotte brought their case to another grand jury.
"Hopefully they will see the evidence this time and reach what we believe will be the right conclusion and indict officer Kerrick," Ferrell family attorney Charles Monnett said in January.
They did, and Kerrick's trial is upcoming.
http://www.wcnc.com/story/news/crim...-grand-juries-rarely-fail-to-indict/70113414/
CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Last September, a Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police officer named Randall Kerrick shot Jonathan Ferrell 10 times after Ferrell crashed his car on Reedy Creek Road and knocked on a stranger's door in the middle of the night, prompting a 911 call.
But when prosecutors brought their case to the grand jury, the grand jury failed to return an indictment. In fact, out of 277 cases that week, Kerrick was the only person not indicted by a grand jury.
"It's very rare, in almost any case, for a grand jury to return no true bill," says S. Frederick Winiker, an attorney not connected to the Kerrick case or to the Michael Brown case, where a grand jury in Missouri also declined to indict a police officer for shooting and killing someone while on-duty.
"Normally the evidence they hear is what the prosecutor decides to submit to a grand jury."
A grand jury is not the same as a petit jury, which is what we see during actual trials. All a grand jury has to do is determine whether there's enough evidence to proceed to trial-- to return an indictment. They typically operate in secret, and a prosecutor is the only lawyer present to question witnesses.
If a prosecutor thinks he or she has a good case at trial, they don't have to submit every piece of evidence they have. They only have to present certain the evidence they need to make their case. Obviously that changes at trial, but it's pretty much a universal sentiment among lawyers-- if prosecutors want an indictment, they can get it.
There's data to back that up. At the federal level, out of 168,000 cases brought in 2010, grand juries declined to return an indictment just 11 times. That led to a famous quote from a judge in New York state, who said a prosecutor could persuade a grand jury to "indict a ham sandwich".
In the Michael Brown case, prosecutors said they brought as much evidence as they had.
"What's very unusual in this case is that the prosecutor, apparently from August 20 until just this past Monday, submitted an awful lot of evidence to that grand jury, including what's called exculpatory evidence or evidence that might lead someone to find him not guilty if it were in a trial setting," says Winiker. "That's unusual at a grand jury stage."
In the Kerrick case, prosecutors in Charlotte brought their case to another grand jury.
"Hopefully they will see the evidence this time and reach what we believe will be the right conclusion and indict officer Kerrick," Ferrell family attorney Charles Monnett said in January.
They did, and Kerrick's trial is upcoming.
