I wonder if this will play into whatever the DOJ plans to do about Darren Wilson and the Ferguson Machine:
Justice Antonin Scalia, in the 1992 Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, explained what the role of a grand jury has been for hundreds of years.
"It is the grand jury’s function not ‘to enquire … upon what foundation [the charge may be] denied,’ or otherwise to try the suspect’s defenses, but only to examine ‘upon what foundation [the charge] is made’ by the prosecutor. Respublica v. Shaffer, 1 Dall. 236 (O. T. Phila. 1788); see also F. Wharton, Criminal Pleading and Practice § 360, pp. 248-249 (8th ed. 1880). As a consequence, neither in this country nor in England has the suspect under investigation by the grand jury ever been thought to have a right to testify or to have exculpatory evidence presented."
Darren Wilson testified for hours.
And here is what prosecutors told the grand jury in direct conflict with the above:
"And you must find probable cause to believe that Darren Wilson did not act in lawful self-defense and you must find probable cause to believe that Darren Wilson did not use lawful force in making an arrest. If you find those things, which is kind of like finding a negative, you cannot return an indictment on anything or true bill unless you find both of those things. Because both are complete defenses to any offense and they both have been raised in his, in the evidence."
Excerpts are from:
http://thinkprogress.org/...
2:53 PM PT: Update: If you read the comments you will find that Scalia was wrong. I apologize for posting a misleading diary.
However, it is clear that this entire process including police procedures and prosecutor choices were extremely slanted toward Wilson. Things like Wilson washing off the blood evidence, them not taking prints from the gun, Wilson not handling the gun according to proper procedure, the police not taking photos that should have been taken, and on and on. Then the way that things were done by the prosecutor in handling witnesses etc shows such extreme bias that Wilson essentially had a trial at which there was only a defense attorney. Isn't there a way to protest this through legal means? Can the DOJ find that this whole process was a violation of Mike Brown's civil rights and if not, why the hell not? What I read is the DOJ can consider if WILSON abused Mike's rights but what about the whole Ferguson "justice" system??? I would really appreciate if you lawyers would give some insight on this. Thanks!