Morbid Angels:http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?7100-Morbid-angel-WIP
I probably come across as a bit of an ***, don't worry I just cannot abide stupid.
Oh I know that it doesn't need to be, but it would be much easier if it were. That way when you start any preceedings you would be comparing law and relevant case law and it would be altogether. Rather than getting the law as wrote and then searching in a large pit for any relevant case law which may or may not be over looked (deliberately or otherwise).
Fan of Fuggles | Derailment of the Wolfpack of Horsemen | In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
That was the prosecution. The chief prosecutor is president of a group that raised money for Darren Wilson. Basically every analysis of the prosecution by bar associations and legal experts has said it was almost as if given by a defence attorney.
(Civil rights attorney/MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Bloom)
Not only all that but the police said Mike Brown was 35ft away from Wilson when Wilson shot him, thus as he "charged" he feared for his life. [URL="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/20/1346374/-BREAKING-VIDEO-Police-Lied-Mike-Brown-was-killed-148-feet-away-from-Darren-Wilson-s-SUV"]He was actually 148 feet away.[/URL]
More on the "prosecutor":
Also note that despite being called a trial it wasn't to find Wilson guilty or innocent, but to determine if there was enough conflicting evidence requiring deliberation, or direct evidence of a crime being committed. Most Grand Jury trials take a day or less, have half a dozen witnesses and do not have the defendant present. This one took 25 days, had 80 witnesses, and Wilson was interviewed for four hours alone.One might give McCulloch (the prosecutor) the benefit of the doubt, if not for his background. His father was a police officer killed in a shootout with a black suspect, and several of his family members are, or were, police officers.
His 23-year record on the job reveals scant interest in prosecuting such cases. During his tenure, there have been at least a dozen fatal shootings by police in his jurisdiction (the roughly 90 municipalities in the county other than St. Louis itself), and probably many more than that, but McCulloch’s office has not prosecuted a single police shooting in all those years. At least four times he presented evidence to a grand jury but — wouldn’t you know it? — didn’t get an indictment.
One of the four: A 2000 case in which a grand jury declined to indict two police officers who had shot two unarmed black men 21 times while they sat in their car behind a Jack in the Box fast-food restaurant. It was a botched drug arrest, and one of the two men killed hadn’t even been a suspect.
McCulloch at the time said he agreed with the grand jury’s decision, dismissing complaints of the handling of the case by saying the dead men “were bums.” He refused to release surveillance tapes of the shooting. When those tapes were later released as part of a federal probe, it was discovered that, contrary to what police alleged, the car had not moved before the police began shooting.
Also also out of around 100,000 grand jury trials only 100 or so have not gone to court. Except in the 81 involving police, where only one has proceeded.
it will always be far more important to them that police officers can kill people freely, than victims get justice. they will have been worried that if Wilson were prosecuted, the floodgates would open and police would have to do things like use reasonable force, or think about their actions. that might make them hesitate to kill, and people would therefore worry about their safety. it is the same with Zimmerman, far more important that stand your ground laws remain than a victim gets justice.
Twelve monkeys, eleven hats. One monkey is sad.
No, because it's not a trial as one usually thinks of it to determine innocence or guilt, but more like a committal hearing to determine the strength of the evidence that there is a reasonable case to go ahead with. I believe the US is the only country to still use them.
What worries me in cases like this or the Mendez trial in the uk. Even where there aren't any procedural issues, there is always the feeling that the establishment will protect the establishment and so there will be those who do not accept the outcome of the trial even if it were without controversey.
I am not sure in such occassions what can be done. Well other than making sure every trial is transparent and everything is proper.
Fan of Fuggles | Derailment of the Wolfpack of Horsemen | In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
Considering the riots I would say it doesn't mater what the cases out come is as this would of hsppend regardless.
Potential war gameing Jawa.