Nixon: No special prosecutor in Darren Wilson case
Last edited Thu Nov 27, 2014, 12:15 AM - Edit history (1)
Source: Stl Post Dispatch
JEFFERSON CITY • Despite calls for a special prosecutor to present Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson's case to a new grand jury, Gov. Jay Nixon said he would not entertain the idea.
On Monday night, St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch announced that Wilson would not face criminal charges for the fatal shooting of Michael Brown, an unarmed teenager in August. The announcement set off unrest throughout the St. Louis area.
Mae Quinn, law professor and director of Washington University's Juvenile Law and Justice Clinic, said in a statement Wednesday that a special prosecutor should be appointed. After reviewing the grand jury transcripts, Quinn said, she believes Wilson's case “received preferential treatment as compared to others in the system."
"It seems clear from the beginning of the proceedings that the prosecution quite unusually adopted a defense stance, injecting the idea of justified homicide into the process well before Wilson testified,” Quinn said. “Prosecutors also served as quasi-witnesses by essentially testifying about facts outside of the existing record and vouching for police processes."
Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/article_e07403a6-0b8d-539e-b236-16c487a55685.html
time to hit the reset button on the MO Dem party
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
jwirr
(39,215 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)We need to get rid of these fakes in our party wherever they fester.
shenmue
(38,506 posts)as federal charges for dereliction of duty?
ColesCountyDem
(6,943 posts)branford
(4,462 posts)in any criminal matter, nor even recommend that a grand jury actually vote to indict.
That is the very essence of prosecutorial discretion.
mainstreetonce
(4,178 posts)Unless there is new evidence or a different charge,redoing it will make the violence worse.
McCulloch and Nixon obstructed justice.
ArsSkeptica
(38 posts)First, I had to check my facts...was McCulloch elected, as I'd heard. Yes. And re-elected every time since, usually unopposed, but winning by wide margins even when there's been a contender. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_P._McCulloch_%28prosecutor%29
Strangely, at no point in any of the media coverage, left or right, have I heard mention of his party affiliation. Democrat, as it turns out. I can see why the left won't push that detail. But why hasn't the right run with it? Seems like it's exactly the kind of red meat they would go for.
Anyhoo, there is still a way to fix this. Since there's no indictment, no charges have been pressed. No charges, no double jeopardy. Put a pro-law and order, pro-actual-justice prosecutor in for 2018 on the promise of a new grand jury run according to the usual way of things. Ham sandwiches and all that. I won't hold my breath for that outcome, but however improbable, it's not impossible.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)They're already seeing him as Zell Miller material, most likely.
(Nixon probably wants that slot, too).
We really shouldn't recognize most white MO. Dem officeholders as Dems, I'm thinking.
pstokely
(10,522 posts)the Repuke congress critters are all white of course
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)If Nixon and McCulloch are any examples of that group, no wonder we usually get hosed in Mo.
pstokely
(10,522 posts)nt
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)It looked, across the country, as though that kind of Dem would rather lose than get re-elected by black votes.
mainstreetonce
(4,178 posts)It can legally be redone, but the damage is done. A fair trial and "beyond reasonable doubt" is now impossible.
ellennelle
(614 posts)a truly aggressive prosecutor could rip wilson to shreds on the stand, there are so many holes and contradictions in his story and statements.
who i'd really like to see on the stand is mcculough; what a scumbag he is.
madville
(7,404 posts)There are multiple eyewitnesses and forensic evidence that tell his version of events as it is, it would be idiotic for the defense to put him on the stand and open him up to cross examination.
Seeing the witnesses and evidence, a conviction seems out of reach at this point, without a video and with multiple opposing eyewitness accounts it would be tough to rule either way "beyond a reasonable doubt" unfortunately.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... for election until 2018? That's too bad. By that time, all Missourians will have forgotten about the Michael Brown case. 
pstokely
(10,522 posts)he's never faced a serious challenge
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)until 2018. Funny how the timing of the announcement came after the election, isn't it?
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)ellennelle
(614 posts)he did not prosecute wilson; he defended him.
if not dereliction of duty as an elected official, is there no way the american bar assn could sanction him?
because this is the level at which this pattern must be stopped, because this is where it lives, this is the engine of the impunity.
not sure when mcculough is up for re-election, but nixon is on for '16; we need to find someone to primary him immediately.
i'd consider moving to MO to campaign against him, if i could. what a worthless POS.
but just see how powerful these police unions are? interesting how the conservatives always go after the teachers, but never the police. just like the bullies they are.
backfired in WI, tho, di'n it?
24601
(3,955 posts)there is no valid case as it is to quash an indictment when you believe there is.
Defense attorneys have a different responsibility - to defend their client using every legal and ethical method.
But prosecutors are not bound to seek every legal and ethical path against every potential defendant. When prosecutors have gone to judges to dismiss cases they conclude are wrong, there praises are sung on DU.
A prosecutor who advocates indictment they believe is not warranted commits a fraud on the court. McCulloch could not ethically advocate indictment any more than any counsel can knowingly allow their client to take the stand with the intent to commit perjury.
Chakab
(1,727 posts)statewide elections in Missouri?
pstokely
(10,522 posts)McCaskil and Nixon started out with lower statewide offices
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)(makes me wonder...if he was old enough to think of this in '72, did Jay. N wear a "Democrats Named Nixon For Nixon" button?
pstokely
(10,522 posts)voting for Keystone, skipping the Dem convention, she and Nixon haven't done much to help Dems on the local level
branford
(4,462 posts)Gov. Nixon does not appear to have the authority to unilaterally appoint a special prosecutor.
The MO Attorney General stated that such a prosecutor could only be appointed upon request from the local elected DA or upon an actual (not necessarily just perceived) conflict of interest or similar legal disqualification. As McCulloch obviously refused to withdraw and there does not seem to be any legally recognized conflict of interest, unless circumstances radically change, Gov. Nixon is powerless.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:RjOfidvPOtcJ:https://localtvktvi.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/missouri-attorney-general-chris-koster-statement-regarding-appointment-of-special-prosecutor-in-michael-brown-case1.docx+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
The only way Wilson will realistically be prosecuted for any wrongdoing is if the DOJ has sufficient evidence to sustain a federal criminal civil rights action.
SunSeeker
(51,511 posts)I don't know what rises to a legal level of a conflict in MO, but if that doesn't meet it then the standard is meaninglessness.
There is also the prior conduct of this prosecutor following the exact same charade grand jury presentation m.o. in the Jack in the Box shootings 12 years ago.
branford
(4,462 posts)Last edited Thu Nov 27, 2014, 01:53 AM - Edit history (1)
of interest (I've not studied either matter extensively).
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/st-louis-prosecutor-has-faced-controversy-for-decades/article_cdd4c104-6086-506e-9ee8-aa957a31fee5.html
Actual conflicts of interests are fairly direct and unequivocal. The circumstances of the death of McCulloch's father are likely too attenuated to either Darren Wilson or Michael Brown to ever substantiate a disqualification motion. The Jack in the Box shooting provided even less of basis. Like now, McCulloch was under no obligation to prosecute the officers, and in fact, the federal investigation actually determined the police shooting was justified. If anything, McCulloch appears consistent.
McCulloch's father's death may indicate the appearance of a conflict, but his withdrawal from any similar cases would be then discretionary. If any party had basis to legally disqualify McCulloch, rather than simply call for his voluntary removal, they would have been in court long ago.
SunSeeker
(51,511 posts)McCulloch's m.o. is to use an investigating grand jury in police shooting cases, allowing McCulloch to bail out the officer without getting blamed for dumping the case, a tool he used to absolve the two cops who unloaded their guns into two black men at that Jack in the Box:
An exhaustive St. Louis Post-Dispatch investigation found that only three of the 13 detectives who testified had said the car moved forward: the two who unloaded their guns and a third whose testimony was, as McCulloch admitted, “obviously…completely wrong.” McCulloch never introduced independent evidence to help clarify for the grand jury whether Murray’s car moved forward.
On the last day of testimony, an investigator in McCulloch’s office read out a list of every interaction Murray and Beasley had had with law enforcement, even arrests that never resulted in charges.
A few hours later, the grand jury voted not to press charges.
http://www.newsweek.com/ferguson-prosecutor-robert-p-mccullochs-long-history-siding-police-267357
Sound familiar?
ellennelle
(614 posts)as in the OJ case, that may be where the facts can finally come out, and see if wilson will then be confident enough in his clear conscience (haha) to allow himself to be cross-examined.
branford
(4,462 posts)although he will be compelled to testify if the case does not settle (remember that any civil jury will be selected from the same jury pool as the grand jurors).
To the extent that Wilson does not have qualified immunity in a civil action, the town's insurance policy will also assuredly pay for his defense and indemnify him for any finding of liability.
Wilson will only face the possibility of any real punishment or consequences if the DOJ seek a federal indictment and prevails.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)insinuated that Nixon would have to dump him for him to be taken off the case. IOW, McCulloch lied yet again since the reality, as you note, is that Nixon could not appoint a special prosecutor unless McCulloch first recused himself. Those two play so many games that I'm amazed blacks in St. Louis County haven't already taken up armed struggle against MO apartheid.
lobodons
(1,290 posts)There is no state wide Dem Party in Missouri. Jesus, the GOP has a veto proof state assembly. We are "lucky" to have Nixon and McCaskill in elected state wide office. Neither will win re-election or will any Dem statewide for the foreseeable future.
pstokely
(10,522 posts)we need to find a progressive primary challenger for Governor in 2016 assuming McCaskil runs
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)and vote for people like this asshole. When I talk about not being able to vote for someone like this I am called a coward, a troll, a traitor, etc, etc.
This is what "pragmatism" gets you, folks.
branford
(4,462 posts)for the office of District Attorney of St. Louis County, MO. I don't know if that would be realistic.
If the choice is between McCulloch and a far more conservative "law and order" Republican, than McCulloch would still appear to be the better choice, despite his conduct in the Brown shooting. A more conservative D.A. might not have even bothered presenting the case to a grand jury at all, with the attendant material adduced that could be used by the Brown family in any civil trial against the Town of Ferguson.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)Voted for Dem, no justice. Voted for GOP, no justice.
branford
(4,462 posts)Not only could a Republican D.A. have actually been worse for the Brown family, but there are innumerable cases every day in St. Louis County with defendants who would face greater hurdles and jeopardy with a Republican office holder.
Sometimes, voters are faced with selecting the lesser of two evils.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)that the lesser of two evils is still evil and a some of us have a VERY hard time with being a party to evil.
And yet, for some people (not accusing you) it is easy as pie and they get awfully damned mad a people for having a conscience. I am personally getting pretty tired of it. Voting for the folks the Dems are putting up is like deciding which cancer you prefer to die from. In the end, you will still be dead, it is just a matter of how nasty the interim will be.
pstokely
(10,522 posts)nt
branford
(4,462 posts)There's a reason why McCulloch, Nixon and McCaskill, while Dems, are sound similar in connection with the Brown case, not unlike Republicans in more liberal states.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)protestations (lies) notwithstanding. He's an absolute disgrace and the national Democratic Party should look into kicking his skanky ass to the curb forthwith.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)This person has done nothing but defend the actions of these corrupt people from Day #1.
Happy that black people are dead!!
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)feeling for black residents' fate and feelings at all. He's not happy, he's not sad. Because, to him, black people aren't really people, except at election time when he might need their votes. It was obvious watching that insulting and patronizing press conference the other night when the GJ decision was announced. Like I've said, I'm amazed blacks haven't already said "Fuck it" and gone to armed struggle.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)would like to move back out here to SoCal. She can't pull it off financially and my wife and I can't help her right at the moment, being financially strapped ourselves.
Response to pstokely (Original post)
Lulu KC This message was self-deleted by its author.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Dem and McCaskill (who signed off on McCulloch's handling of the case back in mid-August) is a Dem.
The most loyal consituency of the (national) Democratic Party since at least 1932 and MO Dems have stabbed them in the back in one of the worst betrayals in modern American political history.
Sorry, got to call 'em as I see 'em.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)for ANY Republican, period. No matter how much you want us to. Many black stayed home in MO and didn't vote at all.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)vote for a racist or fascist (read Republican). I'm just feeling really disappointed in the MO Dems right now for their callous disregard of black Missourians' feelings and citizenship.
I don't know what I would like to see, aside from Democratic Socialism which seems as far away as ever. So again, please accept my apologies for that tone I took.
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)One special prosecutor is still needed to determine if Officer Wilson should trial for the murder of Mike Brown.
Another is needed to determine if Mr. McCulloch's use of the grand jury for three months to determine that same issue, when most such matters take less than a day, constitute fraud against the taxpayers of St. Louis County. Instead of simply determining whether there was probable cause to try Officer Wilson for murder, Prosecutor McCulloch spent time and taxpayer money arguing before the Grand Jury why Officer Wilson should not answer for the death of Mike Brown and to present that case in such a way that the jurors could not reach any other decision.