4 ms·

While I agree that the amount of discretion is too high, Darren Wilson was not "let go" by the prosecution; the grand jury decided that there was not enough evi

While I agree that the amount of discretion is too high, Darren Wilson was not "let go" by the prosecution; the grand jury decided that there was not enough evidence to indict him.

gumby 12y ago
Unfortunately the grand jury was used for cover in this case; the information presented was completely different from what is normal in these cases. The grand looks at the evidence to see if the prosecution has enough to go forward, so normally no exculpatory evidence is presented (in fact the defendant is typically not even there). In this case the prosecutor examined Wilson and basically asked him prove that he (the prosecutor) couldn't make the case!
mcherm 12y ago
I disagree. The prosecutors in this particular case have admitted to the press that they have not used this particular approach (taking a murder case to the grand jury without filing charges beforehand) EVER. Whether or not the prosecutor "did their best" in presenting the evidence is a really good question -- since the grand jury proceedings are secret, I guess the prosecutor and the grand jurors are the only people who know the truth about that -- and really, only the prosecutor. I'm not saying that the grand jury should have indited him, I'm saying that the prosecutor did exercise remarkable amounts of discretion in that case.
- MatthewMcDonald 12y ago
  I wasn't aware that charges weren't filed beforehand; that sounds very suspicious. After reading the other responses (and doing a bit more reading), it does seem like the prosecutor used his discretion, just not in an obvious way.
RealGeek 12y ago
The prosecutor basically confused grand jury by throwing 50 different stories at them. He didn't make a case because he had no intention to charge him.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

4 ms·

While I agree that the amount of discretion is too high, Darren Wilson was not "let go" by the prosecution; the grand jury decided that there was not enough evi

by MatthewMcDonald 12y ago

While I agree that the amount of discretion is too high, Darren Wilson was not "let go" by the prosecution; the grand jury decided that there was not enough evidence to indict him.

gumby 12y ago
Unfortunately the grand jury was used for cover in this case; the information presented was completely different from what is normal in these cases. The grand looks at the evidence to see if the prosecution has enough to go forward, so normally no exculpatory evidence is presented (in fact the defendant is typically not even there). In this case the prosecutor examined Wilson and basically asked him prove that he (the prosecutor) couldn't make the case!
mcherm 12y ago
I disagree. The prosecutors in this particular case have admitted to the press that they have not used this particular approach (taking a murder case to the grand jury without filing charges beforehand) EVER. Whether or not the prosecutor "did their best" in presenting the evidence is a really good question -- since the grand jury proceedings are secret, I guess the prosecutor and the grand jurors are the only people who know the truth about that -- and really, only the prosecutor. I'm not saying that the grand jury should have indited him, I'm saying that the prosecutor did exercise remarkable amounts of discretion in that case.
- MatthewMcDonald 12y ago
  I wasn't aware that charges weren't filed beforehand; that sounds very suspicious. After reading the other responses (and doing a bit more reading), it does seem like the prosecutor used his discretion, just not in an obvious way.
RealGeek 12y ago
The prosecutor basically confused grand jury by throwing 50 different stories at them. He didn't make a case because he had no intention to charge him.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]