Justice Dept. to Recommend No Civil Rights Charges in Ferguson Shooting

I'm saying that if the "narrative" is true, and Brown never hit Wilson, and was only trying to surrender -- he had his hands up, you know -- then there was no reason for Wilson to shoot him.

Now, if the "narrative" isn't true, well...

 

Who do you think you are educating, or correcting here?

Who here, or in the national media, has ever indicated anything different?

 

You'd'a'thought "narrative" would've been 2014 Word of the Year.

And not just because of this case.

 

For starters, all the people who went apeshit when the Washington Post reported in November that this was the likely outcome.

 

It won in 2012. The Academy doesn't like to have the same winner twice in such a short time span.

 

That opens the door for #HotTake to win it in '15!

 

People here, or uninformed people in general?

 

Clearly the leader at this point, but you know how the wordsmiths work. They like to release their potential winners closer to the end of the year so they are fresh in the minds of voters when it comes time to vote.

 

Also, people like this:

When a grand jury declined to indict Darren Wilson for killing Michael Brown, this did not mean that all of the legal questions had been resolved. While Wilson may not be charged with a crime under Missouri law, a federal prosecution remains possible. ... And even if Darren Wilson is not charged with a state or federal criminal offense, the Department of Justice can act to make it less likely that police will shoot unarmed black men in the future.

Superficially, it might seem as if there is a good basis for charging Wilson with violating federal law. There is precedent for the federal government to step in and prosecute police officers for violent acts when local authorities are unable to secure a conviction. Most famously, two of the policemen who were caught on camera beating Rodney King but acquitted by a local jury were convicted for violating the Civil Rights Act of 1870.

Michael Brown and Rodney King: Department of Justice should file civil charges in Ferguson.

The federal investigation was never the panacea it was made about to be.

 

What does that article leave out?

It states that the Rodney King cops were convicted for violating the Civil Rights Act of 1870, and it includes the prerequisite quote from Holder that, “Federal civil rights law imposes a high legal bar in these types of cases."

Now, the author still calls for the Feds to indict Wilson, since they "almost certainly" could secure an indictment, but he didn't mislead anyone as to what the charges would be, or what the standard is supposed to be.

 

Maybe I'm reading too much into it. To me, this and other "commentary" very clearly imply that the federal investigation was a chance at a do-over to right all of the wrongs made at the local level.

It came from both sides, too. The criticism that Eric Holder was going to "swoop in with his Superman cape," etc., etc.

 

I agree that it's a big deal they're not bringing charges. I never thought the feds should've been there in the first place, absent some piece of information that did not get leaked to the public indicating Wilson acted on the basis of racial animus. They certainly don't routinely investigate officer-involved shootings.