Politicsfergusonmediafedsblackop

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 04:26 PM

The Strange Case of Ferguson Witness 40

Easily the strangest of all the documents that have emerged from the Darren Wilson grand jury is the one attributed to Witness 40. These are the pages pulled from her -- I assume her based on writing style -- diary entries from the day Michael Brown was shot, August 9, 2014. She does not appear to have been interviewed. On the face of things, Witness 40 fully corroborates the testimony of Officer Wilson. I leave the grammar uncorrected. “The cop was wobbling,” she wrote from her anxious perch in a silver Pontiac stopped behind Wilson’s car, “the big kid turned and had his arms out with attitude. The cop just stood there dang if that kid didn't start running right at the cop like a football player, head down.” Her take on the final scenario matches not only Wilson’s description, but also the autopsy findings. “I heard cop say something but not sure what or if he was just making noise,” she continued. “Cop took a couple............................

The dissection of this case remains a work in progress at the Treehouse. Given the scrutiny, I would bet that the diary entry is authentic. But given the stakes, I would not rule out fraud.

It would make no sense for the pro-Wilson forces to fabricate a racist eyewitness, but it would make great deal of sense for the anti-Wilson forces -- perhaps those within the DOJ -- to do just that. The Soviets and their spiritual heirs have been manufacturing incendiary racial documents for a century.

Consider the headlines already generated by MSNBC and the Daily Kos. Now imagine their glee if a seemingly pro-Wilson document proved to be a fraud.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/11/the_strange_case_of_ferguson_witness_40.html

Does such vile devious dishonesty exist on the Left in this case? Time will tell and truth will out.

19 replies, 2587 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 19 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Strange Case of Ferguson Witness 40 (Original post)
rahtruelies Nov 2014 OP
Attila Gorilla Nov 2014 #1
JosephNobles Nov 2014 #2
Supercalifragilistic Nov 2014 #3
JosephNobles Nov 2014 #5
saundersnorvell Dec 2014 #11
Zutak Nov 2014 #4
JoeHill Nov 2014 #6
Dork_Diggler Nov 2014 #7
saundersnorvell Dec 2014 #12
Letmypeoplevote Dec 2014 #8
Grebbid Dec 2014 #9
Letmypeoplevote Dec 2014 #10
pavulon-lives Dec 2014 #13
Letmypeoplevote Dec 2014 #15
pavulon-lives Dec 2014 #16
saundersnorvell Dec 2014 #14
Letmypeoplevote Dec 2014 #17
Letmypeoplevote Dec 2014 #18
starcat Dec 2014 #19


Response to rahtruelies (Original post)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 04:36 PM

2. "had arms out with attitude"

That directly contradicts Wilson's account of Brown running forward with his hand in his waistband. That is not full corroboration at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JosephNobles (Reply #2)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 04:43 PM

3. Read it again.

He had his arms out THEN he started running. Not during. How can you run with your head down and arms out? Unless you are playing airplane, of course...then it's preferred.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Supercalifragilistic (Reply #3)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 05:17 PM

5. Wilson says this was a very deliberate move.

I see no reason for this witness, or any other witness considered corroborating his account, to have not described this remarkable and exculpatory event.

But the truth is: Wilson perjured himself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JosephNobles (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 22, 2014, 09:11 PM

11. Because eye witness testimony is like that...

You can have five witnesses who don't corroborate each other's stories...happens all the time. ..it's why eyewitness testimony is considered unreliable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rahtruelies (Original post)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 04:43 PM

4. The journal is fishy, IMHO

It seems either crazy or manufactured... rings false. Tries too hard. And as coincidences go, the first part is off the charts.

Shrug.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rahtruelies (Original post)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 05:19 PM

6. Her testimony was contradicted by a majority of the other witnesses, who said Brown had his hands up

 

She was the only one who said he didn't, iirc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rahtruelies (Original post)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 05:23 PM

7. many of the witnesses lied.

They didn't want to tell the truth because their community it would have killed them like they did the friend if the gentle robbery giant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dork_Diggler (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 22, 2014, 09:12 PM

12. Some lied and other's lying eyes...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rahtruelies (Original post)

Fri Dec 19, 2014, 08:13 PM

8. Ferguson Prosecutor: I Knew Witnesses Lied To The Grand Jury

This is clearly unethical and explains why the grand jury gave the DA his desired result http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bob-mcculloch-ferguson-grand-jury-witness-lied

St. Louis County prosecutor Bob McCulloch told a St. Louis radio station on Friday that he knew some of the witnesses who testified before the Ferguson grand jury were lying.

In an interview flagged by BuzzFeed, McCulloch told radio station KTRS that he allowed the witnesses to testify because he wanted to present as much testimony as possible.....

McCulloch returned to the point several times, describing at least one witness who "clearly wasn’t present when this occurred."

"Witness 40" submitted diary entries containing racist remarks that later appeared to have been fabricated after the fact. There is evidence the person lied about witnessing the shooting by piecing together information based on the officer's already-published account, according to a report by The Smoking Gun.

McCulloch said he had no plans to pursue perjury charges against the witnesses, however.
McCulloch let a known racist tells the grand jury a false story and people wonder why no one thinks that this process was fair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rahtruelies (Original post)

Fri Dec 19, 2014, 09:38 PM

9. That witness number is racist

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rahtruelies (Original post)

Mon Dec 22, 2014, 08:49 PM

10. A Startling Admission By The Ferguson Prosecutor Could Restart The Case Against Darren Wilson

The DA knowlingly put on false testimony form Witness No. 40 and so this who proceeding may have to be redone http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/12/21/3606084/how-a-startling-admission-from-the-ferguson-prosector-could-restart-the-case-against-darren-wilson/

Ferguson prosecutor Bob McCulloch admitted that he presented evidence he knew to be false to the grand jury considering charges against Darren Wilson. In an interview with radio station KTRS on Friday, McCulloch said that he decided to present witnesses that were “clearly not telling the truth” to the grand jury. Specifically, McCulloch acknowledged he permitted a woman who “clearly wasn’t present when this occurred” to testify as an eyewitness to the grand jury for several hours. The woman, Sandra McElroy, testified that Michael Brown charged at Wilson “like a football player, head down,” supporting Wilson’s claim that he killed Brown in self-defense.

McElroy, according to a detailed investigation by The Smoking Gun, suffers from bipolar disorder but is not receiving treatment and has a history of making racist remarks. In a journal entry, McElroy wrote that she was visiting Ferguson on the day of Michael Brown’s death because she wanted to “stop calling Blacks N****** and Start calling them people.” McElroy also has had trouble with her memory since being thrown through a windshield in a 2001 auto accident.....

Even before Friday’s interview, many legal experts were highly critical McCulloch’s use of the grand jury. Marjorie Cohn, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, said she believed McCulloch “did not want an indictment” of Darren Wilson and turned the grand jury process on its head, acting as an advocate for the defense.

Mae Quinn, a law professor at Washington University School Of Law, told ThinkProgress that the unusual decision to present testimony he believed to be false to the grand jury — along with other atypical aspects of the prosecutor’s conduct in the Wilson case — could be an issue. “In terms of personal or professional interest playing a role in the grand jury process, I am struck by the double-bind we keep hearing about. That is, the county prosecutor feeling unable to simply present Darren Wilson’s case like any other without concern for perceived relationships with local law enforcement and others – and then making strategic decisions not singularly focused on representing the county,” Quinn said.

If Maura McShane, the Presiding Judge of the 21st Circuit, agrees with this assessment, she could appoint a new prosecutor and effectively restart the case against Darren Wilson.

Under Missouri law (MO Rev Stat § 56.110) the presiding judge of the court with criminal jurisdiction — in this case Judge McShane — can appoint another prosecutor if the prosecuting attorney demonstrates a conflict of interest or bias. Courts have interpreted this provision broadly to include “conflicts that reveal themselves through the prosecutor’s conduct in the case.” In State v. Copeland, a 1996 case, a Missouri court replaced the prosecutor because the judge “sensed that sympathies for may have prevented him from being an effective advocate for the state.” The judge “found the adversarial process to have broken down in that appeared to be advocating the defendant’s position.”
Thsi grand jury proceeding was a farce and it would be appropriate to appoint a special prosecutor and redo this process

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 22, 2014, 09:15 PM

13. move on. no one is touching that dog turd

its done, you won't even get a civil play out of it. the contact shot on the hand sealed the deal for your side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pavulon-lives (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 22, 2014, 09:27 PM

15. A special prosecutor is warranted but is unlikely

The real justice will be the civil lawsuit that will be filed against Wilson by the Brown family. It is not clear that wilson will be protected by qualified immunity. A couple of weeks ago, a good friend held a town hall on Ferguson http://myemail.constantcontact.com/12-9-14---Fort-Bend-County-Town-Hall-Meeting---Getting-Criminal-Justice-Right--hosted-by-Rep--Ron-Reynolds.html?soid=1104274495285&aid=tCQJQTx3y90 One of the speakers was Mrs. Tolan whose son was shot by local policeman. Her story was amazing including selling her house to fund the lawsuit against a police officer and taking her case to the SCOTUS. The police database had the wrong license plate number in the system and showed that the Tolan's car was stolen. This was a clear police error. The police roughed up Mr. Tolan who is former professional baseball player and the started abusing Mrs. Tolan (a very nice lady who is only 5 foot 2 inches in heels) at which time her son, a promising minor league baseball player, got off the ground to tell the officer to stop hitting his mom and was shot three times. The Tolans sued and the local federal court and the 5th Cir. dismissed the case on the grounds of qualified immunity but the SCOTUS reversed in a per curium opinion.

I found this summary of the case last night http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/05/supreme-court-police-cant-brutalize-your-elderly-mother-or-shoot-you-when-youre-unarmed/361934/?single_page=true

Today’s hypothetical: Police officers come to your home at 2 a.m., insist (as a result of their own clerical error) that the car you’re driving is stolen property, order you to lie on your belly, slam your mother against a garage door, and then shoot you three times from 15 feet away when you protest. Is there some chance—some very slight chance—that their conduct violates a “clearly established” constitutional right?

The Supreme Court on Monday said “yes.” All nine justices agreed that a lower court that blew off the claim needs to go back and take a fresh look at the issue....

The Supreme Court, in a 9-0 opinion, said that the appeals court had put a thumb on the scales. “By failing to credit evidence that contradicted some of its key factual conclusions, the court improperly ‘weigh the evidence’ and resolved disputed issues in favor of” Sergeant Cotton—which the rules forbid.” (Justice Samuel Alito, by far the most pro-prosecution Justice on the Court, wrote separately to emphasize that the Court shouldn’t overturn decisions like this often, but even he agreed that in this case, “there are genuine issues of material fact and that this is a case in which summary judgment should not have been granted.”)...

The Court did not directly address the “qualified immunity” issue. But the decision may send a signal to the lower courts to apply the immunity test as written. “It rights the ship a little bit,” Del Pozo said—and in a case that has been closely watched by civil-rights lawyers nationwide. He speculates that the court didn’t want “to foster a perception that the courthouse doors are closed to persons with meritorious claims.”
Here is a link to the actual SCOTUS opinion http://www.dorsey.com/files/Upload/13-551_ihdk.pdf

The bottom line is that the courts may not protect Wilson in a civil case. There is clear constitutional law stating that you cannot shoot a fleeing suspect and Wilson violated that constitutional standard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 22, 2014, 09:28 PM

16. like I said, nada

not getting paid , imagine "burn it down" dude isn't getting to roll around in all that taxpayer money he earned from the gentle giant. tragic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 22, 2014, 09:16 PM

14. ridiculous

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rahtruelies (Original post)

Wed Dec 24, 2014, 04:15 PM

17. Darren Wilson Prosecutor Admits Witnesses Lied Under Oath to Help Wilson

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rahtruelies (Original post)

Mon Dec 29, 2014, 10:48 PM

18. D.A. McCulloch Knowingly Put a Liar on the Stand

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Letmypeoplevote (Reply #18)

Mon Dec 29, 2014, 10:50 PM

19. "Hands Up" is a lie:

 

The ME explicated these findings at great length to the grand jurors. He explained that the entry direction for the head wounds, for example, was “slightly downward” (157:6). The earlier wounds would not have been disabling (151:1) and would not have been disabling in combination, until the final wound to the top of the head (159:15). In the ME’s opinion, the first wound was the wound to the thumb, the last was the wound to the top of Brown’s head (197). The ME specifically testified that if Brown was bent over, that would be consistent with the entry to the head wounds, although he cautioned that he could not say for certain what position Brown was in at the time he received the wound (166:11).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/11/28/the-physical-evidence-in-the-michael-brown-case-supported-the-officer/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicsfergusonmediafedsblackop