Ono samo po nekim #alternativnim sajtovima i novinama moze da se cuje & vidi da je u Ferguson (Mizuri) uvelo™ vanredno stanje, ne?

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/11/18/return_of_the_ferguson_war_zone

To je zbog Ustava Mizurija. Naime, ne može nacionalnu gvardiju izvest na ulice da postrijelja Fergusonovce, ako dođe do opasnosti od puča i stupanja fergusonske black panther hunte na vlast u Missouriju, ako prethodno ne proglasi vanredno stanje.

E, vidish... :)

WTF   :0.6:

grand jury u brown slučaju donela odluku ali je još niko ne zna. mudro se čeka da padne noć

naravno nema optužnice za Vilsona

^  Happy Holidays!

Сад ви имате нешто више доказа у случају пуцњаве?

Zdrav razum govori da ne mozes da pucas 6 puta u nenaoruzanog coveka i da ne postoji probable cause. Znaci ne beyond reasonable doubt nego samo probable cause

Zdrav razum govori da ne mozes da pucas 6 puta u nenaoruzanog coveka i da ne postoji probable cause. Znaci ne beyond reasonable doubt nego samo probable cause

Здрав разум каже следеће, да они који су донели ту одлуку су имали више података од тебе коју си своју базирао на парт новниских извештаја. Извештај са обдукције си читао? 

Izvestaj ima oko 4500 strana. Pucao je na decka 12 puta. 6 puta ga pogodio. Kada ga je srusio zadnji metak,bilo je 8 feeta razdaljine,ostalo je sve vise od toga. To je po svedocenju Vilsona. Sve i da nije lagao meni je ovo dovoljno da se bar malo znoji u sudnici. Ali izgleda da je ovo toliki slamdunk da nije kriv jer 99 posto odluka zavrsi sa indictment a eto ova je u tih manje od 1 posto.

sa twittera, ne znam da li je istina

 

 

Grand juries not resulting in indictments:

Police Officers: 80 of 81

Civilians: 11 of 162,000

To ima ovde detaljnije.

 

Ovo je zanimljivo.

 

 

There are at least three possible explanations as to why grand juries are so much less likely to indict police officers. The first is juror bias: Perhaps jurors tend to trust police officer and believe their decisions to use violence are justified, even when the evidence says otherwise. The second is prosecutorial bias: Perhaps prosecutors, who depend on police as they work on criminal cases, tend to present a less compelling case against officers, whether consciously or unconsciously.

The third possible explanation is more benign. Ordinarily, prosecutors only bring a case if they think they can get an indictment. But in high-profile cases such as police shootings, they may feel public pressure to bring charges even if they think they have a weak case.

“The prosecutor in this case didn’t really have a choice about whether he would bring this to a grand jury,” Ben Trachtenberg, a University of Missouri law professor, said of the Brown case. “It’s almost impossible to imagine a prosecutor saying the evidence is so scanty that I’m not even going to bring this before a grand jury.”

The explanations aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s possible, for example, that the evidence against Wilson was relatively weak, but that jurors were also more likely than normal to give him the benefit of the doubt. St. Louis County prosecutor Robert McCulloch has said he plans to release the evidence collected in the case, which would give the public a chance to evaluate whether justice was served here. But beyond Ferguson, we won’t know without better data why grand juries are so reluctant to indict police officers.