The #Ferguson #fail by @BloggersRUs

The #Ferguson #fail

by Tom Sullivan

Eugene Robinson this morning does more criticism of the #Ferguson #fail. Robinson calls out the police, for treating the citizens of Ferguson more like "subjects," and Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch for not acting like one:

The way McCulloch conducted the grand jury probe was anything but ordinary. Evidence is usually presented in the light most favorable to the prosecution; the idea is to seek an indictment and then figure out guilt or innocence later at trial. McCulloch presented both sides of the case in great detail, essentially asking grand jurors — not trial jurors — to be adjudicators of the facts. He put Brown on trial, not Wilson.

In his rambling, self-justifying news conference announcing the no-indictment decision, McCulloch made clear that he believed the eyewitnesses who supported Wilson’s version of events and disbelieved those who did not. Moreover, he questioned the motives of those who disputed Wilson’s story, as if they could not be relied on to participate in an honest search for the truth.

Indeed, during Ferguson grand jury eye witness testimony, prosecutors ask witnesses to back up and clarify where they were, what they saw, and how they saw it, etc. The questions weren't especially probing, but prosecutors at least challenged witnesses' stories somewhat. But not Officer Darren Wilson's account of events.

Two things stand out.

First, prosecutors made a point of asking witnesses (with variations) if after Michael Brown, wounded and bleeding, stopped running and turned to face Wilson, "Did you ever see Michael Brown charging at the officer?" Was he a threat at that point? Several said no. A couple said yes. (Including Witness 10, as Lawrence O'Donnell reported.) The jury believed the latter.

Second, prosecutors walked Wilson through his account, mostly just prompting him to continue. They asked few, if any, probing, challenging, or clarifying questions. His account went unchallenged.

The Guardian weighed in yesterday on the conduct of Ferguson-area officials in the aftermath of the Michael Brown shooting in The five leaders who failed Ferguson: St Louis County prosecuting attorney Bob McCulloch; Governor Jay Nixon of Missouri; Ferguson police chief Thomas Jackson; Ferguson mayor James Knowles and St Louis County police chief Jon Belmar. From the grand jury to the governor, these officials appear out of their depth.

I had to scratch my head to think if I'd even heard of Knowles in all this mess. Did I miss it or has he been MIA as his city burned? Jon Swaine writes:

Ferguson’s 35-year-old, part-time mayor was almost invisible as his city was engulfed by chaotic protests. Sometimes he popped up in TV interviews to defend the actions of the police. Since then he has proved unable to insert himself into the crisis in any meaningful way, choosing instead to make a series of unfortunate comments.

While other officials were conceding that they had a problem, Knowles told MSNBC in late August: “There’s not a racial divide in the city of Ferguson. That is the perspective of all residents in our city. Absolutely.” He would later say in November that he “absolutely” regretted the remarks, which were roundly dismissed by residents and protesters.

BTW: The photo atop Robinson's column shows a friend, a Navy vet from the local "Veterans For Peace" chapter, being carried away from a demonstration in front of City Hall in St. Louis. Police dislocated his shoulder during the arrest Wednesday. But he joined more than 100 other protesters for a Thanksgiving meal yesterday:

“You know how at halftime during a football game you get to rest,” he said. “You get that motivational speech. Then you come out stronger for the second half.”