A Thick Blue Wall

If you’re wondering how and why the indictment of Officer Darren Wilson is taking so long, go read this: “What I Did After Police Killed My Son: Ten years later, we in Wisconsin passed the nation’s first law calling for outside reviews,” which starts off

[A]fter police in Kenosha, Wis., shot my 21-year-old son to death outside his house ten years ago — and then immediately cleared themselves of all wrongdoing — an African-American man approached me and said: “If they can shoot a white boy like a dog, imagine what we’ve been going through."

and then continues:

From the beginning I cautioned patience, though Michael’s mother and sister were in an uproar. They had watched him get shot. But as an Air Force officer and pilot I knew the way safety investigations are conducted, and I was thinking that this was going to be conducted this way. Yet within 48 hours I got the message: The police had cleared themselves of all wrongdoing. In 48 hours! They hadn’t even taken statements from several eyewitnesses. Crime lab reports showed that my son’s DNA or fingerprints were not on any gun or holster, even though one of the police officers involved in Michael’s shooting had claimed that Michael had grabbed his gun.

There’s more, there. Check it out.

Then, when you’ve  had some coffee, or tea, and a quiet think, go read “So Why Wasn’t Officer Wilson Arrested? Plus Answers To Other Questions About The Law,” which contains such gems as

Why wasn’t the officer arrested at the scene and charged with murder?

Police officers have the authority to use deadly force when it is reasonable and necessary and usually are not second-guessed. Experts could not think of a case when an officer accused of misusing deadly force was arrested at the scene.

“Police are not usually indicted for this,” said David Harris, an expert on policing at Pitt Law School. “In the majority (perhaps great majority of cases), shootings by officers are found to be justified. Officers do have the power to use force, even deadly force, when reasonable and necessary in the performance of their duties, so they get the legal benefit of the doubt.”

and

Could Nixon or St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley remove McCulloch, who has been accused of favoring the police partly because his father was a St. Louis officer killed in the line of duty?

No. Michael Wolff, dean of Saint Louis University Law School, put it this way: “Dooley can call for a special prosecutor all he wants, but there is no legal cause for one unless McCulloch recuses himself and his office.”

To clarify, the person who has been accused of having biasing sympathies towards the police which citizens believe might interfere with justice being done would have to RECUSE HIMSELF in order to be removed from the case.

Nixon could order Attorney General Chris Koster to provide the prosecutor with “aid,” in any criminal investigation, but McCormick wrote in an email, “It’s not clear that the governor has the power to do this without a request by the prosecuting attorney.”

And also

Can police shoot a fleeing felon who is unarmed?

Generally no, but the fleeing felon must not pose a danger. The typical case of a fleeing felon involves a teen fleeing a burglary without a gun. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that shooting in this kind of case is unconstitutional.

But the Wilson/Brown case is different because Brown would have been considered dangerous if he was struggling with the officer for the gun.

Which? Not so much: “The bullets did not appear to have been shot from very close range because no gunpowder was present on his body. However, that determination could change if it turns out that there is gunshot residue on Mr. Brown’s clothing, to which Dr. Baden did not have access.”

All emphasis mine.

Do you see how the deck is stacked, now? Do you get how this works?

Finally, remember that we’ve only seen official release of three out of the six angles on the convenience store register, and at least ONE of those missing angles seems to show that Brown or whomever did, in fact, pay for those cigarillos.

If the other cameras also show this to be the case, it removes even the flimsy justification of “robbery suspect,” which would be nice, because then we could get that talking point out of the pool, and get back to focusing on “cop shoots unarmed black kid,” and the attendant necessary conversation about institutional racism and the way those in possession of martial power over the populace view said populace.

Good luck, today.