In article ,
SMS wrote:

On 11/27/2014 5:12 AM, gonjah wrote:

snip

It appears to me; the prosecutor was bowing to public pressure to do
something, so he brought it before the grand jury, and then acted like
the defense attorney. Was it all for show?

It was a very strange grand jury proceeding with the prosecutor
essentially acting as a defense attorney. It's very unlikely that this
is over. I don't know who started this thread, but there was no "no
sic guilty" result, that's not what a grand jury does.
Which is not what it is supposed to do. It is supposed to decide if
there is probable cause to think he might have done it. That is a VERY
light burden compared to reasonable doubt. If the evidence can' satisfy
that burden, then why should it be supposed that the higher burden would
have been reached?



http://www.cleveland.com/darcy/index...ecutorial_farc
e.html

There will almost certainly be a civil case, just like when Ron
Goldman's family brought a successful civil case against OJ, after OJ
was found not guilty in criminal court in a botched criminal trial.
Since the officer in this case was not found not guilty the civil case
has even a better chance, especially since so much evidence was not
presented to the grand jury.

The civil case has a lower burden than criminal, but still WAY
above probable cause. The outcome of the GJ will have no impact on the
civil suit whatsoever.
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein