Ferguson grand jury details emerge, egg piles up on the faces of its critics

Darren Wilson ABC InterviewIn the moments after the Ferguson grand jury decision, social media sites exploded with “disgusted” critics — even though they were not privy to the information seen inside the courtroom. As details emerge, those critics increasingly have egg all over their faces.

After exposing Michael Brown’s friend Dorian Johnson as a liar — forensic evidence refuted his claim that Mr. Brown was shot in the back — The Associated Press reported Wednesday:

One woman, who said she was smoking a cigarette with a friend nearby, claimed she saw a second police officer in the passenger seat of Wilson’s vehicle. When quizzed by a prosecutor, she elaborated: The officer was white, “middle age or young” and in uniform. She said she was positive there was a second officer — even though there was not.

Another witness had told the FBI that Wilson shot Brown in the back and then “stood over him and finished him off.” But in his grand jury testimony, this witness acknowledged that he had not seen that part of the shooting, and that what he told the FBI was “based on me being where I’m from, and that can be the only assumption that I have.” …

Another man, describing himself as a friend of Brown’s, told a federal investigator that he heard the first gunshot, looked out his window and saw an officer with a gun drawn and Brown “on his knees with his hands in the air.” He added: “I seen him shoot him in the head.”

But when later pressed by the investigator, the friend said he had not seen the actual shooting because he was walking down the stairs at the time and instead had heard details from someone in the apartment complex.

“What you are saying you saw isn’t forensically possible based on the evidence,” the investigator told the friend.

Shortly after that, the friend asked if he could leave.

“I ain’t feeling comfortable,” he said.

Imagine you’re on a grand jury, and you’re presented with “witnesses” who saw phantom cops in the passenger seat of Darren Wilson’s squad car and men who say they “ain’t feeling comfortable” when their tales of execution-style murder are destroyed by forensic evidence. During this time you’re also presented with a small group of witnesses who confirm the officer’s account of what happened. They do not see ghost cops and their stories stand up to scrutiny.

Now imagine that you see and hear Darren Wilson professionally speak in his own defense for four hours — when he doesn’t need to do so and the choice could seal his doom — and everything he says is backed by the forensic evidence, including analysis provided by an independent expert hired by Michael Brown’s family.

What would you do? If you were a member of the grand jury acting in a professional manner, then there’s a good chance you would not indict the officer. That is not a “disgusting” decision; it is, in fact, perfectly reasonable.

The behavior of online mobs ruled solely by emotion would be laughable if it wasn’t for the fact that an entire community has been ripped and burned, in part, by the ramifications of their rhetoric. Lives have been irreparably harmed by individuals seeking to politically and monetarily exploit others along racial lines, and those who are blinded by ideology can’t see how they are aiding and abetting Machiavellian mouthpieces across the nation.

The good thing about the grand jury’s decision is that it gave officer Wilson a chance to finally tell his side of the story to the public. If you haven’t had a chance to watch his 45-minute interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC, then you should do so. The policeman handled himself very well.

Here is an excerpt of the kind of questions he had to put up with:

Stephanopoulos: And in your training there was no option in those moments when you were faced with Michael Brown but to shoot?

Darren Wilson: Correct.

Stephanopoulos: What about, and I don’t know enough about the training, what about when he’s coming towards you? Why not run behind the car?

Darren Wilson: Run away? How do you run…

Stephanopoulos: You just don’t do that.

Darren Wilson: You can’t run away. That’s not what we’re there for. If we ran away every time something scared us, every time we heard a noise in the night, we wouldn’t be very good at our job. We’re taught and trained to deal with the threat at hand, and that’s what I did.

In the mind of George Stephanopoulos, cops should run away and hide behind their squad cars when a 6’4″, 292-pound robbery suspect charges them.

George Stephanopoulos Darren Wilson
“What about when he’s coming towards you? Why not run behind the car?” Imagine a world where cops are trained by George Stephanopoulos. Would you feel safe?

The story of Michael Brown is a sad one, but it most certainly does not involve a cop with racial animus towards black teenagers. To suggest that Darren Wilson was looking for an excuse to use his gun — the one he had never fired until that day — on a black teenager is preposterous. Likewise, the implication that the Ferguson grand jury did not take their job seriously and come to the conclusion they did based on hard evidence is ridiculous.

Related: Text of Darren Wilson’s testimony before the Ferguson grand jury

Ferguson looters break glass, burn their own community down; Bastiat laughs from the grave

Ferguson FireIt’s probably a safe bet to say that the Ferguson, Mo. residents who looted liquor stores and McDonalds restaurants while essentially burning their own community to the ground late Monday, Nov. 24 have never read Frederic Bastiat. That’s a shame, because then they would know that while their actions may make glaziers happy in the short run, they have only done themselves long-term economic damage.

Ferguson McDonalds vandalismA grand jury decided Monday night that the evidence presented to them regarding the shooting death of Michael Brown did not warrant an indictment of police officer Darren Wilson. That evidence was combed through and analyzed by the federal government — The Department of Justice under Eric Holder’s leadership — as well as an independent forensics expert hired by the Brown family. Sworn statements by multiple eye witnesses backed what the forensic evidence was telling investigators — but that sort of thing doesn’t matter when you’re the kind of person who really, really wants an excuse to rob liquor stores.

Liquor Looter FergusonThere is something paradoxically sad, hilarious and frightening about watching men in “Scream” masks and black hoodies robbing liquor stores adorned with “Hands up, Don’t Shoot” posters.

Ferguson Scream MaskMany Ferguson looters erroneously believe that justice was not served by the grand jury’s decision. (Some know the truth but just want an excuse to steal.) However, they should be thankful that there are still enough members of their own community who are capable of letting evidence instead of emotion guide their thinking.

Ironically, the Ferguson, Mo. authorities will probably not be taken to task for turning a blind eye to the wanton destruction of their own community.

As Bastiat says in “The Law”:

“Man can live and satisfy his wants only by ceaseless labor; by the ceaseless application of his faculties to natural resources. This process is the origin of property.

But it is also true that a man may live and satisfy his wants by seizing and consuming the products of the labor of others. This process is the origin of plunder.

Now since man is naturally inclined to avoid pain — and since labor is pain in itself — it follows that men will resort to plunder whenever plunder is easier than work. History shows this quite clearly. And under these conditions, neither religion nor morality can stop it.

When, then, does plunder stop? It stops when it becomes more painful and more dangerous than labor.

It is evident, then, that the proper purpose of law is to use the power of its collective force to stop this fatal tendency to plunder instead of work. All the measures of the law should protect property and punish plunder,” — (Bastiat, The Law).

How many law-abiding business owners — who had absolutely nothing to do with Michael Brown’s death — will never recover from the destruction of personal property because of the misplaced notion that racial sensitivity trumps the law?

How many businesses — and the jobs that come with them — will now stay far, far away from Ferguson, Mo. because officials made the conscious decision to allow citizens to plunder from one another and raze portions of the city?

Enjoy your liquor, Ferguson looters. The rubble will still remain after your hangovers subside.