Outrageous actions of official bodies

Sorry but there is very great wrong being done in this Officer Wilson case.

Whatever anyone thinks of the verdict, this was the verdict of a Grand Jury – 12 people decided this, of which three were black. The witnesses exonerating Wilson were black. Just as with the Casey Anthony case, despite widespread unhappiness about the verdict, the jury had to come down on the basis of the evidence – they had no choice.

Two subsequent things have happened:

1. Officer Wilson was forced to resign with no severance pay. The mayor, a Democrat fearful of the black population, has made a point of telling blacks Wilson got no money from the city after Saturday, that he would have to find a job as he had no money coming in from the city.

That’s an extraordinary statement, given that Wilson is officially exonerated.

That mayor is duty bound to accept a Grand Jury decision, until an appeal is upheld and that includes severance pay.

There is obviously the right of appeal for the defence and that’s fine but this pre-emptive action is simply wrong. It says the officer is guilty, on the mayor’s say-so. It’s meant to placate the mob and as you’d guess, it hasn’t done in the least, not with that lot of rioters and looters.

But the reason for the resignation is lame – the mayor caves in because a bunch of crims threaten the police with violence? Since when did the law officially capitulate to crime?

2. Now comes the equally extraordinary and non-legal decision of the National Bar Association to comment, as an association, on the decision. Not only that, it takes the prosecution to task for not trying hard enough to get an indictment.

Stop for a moment and think about that. This association is telling a Grand Jury it did it wrong, go back and try again. It’s no bloody business of the Association.

So I began to wonder just who these people were who so blatantly flouted legal procedure and then I found it:

The National Bar Association is the United States’ oldest and largest network of largely African American attorneys and judges. This week they questioned not only the decision of the grand jury, but it’s tone.

Ho ho ho. So I went back to their statement and here is the unbiased tone [remembering that they themselves are complaining about the tone of the Grand Jury]:

The National Bar Association is questioning how the Grand Jury, considering the evidence before them, could reach the conclusion that Darren Wilson should not be indicted and tried for the shooting death of Michael Brown.

“We will not rest until Michael Brown and his family has justice” states Pamela Meanes, President of the National Bar Association.

A law association questioning the verdict and saying they will not rest until the opposite verdict comes in? Sorry, that is so outrageous and confirms to this writer that what characterizes that demographic in society is that the Rule of Law has no meaning to them.

This could be seen in the response on the street to the verdict, the damage to businesses and the refusal of the mayor to order the militia to enforce order on the street.

The U.S. has a major political problem and it’s straight down party lines.

Over here, meanwhile, we have a similar problem, straight down political lines. One side says get out of the EU, get self-determination back and curb immigration. The other side says let’s have open slather and it’s quite OK for Dave to be slapped down by Merkel and have to u-turn. We are, after all, under German [EU] control.

Not for a long time have I seen political division so sharp and so along traditional lines. The only group doing anything to blunt these divisions is UKIP in the UK.

10 comments for “Outrageous actions of official bodies

  1. James Strong
    December 1, 2014 at 7:31 am

    I don’t know how you arrive at the claim that UKIP is doing things to blunt the political divisuions in the UK. I would much rather that they highlight them.
    I am a UKIP voter, although not a member, and I think they are making a tactical mistake by keeping, or allowing the others to keep, the focus so narrowly on EU immigration.
    I want us out of the EU for the major reason that while we are in it we cannot remove from office those who make the laws under which we live.
    I also think UKIP are making a mistake in not talking about non-EU immigration.
    Dennis Skinner offered UKIP an open goal in the House of Commons recently when he claimed that restricting immigration would have meant that the surgeon who operated on him would not have been here.
    That is the complete opposite of the truth of UKIP’s policy, and they have failed to make that point forcefully enough.

    • December 1, 2014 at 8:00 am

      There are two separate points here.

      1, I don’t know how you arrive at the claim

      They are taking votes from both major parties.

      2. I also think UKIP are making a mistake

      Well argued.

    • Viscount Rectum
      December 1, 2014 at 8:50 am

      You are right, Gravesend Kent is looking more like a suburb of Lagos, as for the Poles, fresh faced young and beautiful, as for clapped out Skinner using a immigrant surgeon who may be more needed in his home country may have wasted his talents on him, one less surgeon from his home country we have stolen. David Mellor has he dementia?

  2. Judd
    December 1, 2014 at 8:37 am

    Closer to home is there any other powerful organisation, unelected of course, who don’t accept the verdict of the people…in that case a Grand Jury, closer to home an electorate say like Ireland for example, voting on EU membership.

    Is the Grand Jury to be recalled and keep voting till they give the right answer.

  3. Ed P
    December 1, 2014 at 4:33 pm

    The crowd mentality, encouraged by inflammatory utterances from Obama (who’s not very Presidential at the best of times) exacerbated the protests. Releasing the jury result in late afternoon almost guaranteed a night of rioting – was this the intention?
    The evidence shows clearly Brown was aggressive & unreasonable and that Wilson acted with commendable restraint until pushed too far.
    The masses are now conditioned, by X-factor and other pretend “judging” shows, to expect trial by media instead of jury. God help us all!

    • December 1, 2014 at 5:08 pm

      Have quoted this at my place.

    • mona
      December 2, 2014 at 8:36 am

      Given time all will be revealed about Obama, Shakespeare will never rival his author.

  4. Voice of Reason
    December 2, 2014 at 1:40 am

    My word from the other side of the pond: From the discussion and evidence I have seen, it would appear that Officer Wilson likely did not kill him with intent. However, given that the suspect was unarmed, and Wilson was trained, he should have been able to resolve the situation without gunfire. It is almost certain that he violated procedures. So, if this is indeed the case, he is not indicatbale, but he could and should be fired.

    • Ed P
      December 2, 2014 at 10:53 am

      See the weblog “A Tangled Web” for an impartial summary of the actual evidence (posted approx 25th November), as presented to the Grand Jury. You might change your mind when you discover just how aggressive and out of control Brown was, plus the commendable restraint Officer Wilson had exercised initially.

    • December 2, 2014 at 11:30 am

      [This to VofR] Well, he’s gone now.

Comments are closed.