Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (265129)	11/25/2014 3:07:04 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 540746

It is not. Given the case law, unless you got a jury you could be sure wouldn't follow the case law, you'd never get a conviction. Prosecutors don't prosecute what they can't win. Seems to me the grand jury had amazing access- including testimony of the officer and the ability to question him. Read the record on this- it's pretty interesting, and thorough. I get that you don't like the result- but check out the case law in this area. You may not LIKE the case law, but that isn't an indictment of this prosecutor. You need to blame the Supreme Court for setting the precedents.