“Inconsistency” wouldn’t be a synonym of “perjury” by any chance,would it?
“Inconsistency” is what lying is called now, I guess.
A somewhat misleading “headline”. The documents showed the “inconsistencies” in supposed “eye-witness” testimonies. In other words, the documents showed provable “lies” which should be grounds for prosecution as in “lying to a grand jury”, “lying to the police”, “aiding and abetting” social disorders, and being racist aholes.
Headline should have been: “Documents show some witnesses lied”.
But than again, it is the AP (Anti-American Propaganda news service).
So all a “witness” needs to do is present oneself and give an inconsistent statement...
You can read/download the GJ transcript here. It’s over 2,000 pages.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2014/11/24/ferguson-assets/grand-jury-testimony.pdf
The attack begins first by hinting there were “serious” discrepencies..Note how the AP put 3 leftys on the case.
McCulloch was supposed to conduct a show trial and return a true bill. Worse yet by releasing the content of the hearings he exposed the heavy hand of the regime. Because he didn’t follow the “Police Brutality” line which was being used to hyphenate US by isolating and using “Afro-Americans” to disuade any attempt to “Impeach” as directed by Tzar (as in chief commissar) Obama. The collective known as the democrat party (in name only) will now punish McCullough .
Probable cause simply means that it is “more likely than not” that a crime was committed and “more likely than not” that the person involved committed the crime.
Simply put, it is just a tipping of the scales, however slight, in that direction.
The job of any jury is to try the evidence and determine the trustworthy testimony.
Any pretense to indict was found wanting. All jurors voted consistently not to indict on any charge.
My God, Officer Wilson has been royally hosed! If these were white witnesses saying this about a black cop, we would have the media, justifiably, screaming about the injustice. What is wrong with this country?!
I’m sure the prosecutor’s would have worked just as hard to show any inconsistencies if it had been me or you. /sarc Oh wait, I’m pretty sure I would have been immediately arrested, and if unable to post bail, still be sitting in a dank dungeon cell.
Inconsistencies are absolutely normal between eyewitnesses.
In fact, if several people’s testimony agrees in every detail, then it is probable they got together and rehearsed a story before testifying.
Some of these people were probably intentionally lying, of course.
In reading all of the eye witness statements I realized that they fell into 2 categories. The first category would be the people who live in the apartment complex. Most of their accounts are full of subjective and emotional statements, such as “he shot him in cold blood”. Also, many of these witnesses only saw the final part of the encounter. I believe that all of their testimony was tainted by Michael Brown’s accomplice, who immediately went about the crowd claiming that the officer “shot his friend in the back”. Forensic evidence disproved this, and many subsequently changed their story.
The second group of witnesses were the people in the cars stopped by the patrol car blocking the street and a worker who did not live in the area. These witnesses saw virtually the entire encounter, so they were far more focused by the time the final shots were fired. their testimony is much more similar to that of the officer’s, and is also supported by the forensic evidence.
I was actually impressed with the article. It looked to me like an unbiased recounting of pertinent facts.
inconsistencies
****************
Yep multiple people see something happen and each may have a differing description
of how it occurred. Nothing new about that human action.