Ferguson 411

Written by Grace Ayers on Tuesday, 25 November 2014. Posted in News

What Happened, What You Might Not Know & My 2 Cents

Last night around 6:15 p.m. PST, the Ferguson prosecutor Mr. Robert McCulloch, made an incredibly drawn out announcement to the world that police officer Darren Wilson would not be charged after shooting and killing unarmed teenager, Michael Brown. The grand jury took just over 3 months to come to the conclusion that not only was there not enough evidence to put Officer Wilson on trial for first degree murder, but there was not even enough to try him for involuntary manslaughter, essentially exonerating Wilson for the killing.

Not surprisingly, the announcement sparked a huge uproar, from Ferguson, Missouri, to Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, where protestors hit the pavement to express great upset in the grand jury’s decision. According to the LA Times, 61 people were arrested in Ferguson last night, and at least a dozen buildings were set on fire during the protests.

Is this the end?

No. The United States Justice Department is conducting its own federal investigation into this incident and is also investigating the practices of the Ferguson Police Department as a whole. And thank goodness for that.

A Couple of Interesting Facts You Might Not Know

1. The prosecutor in this case, Robert McCulloch, was accused of bias and asked to step down from his handling of the matter due to his own personal experience: his father was a police officer who was shot to death while in pursuit of a suspect. (Sound familiar?)

2. Officer Wilson has stayed out of the public eye during the grand jury deliberations, but his life was not put on hold by any means – in fact, he got married at the end of last month. Nice to see he isn’t letting the death of an unarmed teenager get in the way of his nuptials.

My 2 Cents

From what the prosecutor said, Michael Brown had turned around and began to run towards Officer Wilson when Wilson fatally shot him “several times.” Brown was unarmed; Wilson was a trained police officer. So my question is, shouldn’t a police officer have some skill or tool OTHER to fatally shoot an unarmed young person who comes toward him? Why not use his Taser? Or a police baton? Or his own police-trained fists. It is my belief that cops should be trained on how to deal with people in ways that do not involve shooting them and if Officer Wilson had been properly trained, he should have been able to quell any threat presented by Michael Brown without killing him in his tracks.

If Brown had pulled a gun on Officer Wilson, then absolutely, shoot to kill. Or if there had been 10 Michael Browns surrounding Officer Wilson, then okay, probably a good idea to pull your gun. Or, if it was ME who Michael Brown was aggressively approaching in a secluded alleyway, then fine, I would probably feel scared and threatened enough to pull a firearm. But an officer of the law should know better – he should know how to deal with an UNARMED person without using his damn gun.

About the Author

Grace Ayers

Grace Ayers

Lead attorney Grace Ayers.

Comments (0)

Leave a comment

You are commenting as guest.

Connect with Us

Connect with attorney Grace E. Ayers through social media!