What the fug?
So it has just come out that the wonderful DA in the Ferguson case allowed witnesses that he knew weren't at the scene to testify (http://www.washingto...stified-anyway/)
Take this woman, for instance:
The woman, who told investigators that she is racist, bi-polar and has raised money for Wilson, approached prosecutors five weeks after the Aug. 9 shooting. In a journal entry that she showed the grand jury, the woman said she had driven through Ferguson at the time of the shooting “so I stop calling Blacks N—— and Start calling them People.”
This woman, Witness 40, was known to be nowhere near the time of the shootings when they occurred. So what'd she see? Brown "going after the officer like a football player." Her story was pretty much exclusively from newspaper accounts.
Another witness was allowed to testify things that directly contradicted the evidence. This was pointed out to the witness - and the Grand Jury - and the witness was dismissed. Why even let someone talk?
Now, the DA says he wanted to present "all of the evidence." But should false evidence be considered evidence?
This is a bunch of bullshit, IMO, and just makes it clear how broken the system is in regards to police officers and the systems in place to prosecute them.