Turning the Wheels of Justice More Quickly.

What in heavens name is taking the grand jury so long to decide whether or not to charge Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting of Michael Brown?  I don't quite understand.

Speedy justice, with thorough presentation of evidence, is important.  If the autopsy results are in, and any chemical or DNA testing, one hopes there is no stalling for political reasons in making a decision.  People there are on edge.  Drama takes precedence over facts.  The people there -- schoolchildren all the way up to the authorities -- deserve better.  The grand jury has a job to do already.

I want to see them be brave...

Last night, another shooting of a young black man by a "white" off-duty police officer moonlighting as a security guard, apparently, in his St. Louis city uniform, was reported.  People will react, for sure.

Teyonna Myers, 23, told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch newspaper that she was the cousin of the suspect and that he was unarmed when he was killed.

"He had a sandwich in his hand, and they thought it was a gun. It's like Michael Brown all over again," she told the paper. Police have not named the teenager.

At one point, about a dozen people punched and kicked two occupied police vehicles, one that was marked and another that was unmarked. Demonstrators then broke the back window of a marked police vehicle.  None of the protesters, some of whom were from Ferguson, had been arrested by the early hours of Thursday, police chief Dotson told a news conference.

"I think the department showed a tremendous amount of restraint," Dotson said.  The officer, who was not hurt, has been placed on administrative leave and an investigation was under way, police said.

Another account reports:

St. Louis Metropolitan Police Chief Sam Dotson said the young man fired three shots at the officer first. The officer, a six-year veteran of the department, returned fire 17 times.
...
“One of them ran in a way that the officer believed that he was armed with a gun – holding his waist band, not running at full stride,” Conway [ed. note:  who is Conway? misidentified source?] said, referring to the 18-year old. 

He drove through the streets after them and then left his car and chased them on foot. [ed note:  attribution?] One of the men then turned toward the officer and approached him “in an aggressive manner,” Dotson said. The suspect and the officer got into a physical altercation. [ed note:  attribution?]

Dotson said the man then ran up a hill and fired three times at the officer before the officer returned fire. Investigators recovered a 9mm Ruger at the scene, which Dotson said was used by the 18-year-old, whom he described as “no stranger to law enforcement.”

“The suspect continued to pull the trigger on the gun … we learned that that gun had malfunctioned and it was jammed,” Dotson said.  The officer returned fire, killing the man.

Justice is supposed to make clear the law of the land.
To eliminate, for good reason, the perceived need for "Street Justice" (ie/No Justice. No Peace.)

Be decisive, not divisive.  Fully examine the evidence.  Stand by the scientific facts, and the grand jury or judge's decisions applying those facts to the law.

  "Get 'er done" already...

In Ferguson, a grand jury is expected to decide next month whether to bring criminal charges against police officer Darren Wilson, who shot dead Michael Brown on Aug. 9.  Brown's death triggered weeks of sometimes violent protests, prompting the governor at one point to summon the National Guard.

Missouri authorities are drawing up contingency plans and seeking intelligence from other police departments around the country, fearing that fresh riots could erupt if a grand jury does not indict Wilson.

-------------------------------

In other news,
the Supreme Court  of the United States (SCOTUS) is apparently delighting in their newfound attention regarding the "gay marriage" gender discrimination cases.

The purpose of the highest court is to provide instruction to the lower courts:  to decide the law consistently, and to be clear, because clear laws provide the standards that people rely on.  Clearly defined laws influence people's decision-making, gives them something to rely on, in doing their jobs and shaping their personal choices.

This is definitely not what is happening here...

Yesterday, Justice Kennedy left legal analysts, who thought they had it all figured out, scratching their heads.  On Monday, it was announced the Court declined to take up the appeals of several states, where lower courts overturned popular referendums banning the civil marriages of two people of the same gender.

Hooray!  said the pro- pundits.
Good news! said the gay-rights advocates.
The thinking went:  by refusing to hear the appeals, the Supreme Court was essentially confirming the conclusion led up to in previous precedent-setting cases, including conservative Justice Scalia's outraged dissents.

Now... hold your horses, folks.
When a lower court acted on the Supreme Court's (non) actions -- in not definitely taking the cases, and proclaiming U.S. Constitutional law loud and clear -- it appears people read the tea leaves wrong...

Just because the Court did not take on any of the appeals -- meaning civil marriage will be extended to all couples in the states affected who otherwise can meet requirements regardless of gender  -- does NOT mean they will not take up the issue when one of the more conservative lower courts rules that federal law  properly should defer to the legislatures and state constitutions, including popular referendum, in deciding this issue, which has always been governed by state law  (That's the con- argument.)

That's where the fight is:  who decides?  Is gender discrimination permitted, if a majority of residents vote it so?  Eventually, the question will come before the Court, because eventually, the circuits will be split...

In the meantime, there are those who believe the issue has lived to fight another day:  they don't accept the current patchwork rulings across the country as legitimate, now and forever, and think that when the Court's composition politically changes, the current up-for-grabs status of the laws will be determined for good.
 

I wish the Court here too would have been brave, accepted a case, and provided clarification.  It was cowardly, I think, to not accept and decide one of the earlier appealed cases, and now stay the decision of the lower circuit court allowing the issuance of licenses in one of the the now-affected states, but not in another, where it appears no appeal will be forthcoming...  Who can keep up?

On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit struck down gay marriage bans in both states. Nevada officials announced that they would no longer fight the issue. But Idaho Gov. C. L. “Butch” Otter (R) filed an emergency request for a stay with Kennedy, who is the justice designated to hear such petitions from states covered by the 9th Circuit.

With little more than an hour to go before Idaho was to begin issuing licenses, Kennedy granted a stay, and told challengers of the law to filed a response by Thursday afternoon.  But his order covered Nevada as well.

Challengers to Nevada’s law thought that might have been a mistake and asked the Supreme Court for clarification. A few hours later, Kennedy issued the amended order “upon further consideration.”

 Everyone is left guessing again...

That's what the Court accomplished, in passively doing their job this week.  Talk about job security*...
 -----------------------






* Put your shoulders to the wheel already, Justice people!