XPost: ba.politics, dc.media, soc.penpals   
   XPost: alt.burningman   
   From: black@turds.com   
      
   In other words, Barack Hussein Obama, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton,   
   Democrat coward Jay Nixon and all those Michael Brown supporters   
   are ignorant racist liars, plain and simple.   
      
   Justice Department investigators have all but concluded they do   
   not have a strong enough case to bring civil rights charges   
   against Darren Wilson, the white police officer who shot and   
   killed an unarmed black teenager in Ferguson, Mo., law   
   enforcement officials said.   
      
   When racial tension boiled over in Ferguson after the Aug. 9   
   shooting, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. traveled to the   
   St. Louis suburb to meet with city leaders and protest   
   organizers in an effort to bring calm. He assured them that the   
   federal government would open a civil rights investigation into   
   the fatal shooting of Michael Brown. But that investigation now   
   seems unlikely to result in any charges.   
      
   “The evidence at this point does not support civil rights   
   charges against Officer Wilson,” said one person briefed on the   
   investigation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because   
   of the sensitivity of the case.   
      
   Justice Department officials are loath to acknowledge publicly   
   that their case cannot now meet the high legal threshold for a   
   successful civil rights prosecution. The timing is sensitive:   
   Tensions are high in greater St. Louis as people await the   
   results of a grand jury’s review of the case.   
      
   Many supporters of Brown say they are already convinced there   
   will be no state-level indictment of the officer. Federal   
   officials have wanted to show that they are conducting a full   
   and fair review of the case.   
      
   Justice spokesman Brian Fallon said the case remains open and   
   any discussion of its results is premature. “This is an   
   irresponsible report by The Washington Post that is based on   
   idle speculation,” Fallon said in a statement.   
      
   Other law enforcement officials interviewed by The Post said it   
   was not too soon to say how the investigation would end. “The   
   evidence we have makes federal civil rights charges unlikely,”   
   one said.   
      
   A lawyer for Brown’s family, Benjamin L. Crump, said he would   
   not comment “on something that is not official.”   
      
   James P. Towey Jr., Wilson’s attorney, did not return calls or e-   
   mails seeking comment.   
      
   The Justice Department is continuing its broad investigation of   
   the policing practices of the Ferguson Police Department, which   
   could result in wholesale reforms and reorganization. The   
   Justice Department on Friday announced an agreement with the   
   city of Albuquerque intended to overhaul the way its police   
   department uses force, the result of one such civil rights   
   investigation.   
      
   At a forum this week organized by the Aspen Institute and the   
   Atlantic magazine, Holder indicated that a similar overhaul   
   could be called for in Ferguson. “It’s pretty clear that the   
   need for wholesale change in that department is appropriate,”   
   Holder said.   
      
   Federal law sets a high bar in bringing civil rights charges   
   against a police officer because prosecutors must prove beyond a   
   reasonable doubt that the officer intended to violate someone’s   
   constitutional rights.   
      
   Authorities faced a similar challenge in the investigation of   
   George Zimmerman in the 2012 shooting death of unarmed black   
   teenager Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla. Under federal law for   
   hate crimes, prosecutors have to show that someone has been   
   victimized intentionally because of a racial or other bias.   
      
   Law enforcement officials have said privately that there is   
   insufficient evidence to bring federal charges in that case,   
   although the two-year probe technically remains open.   
      
   The investigation of the Brown shooting is being conducted by   
   the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division under a federal   
   statute that makes it a crime for a person with government   
   authority — the legal term is “acting under color of any law” —   
   to “willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected   
   by the Constitution or laws of the United States.”   
      
   Sometimes the department is successful. In 2010, prosecutors won   
   convictions of two New Orleans police officers for civil rights   
   violations in connection with the killing of a man and the   
   burning of his body during the disruption that followed   
   Hurricane Katrina. The officers have appealed their convictions.   
      
   Holder and other officials have decried recent news reports   
   about investigative findings in the Ferguson case that have   
   revealed new but conflicting details about the three-minute   
   encounter between Wilson and Brown. Some of those details   
   potentially corroborate the officer’s account that the killing   
   was an act of self-defense, and they could complicate a civil   
   rights case against Wilson.   
      
   The St. Louis County autopsy report, published Oct. 21 by the   
   St. Louis Post-Dispatch, was interpreted by some forensic   
   pathologists as indicating that Brown may have struggled for   
   control of Wilson’s gun during their initial altercation, but   
   they also said the evidence was inconclusive.   
      
   After two shots were fired inside Wilson’s patrol vehicle, the   
   officer got out and Brown fled but later turned around as Wilson   
   continued firing. Some pathologists said the report indicates —   
   but not conclusively — that Brown’s hands were not over his   
   head. Several witnesses said his arms were raised in surrender   
   when the officer shot him again.   
      
   Rachel A. Harmon, a law professor at the University of Virginia   
   and a former prosecutor in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights   
   Division, said it is especially challenging to prove a civil   
   rights case beyond a reasonable doubt.   
      
   “There is an extra burden in federal civil rights cases because   
   the statute requires that the defendant acted ‘willfully,’?”   
   Harmon said. “It is not enough to prove that he used too much   
   force. You have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did   
   so willfully.”   
      
   Harmon also said that if Wilson “genuinely believed he was   
   acting in self-defense,” then his actions are not considered   
   “willful,” meaning he did not intend to deprive Brown of his   
   constitutional rights.   
      
   Brown was shot a total of nine times, including three times in   
   the head, according to the county autopsy.   
      
   Dorian Johnson, the 22-year-old who was with Brown when the two   
   encountered Wilson, has said the officer was the aggressor and   
   did not act in self-defense.   
      
   David Klinger, a former Los Angeles police officer and now a   
   professor of criminology at the University of Missouri at St.   
   Louis, said enduring disputes over what happened are likely to   
   raise reasonable doubt that would make a successful civil rights   
   prosecution almost impossible.   
      
   “The autopsy report is devastating because it raises doubts   
   about him standing still with his hands in the air in   
   surrender,” said Klinger, who fatally shot a suspect in the line   
   of duty when he was an officer. “If you have a halfway competent   
   lawyer, the defense could raise reasonable doubt with this.”   
      
   Samuel Bagenstos, a former Justice Department principal deputy   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)