Giuliani: Feds Won’t Get Officer’s Indictment



The U.S. Justice Department won’t have any better chance getting an indictment against former Ferguson, Missouri police officer Darren Wilson than did the St. Louis County prosecutor’s office, says former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.

Attorney General Eric Holder’s office is conducting two civil rights investigations into the shooting death of black 18-year-old suspect Michael Brown Jr. – one against the white police officer himself and one against the Ferguson Police Department.

But Giuliani, appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” said the Justice Department would be working with no evidence that the Missouri grand jury didn’t have, so there is no need to expect a different result. Giuliani is also a former federal prosecutor.

“This is the kind of case had it not … had the racial overtones and the national publicity where a prosecutor would have come to the conclusion that there’s not enough evidence to present to the grand jury,” Giuliani said. “It’s an impossible case to present to a grand jury.”

Read more at NEWSMAX.

{ Newscenter}


  1. Actually, Eric holder, Christopher Christi, and Janet Reno have all been able to do far more with far less in the their own role as U.S. attorney.

    What went wrong in St. Louis County was that the prosecutor tried to be present all the evidence fairly including, for example, the medical examiners testimony that seemed to exonerate the police officer.

    Since when does prosecutor’s office play fair? It’s not their job to argue that the suspect might not have committed the crime and therefore ought not to be charged. That’s the job of the defense attorney. The prosecutor failed to diligently perform his duty, namely to obtain a true bill from the grand jury, regardless of ethical considerations. The could have been accomplished easily by anyone absent even the least amount of legal training.
    All that was needed was to present perjurious testimony by one or two witnesses and to exclude anything else, and the grand jury would have no choice but to indict. Remember, no cross examination takes place in the grand jury and grand jury proceedings may be sealed should the prosecutor so desire.

    It is of course to be expected that the defense would present exculpatory evidence before a judge and move that the indictment would be dismissed, but then the fault would no longer be placed at the hands of the St. Louis County’s prosecutor’s office, could it? After all, they did all they could. They can’t be blamed if the judge has been “gotten” to, can they?

    Besides, being that State judges are elected the chances are good that the presiding judge will simply rubber stamp the grand jury indictment rather than face the wrath of the electorate either through firebombing or at the ballot box.

    There does exist the remote possibility of the charge of proprietorial misconduct being raised should the State’s attorney proceed with its business as usual, but the chances of that happening are slim to none. After all who will bring these charges? Eric Holder? You’ve got to be kidding.

  2. Giulani is a former prosecutor and he knows better. By proper selection of witnesses the St. Louis County prosecutor could easily have gotten an indictment, and because Warren would not have been able to testify in his own defense, a conviction was quite possible.

  3. Too many cases in the United States get public opinion skewed on the cases because of biased media coverage. In the public’s eye, cases are not worthy enough based on evidence and witnesses because the public is already swayed by biased media coverage.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here