She was lucid enough to lie, post on Facebook, and take a clear position on this.

She lied under oath - should be a slam dunk for a . . . jury.

witnesses that tell a story that does not support Wilson are lying and those who support Wilson are not.

I have tried to make it simple for these racist idiots, simply watch the two men who are reacting, in real time, to something they are watching


http://nydn.us/YzRYSk

I have been dealing with one of those wilsonthepig lovers. Can't seem to understand that this witness#40 was quite the linchpin in the DA's defense of wilsonthepig. Oh well, nothing will happen to this witness, this witness is known/was known as an avowed racist in the right region, at the right time with the 'right' testimony that was allowed...for the GJ to hear....

Because the ONLY reason NOT to indict is if Brown was attacking Wilson when Wilson shot, and NOBODY says that happened, not now anyway.

Perhaps if she were black, and had lied for the Brown side, they might go after her.

I'm sure the DA has as much desire to go after her, as they had to go after wilson. So I doubt this Racist Pig lover will have her fraudulent attempts to help wilson, come back to hurt her.

You see America is an extremely racist country, where white privilege and power dishes out discrimination and hate against many people on a daily basis.

his handling of the Grand Jury. No doubt he knows Wilson is guilty of at least manslaughter yet threw the Grand Jury so they wouldn't indict.

Isn't she the one Hannity likes to quote so much? Scary that people like her exist at all.

And hell yes, if this is true (which it looks like it is), she should be prosecuted.

Lying is something we learn is wrong before we even get into grade school. In a court of law that is known as false testimony and can send innocent people to jail - or in this case, set guilty people free.

This is complete bullshit; the grand jury decision hinged on her testimony because it was the closest match to Wilson's. Gee, how convenient, especially since it was a big, fat, horrific LIE.

Someone fed her the story and paid her off. Take them down too.

They knowingly put a perjuring witness before an empaneled grand jury. The whole crew, including Ms. McElroy, should be in prison.

cell for suborning perjury in addition to losing his license. The other two Assistant D.A.'s bringing the case to the GJ need the same treatment. Maybe one will roll over if charged to prove the D.A. knew she was lying. Disgraceful!
I blame the D.A. More than this sick woman who needs professional help. Inserting yourself in several criminal investigations is a clear sign of a problem.

one of their cases, even when it's clear, there's corroboration, and handed to them. I used to catch perjury on a regular basis in my work and send the information, and supporting documents, to the local DA for the county the perjury occurred in (I worked all over Oregon) Black hole. Deafening silence.

WOW, if true.

After all, he was the one who said they should prosecute Grand Jury witnesses who 'lied.'

SOMEBODY SHOULD ASK HIM about this....

no one should EVER ask Rudy for his opinion on anything. He needs to disappear into the has-been trash pile.

I wouldn't ask him the time of day. 3000 New Yorkers died in one day on his watch, which is another reason why we should never elect Repuke mayors.

If the AfAm community doesnt go nuts after this, if they dont DEMAND the hide of this racist DA, then I will be even more impressed by their patience and decency.

However, something should be done with McCulloch for putting her on the stand. He had to know about her mental condition and her reputation as a perjurer.

I don't make it secret that I'm mentally ill; I do that in order to fight the stigma against mental illness. Ms. McElroy has a more serious problem that I have. McCulloch used her in the most shameless, cynical way. He knew exactly how to use her as a tool.

This is part of a pattern. McCulloch used the grand jury to deliberately throw the case. If anyone should go to jail, he should. If he can't be put in jail, he should be at a minimum disbarred. No prosecutor who really wants an indictment takes three months to present the case to the grand jury. Certainly no prosecutor who really wants an indictment allows the target of the investigation to tell the grand jury his side of the story. Using a mentally ill racist to give fabricated testimony to a grand jury is something no prosecutor would ever do, unless he's either trying to railroad an innocent person let a guilty one off the hook.

it's become more and more evident that he tanked this.

And McColloch is a complete failure.

of the DA, witness 40 and all others that participated in this RICO scam?

Below is for my home state, but most if not all have similar laws thus I am using it as a general guidelines. To be safe check with a local attorney before you do any citizen's arrest for the courts and the police just disfavor such arrests.

First Problem is who a Citizen can arrest:

Now, to do a Citizen's arrest you MUST see the Misdemeanor yourself OR have reliable knowledge of the FELONY (this is similar to the requirement for the police). Unlike Police if you make a mistake and arrest someone who did NOT do a Misdemeanor or a Felony you can yourself be brought up on charges of false arrest. Thus the same test for Citizen Arrest as for an arrest by the Police Officer, but Police Officers have the protection that what they did was based on the best available information they had. Someone making a Citizens arrest does NOT have that defence.

Thus if you are falsely arrested by a Citizen, you can sue that Citizen for the false arrest, but you can NOT sue the Police Officer unless you can show he clearly knew or should have known the arrest was unlawful.

As to summary offences you can NOT make a Citizen's Arrest, police can, but only to a limited degree AND only if they saw it (i.e. a Speeding ticket, technically the Police can take you to a magistrate every time they catch someone speeding, a person making a citizen arrest can NOT).

Second problem, the DA powers:

Technically DAs are Lieutenants of the Attorney General of whatever state they are in. In reality they are personal fiefdoms. Thus if you make a Citizen's arrest, you have to present him to a Magistrate or Justice of the Peace WHO then contacts the DA to see if the DA wants to take on the case. If the DA says no, then the person who was the victim can proceed UNLESS that is prohibited by law, and such prohibition applies to most if not all Felonies and Misdemeanors.

Thus sooner or later you get to a stage where the local DA decides to prosecutie or drop the case. If the local DA says NO, the only other legal person who can do so is the Attorney General, and if the Attorney General says no you are out of luck unless we are talking about a summary offense, like a traffic ticket, then and only then can you proceed. Remember you can NOT make a Citizen's arrest for a summary offense, you have to file a complaint with your local district Justice of the Peace (or whatever your state calls such JPS today, many states have adopted new names for the position).

Side Note:Even in Summary cases, if you do proceed you must do so ALONE - NO ATTORNEY - unless the DA agrees to whoever you want as an attorney. You can have an attorney advise you but he can NOT present the evidence or ask any questions. You have to do both. In most cases these are trespassing cases and other similar summary offenses NOT perjury or other serious crime.

In simple terms, unless the Attorney General does something, this case is done as far as manslaughter or murder charges are concerned. Now, the Feds can file Civil Rights violation for the same acts, but that is a different crime then Manslaughter or Murder.

I understand that she was not the only one.

He knew she was lying but he let her testify anyways. She couldn't commit perjury if not for him.

Grand Jury. Nobody investigated anything or did their homework before the railroad job began. Disgusting. Keystone Cops and DA together with a complete lack of ethics and morality -- a lethal combination.

Witnesses on both sides who made false statements should be prosecuted

having a 100% perfect recollection when you did witness it? Because that was exactly the excuse racists are using for saying her testimony is more credible.
It is bullshit.

Given the recent actions of the St Louis prosecutor, I think he should be a shoe in for AG in a potential new Bush administration.

than jay walking.

Just a comment that perjury is a serious crime and has always been viewed as a serious crime. The bad side is prosecutors rarely go after such criminals for in most cases it is they witnesses doing the lying.

Now in defence of prosecutors lets remember not only do they have to show that someone is NOT telling the truth, that that person is DELIBERATELY not telling the truth. Thus if two people saw something and report it differently, i.e. one person saw a man being beaten by an Police Officer, the other saw a man attacking a police officer, that is a difference in perception not perjury.

In this case this woman probably thinks she did see the incident, even through she was no where near the incident. Again no evidence of deliberate lying, but someone making a false statement that they later internalized so that they now believe it to be true. People do this all the time and since they is no INTENT TO LIE no perjury.

Thus to bring a perjury charge against this witness is easy, but hard to prove and given it is hard to prove prosecutors avoid such cases.

In simple terms no crime by the witness for she does not have the mental attitude to commit perjury, but her mental state should have been known to the prosecutor. Given her mental condition was known, it is another example of how he made sure the officer would not be indicted.

but in this new Brave New World USA, who knows?

Then the killer cop should be prosecuted.

nt