HERE IS SOME OF THE ACTUAL COMPLAINT - 19. From Plaintiff’s perspective, the presentation of evidence to the grand jury investigating Wilson differed markedly and in significant ways from how evidence was presented in the hundreds of matters presented to the grand jury earlier in its term. 20. From Plaintiff’s perspective, the State’s counsel to the grand jury investigating Wilson differed markedly and in significant ways from the State’s counsel to the grand jury in the hundreds of matters presented to the grand jury earlier in its term. 21. From Plaintiff’s perspective, the investigation of Wilson had a stronger focus on the victim than in other cases presented to the grand jury. 22. From Plaintiff’s perspective, the presentation of the law to which the grand jurors were to apply the facts was made in a muddled and untimely manner compared to the presentation of the law in other cases presented to the grand jury. 23. In Missouri, an indictment is returned only when at least nine out of twelve grand jurors concur in finding that an indictment should issue. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 540.260. 24. The decision of a grand jury to return no true bill of indictment means that as few as four out of twelve grand jurors did not concur in finding that an indictment should issue. Id.
Posted on: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 18:10:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015