Ferguson Grand Juror Sues Robert McCulloch


Robert McCulloch

It’s on the basis that Robert McCulloch’s “public characterization” of the grand jury does not reflect the juror’s own views.

Talking point memo reports that the juror is anonymous, and

“In [the grand juror]’s view, the current information available about the grand jurors’ views is not entirely accurate — especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges,” the lawsuit says, per the news outlet. “Moreover, the public characterization of the grand jurors’ view of witnesses and evidence does not accord with [Doe]’s own.”

The juror is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri. It asks the court for an injunction that would allow the juror to speak publicly about the Darren Wilson case, who killed Michael Brown.

The lawsuit also alleges that the legal standards in the investigation of Officer Darren Wilson’s August shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown were “muddled” and presented in an “untimely” manner.

“From [the grand juror]’s perspective, the investigation of Wilson had a stronger focus on the victim than in other cases presented to the grand jury,” the lawsuit states.”


The lawsuit also takes a shot at McCulloch’s vow for transparency and his releasing huge amounts of grand jury documents.


Seven Missouri residents have filed a bar complaint against Bob McCulloch and Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys Kathi Alizadeh and Sheila Whirley.

The complaint alleges that McCulloch, Alizadeh and Whirly violated 15 Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct, including “presenting witnesses to the Grand Jury including Darren Wilson, who McCulloch, Alizadeh and Whirley knew or should have known would make false statements.”



Posted on 01/05/2015, in Michael Brown - Ferguson and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 70 Comments.

  1. yahtzeebutterfly

    Good for this juror….So glad that McCulloch will have to answer for his shenanigans!

    • Don’t know if McCulloch will have to answer for anything, but it sounds like if the court grants the injunction, that the juror will be able to expose what really happened in that grand jury room.

      • Two sides to a story

        This news makes me delirious with joy, but realisitically, these complaints will be brought to the same system that’s pulling shenanigans. It’s rather like police internal investigations.

    • He should be disbarred. The way he handled the grand jury investigation was abhorrent. His obvious bias and prejudice clouded his ability to ensure that justice prevailed. Sal Albanese said it best:

      “It’s an intolerable abuse of power to have employees who are supposed to be advancing the public interest actually working on political campaigns”.

  2. 🙂 I’m trying to understand… are they suing him because they want to talk to the public?

    • The juror wants to talk publicly about his/her experience and how the prosecutor presented the case differently than other cases that the grand jury heard. She/he believes that what they have to say will be beneficial in the relationship, including race relations, in Missouri.

      • Do you think what really happened is that they didn’t have a majority for a no bill?

        • Mindyme,
          McCulloch lied when saying that the entire grand jury agreed. Juror Doe is saying that is not true. They might have had a majority vote for a no bill, the public gets an impression that the decision was all the same, rather than knowing that some jurors would have indicted.

          • I’m wondering, even if the juror were to say, speak to the DOJ, what’s the worst that Bob would do to him, without having it make his office look even worse….

            • Mindmyme,
              Rather than have one grand juror speak out, I don’t know why the Missouri Congress doesn’t establish an investigative committee to investigate that entire grand jury session to verify where Bob intentionally violated ethics and the duty of his position.

  3. Micheal’s body was 153′ east of Wilson’s car with some of his blood 25′ further than east than that. 😦

    • Mindyme,
      If I remember correctly, towerflower pointed out that there was blood in a distance behind where Michael Brown was killed. Like I said then, I’m jaded. Cops are known for planting, moving and removing evidence. Not only that, but we know that Michael was shot at least 6 times, but not all 6 bullets were found in his body. That means that some of the bullets went through, and when they did, they had blood on them. We don’t know the path of those bullets nor where they were eventually found.

      Also, there is blood splatter, and then there is blood droppings. It was assumed that the blood behind Michael’s body were droppings, indicating that he was bleeding while moving forward. There is also an assumption that his moving forward was “rushing” Wilson and not walking towards him while surrendering. What if the blood was from splatter?

      And, if the blood was dripping where he left it behind, that would mean he would have to walk through the blood when making his “rush” forward. Why wasn’t the blood smeared by his walking through it? Or, did he have super powers to walk on air where his feet didn’t touch the ground to walk through the blood?

      Am I mistaken, or did Wilson say that he did not shoot at Michael until Michael began his Captain America, Superman act of running towards Wilson? If that is true, then Wilson fired multiple shots that missed a target coming towards him — even fired into an apartment when Michael was purportedly running towards him in a straight-line fashion.

      • scrodriguez

        Did they test what they found on the street to confirm it was blood? I dont recall that being testified to for all we know it could have been oil or transmission Fluid but I believe the stumble forward after being shot is why there is blood behind where michael landed and died

        • scrodriguez, I didn’t go through all of the grand jury evidence dump. Let’s assume it was blood. The problem I have are the assumptions of what it means. It’s likened to assumptions when a “suspect’s” DNA is found on an officer’s gun. The officer says that the suspect tried taking the gun, but witnesses say that the suspect was trying to point the gun away to keep from being shot. Who do we believe?

    • scrodriguez

      That doesnt mean anything to be honest keep in mind its said that Michael had a wound when he began to run now if your arms are swaying as a runners arms do with an injury your basically casting blood forward and backward as your arms are moving while your running.
      Remember the construction worker? he stated brown stumbled forward after being hit so it makes sense there would be blood behind him under either circumstance.

      • It means he made it 153′ away from Wilson, who alleges he shot Michael in self defense.

  4. peni4yothot

    Basically what the juror is stating is the decision was not unanimous as McCullough enjoys stating and that some of the evidence provided was heavily redacted omitting important facts they believe that everything non redacted was against the victim Mike Brown. Therefore, would like to have the gag lifted in order to tell what they experienced.


    NEW STORY : 7 St. Louis residents file a legal complaint against Prosecutor Bob McCulloch for 15 counts of misconduct


    • Peni,
      Oops. You must have been posting the comment while I was updating the article to include the report about the Bar complaint. 🙂

    • yahtzeebutterfly

      Peni and Xena,

      Thanks for the update links on the bar complaint.

    • Sounds like the proverbial you know what is about to hit the proverbial fan!!

    • sidewinder50

      i hope this includes the outdated statute that the assistant prosecutor presented to the grand jury that a police officer could shoot a fleeing subject and then came back and stated weeks later something like that statute has changed but don’t you worry about that. (serious paraphrasing on my part). I think it was Lawrence O’Connell who brought this to light.

      • yahtzeebutterfly

        Ooh….very good point, sidewinder!!

      • peni4yothot

        “i hope this includes the outdated statute”

        Me too Sidewinder, without any explanation at all. In fact when asked by a juror if the updated SCOTUS ruling would cancel out the other one, the reply from asst. prosecutor brushed them off saying that they didn’t have time to explain the law. IIRC.
        Both Aurie & O’Donnell on MSNBC left me w/the sense that what they’ve seen out of McCullough’s office, would/should compel someone to take action against.

      • Sidewinder, the very one you mentioned is listed here.

        “The bar complaint filed against McCulloch/Alizadeh/Whirley alleges they violated these rules”

  5. peni4yothot

    Shaun King @ShaunKing
    · 1h 1 hour ago

    Give me a rational reason why Bob McCulloch would threaten charges to jurors if they spoke up, but refuse to charge perjured witnesses.

    Shaun King @ShaunKing
    · 1h 1 hour ago
    Knowing full well that several members of the grand jury thought Darren Wilson should be charged tell me why Bob McCulloch never inferred it

  6. I just updated the article. A Bar complaint has been filed against McCulloch and two of his assistant prosecutors.

  7. I’m glad to hear of this……first if the juror’s suit is granted it will expose McCulloch as a liar that we all suspect him to be.

    Next if the other suit is granted hopefully they can get another prosecutor assigned and another grand jury seated to rehear the evidence.

  8. Thinking of the yammering narrative that McCulloch had given to the media and now what may be coming down the pike if “Doe” is granted to speak – along with the bar complaints, it’s quite possible more ugliness within the ranks will be reared, exposing the good ol’boy system. It’s like turning the case for the grand jury on it’s ear…I could hope!

    • Let’s hope that grand juror Doe is not like Juror B37 in Zimmerman’s trial, who only wants to justify their decision and defend Wilson.

      • roderick2012

        Well, if this juror is allowed to speak out then the three jurors who voted to indict would be allowed to speak also.

        I don’t understand why jurors shouldn’t be allowed to speak out since McCulloch released all of the grand jury testimony and evidence.

        • Roderick, I’m hoping it’s not a ploy such as Juror B37 played in Zimmerman’s case, where the public speaking will support Wilson and look for a book deal. If Juror Doe is going to address how the prosecutors misled them in the way evidence and the law, that will set his/her motivation.

          • roderick2012

            Xena, I understand your concern, but from my perspective McCulloch opened Pandora’s box when he not only released ‘all’ of the evidence but he editorialized what the evidence meant and he characterized the testimony of some of the witnesses so it would be hypocritical for the judge to rule against this grand juror and deny him the right to express his opinion.

            • Roderick, I agree. What I see coming is that McCulloch is going to raise the argument of Missouri statute that gags members of the grand jury. I don’t know how a judge is going to get beyond that. Now, if the legislatures should pass a Bill that amends that statute and allows a court of law to remove the gag upon petition and good cause, it’s a slam dunk for Juror Doe.

            • roderick2012

              Xena: Roderick, I agree. What I see coming is that McCulloch is going to raise the argument of Missouri statute that gags members of the grand jury.

              I understand the legal obstacles McCulloch can use to prevent the grand juror from speaking publicly but as far as appearances it would be better if McCulloch doesn’t fight this juror because it will only cause more people to suspect that he is hiding something.

              Also, I wonder if any of the grand jurors will be allowed to testify during the disciplinary hearing since one of the accusations is that the ADA presented the grand jury that unconstitutional law which allowed law enforcement to unrestricted right to kill a suspect.

              It would seem proper since one of the issues is how that ‘mistake’ impacted how the jurors processed the testimony from Wilson and those witnesses who supported him.

            • Roderick,
              I don’t think it is in McCulloch to do the right thing. Truly, I suspect for him to fight this all the way by using the law that gags grand jurors.

              The law that was ruled unconstitutional was used intentionally to mislead the grand jurors. Actually, any law that gives cops the right to follow and kill unarmed suspects would be Wilson’s defense — not the prosecutor’s case. Finding probable cause is never a matter of raising affirmative defenses for the accused. That is why prosecutors are suppose to “indict a ham sandwich” so that the accused get their day in court.

            • roderick2012

              Well the juror who wants to speak can use the internet to get out his story.

              I am not sure how McCulloch would fight that and as I stated the more he fights the more press this story gets and scum like McCulloch prefer to stay hidden.

            • Roderick,
              I thought of ways that the juror could get his/her story out without being prosecuted for violating the gag statute. The juror is going about it properly, but this might be a case where the statute itself is challenged as unconstitutional.

      • Xena,
        It would be a sad day if that were the case. To have other grand jurors come forward would help to shed more light here, though, wouldn’t the other jurors be compelled to speak if ‘Doe’ is successful? Couldn’t they be called as witnesses?

        • Since only Juror Doe petitioned the court, if the court grants the petition, it won’t apply to the other grand jurors. If the court enters an order that applies to all of the grand jurors during that particular session, then they can speak publicly. I don’t know if the court could or would do that since no other juror has asked for that relief.

  9. peni4yothot

    Lizz Brown
    ‏@lizzzbrown .Looking forward to being on @TheLastWord #MSNBC 9:30CST tonight excited to discuss @aclu_mo Grand Juror Lawsuit

  10. OT: has anyone heard of Matt, mysteriously killed while in LE custody Savannah?

    • 😥

      • peni4yothot

        Say what????

        George Zimmerman’s Former Lawyer Working With Family Of Black Man Who Died In Police Custody


        • I wonder if this is O’Mara’s way of apologizing to Trayvon? Also, unless he’s licensed to practice law in Georgia, or working with an attorney that is, then he’s doing nothing more for that family than blowing smoke.

          • peni4yothot

            Will always be leery of him. Although lately, he’s actually sounding human to me, but whomever decided that he come on board; is probably looking at the demographics. Somewhere in Georgia. It’s all about the results to them.

            • Peni,
              Yep. O’Mara seeks fame and money — not justice. We watched how he played to the treeslum crowd. We watched how he picked up a dummy by the shoulders to demonstrate to the jury how George’s head was picked up and bashed. We saw how he disrespect Sybrina on the witness stand. We saw how he questioned Juror B37 during voir dire to identify her and give her instructions on what to do and say during deliberations. He defended a liar who took Trayvon’s life because he wanted to.

            • peni4yothot

              “Yep. O’Mara seeks fame and money — not justice.”
              He fought for the ideal jury that he could play on their fears. Sad that it wasn’t for justice.

    • Peni,
      People need to learn that the police and judges are not social workers. I’ve lost count of the cases recently where family has called the police on relatives with mental problems, to have that family member killed before them. The same is true for some cases in family court where judges tell litigants what is available under the law, to have them respond that they just want the person to “behave.” Because they looked to the courts, things go quickly to hell in a hand basket.

      • Yep, very sad Xena.

        IIRC; years ago in Texas a family member can obtain an order to have their loved one picked up by special MH task force. Usually two officers who will take them directly to a Psych Unit at one of the area hospitals.
        In fact some facilities will tell you to contact your local LE to assist w/transporting them. I think this is partly where the ball is being dropped at. LE is as ignorant regarding mentally challenged as they are domestic abuse victims,
        It boils down to learning the system and good luck w/knowing your rights. It’s a cross your fingers and hope not to die while trying to get help.
        Wow, we really are all living on a prayer…….

        • Peni,
          I think of Ethan Saylor who was Down Syndrome. All the cops had to do was wait 5 minutes for his mom to arrive. They didn’t. It wasn’t as if Down Syndrome could not be observed. Ethan was choked to death. His larynx was broken, and the grand jury did not acquit the officers.

          Yeap — we really are living on a prayer.

  11. yahtzeebutterfly

    Shaun King @ShaunKing · 3h 3 hours ago
    READ & RT! I just published the full letter from @Sifill_LDF & @NAACP_LDF to Judge McShane re: Darren Wilson case


  12. scrodriguez

    I sure hope the bar complaint and the suit gain momentum and grant a 2nd GJ the prosecutor should never practice law again IMO

    • he prosecutor should never practice law again

      He didn’t practice law the first time. He used his Bar license to get before the grand jury, but what he practiced was contrary to law.

      There’s a case here against an assistant state’s attorney for failure to disclose information and misrepresentation of information.


  13. http://flaglerlive.com/73759/taser-confrontation/

    This is a case where everything worked out right. The man wanted suicide by cop and they could have easily justified a shooting but didn’t take that route.

    • It amazes me how a person with a criminal history of Henry Brock is allowed to walk the streets. The cops could have killed him and be found justified. They acted appropriately. It is said that suicide is not to end life but end the pain. Maybe a long jail sentence will give Henry time to think and get the treatment he needs.

  14. The Young Turks talk about the lawsuit.

    • yahtzeebutterfly

      Excellent summation of the lawsuit and McCulloch’s “problems”….such clarity!

      The Young Turk at the end of the video understands why people are protesting as he says this:

      “See…..I wonder why people are protesting? Does this seem even-handed to you? Does this seem like a process that gives faith to people in the American justice system as executed by Bob McCulloch? No, this is exactly what the problem is!”

    • I love Cenk, he says everything I feel/think.

  15. I just added the disciplinary complaint against McCulloch to the “Document” section of the blog. Here is a direct link.

  16. OT: Anyone hear about the bombing of NAACP charter in Colorado Springs? An IED????

    • I’m so glad no one was injured peni4yothot

      • peni4yothot

        What’s sad about this bombing is MSM hasn’t reported a word about it. Unless fatality is attached it’s considered non-news.

%d bloggers like this: