FAQFAQ   SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlistRegisterRegister  ProfileProfile   Log in[ Log in ]  Flint Talk RSSFlint Talk RSS

»Home »Open Chat »Political Talk  Â»Flint Journal »Political Jokes »The Bob Leonard Show  

Flint Michigan online news magazine. We have lively web forums


FlintTalk.com Forum Index > Political Talk

Topic: Ferguson- Prosecutor witness #40 was mentally ill

  Author    Post Post new topic Reply to topic
untanglingwebs
El Supremo

http://bit.ly/1C1jg1X

Only ‘Witness’ To Support Officer Darren Wilson’s Story Now Widely Acknolwedged As Mentally Ill Liar and Racist

December 17, 2014 7:40 pm·

The formerly secret identity of Witness 40 had given testimony in the Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson grand jury that had been latched on to by police brutality apologists because of how closely her report mirrored the police officer’s. But now it has become widely known that this close matching of accounts was no coincidence. Witness 40 was in fact concocting her “eye witness” account based on what social media was reporting of the officer’s statements…

After being exposed this week for a series of lies and racist comments, Sandra McElroy acknowledged that she is in fact “Witness 40” who testified to the super-secret Officer Darren Wilson grand jury. This comes as serious doubt has been cast upon whether or not she was even present at the shooting of Mike Brown, as she claimed. Several public comments she made before coming forward would seem to indicate that far from being at the scene, she was a mentally unstable individual who became obsessed with the case and lied her way into relevance.

Now, McElroy has voiced concerns for her children, even though there have been no threats made towards them whatsoever.

“After I speak with the prosecutor, attorney, and Police if they say its alright I will call you,” she told The Smoking Gun. But so far, she isn’t saying much.

The Ferguson grand jury “Witness 40” became widely known amongst critics of the testimony released, after it was revealed that she testified that she saw Michael Brown pummel Officer Darren Wilson before charging at him “like a football player, head down.”

But it turns out that McElroy has a notable criminal history and has been caught making several overtly racist remarks.


Now, McElroy’s concocted testimony has become part of the traditional, mainstream media narrative about what happened when Officer Darren Wilson pulled the trigger over, and over, and over, and over again on the unarmed African American 18-year-old Michael Brown.

McElroy or “Witness 40”’s testimony that she saw Brown beat the virtually unscathed Officer Wilson was contradicted by numerous other testimonies that Brown had his hands up.

But unlike those other witnesses, McElroy was nowhere near Canfield Drive that Saturday afternoon.

McElroy waited a full four weeks after the shooting before she contacted the police to give her supposedly eye-witness testimony about the events of that day.

But long before commenting on the case, on August 15, she liked a Facebook comment about the shooting that said that Johnson and others should be arrested “for inciting riots and giving false statements to police in connection with their claims that Brown had his hands up when shot by Wilson.”

“The report and autopsy are in so YES they were false,” McElroy commented regarding the “hands-up” claims.

But why didn’t she ever mention that she was there at the scene of the crime yet?

On August 17, McElroy also commented “Prayers, support God Bless Officer Wilson.” Still no mention of having been a witness.

By September 12 McElroy commented on a Riverfront Times story, saying, “But haven’t you heard the news, There great great great grandpa may or may not have been owned by one of our great great great grandpas 200 yrs ago. (Sarcasm).”

Becoming more fixated on the story, yet still not deciding to craft the lie that she was a witness to the events, on September 13, McElroy logged on to a pro-Wilson Facebook page posting an image of Mike Brown’s corpse, saying “Michael Brown already received justice. So please, stop asking for it.”

It wasn’t until October 22 that McElroy went to the FBI field office in St. Louis where she was “interviewed by an agent and two Department of Justice prosecutors” according to The Smoking Gun.


The day before that taped meeting, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch published a lengthy story detailing exactly what Wilson told police investigators about the Ferguson shooting.

McElroy provided the federal investigators with an account that neatly tracked with Wilson’s version of the fatal confrontation. She claimed to have seen Brown and Johnson walking in the street before Wilson encountered them while seated in his patrol car. She said that the duo shoved the cruiser’s door closed as Wilson sought to exit the vehicle, then watched as Brown leaned into the car and began raining punches on the cop. McElroy claimed that she heard gunfire from inside the car, which prompted Brown and Johnson to speed off. As Brown ran, McElroy said, he pulled up his sagging pants, from which “his rear end was hanging out.”

But instead of continuing to flee, Brown stopped and turned around to face Wilson, McElroy said. The unarmed teenager, she recalled, gave Wilson a “What are you going to do about it look,” and then “bent down in a football position…and began to charge at the officer.” Brown, she added, “looked like he was on something.” As Brown rushed Wilson, McElroy said, the cop began firing. The “grunting” teenager, McElroy recalled, was hit with a volley of shots, the last of which drove Brown “face first” into the roadway.

McElroy’s tale was met with skepticism by the investigators, who reminded her that it was a crime to lie to federal agents. When questioned about inconsistencies in her story, McElroy was resolute about her vivid, blow-by-blow description of the deadly Brown-Wilson confrontation. “I know what I seen,” she said. “I know you don’t believe me.”

If it were not for McElroy’s fabricated testimony, the grand jury verdict and indeed much of the popular public opinion amongst police brutality apologists might very well have turned out differently.

Stay tuned to see what happens to McElroy now that her house of cards is coming crashing down. Just a hunch, but it seems like she might be dealt with about as harshly as Ronald Ritchie was when he made his 911 call and admittedly told lies about what he saw John Crawford doing in the Beavercreek Walmart.



(Article by Moreh B.D.K. and Jackson Marciana)
Post Thu Dec 18, 2014 9:07 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
untanglingwebs
El Supremo

Key Witness In Michael Brown Case May Not Have Actually Seen Him Die, Report Says

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/16/sandra-mcelroy-ferguson-witness_n_6334714.html

The Huffington Post | By Amanda Gutterman
Posted: 12/16/2014 3:37 pm EST Updated: 12/17/2014 4:59 pm EST

A new report from The Smoking Gun calls into question the testimony and character of a grand jury witness who corroborated police officer Darren Wilson's account of shooting Michael Brown.

The Smoking Gun confirmed that Sandra McElroy, a 45-year-old St. Louis resident who has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, is Witness 40, the person whose testimony aligned with Wilson's account of how he killed Brown, an unarmed black teenager, in Ferguson, Missouri, in August.

In a journal entry purportedly written just after the altercation, McElroy wrote that Brown charged at Wilson "like a football player, head down." McElroy's description of events contradicted testimony from Dorian Johnson and other witnesses who said Brown had his hands up before Wilson shot at him 13 times.

But The Smoking Gun reported that McElroy changed her story about why she was in Ferguson, has a history of making racist comments online and once inserted herself into another case by lying to police. The outlet also said McElroy "was nowhere near Canfield Drive on the Saturday afternoon Brown was shot to death."

McElroy's journal, where she described seeing the shooting, says she went to Florissant, Missouri, a town near Ferguson, on the morning of Brown's death to "understand the Black race better so I stop calling Blacks Niggers and Start calling them People." And in a subsequent entry describing the Brown-Wilson encounter, McElroy describes Brown as a "big kid" who "started running right at the cop" and "wouldn't stop" even after the first three gunshots.

The Smoking Gun describes how McElroy did not mention the journal's existence when she was first questioned by police, and how her description of events does not appear to be contemporaneous.

Read more at The Smoking Gun.

McElroy did not contact police until four weeks after she allegedly witnessed the shooting. During those four weeks, McElroy posted on Facebook in support of Wilson, writing "Prayers, support God Bless Officer Wilson," and posting a comment about slavery on a news story about the case, The Smoking Gun reported.

The Smoking Gun also says McElroy changed her story after she originally spoke to police. Officers were skeptical of her account, wondering why she had happened to drive 30 miles to Ferguson from her home in St. Louis. McElroy originally claimed to be visiting an old classmate in Ferguson, telling police she stopped to smoke a cigarette and ask directions because she did not have the correct address or a cell phone number. Later, she testified she had gone to Ferguson to better understand African-Americans.

Since the identities of the grand jurors in the Darren Wilson case are secret, it is difficult to calculate the degree to which McElroy's testimony affected the outcome or how seriously prosecutors considered it. Among the dozens of witnesses who offered conflicting versions of events, Witness 40's story stood out for the way it "tracked" to Wilson's account, The Smoking Gun noted.

Even without McElroy's testimony, the evidence that the grand jury considered has been criticized as flawed. Wilson, after shooting Brown, washed the evidence off his body at the police station, and the first officer to interview Wilson didn't bother taking any notes. As ThinkProgress noted, these and other errors may have helped tip the case in Wilson's favor.

Prosecutor Robert McCulloch even cast doubt on many of the witness testimonies, saying that they "made statements inconsistent with other statements they made and also conflicting with the physical evidence. Some were completely refuted by physical evidence."



Also on The Huffington Post

Post Thu Dec 18, 2014 9:11 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
twotap
F L I N T O I D

Yawn. Rolling Eyes

_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times.
Post Thu Dec 18, 2014 10:06 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  Reply with quote  
untanglingwebs
El Supremo

She was selected by McCullough to be a witness.

Last edited by untanglingwebs on Fri Dec 19, 2014 7:16 pm; edited 1 time in total
Post Thu Dec 18, 2014 2:32 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
untanglingwebs
El Supremo

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/st-louis-prosecutor-mcculloch-says-he-knew-witness-40-lied-to-ferguson-grand-jury/




St. Louis prosecutor McCulloch says he knew ‘Witness 40′ lied to Ferguson grand jury

Arturo Garcia
Arturo Garcia
19 Dec 2014 at 18:25 ET


St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch said on Friday that he let witnesses who were lying testify before the grand jury that chose not to indict a Ferguson, Missouri police officer for shooting and killing 18-year-old Michael Brown, Buzzfeed reported.

“There were people who came in and, yes, absolutely lied under oath,” McCulloch told KTRS-AM host McGraw Milhaven. “Some lied to the FBI. Even though they’re not under oath, that’s another potential offense — a federal offense. I thought it was much more important to present the entire picture.”

McCulloch explained that he decided to let “anyone who claimed to have witnessed anything” testify before the jurors, out of the belief that he would be criticized no matter how he approached the possible prosecution of Officer Darren Wilson, who Brown following a confrontation this past August.


He also admitted that the testimony of “Witness 40,” identified in a grand jury transcript as 45-year-old Sandra McElroy, lacked credibility.

“This lady clearly wasn’t present when this occurred,” McCulloch said. “She recounted a statement that was right out of the newspaper about Wilson’s actions, and right down the line with Wilson’s actions. Even though I’m sure she was nowhere near the place.”

Buzzfeed reported that there was no indication that McCulloch’s office instructed the grand jury to consider the credibility of any specific witness. His office has already been criticized for not immediately telling the jurors that a state statute giving officers more leeway on use of deadly force had been found unconstitutional. McCulloch himself has also been accused of being biased toward police.

According to the Associated Press, the interview aired amid a demand by state Rep. Karla May (D) that McCulloch be investigated by a bipartisan committee of state lawmakers.

The committee is already looking into why Gov. Jay Nixon (D) did not send the National Guard into Ferguson on Nov. 24 to help stop unrest and property damage in the city immediately following McCulloch’s announcement that Wilson would not be brought to trial.

“Many St. Louis-area residents believe — and there is at least some evidence to suggest — that Mr. McCulloch manipulated the grand jury process from the beginning to ensure that Officer Wilson would not be indicted,” May said in a letter to the committee’s chairperson, state Sen. Kurt Schaefer (R).

Brown’s death sparked demonstrations accusing police of regularly using excessive force. The protests intensified last month, after the jury decided not to indict Wilson, and took on more momentum after another grand jury in Staten Island, New York, declined to charge NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the choking death of Eric Garner.

“If I didn’t put those witnesses on, then we’d be discussing now why I didn’t put those witnesses on,” McCulloch said on Friday. “Even though their statements were not accurate. So my determination was to put everybody on and let the grand jurors assess their credibility, which they did.”

Watch Millhaven’s interview with McCulloch, as posted online on Friday, below.
Post Fri Dec 19, 2014 7:15 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
untanglingwebs
El Supremo

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/12/10/witness-who-wasnt/
Ferguson Prosecutor Busted Presenting Fake Witness Before Grand Jury (VIDEO)

Author: Nathaniel Downes December 10, 2014 9:59 am


So, you are Prosecutor Bob McCulloch. You have a grand jury investigation with the entire world watching. One of your witnesses in support of the officer is revealed by the FBI to have made up her entire account. What do you do?

Apparently you present a discredited witness to the grand jury anyways. He played the FBI interview, which revealed that Witness 40’s car was not at the location, that 40 could not have exited in the manner described, that 40 did not even tell anyone her story until over two weeks after the shooting. They tore her apart, showing that she changed her story several times while sitting on the stand. For example, in her interview, 40 claimed to have made no contact to the police for two weeks, then later claimed that she did contact them several times before agreeing to be a witness. And that is not the only occasion they caught her changing her story, with other times her lack of knowledge of the crime scene, how her journal and testimony did not match, how the exit for the complex did not exist where she claimed all being revealed. That interview, found on pages 86-184 of Grand Jury Testimony Volume 15, completely discredits her as a witness.

Then, fully knowing this, Bob McCulloch brought her before the grand jury, and entered her hand written journals filled with racist language into the record. And this testimony, by a discredited witness, is the one cited by right-wing media outlets in their attempts to support former Ferguson officer Darren Wilson. Claims of Michael Brown charging like a bull? Her account, and only her account.

Is Witness 40 a legitimate witness? Possible, but highly improbable in light of her interview. Instead, the interviews, the journal, and her own account comes across not as an eye-witness, but instead of someone seeking their moment of fortune and fame in the spotlight. In her interviews it was revealed that Witness 40 involved herself in fundraising for Wilson, even going so far as to work on getting children to send him cards of appreciation. Her story as to why she did not come forward is preposterous, her journal reads not as a diary or narrative essay but instead as someone trying to concoct a story in order to be made famous on Jerry Springer.

Why did Bob McCulloch put such a questionable witness onto the stand, in a case against Darren Wilson? Remember, this is for the grand jury, not a trial, and evidence is for the prosecution’s benefit and not the defense. But here is this questionable witness, who was found to be on shaky credibility grounds, put on the stand, and she came out supporting the defense… as a prosecution witness. This only further highlights that the grand jury process was mismanaged, or worse deliberately rigged.

Witness 40, fraud, con woman, or delusional? Whatever the case, that McCulloch put her on the stand to begin with tells us all we need to about his management, or rather mismanagement, of the entire grand jury process.

All In with Chris Hayes dived into detail on the issues of Witness 40, which you can see here:
Post Fri Dec 19, 2014 7:20 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
untanglingwebs
El Supremo

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/michael-brown-shooting/prosecutor-michael-brown-case-says-some-ferguson-witnesses-clearly-lied-n271876





Prosecutor in Michael Brown Case Says Some Ferguson Witnesses Clearly Lied






The St. Louis County prosecutor who convened the grand jury that investigated the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown says some witnesses before the panel obviously lied under oath.

Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch spoke Friday to KTRS radio. It was his first interview since his Nov. 24 announcement that the grand jury would not indict Ferguson officer Darren Wilson.


McCulloch referred to one woman who backed up Wilson's account with details clearly pulled from a newspaper account. The Aug. 9 shooting of the black and unarmed Brown by a white officer spurred significant unrest, as did the grand jury announcement.

State Rep. Karla May is urging a legislative committee investigating why Gov. Jay Nixon did not use National Guard troops in Ferguson to investigate McCulloch for prosecutorial misconduct.
Post Fri Dec 19, 2014 7:23 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
untanglingwebs
El Supremo

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/michael-brown-shooting/prosecutor-michael-brown-case-says-some-ferguson-witnesses-clearly-lied-n271876



St. Louis Grand Jury Heard Witnesses Who Lied, Prosecutor Says


December 19, 2014 3:53 PM ET


Some witnesses were clearly lying when they spoke to a grand jury about the August police killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., according to St. Louis County prosecuting attorney Robert McCulloch. In an interview about the case Friday, the prosecutor says he won't seek perjury charges.

Nearly a month after he announced the grand jury's decision not to indict Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, McCulloch told St. Louis radio station KTRS 550 AM that he hasn't spoken publicly about the Michael Brown case because "I didn't want to fire things up."

In the interview, KTRS host McGraw Milhaven also asked McCulloch to explain why he made the announcement on the night of Nov. 24, the Monday before Thanksgiving.

"There was no good time to announce this," McCulloch answered.

As you'll recall, McCulloch also arranged for hundreds of pages of grand jury documents to be released about the case, bringing an unusual chance for close analysis of the evidence the panel considered.

Here are some excerpts from the interview:

Lying Under Oath And Perjury

"It's a legitimate issue. But in the situation — again, because of the manner in which we did it — we're not going to file perjury charges against anyone. There were people who came in and yes, absolutely lied under oath. Some lied to the FBI — even though they're not under oath, that's another potential offense, a federal offense.

"But I thought it was much more important to present the entire picture and say listen, this is what this witness says he saw — even though there was a building between where the witness says he was and where the events occurred, so they couldn't have seen that. Or the physical evidence didn't support what the witness was saying. And it went both directions. ...

"I thought it was much more important that the grand jury hear everything, what people have to say — and they're in a perfect position to assess the credibility, which is what juries do."

On Releasing The Findings After Dark

"There was no good time to announce this. Whatever was going to happen was going to happen. We knew that very early on. But I did work very closely with law enforcement. ... I decided early on that I would release it as soon as practicable after the grand jury made a decision. ...

"What occurred afterward was unfortunate; there are a variety of reasons that that may have occurred. Some people were bent on destruction, regardless of when this was going to be released. I thought it was more important to get the information out as quickly as possible. I think waiting longer would have aggravated things."
Post Fri Dec 19, 2014 7:29 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
  Display posts from previous:      
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


Last Topic | Next Topic  >

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Flint Michigan online news magazine. We have lively web forums

Website Copyright © 2010 Flint Talk.com
Contact Webmaster - FlintTalk.com >