Washington Post: Physical Evidence Supports Wilson's Account of Brown Shooting

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Maybe it totally does.

Would've been nice to hear that argued in a trial.

It would show the pointlessness of a trial.

Do you consider every trial where the accused is found not guilty to be "pointless"? The reason why we have trials is to present conflicting evidence and testimony before a grand jury to decide guilt. The physical evidence presented appears to support Darren Wilson's account, but it is by no means a "not guilty" verdict.

Given the grand jury decision, there isn't much question that Wilson would have been found not guilty during a course of a regular trial where the standard for conviction is much higher (beyond a reasonable doubt.)

A trial where the accused is very likely to be found Not Guilty is pointless.

A trial should only occur when the prosecutor is confident about guilt. I've heard some arguments that people wanted a trial to get to the truth, but that doesn't always happen. When there are ambiguities, it favors the defense.

Agreed.

There's also the chance that a few very motivated jurors manage to convince the other jurors to "make a statement", and a fraudulent conviction results.

If the physical evidence backs up Wilson's account, then it's the grand jury's duty not to put his fate up for trial.