We may or may not ever get to see “all the evidence,” but that the grand jury did is itself an issue
As I’ve noted before, if I’m not privy to the evidence, and you’re not privy to the evidence, at this time all we have is speculation and opinion, perhaps reinforced by deeply ingrained biases one way or the other. That still leaves a valid question, and ThinkProgress tackles that question.
Was this grand jury handled in the usual manner, and, if not, why the irregularities? Take 11 minutes of your time, watch the statements of the two attorneys addressing this matter, and if you’re still not sure where you fall on this issue, ask yourself…how would you have wanted the grand jury to be handled if you were facing the possibility of charges? Do you see any conflict of interest here? Were it you, if you don’t happen to be wealthy or politically connected, do you at least have the interests of the establishment to back you up such that you get the kind of special treatment Darren Wilson got? If not, is this how you think justice functions, one way for those without the resources, and another for those that do?