What does Missouri law provide on police use of deadly force?
"The Independent Grand Jury That Wasn’t"
.. this is an excerpt from an article headed What's Different About The Grand Jury Process In The Darren Wilson Case?
Missouri law gives police officers broad power to use force to make an arrest or prevent a felon’s escape. It states: “A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only …. when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested (a) has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or (b) is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or (c) may otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.”
The law is broader than what the U.S. Supreme Court permits. The court has ruled it is unconstitutional to shoot a non-dangerous fleeing felon. But McCormick said that Wilson still could rely on the state law as a justification in his defense.
“He could say that he believed Brown was an immediate danger to people in the community because of Brown's actions in the moment and/or based on what he believed Brown had done at the convenience store. Moreover, he could say that belief was reasonable because any police officer would believe that a person who committed a forcible robbery would use force against others in order to get away. That is the argument, but it's not clear from the facts that Wilson did believe these things."
Which seems to me, putting aside the question of whether or not McCulloch should have ever prosecuted the case and all the questions of how he ran it, raises the question of whether or not the grand jury would have reached the same decision if the law of the land was consistent with the SCOTUS position.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
