(a) Intentionally ignore the burning of 10-15 buildings last night so that they could concentrate their attention on the peaceful protesters and blame said protesters for the arsons today?; or did they
(b) Actually carry out, or arrange in advance for the carrying out of, the burning of 10-15 buildings last night so that they wouldn't have to rely on chance to ensure that they'd have something to blame the peaceful protesters for today?; or
(c) Hmmm ... I'm trying to think of some third possibility, but there doesn't seem to be one. As you were.
Question #2 (in four parts):
Part 1: Can Bob McCulloch be disbarred or otherwise sanctioned by the courts and/or the Missouri Bar Association for his flagrant violation of legal ethics in representing the interests of Darren Wilson rather than the interests of his client ("the people of St. Louis County")?
Part 2: Can Bob McCulloch be financially sanctioned in the amount of the pay he collected to represent "the people of St. Louis County" as prosecutor while he was actually representing Darren Wilson as a defense attorney?
Part 3: Can Bob McCulloch be financially sanctioned in the amount of costs to St. Louis County's taxpayers of putting on his "we're going to pretend this is a grand jury proceeding when in fact it will be an all-out effort to prevent and/or sabotage any possible prosecution of Darren Wilson" charade?
Part 4: Since this case never proceeded to trial as it clearly should have, and since "double jeopardy" is therefore not a factor, is it possible that due process for "the people of St. Louis County" might still be achievable by, for example, the governor appointing a special prosecutor to establish probable cause in either a preliminary hearing or before a grand jury so that Wilson can be charged and tried?