Archive

ShareThis Page
Ferguson police officer resigns because of threats to department | TribLIVE.com
News

Ferguson police officer resigns because of threats to department

The Associated Press
| Saturday, November 29, 2014 9:54 p.m.
459722738
Getty Images
Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson, who fatally shot unarmed teen Michael Brown in August, resigned from the Ferguson, Mo., police department on Saturday, Nov. 29, 2014.

FERGUSON, Mo. — The Ferguson police officer who fatally shot Michael Brown has resigned, his attorney said Saturday, nearly four months after the confrontation between the white officer and unarmed black 18-year-old that ignited protests in the St. Louis suburb and across the nation.

Darren Wilson, who has been on administrative leave since the Aug. 9 shooting, resigned effective immediately, said his attorney, Neil Bruntrager. He declined to comment further.

The Brown family attorney, Benjamin Crump, didn’t return phone and email messages from The Associated Press.

Wilson told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch he decided to step down out of his “own free will” once the police department told him it had received threats of violence if he remained an employee.

“I’m not willing to let someone else get hurt because of me,” said Wilson, who had been with the department for six years.

Wilson fatally shot Brown after a scuffle, and Brown’s body lay in the street several hours as police investigated and a crowd of angry onlookers gathered. Several days of tense and at times violent protests followed, prompting Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon to call in the National Guard to help.

Some witnesses have said Brown had his hands up when Wilson shot him. Wilson told a grand jury that reviewed the case that he feared for his life when Brown hit him and reached for his gun.

The grand jury spent more than three months reviewing evidence before announcing last week that it wouldn’t indict Wilson, igniting violence among protesters that resulted in at least a dozen commercial buildings in the area being destroyed by fire. Several other large but peaceful protests have since been held in Ferguson and across the country.

The Justice Department is conducting a civil rights investigation into the shooting and a separate investigation of police department practices.

Wilson’s resignation didn’t seem to affect protesters outside Ferguson police headquarters.

Rick Campbell said he didn’t care about the resignation, saying: “I’ve been protesting out here since August.”

Several other protesters merely shrugged their shoulders when asked about the resignation.

“We were not after Wilson’s job,” civil rights activist the Rev. Al Sharpton wrote in a statement. “We were after Michael Brown’s justice.”

Ferguson police Chief Tom Jackson didn’t return a call seeking comment.

Wilson, who was recently married, spent months in hiding after the shooting. He broke his silence once the grand jury decision was announced, telling ABC News that he couldn’t have done anything differently in the encounter with Brown.

Wilson said he had a clean conscience because “I know I did my job right.”

Brown’s shooting was the first time he’d fired his gun on the job, he said. When asked whether the encounter would have unfolded the same way if Brown had been white, Wilson said yes.

Wilson began his career in Jennings, Mo., then moved to the Ferguson job a few years ago. He had no previous complaints against him and a good career record, according to Jackson, who called Wilson “an excellent police officer.”

A few months before the shooting, Wilson received a commendation for detaining a suspect in a drug case.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.