"These same 5 players are saying they disagree with the fact-based decision of a 12-member grand jury's decision, which is a fundamental principal of our government."

By law the prosecutor (who represent the people) is to present just enough evidence to show cause to indict. This prosecutor's minions presented the case as if they were defending Darren Wilson. They allowed him to testify, which is highly unusual. Wilson was not cross examined while other eyewitnesses were. In the paperwork presented to the Grand Jury Wilson was listed as the victim & Michael Brown as the suspect. This is totally opposite of what they are to do. Why wasn't Wilson's gun tested for palm or finger prints based on his testimony of Brown grabbing his gun? Too many questions about the entire process.

Here in Colorado when JonBenet Ramsey was murdered in her home the jury decided to indict her parents but the prosecutor declined to follow up.