What to Expect After the Coming Ferguson Grand Jury Announcement

​ Following unarmed teenager Michael Brown's death in Ferguson, Missouri, this summer, general mayhem quickly took hold. Minor looting, clashes with police, and the use of non-lethal weapons like tear gas, flash bang grenades, and bean bag rounds ruled the day. On the protesters' side, there was an air of decentralized chaos—which makes sense considering they were reacting to a fluid situation in which very little was known for certain.

But having had months to prepare for what will almost surely be the disappointing announcement—expected any day now—that officer Darren Wilson will not be indicted by a grand jury for killing Brown, the response on the part of protesters has again been something of a muddle.

"You have caught on very quickly to the foolishness in Ferguson," the Reverend Henry Logan, a Ferguson-based pastor, wrote me last week. "Everyone wants to lead, but not too many are taking instructions. Currently there are many [activist] groups doing their thing, but not one centralized voice."

Still, Deray McKesson, who runs an online newsletter keeping Ferguson citizens and protesters alike abreast of the situation, has emerged as a leading voice. McKesson, who  subscribes to what has become the conventional wisdom that Wilson won't be indicted, has used his online footprint to direct protesters toward resources on his website, NoIndic​tment.org. Like Antonio French, the St. Louis alderman who has been vocally supportive of Heal STL, a community action group for which Logan works, McKesson promotes nonviolent means of civil dissent.

"Nonviolent direct action is a necessary, vital, and wholly American tool in forcing meaningful,permanent, transformative action from our leaders and fellow citizens," McKesson wrote in an ope​n letter last month.

As for the loosely organized nature of the protest movement as a whole, McKesson had this to say:

"The strength of this movement is that every participant is able to lead," he wrote me in an email. "The decision-making structures are decentralized, the sense of purpose and solidarity is shared."

More concerning than any lack of sophisticated organization on the part of protesters, however, may be the cover-your-ass language of Missouri Governor Jay Nixon, who declared a ​state of emergency on Monday, giving armed authorities an undetermined amount of leeway to make their own decisions. In announcing the state of emergency, the governor's office named the St. Louis County Police Department as the top agency on the streets of Ferguson proper—with various responsibilities being doled out to St. Louis Metro, the Highway Patrol, and, possibly, the Ferguson Police Department. Not only did Nixon dodge a question about who is ultimately responsible should the protests turn into a cops-versus-citizens shitshow, he couldn't even formulate sentences when asked what, if any, agency had final say over a police response to protests.

Nixon's response, according to the Guardian's Jon Swaine, ​was as follows:

"It, uh, clearly … I mean, I, uh… [pause] I feel good about the—we worked hard to establish a unified command, to outline responsibilities, and now with the additional assets, provided my order today, of the Missouri National Guard, uh, you know, we have… we've worked through a number of operational issues that, uh, the folks have."

Got that?

The question of who is in charge will be pretty important if things go badly and peaceful protesters and members of the media are again seen becoming targets for police. But Nixon's comments didn't clarify the chain of command, leaving no one person or agency answerable for the potential chaos.

This is more important for the agencies involved than for outside observers. Like the people of Ferguson, who have been the subject of endless news stories, the police bound to be on the streets in the very near future are from the greater community. When the media pulls out, they will remain. If the two sides are ever to reach a sustainable peace, someone—perhaps even Nixon himself—should probably step up and take the blame for clashes.

"I think it is essential that there is one decision-maker, especially given the astonishing number of police being trained along with the National Guard,"  McKesson said. "Leadership means being able to own the impact of decisions. We have not seen this type of leader in St. Louis politics."

One of the only decent moves by the authorities in the immediate aftermath of Brown's death was Nixon's appointment of Captain Ron Johnson of the Missouri State Highway Patrol as head of police operations. Johnson, who is from the area, briefly re​ined in the protesters, at one point leading them in a march on a particularly jubilant night.

Johnson's appointment in August was seen as a step in the right direction by some, at least. But a week and two days after Brown's death, on a warm Sunday night, police under Joh​nson's direction once again resorted to non-lethal weaponry to disperse crowds. Chief Jon Belmar of the St. Louis County Police Department, in ​explaining such methods, has said the police volleys of tear gas and rubber bullets many protesters were incensed about flew through the air because of "unfortunate criminal activity that span out of the protests."

The protesters currently wishing for a peaceful demonstration on the streets after the grand jury announcement will likely face an environment like the one on that steamy Sunday night in August, when the peacemakers left after midnight, leaving behind a smaller, more vocal, and significantly angrier crowd that seemed intent on confrontation. Again and again, the police asked the remaining protesters to leave, something many screamed was an affront to their constitutional rights. Police have claimed all along that the tear gas canisters screaming through the air that night were used as a last, peacekeeping resort.

If that happens again, the only question will be who the public holds accountable for yet more images of violence in Ferguson—the protesters, or the police?

Follow Justin Glawe on ​Twitter.