And I have looked. Since you are more rational than most of the left leaning people on this site I was curious why you would think the Grand Jury is wrong. You are in the fact that I don't see any nuance in this. The complete lack of evidence need to get a conviction seem to take nuance out of the equation.
Here are the explications I've seen.
DA gave the jury to much information when he could have mislead them and got an indictment and then we could learnt he truth in a trial. Sorry but we don't require people to go to trial to prove the are innocent. If there isn't enough evid9ience to get a conviction there should be no trial, that is way are justice system works.
The argument I see is that Brown's actions make no sense. There might be an argument if the physical evidence didn't support it.
The "cops are racist" argument. That holds as much water as the "blacks are thugs" argument does.
I know I have a pro police bias so I have been looking for evidence that my perception that what we are watching is public lynching f police officer because of some peoples views on race and police and they really don't care about the affects on this specific officer or the fact in the case. Tee problem is you are right, while I see nuance is the larger issues in this case I can't find any and it is not for a lack of trying.