Freddie Gray dies a week after being injured during arrest

[Jimmy Higgins]

In fact, Ms. Mosby was so hasty it appears she locked up two completely innocent officers. She charged Freddie Gray’s arresting officers with “false imprisonment” because she said the knife that Gray had on him was legal. In fact, as The Sun reported, the Police Task Force found it to be illegal after all. It was Ms. Mosby who had no probable cause to lock the arresting officers up, an injustice she could have easily avoided by taking her time.

Whoops.

If I were a Baltimore police officer, I'd be looking for another job immediately. And as a Baltimore citizen, I may start looking for someplace else to live. When the police cannot depend upon the state's attorney to be as thorough, competent, non-political and fair with them as she is supposed to be with all citizens, none of us will be safe.

Ouch.

I know! If she took her time with charges, those two officers wouldn't be dead now.

 

[Derec]

I know! If she took her time with charges, those two officers wouldn't be dead now.

So just because those officers are not dead it's ok for the prosecutor to rush into charges for political reasons and to appease rioters/thugs?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I know! If she took her time with charges, those two officers wouldn't be dead now.

So just because those officers are not dead it's ok for the prosecutor to rush into charges for political reasons and to appease rioters/thugs?

Wow! So you are getting your panties in a bunch over a couple officers having an extra charge on them, but not about the guy that appears to have been roughed up to death. The officers were wronged, fuck the guy who died?

 

[Derec]

True. As long as the cops roughed up the guy because they thought he had an illegal knife on him, it is kosher.

Evidence that the bike cops "roughed him up"? As far as I remember, one of the curious things about this case was lack of visible injuries on Grey, which is inconsistent with him being "roughed up" before he was even loaded into the van.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

True. As long as the cops roughed up the guy because they thought he had an illegal knife on him, it is kosher.

Evidence that the bike cops "roughed him up"? As far as I remember, one of the curious things about this case was lack of visible injuries on Grey, which is inconsistent with him being "roughed up" before he was even loaded into the van.

The evidence of him being roughed up is the whole he died thing. I can't understand why this seems so easy for you (and others) to just hand wave. 'Sure he died, but there no evidence that the police were involved.'

 

[Derec]

1. You are ok with the idea that police can stop and search you because you are running?

Not because he was running, because he was running from them. In a high crime area. We are not talking about police stopping joggers just because they are running.

2. What was their probable cause for chasing and searching him?

Not probable cause but reasonable suspicion. Probable cause was (supposedly) given when they found the knife.
See Illinois vs. Wardlow. I tend to agree with the ruling. If you run when you see the police, they have reasonable suspicion to stop and search you.

 

[Derec]

The evidence of him being roughed up is the whole he died thing. I can't understand why this seems so easy for you (and others) to just hand wave. 'Sure he died, but there no evidence that the police were involved.'

There were different officers involved in different stages of the interaction with Grey. Again: what evidence do you have the bike cops roughed him up. Because if there is no evidence that they didn't act in good faith when they arrested him and if there is no evidence they "roughed him up" there is no basis for any criminal charges against them.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The evidence of him being roughed up is the whole he died thing. I can't understand why this seems so easy for you (and others) to just hand wave. 'Sure he died, but there no evidence that the police were involved.'

There were different officers involved in different stages of the interaction with Grey. Again: what evidence do you have the bike cops roughed him up. Because if there is no evidence that they didn't act in good faith when they arrested him and if there is no evidence they "roughed him up" there is no basis for any criminal charges against them.

Alright. So you agree the three other officers are complicit with his death then. Understood.

 

[Derec]

What is the legal probable cause for this particular search?

Issue[edit]
Whether an individual who suddenly and without provocation flees from identifiable police officers patrolling a high crime area creates reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment for the police to stop him.

Is a person's sudden and unprovoked flight from identifiable police officers, patrolling a high crime area, sufficiently suspicious to justify the officers' stop of that person?

Holding[edit]
In an opinion delivered by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the Supreme Court held in a 5 to 4 decision that the police had reasonable suspicion to justify the stop.

 Illinois v. Wardlow

- - - Updated - - -

Alright. So you agree the three other officers are complicit with his death then. Understood.

That is for her to try to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. What I was saying is that she does not appear to have probable cause to charge the bike officers. I offered no opinion on the guilt of the others in that statement, but nice try.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Alright. So you agree the three other officers are complicit with his death then. Understood.

That is for her to try to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. What I was saying is that she does not appear to have probable cause to charge the bike officers. I offered no opinion on the guilt of the others in that statement, but nice try.

Understood. You don't think anything went wrong, but if it did, the guy had it coming.

 

[Derec]

Understood. You don't think anything went wrong, but if it did, the guy had it coming.

Apparently, no, not understood at all. But nice try.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Understood. You don't think anything went wrong, but if it did, the guy had it coming.

Apparently, no, not understood at all. But nice try.

Please. Don't even bother. State's rights and all.

 

[Derec]

Please. Don't even bother. State's rights and all.

Are you just randomly stringing words together at this point?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Please. Don't even bother. State's rights and all.

Are you just randomly stringing words together at this point?

Naw, State's rights has a point. Your response was a "State's Rights" response. IE, when someone is asked a specific question that they don't want to answer because they don't want to take a vocal stand on the position in politics, they'll say "let the state's decide". Your response had the same odor as that.

 

[Derec]

Are you just randomly stringing words together at this point?

Naw, State's rights has a point. Your response was a "State's Rights" response. IE, when someone is asked a specific question that they don't want to answer because they don't want to take a vocal stand on the position in politics, they'll say "let the state's decide". Your response had the same odor as that.

Using "states rights" is ironic since I quoted a SCOTUS decision.
It would also be premature and foolish to come to a conclusion over the cops' guilt or innocence since we do not know what exactly happened in that van.
I offered my opinion on the charges for the bike cops, which seem unfounded to me. Do you disagree and why?

 

[ksen]

I know what happened in that van.

A man died in that van.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I know what happened in that van.

A man died in that van.

Psst. Freddie did not die in the van.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Naw, State's rights has a point. Your response was a "State's Rights" response. IE, when someone is asked a specific question that they don't want to answer because they don't want to take a vocal stand on the position in politics, they'll say "let the state's decide". Your response had the same odor as that.

Using "states rights" is ironic since I quoted a SCOTUS decision.

That'd be contradictory, not irony.

It would also be premature and foolish to come to a conclusion over the cops' guilt or innocence since we do not know what exactly happened in that van.

I know, let the State's decide, because us lefty's think that a trial is unnecessary and we should just hang the officers without a trial. The truth is you don't want the officers found guilty and if they are, you'll say they were railroaded, almost assuredly regardless what evidence is presented.

I offered my opinion on the charges for the bike cops, which seem unfounded to me.

Unfounded, based on what? Hey... that is a good pun.

 

[Derec]

That'd be contradictory, not irony.

If you had meant "states' rights" literally, yes. Since you meant it as a metaphor, I think "irony" is right. But then again I am not an English major. Not even a native speaker.

I know, let the State's decide, because us lefty's think that a trial is unnecessary and we should just hang the officers without a trial.

Well the protesters (who continued to protest even after Mosby announced the charges) demanded a conviction, not a fair trial. So that's not that far from the truth. Also: holy apostrophe abuse, Batman!

The truth is you don't want the officers found guilty and if they are, you'll say they were railroaded, almost assuredly regardless what evidence is presented.

Wrong. My opinion of whether they were railroaded will depend on evidence.

Unfounded, based on what? Hey... that is a good pun.

Based on them having reasonable suspicion to stop and search him and having a probable cause to arrest because they found an arguably illegal knife on him.

 

[Trausti]

Whoops.

If I were a Baltimore police officer, I'd be looking for another job immediately. And as a Baltimore citizen, I may start looking for someplace else to live. When the police cannot depend upon the state's attorney to be as thorough, competent, non-political and fair with them as she is supposed to be with all citizens, none of us will be safe.

Ouch.

I know! If she took her time with charges, those two officers wouldn't be dead now.

RULE 3.8 SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF A PROSECUTOR

The prosecutor in a criminal case shall:

(a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause;

I have a suspicion that we may be seeing the application of this one in the near future:

(e) except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused and exercise reasonable care to prevent an employee or other person under the control of the prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statement that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 3.6 or this Rule.