Freddie Gray dies a week after being injured during arrest

[Jimmy Higgins]

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.

Irony isn't in the same ballpark here. But you speak it well, much better than I do any other language, maybe even English.

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.

Those people are probably just grumpy because a guy who went into police custody died a week later. They probably think the truth is self-evident. They'd be wrong, but I can understand their feelings.

So that's not that far from the truth.

Actually, it'd be a good deal away from the truth.

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.

This is just my opinion, but bullshit.

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.

What does that have to do with the victim's condition just prior to going into the van?

- - - Updated - - -

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.

I know, I know. The officers are the true victims in all of this.

 

[Toni]

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.

At least one witness indicated that Gray seemed injured when he was placed in the van.

What evidence is there that Gray ran BECAUSE he saw the officers? The primary witness is dead. And suppose he did run because he saw an officer: that is no evidence of wrong doing. He could have run because he owed one money or because they were seeing the same woman. Or because he was afraid of being beaten by officers who had previously threatened him.

Police are limited in the types of searches and the circumstances. If you are pulled over for a broken light, an officer does not have probable cause to search your trunk.

 

[Trausti]

I know, I know. The officers are the true victims in all of this.

The officers are no longer officers, they are the accused. They are afforded the same protection against prosecutorial misconduct as any other person accused of a crime. I can't believe that would be in dispute.

 

[ksen]

I know what happened in that van.

A man died in that van.

Psst. Freddie did not die in the van.

You're not the boss of me!!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I know, I know. The officers are the true victims in all of this.

The officers are no longer officers, they are the accused. They are afforded the same protection against prosecutorial misconduct as any other person accused of a crime. I can't believe that would be in dispute.

No shit. Is that true? Based on your posts, I would have assumed that the accused were pretty much free game. Because you seem to be whining a lot more about the injustice against the Officers who have been charged verses that guy that kind of died after being in police custody.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Psst. Freddie did not die in the van.

You're not the boss of me!!

Or did you mean THAT van?

 

[Trausti]

The officers are no longer officers, they are the accused. They are afforded the same protection against prosecutorial misconduct as any other person accused of a crime. I can't believe that would be in dispute.

No shit. Is that true? Based on your posts, I would have assumed that the accused were pretty much free game. Because you seem to be whining a lot more about the injustice against the Officers who have been charged verses that guy that kind of died after being in police custody.

I care because I'm a lawyer. This is what lawyers do. They see another lawyer fucking up and they point it out. It's like watching a lawyer television show with a lawyer. You might find the plot fascinating, while the lawyer can't help but blurt out criticism - "that's not how it works"; "who wrote crap"; "if that happened in real life that guy would be disbarred." There's are reasons for procedural and ethical rules. They were developed over years of trial and error. One rule that all lawyers have to abide by, whether in criminal or civil cases, is to affirmed the allegations or charges they are putting forth are based on a reasonable inquiry from available knowledge and information. You can't bring someone into court on a hunch or because you want to give a sensational press conference. Here, it appears, charges were brought against the bike cops assuming that the knife was legal. Apparently, in the rush to get in front of the cameras no one thought to review the Baltimore municipal code to determine it's legality. Absolutely irresponsible. And since all the charges against the bike cops flow from that assumption, the arrest of the bike cops may in fact be the illegal one.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

And since all the charges against the bike cops flow from that assumption, the arrest of the bike cops may in fact be the illegal one.

So, how does that work then? Does the DA "accidentally" kill those two herself or does she pass that task off onto other police officers? If it's the latter, that seems kind of unworkable since I don't think that cops would want to beat and kill other cops.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

No shit. Is that true? Based on your posts, I would have assumed that the accused were pretty much free game. Because you seem to be whining a lot more about the injustice against the Officers who have been charged verses that guy that kind of died after being in police custody.

I care because I'm a lawyer. This is what lawyers do. They see another lawyer fucking up and they point it out. It's like watching a lawyer television show with a lawyer. You might find the plot fascinating, while the lawyer can't help but blurt out criticism - "that's not how it works"; "who wrote crap"; "if that happened in real life that guy would be disbarred." There's are reasons for procedural and ethical rules. They were developed over years of trial and error. One rule that all lawyers have to abide by, whether in criminal or civil cases, is to affirmed the allegations or charges they are putting forth are based on a reasonable inquiry from available knowledge and information. You can't bring someone into court on a hunch or because you want to give a sensational press conference. Here, it appears, charges were brought against the bike cops assuming that the knife was legal. Apparently, in the rush to get in front of the cameras no one thought to review the Baltimore municipal code to determine it's legality. Absolutely irresponsible. And since all the charges against the bike cops flow from that assumption, the arrest of the bike cops may in fact be the illegal one.

A couple of points (correct me if I am wrong):

1) Do we know the make and model of the knife in question to determine if it was actually in violation of any code?
(From the snip I got there really is no difference in the Baltimore and Maryland codes on the knife in question as the Baltimore code includes the term "commonly known as a switchblade" (paraphrased) and even then I got this from a right wing blog.

2) How do we know somebody didn't review the knife as legal under the Baltimore code?
We have heard nothing indicative about the knife, only speculation.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

No shit. Is that true? Based on your posts, I would have assumed that the accused were pretty much free game. Because you seem to be whining a lot more about the injustice against the Officers who have been charged verses that guy that kind of died after being in police custody.

I care because I'm a lawyer. This is what lawyers do.

No it isn't. Lawyers don't particularly care about anything but winning.

They see another lawyer fucking up and they point it out.

Ahhh... I understand. The reason why you are near silent about the death of a suspect is because you aren't a police officer and therefore don't see the need to point out that injustice.

It's like watching a lawyer television show with a lawyer. You might find the plot fascinating, while the lawyer can't help but blurt out criticism - "that's not how it works"; "who wrote crap"; "if that happened in real life that guy would be disbarred." There's are reasons for procedural and ethical rules. They were developed over years of trial and error. One rule that all lawyers have to abide by, whether in criminal or civil cases, is to affirmed the allegations or charges they are putting forth are based on a reasonable inquiry from available knowledge and information. You can't bring someone into court on a hunch or because you want to give a sensational press conference. Here, it appears, charges were brought against the bike cops assuming that the knife was legal. Apparently, in the rush to get in front of the cameras no one thought to review the Baltimore municipal code to determine it's legality. Absolutely irresponsible. And since all the charges against the bike cops flow from that assumption, the arrest of the bike cops may in fact be the illegal one.

And that is a very good point. It very well could be true. Just like your silence about that dead guy after being in police custody, but we now understand your silence is because your aren't a police officer.

 

[Derec]

Sources: Baltimore police investigation doesn't support some of prosecution's charges

 

[Nice Squirrel]

No surprises there.

 

[dismal]

Good luck getting a conviction arguing against the official police investigation.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Good luck getting a conviction arguing against the official police investigation.

We have a court system to weigh the evidence not opinions. One of the points is whether the knife was legal or not.

 

[Trausti]

Sources: Baltimore police investigation doesn't support some of prosecution's charges

This is why you don't rush things. Take your time to get it right. It hints that little effort was made to do a reasonable inquiry before filing charges. Teachable moment here.

 

[ksen]

Good luck getting a conviction arguing against the official police investigation.

Thanks!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sources: Baltimore police investigation doesn't support some of prosecution's charges

This is why you don't rush things. Take your time to get it right. It hints that little effort was made to do a reasonable inquiry before filing charges. Teachable moment here.

I bet the victim would be saying the exact same thing if he weren't dead and all.

 

[Trausti]

This is why you don't rush things. Take your time to get it right. It hints that little effort was made to do a reasonable inquiry before filing charges. Teachable moment here.

I bet the victim would be saying the exact same thing if he weren't dead and all.

Goodness, your emotion has pretty much suffocated rational thought.

 

[dismal]

Good luck getting a conviction arguing against the official police investigation.

We have a court system to weigh the evidence not opinions. One of the points is whether the knife was legal or not.

If Freddie Gray went on trial for having an illegal knife a jury would have to weigh whether he had an illegal knife.

If a Police Officer goes on trial for illegally arresting someone with a knife the jury does not have to weigh whether it was an illegal knife. The jury has to weigh whether the officer acted in good faith.

Officers can arrest people for things that turn out later not to be crimes. It happens all the time. If you get arrested for something and beat the rap the officer who arrested you does not get sent to jail for false arrest.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

This is why you don't rush things. Take your time to get it right. It hints that little effort was made to do a reasonable inquiry before filing charges. Teachable moment here.

I bet the victim would be saying the exact same thing if he weren't dead and all.

Mistakes by one group don't justify mistakes by another group. The DA should have gotten the process right.

That being said, her city was falling apart and people were rioting in the streets, so she needed to make a strong statement quickly and it's fine for her to back off of that later on when events allow more time for sober reflection. It would have been worse for her to take that time while everything was out of control than to overreach some and make the adjustments to pull back that overreach later.