She specifically went out of her way and spoke to it's legality status in regards to Maryland law, not Baltimore city ordinances which is what the violation listed is.
Ms. Mosby said,
“The knife was not a switchblade and is lawful under Maryland law.”
As the knife may be illegal by ordinance she may be engaged in misdirection.
That remains to be seen, but it is a good possibility.
Even if the officers were mistaken about the knife, it doesn’t make the arrest ‘illegal’ or lacking probable cause… probable cause can be based on an honest mistake.
The Officer stated in his report that the knife was;
found to be a spring assisted, one hand operated knife.
Charging documents for Freddie Gray - Baltimore Sun
The charged law.
City Code
§ 59-22 Switch-blade knives.
(a) Possession or sale, etc., prohibited.(City Code, 1950, art. 24, §155; 1966, art. 19, §160; 1976/83, art. 19, §185.) (Ord. 44-057.)
It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, carry, or possess any knife with an automatic spring or other device for opening and/or closing the blade, commonly known as a switch-blade knife.
(b) Penalties.
Any person violating the provisions of this section, shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not
more than $500 or be imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both, in the discretion of the court.
Switch-blade knives. (§ 59-22)
A spring assisted knife may fall under that law.
Please see the argument laid out here.
Legal Insurrection | Freddie Gray | Unlawful Arrest | Probable Cause
Yes. The videos I posted earlier are there for review.
The folks replying indicates that is not true.
Dershowitz position indicates that is not true.
The FOP's position indicates that is not true.
Etc ...
So why are you speaking untruths?
Never mind, I know.
As you already know, she did not say that.
Again, she specificaly stated that his possesion of the knife did not violate the laws. I don't think there is any reason to question her integrity at this point.
No. What she said was already quoted, verbatim.This is what she said, verbatim: "Knife, not switchblade, was found clipped to Gray's pants pocket; was legal."
Lets say that is true. Is that reason to charge these officers with a crime? Is that common? Seems to me that they should face disciplinary action but false imprisonment is absurd and there is no way they will be found guilty of that. The issue here is the mans death, what caused it and who is responsible. If its the driver-and it seems to be-then the criminal charges should be applied to him only. Nothing else that appears to have happen at the hands of the other officers seems to warrant criminal prosecution. Overcharging is going to cause more problems then it hoped to solve when virtually all the charges are dropped.The prosecutor stated that the knife, or his possesion of it did not violate local law. "Running from the police" could just have been "running"...it is not illegal to run. The cops testimony that it was "after eye contact was made" is fairly irrelevant. If the cops had no real reason to suspect that he was involved in a crime, they had no probable cause to interact with him in any way.
It is only possible to detain for identification if there is probable cause that the suspect was commiting a crime. ID laws do not give cops blanket authority to "check your papers" at will. They must have a reason to ask for identification.
Well good. At least finally the media is reporting on black on black violence then.
Lets say that is true. Is that reason to charge these officers with a crime? Is that common? Seems to me that they should face disciplinary action but false imprisonment is absurd and there is no way they will be found guilty of that. The issue here is the mans death, what caused it and who is responsible. If its the driver-and it seems to be-then the criminal charges should be applied to him only. Nothing else that appears to have happen at the hands of the other officers seems to warrant criminal prosecution. Overcharging is going to cause more problems then it hoped to solve when virtually all the charges are dropped.
That is not true, probable cause can be based on an honest mistake.If they had no legitimate reason to detain him....false imprisonment will stick. If you've done nothing wrong, the cops have no more right to lock you up than I do.
No. What she said was already quoted, verbatim.
Ms. Mosby said,
“The knife was not a switchblade and is lawful under Maryland law.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/02/us/freddie-gray-autopsy-report-given-to-baltimore-prosecutors.html
That may be a misdirection as it was not Maryland law he was charged under. It was City Code.
Then the actual code, as provided, may be applicable (spring assisted is more than likely to fall under that law), and even if not that does not mean there was no probable cause, as probable cause can be based on a mistake.
That is not true, probable cause can be based on an honest mistake.
Are you serious?If there were another law that it did violate, and the Prosecutor said it was legal....that would have been all over the news by now. There is no reason to suspect that she is attempting to misdirect anyone. She stated the knife was legal. :shrug:
Probable cause can be based on a honest mistake. And no, under such circumstance the charges would be dropped, but it would not be an illegal arrest.That makes no sense. A mistake would mean he thought he had probable cause but didn't. The charges would hold if a case of "mistaken probable cause" was attempted.
Are you serious?
She stated it was legal under Maryland Law, not under the City Code charged. And that may not even be true.
Of course there is reason to suspect.
Her whole position is of social concern not legal and is of over charging, and you think there is not reason to doubt her. :doh
Watch the previous video where Dershowitz is interviewed.
Then read the information at the Legal Insurrection link I provided to you.
Probable cause can be based on a honest mistake. And no, under such circumstance the charges would be dropped, but it would not be an illegal arrest.
Which is just further reason top suggest she is overreacting
No, your assumptions in face of the evidence is tin foil bs.That's some tinfoil hat stuff right there. She not autonomous....she can't just get up there and make **** up on the spot. If she were lying in any fashion....and that's what you're claiming she may have done....the state would come down on her like a ton of bricks.
No it doesn't.Finding out that it is a mistake eliminates the probable part. :shrug:
In point of fact, any time this sort of negligence results in death it could result in criminal charges. But it seldom does because prosecutors seldom think it rises to the level of criminality. This case, though, is exceptional.
No, it's not a racial thing even though the mob thinks it is. Three of the six officers charged are black. The one officer charged with murder is black.
No, your assumptions in face of the evidence is tin foil bs.
No it doesn't.
Thinking the knife is in violation of the law gives probable cause.
Lets say that is true. Is that reason to charge these officers with a crime? Is that common? Seems to me that they should face disciplinary action but false imprisonment is absurd and there is no way they will be found guilty of that. The issue here is the mans death, what caused it and who is responsible. If its the driver-and it seems to be-then the criminal charges should be applied to him only. Nothing else that appears to have happen at the hands of the other officers seems to warrant criminal prosecution. Overcharging is going to cause more problems then it hoped to solve when virtually all the charges are dropped.
One feature of the US judicial system is the right to a fair trial, and as such, the fate of those on trial and what may be discussed in court is *not* up to the whims of an elected prosecutor.
Thinking the knife is in violation of the law gives probable cause.
The prosecutor stated that the knife, or his possesion of it did not violate local law. "Running from the police" could just have been "running"...it is not illegal to run. The cops testimony that it was "after eye contact was made" is fairly irrelevant. If the cops had no real reason to suspect that he was involved in a crime, they had no probable cause to interact with him in any way.
It is only possible to detain for identification if there is probable cause that the suspect was commiting a crime. ID laws do not give cops blanket authority to "check your papers" at will. They must have a reason to ask for identification.
No, your assumptions in face of the evidence is tin foil bs.
No it doesn't.
Thinking the knife is in violation of the law gives probable cause.
This one is just idiotic, the moron stood up in the back of the van and fell and broke his own neck and it's the police's responsibility for this mans own stupidity? Give me a break.
Odd reply considering your claim of "me-against-the-world crusade" is rhetoric.
(snip for length)
<cont.>
Officer Porter then physically assisted Mr. Gray from the floor of the van to the bench. However, despite Mr. Gray's appeal for a medic, both officers assessed Mr. Gray's condition and at no point did either of them restrain Mr. Gray, per BPD General Order, nor did they render or request medical assistance.
While discussing the transportation of Mr. Gray for medical attention, a request for additional units was made for an arrest at 1600 W. North Avenue. Officer Porter left the vicinity of Dolphin Street and Druid Hill Avenue to assist in the arrest of another prisoner at North Avenue.
Despite Mr. Gray's obvious and recognized need for medical assistance, Officer Goodson, in a grossly negligent manner, chose to respond to the 1600 block of W. North Avenue, with Mr. Gray still unsecured by a seat belt in the wagon, without rendering to or summonsing medical assistance for Mr. Gray.
Officer Goodson arrived at North Avenue to transport the individual arrested at the location of North and Pennsylvania avenues, at which time, he was again met by Officers Nero, Miller, Porter and Lt. Rice. Once the wagon arrived, Officer Goodson walked to the back of the wagon and again opened the doors to the wagon to make observations of Mr. Gray. Sgt. Alicia White, Officer Porter, and Officer Goodson observed Mr. Gray unresponsive on the floor of the wagon.
Sgt. White, who was responsible for investigating two citizen complaints pertaining to Mr. Gray's illegal arrest, spoke to the back of Mr. Gray's head. When he did not respond, she did nothing further despite the fact that she was advised that he needed a medic.
She made no effort to look, assess or determine his condition. Despite Mr. Gray's seriously deteriorating medical condition, no medical assistance was rendered to or summonsed for Mr. Gray at that time by any officer.
After completing the North Avenue arrest and loading the additional prisoner into the opposite side of the wagon containing Mr. Gray, Officer Goodson then proceeded to the Western District Police Station, where contrary to the BPD General Order, he again failed to restrain Mr. Gray in the wagon for at least the fifth time. At the Western District Police Station, the defendant arrested at North Avenue was unloaded, escorted, and secured inside of the police station prior to attending to Mr. Gray.
By the time Officer Zachary Novak, Sgt. White and an unknown officer attempted to remove Mr. Gray from the wagon, Mr. Gray was no longer breathing at all.
A medic was finally called to the scene, where upon arrival, the medic determined that Mr. Gray was now in cardiac arrest and was critically and severely injured."
(This is from public, Government Documents, so not subject to copyright rules)
More: Statement of Charges in Freddie Gray case | Maryland News - WBAL Home
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?