• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge Questions If Crime Was Committed in Freddie Gray Officer Case

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,985
Reaction score
4,957
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The first officer to go to trial ended with a hung jury. Sounds like a really good chance that this cop will be found not guilty.

Appeared the charges were more about politics then finding a real crime - at least based on the evidence i am aware of.

Judge Questions If Crime Was Committed in Freddie Gray Officer Case - ABC News

The judge in the case of one of the officers who arrested Freddie Gray grilled prosecutors during closing arguments Thursday -- questioning whether a crime was in fact committed.“So, every time there’s an arrest without probable justification – it is a crime?” Baltimore JudgeBarry Williams asked incredulously. “I’m trying to make sure it was a criminal assault. Touching Freddie Gray is assault?”


“I can’t believe I even have to argue this,” he said. “The detention is OK, the cuffing is OK, the moving is OK,” he said. “Being detained is a horrible thing, being cuffed is a horrible thing…but the law allows it.”

 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,733
Reaction score
20,429
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The first officer to go to trial ended with a hung jury. Sounds like a really good chance that this cop will be found not guilty.

Appeared the charges were more about politics then finding a real crime - at least based on the evidence i am aware of.

Judge Questions If Crime Was Committed in Freddie Gray Officer Case - ABC News



[/FONT][/COLOR]
[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR]

I'm not surprised. At the time, listening to the Mayor of Baltimore and the State's Attorney General who brought the charges, it sounded far more like a politically motivated police lynching than any attempt to seek justice.
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
31,625
Reaction score
8,567
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm not surprised. At the time, listening to the Mayor of Baltimore and the State's Attorney General who brought the charges, it sounded far more like a politically motivated police lynching than any attempt to seek justice.

Just to point out.

If I put my hands on you without justification (self defense), and by accident you died, I would be charged with at least assault and more likely battery and possible manslaughter.

Why is a government official exempt from the same?
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
39,850
Reaction score
8,960
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Just to point out.

If I put my hands on you without justification (self defense), and by accident you died, I would be charged with at least assault and more likely battery and possible manslaughter.

Why is a government official exempt from the same?
No you wouldn't.
The prosecutor's whole argument comes down to what they believe was a 3 minute period of time being too long.
It is a ridiculous.


Both sides agreed in their closings that nothing about Gray's initial stop, before he was handcuffed and moved, was illegal. They also agreed that no assault was committed after Gray was searched.

In doing so, prosecutors ceded any argument that Nero was wrong to pursue Gray after Rice radioed that he needed help chasing him. They also, without stating it outright, acknowledged that a knife found on Gray was illegal, therefore substantiating all of the touching of Gray after its discovery.

With those acknowledgements in place, both sides agreed that the period of time in question for the assault charge was only a matter of minutes.

Zayon said it was 1 minute, 28 seconds — which he said was a completely reasonable amount of time to detain someone under the law, even prior to finding probable cause for an arrest. Schatzow said the time was closer to 3 minutes, and that detaining someone for that long without at least attempting to determine justification for the stop was unreasonable — and therefore illegal.


Prosecutors, defense disagree in closings on what constitutes an assault at Officer Edward Nero's trial
 

clownboy

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
26,087
Reaction score
10,860
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Just to point out.

If I put my hands on you without justification (self defense), and by accident you died, I would be charged with at least assault and more likely battery and possible manslaughter.

Why is a government official exempt from the same?

Because that "government official's" job is sometimes to put their hands upon you without what YOU consider justification. That's why.
 

jaeger19

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
31,625
Reaction score
8,567
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Because that "government official's" job is sometimes to put their hands upon you without what YOU consider justification. That's why.

Nope.. because they need to be justified in the eyes of the LAW. They don't get carte blanch because they are the government to lay their hands on me.. or my family and which ultimately causes my or my families death.

And yes.. if I put my hands on someone that's not justified and as a consequence they died.. I would be charged with at least assault and probably battery if not manslaughter.
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
39,850
Reaction score
8,960
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
And yes.. if I put my hands on someone that's not justified and as a consequence they died.. I would be charged with at least assault and probably battery if not manslaughter.
Not if the circumstances were the same as this case. So stop with with the absurd non-comparative comparisons.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,733
Reaction score
20,429
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Just to point out.

If I put my hands on you without justification (self defense), and by accident you died, I would be charged with at least assault and more likely battery and possible manslaughter.

Why is a government official exempt from the same?

Not a government official, but a law enforcement officer. And this individual is entitled to do it because the law says they are entitled to do it, period.
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
47,482
Reaction score
31,164
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The first officer to go to trial ended with a hung jury. Sounds like a really good chance that this cop will be found not guilty.

Appeared the charges were more about politics then finding a real crime - at least based on the evidence i am aware of.

"Gray broke his neck while riding unsecured in the back of a police van"

Nations where a detainee breaks his neck and later dies from the injury, while hidden from the public in a police vehicle, are typically known as "police states"; totalitarian regimes where the police have free reign to do what they will without consequence. I do not wish America to keep turning into such a state.




The charges were about there maybe being something wrong when a detainee enters a police van alive and ends up dead, particularly given the history of officers roughing suspects up by handcuffing them but not restraining them, then going on "rough rides" designed to have them slide around and bang into things in the back. (This, I suspect, will all be denied as "rumor")

Something was seriously wrong here. They didn't restrain him. The reason that the prosecution has trouble with things like this is called "the blue wall of silence." They keep their mouths shut and make sure there's no videos of what actually happened, and HEY PRESTO, suddenly the prosecution has a hard time making a case. This is specifically why people want bodycams on all cops.

Does this mean we should just jail them all because their refusal to snitch means we don't get any evidence? No. But we need some very serious changes at least. There is absolutely no reason why someone should end up with a fractured neck after a ride in a police vehicle, and nobody is able to shed any light on what happened. People don't just spontaneously break their necks.

How many people have broken their necks while riding in your car, eh? That's just not something that happens as a matter of pure unforeseeable accident.
 
Last edited:

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
47,482
Reaction score
31,164
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The prosecutor's whole argument comes down to what they believe was a 3 minute period of time being too long.

No, that's not the whole argument. There are different defendants, yes, but some of the focus is on their actions in placing him in the van handcuffed by not restrained so that it'd be very easy to fall of the metal bench if, say, you took a sharp turn or jammed on the breaks. There was also a dispute of whether they ignored requests by him for medical care.

But, we need police testimony for most of that, and they aren't going to rat each other out. (I also recall some earlier disgusting suggestion that Gray deliberately tried to injure himself for the purpose of claiming excessive force)




As I asked the other person: how often do you think people just spontaneously break their necks and die, in completely innocent circumstances?

They may have trouble proving who did what, but there's no way this is just some mysterious innocent happening.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,985
Reaction score
4,957
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
but some of the focus is on their actions in placing him in the van handcuffed by not restrained so that it'd be very easy to fall of the metal bench if, say, you took a sharp turn or jammed on the breaks.

The (very) new "order" to buckle wasn't a requirement. From recent testimony:

Capt. Justin Reynolds, a Baltimore police officer currently on medical leave, was certified as an expert in officer training, policies and procedures, and testified Wednesday that general orders are simply guidelines. He said officers always have discretion as to whether to follow them and noted the configuration of seat belts in the department's wagons are "spaghetti-like in two pieces" — making it virtually impossible to buckle in an uncooperative prisoner. Gray was agitated and kicking about in the van, according to testimony.
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
39,850
Reaction score
8,960
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
No, that's not the whole argument.
Apparently you are not paying attention.

Again.

Both sides agreed in their closings that nothing about Gray's initial stop, before he was handcuffed and moved, was illegal. They also agreed that no assault was committed after Gray was searched.

In doing so, prosecutors ceded any argument that Nero was wrong to pursue Gray after Rice radioed that he needed help chasing him. They also, without stating it outright, acknowledged that a knife found on Gray was illegal, therefore substantiating all of the touching of Gray after its discovery.

With those acknowledgements in place, both sides agreed that the period of time in question for the assault charge was only a matter of minutes.

Zayon said it was 1 minute, 28 seconds — which he said was a completely reasonable amount of time to detain someone under the law, even prior to finding probable cause for an arrest. Schatzow said the time was closer to 3 minutes, and that detaining someone for that long without at least attempting to determine justification for the stop was unreasonable — and therefore illegal.


Prosecutors, defense disagree in closings on what constitutes an assault at Officer Edward Nero's trial

Yes, the time period is the whole argument at this point.



There are different defendants, yes, but some of the focus is on their actions in placing him in the van handcuffed by not restrained so that it'd be very easy to fall of the metal bench if, say, you took a sharp turn or jammed on the breaks. There was also a dispute of whether they ignored requests by him for medical care.
Ah hello!
We are discussing the case against this Officer, not the other ones.
Or are you really not aware of that?

The whole case against this officer boils down to the information provided. And that is whether or not the argued time period of three minutes is too long.
That is if the Judge even agrees it was three minutes instead of the 1:28 it actually was.
If the the time period is found to be reasonable by this Judge nothing else flies. Capiche?
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
39,850
Reaction score
8,960
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
, but some of the focus is on their actions in placing him in the van handcuffed by not restrained so that it'd be very easy to fall of the metal bench if, say, you took a sharp turn or jammed on the breaks.
* (See #3 below).


There was also a dispute of whether they ignored requests by him for medical care.
Oh gawd!
Again, this is about this Officers involvement.

The report is that he asked for his inhaler. The Officer looked for it.



But, we need police testimony for most of that, and they aren't going to rat each other out.
Stop. You just can't suppose something is true without evidence to support it.


(I also recall some earlier disgusting suggestion that Gray deliberately tried to injure himself for the purpose of claiming excessive force)
1. Irrelevant to this Officer's actions.
2. Disgusting?
Clearly you do not know what disgusting is.
3. That is what a witness said prior to walking that portion back to protect himself from his neighbors. * But he did say (and never walked backed) that it was a smooth ride.
4. There is a guy in the back of your transport van purposely banging about enough that you have to pull over and further restrain him.
As he has a history of claiming injury for profit. That is a good indication of what he may have actually been trying to do isn't it?
And the injuries he sustained would not have let him bang about, so it happened in the van after he stopped banging about.


As I asked the other person: how often do you think people just spontaneously break their necks and die, in completely innocent circumstances?
WTF do you mean spontaneously?

Well this guy broke his neck by banging it into a padded wall.

He then was placed in an isolation cell, where he rammed his head into a wall and broke his neck.
Mentally ill man who broke neck in jail alleges in suit his rights were violated - latimes

In case you didn't know, breaking your neck during a slip and fall is even possible.


In this case he was restrained and was purposely banging about in the back of a moving van.
You do understand that means he was purposely moving around, right?
And yet you do not seem to think that it was more than likely he lost his footing because of his being restrained, slipping while trying to bang about causing his own injury.


They may have trouble proving who did what,
Who did what? Holy ****!
No one did anything except put him into the back of a transport van where he injured himself.
No one was with him in the compartment when he did it.


but there's no way this is just some mysterious innocent happening.
JFC! He injured himself.
 
Last edited:

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
You know there's a problem when the judges goes, "WTF?".
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,926
Reaction score
14,651
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
So all the rioting in Baltimore was over nothing?

Say it ain't so.
 

RetiredUSN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
26,614
Reaction score
13,547
Location
Norfolk Virginia area.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Freddie went to far with his injury for money, and and breaking his own neck this time. The prisoner in the van with him told the police that Freddie was banging his head, then conveniently changed his story before he hit the streets out of self preservation. The self promoting prosecutor prosecutor never had a case other than public emotion.

Freddie Gray Had History of Injuring Himself to Sue Cops | Frontpage Mag

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...d7da10-eec6-11e4-8666-a1d756d0218e_story.html

REPORT: Freddie Gray tried to hurt himself on purpose - Business Insider

Disputed Report: Freddie Gray Hurt Himself in Police Van? - NBC News

Witness says Freddie Gray was trying to hurt himself in Baltimore police van: Washington Post | Reuters

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/freddie-gray-injure-police-van-report-article-1.2204372
 

clownboy

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
26,087
Reaction score
10,860
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Nope.. because they need to be justified in the eyes of the LAW. They don't get carte blanch because they are the government to lay their hands on me.. or my family and which ultimately causes my or my families death.

And yes.. if I put my hands on someone that's not justified and as a consequence they died.. I would be charged with at least assault and probably battery if not manslaughter.


Oh bull****. There is no need to spin analogies or corollaries, what you can do as a private person just doesn't relate to someone hired by the community to police the community. His job justifies "putting his hands on someone", when it doesn't it goes to court and/or through the review process. In this case his job certainly did justify his actions.
 

Texmex

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
5,189
Reaction score
1,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Thug cops killed another citizen unnecessarily. Nothing new.
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
39,850
Reaction score
8,960
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Thug cops killed another citizen unnecessarily. Nothing new.
If you are speaking of this case, you are ignorant of the facts.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,985
Reaction score
4,957
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Sounds as if the third trial may not go prosecutor's way either:

Judge questions Freddie Gray 'rough ride' theory - Washington Times

A Baltimore judge on Monday questioned prosecutors’ theory that a police officer charged with murder in the death of Freddie Gray intentionally gave him a “rough ride” in a police van that caused the 25-year-old black man’s mortal injuries more than a year ago.

Prosecutors had used the phrase “rough ride” in their opening arguments of Officer Caesar Goodson’s trial earlier this month, but Deputy State’s Attorney Janice Bledsoe did not utter the term during closing arguments Monday.

Yet Judge Williams expressed skepticism about a surveillance video presented by prosecutors that showed Officer Goodson running a stop sign and making a wide turn before the van’s fourth stop. The judge said the van could have stopped at the sign beyond the view of the camera and noted that the van wasn’t traveling very fast.
Judge Williams said that Officer Goodson making a slow wide turn may have been safer for Gray than taking a turn sharply at a normal rate of speed.

We'll know Thursday...
 
Top Bottom