# Did Freddie Gray hurt himself?



## poppy

Another prisoner in the van said he could hear Gray slamming himself against the walls of the van. Anyone who has ever watched "COPS" knows angry prisoners sometimes slam their heads against car windows, hoods, etc. 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...d7da10-eec6-11e4-8666-a1d756d0218e_story.html


----------



## Cornhusker

That would be my guess, but far be it from the left to wait for the investigation before they send their hired vandals to destroy a city.


----------



## Doggonedog

Cornhusker said:


> That would be my guess, but far be it from the left to wait for the investigation before they send their hired vandals to destroy a city.


Et tu, Brute? Perhaps we all can wait for the completion of the investigation before uttering inflammatories such as: "far be it from the left to wait for the investigation before they send their hired vandals to destroy a city."


----------



## Laura Zone 5

Is this what human-kind has been reduced too?

Yeah, he was not a model citizen, but he was a human being, with constitutional rights.


----------



## MDKatie

His spine was nearly severed. I'm sorry, but that seems pretty hard to do yourself.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Doggonedog said:


> Et tu, Brute? Perhaps we all can wait for the completion of the investigation before uttering inflammatories such as: "far be it from the left to wait for the investigation before they send their hired vandals to destroy a city."


Really? Did you not see what happened? Same as Ferguson. 
Can you blame it on the far right?


----------



## arabian knight

Cornhusker said:


> That would be my guess, but far be it from the left to wait for the investigation before they send their hired vandals to destroy a city.


Yes he did this and it is the lefts fault for keeping this and others in front of the camera and lying to the American people. That is so wrong in todays society.
And social media is also to blame in getting others to be shipped in to act like the nuts they have become over the last few years..
This is the getting so much worse now that a not so white person is in th eWH He and others of his type are just adding coal to the fire and not going to those places and say STOP, Stop right now. Anymore and you will be in jail. Instead these black mayors are telling the police officers to Stand down????? What the heck is that all about? 
This liberal agenda that the left has is getting WAY out of hand. Way out of hand. It bears to be repeated.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

SO I get a ticket for 'improper use of a seatbelt" (it's fastened, just under my arm) BUT the POLICE do not fasten a seat belt for this kid??

Um, problem.

And this "prisoner" that "couldn't see" Freddie, "says" he was trying to hurt himself?
I wonder how much he's being paid to say that?
I wonder what kind of a "deal" he will get for saying that?
I wonder if he's white so we can MAKE this a black / white issue.........

All gullible people look up........


----------



## MDKatie

The people are ANGRY because Freddie was denied medical care and treated so roughly that his spine was nearly totally severed. He was denied the use of his inhaler, and was not properly restrained in the vehicle because the cops did not follow procedure. 

Yes, he had an arrest record, but he is still a human being and did not deserve to be treated that way. The police are trying to lie about it, and the citizens are angry about that. 

There are THOUSANDS of (peaceful) protestors, but the media only wants to show the rioters, which is a very small part of the group in B'more. Also, most of those rioters from Monday night were TEENAGERS, not home "hired thugs" or whatever. 

The media is NOT helping the situation. You cannot believe everything the media said, as they are only out for ratings and will skew the story to help their cause (to get more views and higher ratings). 

Why is it that conservatives will say how important it is that the soldiers we have are dying for our freedoms (one of those freedoms being the right to peaceably assemble) and then when a group of black citizens does that, everyone has an issue with it? Is that freedom only important when it's a cause they personally support? Hypocrites.

Leaders (black and white) have said they DO NOT support the riots, yet people don't hear that? They only want to hear what they want to hear. 

The rioters were only a VERY SMALL part of the protesting in Baltimore, yet that's what everyone focuses on. Keep the focus on the rioters, so the real issue gets forgotten about? Is that the deal?


----------



## arabian knight

Laura Zone 5 said:


> SO I get a ticket for 'improper use of a seatbelt" (it's fastened, just under my arm) BUT the POLICE do not fasten a seat belt for this kid??
> 
> Um, problem.
> 
> And this "prisoner" that "couldn't see" Freddie, "says" he was trying to hurt himself?
> I wonder how much he's being paid to say that?
> I wonder what kind of a "deal" he will get for saying that?
> I wonder if he's white so we can MAKE this a black / white issue.........
> 
> All gullible people look up........


Many police cars with that installed cage and hard plastic seats in the back do not have seat belts installed.
I would expect that if an accident were bad enough, a too-tightly-handcuffed-behind-the-back helpless individual trapped inside a single piece of rigid molded plastic could get hurt badly enough to sue.


----------



## MDKatie

arabian knight said:


> Many police cars with that installed cage and hard plastic seats in the back do not have seat belts installed.
> I would expect that if an accident were bad enough, a too-tightly-handcuffed-behind-the-back helpless individual trapped inside a single piece of rigid molded plastic could get hurt badly enough to sue.


He was not transported in a police car, it was a larger van/truck type vehicle. This is an excerpt from the article in the OP:



> *Batts has said officers violated policy by failing to properly restrain Gray.* But the president of the Baltimore police union noted that the policy mandating seat belts took effect April 3 and was e-mailed to officers as part of a package of five policy changes on April 9, three days before Gray was arrested.
> Gene Ryan, the police union president, said many officers arenât reading the new policies â updated to meet new national standards â because they think theyâre the same rules they already know, with cosmetic changes. The updates are supposed to be read out during pre-shift meetings.


----------



## gapeach

I am surprised that no one has not suggested that he might have been having seizures while in the van. Could the doctors who treated him tell if he had been having seizures?


----------



## AmericanStand

This report is false on the face of it.
You don't have o be to bright to know that you cant hear someone throwing themselves .
You can see it.
But the sound of one man throwing is the same as one man thrown.


----------



## 7thswan

I read something about this the other day, no way to confirm yet (for me,been busy). 1. he had prior spinal injury and a payout had been made, it is thought that his spine was very weak due to lead paint as a child.


----------



## 7thswan

Laura Zone 5 said:


> SO I get a ticket for 'improper use of a seatbelt" (it's fastened, just under my arm) BUT the POLICE do not fasten a seat belt for this kid??
> 
> Um, problem.
> 
> And this "prisoner" that "couldn't see" Freddie, "says" he was trying to hurt himself?
> I wonder how much he's being paid to say that?
> I wonder what kind of a "deal" he will get for saying that?
> I wonder if he's white so we can MAKE this a black / white issue.........
> 
> All gullible people look up........


There was a sort of large "box" inside the van. It was devided into 2 sections with a solid wall between the sections. First thing I thought when I saw it-it looked like toture for a clastophobic person.


----------



## mmoetc

It's telling that "leaks" from police sources tend to support the side of the story that places the police in the best light.


----------



## 7thswan

mmoetc said:


> It's telling that "leaks" from police sources tend to support the side of the story that places the police in the best light.


Go look at the video, he was able to pick up his feet to get in the van,very last few sec. you can see it.


----------



## Doggonedog

Tricky Grama said:


> Really? Did you not see what happened? Same as Ferguson.
> Can you blame it on the far right?


Read my post again. I'm clearing saying that the investigation should be completed prior to making any decisions on what happened.

Where did I blame the right? Actually, where did I mention the right at all? Can you please point it out? Thanks.


----------



## wr

gapeach said:


> I am surprised that no one has not suggested that he might have been having seizures while in the van. Could the doctors who treated him tell if he had been having seizures?


I'm not sure if an autopsy would be able to prove that seizures or if an autopsy that comprehensive was performed but I have been told that traumatic spinal cord injuries can cause seizures.


----------



## my3boys

MDKatie said:


> The people are ANGRY because Freddie was denied medical care and treated so roughly that his spine was nearly totally severed. He was denied the use of his inhaler, and was not properly restrained in the vehicle because the cops did not follow procedure.
> 
> Yes, he had an arrest record, but he is still a human being and did not deserve to be treated that way. The police are trying to lie about it, and the citizens are angry about that.
> 
> There are THOUSANDS of (peaceful) protestors, but the media only wants to show the rioters, which is a very small part of the group in B'more. Also, most of those rioters from Monday night were TEENAGERS, not home "hired thugs" or whatever.
> 
> The media is NOT helping the situation. You cannot believe everything the media said, as they are only out for ratings and will skew the story to help their cause (to get more views and higher ratings).
> 
> Why is it that conservatives will say how important it is that the soldiers we have are dying for our freedoms (one of those freedoms being the right to peaceably assemble) and then when a group of black citizens does that, everyone has an issue with it? Is that freedom only important when it's a cause they personally support? Hypocrites.
> 
> Leaders (black and white) have said they DO NOT support the riots, yet people don't hear that? They only want to hear what they want to hear.
> 
> The rioters were only a VERY SMALL part of the protesting in Baltimore, yet that's what everyone focuses on. Keep the focus on the rioters, so the real issue gets forgotten about? Is that the deal?


"Treated so roughly his spine was nearly totally severed"

And you know this how?

Btw, for a small group of rioters they did a heck of a lot of damage.

An awful lot of prejudicial assumptions made in your post about motives and what people were feeling and thinking. Truth is, you don't know what happened any more than the rest of us. Mere conjecture, not fact.

Are you as upset about the young black man who was murdered by one of Obama's "dreamers" as you are about this? He was just walking home from a friend's house.


----------



## poppy

mmoetc said:


> It's telling that "leaks" from police sources tend to support the side of the story that places the police in the best light.


Would it hurt or help the situation if police came out and said there is information that he hurt himself? Blacks would riot again if that happened because it does not fit their idea of what happened. Heck, a lot of blacks are still promoting the "hands up, don't shoot" garbage although it has been proved a lie. As for the "van" they hauled him away in, watch any cop show. Seldom are they buckled in. They have bench seats on both sides facing the center. They help the suspect into the van and he sits where he chooses and they shut the door. As far as tending to promote things to place people in a good light, no one tries harder than blacks in these cases. The suspect is always described as a good boy trying to improve his life by signing up for college, helping people in the neighborhood, donating body organs, or rescuing kitties. Then you see his rap sheet and realize something isn't right.


----------



## MDKatie

my3boys said:


> "Treated so roughly his spine was nearly totally severed"
> 
> And you know this how?


Well, let's see. Before he was in police custody, he was running. After the police got ahold of him, his spine was nearly severed. Get it? 

Poppy, please read the quote about how the policy called for passengers to be secured. The officers failed to follow policy. 

It does not matter if he *had* just committed a crime (nevermind the police report says he was arrested because he made eye contact and ran from the police) or if he was only suspected of committing a crime. Our officers are hired to serve and protect. We citizens deserve fair and equal treatment. You know, innocent until proven guilty.


----------



## arabian knight

my3boys said:


> "Treated so roughly his spine was nearly totally severed"
> 
> And you know this how?
> 
> Btw, for a small group of rioters they did a heck of a lot of damage.
> 
> An awful lot of prejudicial assumptions made in your post about motives and what people were feeling and thinking. Truth is, you don't know what happened any more than the rest of us. Mere conjecture, not fact.
> 
> Are you as upset about the young black man who was murdered by one of Obama's "dreamers" as you are about this? He was just walking home from a friend's house.


Ya well it takes some longer then some to get it through the thick sculls that you Don't resists arrest. You commit a crime and act like a nutcase YOU put YOUR OWN life in danger during a police arrest.
Course many think they can do anything they want to the police and that is not true. Do the Crime Do the Time and if your in a mindset that you are better and tell off and run and fight the officers you have another thing coming. 
And fighting is a sure way of getting hurt in the process, and sometimes Death Will happen, some sure seem to have a death wish when it comes to being arrested.


----------



## wr

Is it accepted as fact that the suspect asked for medical attention and that the police van made another stop on route to the police station that was not disclosed by the arresting officers?


----------



## arabian knight

is THIS what the left wants to happen?
there also in their thinking on so many things these days it is scary to say the least.
*Michael Moore Demands America âDisarm The Policeâ*


> Filmmaker Michael Moore demanded on Twitter Thursday that Americaâs police officers be disarmed and all African-Americans imprisoned for non-violent crimes be released.
> 
> Mooreâs demands came in response to the death of Freddie Gray, the 25-year-old man who dies two weeks ago while in police custody in Baltimore.


 Boy talk about







time this is it from that dude.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/30/michael-moore-demands-america-disarm-the-police/


----------



## wr

I think that's Michael Moore's opinion but I don't think he's been elected to speak for others.


----------



## Woolieface

Cornhusker said:


> That would be my guess, but far be it from the left to wait for the investigation before they send their hired vandals to destroy a city.


No doubt the vandals are hired, but the Right and the Left are just two wings on one dirty bird.


----------



## MDKatie

arabian knight said:


> Ya well it takes some longer then some to get it through the thick sculls that you Don't resists arrest. You commit a crime and act like a nutcase YOU put YOUR OWN life in danger during a police arrest.
> Course many think they can do anything they want to the police and that is not true. Do the Crime Do the Time and if your in a mindset that you are better and tell off and run and fight the officers you have another thing coming.
> And fighting is a sure way of getting hurt in the process, and sometimes Death Will happen, some sure seem to have a death wish when it comes to being arrested.


Um, and what did he do to get arrested? He made eye contact and ran from the police, and THEN they chased him. WHY? Because he ran? Is it a crime to run from the police before they even make contact with you? And when they do make contact, they're allowed to treat you however they want? 

And do the crime do the time? So you've already convicted him, in your mind. Guilty until proven innocent?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

7thswan said:


> I read something about this the other day, no way to confirm yet (for me,been busy). 1. he had prior spinal injury and a payout had been made, it is thought that his spine was very weak due to lead paint as a child.


There was no prior injury, and there was no payout.
He and his sister were supposed to get some money from a "lead exposure" suit that was dismissed due to failure to appear in court

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-gray-settlement-20150429-story.html

The statement from the other prisoner in the van is meaningless since he never saw anything , and he has a lot to gain by lying


----------



## Shrek

The footage that showed him being dragged to the paddy wagon van does not adequately indicate if he was intentionally protest dead weighting his legs or he was paralyzed at that time.

Also if the paddy van is not equipped with a cage camera as many are , there may be question if the officers buckled him into the 5 point harness and leg shackles normally used to keep paddy wagon chauffeured arrestees in their seat in the transport cage.

Perhaps the autopsy results will indicate how he was secured for transport and how his injury was caused.

Of all the witnesses, Gray is the only witness who will not change or alter his testimony and ultimately the corpse is the only witness who tells the entire truth, provided the medical examiner who it gives it's testimony to listens to the body closely enough and asks it the right addition questions if necessary.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

wr said:


> Is it accepted as fact that the suspect asked for medical attention and that the police van made another stop on route to the police station that was not disclosed by the arresting officers?


The only stop I know of was when they put the leg irons on him
Only the police know if he asked for treatment


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Um, and what did he do to get arrested?
> He made eye contact and ran from the police, and THEN they chased him. WHY? Because he ran?
> 
> Is it a crime to run from the police before they even make contact with you?
> 
> And when they do make contact, they're allowed to treat you however they want?


He was a known criminal and under indictment for drug possession.

He was in an area known for drug activity, and running is probable cause to assume he's committing a crime.

He had a history of fighting when arrested, and had been arrested many times

If he resisted when they caught him, that's a reason to use the needed force to take him into custody

http://www.inquisitr.com/2048788/freddie-gray-alleged-criminal-history-released-sparks-outrage/


> It has been reported that Gray has an extensive record with at least 18 arrests. However, all of the arrests did not lead to convictions. Gray pleaded guilty to a number of one-count charges, while others where eventually dropped.
> 
> March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
> 
> March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault
> 
> January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing
> 
> January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance,
> possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute
> 
> December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
> 
> December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance
> 
> August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing
> 
> January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana
> 
> September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape
> 
> April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation
> 
> July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute
> 
> March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
> 
> March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute
> 
> February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance
> 
> August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation
> 
> August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana
> 
> August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
> 
> July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)


----------



## gapeach

*UPDATE: Law enforcement sources say Freddie Gray suffered head injury in police transport van*

By Brad Bell ABC news

April 30, 2015 - 02:36 pm 
VIDEO at link:

Read more: http://www.wjla.com/articles/2015/0...lice-who-arrested-him-prob.html#ixzz3YpR8G0tX 

BALTIMORE, Md. (WJLA) -- An investigation into the death of Baltimore resident Freddie Gray has found no evidence that his fatal injuries were caused during the videotaped arrest and interaction with police officers, according to multiple law enforcement sources.
Continue reading


The sources spoke to ABC7 News after being briefed on the findings of a police report turned over to prosecutors on Thursday.


I have not heard this on tv but this seems to be a credible source.



​



​


----------



## kuriakos

> Also if the paddy van is not equipped with a cage camera as many are , there may be question if the officers buckled him into the 5 point harness and leg shackles normally used to keep paddy wagon chauffeured arrestees in their seat in the transport cage.


There is no question. The police admit they didn't seat belt him.


----------



## kuriakos

> He was in an area known for drug activity, and running is probable cause to assume he's committing a crime.


Incorrect. Running from police in a high crime area can produce reasonable suspicion. That is less than probable cause.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Shrek said:


> The footage that showed him being dragged to the paddy wagon van does not adequately indicate if he was intentionally protest dead weighting his legs or he was paralyzed at that time.
> 
> Also if the paddy van is not equipped with a cage camera as many are , there may be question if the officers buckled him into the 5 point harness and leg shackles normally used to keep paddy wagon chauffeured arrestees in their seat in the transport cage.
> 
> Perhaps the autopsy results will indicate how he was secured for transport and how his injury was caused.
> 
> Of all the witnesses, Gray is the only witness who will not change or alter his testimony and ultimately the corpse is the only witness who tells the entire truth, provided the medical examiner who it gives it's testimony to listens to the body closely enough and asks it the right addition questions if necessary.


Shrek, that's just what my DH said-I was watching the vid & said it appeared his legs were not working at that time & DH said you have no idea how many thugs do just that-expecting to be dragged to the paddywagon.
I guess I want to ask why it was so awful for the cops to chase & arrest him-he's a KNOWN FELON! Had many cases PENDING! 
I'm NOT going on the guilty til proven innocent but hey-if the smoke is all over, there's prolly fire.


----------



## arabian knight

kuriakos said:


> Incorrect. Running from police in a high crime area can produce reasonable suspicion. That is less than probable cause.


And so what if he wasn't seat belted WHEWRE was he going? He could get out, he was in a GAGE. If in a wreck and belted in being hand cuffed he really could be in trouble. After all buses don't have seat-belts, no seat belts in School buses either. Maybe there SHOULD BE but there isn't as they want the children to be able to GET OUT FAST in case of something happening.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

kuriakos said:


> Incorrect. Running from police in a high crime area can produce reasonable suspicion. That is less than probable cause.


Its close enough to detain him


----------



## kuriakos

arabian knight said:


> And so what if he wasn't seat belted WHEWRE was he going? He could get out, he was in a GAGE. If in a wreck and belted in being hand cuffed he really could be in trouble. After all buses don't have seat-belts, no seat belts in School buses either. Maybe there SHOULD BE but there isn't as they want the children to be able to GET OUT FAST in case of something happening.


That was an odd response to a post that said nothing about seat belts.


----------



## kuriakos

Bearfootfarm said:


> Its close enough to detain him


True. But they're very different standards so I was clarifying.


----------



## Kathy in MD

www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-gray-ticker-20150425-story.html#page=1



a time line on the arrest of freddie gray



from what i can see on judiciary records... freddie gray has one active case for drugs...it looks like he was out on a $5,000 bail...

police did not follow protocol&#8230;..he did not receive medical when he asked for it&#8230;.he was not belted in&#8230;.these protocol went in to effect weeks before his arrest&#8230;.

The paddy wagon is not equipped with cameras&#8230;.


----------



## poppy

Saw on the news that the report says he had a head wound that matched a bolt inside the police van. He could well have been slamming his head into the wall even if belted in. People do it belted in squad cars all the time.


----------



## mmoetc

poppy said:


> Saw on the news that the report says he had a head wound that matched a bolt inside the police van. He could well have been slamming his head into the wall even if belted in. People do it belted in squad cars all the time.


And the police have been known to leave a suspect cuffed and shackled but unsecured in the back of a vehicle and driving in such a way to cause the prisoner to be thrown about. Rapid stops and starts, cornering quickly, violent turns of the wheel, etc. The bottom line is that the moment someone is put into custody their health and safety become the responsibilty of the authorities holding them. At the very least the Baltimore PD failed in this fundamental responsibilty.


----------



## Vikestand

I feel terrible for Mr. gray he seems .......seemed like an outstanding citizen for this country. 

Nah no I don't.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

He was a human being, a United States Citizen, with Constitutional rights.

THE END.


----------



## kasilofhome

gapeach said:


> *UPDATE: Law enforcement sources say Freddie Gray suffered head injury in police transport van*
> 
> By Brad Bell ABC news
> 
> April 30, 2015 - 02:36 pm
> VIDEO at link:
> 
> Read more: http://www.wjla.com/articles/2015/0...lice-who-arrested-him-prob.html#ixzz3YpR8G0tX
> 
> BALTIMORE, Md. (WJLA) -- An investigation into the death of Baltimore resident Freddie Gray has found no evidence that his fatal injuries were caused during the videotaped arrest and interaction with police officers, according to multiple law enforcement sources.
> Continue reading
> 
> 
> The sources spoke to ABC7 News after being briefed on the findings of a police report turned over to prosecutors on Thursday.
> 
> 
> I have not heard this on tv but this seems to be a credible source.
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> ​





Quiet.....the body of Freddie is speaking.


Injury matches the bolt in the van....

Witness claiming the often arrested Freddie was self inflicting injuries.
Why would a person seek to inflict injury to himself while in police custody....

With the new climate change in the treatment of blacks receiving front page attention nation wide... I mean calls from the white house and good old all frendship acceptance. society dismisses the criminal activity to focus on police brutality so quick the that soon trials will be held on Facebook.. Is that now where we almost are.

Bad guys are learning to find a way to shift the blame on cops.


----------



## mmoetc

kasilofhome said:


> Quiet.....the body of Freddie is speaking.
> 
> 
> Injury matches the bolt in the van....
> 
> Witness claiming the often arrested Freddie was self inflicting injuries.
> Why would a person seek to inflict injury to himself while in police custody....
> 
> With the new climate change in the treatment of blacks receiving front page attention nation wide... I mean calls from the white house and good old all frendship acceptance. society dismisses the criminal activity to focus on police brutality so quick the that soon trials will be held on Facebook.. Is that now where we almost are.
> 
> Bad guys are learning to find a way to shift the blame on cops.


An injury that could have also happened during a "rough ride" to the police station. The bottom line is that the officers were responsible for the prisoner's health and safety from the minute they placed him in custody. Even if he hurt himself, and a bolt injury is far from a severed spine, they failed in that obligation.


----------



## Doggonedog

Laura Zone 5 said:


> He was a human being, a United States Citizen, with Constitutional rights.
> 
> THE END.


This post says it all.


----------



## poppy

mmoetc said:


> An injury that could have also happened during a "rough ride" to the police station. The bottom line is that the officers were responsible for the prisoner's health and safety from the minute they placed him in custody. Even if he hurt himself, and a bolt injury is far from a severed spine, they failed in that obligation.


No indication from the other suspect in the van that they were given a "rough ride". He could hear Gray hitting the van wall in the other compartment. There is video of the van driver stopping at least 3 times (some now say 4) to open the door and check on Gray, probably because he could hear him hitting the van wall too. A severed spine can also be a broken neck and it is entirely possible to break your own neck by slamming your head against something hard.


----------



## Doggonedog

poppy said:


> No indication from the other suspect in the van that they were given a "rough ride". He could hear Gray hitting the van wall in the other compartment. There is video of the van driver stopping at least 3 times (some now say 4) to open the door and check on Gray, probably because he could hear him hitting the van wall too. A severed spine can also be a broken neck and it is entirely possible to break your own neck by slamming your head against something hard.


It doesn't matter if (and that's a big if) Gray deliberately hurt himself in the van. The police were responsible for his well being from the moment they put him in the van. If he were properly restrained in a properly outfitted van he wouldn't have been able to hurt himself to the point where he (allegedly) was, correct?


----------



## mmoetc

poppy said:


> No indication from the other suspect in the van that they were given a "rough ride". He could hear Gray hitting the van wall in the other compartment. There is video of the van driver stopping at least 3 times (some now say 4) to open the door and check on Gray, probably because he could hear him hitting the van wall too. A severed spine can also be a broken neck and it is entirely possible to break your own neck by slamming your head against something hard.


Even if the suspect did manage to break his own neck (just like a good friend of mine once managed to bang his own head on the side of the patrol car door while being helped in) it is the responsibility of the arresting officers to ensure his safety. Did they?


----------



## Tricky Grama

Where is the autopsy report? Hasn't it been nearly a month?

Not that it would help. Had THREE for M.Brown & all showed there was NO "hands up don't shoot" yet idiots still rioted, looted, murdered.


----------



## mmoetc

poppy said:


> No indication from the other suspect in the van that they were given a "rough ride". He could hear Gray hitting the van wall in the other compartment. There is video of the van driver stopping at least 3 times (some now say 4) to open the door and check on Gray, probably because he could hear him hitting the van wall too. A severed spine can also be a broken neck and it is entirely possible to break your own neck by slamming your head against something hard.


You mean the suspect who was put in the van for the last part of the journey who, according to interviews I've seen this morning, didn't say what the police "leak" claims. And if you're stopping to check a prisoner's welfare three or four times wouldn't you think it prudent to buckle him in according to procedure during one of those stops. Simple question- did the police ensure his safety as they are obligated to do?


----------



## HDRider

mmoetc said:


> Even if the suspect did manage to break his own neck (just like a good friend of mine once managed to bang his own head on the side of the patrol car door while being helped in) it is the responsibility of the arresting officers to ensure his safety. Did they?


So, you and others are now saying that in no way could Gray bear any responsibility for his death, further, regardless of any possibilities and circumstances it IS the polices' fault?

Just so I understand your belief.

All that said, we do not have much, or any really, evidence to consider, but it sounds like no matter what, the police are at fault from where you sit.

But remember, a mistake might be negligent, but it is not murder.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

HDRider said:


> So, you and others are now saying that in no way could Gray bear any responsibility for his death, further, regardless of any possibilities and circumstances it IS the polices' fault?
> 
> Just so I understand your belief.
> 
> All that said, we do not have much, or any really, evidence to consider, but it sounds like no matter what, the police are at fault from where you sit.
> 
> But remember, a mistake might be negligent, but it is not murder.


If a drunk drive plows into my car and kills me, BUT his 'mistake' was not intentional / premeditated, then the drunk driver can "take a life" under the guise of "it was a mistake"?

NO

When he got in his car, loaded like a freight train, HE now bears 100% of the responsibility for killing someone because of his choices and actions.

SAME with the police.
If they stopped 4 times to "check on him" yet they never buckled him in?
Were they really stopping to 'check on him' or were they stopping to see if their 'rough ride' was making an impact on his behavior??

I don't care what a piece of crap he might of been, he was a human being.
He was a United States Citizen.
He is protected by the Constitution.


----------



## mmoetc

HDRider said:


> So, you and others are now saying that in no way could Gray bear any responsibility for his death, further, regardless of any possibilities and circumstances it IS the polices' fault?
> 
> Just so I understand your belief.
> 
> All that said, we do not have much, or any really, evidence to consider, but it sounds like no matter what, the police are at fault from where you sit.
> 
> But remember, a mistake might be negligent, but it is not murder.


The minute he was cuffed and shackled the responsibility for his health and safety shifted totally to the police. They were charged with making sure he couldn't hurt or kill himself. It's why simple measures like shoelaces being taken away are important. Whether his death was the result of negligence or maliciousness( likely some combination of both) the result was the same. The police didn't do their job and a man died. Be it murder, manslaughter or accidental death it likely could have been prevented had the police simply done their job.


----------



## kasilofhome

The media and the ilks of Al Sharpton have done a great job of profiting over police brutality. Criminal have faced injuries at the hands of caps by self inflicting injuries...He might have gone over board. Free will can kill.


----------



## HDRider

Laura Zone 5 said:


> If a drunk drive plows into my car and kills me, BUT his 'mistake' was not intentional / premeditated, then the drunk driver can "take a life" under the guise of "it was a mistake"?
> 
> NO
> 
> When he got in his car, loaded like a freight train, HE now bears 100% of the responsibility for killing someone because of his choices and actions.
> 
> SAME with the police.
> If they stopped 4 times to "check on him" yet they never buckled him in?
> Were they really stopping to 'check on him' or were they stopping to see if their 'rough ride' was making an impact on his behavior??
> 
> I don't care what a piece of crap he might of been, he was a human being.
> He was a United States Citizen.
> He is protected by the Constitution.


You are assuming way too much.

Not all homicides, or the killing of persons, are crimes. The definitions of homicide-related crimes will vary among jurisdictions, but there are key differences between the several types of crimes.

Murder involves malice, and some jurisdictions will include deaths caused by drunk driving within the definition of murder.

Manslaughter involves intent to kill, but not malice, or actions that are reckless, wanton and grossly negligent, which result in a personâs death, without intent to kill. Manslaughter offenses may be categorized by degree, or there may be a distinction between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter.

Some jurisdictions will have a lesser offense of criminally negligent homicide, in which a person caused another personâs death by driving a vehicle in a criminally negligent manner, but the circumstances did not amount to a manslaughter or a murder offense.

http://criminal.lawyers.com/dui-dwi/death-due-to-dui-dwi.html


----------



## HDRider

mmoetc said:


> The minute he was cuffed and shackled the responsibility for his health and safety shifted totally to the police. They were charged with making sure he couldn't hurt or kill himself. It's why simple measures like shoelaces being taken away are important. Whether his death was the result of negligence or maliciousness( likely some combination of both) the result was the same. The police didn't do their job and a man died. Be it murder, manslaughter or accidental death it likely could have been prevented had the police simply done their job.


So the police are guilty of murder?


----------



## Ziptie

So, if this guy is resisting arrest and throwing himself around in the back of the van. Would you want to try and get in their to buckle him in? If they did it problably would have taken a couple of them and they would have gotten in troble for holding him down to it. Darned if you do darned if you don't.:surrender:


----------



## Laura Zone 5

In the world we live in today.....assumptions rule.

Will we ever get the real autopsy report? Or will we get what the "powers that be" allow us to see.

Will we ever know the truth? Or will be get some sugar dripping story that our itching ears want to hear?

Will we ever know what really happened to that boy? Or will cover ups abound, money pass hands so stories are told a certain way?

You can argue the 'language' of the law all day.
And based upon "language" you are right.

But the heart of the matter is this: Humans in authority; power....., put another human being in a situation that cost him his life.
A group of humans, in authority, took the life of another human being that was cuffed and unable to defend / protect himself.

At the end of the day this is a heart issue.


----------



## mmoetc

Ziptie said:


> So, if this guy is resisting arrest and throwing himself around in the back of the van. Would you want to try and get in their to buckle him in? If they did it problably would have taken a couple of them and they would have gotten in troble for holding him down to it. Darned if you do darned if you don't.:surrender:


That would be their job. Just like any job there are good parts and bad parts. Many people on these forums have offered the advice to others that if you don't like your job find another. Why should policing be different? Had they properly restrained him, per procedure, we wouldn't be having this conversation.


----------



## mmoetc

HDRider said:


> So the police are guilty of murder?


Maybe, maybe not. I do feel that they were guilty of some negiligence that led to the death of another human being.


----------



## kasilofhome

Stupidity trying to frame the cops for brutality or just lacking the ability to control himself from acting out...like a child toss a temper tantrum he might has caused his own death..


Let's be better than our constitutional lawyer president and wait for the facts before convicting any one.

I have said it before but trial by Facebook is not the American way.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

As a Believer, and Follower of Jesus Christ........I stand by this:

He was a human being.
He was an American Citizen
He has Constitution Rights.

He was Created, in the Image of God.
His choices, lifestyle, etc was just that.....his choices. (free will)
But, that boy was still, Created in the Image of God.

I don't expect those who do not acknowledge God, as the Creator, to understand, or agree. BUT those who Claim Him as their God......cannot in good conscience, excuse this.


----------



## kasilofhome

And I respect that God gave him freewill ....the greatest gift as without it there would be no connection between how we choose to live and how we fail thus how important grace of God is.

Evangelism is now approved.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

Bearfootfarm said:


> He was a known criminal and under indictment for drug possession.
> 
> He was in an area known for drug activity, and running is probable cause to assume he's committing a crime.
> 
> He had a history of fighting when arrested, and had been arrested many times
> 
> If he resisted when they caught him, that's a reason to use the needed force to take him into custody
> 
> http://www.inquisitr.com/2048788/freddie-gray-alleged-criminal-history-released-sparks-outrage/
> 
> It has been reported that Gray has an extensive record with at least 18 arrests. However, all of the arrests did not lead to convictions. Gray pleaded guilty to a number of one-count charges, while others where eventually dropped.
> 
> March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
> 
> March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault
> 
> January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing
> 
> January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance,
> possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute
> 
> December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
> 
> December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance
> 
> August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing
> 
> January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana
> 
> September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape
> 
> April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation
> 
> July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute
> 
> March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
> 
> March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute
> 
> February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance
> 
> August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation
> 
> August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana
> 
> August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
> 
> July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)


1 assault charge.
The rest, non violent charges.
Most charges dropped.

Was that assault charge tacked on because cops were sick of picking him up?
Tried to make him look like more than a petty drug pusher so they could FINALLY get him locked up?

At any rate, the amount of force to take this kid down, seems excessive, on paper.
He could have escalated. 
He could have been on drugs, and became violent.
He could have been sober, and just ticked off, and violent.

We were not there.
We do not have all the facts.
BUT if you go by what's on "paper".....the force to take him down, seems excessive.
HOWEVER, I am not a police officer, I do not play one on TV.
I do not live the life they live.

For God's sake, I just want to see truth, and justice.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

kasilofhome said:


> And I respect that God gave him freewill ....the greatest gift as without it there would be no connection between how we choose to live and how we fail thus how important grace of God is.
> 
> Evangelism is now approved.


It is NOT evangilism. I am not trying to 'convert' anyone.
I am stating WHO I AM.
Why I chose the opinion I do.


> I don't expect those who do not acknowledge God, as the Creator, to understand, or agree.


It's no different than saying "I am _____ and this is why I see things the way I see things" (woman, man, black, green, straight, gay, martian, human)


----------



## where I want to

Seems that some choose to forgive any mistake of the deceased while simultaneously refusing to forgive any mistake of the police. While some are willing to forgive any mistake of the police while refusing to forgive any mistake of the deceased. Both based on their internal personal issues rather than facts or even understanding. 
Is it possible that both bear some fault? 
I wonder how much of the delay in disclosure has been due to the reactions in the Ferguson and previous incidents where anything presented in defense of the police is called character assassination and is just more cause for riot? 
As someone previously said, whatever is done is just an excuse for more violence. Because, like here, many are not prepared to restrain themselves to wait for what facts there are to come. Facts are not going to get in the way of venting and demands.


----------



## Tricky Grama

I agreed w/most, Laura, but this man was DEFINETLEY NOT a "kid". Already at 25 a hardened criminal.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

Tricky Grama said:


> I agreed w/most, Laura, but this man was DEFINETLEY NOT a "kid". Already at 25 a hardened criminal.



25 is a 'kid'.....cause I'm old!! 
Young man. That would be a better term.
Young man.

Yes, he chose a lifestyle of crime. 
Yes, he was a repeat offender.
Yes, he was charged with a lot of crimes, and convicted of a few.
BUT he, by his actions, showed society, that he was choosing to be a criminal. He, by his actions, showed no remorse, and no desire to change / rehabilitate.

All of those are facts.

At 25, he was adult enough to make choices. He chose.

But we have courts, no matter how broken or corrupt they may or may not be, we have courts, judges, lawyers. We have laws, rules, and a Constitution.

No man (or woman, or collective group of humans) have the right to circumvent the system and meet out what they feel is "justified".
Be that a 'rough ride'.
Be that "allowing an unrestrained, cuffed individual to injure himself"
Be that "an extra 'umph' on the take down"
ETC.......

I get the frustration of officers doing their job, putting their lives on the line for crap pay, only to have the courts, judges, lawyers, put the jack holes back on the streets.......I cannot imagine the level of frustration.

But no one, not police officers, not neighborhood watch leaders, not anyone has the right to take (directly or indirectly) another human beings life.
Not without consequences.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Seems to me, that if he'd been convicted & sentenced & incarcerated-long ago- this would not have happened...


----------



## where I want to

Since the investigation is not finished, is it possible to say that there will not be consequences? 
For many instant "eye for an eye" action is what they call justice. No context or investigation needed. Just vengence against the hated ones.


----------



## Bellyman

The older I get, the more I'm inclined to reserve judgement. Almost every time I spout off in judgement, something new comes out that casts a whole new light on the situation sometimes radically affecting my own view of that previous judgement. 

We are NEVER given all of the facts. And we are often led to believe things that just are not so. For instance. Anyone remember the Trayvon Martin thing that was in the news not so long ago? Anyone remember the picture that the media used of him time and time and time again? It was a picture of him as a 12 year old, looking very innocent. Trayvon was not a kid. He was 17 years old, almost 6' tall and weight around 160 pounds. (Reports vary.) Deception? Maybe. Distorting the facts? I think so. FWIW, I don't buy Zimmerman as all "pure and innocent" either. He just happened to survive.

Are there rogue cops? Sure. Are there people that get arrested that make it worse by fighting? Sure. Do innocent people get blamed for things they don't do? Sure. Not everything is as it seems. Believe only 1/4 of what you hear and 1/2 of what you see... and maybe that's too generous. There are way too many lies and half truths to get all that excited about things we just don't know about.


----------



## gapeach

The State's Attorney, Marilyn Mosely, is very impressive. It sounds like she has all the evidience in order and is going to go with it.


----------



## MDKatie

6 Police Officers Charged, 1 With Murder, in Freddie Gray Death



> Gray's death was ruled a homicide. He died April 19 of a severe and critical neck injury he suffered from being handcuffed, shackled by his feet and unsecured inside a police van during his arrest a week earlier, Mosby said Friday, after getting his autopsy report from the coroner.
> 
> Three other officers &#8212; Officer William Porter, Lt. Brian Rice and Sgt. Alicia White &#8212; were charged with involuntary manslaughter, and the other two &#8212; Officer Garrett Miller and Officer Edward Nero &#8212; were charged with second-degree intentional assault.
> 
> *Gray was "illegally arrested,"* Mosby said. She said *police had failed to establish probable cause for his arrest*, and *the knife he had when arrested was legal* and was not a switchblade.


----------



## HDRider

Officer Caesar Goodson Jr., 45, who was the driver of a police van that carried Gray through the streets of Baltimore, was charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter, second-degree assault, two vehicular manslaughter charges and misconduct in office.

Officer William Porter, 25, was charged with involuntary manslaughter, second-degree assault and misconduct in office.

Lt. Brian Rice, 41, was charged with involuntary manslaughter, second-degree assault and misconduct in office.

Sgt. Alicia White, 30, was charged with involuntary manslaughter, second-degree assault and misconduct in office.

Officer Edward Nero, 29, was charged with second-degree assault and misconduct in office.

Officer Garrett Miller, 26, was charged with second-degree assault, misconduct in office and false imprisonment.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...mosby-presser-0502-20150501-story.html#page=1


----------



## where I want to

Well, now justice itself will have difficult issues to answer.


----------



## HDRider

Laura Zone 5 said:


> In the world we live in today.....assumptions rule.
> 
> Will we ever get the real autopsy report? Or will we get what the "powers that be" allow us to see.
> 
> Will we ever know the truth? Or will be get some sugar dripping story that our itching ears want to hear?
> 
> Will we ever know what really happened to that boy? Or will cover ups abound, money pass hands so stories are told a certain way?
> 
> You can argue the 'language' of the law all day.
> And based upon "language" you are right.
> 
> But the heart of the matter is this: Humans in authority; power....., put another human being in a situation that cost him his life.
> A group of humans, in authority, took the life of another human being that was cuffed and unable to defend / protect himself.
> 
> At the end of the day this is a heart issue.


I would consider choosing assumptions over facts folly.

It sounds like you are determined to "assume" the worst.


----------



## gapeach

I do wonder what the races of the charged policemen are?


----------



## poppy

mmoetc said:


> You mean the suspect who was put in the van for the last part of the journey who, according to interviews I've seen this morning, didn't say what the police "leak" claims. And if you're stopping to check a prisoner's welfare three or four times wouldn't you think it prudent to buckle him in according to procedure during one of those stops. Simple question- did the police ensure his safety as they are obligated to do?


Ummm...the police have recordings of his original statement. Did you hear the guy speak? He is afraid of being killed for telling his story and trying to backtrack a bit in an attempt to keep blacks from killing him. Banging your head against a van wall can be done whether buckled or not. Yes, the witness got in the van during the latter part of the ride but his story proves Gray was not injured at that time or he would not have been banging his head around with a broken neck.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> Yes, the witness got in the van during the latter part of the ride but his story proves Gray was not injured at that time or he would not have been banging his head around with a broken neck.


But he claimed that the police mischaracterized his statement, in two separate interviews.

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2015/...the-van-with-freddie-gray-breaks-his-silence/
http://www.vox.com/2015/5/1/8528431/freddie-gray-washington-post

Your opinion is evidently based on a false police statement. News people were skeptical of the story from the start. I saw Matt Lauer asking how the other prisoner could know that with a metal barrier between them. I think it was a lie designed to cover up police misconduct.


----------



## painterswife

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...y-s-arrest-illegal-knife-carrying-lawful.html

The cops will be charged with murder.


----------



## wr

poppy said:


> Yes, the witness got in the van during the latter part of the ride but his story proves Gray was not injured at that time or he would not have been banging his head around with a broken neck.


Or, it could mean that he was suffering from seizures from, which can occur after a significant spinal cord or head injury.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> Ummm...the police have recordings of his original statement. Did you hear the guy speak? He is afraid of being killed for telling his story and trying to backtrack a bit in an attempt to keep blacks from killing him. Banging your head against a van wall can be done whether buckled or not. Yes, the witness got in the van during the latter part of the ride but his story proves Gray was not injured at that time or he would not have been banging his head around with a broken neck.


The police aren't going to get out of this by suggesting that the injury was self-inflicted. They did too many things wrong this time. The arrested him without probable cause that he had violated any law, they failed to summon medical help when he asked for help, and they deliberately roughed him up.

Those cops are in a lot of trouble. Someone needs to clean house at that police department, not that it will do much good.


----------



## arabian knight

painterswife said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...y-s-arrest-illegal-knife-carrying-lawful.html
> 
> The cops will be charged with murder.


Ya right and I have got water front property in Az.
They did NOT shoot him, They did NOT get in the back and beat him to death.
They were in no way decided AHEAD of time look lets just put him in without belting and see if he will KILL Himself. There AS to be Intentional Thought behind this. And so far not one shred of evidence says they murdered him.
There will be NO murder charges 
And this talk of all these changes is JUST TO STOP THE RIOTS and nothing more then Lip Service~!


----------



## Nevada

arabian knight said:


> There will be NO murder charges


Wrong. One cop is charged with murder and three others are charged with manslaughter.

Any more predictions?


----------



## poppy

Charging them and convicting them are two different things. The black prosecutor is no doubt filing all these charges to appease the rioters in Baltimore. However, there is still a lot of support for the cops even among blacks and we haven't heard their defense yet. To say Gray did not deserve to be arrested is probably a stretch, depending on their state laws. To look at a cop and take off running is a felony in most places. It's called eluding. I doubt any jury will convict the cops of any serious crime.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

gapeach said:


> The State's Attorney, Marilyn *Mosely*, is very impressive. It sounds like she has all the evidience in order and is going to go with it.


The deceased's lawyer is one of her largest campaign contributors.
She needs to recuse herself
http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/28949518/prosecutor-charges-6-baltimore-officers-in-grays-death


----------



## HDRider

poppy said:


> Charging them and convicting them are two different things. The black prosecutor is no doubt filing all these charges to appease the rioters in Baltimore. However, there is still a lot of support for the cops even among blacks and we haven't heard their defense yet. To say Gray did not deserve to be arrested is probably a stretch, depending on their state laws. To look at a cop and take off running is a felony in most places. It's called eluding. I doubt any jury will convict the cops of any serious crime.


Right... 

No doubt, they have cop probs in Baltimore, and we have cop probs everywhere else. You can call me master of the obvious...


----------



## AmericanStand

The fact that more than one charge against him has been dropped leads me to believe that the cops or at least one cop has some sort of a vendetta against this man.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> Charging them and convicting them are two different things. The black prosecutor is no doubt filing all these charges to appease the rioters in Baltimore. However, there is still a lot of support for the cops even among blacks and we haven't heard their defense yet. To say Gray did not deserve to be arrested is probably a stretch, depending on their state laws. To look at a cop and take off running is a felony in most places. It's called eluding. I doubt any jury will convict the cops of any serious crime.


Honestly, the charges seem a little heavy handed. If charges happened I was expecting to see 1 or 2 cops charged with serious crimes, and maybe less serious charges for a few more. Seeing 4 cops charged with murder or manslaughter is more than I was expecting. We may see some acquittals on some of the serious charges as a result. If they get guilty verdicts for most of those charges it will send a strong message to police.

I'm disturbed that more isn't being made out of Gray being arrested and mistreated without probable suspicion of anything. That points to a systemic problem in the department.


----------



## AmericanStand

poppy said:


> his story proves Gray was not injured at that time or he would not have been banging his head around with a broken neck.



Buy what logic could that be true ?
The only thing that his statement proves is that he is a liar.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> The fact that more than one charge against him has been dropped leads me to believe that the cops or at least one cop has some sort of a vendetta against this man.


It's not uncommon for multiple charges to be filed in drug cases, and then dropping several of them if there is a guilty plea or conviction on just one.


----------



## hardrock

Grays neck was broken and his windpipe crushed when the 230lb cop 
was on top of him several minutes, with his knee on his neck, grinding him into the pavement

The injury became worse as he was denied treatment and hauled around in the van.

His legs were not working when he was dragged to the van.

The arrest was illegal.

I wonder if the cops, when arrested, received the same "knee to the neck"
treatment?


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> It's not uncommon for multiple charges to be filed in drug cases, and then dropping several of them if there is a guilty plea or conviction on just one.



Yes That helps prove what I said. I've never seen a charge dropped that was a easy conviction and never even heard of dropping charges after getting a conviction.


----------



## gapeach

Bearfootfarm said:


> The deceased's lawyer is one of her largest campaign contributors.
> She needs to recuse herself
> http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/28949518/prosecutor-charges-6-baltimore-officers-in-grays-death


When I posted this, _The State's Attorney, Marilyn *Mosely*, is very impressive. It sounds like she has all the evidience in order and is going to go with it, 
_I did not know this fact about her and that she is on her way up politically.
I agree with you ,BFF.


----------



## HDRider

hardrock said:


> Grays neck was broken and his windpipe crushed when the 230lb cop
> was on top of him several minutes, with his knee on his neck, grinding him into the pavement
> 
> The injury became worse as he was denied treatment and hauled around in the van.
> 
> His legs were not working when he was dragged to the van.
> 
> The arrest was illegal.
> 
> *I wonder if the cops, when arrested, received the same "knee to the neck"
> treatment?*



Two wrongs blah, blah, blah...


----------



## kuriakos

> To look at a cop and take off running is a felony in most places. It's called eluding.


Absolutely not true anywhere in the U.S.


----------



## my3boys

MDKatie said:


> Well, let's see. Before he was in police custody, he was running. After the police got ahold of him, his spine was nearly severed. Get it?
> 
> Poppy, please read the quote about how the policy called for passengers to be secured. The officers failed to follow policy.
> 
> It does not matter if he *had* just committed a crime (nevermind the police report says he was arrested because he made eye contact and ran from the police) or if he was only suspected of committing a crime. Our officers are hired to serve and protect. We citizens deserve fair and equal treatment. You know, innocent until proven guilty.


And even after an investigation and charges filed, how his spinal cord was severed still goes unanswered. That means there is still no proof. No one knows for sure what happened yet, and may never know, including you.

And you are still making accusations based on your own prejudices, political views, and what you hope is true.

Guess what, those policemen are innocent until proven guilty too.


----------



## Tricky Grama

hardrock said:


> Grays neck was broken and his windpipe crushed when the 230lb cop
> was on top of him several minutes, with his knee on his neck, grinding him into the pavement
> 
> The injury became worse as he was denied treatment and hauled around in the van.
> 
> His legs were not working when he was dragged to the van.
> 
> The arrest was illegal.
> 
> I wonder if the cops, when arrested, received the same "knee to the neck"
> treatment?


I, too, thought he was injured b/4 being thrown into the van. 

But I doubt the cops ran from the arresting officers, so you last statement is kinda telling...


----------



## Nevada

my3boys said:


> Guess what, those policemen are innocent until proven guilty too.


The cops will get the benefit of innocent until proven guilty, but what about Gray's innocence?


----------



## painterswife

Tricky Grama said:


> I, too, thought he was injured b/4 being thrown into the van.
> 
> But I doubt the cops ran from the arresting officers, so you last statement is kinda telling...


Running from the cops does not merit any sort of serious injuries


----------



## where I want to

Nevada said:


> The cops will get the benefit of innocent until proven guilty, but what about Gray's innocence?


When you decide to bring him to trial, you can answer that yourself. The charges indicated that there was no basis for the arrest. That is part of what will be determined in court as far as the police are involved.


----------



## Nevada

where I want to said:


> When you decide to bring him to trial, you can answer that yourself. The charges indicated that there was no basis for the arrest. That is part of what will be determined in court as far as the police are involved.


I wonder why the cops didn't give Gray the benefit of investigation or trial. You seem to think that's pretty important for cops, so why not the rest of us?


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> The cops will get the benefit of innocent until proven guilty, but what about Gray's innocence?


Your conviction rate is pretty dismal!! Everyone you hoped and prayed would be found guilty, weren't! :shocked:


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> I wonder why the cops didn't give Gray the benefit of investigation or trial. You seem to think that's pretty important for cops, so why not the rest of us?


Don't run away! 

What would have happened if he just did what the cops asked? They knew him and the criminal he was. Again, let's see what the trial says! Why jump to conclusions?


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> What would have happened if he just did what the cops asked?


How do we know he didn't cooperate? The video indicated he could have been in medical distress, and we have to take the word of the cops for what he said.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> How do we know he didn't cooperate? The video indicated he could have been in medical distress, and we have to take the word of the cops for what he said.


So you don't trust cops? Let's do the reasonable thing and wait for the trial!


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> So you don't trust cops? Let's do the reasonable thing and wait for the trial!


Trust them? They're charged with murder! You don't think they'll say what they have to say to defend themselves? How much can you really trust people who are charged with murder?

Besides, we already know that they've lied. Did they tell the truth about Gray's knife? Did they tell the truth about how many stops the van made?


----------



## AmericanStand

JeffreyD said:


> Don't run away!
> 
> 
> 
> What would have happened if he just did what the cops asked? They knew him and the criminal he was. Again, let's see what the trial says! Why jump to conclusions?



Wait I thought he ran when he saw the cops ? You know, BEFORE they asked him to do anything ?
Is jogging a crime punishable by death in Baltimore. ?
I don't know if they still do it but in the 60s they would pull up to a group of us kids and just start wailing on us. 
We always ran as soon as we saw a squad car on the street. 
Strangely cops walking a beat were always friendly.


----------



## wendle

In a video somebody mentioned he was tazed. If that's the case, I wonder if the fall could have severed his spinal cord. If that happened then it shouldn't be the fault of the police officers. I could see it potentially causing some rethinking on using tazers though. Either way there is still absolutely no excuse for terrorism/riots in our cities. Those people are also criminals. I was not surprised when Hillary jumped in with her speech talking about how so many minorities are treated unfairly by cops. Way to fuel the fire.


----------



## wendle

Just found this. 
A black officer driving the van is charged with second degree murder. I'm still trying to figure out why the whole deal is turning into another race issue. http://news.yahoo.com/six-baltimore-officers-charged-death-gray-one-murder-004330690.html


----------



## Nevada

wendle said:


> Just found this.
> A black officer driving the van is charged with second degree murder. I'm still trying to figure out why the whole deal is turning into another race issue. http://news.yahoo.com/six-baltimore-officers-charged-death-gray-one-murder-004330690.html


This isn't a race issue, it's a police issue. The detention van driver just happens to be black.


----------



## wendle

So why are they going on and on about police treating black people different, especially Hillary. I can understand they need to look into what exactly happened to the guy. They also need to charge the police officers if they are at fault. However this is no reason for yet another riot. There was a white guy killed by officers a while back not too far from where I live. No police officers were considered at fault, and there were no riots. Riots are not just hurting the police officers, but the local businesses and residents.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> Trust them? They're charged with murder! You don't think they'll say what they have to say to defend themselves? How much can you really trust people who are charged with murder?
> 
> Besides, we already know that they've lied. Did they tell the truth about Gray's knife? Did they tell the truth about how many stops the van made?


Oh, you mean the cops in Baltimore, the liberal bastion of greatness. I was talking about cops in general.

So, you've decided on your own that these Baltimore cops are guilty without the benefit of a trial? Really? Well, I'm not surprised. You said the same things about Zimmerman and Brown and you were wrong about them.


----------



## MoonRiver

I think the police are all getting off. Maybe one or 2 of them will be found guilty of a minor charge, but no 2nd degree murder. The city and police department will be sued and settle for a few million.

Gray ran from an alley where he had previously been arrested for selling narcotics. I wonder what he did with them? Was he able to toss them as he was running or did he swallow them? Or maybe we should believe he ran from the police for no reason at all.



> &#8220;This is a very sad day for justice in the United States, in Baltimore and in Maryland,&#8221; Dershowitz said. &#8220;Today had nothing to do with justice. Today was crowd control. Everything was motivated by a threat of riot and a desire to prevent riots.&#8221;
> &#8220;*There is no plausible, hypothetical, conceivable case for murder* under the facts as we now know them. You might say conceivably, there is a case for manslaughter,&#8221; he continued
> He added, &#8220;*My prediction&#8212;they have overplayed their hand. It is unlikely they&#8217;ll get any convictions in this case as a result of this and if they do there is a good possibility they will get reversed on appeal.&#8221;*


http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015...against-baltimore-cops-a-sad-day-for-justice/


----------



## wendle

Here is Hillary jumping on the race bandwagon. [ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R649Kta0Kjg[/ame]


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> Yes That helps prove what I said. I've never seen a charge dropped that was a easy conviction and never even heard of dropping charges after getting a conviction.


Charges are often dropped as a part of plea bargains.
Gray was out on bail awaiting his next trial


----------



## JeffreyD

AmericanStand said:


> Wait I thought he ran when he saw the cops ? You know, BEFORE they asked him to do anything ?
> Is jogging a crime punishable by death in Baltimore. ?
> I don't know if they still do it but in the 60s they would pull up to a group of us kids and just start wailing on us.
> We always ran as soon as we saw a squad car on the street.
> Strangely cops walking a beat were always friendly.


Jogging...no....running from the police...yeah!


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> This isn't a race issue, it's a police issue. The detention van driver just happens to be black.


Sharpton has proved you wrong!


----------



## Bearfootfarm

hardrock said:


> Grays neck was broken and his windpipe crushed when the 230lb cop
> was on top of him several minutes, with his knee on his neck, grinding him into the pavement
> 
> The injury became worse as he was denied treatment and hauled around in the van.
> 
> His legs were not working when he was dragged to the van.
> 
> The arrest was illegal.
> 
> I wonder if the cops, when arrested, received the same "knee to the neck"
> treatment?


So how do you know about a "knee to the neck"?

It's not in any video I've seen, and all the official reports say he was injured in the van


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> So, you've decided on your own that these Baltimore cops are guilty without the benefit of a trial?


I did? When did I say that?

Why did you accuse me of saying that?


----------



## Nevada

Bearfootfarm said:


> It's not in any video I've seen, and all the official reports say he was injured in the van


Then the charges sound correct. It was the van drive who got charged with murder.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> I did? When did I say that?
> 
> Why did you accuse me of saying that?


Because of all the things you've said here accusing them.

Start with this:

"Trust them? They're charged with murder! You don't think they'll say what they have to say to defend themselves? How much can you really trust people who are charged with murder?

Besides, we already know that they've lied. Did they tell the truth about Gray's knife? Did they tell the truth about how many stops the van made?"

Want me to post more of your quotes?


----------



## mmoetc

The officers will get to tell their version of the events. Freddy Gray won't.


----------



## Cornhusker

Nevada said:


> The cops will get the benefit of innocent until proven guilty, but what about Gray's innocence?


He had a rap sheet a mile long.
"Innocent" isn't a word any thinking person would put next to his name.
Liberals and other racists however would think he's a victim and will post his 5th grade picture all over the media.
Bigots of the left miss no opportunity to divide this country.
Obama being the worst.


----------



## JeffreyD

mmoetc said:


> The officers will get to tell their version of the events. Freddy Gray won't.


What about those white folks killed by the cops, they won't get to tell their side either! Why fixate on a known criminal? Do you not care about all those others?


----------



## JeffreyD

Cornhusker said:


> He had a rap sheet a mile long.
> "Innocent" isn't a word any thinking person would put next to his name.
> Liberals and other racists however would think he's a victim and will post his 5th grade picture all over the media.
> Bigots of the left miss no opportunity to divide this country.
> Obama being the worst.


Innocent like Brown was? :shocked:


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> Because of all the things you've said here accusing them.
> 
> Start with this:
> 
> "Trust them? They're charged with murder! You don't think they'll say what they have to say to defend themselves? How much can you really trust people who are charged with murder?
> 
> Besides, we already know that they've lied. Did they tell the truth about Gray's knife? Did they tell the truth about how many stops the van made?"
> 
> Want me to post more of your quotes?


Well, they arrested someone without probable suspicion, inflicted fatal injuries, then lied about it. Their word is suspect at this point.

I'm sorry, but I'm not responsible for the trouble they're in. They're responsible for their own trouble.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> Well, they arrested someone without probably suspicion, inflicted fatal injuries, then lied about it. Their word is suspect at this point.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I'm not responsible for the trouble they're in. They're responsible for their own trouble.


Never said YOU were responsible, he ran from them, that's probable cause. He was NOT out for a jog as some wish to believe. And, i agree that the cops need to go to trial. They will be found innocent or guilty by a jury of their peers. Exactly the way it should be done. One would think that the race baiting liberals would have a clue by now, considering all the times they've been totally wrong, don't you think!


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> Never said YOU were responsible, he ran from them, that's probable cause.


Probably cause to stop & question him, but there was no probable cause for arrest.


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> Innocent like Brown was? :shocked:


This time the victim was arrested for carrying a legal pocket knife.


----------



## kuriakos

> he ran from them, that's probable cause.


Again, this is not correct. Running from the police is not probable cause. It can give them reasonable suspicion, which is a lower standard and is not enough to make an arrest. They were not necessarily wrong to chase him, but they were wrong to arrest him for having a switchblade if all he had was a pocket knife.


----------



## mmoetc

JeffreyD said:


> What about those white folks killed by the cops, they won't get to tell their side either! Why fixate on a known criminal? Do you not care about all those others?


Actually I do care. If you have great concern for white victims of police abuse feel free to start a thread about them. You could even mention some of them by name and case in this thread and I'll likely comment.

There have been abuses by police for as long as there have been police. In some neighborhoods and among some demographics evidence shows more abuse and less attention paid to it. Some seem to think that if your income is low or you have a criminal history you give up your rights. Many of the interviews I've read and heard with Baltimore residents about this situation leave race out of the equation. They almost all mention long simmering tensions between an abusive, unresponsive police force and the local community. Sunshine is a great disinfectant.


----------



## 7thswan

Grey had mj and heroin in his system. Can a mix like this make him freek out?


----------



## MoonRiver

Nevada said:


> Probably cause to stop & question him, but there was no probable cause for arrest.


How about being under the influence of illegal drugs?


----------



## mmoetc

7thswan said:


> Grey had mj and heroin in his system. Can a mix like this make him freek out?


It doesn't matter. The police were responsible for his safety the minute they took him into custody. They failed to protect him whether it was from himself or them.


----------



## 7thswan

mmoetc said:


> It doesn't matter. The police were responsible for his safety the minute they took him into custody. They failed to protect him whether it was from himself or them.


Did he or did he not have a mark on the back of his neck where a bolt hit him where he was slamming his head backward in the van?


----------



## mmoetc

7thswan said:


> Did he or did he not have a mark on the back of his neck where a bolt hit him where he was slamming his head backward in the van?


Or was the mark caused because he was unsecured, driven violently and erratically and thrown about the back the van? Had he been properly secured per procedure would he have been able to injure himself as you claim? The responsibility for his safety was the police's. Did they meet that obligation? The DA has charged, a jury will likely decide. A man's life was lost. More are ruined. All because a seat belt wasn't buckled as required.


----------



## arabian knight




----------



## HDRider

mmoetc said:


> Or was the mark caused because he was unsecured, driven violently and erratically and thrown about the back the van? Had he been properly secured per procedure would he have been able to injure himself as you claim? The responsibility for his safety was the police's. Did they meet that obligation? The *DA has charged*, a jury will likely decide. A man's life was lost. More are ruined. All because a seat belt wasn't buckled as required.


Justice WAS remarkably swift in Baltimore.


----------



## arabian knight

HDRider said:


> Justice WAS remarkably swift in Baltimore.


Saved the tax payers a lot of money too. LOL


----------



## Laura Zone 5

Mj and heroin both are downers, so for him to have a violent outburst would be almost impossible.
He'd be very mellow.....very chill, super relaxed.
Running, would be an amazing feat if he was high on mj and heroin.

This is not a 'black-white' issue.
This is a human issue.
Your meme is immature.

I sure hope the merciless are shown more mercy than they extend......especially if they are called by His Name.


----------



## Tricky Grama

painterswife said:


> Running from the cops does not merit any sort of serious injuries


It certainly shouldn't. Usually there's resisting in there too.
DD had a dubious BF 35 yrs ago, found out the hard way he was into cocaine. They got stopped late one nite by the police, who must've known him. He bolted, ran. She watched. They caught him & beat him to a pulp.
All white, btw, except for 1 black cop.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Nevada said:


> How do we know he didn't cooperate? The video indicated he could have been in medical distress, and we have to take the word of the cops for what he said.


I sure hope they have other vids of Gray being arrested b/c the consensis is that he acted this way every time. #1-if anyone is a repeat offender, gets tossed into paddywagons on a reg basis, has a rap sheet longer than your leg...ya think the cops know this person? Know what he's gonna do? Know how he behaves EVERY time?
He was also an informant, btw.


----------



## mmoetc

HDRider said:


> Justice WAS remarkably swift in Baltimore.


It was administered rather swiftly to Mr. Gray. Justice will play out for the officers as their cases move through the system. How long should an investigation of this sort take? We know the participants. We know the scene. Trained investigators do this every day and charge civilians quickly. Why should it take longer if police officers are involved.


----------



## Tricky Grama

wendle said:


> In a video somebody mentioned he was tazed. If that's the case, I wonder if the fall could have severed his spinal cord. If that happened then it shouldn't be the fault of the police officers. I could see it potentially causing some rethinking on using tazers though. Either way there is still absolutely no excuse for terrorism/riots in our cities. Those people are also criminals. I was not surprised when Hillary jumped in with her speech talking about how so many minorities are treated unfairly by cops. Way to fuel the fire.


Wow, didn't know he'd been tazed. He'd been arrested many times b/4 & guess didn't wanna this time.


----------



## Tricky Grama

wendle said:


> So why are they going on and on about police treating black people different, especially Hillary. I can understand they need to look into what exactly happened to the guy. They also need to charge the police officers if they are at fault. However this is no reason for yet another riot. There was a white guy killed by officers a while back not too far from where I live. No police officers were considered at fault, and there were no riots. Riots are not just hurting the police officers, but the local businesses and residents.


Yup.
Every statistic shows differently. There are NOT proportionately MORE black men being killed by cops than whites. Why is that not in every paper, on all news? If you're black, you are FIVE times more likely to be a crime victim & 3-5 more times the perp is black. 
Hmmm...perhaps there should be demonstrations about this.
Oh, doesn't fit the agenda.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Cornhusker said:


> He had a rap sheet a mile long.
> "Innocent" isn't a word any thinking person would put next to his name.
> Liberals and other racists however would think he's a victim and will post his 5th grade picture all over the media.
> Bigots of the left miss no opportunity to divide this country.
> Obama being the worst.


Post of the year award.


----------



## Tricky Grama

mmoetc said:


> Actually I do care. If you have great concern for white victims of police abuse feel free to start a thread about them. You could even mention some of them by name and case in this thread and I'll likely comment.
> 
> There have been abuses by police for as long as there have been police. In some neighborhoods and among some demographics evidence shows more abuse and less attention paid to it. Some seem to think that if your income is low or you have a criminal history you give up your rights. Many of the interviews I've read and heard with Baltimore residents about this situation leave race out of the equation. They almost all mention long simmering tensions between an abusive, unresponsive police force and the local community. Sunshine is a great disinfectant.


You could post the stats on black crime & white cops killing black men. And you'd find that there are far more-even % wise-whites killed. This perpetuating myth about blacks being killed is just that. MORE cops are killed by blacks than the other way.


----------



## FireMaker

In the day, I drove the paddy wagon for about 4 yrs. it had no seatbelts for custody. If they gave any indication of medical issues we took a detour to the hospital. If the custody was spitting on us through a little 2x4 port, an "animal" would often run in front of us and we applied the brakes. We would ask if they were "ok back there". The typical answer was a faint "yeah". Spitting always stopped. Racial issues - never had them at transport. Never spit on by a black. Spit on and threaten by a bunch of white though. I am white.

Flash forward 15 yrs, the new wagon had molded seats with complete harnesses. You could roll the van and the custody would be fine. This was done to minimize the liability exposure. The seats were angles that spitting would not happen. The custody had individual chambers in the van. This was a needed and positive change in equipment that.

Let's assume in the current case that he was very injured prior to transport. There was a need for the officers to ensure medical treatment. The transporting officers are responsible for anything after he was put in the paddy. While the investigation continues. There is sufficient probable cause to charge and initiate the process. One does not have to have been present to evaluate the probable cause question. Not one person that will be on the jury will have been there. One problem I do see is the large expanse of charges. That will prove difficult to support.


----------



## 7thswan

Tricky Grama said:


> Wow, didn't know he'd been tazed. He'd been arrested many times b/4 & guess didn't wanna this time.


And I read that the tazers of the officers were checked and had not been used.
There is alot of strange "issues" going on with this case. The charges, it dosen't sound like they will stand as serious as they were set.(where are the probable cause charges for the driver ?) A change of venue is also needed because of some of the relasionships of those in power.
Freddy was also well know to Cops as a snitch, he would put on a resisting display for those on the street and then give Cops info at the station.


----------



## MDKatie

Wow, arabian, way to minimize legit issues in society. No wonder many black people feel like they're not heard or treated as equal citizens. You should feel proud of yourself. 

Freddie Gray had an arrest record, we know that. How many of those charges turned into actual convictions? Everyone is defending the cops' charges because they're just charges and not actual convictions, why not do the same for Freddie? 

Bottom line is this- either you think it's ok for cops to have total disregard for the health and safety of their detainees, or you think even lowly alleged criminals should have basic human rights and be treated decently when they're arrested.


----------



## where I want to

MDKatie said:


> Bottom line is this- either you think it's ok for cops to have total disregard for the health and safety of their detainees, or you think even lowly alleged criminals should have basic human rights and be treated decently when they're arrested.


There is always an assumption in arguments like this that the arrested is not creating any issues. But that is not true many times.
There was a complaint here about police brutality. The arrested claimed the police repeatedly hit him and he had done nothing. But someone had been videoing that incident. And the reporter interviewing somehow had obtained the video and showed it to the man. It showed him grabbing a chair and hitting people with it. And that his dramatic face injuries came as people attempted to get the chair away from him. The man just said it looked worse than it was. 
If the video clip just started after the police showed up, it would have showed the police jumping on him and his coming up with injuries. 
The few times I have actually had dealing with people doing criminal things there has been one constant- they always minimize their responsibility and generally rush to accuse someone else of something. In the whole time only one said that he did wrong and was now paying for it. All the rest spent no words on their own actions and plenty on their grievances. 
The worse one in my contacts was the nurse who was convicted of having sex with unconscious, anestethized women left in his care while they recovered in the hospital and all he could talk about was how unfair it was that his mental health worker reported him. 
So yes, it is possible to get pretty jaded over complaining criminals.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Tricky Grama said:


> Wow, didn't know he'd been tazed. He'd been arrested many times b/4 & guess didn't wanna this time.


If he had been tased, it would have been noted in the arrest report, and there would be physical evidence


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Originally Posted by Nevada
> How do we know he didn't cooperate?


Running away isn't "cooperating"

He had a history of fighting the police


----------



## my3boys

mmoetc said:


> Or was the mark caused because he was unsecured, driven violently and erratically and thrown about the back the van? Had he been properly secured per procedure would he have been able to injure himself as you claim? The responsibility for his safety was the police's. Did they meet that obligation? The DA has charged, a jury will likely decide. A man's life was lost. More are ruined. All because a seat belt wasn't buckled as required.


Then anyone who drives a school bus in this country is potentially guilty of "homocide"?

Whenever there is a crash involving a schoolbus resulting in a fatality and the crash was not the drivers fault, should they be charged with murder?


----------



## Nevada

7thswan said:


> Grey had mj and heroin in his system. Can a mix like this make him freek out?


Do you have a reference link for that?


----------



## Nevada

my3boys said:


> Then anyone who drives a school bus in this country is potentially guilty of "homocide"?
> 
> Whenever there is a crash involving a schoolbus resulting in a fatality and the crash was not the drivers fault, should they be charged with murder?


The allegation is that Gray got a "rough ride" in the police van. In other words, the suspect was deliberately tossed around the back of the police van by erratic driving. If that's true then it's no accident.


----------



## MO_cows

arabian knight said:


> Saved the tax payers a lot of money too. LOL


Aside from the fact that is a downright putrid statement, it's wrong. How much money are the taxpayers shelling out for all the extra police and natl guard in the wake of the demonstrations and riots? Six sets of legal proceedings and trials will cost the taxpayers even with the police officers hiring their own lawyers. The investigation has a cost, too. 

It would have been a lot cheaper for the taxpayers to have put a seat belt on Gray, or not take him into custody at all since their reason for picking him up is coming under question, too.


----------



## mmoetc

my3boys said:


> Then anyone who drives a school bus in this country is potentially guilty of "homocide"?
> 
> Whenever there is a crash involving a schoolbus resulting in a fatality and the crash was not the drivers fault, should they be charged with murder?


Yes they are. If they engage in a criminally negligent act while they are driving and are involved in an accident causing fatalities they can be charged with homocide. Most school buses don't have seatbelts and very few districts that I know of require children, other than some with special needs, to be fastened in. Therefor any accident not involving negligent behavior where children aren't required to be buckled doesn't rise to a criminal act. The officers in this case violÃ ted policy by not properly restraining a prisoner. Negligent yes, criminal only if they then proceeded to drive in such a way as to guarantee an unbelted prisoner with his arms and feet restrained was likely to be injured. A jury will hear the evidence and decide.


----------



## Nevada

Cornhusker said:


> He had a rap sheet a mile long.
> "Innocent" isn't a word any thinking person would put next to his name.
> Liberals and other racists however would think he's a victim and will post his 5th grade picture all over the media.
> Bigots of the left miss no opportunity to divide this country.
> Obama being the worst.


As the prosecutor said, the fact that Gray was arrested but hadn't committed a crime is only an aggravating factor. The serious crimes here are those that resulted in death on custody. Guilty or innocent, the suspect deserves to arrive safety at the jail facility, and also deserves medical care if required.

We can't allow police to execute suspects. I hope nobody here is suggesting that.


----------



## where I want to

Nevada said:


> As the prosecutor said, the fact that Gray was arrested but hadn't committed a crime is only an aggravating factor. The serious crimes here are those that resulted in death on custody. Guilty or innocent, the suspect deserves to arrive safety at the jail facility, and also deserves medical care if required.
> 
> We can't allow police to execute suspects. I hope nobody here is suggesting that.


 Only you. 
But it could be that his behavior might cause his own harm. Are you saying that no one ever harms himself?

I think it is very unlikely that the deceased was so violent as to have killed himself. Why he was not properly restrained is an issue that needs to be addressed. But that does not mean it was impossible. Just as it does not mean that the police should be assumed to be the cause of his death without bothering to review the facts. 
I hate smarmy arguments that assign words to other people just because it makes it easy to belittle them without their having to even be part of the discussion. Especially those that are blind to their own assumptions while belittling other's assumptions.


----------



## kuriakos

MoonRiver said:


> How about being under the influence of illegal drugs?


If the police had probable cause to arrest him for that, they would have. Instead they arrested him for something that apparently wasn't even true.


----------



## MDKatie

where I want to said:


> There is always an assumption in arguments like this that the arrested is not creating any issues. But that is not true many times.
> 
> ...
> 
> So yes, it is possible to get pretty jaded over complaining criminals.


The story might be different had the police followed procedure and gotten medical attention for him. It would have prevented any chance of Freddie injuring himself in the van. If Freddie's back was already broken, he would likely have still died, but at least the police had *tried* to do what was needed. 

Instead, they ignored his requests for medical attention. Then, they put him in the van unrestrained, which allowed him the opportunity to either throw himself around or be thrown around by erratic driving. If they had restrained him like they were REQUIRED to do, there would have been a very, very small chance he could have purposely injured himself. He could have maybe hit his head on the wall, but he would not have been able to throw himself around. 

Either way you look at it, the lack of proper procedure caused these issues. 

And if you find yourself jaded by the criminals and allowing your thoughts to prevent you from doing your job properly, you need to find a new job.


----------



## mmoetc

where I want to said:


> Only you.
> But it could be that his behavior might cause his own harm. Are you saying that no one ever harms himself?
> 
> I think it is very unlikely that the deceased was so violent as to have killed himself. Why he was not properly restrained is an issue that needs to be addressed. But that does not mean it was impossible. Just as it does not mean that the police should be assumed to be the cause of his death without bothering to review the facts.
> I hate smarmy arguments that assign words to other people just because it makes it easy to belittle them without their having to even be part of the discussion. Especially those that are blind to their own assumptions while belittling other's assumptions.


The coroner examined the facts and declared it a homicide. The DA examined the facts and made the charges she deemed appropriate. The police weren't assumed to be the cause before facts were reviewed by the proper authorities. They reviewed many more facts than any of us have access to. Had they come to the conclusion that Mr. Gray killed himself would you still be so skeptical?

Mr. Gray may be lucky he didnt find a way to shoot himself like this Louisiana man. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7188652


----------



## where I want to

MDKatie said:


> The story might be different had the police followed procedure and gotten medical attention for him. It would have prevented any chance of Freddie injuring himself in the van. If Freddie's back was already broken, he would likely have still died, but at least the police had *tried* to do what was needed.
> 
> Instead, they ignored his requests for medical attention. Then, they put him in the van unrestrained, which allowed him the opportunity to either throw himself around or be thrown around by erratic driving. If they had restrained him like they were REQUIRED to do, there would have been a very, very small chance he could have purposely injured himself. He could have maybe hit his head on the wall, but he would not have been able to throw himself around.
> 
> Either way you look at it, the lack of proper procedure caused these issues.
> 
> And if you find yourself jaded by the criminals and allowing your thoughts to prevent you from doing your job properly, you need to find a new job.


I can agree with some of that. Certainly they did not appear to follow their proper procedures and that might very well had lead to his death. That is a responsibility, if true, they can not escape.

As for complaints, that is a much harder issue as complaints of pain and injury are constant, and hardly ever valid. Holding an arm becomes "you're breaking my arm." And as for jaded- I imagine that happens about the third time a newby got suckered in by person they arrested.

Being in that kind of position makes giving people the benefit of the doubt hard. I heard on story from a guard at a border checkpoint at a point of civil unrest. A child wanted to pass after curfew. He cried when told no because it meant not getting home. So the guard let him pass. A few minutes later a couple of dozen children had been sent out by their parents to cry so the guard would let them pass too.
As the man said, being in that position means that normal human empathy does not apply. And quitting meant risk for those he was supposed to protect.

The tricky part is keeping a lack of empathy that is necessary to the work from going into comtempt. And that is not so easy as those not in that position would have it.


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> Charges are often dropped as a part of plea bargains.
> Gray was out on bail awaiting his next trial


Plea bargains are offered when the prosecutor doubts his chances of winning. When he knows he's got a predominate chance on winning the bargain with the sentence.


----------



## AmericanStand

JeffreyD said:


> Jogging...no....running from the police...yeah!


 So not wanting to be around a cop on the prowl is a crime. ? Is it a felony to chose another road to avoid a police checkpoint ?


----------



## JeffreyD

AmericanStand said:


> So not wanting to be around a cop on the prowl is a crime. ? Is it a felony to chose another road to avoid a police checkpoint ?


Was that what the cops were doing, prowling? Try this out for your self, find some cops, make sure they see you, make eye contact, turn and run away as fast as you can, come back and tell us all what the result was. It IS illegal to avoid a police checkpoint. Not a felony tho.


----------



## JeffreyD

AmericanStand said:


> Plea bargains are offered when the prosecutor doubts his chances of winning. When he knows he's got a predominate chance on winning the bargain with the sentence.


Plea bargains are offered because the prosecutors are too lazy to actually try the case so a plea bargain is offered so the prosecutor can show a conviction on his list of accomplishments. Without going to trial. It's an easy victory. The crime itself is irrelevant.


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> Plea bargains are offered because the prosecutors are too lazy to actually try the case so a plea bargain is offered so the prosecutor can show a conviction on his list of accomplishments. Without going to trial. It's an easy victory. The crime itself is irrelevant.


There may still be plea bargains here. Some of the cops may agree to testify against other cops in exchange for a reduce sentence.


----------



## wr

my3boys said:


> Then anyone who drives a school bus in this country is potentially guilty of "homocide"?
> 
> 
> 
> Whenever there is a crash involving a schoolbus resulting in a fatality and the crash was not the drivers fault, should they be charged with murder?



I believe in the case of school busses, the accepted protocol is to not buckle children in for various reasons. 

Protocol for prisoner transport is to restrain the passenger, likely to protect the driver and the detainee. If Gray was injured during transport, I would have expected charges to reflect negligence. 


Ultimately, I don't believe that the charges stem from lack of restraint and there certainly is no evidence of a crash. My opinion is simply based on my interpretation of the charges and I have no direct knowledge.


----------



## where I want to

So it seems another double standard is being looked to- a person who is arrested and testifies against another criminal is not to be believed as he is looking to appease the police while a policeman who testifies against another policeman under threat of an indictment is to be believed? To heck with justice, it's all technique. And the enemy of my enemy is my friend, huh?


----------



## Nevada

wr said:


> If Gray was injured during transport, I would have expected charges to reflect negligence.


The allegation is that Gray was deliberately given a "rough ride." That goes beyond negligence.


----------



## Nevada

where I want to said:


> a person who is arrested and testifies against another criminal is not to be believed as he is looking to appease the police while a policeman who testifies against another policeman under threat of an indictment is to be believed?


That's up to a jury to decide. You can bet that if testimony was encouraged with a plea deal that the defense is going to make that fact known to the jury. Maybe the jury will believe it and maybe they won't, but that's the chance a prosecutor takes when he offers a deal.


----------



## where I want to

Nevada said:


> That's up to a jury to decide. You can bet that if testimony was encouraged with a plea deal that the defense is going to make that fact known to the jury. Maybe the jury will believe it and maybe they won't, but that's the chance a prosecutor takes when he offers a deal.


Oh if only people would be willing to admit they don't have all the answers and wait before judging. There could be quite a civilized conversation here.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> Plea bargains are offered when the prosecutor doubts his chances of winning. When he knows he's got a predominate chance on winning the bargain with the sentence.


They are also offered to save the time and expense of a jury trial


----------



## MoonRiver

Nevada said:


> The allegation is that Gray was deliberately given a "rough ride." That goes beyond negligence.


Who made this allegation?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

kuriakos said:


> If the police had probable cause to arrest him for that, they would have.
> 
> Instead they arrested him for something that apparently wasn't even true.


Isn't that excused many times if done "in good faith"?


----------



## Nevada

MoonRiver said:


> Who made this allegation?


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/us/freddie-grays-injury-and-the-police-rough-ride.html


----------



## kuriakos

Bearfootfarm said:


> Isn't that excused many times if done "in good faith"?


I wouldn't say excused, but yes evidence collected in violation of the 4th amendment is sometimes allowed if the officer had an objectively reasonable good faith belief that his actions were lawful. The collection of the evidence is not relevant, since the defendant is deceased. Good faith may come into play for the officers charged with false imprisonment. I don't know the particulars so I can't say for sure. I would not be shocked if they used the wrist flick trick to declare a perfectly legal knife to be an illegal one. If that is the case, it would not meet the good faith standard.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/us/freddie-grays-injury-and-the-police-rough-ride.html


I read the article. 

The reporter and the families attorney. An independent investigator said that hes heard of this but in 20 years, hes never seen it happen.

Here are some snip-its:

âI never saw it, but Iâve heard about it,â said Bernard K. Melekian, the undersheriff of Santa Barbara County, Calif., and a former director of the Justice Departmentâs community-oriented policing office. 

It winds up in a he said-she said situation.â

In 2001, The Philadelphia Inquirer published a series of articles detailing injuries sustained by 20 victims of so-called nickel rides. The victims were paid $2.3 million in city legal settlements, although no officer had ever been disciplined for the practice. In response, the police commissioner at the time, John F. Timoney, banned the use of all police wagons not equipped with seatbelts or safety padding.


----------



## coolrunnin

AmericanStand said:


> So not wanting to be around a cop on the prowl is a crime. ? Is it a felony to chose another road to avoid a police checkpoint ?


Actually in certain cases it is illegal to attempt to avoid checkpoints.


----------



## 7thswan

Nevada said:


> Do you have a reference link for that?


2 of the cops were interviewed on tv, one said a urine test told them of the drugs.


----------



## Nevada

7thswan said:


> 2 of the cops were interviewed on tv, one said a urine test told them of the drugs.


How did Gray provide a urine sample before getting to the jail? In the street, in the transport van?

Honestly, I did a little googling and didn't find anything about this.


----------



## 7thswan

Nevada said:


> How did Gray provide a urine sample before getting to the jail? In the street, in the transport van?
> 
> Honestly, I did a little googling and didn't find anything about this.


video fox news last night. Seriously, don't use google anymore.


----------



## Nevada

7thswan said:


> video fox news last night. Seriously, don't use google anymore.


OK, I finally found something. It mentions an "anonymous cop" talking on Hannity.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3285456/posts?page=55

Doesn't sound credible, and there's no other confirmation. I'm skeptical that the police took a urine sample. There is probably a blood test from the hospital or medical examiner, but that information hasn't been made public yet.


----------



## 7thswan

http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/01/l...overcharged-charges-will-likely-be-dismissed/


John Banzhaf, who teaches public interest law, says that the charges announced by Baltimore state&#8217;s attorney Marilyn Mosby on Friday &#8220;go too far.&#8221;

&#8220;I think a prosecutor is going to have a hard time proving that the actions did in fact cause death, since they seem to have no theory as to how it occurred,&#8221; Banzhaf said in a phone interview.


----------



## Nevada

7thswan said:


> http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/01/l...overcharged-charges-will-likely-be-dismissed/
> 
> 
> John Banzhaf, who teaches public interest law, says that the charges announced by Baltimore stateâs attorney Marilyn Mosby on Friday âgo too far.â
> 
> âI think a prosecutor is going to have a hard time proving that the actions did in fact cause death, since they seem to have no theory as to how it occurred,â Banzhaf said in a phone interview.


I said earlier that I thought the charges were heavy handed. The prosecutor may have done that in an attempt to force some of them to turn states evidence for a plea deal.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Heard a doc on tv say no way could he have done this to himself in the van. Something happened -the stop where 1 cop got back there & shackled him?


----------



## gapeach

Nevada said:


> How did Gray provide a urine sample before getting to the jail? In the street, in the transport van?
> 
> Honestly, I did a little googling and didn't find anything about this.


When he went to the hospital they would have drawn blood for an alcohol/drug test.


----------



## MoonRiver

Nevada said:


> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/us/freddie-grays-injury-and-the-police-rough-ride.html


I don't know if that was an editorial or not, but it was nothing more than speculation with no supporting facts.


----------



## Nevada

Bearfootfarm said:


> Isn't that excused many times if done "in good faith"?


How does "good faith" excuse arresting someone without cause? Got an example?


----------



## popscott

May or may not be true, but......

http://thefourthestate.co/2015/04/b...ad-spine-surgery-just-one-week-before-arrest/

EXCLUSIVE: The Fourth Estate has learned that Freddy Gray&#8217;s life-ending injuries to his spine may have possibly been the result of spinal and neck surgery that he allegedly received a week before he was arrested, not from rough excessively rough treatment or abuse from police. 

http://theconservativetreehouse.com...y-from-car-accident-a-week-before-his-arrest/

Freddie had several unsuccessful spinal fusion surgeries, and his most recent spinal/cervical operation was a week and a half before he was arrested. Freddie should have been at home in bed resting and recovering from this recent major operation.


----------



## Nevada

popscott said:


> May or may not be true, but......
> 
> http://thefourthestate.co/2015/04/b...ad-spine-surgery-just-one-week-before-arrest/
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The Fourth Estate has learned that Freddy Grayâs life-ending injuries to his spine may have possibly been the result of spinal and neck surgery that he allegedly received a week before he was arrested, not from rough excessively rough treatment or abuse from police.
> 
> http://theconservativetreehouse.com...y-from-car-accident-a-week-before-his-arrest/
> 
> Freddie had several unsuccessful spinal fusion surgeries, and his most recent spinal/cervical operation was a week and a half before he was arrested. Freddie should have been at home in bed resting and recovering from this recent major operation.


FALSE

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/freddiegraysuit.asp


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> FALSE
> 
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/freddiegraysuit.asp


So, you rely on snopes for the truth? Really?


----------



## poppy

There's the problem for the prosecutor. She can't (so far) prove where Gray was injured. How do we know it didn't happen at the hospital in the days before he died? I think Nevada even has experience with someone being injured in the hospital. It will be impossible to prove where, when, or by whom Gray was injured. The defense will have a field day.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> There's the problem for the prosecutor. She can't (so far) prove where Gray was injured. How do we know it didn't happen at the hospital in the days before he died? I think Nevada even has experience with someone being injured in the hospital. It will be impossible to prove where, when, or by whom Gray was injured. The defense will have a field day.


She has her work cut our for herself. If I were her I would be offering deals to the other charged cops for testimony.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> She has her work cut our for herself. If I were her I would be offering deals to the other charged cops for testimony.


If they were smart they would! Her charges against them will.not hold up. She a fool for even contemplating those charges. She also needs to appoint a special prosecutor, she has baggage. I understand the playing for their crowd, but she just not realistic. 

I think the cops jackbooted him in the throat, but trying to prove that will not be easy. Imnho!


----------



## poppy

Nevada said:


> She has her work cut our for herself. If I were her I would be offering deals to the other charged cops for testimony.


I'm sure that was her plan all along and the reason she filed charges against so many. There's no way all those cops will be found guilty as charged. She'll try to pin it on the van driver because he is the only one without other cops as witnesses at all times, but I doubt she'll succeed.


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> She a fool for even contemplating those charges.


Remember, those are only charges. In Maryland she also needs an indictment, which needs a grand jury.


----------



## LonelyNorthwind

poppy said:


> Another prisoner in the van said he could hear Gray slamming himself against the walls of the van. Anyone who has ever watched "COPS" knows angry prisoners sometimes slam their heads against car windows, hoods, etc.
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...d7da10-eec6-11e4-8666-a1d756d0218e_story.html


I just watched the second prisoner being interviewed - he says:

#1 he did NOT tell the police anything. He said "I do not work for the police department, I tell them nothing. I told the prosecutor what I heard"

#2 he did NOT hear Gray "slamming himself against the walls" He says he heard 3 bangs - like this - then he knocked 3 times on a metal fence. That's all

somebody's doing a whole lot of lying in Baltimore trying to cover their butts


----------



## poppy

LonelyNorthwind said:


> I just watched the second prisoner being interviewed - he says:
> 
> #1 he did NOT tell the police anything. He said "I do not work for the police department, I tell them nothing. I told the prosecutor what I heard"
> 
> #2 he did NOT hear Gray "slamming himself against the walls" He says he heard 3 bangs - like this - then he knocked 3 times on a metal fence. That's all
> 
> somebody's doing a whole lot of lying in Baltimore trying to cover their butts


Where did you hear the second witness? Late today he was still in jail and unavailable. The third guy was never taken to jail but gave a false interview.


----------



## TxHorseMom

Everyone keeps talking about the seatbelts being the end all solution to the problem of a suspects relative safety. I did not know that a person could no longer move or be injured when seat belted in a vehicle. I did not know a person could not bang their head on anything when wearing a seatbelt. Anyone with a toddler knows they can slip out of those suckers in nothing flat and we WANT our children to be safe. I'm not saying the officer's were innocent, but geeze people do we have to wrap suspects in bubble wrap?


----------



## Tricky Grama

gapeach said:


> When he went to the hospital they would have drawn blood for an alcohol/drug test.


They can collect urine at the hosp too.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Nevada said:


> She has her work cut our for herself. If I were her I would be offering deals to the other charged cops for testimony.


Yeah, like that would work. Hope we hear about it, if she does.


----------



## mmoetc

TxHorseMom said:


> Everyone keeps talking about the seatbelts being the end all solution to the problem of a suspects relative safety. I did not know that a person could no longer move or be injured when seat belted in a vehicle. I did not know a person could not bang their head on anything when wearing a seatbelt. Anyone with a toddler knows they can slip out of those suckers in nothing flat and we WANT our children to be safe. I'm not saying the officer's were innocent, but geeze people do we have to wrap suspects in bubble wrap?


Handcuff your toddlers hands behind their back and see how quickly they release a seat belt buckled in front. Procedure said to buckle him in. Could he have still hurt himself if he had wanted to? Maybe. But we'll never really know because he can no longer tell us. Did the officers simply forget to buckle Mr. Gray in (4 times) or did they do it intentionally for some other reason? We may never know the truth of that, either. No one can provide absolute protection to another but every effort should be made to prevent a prisoner in custody from coming to harm. I've asked repeatedly and gotten no answer. Was it?


----------



## 7thswan

JeffreyD said:


> I think the cops jackbooted him in the throat, but trying to prove that will not be easy. Imnho!


Ben Carson said the same this morning.


----------



## 7thswan

poppy said:


> Where did you hear the second witness? Late today he was still in jail and unavailable. The third guy was never taken to jail but gave a false interview.


From what I understand, that witness was with FG when arrested. So,maybe this guy heard FG bang his head after loaded but before the Van even moved away. Ya, he said he talked to Detectives but not to the Police-he don't talk to no police.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

An infant cannot buckle themselves into a seat belt, because they are helpless.
BUT it's the law. 
AS their parent, guardian, care-giver, AUTHORITY FIGURE in their lives, when you put that infant in the car, it is YOUR responsibility to secure that baby in a car seat.

Officers cuffed this young man (as they should) thereby removing his ability to buckle himself, and making him "helpless".
It then became THEIR responsibility to ensure, his safety in transport.


----------



## poppy

Laura Zone 5 said:


> An infant cannot buckle themselves into a seat belt, because they are helpless.
> BUT it's the law.
> AS their parent, guardian, care-giver, AUTHORITY FIGURE in their lives, when you put that infant in the car, it is YOUR responsibility to secure that baby in a car seat.
> 
> Officers cuffed this young man (as they should) thereby removing his ability to buckle himself, and making him "helpless".
> It then became THEIR responsibility to ensure, his safety in transport.


We hear lots of talking heads on both sides but it always turns out much of what they say is false. I'll wait until all the facts come out. Policies vary in different places. I've seen cops on tv put people in vans and not buckle them. Now, if a prisoner is in a van unbuckled and the van is in a wreck that injures him, the city would probably have some legal problems but this van wasn't in a wreck. If he was injured in the van, he did it to himself. Heck, school buses here haul unbuckled kids every day. There has been ZERO evidence cops gave him the "rough ride" many are talking about. Sort of like "hands up, don't shoot", its a rumor that takes on a life of its own. It may well be his neck was injured either during the arrest or by himself during the van ride. Reports say he wasn't breathing when he arrived for medical care. Their first objective would have been to get him breathing and they would have had no idea his neck was nearly broken. They may have injured him further by giving him CPR or moving him around.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

7thswan said:


> From what I understand, that witness was *with FG when arrested*. So,maybe this guy heard FG bang his head after loaded but before the Van even moved away. Ya, he said he talked to Detectives but not to the Police-he don't talk to no police.


He was picked up after Gray was already in the van
He saw nothing and only heard some banging around


----------



## edcopp

At the end of the month, Freddie will still be dead.:smack


----------



## wr

Does anyone know if the detainee was even seated on a bench? If he had been injured before that point, he wouldn't have been able to sit and if the police felt he has being difficult, they may have loaded him in on the floor believing he was being unruly or difficult by not using his legs.


----------



## where I want to

But it's so much easier to advance an agenda without pesky facts tripping you up. In the end the fate of this "young man" or "criminal" (depending on which prejudice you have already) is not anyone's real concern. He only represents internalized fears.


----------



## poppy

wr said:


> Does anyone know if the detainee was even seated on a bench? If he had been injured before that point, he wouldn't have been able to sit and if the police felt he has being difficult, they may have loaded him in on the floor believing he was being unruly or difficult by not using his legs.


I'm not sure in this case but it is not unusual for a suspect to pretend he can't walk. In the video of him being put in the van, while he is about to go in the door, he is clearly standing on his own legs.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> There has been ZERO evidence cops gave him the "rough ride" many are talking about.


Well, there's the broken neck.


----------



## wr

poppy said:


> I'm not sure in this case but it is not unusual for a suspect to pretend he can't walk. In the video of him being put in the van, while he is about to go in the door, he is clearly standing on his own legs.


I do agree and I have seen those 'dead weight' detainees, who are being difficult or perceived to be difficult, left to lay on the floor (head to front) rather than being put on a bench. My only thought was if that were the case, one quick stop may better explain the nature of his injuries than boot stomping or blatant abuse.


----------



## where I want to

Nevada said:


> Well, there's the broken neck.


Riding that assumption again? That is the debate- what caused it.


----------



## Nevada

where I want to said:


> Riding that assumption again? That is the debate- what caused it.


The cops need to come up with some kind of explanation, because right now it looks like they did it.


----------



## where I want to

Nevada said:


> The cops need to come up with some kind of explanation, because right now it looks like they did it.


Ok- I agree with that.


----------



## poppy

Nevada said:


> The cops need to come up with some kind of explanation, because right now it looks like they did it.


How can the cops come up with an explanation if they have no idea how it happened either? Unless one or more of them saw something outside normal take down and arrests, how would they know? They weren't in the van or with Gray when he was being treated at the hospital. It's up to the prosecutor to come up with an explanation a jury can believe beyond a shadow of doubt.


----------



## poppy

wr said:


> I do agree and I have seen those 'dead weight' detainees, who are being difficult or perceived to be difficult, left to lay on the floor (head to front) rather than being put on a bench. My only thought was if that were the case, one quick stop may better explain the nature of his injuries than boot stomping or blatant abuse.


That may well have happened. Just one of several possibilities. I suspect they figure a difficult detainee is safer on the floor than on a bench where it is easier for him to lurch around and harm himself.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> How can the cops come up with an explanation if they have no idea how it happened either?


Gray was in their custody, and they were entirely responsible for him. I don't think the jury is going to accept that nobody has any idea how his neck got broken. That's not plausible. If the cops can't provide an alternative explanation then the jury will have to consider reasonable allegations.


----------



## poppy

Nevada said:


> Gray was in their custody, and they were entirely responsible for him. I don't think the jury is going to accept that nobody has any idea how his neck got broken. That's not plausible. If the cops can't provide an alternative explanation then the jury will have to consider reasonable allegations.


Wr just provided a possible explanation 2 posts ago and there are others. If Wr's explanation is correct, why should 6 officers face charges when only one was driving the van? Even then, unless there is a witness to a sudden stop, how does the prosecutor convict the driver? It may well turn out that none of the cops is convicted, in which case it will become a civil matter.


----------



## poppy

Nevada said:


> Gray was in their custody, and they were entirely responsible for him. I don't think the jury is going to accept that nobody has any idea how his neck got broken. That's not plausible. If the cops can't provide an alternative explanation then the jury will have to consider reasonable allegations.


People die under someones care all the time and yet nothing was done wrong. Accidents happen. Gray's family will likely get a big payout from the city to avoid a civil trial, but I wouldn't count on anyone going to prison.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> If Wr's explanation is correct, why should 6 officers face charges when only one was driving the van?


Actually, only one officer is charged with murder, but 3 more are charged with manslaughter. Still, I agree that the charges are heavy handed. I suspect she did that to encourage some of them to turn state's evidence.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> People die under someones care all the time and yet nothing was done wrong. Accidents happen. Gray's family will likely get a big payout from the city to avoid a civil trial, but I wouldn't count on anyone going to prison.


This isn't going to be an easy case to prosecute, but I don't think the jury is going to buy that Gray broke his neck accidentally. That's a pretty far-fetched defense theory.


----------



## where I want to

Nevada said:


> Gray was in their custody, and they were entirely responsible for him. I don't think the jury is going to accept that nobody has any idea how his neck got broken. That's not plausible. If the cops can't provide an alternative explanation then the jury will have to consider reasonable allegations.


What is not plausible is the idea that if a meteor fell from the sky and hit an arrested man, the police are still responsible. That is what you are saying.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> The cops need to come up with some kind of explanation, because right now it looks like they did it.


It's pretty obvious the injury occurred during the arrest.

There's no evidence of any injury occurring in the van.

They know how it happened and who did it, and just aren't talking


----------



## Bearfootfarm

where I want to said:


> What is not plausible is the idea that if a meteor fell from the sky and hit an arrested man, the police are still responsible. That is what you are saying.


If they had tried to prevent it, there would be no problem
They have to at least make some effort


----------



## Tricky Grama

Nevada said:


> This isn't going to be an easy case to prosecute, but I don't think the jury is going to buy that Gray broke his neck accidentally. That's a pretty far-fetched defense theory.


Do we even know it was his neck? I know we were told his spine was nearly severed but I never read/heard where. Did hear that his larynx was crushed. Have they said when that happened?


----------



## MoonRiver

Nevada said:


> The cops need to come up with some kind of explanation, because right now it looks like they did it.


I don't know why. They are innocent until proven guilty. It's up to the prosecution to come up with an explanation supported by evidence.


----------



## HDRider

Nevada said:


> Gray was in their custody, and they were entirely responsible for him. I don't think the jury is going to accept that nobody has any idea how his neck got broken. That's not plausible. If the cops can't provide an alternative explanation then the jury will have to consider reasonable allegations.


----------



## Nevada

MoonRiver said:


> I don't know why. They are innocent until proven guilty. It's up to the prosecution to come up with an explanation supported by evidence.


If their defense depends on convincing a jury that Gray broke his own neck I doubt they will prevail. Remember, it's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If the jury doesn't think a self-inflicted broken neck is reasonable then the cops are in trouble.

I'll be interested in what defense theory they'll try. Even more interesting will be how many turn state's evidence.


----------



## MoonRiver

Nevada said:


> If their defense depends on convincing a jury that Gray broke his own neck I doubt they will prevail. Remember, it's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If the jury doesn't think a self-inflicted broken neck is reasonable then the cops are in trouble.
> 
> I'll be interested in what defense theory they'll try. Even more interesting will be how many turn state's evidence.


That's easy. Prove which cop did it. They can't all be guilty - even though they were all charged. Building a circumstantial case against one will likely exonerate the others.


----------



## gapeach

MoonRiver said:


> That's easy. Prove which cop did it. They can't all be guilty - even though they were all charged. Building a circumstantial case against one will likely exonerate the others.


What if it is the driver? Is that going to appease the protesters and rioters of Baltimore if it turns out to be someone of their own color who takes the rap?


----------



## Nevada

gapeach said:


> What if it is the driver? Is that going to appease the protesters and rioters of Baltimore if it turns out to be someone of their own color who takes the rap?


You evidently don't understand the issues.


----------



## poppy

Nevada said:


> You evidently don't understand the issues.


The issue is plain. Ferguson was about white cops and that can't be denied. The issue is not about a dead black man. If it were, there would be constant rioting about all the blacks killed by fellow blacks on a weekly basis. The issue isn't about cops killing people because cops kill lots of white people too and neither blacks or whites riot over those deaths. The issue is social unrest fomented by many groups with agendas, including the Obama administration. Oh, I almost forgot. Free booze and tv's are also a driving force.


----------



## where I want to

Nevada said:


> You evidently don't understand the issues.


Rude and frankly she was right because facts have repeatedly failed to interrupt tirades.


----------



## gapeach

Nevada said:


> You evidently don't understand the issues.


I feel very sure that I do.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> The issue is plain. Ferguson was about white cops and that can't be denied. The issue is not about a dead black man. If it were, there would be constant rioting about all the blacks killed by fellow blacks on a weekly basis. The issue isn't about cops killing people because cops kill lots of white people too and neither blacks or whites riot over those deaths. The issue is social unrest fomented by many groups with agendas, including the Obama administration. Oh, I almost forgot. Free booze and tv's are also a driving force.


The issue in Ferguson was that the taking of a black life didn't seem like as big of a deal as the protestors though it should be. The fact that it was a white cop wasn't the issue.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> The issue in Ferguson was that the taking of a black life didn't seem like as big of a deal as the protestors though it should be. The fact that it was a white cop wasn't the issue.


Where have you been? That all the protesters talked about...


----------



## TxHorseMom

Nevada said:


> The issue in Ferguson was that the taking of a black life didn't seem like as big of a deal as the protestors though it should be. The fact that it was a white cop wasn't the issue.


The issue in Ferguson was a white cop killing a black man.


----------



## Tricky Grama

poppy said:


> The issue is plain. Ferguson was about white cops and that can't be denied. The issue is not about a dead black man. If it were, there would be constant rioting about all the blacks killed by fellow blacks on a weekly basis. The issue isn't about cops killing people because cops kill lots of white people too and neither blacks or whites riot over those deaths. The issue is social unrest fomented by many groups with agendas, including the Obama administration. Oh, I almost forgot. Free booze and tv's are also a driving force.


Post of the year award.


----------



## HDRider

Poppy is king today.


----------



## AmericanStand

MoonRiver said:


> That's easy. Prove which cop did it. They can't all be guilty - even though they were all charged. Building a circumstantial case against one will likely exonerate the others.



Why can't they all be guilty ? 

OR

I wouldn't be surprised to see some thing like each cop saying cop A told me to do X and besides I thought cop D did Y. 

For instance the driver could say his superior told him to drive rough and he thought that the other cop had buckled the victim in tightly.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

poppy said:


> The issue is plain. Ferguson was about white cops and that can't be denied. The issue is not about a dead black man. If it were, there would be constant rioting about all the blacks killed by fellow blacks on a weekly basis. The issue isn't about cops killing people because cops kill lots of white people too and neither blacks or whites riot over those deaths. The issue is social unrest fomented by many groups with agendas, including the Obama administration. Oh, I almost forgot. Free booze and tv's are also a driving force.



ehhhhem....
(as she gently adjusts her tinfoil tiara)

May I suggest, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that the root of the issue is this:

Our society today has been programmed for several generations, the last two being worse than the first two, that if you choose an agenda, somehow you not only become immune to the consequences of your choices BUT you are JUSTIFIED in your poor choices/behaviors BECAUSE of your agenda.

Rare is the family unit.
Rare is the parent that stays home, and raises the children.

Drugs are like roaches.....everywhere, ruining everything.
Absent fathers, mothers more preoccupied with herself than her babies.

That leaves the media (tv,movies,music,the internet,facebook,etc) to raise the kids.
That leaves the 'teachers' to raise the kids, and guide them to which agenda fits them best.......
That leaves the 'peers' to raise the kids. Grouping with others in their teacher / media selected agenda..
Moltov Cocktail, meet your match......

And there you have it. 
Streets full of angry kids, destroying things, stealing things, full of rage and without remorse.

This problem started 4 generations ago.
It's going to get worse and worse and worse........

(With head hung low, she slowly dismounts her soap box)


----------



## HDRider

Laura
You list symptoms. 

What are the causes?


----------



## arabian knight

AmericanStand said:


> Why can't they all be guilty ?
> 
> OR
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised to see some thing like each cop saying cop A told me to do X and besides I thought cop D did Y.
> 
> For instance the driver could say his superior told him to drive rough and he thought that the other cop had buckled the victim in tightly.


That will never happen. They ALL can't be guilty plain and simple.

*Free the Baltimore Six*



> If anyone doubted before Friday that the postmodern lynch mob era is in full swing, Baltimore stateâs attorney, Marilyn Mosby, put those doubts to rest.
> 
> âTo the youth of the city,â said Mosby, âI will seek justice on your behalf. This is a moment. This is your moment. Letâs insure we have peaceful and productive rallies that will develop structural and systemic changes for generations to come. Youâre at the forefront of this cause and as young people, our time is now."
> *
> The âjusticeâ she alluded to comprised charges ranging from false imprisonment to second-degree depraved murder against six Baltimore police officers involved in arresting and transporting the late Freddie Gray. Unlike lynch mob leaders of yore, who set out to subvert the law, postmodernists like Mosby subvert the language to give the illusion that they are supporting the law, if not elevating it.*


 And of course we all know about how some on here just hate police officers. No doubt about that one.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/05/free_the_baltimore_six.html#ixzz3ZB3hZD00


----------



## AmericanStand

arabian knight said:


> That will never happen. They ALL can't be guilty plain and simple.url]



Restating the statement does not answer the question. !

Let me ask again why can't all six be guilty ?

If six people rob a bank they are all guilty if six people shoot a man they are all guilty we don't look for the particular bullet that killed him.


----------



## Nevada

arabian knight said:


> Free the Baltimore Six


It's not like they're political prisoners. They killed someone.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> It's not like they're political prisoners. They killed someone.


There's no proof of that.
For all we really know, he fell when being pursued and injured himself.
I'd suggest waiting for the results of the trials


----------



## arabian knight

Bearfootfarm said:


> There's no proof of that.
> For all we really know, he fell when being pursued and injured himself.
> I'd suggest waiting for the results of the trials


 They ARE indeed Political Prisoners. By what is happening now in todays carp stuff from the blacks any officer is now GUILTY of ANYthing regardless =of what the truth really is because of the POLITICAL ATMOSPHERE that is NOW in this country ever since you know who got in the WH. Period~!
You can't criticize the POTUS cause NOW any criticism is considered Racist by the media and the left. 
Many things that the GOP should be doing is not getting done in the FEAR of losing their political standings.
What in the world is this country going through right now when You can't even speak up and speak your mind about what the POTUS is doing to this country because you will now get thrown to the wolves.


----------



## wr

Nevada said:


> It's not like they're political prisoners. They killed someone.


The have not killed someone. They have been charged with killing someone and will have to be tried and convicted before we can make such a statement.


----------



## Nevada

wr said:


> The have not killed someone. They have been charged with killing someone and will have to be tried and convicted before we can make such a statement.


He died in police custody. I think there is no realistic doubt that he died at the hands of police. Whether those police actions were criminal remains to be seen, but I see no alternative to believing that the police killed him.

I think the theories I've heard that Gray's broken neck was self-inflicted are a stretch, yet those theories are posted in this forum.

Let's face it, the charges are the product of a three week investigation by state and local officials. It's credible enough to present to a grand jury. There's no reason for anyone to be defensive about discussing the charges as credible.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> He died in police custody. I think there is no realistic doubt that he died at the hands of police. Whether those police actions were criminal remains to be seen, but I see no alternative to believing that the police killed him.
> 
> I think the theories I've heard that Gray's broken neck was self-inflicted are a stretch, yet those theories are posted in this forum.
> 
> Let's face it, the charges are the product of a three week investigation by state and local officials. It's credible enough to present to a grand jury. There's no reason for anyone to be defensive about discussing the charges as credible.


Wasn't he in a hospital when he died? Please prove to us right here, right now, how he was killed and by whom. You say you know the cops killed him, now is the time for you to prove yourself. Go for it.......


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> Wasn't he in a hospital when he died? Please prove to us right here, right now, how he was killed and by whom. You say you know the cops killed him, now is the time for you to prove yourself. Go for it.......


Yes, he died from injuries sustained while in police custody, and the coroner ruled the death a homicide. Charges are appropriate.


----------



## MO_cows

Nevada said:


> He died in police custody. I think there is no realistic doubt that he died at the hands of police. Whether those police actions were criminal remains to be seen, but I see no alternative to believing that the police killed him.
> 
> I think the theories I've heard that Gray's broken neck was self-inflicted are a stretch, yet those theories are posted in this forum.
> 
> Let's face it, the charges are the product of a three week investigation by state and local officials. It's credible enough to present to a grand jury. There's no reason for anyone to be defensive about discussing the charges as credible.


He didn't die in police custody. He died later. It seems he was injured in police custody which led to his death. I don't even think we know for sure his neck was broken, either. The reports have said his "spinal cord was nearly severed", but didn't specify where. 

How can there be a meaningful discussion when the facts are thrown out the window?


----------



## Nevada

MO_cows said:


> He didn't die in police custody. He died later. It seems he was injured in police custody which led to his death. I don't even think we know for sure his neck was broken, either. The reports have said his "spinal cord was nearly severed", but didn't specify where.
> 
> How can there be a meaningful discussion when the facts are thrown out the window?


I read that.

_Sources said the medical examiner found Gray's catastrophic injury was caused when he slammed into the back of the police transport van, *apparently breaking his neck*; a head injury he sustained matches a bolt in the back of the van._
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...ad-injury-occurred-inside-police-van-n1993192

Now, show me an account of the medical examiner's report that says otherwise.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> Yes, he died from injuries sustained while in police custody, and the coroner ruled the death a homicide. Charges are appropriate.


Not what I asked!

Please answer the questions as asked.


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> Not what I asked!
> 
> Please answer the questions as asked.


He died at the hospital. So what?


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> He died at the hospital. So what?


Why are you avoiding the questions?


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> Why are you avoiding the questions?


Wasn't that the question?


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> Wasn't that the question?


Post #259. There are a few there, but you knew that already. This is a pattern with you, why?


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> Post #259. There are a few there, but you knew that already. This is a pattern with you, why?


I already admitted that he died at the hospital, but the medical examiner still ruled it as a homicide. The medical examiner specifically said the Gray died of injuries sustained in the police van. On it's face, that's pretty strong evidence.


----------



## watcher

MDKatie said:


> His spine was nearly severed. I'm sorry, but that seems pretty hard to do yourself.


Not really. IIRC it was a neck injury. If you google it you will find people who severed their spines just falling out of bed.

I don't know the specifics in this case so go with me here. Picture this. He's handcuffed with his arms behind him and he wants it to look like the cops beat him. What makes the best show of this? Facial wounds. So he stands up, faces the front of the van leaning forward and tilts his head back to ram his face into the front wall. About the time he reaches the wall the van stops. Now the force of him hitting the wall is multiplied (inertia you know) . His face would hit the wall and stop (duh) and the momentum of his body would drive his chest toward the wall which would hyperextend his spine. That could easily result in a severed spinal cord.


----------



## watcher

wr said:


> I'm not sure if an autopsy would be able to prove that seizures or if an autopsy that comprehensive was performed but I have been told that traumatic spinal cord injuries can cause seizures.


I'm not sure but I'd think the blood chemistry would be "off" if there had been seizures.


----------



## Nevada

watcher said:


> Not really. IIRC it was a neck injury. If you google it you will find people who severed their spines just falling out of bed.
> 
> I don't know the specifics in this case so go with me here. Picture this. He's handcuffed with his arms behind him and he wants it to look like the cops beat him. What makes the best show of this? Facial wounds. So he stands up, faces the front of the van leaning forward and tilts his head back to ram his face into the front wall. About the time he reaches the wall the van stops. Now the force of him hitting the wall is multiplied (inertia you know) . His face would hit the wall and stop (duh) and the momentum of his body would drive his chest toward the wall which would hyperextend his spine. That could easily result in a severed spinal cord.


At best the city has civil liability for not using a seatbelt. At its worst, the individual police officers have criminal liability. I don't see from your suggestion that this could have been self-inflicted.


----------



## Nevada

watcher said:


> I'm not sure but I'd think the blood chemistry would be "off" if there had been seizures.


Off in what way? What would you expect the blood chemistry to show after a seizure?


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> At best the city has civil liability for not using a seatbelt. At its worst, the individual police officers have criminal liability. I don't see from your suggestion that this could have been self-inflicted.


Remove the van making a stop and insert him tripping and falling. This would also result in a broken neck.

I don't know how the law is written so there could be no civil nor criminal liability. If the law exempts prisoner vans in their seat belt law it would make any civil or criminal suit very difficult to bring. Aren't buses (school and mass transit) exempt from seat belt laws? Could the law be written in such a way to prevent law suits? I don't know.


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> Off in what way? What would you expect the blood chemistry to show after a seizure?


I don't know I'm not an expert but I'd think the extreme muscle contractions during a seizure would at the least cause a spike in lactic acid. Then again that would probably not last long.


----------



## Tricky Grama

watcher said:


> Remove the van making a stop and insert him tripping and falling. This would also result in a broken neck.
> 
> I don't know how the law is written so there could be no civil nor criminal liability. If the law exempts prisoner vans in their seat belt law it would make any civil or criminal suit very difficult to bring. Aren't buses (school and mass transit) exempt from seat belt laws? Could the law be written in such a way to prevent law suits? I don't know.


I read early on that the seat belt mandate was new-like days b/4 this happened.


----------



## Nevada

watcher said:


> I don't know I'm not an expert but I'd think the extreme muscle contractions during a seizure would at the least cause a spike in lactic acid. Then again that would probably not last long.


I'm not sure. I can see an electrolyte imbalance providing an explanation for a seizure, but I don't know that you can tell that a seizure occurred by blood work.


----------



## Nevada

watcher said:


> Remove the van making a stop and insert him tripping and falling. This would also result in a broken neck.
> 
> I don't know how the law is written so there could be no civil nor criminal liability. If the law exempts prisoner vans in their seat belt law it would make any civil or criminal suit very difficult to bring. Aren't buses (school and mass transit) exempt from seat belt laws? Could the law be written in such a way to prevent law suits? I don't know.


The thing is that a prisoner who is handcuffed and in leg irons is helpless in the back of that van, even if he wasn't injured at all. There's no way he could put himself in the seat belt. That seems to make the police responsible.


----------



## wr

Nevada said:


> He died in police custody. I think there is no realistic doubt that he died at the hands of police. Whether those police actions were criminal remains to be seen, but I see no alternative to believing that the police killed him.
> 
> I think the theories I've heard that Gray's broken neck was self-inflicted are a stretch, yet those theories are posted in this forum.
> 
> Let's face it, the charges are the product of a three week investigation by state and local officials. It's credible enough to present to a grand jury. There's no reason for anyone to be defensive about discussing the charges as credible.


The charges very likely reflect the findings of an investigation. My point was simply, the officers that have been charged deserve the same as any other accused. Innocent until proven guilty. 

I do agree that it would be unlikely for someone to self harm to the point of a partially severed spinal cord but convicting someone without a trial isn't fair either.


----------



## Nevada

wr said:


> My point was simply, the officers that have been charged deserve the same as any other accused. Innocent until proven guilty.


They deserve it, and they're getting that. What we think doesn't matter. The court will still consider them innocent until proven guilty.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> Yes, he died from injuries sustained while in police custody, and the coroner ruled the death a homicide. Charges are appropriate.


Charges aren't proof of guilt, and we have seen almost none of the evidence.
It's mostly been inaccurate rumors spread across the internet.

It could have all been avoided if he hadn't run



> *I read* that.
> 
> *Sources said* the medical examiner found Gray's catastrophic injury was caused when he slammed into the back of the police transport van, apparently breaking his neck; a head injury he sustained matches a bolt in the back of the van.
> http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattves...e-van-n1993192
> 
> Now, show me an account of the medical examiner's report that says otherwise.


Oh, you read it on the internet from an anonymous source?
Well that settles everything

You can do better than that


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> I'm not sure. I can see an electrolyte imbalance providing an explanation for a seizure, but I don't know that you can tell that a seizure occurred by blood work.


I don't either but it seems logical to me that if your body was reacting that way it'd screw with your body's chemistry.


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> They deserve it, and they're getting that. What we think doesn't matter. The court will still consider them innocent until proven guilty.


If you really believe that I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale, cheap. Right now this case has just about as much chance of being 'just' as you'd expect from a case of a white man killing a black in a 1920s court in the deep south.


----------



## popscott

When this is all over, then we will know the answers to the questions. All we can do right now is speculate.


----------



## HDRider

popscott said:


> When this is all over, then we will know the answers to the questions. All we can do right now is *speculate*.


And some are real good at that.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Seems to me, and NV said so at 1st as well, these charges are over the top. NO WAY will any jury convict the driver of 2nd degree murder! 
Seems we went thru this b/4...the "Z" guy? The prosecuter is so biased she went too far & will not get convictions w/these charges. 
Then what will happen? 
Is that the plan?


----------



## kuriakos

Tricky Grama said:


> Seems to me, and NV said so at 1st as well, these charges are over the top. NO WAY will any jury convict the driver of 2nd degree murder!
> Seems we went thru this b/4...the "Z" guy? The prosecuter is so biased she went too far & will not get convictions w/these charges.
> Then what will happen?
> Is that the plan?


The murder charge is probably not warranted, but she also charged him with lessor offenses, which the Zimmerman prosecutor did not do. That gives the jury a "compromise" charge to convict him of. It's wrong, but it happens all the time. I think he will be convicted of something, whether he should be or not. I don't know the particulars on the charges against the rest of the officers, but I would not be surprised if a few of them get no convictions. Some of the charges will probably be dismissed before trial.


----------



## Nevada

kuriakos said:


> I don't know the particulars on the charges against the rest of the officers, but I would not be surprised if a few of them get no convictions. Some of the charges will probably be dismissed before trial.


The charges still need to be considered by a grand jury.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> Then the charges sound correct. It was the van drive who got charged with murder.


I never said that

I asked how he had such specific information about the "knee in the neck"

I think that's really how it happened too, since he was obviously injured during the intial encounter

I figured to know the weight of the cop there must be a credible source


----------



## Nevada

Bearfootfarm said:


> I think that's really how it happened too, since he was obviously injured during the intial encounter


That's not what the medical examiner thinks.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> The charges still need to be considered by a grand jury.


That's "before a trial"
GJ's have a habit of doing what the prosecutors want since they get a one sided view of the evidence


----------



## Nevada

Bearfootfarm said:


> GJ's have a habit of doing what the prosecutors want since they get a one sided view of the evidence


Yeah, like in Ferguson.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> That's not what the medical examiner thinks.


According to your anonymous source.

Reality is he wouldn't be able to tell a 20 minute difference in the time of the injury, and the version you say is true is merely what has been reported but not verified


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> Yeah, like in Ferguson.


In Ferguson all the forensic evidence supported the defense, and there were several autopsies that gave the same results. All claims of "shot in the back" an "hands up" were refuted by hard evidence

In this case, the ME didn't get to do any examination until more than a week after the incident. There is no hard evidence of what really happened, and the ME supposedly made a determination that may or may not be correct, based on a single bruise to the head, which could easily have occurred before or after the neck injury

It's apples and oranges, so let's stick to this case in this thread


----------



## kuriakos

Nevada said:


> The charges still need to be considered by a grand jury.


Are you sure about that? I haven't followed this case very closely and I don't know the Maryland-specific criminal prosecution procedures, but that sounds incorrect. Either way, my comment was in regards to pre-trial hearings and motions that could whittle the charges down.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

kuriakos said:


> Are you sure about that? I haven't followed this case very closely and I don't know the Maryland-specific criminal prosecution procedures, but that sounds incorrect. Either way, my comment was in regards to pre-trial hearings and motions that could whittle the charges down.


Yes it has to go to a Grand Jury
The prosecutor jumped the gun with the charges to grab the glory.
She knows this is a once in a lifetime shot to make a name for herself

She really should recuse herself since Gray's family lawyer is one of her biggest campaign donors


----------



## Nevada

kuriakos said:


> Are you sure about that? I haven't followed this case very closely and I don't know the Maryland-specific criminal prosecution procedures, but that sounds incorrect. Either way, my comment was in regards to pre-trial hearings and motions that could whittle the charges down.


I'm not sure, but that's what I read in the news. Now I see an article that says she's bypassing the grand jury.


----------



## kuriakos

I haven't been able to determine it, probably because the media doesn't understand how it works either. I saw one article that said they have to face a city grand jury. That would be very unusual procedure after charges are already filed, but Maryland does have some unusual laws.


----------



## wr

Bearfootfarm said:


> In Ferguson all the forensic evidence supported the defense, and there were several autopsies that gave the same results. All claims of "shot in the back" an "hands up" were refuted by hard evidence
> 
> In this case, the ME didn't get to do any examination until more than a week after the incident. There is no hard evidence of what really happened, and the ME supposedly made a determination that may or may not be correct, based on a single bruise to the head, which could easily have occurred before or after the neck injury
> 
> It's apples and oranges, so let's stick to this case in this thread


I think we have all heard bits and pieces of information from 'reputable sources' but I don't believe the coroner's report has been released at this time so like everything else, nothing more than a single bruise to head may be conjecture or something the family stated and I keep thinking that it was a comment that came from the family.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> I think we have all heard bits and pieces of information from 'reputable sources' but I don't believe the coroner's report has been released at this time so like everything else, nothing more than a single bruise to head may be conjecture or something the family stated and I keep thinking that it was a comment that came from the family.


Exactly.

Until there is an official release of the report, it's all speculation, including the detail about a bruise matching a bolt


----------



## Nevada

Bearfootfarm said:


> Until there is an official release of the report, it's all speculation, including the detail about a bruise matching a bolt


Maybe, but I'm not ready to assume that Freddie Gray slipped on a bar of soap either.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> Maybe, but I'm not ready to assume that Freddie Gray slipped on a bar of soap either.


He appeared to be injured before entering the van, and was requesting medical help the entire ride, so the story already doesn't match known details

No honest ME could say precisely what time the fatal injury took place, and could only guess as to when a specific bruise occurred


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> The charges still need to be considered by a grand jury.


Two questions. Ever been on a grand jury? Ever heard the old phrase that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich? Its an old phase which is still used because its mostly true. Remember only one side gets to present evidence to the grand jury.


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> Yeah, like in Ferguson.


And you *know* the prosecutor wanted to have a true bill returned? Don't you think if that was what he wanted he would have just called witnesses who supported the "hands up don't shoot" version of the story? AFAIK, there's nothing which requires them to introduce any exculpatory evidence to a grand jury.


----------



## MoonRiver

Listening to Greta and it sounds like the knife may be illegal after all. That would blow a hole in several charges, and if true would make the DA look like an idiot.


----------



## kuriakos

If true, that will clear the false imprisonment charges and probably some of the misconduct in office charges. At least one has already filed a motion in regards to the knife. My gut tells me it probably was not a spring-assisted knife, but the truth will come out either way.


----------



## AmericanStand

Funny it all seems to revolve around a " manufactured "crime". 
Does anybody really feel the crime of owning a spring loaded knife. ?


----------



## poppy

AmericanStand said:


> Funny list all seems to revolve around a " manufactured "crime.
> Does anybody really feel the crime of owning a spring loaded knife. ?


What we "feel" is not important. If the knife was illegal, that is the law. If it was legal, they arrested him falsely.


----------



## AmericanStand

I disagree , When a large number of people know in their hearts that there is no reason for a "Crime " except to give the authorities another reason to imprison and torment them it foments unrest.
That's important.


----------



## kuriakos

Yes it's a stupid law but that doesn't matter in regards to the officers. They don't make the laws. They just enforce them. If they can convincingly articulate why they believed the knife was illegal (even if it wasn't) it could make a big difference for at least a couple of them.


----------



## AmericanStand

Is belief in a minor crime a defense to murder. ?


----------



## kuriakos

AmericanStand said:


> Is belief in a minor crime a defense to murder. ?


No, but it could be a defense to false imprisonment if it can be shown to be a reasonable belief. The officers charged with false imprisonment are not charged with murder.


----------



## haypoint

In most states, parolees are subject to search by police, without cause. Running away from a search is a violation of parole. In this specific case, the Cops arrested a parole violator. If his condition of parole included no weapons and no drugs, he'd know he was about to go back to prison, so likely took his chances on out running the Cops.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> I disagree , When a large number of people know in their hearts that there is no reason for a "Crime " except to give the authorities another reason to imprison and torment them it foments unrest.
> That's important.


Your disagreement doesn't change the law


----------



## Bearfootfarm

haypoint said:


> In most states, parolees are subject to search by police, without cause. Running away from a search is a violation of parole. In this specific case, the Cops arrested a parole violator. If his condition of parole included no weapons and no drugs, he'd know he was about to go back to prison, so likely took his chances on out running the Cops.


I haven't seen anything that suggests he was on parole.

He had one arrest for "escape" and that normally keeps one from getting parole.

I believe he had completed all his sentences, but was awaiting trail on several new charges


----------



## Tricky Grama

AmericanStand said:


> Is belief in a minor crime a defense to murder. ?


Neither is driving the van a condition for a murder charge. The 2nd degree charge is ludicrous. way over the top & will not stick.


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> Your disagreement doesn't change the law



Really ? Are you sure. ? 
Seems like back in grade school when I learned about government. ( in a Army school ) we were taught that disagreeing with a law was the first step to changing it. 
Now if I can find enough people that feel like me and WE convince enough lawmakers we are on the way to righteousness. !


----------



## poppy

AmericanStand said:


> Is belief in a minor crime a defense to murder. ?


I've seen no evidence murder was done. Have you seen any evidence anyone set out to kill Gray or did anything they thought might kill him? Cops take suspects to the ground and arrest them several times a day in this country without killing them, so unless you can show one or more of the cops exceeded normal procedure, murder was not committed.


----------



## mmoetc

poppy said:


> I've seen no evidence murder was done. Have you seen any evidence anyone set out to kill Gray or did anything they thought might kill him? Cops take suspects to the ground and arrest them several times a day in this country without killing them, so unless you can show one or more of the cops exceeded normal procedure, murder was not committed.


At the very least some of the officers violated normal procedure by not securing the suspect in the back of the transport. They can offer their own explanation of why they violated this simple procedure or they can leave it to the prosecution to offer their explanation. Part of the prosecution's explanation might just include calling as witnesses a number of people who took similar rides. It might also include examining why such a policy was deemed necessary by the city in the first place. His arrest will have to be explained by the defense. Or the prosecution can use the legal settlement paid by the city for just such arrests a few years ago to provide some context. The officer driving can explain the stops made to check on the prisoner or the prosecution can offer their own theories. That officer can also choose to explain the extra stop forgotten on the initial offiicial report. The arresting officers can explain how their arrest reports cite no resistance, struggle or unusual circumstance while the video shows otherwise. The officers can explain how their reports line up with each each other but not the facts and explain how that isn't colusion or the prosecution can exp&#322;ain their conspiracy theory. There are many types of murder charges. A drunk driver doesn't set out to kill someone but can by virtue of their actions be charged with murder. It will be hard for the prosecution to prove the intent or depraved indifference to get a second degree murder conviction but the manslaughter charge could hold up. Unless, of course, the officers provide some perfectly innocent scenario explaining their actions and official misstatements.


----------



## MoonRiver

mmoetc said:


> At the very least some of the officers violated normal procedure by not securing the suspect in the back of the transport. They can offer their own explanation of why they violated this simple procedure or they can leave it to the prosecution to offer their explanation. Part of the prosecution's explanation might just include calling as witnesses a number of people who took similar rides. It might also include examining why such a policy was deemed necessary by the city in the first place. His arrest will have to be explained by the defense. Or the prosecution can use the legal settlement paid by the city for just such arrests a few years ago to provide some context. The officer driving can explain the stops made to check on the prisoner or the prosecution can offer their own theories. That officer can also choose to explain the extra stop forgotten on the initial offiicial report. The arresting officers can explain how their arrest reports cite no resistance, struggle or unusual circumstance while the video shows otherwise. The officers can explain how their reports line up with each each other but not the facts and explain how that isn't colusion or the prosecution can exp&#322;ain their conspiracy theory. There are many types of murder charges. A drunk driver doesn't set out to kill someone but can by virtue of their actions be charged with murder. It will be hard for the prosecution to prove the intent or depraved indifference to get a second degree murder conviction but the manslaughter charge could hold up. Unless, of course, the officers provide some perfectly innocent scenario explaining their actions and official misstatements.


I think she overcharged and most of the officers will be found not guilty.


----------



## Nevada

MoonRiver said:


> I think she overcharged and most of the officers will be found not guilty.


Maybe on some of the charges. But it will also motivate some of them to turn state's evidence to make a deal.


----------



## JeffreyD

Nevada said:


> Maybe on some of the charges. But it will also motivate some of them to turn state's evidence to make a deal.


They won't turn on each other. Next!


----------



## Nevada

JeffreyD said:


> They won't turn on each other. Next!


Don't be too sure about that. I suspect that it's every man for himself right about now.


----------



## kuriakos

MoonRiver said:


> I think she overcharged and most of the officers will be found not guilty.


She probably did overcharge, but she also added lessor charges. It's a terrible way to go about criminal prosecution. Simply throw a lot of charges at someone. The state builds up the idea with so many charges that the defendant must be a really bad guy and deserves some punishment even if the state cannot prove their case on any individual charge, so the jury will settle on one of the lessor charges to give "rough justice." It goes against everything the system is about but it happens all the time.

I'm not taking a side for or against the officers, but the prosecution strategy appears from my perspective to be unethical. This case would probably be a good one to choose a judge trial instead of jury. Juries are usually very hesitant to convict police, but everything I'm hearing about Baltimore suggests it may not be the case there. A judge is more likely to be fair and not succumb to the temptation to compromise.


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> Don't be too sure about that. I suspect that it's every man for himself right about now.


Maybe or maybe not. People who depend on others to help keep them alive tend to form strong bonds.


----------



## Nevada

watcher said:


> Maybe or maybe not. People who depend on others to help keep them alive tend to form strong bonds.


In the first place, I'm not at all sure that any of these defendants will ever return to law enforcement. But even if they do have intentions of remaining cops, the consequences of these crimes will make any of them think about their own problems.


----------



## poppy

Nevada said:


> Maybe on some of the charges. But it will also motivate some of them to turn state's evidence to make a deal.


You're assuming there was something for the others to see that was over the line. That may well not be the case at all.


----------



## Nevada

poppy said:


> You're assuming there was something for the others to see that was over the line. That may well not be the case at all.


There's always more to know about a story. No exceptions.


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> In the first place, I'm not at all sure that any of these defendants will ever return to law enforcement. But even if they do have intentions of remaining cops, the consequences of these crimes will make any of them think about their own problems.


From what little I've been told its next to impossible to get a cop to roll over on another. Even a former cop, that once a Marine always a Marine thing. If they feel they, personally and professionally, are being railroaded there's a good chance they would rather 'take one for the team' rather than "rat out" someone else. They can see themselves as martyrs or protectors of those they love. Even if they think their fellow cop was wrong they will often cover for him. The old story of a man falling on a grenade to save his buddies aren't about someone wanting to commit suicide. 

For the most part people in LE and the military have a much different mindset than others. Lots of psychology involved but it basically comes down to seeing the world as "us" and "them".


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> There's always more to know about a story. No exceptions.


One thing they could do is all roll on each other. Person A say it was B. B say it was C. C point the finger at D. And so on. There's no better way to plant reasonable doubt in a jury's mind than have a lot of people saying that they saw what happened and have none of the stories match.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

The prosecutor seems to be the only one rolling over on anyone


----------



## haypoint

I've never been a cop. I don't have any friends that are Cops. But I worked 27 years in several different prisons in all security levels. I've seen handicapped inmates throw themselves out of their wheelchair and blame Corrections Officers. So, I believe 100% that Freddie was either throwing a temper tantrum or trying to ride the wave of police brutality that is the flavor of the week.
Corrections officers have a similar situation as Cops, our word against theirs. But, I never saw anyone abuse that power. Sure in the old days there was more physical interaction, just as teachers once had paddling boards or actually grabbed misbehaving children. But nearly every Officer I worked with exhibited more restraint than you could ever imagine.


----------



## Nevada

haypoint said:


> So, I believe 100% that Freddie was either throwing a temper tantrum or trying to ride the wave of police brutality that is the flavor of the week.


Are you suggesting that his spine wasn't really severed?


----------



## gapeach

*Baltimore PD Investigation Doesn't Support Charges* 
*Sources: Baltimore police
investigation doesnÂ´t support
some of prosecutionÂ´s charges*

CNN, by Evan Perez

Baltimore &#8212; The Baltimore police investigation into the death of Freddie Gray doesnÂ´t support some of the charges, including the most serious, filed by the Baltimore City StateÂ´s Attorney, potentially allowing lawyers representing the police officers the opportunity to undercut the prosecution, according to officials briefed on the two probes. (Snip) Officials familiar with the probes also say the homicide investigation run by police investigators at most contemplated a manslaughter charge, not second degree murder as Mosby charged one of the officers, Caesar Goodson. To win conviction for murder, prosecutors must prove intent to kill. Manslaughter relates to unintentional killings.

Details: Breaking News
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/06/politi...y-prosecution/

It seems there was a rush to judgement. There are the problems of the heroin in Gray's system and the knife was illegal in Baltimore.

Maybe he was on a drug high.


----------



## Nevada

MoonRiver said:


> Listening to Greta and it sounds like the knife may be illegal after all.


I don't know that it's been established that the knife was legal. I've read that at least one of the defense lawyers wants to see the knife. That's it as far as I know.


----------



## Nevada

gapeach said:


> the knife was illegal in Baltimore.


Do you have a reference for that?


----------



## mmoetc

haypoint said:


> I've never been a cop. I don't have any friends that are Cops. But I worked 27 years in several different prisons in all security levels. I've seen handicapped inmates throw themselves out of their wheelchair and blame Corrections Officers. So, I believe 100% that Freddie was either throwing a temper tantrum or trying to ride the wave of police brutality that is the flavor of the week.
> Corrections officers have a similar situation as Cops, our word against theirs. But, I never saw anyone abuse that power. Sure in the old days there was more physical interaction, just as teachers once had paddling boards or actually grabbed misbehaving children. But nearly every Officer I worked with exhibited more restraint than you could ever imagine.


I'll ask the same question of you that has gone unanswered by others. Were the officers at least negligent in not following proper procedure in not restraining Mr. Gray when they put him in the back of the van? Had Mr. Gray been buckled in as he was supposed to be would we be discussing his death or the problems in Baltimore?


----------



## AmericanStand

Near here a man when to prison for death of a cop. Although the man never. Knew the cop was chasing him. The cop never had him in sight after he started to chase him. Yet the man was held responce able for the cops death when the cops incompetent driving lead to his death since it was as a result of the mans actions. 
In the Gray case the cops actions led much more directly to his death.


----------



## gapeach

Nevada said:


> Do you have a reference for that?


USA TODAY
6 officers charged in Freddie Gray's death

The arrest report stated that the 25-year-old Gray was carrying "a spring-assisted, one hand-operated knife." A police task force also determined the knife was "spring-assisted," thereby violating city law, _The Baltimore Sun _reported.
In a motion filed Monday, one of Nero's attorneys, Marc Zayon, states the knife is illegal under both city and state law.
City law prohibits the sale, possession or carrying of "any knife with an automatic spring or other device for opening and/or closing the blade," commonly called a switchblade. The state statue applies to a knife "having a blade that opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button, spring, or other device in the handle."
"We will litigate the issues of the legality of the arrest of Freddie Gray in the courtroom," Zayon said in a statement. "I am quite confident Officer Nero will be acquitted."

_
Mosby will not let them see the knife._


----------



## Nevada

gapeach said:


> USA TODAY
> 6 officers charged in Freddie Gray's death
> 
> The arrest report stated that the 25-year-old Gray was carrying "a spring-assisted, one hand-operated knife." A police task force also determined the knife was "spring-assisted," thereby violating city law, _The Baltimore Sun _reported.
> In a motion filed Monday, one of Nero's attorneys, Marc Zayon, states the knife is illegal under both city and state law.
> City law prohibits the sale, possession or carrying of "any knife with an automatic spring or other device for opening and/or closing the blade," commonly called a switchblade. The state statue applies to a knife "having a blade that opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button, spring, or other device in the handle."
> "We will litigate the issues of the legality of the arrest of Freddie Gray in the courtroom," Zayon said in a statement. "I am quite confident Officer Nero will be acquitted."
> 
> _
> Mosby will not let them see the knife._


That's the opinion of a few cops, not lawyers. It's not a legal finding, and it's also at odds with the finding of lawyers in the prosecutors office. As your quote said, the issue will be heard in court.


----------



## Nevada

gapeach said:


> _Mosby will not let them see the knife._


The defense will have an opportunity to see all of the evidence before trial, during the normal course of discovery.


----------



## mmoetc

gapeach said:


> USA TODAY
> 6 officers charged in Freddie Gray's death
> 
> The arrest report stated that the 25-year-old Gray was carrying "a spring-assisted, one hand-operated knife." A police task force also determined the knife was "spring-assisted," thereby violating city law, _The Baltimore Sun _reported.
> In a motion filed Monday, one of Nero's attorneys, Marc Zayon, states the knife is illegal under both city and state law.
> City law prohibits the sale, possession or carrying of "any knife with an automatic spring or other device for opening and/or closing the blade," commonly called a switchblade. The state statue applies to a knife "having a blade that opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button, spring, or other device in the handle."
> "We will litigate the issues of the legality of the arrest of Freddie Gray in the courtroom," Zayon said in a statement. "I am quite confident Officer Nero will be acquitted."
> 
> _
> Mosby will not let them see the knife._


Go down to your local farm store and look through the knife case. See those little pieces welded on the blade that allow you to open the knife with one hand while hanging on to whatever you're trying to cut with the other? Qualify as a "switchblade"? Read the law as posted.

The knife will be examined by the defense during the pre-trial discovery. The defense is laying their groundwork and doing their PR just as the prosecution has.


----------



## 7thswan

Read up on ms. Mosley . seems like she is in a world of hurt over her charges. It'a all over tv and the net.


----------



## Shine

Then I am carrying an illegal knife right now. My utility knife can be opened with one hand... I would like to see that law try to pass constitutional muster...


----------



## Nevada

mmoetc said:


> Go down to your local farm store and look through the knife case. See those little pieces welded on the blade that allow you to open the knife with one hand while hanging on to whatever you're trying to cut with the other? Qualify as a "switchblade"? Read the law as posted.


This issue won't hinge on whether there is a legal finding that the knife was legal or illegal. The bar is set much lower for an arrest. It only requires that the cops had a good faith belief that the knife was illegal. If a cop arrests someone on a good faith belief that he was carrying an illegal knife and the knife was later judged to be legal then the charges will be dropped, but the arrest was still a good faith arrest. We should expect the defense to dwell on that point.

So whether there is ultimately a finding that the knife is legal is not as big of an issue as you might think. But if the jury looks at the knife and thinks it's absurd to believe it's illegal then the cops will probably be found guilty if false imprisonment.


----------



## MoonRiver

Nevada said:


> That's the opinion of a few cops, not lawyers. It's not a legal finding, and it's also at odds with the finding of lawyers in the prosecutors office. As your quote said, the issue will be heard in court.


It appears the prosecutor used MD law instead of Baltimore law. Oops!


----------



## Nevada

MoonRiver said:


> It appears the prosecutor used MD law instead of Baltimore law. Oops!


She was quoted as saying that the knife didn't violate MD law, but we don't know if the charges took into account Baltimore city law.


----------



## haypoint

Nevada said:


> Are you suggesting that his spine wasn't really severed?


I am open to the possibility of a self inflected injury that damaged his spine. I've seen inmates throw themselves out of wheelchairs and blame Guards for dumping him out. I've seen inmates slam their heads against walls to create an injury that he'll later blame on staff. 
Plenty of people felt George Zimmerman had self-inflicted injuries. I don't see why the abrasion on the back of Freddie's head that corresponds with a bolt in the van couldn't prove self inflicted injuries.


----------



## Nevada

haypoint said:


> I am open to the possibility of a self inflected injury that damaged his spine. I've seen inmates throw themselves out of wheelchairs and blame Guards for dumping him out. I've seen inmates slam their heads against walls to create an injury that he'll later blame on staff.
> Plenty of people felt George Zimmerman had self-inflicted injuries. I don't see why the abrasion on the back of Freddie's head that corresponds with a bolt in the van couldn't prove self inflicted injuries.


I hope the cops have a better defense than that. I doubt that a jury would buy it.


----------



## watcher

mmoetc said:


> Go down to your local farm store and look through the knife case. See those little pieces welded on the blade that allow you to open the knife with one hand while hanging on to whatever you're trying to cut with the other? Qualify as a "switchblade"? Read the law as posted.



They do not under this law, the key words being "blade that opens automatically". You can push that button on those knives all you want and the knife will not open on its on. You must use your thumb to open it. 

IIRC, there are/were some states which had/have laws written in such a way to make these type of knives illegal. That's because they use wording referring to a knife which can be opened with one hand. Most of them were written to make 'butterfly' knives illegal.


----------



## Nevada

watcher said:


> They do not under this law, the key words being "blade that opens automatically". You can push that button on those knives all you want and the knife will not open on its on. You must use your thumb to open it.


The operative words in the city ordinance are "commonly known as a switch-blade knife." The cops repeated those same words when he was charged (see image below).

So did the cops really have a good faith belief that Gray's knife was a switchblade?


----------



## kuriakos

The operative words are "with an automatic spring or other device for opening and/or closing the blade". The "commonly known as" part isn't really important.

With good faith, it doesn't really matter what the officers believed. What matters is whether that belief was objectively reasonable. The Baltimore PD task force's finding that the knife is illegal lends credence to their good faith, but their objectiveness can be questioned also. If the knife can be shown to be spring assisted, then the arrest is solid and they're good. If it is actually legal, then they will probably have to bring in an outside expert to testify that it was reasonable for them to mistake it for illegal.

Either way, these officers face some more serious charges that will not go away even if the false imprisonment ones do.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

mmoetc said:


> Go down to your local farm store and look through the knife case. See those *little pieces welded on the blade* that allow you to open the knife with one hand while hanging on to whatever you're trying to cut with the other? Qualify as a "switchblade"? Read the law as posted.
> 
> The knife will be examined by the defense during the pre-trial discovery. The defense is laying their groundwork and doing their PR just as the prosecution has.


A stud on the blade isn't the same thing as "spring assisted", and does not make it a switchblade under MD statutes


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> The cops repeated those same words when he was charged (see image below).


That's not a direct quote from the officers.
It's from the ordinance cited

http://baltimorecode.org/19/59/59-22/



> Â§ 59-22 Switch-blade knives.
> 
> (a) Possession or sale, etc., prohibited.
> 
> 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.


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> The operative words in the city ordinance are "commonly known as a switch-blade knife." The cops repeated those same words when he was charged (see image below).
> 
> So did the cops really have a good faith belief that Gray's knife was a switchblade?


In this msg we are talking about blades with a thumb button to allow the user to open it manually with one hand. The law is talking about knives which will open automatically.

The fact that an automatically opening knife is "commonly known" as a switch blade has any bearing. A fully automatic firearm is "commonly known" as a machine gun that doesn't change the fact for it to be view as a full auto weapon it must meet the necessary criteria not just have someone refer to it as a machine gun.

If a cop has a doubt then he is almost always going to err on the side of caution. Its usually better to have the charges dropped when a mistake is made than allowing an illegal weapon to stay on the streets.


----------



## Nevada

watcher said:


> If a cop has a doubt then he is almost always going to err on the side of caution. Its usually better to have the charges dropped when a mistake is made than allowing an illegal weapon to stay on the streets.


If they can get a jury to believe it then fine. That might be reasonable, but I would like to see the knife first.


----------



## watcher

Nevada said:


> If they can get a jury to believe it then fine. That might be reasonable, but I would like to see the knife first.


Got a couple of layers before it hits the jury. Grand jury, prosecutors, judges, defense lawyers and the like. If I were on the jury I'd have to know a lot more about the knife than I could tell by looking at it.


----------



## MoonRiver

watcher said:


> Got a couple of layers before it hits the jury. Grand jury, prosecutors, judges, defense lawyers and the like. If I were on the jury I'd have to know a lot more about the knife than I could tell by looking at it.


I believe she bypassed the grand jury. Since she already filed the charges, no need for grand jury.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> She was quoted as saying that the knife didn't violate MD law, but we don't know if the charges took into account Baltimore city law.


Possessing it at home is legal
Carrying it in a pocket outside the home is not


----------



## AmericanStand

Any proof Mr. Gray actually had a knife ?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

MoonRiver said:


> I believe she bypassed the grand jury. Since she already filed the charges, no need for grand jury.


I've heard conflicting reports as to whether it has to go to the Grand Jury
Mosby needs to recuse herself, but she wants the publicity


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> Any proof Mr. Gray actually had a knife ?


There's never been any dispute as to whether he had a knife
The only disagreement is if it's a legal knife or not


----------



## Nevada

watcher said:


> If I were on the jury I'd have to know a lot more about the knife than I could tell by looking at it.


The only question the jury has to decide regarding the false imprisonment charges is whether the police had a good faith belief that the knife was illegal. That's going to require deciding whether it's reasonable for a lay police officer to see that knife and think it might violate the city ordinance. Remember, these cops aren't lawyers.

This isn't about making a legal finding on the legality of the knife. It's about whether the cops acted in good faith.


----------



## edcopp

Well:

It's baltimore and the Patriot Act covers Baltimore. So. anything to do with the constitution is void. 

No need for probable cause to search the victim. He made "eye contact" with a cop so kill him. They can just call it suicide by "eye contact'.

There is a long list of charges for the cops involved. From murder to hand slap. Stand by for the "hand slap", and this will take a long time.

No hurry, all the cops involved are on leave with pay ($$$$$$$).

Now the Mayor thinks that "this is not quite right (to charge the cops). So she has ordered a federal investigation from the justice department. Should take a few years, or so. It is very possible that the six cops involved will retire before this case might come to trial. They will draw a paycheck until then ($$$$$).

It is extermely likely that there will be no trial at all. This discussion is likely as close as we can get in this case.

The cops are above the law. 

Without the Constitution there is no rule of law.


----------



## edcopp

At the end of the day, Freddie will still be DEAD.


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> There's never been any dispute as to whether he had a knife
> 
> The only disagreement is if it's a legal knife or not



Who would dispute it ? Freddie is dead. 
BUT if it is planted evidence it would go a long ways towards premeditation. 
The reason I ask is a switchblade used to be one of the evidences of choice for a cop to carry in case a justification was needed.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> Who would dispute it ? Freddie is dead.
> BUT if it is planted evidence it would go a long ways towards premeditation.
> The reason I ask is a switchblade used to be one of the evidences of choice for a cop to carry in case a justification was needed.


LOL
Planted evidence?
He had an illegal knife, no matter how much Mosbly wants to deny that


----------



## mmoetc

Bearfootfarm said:


> LOL
> Planted evidence?
> He had an illegal knife, no matter how much Mosbly wants to deny that


So you've seen the knife? Or are you just taking the word of this officer http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/08/baltimore-officer-brian-rice-freddie-gray. It seems he may have a few issues of his own.


----------



## Nevada

Bearfootfarm said:


> LOL
> Planted evidence?
> He had an illegal knife, no matter how much Mosbly wants to deny that


Are you denying that cops sometimes plant evidence? Didn't we just have a case where a cop dropped a tazer gun by a suspect? Other cop at the scene didn't even bat an eye when the tazer was dropped, as if it were a regular thing.

Unfortunately it's a fair question.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

mmoetc said:


> So you've seen the knife? Or are you just taking the word of this officer http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/08/baltimore-officer-brian-rice-freddie-gray. It seems he may have a few issues of his own.


A "task force" has examined the knife and said it meets the definition of "spring assisted"


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> Are you denying that cops sometimes plant evidence? Didn't we just have a case where a cop dropped a tazer gun by a suspect? Other cop at the scene didn't even bat an eye when the tazer was dropped, as if it were a regular thing.
> 
> Unfortunately it's a fair question.


*Other cases have nothing to do with this case*, and there is no evidence, nor have there been allegations anything was "planted"



> http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...e-freddie-gray. It seems he may have a few issues of his own.


See the above


----------



## Nevada

Bearfootfarm said:


> See the above


I can't. Your URL is munged.

Hint: When you copy a link from a conservative forum that has been shortened by the forum software, you can't select the link and copy because you'll copy the shortened version. Instead, right-click on the link and select "copy link location." That will copy the full link instead of the shortened link.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> I can't. Your URL is munged.
> 
> Hint: When you copy a link *from a conservative forum* that has been shortened by the forum software, you can't select the link and copy because you'll copy the shortened version. Instead, right-click on the link and select "copy link location." That will copy the full link instead of the shortened link.


It wasn't my URL
That was a quote from a previous post and "see the above" was meant to answer them, in that former cases mean nothing when discussing this one



> Originally Posted by mmoetc View Post
> So you've seen the knife? Or are you just taking the word of this officer http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...e-freddie-gray. It seems he may have a few issues of his own.


(You think "theguardian.com" is a "conservative forum"?)
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/08/baltimore-officer-brian-rice-freddie-gray

Good one!!


----------



## Nevada

Bearfootfarm said:


> (You think "theguardian.com" is a "conservative forum"?)


My mistake. Most of the munged links I see around here were copied from conservative discussion forums where HT conservatives huddle to discuss comebacks. Do you need to know which forums I'm referring to?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Nevada said:


> My mistake. Most of the munged links I see around here were copied from conservative discussion forums *where HT conservatives huddle to discuss comebacks.* Do you need to know which forums I'm referring to?


What makes you think anyone conspires to discuss comebacks?
Is that what you do?

If you want to list forums, feel free.
The facts are all the "comebacks" I need, and I can find them on my own


----------



## mmoetc

Bearfootfarm said:


> A "task force" has examined the knife and said it meets the definition of "spring assisted"


That would be the police task force investigating police officers in their own force. The same police force that allowed the officer in a supervisory position to continue to serve even though he had threatened officers on other forces and some experts say he should have been relieved of duties before this incident. I'll suspect their non biased attitude.

Since it still remains unanswered I'll ask you the question I've posted before. Were the officers at least negligent in not buckling Mr Gray into the back of the van? Could all this have been avoided if they'd just done their job?


----------



## Wanda

mmoetc said:


> That would be the police task force investigating police officers in their own force. The same police force that allowed the officer in a supervisory position to continue to serve even though he had threatened officers on other forces and some experts say he should have been relieved of duties before this incident. I'll suspect their non biased attitude.
> 
> Since it still remains unanswered I'll ask you the question I've posted before. Were the officers at least negligent in not buckling Mr Gray into the back of the van? Could all this have been avoided if they'd just done their job?



You have to be patient. These fine folks are pondering the evidence, before they answer your simple question! It has only been a couple of weeks now that they have been ignoring your query.:hysterical:


----------



## Laura Zone 5

Nothing that happens from this point forward will satisfy anyone.

Group A will not be happy / satisfied until everyone involved in the case is executed and millions and millions of dollars put into their hands.

Group B will not be happy / satisfied until everyone involved in the case is exonerated because Freddie was a low down thug, and this is all a political move.

Group C will not be happy / satisfied until everyone is a Vegan.

Group D will not be happy / satisfied until the Pope conducts a gay marriage.

Group E will not be happy / satisfied...........

So yeah, no one will be happy.
Why don't we all go outside, take a walk, smell some flowers; eat some fruit. Sheesh.


----------



## mmoetc

Laura Zone 5 said:


> Nothing that happens from this point forward will satisfy anyone.
> 
> Group A will not be happy / satisfied until everyone involved in the case is executed and millions and millions of dollars put into their hands.
> 
> Group B will not be happy / satisfied until everyone involved in the case is exonerated because Freddie was a low down thug, and this is all a political move.
> 
> Group C will not be happy / satisfied until everyone is a Vegan.
> 
> Group D will not be happy / satisfied until the Pope conducts a gay marriage.
> 
> Group E will not be happy / satisfied...........
> 
> So yeah, no one will be happy.
> Why don't we all go outside, take a walk, smell some flowers; eat some fruit. Sheesh.


I'll take that as a "no".


----------



## Laura Zone 5

mmoetc said:


> I'll take that as a "no".


huh?

OF COURSE none of this would have been an issue had they 'done their jobs'.
But they didn't, and it created a NO WIN situation.
That's the human experiment.


----------



## mmoetc

Laura Zone 5 said:


> huh?
> 
> OF COURSE none of this would have been an issue had they 'done their jobs'.
> But they didn't, and it created a NO WIN situation.
> That's the human experiment.


Thanks for finally offering an answer to a fairly simple question.

Just because those on the extreme ends of any problem will never agree in the correct solution doesn't mean there isn't a solution that will work for most people. The investigation, charges, possible trial and subsequent verdicts won't make everyone happy no matter the outcome. It doesn't mean it's not important to do follow through with them in as open and transparent a manner as possible. Maybe it can prevent the next incident like this from happening. Maybe not. But if we never try to improve, we never will. It's an important maxim for individuals like Freddy Gray and organizations like the Baltimore PD.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Bearfootfarm said:


> What makes you think anyone conspires to discuss comebacks?
> Is that what you do?
> 
> If you want to list forums, feel free.
> The facts are all the "comebacks" I need, and I can find them on my own


Aw, c'mon, Bearfoot, you know the only credible links are from old movies, moveon.org & mediamatters! 
Huffy prolly got too 'right'...doesn't provide enuf koolade.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

mmoetc said:


> That would be the police task force investigating police officers in their own force. The same police force that allowed the officer in a supervisory position to continue to serve even though he had threatened officers on other forces and some experts say he should have been relieved of duties before this incident. I'll suspect their non biased attitude.
> 
> Since it still remains unanswered I'll ask you the question I've posted before. Were the officers at least negligent in not buckling Mr Gray into the back of the van? *Could all this have been avoided* if they'd just done their job?


Yes, they should have buckled him in, and it all could have been avoided if he hadn't run in the first place, since it seems obvious the initial injury occurred when he was caught and taken into custody.

There were no real "threats" of other officers.

"Heads will roll" isn't a literal threat


----------



## mmoetc

Bearfootfarm said:


> Yes, they should have buckled him in, and it all could have been avoided if he hadn't run in the first place, since it seems obvious the initial injury occurred when he was caught and taken into custody.
> 
> There were no real "threats" of other officers.
> 
> "Heads will roll" isn't a literal threat


It was apparently threatening enough to report to his superiors and be "investigated". Seems like the officer involved might have some issues with self control and anger management. A potentially deadly combination.

I thought it was obvious the injury occurred when Mr. Gray threw himself around the back of the van and banged his neck against a protruding bolt. One would think that if enough force was used to apprehend Mr. Gray that it resulted in a broken neck it might have been reflected in the official reports the arresting officers signed off on. What's obvious to me is the best people to investigate possible police misconduct isn't the force that has already settled numerous misconduct claims.


----------



## haypoint

Timeline. Freddie was moving his legs as they drug him to the vehicle. Freddie was sitting up in the back of the van. We know that Freddie was sitting up enough to contact the bolt with the back of his head. Freddie was moving around violently, according to the suspect in the van. When the cops got to the Police station, Freddie wasn't moving, not breathing. Seems clear Freddie died after his thrashing about in the van and prior to his arrival at the Police Station. Would riding around in the back of a van without a seat belt snap your neck? What are the maximum G forces in a "rough ride"? Must be greater than the wildest ride at Cedar Point, otherwise thousands of teenagers would be dead. Can we agree that a "rough ride" isn't, by itself, going to snap your neck?
If I were taken on a rough ride in the back of a van, I'd lay down as much as i could, to avoid injury. If I wanted to sustain injuries, I'd get as upright as I could and throw myself across the van, repeatedly. Any crook knows that a Jury will be swayed by Mug Shot showing the Cops beat you up. 
Us average citizens cannot equate the situation in the same light as Freddie may have. A week of bruises and maybe a broken bone that could get you a sentence reduction is a great trade. We'll never know if it was self-inflected, but we must admit he had motive.


----------



## mmoetc

haypoint said:


> Timeline. Freddie was moving his legs as they drug him to the vehicle. Freddie was sitting up in the back of the van. We know that Freddie was sitting up enough to contact the bolt with the back of his head. Freddie was moving around violently, according to the suspect in the van. When the cops got to the Police station, Freddie wasn't moving, not breathing. Seems clear Freddie died after his thrashing about in the van and prior to his arrival at the Police Station. Would riding around in the back of a van without a seat belt snap your neck? What are the maximum G forces in a "rough ride"? Must be greater than the wildest ride at Cedar Point, otherwise thousands of teenagers would be dead. Can we agree that a "rough ride" isn't, by itself, going to snap your neck?
> If I were taken on a rough ride in the back of a van, I'd lay down as much as i could, to avoid injury. If I wanted to sustain injuries, I'd get as upright as I could and throw myself across the van, repeatedly. Any crook knows that a Jury will be swayed by Mug Shot showing the Cops beat you up.
> Us average citizens cannot equate the situation in the same light as Freddie may have. A week of bruises and maybe a broken bone that could get you a sentence reduction is a great trade. We'll never know if it was self-inflected, but we must admit he had motive.


Timeline- Freddy appeared healthy when placed into the van. He had a broken neck when the van arrived. Whose job was it to ensure that Freddy couldn't hurt himself in the back of the van? Who appears to have lied on the arrest reports? Who lied about the number of stops the van made? Who could have simply followed procedure and we never would have heard of Freddy Gray?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

mmoetc said:


> *It was apparently threatening enough to report to his superiors and be "investigated". * Seems like the officer involved might have some issues with self control and anger management. A potentially deadly combination.
> 
> I thought it was obvious the injury occurred when Mr. *Gray threw himself around* the back of the van and banged his neck against a protruding bolt.
> 
> One would think that if enough force was used to apprehend Mr. Gray that it resulted in a broken neck it might have been reflected in the official reports the arresting officers signed off on.
> 
> What's obvious to me is the best people to investigate possible police misconduct isn't the force that has already settled numerous misconduct claims.


No charges were filed were there?

Gray was dragging his feet and complaining of pain when first put in the van

Who do you think should investigate if not those who know the most about the case?



> Timeline- Freddy appeared healthy when placed into the van.


Not in the video I saw


----------



## mmoetc

The people that know the most are the officers involved. By your logic we should have let them, people who filed false reports and lied about the number of stops investigate themselves. That's how many of these incidents are investigated which had heightened the mistrust of the communities involved. There are many competent investigative agencies who could be called in to investigate things like this. Agencies that don't have personal ties to those they are investigating or an interest in protecting the reputation of their own organization by skewing the results in their favor. 

Let's go with your theory that Gray was obviously hurt and had no use of his legs when put into the van. The police would then have put an obviously injured man in restraints unsecured in the back of a moving vehicle and driven him around for half an hour. On top of lying about the physicalness of the arrest and the number of stops made they didn't follow the simple procedure of buckling an obviously injured suspect in. And none of this rises to any level of a crime having been committed by these officers?

Either the officers injured Gray during the arrest as you surmise and their subsequent actions helped lead to his death or he was healthy when put in and by not properly securing him their actions led to his injuries and death. Either way they are in some manner responsible.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Either the officers injured Gray during the arrest as you surmise and their subsequent actions helped lead to his death or he was healthy when put in and by not properly securing him their actions led to his injuries and death. Either way they are in some manner responsible.


Yes they bear some responsibility, and so does Gray, since he started the whole incident



> The people that know the most are the officers involved. By your logic we should have let them, people who filed false reports and lied about the number of stops investigate themselves.


We all know that's not what I meant. Try to be serious



> And none of this rises to any level of a crime having been committed by these officers?


That's for a judge or jury to determine when they see all the facts.


----------



## 7thswan

Does anyone know or not -if FG had a back surgery just before the arrest? I read he had.
My Mom has had 5, I know that at one point if she would have moved the wrong way-it would have severed her spine. She had to wear a brace for a time.


----------



## mmoetc

Bearfootfarm said:


> Yes they bear some responsibility, and so does Gray, since he started the whole incident
> 
> 
> We all know that's not what I meant. Try to be serious
> 
> 
> That's for a judge or jury to determine when they see all the facts.


Mr. Gray is reported to have "started" this incident because he made eye contact with the supervising officer( the one who was the subject of complaints by the other police force) and fled. Of course we only have this information from the same officers involved in the incident who later lied on their official reports about how the arrest happened. Pardon my skepticism. We'll never know why Mr Gray may have fled because he's not around to explain how he "started" things. 

Yeah, I took your statement to its absurd conclusion. Now explain to me how having the same people in the same department which has been repeatedly accused of misconduct investigate their own in a situation like this will help engender trust in a mistrustful community. Aren't there plenty of other organizations without the seeming self serving bias of the Baltimore PD who could be called in to investigate an issue like this. Isn't it usually better to have outside scrutiny? 

You're right, it will ultimately be decided by a judge or jury and little said between anonymous posters on an interweb forum will have much affect on that decision. But we're discussing our opinions here and that was what I referenced. Of course you likely knew that so I'll now ask you to be serious. So I'll ask the question this way- in your opinion did the officers commit crimes that led directly to Freddy Gray's death. Could they, just by buckling him in, or, if was injured as you claim during the arrest, gotten him proper medical care could they have prevented his death. Was it simply negligence on their part or was it criminal?


----------



## mmoetc

7thswan said:


> Does anyone know or not -if FG had a back surgery just before the arrest? I read he had.
> My Mom has had 5, I know that at one point if she would have moved the wrong way-it would have severed her spine. She had to wear a brace for a time.


You should read more. It has been disproven, even in earlier posts here, that Mr. Gray had back surgery or any legal claims regarding back injuries. Even if he had it doesn't explain why he wasn't properly secured for transport.


----------



## 7thswan

mmoetc said:


> You should read more. It has been disproven, even in earlier posts here, that Mr. Gray had back surgery or any legal claims regarding back injuries. Even if he had it doesn't explain why he wasn't properly secured for transport.


That's why I asked, haven't been able to stay up on this.


----------



## mmoetc

7thswan said:


> That's why I asked, haven't been able to stay up on this.


Lol lol. ETA- you asked the same question back in post #14. It was disproven in post #28, about four hours later. You really should try to remember what you said before you repeat obvious misinformation once again.


----------



## Tricky Grama

haypoint said:


> Timeline. Freddie was moving his legs as they drug him to the vehicle. Freddie was sitting up in the back of the van. We know that Freddie was sitting up enough to contact the bolt with the back of his head. Freddie was moving around violently, according to the suspect in the van. When the cops got to the Police station, Freddie wasn't moving, not breathing. Seems clear Freddie died after his thrashing about in the van and prior to his arrival at the Police Station. Would riding around in the back of a van without a seat belt snap your neck? What are the maximum G forces in a "rough ride"? Must be greater than the wildest ride at Cedar Point, otherwise thousands of teenagers would be dead. Can we agree that a "rough ride" isn't, by itself, going to snap your neck?
> If I were taken on a rough ride in the back of a van, I'd lay down as much as i could, to avoid injury. If I wanted to sustain injuries, I'd get as upright as I could and throw myself across the van, repeatedly. Any crook knows that a Jury will be swayed by Mug Shot showing the Cops beat you up.
> Us average citizens cannot equate the situation in the same light as Freddie may have. A week of bruises and maybe a broken bone that could get you a sentence reduction is a great trade. We'll never know if it was self-inflected, but we must admit he had motive.


I thought there was documentation showing the driver stopped at one point & got into the back & shackled him? Coulda been another 'incident' then.


----------



## Tricky Grama

mmoetc said:


> Timeline- Freddy appeared healthy when placed into the van. He had a broken neck when the van arrived. Whose job was it to ensure that Freddy couldn't hurt himself in the back of the van? Who appears to have lied on the arrest reports? Who lied about the number of stops the van made? Who could have simply followed procedure and we never would have heard of Freddy Gray?


The video clearly shows him dragging his legs, b/4 being put into the van. If he was just being obstinate here, its gonna work in his detriment b/c that shows him already injured...from resisting arrest...then banging his head REEEEALLY helped, huh, then the driver got back there...


----------



## mmoetc

Tricky Grama said:


> I thought there was documentation showing the driver stopped at one point & got into the back & shackled him? Coulda been another 'incident' then.


Yet another "theory" to explain how Mr. Gray killed himself? I'm having trouble keeping up.


----------



## mmoetc

Tricky Grama said:


> The video clearly shows him dragging his legs, b/4 being put into the van. If he was just being obstinate here, its gonna work in his detriment b/c that shows him already injured...from resisting arrest...then banging his head REEEEALLY helped, huh, then the driver got back there...


These aren't my "theories". I'm still asking why if he was obviously hurt medical attention wasn't given. If he wasn't why he wasn't properly restrained. Why official reports had false information about the arrest and number of stops. Why a supervising officer seemingly wasn't investigated thoroughly for threatening officers of another force and was on the street to instigate the initial encounter by making "eye contact" with Mr Gray.


----------



## wr

If I'm not mistaken, the detainee on the other side of the partition has indicated that he did not state that he'd heard Freddie Gray thrashing or banging on the other side. 

Am I misinformed or is this something that's changed again?


----------



## 7thswan

mmoetc said:


> Lol lol. ETA- you asked the same question back in post #14. It was disproven in post #28, about four hours later. You really should try to remember what you said before you repeat obvious misinformation once again.


Thanks for the considerate reply. I hope You are haveing a Wounderful day.


----------



## Tricky Grama

mmoetc said:


> Yet another "theory" to explain how Mr. Gray killed himself? I'm having trouble keeping up.


Report I read said the van driver got in the back-at the last stop I believe? So...what happened there?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

7thswan said:


> Does anyone know or not -if FG had a back surgery just before the arrest? I read he had.
> My Mom has had 5, I know that at one point if she would have moved the wrong way-it would have severed her spine. She had to wear a brace for a time.


There's no evidence of any surgery


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> So I'll ask the question this way- in your opinion did the officers commit crimes that led directly to Freddy Gray's death. Could they, just by buckling him in, or, if was injured as you claim during the arrest, gotten him proper medical care could they have prevented his death. Was it simply negligence on their part or was it criminal?


I don't think all of them committed crimes, and I'm not sure if any of them did.

I think the prosecutor wants to be famous, which is why she bypassed a Grand Jury when she really should step aside.


----------



## mmoetc

7thswan said:


> Thanks for the considerate reply. I hope You are haveing a Wounderful day.


Your welcome. I did have a wonderful day. I helped build some raised planters for the good folks down at the assisted living center down the road. The wheelchair bound residents will be able to roll up and play in the dirt. We'll be filling and helping with the planting this weekend. I could talk to the cognitive specialist while I'm there and see if she can recommend any exercises to help with your memory if you'd like.


----------



## mmoetc

Tricky Grama said:


> Report I read said the van driver got in the back-at the last stop I believe? So...what happened there?


Without some link to the report you cite I can't really comment on it with any certainty. Was it the extra stop not noted in the driver's official report? Could be the driver was checking to see if the unsecured ride had the desired effect. Could be she went back to buckle him in so as to look like procedure was followed. Could be a lot of things, most of them not so innocent to me.


----------



## haypoint

It is human nature to take our experiences and a bunch of guessing to create our beliefs.
Most folks know little about the spine and even less about spinal fluid. We know if you dive into a shallow pool and hit your head, your neck breaks and you die. 
But there is a lot more to it than that. You can survive a broken neck. Happens all the time. EMS are trained to immobilize your neck injury. If the spinal bones are damaged, but the spinal cord is not damaged, you can make a full recovery.
Here is a reasonable scenario based on what we know. Freddie ran from the Cops. Cops caught Freddie. Freddie resisted. Freddie was dragged to the Van. Freddie died in the Van.
I think that Freddie could have sustained a neck injury being tackled by Cops. Without a medically necessary neck brace, either the &#8220;rough ride&#8221; or Freddie&#8217;s self-inflicted head banging, the spinal cord was severed.
I&#8217;m not sure if Cops should expect that every time they chase and tackle a suspect, they should call an ambulance and have x rays done. I doubt Freddie or the Cops knew Freddie&#8217;s neck was damaged. 
It is not OK for Cops to be judge and jury on the street. But I don&#8217;t see tackling a fleeing suspect  as intent to kill. I don&#8217;t think a &#8220;rough ride &#8220;was intended to kill Freddie.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Here is a reasonable scenario based on what we know. Freddie ran from the Cops. Cops caught Freddie. Freddie resisted. Freddie was dragged to the Van. Freddie died in the Van.
> I think that Freddie could have sustained a neck injury being tackled by Cops. Without a medically necessary neck brace, either the ârough rideâ or Freddieâs self-inflicted head banging, the spinal cord was severed.
> Iâm not sure if Cops should expect that every time they chase and tackle a suspect, they should call an ambulance and have x rays done. I doubt Freddie or the Cops knew Freddieâs neck was damaged.
> It is not OK for Cops to be judge and jury on the street.But I donât see tackling a fleeing suspect as intent to kill. I donât think a ârough ride âwas intended to kill Freddie.


That's the most logical explanation of how things happened

It doesn't take much force to dislocate cervical vertebrae, and then one wrong move can easily damage the spine


----------



## mmoetc

haypoint said:


> It is human nature to take our experiences and a bunch of guessing to create our beliefs.
> Most folks know little about the spine and even less about spinal fluid. We know if you dive into a shallow pool and hit your head, your neck breaks and you die.
> But there is a lot more to it than that. You can survive a broken neck. Happens all the time. EMS are trained to immobilize your neck injury. If the spinal bones are damaged, but the spinal cord is not damaged, you can make a full recovery.
> Here is a reasonable scenario based on what we know. Freddie ran from the Cops. Cops caught Freddie. Freddie resisted. Freddie was dragged to the Van. Freddie died in the Van.
> I think that Freddie could have sustained a neck injury being tackled by Cops. Without a medically necessary neck brace, either the ârough rideâ or Freddieâs self-inflicted head banging, the spinal cord was severed.
> Iâm not sure if Cops should expect that every time they chase and tackle a suspect, they should call an ambulance and have x rays done. I doubt Freddie or the Cops knew Freddieâs neck was damaged.
> It is not OK for Cops to be judge and jury on the street. But I donât see tackling a fleeing suspect  as intent to kill. I donât think a ârough ride âwas intended to kill Freddie.


The guy who stops for a couple of beers on the way home doesn't intend to kill anyone. But jails are full of people who did just that. Two guys get in a stupid shoving match. One falls, hits his head and dies. No intent to kill but the other goes to jail, anyway. A young mother shakes her baby because she can't make it stop crying. She doesn't want to kill her baby but she does. She'll go jail. I could go on with scenario after scenario of people who had no intent to kill another but did and have gone to jail because of it. 

Police officers are not above the law. Had they simply buckled Mr. Gray into the van per procedure most of my concern would disappear. Mr. Gray may have died from the injuries you say he sustained during the arrest anyway but there would have been no question that they at least fulfilled their minimum duty to protect him while in transit. There are still questions of the falsified reports and the mystery stop. They didn't secure him for a reason. That action likely contributed to his death. Just as if you don't secure your child in their car seat and harm comes to them you will be charged, so should the officers.


----------



## Tricky Grama

mmoetc said:


> Without some link to the report you cite I can't really comment on it with any certainty. Was it the extra stop not noted in the driver's official report? Could be the driver was checking to see if the unsecured ride had the desired effect. Could be she went back to buckle him in so as to look like procedure was followed. Could be a lot of things, most of them not so innocent to me.


I read early on that the last time he was 'seen' by anyone was the driver-a 'he' stopped & got back in the van. These are not "MY THEORIES" I read it. IF there was excessive force in trying to get him in the van, IF he was already injured, IF the ride was rough, IF he banged his head repeatedly, then the driver got in to check...what did he do?
Very simple ?. Not snarky, a ?. I seem to remember that stop was reported, but notsomuch any others...


----------



## Tricky Grama

haypoint said:


> It is human nature to take our experiences and a bunch of guessing to create our beliefs.
> Most folks know little about the spine and even less about spinal fluid. We know if you dive into a shallow pool and hit your head, your neck breaks and you die.
> But there is a lot more to it than that. You can survive a broken neck. Happens all the time. EMS are trained to immobilize your neck injury. If the spinal bones are damaged, but the spinal cord is not damaged, you can make a full recovery.
> Here is a reasonable scenario based on what we know. Freddie ran from the Cops. Cops caught Freddie. Freddie resisted. Freddie was dragged to the Van. Freddie died in the Van.
> I think that Freddie could have sustained a neck injury being tackled by Cops. Without a medically necessary neck brace, either the ârough rideâ or Freddieâs self-inflicted head banging, the spinal cord was severed.
> Iâm not sure if Cops should expect that every time they chase and tackle a suspect, they should call an ambulance and have x rays done. I doubt Freddie or the Cops knew Freddieâs neck was damaged.
> It is not OK for Cops to be judge and jury on the street. But I donât see tackling a fleeing suspect  as intent to kill. I donât think a ârough ride âwas intended to kill Freddie.


Post of the day award.

But when all is said & done, he died in the hosp as a result of SOMETHING in police custody. He was not picked up outta his 'alley drug store' in that condition.


----------



## AmericanStand

In my book "I don't care if he dies" (gross indifference) is worse than "I'll killem" (passion).


----------



## where I want to

AmericanStand said:


> In my book "I don't care if he dies" (gross indifference) is worse than "I'll killem" (passion).


I guess I feel the same way about rushing to convict police. However , since the 'I don't care what happened, all police are guilty' seems to have caused a sudden increase in murders of police, some temperance in that stance is needed.


----------



## Nevada

where I want to said:


> all police are guilty' seems to have caused a sudden increase in murders of police


Is that a fact? There may be increased media attention to police murders, but I don't know that the frequency has increased.


----------



## gapeach

*Officer Deaths by Year*

*


2013 107
2014 117
2015 Jan 1 to May 1 44


*
 
Honoring Officers Killed in 2015

This list does not include recent deaths.
http://www.odmp.org/search/year


----------



## nchobbyfarm

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-c...hooting-deaths-56-percent-2014-report-n276811

Just for info about officer deaths being up.


----------



## gapeach

Thanks, that is quite a rise. 56% in 2014

I tried to find the percentage so far this year but I guess we will have to wait until the site is updated. This is only 4 1/2 months into the year.


----------



## AmericanStand

And what are the statistics for deaths at the hands of the police each year ?
Any idea how many police there are in the USA ?


----------



## gapeach

It would obviously be more than officers killed in the line of duty because police are there to protect the public from people who are people who do harm and commit crimes.

If there were no lawbreakers then there would be no crime. There would be no shooting, at least by the police.

I would like to see more recognition of policemen and their families who are gunned down in cold blood just because they are police officers. It seems to me that some people care more about the criminals than they care about officers of the law.


----------



## gapeach

-delete- double post


----------



## AmericanStand

gapeach said:


> If there were no lawbreakers then there would be no crime. There would be no shooting, at least by the police..



Proof ?
Perhaps it would be more ?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> In my book "I don't care if he dies" (gross indifference) is worse than "I'll killem" (passion).


None of them had any reason to think he was going to die


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> And what are the statistics for deaths at the hands of the police each year ?
> Any idea how many police there are in the USA ?


There are around 750,000 LEO's

"Deaths at the hands of police" would also be counting justifiable homicides

If you want to use numbers to make a point, you should find the numbers


----------



## mmoetc

Bearfootfarm said:


> None of them had any reason to think he was going to die


There are a whole lot of people in American prisons who didn't think anyone would die as the result of their actions. The officers had a reason for not properly securing Mr. Gray. The result of that action was his death. Oops, we didn't mean to kill him doesn't grant them absolution.


----------



## mmoetc

gapeach said:


> Thanks, that is quite a rise. 56% in 2014
> 
> I tried to find the percentage so far this year but I guess we will have to wait until the site is updated. This is only 4 1/2 months into the year.


That 56% rise was over a year that had the lowest level of deaths in the last 40+ years. Last years number of deaths was still less than the average number of deaths each year for the last twenty years. If you extrapolate this years numbers so far it looks like an average year. It's a sad thing when any officer dies in the line of duty but looking at the numbers it seem the 60's and 70's were a much more dangerous time to be a LEO than today.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

mmoetc said:


> There are a whole lot of people in American prisons who didn't think anyone would die as the result of their actions. The officers had a reason for not properly securing Mr. Gray. The result of that action was his death. Oops, we didn't mean to kill him doesn't grant them absolution.


You implied they knew


> "I don't care if he dies"


No one in prison has anything to do with this discussion


> It's a sad thing when any officer dies in the line of duty but looking at the numbers it seem the 60's and 70's were a much more dangerous time to be a LEO than today.


Far fewer wore body armor then


----------



## mmoetc

Bearfootfarm said:


> You implied they knew
> 
> No one in prison has anything to do with this discussion
> 
> Far fewer wore body armor then


Wasn't my quote. But it really doesn't matter. The officers were negligent in not buckling Mr. Gray in per policy. What level of negiligence depends on how they exp&#322;ain that oversight. If they simply forget, through the four stops, they are simply stupid and shouldn't be officers. If they did it to inflict some street justice and adjust Mr. Gray's attitude they are criminally negligent and need to be held responsible for his death. The people in prison for inadvertantly causing a death are important. Police officers should be held to the same standards as common citizens.

Body armor is more prevalent but there are more people today than then and many more LEOs. Over the last twenty years as body armor has become more prevalent the number of deaths of LEOs has remained relatively constant. There has been no huge uptick in police deaths.


----------



## haypoint

Are you saying that if Freddie had just gotten bruised up during his "rough ride", the Cops are guilty of sloppy, forgetful custody procedure. But if their failure to buckle up poor Freddie could have caused his death, they committed murder?
Recently, in Michigan, we passed the no-helmet law for motorcyclists. If I pull out in front of a motorcycle and he hits my vehicle and is thrown off, I'm guilty of a failure to yield. If he was wearing a helmet and received minor injuries, that might be the end of it. But if he wasn't wearing a helmet and died from this crash, do I get charged with negligent homicide? Do the choices of the "victim" impact my charges? The biker should have known the inherent risks of riding without a helmet. So, how can the same actions receive different punishment based on the actions of other that I had no control over?
So, if the Cops had no intent to kill or even seriously injure Freddie, how can they be punished differently based on the unknown and unlikely outcome?


----------



## Wanda

gapeach said:


> *Officer Deaths by Year*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 2013 107
> 2014 117
> 2015 Jan 1 to May 1 44
> 
> 
> *
> 
> Honoring Officers Killed in 2015
> 
> This list does not include recent deaths.
> http://www.odmp.org/search/year






Did you read what you posted. If you take out the heart attacks and traffic accidents the numbers are dramatically lower!!


----------



## mmoetc

haypoint said:


> Are you saying that if Freddie had just gotten bruised up during his "rough ride", the Cops are guilty of sloppy, forgetful custody procedure. But if their failure to buckle up poor Freddie could have caused his death, they committed murder?
> Recently, in Michigan, we passed the no-helmet law for motorcyclists. If I pull out in front of a motorcycle and he hits my vehicle and is thrown off, I'm guilty of a failure to yield. If he was wearing a helmet and received minor injuries, that might be the end of it. But if he wasn't wearing a helmet and died from this crash, do I get charged with negligent homicide? Do the choices of the "victim" impact my charges? The biker should have known the inherent risks of riding without a helmet. So, how can the same actions receive different punishment based on the actions of other that I had no control over?
> So, if the Cops had no intent to kill or even seriously injure Freddie, how can they be punished differently based on the unknown and unlikely outcome?


The difference is that the biker in your scenario had a choice to wear a helmet or not. You, as the driver of the other vehicle have no control over that. Mr. Gray had no choice whether to buckle in or not. The decision was not his. The decision to put him in danger was strictly that of the officers who loaded him in. The decision of how to drive the van was strictly in the hands of the officer at the wheel. Even if I were to buy into the theory that Mr. Gray somehow broke his own neck, which I don't, the officers were negligent in not securing him. Even in your scenario you, or your insurance company , will pay some compensation to the rider and depending on what you were doing that led to you to run the stop sign you might face more serious charges than simply failure to yield.

How can someone who pushes another outside of a bar, not intending to kill or seriously hurt him, end up in prison for manslaughter? Not knowing the exact outcome of your actions ahead of time doesn't absolve you of the consequences of those actions. It is the difference between first degree murder and lesser charges like voluntary and involuntary manslaughter.


----------



## mmoetc

For those of you who presume I always side against the police I'll offer this incident. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7268898. An independent investigation came to the conclusion the officer did nothing wrong. I find no fault with the findings or how they were reached.


----------



## AmericanStand

haypoint said:


> So, if the Cops had no intent to kill or even seriously injure Freddie, how can they be punished differently based on the unknown and unlikely outcome?



The key to the situation is they ALSO didn't show any intent to take proper care of the man in their charge. 
They had a obligation to take positive steps to take care of him. 
They seem to have missed.


----------



## mmoetc

haypoint said:


> Are you saying that if Freddie had just gotten bruised up during his "rough ride", the Cops are guilty of sloppy, forgetful custody procedure. But if their failure to buckle up poor Freddie could have caused his death, they committed murder?
> Recently, in Michigan, we passed the no-helmet law for motorcyclists. If I pull out in front of a motorcycle and he hits my vehicle and is thrown off, I'm guilty of a failure to yield. If he was wearing a helmet and received minor injuries, that might be the end of it. But if he wasn't wearing a helmet and died from this crash, do I get charged with negligent homicide? Do the choices of the "victim" impact my charges? The biker should have known the inherent risks of riding without a helmet. So, how can the same actions receive different punishment based on the actions of other that I had no control over?
> So, if the Cops had no intent to kill or even seriously injure Freddie, how can they be punished differently based on the unknown and unlikely outcome?


You might wish to read the "atomic wedgie" thread. I'm sure the man charged had no thought or intent that his actions would cause the death. Yet he's going to jail.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Wasn't my quote.


You're correct
Sorry for the mix up



> How can someone who pushes another outside of a bar, not intending to kill or seriously hurt him, end up in prison for manslaughter?


Manslaughter isn't murder and there is testimony that Gray was throwing himself around in the van.

It's quite possible he caused the injury himself, even if the police were negligent by not strapping him into the seat


----------



## mmoetc

Bearfootfarm said:


> You're correct
> Sorry for the mix up
> 
> 
> Manslaughter isn't murder and there is testimony that Gray was throwing himself around in the van.
> 
> It's quite possible he caused the injury himself, even if the police were negligent by not strapping him into the seat


The driver is charged with second degree depraved heart murder and involuntary manslaughter. The first is valid if Mr. Gray's life was intentionally put in peril by not buckling him in to teach him a lesson. The second is valid if it was just an oversight to not secure him properly.

The report you cite has been discredited by the person it supposedly came from. And even if you wish to believe that Mr. Gray killed himself it was the police's action in not properly securing him that allowed it to happen. That also can support an involuntary manslaughter charge.


----------

