MD - Freddie Gray dies in police custody #3 *INDICTMENT*

[galiuro]

I can somewhat excuse the sa but the mayor? Really? The local newspaper has been going at it for a week now, and not a peep out of her...

 

[who]

Amazing video! It shows the officers placing shackles on Gray's legs.

It does not show any police brutality that I can see.

Looks like the defense teams might want to get hold of that video, before it disappears.

What in the hell?

 

[dandy]

Link to documents filed by prosecution

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2083851-states-attorneys-response-to-gray-motion-to.html

i read the 1st 3 pages and couldn't continue. imo it sounds like somebody with a grudge/having a really really bad day/sunk to a slimy defense attorney level. i'm shocked that this would come out of a government official.

 

[dandy]

some updated info on seatbelt policy. this article says the policy was published 4/3 but wasn't approved & emailed out to all officers until about a week later (6:10 p.m. on 4/11). it also says that the commander is responsible for notifying his/her officers of the new policies.

http://www.abc2news.com/news/in-foc...w-seat-belt-order-issued-for-baltimore-police

also - does anybody have any confirmation that the van had seatbelts?

 

[who]

1. Yes, they have seatbelts.

2. It is often said "ignorance of the law is no excuse..."

This policy would seem likewise, to apply.

 

[who]

More...

"The Baltimore police lieutenant charged with manslaughter over the death of Freddie Gray threatened to use his Taser on an eyewitness who filmed part of the crucial first stop made by a police van carrying the 25-year-old after he was arrested, according an investigation by the Baltimore Sun."

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...officer-threatened-taser-freddie-gray-witness

The cops threatened to use a Taser on the witness taping it?

Yow.

Even more surprising -- that video was uploaded to youtube almost a month ago. And

-- was reported and shown by CNN April 23. (I never saw it. )

Curiously, today -- it's now being reported as a "new video." Hmmm.

 

[sonjay]

More...

"The Baltimore police lieutenant charged with manslaughter over the death of Freddie Gray threatened to use his Taser on an eyewitness who filmed part of the crucial first stop made by a police van carrying the 25-year-old after he was arrested, according an investigation by the Baltimore Sun."

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...officer-threatened-taser-freddie-gray-witness

The cops threatened to use a Taser on the witness taping it?

Yow.

Even more surprising -- that video was uploaded to youtube almost a month ago. And

-- was reported and shown by CNN April 23. (I never saw it. )

Curiously, today -- it's now being reported as a "new video." Hmmm.

Well.... allegedly. That part is conveniently not shown on the video. We have to take some unknown person's word for it. Color me suspicious.

 

[who]

Well.... allegedly. That part is conveniently not shown on the video. We have to take some unknown person's word for it. Color me suspicious.

Yes. Allegedly.

"The Guardian has documented a series of erratic and violent episodes involving Rice, where it is alleged he engaged in a “pattern of intimidation and violence” against a former romantic partner and her new husband between 2012 and 2013. Rice is also alleged to have threatened to kill another previous girlfriend in 2008.
A number of policing experts have since questioned whether Rice was fit for service."

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...officer-threatened-taser-freddie-gray-witness

Ima guessing there may be other witnesses who could corroborate.

 

[bessie]

ADMIN NOTE: The topic of this thread is ONE Baltimore homicide. ONE and only ONE.

 

[who]

I must say -- I was amazed at just how many Police surveillance cameras there are in that section of Baltimore where FG was arrested and driven though town:

http://chamspage.blogspot.com/2012/04/locations-of-baltimore-police.html

Video's released by the BPD:

https://www.youtube.com/user/BPDMEDIAUNIT/videos

 

[who]

Further -- as to the Taser allegation:

"Surveillance video confirms at least some of that account; it shows three officers moving toward the neighbor, standing between him and the van. Soon, the neighbor is gone from the camera's view."

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...ount-baker-streets-20150520-story.html#page=1

 

[who]

"Joseph L. Giacalone, a retired New York Police Department detective sergeant who trains law enforcement, said, "You would never put a detainee struggling to breathe face down because that never promotes free breathing."

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...ount-baker-streets-20150520-story.html#page=1

 

[vanlutz]

some updated info on seatbelt policy. this article says the policy was published 4/3 but wasn't approved & emailed out to all officers until about a week later (6:10 p.m. on 4/11). it also says that the commander is responsible for notifying his/her officers of the new policies.

http://www.abc2news.com/news/in-foc...w-seat-belt-order-issued-for-baltimore-police

I've heard that the seat belt law took effect 9 days before the incident. But, it's not known whether the memo or law was informed to officers.

Will it be a problem at trial? Maybe. But, if you look at the width of the aisle and such, there's an argument to be made (as one cop did) that when a suspect is acting up, they try to bite, kick... while it's a tough job, it's not a requirement to be injured.

Police are there to protect and serve. It's not part of the job description to die or be injured. It's a damn hard job.

 

[EllieBee]

I've heard that the seat belt law took effect 9 days before the incident. But, it's not known whether the memo or law was informed to officers.

Will it be a problem at trial? Maybe. But, if you look at the width of the aisle and such, there's an argument to be made (as one cop did) that when a suspect is acting up, they try to bite, kick... while it's a tough job, it's not a requirement to be injured.

Police are there to protect and serve. It's not part of the job description to die or be injured. It's a damn hard job.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. If a brand new law is passed and I am unaware, and yet break that law, I would likely be be ticketed/arrested (depending on the offense).

LE are not above the law. Matter of fact they should KNOW better and set the example for the rest of us.

 

[vanlutz]

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. If a brand new law is passed and I am unaware, and yet break that law, I would likely be be ticketed/arrested (depending on the offense).

LE are not above the law. Matter of fact they should KNOW better and set the example for the rest of us.

First: LE are given the benefit of the doubt given the position they hold. For instance the knife. It's actually NOT a crime to arrest someone who carries a knife LE believes to be illegal. That's what the trial is for.

Just because it became law does not mean that officers were told the same day. As with any bureaucracy, information can travel slow.

As for yourself, if you approached the officer with the attitude you presented in your post, you're correct, you probably would be ticketed or arrested. You get the respect you give. I've never not gotten a ticket when stopped. But, I've also always committed the offense I was stopped for. But, I have been stopped on the street quite a few times for a little "Where you live, where you going, what are you doing here", and I've never been arrested and every encounter (with the exception of one) lasted about a minute. It never bothered me that I was being stopped and questioned, I knew the cops were looking out for myself and more important the area I was roaming.

Cops aren't the bad guys. They're stern.

 

[dandy]

1. Yes, they have seatbelts.

2. It is often said "ignorance of the law is no excuse..."

This policy would seem likewise, to apply.

any chance you can point me to the article that states this van had seatbelts - i must have missed it.

 

[dandy]

hopefully mkelly's show will be up on video tomorrow . . .

 

[mysteriew]

I am beginning to believe that maybe, just maybe we should look at the early police activities during the riots and take a lesson from it. Designate an area of the city as police free. Assist those who wish to leave the area to leave. Then leave tne rest to "police themselves" as they have requested. Shootings, stabbings, rapes, thefts or whatever. Not stopped or investigated. But do impose a curfew. No one from that area allowed to be out of the area after a certain time. No one who doesn't live there can go into the area during that time. Then if they as a community should ever wish to be policed again it would take a 2/3 majority vote.

 

[Bravo]

Well I for one want the truth. Yet I don't want anyone to go down due to someones or anyones "agenda". On either side. I do question all these charges and justifiably so. IMO

 

[sonjay]

Well I for one want the truth. Yet I don't want anyone to go down due to someones or anyones "agenda". On either side. I do question all these charges and justifiably so. IMO

As do I. I find it shocking that anyone would suggest there's something wrong with wanting to wait to find out the truth.