In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
Investigators believe Freddie Gray suffered serious head injuries while he was in a police transport van, although they have not concluded how the injuries occurred, according to a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.
One wound occurred when Gray struck his head on a bolt that jutted out in the van, the official said, but that was not Gray’s only head injury. And the injuries overall are consistent with what medical examiners often see in car collisions, the official said.
The findings, which have not been publicly released, are part of an investigation into Gray’s death that Baltimore police handed over to prosecutors Thursday. The new information leaves many unanswered questions for a city roiled by riots and unrest after the 25-year-old’s death from injuries that occurred while in police custody...
The van made four stops before arriving at a police station, including one that police officials on Thursday said they had not initially known about. They said that stop was captured by a private security camera but did not provide additional details. From the police station, Gray was taken to the hospital, where he died a week later. Authorities said he suffered a severe spinal injury.
The giant question mark in this story is that the van didn't crash. If it had, this would make a lot of sense, since he was handcuffed in the back but not strapped to the vehicle so he might have been relatively helpless to break his fall and protect his head if he were thrown suddenly.
To play out the crazy accident scenario, I think the idea is he somehow struck his head the first time and knocked himself out and thus was completely helpless when the van made a sharp turn and he was thrown hard onto his head or neck. This is how people get severe head or neck injuries in (American) football too. It's a defenseless, knocked out player who is unable to protect themselves and gets hit again.
I think it's far more likely he was injured when he was apprehended by police putting their knees into his back. The actual vertebrae is fairly fragile if someone is pushing against it directly, which is why you are explicitly told never to touch it in massage and every combat sport has rules against attacking the spine.
The really damning part of that report is that if he was injured in a freak accident in the back of the van, why didn't the police officers call for medical assistance right away? The idea of freak accidents is plausible, but their response to never call for medical assistance is completely illogical and doesn't fit with that narrative.
What do you mean by "right away"? I haven't heard how long it took for them to get medical assistance.
Because if they only waited till they got to the jail, that actually is not so unbelievable. There are medical professionals at all jails. Were I in the same situation, I might think the best course of action would be to just get him to the jail as quick as possible. That'd be faster than stopping and waiting for an ambulance to come get him.
Now, all bets are off if they didn't get him any help as soon as they arrived at the jail.
Its been ruled a homicide by the DA and the police will be charged with second degree murder.
All the officers have received different charges, some assault. We will have to see how strong the case is, but it looks doubtful it was a freak accident.
yeah that's my question as well. It sure as shit looks like something shady happened but I'm curious as to how they determined which guys did what and how they'll make that stick with little supporting evidence.
Investigators believe Freddie Gray suffered serious head injuries while he was in a police transport van, although they have not concluded how the injuries occurred, according to a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.
One wound occurred when Gray struck his head on a bolt that jutted out in the van, the official said, but that was not Gray’s only head injury. And the injuries overall are consistent with what medical examiners often see in car collisions, the official said.
The findings, which have not been publicly released, are part of an investigation into Gray’s death that Baltimore police handed over to prosecutors Thursday. The new information leaves many unanswered questions for a city roiled by riots and unrest after the 25-year-old’s death from injuries that occurred while in police custody...
The van made four stops before arriving at a police station, including one that police officials on Thursday said they had not initially known about. They said that stop was captured by a private security camera but did not provide additional details. From the police station, Gray was taken to the hospital, where he died a week later. Authorities said he suffered a severe spinal injury.
The giant question mark in this story is that the van didn't crash. If it had, this would make a lot of sense, since he was handcuffed in the back but not strapped to the vehicle so he might have been relatively helpless to break his fall and protect his head if he were thrown suddenly.
To play out the crazy accident scenario, I think the idea is he somehow struck his head the first time and knocked himself out and thus was completely helpless when the van made a sharp turn and he was thrown hard onto his head or neck. This is how people get severe head or neck injuries in (American) football too. It's a defenseless, knocked out player who is unable to protect themselves and gets hit again.
I think it's far more likely he was injured when he was apprehended by police putting their knees into his back. The actual vertebrae is fairly fragile if someone is pushing against it directly, which is why you are explicitly told never to touch it in massage and every combat sport has rules against attacking the spine.
The really damning part of that report is that if he was injured in a freak accident in the back of the van, why didn't the police officers call for medical assistance right away? The idea of freak accidents is plausible, but their response to never call for medical assistance is completely illogical and doesn't fit with that narrative.
What do you mean by "right away"? I haven't heard how long it took for them to get medical assistance.
Because if they only waited till they got to the jail, that actually is not so unbelievable. There are medical professionals at all jails. Were I in the same situation, I might think the best course of action would be to just get him to the jail as quick as possible. That'd be faster than stopping and waiting for an ambulance to come get him.
Now, all bets are off if they didn't get him any help as soon as they arrived at the jail.
Its been ruled a homicide by the DA and the police will be charged with second degree murder.
All the officers have received different charges, some assault. We will have to see how strong the case is, but it looks doubtful it was a freak accident.
yeah that's my question as well. It sure as shit looks like something shady happened but I'm curious as to how they determined which guys did what and how they'll make that stick with little supporting evidence.
I would guess it depends a lot on the statements of the officers. If they all cover each other then it could be hard, if one testifies against his partners it should be doable.
The Police Union is already calling for a special prosecutor because the DA is married to a City councilman. Of course, they were going to call for that anyways because they don't like that the officers have been charged. Now comes the campaign to discredit the DA and "prove" the charges are politically motivated.
On May 02 2015 01:10 Plansix wrote: The Police Union is already calling for a special prosecutor because the DA is married to a City councilman. Of course, they were going to call for that anyways because they don't like that the officers have been charged. Now comes the campaign to discredit the DA and "prove" the charges are politically motivated.
The machine is so predictable.
The lawyer for the Gray family donated four grand to state attorney Mosby's campaign and say on a post-election transition team (ABC report). The request happens to be reasonable. The union stance that none of the six officers are responsible is perhaps expected. As far as your sinister campaign for political motivations--come on, give it a rest. We'll see the evidence and until that point, officers involved have been charged and only your fictitious straw men might think the reasons are purely political.
On May 02 2015 01:10 Plansix wrote: The Police Union is already calling for a special prosecutor because the DA is married to a City councilman. Of course, they were going to call for that anyways because they don't like that the officers have been charged. Now comes the campaign to discredit the DA and "prove" the charges are politically motivated.
The machine is so predictable.
The lawyer for the Gray family donated four grand to state attorney Mosby's campaign and say on a post-election transition team (ABC report). The request happens to be reasonable. The union stance that none of the six officers are responsible is perhaps expected. As far as your sinister campaign for political motivations--come on, give it a rest. We'll see the evidence and until that point, officers involved have been charged and only your fictitious straw men might think the reasons are purely political.
I am just calling a spade a spade. The Union’s sole purpose is to assure that the officers are not charged or found guilty, regardless if the officers are guilty or not. Discrediting the DA and forcing her to step away from the case is good for them. Its even better for them if they find a special prosecutor that is pro-police.
They seem to have a valid complaint that the DA might have to much political involvement with the Gray family. But if she steps away, the Police’s Union’s effort to discredit the case and evidence will not stop there.
Allow me to say that I take a sick sort of pleasure in the fact that y'all are talking about exactly the thing I just took a terribly difficult exam on. Now that criminal law is over, let me add to xDaunts correct statement of the law that the Mens Rea term we read into a charge of depraved heart murder is the word "reckless." Reckless can also be used to satisfy the MR req of involuntary manslaughter, so that the prosecutor decided to initially go with DHM indicates that there is good evidence pointed towards a conscious and extreme disregard for human life on the part of the arresting officers.
On May 02 2015 02:14 farvacola wrote: Allow me to say that I take a sick sort of pleasure in the fact that y'all are talking about exactly the thing I just took a terribly difficult exam on. Now that criminal law is over, let me add to xDaunts correct statement of the law that the Mens Rea term we read into a charge of depraved heart murder is the word "reckless." Reckless can also be used to satisfy the MR req of involuntary manslaughter, so that the prosecutor decided to initially go with DHM indicates that there is good evidence pointed towards a conscious and extreme disregard for human life on the part of the arresting officers.
i dont think it indicates anything. prosecutors overcharge as a matter of course.
On May 02 2015 00:17 ticklishmusic wrote: Probably slap on some obstruction of justice, battery, etc.
If this makes it in front of a jury, it's not a matter of guilty or not, it's a matter of really guilty or really, really guilty.
Nah, I think they'll be hit with bona fide charges, manslaughter and criminal negligence if not murder. The bigger question is whether they can follow through with prosecutions. This will get worse all over again if the state's attorney can't get a conviction.
Yeah, I'm sort of surprised the charges are of murder, and not criminal negligence and manslaughter.
On May 02 2015 00:17 ticklishmusic wrote: Probably slap on some obstruction of justice, battery, etc.
If this makes it in front of a jury, it's not a matter of guilty or not, it's a matter of really guilty or really, really guilty.
Nah, I think they'll be hit with bona fide charges, manslaughter and criminal negligence if not murder. The bigger question is whether they can follow through with prosecutions. This will get worse all over again if the state's attorney can't get a conviction.
Yeah, I'm sort of surprised the charges are of murder, and not criminal negligence and manslaughter.
As dAPhREAk said, they always overcharge. They can always walk the charges back if they want. The reverse is much harder.
I've been withholding comment because I want to see some facts rather than rely upon speculation, but this smells more like a gross negligence case than a murder case. We'll see, though.
I'd guess there's enough to sustain an indictment on depraved homicide, but it'd be hard to get a conviction, so the prosecutor goes that, but with a lesser included charge of gross negligence/recklessness, expecting the jury to settle on that charge.
On May 02 2015 00:17 ticklishmusic wrote: Probably slap on some obstruction of justice, battery, etc.
If this makes it in front of a jury, it's not a matter of guilty or not, it's a matter of really guilty or really, really guilty.
Nah, I think they'll be hit with bona fide charges, manslaughter and criminal negligence if not murder. The bigger question is whether they can follow through with prosecutions. This will get worse all over again if the state's attorney can't get a conviction.
Yeah, I'm sort of surprised the charges are of murder, and not criminal negligence and manslaughter.
As dAPhREAk said, they always overcharge. They can always walk the charges back if they want. The reverse is much harder.
Yeah, that's what I figured. inb4 they officially charge for murder, jury doesn't buy that it's murder. cops walk free, cuz overcharge.
On May 02 2015 00:17 ticklishmusic wrote: Probably slap on some obstruction of justice, battery, etc.
If this makes it in front of a jury, it's not a matter of guilty or not, it's a matter of really guilty or really, really guilty.
Nah, I think they'll be hit with bona fide charges, manslaughter and criminal negligence if not murder. The bigger question is whether they can follow through with prosecutions. This will get worse all over again if the state's attorney can't get a conviction.
Yeah, I'm sort of surprised the charges are of murder, and not criminal negligence and manslaughter.
As dAPhREAk said, they always overcharge. They can always walk the charges back if they want. The reverse is much harder.
Yeah, that's what I figured. inb4 they officially charge for murder, jury doesn't buy that it's murder. cops walk free, cuz overcharge.
they have also been charged with the lesser included offenses.
Two former allies of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) are facing conspiracy charges in a plot to exact revenge against a local politician who declined to endorse Christie's re-election effort by closing toll lanes on the George Washington Bridge, according to an indictment unsealed Friday.
Bridget Anne Kelly, Christie's former deputy chief of staff, and Bill Baroni, a former Port Authority of New York and New Jersey executive appointed by Christie, were each hit with nine counts of conspiracy and fraud for their roles in the so-called "BridgeGate" scandal.
Another former Christie ally, former Port Authority executive David Wildstein, pleaded guilty Friday in U.S. District Court in Newark to two counts of conspiracy and admitted his participation in the revenge plot.
Kelly and her attorney plan to respond to the charges in a press conference scheduled for Friday at 4 p.m. ET.
Wait, so the prosecutor in the Freddie Gray case is personally related to the Gray family?
Maybe it's not so ridiculous to want her to recuse herself. It's a conflict of interest. And there are plenty of other competent attorneys who could do it.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) raised $1.5 million in the first 24 hours after announcing his 2016 presidential bid, his campaign said Friday.
According to the campaign, the contributions came from 35,000 donors, and the average donation was $43.54.
"This is a remarkable start for Bernie's campaign," senior Sanders adviser Tad Devine said in a statement. "People across America are yearning for authentic leadership that tells them the truth about what is holding back our nation. Bernie Sanders understands the problems we face."
The self-described democratic socialist officially declared his candidacy Thursday after months of hinting that he would mount a challenge to presumed frontrunner former secretary of state Hillary Clinton. With his calls to crack down on Wall Street, take on money in politics and address income inequality, he's positioned himself as as a progressive alternative to more business-friendly Democrats.
Clinton's camp did not release its first-day fundraising totals, but officials say they intend to raise $100 million for her primary campaign. On the Republican side, Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) raised close to $1 million his first day of campaigning while Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) hauled in about $1.25 million in his first 24 hours as an official candidate. Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) raised $500,000 his first day.
On May 02 2015 09:08 Millitron wrote: Wait, so the prosecutor in the Freddie Gray case is personally related to the Gray family?
Maybe it's not so ridiculous to want her to recuse herself. It's a conflict of interest. And there are plenty of other competent attorneys who could do it.
She also comes from a long family of cops, which is conveniently neglected it seems. I don't think either of these facts are compelling enough for a recuse.
On May 02 2015 09:08 Millitron wrote: Wait, so the prosecutor in the Freddie Gray case is personally related to the Gray family?
Maybe it's not so ridiculous to want her to recuse herself. It's a conflict of interest. And there are plenty of other competent attorneys who could do it.
She also comes from a long family of cops, which is conveniently neglected it seems. I don't think either of these facts are compelling enough for a recuse.
5 generations of police. And the Police Union's letter also had a thinly veiled threat about her husband's political career at well. They almost come out and say "It would be a real shame if something happen to his job."
I think it's going to be hard for Hillary and Republicans to fight his message. It's concise and his unbecoming and very "not about me" sincerity is something pretty much every other candidate lacks.
Do people think this is an evenhanded enough approach to something as packed with controversy as Baltimore as to not alienate conservative democratic voters?
On May 02 2015 09:08 Millitron wrote: Wait, so the prosecutor in the Freddie Gray case is personally related to the Gray family?
Maybe it's not so ridiculous to want her to recuse herself. It's a conflict of interest. And there are plenty of other competent attorneys who could do it.
Well I'm not a legal expert but a judge had to sign off on the charges no? At least that's what I heard reported? Since she didn't go to a grand jury? Once that's happened political motivations or worse for which cases they choose to prosecute is common all over the country on both sides of the aisle. That's the danger of discretion. This case is just unusual in that they are using that discretion in a way that's uncommon. Being that, if there is any question of guilt an officer rarely goes to trial. Usually the case goes to a grand jury to die. Which is quite an aberration for grand juries, unique to when the accused is an officer.
In 2010, federal prosecutors sought indictments in about 162,000 cases, according to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics. Grand jurors declined to indict in 11 of these federal cases.
Not apples to apples but I think it gives one an idea.
“police have been nearly immune from criminal charges in shootings” in Houston and other large cities in recent years. In Harris County, Texas, for example, grand juries haven’t indicted a Houston police officer since 2004 (280 shootings); in Dallas, grand juries reviewed 81 shootings between 2008 and 2012 and returned just one indictment
Of course those are shootings and indictments (not convictions), not sure on any statistics for more general abuse, or so called "rough rides" though.
I don't see them getting a new prosecutor unless she wants to give it up. The police have been shown to be lying (or misrepresenting the truth) several times just from the little we know, and we still let them investigate. Probably also how/why she was able to press charges so fast had to do with conducting an independent investigation separate from the department.
Firstly they said they had a reason to arrest him. They didn't. They wrote in their report that Gray was taken into custody without force or incident. The video that surfaced the next day showed that was not in fact the case. They said he had an illegal knife. He did not, the knife he had was legal. They are required to report all stops, they went weeks leaving out one of the stops they made. It surfaced on an independent video.
That said, there are obviously some good cops doing the right things in this case or it's unlikely it would of gotten even this far. So I'm not intending to indict all of BPD. Seems like Baltimore at large is using the nations attention to make some real changes across the board.
I don't know what happened but the cops misleading people about it isn't a good sign. It will be interesting to see if any of them roll over on their peers. If anyone's seen any of the shadow interviews they seem to be indicating they are/might.
EPT
