Officer acquitted of all charges in Freddie Gray case

[cooltigger21 0]

A competent professional prosecutor, who wasn't interested in scoring political points, might have secured a conviction in some of the charges.

I'm not really defending the prosecutor's abilities. But I'm just not going to play doe-eyed innocent here and act like I can't look at the known facts of a case and use common sense to say that at the very least, someone was reckless and careless with another human being's safety and that carelessness resulted in a man being killed. At the very least. What I suspect, but can't prove since the only counterwitness died is that they left him unrestrained by a seatbelt and did a hard stop to bounce him around a little bit and 'teach him a lesson' and he was more seriously injured than they meant to hurt him and he died.

But what does not pass the smell test at all is that this was purely some accident that they couldn't have foreseen any issues with. As I said, "not guilty" and "innocent" are two very different things in a legal sense. And I think it's sad that if this trend continues, at least one of these officers is going to get away with something that all of them know was wrong.

Thus my point of a competent prosecutor. We really don't know the actual evidence. Does what they did rise to the level of the charges against them? What is the legal standard for proof on each charge in that jurisdiction? These are things I don't have the answer to. One would think that on some of these charges they would be able to, prove it. They weren't. If the prosecution couldn't prove what they alleged even on the minor charges, it makes one wonder just what they had for evidence.

[homersapien 12,172]

Innocent of all charges.

Didn't over charge??

Huh

It's called a miscarriage of justice. Happens all the time in jury trials. Do you think OJ is innocent?

Personally, I'd like to hear the juries opinion of what caused his death.

[homersapien 12,172]

A competent professional prosecutor, who wasn't interested in scoring political points, might have secured a conviction in some of the charges.

I'm not really defending the prosecutor's abilities. But I'm just not going to play doe-eyed innocent here and act like I can't look at the known facts of a case and use common sense to say that at the very least, someone was reckless and careless with another human being's safety and that carelessness resulted in a man being killed. At the very least. What I suspect, but can't prove since the only counterwitness died is that they left him unrestrained by a seatbelt and did a hard stop to bounce him around a little bit and 'teach him a lesson' and he was more seriously injured than they meant to hurt him and he died.

But what does not pass the smell test at all is that this was purely some accident that they couldn't have foreseen any issues with. As I said, "not guilty" and "innocent" are two very different things in a legal sense. And I think it's sad that if this trend continues, at least one of these officers is going to get away with something that all of them know was wrong.

Thus my point of a competent prosecutor. We really don't know the actual evidence. Does what they did rise to the level of the charges against them? What is the legal standard for proof on each charge in that jurisdiction? These are things I don't have the answer to. One would think that on some of these charges they would be able to, prove it. They weren't. If the prosecution couldn't prove what they alleged even on the minor charges, it makes one wonder just what they had for evidence.

A corpse for one thing.

[TitanTiger 21,064]

Innocent of all charges.

Didn't over charge??

Huh

It's called a miscarriage of justice. Happens all the time in jury trials. Do you think OJ is innocent?

Personally, I'd like to hear the juries opinion of what caused his death.

The first case had a jury. This one was a bench trial.

[homersapien 12,172]

She didn't overcharge this one. He was charged with assault, reckless endangerment and misconduct in office. What on earth charge would you put on someone that did what these officers did?

No charge, as it appears these officers did nothing wrong. The jury heard all the evidence and came to that conclusion. How can anyone that didn't hear and see the evidence say otherwise?

Apparently, you understand even less about our legal system than you do mosquito-borne illnesses. I guess you think OJ is innocent also.

[homersapien 12,172]

Innocent of all charges.

Didn't over charge??

Huh

It's called a miscarriage of justice. Happens all the time in jury trials. Do you think OJ is innocent?

Personally, I'd like to hear the juries opinion of what caused his death.

The first case had a jury. This one was a bench trial.

OK, happens all the time period.

[TheBlueVue 177]

A competent professional prosecutor, who wasn't interested in scoring political points, might have secured a conviction in some of the charges.

I'm not really defending the prosecutor's abilities. But I'm just not going to play doe-eyed innocent here and act like I can't look at the known facts of a case and use common sense to say that at the very least, someone was reckless and careless with another human being's safety and that carelessness resulted in a man being killed. At the very least. What I suspect, but can't prove since the only counterwitness died is that they left him unrestrained by a seatbelt and did a hard stop to bounce him around a little bit and 'teach him a lesson' and he was more seriously injured than they meant to hurt him and he died.

But what does not pass the smell test at all is that this was purely some accident that they couldn't have foreseen any issues with. As I said, "not guilty" and "innocent" are two very different things in a legal sense. And I think it's sad that if this trend continues, at least one of these officers is going to get away with something that all of them know was wrong.

Obviously you cannot. The defendant opted for a bench trial rather than a jury trial which was well within his rights. The Judge is a black man who I'm sure was under terrific pressure to find this defendant guilty but he could not based on the facts of the case. The smell test is not usually the go to bench mark of justice. You should do yourself a favor and admit that you cannot and should not pretend you have all the facts. That Judge does and he ruled not guilty. Why is that such a problem for you? Are you really interested in justice or just looking for someone to hang?

You persist in making unsubstantiated statements as if they're facts. There's simply no way for you to know what you're claiming to know.

[TitanTiger 21,064]

Obviously you cannot. The defendant opted for a bench trial rather than a jury trial which was well within his rights.

No one said otherwise. Why do you waste all our time defending again things no one is arguing with? It's a persistent tactic you employ to pad your posts.

The Judge is a black man who I'm sure was under terrific pressure to find this defendant guilty but he could not based on the facts of the case. The smell test is not usually the go to bench mark of justice.

I didn't say that it did. I'm just pushing back against the idiotic notion that has been expressed or implied that because the officer got off that he did nothing wrong.

You should do yourself a favor and admit that you cannot and should not pretend you have all the facts. That Judge does and he ruled not guilty. Why is that such a problem for you? Are you really interested in justice or just looking for someone to hang?

There are enough facts for common sense to know that something doesn't add up here. Whether it's enough to convict is another matter, but it is enough to be disgusted by the behavior of the officers in this case. Anyone with a functioning brain knows (and should not have to be trained to know) that if regular people should wear seat belts in cars to avoid serious injury or death, that the same would apply to a person who is shackled by their hands and feet and inside of a wide open cargo area of a van.

If they don't, they are too stupid to be entrusted with the authority and responsibility of a police officer.

You persist in making unsubstantiated statements as if they're facts. There's simply no way for you to know what you're claiming to know.

I've done no such thing.

[AURaptor 1,137]

The attorney for the family of Freddie Gray is commending the judge who acquitted a police officer charged in Gray's arrest and says the family respects the verdict

The attorney for the family of Freddie Gray is commending the judge who acquitted a police officer charged in Gray's arrest and says the family respects the verdict.

Billy Murphy said Monday that Baltimore Circuit Judge Barry Williams should be commended for "not bending to public opinion in analyzing this case."

Murphy obtained a $6.4 million settlement for Gray's family. He says he doesn't think anyone should be upset by the verdict. He says Gray's family was looking for a fair process based on evidence, and that there's no reason to remove Williams from the rest of the cases.

Of the Gray family, Murphy said they respect the judge's decision.

Murphy says judges are trained to compartmentalize their decision and Williams has demonstrated his ability to do that.

I guess they worked the system as well, huh ?

[TitanTiger 21,064]

The attorney for the family of Freddie Gray is commending the judge who acquitted a police officer charged in Gray's arrest and says the family respects the verdict

The attorney for the family of Freddie Gray is commending the judge who acquitted a police officer charged in Gray's arrest and says the family respects the verdict.

Billy Murphy said Monday that Baltimore Circuit Judge Barry Williams should be commended for "not bending to public opinion in analyzing this case."

Murphy obtained a $6.4 million settlement for Gray's family. He says he doesn't think anyone should be upset by the verdict. He says Gray's family was looking for a fair process based on evidence, and that there's no reason to remove Williams from the rest of the cases.

Of the Gray family, Murphy said they respect the judge's decision.

Murphy says judges are trained to compartmentalize their decision and Williams has demonstrated his ability to do that.

I guess they worked the system as well, huh ?

Respecting the verdict and agreeing with it are two different things.

The family might not be pleased with the verdict, he said, but they respect the rule of law.

http://www.cnn.com/2...nero/index.html

I'll also note that the phrase "worked the system" has been used three times in this thread so far: all by you. No one is characterizing it as "working the system", yet you persist in arguing against it as if it's a thing being bandied about here.

[AURaptor 1,137]

I'll also note that the phrase "worked the system" has been used three times in this thread so far: all by you. No one is characterizing it as "working the system", yet you persist in arguing against it as if it's a thing being bandied about here.

Wrong. It was uttered by you, first.

I was just following your lead, Titan.

" Yes, Raptor, didn't overcharge. At minimum it was misconduct in office. Just because someone can work the system and get off doesn't mean the charge wasn't accurate. " - Titan Tiger , post # 15.

Apology accepted in advance.

[cole256 17,085]

Same people every time...

[AURaptor 1,137]

Same people every time...

Acquitted on all counts, cole.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

She didn't overcharge this one. He was charged with assault, reckless endangerment and misconduct in office. What on earth charge would you put on someone that did what these officers did?

What did they do? There isn't ANY evidence that they did anything remotely approaching those charges. It takes evidence to convict people of even those charges and there is none, obviously. They tried their "strongest" cases first...their STRONGEST and they're 0 - 2. They don't have a case on any of these officers. She wont get even one conviction due to her gross ineptitude.

Not disputing your comment, but where did you hear that?

[TitanTiger 21,064]

I'll also note that the phrase "worked the system" has been used three times in this thread so far: all by you. No one is characterizing it as "working the system", yet you persist in arguing against it as if it's a thing being bandied about here.

Wrong. It was uttered by you, first.

I was just following your lead, Titan.

" Yes, Raptor, didn't overcharge. At minimum it was misconduct in office. Just because someone can work the system and get off doesn't mean the charge wasn't accurate. " - Titan Tiger , post # 15.

Apology accepted in advance.

My apologies. I forgot I'd even said it.

In my defense, I had since said that they didn't really need to in this case though. The only counter witness got killed by their carelessness.

[TitanTiger 21,064]

She didn't overcharge this one. He was charged with assault, reckless endangerment and misconduct in office. What on earth charge would you put on someone that did what these officers did?

What did they do? There isn't ANY evidence that they did anything remotely approaching those charges. It takes evidence to convict people of even those charges and there is none, obviously. They tried their "strongest" cases first...their STRONGEST and they're 0 - 2. They don't have a case on any of these officers. She wont get even one conviction due to her gross ineptitude.

Not disputing your comment, but where did you hear that?

He's more going on what a typical prosecution strategy is and what some pundits have said. They typically, though not always, put their strongest case first, hoping that a conviction in that one will lead to subsequent ones pleading to avoid trial or putting pressure on recalcitrant suspects to turn on the others. But the strategy doesn't necessarily mean you try multiple suspects in descending order of perceived strength of the case you have against them. Especially when you have a mistrial in the first one. You may reassess what you think your best cases are after that.

[AURaptor 1,137]

I'll also note that the phrase "worked the system" has been used three times in this thread so far: all by you. No one is characterizing it as "working the system", yet you persist in arguing against it as if it's a thing being bandied about here.

Wrong. It was uttered by you, first.

I was just following your lead, Titan.

" Yes, Raptor, didn't overcharge. At minimum it was misconduct in office. Just because someone can work the system and get off doesn't mean the charge wasn't accurate. " - Titan Tiger , post # 15.

Apology accepted in advance.

My apologies. I forgot I'd even said it.

In my defense, I had since said that they didn't really need to in this case though. The only counter witness got killed by their carelessness.

I know it happens. I've done it. Everyone has , to some degree or other. It really is no big deal.

However, if I get a bit torqued at the empty claims that I " lied ", well, then, here's exhibit A, for my own defense. Even in short threads, simple misstatements or errant comments can be made. I don't think you lied, and never would have accused you of such.

You said it, forgot it, and then WHEN IT WAS POINTED OUT, you owned up to it. No worries.

[alexava 6,974]

Same people every time...

on both sides.

[TitanTiger 21,064]

Same people every time...

on both sides.

That's not true. I have consistently backed Officer Wilson in the Michael Brown case for instance. All the physical evidence suggests that his version of events is the correct one and that the "Hands up, don't shoot" meme is based on false and contradictory accounts.

[TitanTiger 21,064]

I'll also note that the phrase "worked the system" has been used three times in this thread so far: all by you. No one is characterizing it as "working the system", yet you persist in arguing against it as if it's a thing being bandied about here.

Wrong. It was uttered by you, first.

I was just following your lead, Titan.

" Yes, Raptor, didn't overcharge. At minimum it was misconduct in office. Just because someone can work the system and get off doesn't mean the charge wasn't accurate. " - Titan Tiger , post # 15.

Apology accepted in advance.

My apologies. I forgot I'd even said it.

In my defense, I had since said that they didn't really need to in this case though. The only counter witness got killed by their carelessness.

I know it happens. I've done it. Everyone has , to some degree or other. It really is no big deal.

However, if I get a bit torqued at the empty claims that I " lied ", well, then, here's exhibit A, for my own defense. Even in short threads, simple misstatements or errant comments can be made. I don't think you lied, and never would have accused you of such.

You said it, forgot it, and then WHEN IT WAS POINTED OUT, you owned up to it. No worries.

I get what you're saying. We'd all do well to be quick to admit mistakes and apologize and quick to grant each other a little grace without assuming the worst of the other.

[alexava 6,974]

Same people every time...

on both sides.

That's not true. I have consistently backed Officer Wilson in the Michael Brown case for instance. All the physical evidence suggests that his version of events is the correct one and that the "Hands up, don't shoot" meme is based on false and contradictory accounts.

sorry I didn't remember that. I didn't back what happened to Freddy Gray in the van because I don't know what happened. I did back the arrest and charge for the knife. Many were critical of the confrontation, chase

[TitanTiger 21,064]

Same people every time...

on both sides.

That's not true. I have consistently backed Officer Wilson in the Michael Brown case for instance. All the physical evidence suggests that his version of events is the correct one and that the "Hands up, don't shoot" meme is based on false and contradictory accounts.

sorry I didn't remember that. I didn't back what happened to Freddy Gray in the van because I don't know what happened. I did back the arrest and charge for the knife. Many were critical of the confrontation, chase

I thought it was a little ridiculous to take it to the extent that they did. But if that's all that had happened I'd have written it off as being a tic over-eager.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

She didn't overcharge this one. He was charged with assault, reckless endangerment and misconduct in office. What on earth charge would you put on someone that did what these officers did?

What did they do? There isn't ANY evidence that they did anything remotely approaching those charges. It takes evidence to convict people of even those charges and there is none, obviously. They tried their "strongest" cases first...their STRONGEST and they're 0 - 2. They don't have a case on any of these officers. She wont get even one conviction due to her gross ineptitude.

Not disputing your comment, but where did you hear that?

He's more going on what a typical prosecution strategy is and what some pundits have said. They typically, though not always, put their strongest case first, hoping that a conviction in that one will lead to subsequent ones pleading to avoid trial or putting pressure on recalcitrant suspects to turn on the others. But the strategy doesn't necessarily mean you try multiple suspects in descending order of perceived strength of the case you have against them. Especially when you have a mistrial in the first one. You may reassess what you think your best cases are after that.

10-4.

On another note: we've had prior discussions on body cams as has the nation. Has there been any national discussion on cams in police vans? I can't recall at present, but there should be. Much of the speculation would cease if their presence indicated wrongdoing or lack thereof.

Imagine for a moment you are a juror with nothing but hearsay in regards to Mr. Gray's injuries sustained in the van. How on earth can you be 100% positive of precisely how they happened? How can you possibly convict without certainty?

[AUFAN78 4,130]

I'll also note that the phrase "worked the system" has been used three times in this thread so far: all by you. No one is characterizing it as "working the system", yet you persist in arguing against it as if it's a thing being bandied about here.

Wrong. It was uttered by you, first.

I was just following your lead, Titan.

" Yes, Raptor, didn't overcharge. At minimum it was misconduct in office. Just because someone can work the system and get off doesn't mean the charge wasn't accurate. " - Titan Tiger , post # 15.

Apology accepted in advance.

My apologies. I forgot I'd even said it.

In my defense, I had since said that they didn't really need to in this case though. The only counter witness got killed by their carelessness.

I know it happens. I've done it. Everyone has , to some degree or other. It really is no big deal.

However, if I get a bit torqued at the empty claims that I " lied ", well, then, here's exhibit A, for my own defense. Even in short threads, simple misstatements or errant comments can be made. I don't think you lied, and never would have accused you of such.

You said it, forgot it, and then WHEN IT WAS POINTED OUT, you owned up to it. No worries.

I get what you're saying. We'd all do well to be quick to admit mistakes and apologize and quick to grant each other a little grace without assuming the worst of the other.

That is deserving of a really big AMEN.

[alexava 6,974]

Same people every time...

on both sides.

That's not true. I have consistently backed Officer Wilson in the Michael Brown case for instance. All the physical evidence suggests that his version of events is the correct one and that the "Hands up, don't shoot" meme is based on false and contradictory accounts.

sorry I didn't remember that. I didn't back what happened to Freddy Gray in the van because I don't know what happened. I did back the arrest and charge for the knife. Many were critical of the confrontation, chase

I thought it was a little ridiculous to take it to the extent that they did. But if that's all that had happened I'd have written it off as being a tic over-eager.

the reason I feel like that is he ran on eye contact, had maybe 19 priors mostly for drugs distribution so it kind of tells you he ditched a bag. That is probably why they were eager to find a charge to at least inconvenience him a while. The damn DA even initially charged the cops with wrongful arrest too, hence her zeal.