All charges dropped against police officers in relation to Freddie Gray's death - Polidicks

[quote]Baltimore State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby said Wednesday she stands by her decision to charge six officers in connection with Freddie Gray's death; however, she felt she had no choice but to drop charges against the remaining officers facing trial. Three had been acquitted earlier. [B]"We do not believe that Freddie Gray killed himself. We stand by the medical examiner's determination that Freddie Gray's death was a homicide.[/B] However, after much thought and prayer, it has become clear to me that -- without being able to work with an independent investigatory agency from the very start, without having a say in the election of whether our cases proceed in front of a judge or a jury, without communal oversight of policing in this community, without real, substantive reforms to the current criminal justice system -- [B]we could try this case 100 times, and cases just like it, and we would still end up with the same result."[/B][/quote] [url]http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/27/us/freddie-gray-verdict-baltimore-officers/index.html[/url]

Well, that's fucked.

Sounds like some "the wire" plot

DA wanted to rush to her version of justice without a single strong case and got nothing. Weird how that works. Who are you going to blame now? the cops? the system? Now its time for those officers to get their justice.

Calling Baltimore Riots 2: Gray Acquittal Boogaloo

[quote]Mosby said the case showed "an inherent bias that is a direct result of when police police themselves." "There were individual police officers that were witnesses to the case, yet were part of the investigative team, interrogations that were conducted without asking the most poignant questions, lead detectives that were completely uncooperative and started a counter-investigation to disprove the state's case," she said.[/quote] Shit's fucked.

Can't wait to read up on the riots.

Is there an unbiased account of this event?

I don't think it's going to happen. And if it does it will probably be not in the same level of the Baltimore riots.

[QUOTE=geel9;50785052]Is there an unbiased account of this event?[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36904409"]Here's the BBC's take on it.[/URL]

No evidence. No evidence to point towards anything saying that a "rough ride" took place, no way to prove negligence, no proof for willful harm. Not much besides emotions from Mosby besides a tantrum, surprise surprise. Can't say I'm surprised or disappointed with the decision. The most you could get them for would be a breach of SOP, but that's hard to use as evidence in a criminal case, apparently. That's what you get when you try and push through bullshit charges as fast as you can. Some of the officers are apparently thinking about going after her for defamation and the like. I wouldn't mind seeing them get her for all she is worth.

[QUOTE=evilweazel;50785189]No evidence. No evidence to point towards anything saying that a "rough ride" took place, no way to prove negligence, no proof for willful harm. Not much besides emotions from Mosby besides a tantrum, surprise surprise. Can't say I'm surprised or disappointed with the decision. The most you could get them for would be a breach of SOP, but that's hard to use as evidence in a criminal case, apparently. That's what you get when you try and push through bullshit charges as fast as you can. Some of the officers are apparently thinking about going after her for defamation and the like. I wouldn't mind seeing them get her for all she is worth.[/QUOTE] yeah he broke his own spine obvi

You don't get a spinal cord injury from just a 'rough ride.' That's nonsense. Whoever was in charge of him and his safety should get willful negligence at best.

[QUOTE=Flameon;50785208]yeah he broke his own spine obvi[/QUOTE] It's [b]not about[/b] what's "obvious", it's about what you can [b]actually prove.[/b] And it [b]should[/b] be that way, even if in some instances guilty people go free.

It was pretty obvious that he had to break his own spine from thrashing around in the back of a van. The plantiffs just simply should have gone for negligence but messed up the whole process instead with how far/fast they went.

[QUOTE=Flameon;50785208]yeah he broke his own spine obvi[/QUOTE] Considering there are witness reports of him being combative and slamming himself around inside the van, it's much more likely than the other option, considering there is no evidence for it. Zip. None.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;50784636]DA wanted to rush to her version of justice without a single strong case and got nothing. Weird how that works. Who are you going to blame now? the cops? the system? Now its time for those officers to get their justice.[/QUOTE] they pretty much blamed the system if you listen to her speech. She says that while the cops have been cooperative, individuals on all levels were obstructing her investigation. the problem with freddy grey was that all the evidence was circumstantial at best. He was arrested on confusing terms (a knife that the officers thought was too long to be legal) and then he arrived at the jail half dead. Obviously something needs to be done, and the arguments that he was murdered by the cops was not backed by facts, but something needs to be done to ensure that more people do not die in police custody

[QUOTE=Sableye;50785257]they pretty much blamed the system if you listen to her speech. She says that while the cops have been cooperative, individuals on all levels were obstructing her investigation. the problem with freddy grey was that all the evidence was circumstantial at best. He was arrested on confusing terms (a knife that the officers thought was too long to be legal) and then he arrived at the jail half dead. Obviously something needs to be done, and the arguments that he was murdered by the cops was not backed by facts, but something needs to be done to ensure that more people do not die in police custody[/QUOTE] I agree. I think not jumping around inside of a moving van and slamming against the walls is a good place to start.

[QUOTE=evilweazel;50785270]I agree. I think not jumping around inside of a moving van and slamming against the walls is a good place to start.[/QUOTE] If it's officially ruled a homicide and not a suicide, then I think it's fair that blaming the victim isn't correct here.

[QUOTE=Flameon;50785208]yeah he broke his own spine obvi[/QUOTE] There was another prisoner in the paddy wagon that testified that he was thrashing around and acting crazy and there was no "rough ride"

[QUOTE=evilweazel;50785270]I agree. I think not jumping around inside of a moving van and slamming against the walls is a good place to start.[/QUOTE] People actually believe this guy threw himself around inside a van so fucking hard [i]that he broke his own spine[/i]. He literally just decided to slam his body around to the point that his [i]spine broke[/i]. Bash his head on the wall? Too hard, he just squirmed enough until he broke his spine. Obviously suicidal, sprinkle some crack and dump him in the hood, no responsibility necessary. The case was fucked and un-salvageable because the DA was an idiot and the police weren't cooperating with the investigation. That's why charges were dropped - not because the police didn't do anything wrong (it was ruled a homicide), but because the case was irreversibly fucked. [editline]27th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=-nesto-;50787496]There was another prisoner in the paddy wagon that testified that he was thrashing around and acting crazy and there was no "rough ride"[/QUOTE] And eyewitness testimony is reliable now? The first thing I hear in almost every police brutality case with eyewitnesses is "they're not reliable," but this one time, this guy is?

[QUOTE=-nesto-;50787496]There was another prisoner in the paddy wagon that testified that he was thrashing around and acting crazy and there was no "rough ride"[/QUOTE] Witness accounts rarely hold water in investigations. Actual hard evidence is what is needed.

He's hardly an eyewitness, he was physically involved in the situation.

[QUOTE=-nesto-;50787589]He's hardly an eyewitness, he was physically involved in the situation.[/QUOTE] Is that not literally the definition of a witness? Someone that was there?

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50787508]People actually believe this guy threw himself around inside a van so fucking hard [i]that he broke his own spine[/i]. He literally just decided to slam his body around to the point that his [i]spine broke[/i]. Bash his head on the wall? Too hard, he just squirmed enough until he broke his spine. Obviously suicidal, sprinkle some crack and dump him in the hood, no responsibility necessary. The case was fucked and un-salvageable because the DA was an idiot and the police weren't cooperating with the investigation. That's why charges were dropped - not because the police didn't do anything wrong (it was ruled a homicide), but because the case was irreversibly fucked.[/QUOTE] Well seeing how you can kill yourself just by falling from standing, yea you could actually hurt your spine on purpose if you were determined to do it. The DA wanted her swift justice and she, rightfully so, found none other than making a fool of herself.

If I remember correctly he had a back injury that left him pretty open to further injury.

Wasn't the back injury the result of an altercation after running from the police, then exacerbated in the back of the paddy wagon?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50787606]Is that not literally the definition of a witness? Someone that was there?[/QUOTE] You and Isak are treating him like a typical eyewitness who gets commonly thrown out. The ones that were 100 feet away, on the other side of the street, and claimed they saw something. The guy was literally involved in the situation. He experienced the same exact ride Freddie experienced. He claims there was no rough ride and that Freddie was thrashing around. But no, you are absolutely right [I]Witness accounts rarely hold water[/I] and [I]Actual hard evidence is what is needed[/I] :downs:

[quote]"Justice has been done," said Gene Ryan, president of the Baltimore Fraternal Order of Police, said after the charges were dropped.[/quote] Funny how it doesn't feel that way

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50787508]People actually believe this guy threw himself around inside a van so fucking hard [i]that he broke his own spine[/i]. He literally just decided to slam his body around to the point that his [i]spine broke[/i]. Bash his head on the wall? Too hard, he just squirmed enough until he broke his spine. Obviously suicidal, sprinkle some crack and dump him in the hood, no responsibility necessary. The case was fucked and un-salvageable because the DA was an idiot and the police weren't cooperating with the investigation. That's why charges were dropped - not because the police didn't do anything wrong (it was ruled a homicide), but because the case was irreversibly fucked. [editline]27th July 2016[/editline] And eyewitness testimony is reliable now? The first thing I hear in almost every police brutality case with eyewitnesses is "they're not reliable," but this one time, this guy is?[/QUOTE] Have you ever been inside a moving truck? I've been in the back of a few straight trucks and vans that were moving at lowish speed, and even then it seemed to me that if I was thrashing all over the place and hit the wrong spot or a corner of something while the truck was breaking/turning even a little hard you could completely demolish yourself. I'm not going to bring up alleged back problems because I don't believe it was ever confirmed, but even regardless, it seems very believable to me that you could break your back if you're doing all the wrong shit in the back of a moving vehicle. That's ignoring the witness, since I'm going to go along with your thought on that being unreliable for one reason or another. Not actual evidence, I know, but it seems like a relevant anecdote you may not have your own experience with. As far as the homicide bit goes, that was a non-legal comment by a state ME, and was ruled as such because of an (alleged) "act of omission", as far as my reading has gone. Which is a pretty broad stroke for something as serious as a homicide allegation. Either or, it doesn't have any legal bearing, a medical examiner doesn't have the legal position determine something a legally-defined homicide or no, nor is it his job to comment or speculate on the circumstances that lead to a death beyond physical evidence provided on the corpse. He probably knew that, and it would be my guess as to why he (as far as I had read when this was all still the big topic, at least) declined to comment on it after the initial report leaked out. Not to mention, said report never came to light except for a leak that got out or something to that effect (as far as I know, at least? If it's a recent development, I missed it, but I'm not finding anything on it after a quick search) I don't know what to make of that in either direction. I don't know of any other sources providing evidence for a homicide theory. Either way, it doesn't seem sensible to me to have the court system in place to prove a homicide allegation by a medical examiner,and when evidence can't be found linking together an actual homicide, to just coil back to people saying "Well, X guy DID think it was at one point!" Call it mental gymnastics if you so desire, but I don't think due process should be ignored because the outcome desired isn't what the populace thought it would be.