Posted on 05/05/2015 4:19:18 PM PDT by navysealdad
“Okay, well that may be so. How would dropping the ‘illegal arrest’ charges mitigate the manslaughter/murder charges?”
With no illegal arrest charges how could the arresting bicycle officers to be guilty of anything?
Repost from an earlier post .....
Ipso facto, res ipsa loquitur
No, what I have is reasonable cause that they should be charged and sent to trial. You don’t have any exculpatory evidence either. You and I only have media talking points and leaked talking points from people with agendas. So if you disagree with my reasoning, show us your reasoning rather than a pithy little setup line to a straw man argument consisting of talking points and media leaks.
and another ....
Freddie Gray was taken into police custody alive. Placed in the back of a police transport and driven around for 45 minutes and subsequently died. We know that his hands and feet where shackled and that he was not safely restrained in the back of the police transport.
Plus he was on probation. Freddy knew he had an illegal knife. That is why he ran from the bike cops cuz if they caught him with it he was going back to the slammer.
That's because you ain't facing a possible conviction depending on said definition...
If or I should say when, the knife in fact comes up to be illegal under an ordinance violation, all three white officers will be charged with what? That had nothing to do with what happened in the van, nor could they know about any injuries that eventually occurred in order to summon medical assistance. (They have the calls BPD made for medical assist for Grey on-line also.)
They had reasonable suspicion to stop the offender; examples but not limited to, location, known offender and unprovoked flight. These meet the requirements of a legal stop. (Illinois vs. Wardlow)
In the complaint filled out by the officers (it’s avail. on-line) they observed the clip for a knife hanging over his pants pocket. Not only was it in plain view, but if it wasn’t they could still legally preform a protective pat down (Terry v. Ohio)
You know what was illegal? The arrest of at least three of the officers for unlawful arrest. If she took the time to evaluate the case and confer with the BPD (they state they were completely surprised by her announced charges) this wouldn’t have happened.
I hope the white officers sue HER for unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution. If they did anything wrong, it would be a civil case NOT a criminal one. That is a stretch too, I guessing the van driver would be the one who makes sure the offender is properly secured.
This keeps happening over and over again with these liberal attorneys. They know the rule of law and took an oath to uphold it without prejudice. The only guy who did his job correctly was the DA from Ferguson and he got crucified for it.
I believe she did this because she had nothing to put on the WHITE policemen, and that would hurt her political future
I wonder how they decided who would drop the knife. Maybe, like a scene from “Police Story,” several were dropped, along with a few zip-guns. Sorry, unless there is video of every second of the takedown and arrest, I frankly would not trust any “found” knife near an arrested man. Just too easy. This is the city that invented the “nickel ride” now called “the rough ride.” A knife? Really? RKBA conservatives are now anti-”illegal knife?” And you have to parse legalities of springs and gravity etc to make it “illegal?” Sorry, I ain’t going down the “illegal knife” route. Anybody arrested can be “found” to be carrying something “illegal” in a world where cops drop knives. And if that offends you, sorry. That is the real world.
I am waiting for an enterprising news channel to put a high-grade crash test dummy in the back of a van with cameras etc. Get it up to 50 on a back street and slam the brakes a few times. Head first into the front bulkhead, hands and legs shackled....
Then examine the CTD’s head, neck and spine.
The officer whose attorney filed the motion isn't charged with manslaughter...in fact the most serious charges were not filed against the arresting officers, with the exception of the Lieutenant in charge.
When the States Attorney (ie District Attorney) said at the press conference that the knife was “legal” UNDER MARYLAND LAW, she was parsing words. She knew, or should have known that Freddied was charged under the Muni Code, and the knife, under that statute, was illegal.
Worth repeating...the arresting officers did not need to have 'proof' the knife was illegal in order to have probable cause to make the arrest.
When a lot of people thought of the word “Buck Knife” that is the knife they thought of. It was also the first and probably still most common locking folder.
Actually not the first but the first really common one.
See post #2
"The meat of the charge is causing the death of Freddie Gray. The prosecutor feels that all 6 are within varying degrees guilty. I don’t know if they *all* are guilty or *all* should be charged but I think some of them should. Namely the driver and any cops riding along that were assigned or asked to ride along as it pertains to Freddie Gray’s death."
" (Illinois vs. Wardlow)"
I read up on this Sunday, thus my #2 post yesterday, and I don't disagree.
But ... See post #45
"Congratulations, the charges of kidnapping (illegal arrest) are dropped. Now, what about the fact that they took him into custody alive, and he arrived at the hospital essentially dead all while shackled and in the back of a van."
" (Terry v. Ohio)"
Again, no disagreement, though I don't see it's applicability. The cops would be given limited immunity in either event since both cases deal with the charges vs the defendant rather than charges vs the cops.
"You know what was illegal? The arrest of at least three of the officers for unlawful arrest. If she took the time to evaluate the case and confer with the BPD (they state they were completely surprised by her announced charges) this wouldn’t have happened."
No, not illegal. The DA has broad authority and much more immunity on prosecutorial discretion and does not have to wait for any conclusion of the eponymous "internal investigations". To say it was illegal is a broad and clumsy attempt to blur and confuse the issue, With lack of any other incidence (such as Freddie's death) those charges would never be brought up exclusively.
42 U.S.C Section 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) and Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) and Saucier v. Katz and to an extent on underlying rules of qualified immunity Pearson v. Callahan.
-- all easily sourced via wikipedia.
Conclusions
=========
I'm not prosecuting the cops on this forum. Nor am I trying to prove their guilt or innocence That's for the Jury and the Judge, or perhaps just the Judge to decide, and any appeals that would occur over the next several years -- if applicable.
I don't give a wit about the trial in the court of public opinion that the media is pushing with agenda driven leaks and controversial news extending talking points designed to squeeze the last bit of profit from this controversy with unofficial chronologies, unqualified opinions and pure speculation.
See the reference used in post The Washington Post's correction problem.
I also recognize that there is a problem with this State Attorney as I expressed in post #31 of the thread Police charges in Freddie Gray case are incompetent at best.
I also know that the 'Baltimore ride' or the 'rough ride' as it is known is a extra-judicial method police used to punish for their own gratification or/and alter the behavior of detainees as brought to light be Clarence Page presented in this thread A 'rough ride' for Baltimore
You failed to provide any specific charges and any evidence for any charges.
“You and I only have media talking points”
Hmmm. You want charges bases on media talking points?
You’re confusing yourself. I don’t need anything. They’ve been appropriately charged by the State Attorney. Who listed the charges, and deemed there is probable cause.
You on the other hand have zero, none, esculpulatory evidence other than media leaks.
My comment only meant to point out that, "legally", the knife might have a valid role.
I’m sure the police will have the best possible representation, and I wish them success at the courtroom tactical level. I’d just hate to have my freedom depend upon if I had an “illegal” knife in that area code, or even if such a knife was planted on me to get a charge that would stick. It’s so easy, and so common to do so.
I think chain of custody is going to be huge in the case when it comes to trial. No matter which side feels harmed by the existence or otherwise of the knife, the c-o-c will be challenged, and the knife produced in court may be called a plant dropped at the scene. Since the prosecution wants a Saint Freddie Gray, they will not dispute accounts of a planted knife, this, to torpedo their own police officers, whom they wish to see sent to the pen for long stretches. The knife will be like O.J.s gloves, a big focal point.
We also might get a lesson in adjudicating the intricacies of MD and muni legal vs. illegal knife codes. When is it a switchblade, when is it a gravity knife, etc. And the manufacturer of the knife will get a huge boost in publicity. I wonder what they would make of my very limber Cold Steel Vaquero Grande?
He was also most likely on probation for one or more of his numerous crimes, in which case there would be various restrictions on him... such as possessing weapons and hanging out with other criminals.
The cops knew this guy well, and I'm sure they knew what he was up to... and so did he, which is why he tried to run away the second the cops saw him.
Gray should have been in jail.
“You’re confusing yourself. I don’t need anything. “
You don’t need anything to charge theses cops? Very revealing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.