It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Freddie Gray's Death Ruled a Homicide; 6 Officers Charged!

page: 40
75
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: WarminIndy

Shouldn't they have asked that during the election? I mean, who would have thought that a State's Attorney might have to take on a case that involved police abuse!


Yeah, who would know that.

I didn't say it was a conflict of interest, only that it has to be ruled out first before it goes to trial, and you know that will be examined.

ETA: CBS news is now quoting experts in determining if Mosby was doing it for justice or crowd control.


Alan Dershowitz, a well-known criminal lawyer from New York and professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, suggested that Mosby's actions were motivated more by political expediency and short-term public safety than strong evidence. He called the charges "outrageous and irresponsible," especially a second-degree murder count filed against the van's driver under a legal principle known as "depraved heart."


And she based that without seeing the video


Mosby also does not have the benefit of a video capturing a decisive moment where lethal force was used,


It was a rush to convict. She didn't have all the facts available yet.


edit on 5/3/2015 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 3 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

The trouble here is that, too often, police are operating under a presumption of guilt, rather than innocence, and acting upon the smallest indications of "suspicion", and race, the way folks dress, should not make them a target for law enforcement. Especially when it leads to wrongful imprisonment, and death.

I feel like far too many folks immediately judge someone based on the way they appear and their ideas of what that culture is about, when ultimately you can't know much about someone just by looking at them. It creates an unfair system all around. But this kind of behavior is too often defended by folks who say " oh, it's not about race, they looked like a terrorist/thug/junkie" and somehow they're constitutional rights become less important. I understand that law enforcement relies on their gut feelings, but that's not a sound procedure. We need more logic, and less reactive, emotionally charged methodology in the justice system, or it's not justice at all. If the police officers are prejudiced, to the point where they likely couldn't be asked to sit on a jury (you're asked to self report any existing prejudices to weed out bias), they shouldn't be trusted to make snap judgments which could end folks lives. It doesn't make sense to treat individuals as any less worthy of proper treatment and justice than any other, regardless of their appearance, or even prior offenses (although, that makes a bit more sense).

Isn't it possible that just looking "like a thug" makes it more likely someone gets caught, eventually, doing something illegal? A lot of bias out there is about how there's more crime going on in these impoverished, predominantly black neighborhoods, when the issue likely is we're more aware of the crime going on there because they're more likely to get caught than someone who appears less conspicuous. Since we can't know every crime committed, it's likely that a lot of what folks defend as "reasonable bias" is just a bunch of social spin and has no place anywhere near what should be a fair and balanced system.



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Plotus

This is seriously inappropriate. I don't understand how your sweeping generalizations and anecdotes about *hostility* factor into the discussion whatsoever. Violence makes news, and media is spinning racial tensions because these people were considered dangerous based primarily on their appearances, and then denied due process. Riots aren't good things, but mlk said it's "the language of the unheard", there is a host of complex issues surrounding these riots. It seems like you're hijacking a legitimate issue to further discuss your own racial biases. The only people charged with a crime in this scenario were the police officers, who have varying ethnic backgrounds.

As someone whose spent much time living in predominantly urban neighborhoods and experienced literally no hostility based on my race, let alone extra in the light of recent events, your personal anecdotes makes it seem more likely that you're projecting your own hostility on others. It's part of the problem, and I hope you examine your personal biases instead of trying to exacerbate social tension.
edit on 3-5-2015 by hearows because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: hearows

It is the right of everyone to dress in a manner that they feel is self-expressive, as long as it does not violate any laws. How do you feel with people dressing as Neo Nazis?

If we place restrictions on certain types of clothing because we associate it with a lifestyle involved, from ghetto thug to Neo Nazi, either we have to say that some types of clothing should be restricted or no restriction at all.

While the majority of people on ATS defend the rights of people to be self-expressive, then we have to be fair to all groups of people who invoke their Constitutional rights. I am not defending the Neo Nazi ideology, but we have to apply their rights to free speech as much as any other group.

If we now say that Neo Nazis are wrong for wearing symbols, then we would have to say the same thing applies for those who wear "colors" to identify their gang affiliation. If it is a matter of free speech, then it has to apply to everyone.

If I were to right now post in my profile of the SS storm trooper lightning bolts, would you offended and why?

But say this, if a klansman were wearing a hood and robe and was doing nothing but running through an alley, even though he had done nothing wrong, would we be having this same discussion?

I might not agree with someone's speech, but I have to recognize their right to speak. And this has to go across the board for all people.

The problem with Freddie Gray is that his friend said "When he saw the police, he said "oh s***" and then started running, bringing attention to himself, and that was the reasonable suspicion for the police, because obviously the police were not chasing every black person in that neighborhood that day.



edit on 5/3/2015 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy

What facts do you believe are missing or being waited on?



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: WarminIndy

What facts do you believe are missing or being waited on?



I don't think she interviewed the friend Gray was talking to just before he ran. And I think she needs to provide the actual evidence for what happened, because she is assuming the ride caused the injury.

While the ride might have indeed caused it, we just don't know yet because neither the prosecution nor the defense have presented any tests or experiments to prove or disprove it.

The problem I have with this is that there was no investigation of what happened prior to his death a week later. I think if there was any hint it was police brutality or negligence, there should have been an investigation earlier.

She also didn't have the physical evidence linking the injury to the bolt, the medical examiner didn't have that, he only ruled on it but he really needs to have the bolt in question presented before making that judgement.

Michael Albano of Chevrolet has not only shown the police vans they manufacture, but the pictures of the ones Baltimore uses.

Right now they are still going to question the other witness in the van. The media needs to stop reporting anything he says because so far there have been two differing accounts from him. Until he is interviewed by both sides, his statements should not be taken as Gospel truth. It will come out in court what he really saw.

It was a rush to convict. And it is way too early now to make that judgment call. Remember the Caycee Anthony trial? There was way more evidence but she was declared not guilty.

Unless it becomes a public trial, then we might not ever know all the evidence. If it goes to a grand jury indictment, that will be secret and sealed.



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Greathouse

I still stand up that she is going for a career in politics and while still young she already had very well off backers, like every politicians that starts with good intentions money, power and corruption always step its eventually.



Of course she's going for a political career, she went home to launch her political career so I hope she is doing it for the people. (i'm just not the type to give up on someone )

Yes she still young no she doesn't have any rich backers. I think you skipped my post where it mentioned in bold. That in the primaries she defeated was a candidate that raised money at a 3 to 1 ratio over her.


After she got elected she went right to work......


The city's new state's attorney, Marilyn J. Mosby, is reshaping the office after winning election in November. In addition to a number of high-level officials who left before Mosby was sworn in last week, several prosecutors have been dismissed in recent days, according to sources familiar with the personnel decisions.

Mosby, who is expected to announce some of her new leadership at a staff meeting Wednesday, is only the third top prosecutor in two decades in Baltimore, and ripple effects the turnover has caused have taken some courthouse observers by surprise.


Third prosecutor in 20 years .

She started hunting bad apples in her own yard. Some of those bad apples knew to leave before she came. (there is your big money corrupt politicians) she fired several prosecutors and formed new investigation units.


State's Attorney Gregg L. Bernstein's deputy and the head of his Major Investigations Unit took jobs with Attorney General Brian Frosh, while Bernstein's chief of staff, head of economic crimes, and top police misconduct prosecutor left for other positions.


I wonder why? Could it be that he was responsible for policing a police department with a long established predisposition of violence and civil rights violations?


Her interest in practicing law was sparked by the murder of her 17-year-old cousin outside her home, when he was mistakenly identified as a drug dealer and killed by another 17-year-old.


How many politicians can say that?


What I see is one of the rare politicians who is actually acting on her promises. If I had to guess I would say you generally dislike politicians. But they can't all be painted with a broad brush. If you do so you might miss the good ones when they pop up occasionally.





edit on 3-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

I wish her luck.

Baltimore gave Obama 100% of the vote there. I noticed in her speech that she was using the common parlance accent of urban inner city, as though she was trying to connect to them because of that.

It would be easy to launch her political career there, but the AG should not be swayed by party lines, the AG should be impartial.

It's going to be a rough time for her in 2016. I can see it coming.



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy

I can respect your opinion. But I think it's been a rough time for her already. There is not a doubt with the moves she's making she's pissed off many of the long establish Baltimore politicians. I don't believe I've ever use this saying before in my life but " go girl" !



Edit; you know I see a big difference between her and Obama. Like it said in the earlier post her cousin was killed in front of her house. She grew up in it, I wonder what kind of stories her dad and grandfather told her?



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: hearows

I understand your point. There are scenarios however where the 'look' fits. If a police officer saw a well dressed white kid in this neighborhood at 2 AM I am pretty certain it is for drugs. In this case, the local officers are WELL aware of who this guy is. He has 5 open cases at the time of the incident. One less than a month ago for drugs.

So, as officers are approaching his lookout calls out. The person he is doing the transaction with and himself split. The officers chase. This was not a lets shake someone done scenario as an innocent black kids exits Starbucks moment. This is a area that is known for drug traffic where it happens in the open. In local stores. From corner to car.

Cops do not look at everyone as a suspect. This is what the media implies.However, they are trained to see things that the average person may not that can tip them to illegal activities. Again, more lives are saved by the actions of officers but since that will not promote an agenda it makes page 6 of the local paper and is not heard again.

This is also not about race as there is a 50/50 split on the 6 officers who were involved. That is not to widespread in the media or with the protestors. I guess they will simply be labeled Uncle Toms and that is ok. I mean, how dare someone of color decide to become a cop and maybe make a difference instead of slanging and bangin on the local corner and not stopping the cycle that has been there for decades.

Also, this guy was not tazed...beaten...shot...punched...nothing.

In the end, I want to hear the testimony of the guy who was there when he bolted. I am sure just like Ferguson this guy will be presented in the coming weeks.

This can also be used as the final piece of the puzzle to take away the rights of states and local government to police themselves and push forward with a national system of policing. Rev Al seems to have spoked too soon I think. This is what scares me. Not a couple thugs who want to sell dope or an out of control cop. It is an out of control government that is my fear.

Summer is upon us. Kids will be out of school. 90 million not in the workforce. It is prime to have a few more cities to burn and start the 'race' war that will set us back as a country 100 years of progress. But that is what the Progressive/Soclialist movement wants.



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse


The downfall of this nation is going to be on the blind trust people have on those that runs the government, is not politician in this nation that has not been corrupted by private interest.

It doesn't matter what color they are, they are all corrupted, but is ok because people believe the crap they preach.


edit on 3-5-2015 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

That's been my point.

I actually researched and looked into this individual before I formed my trust of her. That's the difference.


I choose to make a informed decision based on my research into a politicians. I just don't take my hatred of most politicians and run with it. And believe me I am in the same boat as you the most part.


edit on 3-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 03:12 PM
link   
I am sure that the newly elected young women state Attorney for Baltimore Marilyn Mosby wasn't influence in her decisions when she almost hastily issue warrants for the arrest of the police officers in Grays death case with 22 counts because no only the pressure from the people but also her "Mentor" and biggest financial backer the now Gray family attorney Billy Murphy had anything to do with it.

Even when I know that the police officers should be indicted and brought to justice by a jury of their peers you already can see how her career is starting to fly, the controversy of her deciding no to excuse herself from the case because conflict of interest is enough for me to see what will be becoming of the young state attorney when bigger money starts to come her way during her political career.

Money always talks and BS walk, specially in politics.
edit on 3-5-2015 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

I understand, this days I don't trust any politicians as long as is money interest backing them.



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043
The Gray family attorney has zero to do with a criminal trial. Her job is to present whatever evidence the state can come up with of the guilt of the defendant. I am not sure how you think that can be effected by a family attorney. Do you think she will fabricate evidence or something?



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

Your reply is an echo of the only mainstream media coverage on her. All negative, I have read about the connection to Billy Murray. But the big money backing her theory is pretty thin in her case. Remember you are not going to win any election broke.





– Incumbent Gregg Bernstein reported having almost $450,000 on hand as of May 20, according to campaign finance reports filed Tuesday. The Bernstein campaign has raised $130,000 since January from a who’s who of the Baltimore legal community. Lawyers from The Law Offices of Peter G. Angelos P.C. contributed $21,000, an amount that includes a $4,000 contribution from Angelos’ wife, Georgia. The Bernstein campaign has spent approximately $30,000, according to the filing.
Challenger Marilyn Mosby raised $63,000 and has $106,000 on hand as of May 20, according to her campaign’s filing. Among her contributors is Patricia C. Jessamy, the former state’s attorney who lost to Bernstein in 2010. She and her husband each gave the Mosby campaign $500, according to the filing. Kweisi Mfume and former mayor and incoming University of Baltimore President Kurt L. Schmoke gave Mosby $500 and $1,000, respectively. The Mosby campaign spent almost $57,000 in the last five months, $20,000 of which went toward polls and surveys.



Read more: thedailyrecord.com...


It's pretty obvious who the big money was in that election.

Is there any chance you could link me to the source of your first bold statement? Like I said vetting is a process and it's an ongoing process. I might've missed something so I'd like to see what the source has to say.


is enough for me to see what will be becoming of the young state attorney when bigger money starts to come her way during her political career



Lastly and most importantly I try not to predict the future.
edit on 3-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: WarminIndy

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: WarminIndy

What facts do you believe are missing or being waited on?



I don't think she interviewed the friend Gray was talking to just before he ran. And I think she needs to provide the actual evidence for what happened, because she is assuming the ride caused the injury.


What difference do you think the friend's testimony gonna make? Whatever he has to say, it would have nothing to do with the lack of probable cause and the faulty arrest of Freddie Grey. Even if he claims that Grey in the middle of a drug deal, the officer didn't know that at the time of arrest, and no such suspicion was in the arrest record. According to police records, Grey was arrested for possession of an illegal knife.


While the ride might have indeed caused it, we just don't know yet because neither the prosecution nor the defense have presented any tests or experiments to prove or disprove it.


What kind of test are you looking for? Some crash dummy test from the inside of a police van? Medical specialists have already said that Grey's injury's are consistent with a car accident. Are you thinking that evidence will show that Grey's injuries came from a "beat down" and not a "rough ride"?


The problem I have with this is that there was no investigation of what happened prior to his death a week later. I think if there was any hint it was police brutality or negligence, there should have been an investigation earlier.


According to State Attorney Mosby, the investigation was launched the day of Freddie Grey's arrest.


She also didn't have the physical evidence linking the injury to the bolt, the medical examiner didn't have that, he only ruled on it but he really needs to have the bolt in question presented before making that judgement.


I'm pretty sure the whole "bolt" info is leaked misinformation, but I'm not sure. But, at any rate the bolt wasn't listed among Mosby's list of evidence of charges. It's not necessary to prove that Grey's injuries came from the impact of him being slammed into the van wall.


Right now they are still going to question the other witness in the van. The media needs to stop reporting anything he says because so far there have been two differing accounts from him. Until he is interviewed by both sides, his statements should not be taken as Gospel truth. It will come out in court what he really saw.


He didn't see anything.


It was a rush to convict. And it is way too early now to make that judgment call. Remember the Caycee Anthony trial? There was way more evidence but she was declared not guilty.


Would you still say that if these weren't cops, but a bunch of young adults charged with torturing and killing another young adult?

What does the Casey Anthony trial have to do with this? Apples and helicopters!



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

The friend's testimony can be used in a big way to factor in a jury decision. Courts always use character references to sway the jury.

If Gray was paranoid because he was on drugs....character reference.
If Gray was paranoid because he just took part in a drug deal...character reference.

Either way, Gray was paranoid and this will play a big part in determining why he really ran. You and I might say there was no probable cause, but we aren't wearing badges. Unless you are a cop, then their judgment to make that call has to be considered and we must leave that up to the justice system to define what constitutes probable cause.

Yes, the prosecution and defense will have to examine that possibility by using crash test dummies. They just can't say that is the possibility without determining the possibility.

Leaked misinformation from which side?

Whatever the other witness saw or didn't see, there are two differing accounts. Leave that up to courts to determine that. We are really armchair quarterbacking here, CNN and Fox are also doing that very thing. CNN and Fox might lead the popular opinion court, not the court of law.

Yes, I would indeed say the same thing regardless of who did it or didn't do it.

The only reason I bring Casey Anthony in is because that also was a trial of popular opinion even while the court trial was going on.

I believe in the need for a judicial system, but right now we have to let the judicial system do its job and anything less is just popular opinion and then becomes a public kangaroo court of character assassination.

What we DO know about Freddie Gray is that he was a violent individual who broke the law many times, even for assault. What we DO know about those particular cops is that some of them were veterans for a long time. I have not seen yet anything released if they had infractions as police officers in the past.

What if Freddie Gray had killed someone with his illegally possessed gun? What if Freddie Gray killed the woman he assaulted? What if Freddie Gray had sold some kid drugs that the kid then died from?

It is really easy to say what if when it comes to Freddie Gray, but also what if when it comes to those police officers?

Did he deserve to die as he did at the hands of the police? What if it were his karma catching up to him?



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

I been a voter in this nation since 1979 I come a long way, and all politicians in the US are all corrupted, even if they start clean as soon they become career politic rats they are nothing but that rats.




posted on May, 3 2015 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy




The friend's testimony can be used in a big way to factor in a jury decision. Courts always use character references to sway the jury.

Either way, Gray was paranoid and this will play a big part in determining why he really ran. You and I might say there was no probable cause, but we aren't wearing badges. Unless you are a cop, then their judgment to make that call has to be considered and we must leave that up to the justice system to define what constitutes probable cause.


Freddie Grey ISN'T on trial. The police officers are. The police report indicated the reason Freddie Grey was arrested, and according the DA, it was an illegal arrest. No after the fact testimony, that the officer wasn't privy to at the time of arrest, is going to change that fact.



What if Freddie Gray had killed someone with his illegally possessed gun? What if Freddie Gray killed the woman he assaulted? What if Freddie Gray had sold some kid drugs that the kid then died from?


What if? What if? We don't arrest people for "What ifs". Again, Freddie Grey isn't on trial. The police are.


edit on 3-5-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
75
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join