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.

 

Murder charges against Freddie Gray cops may be DROPPED

page: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

So tell me, who SHOULD be investigating this case?


Not the police.

Police would hardly be the only people who know how criminal justice works.




posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Funny, since the police investigation does support charges.

Just not all the same ones the state's attorney had people arrested on.

But don't let little facts like that get in the way.


Oh, did I say all charges?

I purposely left my comment ambiguous.

But don't let little things like semantics get in the way.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: FraggleRock

Nah. You didn't. You just said "charges against police aren't supported."

We both know why you worded it that way. Safety blankets are cute



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Nah. You didn't. You just said "charges against police aren't supported."

We both know why you worded it that way. Safety blankets are cute


Yeah, I did. And that's all there is to say on the matter.

I'm not getting off topic because you think you know the inner workings of my mind.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: dashen

I think you are confused as to just exactly what a murder charge means. They have to be able to prove intent. It means that they have to prove that those cops, all 6, intended to kill Grey from the get-go. They went into the 'hood with the thought in their heads that they were going to kill someone, anyone.

You can easily see that intent in the video of the SC cop shooting the man in the back. You can't see that intent in anything out of the Freddie Gray case. There are a host of things that you can say went wrong and shouldn't have happened, but I don't see where you get an actual murder charge as defined by law from what has been released.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: dashen

Well, do you want the truth.......or some form of mob ruled justice to appease rioters and looters?

What does the report state happened?



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: FraggleRock

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

So tell me, who SHOULD be investigating this case?


Not the police.

Police would hardly be the only people who know how criminal justice works.
Really? Do you know more than police officers, detectives, and lawyers about criminal justice and law? Who would you suggest? You just say "Not the police". How clever, now tell us curious people who SHOULD be doing it.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
Really? Do you know more than police officers, detectives, and lawyers about criminal justice and law? Who would you suggest? You just say "Not the police". How clever, now tell us curious people who SHOULD be doing it.


Yes, really.

What I know or don't know isn't an issue because I never claimed I should be involved in any investigation.

I didn't just say "Not the police". I also cleverly said "Police are hardly the only people who know how criminal justice works." Do you imply this to be false and that the only people who know or are capable of knowing criminal justice are police? If the answer is no then it opens up a world of possibilities of who SHOULD investigate things when a conflict of interest arises.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: FraggleRock

And yet despite all of your mental gymnastics you can't tell me who these other people are.

Who are they? Name them. Put this debate to rest.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 02:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
And yet despite all of your mental gymnastics you can't tell me who these other people are.

Who are they? Name them. Put this debate to rest.


What gymnastics? Not my fault you can't grasp a simple concept.

Groups of individuals with education in criminal justice who are independent of the police department SHOULD be involved when an investigation involves police. There are no specific names.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: FraggleRock

Let me tell a little secret. People with educations in Criminal Justice are, 99% of the time, INVOLVED in the Criminal Justice system. They don't earn Criminal Justice degrees and then go be an electrician. They earn Criminal Justice degrees to DO police, investigative work. Yes it's a simple concept, but can you FIND these people? and when you do, what then? do you force them out of whatever they're doing with their careers and make them focus on this investigation? That's not very fair to them.

Unless you're suggesting that people without degrees should investigating this.

That would be like suggesting that people who read Wikipedia and Web MD can be nurses.
edit on 8-5-2015 by ScientificRailgun because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

I'm specifically talking about police investigating police creating a conflict of interest and you're talking the entire criminal justice system.

When I see a case where police are the defendants and I hear a police investigation doesn't support the prosecutions charges, red flags go off. So if not a group independent of the police department with a background in criminal justice, then who? Should the police investigate their own? Is that ethical? Would that be acceptable for anyone else?



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: FraggleRock

I agree. Police shouldn't investigating police. If only there was some... I don't know, regulatory body that would step in and investigate charges against police officers without oversight from the department itself, that would be ideal. But they would just be another cog in the Justice System then, and the same complaints would come that the Justice system shouldn't be investigating itself. It's a catch 22.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Which mob? The ones with the badges or the ones without?


originally posted by: macman
a reply to: dashen

Well, do you want the truth.......or some form of mob ruled justice to appease rioters and looters?

What does the report state happened?




posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

God, railgun! It's people who have a background and education in criminal justice, maybe even a degree in it. And study case law. And study policies and procedures. But are removed enough from the system that nobody could possibly ever think they might be tainted.

Duh.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Mosby has good reason to separate her probe from the police. There is widespread community distrust of the police. And many critics say letting police departments investigate themselves is partly why alleged excessive use of force incidents by officers rarely draw serious punishment.


And this, really, sums up my thoughts on the matter.

Any investigation into police brutality, misconduct, or corruption that is conducted by the very agencies accused of such crimes is worthless and void, as far as I'm concerned. It's like letting the foxes investigate the missing hens.

What if, say, the tables were turned, and Freddy Grey was on trial for killing a cop. It would be like putting Freddy Grey's friends and family in charge of the investigation into the cop's murder. Would you take any evidence findings from that seriously? Of course not! So why should it be any different for cops being accused of murder? They should be held under the same magnifying glass, and the only way to do that is through a totally independent investigation from a completely outside agency with no connections to either side.

It's why I still don't believe Ferguson has been properly laid to rest.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Spot on. The problem is the manner in which she handled it. Things like wrapping it up in less than two weeks and not using her homicide investigators, to start with.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

If the tables were turned and Freddie gray had killed a cop. He would've been charged within days it would not of taken weeks.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

Actually it depends on the circumstances the perpetrator commits the crime under. Take the shooting in North Charleston for example. The cop was caught clear as day on video, shooting a running, unarmed man in the back. He was fired and charged within days of the video's release. This case wasn't so cut and dry. There were a lot of variables, and they all had to be investigated. There was no "smoking gun" evidence to confidently charge the officers in Baltimore without a thorough investigation into what happened, where, how, and why. That's why it took weeks, and in my opinion, should have taken a little longer to arrive at charges that would actually stick instead of just throwing the book at them to appease the rioters.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

If I had the time I would quote the average time that murder charges are filed.


But I will use your scenario. If the situation was reversed. Freddie gray handcuffed a officer and threw him in a van. They then found The van about an hour and a half later with the dead police officer in it but no signs of bullet Wounds or beating.

Freddie gray would've still been charged with murder in a couple days if not immediately.


It's kind of hard to argue with logic but still people will find way.


edit on 8-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-5-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)







 
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join