Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Freddie Gray Case: Baltimore Grand Jury Issues Indictments

Freddie Gray Case: Baltimore Grand Jury Issues Indictments

Mosby drops “False imprisonment”? Unclear implications for claimed unlawful arrest

UPDATE: We have additional information on the specific charges specified in the Grand Jury indictments, and how they differ from the charges announced by Prosecutor Mosby on May 1.

Here’s video of Mosby’s press statement on the charges, at which she took  no questions:

Clarification on changes to “false imprisonment” charges: Below we note that the “False imprisonment (8th Amendment)” charges are not present on a written list of the Grand Jury’s charges (embedded below), and we speculate that this may be an implicit concession that the arrest of Gray was lawful.

Shortly thereafter I were provided with the video of Mosby reading the charges, above. In the video the “False imprisonment” charges she specified in her May 1 allegations against the officers are also gone. It seems however, based on her verbal reading, that she has replaced that “False imprisonment (8th Amendment)” charge with a “Misconduct in office for illegal arrest (8th Amendment)”.

It’s unclear if this represents a substantive alteration in the charges.

For purposes of transparency I’ll leave my earlier speculation intact below, but flag it with reference to this clarification.

The officers are now scheduled to be arraigned on July 2, according to Mosby’s read press statement.

Here’s that written list of the Grand Jury’s charges:

GJ Indictment charges

 

Here’s a press release from Mosby’s office that confirms the accuracy of the above.

I note the press release now indicates that each of the “8th Amendment” charges above can be punished by any sentence short of cruel and unusual punishment–so, presumably, even life in prison or capital punishment, if Maryland does capital punishment.

Lt. Brian W. Rice (arresting officer)

Grand Jury charges:

  • Manslaughter (involuntary) (10 years)
  • Assault/second degree (10 years)
  • Misconduct in office (8th Amendment)
  • Misconduct in office (8th Amendment)
  • Reckless endangerment (5 years)

(Note “Clarification on changes to false imprisonment charges,” above.)

Mosby’s May 1 charges had also included “False imprisonment (8th Amendment)”, and that has been dropped.  I see this as an implicit concession that Gray’s arrest was lawful, for the reasons we’ve previously espoused here Freddie Gray Case: Prosecutor Doubles Down On Wrong Law and here Confirmed – Freddie Gray’s Knife WAS Illegal and here Freddie Gray’s Knife – Why is Prosecutor Claiming Unlawful Arrest?

Similarly, every one of the officers who was charged with “False imprisonment” by Mosby on May 1–meaning Rice, Nero, and Miller, the three arresting officers–has had that charge dropped by the Grand Jury.

In its place has been added “Reckless endangerment (5 years), which I interpret as Mosby’s new “safe charge”–that is, the charge on which she hopes to get a conviction even after her case otherwise implodes for lack of evidence.

It is notable that this “Reckless endangerment (5 years) has been added as a charge against each and every one of the six officers, none of whom were previously charged with this offense.

Also, Mosby’s May 1 had two counts of “Assault/second degree (10 years), whereas the Grand Jury indictment specifies only one. Consolidated? Who knows, given the utter lack of transparency by Mosby’s office.

Officer Edward M. Nero (arresting officer)

Grand Jury charges:

  • Assault/second degree (10 years)
  • Misconduct in office (8th Amendment)
  • Misconduct in office (8th Amendment)
  • Reckless endangerment (5 years)

As with Rice, Mosby has dropped the “False imprisonment” charge against Nero, and the “Reckless endangerment” charge added. (Note “Clarification on changes to false imprisonment charges,” above.)

Officer Garrett E. Miller (arresting officer)

Grand Jury charges:

  • Assault/second degree (10 years)
  • Misconduct in office (8th Amendment)
  • Misconduct in office (8th Amendment)
  • Reckless endangerment (5 years)

Again, Mosby has dropped the “False imprisonment” charge against Miller, and the “Reckless endangerment” charge added. (Note “Clarification on false imprisonment charges,” above.)

Sergeant Alicia D. White

Grand Jury charges:

  • Manslaughter (involuntary) (10 years)
  • Assault/second degree (10 years)
  • Misconduct in office (8th Amendment)
  • Reckless endangerment (5 years)

In White’s case the Grand Jury simply added the “Reckless endangerment” charge to Mosby’s May 1 charges.

Officer Caesar R. Goodson Jr. (van driver)

Grand Jury charges:

  • Second-degree depraved-heart murder (30 years)
  • Manslaughter (involuntary) (10 years)
  • Assault/second degree (10 years)
  • Manslaughter by vehicle (gross negligence) (10 years)
  • Manslaughter by vehicle (criminal negligence) (3 years)
  • Misconduct in office (8th Amendment)
  • Reckless endangerment (5 years)

In Goodson’s case the Grand Jury simply added the “Reckless endangerment” charge to Mosby’s May 1 charges.

Officer William G. Porter

Grand Jury charges:

  • Manslaughter (involuntary) (10 years)
  • Assault/second degree (10 years)
  • Misconduct in office (8th Amendment)
  • Reckless endangerment (5 years)

In Porter’s case the Grand Jury simply added the “Reckless endangerment” charge to Mosby’s May 1 charges.

And that’s it for this update.


And in today’s totally predictable news category, NBC is reporting that a Baltimore Grand Jury has issued indictments against the officers criminally charged in the death of Freddie Gray.

In what NBC describes as a “hasty” news conference, Prosecutor Mosby read off the charges handed down by the grand jury.  They report that some of the grand jury charges are more severe than those she initially read to the press on May 1, but as yet details are few.

Mosby provided no explanation of the new charges, nor did she take any questions.  Transparency, what?

Given that the Grand Jury only hears evidence from the prosecution, it comes as no surprise that they would issue the indictments requested by the prosecution.

We’ll update as new information comes in, especially if we get our hands on the actual indictments, so keep an eye out for that.

–-Andrew, @LawSelfDefense


NEW! The Law of Self Defense proudly announces the launch of its online, on-demand state-specific Law of Self Defense Online Training.  These are interactive, online versions of the authoritative 5-hour-long state-specific Law of Self Defense Seminars that we give all over the country, but from the convenience of your laptop, tablet, or smartphone, and on your own schedule.  Click over for more information on our state-specific Law of Self Defense Online Training, and get access to the ~30 minute Section 1. Introduction for free.

Andrew F. Branca is an MA lawyer and the author of the seminal book “The Law of Self Defense, 2nd Edition,” available at the Law of Self Defense blog (autographed copies available) and Amazon.com (paperback and Kindle). He also holds Law of Self Defense Seminars around the country, and provides free online self-defense law video lectures at the Law of Self Defense Institute and podcasts through iTunes, Stitcher, and elsewhere.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:

Comments

The Baltimore Sun has a rundown… false imprisonment charges have gone away.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/freddie-gray/bs-md-freddie-gray-officer-indictments-20150521-story.html

MouseTheLuckyDog | May 21, 2015 at 6:04 pm

Charges listed here:
http://www.wbaltv.com/news/grand-jury-returns-indictments-against-all-6-officers-in-freddie-gray-case/33150980

I doubt we will see the indictment given the secrecy of Mosby. [1]

What does this mean, given that one of the motions included a request to the judge to require the GJ proceedings be recorded?

I seem to remember that the Walker case was in Maryland. The defense moved to have the GJ proceedingas overturned in that case based on the testimony. ( Just to remind everyone I argued that the judge should have, but he didn’t. )

[1] In case you missed it, that was sarcasm.

This is just like Alice in Wonderland! “‘No, no!’ said the Queen. ‘Sentence first — verdict afterwards.’”

Mosby is stupid to try to ride this bull herself. She’s set an impossible case. Most often when juries see defendants are grossly overcharged, they just acquit, figuring (quite correctly) that lesser charges are just in there for insurance or compromise verdicts.

She could recuse herself, still be a hero to the Mau-Mau mobs, and be able to blame the actual prosecutor for losing the case. Mosby would have clean hands on that, while still getting the political benefits she seeks.

But I doubt she is that bright.

    jrterrier5 in reply to Estragon. | May 21, 2015 at 6:19 pm

    she’s just announcing the charges, doesn’t mean she’s going to try the case. i believe some of her deputies have filed the papers in oppostion to defense motions.

    you don’t know baltimore. the jury will be made up of a lot of the people who were rioting (or their friends & relatives). very good possibility she will get a conviction on at least some of the charges.

    FrankNatoli in reply to Estragon. | May 21, 2015 at 6:36 pm

    In the Bernie Goetz case in NYC, the Manhattan DA also conspicuously overcharged Goetz. The jury acquitted on all charges except unlawful possession of a firearm. Although nobody with a clean record [Goetz had no record] would get jail time for that offense alone, the judge, determined to please the mob, gave Goetz jail time, which he served. If the Baltimore jury convicts on the “safe” charge, expect to see the judge impose the maximum sentence.

Guess the knife was illegal after all. The Baltimore Sun is reporting that the false imprisonment charges, which were predicated on the knife-is-legal assumption have been dropped.

“New charges included reckless endangerment, while charges of false imprisonment were removed by the grand jury.”

MouseTheLuckyDog | May 21, 2015 at 6:15 pm

I wonder if Mosby presented evidence of the illegality of the knife, and the jurors were not persuaded; or she just asked for (and got) an indictment on reckless endangerment instead.

Mosby is in no mood to attempt to apportion responsibility. All the officers involved have been charged with some pretty serious charges.

If there is no change of venue, these police officers are in some deep trouble. I feel the worst for Officer Caesar R. Goodson, the driver of the van. If there is going to be a fall guy, it looks like he is the best candidate. There was no video or witnesses that claimed the other officers used excessive force, but Fred ends up dead in the hospital.

MouseTheLuckyDog | May 21, 2015 at 6:28 pm

Manslaughter by vehicle?
I think we are in definite Nifong territory now.

    MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | May 21, 2015 at 6:50 pm

    Does anyone have a citation of the specific statute?

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | May 21, 2015 at 9:32 pm

      http://law.justia.com/codes/maryland/2010/criminal-law/title-2/subtitle-2/2-209

      (a) “Vehicle” defined.- In this section, “vehicle” includes a motor vehicle, streetcar, locomotive, engine, and train.

      (b) Prohibited.- A person may not cause the death of another as a result of the person’s driving, operating, or controlling a vehicle or vessel in a grossly negligent manner.

      (c) Name of crime.- A violation of this section is manslaughter by vehicle or vessel.

      (d) Penalty.- A person who violates this section is guilty of a felony and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 10 years or a fine not exceeding $5,000 or both.

      Seems to me “grossly negligent manner” will be hard to prove.

        DaveGinOly in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | May 22, 2015 at 3:27 pm

        Yeah. Violating agency policy (not buckling Freddy up) isn’t a crime. How violently must a motor vehicle be operated in order for its operation to be considered “grossly negligent”?

FrankNatoli | May 21, 2015 at 6:32 pm

What will now be very interesting is the racial composition of the petit jury. Will the defense attorneys use peremptory challenges to ensure that the jury is not all or overwhelmingly black? See Howard Beach, NYC trial in 1986, where the judge refused to allow the defense attorneys to use peremptory challenges to affect the jury’s racial composition.

Once again Kudos to prosecutor Marilyn Mosby. Hopefully,she’ll be win in court. Especially since the WVI practitioners and hypocrites,never went after Maryland prosecutor Anne Colt Leitess for doing her job.

    Sanddog in reply to m1. | May 21, 2015 at 7:28 pm

    What is it about progressives and their absolute disdain for the rule of law? And while we’re at it… why is it you guys don’t believe words have actual concrete meaning?

      Skookum in reply to Sanddog. | May 22, 2015 at 1:45 am

      Proggies respect the rule of law. The problem is they don’t respect the law on the books. Instead, like any good tyrants, they respect the rule of law they make up as they go.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to m1. | May 21, 2015 at 7:34 pm

    Hey, don’t forget to clean out that lint catcher thing in the dryer, its a fire hazard if you leave it to long.

    heyjoojoo in reply to m1. | May 22, 2015 at 1:43 am

    who or what are you?
    And what does “Hopefully,she’ll be win in court.” mean?

    I’m deducting 15 points for this. Please redo.
    Grade forthcoming.

Gremlin1974 | May 21, 2015 at 7:33 pm

So what does this do to the Defenses motion to dismiss? Are they now charged in circuit and district court? Mrs. Mosby is just laughable.

    I would just re-file the Motion in the Circuit Court.

      Ragspierre in reply to Redneck Law. | May 21, 2015 at 8:27 pm

      That’s what they will do.

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Redneck Law. | May 21, 2015 at 8:40 pm

      I believe the judge in District Court has to sign off on the transfer to make sure all business is finished. When he’s presented with the motion to transfer, he will have to decide one of three things; rule on the motions. hold oral arguments then rule on motions, or hold the motions in abeyance until the case is presented to the circuit court.

      I expect to see one or two more motions before the arraignment though. The first is for the transcripts of the grand jury proceedings, if they don’t exist then for the judge to set aside the indictment. I believe the defense was caught off guard by these grand jury results. Typically people have the right to demand to testify in front of the grand jury. If they were not given the chance, the defense may move to set aside the indictment.

The show trial will be interesting for the interested masses on both sides, but will be hell for the BPD Six. For all six to be criminally at fault in any reality-based system, it seems like there must have been a conspiracy amongst the Six to do Gray serious harm. It’s hard enough to get six people to agree on how to split a lunch check, I can’t imagine the amount of planning and agreement that would be needed for such a nefarious conspiracy, so the prosecution’s theory of the case should make for a good fantasy read. They could, perhaps, argue that the Six were improperly trained, but that would shift the blame to city administrators (where it should be, given how they bumbled the response to the riot), but where the elites in charge will fight like hell to keep from being held accountable.

I see all these “downvotes.” M1 in da house!

Second degree murder is the killing of another person while acting with an extreme disregard for human life. In order to convict the defendant of second degree murder, the State must prove:

(1) that the defendant caused the death of the victim;

(2) that the defendant’s conduct created a very high degree of risk to the life of the victim; and

(3) that the defendant, conscious of such risk, acted with extreme disregard of the life endangering consequences.
—From a Maryland Criminal Defense Lawyer site (not the statute)

THAT seems a VERY high bar for the PA, IMNHO.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2015 at 12:47 am

    Sadly, the prosecutor doesn’t have to prove squat to a cop-hating, biased jury.

      The prosecutor has to present enough evidence that a reasonable jury could find proves the crimes alleged beyond reasonable doubt. Otherwise the judge doesn’t let the charge through to them.

        Ragspierre in reply to Milhouse. | May 22, 2015 at 12:31 pm

        …OR, if the judge DOES…the appellate courts will reverse.

          DaveGinOly in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2015 at 3:31 pm

          If the PA doesn’t support the allegations with sufficient evidence, can’t the defense ask for a directed verdict before the charges go to the jury?

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2015 at 3:43 pm

          Yes, indeed. Also, in some jurisdictions, the defense can move to dismiss pre-trial on an evidence challenge. The criminal equal of summary judgment in civil cases.

          (Not here in Texas, BTW).

(b) Prohibited.- A person may not cause the death of another as a result of the person’s driving, operating, or controlling a vehicle or vessel in a grossly negligent manner.
—Section 2-209 – Manslaughter by vehicle or vessel.

Again…depending on witness testimony regarding the operation of the vehicle…a VERY high bar for the PA.

    I’ve looked at some of the case law on this, and manslaughter by vehicle usually involves situations like drunk driving, street racing, high-speed flight from authorities, etc.

    THAT’S the standard.

    –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Andrew Branca. | May 21, 2015 at 9:42 pm

      In most jurisdictions it’s called “vehicular manslaughter”. ( Yes I know you know, but for the sake of others… )

      I can’t think of any other example where the person killed is inside the car since the action would provide danger to the driver as well.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to Andrew Branca. | May 21, 2015 at 11:11 pm

      Why do I have the feeling that their “justification” for this charge will be basically; “Well he died after being in the vehicle so it must have happened then.”

        Milhouse in reply to Gremlin1974. | May 21, 2015 at 11:37 pm

        Yeah, that’s about the size of it, and it really won’t fly. To use the language we’ve been discussing, it’s enough for reaonable suspicion, but not for probable cause to arrest him, let alone a prima facie case (which is what is needed for indictment) or proven beyond reasonable doubt (needed for a conviction).

        MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Gremlin1974. | May 22, 2015 at 12:18 am

        I think the justification will be he died after being given a “nickle ride”. Driving that way would be a “grossly negligent manner”.I don’t think it will fly though.

          Milhouse in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | May 22, 2015 at 12:25 pm

          But where’s the evidence for that? They can’t just allege it, they have to present evidence that it happened, in this particular instance, or the judge doesn’t even let it through to the jury.

        JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Gremlin1974. | May 22, 2015 at 12:57 am

        I’d be real interested to know what, if any, medical conditions Freddie was already suffering from.

        Did the defense get their own autopsy done? There seems to be a bit of mystery surrounding the ME’s report.

        I presume the defense will seek access to all of Freddie’s medical records prior to his (legal) arrest, hopefully going back to his time in the womb.

    § 2-209. Manslaughter by vehicle or vessel – Gross negligence.

    http://lawofselfdefense.com/statute/md-%C2%A7-2-209-manslaughter-by-vehicle-or-vessel-gross-negligence/

    –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

In order to convict the defendant of involuntary manslaughter, the State must prove:

(1) that the defendant acted in a grossly negligent manner; and

(2) that this grossly negligent conduct caused the death of the victim.

“Grossly negligent” means that the defendant, while aware of the risk, acted in a manner that created a high risk to, and showed a reckless disregard for, human life.

_OR_

Involuntary Manslaughter – Unlawful Act

The defendant is charged with the crime of involuntary manslaughter. In order to convict the defendant of involuntary manslaughter, the State must prove:

(1) that the defendant or another participating in the crime with the defendant committed or attempted to commit an unlawful act(s);

(2) that the defendant or another participating in the crime killed the victim; and

(3) that the act resulting in the death of the victim occurred during the commission or attempted commission or escape from the immediate scene of the unlawful act(s).

Again, this is from a defense attorney website. I can’t find the Maryland code.

Since the whole “illegal arrest” BS went down the crapper, it would seem only the first definition is remotely applicable.

This, again, seems like a HIGH hurdle for the PA.

    MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Ragspierre. | May 21, 2015 at 9:49 pm

    Ok. This question may sound weird but bear with me. How unlawful does the unlawful act have to be?

    Consider the following situation: a person jaywalking ( about a minimally unlawful act as I can think of ), car comes along and swerves to avoid the person. The car crashes and the driver dies.

    Is that unlawful enough for involuntary manslaughter?

    If they can show at any point the driver was speeding even 1 mph over the speed limit?

    FrankNatoli in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2015 at 5:53 am

    What the law says, and what the jury does, can be two very different things. There was a case in NYC, back in the late 1970s, when two NYPD cops stopped a suspicious van in St. Albans, Queens. Before the cops got out of the car, two black guys jumped out of the van and started shooting. The driver of the van proceeded to the driver’s window of the cop car and poured his fire through the window. That cop died on the scene. The passenger of the van stopped at the front bumper of the cop car and poured his fire through the windshield. That cop, gravely wounded, survived. A few days later, two black guys were apprehended in a parking lot at Willets Point, Queens after a gun battle with the cops. Their guns were ballistically matched to the St. Albans shootings. The surviving cop ID’s the two shooters. But the jury, overwhelmingly black, refused to convict on murder and attempted murder, later revealing that deliberations included statements “we cannot convict two brothers of shooting two white cops”. Instead, that jury convicted of first degree manslaughter, which wasn’t even on the charge sheet. Nevertheless, the conviction was valid, and the judge gave the maximum sentence, 25 years to life.

MouseTheLuckyDog | May 21, 2015 at 10:16 pm

8th amendment ????? of the US Constitution.
I couldn’t find one for the MD Constirtion.

Doesn’t make sense at all.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | May 21, 2015 at 11:16 pm

    Yep, the one that reads; “Amendment VIII. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

    Milhouse in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | May 21, 2015 at 11:31 pm

    They’re listing the maximum penalty for each offense. For the ones marked “8th amendment” there’s no statutary maximum, so it’s only limited by the 8th amendment, which is generally understood to prohibit grossly disproportionate penalties.

MouseTheLuckyDog | May 21, 2015 at 11:25 pm

The main elements of reckless endangerment:

(a) Prohibited.- A person may not recklessly:

(1) engage in conduct that creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another; or

(2) discharge a firearm from a motor vehicle in a manner that creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another.

I think it’s blown away by two questions to someone in the police force: 1) How many times has the BPD transported people this way? 2) How many times have people transported this way been seriously injured?

MouseTheLuckyDog | May 22, 2015 at 12:12 am

I see. Thanks.

All this looks like more of the “novel” charging of Miss Marilyn.

Which will mean a lot of it…if not all…will be dismissed pre-trial.

MouseTheLuckyDog | May 22, 2015 at 1:42 am

One thing to keep in mind. Since the arrests there has been a murder a day. A large increase. It will be interesting to see how the mayor and the DA deal with that.

MouseTheLuckyDog | May 22, 2015 at 5:29 am

Here’s an interesting video. I wonder if it is acceptable to get a copy and show it to the jury?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LTAeqgvNx1A#t=0

    You may not be aware of this, because apparently all black folks look alike to you, but black folks are not interchangeable.

    You cannot show a jury a video of one black man doing something foolish, and use that as evidence that another black man probably deserved to be killed, because of what that other black man in your video did.

    John Wayne Gacy was a white man who sodomized and then murdered 33 boys and young men. If I kill you, should I get off scott free if I show a video of John Wayne Gacy, and say, “well MOUSE was white TOO, this is obviously just a THING that white men do, so it’s FINE for me to have killed MOUSE”?

    You people, should at least PRETEND, not to be such blatant racists.

Well, I finally took the time to watch the video of Miss Marilyn.

Very thin-skinned and defensive. She knows she’s in the shit.

Poor, sacrificial lamb.

Also, what a BITCH…!!!

    Elliott in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2015 at 7:13 am

    She has difficulty standing still and not rocking on her toes. And bugging her eyes. She displays great impulsiveness which the defense will exploit. The old guy to her left is her handler.

    MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2015 at 7:36 am

    That press conference has a smell a little bit of Rachel Jentel’s second day. Not that she is as dumb, but I got a feeling she got schooled between the two press conferences amd was trying to pretend to be a bit less surly. Hell she even threw in that innocent until proven guilty bit.

Six ham sandwiches on white to go, please….

ONE…but certainly not the only…really bad problem for the PA is proving “risk” was a known when the BPD…and others all over the nation…have transported prisoners like dead Fred for decades. Thousands and thousands.

It’ll be interesting.

Another, of course, is proving that the LEOs did anything to cause Freddie’s injuries. I look forward to the expert testimony.

    Jesi7145 in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2015 at 8:57 am

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyRy04Hn_-k

    Here is a preview of what the defense expert testimony will be. This guy suffered the exact same injury and was permanently paralyzed by hitting his head into a padded basketball post. Note that this guy was not even in a moving vehicle. (Mass plus force.) It is very medically reasonable that Freddie Gray could have been standing in a normally moving van, slipped and fell and struck the top of his head into the bolt that would have focused the force.

    The mere existence of the injury does not prove a rough ride. The prosecutor is stuck trying to prove the charges based on a lack of a seat belt, which is highly dubious as you noted.

    Failing to promptly provide medical care is her back up theory, but that is also subject to severe difficulties. Gray was resuscitated by CPR, which means that he had only stopped breathing mere minutes prior to that. So the last time the officers saw him before reaching the station to find him not breathing, he was most definitely breathing. The medical testimony will be clear on that. The prosecutor will need something very significant to point to at that second to last stop to prove the officers knew he was in immediate need of medical attention. I seriously doubt that any of the officers gave that kind of proof in their statements.

    I don’t think the prosecutor has considered the medical aspects of this case at all. “His spine was severed, so the police must have done that… He wasn’t breathing at the station, so the police must have ignored a dire medical emergency…” No, none of that can be proven with expert medical testimony.

      Miller in reply to Jesi7145. | May 22, 2015 at 4:54 pm

      He was alive and well before the police decided to chase him down and search him to see if he might maybe have anything that could be considered “contraband” on him. After they chased him down, put his legs in a leg lace, and threw him into the back of their paddy wagon IN THEIR CARE AND CONTROL and did god knows what to him, he came out fatally injured.

      He would still be alive today, if not for the (at best) negligence, or (at worst) actual malicious abuse, of the police.

      I don’t think it was “murder” by any normal person’s definition of the word, but it was still the fault of the BPD, and they need to be held accountable in some way.

      They need to be sent a signal that they can’t just go around killing people.

        Ragspierre in reply to Miller. | May 22, 2015 at 6:51 pm

        Please support…with anything authoritative (meaning NOT your broke-dick opinion)…every statement you just made.

        Moron.

    DaveGinOly in reply to Ragspierre. | May 22, 2015 at 3:37 pm

    Some carnival rides probably do more violence to their passengers than the ride the BPD gave Freddie.

The outcome of this case hinges on venue. The primary goal of the defense should be to bring all resources to bear on getting a change of venue. Legal resources —- and political resources at the state level.

In Baltimore County there is a high probability that these officers could be convicted of “unlawful communication with Martians”. The angry mob needs justice for Freddie Gray.

Indictments are rarely quashed, even for good reason. Change of venue should be the defense goal.

Andrew (or others!), do you know when Mosby has to turn over evidence to the defense?

It seems really unusual to say she’s not going to reveal the evidence her case is baed on, that we won’t get to see the autopsy reports until required by law, etc.

It might be the tactically smart decision once you rush to charge – she doesn’t want to allege something (else) that’s conclusively proven false by subsequent investigation, and if the later investigation includes more facts she can use, she doesn’t want those to look like they were tacked on at the last minute, even if they were.

But how long can she get away with it before she has to reveal evidence to the defense?

Crime has skyrocketed since the B6 indictment.

Why might that be, one might ask?

It could be that this has caused a chilling effect on otherwise lawful arrests throughout the city because police officers don’t want to be the next one arrested by Mosby. So currently, police officers are doing things “by the book,” which is code for “only answering calls and not doing any pro-active police work.”

But what do I know? 🙂

All those charges against six people. I know little of the workings of a grand jury. Is there a mechanism for the members of the grand jury to sign off on only what they agree to.

In other words can the prosecutors slip in charges that were not ok’d by the grand jury.

    Milhouse in reply to davod. | May 22, 2015 at 3:13 pm

    No, there is not. The grand jury makes the charges. The prosecutors merely advise them.

What charges DO survive to trial will make for some VERY interesting stuff.

First, cops are professional witnesses. They’ll be good on the stand.

Second, you have to prove that LEOs KNEW things that LEOs DON’T know, and can’t be expected to know. They aren’t paramedics. And they’ll be happy to tell a jury…very convincingly (since it’s true)…that they can’t evaluate cervical spinal injuries.

Third, COPs get lied to CONSTANTLY by the dead Freds of their community. Why do you think they call them “cons”?

Forth, by the time the experts are finished, there will be LOTS of exculpatory evidence. There are about five central questions concerning Freddie’s injury that are complete unknowns here (I don’t assume he WAS injured in the van, for instance). EVERY element of PROVING those unknowns is on the State.

What charges DO survive to trial will make for some VERY interesting stuff.

First, cops are professional witnesses. They’ll be good on the stand.

Second, you have to prove that LEOs KNEW things that LEOs DON’T know, and can’t be expected to know. They aren’t paramedics. And they’ll be happy to tell a jury…very convincingly (since it’s true)…that they can’t evaluate cervical spinal injuries.

Third, COPs get lied to CONSTANTLY by the dead Freds of their community. Why do you think they call them “cons”?

Forth, by the time the experts are finished, there will be LOTS of exculpatory evidence. There are about five central questions concerning Freddie’s injury that are complete unknowns here (I don’t assume he WAS injured in the van, for instance). EVERY element of PROVING those unknowns is on the State.

It will be interesting…

What charges DO survive to trial will make for some VERY interesting stuff.

First, cops are professional witnesses. They’ll be good on the stand generally.

Second, you have to prove that LEOs KNEW things that LEOs DON’T know, and can’t be expected to know. They aren’t paramedics. And they’ll be happy to tell a jury…very convincingly (since it’s true)…that they can’t evaluate cervical spinal injuries.

Third, COPs get lied to CONSTANTLY by the dead Freds of their community. Why do you think they call them “cons”?

Forth, by the time the experts are finished, there will be LOTS of exculpatory evidence. There are about five central questions concerning Freddie’s injury that are complete unknowns here (I don’t assume he WAS injured in the van, for instance). EVERY element of PROVING those unknowns is on the State.

It will be interesting…

What charges DO survive to trial will make for some VERY interesting stuff.

First, cops are professional witnesses. They’ll be good on the stand generally.

Second, you have to prove that LEOs KNEW things that LEOs DON’T know, and can’t be expected to know. They aren’t paramedics. And they’ll be happy to tell a jury…very convincingly (since it’s true)…that they can’t evaluate cervical spinal injuries.

Third, cops get lied to CONSTANTLY by the dead Freds of their community. Why do you think they call them “cons”?

Forth, by the time the experts are finished, there will be LOTS of exculpatory evidence. There are about five central questions concerning Freddie’s injury that are complete unknowns here (I don’t assume he WAS injured in the van, for instance). EVERY element of PROVING those unknowns is on the State.

It will be interesting… Heh!

What charges DO survive to trial will make for some VERY interesting stuff.

First, cops are professional witnesses. They’ll be good on the stand generally.

Second, you have to prove that LEOs KNEW things that LEOs DON’T know, and can’t be expected to know. They aren’t paramedics. And they’ll be happy to tell a jury…very convincingly (since it’s true)…that they can’t evaluate cervical spinal injuries.

Third, cops get lied to CONSTANTLY by the dead Freds of their patrol area. Why do you think they call them “cons”?

Forth, by the time the experts are finished, there will be LOTS of exculpatory evidence. There are about five central questions concerning Freddie’s injury that are complete unknowns here (I don’t assume he WAS injured in the van, for instance). EVERY element of PROVING those unknowns is on the State.

It will be interesting… Heh!

What charges DO survive to trial will make for some VERY interesting stuff.

First, cops are professional witnesses. They’ll be good on the stand.

Why does the same comment keep posting? And why do older comments disappear? Seems to be a couple of issues with the format.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend