What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Baltimore: The Next Ferguson? (1 Viewer)

Olaf said:
My point of the link is that only books that reach the "acceptable" conclusion that the gap is not natural and can be corrected get the New York Times and mainstream stamp of approval.  Those that don't reach that conclusion get deemed "racist".

But if the gap can be corrected then why hasn't it been?
Click to expand...
I'm going to skip the lecture about how you're soaking in Duke quality soft pedaled eugenics.

What's the logical conclusion of all this, for you I mean? So take these articles and more like them, accept them all as true and then what would be the policy you would expect or want to come out of it? Spell it out.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
As much as I've enjoyed living in Baltimore the past 17 years - and it's been an incredible place to raise a family - I'm starting to think about where we go next once my daughter hits college in 5 years.

I think things are going in the wrong direction with crime and policing. It's just gotten totally out of hand since last April.

Here's a sad but true statistic from today.

BALTIMORE CITY 2016 HOMICIDES:

Homicide #101: 90 years old

Homicide #102: 2 months old

 
Date when Baltimore saw its 100th murder victim
'16: 5/25
'15: 5/22
'14: 7/14
'13: 6/17
'12: 6/20
'11: 6/28
'10: 7/1
'09: 6/10
'08: 6/22
'07: 5/7
'06: 5/17

 
After documenting the extent of the flight, Coleman offered an explanation that infuriated erstwhile allies in the civil-rights movement. He said that in the 1960s he had mistakenly assumed that if middle-class students remained in the majority, they would continue to set the tone for an integrated school. “In that situation, both white and black children would learn.” As it happened, however, “the characteristics of the lower-class black classroom” often took over and constituted the values of the integrated school, even if middle-class students remained in the majority. Middle-class parents then transferred their children to private schools or moved to predominantly White suburbs. The problem, Coleman said, was “the degree of disorder and the degree to which schools … have failed to control lower-class black children.” It was “quite understandable,” Coleman said, for middle-class families “not to want to send their children to schools where 90 percent of the time is spent not on instruction but on discipline.”[16]

Coleman’s report on on White flight riled integrationists. “In 1966, we cited you as proof that [integration] worked,” NAACP attorney Charles Morgan told Coleman in 1975. “We don’t cite you as proof any more.”
Click to expand...
Truth hurts. 

 
The_Man said:
Hundreds of African American kids have been gathering every afternoon at Mondawmin since this verdict was announced.

Then they get on their buses and go home.

City has been very calm and quiet in the wake of the verdict announcements. I will always regret the forced confrontation that police precipitated at the Mondawmin transportation hub last April.

I agree that most of the charges by Mosby were terrible overreaches. She's going to get hers at the voting booth next time, just like her husband did in his aborted Mayoral campaign, just like the Mayor would have if she hadn't jumped out of the race before she got humiliated. None of that changes the fact that an American citizen, committing no crime, was disappeared into the back of a windowless van by armed authorities of the state, and came out with fatal injuries. Do we just shrug our shoulders at that and say too bad? That nobody was to blame? As a libertarian, I can't buy that.

Hey, as much as I like Baltimore, be careful with that. Ever since the uprising, crime has been out of control in Baltimore. The cops really are just phoning it in at this point. I'm sure you're aware of various gangs of teens and how they seem to be targeting bicyclists as much as anyone else.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I hear ya, but I'm not going to play scared. If I can't ride my bicycle through the city without being accosted, I don't want to live there.

 
avoiding injuries said:
Date when Baltimore saw its 100th murder victim
'16: 5/25
'15: 5/22
'14: 7/14
'13: 6/17
'12: 6/20
'11: 6/28
'10: 7/1
'09: 6/10
'08: 6/22
'07: 5/7
'06: 5/17
Click to expand...
It seems like it fluctuates. I wonder if the years with the earlier dates had spring heatwaves/early summer weather, people get feisty when it's hot. 

 
cstu said:
Truth hurts. 
Click to expand...
The theory that mixing good people/students with bad people/students makes bad people/students better is a myth......The bad people/students typically drag the good people/students down.

"Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many".

 

 
cstu said:
Truth hurts. 
Click to expand...
It really is a local problem. Just talking about Coleman here. I saw a comment here where someone challenged another poster saying they probably never noticed or researched every single candidate on their ballot. That may be true. I tend to vote for every race top to bottom and to me not knowing at least a little bit about the players would bother me. But local elections are really important. We have elections for judges and sometimes turnout/participation is under 10%, and people get frustrated with their decisions or when they're investigated and it turns out they were shoddy people. Same is true for school boards. Voters' choices on the local level is IMO part of the reason for urban decay in many places.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The_Man said:
As much as I've enjoyed living in Baltimore the past 17 years - and it's been an incredible place to raise a family - I'm starting to think about where we go next once my daughter hits college in 5 years.

I think things are going in the wrong direction with crime and policing. It's just gotten totally out of hand since last April.

Here's a sad but true statistic from today.

BALTIMORE CITY 2016 HOMICIDES:

Homicide #101: 90 years old

Homicide #102: 2 months old
Click to expand...
I lived in the Baltimore area for 7 years. Went to Towson starting in 2005 and just stayed up there after I graduated and moved away just over 3 years ago. When my wife and I had our daughter, we had talked about moving away from the area to get to better schools and away from crime. I just couldn't imagine sending my daughter out to downtown Baltimore with a group of friends, at any age. I loved the city and all that it offered a college/fresh out of college me. But it just wasn't the right place for me to raise a family. With all that has been going on there the last couple of years, I'm glad I got out of there.

 
Dignan_ said:
It seems like it fluctuates. I wonder if the years with the earlier dates had spring heatwaves/early summer weather, people get feisty when it's hot. 
Click to expand...


avoiding injuries said:
Date when Baltimore saw its 100th murder victim
'16: 5/25
'15: 5/22
'14: 7/14
'13: 6/17
'12: 6/20
'11: 6/28
'10: 7/1
'09: 6/10
'08: 6/22
'07: 5/7
'06: 5/17
Click to expand...
Wouldn't say it fluctuates that much. Basically, things got much much much better after O'Malley and his oppressive focus on locking up small-time drug possessors while ignoring serious offenders left. Dixon took over as Mayor in 07 and look at how much better things got under her, once she told the police to forget about rounding up people for holding drugs and getting serious about catching the druglords and habitual criminals.

Things stayed better under Rawlings-Blake until last year, with the riots and the cops subsequently checking out after the indictments in the Freddie Gray case. Suddenly things are almost as bad again as they were in the worst of the O'Malley days. And - here's my privilege showing - violent crime seems to be on a significant upswing in more affluent (dare I say white?) areas.

 
Marilyn Mosby To Face New Counts Including Malicious Prosecution


Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby will face a slew of new counts, including malicious prosecution and false arrest in a lawsuit brought by two Baltimore cops according to the DCNF.

Sgt. Alicia White and Officer William Porter, two officers charged in the death of Freddie Gray, filed suit May 2 against Mosby and Maj. Sam Cogen of the Baltimore Sheriff’s office for defamation and invasion of privacy. The suit alleges Mosby and Cogen knew the charges were trumped up, but filed them anyway to quell the riots that had ravaged the city.

Michael Glass, the lawyer for the officers in the suit, said that he plans to amend the lawsuit to include “likely a count of malicious prosecution, false arrest, false imprisonment, violation of the Maryland declaration of rights, article 24 and 26.” He said the they’re currently working on modifying the complaint, and the changes will be official in the next few weeks, likely by the end of June.

“These six officers were essentially sacrificed,” Glass said. “Alicia White, she’s accused of murder, she never touched Mr. Gray.”

The officers argue that during the press conference announcing the charges, Mosby revealed her false motives. Mosby raised eyebrows by appealing to the angry residents of Baltimore, many who had just protested and rioted in the last few days. “I heard your calls for, ‘No Justice, No peace,’” she said. “Your peace is sincerely needed as I work to deliver justice on behalf of this young man.”

Glass argues that when Mosby used this rhetoric and filed charges to quell the riots, she acted outside of her role as a prosecutor and thus should not be protected by the immunity usually due to the position. He said he believes new facts obtained through the discovery process will reveal damning conversations exposing the motives behind charging the officers.

Banzhaf told TheDCNF the suit may target both Cogen and Mosby to pressure them to give up information about one another. He said the suit could be to get one defendant to turn on the other.

“If enough pressure is put on [Cogen] he may say ‘can we settle mine and I may tell you some conversations I had with Mosby,’” Banzhaf told TheDCNF. “Provided they have a bona fide claim against him, even if they don’t think its strong or if they don’t think they win it, the motivation may be to get him to turn over evidence.”
Click to expand...
http://lawofficer.com/2016/06/marilyn-mosby-to-face-new-counts-including-malicious-prosecution/

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Judge Williams to hold hearing on witness disclosure as Officer Goodson's trial opens


Judge Barry Williams will hold a hearing Thursday on the first day of trial for Officer Caesar Goodson about whether prosecutors wrongly withheld discussions they had with a potential witness in the Freddie Gray case, newly unsealed documents show.

Attorneys for Goodson are asking Williams to dismiss the charges against him, alleging the failure to disclose the information was a violation of his rights. Documents filed by both sides were filed under seal, but unsealed by Williams on Wednesday.

The 11th-hour filings revolve around Donta Allen, the second man who was placed inside the police transport van after prosecutors say Gray was severely injured. Police said Allen told investigators that Gray was thrashing around the van, but Allen has publicly recanted that statement and said he only heard a faint tapping, according to court documents.

Prosecutors dismissed the meeting as inconsequential, saying it produced no evidence because Allen was "consistent with his inconsistence." They say their meeting with him was "farcical" and "unproductive," and they do not intend to call Allen as a witness.

Goodson's attorneys say Allen's attorney, Jack B. Rubin, contacted them last week and said the state had concealed for over a year that they had met with Allen last May. The defense says Williams has twice determined that the state improperly failed to produce discoverable evidence in two prior occasions.

"Officer Goodson would never have learned of this third instance without the intervention of a conscientious lawyer who felt duty bound to alert the court and the defense to the state's misconduct," Goodson's attorneys write. "This is the state's third strike — the only remedy that can rectify the state's violations ... is dismissal of the charges against Officer Goodson."

...
Click to expand...
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/freddie-gray/bs-md-ci-goodson-hearing-20160608-story.html

- The short of this is that Allen - the key witness - told the police that he heard another passenger in the van - whom he couldn't see - making lots of noise as if he was throwing himself around the van or banging his head or body on the sides of the van.

This would be consistent with the idea that Gray’s injuries were of his own making, and not the result of police misconduct.

Here's the motion with the details of what Allen said about what he heard in the van:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/315260082/Freddie-Gray-Caesar-Goodson-Motion-to-Dismiss-Brady-Violations-6-9-16

- So apparently the prosecution was never ever going to tell  any of the cops or their attorneys (or much less the public) about what Allen had told them and it's only because Allen's attorney felt an ethical duty to voluntarily tell the defense attorney for Goodson about this a week ago - whereupon the defense filed a motion whereupon the whole thing was put under seal and the court just had an open public hearing on it this morning (he denied the motion to dismiss).

So the prosecution is 0-2 and in trial no. 3 they open with a huge Brady violation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Judge Finds Prosecutors Withheld Evidence in Freddie Gray Officer Case


The judge overseeing the trial of a police officer charged with murdering Freddie Gray has determined that prosecutors withheld information that would have been beneficial to the defense.

Judge Barry Williams was visibly angry in the Baltimore court but he did not dismiss the charges against officer Caesar Goodson, as his attorneys had requested. Williams is giving prosecutors until Monday to disclose any other relevant evidence they have withheld. Goodson was the driver of the van during the arrest of Gray last year.
Click to expand...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-finds-prosecutors-withheld-evidence-freddie-gray-officer/story?id=39725459

- This is a bench trial - no jury - so this is a really, really bad start for the prosecution.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
[SIZE=12pt]Williams said prosecution can respond in writing or verbally argue. But that won't be today. Recess until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Defense immediately filed *written* motion for judgement of acquittal. Normal motion at this point in trial, but usually verbally argued.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]The prosecution has rested its case against Ofc Goodson, van driver in #FreddieGray case.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Questioning of Franklin is over. Brief recess.[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]A bunch of the attorneys for the other officers were in the courtroom watching this all go down. They looked... pleased.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]A 10-15, by the way, is police code for a request for a wagon.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Fraling: What's a 10-15? Franklin: IDK Fraling, 1 eyebrow up: "Aren't you testifying as an expert on general orders..policies & procedures?"[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Fraling: Seatbelting does not ensure an individual is secure? Franklin: "No it doesn't."[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Fraling: Prisoners in wagons routinely unseatbelt themselves? Franklin: It's possible.[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Then the discussion briefly was about, basically, whether Franklin had been complicit in this other alleged rough ride himself as young ofc.[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]To that, Judge Williams interjects: Only report it if injury?[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Fraling: What was outcome of that investigation? Franklin: Wasn't one. Fraling: You didn't report it? Franklin: Man wasn't injured.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Then Franklin told story about DUI stop he made in Baltimore as Md trooper when BPD responded and he thinks gave guy he stopped a rough ride[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Fraling, using air quotes: Judge should take you as rough ride "expert" based on anecdotal stories? Franklin: Plus knowledge from arrests[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE][SIZE=10pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Fraling: What's basis of rough ride knowledge? Franklin: Growing up in Baltimore, stories. Fraling: Studied? Written about? Franklin: No. No[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Fraling: In your expert opinion, did Goodson give Gray a rough ride? Franklin: "I can't say for sure."[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Fraling: In review of CCTV, see any unexpected acceleration? Franklin: No. Fraling: Deceleration? Franklin: No. Fraling: Turn? Franklin: No.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Wow. This cross examination of rough ride expert is...um... not going well for the prosecution.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Cross examination has begun.[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]And re manner of driving, he said "obviously it is extremely important." But he didn't speak at all to Goodson's actual driving of Gray.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]He said lack of seat belt means "ability to limit yourself from being a projectile in the back of that van is limited."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]He didn't say Gray got a rough ride. Wasn't shown video or asked about video of the van's trip.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Franklin testified hand cuffs, leg shackles can contribute to rough ride, making it harder for prisoner to brace himself.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]We don't know. But we're going back into court now.[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Will Judge Williams rein in testimony unsupported by or unrelated to evidence/testimony already admitted? Less so bc no jury to prejudice?[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Will he attest as expert that Gray got a rough ride? Or that Goodson would've been aware of past rough ride cases & dangers of not belting?[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Will he discuss general awareness of rough rides? Rough rides as culture? Whether rolling stop at stop sign indicative of rough ride?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Testimony from @NeillFranklin coming up in Ofc Goodson trial should be interesting re what he speaks to, what's objected to & what's allowed[/SIZE]
Click to expand...


- The above is live tweeting from the reporter from the Baltimore Sun covering the trial.

- It reads to me like the prosecution has failed to prove there was even a rough ride. Throw in Allen's original interview testimony that he heard Gray throwing himself around the inside of the van and this is looking really, really, really bad for the prosecution. They are on the verge of being 0-3 and facing serious possibility of malicious prosecution findings.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
No school kids trying to get on buses to go home, so it's going to be a little tougher for BPD to force a confrontation today. Right now, only crowd that's gathered is the swarm of journalists outside the courthouse.

Though MSNBC is running video from the riots from 14 months ago, with a "Happening Now" logo over it.

 
squistion said:
One law professor files an ethics complaint with the bar association asking for her disbarment. That is it, the actions of one person. Anyone could file such a complaint with the state Bar Association. Headline makes it sound like the Bar Association itself is actively moving to disbar her and that is not the case.
Click to expand...
You may be right but bar charges have to be answered and two instances of withholding evidence is a hell of hurdle.

I'm actually more surprised no one has filed for a federal injunction yet.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
You may be right but bar charges have to be answered and two instances of withholding evidence is a hell of hurdle.

im actually more surprised no one has filed for a federal injunction yet.
Click to expand...
No they don't. Just because a complaint is filed, there is no requirement that the Bar Association act on it - so the charges in this complaint may never have to be answered if the Bar Association feels they are not of sufficient merit.

Looks like a publicity stunt to me from someone with a right wing agenda. And it appears they have succeeded as Breitbart and other right wing sites are running with it as if this is breaking news of a disbarment proceeding.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
When are they going to stop wasting taxpayer money..and admit they never had a case...Waste of time and money...$6 million to the family these wasteful trials...burnt down neighborhoods..

 
Benjamin YoungSavage ‏@benjancewicz 34m34 minutes ago Baltimore, MD

#FreddieGray did not kill himself.

Didn't snap his own neck.

Didn't crush his own throat.

Didn't drag himself around Gilmore Homes.
Click to expand...
And it should be noted that the state medical examiner's office concluded that Gray's death could not be ruled an accident, and was instead a homicide, because officers failed to follow safety procedures "through acts of omission." http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/freddie-gray/bs-md-ci-freddie-gray-autopsy-20150623-story.html

So it appears that although we have a homicide, no one has been held responsible for it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sand said:
I'm very surprised we haven't heard about store owners suing the city over the express order by the mayor to allow their property to be looted and vandalized.  
Click to expand...
I have a friend who owns a sports apparel store and they were looted. Everything ruined. The city offered them $35k if they stayed and reopened. According to him, there are only a few insurance companies and they have taken their time paying out claims. He still hasn't received a penny from either of them. Terrible. 

 
squistion said:
And it should be noted that the state medical examiner's office concluded that Gray's death could not be ruled an accident, and was instead a homicide, because officers failed to follow safety procedures "through acts of omission." http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/freddie-gray/bs-md-ci-freddie-gray-autopsy-20150623-story.html

So it appears that although we have a homicide, no one has been held responsible for it.
Click to expand...
Hm, sounds a lot like Hillary's situation, except without the damning fact finding report.

Note - one of the ethical missteps by the prosecution here is that they failed to disclose that the ME originally believed the case was an accident.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sand said:
I'm very surprised we haven't heard about store owners suing the city over the express order by the mayor to allow their property to be looted and vandalized.  
Click to expand...
While that is the right wing spin, it isn't true. There was no express order to allow looting and vandalism and what the mayor said was mischaracterized. From Politifact:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/apr/28/context-baltimores-mayor-space-rioters/

In Context: What Baltimore's mayor said about space for rioters

Did Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake make a conscious decision to allow violent protestors to loot and set fire to stores and police cars in her city? That’s the take from conservative pundits and journalists. [...]

A local CBS news video caught her saying we "gave those who wished to destroy space." The online conservative news outlet Daily Caller picked up on that, as did conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh (hat-tip to Bloomberg’s Dave Weigel). [...]

We thought it would help to provide the entire text of what the mayor said, and the clarification her office put out about 24 hours later.

Here’s how Rawlings-Blake responded to a question of how the police conducted themselves Saturday night. (The question was inaudible, but the mayor said later it focused on property damage.)

"We’ve had these kinds of conversations before, and I made it very clear that I work with the police and instructed them to do everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their right to free speech. It’s a very delicate balancing act. Because while we try to make sure that they were protected from the cars and the other things that were going on, we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well. And we worked very hard to keep that balance and to put ourselves in the best position to de-escalate and that’s what you saw this evening."

And this is the full text of the statement from the mayor’s office the next day, Sunday. It came out under the name of Howard Libit, director of Strategic Planning and Policy:

"What she is saying within this statement was that there was an effort to give the peaceful demonstrators room to conduct their peaceful protests on Saturday. Unfortunately, as a result of providing the peaceful demonstrators with the space to share their message, that also meant that those seeking to incite violence also had the space to operate. The police sought to balance the rights of the peaceful demonstrators against the need to step in against those who were seeking to create violence.

"The mayor is not saying that she asked police to give space to people who sought to create violence. Any suggestion otherwise would be a misinterpretation of her statement."

Her office also offered an official clarification of her comments with emphasis added:

"I’ve made it very clear that I work with the police and instructed them to do everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their right to free speech. It’s a very delicate balancing act, because, while we tried to make sure that they were protected from the cars and the other things that were going on, we also [as a result] gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well. And we worked very hard to keep that balance and to put ourselves in the best position to de escalate, and that’s what you saw."

On Monday, April 27, the mayor held another news conference where she was asked if her words might have encouraged the renewed rioting on Monday. Here is that transcript:

"The very blatant mischaracterization of my words was not helpful today. I was asked a question about the property damage that was done. And in answering that question I made it very clear that we balance a very fine line between giving peaceful protestors space to protest. What I said is, in doing so, people can hijack that and use that space for bad. I did not say we were accepting of it. I did not say we were passive to it. I was just explaining how property damage can happen during a peaceful protest. It is very unfortunate that members of your industry decided to mischaracterize my words and try to use it as a way to say that we are inciting violence."

Question: "There was no word to the police to hold back. To let some of this happen?"

"Absolutely not. Absolutely not. And I’ve never said anything to that effect. What we did was manage a peaceful protest in the best way possible and when it got violent and destructive, we responded to that. We have an obligation to protect people's’ First Amendment rights. We also understand that through the best training and best practices that we have to do everything that we can to de-escalate and those were the tactics that were deployed.

"Did people exploit those tactics, that space that we facilitated for people to have peaceful protest for bad? Yes they did. But we didn't endorse it. We didn’t allow it."

 
Sand said:
I'm very surprised we haven't heard about store owners suing the city over the express order by the mayor to allow their property to be looted and vandalized.  
Click to expand...
I was at an event in Baltimore a couple weekends ago where Mayor Stephanie Rawlings Blake gave a short speech.  When the mayor was announced the boos were considerable and drowned out the polite applause.  It was surprising given the event and audience.

 
squistion said:
While that is the right wing spin, it isn't true. There was no express order to allow looting and vandalism and what the mayor said was mischaracterized. From Politifact:

A local CBS news video caught her saying we "gave those who wished to destroy space."
Click to expand...
Eh - she said it and we can certainly roll the tapes to show how much the crowds, once they turned to looting and vandalizing, were held back from their activities.  Cheat sheet - they weren't, at all.  The police stood back and let them destroy swaths of neighborhoods.  

 
squistion said:
Here’s how Rawlings-Blake responded to a question of how the police conducted themselves Saturday night. (The question was inaudible, but the mayor said later it focused on property damage.)

"We’ve had these kinds of conversations before, and I made it very clear that I work with the police and instructed them to do everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their right to free speech. It’s a very delicate balancing act. Because while we try to make sure that they were protected from the cars and the other things that were going on, we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well. And we worked very hard to keep that balance and to put ourselves in the best position to de-escalate and that’s what you saw this evening."

And this is the full text of the statement from the mayor’s office the next day, Sunday. It came out under the name of Howard Libit, director of Strategic Planning and Policy:

"What she is saying within this statement was that there was an effort to give the peaceful demonstrators room to conduct their peaceful protests on Saturday. Unfortunately, as a result of providing the peaceful demonstrators with the space to share their message, that also meant that those seeking to incite violence also had the space to operate. The police sought to balance the rights of the peaceful demonstrators against the need to step in against those who were seeking to create violence.

"The mayor is not saying that she asked police to give space to people who sought to create violence. Any suggestion otherwise would be a misinterpretation of her statement."

Her office also offered an official clarification of her comments with emphasis added:

"I’ve made it very clear that I work with the police and instructed them to do everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their right to free speech. It’s a very delicate balancing act, because, while we tried to make sure that they were protected from the cars and the other things that were going on, we also [as a result] gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well. And we worked very hard to keep that balance and to put ourselves in the best position to de escalate, and that’s what you saw."
Click to expand...


- Squiz, is it not correct that here three different times the mayor and her office said that the looters were mixed in with the protestors, so the mayor did not seek to stop the looters because that would have meant disturbing the protestors? So some of the protestors weren't really protestors but actually looters?

 
squistion said:
Did people exploit those tactics, that space that we facilitated for people to have peaceful protest for bad? Yes they did.
Click to expand...
Ok, so they chose bad tactics by the sound of it. It sounds to me like police pulled back on the presumption by the command that the protestors would just be protestors, when in fact that presumption was 100% wrong.

- eta - it may not have been an express order to allow looting but it sounds like a completely wrongheaded and foolish tactical decision.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Ok, so they chose bad tactics by the sound of it. It sounds to me like police pulled back on the presumption by the command that the protestors would just be protestors, when in fact that presumption was 100% wrong.
Click to expand...
As she noted she was trying to strike a balance to preserve the free speech of the protestors and let the police do their job.

However, my posting was in response to the claim, repeated here constantly, that she issued an express order to allow looting and vandalism.

 
Officer Garrett Miller, who observed Monday's ruling, is the next officer scheduled to be tried. Miller's case is fraught with new challenges for prosecutors: Because they compelled him to testify under immunity at the trial of Officer Edward Nero, a new team of prosecutors was appointed to handle his case.

Before his case, the court will hold a hearing where prosecutors will have to prove that they were not exposed to any of Miller's testimony. During the process in which prosecutors lobbied to be able to compel Miller to testify, Williams, the Attorney General's Office and the Court of Appeals judges all said prosecutors face a high bar at such a hearing.
Click to expand...
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/freddie-gray/bs-md-ci-rice-analysis-20160718-story.html

- Next up for trial No. 5 - a man faces punishment due to his own compelled testimony despite having been granted immunity.  Yeay.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With another failed prosecution, it's time for Mosby to move on


In the midst of what feels like nationwide madness — a nightmarish period of gun violence against citizens and police officers, racial tension and vulgar political extremism — Baltimore Circuit Judge Barry G. Williams on Monday morning affirmed the rule of law, the heart and soul of the republic. Hearing the certainty in Williams' voice was almost soothing on a day when it seemed as if the country had gone mad.

If that sounds grandiose, good. That's my intent. A judge's constitutional duties are fundamentally grand and foundationally high-minded. In fact, before he delivered his verdicts in the trial of Baltimore police Lt. Brian Rice, the judge noted what was expected of him under Maryland law: that he find facts and render a verdict without emotion, without regard to personal prejudices or to public opinion, without sympathy to either the late Freddie Gray or to the police lieutenant accused of contributing to his death.

Had Williams gone either way — guilty or not guilty — it would have been possible to have confidence that his finding was based on careful and objective consideration of facts. No polemics. No politics. Just facts and law.

In this case, Williams said, the prosecution did not have enough evidence to convict Rice of a crime in the arrest and death of Gray last spring.

This, of course, has become almost routine by now, and it's approaching boring. Williams has so far acquitted three officers from the original Freddie Gray Six, and he's said primarily the same thing about each case. His verdicts have begun to sound like law school lectures: carefully worded, clear, concise and firm.

Maybe Williams could offer an online course in criminal evidence and the requirements for guilty verdicts.

Maybe Baltimore State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby should sign up for it.

The woman who on May 1, 2015, loudly and publicly brought charges against the Freddie Gray Six — now the Freddie Gray Three — was not in Williams' courtroom Monday morning for his verdicts in the Rice case.

Where was she?

Less than a month ago, when Williams read his rulings in the case against Officer Caesar Goodson Jr., the driver of the police van in which Gray sustained his fatal injuries, Mosby sat in the front row of the gallery, directly behind her deputies on the trial team.

Monday? No Mosby.

Her office would not say where she was between 10 and 10:35 a.m., as Williams read his ruling in the Rice case. "For security reasons we do not share the whereabouts of the State's Attorney," was the response I got.

Maybe, like just about everyone else in Baltimore, Mosby expected the Rice acquittal and wanted to be spared another humiliating walk out of the courtroom and into the media arena outside the courthouse.

Perhaps she'll read the transcript of Williams' remarks about the case against Rice and understand, if she does not already, that the judge's ruling constituted a full rebuke of the state's contentions.

Rice's failure to put a seat belt around Gray's waist as he sat in a parked van on April 12, 2015, might have been a mistake, might have been a bad decision, but Williams said it did not constitute a crime. The judge emphasized the difference between civil negligence and criminal liability — and he said, as he has said before, that the state did not have sufficient evidence of a crime. In fact, it didn't even come close.

In rendering his verdict in the Goodson trial, Williams tore apart the state's case, and it took him just under an hour.

He acquitted Rice of all remaining charges Monday in just under 25 minutes.

To those disappointed with these outcomes, who have been protesting police brutality and a culture of harassment, I say this: The Freddie Gray case is not the one on which to build a new standard for conduct by police officers.

Mosby might have wanted to calm the crowds in the spring of 2015 by charging the Freddie Gray Six. Or maybe she wanted to put cops on notice that she's willing to charge them criminally when, in her judgment, they go too far and break the law.

You can argue the relative value and ethics of those motivations — how public safety might have been served, whether the state's attorney gets to bring a case because it might quell civil unrest. But you can't argue that the Freddie Gray cases were worthy of prosecution.

Not anymore.

There was a rush in May of last year that should have made citizens uncomfortable — a rush by Mosby to bring charges, and a rush by police defenders to say she had no business doing so, that it was all a show by an inexperienced prosecutor to score political points.

Now, more than a year later, with four trials ending in one hung jury and three acquittals, with a respected judge consistently giving the state failing grades, it is time for Mosby to declare her mission accomplished — angry crowds quelled, cops put on notice — and move on to trials that matter, with real, provable criminality and sound convictions that make Baltimore a safer city.
Click to expand...
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/dan-rodricks-blog/bs-md-rodricks-0718-20160718-column.html

- Baltimore Sun

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MattFancy said:
Per CNN, all charges have been dropped against the remaining officers to stand trial
Click to expand...
95 pages. Funny how all the debating debaters disappeared. Apparently criminal negligence wasn't even in play.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
For starters, I'm in no way surprised that there has been absolutely no civil unrest in Baltimore since the initial uprising last April. For the first couple verdicts, national media gathered and eagerly awaited more riots (remember MSNBC broadcasting 16-month old footage of the riots with a "Breaking News" caption?). They left disappointed. And now, with all charges dropped, there are again peaceful protests but absolutely no fear over unrest. In addition to the loss of a man's life, the other great shame of this entire situation has been the riot that the Baltimore Police absolutely incited.

The other shame is that thanks to Mosby's egregious incompetence, no one will be held accountable for Freddie Gray's death. Should anyone have been charged with second degree murder in this case? Of course not. Should all the cops who arrived late on the scene and assisted in securing him have been charged with false imprisonment. No. But I am a believer in the USA, and that means I don't believe an American citizen, standing on the street of his own neighborhood, should go into police custody and come out dead, with no one held accountable. I believe there was criminal negligence that resulted in Gray's death.

Mosby covered herself in shame yesterday, with a slightly unhinged diatribe against the Baltimore Police for sabotaging her case. And yet, when she was grabbing headlines when handing down indictments, she specifically said these charges were based on her own office's investigation. So now the city's chief prosecutor and the Police are in a war. Meanwhile, Baltimore just hit 30 murders for the month, a figure that hadn't been reached since the late 90s, but has been commonplace since last April. Know how many cases Baltimore Homicide has cleared this year? Less than 25 percent.

It's a very unfortunate situation. But I am at least heartened that Baltimore's residents are expressing their dissatisfaction with the system in legal, appropriate manner.

 
The_Man said:
For starters, I'm in no way surprised that there has been absolutely no civil unrest in Baltimore since the initial uprising last April. For the first couple verdicts, national media gathered and eagerly awaited more riots (remember MSNBC broadcasting 16-month old footage of the riots with a "Breaking News" caption?). They left disappointed. And now, with all charges dropped, there are again peaceful protests but absolutely no fear over unrest. In addition to the loss of a man's life, the other great shame of this entire situation has been the riot that the Baltimore Police absolutely incited.

The other shame is that thanks to Mosby's egregious incompetence, no one will be held accountable for Freddie Gray's death. Should anyone have been charged with second degree murder in this case? Of course not. Should all the cops who arrived late on the scene and assisted in securing him have been charged with false imprisonment. No. But I am a believer in the USA, and that means I don't believe an American citizen, standing on the street of his own neighborhood, should go into police custody and come out dead, with no one held accountable. I believe there was criminal negligence that resulted in Gray's death.

Mosby covered herself in shame yesterday, with a slightly unhinged diatribe against the Baltimore Police for sabotaging her case. And yet, when she was grabbing headlines when handing down indictments, she specifically said these charges were based on her own office's investigation. So now the city's chief prosecutor and the Police are in a war. Meanwhile, Baltimore just hit 30 murders for the month, a figure that hadn't been reached since the late 90s, but has been commonplace since last April. Know how many cases Baltimore Homicide has cleared this year? Less than 25 percent.

It's a very unfortunate situation. But I am at least heartened that Baltimore's residents are expressing their dissatisfaction with the system in legal, appropriate manner.
Click to expand...
The police started the riot?  I don't recall that footage.

 
The_Man said:
I believe there was criminal negligence that resulted in Gray's death.
Click to expand...
I'm speaking from afar in a city that has had true criminal police behavior and a serious murder problem so please understand I am sympathetic.

But 0-5, with three instances of hiding evidence is worse than bad.

In NO, the US Attorney took over prosecuting cops - when does the DOJ step in, or is it not obvious that they do not because they do not have a case?

In NO, we had innocent men - including a mentally handicapped person - shot on a public roadway while looking for assistance in the storm. Those cops have been rightly prosecuted. We have another instance of a man being murdered, his body hid in a car, the car hidden, the car torched, and a massive cover up. We have situations where cops have formed corporations on the side to profit off their police work. I really do not see how the Gray case compares.

What institutional changes are being made?  We have a Police Monitor - does that exist in Baltimore? Is anyone calling for one? We have an Inspector General - does that exist in Baltimore? Is anyone calling for one? - Where are the calls for civic reform? I see none.

Mosby is out of control in her press conference. Why does anyone think she is thinking in a balanced manner?

Finally, the stuff you are talking about is civil negligence, the city has already paid the family (is this right?) like $6.5 million? Criminal negligence was never, ever in play here, much less depraved heart/manslaughter.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The_Man said:
Meanwhile, Baltimore just hit 30 murders for the month, a figure that hadn't been reached since the late 90s, but has been commonplace since last April.
Click to expand...
When you broaden the scope even further to consider shootings that didn't result in death, you get an even fuller picture of how much violent crime has spiked in Baltimore the past two years:

72 percent:  The increase in nonfatal shootings in 2015.  There were 637 shootings in Baltimore in 2015, a 72 percent increase from 2014, when there were 370 shootings

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Quick Baltimore trip questions
Replies
47
Views
1K
Insein
Insein
mr. furley
Long Island serial killer suspect in custody
Replies
34
Views
1K
Dezbelief
Dezbelief
fatness
“I am extremely embarrassed by this incident. It does not reflect who I am"
Replies
13
Views
709
Chris B.
Chris B.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top