PDA

View Full Version : The Freddie Gray Case



Osborne Russell
04-30-2015, 10:45 AM
. . . as opposed to the riots and protests.

The city police have "turned over the investigation" to the state. Classic hide the weenie and play for time. If they haven't located and interviewed the witnesses by now, they're incompetent and/or intentionally crippling the investigation in fear of what it might reveal. This isn't a big case.

Only today do they reveal that the van transporting Mr. Gray made a "previously unknown" stop on the way to the jail. That must have been when the driver, like the passenger, who, although they couldn't see, nevertheless heard the characteristic sounds of Mr. Gray "injuring himself".

And then there's the Red Dog Whistle machine:



Those stories that Freddie Gray had a preexisting spinal injury are totally bogus

By Michael E. Miller April 30 at 2:44 AM


In an “exclusive” that quoted anonymous sources, the Web site the Fourth Estate reported that “Freddie Gray’s life-ending injuries to his spine may have possibly been the result of spinal and neck surgery that he allegedly received a week before he was arrested, not from rough [sic] excessively rough treatment or abuse from police.” The site claimed his injury was from a car accident.

“If this is true, then it is possible that Gray’s spinal injury resulting from his encounter with the Baltimore Police was not the result of rough-handling or abuse, but rather a freak accident that occurred when Gray should have been at home resting, not selling drugs,” the site reported right above images of documents pertaining to a civil lawsuit involving Gray.

“The police didn’t mistreat him at all; he mistreated himself,” the report concluded.

But the images on the Fourth Estate actually relate to Gray’s lead paint lawsuit, the Baltimore Sun revealed. An attorney representing the Gray family confirmed that the case concerned lead paint, not a spinal cord injury a week before Freddie Gray’s arrest.

“We have no information or evidence at this point to indicate that there is a prior preexisting spinal injury,” Jason Downs, an attorney representing one of Gray’s relatives, told the Sun. “It’s a rumor.”

And yet that rumor might have caused real damage in a country already polarized on the subject of race and the police. The story quickly spread to several other Web sites, such as Free Republic and the Conservative Tree House, which called Gray’s supposedly preexisting injury “a potential game changing discovery.” A site called New York City Guns ran the headline “Dead Baltimore Drug Dealer Had Spinal Surgery DAYS Before He Collapsed in Police Van (Rioters Say ‘OOPS’).”

“Boom! Seems legit,” a commenter wrote on the Conservative Tree House.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/04/30/those-stories-that-freddie-gray-had-a-pre-existing-spinal-injury-are-totally-bogus/

CWSmith
04-30-2015, 10:53 AM
If it were the MD state police, I would worry. If it's an MD state prosecutor, I take some comfort in knowing that the Baltimore police will not be investigating themselves.

Peerie Maa
04-30-2015, 12:01 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11567318/Mobile-phone-footage-shows-Freddie-Gray-in-agony-during-arrest.html

The embedded video has warnings about its distressing content.

I would have expected the arresting police to have called for medical assistance under these circumstances. UK police would have.

CWSmith
04-30-2015, 12:29 PM
I would have expected the arresting police to have called for medical assistance under these circumstances. UK police would have.

How about a complete lack of respect for the "criminal" (read "victim")?

This is not about law and order. This is about the need for some officers to get "respect" the old fashioned way - through violence.

John Smith
04-30-2015, 12:53 PM
NIghtly Show last night had an interesting piece. Seems Baltimore Police have paid out a LOT of money in abuse settlements. They give suspects very bumpy rides.

I'm guessing the money doesn't come out of the pockets of the individuals, so they don't care; probably find it entertaining.

Osborne Russell
04-30-2015, 12:53 PM
If it were the MD state police, I would worry.

Why?


If it's an MD state prosecutor, I take some comfort in knowing that the Baltimore police will not be investigating themselves.

Maybe. The politics of state vs. local can stack up a lot of different ways. They can be best friends or worst enemies and anyplace in between.

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 01:36 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11567318/Mobile-phone-footage-shows-Freddie-Gray-in-agony-during-arrest.html

The embedded video has warnings about its distressing content.

I would have expected the arresting police to have called for medical assistance under these circumstances. UK police would have.

it's not so much that police don't receive respect as it is the police have no respect for their employers... this has been evolving for years and it's easier for people to fall back on 'isims' of not respecting the police to avoid uncomfortable decisions or actually exercising their own humanitarianism.

Paul G.
04-30-2015, 01:55 PM
To even discuss that justice will be determined by political connections is banana republic stuff- have you really sunk that low?

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Too bad black communities dont count in the land of the free

Kevin T
04-30-2015, 01:57 PM
To even discuss that justice will be determined by political connections is banana republic stuff- have you really sunk that low?

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Too bad black communities dont count in the land of the free

Why yes, yes we have, for decades in fact, and to our great discredit sadly.

Peerie Maa
04-30-2015, 02:44 PM
To even discuss that justice will be determined by political connections is banana republic stuff- have you really sunk that low?

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Too bad black communities dont count in the land of the free


its purest sense, a racist is someone who believes another person is inherently inferior due to the biological fact of their race. This belief drove the centuries-long enslavement of Africans by Europeans, and also the colonial era that followed, in which Africans were deemed incapable of running their own lands. Part of this discourse involved associating Africans with a plethora of negative personality traits: they were supposedly primitive, simple-minded, lazy, aggressive and sexually uncontrolled. This became a convenient way of justifying a system of exploitation that created massive wealth throughout the western world. Asians and native Americans were never enslaved in the same way, so the justification of their treatment did not go to such extreme lengths: the common perception held, though, that their culture and religion were inferior, and they needed the civilising hand of European conquest.


From this Op Ed http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/30/why-people-racist-you-asked-google, which concludes
Many people fail to comprehend the centrality of power to racism. Why are black and Hispanic Americans incarcerated in such huge numbers? Because the system is set up by and for white people. Let’s face it, black people were only given the right to vote in the US 50 years ago.
We can see how those power structures work by considering the presidency of Barack Obama. He is supposedly the most powerful man on the planet, but has he been able to eradicate racism? To stop police killings of black people (http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/on-baltimore-s-unrest-obama-says-i-ve-seen-this-movie-too-many-times-before-20150429)? To end inequality? Not at all, because he still works within a white system of power that seemingly blocks every attempt to change the status quo, from “Obamacare” to gun control (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/11/newtown-politics_n_4427513.html). The US senate and congress, which he has to answer to, are both white-dominated, as is the US supreme court.
Globally Europeans and, by extension, white people, have been the dominant group for centuries. This may continue for many more. But it’s at least conceivable today that the rise of China might change that: the profound economic and military setbacks the west has suffered in the last decade could be an opportunity for the east to take over. In which case, colonialism, plunder and exploitation would have a different face, a different beneficiary, and a different victim.
Racism, as we know it, would be over; but racism in a new guise would continue.

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 02:55 PM
From this Op Ed http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/30/why-people-racist-you-asked-google, which concludes

"Let’s face it, black people were only given the right to vote in the US 50 years ago."

I hate very few things... but being lied to is one of them

15th amendment... 1870... and lets not get into semantics please

Keith Wilson
04-30-2015, 03:00 PM
black people were only given the right to vote in the US 50 years ago.Eh? That's true in the former Confederacy, at least in practice, and some other places. It's not the case for much of the country.


15th amendment... 1870... and lets not get into semantics pleaseOnce federal troops were withdrawn from the south after Reconstruction, blacks lost the right to vote, in many cases by violence - not in law, of course, but they sure as hell couldn't vote. That is not semantics.

John of Phoenix
04-30-2015, 03:02 PM
Eh? That's true in the former Confederacy, at least in practice, and some other places. It's not the case for much of the country.And many are working feverishly (and successfully) to take voting rights away.

hokiefan
04-30-2015, 03:04 PM
"Let’s face it, black people were only given the right to vote in the US 50 years ago."

I hate very few things... but being lied to is one of them

15th amendment... 1870... and lets not get into semantics please

Its true they had the legal right to vote starting in 1870. The ability to do exercise that right was vigorously suppressed in the Old South for many years, until about 50 years ago.

Cheers,

Bobby

Captain Intrepid
04-30-2015, 03:05 PM
"Let’s face it, black people were only given the right to vote in the US 50 years ago."

I hate very few things... but being lied to is one of them

15th amendment... 1870... and lets not get into semantics please

The Voting Rights Act of 1965. The mass disenfranchisement of black Americans before it was passed wasn't semantics, it was a monumental injustice.

Tom Wilkinson
04-30-2015, 03:06 PM
"Let’s face it, black people were only given the right to vote in the US 50 years ago."

I hate very few things... but being lied to is one of them

15th amendment... 1870... and lets not get into semantics please

I hope you don't honestly think that the 15 amendment actually cleared the way for them to vote. There were many things put in place for nearly 100 years after that, and none of them had to do with semantics.

If that wasn't the case there would have been no need for the voting rights act of 1965.

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:07 PM
Its true they had the legal right to vote starting in 1870. The ability to do exercise that right was vigorously suppressed in the Old South for many years, until about 50 years ago.

Cheers,

Bobby

how about a state by state analysis including all states... you might be surprised thought I doubt you will acknowledge it

John of Phoenix
04-30-2015, 03:08 PM
you might be surprised thought I doubt you will acknowledge itWhy don't YOU surprise us?

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:09 PM
The Voting Rights Act of 1965. The mass disenfranchisement of black Americans before it was passed wasn't semantics, it was a monumental injustice.
I agree about injustice... but the right to vote came ahead of women's right to vote... my own mother was born before women were allowed to vote... does that mean your grandparents were misogynists?

Tom Wilkinson
04-30-2015, 03:10 PM
how about a state analysis including all states... you might be surprised thought I doubt you will acknowledge it

Do your own research and present your case. We all know that wont happen and I surely won't waste my time doing it for you.

Captain Intrepid
04-30-2015, 03:10 PM
how about a state analysis including all states... you might be surprised thought I doubt you will acknowledge it

So, say, if 3 out of 5 states didn't prevent black Americans from voting, you might say they were 3/5ths free?

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:12 PM
Do your own research and present your case. We all know that wont happen and I surely won't waste my time doing it for you.

how about I NOT do your research... flinging such a self righteous claim out then refusing to defend it is rather silly

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:13 PM
So, say, if 3 out of 5 states didn't prevent black Americans from voting, you might say they were 3/5ths free?

semantics

CWSmith
04-30-2015, 03:16 PM
Why?

I grew up in Md. The state police there are a very militaristic organization. I cannot remember them ever finding fault with their own actions or the actions of other officers. Think LA police and their reputation and you have the idea.

Peerie Maa
04-30-2015, 03:19 PM
Wow, Super, Right on. Another PA pissing match.

Tom Wilkinson
04-30-2015, 03:19 PM
how about I NOT do your research... flinging such a self righteous claim out then refusing to defend it is rather silly

UMM, you are the one asking for a state by state analysis, AND the one claiming they could vote per the 15th amendmant. I made no such claims therefore have nothing to defend. The necessity of voting rights act of 1965 pretty well proves that there were plenty of impediments to blacks voting well after the 15th amendment.

You want to claim otherwise, YOU make the case for it.

Keith Wilson
04-30-2015, 03:21 PM
So Phillip, what are you claiming?
- That African-Americans actually could vote everywhere before the 1960s? This is hogwash.
- That the barriers preventing them from voting were not exclusive to the south? That's partly true, but only partly. The restrictions were much more effective in the former Confederacy.

John of Phoenix
04-30-2015, 03:22 PM
how about a state by state analysis including all states... you might be surprised thought I doubt you will acknowledge it
how about I NOT do your research... flinging such a self righteous claim out then refusing to defend it is rather sillyYou are the flinger here, bub. You need to defend your crap.

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:30 PM
So Phillip, what are you claiming?
- That African-Americans actually could vote everywhere before the 1960s? This is hogwash.
- That the barriers preventing them from voting were not exclusive to the south? That's partly true, but only partly. The restrictions were much more effective in the former Confederacy.

of course some, even a lot of, blacks were denied the right to vote... but on a state by state and county by county scale, and it's practice was NEVER defined by the Mason-Dixon line... I don't like the flat lie I originally referred to... editing the thrust of what I or anyone said is SOP down here... I try to stop from time to time but fall off the wagon from time to time... but that's a different thread topic... the lie about voting rights takes away any legitimacy the original liar may have had

first you ask me a question then you answer for me then you minimize the illegal acts of the North... SOP

John of Phoenix
04-30-2015, 03:31 PM
the lie about voting rights takes away any legitimacy the original liar may have hadI see you're looking in a mirror for a change.

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:34 PM
So Phillip, what are you claiming?
- That African-Americans actually could vote everywhere before the 1960s? This is hogwash.
- That the barriers preventing them from voting were not exclusive to the south? That's partly true, but only partly. The restrictions were much more effective in the former Confederacy.

you have added a word I did not use... I referred to the right to vote and I did not lie about it

Peerie Maa
04-30-2015, 03:34 PM
. . . as opposed to the riots and protests.

The city police have "turned over the investigation" to the state. Classic hide the weenie and play for time. If they haven't located and interviewed the witnesses by now, they're incompetent and/or intentionally crippling the investigation in fear of what it might reveal. This isn't a big case.



I think that the US is 15 years behind the UK, and not necessarily trying to catch up yet.

Institutional racism: lessons from the U.K.

5 December 2000
Robin Oakley1

On February 24, 1999, a major step forward was taken in the fight against racism in the UK, with the publication of the Report of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. This report led to official recognition of a concept that activists had been fighting to establish for more than twenty years: the concept of "institutional racism". Why has this been considered so important, and why has securing recognition of it been so difficult? And what are the implications for tackling the massive racism and discrimination that affect Roma, especially in the transition countries of Central and Eastern Europe?

The Inquiry did hear, however, extensive evidence that police behaviour was affected by racial considerations in rather more subtle ways. These included: initial police suspicion that the youths had been victims of a drug-related attack; police suspicion that Duwayne Brooks himself might have been the killer; lack of initial consideration that racial motivation might have been a factor in the attack; lack of action when Duwayne Brooks stated that he had heard the word "nigger" being shouted by the white youths; hostility towards Stephen's parents when family and friends rallied to their support; poor quality communication and support for Stephen's family; and lack of effort in the conduct and progression of the investigation in general. Although many such claims were contested by the police as unproven, or at least not racial in character, they were strongly affirmed as having a racial dimension by the victims and the black community.

Such evidence pointed towards a very different form of racism from that which is usually the focus of public attention. Not only is this subtle in its manifestations, but while sometimes conscious, it may be often unconscious, unintended, and resulting not from action but from the failure to act - or to act in appropriate ways. It may be the unconscious result of feelings and preconceptions relating to particular racial or ethnic groups that quite unconsciously influence - to a greater or lesser degree according to circumstances - a person's behaviour. It is a form of racism that reflects the fact that ignorance, misunderstandings and even stereotypes about minorities are widespread throughout society, and may unwittingly be reflected even by well-intentioned people in their behaviour.

from http://www.errc.org/article/institutional-racism-lessons-from-the-uk/1191

Keith Wilson
04-30-2015, 03:36 PM
and it's practice was NEVER defined by the Mason-Dixon line...Not 100%, but mostly. Most blacks in the north could vote prior to the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, very few in the south could.

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:45 PM
Not 100%, but mostly. Most blacks in the north could vote prior to the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, very few in the south could.

'very few' is undefined... is there a reason for that? the original complaint was the universal lie that blacks did not have the right to vote before 50 years ago... I requested we not 'play' with words... that request has been ignored by 3 or 4 people here

Paul G.
04-30-2015, 03:47 PM
I think the US has not yet come to terms that it was built on the enslavement of their fellow humans.

Captain Intrepid
04-30-2015, 03:51 PM
'very few' is undefined... is there a reason for that? the original complaint was the universal lie that blacks did not have the right to vote before 50 years ago... I requested we not 'play' with words... that request has been ignored by 3 or 4 people here

Semantics.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gNIS2LNL38Q/UFEmzStZggI/AAAAAAAAEIY/0rPTglG1CpI/s1600/littlerock+2.jpeg

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:51 PM
I think the US has not yet come to terms that it was built on the enslavement of their fellow humans.

color didn't enter into it until long after settlement was started... no one ever remembers that Aesop was a slave either... was he black? were the slaves in the middle east all blacks? our bias is patently obvious.

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:54 PM
Semantics.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gNIS2LNL38Q/UFEmzStZggI/AAAAAAAAEIY/0rPTglG1CpI/s1600/littlerock+2.jpeg

when you first witnessed this, did you defend the black man?

Captain Intrepid
04-30-2015, 03:57 PM
when you first witnessed this, did you defend the black man?

Are you denying the reality of 1950s southern culture in all it's degenerate racist glory?

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 03:59 PM
Are you denying the reality of 1950s southern culture in all it's degenerate racist glory?

no... now how about YOU answering my question, I answered yours

Captain Intrepid
04-30-2015, 04:01 PM
I was not alive in the 1950s and 1960s.

Peerie Maa
04-30-2015, 04:04 PM
color didn't enter into it until long after settlement was started... no one ever remembers that Aesop was a slave either... was he black? were the slaves in the middle east all blacks? our bias is patently obvious.

read my post #10.

Lots of English criminals were transported to the US and bonded to American owners, they were treated less well than the Blacks owned by
Americans, but only for the duration of their indenture. If they survived they were free.

Keith Wilson
04-30-2015, 04:06 PM
'very few' is undefined... is there a reason for that?Because 'none' is not correct and would have invited quibbling. "Almost none' is accurate.

Good God, I'm sorry I brought it up. http://www.reduser.net/forum/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Kevin T
04-30-2015, 04:09 PM
Relative to the photo for me personally, I've never witnessed such an act as I didn't live in the south when the photo was taken and based on the style of dress in the photo I would have been all of a year or two old when the picture was taken.

But the far greater shame amendment-wise (talking about actual ratification) is that there were two states that didn't actually ratify the amendment until the 20th Century and one, MS did ratify until quite recently. To me it doesn't matter if some will claim that it was a mere technicality that MS didn't ratify and certify until February 7, 2013. That is shameful.



Kentucky — March 18, 1976[80] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion#cite_note-80) (After rejection – February 24, 1865)
Mississippi — March 16, 1995; Certified – February 7, 2013[81] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion#cite_note-Mississippi13thAmendmentABCNews-81) (After rejection – December 5, 1865)

skuthorp
04-30-2015, 04:13 PM
Lovely little country you've got devolving there……………


And here for that matter though it's more the guilt factor I think, and plain incapacity to understand.

John of Phoenix
04-30-2015, 04:16 PM
Lovely little country you've got devolving there……………


And here for that matter though it's more the guilt factor I think, and plain incapacity to understand.Thanks, we've been working on this for some time now and it's finally starting to show some progress.

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 04:23 PM
Relative to the photo for me personally, I've never witnessed such an act as I didn't live in the south when the photo was taken and based on the style of dress in the photo I would have been all of a year or two old when the picture was taken.

But the far greater shame amendment-wise (talking about actual ratification) is that there were two states that didn't actually ratify the amendment until the 20th Century and one, MS did ratify until quite recently. To me it doesn't matter if some will claim that it was a mere technicality that MS didn't ratify and certify until February 7, 2013. That is shameful.



Kentucky — March 18, 1976[80] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion#cite_note-80) (After rejection – February 24, 1865)
Mississippi — March 16, 1995; Certified – February 7, 2013[81] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion#cite_note-Mississippi13thAmendmentABCNews-81) (After rejection – December 5, 1865)



I never witnessed such an act or anything like it... and I have always lived in Arkansas... My Dad explained to me some of the race problems (from the black's point of view) when I was maybe 3 or 4 years old... I simply wasn't raised in such a way as many here have accused me of... I have always recognized this as it's own sort of racism

Tom Wilkinson
04-30-2015, 04:24 PM
'very few' is undefined... is there a reason for that? the original complaint was the universal lie that blacks did not have the right to vote before 50 years ago... I requested we not 'play' with words... that request has been ignored by 3 or 4 people here

HAHA. You request that we not play with words and yet that is EXACTLY what you are doing.

Make your case or go away. The fact is that though the right may have been given in the 15th many things were put in place that made sure that right never was actually available, so what you claim to be a lie, is in fact a truth, and it took additional laws being passed as late as 1965 (some even later) to ACTUALLY give them that right.

You are the one playing semantics, as always.

bobbys
04-30-2015, 04:34 PM
. . . as opposed to the riots and protests.

The city police have "turned over the investigation" to the state. Classic hide the weenie and play for time. If they haven't located and interviewed the witnesses by now, they're incompetent and/or intentionally crippling the investigation in fear of what it might reveal. This isn't a big case.

Only today do they reveal that the van transporting Mr. Gray made a "previously unknown" stop on the way to the jail. That must have been when the driver, like the passenger, who, although they couldn't see, nevertheless heard the characteristic sounds of Mr. Gray "injuring himself".

And then there's the Red Dog Whistle machine:
.

All the facts are not in yet but I see that has not stopped you from deciding the case..

Peter Malcolm Jardine
04-30-2015, 08:44 PM
I must admit we don't get a lot of cases like this in Canada..... very few physical beatings by police even take place. A lot of this is just size, altho we do have several large urban centers that have some gang activity and gun violence.


What I don't get about this case, and quite a few others, is the oversight process. I can't wrap my head around police investigating police in a killing. If I killed someone, it would be like my family and friends investigating the incident and coming up with the evidence appropriate for the next level. The police culture didn't develop off the grass, it is an extension of prejudice towards black neighbourhoods across the USA. I know there must be a bunch of evidence, but the video shows quite clearly a guy asking for medical attention. Why didn't he get it? Why wasn't he strapped into the van? The injuries he suffered weren't minor in any sense.... it takes a fair bit of force to break a man's spine. He was crying out in pain.... why would anyone think he would 'injure himself' inside the van, rather than try to get on the floor to get as comfortable as possible.


This whole incident reeks. No wonder people are outraged. Wait to see what happens when they decide not to indict.

Phillip Allen
04-30-2015, 09:08 PM
I must admit we don't get a lot of cases like this in Canada..... very few physical beatings by police even take place. A lot of this is just size, altho we do have several large urban centers that have some gang activity and gun violence.


What I don't get about this case, and quite a few others, is the oversight process. I can't wrap my head around police investigating police in a killing. If I killed someone, it would be like my family and friends investigating the incident and coming up with the evidence appropriate for the next level. The police culture didn't develop off the grass, it is an extension of prejudice towards black neighbourhoods across the USA. I know there must be a bunch of evidence, but the video shows quite clearly a guy asking for medical attention. Why didn't he get it? Why wasn't he strapped into the van? The injuries he suffered weren't minor in any sense.... it takes a fair bit of force to break a man's spine. He was crying out in pain.... why would anyone think he would 'injure himself' inside the van, rather than try to get on the floor to get as comfortable as possible.


This whole incident reeks. No wonder people are outraged. Wait to see what happens when they decide not to indict.

this has been coming for a long time... it's likely to turn ugly unless we the people can be successfully intimidated

Canoeyawl
05-01-2015, 12:25 AM
...

Gerarddm
05-01-2015, 10:11 AM
The indictments will help.

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 10:39 AM
That's good news that they decided to prosecute; it seems like there;s good evidence that the police handled it very badly for no good reason

Isn't it amazing how according to police unions, their members are saints, every single one of them, and never ever do anything wrong?

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 10:45 AM
The Associated Press ‏@AP

BREAKING: Police union: 6 officers aren't responsible for Freddie Gray's death, were diligent in case.

11:14 AM - 1 May 2015

well if their behaviour on the vid in the Telegraph page I linked to is diligent, I would hate to see an example of careless behaviour.

Phillip Allen
05-01-2015, 11:06 AM
That's good news that they decided to prosecute; it seems like there;s good evidence that the police handled it very badly for no good reason

Isn't it amazing how according to police unions, their members are saints, every single one of them, and never ever do anything wrong?
I wish it were more amazing than it actually is

Canoeyawl
05-01-2015, 11:21 AM
What would constitute a "good reason" to handle an arrest "very badly?"

Killing the "suspect" so he can not testify.

CWSmith
05-01-2015, 11:40 AM
The police union is without credibility on this. Let them defend the accused and stand next to them when the verdict comes down. Maybe they will get the point.

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 11:44 AM
What would constitute a "good reason" to handle an arrest "very badly?"Badly written. I mean that it appears from the partial information that has come out so far they handled this case very badly, and injured Mr Gray for no good reason.

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 11:55 AM
The Associated Press ‏@AP

BREAKING: Police union: 6 officers aren't responsible for Freddie Gray's death, were diligent in case.

11:14 AM - 1 May 2015

it is perhaps strange that this is reported only on the AP twitter feed, every other report that I can find refers back to that one.

The Union to which these officers pay their subs must represent them, but it is apparent from this report: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3052387/Baltimore-police-union-criticized-attempt-smear-peaceful-Freddie-Gray-protesters-lynch-mob-demonstrations-planned.html that the union spokesman is an idiot.

Osborne Russell
05-01-2015, 12:47 PM
The incident spans a few hours, from arrest to admission to the hospital. During that time, the witnesses are almost all policemen.

The police department was surprised to learn of the "extra stop" the police van made between the arrest site and the police station - one of several stops. They only found out about it when a citizen turned in video.

That means the police knew, or say they knew, of all the stops but one. How? By interviewing the witnesses. The only witnesses were those in the van, until the citizen came forward. Maybe a dispatcher.

Either those witnesses lied by not mentioning the extra stop to the police investigators, or the police department lied to the public by not mentioning it.

Any guesses on where and when the injuries were inflicted?

CWSmith
05-01-2015, 01:07 PM
Any guesses on where and when the injuries were inflicted?

Actually, everything I've read and seen suggests the injuries occurred at the time of arrest. They probably hid the extra stop because they know it looks bad to have an injured man in custody who did not get medical attention in a prompt manner.

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 01:28 PM
The AP report stems from a story in the Baltimore Sun, concerning an open letter from the Police union to the State Attorney.

Baltimore Sun (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-riots/bs-md-fop-letter-20150501-story.html)

Open Letter from the Fraternal Order of Police (http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2015-05/23456543977100-01082347.pdf)

I think that Gene S Ryan was a bit too enthusiastic with his defence of his colleagues. One can only assume that he had not seen the mobile phone evidence when he signed his name to that opinion.

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 01:36 PM
Since the letter was sent this morning, I can only assume he had seen the cell phone video.

If you are right he is a bit of a dick. When you know that a statement is as flakey as can be it is better to simply say nothing.

Paul Pless
05-01-2015, 01:37 PM
Where's ronw? Banned? He was eating those Fox news stories up about Freddie Gray having an existing condition and it being his own fault for not 'taking it easy'. . .

johnw
05-01-2015, 01:52 PM
If you are right he is a bit of a dick. When you know that a statement is as flakey as can be it is better to simply say nothing.

This is typical behavior for police unions. They don't pay a price for their members' conduct, so have no incentive to weed out the bad ones.

Osborne Russell
05-01-2015, 01:55 PM
Actually, everything I've read and seen suggests the injuries occurred at the time of arrest. They probably hid the extra stop because they know it looks bad to have an injured man in custody who did not get medical attention in a prompt manner.

Those were my thoughts originally. But, in the video loading him in the van, although he is mostly unable to stand or walk, when they get him up on the step, he appears to be standing for a moment, which I would think would be very unlikely for someone with a severed spinal chord. He was in bad shape, for sure.

At some point, he also wound up with a split larynx. Made of cartilage, easy to deform, difficult to break. I saw TV footage of a doctor testifying about it, using two analogies: if a person were to fall face first, and just before reaching the ground, their neck contacted a 2x4 in position to act as a fulcrum directly under the larynx, the force of the fall would likely not be enough to split the larynx. He said it would take something along the lines of a blow with a baseball bat directly to the throat over the larynx by, and I quote, "a pretty good hitter".

I think they beat him up pretty bad at the arrest and murdered him in the van. At each of the stops they beat him some more, until the last one, where he was utterly helpless and they could really indulge their brutality.

There's the other prisoner, in the other partition in the van, who was reported to have said he "heard" Gray "trying to injure himself". This other prisoner has since said he was misquoted, and admits he didn't see anything, but he doesn't look like a very good witness to anything. But again, he was a witness known to the police. He was in the same van. However messed up his description of things was to the police investigators, how is it that upon hearing their version of it in the news, he immediately denies it?

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 01:56 PM
This is typical behavior for police unions. They don't pay a price for their members' conduct, so have no incentive to weed out the bad ones.

That is not what Unions are for. Unions function is to keep people in employment.

johnw
05-01-2015, 02:07 PM
That is not what Unions are for. Unions function is to keep people in employment.

Unions exist for a variety of reasons, one of which is to may sure their members are not unfairly fired. Police unions typically take this to mean that they should never be fired.

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 02:11 PM
Unions exist for a variety of reasons, one of which is to may sure their members are not unfairly fired. Police unions typically take this to mean that they should never be fired.

I expect that they are onto a looser then. Sometimes the only solution is a compromise. A form of "peace with honour".

Ian McColgin
05-01-2015, 02:16 PM
It's a bit like being a defense attorney. When your guy is bad, your job is really to make the employer do things correctly. The employer is punished by being stuck with the schlub if they do it wrong. But here the union has simply a cheer leader role as it's a criminal matter. The should be mouthing due process platitudes rather that stand by your man nonsense.

Phillip Allen
05-01-2015, 02:22 PM
This is typical behavior for police unions. They don't pay a price for their members' conduct, so have no incentive to weed out the bad ones.

that is a point I've wished to make before... thank you
they need to have some skin in the game

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 02:26 PM
that is a point I've wished to make before... thank you
they need to have some skin in the game

Read #745. Unions role is to serve their members. That is it, no more no less.

Phillip Allen
05-01-2015, 02:27 PM
I wish I could hear a motive explained that didn't sound simply incredible... I can't imagine anyone just being mean and murderous with so many witnesses (fellow cops)

CWSmith
05-01-2015, 02:54 PM
At some point, he also wound up with a split larynx ... "a pretty good hitter"....

If these stories prove true, then those SOBs are outright murderers pure and simple and need to be treated as such. No one wants to believe that could be possible because we are all vulnerable to police abuse. At least the justice system seems to be moving against them and there is hope.

Norman Bernstein
05-01-2015, 03:08 PM
I get the general impression that the charges may be structured as an attempt to get one of the defendants to turn states evidence.... without that, the truth may never be known.

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 03:12 PM
I get the general impression that the charges may be structured as an attempt to get one of the defendants to turn states evidence.... without that, the truth may never be known.

Good forensics, and a collective "aiding and abetting" or "conspiracy to pervert the course of justice" strategy should make the case worth trying.

John of Phoenix
05-01-2015, 03:35 PM
The six officers charged by Baltimore’s prosecutor in the death of Freddie Gray include the van driver who transported him, as well as the officers who apprehended him. They face charges including second-degree depraved heart murder, involuntary manslaughter, false imprisonment and false arrest.

That's a new one (and is what the van driver is charged with).

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 03:40 PM
Odd legal term; I never hear it before either. It needs a hyphen, I think: 'depraved-heart murder', murder with a depraved heart, i.e. indifference to the consequences of one's actions. Seems to fit. Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depraved-heart_murder).


Depraved-heart murder, also known as depraved-indifference murder, is an American legal term for an action where a defendant acts with a "depraved indifference" to human life and where such act results in a death. In a depraved-heart murder a defendant commits an act even though he knows his act runs an unusually high risk of causing death or serious bodily harm to someone else. If the risk of death or bodily harm is great enough, ignoring it demonstrates a "depraved indifference" to human life and the resulting death is considered to have been committed with malice aforethought aka premeditation. In most states, depraved-heart killings constitute second-degree murder.

bobbys
05-01-2015, 03:50 PM
I get the general impression that the charges may be structured as an attempt to get one of the defendants to turn states evidence.... without that, the truth may never be known.
.

I get the impression the charges were structured as murder in fact to get one to turn on another to get the outcome desired, If you are facing murder charges there is a powerful incentive to save your own skin by pointing to another..

This was not lost on the prosecuter.

bobbys
05-01-2015, 03:52 PM
The six officers charged by Baltimore’s prosecutor in the death of Freddie Gray include the van driver who transported him, as well as the officers who apprehended him. They face charges including second-degree depraved heart murder, involuntary manslaughter, false imprisonment and false arrest.

That's a new one (and is what the van driver is charged with)..

As was said trumped up charges to get him to turn .

bobbys
05-01-2015, 03:57 PM
Unions exist for a variety of reasons, one of which is to may sure their members are not unfairly fired. Police unions typically take this to mean that they should never be fired..

as another point if one is fired and it turns out unfairly one would never work again and ones career is over..

I know one person fired, the union fought it , he won a settlement., he can never get another job, No body is going to hire a person fired when there are dozens of applicants.

Paul Pless
05-01-2015, 03:57 PM
Its the same as reckless endangerment except that death actually resulted. Its an expression of carelessness. More serious charges will likely follow.

Tom Wilkinson
05-01-2015, 03:58 PM
.

as another point if one is fired and it turns out unfairly one would never work again and ones career is over..

I know one person fired, the union fought it , he won a settlement., he can never get another job, No body is going to hire a person fired when there are dozens of applicants.

He is filling out his application and resume wrong then.

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 04:02 PM
As was said trumped up charges to get him to turn .Trumped-up? Really? Now, given that none of us know all the facts, merely what was reported in the news. However, we know some things for sure. Mr Gray was in reasonably good health before he was arrested. He died of severe injuries sustained while in police custody, including a severed spine and a spit larynx. Does that not fit the definition of 'depraved-heart murder' above?

bobbys
05-01-2015, 04:04 PM
He is filling out his application and resume wrong then.
.

You don't live in the real world.

bobbys
05-01-2015, 04:05 PM
Trumped-up? Really? Now, given that none of us know all the facts, merely what was reported in the news. However, we know some things for sure. Mr Gray was in reasonably good health before he was arrested. He died of severe injuries sustained while in police custody, including a severed spine and a spit larynx. Does that not fit the definition of 'depraved-heart murder' above?
.

murder from driving the van?.

You do not think that's trumped up?

Paul Pless
05-01-2015, 04:08 PM
.

You don't live in the real world.

We can't all be altruistic reds. . .

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 04:10 PM
.

murder from driving the van?.

You do not think that's trumped up?

In our legal language that is aiding and abetting the crime.

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 04:13 PM
. . . murder from driving the van?.If the guy in the back of the van is injured so severely that he dies, damn right. It exactly fits the definition of 'depraved-heart murder' above. "In a depraved-heart murder a defendant commits an act even though he knows his act runs an unusually high risk of causing death or serious bodily harm to someone else. "

Here's a NYT article describing the police department tradition of the 'rough ride' (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/us/freddie-grays-injury-and-the-police-rough-ride.html?_r=0), a way of beating the living crap out of a suspect without ever laying a hand on him.

Kevin T
05-01-2015, 04:14 PM
.

murder from driving the van?.

You do not think that's trumped up?

It's probably not that far of a stretch. Here's a potential scenario:

You, or rather lets say your best buddy is wrongly arrested. The cops work your buddy over pretty good and then shackle his hands and feet and "place" him in the interior of a metal van. the kind with two bench seats down the sides and a solid steel wall between the driving compartment and where your buddy is sitting.

Now imagine if you will a series of jack rabbit starts and stops, hard turns to the left and the right. Essentially in an attempt to get someone with no way of holding on, nor bracing himself to get tossed around in a metal box for 20 minutes or so.

I think it was Vince B who said that in Philly they actually have a name for this kind of "transportation" method, although it escaped him at the time. Still think the driver is innocent?

=================
ETA: Typing while Keith was posting video of just this scenario.

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 04:17 PM
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that it's been established that he died of injuries that occurred between the time he was stopped and the time he got to the police station.

In Philly, they call it the 'nickel ride'; amusement park rides used to cost a nickel. See the article I linked in #96.

johnw
05-01-2015, 04:18 PM
Odd legal term; I never hear it before either. It needs a hyphen, I think: 'depraved-heart murder', murder with a depraved heart, i.e. indifference to the consequences of one's actions. Seems to fit. Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depraved-heart_murder).

I'd heard of it as depraved indifference. Someone's dying, you could easily prevent their death, but you just let them die. I'm surprised this charge hasn't been made in the Tamar Rice case, where the officers didn't render first aid after one of them shot the kid (http://booksellersvsbestsellers.blogspot.com/2014/12/tamir-rice-and-depraved-heart.html). I seem to be the only one who thought it was remarkable that charge wasn't discussed.

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 04:21 PM
I believe he's presumed to be innocent, until proven otherwise.

Very true, but he should not be exempted from standing in the dock with the rest of his colleagues who stand accused.

Kevin T
05-01-2015, 04:22 PM
I believe he's presumed to be innocent, until proven otherwise.

Let me be a little clearer, is it possible the driver is just an innocent participant if he did take the suspect for a rough ride?

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 04:24 PM
Has he been exempted? I must have missed that.

Ohhh Snarky.



As usual.




Do you ever lighten up?

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 04:31 PM
News reports say that the medical examiner's report said Mr. Gray's fatal spinal injury was caused by impact against the inside of the van. The report was provided to the prosecutor, of course, but AFAIK it has not been released to the public.

Peerie Maa
05-01-2015, 04:31 PM
What's snarky about it? You stated he "should not be exempted," as if he has been.

Errrm future tense, not past tense. Yes? That would be "have been " if it were past tense.

Your phraseology was still snarky even if you had been correct. Unnecessary.

Kevin T
05-01-2015, 04:46 PM
^ Always keeping it classy. ;):rolleyes:

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 04:50 PM
What I'd guess happened is that they arrested Gray on a pretext, (he's no saint, been arrested like 20 times before, small-time drug stuff mostly) roughed him up, then took him for the 'rough ride' to beat him up more seriously without actually hitting him. Bad luck; he got hurt worse than usual and died, and then all hell broke loose.

One can only hope some good will come out of this in the end; some reform of the police force at least.

Osborne Russell
05-01-2015, 04:57 PM
I grew up in Md. The state police there are a very militaristic organization. I cannot remember them ever finding fault with their own actions or the actions of other officers. Think LA police and their reputation and you have the idea.

You mean this reputation?


"Then there's nothing in it," I said.

He looked at his cigarette. "Nothing in what?"

"Nothing in the idea that Almore murdered his wife, and had enough pull to get it fixed."

Degarmo came to his feet and walked over to lean down at me. "Say that again," he said softly.

I said it again.

He hit me across the face with his open hand. It jerked my head around hard. My face felt hot and large.

"Say it again."

I said it again. His hand swept and knocked my head to one side again.

"Say it again."

"Nope. Third time lucky. You might miss." I put a hand up and rubbed my cheek.

He stood leaning down, his lips drawn back over his teeth, a hard animal glare in his very blue eyes.

"Any time you talk like that to a cop," he said, "you know what you got coming. Try it on again and it won't be the flat of a hand I'll use on you."

I bit hard on my lips and rubbed my cheek.

"Poke your big nose into our business and you'll wake up in an alley with the cats looking at you," he said.

I didn't say anything. He went and sat down again, breathing hard.


Raymond Chandler, The Lady In The Lake (1943) Library of America Edition (1995)
p. 116

Osborne Russell
05-01-2015, 05:03 PM
I believe he's presumed to be innocent, until proven otherwise.

True. But he's the only one charged with murder. Which indicates that the evidence indicates he's primarily responsible. Evidence coming almost entirely from interviews with the officers involved, and presumably the people at the hospital. He didn't get his spine and his larynx severed in the hospital, and he was conscious and speaking before he went in the van, that's on tape. In between is the van ride with the various stops.

Sky Blue
05-01-2015, 05:05 PM
The police force is not the problem, Keith. Petit overcriminalization is the primary problem, as indicated by the facts and suppositions of your #112 (i.e., endless low level stops and arrests, etc.).

Progressives' fixation with overt police racism has blinded them to its more institutional, insidious forms as represented by overcriminalization, as argued in this piece (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/01/progressives-miss-the-point-of-baltimore.html).

johnw
05-01-2015, 05:14 PM
The police force is not the problem, Keith. Petit overcriminalization is the primary problem, as indicated by the facts and suppositions of your #112 (i.e., endless low level stops and arrests, etc.).

Progressives' fixation with overt police racism has blinded them to its more institutional, insidious forms as represented by overcriminalization, as argued in this piece (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/01/progressives-miss-the-point-of-baltimore.html).

"Overcriminalization?" Freddie Gray was breaking no laws, so the problem wasn't that there were too many laws. The problem was that the cops grabbed a guy with no probable cause, brutalized him to the point where he died, and didn't get him medical help for his injuries.

Osborne Russell
05-01-2015, 05:15 PM
Here's a NYT article describing the police department tradition of the 'rough ride', a way of beating the living crap out of a suspect without ever laying a hand on him.

Don't you love American police spokesmen?


Mr. Alston, paralyzed from the neck down, settled for $6 million in 2004.



"I don’t believe this is standard operating procedure,” said Hubert Williams, a former police director of Newark, who is a consultant with the nonprofit Independent Institute. “What’s been happening through the years is that the police have changed. Policing by and large through the years has become more community-oriented and more accountable to the public."

Take heart, trust the police, the neck snappings are on the decline since the days when we denied they even happened in the first place.

Sky Blue
05-01-2015, 05:30 PM
"Overcriminalization?" Freddie Gray was breaking no laws, so the problem wasn't that there were too many laws. The problem was that the cops grabbed a guy with no probable cause, brutalized him to the point where he died, and didn't get him medical help for his injuries.

He was overcriminalized, johnw, and it cost him his life. Some 20 arrests, most of them petit? Overcriminalization is not just the concept of an excess of petit criminal laws. It is also the concept that any such petit laws will justify a police contact which then comes with the possibility of brutality and recklessness or negligence simply as a statistical matter.

The fact that a police contact was occurring under the circumstances you describe is itself an aspect of overcriminalization.

Again, johnw, you fall precisely into the trap that McWhorter's piece describes. Making this incident simply about police racism or failed training ignores tenfold the larger issue: unnecessary contacts between police and citizens (whether because of petit law enforcement or not), decade after decade, generation after generation, resulting in a statistic that says that 1 in 3 black males in America today will at some point serve time in prison. That will need to change, with part of the change being getting cops out of these people's lives unless absolutely necessary, and getting rid of numerous petit criminal laws sufficient that contact minimization occurs.

We've argued this before, johnw, before the Ferguson findings came out showing blatant revenue generation funding civic government in that community, largely on the backs of its poorest citizens. The problems this society has with police and black citizens will not become better until the overcriminalization problem becomes better.

Phillip Allen
05-01-2015, 05:31 PM
Read #745. Unions role is to serve their members. That is it, no more no less.

and the policeman's role is... ?

skuthorp
05-01-2015, 05:40 PM
I Gray broke no laws, and the arrest was unjustified, even illegal and he shouldn't have been in the van in the first place then I presume that apart from the matter of false arrest, the other 5 will be charged as accessories to murder, or at least manslaughter?
And what if the police chief and the administration of his department in this?

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 06:19 PM
The police force is not the problem, Keith. Petit overcriminalization is the primary problem . . . It isn't necessarily a choice of one or the other. I agree with you about overcriminalization, but I think both qualify as real problems. The Baltimore police's treatment of Mr. Gray in this case sure was a problem for him.

CWSmith
05-01-2015, 06:54 PM
"Overcriminalization?" Freddie Gray was breaking no laws, so the problem wasn't that there were too many laws. The problem was that the cops grabbed a guy with no probable cause, brutalized him to the point where he died, and didn't get him medical help for his injuries.

The "probable cause" was that he and the police exchanged glances and then he ran. After this, I'd run, too.

johnw
05-01-2015, 07:00 PM
He was overcriminalized, johnw, and it cost him his life. Some 20 arrests, most of them petit? Overcriminalization is not just the concept of an excess of petit criminal laws. It is also the concept that any such petit laws will justify a police contact which then comes with the possibility of brutality and recklessness or negligence simply as a statistical matter.

The fact that a police contact was occurring under the circumstances you describe is itself an aspect of overcriminalization.

Again, johnw, you fall precisely into the trap that McWhorter's piece describes. Making this incident simply about police racism or failed training ignores tenfold the larger issue: unnecessary contacts between police and citizens (whether because of petit law enforcement or not), decade after decade, generation after generation, resulting in a statistic that says that 1 in 3 black males in America today will at some point serve time in prison. That will need to change, with part of the change being getting cops out of these people's lives unless absolutely necessary, and getting rid of numerous petit criminal laws sufficient that contact minimization occurs.

We've argued this before, johnw, before the Ferguson findings came out showing blatant revenue generation funding civic government in that community, largely on the backs of its poorest citizens. The problems this society has with police and black citizens will not become better until the overcriminalization problem becomes better.

There were a lot of buzzwords in that piece, but nothing that justifies what you're saying. One buzzword that's missing from the piece is overcriminalization, which he didn't use because it isn't what he was talking about.

Unless the concept of overcriminalization has a different meaning than the last time we discussed this, Freddie Gray's problem wasn't that. It was a policing style that criminalizes an entire class of people. Alice Goffman did an immersive study, published as On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City, which deals with the problem in depth. The New York Times review is here:


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/30/books/alice-goffman-researches-poor-black-men-in-on-the-run.html?_r=0

Practices like stop and frisk may grab the headlines, but even more pernicious, she argues, is the little-noted spread of technology that allows the police to track people with outstanding warrants, often arresting them even for minor probation violations, missed court dates or unpaid fines.The growth of this system over the last two decades has turned many men into “fugitives,” she writes, who avoid workplaces, hospitals, (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/12/nyregion/from-shooting-victim-to-prisoner-not-uncommon-in-new-york.html?hp) funerals and other places where the police routinely come to run the names of men who show up. Even family ties become part of the “net of entrapment,” as girlfriends and mothers are pressured into informing on legally entangled sons and partners.

“It’s an unraveling of relationships from the inside out,” Ms. Goffman said. “Home becomes a place of risk and danger.”



Now, last time we talked, overcriminalization meant too many things were illegal. That's not the problem described above. Has the meaning changed so that it applies to the sort of thing described above?

Osborne Russell
05-01-2015, 07:01 PM
Petit overcriminalization is the primary problem . . .

Baloney. American cops been bustin' heads long time now. The primary problem is a culture that permits it, to an extent demands it. The culture permits it because the culture is racist, but that's not all. The culture is imperialist and exceptionalist too. Shining city on a hill is us; everything else is them. They do it to white people too, because white people are always ready to become N lovers. Ever been called a N lover? Up until about 1980, I thought it was my nickname. They quit saying it but kept on thinking it. In my parents' time they always wound up saying it, even if they didn't really want to. They were obliged to. Prior to that was Jim Crow and prior to that was slavery. What in the world makes you think that inertia has run out?

"We have to give our guardians what they need in abundance. Not just deference and money but hardware and laws. The tools they need." You never heard that? You're not listening.

The BS laws and imprisonment industry come last, as a logical development of fundamental values, not a regrettable anomaly that if you could just make it go away, everything else would be jake because racism, imperialism and the rest of it are over, miraculously expunged, Hallelujah, and are just being milked on and on by Stalinists to liquidate Ma and Pa Kettle.

See, if you were just talking about overcriminalization, I would agree. When you try to move it ahead of racism in a hierarchy of causes, you have to strain yourself logically and rhetorically, which indicates that you have some other agenda in mind, which might be OK if you stated it, but you don't, you deny you have one. Which means our ostensible common interest in reducing over-criminalization goes un-defended and over-criminalization grows unopposed for want of joint effort by you and me, because I don't trust you, because you say things like racism isn't the problem. If this kind of neutralization isn't you goal, you need to consider that that is it's effect. Divide and conquer.

We don't have to agree on everything and if we wait until we do they will dork us around until we die and after. Who gains by that, except the powers that be? Whose side are you on? If you continue to insist on the tortured logic and rhetoric, I'll know.

I think there should be a separate thread on the cultural and philosophical etc ramifications of this case. A serious topic, oh yeah. This thread, I had hoped, would be confined to the case itself. This one is about a guy that whose spinal chord was severed and his larynx split. I can link it directly to the Shining City On A Hill but that's a different thread.

CWSmith
05-01-2015, 07:11 PM
Baloney. American cops been bustin' heads long time now. The primary problem is a culture that permits it, to an extent demands it. The culture permits it because the culture is racist, but that's not all.

Far from all, we have had 2 centuries of aggressive cops because "the haves" have always feared the poor and the new arrivals. This particular emphasis on racism is just the latest manifestation. We need to change the very idea of what a cop should do, how he should conduct himself, and what is acceptable behavior. We could take a lesson from Britain.

oznabrag
05-01-2015, 07:53 PM
Osborne Russell nails it yet again.

Sky Blue
05-01-2015, 08:11 PM
Osborne Russell nails it yet again.

Funny. I found it rambling, discursive and clichéd.

bobbys
05-01-2015, 08:15 PM
I Gray broke no laws, and the arrest was unjustified, even illegal and he shouldn't have been in the van in the first place then I presume that apart from the matter of false arrest, the other 5 will be charged as accessories to murder, or at least manslaughter?
And what if the police chief and the administration of his department in this?


Baloney. American cops been bustin' heads long time now. The primary problem is a culture that permits it, to an extent demands it. The culture permits it because the culture is racist, but that's not all. The culture is imperialist and exceptionalist too. Shining city on a hill is us; everything else is them. They do it to white people too, because white people are always ready to become N lovers. Ever been called a N lover? Up until about 1980, I thought it was my nickname. They quit saying it but kept on thinking it. In my parents' time they always wound up saying it, even if they didn't really want to. They were obliged to. Prior to that was Jim Crow and prior to that was slavery. What in the world makes you think that inertia has run out?

"We have to give our guardians what they need in abundance. Not just deference and money but hardware and laws. The tools they need." You never heard that? You're not listening.

The BS laws and imprisonment industry come last, as a logical development of fundamental values, not a regrettable anomaly that if you could just make it go away, everything else would be jake because racism, imperialism and the rest of it are over, miraculously expunged, Hallelujah, and are just being milked on and on by Stalinists to liquidate Ma and Pa Kettle.

See, if you were just talking about overcriminalization, I would agree. When you try to move it ahead of racism in a hierarchy of causes, you have to strain yourself logically and rhetorically, which indicates that you have some other agenda in mind, which might be OK if you stated it, but you don't, you deny you have one. Which means our ostensible common interest in reducing over-criminalization goes un-defended and over-criminalization grows unopposed for want of joint effort by you and me, because I don't trust you, because you say things like racism isn't the problem. If this kind of neutralization isn't you goal, you need to consider that that is it's effect. Divide and conquer.

We don't have to agree on everything and if we wait until we do they will dork us around until we die and after. Who gains by that, except the powers that be? Whose side are you on? If you continue to insist on the tortured logic and rhetoric, I'll know.

I think there should be a separate thread on the cultural and philosophical etc ramifications of this case. A serious topic, oh yeah. This thread, I had hoped, would be confined to the case itself. This one is about a guy that whose spinal chord was severed and his larynx split. I can link it directly to the Shining City On A Hill but that's a different thread.
. We could have a thread about the protesters are black democrats, the police are Union and mixed race, the mayor is a black democrat. The DA is a Black democratic , Most of the whole city is democratic..

Our Liberal forum members are already in a pinch to lay this on republicans and / or racism..

A failed liberal city with no end in sight for more misery.

oznabrag
05-01-2015, 08:21 PM
Funny. I found it rambling, discursive and clichéd.

You prove my point.

CK 17
05-01-2015, 08:29 PM
The Associated Press ‏@AP

BREAKING: Police union: 6 officers aren't responsible for Freddie Gray's death, were diligent in case.

11:14 AM - 1 May 2015

police union has zero credibility.

bobbys
05-01-2015, 08:49 PM
Far from all, we have had 2 centuries of aggressive cops because "the haves" have always feared the poor and the new arrivals. This particular emphasis on racism is just the latest manifestation. We need to change the very idea of what a cop should do, how he should conduct himself, and what is acceptable behavior. We could take a lesson from Britain.
.

It's not as though the people in the inner city that the police have to deal with are from the sound of music and the Brady bunch. The liberal " haves" here can open a liquor store at any time in the hood.

One can also state the fact big grocery stores are non existent .

After riots what company is going to invest..

Untill they put a stop to riots or teach their own people looting and rioting are against their own self intrest nothing is going to change..

police,........ a convient scape goat.

Gill
05-01-2015, 08:58 PM
There were a lot of buzzwords in that piece, but nothing that justifies what you're saying. One buzzword that's missing from the piece is overcriminalization, which he didn't use because it isn't what he was talking about.

Unless the concept of overcriminalization has a different meaning than the last time we discussed this, Freddie Gray's problem wasn't that. It was a policing style that criminalizes an entire class of people. Alice Goffman did an immersive study, published as On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City, which deals with the problem in depth. The New York Times review is here:



Now, last time we talked, overcriminalization meant too many things were illegal. That's not the problem described above. Has the meaning changed so that it applies to the sort of thing described above?

In Goffman's book she details a group of young men who live side by side in the same neighborhood who are not being arrested. They work full time jobs and spend their spare time inside playing video games instead of running the streets. They take strenuous measures to avoid those that are living "dirty" and by doing so they don't run afoul of the law. That indicates to me that a lot of the criminalization is self-inflicted.

oznabrag
05-01-2015, 09:10 PM
.

It's not as though the people in the inner city that the police have to deal with are from the sound of music and the Brady bunch. The liberal " haves" here can open a liquor store at any time in the hood.

One can also state the fact big grocery stores are non existent .

After riots what company is going to invest..

Untill they put a stop to riots or teach their own people looting and rioting are against their own self intrest nothing is going to change..

police,........ a convient scape goat.

You got one thing right.

'Haves' can open a liquor store in the hood.

You seem oblivious to the fact that the hoodies can't go uptown and open a liquor store.

You are certainly blind to the fact that these people are living in a penal colony.

oznabrag
05-01-2015, 09:15 PM
In Goffman's book she details a group of young men who live side by side in the same neighborhood who are not being arrested. They work full time jobs and spend their spare time inside playing video games instead of running the streets. They take strenuous measures to avoid those that are living "dirty" and by doing so they don't run afoul of the law. That indicates to me that a lot of the criminalization is self-inflicted.

This is true, to a point.

What you may be missing in this discussion is that the most powerful nation on Earth is so afraid of a certain type of person that they have set up systems to identify them and arrest them on bogus charges.

Then they are thrown into a box van and careened around the streets until they die.

It is a fine thing these officers have been indicted.

A damned fine thing.

bobbys
05-01-2015, 09:17 PM
You got one thing right.

'Haves' can open a liquor store in the hood.

You seem oblivious to the fact that the hoodies can't go uptown and open a liquor store.

You are certainly blind to the fact that these people are living in a penal colony.
.

As in Fergerson the first place looted was the liquor stores.

Maybe the people thought the services were being held at the liquor store..

What better way to justify stealing and looting then to blame some one else.

CWSmith
05-01-2015, 09:22 PM
.

It's not as though the people in the inner city that the police have to deal with are from the sound of music and the Brady bunch. The liberal " haves" here can open a liquor store at any time in the hood.

One can also state the fact big grocery stores are non existent .

After riots what company is going to invest..

Untill they put a stop to riots or teach their own people looting and rioting are against their own self intrest nothing is going to change..

police,........ a convient scape goat.

The police are not a scapegoat when they kill a young man who is arrested on bogus charges. The right to life should not be dependent on being squeaky clean and I think your comments sound like a desperate attempt to turn reality inside out.

oznabrag
05-01-2015, 09:22 PM
.

As in Fergerson the first place looted was the liquor stores.

Maybe the people thought the services were being held at the liquor store..

What better way to justify stealing and looting then to blame some one else.


'Haves' can open a liquor store in the hood.

You seem oblivious to the fact that the hoodies can't go uptown and open a liquor store.

You are certainly blind to the fact that these people are living in a penal colony.

Jimmy W
05-01-2015, 09:25 PM
In Goffman's book she details a group of young men who live side by side in the same neighborhood who are not being arrested. They work full time jobs and spend their spare time inside playing video games instead of running the streets. They take strenuous measures to avoid those that are living "dirty" and by doing so they don't run afoul of the law. That indicates to me that a lot of the criminalization is self-inflicted.
So they have to spend their time at work or inside hiding to keep from having to deal with the "law"?

Keith Wilson
05-01-2015, 10:21 PM
The six police officers charged in this case.

http://images.wjla.com/crime/freddiegray_officers_charged_mugshots_606.jpg

The one at the upper left is Caesar Goodson, who drove the van, and is facing the most serious charges. (source, with more information (http://www.wjla.com/articles/2015/05/a-look-at-the-6-officers-charged-in-freddie-gray-s-death-113655.html))

Dave Wright
05-01-2015, 10:56 PM
There were a lot of buzzwords in that piece, but nothing that justifies what you're saying. One buzzword that's missing from the piece is overcriminalization, which he didn't use because it isn't what he was talking about.

Unless the concept of overcriminalization has a different meaning than the last time we discussed this, Freddie Gray's problem wasn't that. It was a policing style that criminalizes an entire class of people. Alice Goffman did an immersive study, published as On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City, which deals with the problem in depth. The New York Times review is here:



Now, last time we talked, overcriminalization meant too many things were illegal. That's not the problem described above. Has the meaning changed so that it applies to the sort of thing described above?

Dwayne Betts wrote an interesting review of Goffman's book:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/07/alice_goffman_s_on_the_run_she_is_wrong_about_blac k_urban_life.html

Betts is a black man who in an earlier life lived in the hood and spent 8 years in prison.

Peerie Maa
05-02-2015, 05:11 AM
Stuff it. If you don't like my usage, put me on ignore.

Actually it is you who cannot handle the usage of a native English speaker. :p

Peerie Maa
05-02-2015, 05:16 AM
The police force is not the problem, Keith. Petit overcriminalization is the primary problem, as indicated by the facts and suppositions of your #112 (i.e., endless low level stops and arrests, etc.).

Progressives' fixation with overt police racism has blinded them to its more institutional, insidious forms as represented by overcriminalization, as argued in this piece (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/01/progressives-miss-the-point-of-baltimore.html).

Any police who cause the death of a suspect after arresting them is a problem.

It may be a part of institutional racism in the police, but institutional racism does not always lead to dead suspects.

Sky Blue
05-02-2015, 09:55 AM
Excessive, unnecessary police contacts are the problem, Nick.

As a statistical matter, there will be suspect deaths, excessive force, shootings, mistakes, recklessness and negligence associated with police contacts with civilians.

It stands to reason that minimizing such contacts to the extent consistent with public safety will reduce the statistical probability of such events. For example, cities probably don't need to send armed state police to arrest poor persons selling loose cigarettes simply to protect tax revenue streams created to fund fat government.

Less contacts = Less deaths. Of course, progressives would need to stop funding bloated government with federal subsidies associated with "out of control crime" as well as letting go of the nickel/dime fee collection schemes associated with overcriminalization and paid primarily by the poor.

Phillip Allen
05-02-2015, 12:17 PM
Excessive, unnecessary police contacts are the problem, Nick.

As a statistical matter, there will be suspect deaths, excessive force, shootings, mistakes, recklessness and negligence associated with police contacts with civilians.

It stands to reason that minimizing such contacts to the extent consistent with public safety will reduce the statistical probability of such events. For example, cities probably don't need to send armed state police to arrest poor persons selling loose cigarettes simply to protect tax revenue streams created to fund fat government.

Less contacts = Less deaths. Of course, progressives would need to stop funding bloated government with federal subsidies associated with "out of control crime" as well as letting go of the nickel/dime fee collection schemes associated with overcriminalization and paid primarily by the poor.
that was a horizontal lynching for the purpose of collecting tax a second time on the same cigarette

bobbys
05-02-2015, 12:41 PM
passenger in van , Donta Allan said it was a smooth ride.

johnw
05-02-2015, 12:52 PM
Excessive, unnecessary police contacts are the problem, Nick.

As a statistical matter, there will be suspect deaths, excessive force, shootings, mistakes, recklessness and negligence associated with police contacts with civilians.

It stands to reason that minimizing such contacts to the extent consistent with public safety will reduce the statistical probability of such events. For example, cities probably don't need to send armed state police to arrest poor persons selling loose cigarettes simply to protect tax revenue streams created to fund fat government.

Less contacts = Less deaths. Of course, progressives would need to stop funding bloated government with federal subsidies associated with "out of control crime" as well as letting go of the nickel/dime fee collection schemes associated with overcriminalization and paid primarily by the poor.

Are you saying the police are incapable of having contact with people without inflicting mortal wounds? That's just not true. I think this has to do with a culture of impunity.

johnw
05-02-2015, 01:34 PM
. We could have a thread about the protesters are black democrats, the police are Union and mixed race, the mayor is a black democrat. The DA is a Black democratic , Most of the whole city is democratic..

Our Liberal forum members are already in a pinch to lay this on republicans and / or racism..

A failed liberal city with no end in sight for more misery.

Do you suppose that's why, in this case, the police are being held accountable?

johnw
05-02-2015, 01:43 PM
Dwayne Betts wrote an interesting review of Goffman's book:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/07/alice_goffman_s_on_the_run_she_is_wrong_about_blac k_urban_life.html

Betts is a black man who in an earlier life lived in the hood and spent 8 years in prison.

Thanks for the link.

johnw
05-02-2015, 01:44 PM
In Goffman's book she details a group of young men who live side by side in the same neighborhood who are not being arrested. They work full time jobs and spend their spare time inside playing video games instead of running the streets. They take strenuous measures to avoid those that are living "dirty" and by doing so they don't run afoul of the law. That indicates to me that a lot of the criminalization is self-inflicted.

Sounds like they have to hide in their apartments when they aren't working. What kind of life is that? A guy should be able to take a walk in his own neighborhood.

johnw
05-02-2015, 02:10 PM
Turns out Freddie Gray ran after making eye contact with Lt. Brian Rice. Rice has been hospitalized for alleged mental health issues and twice suspended, it appears because of concern for his self-control and judgement.

http://www.businessinsider.com/indicted-baltimore-police-officers-has-mental-health-issues-2015-5

Gray knew he was clean and committing no crime, yet he ran from Rice. I wonder what interactions they had previous to this incident.

Canoeyawl
05-02-2015, 03:19 PM
From the report;

"The top Baltimore city police officer indicted Friday for the death of Freddie Gray was hospitalized in April 2012 following concerns about his mental health, according to records from a sheriff's department and court obtained by The Associated Press.

Worries about Lt. Brian Rice's stability — originally raised by a fellow Baltimore police officer who is the mother of his child — led deputies to confiscate his guns and contact high-ranking police officials, the report says."

"... citing "credible information," the deputies confiscated both his official and personal guns, called his commanding officer and transported Rice to the Carroll Hospital Center. The weapons included his .40-caliber police pistol, a 9 mm handgun, an AK-47-style rifle, a .22-caliber rifle and two shotguns."

I wonder if the police union that is now speaking in defense of this guy had any complicity in keeping him on the Baltimore payroll.

Paul Girouard
05-02-2015, 03:30 PM
Turns out Freddie Gray ran after making eye contact with Lt. Brian Rice. Rice has been hospitalized for alleged mental health issues and twice suspended, it appears because of concern for his self-control and judgement.

http://www.businessinsider.com/indicted-baltimore-police-officers-has-mental-health-issues-2015-5

Rice knew he was clean and committing no crime, yet he ran from Rice. I wonder what interactions they had previous to this incident.


Rice was running from Rice? What kind of police work do you do?

bobbys
05-02-2015, 03:44 PM
passenger in van , Donta Allan said it was a smooth ride.
.

the one witness stated it was a smooth ride yet the DA has the driver on murder charges..

she knew it would be thrown out.

Or they never asked Donta..

She pandered to the crowd..

A DAs job is not to make political statements.

johnw
05-02-2015, 04:07 PM
Rice was running from Rice? What kind of police work do you do?

Thank you for pointing out the mistake, I'll fix it.

It's really a shame you aren't equipped to figure out what I meant.

Phillip Allen
05-02-2015, 04:08 PM
Thank you for pointing out the mistake, I'll fix it.

It's really a shame you aren't equipped to figure out what I meant.

if a bit more civil (all of us) perhaps it won't get so ugly this time... just a thought

johnw
05-02-2015, 04:10 PM
if a bit more civil (all of us) perhaps it won't get so ugly this time... just a thought

When was the last time you responded with civility to an insult?

Phillip Allen
05-02-2015, 04:30 PM
When was the last time you responded with civility to an insult?

I'm trying to get better...

Paul Girouard
05-02-2015, 04:43 PM
Thank you for pointing out the mistake, I'll fix it.

It's really a shame you aren't equipped to figure out what I meant.

SOP for WBF. People make mistakes all the time , police that make mistakes, conservitive politicans that make mistakes get crucified (figuratively ) by liberals on the WBF, by the media , etc. Fighting fire with fire , tit for tat, whats good for the goose is good for the gander. YMMV.

johnw
05-02-2015, 04:58 PM
SOP for WBF. People make mistakes all the time , police that make mistakes, conservitive politicans that make mistakes get crucified (figuratively ) by liberals on the WBF, by the media , etc. Fighting fire with fire , tit for tat, whats good for the goose is good for the gander. YMMV.

Thanks, I figured you were smart enough to catch the humor and had think enough skin for the snark.

bobbys
05-02-2015, 06:06 PM
A fight breaks out and Duncan is goofing off already as BROTM.

I told Ya so!Y:o

Paul Girouard
05-02-2015, 06:49 PM
Thanks, I figured you were smart enough to catch the humor and had think enough skin for the snark.


"think enough skin" , ah , ya , maybe put that cork back in the bottle for the rest of the day LOL!! Start again tomorrow, when your typing skills are not quite so "impaired".

oznabrag
05-02-2015, 11:05 PM
That's pretty ugly stuff there, Paul.

Gill
05-03-2015, 05:47 AM
Sounds like they have to hide in their apartments when they aren't working. What kind of life is that? A guy should be able to take a walk in his own neighborhood.

Yes, it is too bad that the rest of the resident troublemakers, those that choose the outlaw lifestyle, make it impractical for the good ones to enjoy their own neighborhoods.

Gill
05-03-2015, 05:57 AM
So they have to spend their time at work or inside hiding to keep from having to deal with the "law"?

No, to avoid the resident troublemakers.

oznabrag
05-03-2015, 09:24 AM
Yes, it is too bad that the rest of the resident troublemakers, those that choose the outlaw lifestyle, make it impractical for the good ones to enjoy their own neighborhoods.

Our drug laws, in their majestic equality, prohibit both the 1% and the Hoodies from smoking dope.

The difference is that dealing drugs is an attractive option for people who have no other employment opportunity.

Over the years, our Congress has created an entire criminal class where only fun-lovers and addicts existed before.

Osborne Russell
05-03-2015, 09:40 AM
The stop was for running. The arrest was for possessing the knife.


Police union attorney Michael Davey said officers had every right to give chase.

"There is a Supreme Court case that states that if you are in a high-crime area, and you flee from the police unprovoked, the police have the legal ability to pursue you, and that's what they did," he said.

"In this type of an incident, you do not need probable cause to arrest. You just need a reasonable suspicion to make the stop."

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/24/us/baltimore-freddie-gray-death/index.html

CWSmith
05-03-2015, 09:57 AM
The stop was for running. The arrest was for possessing the knife.

The arrest resulted in his death without a crime. The knife was misrepresented as a switch blade when it was perfectly legal.

Osborne Russell
05-03-2015, 09:57 AM
From what I have been able to gather, the spinal injury was due to a single trauma, possibly aggravated by others. But you can't break a spine by hitting it 10,000 times with a pencil. One application has to be tremendous, either by a blow or by bending the body.

The witness who photographed Gray being placed in the van the first time says as he starting photographing, the arresting officers, Brian Rice and Garrett Miller, had Gray face down on the sidewalk with a knee on his neck, bending his legs backward like they were trying to get his feet to touch his back. This doesn't show on the video. It does show Gray unable to stand or walk, being dragged to the van.
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/04/23/ac-freddie-gray-witness-speaks-to-anderson-cooper.cnn

There is also video showing the stop where they pulled Gray half way out of the van to put leg shackles on him. Another possible time for the injury to occur by tension. http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/24/us/baltimore-freddie-gray-death/index.html

The initial autopsy theorizes that during braking, Gray slid forward, his head going into the bulkhead and breaking his spinal chord by compression but . . .


Batts said he had been given preliminary results of an autopsy on Gray. The medical examiner's full autopsy may take another 30 to 45 days, Batts said, because toxicology tests still need to be examined and spinal experts may be brought in to assess Gray's injury.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/24/us/baltimore-freddie-gray-death/index.html

I would think force tests and calculations could be done to measure how much force is available by braking or turning the vehicle. Was it enough, at the van's speed, and Freddie Gray's weight, to sever his spine? The initial autopsy says yes.

If not, there would seem to be no question that Freddie Gray was murdered by the laying on of hands.

Osborne Russell
05-03-2015, 09:58 AM
The arrest resulted in his death without a crime. The knife was misrepresented as a switch blade when it was perfectly legal.

Yep. I'm just trying to get things untangled.

Osborne Russell
05-03-2015, 10:15 AM
The arrest resulted in his death without a crime. The knife was misrepresented as a switch blade when it was perfectly legal.

In fact, the fact that the stop and the arrest are separate raises several inferences:

1. The stop is where they folded him, breaking his spinal chord.

2. Having done so, they couldn't very well leave him lying on the sidewalk.

3. Finding the knife, now they have the opportunity to put him in a police van instead of waiting for an amubulance. An ambulance might have saved him, long enough to talk, anyway.

The police van sure took its time getting to the police station. Along the way, it stopped four times to "check on his condition". To make sure that . . . he didn't need medical attention. He didn't need it the first time. Let's just stop one more time to make sure. OK, just one more time. OK, just one more time. OK, now we're sure, he doesn't need medical attention. We'll bring him to jail now. The jail people say, this guy needs immediate medical attention.

Gee whiz, a lot must have happened between the last stop and the jail. He was fine up til then. We "checked him" four times, nudge nudge wink wink.

Also: is making a bogus arrest obstructing justice, if the purpose is to conceal murder?

Paul Girouard
05-03-2015, 11:41 AM
Then you have this:



A New York City police officer was recovering Sunday after being shot in the head while attempting to stop a man he suspected of carrying a handgun.
The incident is the fifth shooting of a New York City officer in as many months, officials said.


Officer Brian Moore, 25, underwent surgery after being rushed in a patrol car to a Queens hospital Saturday evening after he and his partner pulled up in an unmarked police car to a man who was adjusting his waistband suspiciously, police Commissioner William Bratton said.
The officers exchanged words with the man before he turned suddenly and fired at least twice, striking Moore, Bratton said. His partner, Officer Erik Jansen, 30, radioed for help.
"They did not have an opportunity to get out and return fire," the commissioner said at a Saturday night news conference at Jamaica Hospital Medical Center with Mayor Bill de Blasio and other officials.

Ian McColgin
05-03-2015, 12:38 PM
Yes, Paul. According to the FBI:

▪ In 2013, 27 law enforcement officers died from injuries incurred in the line of duty during felonious incidents.
▪ Of the officers feloniously killed, 16 were employed by city police departments, including 4 who were members of law enforcement agencies in cities with 250,000 or more inhabitants.
▪ Line-of-duty deaths occurred in 16 states.
▪ By region, 15 officers were feloniously killed in the South, 6 officers in the West, 4 officers in the Midwest, and 2 officers in the Northeast.

Additionally:

▪ In 2013, the FBI collected assault data from 11,468 law enforcement agencies that employed 533,895 officers. These officers provided service to more than 247*million persons, or 78.2 percent of the nation’s population.
▪ Law enforcement agencies reported that 49,851 officers were assaulted while performing their duties in 2013.
▪ The rate of officer assaults in 2013 was 9.3 per 100 sworn officers.


http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/2013/officers-feloniously-killed/felonious_topic_page_-2013

oznabrag
05-03-2015, 12:49 PM
Yes, Paul. According to the FBI:

▪ In 2013, 27 law enforcement officers died from injuries incurred in the line of duty during felonious incidents.
▪ Of the officers feloniously killed, 16 were employed by city police departments, including 4 who were members of law enforcement agencies in cities with 250,000 or more inhabitants.
▪ Line-of-duty deaths occurred in 16 states.
▪ By region, 15 officers were feloniously killed in the South, 6 officers in the West, 4 officers in the Midwest, and 2 officers in the Northeast.

Additionally:

▪ In 2013, the FBI collected assault data from 11,468 law enforcement agencies that employed 533,895 officers. These officers provided service to more than 247*million persons, or 78.2 percent of the nation’s population.
▪ Law enforcement agencies reported that 49,851 officers were assaulted while performing their duties in 2013.
▪ The rate of officer assaults in 2013 was 9.3 per 100 sworn officers.


http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/2013/officers-feloniously-killed/felonious_topic_page_-2013

Also:

In terms of dangerousness, however, law enforcement doesn't even crack the top-ten list of most dangerous professions: (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-04-26/rising-police-aggression-telling-indicator-our-societal-decline)
http://media.peakprosperity.com/images/Work-related-death-rates.jpg

Phillip Allen
05-03-2015, 01:40 PM
Also:

In terms of dangerousness, however, law enforcement doesn't even crack the top-ten list of most dangerous professions: (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-04-26/rising-police-aggression-telling-indicator-our-societal-decline)
http://media.peakprosperity.com/images/Work-related-death-rates.jpg

I got an idea... in the last few decades I've heard an outcry to pay cops more because their job is dangerous... now how about a federally mandated raise for all those other dangerous jobs and maybe they, too, will fall out of the top ten dangerous job list...

Ian McColgin
05-03-2015, 01:56 PM
The objective danger of policing is not so high but the stress is indeed great because every officer has a sworn duty that includes not getting mad at stuff that rile normal folk, like being sworn at, lied to and spit upon. An officer of the law should not be using such things as an excuse for abusing his or her authority.

Phillip Allen
05-03-2015, 02:05 PM
The objective danger of policing is not so high but the stress is indeed great because every officer has a sworn duty that includes not getting mad at stuff that rile normal folk, like being sworn at, lied to and spit upon. An officer of the law should not be using such things as an excuse for abusing his or her authority.

so... when we see 20 cops standing around Rodney King while two or three assault him, they are breaking their oath not to interfere... in fact breaking the law... hmmm... why weren't those standing around charged with crimes?

Reynard38
05-03-2015, 03:03 PM
Also:

In terms of dangerousness, however, law enforcement doesn't even crack the top-ten list of most dangerous professions:
(http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-04-26/rising-police-aggression-telling-indicator-our-societal-decline)
http://media.peakprosperity.com/images/Work-related-death-rates.jpg

I've seen this chart before. Always surprised to see flying as such a dangerous profession. However it's pretty rare to be injured in this line of work. When things go really wrong though it's not just an OJI.

Paul Girouard
05-03-2015, 05:35 PM
JHC, talk about a off the subject defection. What ever.

Maybe truckers should be allowed to have a "The Gary Crow Lazer Cannon" attached to their bumpers. For safety's sake.

Old Dryfoot
05-03-2015, 06:07 PM
JHC, talk about a off the subject defection. What ever.


About as off topic as #171.

Paul Girouard
05-03-2015, 06:55 PM
About as off topic as #171.

Really?? You see NO similarities between a cop who confronts a person who is acting strangely and gets shot , to the case where a cop confronts a person who runs to get away and is injuried in the process!

My your minds as old and dry as your foot!

Phillip Allen
05-03-2015, 07:14 PM
JHC, talk about a off the subject defection. What ever.

Maybe truckers should be allowed to have a "The Gary Crow Lazer Cannon" attached to their bumpers. For safety's sake.

perhaps they should shoot a few unarmed civilians to feel safer... maybe just kill people's pets

CWSmith
05-03-2015, 07:15 PM
Is it illegal to run in the presence of a cop? They were not questioning him. Does that action carry the death penalty?

Old Dryfoot
05-03-2015, 07:21 PM
Really?? You see NO similarities between a cop who confronts a person who is acting strangely and gets shot , to the case where a cop confronts a person who runs to get away and is injuried in the process!

My your minds as old and dry as your foot!

They are related in so far as they both involve a cop(s) and a civilian. Nothing more.

The NY incident is a case of a cop having probable cause, which turned out to be correct, and in Baltimore, the cops had no cause at all. Its also been shown that the cops lied about the knife Freddie had on him, so what else are they lying about?

Paul Girouard
05-03-2015, 07:34 PM
perhaps they should shoot a few unarmed civilians to feel safer... maybe just kill people's pets


Maybe we should disarm the police and just let anyone who would like to shot them. Ya , that's the ticket! Anarchy should rule the day.

Paul Girouard
05-03-2015, 07:36 PM
They are related in so far as they both involve a cop(s) and a civilian. Nothing more.

The NY incident is a case of a cop having probable cause, which turned out to be correct, and in Baltimore, the cops had no cause at all. Its also been shown that the cops lied about the knife Freddie had on him, so what else are they lying about?

Then it is similar , more so than how many truck drivers get killed daily driving thier rigs , or maybe even to and from work.

Anyone who runs from a cop , more than likely has a reason , and it not that they need the exercise.

Phillip Allen
05-03-2015, 07:40 PM
Then it is similar , more so than how many truck drivers get killed daily driving thier rigs , or maybe even to and from work.

Anyone who runs from a cop , more than likely has a reason , and it not that they need the exercise.

running is NOT probable cause any more than having a car trunk is probable cause of dope dealing

Old Dryfoot
05-03-2015, 07:43 PM
Then it is similar , more so than how many truck drivers get killed daily driving thier rigs , or maybe even to and from work.

Anyone who runs from a cop , more than likely has a reason , and it not that they need the exercise.

Do we know for sure that he ran? As I said, they lied about the knife. What else are they lying about?

As far as disarming all the police, that is a pretty dumb statement. I don't think you are a dumb individual, so don't play one on the internet. It doesn't look good on you. Phillip is advocating for accountability. You're in favor of that, aren't you?

Canoeyawl
05-03-2015, 08:57 PM
Anyone who runs from a cop , more than likely has a reason , and it not that they need the exercise.

In most cities here in the US, being black is good enough reason to run. It is sort of like deer hunting, they see a human and they run for their lives.

Keith Wilson
05-03-2015, 09:02 PM
to the case where a cop confronts a person who runs to get away and is injured in the process! This is not an accurate description of Mr. Gray's case. Given the information we have, a more accurate description would be "a person who runs away, is caught, arrested for no valid reason, and then beaten to death by the police."

It's difficult to imagine how one could plausibly defend the actions of the police in this case.




.

Paul Girouard
05-03-2015, 09:40 PM
This is not an accurate description of Mr. Gray's case. Given the information we have, a more accurate description would be "a person who runs away, is caught, arrested for no valid reason, and then beaten to death by the police."

It's difficult to imagine how one could plausibly defend the actions of the police in this case.




.


And you contend your discription is? Guess we'll see when the trial takes place , if it gets that far. I'm confidant that the truth will prevail. It won't happen here on WBF , I do know that.

Phillip Allen
05-03-2015, 10:32 PM
for gosh sakes, stop digging!

if nothing else, someone's gonna have been wrong, let us not gloat over his error

Captain Intrepid
05-03-2015, 11:59 PM
Anyone who runs from a cop , more than likely has a reason , and it not that they need the exercise.

Perhaps they're afraid of being beaten to death by criminals?

Keith Wilson
05-04-2015, 06:25 AM
And you contend your description is? Guess we'll see when the trial takes place , if it gets that far.What we know with pretty high confidence:
- Mr. Gray was in reasonably good heath before he was stopped by police; good enough to run away, at least.
- He was arrested for possessing a legal knife.
- When he arrived at the police station, he had very severe injuries, which caused his death a few days later.
- These injuries occurred between the time the police stopped him and the time he arrived at the station, while he was in police custody.

Now the officers charged may or may not be guilty of a crime; that will be decided at the trial. But unless the information that has come out so far is wildly inaccurate, 'beaten to death by police' appears to be unavoidable, whether they did it by beating on him directly or by bashing him around in the back of the van while driving, the traditional 'rough ride'.

Again, it's difficult to imagine how one could plausibly defend the actions of the police in this case.

Phillip Allen
05-04-2015, 10:57 AM
What we know with pretty high confidence:
- Mr. Gray was in reasonably good heath before he was stopped by police; good enough to run away, at least.
- He was arrested for possessing a legal knife.
- When he arrived at the police station, he had very severe injuries, which caused his death a few days later.
- These injuries occurred between the time the police stopped him and the time he arrived at the station, while he was in police custody.

Now the officers charged may or may not be guilty of a crime; that will be decided at the trial. But unless the information that has come out so far is wildly inaccurate, 'beaten to death by police' appears to be unavoidable, whether they did it by beating on him directly or by bashing him around in the back of the van while driving, the traditional 'rough ride'.

Again, it's difficult to imagine how one could plausibly defend the actions of the police in this case.

the logic: if you have nothing to hide, you should submit to a police beating... the police did nothing wrong... probable cause is established by the 'defendant's' having died.

... and, YES I'm pissed off... but apparently that makes me a cop hater according to some here.
the fact that 'some' are not outraged is probable cause to believe they are stupid

CWSmith
05-04-2015, 12:58 PM
They said on TV the neighborhood where all this happened is the same neighborhood where Thurgood Marshall lived. I can't tell you how sad that makes me.

Osborne Russell
05-04-2015, 01:19 PM
What we know with pretty high confidence:
- Mr. Gray was in reasonably good heath before he was stopped by police; good enough to run away, at least.
- He was arrested for possessing a legal knife.
- When he arrived at the police station, he had very severe injuries, which caused his death a few days later.
- These injuries occurred between the time the police stopped him and the time he arrived at the station, while he was in police custody.

Now the officers charged may or may not be guilty of a crime; that will be decided at the trial. But unless the information that has come out so far is wildly inaccurate, 'beaten to death by police' appears to be unavoidable, whether they did it by beating on him directly or by bashing him around in the back of the van while driving, the traditional 'rough ride'.

Again, it's difficult to imagine how one could plausibly defend the actions of the police in this case.

The facts you mention, except maybe the legality of the knife, are not just undisputed, they were provided by the police. A few lame attempts were made to obscure them but these are facts of a very special quality. The time frame is very short and the injuries were very severe.

It wasn't a spinal injury and asthma. It was a nearly severed spinal cord and a crushed larynx. Both injuries take huge amounts of force, on the order of a car crash. http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/bs-hs-gray-injuries-20150420-story.html

There was no car crash. How can you drive in such a way as to generate that kind of force without crashing the car? You stand on the brakes at what, 60mph? Can that police van even go that fast? Did anyone see it traveling at high speed? See it brake violently? Stand it on the front wheels? Where's the skid marks?

Whatever, it could not have also crushed the larynx unless by some truly freak occurrence, his larynx and the site of the spinal cord severance were in line with the direction of force. Even if it did happen that way, you would expect serious skin lesions and bruising at the points at which the inertia of the vehicle was transferred to Mr. Gray, none of which were noted AFAIK.

Far more likely is that he was bent backwards such that the two injuries were connected in a curve, i.e. the curve of his spine, with the attention of a fulcrum under the larynx, i.e. a billy club or elbow, and a fulcrum to the back, i.e. a knee or hand. The police love to choke a fellow by this very means.



http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/bs-hs-gray-injuries-20150420-story.html

johnw
05-04-2015, 01:25 PM
"think enough skin" , ah , ya , maybe put that cork back in the bottle for the rest of the day LOL!! Start again tomorrow, when your typing skills are not quite so "impaired".

My typing is always impaired, I'm just clumsy at the keyboard. You'll see plenty more to criticize, I'm sure.

John of Phoenix
05-04-2015, 01:28 PM
perhaps they should shoot a few unarmed civilians to feel safer... maybe just kill people's petsSomeone should repost this the next time you insist that you don't hate cops.

johnw
05-04-2015, 01:29 PM
Then it is similar , more so than how many truck drivers get killed daily driving thier rigs , or maybe even to and from work.

Anyone who runs from a cop , more than likely has a reason , and it not that they need the exercise.

Suppose you're investigating a suspicious death. One man catches the other's eye, chases him down, manhandles him and puts him in a van. When the man who was caught emerges from the van, he is mortally injured.

Wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that he ran because he feared injury?

Phillip Allen
05-04-2015, 01:36 PM
The facts you mention, except maybe the legality of the knife, are not just undisputed, they were provided by the police. A few lame attempts were made to obscure them but these are facts of a very special quality. The time frame is very short and the injuries were very severe.

It wasn't a spinal injury and asthma. It was a nearly severed spinal cord and a crushed larynx. Both injuries take huge amounts of force, on the order of a car crash. http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/bs-hs-gray-injuries-20150420-story.html

There was no car crash. How can you drive in such a way as to generate that kind of force without crashing the car? You stand on the brakes at what, 60mph? Can that police van even go that fast? Did anyone see it traveling at high speed? See it brake violently? Stand it on the front wheels? Where's the skid marks?

Whatever, it could not have also crushed the larynx unless by some truly freak occurrence, his larynx and the site of the spinal cord severance were in line with the direction of force. Even if it did happen that way, you would expect serious skin lesions and bruising at the points at which the inertia of the vehicle was transferred to Mr. Gray, none of which were noted AFAIK.

Far more likely is that he was bent backwards such that the two injuries were connected in a curve, i.e. the curve of his spine, with the attention of a fulcrum under the larynx, i.e. a billy club or elbow, and a fulcrum to the back, i.e. a knee or hand. The police love to choke a fellow by this very means.



http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/bs-hs-gray-injuries-20150420-story.html

read this...


I talked with someone who said the method used in breaking his neck was (likely) to knee him in the back as he was face down in the van while a baton was passed under his neck and pulled up sharply... it would explain the damage to his voice box too


"... was one of six officers suspended pending a criminal inquiry into the death of Gray, who died after his neck was “80% severed” by the breaking of three vertebrae, according to his family’s attorney, who said Gray’s voice box was almost crushed."
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/23/baltimore-officer-who-chased-freddie-gray-had-pattern-of-violence-court-filings

Peerie Maa
05-04-2015, 01:40 PM
Suppose you're investigating a suspicious death. One man catches the other's eye, chases him down, manhandles him and puts him in a van. When the man who was caught emerges from the van, he is mortally injured.

Wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that he ran because he feared injury?

This line of argument is a bit irrelevant.
Any prisoner, whether arrested by the police or the army at war, must receive a duty of care which means they go into the cell in as good condition as they were when first apprehended.

Keith Wilson
05-04-2015, 02:05 PM
Exactly. Why he ran away is irrelevant; whether it was because he was late to a dentist appointment or because he had just murdered seventeen people makes no difference. When a person is taken into police custody, it's the duty of the police to not kill him.

johnw
05-04-2015, 02:35 PM
This line of argument is a bit irrelevant.
Any prisoner, whether arrested by the police or the army at war, must receive a duty of care which means they go into the cell in as good condition as they were when first apprehended.

The fact that he ran is being held against him. It shouldn't be, but it is. I suspect he ran because he was quite reasonably afraid of being abused.

Osborne Russell
05-04-2015, 02:55 PM
read this...

You need to support your argument with something additional to "nobody listens to me."

Osborne Russell
05-04-2015, 03:05 PM
This line of argument is a bit irrelevant.
Any prisoner, whether arrested by the police or the army at war, must receive a duty of care which means they go into the cell in as good condition as they were when first apprehended.

Yeah. Applies to populations as well as individuals see e.g. Iraq. Indeed there is a duty to make provision for care of persons taken into custody before they are taken into custody, because otherwise there would always be the excuse of emergency, and their rights would never in fact be protected. We might as well admit we are cowards and surrender the rights, preserving the last sliver of dignity.

From England and Rome originally we have the idea of due process which in the USA takes the form of "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law."

Since the law doesn't give unlimited powers to the police it follows that anything outside those powers that deprives someone of the big three is for that reason alone illegal. On the way to the dentist or just returned from murdering more people than Stalin, doesn't matter.

Phillip Allen
05-04-2015, 03:25 PM
You need to support your argument with something additional to "nobody listens to me."

what argument is that?

CWSmith
05-04-2015, 04:10 PM
Exactly. Why he ran away is irrelevant; whether it was because he was late to a dentist appointment or because he had just murdered seventeen people makes no difference. When a person is taken into police custody, it's the duty of the police to not kill him.

Very well said.