Freddie Gray case: Strike 3 for prosecution

[AURaptor 1,122]

Mosby now 0-3 , officer Goodson not guilty - all charges.

That is all.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

[aujeff11 6,243]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

Noted. Just like the black guy that was shot twenty times in the head was the worst case of suicide that the southern sheriff had ever seen.

[AURaptor 1,122]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

Civil case , maybe. Not criminal

[TheBlueVue 177]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

NO what I would say is evident is, Mrs Moseby pressed charges w/o the evidence to support them.

[AUDub 11,147]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

Noted. Just like the black guy that was shot twenty times in the head was the worst case of suicide that the southern sheriff had ever seen.

Juries these days. How is there reasonable doubt here?

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

Noted. Just like the black guy that was shot twenty times in the head was the worst case of suicide that the southern sheriff had ever seen.

Juries these days. How is there reasonable doubt here?

It was another bench trial - same judge that acquitted the other guy a few weeks ago.

[AUDub 11,147]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

Noted. Just like the black guy that was shot twenty times in the head was the worst case of suicide that the southern sheriff had ever seen.

Juries these days. How is there reasonable doubt here?

It was another bench trial - same judge that acquitted the other guy a few weeks ago.

That explains many things.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

NO what I would say is evident is, Mrs Moseby pressed charges w/o the evidence to support them.

So we're left to believe that since the officers did nothing wrong, Freddie managed to do it to himself.

I mean, come on, not even you believe that's what happened. Right? You can't even come up with 'reckless endangerment' as a charge for binding a man's hands and feet and putting him in a van unrestrained by a seatbelt, then driving roughly enough that his spinal cord was almost severed?

Tell me you don't think this was all just some unfortunate accident. Tell me you can get out of the politics of it and at least see that.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

Noted. Just like the black guy that was shot twenty times in the head was the worst case of suicide that the southern sheriff had ever seen.

Juries these days. How is there reasonable doubt here?

This case was a bench trial..no jury was invovlved

[TheBlueVue 177]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

NO what I would say is evident is, Mrs Moseby pressed charges w/o the evidence to support them.

So we're left to believe that since the officers did nothing wrong, Freddie managed to do it to himself.

I mean, come on, not even you believe that's what happened. Right? You can't even come up with 'reckless endangerment' as a charge for binding a man's hands and feet and putting him in a van unrestrained by a seatbelt, then driving roughly enough that his spinal cord was almost severed?

Tell me you don't think this was all just some unfortunate accident. Tell me you can get out of the politics of it and at least see that.

Convictions can only come from the evidence NOT what we think. In the absence of evidence the presumption of innocence prevails

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

NO what I would say is evident is, Mrs Moseby pressed charges w/o the evidence to support them.

So we're left to believe that since the officers did nothing wrong, Freddie managed to do it to himself.

I mean, come on, not even you believe that's what happened. Right? You can't even come up with 'reckless endangerment' as a charge for binding a man's hands and feet and putting him in a van unrestrained by a seatbelt, then driving roughly enough that his spinal cord was almost severed?

Tell me you don't think this was all just some unfortunate accident. Tell me you can get out of the politics of it and at least see that.

Convictions can only come from the evidence NOT what we think. In the absence of evidence the presumption of innocence prevails

So what you're telling me is that circumstantial evidence is never enough? Unless we have a video camera in every corner of the world and we have witnesses other than the deceased and the person(s) accused, no inferences can be made after that? What sort of evidence would you need to see in this case to render a conviction? You know he was arrested and shackled hand and foot and placed in the police van. You know he was unrestrained inside the vehicle and that his body experienced forces significant enough during the drive to fracture three vertebrae and leave his spine 80% severed at the neck and that he died as a result.

He wasn't under anyone else's control during that time. The officers don't allege that he was thrashing himself about and injured himself. So explain to me how you can't look at that evidence and at least come up with something like reckless endangerment (for not securing him in the vehicle)?

[homersapien 11,366]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

NO what I would say is evident is, Mrs Moseby pressed charges w/o the evidence to support them.

non sequitur

[TheBlueVue 177]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

NO what I would say is evident is, Mrs Moseby pressed charges w/o the evidence to support them.

So we're left to believe that since the officers did nothing wrong, Freddie managed to do it to himself.

I mean, come on, not even you believe that's what happened. Right? You can't even come up with 'reckless endangerment' as a charge for binding a man's hands and feet and putting him in a van unrestrained by a seatbelt, then driving roughly enough that his spinal cord was almost severed?

Tell me you don't think this was all just some unfortunate accident. Tell me you can get out of the politics of it and at least see that.

Convictions can only come from the evidence NOT what we think. In the absence of evidence the presumption of innocence prevails

So what you're telling me is that circumstantial evidence is never enough? Unless we have a video camera in every corner of the world and we have witnesses other than the deceased and the person(s) accused, no inferences can be made after that? What sort of evidence would you need to see in this case to render a conviction? You know he was arrested and shackled hand and foot and placed in the police van. You know he was unrestrained inside the vehicle and that his body experienced forces significant enough during the drive to fracture three vertebrae and leave his spine 80% severed at the neck and that he died as a result.

He wasn't under anyone else's control during that time. The officers don't allege that he was thrashing himself about and injured himself. So explain to me how you can't look at that evidence and at least come up with something like reckless endangerment (for not securing him in the vehicle)?

Nope, what I'm telling you is the Judge didn't see ANY evidence sufficient to convict Goodson of 2nd degree murder, period. One very troubling problem is the prosecutors tries to with hold evidence that went against their rough ride theory. They interviewed another person who was in that truck who had reported it was not a rough ride at all. In addition, there is video evidence at various spots along the way that showed no evidence of a rough ride. As much as you dont like it, court rulings and convictions are determined by the evidence and there simply isn't any that Goodson murdered Freddie Gray. I would also point out this is not about politics because the Judge is a black man who was probably under pressue to convict this guy but just could not do it in the absence of the evidence.

People dont really seem interested in justice here, they're much more interested in retribution but, to punish someone, there has to be case that can be made. Thus far there isn't one.

Goodson wasn't charged with reckless endangerment. Remember me saying Moseby way over charged these guys? If he had been charged with that maybe he would have been convicted but he wasn't.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/1/caesar-goodson-charged-second-degree-murder-freddi/

[homersapien 11,366]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

NO what I would say is evident is, Mrs Moseby pressed charges w/o the evidence to support them.

So we're left to believe that since the officers did nothing wrong, Freddie managed to do it to himself.

I mean, come on, not even you believe that's what happened. Right? You can't even come up with 'reckless endangerment' as a charge for binding a man's hands and feet and putting him in a van unrestrained by a seatbelt, then driving roughly enough that his spinal cord was almost severed?

Tell me you don't think this was all just some unfortunate accident. Tell me you can get out of the politics of it and at least see that.

Convictions can only come from the evidence NOT what we think. In the absence of evidence the presumption of innocence prevails

So what you're telling me is that circumstantial evidence is never enough? Unless we have a video camera in every corner of the world and we have witnesses other than the deceased and the person(s) accused, no inferences can be made after that? What sort of evidence would you need to see in this case to render a conviction? You know he was arrested and shackled hand and foot and placed in the police van. You know he was unrestrained inside the vehicle and that his body experienced forces significant enough during the drive to fracture three vertebrae and leave his spine 80% severed at the neck and that he died as a result.

He wasn't under anyone else's control during that time. The officers don't allege that he was thrashing himself about and injured himself. So explain to me how you can't look at that evidence and at least come up with something like reckless endangerment (for not securing him in the vehicle)?

Obviously, this black life didn't matter.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

NO what I would say is evident is, Mrs Moseby pressed charges w/o the evidence to support them.

So we're left to believe that since the officers did nothing wrong, Freddie managed to do it to himself.

I mean, come on, not even you believe that's what happened. Right? You can't even come up with 'reckless endangerment' as a charge for binding a man's hands and feet and putting him in a van unrestrained by a seatbelt, then driving roughly enough that his spinal cord was almost severed?

Tell me you don't think this was all just some unfortunate accident. Tell me you can get out of the politics of it and at least see that.

Convictions can only come from the evidence NOT what we think. In the absence of evidence the presumption of innocence prevails

So what you're telling me is that circumstantial evidence is never enough? Unless we have a video camera in every corner of the world and we have witnesses other than the deceased and the person(s) accused, no inferences can be made after that? What sort of evidence would you need to see in this case to render a conviction? You know he was arrested and shackled hand and foot and placed in the police van. You know he was unrestrained inside the vehicle and that his body experienced forces significant enough during the drive to fracture three vertebrae and leave his spine 80% severed at the neck and that he died as a result.

He wasn't under anyone else's control during that time. The officers don't allege that he was thrashing himself about and injured himself. So explain to me how you can't look at that evidence and at least come up with something like reckless endangerment (for not securing him in the vehicle)?

Obviously, this black life didn't matter.

Interesting that would be YOUR conclusion...to hell with Goodson's life, right?

[AURaptor 1,122]

Mosby is 0-3.

Not a non sequitur

[homersapien 11,366]

Evidently, Freddie did it to himself.

NO what I would say is evident is, Mrs Moseby pressed charges w/o the evidence to support them.

So we're left to believe that since the officers did nothing wrong, Freddie managed to do it to himself.

I mean, come on, not even you believe that's what happened. Right? You can't even come up with 'reckless endangerment' as a charge for binding a man's hands and feet and putting him in a van unrestrained by a seatbelt, then driving roughly enough that his spinal cord was almost severed?

Tell me you don't think this was all just some unfortunate accident. Tell me you can get out of the politics of it and at least see that.

Convictions can only come from the evidence NOT what we think. In the absence of evidence the presumption of innocence prevails

So what you're telling me is that circumstantial evidence is never enough? Unless we have a video camera in every corner of the world and we have witnesses other than the deceased and the person(s) accused, no inferences can be made after that? What sort of evidence would you need to see in this case to render a conviction? You know he was arrested and shackled hand and foot and placed in the police van. You know he was unrestrained inside the vehicle and that his body experienced forces significant enough during the drive to fracture three vertebrae and leave his spine 80% severed at the neck and that he died as a result.

He wasn't under anyone else's control during that time. The officers don't allege that he was thrashing himself about and injured himself. So explain to me how you can't look at that evidence and at least come up with something like reckless endangerment (for not securing him in the vehicle)?

Obviously, this black life didn't matter.

Interesting that would be YOUR conclusion...to hell with Goodson's life, right?

Yeah, that's my conclusion. Freddie Gray died because of the actions of these officers. He didn't kill himself.

If you are so concerned about seeing justice done, where's the justice for Gray? Does his life matter or not?

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Nope, what I'm telling you is the Judge didn't see ANY evidence sufficient to convict Goodson of 2nd degree murder, period.

You do realize he had multiple options other than 2nd degree murder, don't you? He could have convicted him of something as small as misconduct in office. Are you telling me that you can't even see in the circumstantial evidence enough to warrant a misconduct in office conviction for any of these folks?

One very troubling problem is the prosecutors tries to with hold evidence that went against their rough ride theory. They interviewed another person who was in that truck who had reported it was not a rough ride at all. In addition, there is video evidence at various spots along the way that showed no evidence of a rough ride. As much as you dont like it, court rulings and convictions are determined by the evidence and there simply isn't any that Goodson murdered Freddie Gray. I would also point out this is not about politics because the Judge is a black man who was probably under pressue to convict this guy but just could not do it in the absence of the evidence.

Stop parsing your words carefully to bolster your argument. I didn't say he had to be convicted of murder. I haven't said any of these officers had to be convicted of murder. I am saying that based on circumstantial evidence, they are criminally responsible in some way for Freddie Gray's death. Whether that's misconduct in office, gross negligent manslaughter by vehicle, criminal negligent manslaughter or second-degree assault (all of these were options for lesser charges), it seems rather evidence that Gray's injuries didn't spontaneously occur on their own and there is no allegation by the police that he did this to himself.

I think the circumstantial evidence is enough to say that the combination of the police failing to follow department policy in securing him in the vehicle and something they did in the course of driving him to the station caused his fatal injuries. That's not some fantastic leap of logic or something beyond the scope of circumstantial evidence.

People dont really seem interested in justice here, they're much more interested in retribution but, to punish someone, there has to be case that can be made. Thus far there isn't one.

That's idiotic. Of course we want justice. If the officers aren't responsible for his injuries and death, who is?

Goodson wasn't charged with reckless endangerment. Remember me saying Moseby way over charged these guys? If he had been charged with that maybe he would have been convicted but he wasn't.

You're right, reckless endangerment wasn't on the table. He was charged with two lesser charges that no one in their right mind would call "way over charging": criminal negligent manslaughter (3 year max. sentence) and misconduct in office. Even your oft-cited Alan Dershowitz only said the murder charge was something he viewed as over-charging them.

If a judge can't bring himself to even convict of misconduct in office under these circumstances, over-charging wasn't the issue here.

[TheBlueVue 177]

You're right, reckless endangerment wasn't on the table. He was charged with two lesser charges that no one in their right mind would call "way over charging": criminal negligent manslaughter (3 year max. sentence) and misconduct in office. Even your oft-cited Alan Dershowitz only said the murder charge was something he viewed as over-charging them.

The primary charges were 2nd degree murder and manslaughter bud, and, the fact is, there is no evidence to support ANY of them. Just because Freddie Gray is dead does not mean the guy who drove him to jail murdered him.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

The primary charges were 2nd degree murder and manslaughter bud, and, the fact is, there is no evidence to support ANY of them.

It doesn't matter what the primary charges were. All the charges were options. Even if the prosecutor didn't charge him with 2nd degree murder and manslaughter at all, it makes no difference on the other charges.

Just because Freddie Gray is dead does not mean the guy who drove him to jail murdered him.

Of course there is evidence. The medical examiner ruled his death a homicide:

Freddie Gray suffered a single "high-energy injury" to his neck and spine — most likely caused when the police van in which he was riding suddenly decelerated, according to a copy of the autopsy report obtained by The Baltimore Sun.

The state medical examiner's office concluded that Gray's death could not be ruled an accident, and was instead a homicide, because officers failed to follow safety procedures "through acts of omission."

Though Gray was loaded into the van on his belly, the medical examiner surmised that he may have gotten to his feet and was thrown into the wall during an abrupt change in direction. He was not belted in, but his wrists and ankles were shackled, putting him "at risk for an unsupported fall during acceleration or deceleration of the van."

http://www.baltimore...0623-story.html

We know that the police shackled his hands and feet leaving him unable to brace himself as the vehicle drove around accelerating and decelerating, hitting bumps or making turns. We know that the police officers did not follow department policy in their decision not to seatbelt him in. We know Freddie Gray wasn't driving the vehicle and we know that none of the officers are contending that he did this to himself. Finally, we know that there is no allegation by any of the accused that at any time Gray was out of their custody, so this wasn't the result of another suspect who assaulted him for instance.

This combined with the medical examiner's report is what circumstantial evidence is and people are convicted on it all the time.

And while it may be true that "just because Freddie Gray is dead does not mean the guy who drove him to jail murdered him," it doesn't mean that the officers involved (driver included) shouldn't bear some criminal responsibility for his death. So stop harping on only the most serious charges as if that somehow makes your argument for you.

[homersapien 11,366]

You're right, reckless endangerment wasn't on the table. He was charged with two lesser charges that no one in their right mind would call "way over charging": criminal negligent manslaughter (3 year max. sentence) and misconduct in office. Even your oft-cited Alan Dershowitz only said the murder charge was something he viewed as over-charging them.

The primary charges were 2nd degree murder and manslaughter bud, and, the fact is, there is no evidence to support ANY of them. Just because Freddie Gray is dead does not mean the guy who drove him to jail murdered him.

No, it means he was responsible for his death via his deliberate actions. Sounds like manslaughter to me.

[AURaptor 1,122]

The state failed to make its case. Surprisingly, everyone saw this coming except the DA.

[TheBlueVue 177]

The primary charges were 2nd degree murder and manslaughter bud, and, the fact is, there is no evidence to support ANY of them.

It doesn't matter what the primary charges were. All the charges were options. Even if the prosecutor didn't charge him with 2nd degree murder and manslaughter at all, it makes no difference on the other charges.

Just because Freddie Gray is dead does not mean the guy who drove him to jail murdered him.

Of course there is evidence. The medical examiner ruled his death a homicide:

Freddie Gray suffered a single "high-energy injury" to his neck and spine — most likely caused when the police van in which he was riding suddenly decelerated, according to a copy of the autopsy report obtained by The Baltimore Sun.

The state medical examiner's office concluded that Gray's death could not be ruled an accident, and was instead a homicide, because officers failed to follow safety procedures "through acts of omission."

Though Gray was loaded into the van on his belly, the medical examiner surmised that he may have gotten to his feet and was thrown into the wall during an abrupt change in direction. He was not belted in, but his wrists and ankles were shackled, putting him "at risk for an unsupported fall during acceleration or deceleration of the van."

http://www.baltimore...0623-story.html

We know that the police shackled his hands and feet leaving him unable to brace himself as the vehicle drove around accelerating and decelerating, hitting bumps or making turns. We know that the police officers did not follow department policy in their decision not to seatbelt him in. We know Freddie Gray wasn't driving the vehicle and we know that none of the officers are contending that he did this to himself. Finally, we know that there is no allegation by any of the accused that at any time Gray was out of their custody, so this wasn't the result of another suspect who assaulted him for instance.

This combined with the medical examiner's report is what circumstantial evidence is and people are convicted on it all the time.

And while it may be true that "just because Freddie Gray is dead does not mean the guy who drove him to jail murdered him," it doesn't mean that the officers involved (driver included) shouldn't bear some criminal responsibility for his death. So stop harping on only the most serious charges as if that somehow makes your argument for you.

You're just wrong bud. Just because someone is dead, nobody can be found guilty of a crime if there is NO EVIDENCE. You're making it an emotional issue and refuse to accept the reality that a crime can only be charged if there is evidence to support the charge. The coroner may legitimately believe it was a homicide and, if it was, it is STILL the prosecutors responsibility to prove it and that's what you're railing against. You're actually making my original point that Marilyn Moseby sucks at her job.

[homersapien 11,366]

The primary charges were 2nd degree murder and manslaughter bud, and, the fact is, there is no evidence to support ANY of them.

It doesn't matter what the primary charges were. All the charges were options. Even if the prosecutor didn't charge him with 2nd degree murder and manslaughter at all, it makes no difference on the other charges.

Just because Freddie Gray is dead does not mean the guy who drove him to jail murdered him.

Of course there is evidence. The medical examiner ruled his death a homicide:

Freddie Gray suffered a single "high-energy injury" to his neck and spine — most likely caused when the police van in which he was riding suddenly decelerated, according to a copy of the autopsy report obtained by The Baltimore Sun.

The state medical examiner's office concluded that Gray's death could not be ruled an accident, and was instead a homicide, because officers failed to follow safety procedures "through acts of omission."

Though Gray was loaded into the van on his belly, the medical examiner surmised that he may have gotten to his feet and was thrown into the wall during an abrupt change in direction. He was not belted in, but his wrists and ankles were shackled, putting him "at risk for an unsupported fall during acceleration or deceleration of the van."

http://www.baltimore...0623-story.html

We know that the police shackled his hands and feet leaving him unable to brace himself as the vehicle drove around accelerating and decelerating, hitting bumps or making turns. We know that the police officers did not follow department policy in their decision not to seatbelt him in. We know Freddie Gray wasn't driving the vehicle and we know that none of the officers are contending that he did this to himself. Finally, we know that there is no allegation by any of the accused that at any time Gray was out of their custody, so this wasn't the result of another suspect who assaulted him for instance.

This combined with the medical examiner's report is what circumstantial evidence is and people are convicted on it all the time.

And while it may be true that "just because Freddie Gray is dead does not mean the guy who drove him to jail murdered him," it doesn't mean that the officers involved (driver included) shouldn't bear some criminal responsibility for his death. So stop harping on only the most serious charges as if that somehow makes your argument for you.

You're just wrong bud. Just because someone is dead, nobody can be found guilty of a crime if there is NO EVIDENCE. You're making it an emotional issue and refuse to accept the reality that a crime can only be charged if there is evidence to support the charge. The coroner may legitimately believe it was a homicide and, if it was, it is STILL the prosecutors responsibility to prove it and that's what you're railing against. You're actually making my original point that Marilyn Moseby sucks at her job.

You sound as if you don't believe a crime was committed. Do you?