Officer in Freddie Gray Case Acquitted On All Charges

[catswiththum]

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

Here's a profile on your "insider", by the way:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/mar...901-story.html

Career highlights: Led court's criminal division from 2012 until January. Chaired Criminal Justice Coordinating Council for Baltimore, 2012-2014. Special litigation counsel for the civil rights division of the U.S. Justice Department, 2002-2005. Trial attorney in the civil rights division of the U.S. Department of Justice, 1997-2002. Assistant state's attorney in Baltimore, 1989-1997

His resume reads like someone whom the prosecution would have favored in this case, since this trial was as much about "social justice" as alleged criminality.

I knew it would be you to be the first to say, "But he's black!"

It's not a black issue. It's a blue issue.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

I knew it would be you to be the first to say, "But he's black!"

It's not a black issue. It's a blue issue.

Unless you were in the courtroom for the duration of the case, you have no basis to question the judge's ruling. He seems imminently qualified and comes from a civil rights background. I'll defer to him rather than your wild-ass guess that he's somehow corrupt.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Unless you were in the courtroom for the duration of the case, you have no basis to question the judge's ruling. He seems imminently qualified and comes from a civil rights background. I'll defer to him rather than your wild-ass guess that he's somehow corrupt.

They should have selected a judge who was fully qualified instead of onewhose qualification was merely imminent.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

They should have selected a judge who was fully qualified instead of onewhose qualification was merely imminent.

eminently

[donquixote99]

The question that, according to the reporting, the judge brought up repeatedly, strikes me as tangential at best to the issues in the case. "Whether...every arrest made without probable cause amounted to a crime?" seems like a defense attorney question to me, actually. The correct answer, no, sounds exculpatory.

But that really isn't the question, is it? The question is, was it a crime in this case.

I'll be interested in the 'expert analysis' this time, very interested.

[finnbow]

From what this article says, it would have been novel indeed had the officer been convicted for his role in Gray's death (none).

Prosecutors pursued a novel, perhaps unprecedented, legal strategy, arguing that Nero was partially responsible for Mr. Gray’s death because he arrested Gray without probable cause. Gray sustained fatal injuries later, when Nero was no longer involved.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice...ustice-collide

[catswiththum]

Originally Posted by finnbow

From what this article says, it would have been novel indeed had the officer been convicted for his role in Gray's death (none).

Prosecutors pursued a novel, perhaps unprecedented, legal strategy, arguing that Nero was partially responsible for Mr. Gray’s death because he arrested Gray without probable cause. Gray sustained fatal injuries later, when Nero was no longer involved.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice...ustice-collide

Isn't it just like you to douse a lot of perfectly good supposition with a bucket of cold fact.

[donquixote99]

In the criminal law in most states, it works like this. Let's say George threatens Rob with a gun, to rob him. Then George calls Ed to approach and take Rob's wallet. Ed come up to Rob and hits him on the head with a club, killing him. George goes down for felony murder in most states, even if he didn't intend for Ed to hit Rob.

Basically, if Nero knew he needed probable cause, knew he didn't have it, and proceeded with the arrest anyway, it's not unreasonable to argue he began a crime against Gray, and shares in the culpability when his confederates compounded the crime. The Judge didn't buy it, but I can see the argument.

[mpholland]

Trial by judge can be a very wise choice if your actions are generally within the law, but might be seen differently with a jury who, even though instructed not to, still often weigh their verdict with more emotion than intellect. Not unlike many conversations in this forum.