U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:37 AM
 
4,590 posts, read 2,969,016 times
Reputation: 6840

Advertisements

This is what the inside of a transport vehicle looks like. The Baltimore version had straps to allow the passengers to be belted in, this one does not.



There is a thin metal partition between the rows of seats. People sitting on opposite sides cannot see each other, but they can a) definitely hear each other, and b) hear people climbing in and out of the back.

It is then both plausible that a) the second passenger was easily able to hear Freddie banging about on his side and b) be able to tell if a police officer was in the back with him or not while the thrashing was occurring.

Everything else is unknown and is in the process of being investigated. Can't we leave it at that until we learn otherwise?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:40 AM
 
23,940 posts, read 17,603,952 times
Reputation: 12821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amythyst View Post
BBM

An assumption?

Did this witness have xray eyes to see through a metal partition?



is it your position that only way that information can be obtained is from seeing it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nor Cal Wahine View Post
This is what the inside of a transport vehicle looks like. The Baltimore version had straps to allow the passengers to be belted in, this one does not.



There is a thin metal partition between the rows of seats. People sitting on opposite sides cannot see each other, but they can a) definitely hear each other, and b) hear people climbing in and out of the back.

It is then both plausible that a) the second passenger was easily able to hear Freddie banging about on his side and b) be able to tell if a police officer was in the back with him or not while the thrashing was occurring.

Everything else is unknown and is in the process of being investigated. Can't we leave it at that until we learn otherwise?
those benches have some rather abrupt, sharp-looking edges.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:40 AM
 
Location: Gods country
5,336 posts, read 4,014,186 times
Reputation: 7380
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Figures. He and his family had already demonstrated they will sue insurance for liability. Too bad he went too far with it this time.
I haven't thought about that. Seems like a pattern is beginning to emerge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:42 AM
 
Location: Gods country
5,336 posts, read 4,014,186 times
Reputation: 7380
Quote:
Originally Posted by seain dublin View Post
That's not correct. The witness didn't see anything. He said he heard Gray being slammed around and thought he was slamming himself around, he wasn't belted in. But this witness saw nothing. The witness couldn't see anything as there was a metal partition between them.

Now the police were the ones who when this first came out said Gray wasn't belted in and was given a "rough ride", their words.

Now that is changing.
Yes, you are correct the witness did not "see" what happened. My mistake in using the word saw.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:44 AM
 
1,077 posts, read 650,103 times
Reputation: 1636
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Yes assumption. You assume there is a partition that you have never seen. Assume the witness didn't ask and was told was going on. Assume that witness lacks mental abilities to figure out what is going on. Assume it takes superman xray vision (your words) to see what is happening.

Much assumption, not much in the way of convincing argument.
I assumed nothing, the police chief stated this. Not looking for a link, it's in the other thread..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:44 AM
 
Location: St Louis, MO
4,677 posts, read 4,596,624 times
Reputation: 2966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox Terrier View Post
Of course! What else WOULD they state?

Besides, what data can they track? Left or right turns? Brake pressure? Speed?

That data can tell some things, but not all things.
Normally they track lat/long, direction of travel, and speed. So they can get all of that info except brake pressure.
If they were plugged into OBD-II port, something normally only large well-funded departments do but we are talking about a large well-funded department, then they also have engine revolutions, throttle position, accelerator pedal position, brake position, brake pedal position, acceleration/deceleration, and lateral G-forces.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:45 AM
 
16,785 posts, read 19,658,486 times
Reputation: 33231
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
I have yet to see the police claim that he was given a 'rough ride.' cite?

It was reported on CNN that he wasn't belted in and it was a rough ride(per the Baltimore police), this was a few days ago.

Regardless, he wasn't belted in. Just seeing the condition he was in as he was being put in the van, there is no way someone could brace themselves if they weren't belted in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:46 AM
 
Location: St Louis, MO
4,677 posts, read 4,596,624 times
Reputation: 2966
Quote:
Originally Posted by marilyn220 View Post
I don't understand why cops wouldn't WANT this.

If I was a cop, I'd want cameras EVERYWHERE.

The only cops who don't want it are the bad ones.
*Criminal breaks camera*
*You get fired*
That's one of the big reasons. Also, you might be surprised to realize that police officers do not really want to be mobile video surveillance systems for the media. Since camera footage is completely open over most sunshine laws, all it takes is a burner cell phone to send the police anywhere you want to get whatever footage you want. Where the sunshine laws have been tightened down on cameras, and policies are being set that protect officers from camera breakage and malfunction, you see a lot more support.
(Bad officers love cameras. The one way vantage point and audio recording makes it easy for them to set up justification. And they are the ones who will purposely break a camera otherwise.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:49 AM
 
4,590 posts, read 2,969,016 times
Reputation: 6840
The unsubstantiated rumors about his possibly having a previous injury stem from Gray's own court paperwork for the lead poisoning case in which he wrote down that he had injuries caused by a work injury, medical malpractice, and a car accident. This was part of a Baltimore Sun article posted a couple days ago. One must actually READ the entire article to learn how these issues are connected.

The truth about Freddie Gray's 'pre-existing injury from car accident' - Baltimore Sun

There is no proof yet that any of these things really occurred - only what he himself listed on court documents. It will either pan out as nothing, or we will learn that he indeed had received previous settlements for one or more of those alleged incidents.

Patience is a virtue that is clearly dying in today's society. We want answers NOW, and if we don't get them, we'll use supposition, rumors, and our own common sense to dictate a verdict.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:50 AM
 
23,940 posts, read 17,603,952 times
Reputation: 12821
Quote:
Originally Posted by seain dublin View Post
It was reported on CNN that he wasn't belted in and it was a rough ride(per the Baltimore police), this was a few days ago.

Regardless, he wasn't belted in. Just seeing the condition he was in as he was being put in the van, there is no way someone could brace themselves if they weren't belted in.
there is no question he wasn't belted in, which was a huge mistake. however, in hours and hours of news coverage and dozens of news articles i have never once seen the police claim he was given a rough ride.

do you have a link?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top