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.
Bingo! What the quoted poster was saying is basically that the cops were so unbelievably incompetent that they can't be convicted of false imprisonment. Sadly, stupidity is generally not considered a defense.
Res ipsa loquitur may prove useful in the civil trial for wrongful death. It does not apply in criminal cases. Probable cause is shorthand for probable cause to believe a person committed a crime.
Here's the actual analysis: a brief detention (Terry stop) is warranted where an officer has a reasonable suspicion of an individual--reasonable suspicion means the officer has observed specific and articulable facts that suggest the person may be involved in criminal activity. In other words, a "gut feel," is not good enough to legally justify a stop. A frisk can only be conducted under limited circumstances in this type of stop--a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the detainee may be armed and dangerous.
Running in a high-crime area, alone, is not enough justification for a detention. In the case from which that myth came, an individual was standing in an area known for drug sales, holding an opaque plastic bag. The individual made eye contact with the police, then ran.
Once you've got the reasonable suspicion, you can briefly detain a person to dispel those suspicions. In Baltimore, they patted down Freddie Gray and found a folding knife. Folding knives are legal. If they find no evidence of a crime, the police are obligated to let the suspect go. In Baltimore, they found no evidence. You need evidence establishing probable cause to believe someone committed a crime in order to arrest that person. A legal folding knife is not such probable cause. Finding an illegal knife would be probable cause. Finding other actually illegal contraband would be probable cause. An admission from the person that they were involved in a crime would be probable cause.
The defense is going to be focused on the murder/manslaughter charges. On their list of priorities, the legality of the knife is going to be low--especially because the knife is actually legal. Arguing, essentially, stupidity is probably not a great strategy for them when three of them are trying to avoid manslaughter, a.k.a. criminally negligent homicide charges.
If police arrest someone for the crime of possessing an unlawful weapon, then the police need to know just what constitutes an unlawful weapon. They can't arrest you for carrying a hardbound book and claim it was for the crime of possessing an unlawful weapon--even though a hardbound book could be dangerous.
How do you know this? There is going to be a trial and there will be evidence presented. I highly doubt that all six of those cops colluded to just arrest this guy for no reason.
You know this because your smarter than the District Attorney, and all the Investigators? Good luck with that.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,543 posts, read 12,517,887 times
Reputation: 10463
Quote:
Originally Posted by MordinSolus
Yes you did. You said that because he has an arrest record he should expect to be killed by the police. Even though he did nothing illegal when the police pursued him and ultimately killed him you think it's perfectly acceptable that they killed him because he has an arrest record.
Quote that phrase from any post of mine where you [mistakenly] thought I'd said it. Impossible to do since I never said "he has an arrest record he should be expected to be killed by the police" (or any similar wording).
Quote that phrase from any post of mine where you [mistakenly] thought I'd said it. Impossible to do since I never said "he has an arrest record he should be expected to be killed by the police" (or any similar wording).
Right here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by berdee
A person who chooses a criminal lifestyle should have a reasonable expectation of being harmed or killed, by either the cops or by other the other criminals they deal with, or being arrested by the cops.
He didn't do anything illegal when the police arrested him and he certainly didn't do anything to get killed by the police. You keep making excuses and blaming the victim. The police caused his death, not his previous criminal activity. His previous arrests didn't show up and sever his spine, the police did that.
So last night a couple of interviews with Baltimore Cops who wished to remain anonymous give some inside information to that arrest and condition of Freddie Gray.
If these statements are proven to be true the cops that are now going to trial will most likely be criminally vindicated.
From one cop: The toxicology report shows Freddie had Heroine and Pot in his system when arrested. This is important given what is now being said about the reason Freddie was arrested which was that officers saw him doing a suspected drug deal (exchanging a small package for cash) in an area known for drug sales and when they went to confront both Freddie and the buyer they both ran in different directions.
When Freddie was caught he didn't have any drugs on him (surprise,surprise) so they listed other reasons for probable cause.
The officer went on to say that in that area when drug dealers are confronted they either run and toss the drugs or swallow the drugs.
Now if you look back to what Freddie (alleged) was found to have in his system at the time that lends credence to the idea he ate his own drugs to avoid a drug arrest and this alone could have led to his death.
Hmmmm, plot thickens doesn't it????
Can't wait for them to release all the information...
You can put any kind of spin on it that you like. Freddie Gray was murdered. Plain and Simple. Guilty verdicts are expected.
The knife is not in question. The Investigation (consisting of folks who know the Law) already said it was legal Have you got some Magic Team that's going to appear and say Maryland Law is not correct, and a pocket knife is a switchblade? Illegal Arrest, Detainment, and killing.
BTW: Did you see the News that the Justice Department is investigating and will decide whether to file Civil Rights Violation Charges too? In Violation that leads to the Death of the victim, you can get Life I Prison or the Death Penalty, plus a lot more years for multiple charges. Some folks think they are out of the woods. I think they have not even got close yet. The worse could still be coming.
"Meanwhile, a police investigation continues as Baltimore State's Attorney Marilyn J. Mosby builds her case. The separate investigations have some conflicting findings.
While Mosby said Friday that the officers had made an illegal arrest because a knife Gray was carrying was not a "switchblade," a violation of state law, the police task force studied the knife and determined it was "spring-assisted," which does violate a Baltimore code."
Mosby said the knife is legal under state law. She carefully avoided mentioning the Baltimore code, which is the specific law at issue.
You can put 100% faith in Mosby's press conference and parrot her comments; I'll wait for more than that.
The DOJ is investigating So what, is there anything they don't investigate. They went after Zimmerman for years, and Darren Wilson, and came up with squat.
It's rough on the people being investigated, but has zip to do with guilt, or justice.
Switchblade knives are illegal in many jurisdictions, and in most places they're
defined as opening with a button or lever in the handle of the blade. It's an
important legal distinction, one that was recognized by the federal government
in 2009 when they clarified that spring assisted knives are not, legally,
switchblades.
But when Baltimore's statute was written 60 years ago,
it's language was crafted more vaguely than laws elsewhere. The municipal code
currently bans "any knife with an automatic spring or other device for opening
and/or closing the blade." In that way, it differs from switchblade bans in most
areas — including New York — which rely on the blade/handle
distinction.
The feds sought fit to clarify the federal version of the
switchblade ban because spring-assist knives — which were explicitly designed to
comply with decades-old switchblade prohibitions — are far from exotic in
today's marketplace. You can find them at some of the country's largest
retailers; hardware stores like Home Depot and outdoor gear shops like REI
routinely stock them.
I wonder if BPD relied on an antiquated statute, or wasn't given the updated version.
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.
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.
So what, is there anything they don't investigate. They went after Zimmerman for years, and Darren Wilson, and came up with squat. 
