Post by downtoearth on May 1, 2015 10:33:50 GMT -5
I have to say I'm conflicted. I'm so happy that this could be a catalyst for some changes that go through the system, but I don't feel relief. My heart is so heavy that it comes at the traumatic loss of Feddie's life and the so many more who came before him.
Six officers involved (and probably many more involved in the investigation)?! I hope some of them speak up about what happened (especially in court) and can help other officers feel more comfortable dissenting within their system before it gets to any more deaths.
I read one article that talked about how in all of these cases no one mentions that the majority of officers are young and inexperienced. All of the cases in the last year that I can think of, it sounds about right. I don't know if it is just because those cops are more likely to be on the streets vs. veteran cops, but I would be interested to find out why that is.
I read one article that talked about how in all of these cases no one mentions that the majority of officers are young and inexperienced. All of the cases in the last year that I can think of, it sounds about right. I don't know if it is just because those cops are more likely to be on the streets vs. veteran cops, but I would be interested to find out why that is.
I thought it was interesting how the ages of the officers correlated with the severity of their charges.
I asked this on my local too - but I'd be interested in hearing the lawyers types opine on the COI of prosecuting a highly controversial case where the victim was your h's constituent?
I asked this on my local too - but I'd be interested in hearing the lawyers types opine on the COI of prosecuting a highly controversial case where the victim was your h's constituent?
Not an issue.
Prosecutors are often elected. If they couldn't run a case because the victim is a constituent of their spouse, they wouldn't be able to run a case if the victim was their own constituent. That would make no sense.
In any event, prosecutors have to abide by legal ethics rules...turn over exculpatory evidence, not put witnesses on the stand that they know are lying.
I asked this on my local too - but I'd be interested in hearing the lawyers types opine on the COI of prosecuting a highly controversial case where the victim was your h's constituent?
Not an issue.
Prosecutors are often elected. If they couldn't run a case because the victim is a constituent of their spouse, they wouldn't be able to run a case if the victim was their own constituent. That would make no sense.
In any event, prosecutors have to abide by legal ethics rules...turn over exculpatory evidence, not put witnesses on the stand that they know are lying.
Gene Ryan, president of the Baltimore City Fraternal Order of Police, called for Mosby to appoint a special prosecutor to the case due to her “many conflicts of interest.”
“I have full faith in your professional integrity. While I have the utmost respect for you and your office, I have very deep concerns about the many conflicts of interest presented by your office conducting an investigation in this case. These conflicts include your personal and professional relationships with the Gray family attorney, William Murphy and the lead prosecutor’s connections with members of the local media. Based on several nationally televised interviews, these reporters are likely to be witnesses in any potential litigation regarding this incident,” Ryan said in an open letter to Mosby. “Most importantly, it is clear that your husband’s political future will be directly impacted, for better or worse, by the outcome of your investigation. In order to avoid any appearance of impropriety or a violation of the Professional Rules of Professional Responsibility, I ask that you appoint a Special Prosecutor to determine whether or not any charges should be filed.”
Ryan added that the officers are not responsible for Gray’s death.
The police union is calling for their own investigation because her husband is a councilman. They feel she has a conflict of interest. Aren't they washing over that she is also 5th generation police family?
I read one article that talked about how in all of these cases no one mentions that the majority of officers are young and inexperienced. All of the cases in the last year that I can think of, it sounds about right. I don't know if it is just because those cops are more likely to be on the streets vs. veteran cops, but I would be interested to find out why that is.
I thought it was interesting how the ages of the officers correlated with the severity of their charges.
Yes. I *almost* feel badly for the younger guys. I suspect their training was inadequate and they no doubt look to the more experienced officers as an example. I'm sure it's difficult for a brand new 25 yr old officer to speak up against a 40 yr old veteran when something is wrong.
The police union is calling for their own investigation because her husband is a councilman. They feel she has a conflict of interest. Aren't they washing over that she is also 5th generation police family?
The police union is calling for their own investigation because her husband is a councilman. They feel she has a conflict of interest. Aren't they washing over that she is also 5th generation police family?
You know, I saw an interview with her husband last night, which I posted about in one of the threads. Until that point, I wasn't sure what to think about how this would play out, but based on what he said, I had a really good feeling about the outcome (in the sense that it just wouldn't be dropped and that she would pursue an investigation).
Interesting about the leaks yesterday, I wonder if the police leaked those to try and get ahead of this. It was weak as hell, but totally messy and makes me think they knew this was coming and knew the evidence was stacked high against them.
The police union is calling for their own investigation because her husband is a councilman. They feel she has a conflict of interest. Aren't they washing over that she is also 5th generation police family?
yeah apparently her husband's assumed political ambitions and the fact that she is friendly with reporters () = COI as far as the FOP is concerned. I don't even understand the second one.
You know, I saw an interview with her husband last night, which I posted about in one of the threads. Until that point, I wasn't sure what to think about how this would play out, but based on what he said, I had a really good feeling about the outcome (in the sense that it just wouldn't be dropped and that she would pursue an investigation).
Interesting about the leaks yesterday, I wonder if the police leaked those to try and get ahead of this. It was weak as hell, but totally messy and makes me think they knew this was coming and knew the evidence was stacked high against them.
I think it's their attempt to taint the jury pool in order to get the trial(s) moved.
Iam in the car, parked, listening to Rush and he is acting like a sore loser. There is a huge conspiracy headed by Sharpton. I can't decipher what the conspiracy is through my laughter and dry heaves
You know, I saw an interview with her husband last night, which I posted about in one of the threads. Until that point, I wasn't sure what to think about how this would play out, but based on what he said, I had a really good feeling about the outcome (in the sense that it just wouldn't be dropped and that she would pursue an investigation).
Interesting about the leaks yesterday, I wonder if the police leaked those to try and get ahead of this. It was weak as hell, but totally messy and makes me think they knew this was coming and knew the evidence was stacked high against them.
I think it's their attempt to taint the jury pool in order to get the trail(s) moved.
Yeah, that might be it. Getting trials moved is interesting to me now, with how quickly news spreads. It seems like a lot of the huge cases dominate the news everywhere, not just in the local areas. Less chance for personal connections and being completely inundated with the news if a trial is moved, but it seems like it would be almost impossible to find a jury that really hasn't heard much of anything at all.
Prosecutors are often elected. If they couldn't run a case because the victim is a constituent of their spouse, they wouldn't be able to run a case if the victim was their own constituent. That would make no sense.
In any event, prosecutors have to abide by legal ethics rules...turn over exculpatory evidence, not put witnesses on the stand that they know are lying.
Gene Ryan, president of the Baltimore City Fraternal Order of Police, called for Mosby to appoint a special prosecutor to the case due to her “many conflicts of interest.”
“I have full faith in your professional integrity. While I have the utmost respect for you and your office, I have very deep concerns about the many conflicts of interest presented by your office conducting an investigation in this case. These conflicts include your personal and professional relationships with the Gray family attorney, William Murphy and the lead prosecutor’s connections with members of the local media. Based on several nationally televised interviews, these reporters are likely to be witnesses in any potential litigation regarding this incident,” Ryan said in an open letter to Mosby. “Most importantly, it is clear that your husband’s political future will be directly impacted, for better or worse, by the outcome of your investigation. In order to avoid any appearance of impropriety or a violation of the Professional Rules of Professional Responsibility, I ask that you appoint a Special Prosecutor to determine whether or not any charges should be filed.”
Ryan added that the officers are not responsible for Gray’s death.
This is just to try to intimidate her into stepping down to try to get someone like the Ferguson asshole.
Try hard enough and you can find a conflict of interest for just about anyone.
I need to come back to this conflict of interest shit again. It's really just because she's black. It's because dipshits think black people always side with black people, and only white people are capable of being impartial and fair.
It's like when they were calling for the gay Prop 8 judge to step aside.
I would think that once you establish that there existed no probable cause for an arrest the rest of the charges become easier to prove, no? Don't most of the laws concerning cirizen/police interaction have the "pursuant to a lawful arrest" language in them?
I would think that once you establish that there existed no probable cause for an arrest the rest of the charges become easier to prove, no? Don't most of the laws concerning cirizen/police interaction have the "pursuant to a lawful arrest" language in them?
so basically once you establish that they had no right to arrest the person, from there it's basically as if they were a private citizen who made the asinine decision to slap restraints on him, throw him in the back of the van and then drive like an asshole while ignoring his pleas for medical help? I mean...because if I decided to do all that to my neighbor I sure as shit would get convicted.
That's what's constantly confused me about a lot of these cases - the level of "well, it's ok because it's a cop" that is legally required/allowed. where is that line?