quote:

The medical examiner said the most likely scenario was that Freddie Gray (tied hand and foot and on his belly) stood up in the van. Then some type of van maneuver was hypothesized to have caused him to strike his head and break his neck.

Pure speculation on her part. Gray could have stood up and took a dive trying to hurt himself.
Given his history with the police in the past this is as much a likely scenario as a "rough ride". Pure speculation on my part also.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: wcb6092,

A couple of new things came to light today. They reinforced the thinking that the prosecutors are like Mike Nifong of the Duke Lacrosse rape hoax.

source:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...-20151209-story.html

One of the arresting officers (Zachary Novak) was offered immunity and he testified to the grand jury to get indictments. Novak was not a prosecution witness in this trial.

But the defense called Novak.

Novak testified that he places detainees in seat belts when he transports them in his vehicle, but when he observed suspects transported in a wagon, he said they were seat-belted only about 10 percent of the time .

He also testified that van drivers are understood to have "primary custody" of detainees in their vehicles.

gee, I wonder why the prosecutors didn't call their immunity witness

Porter testified today.

Porter calmly responded to questions from his attorney, Gary Proctor, but bristled at times under cross-examination by Schatzow.

He said that taking the stand allowed him to elaborate on what he said in his April statement. When he gave his initial statement, he said, he thought he was just a witness — not a suspect.

"I didn't know I needed to defend myself," he said.

Porter testified about growing up in West Baltimore and becoming familiar with law enforcement at an early age at police athletic camps for children, which he attended in part because they were free

He joined the department in 2012, he said, because he sensed a growing distrust between the community and police, and he wanted to "give people a different perspective."

Porter said he was familiar with Gray as a "regular fixture" in the neighborhood, and that he and Gray would talk whenever Gray wasn't "dirty," or carrying drugs. He'd never arrested Gray, Porter said, but witnessed a prior arrest in which Gray tried to kick out the window of a police vehicle.

Proctor asked Porter if he was sorry Gray had died, and Porter said he was.

"Freddie Gray and I weren't friends, but we had mutual respect for one another," he said. Gray understood Porter had a job to do, the officer said, and he understood why Gray did what he did on the streets. "We built a rapport."

******************
Porter has only been a cop for 3 years.

The things that have been written about him indicate he is a good cop and very aware of the challenges of inner city life.

From what I've read in the news, it doesn't seem that they have proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

I think if this were a civil case with less of a burden of proof, this would certainly be a win for the plantiff against the department, and possibly against the officers... But I don't think the charges are going to stick in this trial.

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:
From what I've read in the news, it doesn't seem that they have proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

I think if this were a civil case with less of a burden of proof, this would certainly be a win for the plantiff against the department, and possibly against the officers... But I don't think the charges are going to stick in this trial.

All we can hope for is that the jurors are honest, and follow the rule of law. With the first "not guilty" Baltimore is going to absolutely explode. I hope this time they don't hobble the police with silly marching orders.

Mayor Hyphen has asked for calm so Im sure it will be fine.

She and the prosecutor own what happens after the not guilty verdict. Every single bit of it.

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:
I think if this were a civil case with less of a burden of proof, this would certainly be a win for the plantiff against the department, and possibly against the officers... But I don't think the charges are going to stick in this trial.

How so Kevin? I too have read whatever I could find, but nothing I've read creates any evidence of wrong doing by the police. Unless its because Porter didn't belt Gray in in the van, which again, is simply a violation of policy but not an indication of guilt in his injuries, I'm not seeing any winning litigation here.

As others have suggested, I've been waiting for that evidence none of us have seen, and its hasn't been presented yet.

quote:

Originally posted by TKO:
She and the prosecutor own what happens after the not guilty verdict. Every single bit of it.

You're kidding, right? The BLM group and the race hucksters like Obama, Lynch, and Sharpton are going to jump on the opportunity a not guilty verdict would provide to further assert there is no justice for black people. Call it Mike Brown 'two'.

If Baltimore burns this time, it will be due to a corrupt legal system stacked against black people, not ridiculous charges filed by an incompetent SA against cops doing the job they were hired to do.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:
I think if this were a civil case with less of a burden of proof, this would certainly be a win for the plantiff against the department, and possibly against the officers... But I don't think the charges are going to stick in this trial.

How so Kevin? I too have read whatever I could find, but nothing I've read creates any evidence of wrong doing by the police. Unless its because Porter didn't belt Gray in in the van, which again, is simply a violation of policy but not an indication of guilt in his injuries, I'm not seeing any winning litigation here.

As others have suggested, I've been waiting for that evidence none of us have seen, and its hasn't been presented yet.

Civil cases are not based on the letter of the law and only require 51% or higher preponderance of the evidence- in other words, a drama filled circus could result in the officers being held liable, whereas in a criminal case, 1 juror can be the difference between guilty and innocent.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...-20151210-story.html

The police chief of Charlottesville, Va. testified Thursday that Officer William G. Porter acted reasonably in how he handled Freddie Gray's requests for help and medical attention.

Timothy Longo, the outgoing Charlottesville chief and a former Baltimore Police commander, testified that Porter was right to help Gray up inside of the transport van and to communicate to the van driver and a supervisor that Gray needed to be taken to a hospital.

And he defended Porter's decision not to put a seatbelt on Gray, despite department rules directing officers to do so.

That prompted an incredulous line of questioning from Chief Deputy Michael Schatzow, who asked how Longo could defend an officer not following the rules.

"Isn't the purpose of the general orders and policies and procedures to guide and mandate the discretion of the officers?" Schatzow asked.

"Everything a police officer does is based on what is objectively reasonable under the circumstances at the time," Longo said.

A key legal issue for proving whether Porter committed involuntary manslaughter is whether he acted outside what a "reasonable" officer would do under similar circumstances.

Earlier Thursday, a Washington, D.C.-based neurosurgeon testified for the defense that Gray's injuries would have immediately caused him to lose the ability to breathe, contrasting findings of a prosecution expert.

Dr. Matthew Ammerman said Gray suffered an injury in the back of a police transport van that would have "immediately rendered him paralyzed, stopped him from breathing, and unfortunately ended his life."



adding:

http://fox6now.com/2015/12/10/...-of-gray-reasonable/

Matthew Wood, a three-year police veteran, testified for the defense that he heard yelling inside the wagon during the first stop.

“I could tell the wagon was shaking back and forth, like side to side,” Wood said, adding that he also heard a sound “like a banging off of metal or something like that.”

Under cross examination, Wood said he had learned from veteran officers that prisoners needed to wear seat belts. But he testified that he never saw an officer use a seat belt in a wagon before the day of Gray’s fatal injury .


http://www.usnews.com/news/us/...t-freddie-gray-trial

Officer Mark Gladhill is the sixth defense witness to testify on behalf of Porter.

Prosecutors say Porter was criminally negligent because he didn't call a medic when Gray indicated he needed aid and he didn't buckle Gray into a seat belt at the van's fourth stop.

Prosecutors say that by the fourth stop, Gray had already suffered the spinal injury that eventually killed him.

Gladhill responded to the van's fifth stop. He testified Thursday that he saw Gray in the back of the van with his head and back up. Medical experts for the defense have testified that would have been impossible if Gray had already broken his neck.

Gladhill backed up his colleague during his testimony, saying, “I’ve never seen anyone seat belted in a wagon.”

There are no cages in patrol cars, so it’s common to apply seat belts in a cruiser for officer safety, but when prisoners “are actually in the wagon my understanding is the wagon driver is responsible for the detainee,” he testified.

Officer Novak told the jury that by April 12, the day Gray was hurt, he hadn’t seen an updated seat belt policy that had been emailed to all department employees, nor had it been read aloud at roll call.

He testified that on the day of Gray’s arrest, when he checked on him in the van, he saw no cause for concern.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

Originally posted by TKO:
She and the prosecutor own what happens after the not guilty verdict. Every single bit of it.

You're kidding, right? The BLM group and the race hucksters like Obama, Lynch, and Sharpton are going to jump on the opportunity a not guilty verdict would provide to further assert there is no justice for black people. Call it Mike Brown 'two'.

If Baltimore burns this time, it will be due to a corrupt legal system stacked against black people, not ridiculous charges filed by an incompetent SA against cops doing the job they were hired to do.

Oh, I know what the story published will be... but we both know that it will be as a direct result of the two of them trying this case when it shouldnt have been. There is no doubt a not guilty will lead to unrest. The rioting and looting etc should fall squarely on the shoulders of the mayor and the prosecutor. If they hadnt been pandering to the rioters there wouldnt be a pile of kindling sitting on the ground waiting for a spark. Of course, we will see them step up to that about the same time the MSM says "you know, we should really stop sensationalizing the shit out of mass murder"

More likely all 75k of us here will be struck by lightning.

This may well be the closet thing to a real "kangaroo" court I have seen in my lifetime. Only lacking the prosecutors hopping out of the courtroom on their back legs.

These guys are in deep kimchee.

RMD

Former Baltimore police commander: Porter acted reasonably in handling Freddie Gray

http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...-20151210-story.html

The police chief of Charlottesville, Va. testified Thursday that Officer William G. Porter acted reasonably in how he handled Freddie Gray's requests for help and medical attention.

Timothy Longo, the outgoing Charlottesville chief and a former Baltimore Police commander, testified that Porter was right to help Gray up inside of the transport van and to communicate to the van driver and a supervisor that Gray needed to be taken to a hospital.

And he defended Porter's decision not to put a seatbelt on Gray, despite department rules directing officers to do so.

That prompted an incredulous line of questioning from Chief Deputy Michael Schatzow, who asked how Longo could defend an officer not following the rules.

"Isn't the purpose of the general orders and policies and procedures to guide and mandate the discretion of the officers?" Schatzow asked.

"Everything a police officer does is based on what is objectively reasonable under the circumstances at the time," Longo said.
Officer William Porter trial: Live coverage
Officer William Porter trial: Live coverage

A key legal issue for proving whether Porter committed involuntary manslaughter is whether he acted outside what a "reasonable" officer would do under similar circumstances.

Porter, 26, is charged with manslaughter, second-degree assault, misconduct in office and reckless endangerment in connection with Gray's death in April. Prosecutors allege he "criminally neglected his duty" by failing to secure Gray with a seat belt in a police transport van on April 12 and not calling for medical assistance when Gray requested it.

Gray, 25, suffered a severe spinal injury while in the transport van and died a week later. Porter is one of six Baltimore Police officers charged in connection with his death. All of the officers have pleaded not guilty.
Officer William Porter trial

Longo said even though Gray was shackled and Porter said he was calm, Longo said Gray could present a danger at any time.

"Under what you're saying, danger can arise at any moment," Schatzow said.

"Any second," Longo said.

"So nobody gets seatbelted?" Schatzow asked.

"It's certainly within the discretion of officers," Longo said.

Longo said the van driver, Officer Caesar Goodson, had responsibility over Gray's care, and that Porter rightly notified his supervisor, Sgt. Alicia White that Gray needed attention.

Pressed further by Schatzow, Longo said he "suppose he could have gone on the radio and called for a medic" after it appeared the other officers did not.

Longo has been a high profile figure in Charlottesville, leading his department through the investigation of the death of University of Virginia student and Baltimore County native Yeardley Love in 2010. He was also the face of a nationwide manhunt for the suspect in the death of another Virginia student, Hannah Graham.

Earlier Thursday, a Washington, D.C.-based neurosurgeon testifiedfor the defense that Gray's injuries would have immediately caused him to lose the ability to breathe, contrasting findings of a prosecution expert.

Dr. Matthew Ammerman said Gray suffered an injury in the back of a police transport van that would have "immediately rendered him paralyzed, stopped him from breathing, and unfortunately ended his life."

There has been testimony that Gray was asking for help during the van's first four stops. The defense claims he was not injured then, but rather out of energy after resisting arrest, and that he suffered his injury later.

Prosecutors have countered that a later injury would mean Porter had even more opportunities to help Gray by fastening his seatbelt or calling for medical attention when he first asked.

Previously, a prosecution neurosurgeon expert testified that though Gray's injury was severe, he would have been able to continue breathing by using secondary, "accessory" muscles and that he was trying to communicate his injury to Porter.

Following a dramatic day of testimony Wednesday, the trial resumed Thursday morning with Porter's attorneys calling Ammerman to the stand.

Porter testified in his own defense Wednesday. His testimony was marked by contentious exchanges with a prosecutor and dramatic demonstrations in which one of Porter's attorneys, Joseph Murtha, got on the ground and pretended to be Freddie Gray as Porter described Gray's position in the back of the van following his arrest.

A small group of demonstrators gathered outside Baltimore Circuit Court Thursday morning, with some holding banners that read "Jobs and Education, Not Police Terror" and "Black Lives Matter."

I was wondering if a higher ranking police officer would testify about the difference between a training manual and life on the street.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...-20151211-story.html

the defense called Capt. Justin Reynolds of the Baltimore Police Department to the stand as an expert in police policies.

Reynolds echoed testimony from multiple defense witnesses who took the stand on Thursday, saying that the van driver had ultimate responsibility for Gray.

Reynolds also said that by helping Gray off the floor of the van at the fourth stop and asking him what was wrong, Porter went "beyond what many other officers would have done."

At the fifth stop, Porter did the right thing by telling Sgt. Alicia White, his supervisor, that Gray had requested to go to the hospital.

"An officer expects that when they tell a supervisor something, the supervisor is going to act upon that," Reynolds said.

Reynolds said he has sat on departmental trial boards that assess officer violations of general orders, to recommend internal administrative punishment if necessary.

It is understood within the department that officers have the right to use discretion when working on the street, and sometimes have to break with general orders to do their jobs.

"You have to use common sense," he said. "It prevails over everything else."

********************

complicates the defense of the van driver and Officer White, but the defense has already established that the van seat belts were hardly ever used prior to Gray's accidental death.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...-20151211-story.html

The defense team for Officer William G. Porter rested its case Friday in his manslaughter trial in the death of Freddie Gray, and put Porter's mother on the stand as their last witness.

After her testimony, Judge Barry Williams told jurors they were dismissed until Monday morning, though he and the attorneys in the case would return to the courtroom Friday afternoon for legal discussions in the case.

Closing arguments — when attorneys for both sides sum up their cases before the jury — could begin Monday, with jury deliberations after that. It is unclear how long those deliberations will last or when a verdict may be reached, though Williams has previously said that the trial would be concluded by Thursday.

Schatzow asked if Reynolds had considered the short amount of time it would have taken Porter to secure Gray in a seat belt when he determined his actions were reasonable. Murtha objected, and Williams sustained.

Schatzow tried a few more questions, each time rebuffed by Murtha's sustained objections. Schatzow asked if he could approach the bench to discuss his questioning with Williams.

Williams said he could not. Schatzow then gave up trying to craft questions that would fly in court.

"Your honor, you've exhausted my imagination," he said.

Williams laughed, then laughed again. "Thank you, counselor. I appreciate that."

*********************

nice that they enjoyed the railroad

Closing arguments today

Judge Barry G. Williams told jurors Monday morning they could only find Porter guilty of the most serious charge — involuntary manslaughter — if they determined that he “acted in a grossly negligent manner,” severely out of line with the behavior of “a reasonable police officer.”

To find Porter guilty of assault, Williams said, the jury will have to find that Porter was aware he was putting Gray “in a high degree of risk” with his behavior and again was “grossly negligent.”

To find Porter guilty of misconduct in office, Williams explained, they must find that he failed to do something required by the duties of his office, not as an honest mistake but as “a willful act, with an evil motive and in bad faith.”

Finally, to find Porter guilty of reckless endangerment, they would have to agree that “a reasonable officer ... would not have engaged in that conduct.”

The jury should not judge his conduct from the perspective of a civilian, Williams said, but from that of “a reasonable police officer in a similar situation.”

The jury can consider police policies and general orders as factors in their decision-making, he said, but merely violating those orders is not enough to make Porter guilty of a crime.

Prosecutor Janice Bledsoe called the van “his casket on wheels.”

It is the prosecutors who should be on trial.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Prosecutor Janice Bledsoe called the van “his casket on wheels.”

It is the prosecutors who should be on trial.

I'm apparently missing something here that you may be able to help with. Not belting Gray into the van may indeed be a violation of department policy. But to this date, I have yet to hear anything but the 'questionable' commentary/perspective of ME about how Gray got injured. I have yet to read one witness statement presented by the prosecutor that they witnessed Porter operating the van in an unsafe or reckless manner which could have resulted in Gray's injuries. So given that gaping hole in the trail of evidence, how is anyone supposed to get from Porter driving Gray to the station unbelted, to finding him guilty of involuntary manslaughter?

Can you fill in any missing pieces I don't have here?

bigdeal,

Porter was not the van driver.

He was called by the van driver to check on Gray.

The van driver's trial starts in early January.

One of the points brought up by Porter's defense is that the primary responsibility for the prisoner is the van driver. (not someone like Porter)

There has been no evidence (witness or video) that the van was driven recklessly.

No one knows when Gray hit his head. The medical examiner says there was a single catastrophic blow that broke his neck.

The defense is arguing that the blow to the head came after Porter checked on him.

The time line for the prosecutor is their conjecture.

While not using a seat belt violates policy, witnesses for the defense said that the belts are not used. Some said they are never used, one officer said they are used 10% of the time.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...-20151214-story.html

Deputy Chief State's Attorney Janice Bledsoe began an impassioned closing argument by holding up a seatbelt and clicking it. "That's all it would've taken," Bledsoe told jurors.


***********************

of course the prosecutors never told the jury that the Baltimore police were not using the seat belts regardless of the policy.

they were too busy rushing to prosecute to ask if the police were using the seat belts, or even worse, they knew the policy was being widely ignored and tried to hide that info.

The key is what would a "reasonable" officer do. If all of the other police were ignoring the policy, they shouldn't nail these 6 cops.

Many of these issues will come up in the other 5 trials. The entire prosecutor case is based on :

seat belt use was not forced on Gray, and
medical attention was not sought fast enough.

The seat belt issue has been proven false by testimony already.

If Gray hit his head late in the 45 minute van ride, then the issue of not getting medical assistance fast enough is also proven false.

Baltimore is going to

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
bigdeal,

Porter was not the van driver.

Shoot, I got my defendants confused. My apologies for the error.

quote:

One of the points brought up by Porter's defense is that the primary responsibility for the prisoner is the van driver. (not someone like Porter)

Which makes perfect sense as that should help exonerate Porter.

quote:

There has been no evidence (witness or video) that the van was driven recklessly.

No one knows when Gray hit his head. The medical examiner says there was a single catastrophic blow that broke his neck.

The defense is arguing that the blow to the head came after Porter checked on him.

The time line for the prosecutor is their conjecture.

So my original comment still holds, that no one as yet has been able to make any progress establishing exactly when or how Gray was injured. I'd see that as a major problem for the prosecution to overcome in the driver's trial.

So far this whole process still appears to be utterly improper to me.