Officer Acquitted in Freddie Grey Case
Source: Associated Press
@AP: Baltimore officer acquitted of assault, other charges in arrest of Freddie Gray, who died in police custody.
The Latest: Officer acquitted in Freddie Gray case
MAY. 23, 2016 11:02 AM EDT
BALTIMORE (AP) — The Latest on the trial for an officer charged in the arrest of Freddie Gray, a 25-year-old black man who died a week after he was critically injured in police custody (all times local):
11 a.m.
A Baltimore police officer has been acquitted of assault and other charges in the arrest of Freddie Gray, a young black man who died a week after he was critically injured in police custody.
A judge found Officer Edward Nero not guilty of misconduct in office and reckless endangerment. The judge announced his verdict on Monday.
Nero was one of six Baltimore police officers charged in the case. He waived his right to a jury trial, opting instead to argue his case before Circuit Judge Barry Williams.
Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/d5f6a756cb354c2dbc4ed6c1b5fa1c34/latest-officer-acquitted-freddie-gray-case
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Archae
(46,323 posts)If cops get busted, unless they are on video, (and sometimes even that isn't enough,) juries let them off.
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)Was a judge. Non-jury trial. Disgusting this is even allowed.
former9thward
(31,986 posts)What other parts of the Constitution would you like to throw out?
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)Try again
former9thward
(31,986 posts)Just leave it to the non-educated in the room? No thanks.
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)Over ONE appointed judge to impart justice any day of the week.
Akicita
(1,196 posts)trusted 12 jurors over a judge just like you.
Response to Akicita (Reply #34)
philosslayer This message was self-deleted by its author.
Judi Lynn
(160,525 posts)
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,417 posts)It generated many newspaper articles, both before and after a suspect had been arrested. Following the arrest of the suspect, his picture appeared often, in print and on television. With that, the newspaper commenters were off to the races.
"No need for a trial; execute him now," was pretty much the call of the mob. Even highly educated people got in on the act.
So many commenters decided that the individual who had been arrested was guilty, based solely on their impressions made through his appearance, and without hearing a word of testimony or seeing a single piece of evidence, that you'd think you were at DU.
After reading those comments, I decided that if I were ever charged with a crime that could lead to a trial by jury in northern Virginia, I would opt for a non-jury trial instead. At least a judge would - I hope - be better learned in the ways of jurisprudence.
Comments to newspaper articles have put the lie to the dream of a trial by your peers. Sorry; Twelve Angry Men is a myth anymore.
Spacedog1973
(221 posts)Everyone has bias, I'd say that people who see offenders day in and day out are more likely than those who don't to hold bias. Juries are expected to hold bias, whether they have seen media articles or not - the whole point of there being many jurors is to mitigate the bias. With a sole judge the likelihood of bias being expressed is potentially increased significantly.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)Goddamn. You are CLUELESS.
former9thward
(31,986 posts)So you are saying we should not allow judges to give verdicts? What other parts of the Constitution do you want to eliminate? Goddamn. You are CLUELESS.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)instead of a jury trial. It's what someone who doesn't want emotion to rule should ask for.
24601
(3,959 posts)t stake is at least $10.
A criminal defendant normally has been allowed to waive a jury trial; however, that is not absolute. There has been an occasional death penalty case where sentence must be determined by a jury and in several cases their request for a bench trial was denied.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)That judges will refuse a bench trial for a death penalty case (also will not allow a defendant to defend themselves). I also thought it was a $20 stake that was needed (7th amendment?)
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Did you read the article?
Amishman
(5,556 posts)The driver has the responsibility of securing detainees and was the one who did the 'rough ride'.
S_B_Jackson
(906 posts)the decision whether to try before a jury or a judge is one made by the defense.
If the case turns upon interpretations of matters of law, not evidence, it's beneficial to remove the jury from the equation. I cannot fault officer Nero's defense team for deciding to go with the trial by judge.
I can certainly fault the kangaroo-type courts that were being sought by ASA Marilyn Moseby trying to ramrod through cases, violating constitutional protections of the defendants based upon sketchy interpretations of the law.
raging moderate
(4,298 posts)My EMT training was several decades ago, but poor Freddie Gray exhibited obvious signs of a severe back injury for which a competent EMT would immediately institute careful procedures to protect and immobilize and stabilize.
raging moderate
(4,298 posts)Last edited Mon May 23, 2016, 03:39 PM - Edit history (1)
I can barely stand to look at it.
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)
Crepuscular
(1,057 posts)Prosecutorial over-reach.
Verdict was predictable, so far one mistrial and one not guilty, waste of time to try the other four accused.
onecaliberal
(32,831 posts)
Calista241
(5,586 posts)The case against Nero was extremely, monumentally weak. He was only peripherally involved in the arrest, and was not involved after the first stop.
Gray was removed from the van at later stops by other cops and put back in.
They tried to say that he was arrested without justification and that constitutes assault.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)in exchange for his testimony against the more culpable cops.
I get the feeling that the approach here was to throw the book at everyone in sight as opposed to concentrating on the cops who were really at fault.
christx30
(6,241 posts)and he wouldn't have been as cooperative as he could have been. The case against him was weak. Now he gets off completely, without having to sell out his people to do it.
Quackers
(2,256 posts)They offered someone else immunity if they had testified against him.
niyad
(113,275 posts)StarTrombone
(188 posts)This guy
Barry Glenn Williams
Age: 53
Title: Associate judge, Baltimore City Circuit Court, since December 2005
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
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/freddie-gray/bal-who-is-the-judge-in-the-freddie-gray-hearing-20150901-story.html
Democat
(11,617 posts)That's what way it often works.
StarTrombone
(188 posts)He had no reason to protect the cop in this case
He worked at the Dept of Justice, civil rights div for God's sake
Maybe he decided the case on it's merits and not some preconceived notion
Akicita
(1,196 posts)
alarimer
(16,245 posts)Guess cops literally can get away with murder.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)The ones responsible haven't even been in court yet. This guy was not responsible for the death at all. The judge ruled correctly. Why are you saying that he is getting away with murder when he was not involved in that part?
moonbabygo
(281 posts)We've seen this so many times it just back fires.
Bettie
(16,095 posts)but not surprising.
Yeah, he waived his jury trial, because he knew the judge would let him off.
branford
(4,462 posts)and the evidence presented by the prosecution concerning this particular defendant? Do you have any evidence whatsoever that this long-standing African-American, judge who served in the Civil Rights Division, of the U.S. Department of Justice, was anything other than impartial? There's been ample analysis in the media, and little to none of it favorable to the prosecution.
Nero was, at best, an ancillary defendant in the Gray matter, and the prosecution gratuitously overcharged, including the legally outlandish argument that any arrest later found to be without probable cause constitutes an assault despite the good faith of the arresting officer.
Even if found guilty, an assault conviction quite likely would have been reversed on appeal. Nero was quite right to waive a jury trial, his constitutional right, lest people like you convict based on emotion rather than evidence.
This case is a perfect example of a state prosecutor overcharging to score political points, angering and losing credibility with judges and juries, and then being embarrassed at trial (see also, the Zimmerman prosecution).
Akicita
(1,196 posts)pre-1960 past where many whites were outraged if an AA was found not guilty of murdering or raping a white person no matter what the evidence pointed to. It's sad that many cops get away with murder. It's just as sad that people want cops convicted whether they are guilty or not.
Bettie
(16,095 posts)will receive any consequence whatsoever.
branford
(4,462 posts)You clearly implied the judge in the Nero case predetermined the verdict or was otherwise corrupt.
That's a serious allegation, and you provided no proof other than some righteous indignation.
In any event, not every police officer in Baltimore is bad or racist, not every officer who encountered Gray did something to warrant criminal liability, and those who may deserve criminal sanction are not all equally guilty or responsible.
Simply, as with all criminal cases, a defendant is presumed innocent, and the state bears the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In virtually all of the Gray cases, the district attorney seriously overcharged everyone (including some who probably should not have been charged at all) and otherwise engaged in questionable legal strategies and practices, likely in response to political and social pressures rather than legal acumen and ethics. The hung jury and acquittal thus far are not surprising, but should only be blamed on the (African-American woman!) district attorney's political ambitions, not a systemic failure of the legal system.
The primary defendants have yet to be tried, and absent more gross incompetence from the prosecutors, there may be some convictions. Based on the actual evidence, however, it appears Nero did not deserve any criminal consequences for his actions. Lastly, note that Nero will still face internal review and potential discipline.
Calista241
(5,586 posts)In light of the judges comments regarding Nero's failure to buckle Gray into the van not rising to the level of reckless endangerment, can the other officers be charged with any crime stemming from the failure to buckle Gray's seatbelt?
branford
(4,462 posts)First, although I'm an attorney (in NY and NJ), criminal law, no less in Maryland, is not my area of expertise, and my knowledge of the case is limited like everyone else to many media stories and reports about the judges' comments and various other interesting motions about the cases.
The biggest problem with the Nero prosecution was the district attorney's novel legal theory that the arrest itself, if found to be without probable cause despite any good faith by Nero, automatically is a criminal assault. That's not the law anywhere, it would have tremendous repercussions (and be a BIG issue on appeal), and the state's inability to justify the theory decimated the government's credibility with the court. I was shocked at how amateur and unprepared the prosecution appeared.
I would need to more closely examine the specific charges against the other officers, the relevant law, and the state's theory of the case before offering anything approaching a definitive legal opinion.
Nevertheless if it could be proven that some of the officers conspired to intentionally injure Gray during the van ride, and as part of that conspiracy, they intentionally didn't properly buckle him in knowing it would cause or aggravate any injury, I would surmise that it would be more than adequate to sustain fairly serious criminal charges. However, as with all criminal allegations, the government needs admissible evidence and bears the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Further, as we've seen many times, if they overcharge anyone to satisfy political sentiments and demands, judges and juries tend to disregard everything and acquit or hang (if a jury).
Calista241
(5,586 posts)Bettie
(16,095 posts)in most cases.
There is seldom any sort of real discipline for cops either, before they are back out, doing the same things.
I grew up thinking that police were there to serve and protect.
I no longer believe that, the current police model is that they are to be obeyed without question in all cases and we (the people) are insurgents who they must protect themselves against.
It matters little what race any of the people involved are. Authoritarians come in all
branford
(4,462 posts)However, you complained about the verdict in this particular case and even intimated that the judge was corrupt.
Other than your generalized opinion about all police, could you kindly indicate what this particular officer did that actually broke a recognized criminal law and the evidence offered by the prosecution the judge failed to consider?
Nero was not, and should not, have been sacrificed on the alter of dissatisfaction with the police or to appease a virtual mob.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)Burn him.
branford
(4,462 posts)Here in Ye Olde Colonies, we prefer trial and punishment by Dunking.
If the officer floats, he's guilty and then executed, and if he drowns, he's innocent.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I minimize and trivialize the violence of police too. I pretend they are righteous, pure and and criticism that against them is indicative of a severe lack of Star Spangled Awesomesauce.
I also rationalize doing so. Your're correct-- it's ethically convenient and mentally simplistic. Thanks for the suggestion! 
branford
(4,462 posts)Being a police officer is not a crime, despite your personal issues, and the officer was not, and should not, have been convicted because he's a member of a group you dislike or a profession you generally want reformed.
This trial was not some referendum on the "trivialization of police violence," and I'm not particularly sorry you and others are apparently unhappy that your mob didn't claim a scalp. As an attorney, I've worked to ensure all defendants receive fair and impartial trials (among other causes), regardless of whether the accused is a poor and young minority man from the inner city or a police officer accused of misconduct. Demanding that constitutional protections apply regardless of the popularity of a defendant trivializes nothing except the self-righteous blood-lust of the mob.
Now, would you care to discuss the specific allegations against Nero, the actual officer on trial, the relevant and applicable law in the case, the evidence (or lack thereof) and novel legal theories the prosecution offered at trial, and what you believe the deficiencies were in the court's reasoning that lead to acquittal?
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Little bit of everything all mashed together...
floriduck
(2,262 posts)branford
(4,462 posts)That's the point, and the decision is more than amply supported by the evidence, your feeling about the Baltimore police notwithstanding. Rather than express righteous, yet vague, indignation, would you care to analyze what the court purportedly got wrong with actual evidence or law in this particular case, as has been done repeatedly in many articles, few of which have been favorable to the prosecution.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)If not, why not?
Why did they go after someone so peripherally involved?
branford
(4,462 posts)against the primary defendants. It belied the weakness of the prosecution;s cases and is often risky strategy, as has become evident by the first hung jury and outright acquittal of the second officer.
In light of the serious prosecutorial overreach, questionable legal choices that are still subject to appeal (e.g., attempting to force certain officers to testify without full state and federal immunity), and the increasing lack of faith in the district attorney by both the judiciary and potential jurors, I would not be surprised if all the police officers were acquitted.
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)Not much time to figure out who was involved and who wasn't.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)This happens to white folk all the time
oh wait, no it doesnt
philosslayer
(3,076 posts)TipTok
(2,474 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Like simply swimming in a neighborhood pool in McKinney TX?
It's adorably naive you think "just following the law" is a wonder-cure.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Everyone deserves due process...
Even if you disagree...
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)Oh wait, they're both dead for holding toy guns while black in the presence of incompetent cops.
And in each case, all the police got was "away with it".
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)are that of privilege in comparison.
Most, not all but most white people are given an assumption in our society that POC are not.
Most, not all but most white people are assumed to be law followers, not law breakers.
Most, not all but most white people are assumed to be telling the truth, not lying when talking to police.
Most, not all but most white people are considered to be victims in any crime scene, until the facts are discerned, not the criminals.
Anybody who wants to add on to this, be my guest.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Especially in situations like the ones above where emotions are running high and a vocal group is calling for someone's head.
Deliberate and legal is the way to go. It also sets a bad precedent to drive the legal process with politics.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Instead they choose to believe the initial, inaccurate media reports and public figures pushing their own agenda.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)we need to remind them that in law, they don;t, and that is exactyl the problem that needs addressing.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)What makes you think the judge made the wrong decision?
Even the lawyer for Freddie Gray's family commended the judge.
psychmommy
(1,739 posts)What a defendant is charged with. You can overcharge to ensure that no one gets convicted. You can overreach on a charge to ensure it is thrown out or acquitted. This case was never going anywhere and I am disappointed for the families. This is what the system looks like for african amercians. Because folks aren't held accountable, this will continue to happen. Probably get worse. People will continue to sweep it under the carpet-due to no convictions. The system is rigged my friends.
branford
(4,462 posts)intentionally overcharged most, if not all, of the police officers to ensure she would lose all the cases.
That's simply ludicrous.
I would also remind you the the district attorney of Baltimore is a African-American woman, and the judge in the Nero case was a African-American man who served in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.
psychmommy
(1,739 posts)And some people in jail. Their race is inconsequential, some of the cops that are alleged to have contributed to the young man's death were black also. Things aren't always black vs white. You are entitled to your opinion, as am I. I think it's ludicrous to believe a black da would be any different than a white one.
branford
(4,462 posts)However, do you have any actual evidence that this particular district attorney intentionally threw the case, or that the judge or anyone else conspired to not zealously prosecute any of the officers.
More importantly, would you care to discuss the actual conduct of this particular officer, and any supporting evidence, that could sustain a criminal conviction concerning anything?
Simply, the mob alleges many things and often bays for blood. It doesn't make these allegations true and it's certainly not evidence.
Convicting Nero to because of generalized allegations of racism, hatred of police, or because of another officer's conduct, is not justice and does nothing to diminish institutional racism.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)That's the way it's supposed to work.
askeptic
(478 posts)Nero was one of three bike officers involved in the initial police encounter with Gray on April 12, 2015. He and Officer Garrett Miller were called to assist another officer, Lt. Brian Rice, who had initially begun chasing Gray.
Prosecutors claimed that Nero assaulted Gray by detaining him without justification. But Miller testified under limited immunity that he alone detained and handcuffed Gray, that he was the one who walked Gray to the wall while Nero retrieved officer Miller's bike. The only time Nero touched Gray at the arrest site was when Gray asked for his inhaler, Miller testified.
Williams gave considerable weight to Miller's testimony, noting it was corroborated by Gray's friend, Brandon Ross.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/23/us/edward-nero-verdict-judge-ruling/
