Lt. Rice aquitted in Freddie Gray case

[Bird Dog]

Someone must be hung.

It already happened...Frddie Gray!

Plus his family got something like 6 million....

 

[Merlin99]

Certainly, the police commissioner disagrees with you:

Sounds like he's stepping up and taking responsibility for it, why wasn't he charged.

 

[PrchJrkr]

It already happened...Frddie Gray!

Plus his family got something like 6 million....

"We gehin' paid! WE GEHIN' PAID!!!"

Whoever received the money should have to pay back all the costs the city/state incurred locking him up all those years. Think of it as a housing/food/court costs bill for the worthless POS.

 

[This_person]

Sounds like he's stepping up and taking responsibility for it, why wasn't he charged.

:shrug: I'm guessing because he wasn't the officer on the scene responsible for doing the buckling in. He's the guy saying, "yep, that's our policy and our guy didn't do it, so, you taxpayers are gonna owe his estate money for our negligence". Apparently, though, as far as everyone else is concerned, the negligence was no one's negligence, so the money was paid because, uh, uh, uh, well, it's certainly not because there's any fault on anyone's part, so, it, uh, must be because the city is just really nice and wants to do reparations one family at a time (when they happen to die in the custody and care of the government). Yeah, that's it.

 

[Gilligan]

, must be because the city is just really nice and wants to do reparations one family at a time (when they happen to die in the custody and care of the government). Yeah, that's it.

The money was paid simply to pander and buy votes...and keep the riots down to a dull roar.

 

[Hijinx]

:shrug: I'm guessing because he wasn't the officer on the scene responsible for doing the buckling in. He's the guy saying, "yep, that's our policy and our guy didn't do it, so, you taxpayers are gonna owe his estate money for our negligence". Apparently, though, as far as everyone else is concerned, the negligence was no one's negligence, so the money was paid because, uh, uh, uh, well, it's certainly not because there's any fault on anyone's part, so, it, uh, must be because the city is just really nice and wants to do reparations one family at a time (when they happen to die in the custody and care of the government). Yeah, that's it.

Geeez when some people get a wild hair up their ass , they just cam't let go.

 

[This_person]

The money was paid simply to pander and buy votes...and keep the riots down to a dull roar.

That's certainly a plausible theory. It doesn't explain the Commissioner explicitly saying his people were negligent, but it's a plausible theory.

 

[Gilligan]

That's certainly a plausible theory. It doesn't explain the Commissioner explicitly saying his people were negligent, but it's a plausible theory.

What else could possibly explain why it happened almost immediately?...without benefit or consideration of investigations and legal proceedings that took place afterward. The public officials cut that check in record time!

 

[This_person]

What else could possibly explain why it happened almost immediately?...without benefit or consideration of investigations and legal proceedings that took place afterward. The public officials cut that check in record time!

I agree it's mostly likely that politics had a strong hand in why it was so high, and why it was so fast.

Doesn't explain why the Police Commissioner says his people were negligent though.

 

[tblwdc]

I agree it's mostly likely that politics had a strong hand in why it was so high, and why it was so fast.

Doesn't explain why the Police Commissioner says his people were negligent though.

So you can imagine politics played a part in the settlement of Freddy Gray's civil case, but lack the imagination to understand why a police commissioner, whose predecessor was fired in the aftermath of Freddy Gray's death, might try to place blame on the officers but not the department who failed to train the officers. The manner in which they placed Freddy Gray in the back of the van was the known protocol to those officers at that time. While a policy may have been instituted days before Gray's death, that isn't an effective policy if the officers aren't aware of it.

In simple terms, I'll explain why Kevin Davis is trying to throw his officers under the bus. He wants to keep his job. That should be, but somehow I doubt will be explanation enough for you.

 

[Gilligan]

So you can imagine politics played a part in the settlement of Freddy Gray's civil case, but lack the imagination to understand why a police commissioner, whose predecessor was fired in the aftermath of Freddy Gray's death, might try to place blame on the officers but not the department who failed to train the officers. The manner in which they placed Freddy Gray in the back of the van was the known protocol to those officers at that time. While a policy may have been instituted days before Gray's death, that isn't an effective policy if the officers aren't aware of it.

In simple terms, I'll explain why Kevin Davis is trying to throw his officers under the bus. He wants to keep his job. That should be, but somehow I doubt will be explanation enough for you.

Sounds about right to me.

 

[This_person]

So you can imagine politics played a part in the settlement of Freddy Gray's civil case, but lack the imagination to understand why a police commissioner, whose predecessor was fired in the aftermath of Freddy Gray's death, might try to place blame on the officers but not the department who failed to train the officers. The manner in which they placed Freddy Gray in the back of the van was the known protocol to those officers at that time. While a policy may have been instituted days before Gray's death, that isn't an effective policy if the officers aren't aware of it.

In simple terms, I'll explain why Kevin Davis is trying to throw his officers under the bus. He wants to keep his job. That should be, but somehow I doubt will be explanation enough for you.

The protocol existed, and a reasonable person should have been aware. Even without the protocol, a reasonable person should be aware they are responsible for the safety of those they hold prisoner.

Do you believe no one is responsible for this man's death? Not whether he was a loser, a thug, whether he would have died young anyway, or any of that meaningless drivel - but, he was a prisoner of the government, he died in a preventable death that was indirectly caused by the officers not following protocol nor what any reasonable person would do - does any of that lead to someone being responsible, or is it just an act of God that no one could have foreseen and changed?

 

[This_person]

Sounds about right to me.

Same question.

 

[This_person]

The protocol existed, and a reasonable person should have been aware. Even without the protocol, a reasonable person should be aware they are responsible for the safety of those they hold prisoner.

Do you believe no one is responsible for this man's death? Not whether he was a loser, a thug, whether he would have died young anyway, or any of that meaningless drivel - but, he was a prisoner of the government, he died in a preventable death that was indirectly caused by the officers not following protocol nor what any reasonable person would do - does any of that lead to someone being responsible, or is it just an act of God that no one could have foreseen and changed?

 

[tblwdc]

The protocol existed, and a reasonable person should have been aware. Even without the protocol, a reasonable person should be aware they are responsible for the safety of those they hold prisoner.

Do you believe no one is responsible for this man's death? Not whether he was a loser, a thug, whether he would have died young anyway, or any of that meaningless drivel - but, he was a prisoner of the government, he died in a preventable death that was indirectly caused by the officers not following protocol nor what any reasonable person would do - does any of that lead to someone being responsible, or is it just an act of God that no one could have foreseen and changed?

If Freddy Gray thrashing himself about the back of the van (as witnesses have testified too) is what lead to his death, I would say Freddy is responsible. The fact is, we don't know exactly actions lead to his death. They refuted the rough ride theory. The protocol known to the officers at the time of Gray's death was to handcuff and place on their face in the back of a wagon an uncooperative suspect. This was done hundreds, probably thousands of times before without it resulting in death.

It is funny though, you can't see politics in a police commissioner, hired by a corrupt mayor, saying his officers were negligent, but you can in a settlement check.

 

[officeguy]

The protocol known to the officers at the time of Gray's death was to handcuff and place on their face in the back of a wagon an uncooperative suspect. This was done hundreds, probably thousands of times before without it resulting in death.

Actually, the city has paid out millions before for injuries sustained in the back of wagons. They seem to be slow learners.

 

[tblwdc]

Actually, the city has paid out millions before for injuries sustained in the back of wagons. They seem to be slow learners.

The city has paid out lots of money for people falling on the sidewalk, slipping on snow, etc. I don't know where you get your millions figure from, but that's what big cities do. They settle instead of going to court. They likely changed the policy because people got paid. That, however wasn't what the officers were trained to do on the day Freddy Gray was arrested and that procedure had never before resulted in a death.

Now, can you show me where a person has died from not being seatbelted in a BPD van? I can't find one other than Freddy Gray.

 

[This_person]

If Freddy Gray thrashing himself about the back of the van (as witnesses have testified too) is what lead to his death, I would say Freddy is responsible. The fact is, we don't know exactly actions lead to his death.

I can agree with all of this. We know the coroner said that your "if" statement is not possible to have caused his death, though.

Or, do we have the mayor, the police commissioner, the council that voted to pay the money, the state's attorney, AND the coroner all in on the conspiracy?

They refuted the rough ride theory.

No proof, no reason to call out that eventuality. I do not believe the rough-ride theory, because there isn't an ounce of proof to it.

The protocol known to the officers at the time of Gray's death was to handcuff and place on their face in the back of a wagon an uncooperative suspect. This was done hundreds, probably thousands of times before without it resulting in death.

And, yet, the protocol changed. That should have been known to a reasonable person. Meanwhile, a reasonable person would understand that the state is responsible for the health and safety of those they've imprisoned. So, do you believe no one is responsible for this man's death? Not whether he was a loser, a thug, whether he would have died young anyway, or any of that meaningless drivel - but, he was a prisoner of the government, he died in a preventable death that was indirectly caused by the officers not following protocol nor what any reasonable person would do - does any of that lead to someone being responsible, or is it just an act of God that no one could have foreseen and changed?

It is funny though, you can't see politics in a police commissioner, hired by a corrupt mayor, saying his officers were negligent, but you can in a settlement check.

It's not that I can't see politics in him admitting, before the riots by the way, what he did. The problem I have is that there is no counter argument. It's not like, "wait, that was NOT the protocol, he's LYING!" could be said. What he said is factually accurate, and that doesn't happen a lot in politics.

 

[tblwdc]

I can agree with all of this. We know the coroner said that your "if" statement is not possible to have caused his death, though.

Or, do we have the mayor, the police commissioner, the council that voted to pay the money, the state's attorney, AND the coroner all in on the conspiracy?No proof, no reason to call out that eventuality. I do not believe the rough-ride theory, because there isn't an ounce of proof to it.And, yet, the protocol changed. That should have been known to a reasonable person. Meanwhile, a reasonable person would understand that the state is responsible for the health and safety of those they've imprisoned.

You did pay attention to the evidence presented in the case correct? You do know there was evidence presented which said the coroner first said this was an accident. It wasn't until peer review, (or possibly riots evolved), which then changed the coroner's decision.

So, do you believe no one is responsible for this man's death?

I do not believe there is sufficient evidence to point to any individual being responsible for his death. I believe because of this, the head of the agency who is responsible for training these officers should be held responsible and lose his job. Oh wait, that happened. There you go.

It's not that I can't see politics in him admitting, before the riots by the way, what he did. The problem I have is that there is no counter argument. It's not like, "wait, that was NOT the protocol, he's LYING!" could be said. What he said is factually accurate, and that doesn't happen a lot in politics.

You keep saying it was the protocol. What you keep avoiding is that the officers didn't know it was protocol. That is not the way they were trained.

 

[This_person]

You did pay attention to the evidence presented in the case correct? You do know there was evidence presented which said the coroner first said this was an accident. It wasn't until peer review, (or possibly riots evolved), which then changed the coroner's decision.

So, it was coercion? You actually believe COL Jessup ordered the Code Red without evidence, but you want me to prove coercion?

The evidence is what the evidence is, and that is that the coroner says this was not possible to be caused through self-infliction. If you have evidence to the contrary, I'm glad to see it.

I do not believe there is sufficient evidence to point to any individual being responsible for his death. I believe because of this, the head of the agency who is responsible for training these officers should be held responsible and lose his job. Oh wait, that happened. There you go.

If you're good with that, I'm happy for you. I'm not. I think the government can't kill people through negligence to the people's safety and simply get fired. I think there is more to a citizen's life than a government person's job.

You keep saying it was the protocol. What you keep avoiding is that the officers didn't know it was protocol. That is not the way they were trained.

I keep saying it because it is the truth. But, I'm not avoiding at all that the officers claim to have not known. I say, they should have known (any reasonable person would expect them to), and I also say that any reasonable person would know that they were responsible for the prisoner's safety. They did not meet that responsibility, as evidenced by the prisoner's death.