Riots in 3...2...1...


BALTIMORE (WJZ) €” Freddie Gray arresting officer Edward Nero has been
found not guilty on all counts by Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge
Barry Williams.

Nero faced second-degree assault,reckless endangerment and two counts of misconduct in office.

Nero waived his right to a trial by jury. His bench trial began May 12 and final arguments were heard Thursday.

Gray, a 25-year-old black man from the Sandtown area of Baltimore, died on April 19, 2015 of a spinal cord injury he sustained while in police custody.

His death set off more than a week of protests followed by looting, rioting and arson that prompted a citywide curfew.

Nero is one of six officers charged in relation to Grays death, and the second to be tried. Officer William Porters trial ended in a hung jury and mistrial in December.

Four other officers €” Officer Garrett Miller, Lt. Brian Rice, Sgt. Alicia White and Officer Caesar Goodson Jr. €” have not yet been tried.

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 11:08:24 AM UTC-4, burfordTjustice wrote:
Riots in 3...2...1...


BALTIMORE (WJZ) €” Freddie Gray arresting officer Edward Nero has been
found not guilty on all counts by Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge
Barry Williams.

Nero faced second-degree assault,reckless endangerment and two counts of misconduct in office.

Nero waived his right to a trial by jury. His bench trial began May 12 and final arguments were heard Thursday.

Gray, a 25-year-old black man from the Sandtown area of Baltimore, died on April 19, 2015 of a spinal cord injury he sustained while in police custody.

His death set off more than a week of protests followed by looting, rioting and arson that prompted a citywide curfew.

Nero is one of six officers charged in relation to Grays death, and the second to be tried. Officer William Porters trial ended in a hung jury and mistrial in December.

Four other officers €” Officer Garrett Miller, Lt. Brian Rice, Sgt.. Alicia White and Officer Caesar Goodson Jr. €” have not yet been tried.


Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

On Mon, 23 May 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

It takes some balls to stand before a judge in a Bench Trial

This whole case was a farce from the beginning, imo. The City really
screwed the pooch.

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:02:40 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

It takes some balls to stand before a judge in a Bench Trial

This whole case was a farce from the beginning, imo. The City really
screwed the pooch.

And the deck has been stacked against the cops from day one.
Refusing a change of venue is about as unfair as it gets.
Probably the worst charge brought in the whole thing was charging
the cops with illegal restraint, because the state claims that
the switchblade knife Grey had was not illegal. Regardless of
whether it was illegal or not, what kind of message does that send
to police? Grey had a knife and they legitimately believed it was
illegal. The cops have demanded all along that the prosecutor show
the knife to the public, but they refuse. Even if the knifed is
determined to not be illegal, this happens in the course of police
work. It's dealt with by the prosecutor declining to prosecute,
not with the arrest of the cops.

We'll see how the rest of the cops make out. From what I've seen,
there is plenty of reasonable doubt as to how Grey actually received
his injury. The guy who was put in with him, giving police a statement
where he said it sounded to him like Grey was deliberately slamming
himself around, would likely be enough reasonable doubt for me.

On Mon, 23 May 2016 09:56:45 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:02:40 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

It takes some balls to stand before a judge in a Bench Trial

This whole case was a farce from the beginning, imo. The City really
screwed the pooch.

And the deck has been stacked against the cops from day one.
Refusing a change of venue is about as unfair as it gets.
Probably the worst charge brought in the whole thing was charging
the cops with illegal restraint, because the state claims that
the switchblade knife Grey had was not illegal. Regardless of
whether it was illegal or not, what kind of message does that send
to police? Grey had a knife and they legitimately believed it was
illegal. The cops have demanded all along that the prosecutor show
the knife to the public, but they refuse. Even if the knifed is
determined to not be illegal, this happens in the course of police
work. It's dealt with by the prosecutor declining to prosecute,
not with the arrest of the cops.


I can't recall details. There was a court ruling (?), that an officer
couldn't invoke his 5th Amendment protection and would have to testify
about another officer - potentially "incriminating" himself.

The world has gone mad.

We'll see how the rest of the cops make out. From what I've seen,
there is plenty of reasonable doubt as to how Grey actually received
his injury. The guy who was put in with him, giving police a statement
where he said it sounded to him like Grey was deliberately slamming
himself around, would likely be enough reasonable doubt for me.

I think the rest of the pending cases will fall by the wayside. The DA
could appeal and spend more wasted money. **** wit Libs
--
"We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

Benjamin Franklin

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:02:40 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

It takes some balls to stand before a judge in a Bench Trial

This whole case was a farce from the beginning, imo. The City really
screwed the pooch.

And the deck has been stacked against the cops from day one.
Refusing a change of venue is about as unfair as it gets.
Probably the worst charge brought in the whole thing was charging
the cops with illegal restraint, because the state claims that
the switchblade knife Grey had was not illegal. Regardless of
whether it was illegal or not, what kind of message does that send
to police? Grey had a knife and they legitimately believed it was
illegal. The cops have demanded all along that the prosecutor show
the knife to the public, but they refuse. Even if the knifed is
determined to not be illegal, this happens in the course of police
work. It's dealt with by the prosecutor declining to prosecute,
not with the arrest of the cops.

We'll see how the rest of the cops make out. From what I've seen,
there is plenty of reasonable doubt as to how Grey actually received
his injury. The guy who was put in with him, giving police a statement
where he said it sounded to him like Grey was deliberately slamming
himself around, would likely be enough reasonable doubt for me.

Any info regarding the outcome of the charges against "the guy who was
put in with him"?

Hypothetically speaking...

Officer Friendly to "the guy who was put in with him":

"Look, we can help you out. All you have to do is say that he was slamming
himself around. We can make it easy on you or not so easy. Your choice."

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 09:56:45 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:02:40 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

It takes some balls to stand before a judge in a Bench Trial

This whole case was a farce from the beginning, imo. The City really
screwed the pooch.

And the deck has been stacked against the cops from day one.
Refusing a change of venue is about as unfair as it gets.
Probably the worst charge brought in the whole thing was charging
the cops with illegal restraint, because the state claims that
the switchblade knife Grey had was not illegal. Regardless of
whether it was illegal or not, what kind of message does that send
to police? Grey had a knife and they legitimately believed it was
illegal. The cops have demanded all along that the prosecutor show
the knife to the public, but they refuse. Even if the knifed is
determined to not be illegal, this happens in the course of police
work. It's dealt with by the prosecutor declining to prosecute,
not with the arrest of the cops.


I can't recall details. There was a court ruling (?), that an officer
couldn't invoke his 5th Amendment protection and would have to testify
about another officer - potentially "incriminating" himself.

The world has gone mad.

We'll see how the rest of the cops make out. From what I've seen,
there is plenty of reasonable doubt as to how Grey actually received
his injury. The guy who was put in with him, giving police a statement
where he said it sounded to him like Grey was deliberately slamming
himself around, would likely be enough reasonable doubt for me.

I think the rest of the pending cases will fall by the wayside. The DA
could appeal and spend more wasted money. **** wit Libs
--


The DA ca't appeal, it's over, double jeopardy. The feds could try to
bring charges, but they won't for this arresting officer at least, that's
for sure. There never was a case there. Cop driving the van, they might
have a case there, but I see plenty of reasonable doubt. On the other
hand, the trial is being held in Baltimore, which as I said, is already
a grave injustice.

And I agree on the cop being required to testify against the other cop.
I never heard such a thing, where you're involved, charged and you can't
plead the fifth? If I were the cop, I would have taken that to the SC
for a ruling. Apparently the fifth only applies for skunks like Lois Lerner
and Clinton's employee Pagliano.

On Mon, 23 May 2016 10:33:32 -0700 (PDT)
DerbyDad03 wrote:

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:02:40 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

It takes some balls to stand before a judge in a Bench Trial

This whole case was a farce from the beginning, imo. The City
really screwed the pooch.

And the deck has been stacked against the cops from day one.
Refusing a change of venue is about as unfair as it gets.
Probably the worst charge brought in the whole thing was charging
the cops with illegal restraint, because the state claims that
the switchblade knife Grey had was not illegal. Regardless of
whether it was illegal or not, what kind of message does that send
to police? Grey had a knife and they legitimately believed it was
illegal. The cops have demanded all along that the prosecutor show
the knife to the public, but they refuse. Even if the knifed is
determined to not be illegal, this happens in the course of police
work. It's dealt with by the prosecutor declining to prosecute,
not with the arrest of the cops.

We'll see how the rest of the cops make out. From what I've seen,
there is plenty of reasonable doubt as to how Grey actually received
his injury. The guy who was put in with him, giving police a
statement where he said it sounded to him like Grey was
deliberately slamming himself around, would likely be enough
reasonable doubt for me.

Any info regarding the outcome of the charges against "the guy who
was put in with him"?

Hypothetically speaking...

Officer Friendly to "the guy who was put in with him":

"Look, we can help you out. All you have to do is say that he was
slamming himself around. We can make it easy on you or not so easy.
Your choice."

First trial resulted in a mistrial....hung jury

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 1:33:37 PM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:02:40 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

It takes some balls to stand before a judge in a Bench Trial

This whole case was a farce from the beginning, imo. The City really
screwed the pooch.

And the deck has been stacked against the cops from day one.
Refusing a change of venue is about as unfair as it gets.
Probably the worst charge brought in the whole thing was charging
the cops with illegal restraint, because the state claims that
the switchblade knife Grey had was not illegal. Regardless of
whether it was illegal or not, what kind of message does that send
to police? Grey had a knife and they legitimately believed it was
illegal. The cops have demanded all along that the prosecutor show
the knife to the public, but they refuse. Even if the knifed is
determined to not be illegal, this happens in the course of police
work. It's dealt with by the prosecutor declining to prosecute,
not with the arrest of the cops.

We'll see how the rest of the cops make out. From what I've seen,
there is plenty of reasonable doubt as to how Grey actually received
his injury. The guy who was put in with him, giving police a statement
where he said it sounded to him like Grey was deliberately slamming
himself around, would likely be enough reasonable doubt for me.

Any info regarding the outcome of the charges against "the guy who was
put in with him"?

Hypothetically speaking...

Officer Friendly to "the guy who was put in with him":

"Look, we can help you out. All you have to do is say that he was slamming
himself around. We can make it easy on you or not so easy. Your choice."

IDK what happened or didn't happen with that guy, but the guy had retracted
his story within a couple days. I hope that they have it on video or audio,
because otherwise how will they even prove he said it to begin with?

That guy would be critical as a witness, potentially for either side.
He was in the van and could testify to whether the van was being
deliberately driven to knock people around or not.

On Mon, 23 May 2016 11:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
trader_4 wrote:

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 09:56:45 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:02:40 PM UTC-4, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

It takes some balls to stand before a judge in a Bench Trial

This whole case was a farce from the beginning, imo. The City
really screwed the pooch.

And the deck has been stacked against the cops from day one.
Refusing a change of venue is about as unfair as it gets.
Probably the worst charge brought in the whole thing was charging
the cops with illegal restraint, because the state claims that
the switchblade knife Grey had was not illegal. Regardless of
whether it was illegal or not, what kind of message does that send
to police? Grey had a knife and they legitimately believed it was
illegal. The cops have demanded all along that the prosecutor show
the knife to the public, but they refuse. Even if the knifed is
determined to not be illegal, this happens in the course of police
work. It's dealt with by the prosecutor declining to prosecute,
not with the arrest of the cops.


I can't recall details. There was a court ruling (?), that an
officer couldn't invoke his 5th Amendment protection and would have
to testify about another officer - potentially "incriminating"
himself.

The world has gone mad.

We'll see how the rest of the cops make out. From what I've seen,
there is plenty of reasonable doubt as to how Grey actually
received his injury. The guy who was put in with him, giving
police a statement where he said it sounded to him like Grey was
deliberately slamming himself around, would likely be enough
reasonable doubt for me.

I think the rest of the pending cases will fall by the wayside. The
DA could appeal and spend more wasted money. **** wit Libs
--


The DA ca't appeal, it's over, double jeopardy. The feds could try to
bring charges, but they won't for this arresting officer at least,
that's for sure. There never was a case there. Cop driving the van,
they might have a case there, but I see plenty of reasonable doubt.
On the other hand, the trial is being held in Baltimore, which as I
said, is already a grave injustice.

And I agree on the cop being required to testify against the other
cop. I never heard such a thing, where you're involved, charged and
you can't plead the fifth? If I were the cop, I would have taken
that to the SC for a ruling. Apparently the fifth only applies for
skunks like Lois Lerner and Clinton's employee Pagliano.

No matter the outcomes, these cops are screwed job wise.
Probably will have to move.

On 5/23/16 11:51 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 11:08:24 AM UTC-4, burfordTjustice wrote:
Riots in 3...2...1...


BALTIMORE (WJZ) €” Freddie Gray arresting officer Edward Nero has been
found not guilty on all counts by Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge
Barry Williams.

Nero faced second-degree assault,reckless endangerment and two counts of misconduct in office.

Nero waived his right to a trial by jury. His bench trial began May 12 and final arguments were heard Thursday.

Gray, a 25-year-old black man from the Sandtown area of Baltimore, died on April 19, 2015 of a spinal cord injury he sustained while in police custody.

His death set off more than a week of protests followed by looting, rioting and arson that prompted a citywide curfew.

Nero is one of six officers charged in relation to Grays death, and the second to be tried. Officer William Porters trial ended in a hung jury and mistrial in December.

Four other officers €” Officer Garrett Miller, Lt. Brian Rice, Sgt. Alicia White and Officer Caesar Goodson Jr. €” have not yet been tried.


Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?


If they do, no doubt Nero could fiddle....

--
I miss the country I grew up in.

On Mon, 23 May 2016 11:02:27 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

I can't recall details. There was a court ruling (?), that an officer
couldn't invoke his 5th Amendment protection and would have to testify
about another officer - potentially "incriminating" himself.

The world has gone mad.

We'll see how the rest of the cops make out. From what I've seen,
there is plenty of reasonable doubt as to how Grey actually received
his injury. The guy who was put in with him, giving police a statement
where he said it sounded to him like Grey was deliberately slamming
himself around, would likely be enough reasonable doubt for me.

I think the rest of the pending cases will fall by the wayside. The DA
could appeal and spend more wasted money. **** wit Libs
--


The DA ca't appeal, it's over, double jeopardy. The feds could try to
bring charges, but they won't for this arresting officer at least, that's
for sure. There never was a case there. Cop driving the van, they might
have a case there, but I see plenty of reasonable doubt. On the other
hand, the trial is being held in Baltimore, which as I said, is already
a grave injustice.


"Appeal" was a poor word. If new evidence is discovered, the DA could
bring other charges for other offences and it wouldn't be double
jeopardy based on new and revealing evidence. I won't happen.

And I agree on the cop being required to testify against the other cop.
I never heard such a thing, where you're involved, charged and you can't
plead the fifth? If I were the cop, I would have taken that to the SC
for a ruling. Apparently the fifth only applies for skunks like Lois Lerner
and Clinton's employee Pagliano.

I waived my 5th once. Inspector General - two guys playing good cop
bad cop. Oren spanked 'em both. Two hours later they told me to
enjoy my oncoming retirement

It was a HOOT.

On Mon, 23 May 2016 10:33:32 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Any info regarding the outcome of the charges against "the guy who was
put in with him"?

Hypothetically speaking...

Officer Friendly to "the guy who was put in with him":

"Look, we can help you out. All you have to do is say that he was slamming
himself around. We can make it easy on you or not so easy. Your choice."

The question becomes about informant reliability, past credence of
accurate information. Are they "tested & documented"? Who holds the
files, on snitches? A folder in a safe?

In fact, the other guy could get out of jail, easy for a jaywalking
charge. Which officer guarantees his safety...

BTW the same Judge is set to preside over
all the rest of the Trials, and he is....
BLACK!

There goes your Racism cry...must riot...

On 5/23/16 1:26 PM, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 09:56:45 -0700 (PDT), trader_4

I can't recall details. There was a court ruling (?), that an officer
couldn't invoke his 5th Amendment protection and would have to testify
about another officer - potentially "incriminating" himself.


Kinda sorta. As with everything SCOTUS-related it isn't quite that
straight forward. This is a Garrity Warning.
If interested see the URL below.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/m...ssue_id=122012



I think the rest of the pending cases will fall by the wayside. The DA
could appeal and spend more wasted money. **** wit Libs

The first one ended in a hung jury, so essentially the DA is 0 for 2. My
guess is the politics will be so heavy that they have to do at least one
more.

On 5/23/16 2:06 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 1:33:37 PM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:


That guy would be critical as a witness, potentially for either side.
He was in the van and could testify to whether the van was being
deliberately driven to knock people around or not.

Nah, he is useless as a witness. The side he testifies against points to
his original statement and then the retraction and ask which was the lie
and which is the truth and why should we believe anything you say on any
topic. Seen it happen multiple times.

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 8:04:55 PM UTC-4, Kurt V. Ullman wrote:
On 5/23/16 1:26 PM, Oren wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 09:56:45 -0700 (PDT), trader_4

I can't recall details. There was a court ruling (?), that an officer
couldn't invoke his 5th Amendment protection and would have to testify
about another officer - potentially "incriminating" himself.


Kinda sorta. As with everything SCOTUS-related it isn't quite that
straight forward. This is a Garrity Warning.
If interested see the URL below.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/m...ssue_id=122012



I think the rest of the pending cases will fall by the wayside. The DA
could appeal and spend more wasted money. **** wit Libs

The first one ended in a hung jury, so essentially the DA is 0 for 2. My
guess is the politics will be so heavy that they have to do at least one
more.

I think the cop that drove the van is next, who's up for murder.
If they can't get a conviction with him, that should do it. But
you're not dealing with a normal prosecutor here or most of these
charges would never have been brought to begin with. So, I would
not be surprised to see them try them all.

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 8:09:22 PM UTC-4, Kurt V. Ullman wrote:
On 5/23/16 2:06 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 1:33:37 PM UTC-4, DerbyDad03 wrote:


That guy would be critical as a witness, potentially for either side.
He was in the van and could testify to whether the van was being
deliberately driven to knock people around or not.

Nah, he is useless as a witness. The side he testifies against points to
his original statement and then the retraction and ask which was the lie
and which is the truth and why should we believe anything you say on any
topic. Seen it happen multiple times.

Yeah, you're right about that. I was thinking in terms of him being in
the van and knowing what went on. But given that he's apparently told
two different stories, he's not too much use. If I was the defense and
had proof of his initial story, I'd still put him on though. Credible or
not it would help raise reasonable doubt.

On 05/23/2016 09:51 AM, trader_4 wrote:
Are they going to burn Baltimore down again tonight?

The mayor has said she will give them a safe space to destroy stuff.
Where is Richard Daley when you need him? 'Shoot to kill or main.'