Police Work, Politics and World Affairs, Football and the ongoing search for great Scotch Whiskey!

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

I've posted on my contempt for the State Attorney Marilyn Mosby in Baltimore. She has used the unfortunate death of a lifetime criminal for her political ambitions, the fact it will likely lead to riots when (presumably) the innocent officers are found not guilty. Now this is interesting. When the law doesn't fit your political ambitions, you simply test novel legal theory.
Prosecutors to test novel legal theory in trial of officer charged in Freddie Gray case

Upcoming trial in Freddie Gray case will turn focus from van ride to his arrest, testing novel legal theory.

Prosecutors are expected to test a novel legal theory this week in the trial of a police officer charged in the arrest and death of Freddie Gray — that the officer didn't have the authority to detain him and therefore committed an assault by putting him in handcuffs.

The allegation could have widespread implications for policing in Baltimore and Maryland. Hundreds of detainees in the city are released every year after being arrested without being charged.

Officer Edward M. Nero's defense team argues that police shouldn't be second-guessed — and face criminal charges — when they carry out their duties in good faith, while prosecutors say officers should face consequences when their actions turn out to be wrong, and the consequences are so catastrophic.

By taking a chance with this kind of case, legal experts said, Baltimore's State's Attorney Marilyn J. Mosby must believe she is correctly interpreting the law and has the political will.

"Is it a gutsy theory? Yes. Do I think most prosecutors would have brought charges on this theory? Probably not," said Paul Butler, a former federal prosecutor who is now a Georgetown University law professor. "But these are extraordinary times, and Baltimore is a city where a lot of the usual political dynamics don't apply."...

...The first trial in the Gray case — against Officer William Porter, who checked on Gray during his transport and faces charges including involuntary manslaughter — ended in a hung jury and mistrial in December.

The second trial will turn the focus away from Gray's fatal spinal injuries, which the medical examiner found were sustained in the back of a police transport van, to whether officers committed a crime when they pursued and arrested him on April 12, 2015.

It's also expected to lead to the first verdict. Nero is likely to request a bench trial, according to legal observers, so that Judge Barry Williams would render the verdict, not a jury.

The reckless endangerment charge relates to Gray's being loaded into a van without being restrained by a seat belt. Prosecutors said the failure of officers, including Nero, to do so "not only knowingly risked injury or death to Mr. Gray, but actually resulted in it."

Nero's defense attorneys sought to have the charges dismissed, saying the officers had legal justification to pursue Gray as he ran unprovoked through the area around Gilmor Homes, and had probable cause to arrest him after finding a knife clipped to his belt. In filing charges, prosecutors said the knife was legal.

Nero's attorneys, Marc Zayon and Allison Levine, wrote in a recent court filing that they couldn't locate a "single case" in which an officer had been criminally charged with assault on the basis that an arrest was made without probable cause...
I remember during the beginning of this adventure she came out and said, "The knife wasn't illegal so they had no reason to arrest them...", but she would not present the knife to the defense for examination. And she and her office argued with a judge that they should not be allowed to. Slight problem, she has to by a minor document called the Constitution of the United States.

Gee, you think this woman is grasping at straws. I will really enjoy when this puts more egg on her face. Good riddance to bad garbage.

No comments:

Post a Comment