Freddie Gray Arresting Officer Edward Nero Found Not Guilty On All Charges

Yea they have been racial hoaxes since this country was founded. Slavery was a racial hoax, Jim Crow was a racial hoax.

 

You're looking at the effect, but not the cause.

To stop the effect you must first change the cause.

The cause is criminalization, the effect is people seeking profit.

Now to stop that you simply legalize, mass produce, make it dirt cheap, and watch the black market fade away.

Meth is the only drug that shouldn't be legal.

 

I never said it was a suicide so I don't defend those claims. Her conclusion it was a homicide and not an accidental death is without evidence AS SHE ADMITTED and in fact the evidence we DO have says otherwise, you know the witness she stated did not exist and she did not interview.

 

Like with OJ?

- - - Updated - - -

Slavery happened to all races, it is a hoax to think it was just targeted at blacks. White Irish where the original slaves.

 

How many OJ cases can you quote from?

Not in this country.

What was the Civil War that ended slavery for the Irish again?

 

Don't get your liberal panties in such a twisted wad, bro.

Soon you will be calling Donald Trump "President Elect Trump" and then "President Trump" a little bit after that and all things will be great again.

 

The history of something doesn't in any way have to do with a current ruling of a black judge that used facts and evidence.

 

The civil war was fought to keep the southern states part of the union, not to free slaves. Yes, the south broke off because they wanted to keep their slaves(of all races), but Lincoln didn't want the Union broken, so he invaded to bring the south back into the fold and under submission. The emancipation meant absolutely nothing but to serve as a propaganda piece to keep the UK from siding with the south and declaring them an independent nation. No slave was ever freed because of that executive order, only after the north took territory did any slave get freed. And the emancipation was only directed to the states who seceded, not for any in the north who still had servants.

 

MY liberal panties......now that is rich. The resident liberals will get a kick out of that.

 

I replied to the wrong post.

My bad!

 

An accidental death or a criminally negligent manslaughter, is still a homicide.

 

Whew..................

- - - Updated - - -

An accidental death can be a manslaughter but not necessarily. This was a case of accidental death by his own misadventure. The ME said it is a homicide, a manslaughter because, without any evidence, stated that the driving, sudden stopping and starting, by officer, another person, while not unlawful caused Grey's death. That goes beyond their purvey, that is the job of the forensic and crime scene investigators to determine if that happened, as the ME stated she has no evidence towards that YET declared it a homicide.

 

Source? And since I sourced it's a homicide, it's a homicide until you got something that disputes this.

 

The evidence we DO have and the LACK of evidence otherwise as the ME admitted. Heck even she has to admitted be, after being ordered to remain know the floor, got himself into a standing position.

 

I'm not seeing a source. Hence my source stands.
Thank you.

 

My source IS YOUR SOURCE, the ME said there was no evidence to back her claims. Scroll back to message #97. And we DO however have the other passenger witness to corroborate her statement she believes that Grey got himself up off the floor of the van and was standing.

What are you disputing?

But the fact remains the ME cannot make those determinations, the investigators determine how that sudden blow to the head occurred of how the neck was snapped.

Grey caused his own demise by his own misadventure which went against the orders the police had given him.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=457723&page=10&p=1066217272#post1066217272

That rant of yours... used as "source" http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/12/07...r-went-to.html
I use wikipedia.

They have. It says so on wikipedia.

 

Yes Wikipedia written by clueless subscribers who did not even have that testimony. Use better news sources that report ALL the facts. And that "rant" his the testimony of the ME which failed at trial to support her claims. What do you have to refute her own testimony?

Let's review again

AND in fact when was being cross examined tried to deny she had made such a declaration or that she had any evidence of such movement by the van

"Allan wrote in the report that Gray's injuries suggested he had gotten up sometime between the second and fourth van stop, lost his balance due to an "unexpected turning motion, acceleration or deceleration" and was unable to brace himself because of his wrists and ankles were restrained.

Murtha questioned the findings.

"Do you have any facts, anything that's documented, between stops two and four?" Murtha asked.

"Other than he was injured, no," Allan replied.

When asked about the van's speed or the possibility of a sudden deceleration, she said "there's no evidence, because there are no witnesses."

"So you sort of made up this thing that you're calling evidence?" Murtha said.

"I didn't call it evidence," she said.

Allan added that Porter's lack of buckling Gray into a seat belt was "not a primary concern," when considering the man's injuries, perhaps an important admission considering the state's position that Porter's failure to secure Gray in a belt amounts to criminal negligence.

Allan also said that if the wagon driver, Caesar Goodson, had taken Gray to the hospital immediately after Porter had asked him to she would not have ruled Gray's death a homicide."
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/12/07...r-went-to.html

And that last part makes no sense at all, if I purposely shoot you but take you to the hospital where you then die does that mean I didn't commit murder?

And she states there were no witnesses WELL YES THERE WERE, the other passenger, but she came to a conclusion that brought charges while admitting she no witnesses to that effect and had no evidence to that affect, it was baseless speculation but desperately needed in order to bring charges. SHE should be charged with issuing a false report and removed from her position.

The ME is as incompetent as the mayor and the DA all three of which were out to get the officers at all cost.

He died due to his own misadventure not due to some other person and the ME admits she has not evidence to make that claim.

 

Ho go cry your little eyes out and see that I care you stick with your Fox "news" source and disregard wikipedia that is generally totally accepted source on the internet. And so much of your claim we both use the same source.

 

And now we find the prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence, the statements of the other passenger stating Grey was thrashing around in the van which he could not do if he was paralyzed and pounding his head on the separating wall. The guys OWN ATTORNEY called the defense last week and told them hey you need to know about this. Withholding evidence from the defense is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, it violates the rights of the defendant against the tenants of law here. The judge has called for a hearing in the morning.

Judge Williams to hold hearing on witness disclosure as Officer Goodson's trial opens

Judge Barry Williams will hold a hearing Thursday on the first day of trial for Officer Caesar Goodson about whether prosecutors wrongly withheld discussions they had with a potential witness in the Freddie Gray case, newly unsealed documents show.

Attorneys for Goodson are asking Williams to dismiss the charges against him, alleging the failure to disclose the information was a violation of his rights. Documents filed by both sides were filed under seal, but unsealed by Williams on Wednesday.

The 11th-hour filings revolve around Donta Allen, the second man who was placed inside the police transport van after prosecutors say Gray was severely injured. Police said Allen told investigators that Gray was thrashing around the van, but Allen has publicly recanted that statement and said he only heard a faint tapping, according to court documents.

Prosecutors dismissed the meeting as inconsequential, saying it produced no evidence because Allen was "consistent with his inconsistence." They say their meeting with him was "farcical" and "unproductive," and they do not intend to call Allen as a witness.

Goodson's attorneys say Allen's attorney, Jack B. Rubin, contacted them last week and said the state had concealed for over a year that they had met with Allen last May. The defense says Williams has twice determined that the state improperly failed to produce discoverable evidence in two prior occasions[/QUOTE]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/freddie-gray/bs-md-ci-goodson-hearing-20160608-story.html

Got that?? THIRD time. This out of control prosecutor is about to face her own legal jeopardy for this farcical prosecution with which she has been hoping to further the career by being the one who "got the cops".

 

The prosecutor is nothing but the face of the police force who collected the evidence. It's indeed the prosecutors career that's now being sacrificed because that corrupt and rotten to the core police force is failing with their fanatic keeping the lid on their ways. It's of no surprise that the victims of the cops had enough for quiet some time. And that scares them ... mostly white thugs with badges.

 

You realize that there were a few minorities on the force of the night of the Gray incident, right? I agree with Bluesguy(as the case has been from the beginning) that Mosby is abusing that office, and DA's very recently seem to think that office is to be abused. No, it isn't. It's an office of extreme trust.

 

Yep.. of the 6 involved 3 were black but lemmings keep repeating the "racist white cops" talking point.

 

She does her own investigation and in this one she withheld evidence from the defendent, the third time now. What aren't you grasping here. She is denying the defendent due process.

 

And her flimsy excuse of "Well, his story was inconsistent and we're not going to call on him as a witness" is NOT good enough. If in fact there is evidence(and nothing is closer to evidence than an eye-witness account, no matter how faulty it might be), the defense has a right to inspect it or interview that person.

What a disgrace of a "public servant", she should step down in shame. They should take away her law license, she has violated stature!