Baltimore protests

[dsc123]

If they took the attitude that they weren't going to arrest curfew-breakers, what's the point of imposing it? I don't get the logic. The curfew helped stop the madness. If you were on the streets after curfew, it was a slam dunk, you're going downtown. Actually making those arrests showed others they were serious and it spurred them to clear the streets. As I said, lesson learned at no real cost to the bone heads who tried to test the cops.

And what's the logic behind setting a curfew that cannot be enforced without violating the law?

My heart sinks when I hear Americans speak of clear violations of another person's civil rights as "no real cost."

[disco111]

I hope you're wrong about this.  But, I just read that they are charging the cops involved:  http://news.yahoo.com/freddie-gray-sustained-fatal-head-injury-in-back-of-police-van--report-124521845.html

I reallllllllllly hope that they have concrete evidence supporting those charges and that they're not a rash reaction to appease the public outraged by the slew of recent cases like Ferguson where nobody was indicted.

Because if it is the latter and it turns out that these guys didn't do anything wrong (or at least there isn't enough proof that they did) and they are found not guilty ... oh boy.

IMO, this is not so much a rash reaction, but a political one. The lawyer for the Grey Family is connected to the Baltimore official pressing / presenting the charges. All six officers are being charged. Now here is a run down of those associated with the arrest. Two officers were bicycle patrol, only assisted in placing Grey into the van. Kind of difficult to assess if they actually did anything. The other officers were I assume from a patrol unit and again, don't know how much influence they had on the situation. The fifth office should have been in the van with the driver, because those arrested are actually in a caged / confined area and then there's the driver. Now this is where it gets really off the wall. The driver of the van, who apparently didn't have any hands on with Mr. Grey, is being indited on the highest charge(s) of any of the officers. Now, again IMO, this smacks of political slight of hand. Look at this hand, while the other hand does something different. As I said in my last post, it's going to get worse. When they finally get around to dealing with these allegations and findings that most likely will exonerate the police, especially the driver, Baltimore will explode and so will other cities. This country is sitting on a powder keg of immersible proportions and those out there that are looking for any excuse, will have a field day.

If you want to know why a lot of major departments have procedure'd military hardware, it's because they have seen the self alienation of a portion of society and they are attempting to get to a level playing field. Look at the boarder patrol as an example. They are out maned and out gunned. The cities are rife with gangs, supplied by the cartels and smaller departments are also out maned and out gunned. Here's a small example. about a year ago, a female officer here was attempting to arrest a legal / illegal (?) never determined Mexican man on a traffic warrant. She was shot almost point blank by his 15 year old son, with an AR15. Luck would have it, he was a bad shot, but she was still hurt very badly. This is the mindset of the young generation. Perhaps it's from video games or watching the parents, movies from Hollywood or it's their friends, but regardless, that mindset is there and it comes out in the blink of an eye.

[newtogolf]

And what's the logic behind setting a curfew that cannot be enforced without violating the law?

My heart sinks when I hear Americans speak of clear violations of another person's civil rights as "no real cost."

The city imposed a curfew, those that were on the streets past the curfew time were in violation of the law and deserved to be arrested.  Without laws there is chaos, which is what occurred in Baltimore those previous nights when the police were told by the Mayor to "let them loot, it's only property".

You seem to be very anti-police and laws, but I don't see you proposing anything to resolve the problem.  How about the rights of the shop owners who lost their businesses to looting and fire?  How about the rights of those who lost their homes to fires?  Your anger and frustration seems to be directed at the wrong people.

[mdl]

I don't pretend to understand what the life experiences of those that live in the poor parts of Baltimore, though I'm sure they don't get the same benefit of the doubt that I do given my demographics compared to theirs.  Their relationship with the police is different because the police are the bad guys who arrest their fathers, brothers, sisters, mothers because they broke the law.  They are taught to hate the police and many who are involved in gangs or illegal activities know they are a threat to their freedom.

I think the bolded is the base assumption that I think is wrong and leads you to a general view I disagree with (though of course in many of the particulars we can all agree).  The issue is not that the police arrest people who commit violent crimes or run drug gangs, or that they have arrested one's relatives or friends who do those things.  The issue is that for the vast majority of residents of those areas who are law abiding citizens working hard and trying to get by, the facts of poverty and a higher crime rate and racial history have created a culture of occupation, instead of one of cooperation, between the police and the citizens.  The issue for the typical resident is not that his cousin was arrested for selling drugs and carrying an illegal firearm.  It's that he lives under constant surveillance and occupation by a police force that views him as guilty until proven otherwise and with suspicion based only on his race and neighborhood.  It's that he's scared to hang out on the corner with some friends because police will pull up and interrogate them and who knows where that will lead no matter how law abiding he is.

Read the article I linked to earlier.  It really gets at the heart of the matter better than I can and explains what the problem really is.

[Golfingdad]

You seem to be very anti-police and laws,

He comes across as nothing at all like that to me.  He sounds only PRO liberty, PRO due process, and PRO Constitution.

That's all I get from his posts here.

[newtogolf]

I hope you're wrong about this.  But, I just read that they are charging the cops involved:  http://news.yahoo.com/freddie-gray-sustained-fatal-head-injury-in-back-of-police-van--report-124521845.html

I reallllllllllly hope that they have concrete evidence supporting those charges and that they're not a rash reaction to appease the public outraged by the slew of recent cases like Ferguson where nobody was indicted.

Because if it is the latter and it turns out that these guys didn't do anything wrong (or at least there isn't enough proof that they did) and they are found not guilty ... oh boy.

Remember that the LA Riots started not when the Rodney King video surfaced, but when the cops were all ultimately acquitted of the charges.  (Which, coincidentally, was 23 years ago Wednesday.)

"April [29th] 1992

There was a riot on the streets

tell me where where you?"

The officers certainly violated protocol, the van carrying Gray stopped for undisclosed reasons at least once, but if they were responsible for his death is unclear.  Gray was not properly restrained in the van which means he could have been thrown around inside or did attempt to hurt himself.

Without video we have little to go by but the word of the officers and the arrested suspect in the other part of the van who initially claimed he heard Gray banging his head on the walls but has now recanted his statement because his life was threatened.

Without hard proof of their innocence I highly doubt the Mayor will allow the verdict to be anything less than guilty for the officers involved.

[newtogolf]

He comes across as nothing at all like that to me.  He sounds only PRO liberty, PRO due process, and PRO Constitution.

That's all I get from his posts here.

I am all those things too but given the circumstances, the priority has to be on calming the situation which means clear the streets so the mob mentality doesn't come into play again.   If I drive drunk and get pulled over I expect to be arrested because that's the law.  If I am on the streets after a city imposed curfew I can't be shocked that I'm arrested either.

You can't expect a city to regularly maintain the staff that would be required to process all those people in a single night in the event there's ever a riot.  It was a stare down, the police had two choices, enforce the curfew and arrest violators or risk a repeat of Monday night where people, businesses and homes were destroyed.  Sometimes you have to consider the greater good even if it's not an ideal option.

[Gunther]

The city imposed a curfew, those that were on the streets past the curfew time were in violation of the law and deserved to be arrested.  Without laws there is chaos, which is what occurred in Baltimore those previous nights when the police were told by the Mayor to "let them loot, it's only property". You seem to be very anti-police and laws, but I don't see you proposing anything to resolve the problem.  How about the rights of the shop owners who lost their businesses to looting and fire?  How about the rights of those who lost their homes to fires?  Your anger and frustration seems to be directed at the wrong people.

Exactly how I was going to respond, now I don't have to. ;-)

[disco111]

Is it sad because there is nothing wrong with doing that and yet they were arrested and held in jail for 2 days--twice the length of time allowed under the law--without any probable cause finding?  Or do you think its sad that they're just too dumb to think for themselves, and it doesn't matter if their civil rights were violated?

And where do you come up with this stuff that the peaceful protesters are pawns of the looters?  And that the looters don't live there?  You're just making this stuff up to discredit the innocent civilians and justify the violation of their civil rights.

I don't mean to be a jerk, but its telling that you're so quick to make up facts about the people arrested and (separately) about the people doing damage, and apparently think nothing of the police violating their civil rights.

OK, reading comprehension time. Apparently the term "indirectly" was overlooked. If you've never been in a riot situation, it's not all that hard to figure things out. Lots of good intention-ed people, voicing an opinion and marching peacefully. One or two of the less than desirable crew starts with a rock or bottle being thrown, mind you, under the umbrella of all those peaceful attendees and then it escalates and more of the less than undesirables fall in and there you go, a riot erupts and most of those that started it are way back of the good folks, until the herd starts to thin. By that time a lot of those good folks have been taken into custody, why, because they were running and yelling and yes, even some of them got caught up in the not following orders from the police or even went so far as to throw a canister back at the police or any number of things that people do when under emotional stress. Do they live there, most of them most likely don't. Do the looters live there, some of them most like do. Remember, even those that live in the area, most likely don't give a damn and probably are no strangers to law enforcement.

I'm sure your not a jerk, but just where in any of my posts that I cried "these are facts"? I used the term IMO and if damage was done, which it was, it was done by people arrested one would think. As for civil rights being violated. If your in violation of a lawful order, that has public safety measured and you willfully disregard that order, the rights of those not involved with your demonstration (business owners, local home owners, taxpayers (destruction of city property) trump your individual civil rights, because you are breaking the law. We all saw Baltimore burning and I wonder what those people thought about the protesters civil rights.

As for those being held for that extended time period, I agree with you that it was wrong, but face facts in this situation. The system was overwhelmed. It's an excuse of sorts but now that is a fact. Nothing we say here will make any difference to what transpired with this aspect. It is what it is and it's not pretty, but perhaps some of those that got caught up in it, will now have a better understanding of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and not be there again.

[dsc123]

Unbelievable.

When told that people were arrested, without being charged, and without and probable cause finding, without knowing anything else about the people, you say:

Sadly, the bulk of those arrested were the, "I saw what was perhaps an injustice" and I want to lend my voice in outrage. They are in fact indirectly pawns, being used by the true trouble makers, who want nothing more than to take full advantage of a situation to loot and burn. Those folks don't live there, they come from outside the scope of those neighborhoods.

Pure BS.  You simply made this up.  None of this is fact (edit: or, after seeing your post, I'll call it an "uniformed opinion" or "opinion not based on fact").  It just supports the narrative you want.

And compare that to this, your response when all you know is that a man died in police custody, that the police conducted an investigation, and that based on that police investigation, 6 cops have been charged:

IMO, this is not so much a rash reaction, but a political one. The lawyer for the Grey Family is connected to the Baltimore official pressing / presenting the charges. All six officers are being charged. Now here is a run down of those associated with the arrest. Two officers were bicycle patrol, only assisted in placing Grey into the van. Kind of difficult to assess if they actually did anything. The other officers were I assume from a patrol unit and again, don't know how much influence they had on the situation. The fifth office should have been in the van with the driver, because those arrested are actually in a caged / confined area and then there's the driver. Now this is where it gets really off the wall. The driver of the van, who apparently didn't have any hands on with Mr. Grey, is being indited on the highest charge(s) of any of the officers. Now, again IMO, this smacks of political slight of hand. Look at this hand, while the other hand does something different. As I said in my last post, it's going to get worse. When they finally get around to dealing with these allegations and findings that most likely will exonerate the police, especially the driver, Baltimore will explode and so will other cities. This country is sitting on a powder keg of immersible proportions and those out there that are looking for any excuse, will have a field day.

All we know about these cops is bad, and you're here calling...i guess the other cops who did the investigation..politically motivated liars.

Again, just making things up that support your narrative, as a former cop.

Quote:

The city imposed a curfew, those that were on the streets past the curfew time were in violation of the law and deserved to be arrested.  Without laws there is chaos, which is what occurred in Baltimore those previous nights when the police were told by the Mayor to "let them loot, it's only property".

You seem to be very anti-police and laws, but I don't see you proposing anything to resolve the problem.  How about the rights of the shop owners who lost their businesses to looting and fire?  How about the rights of those who lost their homes to fires?  Your anger and frustration seems to be directed at the wrong people.

I can get the part about someone who breaks the law should be arrested.  I get that.  But look at the bigger picture.  How important is it to arrest a peaceful protester after curfew?  I'm not saying that its a 0 on a scale of 1-10, but its probably around a 3 or 4, right?  And how important is it for the police not to unlawfully imprison people?  To ME, that's a 10.   Also, according to that public defender, a huge chunk of those people were swept up monday afternoon--they weren't all curfew breakers.   Many didn't even know why they were arrested, let alone held for twice as long as permitted by law.

I am certainly not anti-law--in fact, I have sworn to defend and uphold the Maryland constitution and its laws.  I am NOT a criminal lawyer, so its not like I've got some ax to grind against the police.

Nor am I anti-police, there are many good police.  A childhood friend of mine is a cop and recently shot and killed a suspect.  From what I understand, it was clean.  I'm glad he is safe and I'm glad he shot first.  But we're talking about 2 things here.  One is freddy gray, who was arrested without probable cause, because the cops thought (incorrectly) that he had a switchblade (seriously! that's what started this!  You could carry a switch blade on you every day of your life and no cop would ever both you), and who died at the hands of the arresting officers.  I am most certaintly anti- those cops.  The other thing are the looters.  I do not condone the looters.  But I also understand that they live in a world where the police treat them like they treated Freddy Gray.  Wright or wrong, that's the world they live in.  I am most certainly anti-the police mentality that contributes to that sort of treatment.

None of that makes it okay.  I'll say it again and again--looting is wrong.  Burning buildings is wrong.  That's true whether we're talking about the poor people in Baltimore, the Students at the University of Maryland after a loss to Duke, or the fans in Boston or San Francisco after winning a world series.

[Ernest Jones]

Stellar cover! A picture is worth a thousand words. (Especially if there's a few words with it...)

[newtogolf]

I can get the part about someone who breaks the law should be arrested.  I get that.  But look at the bigger picture.  How important is it to arrest a peaceful protester after curfew?  I'm not saying that its a 0 on a scale of 1-10, but its probably around a 3 or 4, right?  And how important is it for the police not to unlawfully imprison people?  To ME, that's a 10.   Also, according to that public defender, a huge chunk of those people were swept up monday afternoon--they weren't all curfew breakers.   Many didn't even know why they were arrested, let alone held for twice as long as permitted by law.

I am certainly not anti-law--in fact, I have sworn to defend and uphold the Maryland constitution and its laws.  I am NOT a criminal lawyer, so its not like I've got some ax to grind against the police.

Nor am I anti-police, there are many good police.  A childhood friend of mine is a cop and recently shot and killed a suspect.  From what I understand, it was clean.  I'm glad he is safe and I'm glad he shot first.  But we're talking about 2 things here.  One is freddy gray, who was arrested without probable cause, because the cops thought (incorrectly) that he had a switchblade (seriously! that's what started this!  You could carry a switch blade on you every day of your life and no cop would ever both you), and who died at the hands of the arresting officers.  I am most certaintly anti-those cops.  The other thing are the looters.  I do not condone the looters.  But I also understand that they live in a world where the police treat them like they treated Freddy Gray.  Wright or wrong, that's the world they live in.  I am most certainly anti-the police mentality that contributes to that sort of treatment.

None of that makes it okay.  I'll say it again and again--looting is wrong.  Burning buildings is wrong.  That's true whether we're talking about the poor people in Baltimore, the Students at the University of Maryland after a loss to Duke, or the fans in Boston or San Francisco after winning a world series.

Dan,  I think we agree more than we disagree .   I have seen enough videos on YouTube to agree that police throughout the country have become drunk with power.  Too many citizens (regardless of race) are brutalized by officers who believe they are above the law and have become accustomed to getting away with assault.  We are now seeing police forces acquire military weapons, drones, tanks, etc that far exceed the type of equipment they should have access to.

It is up to our elected officials to reel in the police forces and reset the established protocols for interaction with the public.  But you can't expect that to happen in the middle of violent protests and riots.  Mandating cameras be worn and upload video to a secure site that cannot be tampered with is a great first step.  Next step is to remove all the military weaponry that they have accumulated, the police is not the National Guard, if we need the fire power of the National Guard we can call upon them when required.

These are tough times, in the last year there have been series of violent protests and riots.  We've seen when left to their own devices these people will loot, destroy property and put innocent peoples lives at risk.  While I fully support the right to protest, once must use proper judgment and not violate the law while exercising their constitutional rights.

[phan52]

The officers certainly violated protocol, the van carrying Gray stopped for undisclosed reasons at least once, but if they were responsible for his death is unclear.  Gray was not properly restrained in the van which means he could have been thrown around inside or did attempt to hurt himself.

Without video we have little to go by but the word of the officers and the arrested suspect in the other part of the van who initially claimed he heard Gray banging his head on the walls but has now recanted his statement because his life was threatened.

Without hard proof of their innocence I highly doubt the Mayor will allow the verdict to be anything less than guilty for the officers involved.

Since when is the Mayor the Judge and Jury? I assume they will get due process.

Cops in Baltimore have a tough job but unfortunately the circumstances lead to systemic violations. IMO, these arrests are not surprising for a police department that has had settlements of over $6 million in recent years due to police brutality cases. This type of abuse happened regularly  for years in Philly (known as "the nickel ride") but they put a stop to it about a decade ago and are phasing out the vans as transport for lone arrests. It is too easy to get hurt in the back of those things, even without intent.

[newtogolf]

Since when is the Mayor the Judge and Jury? I assume they will get due process.

If the officers are found guilty I didn't mean to imply that they weren't.  The Mayor has influence over the DA and I'm confident that everything will be done to ensure a guilty verdict is reached to ensure further rioting does not occur.   I also wouldn't be shocked if a plea bargain deal was made where the cops served some minimal amount of jail time, lost their jobs and pension.  Baltimore needs this problem to go away quick, the only way that happens is if the cops go to jail.

[RJH999]

Yaaaaaaas.

[Ernest Jones]

Saw more than one protester raising the BPP fist.

[dsc123]

Dan,  I think we agree more than we disagree .

Totally.  Its a matter of perspective at the edges.  I give a little more leeway to the citizens than you, and you give a little more leeway to the police, but its all on the margins.

We are now seeing police forces acquire military weapons, drones, tanks, etc that far exceed the type of equipment they should have access to.

It is up to our elected officials to reel in the police forces and reset the established protocols for interaction with the public.  But you can't expect that to happen in the middle of violent protests and riots.  Mandating cameras be worn and upload video to a secure site that cannot be tampered with is a great first step.  Next step is to remove all the military weaponry that they have accumulated, the police is not the National Guard, if we need the fire power of the National Guard we can call upon them when required.

I think this is all dead on.  All this does is further threaten the population and enlarge the gulf between the people and the police.  I am hopeful that the militarization of police can be rolled back, but at this point I have little reason to believe that any improvement will come in the relationship between the police and the public.

[phan52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

Since when is the Mayor the Judge and Jury? I assume they will get due process.

Originally Posted by newtogolf

If the officers are found guilty I didn't mean to imply that they weren't.  The Mayor has influence over the DA and I'm confident that everything will be done to ensure a guilty verdict is reached to ensure further rioting does not occur.   I also wouldn't be shocked if a plea bargain deal was made where the cops served some minimal amount of jail time, lost their jobs and pension.  Baltimore needs this problem to go away quick, the only way that happens is if the cops go to jail.

Again, the Mayor has zero influence on the outcome of a trial. She may be able to pressure the DA to bring charges, but the verdict would be up to the jury. It all depends on the strength of the case.

And I don't mean a grand jury, like in Ferguson. That wasn't a trial where there is a prosecution and defense. The prosecution can lead a grand jury where they want and the evidence that is submitted is not challenged like in a jury trial. The evidence would have to be pretty solid for a guilty verdict in a jury trial.