Baltimore Update

[Hagar]

52 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

That is what sooo many people do not see. They think BLM movement will somehow make a difference. BLM should focus on teaching the law (and the CORRECT LAW) to their followers.

TVC you really do a service when you make your law and legal comments concerning what police officers are burdened with. I hope folks in this forum are paying attention. You have taught me so much over the years......Thanks

and I have passed all that information to my Son.....he will be driving in a very short 6.5 months

 

+1000

[TxHoops]

5 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

Help me understand.

What specific laws would you change to make it "fair"?

Fair question.  I am not sure I am the person with the answers.   All men were not created equal (sorry Founding Fathers).  All lawyers are not created equal.  I predicated my answer with socioeconomic considerations.  To me, these are probably more indicative of the level of justice you receive than race.  Do you think OJ would have walked if he was poor and a nobody?  What if he was a poor white dude?  The answer to both of those is almost assuredly a resounding no.   There were a lot of factors in that case, not the least of which is he had absolutely the best defense money could buy. 

[TxHoops]

3 hours ago, stevenash said:

TxHoops- am I hearing an inference from you that the outcome of the case was predicated on factors other than the law?

No you're not.  I do not know near enough of the evidence in that case to make any inference.  My comment was a general one; and one shared by a large majority of the legal community if they are honest about it. 

[Big girl]

22 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

The law will have to change for that to be acceptable. Would it not be easier if the person being arrested would just comply?

 

Do you agree that if a person is noncompliant they should be executed? I didn't know that resisting arrest is punishable by death. Aren't cops taught to deesculate a situation?

[CraigS]

5 minutes ago, Big girl said:

Do you agree that if a person is noncompliant they should be executed? I didn't know that resisting arrest is punishable by death. Aren't cops taught to deesculate a situation?

If by non-compliant you mean attacking an officer or resisting by fighting with the officer once other means are used........then YES, the up to and including taking that person life is justifiable to prevent injury or even death to the officer at the expense of a non-compliant law breaking criminal....white or black / male or female . YES, ALL DAY LONG.

[baddog]

1 hour ago, CraigS said:

If by non-compliant you mean attacking an officer or resisting by fighting with the officer once other means are used........then YES, the up to and including taking that person life is justifiable to prevent injury or even death to the officer at the expense of a non-compliant law breaking criminal....white or black / male or female . YES, ALL DAY LONG.

Your words fall on deaf ears with Big Girl. She only cares that a black man was shot by a cop. Facts throw her off a tad.

[thetragichippy]

On ‎7‎/‎20‎/‎2016 at 10:20 AM, Big girl said:

Do you agree that if a person is noncompliant they should be executed? I didn't know that resisting arrest is punishable by death. Aren't cops taught to deesculate a situation?

That is the problem. You do not, like many, understand or want to understand the law. Those questions proves:

1. You do not know the law.

2. You do not read TVC's post (he posts CASE LAW for Gods sake!)

3. You have not researched it yourself.

 

[new tobie]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Well look at this!!!

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, new tobie said:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Well look at this!!!

Old story. 

Why do you think this is big news with the "Well look" comment?

 

[LumRaiderFan]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Englebert]

7 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

I'm sure many on the Left won't believe this since you linked to Fox News. They will have to wait until the story comes out on Huffington Post, New York Times, Mother Jones, or one of their more "reputable" sources.

[LumRaiderFan]

7 minutes ago, Englebert said:

I'm sure many on the Left won't believe this since you linked to Fox News. They will have to wait until the story comes out on Huffington Post, New York Times, Mother Jones, or one of their more "reputable" sources.

Noted...

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[stevenash]

32 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Noted...

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

I think everyone knew this was the likely outcome.  However, certain people felt it necessary, for appearances sake, to make symbolic gestures.

[new tobie]

1 hour ago, Englebert said:

I'm sure many on the Left won't believe this since you linked to Fox News. They will have to wait until the story comes out on Huffington Post, New York Times, Mother Jones, or one of their more "reputable" sources.

Im waiting for the Rush, Hannity or Oreilly show to come on

[Englebert]

6 minutes ago, new tobie said:

Im waiting for the Rush, Hannity or Oreilly show to come on

I'm sure they will mention it. Although LumRaiderFan provided you some links from like-minded sources, I applaud you for waiting for the "real" no-spin stories.

[stevenash]

15 minutes ago, new tobie said:

Im waiting for the Rush, Hannity or Oreilly show to come on

Well Tobie, just like Mrs. Clinton, the justice system found these people innocent.  Are you once again practicing "selective satisfaction" with the justice system?

[thetragichippy]

The problem is they were overcharged by the stupid DA Mosby. There was no way she could prove "intent"

[Englebert]

Just now, thetragichippy said:

The problem is they were overcharged by the stupid DA Mosby. There was no way she could prove "intent"

One that tried to prosecute without the ability to prove intent and one that chose to not prosecute but could show intent.

[tvc184]

55 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

The problem is they were overcharged by the stupid DA Mosby. There was no way she could prove "intent"

There was no overcharge. There were charges period that were wrong. 

About the only thing that could be proven as a crime in the entire incident was the driver committed two traffic violations and he could have received citations. The rest was just political grandstanding and Mosby's response today was more of the same. 

She pushed this case so that she could enhance her career but hopefully it will end her career and the lawsuits filed against her will be successful. With many large cities now opting for a $15 an hour minimum wage for burger flippers, she can still earn a "living wage". 

 

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, thetragichippy said:

The problem is they were overcharged by the stupid DA Mosby. There was no way she could prove "intent"

I don't think they were ever charged with intent and certain all of the charges brought did not require intent. They even brought charges for illegal arrest... which like the others, was completely bogus. All of the officers also faced charges of "recklessness" in his death.

I think most courts (and I know TX) use the "mens rea" (guilty mind) or culpable mental states of intent, knowing, reckless and criminal negligence. These officers could have been convicted of crimes if the prosecution could have only shown "recklessness" in his death.

The claim of overcharging is a favorite of television talking heads. When it doesn't go their way... the prosecution "overcharged". While in some cases that may be true, in many states (maybe all of them) a person can be convicted of a "lesser included" charge. For example if charged with murder, a jury might find a person guilty of manslaughter. The prosecution can go with the highest charge and let a jury decide which best fits the evidence.

In this case however, all officers were even charged with only recklessly causing death and not intent. 

 

[new tobie]

16 hours ago, stevenash said:

Well Tobie, just like Mrs. Clinton, the justice system found these people innocent.  Are you once again practicing "selective satisfaction" with the justice system?

Did you accept the clinton verdict?

[thetragichippy]

15 hours ago, tvc184 said:

I don't think they were ever charged with intent and certain all of the charges brought did not require intent. They even brought charges for illegal arrest... which like the others, was completely bogus. All of the officers also faced charges of "recklessness" in his death.

I think most courts (and I know TX) use the "mens rea" (guilty mind) or culpable mental states of intent, knowing, reckless and criminal negligence. These officers could have been convicted of crimes if the prosecution could have only shown "recklessness" in his death.

The claim of overcharging is a favorite of television talking heads. When it doesn't go their way... the prosecution "overcharged". While in some cases that may be true, in many states (maybe all of them) a person can be convicted of a "lesser included" charge. For example if charged with murder, a jury might find a person guilty of manslaughter. The prosecution can go with the highest charge and let a jury decide which best fits the evidence.

In this case however, all officers were even charged with only recklessly causing death and not intent. 

 

I didn't realize they could be charged a lesser crime?. Someone who is charged with Murder can be charged with manslaughter?  Is that what you are saying?

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

I didn't realize they could be charged a lesser crime?. Someone who is charged with Murder can be charged with manslaughter?  Is that what you are saying?

Yes. It is normally in the jury's "charge"  which is the instructions from the judge. The charge lists the laws that apply, the definitions that apply and any potential verdict from guilty or not guilty or lesser included charges. 

[stevenash]

4 hours ago, new tobie said:

Did you accept the clinton verdict?

By "verdict" do you mean the FBI refusal to prosecute?  If so, that is not a verdict.   From my small understanding of the law, you  need a judge and jury in order to render a verdict.

[new tobie]

3 minutes ago, stevenash said:

By "verdict" do you mean the FBI refusal to prosecute?  If so, that is not a verdict.   From my small understanding of the law, you  need a judge and jury in order to render a verdict.

Do you think that this is the first time that this has happened