Freddy Gray Payout

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 03:26 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Forensic evidence proved nothing.

Hence no criminal charges were filed.  

[fredtoast]

(08-04-2016, 03:28 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Hence no criminal charges were filed.  

So you honestly think that no one can be convicted or even charged without forensic evidence?



This is getting good.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 03:32 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So you honestly think that no one can be convicted or even charged without evidence?

Of course I do.

[GMDino]

So, in the end, a man was arrested for "running from police"  after he "made eye contact" with one.  He's taken into custody for having "an illegal switchblade".  Falls into a coma in the back of a police transport and has a broken neck.

And that's it.  No one is to blame. Another dead guy that we're all supposed to just shrug our shoulders and blame the prosecutors for overcharging. Or him for "running".

Damn shame.

Whether he was a criminal previously or not.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 09:37 AM)GMDino Wrote: So, in the end, a man was arrested for "running from police"  after he "made eye contact" with one.  He's taken into custody for having "an illegal switchblade".  Falls into a coma in the back of a police transport and has a broken neck.

And that's it.  No one is to blame. Another dead guy that we're all supposed to just shrug our shoulders and blame the prosecutors for overcharging. Or him for "running".

Damn shame.

Whether he was a criminal previously or not.

I'll do you the courtesy of actually responding like me and not Fred.  Even as a troll posing like him was disturbing.


I find it odd that you have "running from police" and "made eye contact" in quotes as neither of those facts are in dispute.  Additionally, the knife Gray had on him was, in fact, illegal hence your quotes are again unnecessary.  As for what happened to Gray there is evidence that he could have fallen after standing up on his own.  With your hands cuffed behind your back your head is very likely to be the first thing that impacts an object during your fall.  Do I know for sure that's what happened, no.  Do I know that the prosecutions theory of a "rough ride" (correct use of quotes alert) had innumerable holes in it, had no substantive evidence to support it and utterly failed in court?  Sure do.


Again, you and your buddy scoff and the notion of establishing contact with a person due to their response after making eye contact with you.  I've tried explaining this, it seems to go over you head, but I'll try again.  That kind of thing is exactly how proactive policing works.  Reading the physical and verbal cues of the person you are interacting with, or about to interact with, is a huge tool for an experienced officer.  I was going to make a thread about this last night but got way to into hoisting Fred with his own tactics.  Yesterday, speaking with a family it became very obvious to me within a short time period that something was wrong.  A few more lines of dialogue and I was convinced something was wrong.  A few more questions and the truth comes out, mom's been physically abusing the kids.  Get DCFS involved, turns out mom's been abusing the oldest, now fifteen, since he was five.  All because mom "made eye contact" or in this case exhibited odd behavior and responses to my questions.  That's pro-active, that's really the main focus of a good LEO.  This family was, at first, only peripherally involved in what I was currently doing.  I can't guarantee that the rest of those kid's lives will be easy, but they don't have to live in constant fear of physical abuse now.


All because of my mystical LEO psychic abilities.

[GMDino]

(08-04-2016, 10:50 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'll do you the courtesy of actually responding like me and not Fred.  Even as a troll posing like him was disturbing.


I find it odd that you have "running from police" and "made eye contact" in quotes as neither of those facts are in dispute.  Additionally, the knife Gray had on him was, in fact, illegal hence your quotes are again unnecessary.  As for what happened to Gray there is evidence that he could have fallen after standing up on his own.  With your hands cuffed behind your back your head is very likely to be the first thing that impacts an object during your fall.  Do I know for sure that's what happened, no.  Do I know that the prosecutions theory of a "rough ride" (correct use of quotes alert) had innumerable holes in it, had no substantive evidence to support it and utterly failed in court?  Sure do.


Again, you and your buddy scoff and the notion of establishing contact with a person due to their response after making eye contact with you.  I've tried explaining this, it seems to go over you head, but I'll try again.  That kind of thing is exactly how proactive policing works.  Reading the physical and verbal cues of the person you are interacting with, or about to interact with, is a huge tool for an experienced officer.  I was going to make a thread about this last night but got way to into hoisting Fred with his own tactics.  Yesterday, speaking with a family it became very obvious to me within a short time period that something was wrong.  A few more lines of dialogue and I was convinced something was wrong.  A few more questions and the truth comes out, mom's been physically abusing the kids.  Get DCFS involved, turns out mom's been abusing the oldest, now fifteen, since he was five.  All because mom "made eye contact" or in this case exhibited odd behavior and responses to my questions.  That's pro-active, that's really the main focus of a good LEO.  This family was, at first, only peripherally involved in what I was currently doing.  I can't guarantee that the rest of those kid's lives will be easy, but they don't have to live in constant fear of physical abuse now.


All because of my mystical LEO psychic abilities.

Well at least now I know not to make eye contact with the police lest they use their proactive policing to follow me if I leave the scene.    

I put those phrases in quotations because of the story I linked:

Quote:"Police have said Gray made eye contact with two officers on routine bicycle patrol and ran.

Roary did not have a clear explanation for why they ran, but said they didn't see any officers. "We just took off," he said in a phone interview from jail."

Two versions.  One from the police said they made eye contact and ran.  One said they didn't see the police and ran.

As for the knife:  it may have been illegal...it may not have been.  So, again, in quotes.


Another source that still says "they believed to have been illegal"  

Heck 2 days ago there was an article still arguing it.

Serious question though...and I am trying to engage you in conversation, not "troll" you:  How many times have you thought something was wrong and were wrong yourself?  Do those occasions (assuming they happen) cause you to doubt what you think or do you think that the next time you might be right so you pursue your line of thought anyway?  I would assume you always follow up because that is your job.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 11:07 AM)GMDino Wrote: Two versions.  One from the police said they made eye contact and ran.  One said they didn't see the police and ran.

So either way it is a fact that Gray ran.

Quote:As for the knife:  it may have been illegal...it may not have been.  So, again, in quotes.

The fact that the false imprisonment charges were dropped in several of the cases would seem to indicate that the prosecution knew the knife was illegal, or close enough for a good faith basis for arrest.

Quote:Serious question though...and I am trying to engage you in conversation, not "troll" you:  How many times have you thought something was wrong and were wrong yourself?  Do those occasions (assuming they happen) cause you to doubt what you think or do you think that the next time you might be right so you pursue your line of thought anyway?  I would assume you always follow up because that is your job.  

Do they happen, yes.  They don't happen very often and they happen at a rate that gets continuously lower with experience.  Do they cause me to doubt, no, because in every instance there was an alternative explanation for the person's behavior that was completely unknowable at the time of interaction.  In those instances the worst that happens is that someone is temporarily inconvenienced and then let free with a sincere apology.  I've said before I've gone out of my way to assist people who were being done dirty.  The concept of justice is very important to me and if justice involves helping the defense than I am happy to do it.

[GMDino]

(08-04-2016, 11:18 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So either way it is a fact that Gray ran.

Running isn't (usually) illegal. But that's neither here nor there as it caused the officers to be suspicious. Just explaining that there were two versions of why he ran.

(08-04-2016, 11:18 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The fact that the false imprisonment charges were dropped in several of the cases would seem to indicate that the prosecution knew the knife was illegal, or close enough for a good faith basis for arrest.

I'll take your assumption on this.

(08-04-2016, 11:18 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Do they happen, yes.  They don't happen very often and they happen at a rate that gets continuously lower with experience.  Do they cause me to doubt, no, because in every instance there was an alternative explanation for the person's behavior that was completely unknowable at the time of interaction.  In those instances the worst that happens is that someone is temporarily inconvenienced and then let free with a sincere apology.  I've said before I've gone out of my way to assist people who were being done dirty.  The concept of justice is very important to me and if justice involves helping the defense than I am happy to do it.

Thank you for the honest answer.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 11:37 AM)GMDino Wrote: Running isn't (usually) illegal.  But that's neither here nor there as it caused the officers to be suspicious.  Just explaining that there were two versions of why he ran.

I understood that.  I'm just pointing out that running when the police arrive is cause for a good faith contact with that person.

Quote:I'll take your assumption on this.

My assumption isn't necessary, the legal cases addressed this issue beyond a legal certainty.

Quote:Thank you for the honest answer.

You are very welcome.  I always give an honest answer.  Well, when I'm not hoisting Fred by his own petard that is.

[*bfine32*]

I think a point to address his injuries is that there is a chance they were self inflicted.

Of course like everybody else I am not privey to all the facts, but I do recall witness accounts of noise coming from the van while it was stationairy.

Perhaps Gray would uncontrollable in the back of the van and caused his own fatal injuries, by banging his head against the wall, ect...

Perhaps the officers all ganged up and took turns twisting his neck.

What we do know, is that this case was tried and those accused cleared.

[THE Bigzoman]

How can someone break their own spine?

[fredtoast]

(08-04-2016, 03:32 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Of course I do.

Why didn't you answer the question I asked?

Oh, wait, I see what you did.  You altered my statement to make it say what you wanted it to say instead of what I actually said.  

Thanks for proving how little police respect the truth and the lengths they will go to in order to deceive people.

[fredtoast]

(08-04-2016, 11:57 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You are very welcome.  I always give an honest answer.  Well, when I'm not hoisting Fred by his own petard that is.

It is not my petard when you have to make changes and hope no one notices.

What a funny definition of "honest" you police think is acceptable.

[fredtoast]

(08-04-2016, 11:18 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Do they happen, yes.  They don't happen very often and they happen at a rate that gets continuously lower with experience.  Do they cause me to doubt, no, because in every instance there was an alternative explanation for the person's behavior that was completely unknowable at the time of interaction.  In those instances the worst that happens is that someone is temporarily inconvenienced and then let free with a sincere apology.  I've said before I've gone out of my way to assist people who were being done dirty.  The concept of justice is very important to me and if justice involves helping the defense than I am happy to do it.

Actually the worst case scenario is that an innocent person gets arrested and either has to sit in jail or pay a bondsman to get out.

If you claim you have never arrested an innocent person then you are just flat out lying.  every honest cop that I have ever met will admit that they sometimes arrest an innocent person.   I understand why it happens because it does not require evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt" to arrest a person.  All it takes is "probable cause".  And any HONEST law officer will admit that innocent people get arrested because "probable cause" is not the same as "being guilty".  But it would be an impossible standard to ask police to have evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt" before making an arrest.

In fact this is a very good test for anyone who wants to separate the lying police officers from the ones that tell the truth.  Any officer who claims he has always been able to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt before even making an arrest is lying.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 11:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Why didn't you answer the question I asked?

Talking to yourself again?

(08-04-2016, 11:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually the worst case scenario is that an innocent person gets arrested and either has to sit in jail or pay a bondsman to get out.

Not in the scenario we're discussing.  Please do keep up.

[fredtoast]

(08-04-2016, 11:20 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Not in the scenario we're discussing.  Please do keep up.

The scenario we are discussing is when "you thought something was wrong, but you were wrong yourself."

And in that scenario clearly a wrongful arrest is the worst case scenario.

You are the one who needs to "keep up".

[fredtoast]

(08-04-2016, 11:20 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Talking to yourself again?

No.  I am talking directly to you.

I asked a question and instead of answering that question you changed it to something different before you answered it.

That is why I asked why you did not answer the question I asked.  

Understand now?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-05-2016, 02:25 AM)fredtoast Wrote: And in that scenario clearly a wrongful arrest is the worst case scenario.

No one mentioned arrest counselor, do try and keep up.

(08-05-2016, 02:29 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  I am talking directly to you.

Odd, it just seemed like you were talking to someone else.  Maybe a bald dude who works in the field of law.

Quote:I asked a question and instead of answering that question you changed it to something different before you answered it.

That's horrible.  Anyone who would seriously do such a thing is a complete coward and an utter douche bag.

Quote:That is why I asked why you did not answer the question I asked.  

Not answering a directly asked question?  Egads, what a scoundrel!

Quote:Understand now?

Que?

[fredtoast]

(08-05-2016, 03:16 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No one mentioned arrest counselor, do try and keep up.

I am talking about it.

The fact is that when a policeman is wrong an innocent person can get arrested.  The fact that you refuse to address reality does not mean it is not reality.

[fredtoast]

(08-05-2016, 03:16 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: That's horrible.  Anyone who would seriously do such a thing is a complete coward and an utter douche bag.

Thanks for admitting that you are a coward.  Many people are not willing to admit that they fear me.