The recent charging of six Baltimore police offices with crimes related to the death of Freddie Grey based upon an alleged illegal arrest reveals more than the overt political motivation of the local prosecutor. Her public statements also reveal her abject ignorance of the law when she stated his arrest was illegal. It sure appears that this attorney was asleep in law school when the subject of stop and frisk was covered.
The clear evidence in the case is as follows:
1. The location where the incident Freddie Grey is known as one of the highest illegal drug trafficking areas in the entire city of Baltimore. This is beyond dispute and has been reported by numerous media reports.
2. Court records reveal that Freddie Grey was a convicted drug dealer who was on three years probation for drug offenses. Normal conditions of probation in every state restrict those on probation from carrying a weapon of any type.
3. Freddie Grey fled from the police.
4. When captured he was found to have a concealed knife. Whether it was a switchblade or not is irrelevant since it is prohibited for a convicted felon on probation to possess a weapon of any type.
5. It also appears that the Baltimore City ordinance on carrying concealed weapons is much more restrictive than the Maryland statute cited by the prosecutor and it appears that this knife would violate that criminal ordinance.
Under the US Supreme Court decision Terry v. Ohio 392 US 1 (1968) the right of officers to stop and frisk suspects for weapons was clearly authorized.
Furthermore, in the US Supreme Court case of Illinois v. Wardlow 528 US 119 the exact circumstances of the Terry v, Ohio search for weapons of a suspect who fled officers in a high illegal drug activity area was decided. The court upheld the search and subsequent charging of a suspect for possession of a weapon who fled from the police. Since this case was exactly similar to the one decided the arrest was legal. This decision is the law of the land despite the idiodic prosecutor's wrong decision. Her charges are the ones that are illegal and improper! End of story!

Quote from: Bigwater on May 24, 2015, 04:37:17 PM
The recent charging of six Baltimore police offices with crimes related to the death of Freddie Grey based upon an alleged illegal arrest reveals more than the overt political motivation of the local prosecutor. Her public statements also reveal her abject ignorance of the law when she stated his arrest was illegal. It sure appears that this attorney was asleep in law school when the subject of stop and frisk was covered.
The clear evidence in the case is as follows:
1. The location where the incident Freddie Grey is known as one of the highest illegal drug trafficking areas in the entire city of Baltimore. This is beyond dispute and has been reported by numerous media reports.
2. Court records reveal that Freddie Grey was a convicted drug dealer who was on three years probation for drug offenses. Normal conditions of probation in every state restrict those on probation from carrying a weapon of any type.
3. Freddie Grey fled from the police.
4. When captured he was found to have a concealed knife. Whether it was a switchblade or not is irrelevant since it is prohibited for a convicted felon on probation to possess a weapon of any type.
5. It also appears that the Baltimore City ordinance on carrying concealed weapons is much more restrictive than the Maryland statute cited by the prosecutor and it appears that this knife would violate that criminal ordinance.
Under the US Supreme Court decision Terry v. Ohio 392 US 1 (1968) the right of officers to stop and frisk suspects for weapons was clearly authorized.
Furthermore, in the US Supreme Court case of Illinois v. Wardlow 528 US 119 the exact circumstances of the Terry v, Ohio search for weapons of a suspect who fled officers in a high illegal drug activity area was decided. The court upheld the search and subsequent charging of a suspect for possession of a weapon who fled from the police. Since this case was exactly similar to the one decided the arrest was legal. This decision is the law of the land despite the idiodic prosecutor's wrong decision. Her charges are the ones that are illegal and improper! End of story!

Anybody remotely familiar with the Law and Supreme court decisions..."terry" etc knows what a railroad this is...besides fleeing police can be illegal in some jurisdictions, I'm not sure about Md law but anyhow it would strengthen any "reasonable suspicion' under 'Terry" or add to any PC...a few points here...

I want to know what PC or reasonable suspicion the officers had to initially approach Gray...did they see a drug transaction? Did they recognize Grey? This will come out in Court. Either would go to the officers legality to approach.

Second, who was the other guy Grey was supposedly with...HE'S A WITNESS...WOnder what he'll say...rather what lie he'll come up with. Thats good because such lies will usually come out when thugs testify on the stand.

Third...knowing how narcotic units operate since I was in change of one, I can't help but wonder if this just the beat officers doing their thing or this was some sort of operation, if so Freddie might be on film, Won't that be a kick in the ass to the prosecution if Grey is on film doing 'hand to hands" for half an hour before approach by officers....

Problem with that is the libs own that city and the police leadership. If there were tapes the AG has them already!