Freddie Gray case: Baltimore Police Officer Edward Nero found not guilty of all charges


#1

msn.com/en-us/news/us/freddie-gray-case-baltimore-police-officer-edward-nero-found-not-guilty-of-all-charges/ar-BBtn4Jy?ocid=spartandhp

Officer Nero was charged with 4 misdemeanors. It’s hard to imagine it’s going to be easier to get convictions on the more serious charges, like 2nd degree murder if they can’t even get minor convictions.


#2

“Not guilty” in a court of law is a legal term in the hands of men; justice is God’s exclusive domain, and only he can pronounce someone “Innocent”…so I’ll ibide by the legal decision of man, and leave justice to the Creator without trying to second guess Him.

In the meantime I’ll offer prayers for the repose of Freddie Gray’s soul, and for the comfort of his family and friends.


#3

Unfortunately some people (some jurors evidently) still believe that a police officer can do no wrong. Hopefully they will wake up and smell the coffee one day. There are far too many thugs with badges out there and they need to be take off the street.


#4

This was not a jury trial.


#5

The court of public opinion, which has no time for such trifles as the evidence, may still well find him guilty, indeed may already have found him guilty.


#6

There are also people who believe that a police officer is always wrong no matter what he does. Believe it or not, even police have a right to a fair trial taking into account actual evidence, rather than just anti-police bias. Sometimes, that evidence may even show that perhaps they did nothing wrong. Just a thought.


#7

Officer Nero opted for a bench trial, there was no jury. A Baltimore Circuit judge heard the case and ruled.


#8

Judges are even more biased towards police than the average person so that really does account for it.

There are also people who believe that a police officer is always wrong no matter what he does. Believe it or not, even police have a right to a fair trial taking into account actual evidence, rather than just anti-police bias. Sometimes, that evidence may even show that perhaps they did nothing wrong. Just a thought.

Did Freddie Gray have a fair trial? No, and his death was ruled a homicide by the coroner. Homicides do not just happen.


#9

Excuse me, but this is neither necessary nor remotely fair.

The judge’s comments can be read in full here: baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/freddie-gray/bs-md-ci-williams-nero-transcript-20160523-story.html.

It’s best to restrict ourselves to disagreeing with his legal opinion as he has outlined it, rather than coming rather close to calumniating him.


#10

Six months ago Judge Williams ruled against the police officer’s motions to dismiss the case and against their request to have the state’s attorney who brought the case, Marilyn Mosby, recuse herself. He wasn’t biased towards the police then, what makes you think he is now?

A homicide isn’t necessarily a murder. It also covers accidental deaths which is most likely what occurred to Freddie Gray.


#11

I think judges in general are biased in favour of police officers, no one judge more than others. I have read the judgment, which I believe to interpret the law in a rather favorable way towards the officer, especially in regard to this points.

Furthermore, the court does not find, with the facts presented, that there was a duty on the part of the defendant to ask any questions of Miller before he assisted with the continued detention and ultimate arrest of Mr. Gray.

A homicide isn’t necessarily a murder. It also covers accidental deaths which is most likely what occurred to Freddie Gray.

Homicide: “The deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder”. This would admittedly cover manslaughter also.

Frankly, with all the advantages police officers have of being for benefiting from a district bias in their favour, ir would be reasonable if the law regarded any officer on trial as guilty until proven innocent. Police should be held to a higher standard.


#12

The fourteenth amendment begs to differ.


#13

In the US, it is the killing of one human being by another. The term covers accidental and justifiable killing (i.e. shooting a home intruder) as well.


#14

Peter26, for all your griping, if you knew anything at all about American law - and I mean ANYTHING - you’d know that “biases” inherent in US law favor the criminal defendant. When in doubt, a defendant is not guilty. If there’s a “bias” at all, it’s in favor of the defendant being not guilty.

If you don’t like that, and would prefer pro-prosecution, North Korea will surely have you.


#15

Oh yes, if I think one person is guilty, I must be a communist totalitarian. :rolleyes: There have been numerous killing by police officers in the US in the last couple of years. The officers in question are not convicted. What other conclusion can one reach other than bias? One death is an accident, two is negligence, three…?

And as for the 14th Amendment, a police officer is a state actor. Killing someone is depriving them of equal protection. What I would prefer is out of control officers off the streets.


#16

:thumbsup:


#17

:rolleyes:


#18

We would all prefer out of control officers and killers in general off of the streets.
Who has ever come out in support of out of control state officials on the streets?

That is not an argument against anything,.
What you would have to argue to make a compelling case is why your opinion is superior to that of the court, in this case.


#19

All those some how saying there is a bias against the cops, obviously haven’t seen the video of this young man’s body going limp before he was even placed in the van. His spine was shattered.


#20

Right. Even an execution is considered a homicide. In most jurisdictions here, we have 4 levels of criminal homicide (1st degree murder, which is either pre-meditated or committed during another felony; 2nd degree murder, which is usually the charge when pre-meditation is suspected but cannot be proven; voluntary manslaughter, which is either a “heat of the moment” charge or blantant disrespect for life; and involuntary manslaughter, which is homicide due to recklessness and/or negligence. Vehicular manslaughter comes under involuntary manslaughter), plus non-criminal homicide. Non-criminal homicide = defense of self or others, accidental shootings, and even “temporary insanity”. Usually a grand jury decides if criminal charges should be filed from a homicide investigation.

Not only that, but police are generally given the benefit of the doubt primarily because they are quite often targets from criminals, and have the responsibility to protect the public. They quite often must make split second decisions, much of which they would take back if they had to do the scenario again (often, they may believe that a suspect is targetting them with a knife, when there is only a stick in the suspect’s hands, but they’re too far away to tell and fear getting closer). And so the burden of proof on the prosecution is much higher than other cases, because not only do they have to prove that the police officer shot the suspect (easy enough), but they also have to prove that (a) the suspect was not a threat at all and (b) could not possibly have been seen by another person as a threat in the heat of the moment.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.