Offline
Baltimore Reaches Settlement in Freddie Gray Police Death
By MARK S. GETZFRED
SEPT. 8, 2015
Baltimore has reached a tentative settlement of $6.4 million with the family of a black man who died from an injury sustained while he was in police custody, city officials said on Tuesday.
Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake said in a statement that the settlement with the family of Freddie Gray would be sent to the Baltimore Board of Estimates for a vote on Wednesday.
Mr. Gray died in April from a spinal injury suffered in the back of a police transport van, and six Baltimore officers have been charged in his death. The death set off protests and a day of rioting, arson and looting. A judge last week refused to dismiss the charges against the officers and ordered individual trials for them.
“The proposed settlement agreement going before the Board of Estimates should not be interpreted as a judgment on the guilt or innocence of the officers facing trial,” Ms. Rawlings-Blake said. The proposed settlement will be paid as $2.8 million in the current fiscal year and $3.6 million in the year beginning in July of 2016.
Offline
Just a guess, but the people who are insisting the police did nothing wrong will vilify the family for taking the settlement, right?
Victims are criminals, criminals are victims.
I fear I'm beginning to understand this world.
Offline
For all those people who claim that Gray's treatment was reasonable, and it was just an accident, consider this:
Nobody just hands over $6.4 million unless they know that they are going to get their asses handed to them if it goes to court, because res ipsa loquitur.
Offline
Perhaps, then, this explains what CNN is reporting this morning--that there was no civil suit filed by the family which resulted in this huge payoff. There's yet to come the individual criminal suits against each of the police officers. What additional financial settlements X number of officers is yet to come?
Offline
There's a cartoon makng the rounds on Facebook.
It's a drawing of 'officer friendly'
It starts with the caption "The problem isn't police brutality..." then goes on to say what a lousy job parents are doing raising their children
So sad that these innocent officers are being forced to kill people's unrly children.
Offline
If a death occurs during one of those split second, life or death situations, I'll bend over backwards to give the officer the benefit of the doubt.
But, when a cuffed, and shackled man gets his neck broken during a routine transport,,,,,,,,,,,, We've got a big problem with those officers.
Offline
Conspiracy Theory wrote:
So sad that these innocent officers are being forced to kill people's unrly children.
I don't thnk you intended sarcasm.
It is very sad.
Having couseled a number of officers placed in that position I can unequivocally state: They are scared for life.
They did not shoot to kill, they shot to live, but the life they now live is nothing at all like the one they had "before".
Their lives are forever reckoned as "before the shooting" and "after".
Offline
Tarnation wrote:
Conspiracy Theory wrote:
So sad that these innocent officers are being forced to kill people's unrly children.
I don't thnk you intended sarcasm.
It is very sad.
Having couseled a number of officers placed in that position I can unequivocally state: They are scared for life.
They did not shoot to kill, they shot to live, but the life they now live is nothing at all like the one they had "before".
Their lives are forever reckoned as "before the shooting" and "after".
"Shoot" is the key word. Shoot to kill or shoot to live. The act of shooting will inevitably do harm to someone.
Offline
As I noted previously, the most notorious cases do NOT involve split second decisions involving life and death.
Offline
The level of sarcasm was intended to be equal to the level of stunned amazement felt over blaming victims for their own murders.