Porter is the first of six Baltimore City Police officers to stand trial for the April 19 death of Freddie Gray, who died one week after suffering a broken neck and spinal cord injury after he was arrested and loaded into a police van and taken to the Western District police station.
Exactly two weeks after jury selection began, the jury of seven women and five men will retire to the jury deliberation room, likely this afternoon, to decide whether Porter is guilty of any of the four charges against him.
Those charges are involuntary manslaughter, second degree assault, reckless endangerment and misconduct in office.
Before that happens, the judge will give the jury instructions, and then attorneys from both sides will present closing arguments.
More
defense doing their closing now
ReplyDeletestate can make rebuttal
then probably lunch break
and then deliberations
The Mayor of Baltimore has activated the city's Emergency Operations Center a little while ago. It's disgusting to think this had go be done. What a bunch of uncivilized losers in that city.
ReplyDeleteI've been following this closely and one thing that stood out were some statistics. Out of the 30+ percent of detainees who are transported to the hospital in Baltimore, only 1.5 percent actually are found to have any type of injury or illness, serious, minor or otherwise by medical personnel. This 30+ percent doesn't include those who claim they are hurt or sick and it's determined they are faking. It did come out in the trial that if a detainee keeps it up about being sick or hurt and they are only suspected of a minor crime, the police will let them go.
ReplyDeleteI would have thought the lack of evidence would have stood out more to you.
Deletedefense finished
ReplyDeletestate coming back with rebuttal
Def atty Murths said assumptions made by state, medical examiner about sequence of events are "astonishing" & "scary"
this is true and anyone with a basic knowledge of the justice system should be outraged that this miscarriage of justice is occurring. If you aren't outraged do not bother commenting because you are a clueless ignorant fool who isn't worth the time of anyone intelligent. The justice system is fact based and not a place to assume.
Brilliant however trying him first if you know what I mean.
ReplyDeleteall done
ReplyDeletebreak until 2:15 then it goes to the jury
1:24 I think the decision to try him first was because Porter, while not certain because Gray was not showing any signs of obvious injury or distress, was concerned enough to suggest that Gray may be in need of some medical attention. None of the other officers said that in their initial statements. If he is found not guilty it will be much harder if not impossible to convict any of the others. I think trying him first is a test so to speak.
ReplyDeletevery much a lack of evidence 1:28 and the assumptions made by the state were shot down by defense witnesses, who were credible and knowledgeable. The reasonable doubt is too great for anyone looking objectively at the case to ignore.
ReplyDeletejury officially entered deliberations just under 5 mins ago
ReplyDeletePorter and his mother sat together in hallway during 45 min break
[Judge tells jury they have to consider whether Porter's statements to police were voluntary; if not, they must "disregard" them.]
ReplyDeleteYou can't unring a bell.
It was the judge's responsibility to make the determination as to whether the statements were voluntary and admissible or not during pretrial hearings.
Matters of law concerning the admissibility of evidence are the province of the judge and handled in pretrial motions and hearings.
While it's true that the jury can decide what if any weight to give evidence the judge allowed to be presented, it's not the jury's place to determine whether or not the judge erred in allowing in evidence that should have been excluded as a matter of law. That would be the province of the appellate court.
the alternate jurors have been dismissed and are being taken out in a van to keep their id anon
ReplyDeleteChristmas Looting will start within one minute after his acquittal.
ReplyDeleteThe weather is warm so the congress will be active.
ReplyDeleteI would vote not guilty on all charges. The states witness couldn't say exactly when the injury occurred. Defense had several prominent MD's testify that with that type of injury Gray would have not been able to move, talk or breath immediately so it had to happen after the 2nd to last stop. Those witnesses' curriculum vitae made the state's witnesses look like inexperienced amateurs.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the seat belt I think it would have been unreasonable for any of the officers to climb in that van and seat belt Gray in. However passive his actions were in his obvious resistance of being arrested that could have changed in a second and he could have become dangerous.
The video clearly shows his passive resistance and that proves he did not want to go to jail. He was not to be trusted. A thug is a thug and they do not deserve the benefit of doubt. He was a criminal. You don't trust him, ever.
The defense experts at least one who wrote PD dept's policy said policies aren't set in stone and to be obeyed at all times. Officer discretion is an option as long as the officer can identify why they deviated from policy. Besides since when did an employee breech of policy become a law and that is what is bothersome. I agree with above. Anyone who supports the conviction of any of these officers is ignorant of the law and should not be offering up their opinion because it would only prove to spread more ignorance. Ignorance has been a major problem with this whole issue as it was in the George Zimmerman/Michael Brown cases.
3:59 none of this has anything to do with the law and to be honest im not sure the verdict will be either
ReplyDeleteI hope he's found not guilty. I have no sympathy for FG or his family. To me they aren't human. Mother heroin addict running around making babies with losers. Welfare sponges. FG is no better than the terrorists who killed the 14 people in CA. Society is better off with him dead. Surely his heroin he sold killed people either directly or indirectly. It's hard to see people like this as human because dogs are more civilized and provide for their young better and aren't out creating war zones out of their neighborhoods.
ReplyDeleteAnd to think his mom is a multi milionare.
ReplyDeleteProbably not anymore. It's been a couple weeks, at least.
DeleteSo black lives matters burnt down a city over a black man not seat belting another black in his seat. Whoa, they have strict guidelines. Geez.
ReplyDeleteJury's asked for a few definitions and to go home at 5:30. I think they probably have reached a decision but want to sleep on it.
ReplyDeleteNot quite 4:42. The lawyers will get a lot and taxes. Some goes to his father and some goes into Freddie's estate to pay U of MD Medical System for his week stay and surgery in Shock Trauma. That bill is in excess of $100,000. She will walk with maybe a million though that's up in the air, because the council has threatened to block the settlement if the mayor pays an outside law firm to handle justice dept investigation.
3:48 That was clever. If you didn't catch it, look it up in the dictionary.
ReplyDeleteJury to go home.
ReplyDeleteMy take as of this point, not guilty as to manslaughter and
assault 2. They asked for definition of evil intent. This goes to misconduct in office. In order to be guilty of misconduct there must be evil intent.
I think most jurors want to acquit on all charges but a few are hung up on the misconduct and reckless endangerment. Could be they don't want to let Officer Porter off all together.
I predict not guilty of all charges will be the end result.
531 you never really no what a jury will do until the verdict.. Sounds like to me they have found him guilty.. Otherwise it would be more of a pee break then come back with not guilty. However I've been told the longer it goes the better it is for the defendent.
DeleteJurors also asked to come in at 8:30 tomorrow morning
ReplyDeleteI predict they've come to a not guilty on all charges verdict already. They chose to not announce it because of darkness and fear of the forth coming riots and they want to get home tonight. It's been a long day for them and a long few weeks. They want it over and only to get home. Tomorrow they will announce early so when the riots begin, officials have all day during daylight hours how to figure out how to get them home safely and undetected. My crystal ball doesn't lie.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe closing arguments were pretty much as expected.
The defense has the evidence and the law.
The prosecution has “spiderman” (With great power comes great responsibility-I know Voltaire but also spiderman) and BS.
@3:00-What I found amazing was that the judge allowed Porter’s statements to be admitted in the first place, then tells the jury to ignore them if they believed them not voluntary. That's reversible error. The judge decides the admissibility of evidence. He doesn’t admit evidence and then tell the jury to ignore it if they believe it is involuntary.
ReplyDelete@6:42-I think you are on to something. The jurors asked if the jury room was going to be locked. This has me thinking the foreperson has already filled out the verdict forms. I'm leaning across the board acquittal and the jurors are fearful for their own safety and yes would prefer verdict to be read in the AM.
Today a Chicago cop, Glenn Evans, was acquitted of charges that he shoved a gun down someones throat.
ReplyDeleteI’m sure Rahm was hoping for a quick not guilty verdict, so the riots can distract everyone from his troubles in Chicago.
ReplyDeleteDue to lack of substantial evidence, my prediction is “not guilty” on all counts. I don’t see any way that the entire jury can get over the reasonable doubt standard for any of the counts. However, it’s possible that there could be a hung jury on one or more counts but no convictions.
The more I learned about officer Porter during this trial, the more I came to realize that he is the kind of cop people in any city should want more of. He treats people including the lawbreakers with respect and gets his job done very peacefully. If it were not for Baltimore politics these charges would never have occurred.
700pm are you at the court house warching?
DeleteThe jury asked for the definition of "evil motive,” “bad faith” and “not honestly."
ReplyDeleteAfter channeling with my spirit guides, I divine that there are one maybe two holdouts for guilty of one of the lessor charges. The other jurors asked the judge for the definitions to force the holdout jurors to be faced with the truth and find the good officer not guilty of all charges.
No 11:00 not at the courthouse watching, but I have read hours upon hours of materials covering these trials including media reports, interviews, filed court docs. The Wash Post published an excellent article about Officer Porter's life back in September. Anyone (with morals of course) would be proud to have him as a son. If he were anything but what I posted above you can be assured without any doubt that the media would have uncovered it.
ReplyDeleteAlso his mother Helena Porter deserves credit for raising him and is a role model for young single mothers. She was a high school dropout and 17 when he was born. His brother was born 17 months later. She obtained her GED and went on to become a medical technician. His father was in the military and they kept on good terms and eventually married. She was determined to get her sons out of west Baltimore and was able to purchase a home in a better neighborhood in north Baltimore.
The judge refused to clarify the phrases for the jurors. I think the one or two jurors who were unclear now have bad feelings against the state. They may feel since the judge won't explain the legal definition of the phrases , then the state can go jump in the lake and that their time has been wasted by not helping them get through this with regard for the specifics.
ReplyDeleteI am feeling stronger this morning that they are less likely to convict because they are unsure of the technical details that they've been asked to consider and they don't want to convict Officer Porter through a misunderstanding.
We shall see.
11:00 if you are insinuating that someone has to be in the courtroom to get a complete and accurate picture of Officer Porter's character than you are uninformed. As a defendant in a criminal case, you are only going to get what is allowed by the rules which by no means give you even a slight picture into someone's character and background.
ReplyDeleteThis info comes from outside sources like the media.
912. This is why is asked if you were in the court room.
ReplyDelete