So you are comparing police officers, employees of the government entrusted with serving the public, to wild animals that must be treated with the utmost caution and fear?
I don’t have grizzly bears wandering through my neighborhood, but I do have police. I should assume that a police officer is as rational and dangerous as a wild grizzly bear and I shoud behave accordingly.
And you don’t see a problem with that?
You keep saying this. It’s false. “Cause” (as in “probable cause”) is a legal term and you’re using it wrong.
No they did not. They had reasonable suspicion to perform a body search once he fled. However, since the search turned up no weapons illegal to possess, the police had no probable cause for arrest.
This has already been explained to you though, so I’m not holding out hope this time will stick. 
I don’t know if they’re lying. The trial should help us find out.
I don’t know – there are a million possibilities. Hopefully the trial will help us find out.
What’s your explanation for how he died? He got arrested after not having committed a crime, got thrown in the back of a van and then thought “as long as I’m here, I might as well break my neck against the side of the van?”
In order to pursue, they don’t have to have “probable cause”.
So you don’t know what happened, but you’re sure it was illegal.
If the trial finds them not guilty on all counts, will you be satisfied with that?
He wasn’t buckled in because he chose not to let them buckle him in and he got the back of his neck smashed because of it.
When did I say that? Why do you constantly make shit up? It’s like a tic with you. You can’t even control it, apparently.
It depends on the nature of the evidence presented.
And you reach this conclusion based on what? You know this … how? 
I submit that one must accept that your position isn’t a matter of ignorance (not even willful ignorance), but (in part) stupidity. And because one cannot fix stupid…
What is your evidence for that? And why was he arrested in the first place? Even if he ran, he had not committed a crime.
He wasn’t arrested, he was kidnapped.
[QUOTE=The state’s attorney for Baltimore, Marilyn J. Mosby]
Ms. Mosby faulted the officers’ conduct almost from the minute the police first came into contact with Mr. Gray, not just on the van ride. The officers who arrested him had no probable cause to do so, she said, describing the arrest as illegal.
[/QUOTE]
He (also) wasn’t kidnapped. There was no probable cause (reasonable articulable suspicion) to believe he’d committed a crime when deciding to run after him. (Rather unfortunately, a fuckton of police are terribly ignorant, and ignore proper procedure even when they know what proper procedure is. Quite often, the police will make something up; under the circumstances, all they could do was lamely refer to the allegedly unlawful knife that they found in his pocket after unlawfully detaining him.) Making eye contact and then running are both lawful acts. A person is free to decide (s)he doesn’t want to be anywhere near police (even if it turns out one is carrying an unlawful weapon, to be discovered only upon unlawful detention); one is free to give into the fight or flight instinct. One is also free to resist unlawful arrest.
Wrong. I cited the relevant Supreme Court decision already. Running after him was fully legal and justified.
Running away is not probable cause, but this issue is entirely beside the point. Even if the police had witnessed a heroin sale that lead to a chase, it would be intolerable if they drove in a negligent way that caused F.G.'s death.
I could see a nationwide protest where people go up to policemen, look them in the eye and run away.
For some reason I’m reminded of Full Metal Jacket:
“Anyone who runs, is a VC. Anyone who stands still, is a well-disciplined VC!”
If you know much about the law, you’ll understand that it is super nitpicky, and how states will apply it is up to them (if someone disagrees with the state’s position, naturally, they’re free to attempt to address). “[S]uggestive of wrongdoing” does not equal probable cause to suspect a crime has been committed. (Here, the cops would’ve been better doing the usual but telling a better lie rather than pointing to the allegedly unlawful knife that was found AFTER tackling (vs. he made eye contact and immediately turned around and ran, they might have said "we saw ‘x’ in his pants such that screamed it could *only *be (in their experience) an ‘unlawful’ weapon). Or they could’ve said they saw a baggie in his hands or other bulge in his pants that indicated X to them (in their experience) and that, in combination with his turning around and running, is what led to the decision to run him down and tackle his ass.
State local government is still free to dictate procedure to the police and what is and is **not **probable cause to proceed to do X (in this case, to run after and tackle someone). Ms. Mosby was not talking out of her ass when she indicated that the police did not have probable cause to run after the guy for turning around and running in the other direction. (And this presumes the kid in fact was engaged in “headlong [rash, impetuous] flight” v. wanting to avoid being rousted. So far, I’ve only seen in detail how story was told by/characterized by police.)
If you want recommended reading in terms of case law in Maryland, let me know.
Could become quite popular:
Watch Americans (and perhaps some illegals) run from the Cops! Ten times the excitement of The Running of the Bulls! Cops, much better chasers than bulls!
“American Roulette, will they live or die?”
Saturdays nights live from 9:00 to 11:00 on NBC – sponsored by Bwin, your best on-line bet!
Coming soon to a city near you!
Disclaimer: should this program run afoul of US laws for reasons unbeknown to us, we will try again with GITMO detainees!
The case was not about probable cause. You don’t need probable cause to run after the guy. You need reasonable suspicion. That’s what the court ruled on. You claimed that Gray was unlawfully detained after he ran. The case I cited shows that he was, in fact, lawfully detained.
The arrest may have been unlawful if the cops did not have probable cause for it. But the initial running after him and detention was lawful.
AFAIK Ms. Mosby said no such thing. Can you give a cite?