Apologies if this story has been covered. The DEA essentially pays a guy to steal his employer’s truck for use in a botched drug sting. The truck is shot up, the employee is killed. The DEA won’t compensate the owner.
If what is in this article is true, a big part of the case against the six Baltimore officers has just fallen apart:
Baltimore City code says a person can’t carry or possess any knife “with an automatic spring or other device for opening and/or closing the blade, commonly known as a switch-blade knife.”
A Baltimore police task force, commissioned to investigate Gray’s death, analyzed the knife and determined that it was “spring assisted” and in violation of the city’s law.
If true, that provides the “probable cause” for Gray’s arrest, makes the “false imprisonment” charges fall apart, and gets at least a couple of the six officers completely off the hook.
And when, exactly, did the police become aware of this probable cause for arrest? By any chance, was it after he was already arrested?
from Baltimore City Code:
*§ 59-22. Switch-blade knives.
(a) Possession or sale, etc., prohibited.
It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, carry, or possess any knife with an automatic spring or other device for opening and/or closing the blade, commonly known as a switch-blade knife.
(b) Penalties.
Any person violating the provisions of this section, shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $500 or be imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both, in the discretion of the court.*
(City Code, 1950, art. 24, §155; 1966, art. 19, §160; 1976/83, art. 19, §185.) (Ord. 44-057.)
Which is to say, it does not look to me like possessing a switchblade, if in fact it was a switchblade, is anything close to a capital offense.
From that, you get that the case may have fallen apart? It looks more like someone on the defense is trying to stretch the definition of “automatic spring or other device for opening and/or closing the blade” to include “includes spring to hold blade in place when open or shut”, and I don’t think it is going to fly, especially when the prosecution asks if anyone has ever been arrested before on the same charge for having one of those types of pocketknives.
Unless he brandished the knife before taking off but after making eye contact…as one does :rolleyes: and as nobody including the cops alleged, that’s probable cause for jack shit. It’s a complete red herring, in fact - one that at best only serves to play the “he was no angel” card. The officers who arrested him had no way to know he was in fact carrying such a knife, nor any particular reason to suspect he did.
Unless the knife actually had a spring-loaded blade (you know, an actual switchblade), this seems like a “throw it against the wall and see what sticks” kind of tactic that’s unlikely to provide any actual legal defense.
My every day carry knife is a Kershaw assisted open knife (a “flipper”). People have looked askance and asked me about my “switchblade”, but it is not and is perfectly legal in my state, which forbids switchblades.
No.
You’re mixing up the original detaining and the arrest. The eye-contact, then running then detaining/searching - that does not require “probable cause”. That requires “reasonable suspicion” and the Supreme Court has ruled already that unprovoked flight from police in a high crime area is reason enough for that.
The arrest came after the search and finding the knife. That’s what requires “probable cause”. The prosecutor’s claim that there was no “probable cause” is now debunked. That part of her case is in shambles.
“A Baltimore police task force, commissioned to investigate Gray’s death, analyzed the knife and determined that it was “spring assisted” and in violation of the city’s law.”
It is not “someone on the defense”.
“A Baltimore police task force, commissioned to investigate Gray’s death, analyzed the knife and determined that it was “spring assisted” and in violation of the city’s law.”
And by the way, here is another interesting point. “Probable cause” does not require the actual violation of the law. From FindLaw:
Probable cause for arrest exists when facts and circumstances within the police officer’s knowledge would lead a reasonable person to believe that the suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. Probable cause must come from specific facts and circumstances, rather than simply from the officer’s hunch or suspicion.
Since no less than a police task force, commissioned to investigate Gray’s death, has determined that the possession of the knife violated the law, it would be trivial for an attorney to show to the jury that it was reasonable for the police officer at the scene to believe that it violated the law.
It seems that the prosecutor pretty egregiously overcharged. There is no way she will be able to show there was no probable cause for the arrest.
So says “a Baltimore police task force” – that doesn’t make it so, and it doesn’t put any case “in shambles”. The prosecution definitely has its work cut out for it, but we shall see if this “Baltimore police task force” was an objective fact-finder or just part of the blue-wall, knee-jerk must-defend-all-police-officers-of-anything that seem to be so integral to many police departments.
As I said if (note the if) the knife in question was illegal, as it seems everyone except Mosby is saying, then her case is, in fact, in shambles and if she ignored the fact that it was illegal under Baltimore laws and deliberately indicted anyway that rises to prosecutorial misconduct.
If the knife is indeed illegal, then the part of the case that includes wrongful arrest and related charges might be “in shambles”. If she deliberately ignored this, then she might be guilty of misconduct.
But neither of these things have come close to being confirmed. This could be something or it could be nothing, and so far the only ones asserting that it’s something are the police and the defense attorneys. We’ll see if this was objective fact-finding or blue-wall nonsense.
BTW here’s the detailed article about what the task force is and how it was working.
Doesn’t look like “blue-wall nonsense” to me.
Liar.
Idiot.
ne’er-do-well.
No-good-nik!