Lots going around in media circles and social speculations regarding the death of Mr. Gray, which is not 'unfortunate' because it is a case of murder. Legally speaking.
Despite not knowing many things, we do know evidence points strongly to a complete disregard for regulations, abandonment of legal obligations and plenty of proof that Mr. Gray was fine; Until cops catch up to him.
On those several bases and a couple of inscrutable attentions to details by Prosecutor Mosby, supported by behavior which can only be categorized as 'wanton', I predict there will be 8 convictions, as charged, in the case of death of Mr. Freddie Gray.
Here below are primary, irrefutable facts which make this 2nd Degree MURDER at minimum, as charged.
1. Mr. Gray was demonstrably healthy when police first encountered him. He was riding a bike, then ran through narrow streets to avoid them for several minutes. This eliminates prior conditions causing his death (like a weak heart, or overweight complications)
2. When raised from the ground, restraints in place, he was able to speak and did so repeatedly, communicating clearly that he was in need of medical attention. Therefore his trachea had not yet been collapsed.
3. Medical attention was repeatedly withheld by those with a legal duty to provide same.
4. Proper transport in the specified manner regarding restraints for passenger safety were disregarded. And the disregard was reiterated 4 times when the imperative BPD directive was operative for a standard of conduct.
Read more legal analysis below the Baltimore Police Department smokescreen.
Contrary to many people's speculation and many memes: it doesn't matter what Mr. Gray was doing or why police pursued him. There is a standard of conduct for professional of every avocation to uphold regarding their professional conduct and when a person in custody is injured by an officer, that officer has a legal duty to call professional assistance to prevent greater harm.
It all doesn't matter in the murder manslaughter trial of Mr. Gray, that a suspect ran, or that he had a knife concealed in his pocket before he was taken down. He did not threaten an officer at any point according to officers statements to investigators, therefore force beyond 'reasonable' would be deemed unnecessary and punishable under several legal theories. Those are what we can call immaterial facts to the matter of Mr. Gray's death.
If you're still with me, here's what matters.
Once in police custody, Mr. Gray deserves under his civil rights and legally mandated duty from arresting officers the prompt access to medical attention he repeatedly (prove-ably) requested. Evidence of the several stops to supposedly 'check on his condition' and his subsequent death from injuries suffered while in custody conclusively indicates that officers inspected and therefore are legally regarded as knowing that his care was below the standard, his injuries not addressed as required. These admitted and known actions prove wanton disregard for Mr. Grays' physical condition and injuries; for the Baltimore Police regulations for proper restraint in transport and therefore establish a 'state of mind' (intent) upon which the finding of manslaughter can be upheld.
In cases for 'depraved heart' murder, the parameters for requisite intent are simple.
It involves the deliberate perpetration of a knowingly dangerous act with reckless and wanton unconcern, indifference as to whether anyone is harmed or not. That is the very essence of putting an injured person requesting medical assistance into a van unrestrained, then withholding necessary medical attention in the ensuing route about town. Simply put, Mr. Gray was murdered in this manner and those involved are liable for that consequence. One can argue whether an officer could comprehend such results but cannot dispute the requirement under BPD regulations. (Meaning: that's it, toast)
A couple things regarding 'lesser included offenses' (LIO's).
Every crime has what we refer to as lesser included offenses. A burglary is the breaking and entering of the dwelling of another for the purpose of committing a felony therein. If the target act was not a felony but misdemeanor (the item taken belonged to the person entering), the lesser included offense of misdemeanor (unlawful) entry is included. The reasons for lesser included offenses include not enumerating repetitiously all the details necessary to convict of every crime. So prosecutors charge for what they believe they can prove and the 'lesser included' are contained in jury instructions. Got that? Many people unfamiliar with law (who isn't?) are understandably confused by all the mumbo-jumbo. Compounding this are 'legal experts', who cannot practice law for a living, who are offering their opinions on Fox and CNN... okay so I'm snarky about those wasteoids. Sorry. (not!)
I'm going to summarize this brief legal teaching with a different moral lecture. I've experience with both 'law enforcement' and police on several levels from teaching to undercover, operations directions, to enforcement of discipline in our 'system' and arrived at the conclusion from these many varied perspectives that police are racists because they regard themselves as better than and above the rules applying to everyone else...and deserving respect and instantaneous compliance because they are police. If it isn't addictive, I don't know what is. And I can assure you that most cops can relate upon 'being open' that they viewed themselves as 'justified in anything they chose to do'. I can't tell the uninformed why that state of mind instantly qualifies one as racist except this: every religious and democratic institution teaches that we are equals. The Thin Blue Line says differently. and that's my opinion.