The Prince George’s County Police officer who held a gun to a man’s head and mouth during a stop was sentenced to five years in prison.

Jenchesky Santiago was sentenced Friday. The incident was captured on cell phone video back in May of 2014 in Bowie and happened while the man was being dropped off at his own home.

Prosecutors say Santiago accused the victim of parking illegally even though he had not.

Santiago was found guilty of first and second degree assault, use of a handgun in the commission of a crime of violence and two counts of misconduct in office.

No one was hurt in the incident.

Prosecutors have described Porter as acting with “callous indifference”, alleging the officer ignored Gray’s plea for help when he said he couldn’t breathe in the back of the police wagon. Two weeks after Gray’s death, Marilyn Mosby, the state’s attorney for Baltimore, charged six officers, including four accused of murder or manslaughter. The terms are “evil motive”, “bad faith” and “not honestly”.

Prisoners were never secured with seat belts during field training, and though cadets were instructed to secure prisoners with seat belts, they were not shown how, Porter said.

The jury will return to the deliberation room at 8:30 a.m.

The letter dated Monday from school system CEO Gregory Thornton was sent home with students. In October, more than a dozen activists, including several high school students, were arrested after an overnight sit-in at City Hall. They will resume deliberations Tuesday.

A panel of eight women and four men were handed the closely watched case on Monday after closing arguments.

The jury was told to consider Porter’s conduct from the perspective of a reasonable police officer, not as a civilian.

The case went to the jury Monday after closing arguments. He could face about 25 years in prison if convicted on all charges.

There was no camera inside the van, and there was conflicting information from medical experts who testified about when Gray may have become injured. But on the stand, Porter said he had heard Gray say those words when he was first being arrested and not again.

The defense says the prosecution’s case was based on speculation, not evidence.

Defense closings were expected following a short break.

Porter faces charges of manslaughter, assault, reckless endangerment and misconduct in office.

Shaleena tells WNEW’s Jenny Glick she does not feel safe, or that the city is prepared.

Joseph Murtha spent more than an hour delivering closing remarks Monday.

Gray’s death was a “horrific tragedy”, Murtha said, but “there is literally no evidence” that Porter caused it.

Authorities say Gray broke his neck on April 12 while being transported in the police van, shackled but not wearing a seat belt.

Prosecutors said that was a blatant lie.

Porter told jurors he didn’t call a medic because Gray didn’t show signs of injury, pain or distress and said only “yes” when Porter offered to take him to the hospital.

‘How long does it take to click a seat belt?’

“Simply because it is hard to prove doesn’t mean a case shouldn’t be brought”, he said.

Other witnesses also testified that the driver was responsible for buckling Gray to the bench.

“It is the responsibility of the wagon driver to get the prisoner from point A to point B”, he told the jury. “We need everyone visiting our city to respect Baltimore“.

The van “became his casket on wheels” after Porter repeatedly denied Gray medical care and left him handcuffed and shackled but unbuckled, thus unable to keep his body from slamming into the end of the metal compartment if the van stopped suddenly, Bledsoe said. Rawlings-Blake says the city also is communicating with outside law enforcement agency partners. Six officers are charged in his death.

The apparent police killing of yet another black man, a seemingly preventable death in a city with a long history of police abuse, sparked widespread protests in Baltimore and beyond.

Following Gray’s funeral in late April, there were riots in parts of the city, drawing the National Guard to help quell the unrest.

“Freddie Gray went into the van healthy and he came out of the van dead”, prosecutor Janice Bledsoe reminded jurors. He’s charged with manslaughter, assault, reckless endangerment and misconduct in office. He was found unconscious and not breathing at the Western District police station.

Gray died April 19, a week after he suffered a broken neck in the back of a police transport van.

Using video clips of Porter’s statements and video from the scene, prosecutors argued that Porter knew that Gray was too injured to be booked into jail, but did nothing.

A Baltimore man shot this summer by a transit police officer in Northeast Baltimore had fled after the officer saw him taking a photo of himself holding a handgun, police say in new court documents.

The shooting, which occurred in June, has been ruled justified by the Baltimore state’s attorney’s office. Jamal Kimble was charged with various handgun offenses and assault, and is tentatively slated for trial next week.

In a search warrant affidavit filed in U.S. District Court in which authorities seek to search Kimble’s phone, police said that about 9:30 p.m. June 19, MTA officer Aaron Jackson approached a vehicle illegally parked in a bus zone in the 5500 block of Harford Road.

“As the MTA officer began to write a parking citation, he observed a male subject later identified as Jamal Kimble in plain view, seated in the front passenger seat of a vehicle holding a firearm in one hand and the [phone] in the other hand,” police said. “Kimble appeared to be taking a picture of himself holding a firearm.”

Jackson knocked on the window and told Kimble to drop the weapon, police said. The officer said Kimble threw the gun, a .45-caliber semiautomatic pistol, out the window onto the ground and said, “OK, man, you got the gun,” then jumped out of the vehicle and fled.

Kimble allegedly reached for Jackson’s gun after the officer caught him, and the officer fired one shot, striking Kimble in the pelvic area, police said.

Kimble has several prior felony convictions for drugs, which would prohibit him from possessing a firearm, police said.

Todd Oppenheimer, Kimble’s attorney, declined to comment on the allegations in the case. Of the recently obtained warrant to search the phone, he said: “It would be nice if the state got us timely discovery and let us know what was going on in the investigation.”

The MTA said Jackson returned to full duty after being cleared of wrongdoing in the shooting.

From masstransitmag.com

In a case with eerie parallels to Freddie Gray’s alleged mistreatment by Baltimore police, a Hampden woman who said she was given a “rough ride” by officers in 2012 is set to be paid $95,000 by the city.

Christine Abbott said two officers put her, bleeding and in handcuffs, into a police transport van, which they then “maniacally drove” to the police station, tossing her around the interior of the van and causing her further injuries.

In court documents, Officers Lee H. Grishkot and Todd A. Edick denied they gave a “rough ride” to Abbott, but Grishkot admitted that he did not strap or harness her into the back of the van as required by police procedures.

Last April, 25-year-old Gray suffered severe spinal injury in police custody and died after he was allegedly given a “rough ride” through West Baltimore in the back of a police van.

Six police officers have been indicted on various charges in connection with Gray’s April 19 death, which sparked protests and riots in parts of Baltimore.

Incident on York Road

This is not the only case of alleged police misconduct before the spending board tomorrow.

The panel is also set to pay out $125,000 to Dameatrice Moore, a bystander who was shot in the stomach and arm during a scuffle between a police officer and an unnamed individual on January 12, 2013.

The incident took place on the 5400 block of York Road, where police were breaking up a “rowdy crowd” near a pizza shop. Officer Quinton Smith said he shot Moore after he was thrown to the ground by another member of the crowd.

Moore, who was treated for his injuries at Johns Hopkins Hospital, was not charged in the incident.

Spawned by a Noise Complaint

The Abbott case started with a routine encounter with police.

Responding to a noise complaint on the 3800 block of Falls Road on June 2, 2012, Officer Edick talked to Abbott’s boyfriend, who was holding a party, and told him to put out his cigarette.

When the boyfriend refused, Edick threatened to use a Taser gun on him, at which point Abbott intervened and asked Edick to “calm down.”

According to her lawsuit and the city’s brief summary of the incident, Officer Grishkot “grabbed” Abbott and threw her to the ground, causing her dress to “become ripped” and “exposing her breast as she was stood up by the officer.”

Both officers refused to allow her to pull up her dress or call a female officer to help her cover her breasts and shoulders, which were cut and bleeding, according to her account of the incident.

Instead, the officers handcuffed her and put her in a transport van, but “did not strap or harness her in the back” of the van, which was “maniacally” driven to the Northern District police station.

Abbott was charged with “assault, resisting arrest, obstructing and hindering, and disorderly conduct,” and was detained for nearly a day before being released.

Abbott was hospitalized briefly for her injuries, and the charges against her were later dismissed.

“Because of conflicting factual and legal issues involved, and given the uncertainties and unpredictability of jury verdicts, the parties propose to settle the matter for a total sum of
$95,000 in return for a dismissal of the litigation,” according to the Board of Estimates agenda.

Such awards are typically approved without comment by the five-member spending board, which includes Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and City Council President Bernard C. “Jack” Young.

Last month, the board approved a $6.4 million settlement to the family of Freddie Gray to avoid protracted litigation, according to Mayor Rawlings-Blake.

Both the Gray and Abbott settlements include “nondisparagement clauses” that require the plaintiffs not to discuss their cases publicly or give interviews to the news media.

Baltimore Police continuing their investigation into why a high-ranking police commander shot an unarmed man in the leg in Southwest Baltimore on Monday night.

John Rau showed Baltimore’s WJZ his gunshot wound. He was shot by police Major Byron Conaway in a bizarre incident that unfolded along Washington Boulevard.

It happened in front of several witnesses including his young nephew and his brother, Ronald Birmingham.

“He said, ‘What do you got in your pocket?’ My brother clearly stated ‘Officer I only have a Chapstick, I only have a Chapstick.’” Birmingham recounts.

In fact Rau was unarmed that night, but witnesses say he was shot by the officer as he pulled his hand out of his pocket holding a small Chapstick.

“He missed my brother’s artery by so much over that,” said Birmingham. “There’s no way you can mistake this for a weapon.”

Witnesses say Maj. Conaway, seen in a recent WJZ interview, gave commands for Rau to show his hands.

Police say they’re still investigating why the officer stopped and confronted Rau to begin with and why he pulled the trigger.

“I think everyone wants answers and we want answers too, but we don’t want to put out inaccurate information,” said police spokesman T.J. Smith.

Birmingham says he tried to rush to his brother to stop the bleeding but he was stopped by Maj. Conaway.

“The officer clearly stated to me, ‘I got a bullet for you too,’” said Birmingham.  “I said ‘My brother’s bleeding’, he said, ‘Back up,’ and he kept pointing the gun and me and pointed the gun at my brother.”

Rau is expected to make a full recovery.

Maj. Conaway is on routine administrative leave duties during the investigation.

The police department’s Special Investigation Response team is in charge of reviewing whether the major’s use of force was justified. Those findings are then given to the State’s Attorney’s Office who ultimately decides if charges are warranted in the case.

In accordance with state law, Maj. Conaway has up to ten days to make a statement to investigators regarding the shooting.

A man was shot dead after pointing his finger as if it was a gun at a police officer who was chasing him for trying to obtain cough syrup with a fake prescription, police in Maryland said on Thursday.

Baltimore County police said 19-year-old Keith McLeod was shot three times in Reisterstown after “reaching around to the small of his back and abruptly whipping his hand around and pointing it toward the officer, as if with a weapon”.

Police said in a statement that the shooting on Wednesday was recorded on surveillance footage from a nearby business, which shows that after falling to the ground he “refuses to comply and keeps reaching into his waistband, as if for a weapon”.

McLeod was being pursued for attempting to use a fake prescription at a pharmacy, according to police, who said the officer responded to a call from a pharmacist and chased the man across the street. Witnesses reported the officer told the man to stop, police said.

“Narcotics detectives confirm that the suspect tried to obtain promethazine plus codeine at the Nature Care pharmacy,” Baltimore County police said in a statement. “This is a narcotic cough syrup, often combined with alcohol to produce a ‘high’.”

On Wednesday police had said “a confrontation occurred” between the two men and that officers had “not yet recovered a weapon” from the scene. Thursday’s statement said: “A weapon was not found.”

Reistertown is a suburb of Baltimore about 25 miles north-west of the city, where protests and riots broke out earlier this year following the death of Freddie Gray, 25, in police custody. Gray suffered a broken neck and six officers have been charged over his death.

McLeod was transported to Northwest hospital, where he was declared dead. Police released his name on Friday.

The officer who shot him has been placed on administrative leave, according to police, who said the shooting would be investigated by his own department and reviewed by the Baltimore County district attorney.

Two days after Boston Police Commissioner William Evans’ announced he was implementing a body camera pilot program, local civil rights groups have released a policy proposal for the technology.

The proposed policy outlines protocols for how officers should operate body cameras as well as how police departments should store video footage, make data available to the public and enforce the policy.

The ACLU of Massachusetts, the NAACP in Boston and the Boston Police Camera Action Team (BPCAT) say they applaud the Boston Police Department’s move to implement body cameras. The groups joined together to release a proposed policy Thursday that they hope will serve as a “model policy” for police departments across the state.

“The locations where they have adopted body-worn cameras, there has been a significant decline in complaints about police abuse,” said Rahsaan Hall, the director of the ACLU’s racial justice program. “So we’d want to see if that holds true for Massachusetts.”

Hall, who helped craft the proposed policy, said the main objective was to address privacy, transparency and accountability.

The privacy issue in particular also raises many questions about surveillance and civil rights — all core issues the ACLU works to protect. But body cameras seem to be a special case for the organization, which is pushing for the technology to be adopted.

“We’re certainly concerned with privacy rights; it’s a hallmark of our organization,” Hall said. “We’re also concerned with due process rights and equal protection rights and to the extent that those rights are violated by law enforcement. We want to be able to show that. We want to be able to prove that. We want to be able to provide redress for that.”

The proposed policy calls on officers to activate the cameras (both audio and video) whenever they respond to a call or are conducting an investigation, and to leave them on until an encounter was over. The policy also says officers should notify people when they are being recorded and in some cases ask the person if they want to be recorded — for example, before entering a private residence without a warrant, when interacting with a victim or when a person is trying to report a crime anonymously.

The proposed policy would prohibit officers from using body cameras for surveillance or recording activity that is unrelated to an investigation.

“We don’t want people just taped when they’re exercising their free speech right or freedom of expression or their right to organize or freedom of assembly,” Hall said.

The policy would also ban the use of body cameras in elementary or secondary schools unless responding to an imminent threat to life. It also says video that is improperly gathered must be destroyed immediately.

The proposal calls on police departments to store body camera footage for six months before permanently deleting it. In some instances, departments would have to store videos for at least three years — for example, if there was any use of force, a complaint is filed about the encounter or for felony level crimes. Video would also have to be stored for at least three years if an officer or subject of a body camera video requests it. Body camera video could also be made public through a public records request or for law enforcement purposes under the proposal.

Enforcement of these protocols would fall to the police departments under the proposal. The proposal says those who fail to comply with the policy should face “appropriate disciplinary action.” That would need to be determined by the management structure and disciplinary measures already in place at police departments, Hall said.

“This is a framework for them to use to contemplate how to use the body-worn cameras,” Hall said.

Local activists have been raising the issue of bringing body cameras to Boston since last year. The ACLU recommended using the technology last fall after a report found blacks were disproportionately stopped by Boston officers. Last month, the Boston City Council also took up the issue.

Commissioner Evans said earlier this week that he hopes to have the first body cameras on Boston police officers “within the next couple of months.” Mayor Marty Walsh supports the pilot program and said body cameras “could be a valuable investment in our police force.” In a statement Thursday, the mayor’s spokeswoman Bonnie McGilpin said Walsh “looks forward to reviewing the ACLU’s proposal.”

In a phone interview, police spokeswoman Officer Rachel McGuire said the department is aware of the ACLU’s proposal and Commissioner Evans will be taking suggestions as he moves ahead with the pilot program.

“We’re not just going to take the ACLU’s policy and implement that,” McGuire said. “It’s a suggestion and the commissioner will take it into consideration.”

Body cameras became part of a national dialogue on police-community relations in the wake of Ferguson and other high profile cases where unarmed black men were killed by police.

Many believe body cameras would provide greater transparency, improve community relations and help resolve conflicting accounts of police encounters. But the technology also raises concerns about privacy, costs, data storage, policy and logistics.

Cities across the country have already launched body camera pilot programs — including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Seattle and Washington, D.C. And in Massachusetts, a few cities are testing them out, including Worcester, Springfield, Methuen,Abington and Gill. Lowell police and State Police are also looking into the technology.

TheRealNews investigates and attempts to answer this question.

AUTO-GENERATED TRANSCRIPT

TAYA GRAHAM, TRNN: This is Taya Graham reporting for the Real News Network. I’m here in front of the Mitchell Courthouse awaiting the motions that are first being argued by the lawyers in the Freddie Gray case, who died at the hands of six police officers while in police custody.

I’m here with Paul Jay, senior editor of the Real News Network. Hi. Welcome, Paul. Thank you. What I want to know is, what do you think some of the implications might be of this Freddie Gray case? What do you think, how the city’s reacting to the case, whether or not you see more possibility of uprising?

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Well, let me start by saying that this is nothing new. The police abuse, systemic police abuse, has been going on for 50-60 years or maybe longer in Baltimore. There have been people killed by police often over the years. The reason this has become such an issue I guess is probably because it was caught on videotape. As we’ve seen in other parts of the country, when it goes public you can actually see it. But it’s a tip of the iceberg.

But the–we’re hearing a big siren, which is part of living in Baltimore. You get used to sirens.

GRAHAM: And helicopters. Also helicopters.

JAY: Helicopters, yeah. This one’s an ambulance going by. But we’re standing right next to a bunch of hospitals so that may be why.

What doesn’t, isn’t being asked in the media very often, is why is there systemic police abuse? You get the odd reference to poverty. But the connection between poverty and police abuse is not normally drawn. Because the next question has to be asked, why since about the 1950s in Baltimore have you had whole areas of communities that were vibrant communities where people had jobs, there were grocery stores, there was cafes, there was a real life, how those communities have been destroyed. And not just recently. The destruction begins around the end of the 1950s into the 1960s. And one failed policy after another has not changed the situation.

So it’s a complex set of issues, but the role of police in all this is to keep a lid on poor people. Because if people are living in desperate conditions they will fight back desperately. Sometimes self-destructively. The murder rate in Baltimore, most of the people that are getting killed are poor black people. In fact, it’s one of the safest cities in America if you’re white. It’s like, I think last year was about 240 murders, and I think 11 were white people. So this is poor people, poor black people, in a desperate situation with their families under–being destroyed. To a large extent–in fact, if you ask people in these areas what is the number one thing, the answer’s always jobs. Lack of being able to make a dignified living.

So the role of the police, and it’s not just about bad police and bad apple police. Even the good cops. They’re being asked to enforce laws, and these laws reinforce a whole set of social, economic and political relations that are based on some people have enormous wealth and a lot of people are living in utter poverty. And even the people that aren’t living in utter poverty, a large section of Baltimore go to work every morning. Sometimes they go to work again in a second job. And they’re making $8 and $9 an hour trying to support three or four kids.

I’ve been telling this story about somebody we interviewed at Johns Hopkins who was on strike a few months ago. He cleans–this guy cleans surgical rooms at Johns Hopkins. He has to take special drugs because he’s cleaning up blood and guts. He has to take special drugs to avoid getting HIV. He’s been doing this for 14 years. 14 years of seniority. He’s making $13 an hour. Yeah, oh my gosh. So why is he doing the job? Because unemployment is so high people are desperate for jobs. And if you’re desperate you take what you can get. In fact, $13 an hour is actually considered a good pay in Baltimore for most people. Never mind how ridiculous it is after 14 years of work.

So the high unemployment is advantageous to people who are hiring people. So this idea of having a big pool of unemployed people, it’s very good if you happen to own a business or you’re running a big hospital, or a pharma sector–and you can make your cleaning staff bear the brunt.

The other thing is people are speculating like crazy on real estate. All the government schemes to get rid of poverty have thrown money which essentially–sometimes it’s programs so people can buy houses. In fact the whole subprime mortgage fiasco that helped trigger the crash I ’07-’08 was invented in Baltimore in the 1990s. The number one cause of foreclosures in Baltimore in the year 2000 was subprime mortgage foreclosures deliberately targeting African-Americans. In fact, the city wound up suing Wells Fargo and a couple of other banks. And in the lawsuit some of the emails came out, and outright Ku Klux Klan racist language amongst the Wells Fargo people who were selling these mortgages to people.

So what’s the role of police in all this? “Society”–I put it in quotation marks because it’s really the top percentile who actually own stuff that really have the influence on what kind of laws get passed. But the kind of laws that get passed reinforce these economic, social, political relations where people can live in half a century and more, and no end in sight of desperate poverty. So then you say, police enforce these laws. And I’ve asked a cop, you know, what do you think of all this abuse and what’s going on? His answer, I thought, was pretty good. He said, well, what do you want us to be? You want us to be the hammer, or you want us to hand out flowers?

Now, we know there is somewhere in between there. But the truth is, the laws, the people that really have political power in the country, they fundamentally want the police to be the hammer. Because the only way to really solve chronic poverty is to have a kind of public policy that they don’t want. First of all, higher taxes on wealthy people. But even more importantly it’s really clear from decades and decades of public policy of–supposedly investing in the downtown harbor was going to revitalize Baltimore and solve the problem of poverty. Well, a lot of developers and hotels and now casinos have made money out of that development. Very, very little has trickled in. in fact, there’s pretty good evidence, we’re looking into it now, that more public money has gone into that development than tax money came out.

And it certainly has had next to no effect on the school system falling apart, on–in fact, the number of neighborhoods in poverty has grown exponentially even since all this Inner Harbor development. Even some of the other policies, like subprime was one, there’s been other get people to own a home programs. It caused a flurry of real estate. Real estate values go up. They go up–and speculators are the ones that have already bought the stuff. So they’re cashing in on this, public money goes in. It looks nice. Oh, you’re going to get, help people buy houses. Really what happens is people wind up buying houses they can’t afford, so they get a little real estate bubble going. And eventually they get foreclosed anyway and they’ll lose their houses. And then the city–the neighborhood’s right back where it was before.

So again, police are being asked to reinforce these relationships. And so police abuse is actually built in to what we’re–we, I say we. If it was up to us we wouldn’t have this kind of society or this kind of police force, so I’ll say they. What they’re trying to do in terms of maintaining the status quo in the society–.

So why is the DOJ worried? Why is the Department of Justice coming in to investigate the Baltimore police force? Why does Marilyn Mosby finally actually charge some cops? I’m not saying finally for her, but finally a state’s attorney actually charges cops. It’s not good for the system for the abuse to go too far. [Hardly] in the realm of–day of cameras.

GRAHAM: So this is a way of putting a lid on it, essentially. So just like you could say charitable operations, people like Warren Buffett simply are a way of giving just enough back to prevent people from being radicalized, from keeping the poor from actually uprising. So you’re saying it’s similar, that here it’s just an action just to keep the lid on things, just to keep the poor from going to going together in solidarity and uprising, essentially.

PAUL: I think when the abuse gets too overt and it’s caught on camera it’s a very radicalizing effect on people. And they don’t want the abuse to get so far. So when some cops cross a certain line they do want to pull it back. But they need–it’s a balancing act for them. Because they don’t want to send a message to the police, don’t be the hammer.

GRAHAM: Okay, I see what you’re saying. Thank you so much, Paul Jay. We really appreciate it. This is Taya Graham, Stephen Janis, and Megan Sherman for the Real News Network at City Hall.

Part 2

GRAHAM: Hi. We have here now Paul Jay, our senior editor for the Real News Network. Thank you so much. We appreciate having you come out and speak with us.

We’re here in front of the Mitchell courthouse, once again going over the Freddie Gray case where recent motions have been filed. The first motion filed is that city State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby should be recused from the case. The second motion on behalf of the defense most likely will be that this case has to be a change of venue, moved to another place, because supposedly there can’t be an impartial trial within Baltimore City limits. I’m here with Paul Jay of the Real News Network, our executive producer. Hi. Thank you so much.

What I wanted to ask you first off is the question that I don’t think a lot of people have asked. Our current mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, seems to have had her position somewhat weakened by recent events. And so now we have a flood of players coming into the mayoral race. Do you think that the case, the trial of Freddie Gray, is having some effect on our candidates? Do you think it’s affecting the current mayoral race?

JAY: It’s a good question. It’s hard to tell, because I don’t think we really know where broad public opinion on this case is right now. And I think a lot of the city, and the city’s at least 63 percent black, and black working people–they’re kind of caught betwixt and between on this issue. Nobody suffers from high crime and murder and mayhem more than black people do, especially working people and poor people. So they need that to stop. You got to be able to walk to the corner store and not get mugged. You don’t want to worry about an [addict] coming after you or your kid. So they need some safety. And they’re kind of stuck, because the only, at least perceived, place where safety will come from is from the police.

On the other hand they’re very aware–and I’m talking about broad sections of the people here, not just people living in the poorest areas, or the hood. They’re very aware that black people and brown people are targeted for abuse and targeted systemically because, as I said in the earlier interview, that’s what police are for. To enforce laws that reinforces a set of social conditions where some people are rich and a lot of people are poor.

So yeah, the politicians are trying to gauge where is public opinion on this. Because while a lot of the public hate what happened to Freddie Gray and they hate the police abuse they do want some kind of law and order. And they’re stuck because they know, most people know, the real solution to poverty and mayhem here is alleviate the poverty. Alleviate the social conditions. Get jobs, have decent schools, and so on and so on. But people have gotten so pessimistic about that ever happening, because the decades and decades that things don’t improve, in fact they get worse. Then they figure, well, then maybe we do at least need more policing.

GRAHAM: Many of the people that I’ve spoken to don’t see to have any faith in the political process anymore, whether it’s the Democratic party of Maryland as a whole, or even our current, incumbent mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake.

You said that the larger public still hasn’t made up their mind about Freddie Gray, but I think a–oh, I’m sorry.

JAY: No, no. They’ve made up their mind about Freddie Gray. And I think there’s broad support for the charging of these cops. And if anything I think there’s some concern, a lot of concern, that the charges might be dropped. I don’t think they buy or have a lot of sympathy for the argument that this is going to stop the police from being effective and doing their job. I’m not suggesting that. I’m just saying they’re not against having policing because they don’t know what else there is to make life livable.

On the other hand, they know more policing has never been an answer. I’m saying people are stuck. Oh, I think there’s broad public opinion in support of the charging of these police. Absolutely, people are demanding an end to the abuse, to the murders. There’s no ambiguity on that.

GRAHAM: I suppose it begs the question then, if the police are actually charged, assuming that city State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby actually successfully gets all the charges that she’s levied against these police officers, do you think it will make any actual difference in the average Baltimore citizen’s day-to-day life? Do you think it will actually affect policing in Baltimore?

JAY: Well, that’s kind of the most important question. And there’s, I’d say, a couple of parts to the answer.

One of the charges she had originally laid was the most important systemic charge, and that was the illegal confinement. It’s actually saying to cops that if you arrest somebody without probable cause, and you lock them up and you put them in the paddy wagon, and you send them back to the police station, even if nothing ever happens to them that’s in itself an illegal act. Not just not good procedure, not good process. Not just maybe a reason why the case might get kicked out of court, the charges might get thrown out by a judge. It’s actually you as a police officer could go to jail because you’ve essentially just kidnapped somebody. Because even though you’re a cop you can’t forcibly confine somebody unless you have probable cause. That’s supposed to be constitutional rights.

And the original charge Mosby laid said if you violate someone’s constitutional right by taking away their right of free assembly and walking around and habeas corpus, and all the rest, if you do this without probable cause you’ve committed a crime. And that’s the thing that would have been the most systemic in terms of changing policing. Not just in Baltimore, but if it held up on appeal, and I’m sure if it had been followed it would have maybe even appealed right up to the Supreme Court, it could have changed policing right across the country.

Well, she dropped that. And I think she dropped it because it was so systemically significant. Maybe she didn’t get how important it was when she first filed that charge. The State’s Attorney’s office is saying they dropped that charge because they didn’t want it to be a distraction from the murder cases and the manslaughter cases. In a normal course of things–.

GRAHAM: Doesn’t a prosecutor normally throw every single charge they can?

JAY: Well, no. No, you don’t. You don’t want to overcharge. It’s very important you don’t want to overcharge. Because if you overcharge you can wind up weakening your overall case. And some people accused her of overcharging, but the legal people we’ve talked to do not think she overcharged. But I think she came under enormous pressure to drop these charges. And–.

GRAHAM: Because of the implications.

JAY: Because what it means is what happens every day in Baltimore is that on a corner a police officer comes up and says, up against the wall, kid. Put your hands behind your back, kid. No probable cause. The kid’s just been standing on the corner or the adult’s just been, you know, black male of any age, really, is standing on the corner. Show me your ID. Pat down. And often, often, get in the car. With no probable cause. In fact, they call them walkthroughs now.

GRAHAM: Or abated by arrest, as well.

JAY: And they’re taking people back to the headquarters. And it’s just an act of intimidation. Of creating dominance in the hood, that we could pick you up and we can do what we want to you. If she had left those charges and if doing that, putting somebody without probable cause into a police car and taking them back to the headquarters, to the police station, if that was something that could send a cop to jail that would change day-to-day policing in Baltimore.

Well, she dropped that. Okay. So what are we left with? Yes, if these cops are convicted it will have an influence. The cops don’t like it. There’s been a lot of evidence and discussion that the cops have deliberately held back on policing since the charges. A lot of people say it’s one of the reasons for the spike in the murder rate, which is up 60 percent over last year. I don’t think it’s the only reason. You’re seeing a spike in murder in other cities in the United States.

GRAHAM: But that implies that policing actually prevents crime in the way it’s enacted now. That policing can actually prevent murder.

JAY: I think it’s obvious to some extent it does. I mean, if you’re on a street corner and you think you think you can shoot somebody and walk home and no one’s going to do anything about it, it’s got to give rise to more room, more space for especially–I would say more deliberate killing, more gang-type killing where it’s kind of thought out and more premeditated. I don’t think it has much to do with domestic violence, which is the consequence of terrible poverty and is done in a rage. I don’t think policing has anything to do with that.

And we don’t have good numbers on how much of the murder rate is this kind of more deliberate, gangland stuff and how much is domestic. Based on talking to some hospital workers they actually think the numbers are far, far higher on the domestic side than anyone thinks. But we don’t know for sure. But is it–but to some extent if you send the message out this whole area’s not going to be policed anymore, and people want to seek revenge, it’s a no-briner that it has an effect.

Am I suggesting that more policing is a real solution to crime and murder? Well, no. Clearly even with tons of cops and tons of policing prior to Freddie Gray, you still had 240, 250–and the only reason it’s 240, 250 murders–I shouldn’t say the only. One of the primary reasons it’s more is not that there’s that much less attempt at murders. They’re doing way better triage in the hospitals because they’re bringing back medical technology from Iraq and from the war theater, and they know how to save people so that the actual death rate is coming down. But it really doesn’t–we don’t know for sure, again. Terrible data. We don’t really know whether people trying to kill each other is down, even though we’re seeing a murder rate go down. It just means not as many people are dying.

No, I’m not suggesting the solution is more policing. The solution is obvious. The solution is jobs. The solution is social safety net, education, so on and so on. But to say, tell people in a certain area where there’s a lot of gang rivalry, and also people frustrated and going crazy in the summertime that it’s don’t worry, do whatever you want, we’ll take an hour before we show up. I think there’s some evidence that’s being done. I think a kind of deliberate attempt to say more mayhem, the more you need us cops.

GRAHAM: That’s a very good point.

JAY: So systemically, will this in any way mitigate the abuse that goes on? Maybe a little. But as long as police play the fundamental role as being the buffer between people that own stuff and people that don’t, and if they’re fundamentally enforcing laws that just perpetuate this long-term suffering, well, no. It’s going to be a very minor effect and over time it will dissipate, and we’ll be back where we were before Freddie Gray was murdered.

GRAHAM: So if I understand you correctly you’re saying some of these public programs like helping people buy homes, things along those lines, are just small gimmes. They’re the carrot, and the police officers are the big stick of the capitalist class.

JAY: No, I’d go further than that. Most of these little programs made money for wealthy people. The public money went into the program. It may have in the short term helped some people. But in the longer term, people who had to buy houses lost their houses. But the real estate speculators or the developers in the Inner Harbor, they did very well with all this public money.

GRAHAM: So essentially people in Baltimore have found a way to profit off of the poverty and the misery of people who live here in Baltimore City.

JAY: Yeah, it’s a good business.

GRAHAM: Thank you so much. This is Paul Jay, the senior editor of the Real News Network. And I’m Taya Graham, here in front of the Mitchell courthouse reporting for you, the Real News Network.

End

DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.

A man walks past a burning police vehicle, Monday, April 27, 2015, during unrest following the funeral of Freddie Gray in Baltimore. Gray died from spinal injuries about a week after he was arrested and transported in a Baltimore Police Department van. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

The aftermath of Freddie Gray’s scattered and seemingly piece-less death in police custody has been complex for Baltimore City – bringing tense relations among police, city officials, activists, and neighboring residents. What was originally seen as a mysterious in-custody death turned into national coverage and eventual rioting of the city’s police and businesses. Maryland’s guardsmen were then deployed through the city, curfews were enforced, and what went from protesting to rioting was now mostly silence, and the eerie control of military and police. In the proceeding days of Baltimore’s eruption, it was the primary task of many to ensure peace; gangs were even associating their organizations – helping enforce curfew and cleaning up.

Once what was like a show was finally over, the media pundits and participating class went back to daily life. The riot though, which has been the center of attention, respectfully so, for its chaos and disorder, is a microcosm of what is taking place in many other cities and states. Influence and distrust in state police has grown to its bloom stage, and now the response is being made by anti-police factions of all sorts – whether libertarian or progressive. Baltimore is not an exclusive city to the occurring dissent; as we have seen in the Tamir Rice and Eric Garner cases. In fact, this year over 700 have been killed so far by police, according to The Guardian’s statistics tracker. It’s reasonable to expect some rejection of authority.

What is being missed severely though by almost every corner of the room is the Drug War, and the Drug War’s affect on even Freddie Gray. Alone, in Gray’s life, he was stopped, detained and arrested 18 different times by city police. You could make Gray out to be the next Capone with that sort of count; what is interesting, is not the count of arrests, but the similarity and theme in records comparative to Gray’s. According to an ACLU report, African-Americans are nearly 6 times more likely to be arrested for cannabis possession than white folks in Baltimore City. And as ‘CommonDreams’ notes, “56.4 percent of Baltimore students graduate from high school.  The national rate is about 80 percent.” A very grim scene for youth, like Gray, in the city.

In the 18 arrests of Gray, he was arrested in 15 due to non-violent drug offenses, e.g. a ‘crime’ that does not come with a victim – he did not impose himself on another individual – he merely had a bag. The other were trespassing, destruction of property and burglary…all crimes that come with a victim – Gray imposed himself on an individual or an individual’s property. So, in this case, with Gray being a known ‘criminal’ to the police, the image is portrayed that Gray is a daily villain among the Baltimore residents.

However, Gray is not. And this is what the Drug War has tried to do, but failed at with individuals like Gray – they have tried to force the individual to stop selling, using or making drugs. Ignoring the fact that Gray is non-violent, the legislature sees it necessary to police the personal lives of drug users; interestingly, pharmaceutical drugs fit the exception in this rule.

In all, what is being missed in the room is that prohibition has utterly failed, and that Gray who is relatively non-violent, was a victim of the Drug War. If there had not been drug laws created by legislatures in Washington and Baltimore City, both monopolists in their own territory, then the police would have never arrested or even confronted Gray 15 of those 18 times.

Of course, Freddie Gray’s last arrest ended in death – but instead of focusing on the end – the reader should also focus on the beginning. What was Freddie doing wrong? What did Freddie have that was illegal? Did Freddie hurt people or property? Surely, the police officers who felt resources were needed to transport him, process him and then cage him thought he did something wrong enough. Actually what happened before Freddie’s death is not fully known even at this time, as details have not been made public by the Baltimore City Police Dept., and there seems to be no mention in media.

What has been revealed so far, is that bicycle officers were on patrol when one officer [Lt. Brian W. Rice] made visual contact with Freddie, and at that point the officer allegedly watched Freddie run. The runner, Freddie, had done nothing criminal at that point – at least from what officers could objectively know. However, instead of allowing Freddie to run, officers engaged in a chase which ended shortly after. That is where Freddie was detained and then searched. Once opened up and around, officers found five guns, a bloody dagger and some cologne that was actually just explosive material.

Just kidding, they found a pocket-size folded knife – and apparently, according to Marilyn Mosby, the blade piece itself is not against Maryland law. Regardless of the law though, Mr. Gray was in no fashion of the word ‘violent’ before, during or after the police detainment. Law in that situation is victim-less, in the sense that it targets individuals who have not impeded on or encroached on anyone else. Essentially, by passing the law, you are requiring all public enforcement, e.g. police and military, to enforce law through barrel of a gun – which is dressed as moral guidance: drug use or carrying a knife blade in your pocket – scary. These sort of laws, which come by the thousands, are what led to Gray’s death and what is being overlooked entirely.

Advocacy for doing drugs and carrying blades wherever you go is nonexistent in this paragraph, either. But it is time to admit that drug law policies and other state edicts are creating unintended consequences with the public itself. The relationships with police are no longer about solving crime, but handing out citations and chasing drug users – possibly even shutting down a lemonade stand. This has strained trust, and has created violence. For violence to exist in drug trade itself, laws have to exist. Without the prohibition of drugs, the black market monopolies who use violence are no longer able to; and that includes street monopolies ‘gangs’.

Even with Freddie, it is an example of a failure to prohibit drugs, as he is arrested many times for possession and distribution. The failure to prohibit is inherent with any object you try to ban. So to wage a war on ‘drugs’, knowing that you cannot really eliminate the drugs is fallacious, considering at that point, you are only waging a war on the individual who is in possession of said drug. Drug laws are an iron fist in velvet, a one-size-fits-all, socialist can-of-worms that should be done away with today.

One resident who was close to Freddie explained to the Washington Post, “He always got locked up because he’d tell the cops, ‘I ain’t afraid of you.’ He wouldn’t back down. He ran because they always beat him up.” Whether Freddie was afraid or not, he knew one day to run, and it was for good reason, because after the police caught up with Mr. Gray, they decided to let him tumble in the back of a van, instead of provide medical attention, per his request.

Not to fantasize over statistics, it has been under-reported that since the federalist’s ‘war on drugs’, started by President Richard Nixon, addiction rates in the United States have remained steady. Based on the government’s expenditures, drug prohibitionists spent $2 billion in 1970 (start) and $20 billion in 2010 (current) on fighting drugs, or people really. Increase in money funds has done nothing to stop addiction rates in the United States. The researcher of the statistics, Matt Groff, notes, “Drug use and abuse exists on a spectrum and as a society we must accept that some portion of the population will be addicted to drugs even if we don’t like it,” believing State prohibition will not create better results.

Friend of Freddie, who actually filmed the infamous video of Gray being carried off like timber wood, explained to Think Progress, “I just hope that whatever happens, Freddie gets the justice that he deserves.” In the coming months, court trials will be debated, hashed over and cherry-picked, but just remember that Freddie Gray is one more victim to the Drug War, and for that, he is dead.

Written by Ezra Van Auken for TheStateWeekly.com