Anybody know if ShotSpotter is good? From an NYPD press release:
This is one of more than 30 firearms that have been recovered since the inception of the ShotSpotter program, back in March of this year.
Three guns a month doesn’t seem like so many. But then to get 30 guns off the streets, back in the old stop-and-frisk would have meant stopping 26,370 people!
How does ShotSpotter work in practice? Is a response mandatory or discretionary? What about false positives?
“Mosby is getting her rear end kicked in court. Not by a brilliant defense strategy, but by the facts. Facts that she could have discovered had she conducted herself professionally and ethically.” So saysPage Croyder, who retired in 2008 after 21 years with the State’s Attorney’s Office. My last post highlighted her insightful blog.
In police trials like this, people look for solutions to grand moral and historical issues. But criminal prosecution is about the guilt of an individual. If you’re looking for answers to society’s problems, or just someone to blame for all the wrongs in the world, a criminal trial isn’t the right place.
Even among those who love the idea of prosecuting cops, ideologues who lap up and purr any time they hear “progressive” talk, I’ve yet to hear anybody actually defend Mosby’s choices or competency. Even those who don’t trust cops (sometimes for good reason) may have to accept that these cops are innocent.
Here is Croyder’s take on the current trial of Officer Porter (the first of six officers to be tried). She wrote this op-ed in the Sun from back in May. But her similar blog piece throws some extra punches.
A later piece, also from May:
I already discussed Mosby’s failure to use the important tools available to her that any competent prosecutor would have taken. I was willing to believe that this reckless failure stemmed from inexperience.
But her press conference was troubling in how far it strayed from a prosecutor’s duty. She addressed herself to protesters across the country, embraced their cause, called for sociological change, promised justice for the young and for Freddie Gray.
…
These words, together with her demeanor, drew praise from newspaper editors, TV reviewers and many in the public. But they were the words of a politician, not a prosecutor. As a prosecutor her performance was awful, violating her ethical duty and generating suspicion that her charges were political.
…
Mosby is in the wrong office. Once elected as State’s Attorney, she had to abide by ethical rules that she repeatedly ignores…. Politicians can lead wherever they choose. But unless prosecutors are bulwarks against politics in the criminal justice system, that system fails.
From June:
Death by no seat belt or medical delay would ordinarily be a case headed for civil court….
What to me remains most indicative of Mosby’s mindset is her pursuit of the two arresting officers, who we now know for certain had nothing to do with Gray’s death. On duty after Mosby’s office urged greater crime suppression in that exact location, these officers justifiably pursued someone who fled from them on sight, and with ample legal precedent behind them, took him down and patted for weapons. By turning this into a crime, Mosby has told all police officers that they cannot do their jobs as they have been trained to do them.
Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and [now former] Police Commissioner Leonard Batts are taking all the heat for the crime spike since Mosby charged the six officers. No one locally wants to point the finger at Mosby. I will. It’s mostly on her.
I said much the same thing. It’s not just that cops were worried about making a terrible mistake and then being prosecuted. It’s the legitimate fear Baltimore cops have of being criminal charged for doing their job correctly.
From October:
The decision of Judge Barry Williams to keep the trials of the six police officers charged in the death of Freddie Gray in Baltimore City demonstrates that judges, too, are human.
…
Legally speaking, Judge Williams should have moved the trials out of Baltimore…. If the top prosecutor, whose sole job it is to follow the facts and the evidence, was influenced by the unrest, wouldn’t the citizens of Baltimore be similarly influenced?
…
By deciding to keep the case in Baltimore, Judge Williams has created a substantial argument for reversal, something that trial judges try – or should try – to avoid for the sake of all parties.
Judge Williams has proved that he will work hard. A number of lazy Baltimore judges would have moved the case just to get out of the work this case entails. Nevertheless, those lazy judges would have been legally correct.
In the first year of her administration, with a million issues to confront, Mosby is being paid over $238,000 to watch a trial. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why: she has staked her reputation on this case, and she wants the judge and jurors to know it, to influence them by her presence. Never in my two decades as a Baltimore prosecutor did I see the State’s Attorney watch a trial. They had too much work to do.
Mosby and her team lack the judgment, priorities and experience needed to run an effective prosecutor’s office anyway. Mosby was a run-of-the-mill prosecutor who became a run-of-the-mill insurance attorney before election to the largest prosecutor’s office in the state.
Here’s her most recent post:
Her own probable cause statement did not support her sensational indictments. The autopsy report didn’t either, despite it’s legal conclusion (that was clearly influenced by Mosby.) And now the facts reveal that not only are the charges not provable beyond a reasonable doubt, but the officers are actually innocent.
…
In any event, there is no such crime as “homicide by no seat belt.” If one wants to call it negligence — despite other police departments (not to mention other transit vehicles, like buses) not using seat belts — then fine. That’s why the city paid the Gray family over $6 million. But there was no police brutality or a criminal disregard for Gray’s safety.
When Mosby loses and the officer walk free, then what? Bad leadership has consequences.
Page Croyder spent two decades with the Baltimore State’s Attorney’s Office. A few weeks ago I discovered her blog (thanks to a comment). The prosecutor’s office — the State’s Attorney in Maryland — and the court system in general is a big Skinner box of unknown for most people. Croyder offers insight.
People get arrested and somehow they end up in jail or prison. Even if the courts have the power, the prosecutors may be the puppet masters of the system. They shape police behavior and tactics. They determine who walks and who doesn’t. And all this in an elected underfunded office not represented by any union. The courts have no constituency to fight for dollars. Most people don’t really care what happens in the courts as long as they don’t get called for jury duty.
Croyder was never the most prolific blogger, which makes it all the more readable as small glimpse, “a small glimpse into the lazy, egotistical, dysfunctional world of key players in criminal justice system.”
I assume Croyder is to the right of me politically. Or maybe not. She’s no fan of O’Malley, but then, who is?
Funny thing is, if liberals read my blog with open minds they would see that I am no Attila-the-Hun. I support improved prisoner re-entry programs, bail reform, effective alternatives to incarceration, a radically new approach to drug crimes, reducing the barrier of criminal records to employment, and so forth.
But I do believe that there are people who need to be locked up for the public’s safety and well-being. Not forever (for most), but until the period of their greatest dangerousness passes. This makes liberals scream. They want more rehabilitation and prevention programs.
Fine. There’s no conflict there. But the existing criminal justice system still needs to improve its focus, prioritization and performance right now with the resources at hand.
I see her writing as refreshingly untainted by ideology.
Here are some highlights in chronological order. From 2012:
And the city doesn’t need such quick turnover. Having four different police commissioners in the O’Malley mayoral years wrecked the Police Department. We need stability… to conceive a plan, develop it, and achieve significant results with violent criminals over the past six and a half years.
We had plenty of stability at the top of the prosecutor’s office before Bernstein [under Jessemy], but insufficient competence. Now we’ve got competence. Add stability, and we achieve long term success.
From 2013:
The problem between police officers and judges over warrants has been going on a long time and should have been resolved ages ago.
…
Baltimore city judges are supposed to take turns being “on duty” for one week at a time. Since there are about 60 of them, this means they should have this duty less frequently than once a year….
But judges and police have fussed about this ever since I can remember. Judges feel that police bother them after hours for non-emergencies.
…
To minimize their own inconvenience, individual judges often make their own rules for reviewing warrants. Many, for example, refuse to sign any “narcotics” warrants after hours, which they regard as routine.
…
To me the solution is simple: police officers should do their best to present their warrants during reasonable hours, while judges should resign themselves to the fact that for one week out of every 60 they will be reviewing warrants after they leave the courthouse. They should just go home and be mentally prepared for the police to come over, not whining about officers interrupting them while they are out at dinner or the mall.
From 2014:
Marilyn Mosby, who just defeated Bernstein in the primary election, lacks the experience to fully comprehend the enormity of the task in front of her, let alone be able to hit the ground running. And the state’s attorney’s office will hemorrhage experienced people these next six lame-duck months, making the task that much harder. It doesn’t mean that Mosby, should she win in November, can’t eventually succeed. But her learning curve will be very steep and at public expense.
That’s some foreshadowing.
Next postI’ll highlight Crowder’s take on the current prosecutions related to Freddie Gray.
I don’t personally remember Timothy Longo, but I do remember his name. Was he in the E&T chain of command in 2000?
Londo testified in Porter’s trial today. Longo said that the van driver, Goodson:
was ultimately responsible for Gray’s care, and that Porter had notified a supervisor that Gray needed help. He said Goodson and the supervisor, Sgt. Alicia D. White — not Porter — had the responsibility to take further action.
“I believe [Porter’s] actions were objectively reasonable under the circumstances he was confronted with.”
Well said.
But what is more interesting to me is that Longo said officers can violate general orders, “with the understanding that they could face administrative scrutiny.” Of course that is exactly the way the police world works, but I’ve never heard it expressed exactly that way: go ahead and violate the rules; just be able to defend you actions. Rules aren’t laws.
Of course the average cop doesn’t trust their boss enough to do the right thing. But it’s still nice to hear such standards articulated by Longo.
Update: “Reynolds saysgeneral orders are acceptably violated all the time. Officers asked to use common sense and good judgment”
Great column by Tricia Bishop, if you still have free Sun articles in the bank (you could always subscribe).
The prosecution rested. Judgment of Acquittal did not happen, alas.
Judge Williams did rule that prosecutors failed to disclose that Freddie Gray had allegedly told a police officer the month before he died that he suffered from back problems. From the Sun:
Porter’s attorneys asked that Williams dismiss the charges against Porter, grant a mistrial, or strike the testimony of the medical experts who had testified. Williams did not grant those requests but said the defense could use the information.
The Sun on that BPD seat belt policy:
Chief Deputy State’s Attorney Michael Schatzow said Porter showed a “callous indifference for life” when he deviated from department policies. Defense attorneys have said other police officers routinely break such policies, but Schatzow said those officers should not be considered “reasonable.”
What’s interesting is that the “new” policy, says the department, came out on April 3. Yet a source, a person I trust, says that policy didn’t actually come out till after Freddie Gray’s arrest, on April 12. The department backdated the memo. I wouldn’t put that past them. According to reports, the April 3 memo “went out on April 9, just three days before Porter’s encounter with Gray in Sandtown-Winchester.” Wouldn’t that be convenient. But it was never read in roll call. Nobody seems to have seen it until after Freddie Gray died. There should at least be an email trail, that 80 page attachment. When did that arrive in the in-boxes?
Of course even if there were no 2015 update, the 1999 memo should still be in effect. Or maybe there was another update in policy between 1999 and 2015? I don’t know. How could anybody know? The whole damn system is messed up. I suspect the department didn’t know about the 1999 memo and assumed the 1997 policy was still valid. (Which I can’t find but nobody seems to doubt.)
So it’s possible that in 2015 somebody in the Baltimore City Police Department backdated a new policy to screw the officers involved in the death of Freddie Gray, unaware that the policy they were updating was actually identical to what the new memo said. (The 2015 memo might say the year of the policy it is updating, right? I’d be curious to see it.)
Either way, based on 1999 general orders or 2015 policy, all prisoners should be seatbelted. And also no police officer: “while riding gratis on any type of public conveyance, [is] permitted to be seated while other passengers are standing.” One questions at hand (the other is about delayed medical care) is whether violating the seat belt policy can be a crime (because Freddie Grey died) It seems like a reasonable person might have doubts.
Ashley Luthern of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel looks at the direct costs of a shooting. It adds up to more than $700,000. $400,000 on prison.
@PeterMoskos wins the “Most Profanity in One Quote” Award. https://t.co/Rt22OJRYjy
— Jeffrey Butts (@JeffreyButts) December 5, 2015
I’m humbled and honored to win the Golden Middle Finger award. I’d like to thank all the sailors and pirates who taught me everything I know, gosh darnit.
In all seriousness, this Guardian piece by Baynard Woods might be the first fair thing The Guardianhas written about police since the Coldbath Fields Riot of 1833:
“I can imagine for Porter it’s difficult,” said Leon Taylor, an African American who served as a Baltimore City police officer for over a decade. “It’s more difficult when you feel that you’re part of the community and the community is willing to negate all of the positive things that you’ve done and all the greater things you could have accomplished because of this incident.”
…
“If he’s convicted then his lawyer is under an ethical duty to present Porter with other alternatives to being sentenced for the crime or crimes for which he was convicted,” Colbert [a professor of law at the University of Maryland] said. “That’s where he’ll be faced with being offered a negotiation that would likely require his testimony against other officers in exchange for leniency in his ultimate sentence.”
…
Peter Moskos, a former member of the Baltimore police department who is now an author and professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, acknowledged that there is a blue wall but said it only goes so far.
“The general rule of thumb is: No, cops will not go out of their way to say bad things about another cop certainly,” he said. “But cops also aren’t willing to go to jail for the misdeeds of another cop. ‘Why am I going to risk my pension and my job for your fuck up’ is the general attitude … To some extent, when the shit hits the fan, all bets are off. You do have to cover your ass first.”
“It seems like they’ve adopted a divide and conquer strategy to get the desired outcome of the case,” Taylor said of the prosecution, but noted that ultimately it depends on the outcome.
Moskos was a bit more fatalistic.
“I mean the problem is, even in the best case scenario for cops, they’re still fucked because Freddie Gray went into the van alive and came out dead,” he said. “That can’t happen.”
Yeah, I got four bad boys and two f-bombs in there, thank you very much. Just for the record, we chatted for half an hour and there were long stretches without single a curse word.
As a side note, it always cracks me up when people who don’t know policing talk confidently about the “Blue Wall of Silence”: “There’s a very strong police culture that values and enforces a code of silence,” Colbert says. How the hell would he know?
Cops testify against cops all the time. Cops are testifying against cops right now. And right now people will insist it never happens. I mean, I bet Colbert knows a few professors, maybe some lawyers, who haven’t always been on the level. What has he said? How many of you would go out of their way to rat out a colleague? Do students tell on other students who cheats? Not in my experience. Hell I know of a married sociologist who slept with a student. Have I said anything? No. And this isn’t out of some academic “wall of silence.” I don’t even like the guy. But what can I do? It’s not a crime. And I can’t prove it. Policing is no different.
But one thing Colbert said does make perfect sense. Mosby needs to get a conviction against Portor. She needs to. Because if she does, she can leverage the sentence over him. “Reckless endangerment” can get up to five years (though it’s a misdemeanor… how is that possible?). Five years would mean three years with good time. Or, they tell him, you can walk free if you testify enough against Ceasar Goodson to get a felony conviction (Goodson is the only one of the six who might be found guilty of anything real). Such proscutorial games are standard practice, of course. But that doesn’t make it right. Still, if Portor is acquitted of everything, which he will be if he does well on the stand (which is not a given), this whole “charge everybody who was there” is going to come crashing down on Mosby, as it should.