[quote=CA renter][quote=spdrun]Sport, revenge, punishment, whatever. They’re accused of overstepping their authority. If they’re convicted, they need a few decades to think about what they did.[/quote]

We don’t yet know what caused his injuries, or why. We need to see what comes out in the trial.

In no way am I condoning what the cops did if they caused his injuries and subsequent death. We just need to know all of the details before we start accusing them of “killing for sport” (or revenge, etc.). If it turns out that they did more than just try to subdue/arrest him, then I’m all for jail time. But we just need to know more before we can make that judgement.[/quote]

There is a legal theory referred to as “res ipsa loquitur” which roughly means “the thing speaks for itself”. It is used to describe a circumstance where fault is presumed based on circumstances. Freddie Gray was riding a bicycle when the police began chasing him, so one can only surmise that his spine was intact. He was arrested and placed in a van, unrestrained (against policy) and emerged with a severed spinal cord. I can barely think if a more clear res ipsa case. I agree that an exlanation should be provided, but unless his spine sponateously broke in two, i have a hard time even imagining a scenario where the police are not at fault. The degree and distribution of guilt does require some investigation.