Jump to content

Talk:Killing of Freddie Gray

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 107.144.213.97 (talk) at 18:04, 2 May 2015 (→"legal sized pocket knife"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


2015 Baltimore riots

I object to [1] because of the abundance of sources calling the aftermath the 2015 Baltimore riots. EllenCT (talk) 23:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might make sense to have two separate articles; one on the riots, and one on the death. The death article would reference the riots where they overlap, but the riots page should cover those events, particularly if they stray from the death, in more detail. As a somewhat related note, I just deleted 2015 Baltimore Riots as it was a copy-paste move of the "Protests and riots" section. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:39, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are redirects at 2015 Baltimore riots, 2015 Baltimore unrest and Baltimore unrest that can be pointed at wherever you decide to put the split. Monty845 23:42, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There needs to be a separate article for this given the magnitude, unless you think that this wont be notable with multiple buildings burned/people injured. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:34, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's premature at this point, since this isn't nearly on the level of Ferguson unrest. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:40, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How so? They have called in the national guard and 5,000 police to the city. Unlike Ferguson the looting and chaos looks to be widespread. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:42, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We cannot predict the future. For all we know, the riots could die down by the next day (though that's unlikely). I suggest we wait for a while longer before we have further proof that this needs a separate article. Libertarian12111971 (talk) 01:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree -- Why rush to split the article? It's barely been two days and there's no strong evidence yet that this will be known long term by that title. Let the info accrue in that section, and wait for reliable sources to establish the significance of the news events. -- Fuzheado | Talk 01:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me to wait, also. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I also oppose this proposal for now, unless it can be shown that the riots have had a long-lasting or widely-spreading effect. Unless it reaches the quality of the Ferguson riots, I don't think that the Baltimore riots need to be splitted right now. Epic Genius (talk) 02:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple structures burned down. I suggest we split article immediately into separate article 2015 Baltimore Riots - Flatbushthecat (talk) 02:20, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support split: This has now escalated to massive fires, riots, police injuries, a State of emergency, and the National Guard being called in. There is more than enough material for 2 separate articles; and while there is some overlap - they are two different subjects. This isn't some minor issue that's going to "die down". — Ched :  ?  02:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with this. Couldn't have put it any better myself. If you need precedent, Rodney King has a different page than the LA riots.Fireflyfanboy (talk) 02:38, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That is what I have been saying, damage has already been done here. Its not wait until what the future holds... its turning on CNN and seeing cars burn in the streets on live TV. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:48, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We are quite far from a Rodney King state of affairs -- that was a seven day event where 53 people died. What's the compulsion to rush ahead with a split? When there's a critical mass in that section that warrants a split, then split. Otherwise, we are embarking on original research by adopting terms that news agencies have not used. I'm staring at MSNBC, CNN and CBS News broadcasts now, and none of the lower third graphics are using the term "Baltimore Riots." I'm also uncomfortable with claiming this isn't going to "die down." That's exactly what WP:CRYSTALBALL warns against editors doing. -- Fuzheado | Talk 02:52, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. You've changed my mind. We should wait a week to see if events continue to develop. Otherwise, we could fit all the information under a "Aftermath and reactions" section on this page. 24.44.176.72 (talk) 02:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that both @Sebwite: and @Knowledgekid87: have acted against the above consensus and split the article. Can you please respect the community processes we have here? -- Fuzheado | Talk 03:13, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't split anything, if you want to send the article to AfD feel free. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:14, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that the standalone article is now having an edit history of its own and is now 16 kB. A merge would be very hard by now. Epic Genius (talk) 15:04, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph beginning, "On April 25, 2015, protests were organized in downtown Baltimore..." has inaccurate statements. During the April 25 protests, six officers were injured (and remove citation 7, which refers to the later protest). Fifteen were injured on April 27. Curlerlikeyou (talk) 00:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead Poisoning

The lead poisoning of the Gray family seems like an odd inclusion, it was jarring when I read the article. Perhaps retitle the page Freddie Gray, and have his death be a large section? Unless the implication is that lead poisoning led to his having a switchblade, which led to his death, this seems unrelated. Loratone (talk) 00:23, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it's a really odd thing to include. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If it is associated with [2] then I would prefer that it stay. EllenCT (talk) 03:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Gray doesn't appear to be mentioned in that article—assumptions like that without any source explicitly linking the two would be synthesis. If that were a story that somehow connected Gray's crime of carrying a switchblade and lead poisoning, that might be another story. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:23, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article about the relationship between lead poisoning and crime is from 2013. I personally find it very convincing. If there was evidence that there was an endemic problem with lead poisoning in the subject's family, because the subject was a minority ethnicity criminal who was treated extrajudicially by police, instead of as a poisoning victim, then that shows the reader why science is more important than prejudice. EllenCT (talk) 17:52, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It turns out the knife wasn't even a switchblade, and wasn't illegal.[3] EllenCT (talk) 17:19, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Additional mass media sources: [4], [5], [6], [7], and possibly [8] although not directly, as far as I can tell so far. EllenCT (talk) 00:36, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

what is the point of the did you know section? This is skating very close to political advocacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.57.23.82 (talk) 01:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When someone nominates an article for DYK, it's automatically added to that article's talk page. I'd bring up your concerns at Template:Did you know nominations/Death of Freddie Gray. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Baltimore riot toll: 200 arrests, 144 car fires, 15 buildings burned Los Angeles Times - ‎16 minutes ago‎ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.242.35.130 (talk) 17:11, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

death

Baltimore riot toll: 200 arrests, 144 car fires, 15 buildings burned Los Angeles Times - ‎16 minutes ago‎65.242.35.130 (talk) 17:13, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No subsequent deaths reported let alone confirmed in mass media yet, thank goodness. EllenCT (talk) 20:57, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead Paragraphs

I know this is a current event and a very sensitive one at that... I don't wish to remove anything of substance, or upset anyone, but I do feel compelled to point out that the lead paragraphs are packed altogether too tightly with details and quotes. The header is three paragraphs and that is the same number of paragraphs in the "Arrest and Death" section... and much, if not all of the information is repeated. This is not unusual for Wiki articles, but I don't think it's helpful or informative to succumb to the temptation to put all the information and details out there in header paragraphs... I (personally) don't think that either refs or quotes belong in the header paragraphs on Wikipedia. The header should merely summarize points in the article. Since this is a current and sensitive topic, I don't want to charge in and make such large changes wholesale, but I would like to suggest we cut down the first three paragraphs to a manageable summary and any of the edited information, including refs and quotes, be used to expand the "Arrest and Death" section. The article will be better and more informative (that is, cleaner and less repetive) than it stands at present. The summation, I think, should be something like:

Freddie Gray was a 25 year old African American resident of Baltimore whose April 19th 2015 death after arrest led to protests and riots throughout much of the city. Gray was arrested, in apparent good health, on April 12th. He later fell into a coma due to injuries to his spine and larynx and, after multiple surgical attempts to save him, died a week later. The cause and circumstances of the injuries has, to date, not been determined. Six police officers have been suspended pending an investigation.

TreebeardTheEnt (talk) 17:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Object: The lead must serve as a standalone summary of all of the article's key points. ViperSnake151  Talk  20:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not certain how this addresses my concerns. The lead is, at present, not a summary but a highly detailed account: it does not summarize but explicates... Maybe what I suggested isn't sufficient but I don't think the present lead is a summary. TreebeardTheEnt (talk) 14:52, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

there is not enough in the later part of the article about analysis and reaction which obviously there has been a lot. something should be added — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.193.59 (talk) 17:24, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invocation of WP:BOLDTITLE

"Freddie Gray" is bolded per WP:BOLDTITLE. According to that page:

If an article is about an event involving a subject about which there is no main article, especially if the article is the target of a redirect, the subject should be in bold:

checkY Azaria Chantel Loren Chamberlain (11 June 1980 – 17 August 1980) was an Australian baby girl who was killed by a dingo on the night of 17 August 1980 on a family camping trip to Uluru (at that date known as Ayers Rock) in the Northern Territory. (Death of Azaria Chamberlain, redirected from Azaria Chamberlain)

So, since Freddie Gray redirects to Death of Freddie Gray, this is bolded per the policy, not unbolded. Epic Genius (talk) 01:11, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Participants: Six Baltimore police officers

Why is this included in the infobox of this page? The statement that six Baltimore police officers participated in the death of Freddie Gray is unsourced.

Saying that the police were participants in his death would be like saying bystanders participated in someone else getting hit by a car.

No evidence has lead to the death of Freddie Gray to be police related, so we should remove this from the infobox.Replaceinkcartridges (talk) 04:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Baltimore Sun on "What's Next"

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-whats-next-in-freddie-gray-investigation-20150428-story.html

It's full of good information but I've got other stuff to do. EllenCT (talk) 04:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gray's arrest record

The article states:

"Gray had a criminal record, mainly for misdemeanors and drug-related offenses."

That is too vague.

The following information from CNN should be added:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/22/us/baltimore-freddie-gray-what-we-know/

"According to court documents CNN obtained, there were more than 20 criminal court cases in Maryland against Gray, and five of those cases were still active at the time of his death."

"The cases involve mostly drug-related charges, but there are charges from March for second-degree assault and destruction of property."

74.98.33.164 (talk) 05:50, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would also add the current wording "Gray had a criminal record, mainly for misdemeanors and drug-related offenses.[10]" Does not match the cited article which reads "He had a police record, mainly on drug charges and minor crimes, according to court records reported by the Baltimore Sun." -- This is not the same thing. The word misdemeanor, a word with a clear meaning, does not appear in the cited reference. If the reference is to be used it should be quoted accurately. Drake76 (talk) 02:12, 2 May 2015 (UTC) While Gray's criminal record has encyclopedic relevance, it has no bearing whatsoever on the legal standing of the police participants; their roles in enforcement give them no standing to deal punishment for charges, whether ajudicated or not. Any post mortem review of this info should point this out, or it will appear that the criminal record is being offered as justification. 10:23, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think an important point is that he was given 3 years probation stemming from a charge on from Sept 28, 2013. "Gray was charged September 28, 2013 with distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault of a law enforcement officer and second-degree escape. He was found guilty of distribution of narcotics, assault and escape, while the other charges were dropped as part of a plea agreement. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison, suspended after 3 years served. It's not clear when he was released from prison. He also received three years of probation." http://heavy.com/news/2015/04/freddie-gray-arrest-criminal-record-convictions-court-documents-files-rap-sheet-drug-charges/10/ Putanotherway (talk) 14:03, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the summary we have now is more than sufficient. This article is not about Gray's criminal record. but about his death. - Cwobeel (talk) 14:05, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right now we have the number of charges, a brief characterization of those charges, the number still active, and the date of his next court date. It seems to me that the fact that he was given 3 years probation in 2013 is more relevant than the number of charges against him, or when his next court date was set for. Especially since running from the officers seems to be the reason he apprehended, and the legality of carrying a knife might depend on his probation status, which is a big issue in the case against the officers involved. Putanotherway (talk) 16:29, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 April 2015

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 12:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Background

Freddie Gray was the 25-year-old son of Gloria Darden. He had a twin sister, Fredericka, as well as another sister, Carolina.<ref name=":4">{{Cite web|title = Beginning of Freddie Gray's life as sad as its end, court case shows|url = http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-freddie-gray-lead-paint-20150423-story.html#page=1|accessdate = April 23, 2015|first = Jean|last = Marbella|date = April 23, 2015}}</ref> At the time of his death, Gray lived in the home owned by his sisters in the Gilmor Homes neighborhood.<ref name=":4" /> He stood {{convert|5|ft|8|in}} and weighed {{convert|145|lbs}}.<ref name=":7" /> Gray had a criminal record, mainly for misdemeanors and drug-related offenses.<ref name=":7">{{Cite news|title = The death of Freddie Gray: What we know - and don't know|url = http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-baltimore-freddie-gray-20150422-story.html|newspaper = Los Angeles Times|access-date = April 26, 2015|issn = 0458-3035|language = en-US|date = April 22, 2015|last = Muskal|first = Michael}}</ref> He had been arrested a total of 22 times in Maryland, primarily for possession and distribution of illegal narcotics.<ref name=":10"> {{Cite web|title = FREDDIE GRAY’S ARREST RECORD: Here’s The Rap Sheet Of The Dude They’re Destroying Baltimore Over|url = http://clashdaily.com/2015/04/freddy-grays-arrest-record-heres-the-rap-sheet-of-the-dude-theyre-destroying-baltimore-over/#|accessdate = April 29, 2015|first = Jean|last = Marbella|date = April 29, 2015}}<ref name=":10" /> At the time of his death, Gray lived in the home owned by his sisters in the Gilmor Homes neighborhood. ~~~~djplayer123

@Edgars2007: Um, this was the request that was made. Still,  Not done. Epic Genius (talk) 19:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page

Shouldn't there be a link to this article on the main page? It is a major current event..it could possibly pass quickly but it is at this time all over the news and I`ve seen links there a lot less relevant..for instance at the moment a sporting event...the London marathon. 24.240.171.194 (talk) 00:00, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not unless it goes to WP:ITNC. There's no consensus for that right now. So it is not on the main page. Epic Genius (talk) 03:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

NYC lost flier image

lost flier from protest in New York City

The section never mentions anything about nationwide protests. What is this image's significance and why should it be included, then? Epic Genius (talk) 13:50, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had expected someone else to add the links once the news was published by news articles. I've done so myself now that coverage exists. Tduk (talk) 15:35, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So, I guess it's fine to add the image now that it's relevant to the article. Epic Genius (talk) 16:22, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the article's hidden note says, "This section has been split. Please add further info to that article.", so this new section and associated image is now in the 2015 Baltimore riots article. Epic Genius (talk) 16:24, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, EpicGenius. Do you think the title of the new article should be changed, if it's going to reflect more riots than just in Baltimore? That's why I didn't originally put the information there. We can discuss on that talk page if you like. Tduk (talk) 16:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sure. A requested move can be set up at Talk:2015 Baltimore riots. Most of the rioting is happening in Baltimore, then. Epic Genius (talk) 17:06, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is the meaning of this?

In reference to the riots, I am finding "local businesses and a CVS drug store". What is the meaning of the specific reference to CVS drug store? It too is a local business. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 17:19, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, CVS is a national brand. Local = mom-and-pop. Epic Genius (talk) 18:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Charges

All six officers were charged, but not all for homicide. Can we please fix it?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:45, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here are two photos of the specific charges from [9]. Details: [10] EllenCT (talk) 17:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the issue was fixed. At the time it just said they were all charged with homicide which is untrue.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 19:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Legality of the knife Freddie Gray was carrying at the time of the arrest?

The beginning sentence currently reads "On April 12, 2015, Freddie Gray, a 25-year-old African-American man, was taken into custody by the Baltimore Police Department for possession of a switchblade,[2] which was illegal under Baltimore law at the time."

The article cited in this sentence ([2], NYT "Baltimore Officers Suspended Over Death of Freddie Gray Are Identified" @ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/22/us/baltimore-police-officers-suspended-in-freddie-gray-inquiry-are-identified.html) states that Freddie Gray was arrested for carrying a switchblade, but the article does not state whether carrying that knife was actually illegal.

My question is whether this first sentence is correct in stating that the knife was illegal. This article http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/01/us/freddie-gray-baltimore-death/index.html cites the MD state attorney general Marilyn Mosby as refuting the illegality of the knife: "Mosby said Friday that three Baltimore police officers illegally arrested Gray on April 12. She also said that a knife that Gray had was not illegal."

Does anyone have additional citations or clarifications about whether the knife was illegal? If not, I suppose we should remove ", which was illegal under Baltimore law at the time." from the first sentence as erroneous/unsupported. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawaegel (talk • contribs) 16:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just added it to the article. The prosecutors say the blade was LEGAL and that the arrest was illegal. --Beneficii (talk) 16:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks muchly! --Dawaegel (talk) 16:33, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But was it legal for him to own and carry the knife? That's a separate issue which should be addressed otherwise we're implying he was not breaking the law. If he was on probation, which is likely considering his recent crimes, it is unlikely that he was legally allowed to carry the knife as I note below. Putanotherway (talk) 18:14, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


yes this is obviously incorrect since it says first that the knife was illegal and then that it was not. at least the term -allegedly- should be included in the first mention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.193.59 (talk) 17:17, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading/wrong date in quick fact box

The title of this article is "Death of Freddie Gray" so I would expect the "Date" in the quick fact box to be the date on which the death occurred.

The date there is currently listed as "April 12, 2015", which is the date of his arrest and injury. His actual death occurred on April 19th, which is the date in main photo caption (Freddie Carlos Gray, Jr. August 16, 1989 – April 19, 2015) and the date listed in the "Outcome section"

I believe this article's title must have been changed at some point from "Arrest of Freddie Gray" or something like that to the current title ("Death of Freddie Gray") and this is why the fact box is in its current state. However, I believe it is factually inaccurate to state that the "Death of Freddie Gray" occurred on April 12th, as that is the date on which the events leading up to his death transpired, not the actual death itself. Does anyone have any objections to changing the "Date" to April 19th, 2015 and either removing or tweaking the "Outcome" section to something more appropriate?

Dawaegel (talk) 16:29, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article has always been titled "Death of Freddie Gray", and the original entry into the "Event infobox" listed the Date parameter as "Incident began April 12, 2015." I agree the current listing is misleading, and have no objection to either deleting it or otherwise clarifying the date." Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 16:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is clear enough: Outcome Death of Freddie Gray on April 19, 2015; Burial April 27, 2015 - Cwobeel (talk) 16:42, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
it is kind of obvious. Gray was arrested on the 12th, which preceded his death on the 19th. Epic Genius (talk) 19:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

False statements about the injuries leaked by police

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/05/01/3653821/freddie-gray-case-warning-reporters-print-unfounded-police-leaks/ EllenCT (talk) 17:16, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arrest and death deleted section

Hi,

I note that ViperSnake151 deleted a slightly lengthy witness quote (the witness who spoke to Anderson Cooper), and I sort of agree that there's no need for two.

On the other hand this witness went a bit further, and noticed that after the move (what another witness called the 'pretzel move') it had appeared that Gray had lost the use of his legs.

I am the one who put in that paragraph and I don't object to it being deleted, but there are now five or six witness reports who describe Gray complaining that his neck hurts, the police having one knee on the neck while bringing his feet around to his back, and subsequently him appearing to have no control over his legs, or broken legs.

It is also relevant that the pathologist noticed no actual injury to the legs.


Here is a run-down of some of the quotes I found, none of which are included, and some of which seem to include more info than the included quote:

.

Harold Perry ( blind person), 1700 block of Presbury street:

http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/local/maryland/2015/04/21/freddie-gray-baltimore-arrest-videowitness/26122671/

"About 8:30 in the morning, and I heard this boy hollering and screaming get off me get off me. You're hurting my neck. Get your knee off my back. And then two cars pulled up. One door slammed and then the other door slammed, and then he got to screaming loud. And it sounded like, I live in the corner house, it sounded a distance away from me, down this way somewhere, and he said I got asthma, or something like that, and kept screaming and hollering and the police said, somewhere over in here, I guess they must have pulled him up from over here somewhere, somewhere over in here it sounded like he was hollering, shut the fuck up, that's what the police said, and I woke my wife, and she got up, and she said, they dragging him to the wagon, and the wagon was in the driveway over here somewhere."

.

The witness who spoke to Anderson Cooper:


http://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/04/23/ac-freddie-gray-witness-speaks-to-anderson-cooper.cnn

"when I got there to the site it was just terrible. By the time I started recording him, the heels of his feet were almost at his back, he was already cuffed at the time,so, and the police had their knee in his neck, and he was crushing his neck really hard....To me he didn't look like he was able to use his legs at all. They were totally limp. He had no use. I mean They said he was able to pressure on one leg but I'm pretty sure that if you took away that help from the officers holding him up, that he wouldn't be able to stand on his own. There's no way possible. As you can see in the video they're dragging him to the paddy wagon because he couldn't walk."

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YV0EtkWyno&feature=youtu.be

"Ah, they day to(?) tase you like that. You wonder why he can't use his legs."

.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1176745/Baltimore-Police-drag-Freddie-Gray-van-arrest.html

"His leg look broke. Look at his fucking leg. Look at his fucking leg. That boy leg look broke. His leg look broke and you all dragging him like that?"

.

http://cw39.com/2015/04/22/witness-police-had-freddie-gray-bent-up-like-a-pretzel/

“They had Freddie Gray bent up into what I’d like to call a pretzel-type of move, where they had the heels of his feet to his back, and he was still in handcuffs and they had their knee in the back of the neck.”

It might be worthwhile expanding the existing quote or replacing it by a more complete witness description if you are going to delete that paragraph.


---(end quote)----

Createangelos (talk) 17:33, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Hey thanks whoever fixed this, it is a lot better now,

Createangelos (talk) 21:41, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"legal sized pocket knife"

I think it's important to add to this that Freddie Gray may not have been able to legally own or carry a pocket knife. One of the standard conditions of probation in Maryland is "Get permission from the court before owning, possessing, using, or having under your control any dangerous weapon or firearm of any description." Just saying he had a "legal sized pocket knife" implies that he legally owned and carried that pocket knife. The fact that I think should be added is "One of the standard conditions of probation in Maryland is that people on probation must 'get permission from the court before owning, possessing, using, or having under [their] control any dangerous weapon or firearm of any description'".

http://www.courts.state.md.us/courtforms/joint/ccdc026.pdf Putanotherway (talk) 18:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The url provided above links to a primary source, and as Putanotherway notes, we do not have a reliable source indicating Gray was on probation. We need to stick to the facts as reported in independent, reliable secondary sources. Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 19:20, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
He was still on probation. He was on 3 years probation from Sept 28, 2013. Thus the way the article stands it is very misleading. It leads the reader to believe that Gray was legally carrying a knife, when he was actually on probation, and unless he had special permission from the courts was in fact carrying that knife illegally. I have a source below, which I came across this morning.
"Gray was charged September 28, 2013 with distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault of a law enforcement officer and second-degree escape. He was found guilty of distribution of narcotics, assault and escape, while the other charges were dropped as part of a plea agreement. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison, suspended after 3 years served. It's not clear when he was released from prison. He also received three years of probation."
http://heavy.com/news/2015/04/freddie-gray-arrest-criminal-record-convictions-court-documents-files-rap-sheet-drug-charges/10/ Here's another source describing Maryland's standard conditions for probation. http://ricelawmd.com/probation-in-maryland/Putanotherway (talk) 13:34, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


I have refactored some comments above per WP:BLP. I remind everyone that BLP applies to talk pages as well. - Cwobeel (talk) 21:00, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: BLP only applies to living persons. Gray, being dead, is not subject to BLP, but any living person in the article (i.e. those charged, other people involved) are alive and do fall under BLP. 206.125.92.246 (talk) 06:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
BLP applies to recently deceased people as well. Read the policy WP:BDP - Cwobeel (talk) 14:07, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
BLP is probably still in effect for grey via WP:BDP. Regarding the knife, the knife itself was likely legal under MD law, but Gray's possesion may be illegal due to probation. I believe we have RS for the former, but not for the latter. putting together his arrest record and the knife laws is clear WP:SYNTH and WP:OR so we will have to wait for an WP:RS to do that for us. Gaijin42 (talk) 14:07, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear. Nobody is saying that the article should read that he did not legally posses the knife (which is unknown). I think it is notable that he was given 3 years probation stemming from a charge in Sept 2013, which I believe is well sourced. I think it is also notable that a standard condition of probation is that a person can't carry a weapon of any kind without permission from the court, which I also believe is well sourced. I think the standard conditions of probation are notable because of the use of the term "legal size" used multiple times in the article. I think that is deceptive language in that it leads people to believe he was legally carrying that knife, which is not a known fact. If it was changed to a "claim", or those terms were removed, then I don't think the standard conditions of probation would be notable at this time. However I still think the fact that he was given 3 years of parole stemming from a 2013 charge is notable regardless. Putanotherway (talk) 15:11, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It should be noted that a small pocket knife, which seems to be what Mr. Gray had based on statements made by the prosecutor, is NOT generally considered to be a weapon. It is a tool. I keep one attached to my key ring all the time. I have chef's knives I keep in my kitchen that would function as a far more dangerous weapon. I also have a machete, axe, hatchet, pick axe and other tools that would be far more dangerous and are considered tools not weapons. My point being that one could call anything a weapon if one wanted to.

No statements from van witness?

I didn't find any of the statements the van witness made to the police or to the media in the article. Why would this witness's statements be left out?

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/van-witness-i-never-said-freddie-gray-was-trying-hurt-himself Putanotherway (talk) 18:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

truthrevolt.org is not a reliable source. - Cwobeel (talk) 20:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how a video can be unreliable, but here's a link to another site with the exact same interview. http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2015/04/30/wjz-exclusive-the-other-man-in-the-van-with-freddie-gray-breaks-his-silence/ Putanotherway (talk) 13:41, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Race of police officers

Since there is an obvious component of race relations to this story (hence the {{2010s controversial killings of African Americans}} template at the bottom), shouldn't the races of the police officers charged in Freddie Gray's death be mentioned? Edgeweyes (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My view is that that should wait until the race of the officers is analyzed in secondary sources. --I am One of Many (talk) 20:56, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No sources that I have seen mention the races of the officers. - Cwobeel (talk) 20:58, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A source has listed the race of the driver of the van as "black". Can that be confirmed and listed? Can the races of the other officers be listed soon after being revealed?

Since the article already mentions that Gray's death is being blamed on racism, the article should also mention that the police officer charged with murdering Gray is black. Source: http://news.yahoo.com/six-baltimore-officers-charged-death-gray-one-murder-004330690.html 71.182.250.124 (talk) 03:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Three of them are black, but since that doesn't fit the preferred media narrative, it is being left out of media reports... at least until they can imagine some way of blaming the black officers' actions on the influence of white officers somehow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.36.65.134 (talk) 10:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe this helps, "The officers who were arrested, three white and three black" http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/02/us/freddie-gray-autopsy-report-given-to-baltimore-prosecutors.html?_r=0 Putanotherway (talk) 13:45, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see the 'preferred media narrative' canard, a favorite of the paranoid, is making its appearance on this talk page. Let's hope editors are sensible enough to keep it out of the article. MikeyLin (talk) 15:16, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please figure out what to do with the protests

I see in an above conversation that someone prematurely tried to split any kind of reaction to the death into the pre-existing 2015 Baltimore riots article. The problem is that that article is about the spread of violence and actions concerning it per se, in Baltimore only. You might split this article and have an actual 2015 Baltimore civil unrest article that isn't just a redirect, or you could use some more general name that doesn't limit the reactions just to those in Baltimore since it's national level by now, or you could just cover it here (which I think makes the most sense), but whatever you do, don't direct people to put the general data about protests in other cities in an article about looting and arson in Baltimore. Wnt (talk) 20:55, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand what you're asking. Are you saying the protests related to Gray's death should not be mentioned? Because I strongly disagree, it helps people understand this is a national debate. If this is not what you meant, please elaborate a little further. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 23:13, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not what I want! I want the regular protests to be covered in this article, or in a new article if you want to split off something about the protests, anywhere but in the article about the Baltimore riots. The thing is, the Baltimore riots were two specific days, specific city, specific kinds of thing that you can put in a fairly neat little box. The protests... well, anything can be a protest, up to and including official statements by major politicians, and they can happen anywhere in the world. Wnt (talk) 00:39, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What needs to be done is to move the "Baltimore riots" article to "Baltimore unrest", and describe the civil unrest in toto, riots, peaceful protests and the rest. That is what NPOV is about, otherwise we will have a POVFORK. - Cwobeel (talk) 00:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, and apologies to Wnt for my confusion. I'm really trying to help improve this article, and I didn't mean to interpret your contributions in discussions in a way you did not intend.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 04:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

race

List the races of the individual officers listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.49.111.250 (talk) 23:09, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since the article already mentions that Gray's death is being blamed on racism, the article should also mention that the police officer charged with murdering Gray is black. Source: http://news.yahoo.com/six-baltimore-officers-charged-death-gray-one-murder-004330690.html 71.182.250.124 (talk) 03:20, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe any source is claiming to blame racism. The police broke protocol and were negligent for the injuries sustained by Gray. Until race is a confirmed factor I don't see why it should be included.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 04:05, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... I think I'm leaning toward supporting inclusion. The article does say, "as part of a larger string of controversial uses of force by police officers in the United States—especially against African-Americans", it does list the race of the subject of the article, it has "2010s controversial killings of African Americans" at the bottom, and the NYT lists the race of the officers, "The officers who were arrested, three white and three black" http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/02/us/freddie-gray-autopsy-report-given-to-baltimore-prosecutors.html?_r=0 Putanotherway (talk) 14:20, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
From what I've seen there's been a few sources citing racism as a factor in his death, or at least that racial discrimination is an important contextual matter to the events. e.g. Daily Mail, New York Times, BBC News. It's also related to many of the protests relating to racial discrimination such as Hands up, don't shoot and Black Lives Matter. RatRat (talk) 14:36, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stops

The article reads that The van made four confirmed stops while Gray was detained. At 8:46 a.m, but recent reporting says that the fourth stop was omitted from the police report, and this has been seen as one of the reasons for the quick filing of charges, as the officer's entire report was thrown into question. See [11] - Cwobeel (talk) 23:52, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was also questioning the stops. An addition to the article said the police saw him at 8:45. I don't believe they placed him in the van in a minute. I think we need to find exact times that are not in conflict with another.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:54, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. apologies for the conflicting timelines. I was the one who added the times and stops to the section, granted it was at an earlier stage of the investigation. It is something that needs to be confirmed as it is an incredibly important piece of the article. In the reference I used, it said they made contact at 8:39, just saying.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:17, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link to an article on ABC that gives a breakdown of the stop and a image that shows the route the officers took. the Map/route I feel shows WHY this is a contested case. http://abcnews.go.com/US/freddie-gray-details-fill-journey-baltimore-police/story?id=30704154 - Olanatan (talk) 14:19, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 May 2015

Death of Freddie Gray → Murder of Freddie Gray – Since the death has been classified as a murder by the authorities, should we move the page to "Murder of Freddie Gray"? Illegitimate Barrister 08:41, 2 May 2015 (UTC) Illegitimate Barrister 08:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. There's no question that Freddie Gray died; it's still an open question whether he was murdered, and Wikipedia should not take a position on whether he was, due to NPOV, the potential effect on living people (those charged with, but not yet convicted of, murder and related offenses), and the risk of "activist" editing on both sides (as has already happened on the riot article). Note that a medical examiner's finding of "homicide" is not a finding of "murder", and a prosecutor's decision to prosecute for murder is also not an official finding of murder - only a court verdict can establish that. Moreover, going by prior practice, even if the previous concerns did not hold and it was uncontroversial to say that Gray was murdered, the better title would be Killing of Freddie Gray, not "Murder of...". However, we're not even there yet. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 12:11, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose opposed strictly to proposed change, not necessarily opposed to some other change. User Cwobeel states "if and when there is an indictment we may consider such a move", but there has in fact already been an indictment. Change that word to "conviction" and the statement becomes accurate and the reasoning becomes sound. Editor Putanotherway correctly mentions that not all homicides are murders, but fails to take the next step: not all deaths are homicides. Therefore, the current title is not as descriptive as it could be. "Killing of Freddie Gray" or "Freddie Gray homicide" are more accurate. The anonymous editor further noted that previous practice has held that "Killing of" is the better title even if the murder is proven, I have also noticed this practice, most notably with voluntary manslaughter victim Latasha Harlins, but don't concur with it. However, that's a discussion for another time. For now, Murder of is premature. MikeyLin (talk) 15:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The same thing happened with another Baltimore prisoner in 2005

http://www.post-gazette.com/news/nation/2015/05/01/Freddie-Gray-death-ruled-a-murder-charges-to-be-filed-in-Baltimore-case/stories/201505010241

In 2005, a man died of a fractured spine after he was transported in a Baltimore police van in handcuffs and without a seat belt. At a civil trial, an attorney for his family successfully argued that police had given him a “rough ride.”

71.182.250.124 (talk) 14:20, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see what relation your trying to make, but until all the facts about the case are confirmed, I don't think it is relevant as of now.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not supported by source

"This was found to be false during the investigation, as the knife was of folding type which is not illegal."

The source says, "Ms Mosby said that Gray was not carrying an illegal switchblade as reported earlier by police, but a legal pocketknife." So now we have some sources saying the police said it was a switchblade or spring assisted knife, and another source saying Ms Mosby says it wasn't. The way the article is currently written it reaches the conclusion on it's own that Ms Mosby is right and the police were wrong. It also uses the term "pocketknife" not "folding type". I suggest finding another source, or changing the article to reflect what the source is actually saying. Putanotherway (talk) 16:08, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bolt injury

I'm very concerned about the following section in the article.

"The same day, medical examiners reported Gray sustained more injuries as a result of him slamming into the inside of the transport van, 'apparently breaking his neck; a head injury he sustained matches a bolt in the back of the van'."

This is what the original article says: "The sources quoted by the Washington-based station said the medical examiner had determined Gray's death was caused by a catastrophic injury after he slammed into the back of the police transport van while inside it, 'apparently breaking his neck; a head injury he sustained matches a bolt in the back of the van.'"source

However another article says: "Officials, however, refuse to confirm the report. A spokesman for the medical examiner said, 'We don’t do preliminary findings, and the investigation isn’t concluded.'"source

My concern is that "sources" said the medical examiner said that, but we're presenting it as the "medical examiners reported". Personally, I would love to believe a bolt did this, but I'm afraid that what "sources" said, won't wind up matching what the medical examiner actually says in his/her report. I think it might be best to word this closer to the original article, where it's attributed to "sources", and maybe point out that the ME wouldn't confirm the report. Anyone else share this concern, or do you think it's okay as is? Putanotherway (talk) 16:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Better source?

Moore was later released from custody, but two other individuals who were arrested along with Moore remained in custody.

"The man who filmed the arrest of Freddie Gray was arrested Thursday night in Baltimore, according to reports on Twitter and Counter Current News.

Moore was later released without charges, while two others who were in a car with him remained in custody."source

There has to be a better source, than one that says, "according to reports on Twitter and Counter Current News".Putanotherway (talk) 16:57, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Killing_of_Freddie_Gray&oldid=660466309"