Except when I corrected myself acknowledging that I was wrong in stating that Freddie Gray was not running when he was arrested, I haven't changed anything.
:shock: This comment makes no sense as a reply to what you quoted.
What you quoted indicated the need to make changes to false claims. The fact that they hadn't changed, was the point.
This "ear witness" has changed his story since then now hasn't he?
Yes he has and he even stated why he has changed it.
And that reason casts what he now says in doubt,
as already stated several times.
don't you think it would be difficult if not impossible for Freddie Gray to bang his head against the wall of the van if he remained on the floor
Why are you remaking my points?
That is an obvious indication that he was moving around on his own becasue he had to turn himself around to receive injury from the rear of the van.
It might have been for the 2nd detainee, Donta Allen, but it's questionable whether or not the first 20 minutes of Freddie Gray's were. You keep forgetting (or ignoring) that Donta Allen was picked up at least 20 minutes after Freddie Gray was arrested and 5 minutes before he suffered his neck injury. Isn't it possible that the reason Donta Allen had a smooth ride is because his part of the transit was, in fact, smooth whereas Freddie Gray's was not?
:naughty
No I do not ignore that.
We already know that the supposed witness, as revealed by the Commissioner, said that the other guy was thrashing around and banging his head.
Do you think he would be up with a broken neck and a crushed voice box thrashing around and banging his head?
That means he was up and about, and is an indication that the injury happened to him when the witness was on the other side during that
smooth ride.
You sure didn't feel that way when you asked me prove that it wasn't Freddie Gray's body thrashing about in the back of the police van. But now you want me to stop with the proof argument.
Not even.
Asking for proof of an argument like I did, is not the same as saying a person has no proof in an argument of the evidence like you did.
But even if he were faking his injuries, Baltimore Police Department policy (even their policy from 1997) states:
Ensure medical treatment for a prisoner is obtained, when necessary, at the nearest emergency medical facility.
Which I already pointed out.
And thus far no one has been able to show any medical treatment was required prior to the arrival at their destination, which is where is was provided.
His lying about needing an inhaler when he was obviously breathing fine and screaming does not necessitate that he be given treatment.
Now, despite the fact that on the 3rd spot at 8:59am Freddie Gray had requested medical attention AND that he was unresponsive at their 4th stop, it's very evident that the Baltimore PD were in violation of their own police department policy on handling detainees during transport. We can argue the seatbelt -vs- cuff and leg/ankle restraints (i.e., shackles) and question whether they were sufficient per police policy 'til the cows come home, but there's no debating whether or not the Baltimore PD were negligent in their failure to properly respond to Freddie Gray's medical needs at any point during transport.
Yes it is very debatable.
His requesting does not mean he needs it.
And yet you've based the bulk of your defense of the Baltimore Police's actions in this case squarely on "this idiot's statement". You do see the irony here, don't you?
There is no irony there at all.
All of this has been previously pointed out.
The acceptance of what he says should be based on the surrounding circumstances at the time he made them.
In the case of what he supposedly said to the Police, there exists no reason to doubt he was being truthful. They were made immediately, without any known coercion or in return for any benefit.
His statements now are suspect and he himself tells us why he is saying what he is.
That is a form of coercion placed upon him by his community, and is made in return of a benefit for him. His life.