Leaked text messages between one of Baltimore State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby's deputies and the lead investigator in the Freddie Gray case are raising new concerns about whether politics played a role in the decision to charge six officers with his death.Fox News' Trace Gallagher reported that the leaked messages suggest that the prosecutors planned to charge the officers, regardless of what the evidence showed.
Detective Dawnyell Taylor reportedly revealed in case notes that she was handed a narrative by the prosecution that she read to the grand jury. She wrote that the narrative "had several things that I found to be inconsistent with our investigation."
"I thought the statements in the narrative were misquoted," the detective added.
In one of the leaked text messages, Taylor also reportedly told the top investigator she didn't feel comfortable reading the script provided to her.
"I'm fine with finding the facts but between us I believe we omitted key things from their combined statements," Taylor said.
Grand juries are inquisitorial rather than adversarial. That is, they are ex parte proceedings at which the prosecutor presents the case that there is probable cause to indict the prospective defendant. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is not required at that stage, and no defense lawyer is permitted in the grand jury room (at least in federal, and I believe most states', practice). The defense has its shot at trial, where the government bears the full burden of proof and must convince all 12 jurors. (Grand juries, unlike petit juries, are not required to be unanimous).
The tremendous power wielded by grand juries and the prosecutors who guide (some would say "run") them presupposes that the prosecutor will play it straight -- that is, will look to base the grand jury's outcome on the truth. When the prosecutor breaches this presupposition, and presents a prefab version of evidence regardless of what it turns out to be, what you have is a breach both of a core duty, and of the basic trust citizens repose (and often have no practical choice but to repose) in the prosecutor.
As Al Regnery pointed out, one of the most damaging aspects of the Freddie Gray prosecutions consists of the skepticism they will engender against difficult, but good faith and meritorious, cases in the future.
Ms. Mosby should resign, but won't. When she fails to, she should be removed. The corruption of duty she has displayed is, unlike large banks, too big to succeed.
Sickening. I like to focus on Officer Nero (the bike cop), as his prosecution is the most egregious. The ethics rules provide a standard--was there probable cause? In the case of Nero, it is simply impossible to articulate any facts that show anything close to probable cause. In other words, it's not a close case---and given the fact that Mosby's words and deeds do not show any sort of "empty head, pure heart", disbarment is not only justified, it is required.
Let;s not forget--Officer Nero is a citizen of a free republic. He has a right not to be abused by the government in this manner. That right was trampled. Society demanded that he submit himself to a process that could have resulted in the loss of his freedom. Society cannot expect him to sit back with no justice. The Maryland bench and bar owe it to Officer Nero to yank this woman's license. Having grossly abused her power, why should any free citizen be subject to her whim again? Why should any adversary have to deal with someone who has grossly abused the ethics of the profession?
Officer Nero, citizen whose liberty was placed at risk, deserves justice too. Why that is controversial is beyond me.
Maybe Mosby has some sort of defense to her conduct that no one knows about. We'll see what the civil trials bring out.