“Initially the state alleged that Goodson gave Gray a “rough ride” with the intention of bouncing the man around and injuring him. But prosecutors made no mention of a rough ride in their closing arguments, and Goodson’s defense accused them of changing their story.”
No rough ride = defense verdict.
This is why the ‘rough ride’ wasn’t mentioned in closing arguments by the prosecution:
Freddie Gray trial: expert witness crumbles in van driver’s prosecution
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/16/freddie-gray-trial-caesar-goodson-rough-ride-prosecution
Witness Stanford O’Neill Franklin, a former police commander, was called to support the prosecution’s theory that Gray suffered what is known as a “rough ride”, a practice in which a driver jolts and takes sharp turns, jostling a prisoner who is handcuffed and shackled without a seatbelt.
But when asked by defense attorney Matthew Fraling whether he saw any evidence of Goodson’s erratic driving, he couldn’t say.
Asked if, in reviewing footage of the van’s stops, he saw evidence of unexpected starts, stops, or turns, Franklin answered: “I did not.”
“It’s not your contention that Officer Goodson in any way engaged in a rough ride?” Fraling asked.
“I can’t say for sure,” Franklin responded.
On redirect, assistant deputy state’s attorney Michael Schatzow did not ask any further questions about the rough ride before resting his case.