Arundel grand jury identifies real culprits in FBI (shooting of innocent young man in(Maryland)

Baltimore Sun ^ | July 14,2002 | Gregory Kane

[Donald Stone]

THANKS TO the wisdom of Baltimore attorney Andrew C. White and an Anne Arundel County grand jury, we now have some clarification on what does and does not constitute a "cap-able" offense in the eyes of law enforcement officers.

For those of you not familiar with current American slang, it's only fair to point out that there is no such word as "cap-able." It's an invention, deriving from the street lingo phrase "to pop a cap in the ... " - I'm told the rest of the expression can't be used in this paper - or, in other words, to shoot someone.

[Donald Stone]

No Comment !!!!!!

[glock rocks]

these are not the droids you're looking for.

sad.

[Icthus]

Unbelievable!

[from occupied ga]

Kane is right on the money, but surely no one in their right mind expected any different result. A grand jury is the prosecutor's tool. The only evidence that a grand jury sees is what the prosecutor chooses to show them. If the prosecutor choose not to show them any incriminating evidence about Braga, then the grand jury would not vote to indict. So the fix was in (as it always is when cops shoot innocent civilians) and Braga walks. He did it before, and he'll probably shoot someone else in a few years and he'll walk on that too.

[RandomUserName]

Sooner or later, the formerly law abiding citizens of this once fine country are going to decide that it is open season on federal agents.
It is not going to be pretty.

[OBAFGKM]

I dunno. Seems to me that the grand jury simply determined that there was no basis for a criminal charge. I.e., if they had returned an indictment, the defense could have easily shot it down in court.

On the other hand, seems to me that the police department and Special Agent Bragga are wide open to a humongous civil settlement.

[ArrogantBustard]

Mr. Kane is remarkably intelligent and articulate. I've never understood why the Bawl'mer Sun continues to employ his services as a columnist.

Everybody get that? You know-it-alls who thought cops could only shoot folks who were armed and presented imminent danger to police or others should learn a lesson from this. You've been wrong. You've been wrong for years. You don't need to have a weapon. You don't need to present a danger. If you simply refuse to raise your hands, prepare to get a cap popped in you.

[FreeTally]

Although this topic has been posted on before, it still makes me just as angry every time.

Braga had committed neither first-degree assault, second-degree assault nor reckless endangerment, the grand jury ruled after carefully considering the weighty matter for all of 20 minutes.

In a case such as this, where a party has been injured or killed, and there is NO question as to the identity of the individual who was directly responsible, the grand jury should be forced by law to explain what the actions did constitute if they dismiss the charges. I know, they are not the prosecuter, but you can not have a GJ say the perpetrator did not commit assault or reckless endangerment when an innocent person gets shot in the face. Civil penalties are fine, but the cop should be stripped of his bade and probably put in prison.

We definitely need more laws(ARGH!) governing the conduct of LEO's. One simple law is that and LEO who shoots a person innocent of any crime should immediately lose his/her job at a minimum. At that point, each should be treated on a case per case basis as to whether to criminally charge the officer.

Yeh, I know, LEO defenders will say something like, "But that puts undue pressure on the officer if he was to consider every action he/she makes may make them criminally liable". And I would say, "Yep! Whats wrong with that?" Its a breach of public trust if an LEO harms or kills the people he/she is sworn to protect. GJ's getting away with this stuff simply says that LEO's can shoot an innocent person, and suffer no recourse - not even losing his/her job!

This sh!t has to be ended.

[nothingnew]

No Comment !!!!!!

You better not!...You could get "capped"!

What BS...

Keep yer powder dry!

FMCDH

[FreeTally]

Sooner or later, the formerly law abiding citizens of this once fine country are going to decide that it is open season on federal agents.

I've made a similar comment before myself. I describe it as: If this stuff continues to happen, the normal, law-abiding citizen will adopt a policy of "shoot first, ask questions later" when approached by federal officers with guns drawn.

[truenospinzone]

I wish I could say I'm shocked and appalled, but I can't even muster that. I knew this thug would walk.

Remember, kids, when two or more LEOs give you contradictory commands, obey them all simultaneously, or die.

[Maelstrom]

1st class citizen shoots 2nd class citizen...I'm surprised a grand jury was deemed necessary.

[archy]

Sooner or later, the formerly law abiding citizens of this once fine country are going to decide that it is open season on federal agents.
It is not going to be pretty.

You really think so?

I expect that some will find the results not only *pretty,* but much closer to real justice than most of what's come from our courts in the last several dozen years.

-archy-/-

[willyone]

Or as a poor dumb basrard in San Diego discovered a few years ago walk into your own garage while holding a laundry basket. The cops were there supposedly investigating some other matter and killed him. Nothing happened of course. All cop shootings are justified. you on the other hand can be fighting for you life with stab wounds from your assailant and if you defend yourself they will try and prosecute you. The era of the King is rapidly arriving.

[Free the USA]

Index Bump

[rdavis84]

"At first, his gun control colleagues feared the issue had made him and them targets. Some were initially fearful after Wales was murdered.

"I left town for a few weeks," said Gryniewski. "I was under armed guard."

Awwwwww. Poor baby.

[from occupied ga]

his gun control colleagues ... "I left town for a few weeks," said Gryniewski. "I was under armed guard."

Anyone other than me see the irony of this?

[Henrietta]

Seems to me that the grand jury simply determined that there was no basis for a criminal charge.

Grand juries are far from independent. They do what the DA asks them to. They will indict a ham sandwich if the DA wants it, and will turn loose a murderer if the DA tells them to. It appears that is what happened in this case.

Based on what I read in the news, there was definitely cause to indict this guy. No one, including the cops, has the right to use deadly force unless he or she has a reasonable belief that he or she is about to suffer death or grave bodily harm. The kid did what he was told to do, and was shot. This officer could not have had a reasonable belief that he was about to be shot when the kid reached down to unlock the door as he was instructed. End of story.

[eno_]

Who was the prosecutor?