In what universe is this behavior appropriate? More to the point, how can the 6 police officers accused in the death of Freddie Gray possibly hope to get a fair trial?

Prince told everyone at his concert to wear gray to honor Freddie Gray. I am not sure why Freddie Gray deserves to be honored. What did he do honorable? [Crickets] It sounds like 50 Shades of Gray has come to Baltimore.

Mosby needs to step back and take a look at herself. Her integrity has already been questioned because of various alliances. Is she trying to be a professional prosecutor or is the media attraction to stardom seducing her away from justice. Right now, she isn’t making a very pretty Lady Liberty.

Prince may do what he wants. He is an entertainer. A prosecutor must put him or herself far above question and stop listening to the sirens of stardom. So far she has failed.

36 thoughts on “Conflict of Interest? Marilyn Mosby appears on stage with Prince

  1. Steve Thomas

    Yes. This is 100% political theater. I suspect that she’s looking well beyond her current elected office, as her actions and comments would indicate.

  2. blue

    All of the defense lawyers for the 6 officers have filed in court to force Mosby to recuse hereself. She could loose her license over this. She canot take this to a Grand Jury now.

    1. This is a red letter day. I agree with Blue. She has compromised herself way too much.

      I dont expect a prosecutor to remain neutral but I also don’t expect them to become media hogs.

      Did everyone see that George Zimmerman got shot? Couldnt have happened to a nicer person.

  3. Jackson Bills

    Agree with everything you have said here Moon. What a shame too because something happened to this guy but unfortunately the circus that Ms. Mosby has made this case out to be I doubt we will ever find out.

    She is a joke and quite honestly I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything like this before. Since when does a prosecutor show up on stage for a concert like this under these conditions? Absolutely absurd… and she should know better, she claims to come from 5 generations of law enforcement in her family.

    However, having said that, she would win any Baltimore city council she wanted to hands down (that’s if her husband didn’t already sit on the Baltimore city council). So…. maybe the next mayor of Baltimore? Maybe she could convince Elijah Cummings to not seek reelection; she would win that seat in a heartbeat.

    1. She is a glory hog. The first 30 seconds she was out there commenting, I knew we had a problem. I like the mayor. I hope she stays.

  4. Steve Thomas

    @Moon-howler

    “Did everyone see that George Zimmerman got shot? Couldnt have happened to a nicer person.”

    Now what exactly is that supposed to mean? He lawfully defended himself from a physical assault, was subjected to a tremendously difficult trial, threats, divorce, and financial ruin, and was acquitted, but now has to bear the mark of Cain…and it’s OK for someone to take a shot at him?
    Apparently, he was again the victim of an assault. He wasn’t shot, but he was shot at, and to his credit, wisely didn’t shoot back. The assailant fired two rounds, barely missed Zimmerman’s head, shattering the window in his vehicle.

    But it’s OK for someone to shoot at him? Why? Because he’s George Zimmerman?

    1. He was hospitalized. It was some on-going altercation he was having, according to the news. He also has used his aggressive behavior against wives and girl friends. I see this guy as a loose cannon.

      I also don’t think the was just defending himself from a physical assault. I believe he instigated it. Who is to say Treyvon Martin wasn’t standing HIS ground?

  5. Rick Bentley

    She’s way inappropriate.

    But that seems to me much less an issue or injustice than the way the police killed a guy and then began an aggressive coverup campaign.

    1. I don’t think we know the facts.

  6. Steve Thomas

    @Moon-howler
    And you don’t know the facts in the Martin case, but they are out there, and they don’t support your opinion, nor does the law support your opinion.

    1. I guess I know about as much about the Martin case as the next guy. what I do know is that George Zimmerman got a fair trial which is pretty much all anyone can hope for. However, instead of learning his lesson, he went on and kept getting in all sorts of scrapes. Bad luck or bad judgement? It sounds to me like he has a lifetime of making bad choices. It sure makes me wonder if he had minded his own business if Treyvon Martin would still be alive. I look at patterns. Patterns going forward and patterns going backward.

      He is a wannabe and he has a track record of bullying women. Can’t say I feel sorry for him.

      You seem to be willing to make him the perpetual victim.

  7. Steve Thomas

    Moon-howler :I guess I know about as much about the Martin case as the next guy. what I do know is that George Zimmerman got a fair trial which is pretty much all anyone can hope for. However, instead of learning his lesson, he went on and kept getting in all sorts of scrapes. Bad luck or bad judgement? It sounds to me like he has a lifetime of making bad choices. It sure makes me wonder if he had minded his own business if Treyvon Martin would still be alive. I look at patterns. Patterns going forward and patterns going backward.
    He is a wannabe and he has a track record of bullying women. Can’t say I feel sorry for him.
    You seem to be willing to make him the perpetual victim.

    Moon, Being a CCW advocate, attending regular training, classes, and lectures, reading (too) much material on the subject, I can say that within the CCW community, the Zimmerman/Martin case has been picked apart, analyzed in depth, and commented upon, by the best legal experts in the “use of force”. He got a fair trial, and was aquitted by the legal system, but he didn’t receive a fair trial in the media, or the court of public opinion. Your comments illustrate this.

    Yes, he’s had some minor interactions with law enforcement. Have any of these interactions resulted in criminal charges? No. They have not.

    As far as this particular incident goes, he was shot AT. Therefore, he is legally considered the victim, until an investigation shows that he was the initial agressor. Even if all he did was exchange heated words or obscene hand gestures with the shooter, this wouldn’t meet the threshold for response with lethal force. If such an exchange occurred, and he then decided it better to withdraw, and was attempting to leave the area (rather than stand his ground) he would legally regain the position of innocent.I

    But something else I think you fail to consider: He’s George Zimmerman, his noteriety gained from a tragic incident, for which he was acquitted. It would appear that he was known to the individual who shot at him, and that individual could make a reasonable assumption that George may be armed. What’s the best way to beat a known gunfighter? Shoot first. What did he say to a witness? “Call 911. I just shot George Zimmerman”.

    So, in your world, someone whose was physically assaulted by ambush (legal term) by a stronger assailant (disparity of force), who was in a dominant position (as the forensic evidence indicated), while not engaged in any illicit acitvity, is tried and acquitted of any wrong-doing, and was not found to be the agressor at any stage of the incident, who endured a financially and emotionally draining trial, turned into a public spectical by the media and race-hustlers in this country, had a death-bounty placed on him by leftist social anarchists, and even had the president coming out against him…is fair game to be killed, because you don’t think he’s a sympathetic character. Because he was alleged (but never charged) to have thrown a wine bottle at his girlfriend, or broke his ex-wife’s ipad, has had a couple of speeding tickets, and maybe exchanged words with fellow motorists.

    George Zimmerman is hardly the dregs of society. I will say this; were I George Zimmerman, I’d loose some weight, grow a beard, move out to Wyoming and get a job as a janitor somewhere. If you think it’s open-season on George Zimmerman, simply because of his as you say “scrapes” with the law, he’ll forever be a marked man.

    1. I believe my first remark was, “couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy” with obvious sarcasm button on.

      I think he is a toadie and I also believe if he had minded his own business, he could have spared himself a lot of grief and a kid would be alive today. Zimmerman also pretty much walks up to the line and somehow doesn’t cross over it.

      What I find interesting is that 2 infamous Manassas people, George Zimmerman and Lorena Bobbitt have both gained national notoriety. One person is like a trouble magnet. Everywhere he goes, his name pops up. The other person has made a good life for herself. She furthered her education, is a mom, has a professional career and hs started a foundation for abused women. Hmmmmmmm…what does that tell us?

      Apparently Zimmerman has relationship problems, both social and casual.

      I suppose I look at this case from a non A-2 point of view. Its probably a good thing that Zimmerman lives and plays in Florida. I think if he lived in a couple other states he would either be in the big house or on a slab.

  8. Steve Thomas

    @Moon-howler
    “Hmmmmmmm…what does that tell us?”

    I don’t know. What does it tell “us”?

    “I suppose I look at this case from a non A-2 point of view.”

    I don’t look at it as a 2A issue. I look at it as a right to self defense issue, and a lawful use of lethal force issue. The firearm is just the tool, same as a knife, or other weapon, uptoandincluding hands and feet, which can kill as well.

    What I find odd is in your top post, you are (rightly) questioning the objectivity of the Baltimore SA, questioning her motives for pursuing the Gray case, and her ongoing attempts to politicize the case, for possible self-aggrandizement. You rightly pose the question, “Can a fair trial be conducted, so that justice can be served”?

    And yet in the case of Zimmerman, justice was served. He was acquitted. He didn’t get off on some technicality, like an illegal search or some other issue. There was no mistrial declared. He was acquitted by a jury of his peers, in spite of the comments of the president, the media, the New Black panther party, etc. He has a couple of minor interactions with law-enforcement, which are of course are immediately pounced upon by the media. But to you, he’s a toad, and it’s OK if a toad gets shot at.

    Maybe, if Trayvon Martin hadn’t been a highschool delinquent, a thug in development, he’d not been sent to live with his Dad. Maybe if he’d been walking on the sidewalk like normal people do, rather than cutting through people’s yards on a dark, rainy night, maybe he wouldn’t have aroused the suspicion of Zimmerman, who as a member of the neighborhood watch. Maybe if Martin had hung up his cell phone call to his girlfriend, he could have called 911 to report that he was being followed.

    And maybe, if Trayvon Martin, who had a history of using is fists instead of his brain, hadn’t run up an punched Zimmerman in the face, pinned him to the ground and proceeded to punch and Zimmerman’s head into the pavement, he wouldn’t have ended up being shot. So, Martin had a delinquent history, exhibited thuggish behavior, and chose to physically assault someone who was lawfully armed, and paid for his previous bad decisions and behaviors with his life.

    If I said Martin was a “thug” and got what he deserved, would you agree, or disagree?

    1. Steve, you are defending the indefensible in my opinion. In the first place, you came at me like gang busters for basically saying “couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.” The is an opinion of dislike. Never once did I say he should have been strung up. He had a fair trial. (or what I can assume was a fair trial) I didn’t even have an opinion other than I thought he should stand trial. After it was over, you didn’t hear me weeping and wailing over the verdict. It was what it was and where it was.

      Let’s go to Martin. Now that is an area I do know a lot about. Teen-age thugs. I wouldn’t classify him as a thug. I know, if you read the internet and all the bias, he was just a horrible human being. However, there is no real proof that he was any worse than his peers. I am going to go on record as saying most kids his age have done weed, gotten in a few altercations and maybe had a few suspensions.

      In fact, from testimony, he thought he was being stalked or at least followed by a stranger? I don’t think he should have died. Nor do I think he was what most of us think of as a thug unless, of course, most of us think of most minority teens with a little swagger to be thugs. I do not. I know real thugs when I have encountered them. You are expecting a teenage boy to evaluate dangerous encounters as something other than a teenager. The reality is, that’s how most of them would respond if they were being stalked by a stranger.

      Which leads me to my point: George Zimmerman always seems to find an altercation, wherever he goes. I think that this makes him a real toadie. You probably don’t but I sure wouldn’t defend this AH. His incidents are just a little too frequent to be chance. His decision-making has to play a role in the outcome. Isn’t he 30 something now? I think we need to evaluate who is really acting like an adult.

      Oh and the notoriety? I dont think you could get more notorious than Lorena. Her name is now synonymous with castration. Somehow she has turned her life around. Zimmerman has not.

  9. Meanwhile, poor Bob McDonnell is in the middle of his appeal. Now I think he was railroaded. I don’t like his politics but I think he is a decent human being. He broke no Virginia laws.

    The man does not belong in prison.

    How on earth will we be able to get decent humans to run for office?

  10. Steve Thomas

    @Moon-howler
    “In the first place, you came at me like gang busters for basically saying “couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.” The is an opinion of dislike. Never once did I say he should have been strung up.”

    Your sarcasm implied that you thought it OK that he was shot (which you believed at the time), not for anything he was doing at the time, but rather because of who he is and I take issue with that.

    “I wouldn’t classify him as a thug.”

    I classified him as a delinquent, which is how his former HS classified him, and why he was sent to live with his father. Also, once the media quit using the outdated picture of an angelic looking 8-yearold, and we got a look at his social media pages, he was certainly attempting to portray himself as living the “thug life”. He may have been a wannabe, but George Zimmerman didn’t have the benefit of all that analysis, as he, George Zimmerman was being assaulted.

    “In fact, from testimony, he thought he was being stalked or at least followed by a stranger? I don’t think he should have died. ”

    Do you know why Zimmerman was allowed to use “self-defense/Stand Your Ground” as an affirmative defense? A-Ability. O-Opportunity. J-Jeprody. This is the three-factor test that is applied in all self-defense cases, and all three factors must be satisfied before lethal force is justified. Up until the moment Martin sucker-punched Zimmerman in the face, NEITHER Zimmerman or Martin had justification to use deadly force. Whoever acted violently first, immediately loses the legal protection of a self-defense claim. Talk to any use of force attorney. They will tell you the same thing. If you have the physical ability to inflict grievous injury on another, Are in a position (proximity) to do so and act, with violence and place that person in fear for their life, that person is justified in using lethal force, under the law. Martin physically attacked an armed person. He got shot. He died. It was his using AOJ that led to his death.

    “His incidents are just a little too frequent to be chance. His decision-making has to play a role in the outcome.”

    Like I said, if I were him, I’d disappear. But I’m not him. But, unless he crosses the AOJ line, he doesn’t deserve to be shot at, AH or toadie notwithstanding.

    “Oh and the notoriety? I dont think you could get more notorious than Lorena.”
    That was what, over 20 years ago? Before social media. Before the 24-hour news cycle? Before Al Gore invented the internet that we use today? Much easier to disappear back then, and I highly doubt there was a line of guys wanting to be her next beau.

    1. Actually, I know several people who wanted to date Lorena. My discretion keeps me from naming them. Lorena was very notorious. She tried to put her life together.

      I never said Zimmerman should be shot. Given his behavior since his trial, he really hasn’t shown that he is a responsible person. His altercation this past week was predictable. Thus, my sarcasm.

      I also question how reliable information leaked out of a school will be. Martin’s high school had no business calling him a delinquent. Many kids get sent to live with the other parent when they get to big for their britches. Where is Martin’s rap sheet, just out of curiosity?

  11. Scout

    @ Steve and Moon: the legal proceedings against Mr. Zimmerman determined that the State had not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he was criminally responsible for Mr Martin’s death. That was not an astounding conclusion, given that only two people knew exactly what happened and one of them was dead. In my mind, the point of all of this was that Zimmerman had every opportunity to avoid the confrontation, but chose to seek it out. He was the one person who clearly had the opportunity to break the sequence of events that led to Mr. Martin’s death. A secondary point that continues to bother me is why neighborhood watch programs would permit their volunteers to carry weapons.

    1. I totally agree with Scout.

      He wasn’t convicted. That was not a shock either. Regardless of where he moves, he needs to keep his nose clean and stop fighting with people. He also needs to cut out the bullying of women.

  12. Steve Thomas

    @Scout
    Scout, what you described is an acquittal in a criminal case…not guilty. The way 100% of “not guilty” verdicts occur. Nice spin though.

  13. Steve Thomas

    @Scout
    As to your secondary point, volunteer participation in a program doesn’t require the surrender of a constitutional right. There are prohibited places, and prohibited people, but no prohibited activities under federal or Floridian firearms laws.

    1. There is a huge difference in surrendering a right and not being permitted to carry a gun while on Watch duty. You cannot do it in Prince William County. If you can’t go by the rules, don’t join a watch group. Seems simple enough to me.

  14. blue

    @Scout

    ‘Zimmerman had every opportunity to avoid the confrontation, but chose to seek it out.’

    Gee, I did not understand that being attacked from behind a bush at night and then, having been surprised, having your head bashed in was seeking it out. Of course if you think that reaching for his gun – what because he had one was also seeking it out as an opportunity to kill some kid, I don’t think we have much to talk about.

    1. Blue, I really need to ask you if he was on duty. Why was he even in the area?

      It’s one thing if you are where you should be, going about your own business and someone bashes your head in. Its another thing to seek out confrontation. I always thought he asked for it.

      But this is old news and not what the thread is about. You and I will never agree on this issue.

  15. Scout

    Steve: My point wasn’t that someone has to surrender a constitutional right. If Zimmerman wants to carry heat because he lives in some extraordinarily dangerous setting where there are a lot of gunfights, I don’t mind as long as he complies with all reasonable regulation of that right (and we know that reasonable regulation is a part of the right). My point, however, is that a Neighborhood Watch program should make clear that if you want to volunteer, leave your shooting irons at home. If you don’t want to leave them at home, then don’t participate in the program.

  16. Scout

    @ Blue: Zimmerman called in the Trayvon sighting. His job was done. He was told by the dispatcher (as if one needed to be told), “we don’t need you to do that” when he announced that he was going to continue the contact. That was the point where Zimmerman should have let the police take over. Trayvon would be alive today if Zimmerman had had that modicum of common sense.

  17. Wolve

    Well, if you bloggers are so determined to go all historical like this, how about that Julius Caesar deal, eh? If the Roman Senate sergeant-at-arms had been doing his anti-weapons search correctly, maybe old Brutus would not have been able to sneak that blade in there, and………..Oh, forget it.

    All the principal defense attorneys for the six accused Baltimore cops have now requested that Marilyn Mosby be taken off the cases.

  18. Wolve

    Scout — If Mosby refuses to step down from these cases, what legal mechanisms could be used to force her to do so? Or is it solely her choice?

  19. Scout

    Wolve – I haven’t followed it closely enough to know whether the news reports of defense counsel asking that she step down reflect a formal motion to the court or simply a more informal request to the State Attorney herself or her office. If the latter, and if they are unsuccessful, they can always ask the court to order her to recuse herself. If they fail there, they can note their objection to the ruling and preserve it as a point of appeal.

    These things are always tricky. I tell my young attorneys that if they are trying to get a recusal, make sure you’re using an elephant gun. You really have to have your ducks all lined up. You don’t want to miss and then have a very annoyed judge presiding over your trial (which, by the way, is the usual context in which these things come up, rather than against a prosecutor).

    I’m rambling a bit (not the first time that’s happened), but the other consideration is whether the defendants might not be better off letting her take the case. She has clearly made it a political issue and is campaigning with it. How good a prosecutor, as opposed to a politician is she? If defense counsel assess her legal skills as deficient (compared, let’s say, to some really competent career prosecutor in her office), they may want her to take the case and screw it up.

    Finally, I agree with the larger trend in sentiment expressed by almost everyone here: she crossed a line with the content and spirit of her public statements. Just the facts, Ma’am.

  20. Steve thomas

    @Scout
    Honest question: would you rather face an inexperienced (she is) prosecutor who may make a whole bunch of mistakes leading to an acquittal, a mistrial, or grounds for appeal, or face someone with more capital experience?

    1. I would rather face any prosecutor in the United States other than Paul Elbert.

  21. Steve thomas

    Way to go, Baltimore:Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services announced Wednesday that investigators reviewed video that allegedly showed looting from a 7-Eleven store in the 300 block of West Baltimore Street downtown, which led to the suspensions.

    A DPSCS statement said that the video, recorded on the evening of April 25, showed two women — later identified as Tamika Cobb and Kendra Richard — leaving the store with merchandise.

    Both women had been assigned to a downtown Baltimore Division of Correction facility. They are on leave without pay as the charges against them include a felony.

    The officers had initially been placed on administrative leave during the investigation until being criminally charged Wednesday.

  22. Steve Thomas

    Moon-howler :
    I would rather face any prosecutor in the United States other than Paul Elbert.

    On this we agree…100%

    1. And I say this with the greatest respect. Mr. Ebert gets the job done!

  23. Scout

    Steve: Interesting question. As is probably true in a lot of areas where there are winners and losers, professionals probably would prefer dealing with capable adversaries, particularly ones that know the procedural ropes. Ironically, sometimes when you have an inexperienced opponent, a judge will try to help out (consciously or subconsciously) the tyro in ways that work against the more experienced litigant. Most of my work is defense oriented, although the constitutional cases I take are usually on the plaintiff’s side. Other than the occasional pro bono case I don’t do criminal defense. But to wander back to a direct answer to your question, I guess if my goal was to keep a client from getting the death penalty, I’d want as inexperienced an opponent as possible.

Comments are closed.