NationStates Jolt Archive

This happened in the county where I live.


County Public Safety Director Vernon Herron told the guards who are not cooperating with the homicide investigation at the jail that if they don't talk to investigators, they could be fired, News4 reports.

The investigation was launched after Ronnie White, 19, was found slain in his Prince George's County jail cell a day after he was arrested in the killing of Cpl. Richard Findley, 39. White had been charged with first-degree murder in the death. Police said White was the driver of a pickup truck that struck Findley on Friday.

The investigation into the homicide had hit a roadblock. Some corrections officers had been looking for lawyers instead of cooperating with investigators, officials said.



Full Article (http://www.nbc4.com/news/16756016/detail.html?dl=mainclick)

I don't know how to feel about this. On the one hand, these guards do have a right not to incriminate themselves by co-operating if, in fact, doing so would serve to incriminate them, but at the same time it seems like SOMEBODY must know what happened and can come forward without incriminating himself.

Is this an example of the jail staff covering for each other?

On the one hand, these guards do have a right not to incriminate themselves by co-operating if, in fact, doing so would serve to incriminate the...

Eh... what?

There's a 'right' out there that protects people involved in - for example - conspiracy to murder, from having to account for their actions?

Eh... what?

There's a 'right' out there that protects people involved in - for example - conspiracy to murder, from having to account for their actions?

...check the 5th amendment. No person can be required to give information that may have the tendancy to implicate them in a crime.

Living in VA, I say more power to whoever killed him. Anybody that kills a cop should not be surprised if they turn up dead. I'd say that refusing to cooperate, especially by invoking the 5th, is their best chance to avoid it. They were smart, they're not "refusing to cooperate" they're invoking their legal right not to incriminate themselves, and as long as the only guys that do cooperate can't say anything useful, they're safe. They can't be fired or they'll probably have a wrongful termination suit on their hands.

Go US legal system, anonymously killing the guilty for decades.

Go US legal system, anonymously killing just about anyone, really, for decades.
Fixed.

...check the 5th amendment. No person can be required to give information that may have the tendancy to implicate them in a crime.

I'm not entirely sure that's true.... Wouldn't that just stop the investigators from using 'compulsion'? Don't almost all states allow employers the right to dismiss employees for any - or even no - grounds?

I don't see how the fifth amendment would apply in this case.

Certainly, it seems like - as this appears to be a unified effort, and thus, a conspiracy to obstruct justice, there should be some avenue of leverage.

This happened in the county where I live.




Full Article (http://www.nbc4.com/news/16756016/detail.html?dl=mainclick)

I don't know how to feel about this. On the one hand, these guards do have a right not to incriminate themselves by co-operating if, in fact, doing so would serve to incriminate them, but at the same time it seems like SOMEBODY must know what happened and can come forward without incriminating himself.

Is this an example of the jail staff covering for each other?

It seems to me that they feel the killing was justified and are seeking to gum up the works as much as possible to protect a co-worker from prosecution. Hell, they might not even know anything.

By the way, they're all scumbags with as little regard for the law as any other murderer. That kid didn't even get a day in court.

Living in VA, I say more power to whoever killed him. Anybody that kills a cop should not be surprised if they turn up dead. I'd say that refusing to cooperate, especially by invoking the 5th, is their best chance to avoid it. They were smart, they're not "refusing to cooperate" they're invoking their legal right not to incriminate themselves, and as long as the only guys that do cooperate can't say anything useful, they're safe. They can't be fired or they'll probably have a wrongful termination suit on their hands.

Go US legal system, anonymously killing the guilty for decades.

Please tell me you're being satirical...

This happened in the county where I live.




Full Article (http://www.nbc4.com/news/16756016/detail.html?dl=mainclick)

I don't know how to feel about this. On the one hand, these guards do have a right not to incriminate themselves by co-operating if, in fact, doing so would serve to incriminate them, but at the same time it seems like SOMEBODY must know what happened and can come forward without incriminating himself.

Is this an example of the jail staff covering for each other?

of course it is. every one of those guards know what happened and every one of them should be fired.

...check the 5th amendment. No person can be required to give information that may have the tendancy to implicate them in a crime.

They also have a right to a lawyer. Just because someone invokes the 5th and hires a lawyer doesn't mean they are guilty or involved in a conspiracy.

Recent news stories on TV here indicate that initially they thought that seven guards had access to the victim - now they are admitting that it's far more than that, and that they really have no idea who had access.

Yes, it's a murder case. And yes, it sounds like it's in retaliation for the victim killing a police officer. And yes, that would be an illegal act. But until an investigation is complete, and individuals charged, you can't go around saying, "it's a conspiracy".

It seems to me that they feel the killing was justified and are seeking to gum up the works as much as possible to protect a co-worker from prosecution. Hell, they might not even know anything.

By the way, they're all scumbags with as little regard for the law as any other murderer. That kid didn't even get a day in court.

I agree completely. I think this is probably an example of how the police department treats suspects of a cop murder much differently than they do with any other. It's like they take it personally, or the police see themselves as inherently better than the rest of us.

Did this guy run over the dead officer deliberately or by accident? I don't know, and I guess we never will now.

On the radio this morning they were speculating that this might have involved gangs. I call BS.

One thing that gets me... where's the surveillance tape? In a jail, every inch of the inmate area is visible by cameras, except into the cells themselves. The guards NEVER come into the cells except for a periodic spot check. That should make it VERY easy to see who went in there, and the victim was strangled inside the cell (apparently.)

But until an investigation is complete, and individuals charged, you can't go around saying, "it's a conspiracy".

If there is an agreement between all of the guards to obstruct the investigation, that is a 'conspiracy', regardless of whether or not the investigation is complete, whether charges ever get pressed... or even, whether or not a trial-able crime is ever decided to have taken place.

...check the 5th amendment. No person can be required to give information that may have the tendancy to implicate them in a crime.

I don't know much about the American amendments, but shouldn't one be about 'not being murdered in you cell before a fair trial?'

I don't know much about the American amendments, but shouldn't one be about 'not being murdered in you cell before a fair trial?'

Yeah that's the Right to Due Process.

Which is why I have a problem with this vigilantism on the part of law enforcement personnel.

If there is an agreement between all of the guards to obstruct the investigation, that is a 'conspiracy', regardless of whether or not the investigation is complete, whether charges ever get pressed... or even, whether or not a trial-able crime is ever decided to have taken place.

You have no evidence of that at this point. Taking the 5th and calling a lawyer is no evidence of conspiracy.

I'm not entirely sure that's true.... Wouldn't that just stop the investigators from using 'compulsion'? Don't almost all states allow employers the right to dismiss employees for any - or even no - grounds?

I don't see how the fifth amendment would apply in this case.

Certainly, it seems like - as this appears to be a unified effort, and thus, a conspiracy to obstruct justice, there should be some avenue of leverage.

Police and guards have a union. In this case, it's probably impossible to fire them for taking the 5th, which is always their right.

Police and guards have a union. In this case, it's probably impossible to fire them for taking the 5th, which is always their right.

But it may be possible to fire them on the grounds that they failed in their duty to safeguard the inmate's life, and there may be some regulation requiring them to assist in any investigation into such a death. The 5th Amendment protects them from criminal self-incrimination, but not in terms of employment.

Just because witnesses wont talk doesnt mean the investigators will throw up thier hands and go oh well lets just drop the whole thing. Its still a murder, and the people responsible will get charged. If nothing else, supervisors could be charged with criminal negligence or whatever as a start and that will get people to start talking etc.

This isnt the first time in the history of American murder investigations that witnesses have clammed up. Investigators arnt dumb and they know the legal ways to use leverage to get people to talk.

If there is an agreement between all of the guards to obstruct the investigation, that is a 'conspiracy', regardless of whether or not the investigation is complete, whether charges ever get pressed... or even, whether or not a trial-able crime is ever decided to have taken place.

Doesn't have to be a conspiracy, could be one guard, or cop, good at covering their trail. Unless they have some pretty solid evidence the killer will never get caught. Or if someone saw it and turns on them.

Both are pretty unlikely. Honestly it's unusual for a cop killer to survive long enough to get to jail. They often "commit suicide" when cornered.

Doesn't have to be a conspiracy, could be one guard, or cop, good at covering their trail. Unless they have some pretty solid evidence the killer will never get caught. Or if someone saw it and turns on them.

Both are pretty unlikely. Honestly it's unusual for a cop killer to survive long enough to get to jail. They often "commit suicide" when cornered.

There had to be some kind of conspiracy, either before or after the fact. Somebody pulled those surveillance tapes. According to the article, the guy was reported to be just fine at 10:15 and dead at 10:30 so either the last guy who claimed to see him alive was lying or someone turned a blind eye in that 15 minutes.

Did White have a cellmate? It seems he did not. Did any other inmate on the block see anything? That's where the investigation should focus.

For me personally this sounds like they did him a favor... Assuming there was enough evidence to convict him.

There had to be some kind of conspiracy, either before or after the fact. Somebody pulled those surveillance tapes. According to the article, the guy was reported to be just fine at 10:15 and dead at 10:30 so either the last guy who claimed to see him alive was lying or someone turned a blind eye in that 15 minutes.

Did White have a cellmate? It seems he did not. Did any other inmate on the block see anything? That's where the investigation should focus.

Or someone was negligent in their sweep of the cells and he was dead before 10:15. Isn't speculation fun?

You have no evidence of that at this point. Taking the 5th and calling a lawyer is no evidence of conspiracy.

I think you fail to understand what 'conspiracy' means, and can only relate to it in we're-all-being-governed-by-lizard-men-from-Mars terms, perhaps.

If ALL the guards are refusing to cooperate (which isn't the same as admitting they know nothing), then there is either a coincidence of unbelievable proportions (i.e. ALL the guards SPONTANEOUSLY decided ALONE, to act in an obstructive fashion), or there is some kind of premeditated group action. And that, my friend - is conspiracy.

Police and guards have a union. In this case, it's probably impossible to fire them for taking the 5th, which is always their right.

Rubbish. ALL but two states (and I'd have to check which ones) allow firing on no grounds.

It is possible we are talking about one of those states (but the odds are 25:1, yes?)... but 'union membership' isn't going to be the deciding factor on the legitimacy of firings.

Why are people talking about firings when a murder has occured here? The topic should be about who gets electrocuted not who gets fired with or without cause.

Or someone was negligent in their sweep of the cells and he was dead before 10:15. Isn't speculation fun?

Yar

Rubbish. ALL but two states (and I'd have to check which ones) allow firing on no grounds.

It is possible we are talking about one of those states (but the odds are 25:1, yes?)... but 'union membership' isn't going to be the deciding factor on the legitimacy of firings.

This took place in Maryland and I'm pretty sure this isn't one of those 2.

Why are people talking about firings when a murder has occured here? The topic should be about who gets electrocuted not who gets fired with or without cause.

'cause we don't know whodunnit yet. Maryland has the death penalty but we haven't executed anybody in over 35 years. Besides, I highly doubt they'd sentence someone with a badge to die, regardless of the crime but especially considering the victim.

It should be a law that you do not hold a person accused of attacking or killing a police officer in his precinct because its in everybodys best interest that he should be transferred to an adjacent County for holding.

It should be a law that you do not hold a person accused of attacking or killing a police officer in his precinct because its in everybodys best interest that he should be transferred to an adjacent County for holding.

The only thing is, he allegedly killed a County Police officer and when he was in this jail he wasn't in the custody of the County Police... He was in the custody of the Department of Corrections. We don't know at this point whether the guards at the jail were friends of the dead officer.

Although generally speaking I do agree with you.

I'm surprised DK didn't argue that the guy deserved it.

I'm surprised DK didn't argue that the guy deserved it.

I'll argue that.

*insert long winded speech that changes everyobdy's minds, and brainwashes them into eating applesauce through a straw, which is in their nose while upside down*

Living in VA, I say more power to whoever killed him. Anybody that kills a cop should not be surprised if they turn up dead. I'd say that refusing to cooperate, especially by invoking the 5th, is their best chance to avoid it. They were smart, they're not "refusing to cooperate" they're invoking their legal right not to incriminate themselves, and as long as the only guys that do cooperate can't say anything useful, they're safe. They can't be fired or they'll probably have a wrongful termination suit on their hands.

Go US legal system, anonymously killing the guilty for decades.

The person accused of killing the cop never saw his day in court, and if I remember correctly (I'm pretty sure I am :p), people are innocent until PROVEN guilty.

The person accused of killing the cop never saw his day in court, and if I remember correctly (I'm pretty sure I am :p), people are innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Nacy Grace and the Bush adminstration disagree.

Nacy Grace and the Bush adminstration disagree.

They're both horrible horrible people though.

They're both horrible horrible people though.

Actualy, according to Executive order #5962 Bush is not a bad person, and anyone that says other wise is gets sent to Gitmo.

The jail staff's covering for each other. They killed this guy and -from the method of death- I determine he killed the cop by accident. So cops meet manslaughter w/homicide. If you want to live free you've to fight to the death :mp5: never accepting arrest. But if you try to make up :fluffle: w/the government :mad: you'll be :upyours: screwed.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzKaUxqDnxE

The jail staff's covering for each other. They killed this guy and -from the method of death- I determine he killed the cop by accident. So cops meet manslaughter w/homicide. If you want to live free you've to fight to the death :mp5: never accepting arrest. But if you try to make up :fluffle: w/the government :mad: you'll be :upyours: screwed.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzKaUxqDnxE
I wish we could make people with under 100 posts banned from using smiley icons of any sort

I wish we could make people with under 100 posts banned from using smiley icons of any sort

Or how about anyone that has less than 100 posts can't post?

They're both horrible horrible people though.

No, one is a horrible horrible person, the other is a horrible horrible group of people.

Nacy Grace and the Bush adminstration disagree.

Who's Nacy Grace?

Yeah that's the Right to Due Process.

Which is why I have a problem with this vigilantism on the part of law enforcement personnel.

I thought that I had the right to do Process. Y'know, like she was some chick somewhere... That would be a weird name to have... Process... Heh.

Anyway, I'm probably going to need a criminal lawyer, now that I know those charges are actually serious...

All I've heard is the police side of the story. I will reserve judgment until I know the circumstances surrounding the death of the cop and the full story of the murder. The police have a reputation (whether justly earned or not I don't know) for pursuing their own vigilante justice when someone is accused of killing one of their own. It's entirely possible that the guy who killed the cop did so for a justifiable reason. Maybe not probable, but possible.

I wish we could make people with under 100 posts banned from using smiley icons of any sort

Or how about anyone that has less than 100 posts can't post?

Maybe some sort of Smilie Competency exam. :)

All I've heard is the police side of the story. I will reserve judgment until I know the circumstances surrounding the death of the cop and the full story of the murder. The police have a reputation (whether justly earned or not I don't know) for pursuing their own vigilante justice when someone is accused of killing one of their own. It's entirely possible that the guy who killed the cop did so for a justifiable reason. Maybe not probable, but possible.

Yar but all that's kinda irrelevant to the guy being killed in his cell. Whether he murdered that cop or not, this is unacceptable.

This took place in Maryland and I'm pretty sure this isn't one of those 2.


Aye, that's what I thought, but I don't want to run in with guns blazing, when I'm not sure. :)

Rubbish. ALL but two states (and I'd have to check which ones) allow firing on no grounds.
If there is no agreement to the contrary. Almost certainly in this case the union contracts restrict the right to fire.