In Baltimore, We’re All Freddie Gray

The story of Freddie Gray, the 25-year-old black man who was viciously attacked by police officers on April 12 more or less because he looked at them, seems to plague the city of Baltimore, Maryland. To us, the Baltimore Police Department is a group of terrorists, funded by our tax dollars, who beat on people in our community daily, almost never having to explain or pay for their actions. Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, in conjunction with Police Commissioner Anthony W. Batts, spent over a week investigating what appears to be an open-and-shut case. The police officers in Baltimore, as in many places in the country with dense black populations, are out of control, have been out of control. Many other Baltimoreans feel the same way, which is why a diverse collection of protesters has taken to the streets every day since Freddie Grays death on April 19. From there, a group of protesters, including myself, marched to Camden Yards, where the Orioles were playing the Boston Red Sox. The young up risers of Baltimore have been paying attention to the peaceful protests in Sanford, Fla., Ferguson, Mo., and New York, only to be let down by the end result, over and over again. 

When will Americans learn? I feel like I say the same thing every time chaos breaks out between cops and civilians. America will not progress until we stop pointing fingers at each other and decide to work together! by putting the blame on each other and not taking full responsibility, society will deteriorate. 

"In Baltimore, We’re All Freddie Gray." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Apr. 2015. Web. 29 Apr. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/29/opinion/in-baltimore-were-all-freddie-gray.html?_r=0>.

Hurst v. Florida with respect to Ring v. Arizona

In Hurst v. Florida the main question was whether Florida's death sentencing scheme violates the Sixth Amendment or the Eighth Amendment in light of this Court's decision in Ring v. Arizona, 536 U. S. 584 (2002). On appeal, Hurst was granted a new sentencing trial because the Supreme Court of Florida found that his counsel should have investigated and presented evidence of Hursts borderline intelligence and possible organic brain damage. At his new sentencing trial, Hurst was prevented from presenting mental retardation evidence as an absolute bar to the imposition of the death penalty, though he was allowed to present it as mitigating evidence. In 2002, the Supreme Court decided the case Ring v. Arizona, in which the Court held that the Sixth Amendment required that the presence of aggravating factors, which Arizona's death penalty sentencing scheme viewed as essentially elements of a larger offense, be determined by the jury. The Supreme Court of Florida had previously held that the decision in Ring v. Arizona did not apply to Florida's death penalty sentencing scheme generally and specifically did not require that a jury's recommendation of the death penalty be unanimous or that a jury determine the factual issue of a defendants potential mental retardation.