Police chokehold on man ruled a homicide

[InRareForm]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/01/official-police-chokehold-caused-nyc-mans-death/13475451/

[Trainwreck2100]

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[spurraider21]

good

[TheyCallMePro]

Have to say one thing about this: This is why you don't ever try to resist arrest. Things can get dicey because the cops are now obligated to use force to arrest you. And this is the type of thing that can happen.

Unfortunately this aspect will be completely lost on the public calling for the police's heads.

[rogues]

good

Agreed..fuck tha police

[spurraider21]

Agreed..fuck tha police
to be fair, i'm not the typical pothead "fuck da police" guy... but when somebody pulls shit like this they deserve everything that's coming to 'em

[silverblk mystix]

Can't find the video but it appears the fat guy was resisting arrest -

at his own peril.

His 350-400 pounds obviously had nothing to do with his difficulty breathing - and his saying "I can't breathe" eight times - does not contradict that you have to be able to breathe to be able to repeat something verbally 8 times -

just ask any rapper how "breath control" is important to their "art"


Of course if a cop instructs you to "stop resisting" and "place your hands behind your back" - and you refuse and begin resisting -


it is at your own peril.


But, sure - blame the cops.



:lmao:lmao

[rogues]

Can't find the video but it appears the fat guy was resisting arrest -

at his own peril.

His 350-400 pounds obviously had nothing to do with his difficulty breathing - and his saying "I can't breathe" eight times - does not contradict that you have to be able to breathe to be able to repeat something verbally 8 times -

just ask any rapper how "breath control" is important to their "art"


Of course if a cop instructs you to "stop resisting" and "place your hands behind your back" - and you refuse and begin resisting -


it is at your own peril.


But, sure - blame the cops.



:lmao:lmao
You don't even know the details of the story. An officer used a banned maneuver while seven of his fellow policeman held the guy down..several minutes later the guy is unconscious..and dies..the officer was at fault for going overboard..

[silverblk mystix]

You don't even know the details of the story. An officer used a banned maneuver while seven of his fellow policeman held the guy down..several minutes later the guy is unconscious..and dies..the officer was at fault for going overboard..


Yes, you are correct - I never found the video - so I don't know all the specifics -


I was just commenting on the few details that were in the article.

[Clipper Nation]

You don't even know the details of the story. An officer used a banned maneuver while seven of his fellow policeman held the guy down..several minutes later the guy is unconscious..and dies..the officer was at fault for going overboard..
Tino blindly defends everything the police does regardless of how egregious it is, so don't even waste your breath on that faggot....

[rogues]

Yes, you are correct - I never found the video - so I don't know all the specifics -


I was just commenting on the few details that were in the article.
:lol The very first sentence of the article mentions 'illegal chokehold'..and a few passages later, they have a statement from the medical examiner spokeswoman about the cause of death..

[rogues]

Tino blindly defends everything the police does regardless of how egregious it is, so don't even waste your breath on that faggot....
:lol Looks like it..the article should be accessible to him, I doubt he even read it..

[xmas1997]

Tino blindly defends everything the police does regardless of how egregious it is, so don't even waste your breath on that faggot....

You must be a criminal at heart.
:lmao

[Chris]

Four emergency workers were suspended without pay after witnesses reported they did not administer CPR or oxygen as Garner lay motionless.

[DMC]

When one person kills another, it's by definition a homicide.

[silverblk mystix]

When one person kills another, it's by definition a homicide.

Wait until the court case is resolved and then the verdict will be your correct definition.

For now -

a fat guy resisted and died due to a number of possible reasons. The cop hating public needed nothing further and made a judgement based on their programming, conditioning, prejudices, etc...

[DMC]

Homicide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homicide) is the killing of another human.

[silverblk mystix]

Homicide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homicide) is the killing of another human.


If he died of a heart attack = not homicide.

[Chinook]

It was bound to get caught on camera eventually. The rise in police related incidents made this inevitable.

[DMC]

If he died of a heart attack = not homicide.
A New York City police officer's illegal chokehold killed Eric Garner last month, and his death has been ruled a homicide, the medical examiner announced Friday.

Try reading the links.

[silverblk mystix]

A New York City police officer's illegal chokehold killed Eric Garner last month, and his death has been ruled a homicide, the medical examiner announced Friday.

Try reading the links.



From the state of new york - penal code;



S 125.00 Homicide defined. Homicide means conduct which causes the death of a person or an unbornchild with which a female has been pregnant for more than twenty-fourweeks under circumstances constituting murder, manslaughter in the firstdegree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.20), manslaughter in the second degree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.15), criminally negligenthomicide (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.10), abortion in the first degree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.45) or self-abortion in the firstdegree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.55).

S 125.10 Criminally negligent homicide. A person is guilty of criminally negligent homicide when, withcriminal negligence, he causes the death of another person. Criminally negligent homicide is a class E felony.





Unless the medical examiner in new york is giving himself the title of judge and jury -then there is no homicide yet.




Have to prove the "criminal negligence" part -


Next time -

try sticking to things you know something about.

[xmas1997]

From the state of new york - penal code;



S 125.00 Homicide defined. Homicide means conduct which causes the death of a person or an unbornchild with which a female has been pregnant for more than twenty-fourweeks under circumstances constituting murder, manslaughter in the firstdegree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.20), manslaughter in the second degree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.15), criminally negligenthomicide (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.10), abortion in the first degree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.45) or self-abortion in the firstdegree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.55).

S 125.10 Criminally negligent homicide. A person is guilty of criminally negligent homicide when, withcriminal negligence, he causes the death of another person. Criminally negligent homicide is a class E felony.





Unless the medical examiner in new york is giving himself the title of judge and jury -then there is no homicide yet.




Have to prove the "criminal negligence" part -


Next time -

try sticking to things you know something about.

[DMC]

From the state of new york - penal code;



S 125.00 Homicide defined. Homicide means conduct which causes the death of a person or an unbornchild with which a female has been pregnant for more than twenty-fourweeks under circumstances constituting murder, manslaughter in the firstdegree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.20), manslaughter in the second degree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.15), criminally negligenthomicide (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.10), abortion in the first degree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.45) or self-abortion in the firstdegree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.55).

S 125.10 Criminally negligent homicide. A person is guilty of criminally negligent homicide when, withcriminal negligence, he causes the death of another person. Criminally negligent homicide is a class E felony.Unless the medical examiner in new york is giving himself the title of judge and jury -then there is no homicide yet.




Have to prove the "criminal negligence" part -


Next time -

try sticking to things you know something about.

His death was RULED a homicide by the M.E's office in NY. I guess they don't get it either. I never mentioned anything about criminal negligence.

[DMC]

Homicide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homicide) is the killing of another human.


If he died of a heart attack = not homicide.


A New York City police officer's illegal chokehold killed Eric Garner last month, and his death has been ruled a homicide, the medical examiner announced Friday.

Try reading the links.


From the state of new york - penal code;



S 125.00 Homicide defined. Homicide means conduct which causes the death of a person or an unbornchild with which a female has been pregnant for more than twenty-fourweeks under circumstances constituting murder, manslaughter in the firstdegree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.20), manslaughter in the second degree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.15), criminally negligenthomicide (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.10), abortion in the first degree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.45) or self-abortion in the firstdegree (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm#p125.55).

S 125.10 Criminally negligent homicide. A person is guilty of criminally negligent homicide when, withcriminal negligence, he causes the death of another person. Criminally negligent homicide is a class E felony.





Unless the medical examiner in new york is giving himself the title of judge and jury -then there is no homicide yet.




Have to prove the "criminal negligence" part -


Next time -

try sticking to things you know something about.


His death was RULED a homicide by the M.E's office in NY. I guess they don't get it either. I never mentioned anything about criminal negligence.

This is too easy.

[silverblk mystix]

His death was RULED a homicide by the M.E's office in NY. I guess they don't get it either. I never mentioned anything about criminal negligence.


When they go to court and are unable to prove that the cop willfully murdered the suspect and/or was criminally negligent - then the M.E. will have to defend itself against a lawsuit for slandering the cop.

But - hey - semantics - at this point.


The guy is dead -


By the choking, his health, his weight, his refusal to stop resisting, etc....

One of those.

[DMC]

When they go to court and are unable to prove that the cop willfully murdered the suspect and/or was criminally negligent - then the M.E. will have to defend itself against a lawsuit for slandering the cop.

But - hey - semantics - at this point.

The death has been ruled a homicide by an authority having jurisdiction. That means the vic did not die of natural causes. The criminal element is irrelevant to that fact.




The guy is dead -


By the choking, his health, his weight, his refusal to stop resisting, etc....

One of those.
The M.E.'s office that conducts the autopsy has issued a ruling. Why are you acting as if the cause of death is still up in the air at this point?

[silverblk mystix]

The death has been ruled a homicide by an authority having jurisdiction. That means the vic did not die of natural causes. The criminal element is irrelevant to that fact.

The M.E.'s office that conducts the autopsy has issued a ruling. Why are you acting as if the cause of death is still up in the air at this point?


Because you and the rest of the public cannot differentiate between;

cause of death = choking

and

cause of death = choking due to criminal negligence/murder/homicide/


It has to be proven first but everyone already assumes the cop killed/murdered/ him.

[xmas1997]

Now he will make his ludicrous claim he took you to the woodshed, or that you aborted.
Where do these idiots who have no conceptions of discussions come from?
:lmao

[DMC]

Because you and the rest of the public cannot differentiate between;

cause of death = choking

and

cause of death = choking due to criminal negligence/murder/homicide/


It has to be proven first but everyone already assumes the cop killed/murdered/ him.
I said nothing about cause of death. I said homicide is the killing of another person. That's directly from Wiki. The M.E.'s office ruled his death a homicide. You're equivocating homicide with negligent or criminal homicide. Even state sanctioned killings are homicides. My point was that the OP thread title was misleading. It doesn't address the criminal aspect of the ruling, since one wasn't made. People automatically think homicide is murder.

[DMC]

Now he will make his ludicrous claim he took you to the woodshed, or that you aborted.
Where do these idiots who have no conceptions of discussions come from?
:lmao
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237785&p=7528106&viewfull=1#post7528106

[silverblk mystix]

I said nothing about cause of death. I said homicide is the killing of another person. That's directly from Wiki. The M.E.'s office ruled his death a homicide. You're equivocating homicide with negligent or criminal homicide. Even state sanctioned killings are homicides. My point was that the OP thread title was misleading. It doesn't address the criminal aspect of the ruling, since one wasn't made. People automatically think homicide is murder.


Fair enough -


I honestly wasn't actually paying the proper attention - and I just re-read the OP's article -

---Choking - is a no-no in NYPD -


looks like cop will try to go the "I didn't willfully murder him" route -

but it appears he is fucked.

My mistake for not taking the time to read it carefully.

[xmas1997]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237785&p=7528106&viewfull=1#post7528106

And ..........

[xmas1997]

Fair enough -


I honestly wasn't actually paying the proper attention - and I just re-read the OP's article -

---Choking - is a no-no in NYPD -


looks like cop will try to go the "I didn't willfully murder him" route -

but it appears he is fucked.

My mistake for not taking the time to read it carefully.

Now he will make his idiotic claims that you "lost" some fictitious message board contest and made a laughing stock out of you.
These idiots abound on here.
:rollin

[BlackSwordsMan]

way I see it is a cop killed a black people in the long run probably prevented another crime so what do we now punish cops for doing their jobs?

[bigzak25]

Cop has thanked me for not resisting. No point really.

[DMC]

Fair enough -


I honestly wasn't actually paying the proper attention - and I just re-read the OP's article -

---Choking - is a no-no in NYPD -


looks like cop will try to go the "I didn't willfully murder him" route -

but it appears he is fucked.

My mistake for not taking the time to read it carefully.

Grown man move. Let's be friends, scrah.

[DJR210]

to be fair, i'm not the typical pothead "fuck da police" guy... but when somebody pulls shit like this they deserve everything that's coming to 'em

Hope you never get fucked over by a crooked cop..will change your views.

[spurraider21]

way I see it is a cop killed a black people in the long run probably prevented another crime so what do we now punish cops for doing their jobs?
that's not a cop's job

[spurraider21]

Hope you never get fucked over by a crooked cop..will change your views.
oh, i'm certain there are bad cops, that's not the issue here. when people say "fuck the police" i doubt they mean "i understand that a majority of cops are good, but i only mean 'fuck those cops that are bad people'"

when a cop acts outside his bounds, i hope he gets fucked by the long dick of the law (to quote superbad). personally i'm not stupid enough to get myself in those kinds of positions. even though i strongly disagree with the cops' action in this incident, if you have seen the footage, the guy was resisting during much of it. they were trying to cuff him and he kept tucking his arms by his side instead of allowing them to cuff his arms behind his back, etc

[DJR210]

oh, i'm certain there are bad cops, that's not the issue here. when people say "fuck the police" i doubt they mean "i understand that a majority of cops are good, but i only mean 'fuck those cops that are bad people'"

when a cop acts outside his bounds, i hope he gets fucked by the long dick of the law (to quote superbad). personally i'm not stupid enough to get myself in those kinds of positions. even though i strongly disagree with the cops' action in this incident, if you have seen the footage, the guy was resisting during much of it. they were trying to cuff him and he kept tucking his arms by his side instead of allowing them to cuff his arms behind his back, etc

Most cops I've dealt with are just pricks, luckily only ran into a couple of legitimately "need to have their heads sawed off on streaming video" crooked ones

[spurraider21]

Most cops I've dealt with are just pricks, luckily only ran into a couple of legitimately "need to have their heads sawed off on streaming video" crooked ones
i dont care if they're pricks. i just care that they're not maniacal

[Oh, Gee!!]

Homicide means killing of a person by another person. Its not a legal ruling, but a medical/forensic one. Whether he was justified in causing death is for the grand jury to decide.

[Aztecfan03]

When they go to court and are unable to prove that the cop willfully murdered the suspect and/or was criminally negligent - then the M.E. will have to defend itself against a lawsuit for slandering the cop.

But - hey - semantics - at this point.


The guy is dead -


By the choking, his health, his weight, his refusal to stop resisting, etc....

One of those.

Labeling someone's death a homicide is not slandering anyone.

[Aztecfan03]

Now he will make his idiotic claims that you "lost" some fictitious message board contest and made a laughing stock out of you.
These idiots abound on here.
:rollin

You are the one being idiotic on this thread.

[SnakeBoy]

Homicide means killing of a person by another person. Its not a legal ruling, but a medical/forensic one. Whether he was justified in causing death is for the grand jury to decide.

The only problem with the homicide label is that the medical examiners own finding contradict it....


Medical examiner spokeswoman Julie Bolcer said Garner died from "the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police." Asthma and heart disease contributed to his death, she said.


Whether his death was brought on by an altercation with police or walking up a flight of stairs the true cause of his death should be labeled being a fat ass.

[Oh, Gee!!]

The only problem with the homicide label is that the medical examiners own finding contradict it....



Whether his death was brought on by an altercation with police or walking up a flight of stairs the true cause of his death should be labeled being a fat ass.

he died from asphyxia. his heart health and asthma issue contributed to his death, but the primary cause is choking. you're too stupid to live.

[Oh, Gee!!]

only healthy people can be homicide victims

[SnakeBoy]

he died from asphyxia. his heart health and asthma issue contributed to his death, but the primary cause is choking. you're too stupid to live.

Your too stupid to know that asphyxia does not mean choking.

[mrsmaalox]

Your too stupid to know that asphyxia does not mean choking.

Yes it does

[resistanze]

:lol SnakeBoy

[rogues]

:lol SnakeBoy
:lol He's an idiot

[Oh, Gee!!]

Your too stupid to know that asphyxia does not mean choking.

asphyxia is the loss of oxygen (which can cause death); choking is one way to cause asphyxia.

[SnakeBoy]

Yes it does

No it doesn't.



asphyxia is the loss of oxygen (which can cause death); choking is one way to cause asphyxia.

Good you used google. Dude wasn't choked to death. The medical examiners report makes it clear he died from being a fat fuck.

[baseline bum]

Hope you never get fucked over by a crooked cop..will change your views.

Only in Mexico tbh

[mrsmaalox]

No it doesn't.


Good you used google. Dude wasn't choked to death. The medical examiners report makes it clear he died from being a fat fuck.

What do you think it means then?

[SnakeBoy]

What do you think it means then?

Aren't you a nurse? I don't think I should have to explain it to you but here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asphyxia

Oh Gee's contention that because he died of asphyxia he was choked to death is simply wrong.

[DJR210]

Only in Mexico tbh

I won't even fucking go there with my skin tone. Asking for problems.

[RD2191]

I won't even fucking go there with my skin tone. Asking for problems.

Shit brown?

[mrsmaalox]

Aren't you a nurse? I don't think I should have to explain it to you but here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asphyxia

Oh Gee's contention that because he died of asphyxia he was choked to death is simply wrong.

It says right there an example of asphyxia is choking. Now look up the definition of choking.

"Medical examiner spokeswoman Julie Bolcer said Garner died from "the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police." Asthma and heart disease contributed to his death, she said."

[DJR210]

Shit brown?

:lol cocaine white

[SnakeBoy]

NYC grand jury to return no indictment in police choke hold case:
http://news.yahoo.com/nyc-grand-jury-return-no-indictment-police-choke-193254083.html

[Drachen]

Let's see, video of incident? Check. Use of illegal technique? Check. Ruled homicide by coroner? Check. Indictment? Chec.... Wait WTF?

[spurraider21]

What is standard procedure when somebody resists arrest? i dont have experience in law enforcement

[TheSanityAnnex]

Fat shaming at it's worst. smh

[Blake]

Can't find the video but it appears the fat guy was resisting arrest -

at his own peril.

His 350-400 pounds obviously had nothing to do with his difficulty breathing - and his saying "I can't breathe" eight times - does not contradict that you have to be able to breathe to be able to repeat something verbally 8 times -

just ask any rapper how "breath control" is important to their "art"


Of course if a cop instructs you to "stop resisting" and "place your hands behind your back" - and you refuse and begin resisting -


it is at your own peril.


But, sure - blame the cops.



:lmao:lmao

how are things going, sbm?

[Blake]

You must be a criminal at heart.
:lmao

sup xmas?

[Creepn]

Dat white logic kills.

Video of cop illegally choking a man with his hands up and still gets off.

[Blake]

Dat white logic kills.

Video of cop illegally choking a man with his hands up and still gets off.

Was it an illegal choking?

I don't think so.

Department policy =/= law

[spurraider21]

Dat white logic kills.

Video of cop illegally choking a man with his hands up and still gets off.
i'm not familiar with law enforcement. what is standard procedure when somebody is resisting arrest?

[ohmwrecker]

i'm not familiar with law enforcement. what is standard procedure when somebody is resisting arrest?

I'm pretty sure choking them until they die is not standard procedure. Could be wrong though.

[spurraider21]

I'm pretty sure choking them until they die is not standard procedure. Could be wrong though.
does it usually include taking them to the ground on their stomach until handcuffs are applied?

i also think the use of several officers so subdue them is safer since they can simply weigh somebody down rather than striking him to subdue him.

tbh the choke hold was incorrectly applied and the cop should lose his job for doing it, but he was released from that choke after they got on the ground, and he was still able to speak at that point. people act like he literally held the choke until the point of death

[BatManu20]

I sided with the grand jury's decision to not indict Darren Wilson, but this is different.

The choke hold was outlawed by NYC Police in 1993 for this very reason. It was the chokehold that killed Eric Garner (he was asthmatic).

[spurraider21]

I sided with the grand jury's decision to not indict Darren Wilson, but this is different.

The choke hold was outlawed by NYC Police in 1993 for this very reason. It was the chokehold that killed Eric Garner (he was asthmatic).
he was alive and talking after the choke was released

[Creepn]

Was it an illegal choking?

I don't think so.

Department policy =/= law

The law says it's legal to choke a man to death?

[spurraider21]

The law says it's legal to choke a man to death?
how can you say he was choked to death from the hold if he was speaking after the choke hold was released?

[ohmwrecker]

how can you say he was choked to death from the hold if he was speaking after the choke hold was released?

Not saying you're wrong, but I can't find anything that validates that claim.

[SnakeBoy]

Police Officer Daniel Pantaleo, 29, was suspended in mid-July following the death of Eric Garner. He issued a statement Wednesday after it was announced that a Staten Island grand jury has declined to indict the officer.

“I became a police officer to help people and to protect those who can’t protect themselves,” Pantaleo said in the statement. “It is never my intention to harm anyone and I feel very bad about the death of Mr. Garner. My family and I include him and his family in our prayers and I hope that they will accept my personal condolences for their loss.”


Gardner clearly wasn't "choked to death" but I find this cops statement dickish enough to say fuck that cop.

[spurraider21]

Not saying you're wrong, but I can't find anything that validates that claim.
jump to 1 minute mark. clearly, the officer in the green 99 shirt is the one administering the choke hold. once they roll him over to his stomach soon after, you can see the Green 99 guy releases the choke. after that point you can still hear him speaking saying "i can't breathe."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LSBpwmMnVM

again, as i've stated, the cop should surely be disciplined for using a hold that is not allowed per NYPD standards.

from my limited understanding, isn't it protocol to put somebody on the ground and cuff him if they are resisting arrest?

[Creepn]

how can you say he was choked to death from the hold if he was speaking after the choke hold was released?
So if I choked a man that sets off a chain of events within his body that fatally kills him seconds later, even if he says "I can't breathe!" due to the fact that he got choked, I shouldn't be held accountable?

Seriously brah? Damn that white logic is deadly.

[spurraider21]

So if I choked a man that sets off a chain of events within his body that fatally kills him seconds later, even if he says "I can't breathe!" due to the fact that he got choked, I shouldn't be held accountable?

Seriously brah? Damn that white logic is deadly.
didnt say the police action didn't lead to his death. i'm saying the "killer choke hold" thing is being blown out of proportion.

[Trill Clinton]

how can you say he was choked to death from the hold if he was speaking after the choke hold was released?

http://i57.tinypic.com/oqbngm.png
The cause of Garner's death was "compression of neck (chokehold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police," the medical examiner's office has said. The New York City Police Department prohibits chokeholds. The death was ruled a homicide.

[ChumpDumper]

didnt say the police action didn't lead to his death. i'm saying the "killer choke hold" thing is being blown out of proportion.Well, it compressed his neck.

That seems bad.

[spurraider21]

http://i57.tinypic.com/oqbngm.png
The cause of Garner's death was "compression of neck (chokehold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police," the medical examiner's office has said. The New York City Police Department prohibits chokeholds. The death was ruled a homicide.
i'm glad you chose to bold the first half of the statement and not the second half, which is illustrated in the video after the chokehold was released

[spurraider21]

Well, it compressed his neck.

That seems bad.
of course its bad. i didn't suggest the choke was good for his health. i think its physically impossible to choke somebody without compressing their neck.

[SnakeBoy]

So if I choked a man that sets off a chain of events within his body that fatally kills him seconds later, even if he says "I can't breathe!" due to the fact that he got choked, I shouldn't be held accountable?


The officer can't be held responsible for Garners underlying medical issues. The issue to me isn't the headlock/chokehold, it's not clear to me in the video if it was a chokehold or headlock. Instead it is that the cops escalated the situation without cause and then failed to render basic medical care they are trained in that could have saved his life and instead let him lie there until EMT's showed up. I don't know what laws exist that they could be prosecuted with but they should have some accountability for those two things.

[ChumpDumper]

of course its bad. i didn't suggest the choke was good for his health. i think its physically impossible to choke somebody without compressing their neck.Well, there you go.

[Creepn]

didnt say the police action didn't lead to his death. i'm saying the "killer choke hold" thing is being blown out of proportion.


Wow.

Bet that's the mindset of the jury that let this man go.

[spurraider21]

The officer can't be held responsible for Garners underlying medical issues. The issue to me isn't the headlock/chokehold, it's not clear to me in the video if it was a chokehold or headlock. Instead it is that the cops escalated the situation without cause and then failed to render basic medical care they are trained in that could have saved his life and instead let him lie there until EMT's showed up. I don't know what laws exist that they could be prosecuted with but they should have some accountability for those two things.
i've asked several times in this thread what police protocol is in response to the resist of arrest. from my understanding, you take somebody to the ground (face down so that you can administer handcuffs). am i incorrect?

[spurraider21]

[/B]

Wow.

Bet that's the mindset of the jury that let this man go.
i'm betting they watched the video and saw he was alive after the choke was executed and released

[spurraider21]

Well, there you go.
was he alive after the choke hold was released?

[Creepn]

was he alive after the choke hold was released?

Do people always die instantly after getting shot?

[Trill Clinton]

and when was he talking???

dude didn't even get medical attention until he got to the hospital

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT66U_Ftdng

[ChumpDumper]

was he alive after the choke hold was released?Is he alive now?

Shit. Why is there even a grand jury?

Hey everyone -- you can stop now. Dude never dieded.

[Trill Clinton]

he laide there unresponsive after being choked to death and died at the hospital. again, when was he speaking after the choke???

[spurraider21]

Do people always die instantly after getting shot?


Is he alive now?

Shit. Why is there even a grand jury?

Hey everyone -- you can stop now. Dude never dieded.
if they had the choke hold, released it, left him alone, and then he died, i'd be 100% with you.

if there is an intervening cause, it changes the picture. as the coroner noted, the compression of his chest along with the prone positioning was a cause of death. this is not related to the choke hold

[spurraider21]

and when was he talking???

dude didn't even get medical attention until he got to the hospital

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT66U_Ftdng
sometime in between the choke and when this video started. look at the posted video on page 3 doggie

[Trill Clinton]

somewhere, give me a timestamp.

[spurraider21]

why is nobody answering my question on police protocol in response to resisted arrest?

[spurraider21]

somewhere, give me a timestamp.
read what i posted instead of asking so many questions...

jump to 1 minute mark. clearly, the officer in the green 99 shirt is the one administering the choke hold. once they roll him over to his stomach soon after, you can see the Green 99 guy releases the choke. after that point you can still hear him speaking saying "i can't breathe."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LSBpwmMnVM

again, as i've stated, the cop should surely be disciplined for using a hold that is not allowed per NYPD standards.

from my limited understanding, isn't it protocol to put somebody on the ground and cuff him if they are resisting arrest?

[Trill Clinton]

cuz its a dumb ass question

[Trill Clinton]

dude had a stroke and lost consciousness and died due to an illegal chokehold, aint no way around it.

[spurraider21]

so you ask for when he was talking. i show you when he was talking.

and then you say it doesn't matter. ok

[spurraider21]

i've asked several times in this thread what police protocol is in response to the resist of arrest. from my understanding, you take somebody to the ground (face down so that you can administer handcuffs). am i incorrect?

[Trill Clinton]

so you ask for when he was talking. i show you when he was talking.

and then you say it doesn't matter. ok

your question about the protocol doesn't matter. and him saying i can't breathe after an illegal chokehold doesn't mean shit. cop killed him. homicide was the ruling.

[Trill Clinton]

stop asking that dumb ass question lol

[SnakeBoy]

i've asked several times in this thread what police protocol is in response to the resist of arrest. from my understanding, you take somebody to the ground (face down so that you can administer handcuffs). am i incorrect?

I'm not a cop, I don't know police protocol. From the video I don't see him resisting arrest. He's arguing with the cops then they jump him. He doesn't even seem to be aware they are placing him under arrest prior to jumping on him. Shouldn't police give clear instructions and time for someone to comply if it is a non threating situation?

[ohmwrecker]

didnt say the police action didn't lead to his death. i'm saying the "killer choke hold" thing is being blown out of proportion.

Kind of a semantic argument when a guy is dead.

[spurraider21]

your question about the protocol doesn't matter. and him saying i can't breathe after an illegal chokehold doesn't mean shit. cop killed him. homicide was the ruling.
homicide means a person killed a person. that was pretty much known for a while. the michael brown case, the trayvon martin case... those were all homocide as well.

[spurraider21]

stop asking that dumb ass question lol
you're calling it a dumbass question, but according to the coroner's report, part of the cause of death was from the chest suppression and prone position. if that aspect of it (putting a guy on his stomach) is part of police protocol, it muddies the situation.

[spurraider21]

Kind of a semantic argument when a guy is dead.
yes and no. the guy's death is a tragedy. but this thread isn't about the tragedy, its about the police actions and the repercussions (or lack thereof). if his death was caused by something that is standard police protocol (putting a guy on his stomach and applying weight to hold him down), it makes it more difficult to attach guilt or liability. that is my point. the choke hold is obviously wrong. but if he was alive after the choke hold and died after chest compression, it puts the grand jury in a tough spot.

[DMC]

Let's see, video of incident? Check. Use of illegal technique? Check. Ruled homicide by coroner? Check. Indictment? Chec.... Wait WTF?
Homicide isn't murder. Obviously the death was caused by the choke hold ergo homicide.

[DMC]

Kind of a semantic argument when a guy is dead.
Semantics are very important in cases like these. You cannot equivocate murder and homicide.

[Th'Pusher]

does it usually include taking them to the ground on their stomach until handcuffs are applied?

i also think the use of several officers so subdue them is safer since they can simply weigh somebody down rather than striking him to subdue him.

tbh the choke hold was incorrectly applied and the cop should lose his job for doing it, but he was released from that choke after they got on the ground, and he was still able to speak at that point. people act like he literally held the choke until the point of death

You're going to make a shitty lawyer in that you're a complete and total apologist for the cops/brass. You Might wanna just save some money and drop out of law school now tbh.

[rogues]

You're going to make a shitty lawyer in that you're a complete and total apologist for the cops/brass. You Might wanna just save some money and drop out of law school now tbh.
:lol This emotional sophist faggot again

[HI-FI]

:lol This emotional sophist faggot again
:lol

[Th'Pusher]

:lol This emotional sophist faggot again

Explain to me what was emotional and sophist in my response.

You appear to be a relatively unintelligent man.

[Th'Pusher]

:lol

You can answer the above too.

[spurraider21]

You're going to make a shitty lawyer in that you're a complete and total apologist for the cops/brass. You Might wanna just save some money and drop out of law school now tbh.
i asked the question several times and even made it very clear that i don't have experience with law enforcement... which is why i keep asking (hoping somebody will confirm or correct it). instead you are trying to turn my honest question into a personal attack, claiming that i'm going to make a poor lawyer because i dont share your political views. :tu

[Th'Pusher]

i asked the question several times and even made it very clear that i don't have experience with law enforcement... which is why i keep asking (hoping somebody will confirm or correct it). instead you are trying to turn my honest question into a personal attack, claiming that i'm going to make a poor lawyer because i dont share your political views. :tu

It's not about political views. It's about your default response. Your default response is never neutral. It always favors authority. You seem to be an intelligent enough person, you just don't seem to have the ability to judge without applying a relatively significant bias. IMHO, I don't think you have what it takes to be a good lawyer. Note: I think you can be a successful lawyer. I just don't think you'll ever be a good lawyer...Which is fine. Mediocre successful lawyers are a dime a dozen tbh.

[spurraider21]

It's not about political views. It's about your default response. Your default response is never neutral. It always favors authority. You seem to be an intelligent enough person, you just don't seem to have the ability to judge without applying a relatively significant bias. IMHO, I don't think you have what it takes to be a good lawyer. Note: I think you can be a successful lawyer. I just don't think you'll ever be a good lawyer...Which is fine. Mediocre successful lawyers are a dime a dozen tbh.
You are entitled to your opinion.

My default stance is neutral, but its not going to stay neutral in the face of evidence. For instance, when the Michael Brown news first broke out, many members here were calling for Wilson's head, I kept quiet. In light of forensic evidence, i began to formulate an opinion on what happened. That being said, if you read all my posts on that matter, you would know that I thought there certainly should have been a trial.

In this case, I think its clear there was police misconduct (the choke hold that the NYPD does not use). But looking at the video (as the grand jury in this case likely did), its hard to consider the chokehold the cause of death when the coroner also specifically cited the chest compression and prone position, and those events superseded his unfortunate death, well after the choke hold was released and he is still seen alive and talking. From my perspective, the only way the choke itself was the cause of death would be if his trachea collapsed as a result of the hold.

This is why I have continuously been asking if this is considered to be common police protocol (to lie somebody face down and apply weight to keep him down). If somebody corrects me and says they went against protocol in that situation, then my opinion on this will likely swing.

You should also realize that having an inherent bias (which I disagree that I have) does not decide what makes a good attorney or not. Attorneys are adversarial and often times will defend somebody they know to be guilty or in the wrong. Perhaps you think I won't be a great judge, instead. Again, that's your opinion, and those are like assholes.

[rogues]

:lol I never thought I'd side with the Armenian..the pothead subhuman is clearly emotional about this..watch him quote me and lodge a personal attack..

[ChumpDumper]

if they had the choke hold, released it, left him alone, and then he died, i'd be 100% with you.

if there is an intervening cause, it changes the picture. as the coroner noted, the compression of his chest along with the prone positioning was a cause of death. this is not related to the choke holdCompression of the neck.

Since percentages of blame were not given for any injury, I don't see how you can just dismiss the neck compression.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol I never thought I'd side with the Armenian..the pothead subhuman is clearly emotional about this..watch him quote me and lodge a personal attack..I just watched you launch a personal attack on him.

[Koolaid_Man]

You are entitled to your opinion.

My default stance is neutral, but its not going to stay neutral in the face of evidence. For instance, when the Michael Brown news first broke out, many members here were calling for Wilson's head, I kept quiet. In light of forensic evidence, i began to formulate an opinion on what happened. That being said, if you read all my posts on that matter, you would know that I thought there certainly should have been a trial.

In this case, I think its clear there was police misconduct (the choke hold that the NYPD does not use). But looking at the video (as the grand jury in this case likely did), its hard to consider the chokehold the cause of death when the coroner also specifically cited the chest compression and prone position, and those events superseded his unfortunate death, well after the choke hold was released and he is still seen alive and talking. From my perspective, the only way the choke itself was the cause of death would be if his trachea collapsed as a result of the hold.

This is why I have continuously been asking if this is considered to be common police protocol (to lie somebody face down and apply weight to keep him down). If somebody corrects me and says they went against protocol in that situation, then my opinion on this will likely swing.

You should also realize that having an inherent bias (which I disagree that I have) does not decide what makes a good attorney or not. Attorneys are adversarial and often times will defend somebody they know to be guilty or in the wrong. Perhaps you think I won't be a great judge, instead. Again, that's your opinion, and those are like assholes.

You aint gonna be shit but a public defender with your dumbass

[Silver&Black]

You aint gonna be shit but a public defender with your dumbass

Probably will be representing you tbh....

I hope you resist arrest though.....and you know how that turns out nowadays.

[Koolaid_Man]

Probably will be representing you tbh....

I hope you resist arrest though.....and you know how that turns out nowadays.

I dont have to....im shooting to kill...or my dads firm will represent me.

[spurraider21]

You aint gonna be shit but a public defender with your dumbass
if you work for the state for 10 years, they forgive your law school loans :toast

i dont know if i even want to enter criminal law, but depending on which county you work in, it's not bad at all, especially in California... an average public defender in Santa Clara County CA gets paid over 100K per year. starting salary up there is about 83K.

you combine that with 6 figures of debt forgiveness over 10 years and its not a bad starting gig if thats what you fall into.

[Silver&Black]

I dont have to....im shooting to kill...or my dads firm will represent me.

You know who your daddy is? Are you sure you're black?

[Koolaid_Man]

You know who your daddy is? Are you sure you're black?

I was born of a virgin.

[DMC]

It's not about political views. It's about your default response. Your default response is never neutral. It always favors authority. You seem to be an intelligent enough person, you just don't seem to have the ability to judge without applying a relatively significant bias. IMHO, I don't think you have what it takes to be a good lawyer. Note: I think you can be a successful lawyer. I just don't think you'll ever be a good lawyer...Which is fine. Mediocre successful lawyers are a dime a dozen tbh.

Really? Because it seems their rates are a bit higher than that.

[Trill Clinton]

y'all keep saying this man resisted arrest but he didn't. cops used way too much force. he wasn't kicking, swinging his arms, trying to get up when they had him on the ground. dude was murdered by the pussy ass cop for nothing. the fact y'all are saying he resisted is intellectually dishonest and evil.

[ohmwrecker]

Semantics are very important in cases like these. You cannot equivocate murder and homicide.

Either way, charges should have been filed.

[Blake]

The law says it's legal to choke a man to death?

Was he trying to choke him to kill him?

There's a law against resisting arrest for a reason. People get hurt and die while trying to resist arrest.

I think the family will and should sue for wrongful death, but I have a hard time charging a cop with felony manslaughter while trying to do his job.

[Cry Havoc]

This thread hurts my brain.

Cop chokes man

Man dies soon after

And we have people arguing about whether or not the choke killed him. As in, if the cop didn't choke him out he would have keeled over of his own accord that very same day.

:wow

[CosmicCowboy]

Grand jury got it wrong on this one.

Was that 4 on 1 beat down murder?

Probably not but a jury should have seen everything and been given the option of a lesser charge like negligent homicide. On the surface, having the guy saying "I can't breathe" until he CAN'T say it because he passed out seems pretty negligent.

[Blake]

This thread hurts my brain.

Cop chokes man

Man dies soon after

And we have people arguing about whether or not the choke killed him. As in, if the cop didn't choke him out he would have keeled over of his own accord that very same day.

:wow

Yeah, the medical examiner declaring "homicide" should have ended that before it began.

[ChumpDumper]

Officers should get their checkbooks ready.

[Blake]

Grand jury got it wrong on this one.

Was that 4 on 1 beat down murder?

Probably not but a jury should have seen everything and been given the option of a lesser charge like negligent homicide. On the surface, having the guy saying "I can't breathe" until he CAN'T say it because he passed out seems pretty negligent.

a cop choking someone in the act of arresting someone resisting is not illegal in the state of NY

[Cry Havoc]

a cop choking someone in the act of arresting someone resisting is not illegal in the state of NY

Yes it is. This isn't even debatable.

[CosmicCowboy]

Yes it is. This isn't even debatable.

You are wrong. NTPD employee guidelines are not laws. Employee guideline says no choke holds, fine. NYPD guidelines also says no beards. Having a beard is not illegal.

[JoeTait75]

This case is far more egregious than Ferguson, IMO, but watch it vanish right down the memory hole. The NYC-based prestige media doesn't mind so much when its own police employs these kinds of tactics- and no big-city police department racially profiles more rigorously or is quicker with the truncheon and the chokehold than the NYPD. Better to make a big deal out of some podunk PD in Missouri.

[Cry Havoc]

You are wrong. NTPD employee guidelines are not laws. Employee guideline says no choke holds, fine. NYPD guidelines also says no beards. Having a beard is not illegal.

It's both a NYPD guidline AND a state law. Both expressly prohibit a choke-hold such as what happened.

[CosmicCowboy]

It's both a NYPD guidline AND a state law. Both expressly prohibit a choke-hold such as what happened.

Your source is?

[Blake]

Yes it is. This isn't even debatable.

then it's really odd he never got charged with simple "choking" or some other assault charge.

[Cry Havoc]

Your source is?

Every single news article covering this states as such.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/03/justice/new-york-grand-jury-chokehold/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/30/chokehold-ban-bill-nypd-new-york-rory-lancman_n_5634186.html

https://www.newsday.com/news/new-york/eric-garner-chokehold-case-nypd-officer-daniel-pantaleo-doesn-t-face-charges-1.9676351

"Pantaleo now faces the prospect of command discipline and an Internal Affairs Bureau probe, police officials said. Police investigators will be closely looking at whether Pantaleo used excessive force, including a chokehold that is against NYPD protocol, said one law enforcement official."

IIRC reading it was outlawed in 1993.

[Cry Havoc]

then it's really odd he never got charged with simple "choking" or some other assault charge.

Yes, because police have never broken the law and gotten away with it before, right?

:lol Blake getting his Blake on

:lol Insinuating the system is perfect and would never indict someone who hasn't committed a crime

[Blake]

Every single news article covering this states as such.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/03/justice/new-york-grand-jury-chokehold/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/30/chokehold-ban-bill-nypd-new-york-rory-lancman_n_5634186.html

https://www.newsday.com/news/new-york/eric-garner-chokehold-case-nypd-officer-daniel-pantaleo-doesn-t-face-charges-1.9676351

"Pantaleo now faces the prospect of command discipline and an Internal Affairs Bureau probe, police officials said. Police investigators will be closely looking at whether Pantaleo used excessive force, including a chokehold that is against NYPD protocol, said one law enforcement official."

IIRC reading it was outlawed in 1993.

Against protocol =/= against the law.

Focus.

[Cry Havoc]

Against protocol =/= against the law.

Focus.

So you think putting a chokehold on someone is legal? So I could theoretically walk up to you in the middle of NYC and put you into a choke hold until you pass out and the police would do nothing?

Serious question. I want to know how devoid from reality you are about processing this situation.

[Blake]

Yes, because police have never broken the law and gotten away with it before, right?

:lol Blake getting his Blake on

:lol Insinuating the system is perfect and would never indict someone who hasn't committed a crime

CH getting his logical fallacies on

[Cry Havoc]

CH getting his logical fallacies on

No. You're just an idiot. And I'm done with you.

[Blake]

So you think putting a chokehold on someone is legal? So I could theoretically walk up to you in the middle of NYC and put you into a choke hold until you pass out and the police would do nothing?

Serious question. I want to know how devoid from reality you are about processing this situation.

Because choking me for no reason is exactly the same.

Serious question: are you trying to turn this into an e-contest or are you really asking for the truth?

Because the truth is rather easy to google or I can provide it if you ask nicely. But if you're trying to go with some upper cuts here, it won't end well.

[Blake]

No. You're just an idiot. And I'm done with you.

Suit yourself. You're wrong.

[Cry Havoc]

Suit yourself. You're wrong.

Nope. You're an idiot. And you're wrong. By all means show the links to prove otherwise. You can't. And you won't. Because you're full of shit.

[spurraider21]

This thread hurts my brain.

Cop chokes man

Man dies soon after

And we have people arguing about whether or not the choke killed him. As in, if the cop didn't choke him out he would have keeled over of his own accord that very same day.

:wow
probably because the coroners report also cited his prone position, the chest compression (from the weight above him, not any sort of choke hold), and his weight in conjunction with the two. if you watch the video you can see the guy repeatedy saying "i cant breathe" while he was on the ground even after the choke was released. if i had a choke hold on you, and AFTER i let it go, would you be saying "i cant breathe" for 20+ seconds and then just die? the only way that would happen is if i damaged your trachea to an extent that was not discovered in this case

[spurraider21]

So I could theoretically walk up to you in the middle of NYC and put you into a choke hold until you pass out and the police would do nothing?.
its would also be illegal for me to walk up to you, forcibly put you in handcuffs, force you into the backseat of my car, and drive you into a holding cell in my house, even if i saw you commit a crime. yet this is police protocol.

can you stop confusing NYPD policy with NY state law?

[Creepn]

:lol Insinuating the system is perfect and would never indict someone who hasn't committed a crime

That's one of my main problem with these police sympathizers. They refuse to acknowledge the wrongdoings because the law gives them a pass somehow so therefore they must be innocent. It should be the other way around.

Blake, you like to bash Christians for not questioning the bible but here you are justifying murder because of what infallible men wrote.

[spurraider21]

i acknowledged the cop's wrongdoing in administering a choke hold that goes against NYPD guidelines and suggested he get disciplined for that

[debo]

Man caught on camera doing something illegal, result is a fatality.
Innocent. Guarantee if the man who died was caught on camera doing something illegal (and dont say he was resisting arrest, he seemed plenty contained), a jury would have no problem disciplining him.
Bullshit.

[Blake]

Nope. You're an idiot. And you're wrong. By all means show the links to prove otherwise. You can't. And you won't. Because you're full of shit.

You didn't ask nicely so there's gonna have to be something in it for me to do work for you.

a new sig declaring my greatness might work.

[Biernutz]

The police made a mistake on how he was detained. When you have a guy who is as big as three men,
who is combative and resiting arrest you just back off and tazer him. If that wont bring him down, shoot
him in the kneecap. Like chopping down a tree.

[spurraider21]

The police made a mistake on how he was detained. When you have a guy who is as big as three men,
who is combative and resiting arrest you just back off and tazer him. If that wont bring him down, shoot
him in the kneecap. Like chopping down a tree.
no

[Blake]

That's one of my main problem with these police sympathizers. They refuse to acknowledge the wrongdoings because the law gives them a pass somehow so therefore they must be innocent. It should be the other way around.

Blake, you like to bash Christians for not questioning the bible but here you are justifying murder because of what infallible men wrote.

I'm not justifying it at all. In fact, I've already said here that the family needs to sue for wrongful death since department policy was not followed.

[Blake]

The police made a mistake on how he was detained. When you have a guy who is as big as three men,
who is combative and resiting arrest you just back off and tazer him. If that wont bring him down, shoot
him in the kneecap. Like chopping down a tree.

people have also died from tazers

[Biernutz]

people have also died from tazers

It's not a head lock.......

[Blake]

It's not a choke hold........

meh. Taser might be a marginally better option, especially considering the guy's condition(s)

I don't like either option, tbh.

[spurraider21]

I'm not justifying it at all. In fact, I've already said here that the family needs to sue for wrongful death since department policy was not followed.

[Biernutz]

it might be a marginally better option, especially considering the guy's condition(s)

Cops need to put away their egos and drop these combative and resiting men with a approved non- lethal tools. Bean
bags, nets and tazers are some of them. Not 10 second head lock.

[Cry Havoc]

That's one of my main problem with these police sympathizers. They refuse to acknowledge the wrongdoings because the law gives them a pass somehow so therefore they must be innocent. It should be the other way around.

Blake, you like to bash Christians for not questioning the bible but here you are justifying murder because of what infallible men wrote.

The cognitive dissonance on this board is a sight to behold.

[cantthinkofanything]

The cognitive dissonance on this board is a sight to behold.

That's my favorite Tesla album.

[spurraider21]

That's my favorite Tesla album.
Tesla is cool. they opened for Scorpions last june, they killed it

[CosmicCowboy]

Every single news article covering this states as such.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/03/justice/new-york-grand-jury-chokehold/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/30/chokehold-ban-bill-nypd-new-york-rory-lancman_n_5634186.html

https://www.newsday.com/news/new-york/eric-garner-chokehold-case-nypd-officer-daniel-pantaleo-doesn-t-face-charges-1.9676351

"Pantaleo now faces the prospect of command discipline and an Internal Affairs Bureau probe, police officials said. Police investigators will be closely looking at whether Pantaleo used excessive force, including a chokehold that is against NYPD protocol, said one law enforcement official."

IIRC reading it was outlawed in 1993.

Your own links even refute your claim. :lmao

Cops using a choke hold is not illegal even though it is against department policy.


Sources said the NYPD probe will specifically try to determine whether Pantaleo used a chokehold, which is not illegal in New York, but is against department policy.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/03/sources-grand-jury-decides-not-to-indict-cop-in-eric-garner-chokehold-case/

[Blake]

The cognitive dissonance on this board is a sight to behold.

Yeah, like when someone says "this thread hurts my brain".

Funny stuff, tbh.

[Blake]

Your own links even refute your claim. :lmao

Cops using a choke hold is not illegal even though it is against department policy.



http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/03/sources-grand-jury-decides-not-to-indict-cop-in-eric-garner-chokehold-case/

Aw, Cmon man. Don't give it away for free.

[cantthinkofanything]

Tesla is cool. they opened for Scorpions last june, they killed it

I bet that was pretty cool. One of my favorite albums back in the day was Scorpions World Wide Live. They often end up as a punchline but they were badass.
And tbh, my favorite Tesla album was The Great Radio Controversy.

[Cry Havoc]

It's both a NYPD guideline AND a state law. Both expressly prohibit a choke-hold such as what happened.


Your own links even refute your claim. :lmao

Cops using a choke hold is not illegal even though it is against department policy.



http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/03/sources-grand-jury-decides-not-to-indict-cop-in-eric-garner-chokehold-case/

Fails at reading comprehension. :lmao I made it big since apparently you need help.

[CosmicCowboy]

:lmao at the idiot quoting himself as "proof".

[lefty]

He was neutralized yet he kept chocking him

White coward faggot cop with microscopic dick :lol

[Cry Havoc]

:lmao at the idiot quoting himself as "proof".

:lmao at racism in action, defending a cop to the bone despite how fucking obvious it is that he murdered someone.

[Blake]

Fails at reading comprehension. :lmao I made it big since apparently you need help.

Dude, you apparently aren't getting the difference between standard operating procedure and law.

But keep strutting. It's funny.

[lefty]

:lmao at racism in action, defending a cop to the bone despite how fucking obvious it is that he murdered someone.

[Blake]

:lmao at racism in action, defending a cop to the bone despite how fucking obvious it is that he murdered someone.

i don't see anyone here defending the cop.

U drunk?

[Cry Havoc]

Dude, you apparently aren't getting the difference between standard operating procedure and law.

But keep strutting. It's funny.

If this was SOP, why was the case brought before a grand jury?

[Cry Havoc]

i don't see anyone here defending the cop.

U drunk?

Really? You don't see that?

[CosmicCowboy]

:lmao at racism in action, defending a cop to the bone despite how fucking obvious it is that he murdered someone.

You sure are stupid.

I'm on record saying the grand jury fucked up in my opinion and there should have been a trial on a lesser charge than murder.

[spurraider21]

If this was SOP, why was the case brought before a grand jury?
are you not understanding his argument? like at all?

[Blake]

Really? You don't see that?

Which post? Maybe I missed it.

[Blake]

If this was SOP, why was the case brought before a grand jury?

it was brought before a grand jury because the ME declared homicide. Pretty standard stuff.

Why do you think he hasn't been charged with assault?

[DMC]

Either way, charges should have been filed.
Not according to the members of the grand jury who actually saw all the evidence and heard testimony.

[ohmwrecker]

Not according to the members of the grand jury who actually saw all the evidence and heard testimony.

Neat.

Negligent homicide should have been the charge. The medical examiner ruled homicide and it's very clear that the officer who administered the chokehold is responsible for Garner's death.

[DMC]

Neat.

Negligent homicide should have been the charge. The medical examiner ruled homicide and it's very clear that the officer who administered the chokehold is responsible for Garner's death.

Neat, an entire jury disagrees with you. Neat.

[Creepn]

Neat, an entire jury disagrees with you. Neat.

Yes, that tends to happen with a jury of idiots.

[ohmwrecker]

Neat, an entire jury disagrees with you. Neat.

:lol Are you saying that there will never be a jury's decision that you disagree with, or that if you do disagree, you must be wrong because a jury ruled to the contrary? That seems very strange to me.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Neat, an entire jury disagrees with you. Neat.

Who called and presented evidence? The cop's district's attorney did and you really seem to miss the substance of the issue.

[DMC]

:lol Are you saying that there will never be a jury's decision that you disagree with, or that if you do disagree, you must be wrong because a jury ruled to the contrary? That seems very strange to me.

So any time a jury decides against your opinion, and they have more access to testimony and evidence than you have, you think it must be them who are mistaken, not you? Neat.

[DMC]

Who called and presented evidence? The cop's district's attorney did and you really seem to miss the substance of the issue.
The grand jury, which sat for nine weeks, heard from 50 witnesses, including 22 civilians who witnessed some part of the incident, the court order said. The remaining witnesses included police officers, emergency medical personnel and doctors, the order said. Grand jurors also saw four videos, medical records, photographs of the scene, and information about police training and policies, the order said.
"The Grand Jury was instructed on relevant principles of law," the order said, including laws "regarding a police officer's use of physical force in making an arrest." The court did not disclose which charges the grand jury considered.
A prosecutor would have presented a grand jury with a range of possible charges ranging from murder to manslaughter, legal experts say. A grand jury need find only probable cause to indict. But almost every option would require the grand jury to consider the officer's intent, said former federal prosecutor Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
"Mistakes by police officers get them fired. It's only willful or harmful intent that gets them charged," Levenson said. "The big issue here is not so much what happened. The big issue is what was going on in the officer's mind."


So how much of all this evidence have you seen? Did Wild Cobra fill you in?

[ohmwrecker]

So any time a jury decides against your opinion, and they have more access to testimony and evidence than you have, you think it must be them who are mistaken, not you? Neat.

Not necessarily, but you didn't answer my question.

[Blake]

Neat.

Negligent homicide should have been the charge. The medical examiner ruled homicide and it's very clear that the officer who administered the chokehold is responsible for Garner's death.

I'm a gonna disagree.

The main issues for me are 1) Garner resisted arrest 2) Pantaleo's intent was clearly to subdue and arrest
The laws in NY are favorable to cops in this situation.

Should the laws change? Maybe. Seems like there's got to be a better way to arrest someone resisting.

But as it is, I don't see how he gets charged or at worst, convicted with anything.

[ohmwrecker]

I'm a gonna disagree.

The main issues for me are 1) Garner resisted arrest 2) Pantaleo's intent was clearly to subdue and arrest
The laws in NY are favorable to cops in this situation.

Should the laws change? Maybe. Seems like there's got to be a better way to arrest someone resisting.

But as it is, I don't see how he gets charged or at worst, convicted with anything.

Yeah, I get all that, but the truth remains that Garner is dead as a direct result of Pantaleo's actions. For selling cigarettes? There's just no getting around that... at least for me anyway.

[Blake]

Yeah, I get all that, but the truth remains that Garner is dead as a direct result of Pantaleo's actions. For selling cigarettes? There's just no getting around that... at least for me anyway.

I think the family will win a wrongful death civil suit since department policy was broken.

but the question is should he be held criminally accountable for this?

for me, it still comes back to Garner resisting arrest. How do you non-forcibly arrest someone trying to resist?

[ohmwrecker]

I think the family will win a wrongful death civil suit since department policy was broken.

but the question is should he be held criminally accountable for this?

for me, it still comes back to Garner resisting arrest. How do you non-forcibly arrest someone trying to resist?

It seemed excessive for the amount of resisting Garner was putting up. The man was obviously in poor health. It's not like he was going to make a run for it or anything. I understand that, as an officer, you want to defuse the situation as quickly as possible, but hopping on the man's back and choking him out seems really excessive. It's tough. I don't have an alternative, but I'm also not a trained peace officer.

[DMC]

Not necessarily, but you didn't answer my question.
Your question made false assumptions. It wasn't as much a question as it was an accusation disguised as a question. One instance doesn't equate to "any time" for me just as it didn't for you. That should answer your question. I give the jury benefit of the doubt over what limited information I have available to me. I might have a bias anyhow, which we all do, so that has to be taken into consideration as well and a jury of 14 or so won't be subject to the same individual bias that an individual is subject to, and we post as individuals.

[ChumpDumper]

The grand jury, which sat for nine weeks, heard from 50 witnesses, including 22 civilians who witnessed some part of the incident, the court order said. The remaining witnesses included police officers, emergency medical personnel and doctors, the order said. Grand jurors also saw four videos, medical records, photographs of the scene, and information about police training and policies, the order said.Is that normal for a grand jury?

Sounds more like an actual trial.

[DMC]

Is that normal for a grand jury?

Sounds more like an actual trial.

It's probably a bit above normal time, but 3 to 6 weeks is standard.

[Blake]

" A New York City police officer's intentions at the moment he used a choke hold to arrest an unarmed black man weighed heavily in a Staten Island grand jury's decision not to indict the officer for the man's death, legal experts say.

"Intent. It's everything," former New York City prosecutor Zachary Johnson said. "In a case like this, there's just the fact of a homicide — a man was killed by another man. Not all homicide is illegal."

.....

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/04/grand-jury-needed-intent-to-indict-police-officer-in-chokehold-case/19895341/

[Blake]

" NEW YORK — The white New York City police officer whose choke hold led to the death of an unarmed black man has been sued three times for allegedly violating the constitutional rights of other blacks he and fellow cops arrested."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/04/choke-hold-cop-pantaleo-sued/19899461/

He'll probably be sued again

[jjktkk]

I could be wrong, but I didn't notice if the police officer who administered the choke hold had any kind of weapon, like pepper spray, taser, police baton, etc... I thats the case, the officer accused had no way to subdue the suspect, either choke hold or shoot him. Again, I basing this on the one time I've seen the video. Was there an excessive force charged against the police officer?

[ChumpDumper]

I could be wrong, but I didn't notice if the police officer who administered the choke hold had any kind of weapon, like pepper spray, taser, police baton, etc... I thats the case, the officer accused had no way to subdue the suspect, either choke hold or shoot him. Again, I basing this on the one time I've seen the video. Was there an excessive force charged against the police officer?Weren't there like three other officers there?

[jjktkk]

Yea, I'm just trying to figure out why that one officer felt compelled to try that chokehold on the suspect. Because he did have backup.

[ChumpDumper]

I call it Radio Raheem syndrome.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The grand jury, which sat for nine weeks, heard from 50 witnesses, including 22 civilians who witnessed some part of the incident, the court order said. The remaining witnesses included police officers, emergency medical personnel and doctors, the order said. Grand jurors also saw four videos, medical records, photographs of the scene, and information about police training and policies, the order said.
"The Grand Jury was instructed on relevant principles of law," the order said, including laws "regarding a police officer's use of physical force in making an arrest." The court did not disclose which charges the grand jury considered.
A prosecutor would have presented a grand jury with a range of possible charges ranging from murder to manslaughter, legal experts say. A grand jury need find only probable cause to indict. But almost every option would require the grand jury to consider the officer's intent, said former federal prosecutor Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
"Mistakes by police officers get them fired. It's only willful or harmful intent that gets them charged," Levenson said. "The big issue here is not so much what happened. The big issue is what was going on in the officer's mind."


So how much of all this evidence have you seen? Did Wild Cobra fill you in?

None of that addresses what I am getting at. Typical GJ has the prosecutor show only what demonstrates probable cause. For example, he could have only showed the video and medical examiners opinion and given a straightforward narrative. In Michael Brown's case he could have only shown the witnesses who said Brown was attempting to surrender and gotten an indictment.

That is not what happened at all. Instead he leaves the GJ in the wind with generalities and ask them to indict for their own reasons instead of reasons the prosecutor puts forth.

Quite frankly, your approach to looking at the proceedings seems naive.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yea, I'm just trying to figure out why that one officer felt compelled to try that chokehold on the suspect. Because he did have backup.

And he was never trained to do that according to his department. Why indeed.

[ohmwrecker]

Your question made false assumptions. It wasn't as much a question as it was an accusation disguised as a question. One instance doesn't equate to "any time" for me just as it didn't for you. That should answer your question. I give the jury benefit of the doubt over what limited information I have available to me. I might have a bias anyhow, which we all do, so that has to be taken into consideration as well and a jury of 14 or so won't be subject to the same individual bias that an individual is subject to, and we post as individuals.

It wasn't an accusation. I honestly want to know if you believe a grand jury's ruling to be the end all be all truth even if you had disagreed with the decision prior to the ruling. Can you understand why a grand jury ruling would not change a person's opinion of what the truth is as they see it?

[Blake]

And he was never trained to do that according to his department. Why indeed.

side note, the police union is claiming he was trained to do that at the academy.

[spurraider21]

side note, the police union is claiming he was trained to do that at the academy.
ur being a racist

[FuzzyLumpkins]

side note, the police union is claiming he was trained to do that at the academy.

Have to love secret testimony. Wonder what was shown or not shown to the grand jury. If the department was mum and union reps testified then it is obvious why he was exonerated.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

ur being a racist

This is dumb. I have repeatedly said that civil rights should be independent of race in this discussion. If you are getting feelings of guilt regarding being labeled a racist, it isn't coming from me.

[Blake]

Have to love secret testimony. Wonder what was shown or not shown to the grand jury. If the department was mum and union reps testified then it is obvious why he was exonerated.

I can't see any reason for union reps to testify

[spurraider21]

This is dumb. I have repeatedly said that civil rights should be independent of race in this discussion. If you are getting feelings of guilt regarding being labeled a racist, it isn't coming from me.
good thing that quote wasn't directed at you then, huh

[Chomag]

The evidence that seems to be comming out right now seems to point to the death being from the stressful situation and not because he was suffocated. Looks like poor health is what is more likely to have caused the death. Im not saying this is sure fact as I would like more "real" info to be released but im just saying this might have been one of the things that the jury looked at.

[DMC]

It wasn't an accusation. I honestly want to know if you believe a grand jury's ruling to be the end all be all truth even if you had disagreed with the decision prior to the ruling. Can you understand why a grand jury ruling would not change a person's opinion of what the truth is as they see it?

The ruling doesn't change what I think to be right or wrong, only what I think to be legitimate defense to prosecution. You cannot blame the GJ for coming to the decision they did. They are presented with evidence and testimony, even if it's cherry picked by the prosecutor, and there's no defense attorney present for the officer in question. Where's his representation? If every cop went on trial for murder every time a suspect died in custody or during a scuffle, the courts would be tied up with these cases and cops would be even more worthless than they are now because they'd be afraid to act.

[DMC]

Yea, I'm just trying to figure out why that one officer felt compelled to try that chokehold on the suspect. Because he did have backup.

Holy shit, haven't seen you in a month of Sundays. How have you been?

[DMC]

None of that addresses what I am getting at. Typical GJ has the prosecutor show only what demonstrates probable cause. For example, he could have only showed the video and medical examiners opinion and given a straightforward narrative. In Michael Brown's case he could have only shown the witnesses who said Brown was attempting to surrender and gotten an indictment.

That is not what happened at all. Instead he leaves the GJ in the wind with generalities and ask them to indict for their own reasons instead of reasons the prosecutor puts forth.

Quite frankly, your approach to looking at the proceedings seems naive.

This doesn't make any sense. If you're going to show the GJ only what you want them to see to get an indictment, there should always be an indictment because you can always find someone to support your stance.

I'm curious why anyone here thinks the information they are able to glean on web searches trumps what the GJ was allowed to see and hear.

[boutons_deux]

This doesn't make any sense. If you're going to show the GJ only what you want them to see to get an indictment, there should always be an indictment because you can always find someone to support your stance.

I'm curious why anyone here thinks the information they are able to glean on web searches trumps what the GJ was allowed to see and hear.

There are MANY prosecutors, lawyers, law professors who are saying the Ferguson GJ was a farce by the cop-protecting/compromised exonerator.

A prosecutor DEPENDS on "his" police to obtain the prosecutor's quota, career-padding, crusading convictions.

Prosecutors present to a GJ what they think is enough evidence to convict (not to exonerate), and then it's sorted out in a trial (or plea deal).

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This doesn't make any sense. If you're going to show the GJ only what you want them to see to get an indictment, there should always be an indictment because you can always find someone to support your stance.

I'm curious why anyone here thinks the information they are able to glean on web searches trumps what the GJ was allowed to see and hear.

It doesn't make any sense because you don't understand how GJ operate. There is no discovery or full disclosure requirement for a GJ and prosecutors use that advantage all the time by only showing prosecuting arguments, evidence, and witness. Between that at the lower burden of proof, you get comments about how easy it is to indict.

What we got in the Brown case is teh prosecutor looks magnanimous for letting 'everyone' testify but then he only made defense arguments and cross examination. Wilson never had to make a statement or police report nor did he undergo cross. The prosecutor cross examined offense witnesses and questioned their credibility. That is not how GJ are done typically.

[jjktkk]

Did anyone know if this was some sort of ATF sting, or strictly NYPD? Just curious, seeing that the suspected was selling cigarettes.

[jjktkk]

Holy shit, haven't seen you in a month of Sundays. How have you been?

Doing good. Usually just lurking, don't post much anymore.

[DMC]

It doesn't make any sense because you don't understand how GJ operate. There is no discovery or full disclosure requirement for a GJ and prosecutors use that advantage all the time by only showing prosecuting arguments, evidence, and witness. Between that at the lower burden of proof, you get comments about how easy it is to indict.

What we got in the Brown case is teh prosecutor looks magnanimous for letting 'everyone' testify but then he only made defense arguments and cross examination. Wilson never had to make a statement or police report nor did he undergo cross. The prosecutor cross examined offense witnesses and questioned their credibility. That is not how GJ are done typically.


So now you're a legal expert too?

[DMC]

There are MANY prosecutors, lawyers, law professors who are saying the Ferguson GJ was a farce by the cop-protecting/compromised exonerator.

A prosecutor DEPENDS on "his" police to obtain the prosecutor's quota, career-padding, crusading convictions.

Prosecutors present to a GJ what they think is enough evidence to convict (not to exonerate), and then it's sorted out in a trial (or plea deal).

Argument by popularity.

[m>s]

Cops just thinning out the herd tbh

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So now you're a legal expert too?

You're clearly not and what I say is either true or not. Nice dodge though.

[TheSanityAnnex]

What we got in the Brown case is teh prosecutor looks magnanimous for letting 'everyone' testify but then he only made defense arguments and cross examination. Wilson never had to make a statement or police report nor did he undergo cross. The prosecutor cross examined offense witnesses and questioned their credibility. That is not how GJ are done typically.
It should never have even gone to a grand jury in the first place.

[DMC]

You're clearly not and what I say is either true or not. Nice dodge though.
What everyone says is either true or not.

[Thebesteva]

You guys know how I feel about the Michael Brown case. I got to be honest with you, while Mr. Garner shouldn't have resisted arrest, what that officer did to him was MURDER imho. I genuinely feel for his family and I hope the cop gets a sentence for this.

The guy was clearly saying,"I CANT BREATHE, I CANT BREATHE"....and somehow the cop thought the better idea was to hold on and strangle him more?

[Expert]

don't you think every perp who resists arrest complains about not being able to breathe or something else on their body that's hurting them so you will stop trying to arrest them?

[RandomGuy]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/01/official-police-chokehold-caused-nyc-mans-death/13475451/

I can't breathe.