I hope this will not bring another excuse for those scum bags to cause another riot/looting.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/...hokehold-case/
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/...sion-protests/
I hope this will not bring another excuse for those scum bags to cause another riot/looting.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/...hokehold-case/
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/...sion-protests/
Don't worry, it will, never let a crisis go to waste.
I'm sure hadji/holder already have a plan for their pals to do some "shopping" as Saks.
Riots in Ferguson is one thing... but downtown New York? Holy crap that could get really ugly.
I think Judge Napolitano is spot on:
http://insider.foxnews.com/2014/12/0...-indicted-eric
Here we go again.
When you have a mayor who's walking lock step with protesters including this bomb throwerQuote:
Originally Posted by HoneyBadger
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/...rner-decision/
“This is a national moment of grief,” said de Blasio, “and a national moment of frustration.”
Mayor de Blasio said that though many honor the tradition that police exist to protect, he acknowledged that “for so many of our young people there is a fear and for so many of our families there is a fear.”
Bridging the RACIAL DIVIDE.. Him and his administration has done more damage and divisiveness regarding race relations, than we did damage in Dresden
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-says-gar...220904880.html
While not directly commenting on the case,(Then shut the fuck up) Obama said the decision speaks to "the concern on the part of too many minority communities that law enforcement is not working with them and dealing with them in a fair way."
heh, couldn't happen to a nicer place.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoneyBadger
Disagree. Even though he qualifies his statements by saying he hasn't seen all the evidence that's exactly why he, of all people, should trust the grand jury system. How can a judge say, with a straight face, a person should be indicted for a crime when he hasn't seen the evidence. That's like the judge saying, "We don't need to go to trial and listen to all the witness testimony and review the physical evidence. I've seen the video. Guilty."Quote:
Originally Posted by HoneyBadger
Came to post this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
I was wondering why the forum has been quiet on this one. I don't know man. Looks kinda bad for the cops here, based on the video I saw. But not in a racial way. If there's more to see/know I'd like to see it.
Nope, not cop bashing. Just looks bad.
Now should he face some pretty severe departmental action for using an unauthorized choking procedure? I'm gonna say yes. The evidence in the video is pretty clear. Especially since it was a relatively minor crime and even though the guy was resisting a bit choke holds are a thing of the past. We were warned against using them when I went through the academy in the late 80s.
Civil suit to follow. The officer/city will likely lose big unless there's an out of court settlement.
Do NYPD even get that much training? (seriously asking) because it seems like there must be so many of them due to the size of NY, that quality control could be difficult (especially if they're doing secret affirmative action type recruiting.. and not just race-based, but overall qualifications type selection). Don't forget, two years ago a couple NYPD shot *NINE* bystanders while aiming at 1 suspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by GilpinGuy
Speaking from my experience on administering "choke holds" and the procedures afterwards, there is some degree of negligence here. I was taught, and it was hammered into us, if you use a Coratid control hold, after the subject is under control you check vitals and move them so they can breathe. You call dispatch and request medical immediately.
I can't attest to the training that NYPD gives, but again if the Empire State building shooting is any indication, shit.
I'm also going to add that a Coratid hold doesn't involve actually choking someone. You apply pressure to the sides of the neck to temporarily deprive the brain of oxygen. It's supposed to be used on violently resisting subjects.
Valid points. In hindsight, it does seem a little strange that he would come out and pick a side without seeing all the evidence. Maybe he knows something we don't. [Dunno]Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
Thanks for sharing. I can't believe the guy wasn't immediately cared for.Quote:
Originally Posted by stoner01
I agreed with the Wilson/Brown GJ decision.. This one however is a little different.
We have complete video evidence of before and during the incident. The cop used a banned procedure and ended up killing someone. The video speaks for itself.. Is there any other evidence that would contradict the evidence??? I doubt it. Did the cop intend to kill him??? I don't think so.
The fact is, the cop broke the rules and killed someone, just as if we break the rules of self defense and kill someone, we should get arrested.
The grand jury deciding not to indict in this case is a travesty.. He should be arrested for voluntary manslaughter, not some "severe departmental action".
Remember, he killed someone... That's not to be taken lightly....
Im trying to figure out why they were trying to arrest him for selling a cigarette? I mean isn't arresting him a bit much here? Shouldn't this be a ticket at the most? He was basically loitering.
I blame the politicians that pass laws like this. Bloomberg with his big gulp ban comes to mind. If not for these crap laws that infringe on our freedoms there never would have been a confrontation here.
The ironic thing is the people that tend to vote these types of politicians into office are the same ones that tend to be affected most by them.
Policy violations aren't criminal. Breaking department rules isn't criminal. If NY state law prohibited choke holds that would be different. Obviously you're privy to evidence the grand jury didn't have.Quote:
Originally Posted by bryjcom
Man.. you're f'ing crazy..... The cop strangled a man and killed him... Yes I believe it was by accident but this is NOT a case of self defense... I sure would like to be "privy" to the "evidence" that the GJ has, that would contradict the complete video.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
What's interesting is you're starting to see a lot of conservatives come out and say the decision was bullshit as well...
This^^^^^^^^^^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by bryjcom
Bailey, did you see a different video than the rest of us? The guy was committing at best a minor/non-violent misdemeanor and had his hands up when the cop killed him. He said he couldn't breathe and no CPR/First Aid was admitted when he passed out. Everyone knows your not gonna cross the blue line, but helll, if a pilot intentionally took a plane down I'd be the first to call him on it. Doesn't NYC have bigger problems like gangs of roving bikers to handle?
Up side is NYPD arrested more tonight than fergadishu did in 3 days.
One less criminal off the streets.
Eff NYC...that place scares me. Just wall it off and make it a prison...
It is, the residents who live there accept it as part of the NYC cultural experience. We left 30 years ago to avoid shit like this, among other things. Before that a gathering of civil disobedience had a decent body count, of sheeple .Quote:
Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy
next it's going to be 3 more white cops taking down a black guy drinking a 32oz coke.Quote:
Originally Posted by RMAC757
Can we please refer to it by the correct term of blood chokeQuote:
Originally Posted by stoner01
I realize that people are still amped up over the ridiculous things that have occurred surrounding Ferguson, but some posters need to step away from the keyboard and exit prick mode for a few hours.
I'm going with this. ^^^. Well stated.Quote:
Originally Posted by RMAC757
In the Ferguson case, based off of the evidence I saw before and since the GJ decision, I think the GJ made the right call.
Now, in this NYC event, based off of the video and little else, I think there were enough questionable actions to warrant more investigation and review than the GJ could possibly provide. The little LE training I received from a buddy years ago and from the USAF when I "played cop", even I know that those sorts of chokes are NOT appropriate. PERIOD. This GJ decision leaves me mystified. If there was to be fallout from a GJ decision, THIS is the one that should have created concern.
Perhaps someone can correct me if I'm wrong .. BUT ...
Can't the Grand Jury only give a bill or no bill on the charges presented to them ?
My understanding is they were presented with murder charges against the cop .
so If I'm correct on both counts you have to ask "Was this MURDER?"
I have to reply No.
Did the man Die ? Yes
Was the hold against policy ( but not law) ? Yes
Could the officer reasonably believed that the man would die from the choke hold? I say no. he's probably done this " a 100 times" and no one has died . that day would be no different in his mind.
Can you beyond a reasonable doubt prove that the officer intended for the man to die that day? Again No.
IF I am correct in my first statement then the real failure here was by the prosecution . this was not Murder. it was manslaughter, and should have been handled like that.
This is a tough on for me. If Garner can say the words I can't breathe close to ten times, that tells everyone that he was breathing at that time. As soon as they had control of him, the cop let go of his neck.
Nothing good ever comes from resisting arrest. The visual of a person being taken down while resisting is also never good.
I think this is a little strange:Quote:
Originally Posted by clublights
"It was unclear exactly what charges prosecutors asked the grand jury to consider filing, or how the vote went." Source
When non-tax stamped cigarettes are outlawed, only outlaws will have non-tax stamped cigarettes. I dont smoke but $13.00 for a pack of cigs is ridiculous. Over $6.00 tax per pack!! Seems like a petty offense to die for to me, but resisting arrest is never a good idea.
Yup, Mr Garner shouldn't have resisted arrest from the little guy. That allowed a greater degree of force to be used. In these days of "less lethal", I'm wondering why the cops didn't warn/use OC or taser instead? Maybe that wasn't NYPD's policy, but it would be good to know what NYPD's policy called for. Would also be good to know exactly what charges the grand jury was asked to consider.Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
A pilot intentionally bringing a plane down and killing his/her passengers is not analogous to a police officer using an unauthorized but not illegal restraint tactic and unintentionally causing the death of a person with a criminal record and resisting arrest, during the course of arrest. You can't charge someone for violating policy that doesn't rise to a violation of law.
Garner also had other medical issues that contributed to his death: hypertension, bronchial asthma, obesity and diabetes. He was a physical wreck.
Furthermore, some of you people need some serious reading comprehension work. Nowhere in this discussion have I defended the officers. The fact is, none of you know what the GJ heard. You know what you've read in various media reports. If you think you can make a fair decision from watching this video then your the one who's crazy and I hope none of you are ever called to make a "fair" decision as a member of any jury. Because you obviously can't do it.
Here's what I know: The officers contacted Garner and for whatever reason attempted to arrest him. He resisted (granted it wasn't violent). In an attempt to restrain Garner and get him to the ground (standard police protocol) an officer used an unauthorized tactic that is not illegal...it just violates policy (and for good reason, obviously). In an attempt to handcuff Garner the officers placed him face down...also standard police protocol. Garner is obese with the other mentioned health issues. He said he couldn't breathe. Obviously, he could breathe or he wouldn't have been able to speak. He probably couldn't breathe very well. Paramedics arrived but did not initially attempt to assist Garner, who was then apparently unconscious. Garner went into cardiac arrest in the ambulance.
Here's other things I know: Garner weighed 400 pounds. Garner had a criminal history with over 30 arrests dating to when he was 16. Had he not resisted, he wouldn't be dead. Officer Pantaleo has been the subject of prior lawsuits for violating procedures. I don't know the details or outcome of those lawsuits. Pantaleo should not have used the choke hold. The officers should have recognized the warning signs that Garner was in distress. On the other hand, many people complain of various physical issues when they're arrested so, and I'm not defending them...just stating what I've seen from experience, I'm sure they didn't put a lot of credence into his complaints. They also aren't trained medical personnel.
Positional asphyxia started to be taught to police officers, at least where I worked, in the early 90s. But we were taught simply to place a person who had been restrained completely (hands and feet) on their side or back if possible. New restraint equipment then became available that allowed a "hog-tied" (old term) person to sit upright to avoid these potential issues. But choke holds were strictly forbidden. I can tell you one of the easiest ways to get a person who's resisting on to the ground is to grab their head/hair. Where the head goes the body will follow. It happens sometimes when everyone's amped up.
So, bottom line, I support the GJ decision because I don't have ENOUGH INFORMATION to dispute it. I don't support the officers actions relative to the alleged offense. And it's tragic the guy died. But he made decisions, and he had health issues, that contributed to his death. The ME even said so (the health issues part). This isn't over by a long shot. There could be potential federal and civil issues (the family has already filed a $75 million lawsuit).
My opinions have nothing to do with not wanting to "cross the thin blue line". Some of you need to get over that. I haven't worn a badge for 13 years. But, unlike most of you, I've been there, know the training, know the procedures and I have a good working knowledge of the law and legal process. I didn't learn what I know about police work and the legal system from watching TV. Many of you apparently did...and you didn't even watch the entire episode apparently.
I wouldn't attempt to make a judgement on a commercial pilot who made a mistake flying a 767 (or any other airliner) because I don't know how to fly an airliner. Nor would I tell an IT guy how to do his job because I don't know the ins and outs of it (or IT). I don't know why everyone seems to think they're some kind of freakin expert on police work when they've never done it. Or why they think they know better than a grand jury on whether or not to issue a true bill when they didn't hear the evidence and the grand jury did.
Well put buddyQuote:
Originally Posted by Irving
Same.Quote:
Originally Posted by RMAC757
Video speaks for itself.
I need more information. The Rodney King video was supposed to speak for itself too but things were completely different when the complete video was made available and you saw just how nuts and out of control King was. In this case, I don't understand from what I've seen why the cops "immediately" moved into what appeared to be an aggressive move to restrain Garner but the headlock used did not appear to be the banned carotid chokehold.
I can guess that the cops may have thought Garner was overacting when he complained about not being able to breathe or that he was able to breathe again when he went quiescent but I really don't know what was in their minds and why they didn't check his vitals.
At the end of the day, I have to trust the grand jury system knowing that -- like our republican form of government -- it's flawed but still the best system we have available.
Random observations and thought after viewing the video. 1)looked like a pretty poor choke hold to me. 2) did the choking prevent him from breathing or the dogpile of weight? 3)every cop should be trained and armed with a taser. 4) was the cardiac arrest due to the choking, weight pile, or the previous Big Macs?
i wasn't there, but I'd be a bit miffed if 4-6 cops took me down before asking me to put my hands behind my back, that I was under arrest. (This may have been said, I don't know)
bad day for more than just one person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
Bailey, my comparisons of the two jobs were more about the fact that carelessness at either can cost lives. Both jobs require that total strangers place a large amount of blind trust in you to keep them safe and assume your training is adequate to do so. As you know, every time there is an air accident we are heavily scrutinized and often found at least partially at fault even when those actions had nothing to do with the final outcome ( Most of the time we're also not there anymore to defend ourselves ). I won't get into it, but one of my degrees ( I'm not that smart, 2 was just more cost effective than one ) is heavily based in constitutional law, so I have studied the structure and process of our legal system. I like to stay clear of most race based threads as they turn into stupid forums for people to allow themselves to be heard and spout venom. I do not believe this is one of them though a couple have tried to steer it that way.
Often it appears that the level of participation on this site has to do more with a passive "Hate meter" than a common interest in the 2nd Amendment and our general rights as citizens. Everyone knows who most of the fire starters are. Bailey, you commented a lot on the Martain/Zimmerman and Wilson/Brown cases as well. A lot of which could've construed as speculation on your part. I guess my point in all of this worthless babble is that. "On it's face" something stinks here. I'm also tired of seeing this awesome country ripped apart over stuff as stupid as ethnicity and race ( You're either a citizen or your not....end of story). Even though we've had our polite differences, I alone should be your reference that not everyone thinks as part of a heard mentality. Yet it continues to be the catalyst for many of these conversations.
Finally, who gives a rat crap about Sharpton or Jackson. The only reason the media puts them on TV is that they know it will piss people off and increase viewer percentage. As most of our parents taught us.....ignore them and it will go away.
Have a good day
R
The moral of this mess - You break the law, you may expect to possibly be arrested regardless of how petty YOU believe that law to be. Resist arrest and you know the possible consequences. Simple message - don't break the law in the first place.
Honestly I think a taser would have INCREASED the likelihood of Garner dying.