Grand Jury Decides Not To Indict Cop In Eric Garner Chokehold Case

[HoneyBadger]

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

[Great-Kazoo]

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

When you have a mayor who's walking lock step with protesters including this bomb thrower

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."

[KestrelBike]

Riots in Ferguson is one thing... but downtown New York? Holy crap that could get really ugly.

heh, couldn't happen to a nicer place.

[Bailey Guns]

I think Judge Napolitano is spot on:
http://insider.foxnews.com/2014/12/0...-indicted-eric

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."

[stoner01]

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."

Came to post this.