Here you can see the "not a chokehold" wrapped around Mr. Garner's throat.
To me, it looks like it's not "not a chokehold"... LOL! :)
Posted on 12/12/2014 5:53:59 PM PST by Enza Ferreri
Google "198 Bay St, Staten Island, NY" and zoom in on the Street View. You'll see a fat guy standing there with what looks like a loosie in his left hand.
What are the odds that on the random day Google Earth drives by...
Nonsense. Had there been no arrest, he’d still be alive. Reckless conduct during the arrest (warranted or not) caused the death. Unless one believes it’s “reasonable” to leave a suspect in custody to die of cardiac arrest while 5 -or more- officers stand around.
You’re quite right. I guess New York has second degree homicide rather than Involuntary. I don’t see much of a distinction between Second Degree and Reckless Endangerment though in the code.
Whatever. It’ll go civil anyway and the Garner heirs will get an obscene amount of money. It’s a safe bet it settles well before it gets to court.
Witty and original.
And as meaningless as your baseless opinions on this matter.
So he was manslaughtered via arrest?
I’m not sure I follow.
Which reckless conduct specifically caused his death and precisely how?
And no, I don’t think it’s reasonable for 5 or more officers to stand around while he was in medical need, but maybe those officers weren’t trained in medical responses.
None of that means the officers who arrested him killed him.
I still want to see the call logs and the "loosies" evidence.
I say plainclothes boy Pairapanties was power-tripping. Whoops, for Eric Garner. But no worries! The DA was looking out for Danny Boy...
I posted links to actual news stories. You shot your mouth off. Big difference.
@ moe - chris is just interested in shooting his/her mouth off, not a real discussion. :)
Dead guy still dead, cop still not charged, no one going to show you jack squat, because you don’t matter.
I’m not really sure why you want to have a discussion with me anyway, I’m not sympathetic to your cause, and you won’t be convincing me to change my mind with LOLs and smilies.
This case goes to show everyone that cops can kill people without sanction for violating petty laws.
3. Garner, 43, had history of more than 30 arrests dating back to 1980, on charges including assault and grand larceny.
How many convictions? (How many wrongful arrests?) This report doesn't say. But being arrested for something doesn't prove guilt, and especially so in a jurisdiction where cops profile.
4. At the time of his death, Garner was out on bail after being charged with illegally selling cigarettes, driving without a license, marijuana possession and false impersonation.
On the other hand, how many crimes does someone have to have under their belt to be held away from society?
5. The chokehold that Patrolman Daniel Pantaleo put on Garner was reported to have contributed to his death. But Garner, who was 6-foot-3 and weighed 350 pounds, suffered from a number of health problems, including heart disease, severe asthma, diabetes, obesity, and sleep apnea. Pantaleo's attorney and police union officials argued that Garner's poor health was the main cause of his death.
The "but" (underlined) does not logically belong. Chokeholds were banned, and the cop apparently used one. Police brutality is a worse crime than selling untaxed cigarettes.
6. Garner did not die at the scene of the confrontation. He suffered cardiac arrest in the ambulance taking him to the hospital and was pronounced dead about an hour later.
So? If a citizen fought a police officer and the officer died an hour later, you can be sure the citizen would have been charged in the death.
7. Much has been made of the fact that the use of chokeholds by police is prohibited in New York City. But officers reportedly still use them. Between 2009 and mid-2014, the Civilian Complaint Review Board received 1,128 chokehold allegations.
So, apparently, not enough has been made of this fact, because police are still acting in contravention to policy. Such officers should be sanctioned, from loss of pay to being fired to facing criminal charges.
Patrick Lynch, president of the New York City Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, said: "It was clear that the officer's intention was to do nothing more than take Mr. Garner into custody as instructed, and that he used the takedown technique that he learned in the academy when Mr. Garner refused."
Irrespective of where he learned it, if it was banned, it was banned.
9. The 23-member grand jury included nine non-white jurors.
This fact is meaningless without some indication of the necessary majority. If it was the case of a simple majority, then the blacks are outnumbered and could have unanimously voted to indict without result.
10. In order to find Officer Pantaleo criminally negligent, the grand jury would have had to determine that he knew there was a "substantial risk" that Garner would have died due to the takedown.
Why was the chokehold banned? Why didn't the officer comply with the ban? Did the officer ever learn of cases, or was he ever officially told, of the fact and/or reason of the ban? Which chokehold he nevertheless elected to use on an obviously obese person?
11. Less than a month after Garner's death, Ramsey Orta, who shot the much-viewed videotape of the encounter, was indicted on weapons charges. Police alleged that Orta had slipped a .25-caliber handgun into a teenage accomplice's waistband outside a New York hotel.
This is nothing more than an attack-the-messenger fallacy. Unless the video is being alleged to be fake, what sort of person Orta is has zero bearing on the facts of the Garner case, and one has to wonder what is the agenda of any person who raises this issue.
1. Which cop specifically killed him and how?
1a. If you choose to resist an arrest order, then it is possible that you can die as a result of that choice.
3. None of that matters. What does matter is that he resisted an arrest order that day.
5. It was not a choke hold. At no time in that video did I see the officer purposely attempt to prevent Garner from breathing or receiving natural blood flow to the brain, and and no time during the time period that the officer was in contact with garner did Garner lose consciouness, which the the result of a chokehold.
6. From what I saw in the video, it looked to me that Garner was dead before he was in the ambulance, but that is just my opinion, I have no proof of that.
6a. A citizen does not have the right to fight a police officer whereas an officer does have the right to arrest a citizen, and that citizen does not have the right to resist that arrest. If a person fights an officer and that officer later dies as a result of that fight, then that person should be charged in that death.
7. It wasn’t a choke hold.
9. The necessary majority was 12.
10. It wasn’t a choke hold.
11. The record of the person who filmed Garner’s arrest is not relevant in my mind. I am glad he filmed it so that I could watch it and decide for myself to be perfectly honest. So I definitely agree here.
Was the hold being used specifically banned, even if it was not a “choke hold”?
Here you can see the "not a chokehold" wrapped around Mr. Garner's throat.
To me, it looks like it's not "not a chokehold"... LOL! :)
It should look like not a chokehold to you, what I mean especially considering that it’s not a chokehold.
Maybe you should educate yourself about chokeholds before you try talking about what is and is not a chokehold so you can stop being an ignorant little punk LOL exclamtion point smiley DURR HURR.
Though I don't think the Suit was Magic in the end, in this particular case... LOL! :)
No, and he was taught the maneuver at the police academy.
The maneuver was a take down, and personally I think it is safer than a single or double leg takedown considering Garner’s size versus the size of the police.
Yes, I would tell anyone that it isn’t a chokehold, because for one, it’s not a chokehold, and for two, I am not full of horsecrap like yourself LOL exclamation point smiley DURR HURR.
I've been punking you this whole time, chrissie - using the teachings of the Great Laz:
Lazamataz posted:
The Secret To Posting On Facebook (fun Vanity)
Posted on 5/6/2014, 9:41:47 PM by Lazamataz
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3153014/posts
Have you ever noticed you can say the most hideous things to people on Facebook so long as you follow it with a LOL and a smiley face?
For example and when communicating with a foreign person:
=======
I stuned you with a beeber, chris. All yer chokeholds are belong to us. LOL! :)
Don't waste your time, coloradan.
It's like arguing with an Inuit over the 47 different kinds of snow. LOL! :)
Amazing.
You are an regular internet ninja.
Oh and, let me tell you, you are the very first person in my entire life to call me chrissie. You are as original as they come.
Anyway, dead guy is still dead, cop is unindicted, and there ain’t squat you can do about it but laugh and smile about it on an internet forum.
Too bad, so sad LOL exclamation point smiley DURR HURR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.