Posted on 12/12/2014 8:07:34 AM PST by upchuck
Eric Garner, a 43 year-old father of six, is dead. This is a tragedy, regardless of the circumstances. We rightly mourn with his wife and children. They will never see their husband and father again, and that should break everyone’s heart.
When we witness a gut-rending tragedy like this, we want to know who is responsible. Who is to blame for depriving this family of its husband and father? As the facts emerge, it becomes increasingly clear that, as tragic as this situation is, in the end the culpability for Eric Garner’s death rests with Eric Garner.
To put it as simply as possible, if Mr. Garner had not broken the law and then resisted arrest, he would be alive today.
While protesters are trying to make this about race, it must be noted that the police showed up in response to complaints from black business owners. The arrest was ordered by a black officer, and the arrest itself was supervised by a black officer, a female sergeant.
A crackdown on the sale of illegal, untaxed cigarettes - called “loosies” since they are sold in singles rather than in packs - had been ordered just days before Garner’s arrest by the highest ranking black police officer in the NYPD, Philip Banks.
So a black officer ordered the crackdown, black business owners called for the arrest, a black officer ordered the arrest, and a black officer supervised the arrest itself. It’s also worth noting that the 23-member grand jury which refused to indict the arresting officer included nine non-white members. Ask yourself how many of those facts you have heard from any member of the race-obsessed, low-information media.
Garner had been arrested 31 times, and eight of those had been for selling loosies. His rap sheet goes back decades and includes arrests for assault and grand larceny.
At the time of his death, Garner was out on bail after being charged with multiple offenses, including illegal sale of cigarettes, marijuana possession, false impersonation and driving without a license.
So he certainly knew the law, knew he was in violation, and knew doing it again would likely lead to his arrest, a drill he’d been through dozens of times before.
There were 228,000 misdemeanor arrests in New York City in 2013, the last year for which figures are available. All of them put together led to precisely zero deaths.
Garner, all six-foot, three inches and 350 pounds of him, clearly resisted arrest, swatting away the arresting officer’s hands while loudly exclaiming, “Don’t touch me!” After he was taken to the ground, he growled, “This ends here!” That could be taken any number of ways, but in the heat of the moment it certainly could be read reasonably as a declaration that he was going to fight arrest until he was subdued by compelling force.
The patrolman who wrestled Garner to the ground, Daniel Pantaleo, did it by the book, using a takedown maneuver every policeman is taught at the academy. He did not, in fact, use a chokehold, which is defined by the NYPD as “any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.” Now Garner was clearly able to breathe, since that’s the only way he could repeatedly say, “I can’t breathe.”
The autopsy explicitly declares that there was no injury to Garner’s windpipe or to his neck bones. This was a wrestler’s headlock, not a chokehold. (As a sidenote, chokeholds, while contrary to police policy, are not in fact illegal in the state of New York when an officer uses one to restrain a resisting subject. They are not even illegal in New York City, at the insistence of liberal mayor Bill DeBlasio.) Patrolman Pantaleo was not indicted for the simple reason that he did nothing wrong.
Garner’s death likely should be attributed to the fact that he himself suffered from severe asthma, something the arresting officers had no reason to know. According to Garner’s friends, his asthma was severe enough that he was forced to quit his job as horticulturist for the city. He wheezed when he talked and could not walk so much as a city block without having to stop to rest. Garner “couldn’t breathe” because of his asthma, not because of a chokehold.
In addition, he suffered from heart disease, advanced diabetes, hypertension, obesity and sleep apnea. Contrary to public perception, he did not die on site, nor did he die of asphyxiation. He suffered cardiac arrest in the ambulance and was declared dead about an hour later at the hospital.
So it turns out that almost everything bleated out by the race-mongers and the low-information media has turned out to be wrong. As the wisest man who ever lived wrote 3000 years ago, “The one who states his case first seems right until the other comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17).
Eric Garner and Michael Brown both fought the law, and the law won. In the end, they have no one to blame but themselves.
New York Post columnist Bob McMcanus concluded his column on Eric Garner this way:
“There are many New Yorkers — politicians, activists, trial lawyers, all the usual suspects — who will now seek to profit from a tragedy that wouldn’t have happened had Eric Garner made a different decision.
“He was a victim of himself. It’s just that simple.”
Bookmark
Oh, and Michael Brown wasn't killed for the robbery - he was killed for attacking officer Wilson, trying to take his gun and then charging him.
It seems that a lot of people are cherry-picking the autopsy for what they want. True that he succumbed to cardiac arrest but the coroner's report cited the asphyxia as the actual COD.
If a person bleeds out then they will succumb to cardiac arrest but their COD will be exsanguination. Or if they get shot they may bleed out and succumb to cardiac arrest but the COD will be getting shot.
From one of the analyses of the coroner's report:
...the coroner's report said Garner died of “compression of neck (chokehold), compression of chest, and prone positioning during physical restraint by police.” It also ruled his death a homicide.
MeganC, I don’t see that as a homicide. I think that’s gaming the situation. I don’t particularly care if it’s Baden or not. I generally like the guy, but I think he’s going a bit overboard here.
Do you know that hold around the neck lasted for twenty seconds? Twenty seconds, and yet that was supposed to have killed the guy. No. I’m sorry but you can’t kill someone with depriving them of air for twenty seconds.
Next, if you can’t breathe, you can’t talk. It takes the expulsion of air going past the wind-pipe to talk. And this guy was talking. Someone mentioned he said he couldn’t breathe 11 times. Even if it was few less times, that’s a lot of talking. Can’t breathe? Air was going in and out. I call that breathing.
How one autopsy finds no damage to the wind-pipe or arteries and the other one does..., rather strange IMO.
The amount of time these guys took to take him down and get off of him seemed to be less than a minute. It takes loss of air for over five minutes to cause brain damage. I’ve held my breath without fainting for 4 minutes and fifteen seconds.
This guy had health issues. He died of a heart attack. I think it was more skirmish related than actual damage related. Another-words, it’s traumatizing to go through an altercation like that. I think that is what did him in. His health issues coupled with the skirmish, did him in. That’s of course a layman’s opinion, but it seems to me there’s some serious cherry picking on both sides here.
Thank you for your response. I appreciated the nice things you said too. Take care.
Again, not trying to be overly hostile here. Just my thoughts on it...
“No. I’m sorry but you can’t kill someone with depriving them of air for twenty seconds.”
My husband and lots of other Marines just like him were trained to punch someone in the throat and break their larynx, causing it to swell and cut off their breathing so they’ll die quietly. That punch takes less than a second.
When someone’s larynx is broken, can they still talk clearly?
I’ll stick with the official findings.
I don't know. Let me find a good test subject and I'll get back to you with the results of my research.
Well, whatever you do, don’t look at the official conclusions.
Do you realize that the head-lock has been used in wrestling for over 60 years, and is still being used today?
Megan, I’d like you to link me to where you think you see evidence that the police officer struck Garner in the throat, in the manner you say your husband was trained to do.
Thanks in advance.
I really don’t care. I saw the video and I saw what I saw. I’m also highly incensed at the double-standard that cops are not responsible for their actions but everyone else would be held responsible for the very same actions.
Seriously, had that just been five guys wrestling a man to the ground and then he died as result then all their asses would be in jail awaiting trial. The medical condition of the victim would be irrelevant.
The final irony is that the very cops who caused this man’s death would not have the least bit of mercy or understanding were they arresting you for doing what they did and you know it.
I never said Garner was ‘struck in the throat’. Never said that at all.
So a 350lb severe asthmatic sells illegal cigarettes for a “living” ?
MeganC, I don’t have a rap sheet as long as my arm.
I would not strike an officer.
I would not resist arrest.
I know you don’t care. That’s what really bothers me.
You think these officers acted recklessly.
They didn’t. They took him down, got him under control, and backed off.
The man died of cardiac arrest on the way to the hospital.
Five members of the public would not be handling this man using approved methods because of his criminality, and non compliance.
They would be breaking the law. That would be assault, and death at the hands of another.
These officers are doing their duty. They are not breaking the law. This is not an innocent death at the hands of another.
What these men did, they did because of a determination by supervisors to take action against this man. The supervisors reviewed his actions, and they chose to take him into custody. They did it in compliance with department policy. That department policy was in compliance with the law.
You made a decision at some point to blame the officers.
That was a mistake.
There is one man to blame here, and he knew his medical condition better than anyone else. He decided to act that way knowing full well what it might cost him.
When I said they only had him in a headlock for twenty seconds, you said you knew of a way to do damage to his wind pipe in a couple of seconds. You must have thought that had relevance. Do you now say it didn’t?
You need to go back and look at your post that I replied to. Once you do you’ll see you’re going off the rails on me and arguing with me about things I didn’t say.
I refuse to defend things I never said and if you want to persist with this then you’ll need to play with someone else.
Megan, did I address that the head-lock only lasted 20 seconds? Yes.
And didn’t you respond by stating that someone you know assured you a wind pipe could be struck and closed in under two seconds? Yes you did.
I am trying to tell you that head locks take place all the time in wrestling. A head lock is not fatal.
So baring the type of 2 second action you mentioned, the wind-pipe is not destroyed by a head-lock.
Therefore I asked you if you saw someone strike Garner in the throat?
I don’t think that is an unfair question to ask in light of your discussion.
I’m not sure why you do.
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.