Posted on 12/03/2014 8:58:20 PM PST by TigerClaws
Charles Krauthammer said Wednesday on "Special Report with Bret Baier" that a grand jury's decision not to indict a New York City police officer in the death of Eric Garner, an unarmed black man who died in July after the officer placed him in a chokehold, is "totally incomprehensible."
"It looks like they at least might have indicted him on something like involuntary manslaughter at the very least," Krauthammer, a syndicated columnist and Fox News contributor, said. "The guy was unarmed, and the crime was petty as they come. He was selling loose cigarettes, which in and of itself is almost absurd that somebody has to die over that."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
“If he could say “I can’t breathe” he was breathing.”
One can be breathing and still have trouble breathing, for a variety of reasons. Obviously, he was not breathing shortly after he made that statement, so I’d say his complaint turned out to be legitimate.
I can see that he could be killed by his on weight pressing on his chest.
But he is the one who caused that situation by resisting arrest.
I do not see why the officer should be charged with trying to effect an arrest that resulted in an accidental death.
I see no malice here.
I don’t think anyone was out to kill that guy.
There certainly was a chokehold. It did not start out as a chokehold, when first applied, but then the officer lost his grip from under the armpit while trying to take him down. The officer then reached over the shoulder to get a hold of him, and that was a chokehold. He was pressing his forearm against the man’s larynx and applying pressure with the other arm. You can’t call that something else.
I believe he died in an ambulance on the way to the hospital from cardiac arrest. The coroner's report supports the idea that he was not asphyxiated at the scene.
He probably was having some difficulty breathing at the scene but it was not from asphyxiation.
His resisting arrest, the resulting submission hold and his bad health are probably the circumstances that caused his cardiac arrest and his demise.
Well, he didn’t die of asphyxia from application of a choke hold.
So the person applying the head lock shouldn’t be charged with killing him via choke hold, because he didn’t.
He died of cardiac arrest. Not asphyxiation.
He was breathing. It takes a lot of air to speak.
Sorry.....this was an accident, not an intentional strangulation.
I agree with Krauthammer.
Its funny isn’t it.....one minute Freepers call cops gestapo
The next minute the cop love is nauseatingly Animal Farm like for a liberty loving forum
Cops should be liable on this one...shame on them
You are correct.
The fact that many here keep talking about a chokehold and the man not breathing is moot.
A speaking person is breathing.
He died of cardiac arrest.
My guess is this is why no indictment was put forward.
These facts are important.
Yes, I see that, but you and he are both wrong.
It amazes me how people can look right at something and see something else.
Body cameras on cops don’t matter, because people see what they want to see, and don’t see what they don’t want to see.
He didn’t choke the guy.
That is all.
What are the cops liable of?
No, a police officer who committed no crime deserves liberty too.
Well, those are sports chokeholds, but we should be looking at the holds that law enforcement commonly uses. Here is some info from an article that is specifically about the NYC ban:
“In 1980, under the threat of several lawsuits, Los Angeles banned the use of one especially lethal choke hold — called the bar-arm hold, which cuts off the air supply by crushing the larynx — and many large police departments followed suit, Professor Fyfe said. In many cases, the departments also banned or restricted use of a less dangerous hold, the carotid hold, which compresses the carotid arteries in the neck and temporarily cuts off blood to the brain.”
“Chief Timoney said the city policy specifically did not distinguish between various types of holds, but rather banned them categorically. It also prohibited other restraints or tactics — like standing on a suspect’s chest or transporting a suspect in a face-down position — which might impede breathing.
“Basically, stay the hell away from the neck,” he said. “That’s what it says.””
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/11/24/nyregion/kelly-bans-choke-holds-by-officers.html
So, the use of the forearm pressed against the larynx, even if it didn’t meet a proper MMA form, still would violate the policy as explained by the former Chief. According to this Handbook of Forensic Pathology, it would seem to qualify as a “bar arm chokehold”:
“Well, he didn’t die of asphyxia from application of a choke hold.”
Is the chokehold only banned if someone dies from it? No.
“So the person applying the head lock shouldn’t be charged with killing him via choke hold, because he didn’t.”
Perhaps not, but that doesn’t mean he acted properly in applying it, and it doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be any repercussions at all.
....”he is the one who caused that situation by resisting arrest”....
Actions have consequences but the blacks on the low-end don’t think there should be for their crimes. He was breaking the law for the very thing he’d been arrested for 8 timed before......what did he expect?....well, he told them to leave him alone. And that is the mentality of many blacks.
It took a bunch of Cops to bring down an almost 400 pound man. Not a child, a full grown and then some man mountain king. He was huge. And he didn’t die until later at the hospital. So it wasn’t from lack of air, asthma, at least not at the time of the incident My guess is from a heart attack because of his size, asthma, diabetes and obesity later on at the hospital.
There is proximtion to the incident with the Cops, but only that, as he died later, and it wasn’t from any compression to his neck area at the time of the incident itself. And it wasn’t the first incident Cops had with this guy. There were 31 prior incidents, 9 for selling ciggies. I’m on the Cop’s side. This was no “child” as the Black defenders on TV are saying. All Black “victims” are “children” to these commentators. Plus they are all lying and saying “illegal chokehold” when it’s not illegal as in criminality, just a police dept. rule. Once again, lots of lies being given out to serve the meme that this is racism and illegality on the part of the Cops. Makes me sick.
“He died of cardiac arrest. Not asphyxiation.”
Yes, that may be, but it doesn’t excuse the use of improper force, which obviously was the proximate cause of death. He wasn’t dead until the officers laid hands on him, and then he was, very shortly thereafter. I am not going to believe he would have suddenly had a heart attack if they hadn’t choked him, piled on top of his back, compressed his chest, and kneeled on his head.
“He was breathing. It takes a lot of air to speak.”
Again, you can still be breathing and have trouble breathing, or have a damaged airway, or some other acute condition that is going to shortly lead to your death. Obviously this was the case, because he died.
“Sorry.....this was an accident, not an intentional strangulation.”
No, I don’t think it was intentional, however, that isn’t really the issue here.
This link ... Paragraph 18 (I think) ... Said the coroner found the death was a “homocide” caused by compression applied by the officers.
When he was repeatedly complaining that he couldn’t breathe they should have stopped.
IMO this was just wrong.
So the chokehold may not have killed him (though we can’t say it might not have contributed). It’s still not a proper use of force, according to the police policy. That, along with several other techniques the police used seem obviously to violate their policy.
As for him not dieing until later, I don’t see how that changes anything. He was unresponsive very soon after they piled on him, not speaking, not moving. So he didn’t simply have a heart attack a few hours later. Something was obviously very wrong with him very quickly.
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.