Evaluating Conservative Attacks On The Garner Grand Jury

Townhall.com ^ | December 5, 2014 | Mark Davis

[Biggirl]

The problem was that Mr. Gardner was the subject of complaints coming from the small busineses in the area he was in.

[Kaslin]

That is correct. They complained because he sold untaxed lose cigarettes which is against the law.

[circlecity]

"In order to indict, the grand jury would have had to find reckless disregard for Garner’s safety, a fair expectation that the officers knew he could die, and perhaps even a callous disregard for that danger."

I believe all three of those were present in this case and would have voted to indict the officer. I acknowledge, however, that reasonable can disagree on this and hold no animus againast those who come to a different conclusion.

[bert]

His people of color have been shouting what to do but Mr Gardner didn't understand the message......

I surrender

[Abby4116]

Assuming he bought them legally in New York, New York received their tax so he was just making an additional profit on the already taxed cigarettes.

[cripplecreek]

As I understand it, he was attracting bums who were also hanging around the stores.

[atc23]

"against the law

oh, yes - the cops are free, Eric Garner is murdered over loose cigarettes and the guy who recorded the murder, he went to jail. We fund the Fascist Police State with our tax dollars.

[HMS Surprise]

Cops are typically merely under “color of law,” they are not the law. So merely having the appearance of law, unlike a Sheriff who is the law. They are more like revenue officers, investigating petty infractions such as selling cigarettes on the street. Certainly at some point they have the authority to arrest, but they are just a liable for poor behavior as any citizen when they do, regardless of statute. When a man says he can’t breathe, and you don’t take ANY action to relieve his distress... that YOU are causing... YOU have committed the greater crime. He sold cigarettes, you killed him. This is not Ferguson, it is different. Freepers need to realize that.

[jersey117]

A solution: White cops shouldn’t answer calls in black crime ridden areas. Let them kill each other. Or send black cops in and let them put their lives on the line. Problem solved.

[Dryman]

Never much liked this Mark Davis.

[Alberta's Child]

They were not asked whether the video upset them. They were not asked if the events were disturbing to watch. They were not asked whether the arrest went flawlessly. They were asked whether Officer Daniel Pantaleo broke the law in the dispatch of his duties.

Technically, I don't think this is correct. This was a grand jury, not a trial jury in a criminal case. I believe the grand jury's charge is simply to determine if there is sufficient evidence to support a criminal charge.

If the video was the only piece of evidence in the case, I figured an indictment was inevitable. But a grand jury weighs a lot of evidence, and I would have thought conservatives in the media -- especially a legal professional like Napolitano -- would know that better than anyone.

Personally, I wonder if the grand jury basically walked away from the case when they learned that Garner had been arrested previously more than 30 times -- and that he was out on bail awaiting trial after his last prior arrest when this incident occurred.

[Kaslin]

The real blame goes to the New York politicians imo

[Kaslin]

No he did not bring them legally in. He bought the cigarettes from the Cherokee reservations in NC and or SC

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

The grand jury is NOT convened to determine guilt or innocence. The grand jury merely decides if a case has merit to move forward to a trial.

What this author suggests is that there is a wide options of opinion. In most grand jury decisions, if there is a wide options of opinions, then there is an indictment. Then it is up to a court of law to determine guilt or innocence.

[FunkyZero]

That's a Drudge headline trick. He wasn't murdered over loose cigarettes. His death was accidental and it happened because a) he was resisting law enforcement and b) the cops used disproportionate force in order to detain him. I grudgingly agree with the decision on this case, it follows the guidelines of the law. That does not, however, mean i think that what happened was right or just. I think the cops were far too aggressive and did not have any regard for the injuries they were or could cause.

The police often get forced into this situation because you can't just throw up your hands and allow a criminal to walk away, regardless of the crime. The only real factors should be when the methods used to detain the person put the public at risk or cause disproportionate injuries to the suspect. Of course, that part is simply my humble opinion, not the law of policy.

[Abby4116]

Thank you. It is the first that I have heard that.

[Alberta's Child]

When a man says he can’t breathe, and you don’t take ANY action to relieve his distress... that YOU are causing... YOU have committed the greater crime.

I was surprised there was no indictment in this case, but on this point I don't agree with you. Anyone who has watched the TV show "Cops" will tell you that most perpetrators complain of some kind of distress when they are being apprehended ... "The cuffs are too tight," "I can't walk," etc.

Heck -- for all we know, there may have been evidence that Garner himself complained repeatedly like this during all of his previous 30+ arrests, and nothing ever happened to him in those situations.

So that point alone wouldn't be sufficient to warrant a criminal charge against the police, in my opinion.

[trebb]

That is correct. They complained because he sold untaxed lose cigarettes which is against the law.

So is going 26 in a 25 zone...

[Alberta's Child]

Good post. I also suspect that the wide range of complicating factors in this case related to Garner’s health were a big reason why the police officers weren’t indicted. Based on what I’ve read about Garner’s medical condition, he was just as likely to die standing on a street corner at any given moment.