Posted on 12/03/2014 6:28:48 PM PST by Biggirl
On Wednesday, a New York grand jury refused to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of 43-year-old Eric Garner. Pantaleo is white; Garner is black. That one fact meant that the President of the United States and the Mayor of New York City took to the microphones to denounce American racism.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Mr. Gardener was 6’3”, 350lbs. That is a big man, and would likely require more than two men to restrain him, even if he cooperated.
While I have no specific knowledge of police procedure, but of military tactics, a patrol of 4 on an enforcement crackdown, over a large area, makes sense. A 4-man presence makes a statement in a high-crime area.
The man’s death is tragic, and I will assume the officers had no intent to kill him. Should there be a review of procedures? Sure. Does suspension with pay during the review make sense? Sure.
The Grand Jury didn’t think there was enough to go to trial. End of story.
Tase the sob
I think you can count on a medical examiner to know what a “true” choke hold is.
Cops cannot be held accountable to know the medical condition of the suspect except in circumstances where they have time to talk to people or the condition is obvious wheelchair etc.
If the family sues for wrongful death, I suspect they will win. It would only require a preponderance of the evidence showing insufficient care was taken during the arrest to keep the guy alive. If the officers unintentionally acted in a way that caused the death, and it was not force justified by the dead man, then I think they should win.
Then seeing the pictures and video where the officer slipped one arm up and underneath the right arm pit while having his left arm come over the top of the left shoulder should have indicated that this was NOT a choke hold. I describe it as being more like steer wrestling
thank you
There is a movement that is commie driven trying tobreak this country apart. I am not an anarchist. Nor do I think that the police are always right. I just want the facts to be out there.
If he was cooperating why would it take more than one?
While I have no specific knowledge of police procedure, but of military tactics, a patrol of 4 on an enforcement crackdown, over a large area, makes sense.
We're not talking military tactics. We're talking about policing a quiet neighborhood, and arresting a man for what was almost certainly a misdemeanor. Would they send 10 cops for a jaywalker?
The man’s death is tragic, and I will assume the officers had no intent to kill him.
The justice system is full of people who had no intent of killing someone but who, by their actions, caused the death of another person. And almost all of them will face a jury. But not cops.
The Grand Jury didn’t think there was enough to go to trial. End of story.
Because cops can get away with murder. Literally.
Yes. I see all 3 NYC newspapers that I read are still calling it a choke hold. I guess they don’t read FR.
Still lots of cop cars racing around at the moment.
Helicopters, so they must be nearby.
The Medical Examiner’s Office ruled Garner’s death a homicide caused by “compression of neck (chokehold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police.”
Whether a choke hold or “sleeper hold” it was certainly a contributing factor.
You know something funny? It’s bringing people together in a way. Most black people are sick of it, especially in the Christmas season. People are yelling nice thing to other people on the street.
It takes one to cuff him, and one to watch his partner’s back. This was not a “quiet” neighborhood, as the police had been called there many times for any number of crimes.
The cops weren’t just looking for Garner, they were are a larger mission. He just happened to be one person they encountered that day. And yes, he was an 30-time repeat offender. The cops weren’t radioed to the scene, that is difference in your jaywalking analogy.
Many people everyday use a firearm, lethally, and don’t even see a grand jury, much less a jury trial. Pick up a copy of any recent NRA magazine, and the front section has to do with guns being used to prevent crime, including killing bad guys.
Murder isn’t homicide, isn’t self-defense, isn’t manslaughter. In this case, the grand jury was responsible to either send up an indictment or not. They chose not to.
Despite what the press says, he didn’t use a “chokehold,” which was banned by the NYPD, but used a lawful take down method taught at the police academy. He didn’t strangle him, he brought the man down and they sat on him.
If you can’t breathe, you can’t say “I can’t breathe.” If you watch the video from the NYPost, he is on the ground for over 4 minutes, with no one on him. When EMS gets there, he says he can’t breathe. Clearly, he isn’t being suffocated, strangled, or in a chokehold.
I don’t think the officer meant to kill Garner, but that was the unnecessary effect of the application of excessive force.
Watching the video, I can come up with half a dozen ways of handling that so that nobody gets hurt.
Why can’t cops think?
In any reasonable conclusion and normal circumstances, the man would not have died. You do not make laws based on unreasonable conclusions and abnormal circumstances. Outlying irregularities do not count. Where do you draw the line? Some people have a severe fatal reaction to pepper spray. Does that mean you outlaw pepper spray?
Read any Physicians' Desk Reference about the side effects of common drugs. . . and almost everyone of them has DEATH as one of the very rare side effects in some cases. Does that mean you NEVER prescribe these common medications because someone might die from using it?
Just in this case, 1 out of 100,000 take-downs may result in a death because of a concatenation of events. This was the one. Does that mean you NEVER take down someone in an arrest because there is a minuscule risk? Sorry. You are wrong.
No. You misunderstand me. I did not disagree and agree in the same post. The cops did not kill him. He did not even die at the scene. He died of cardiac arrest in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. This is a tragedy all the way around.
I used to weigh what he did. I no longer do. I know what it is like to be that heavy. I had a 54 inch waist and had gotten up to 360 pounds because of a side-effect of some medication I was taking. When I was that heavy, I never wanted to be on my big belly because of the consequences to my ability to breathe. The few times I found my self prone, it was NOT pretty. I stopped taking that medication (Thank God) and started shedding pounds like crazy and am now blessed with a 40" waist and trip the scales a little over 210. I can now lie on my stomach with impunity once more. YAY!
What happened here is a tragedy of stupidity on the part of the liberal's law about cigarettes (Liberals think that they can pass ridiculous taxes such as these with impunity and no consequences and no side-effects), stupidity on the part of the victim for being non-cooperative and combative (he knew what he had been doing, should have shrugged his shoulders, taken his lumps, paid the fine, and gone about his business), ignorance on the part of the police about what happens to heavy people on their stomachs, incompetence on the part of the police department in not training on what to do AFTER they taken down someone of that girth due to lack of training about that situation, but there was no criminality or negligence on the part of the officer doing his job. Ergo, he did not kill the victim.
Yes, there were somethings they could have done better. . . but they were NOT trained in what to do. And not ever having been 350 plus pounds, they did not have the experiential knowledge of what being forced to lay on a gut that large unable to move was doing to him.
Essentially, lying on his stomach was pushing the fat of his belly up into him, compressing his diaphragm into his lungs, limiting its motion, thereby suppressing his ability to exhale, combined with his tendency to asthma closing down his bronchial passages limiting his airway even more, thus building up a load of CO2, which with his underlying diabetes, leads to anoxia, then hypoxia, and then asphyxia, all of which is putting an extreme load on his heart, resulting to the infarction. Once he was on that downward spiral, it was unlikely that even the EMTs could stop it and save him. On of the doctors in my office outlined this for me the other day. Had they known, what could they have done early on to prevent this spiral of events? Moved him onto his side. Much easier for someone of his size to breathe lying on the side.
It was a concatenation of events that killed this man. Everyone involved killed this man. . . the least culpable persons were the EMTs and the cops. Even the witnesses were more culpable than the cops for VOTING for the Liberals who passed the cigarette taxes in the first place. The most culpable was the victim for not cooperating with the cops. In the long run, a very stupid Liberal Nanny Cigarette Tax Law killed this man.
That is a lot of nothing, the problem was the methods and techniques used for the arrest, not whether they were arresting him for an unpaid ticket, or heroin, or cigarettes, or for soliciting a hooker, or for being a hooker.
Cops better be prepared to run into obese people since they are so common, it isn’t like a 360 pound man or fat woman is a great rarity.
Did you bother to read what I wrote? Or did you just skim it. Read it again.
Facts don’t matter to the lunatics.
I was completely wrong. The Grand Jury was completely correct no-billing the cop.
The choke hold that is against NYPD regulations involves using a baton to choke the perp. Also there is apparently a difference between a “submission hold” and a “choke hold” depending on where the elbow is placed.
Also there was no damage to the windpipe.
Basically the guy was in miserable health. He worked himself up into a tantrum, was subdued and died from his health issues. Not the cops fault.
The real culprit is are draconian laws against selling loose cigarettes. Cops should not be used as revenuers. NYC is not so crime-free that cops don’t have better things to do than harass folks for selling loose cigarettes.
I have heard that there was a turf fight. Since I haven’t seen this in print anywhere, I guess it could be false. But I heard that two guys were fighting over who could sell the cigarettes in a particular place, and the cops broke up the fight. That makes a lot more sense than they busted him for the cigarette sales.
I read today that by NY State law, the testimony etc. in a grand jury hearing cannot be revealed. Since we saw evidence in the Ferguson hearing right away, I thought the same thing would happen and the fight would be discussed. but nothing, and now I know why.
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.
