Page 220 of 276 FirstFirst ... 120170210218219220221222230270 ... LastLast
Results 2,191 to 2,200 of 2756

Thread: No Indictment in Chokehold Death [W:1903,2680]

  1. #2191
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    39,234

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    So the person hired to relate the medical examiner's findings... is not to be trusted as an accurate source of information?
    The quote is not from the Medical Examiner, much as people are repeating that lie.

    Link the autopsy so we can see where the ME used those words.

    And no, a PR person can't always be trusted as an "accurate source of information", although that isn't the topic here. Did you fully trust all of George W. Bush's press secretaries? How about the PR Departments for the Wall Street firms that caused the financial meltdown?

    Until I see the autopsy report itself, there's nothing to see. Julie Bolcer is a PR person and is not a medical expert.
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  2. #2192
    Sage

    vesper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,890

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    Obama is granting his attention to Al Sharpton and calling him in to the WH for meetings. Obama's actions have been repulsive.
    That's been reported for some time and proved by WH visitor records. And most recently Al Sharpton was a member of those invited to the pow wow on Monday of this week with Obama Eric Holder and others where it resulted in what police officers need to change but nothing to do address the reasons for the level of criminals that live in black communities that require so many cops in the area.

    Today Al Sharpton was front stage with the widow of Garner playing the f-ing race card for all he could get! Add that to de Blasio's comments yesterday implying his force is racist and untrustworthy. And wallah! you have Mayhem in the streets. ( by design).

    We also heard from Jesse Jackson today claiming the Grand Jurists in Ferguson and Staten Island are racists. There's a video out there going viral of his comments.

    You got a President that calls and personally thanks de Blasio for trashing his police department in the name of racism.

    You got an Atty Gen. not happy with the Grand Jury in Ferguson or Staten Island and has used his power to put a cloud over their findings so people will not trust the system.

    This has more to do with an agenda than anything else. You know, Obama, Holder, Sharpton all agree that cops need to wear cameras. I think every f-ing politician, and loud mouth racebaiter should.

    The idea that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson use the name Reverend makes me want to puke.
    Rant Off.

  3. #2193
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    So the person hired to relate the medical examiner's findings... is not to be trusted as an accurate source of information?
    No, not for the granularity of this discussion. The autopsy has not yet been released to the public. In our discussion, the actual wording is key.

  4. #2194
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:38 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,017

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    I read what you wrote. I quoted what you wrote, too. You said it was by definition "intentional actions", and I corrected you. "Intentional" is not in the official definition of the word "homicide".
    Homicide—‘‘occurs when death results from...’’ an injury or poisoning or from ‘‘...a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death. Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’ (emphasis added)

    Straight out of the Medical Examiner's Guide, published by the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_me.pdf

    And for the 2nd time: I explicitly stated that the ME's judgment does not mean or prove that the officers intended to kill Garner. It means they chose a course of action that killed Garner.

  5. #2195
    Sage
    Gaius46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,494

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    The quote is not from the Medical Examiner, much as people are repeating that lie.

    Link the autopsy so we can see where the ME used those words.

    And no, a PR person can't always be trusted as an "accurate source of information", although that isn't the topic here. Did you fully trust all of George W. Bush's press secretaries? How about the PR Departments for the Wall Street firms that caused the financial meltdown?

    Until I see the autopsy report itself, there's nothing to see. Julie Bolcer is a PR person and is not a medical expert.
    Autopsy reports aren't publicly available so the chances of us ever seeing it are slim.
    Don't be a grammar nazi - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 1 #7

  6. #2196
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:38 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,017

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    See Joko's post #2041
    So a wholly unattributed quote is authoritative... lol


    Yes you are. Most of those links don't quote the autopsy of the ME. The one that purports to doesn't quote the ME directly. To prove me wrong, you're going to need at least a direct quote from the ME or the autopsy. Something you have not thus far managed.
    It's not publicly released... and it's not like Joko has it either. Meanwhile, the version I quoted has been consistently cited by a wide variety of sources, whereas you have... nothing.

    I mean, really. Are you genuinely going to dispute that the ME declared it a homicide?

  7. #2197
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    Homicide—‘‘occurs when death results from...’’ an injury or poisoning or from ‘‘...a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death. Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’ (emphasis added)

    Straight out of the Medical Examiner's Guide, published by the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_me.pdf

    And for the 2nd time: I explicitly stated that the ME's judgment does not mean or prove that the officers intended to kill Garner. It means they chose a course of action that killed Garner.
    Funny how you can read something and not understand it. Perhaps it would help you if it were quoted as it was written in the linked material:

    Homicide—‘‘occurs when death results from...’’ an injury or poisoning or from ‘‘...a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death. Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’
    I bolded the sentence you snipped in your mind, all you saw was "volitional act" you didn't stick around for the qualifiers. You also seemed to skip over an important "or".

  8. #2198
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,066

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    The quote is not from the Medical Examiner, much as people are repeating that lie.
    Okay, fine, they're not. I never claimed they were. I'm asking you whether a person hired by the medical examiner's office to relate the medical examiner's findings should be trusted.

    Link the autopsy so we can see where the ME used those words.

    And no, a PR person can't always be trusted as an "accurate source of information", although that isn't the topic here. Did you fully trust all of George W. Bush's press secretaries? How about the PR Departments for the Wall Street firms that caused the financial meltdown?

    Until I see the autopsy report itself, there's nothing to see. Julie Bolcer is a PR person and is not a medical expert.
    Your comparisons are pretty weak. A medical examiner does not need to put a spin on his findings because his job is not dependent on public opinion. Actually, correction, it is dependent on public opinion to the extent that if he's caught relating false information through a spokesperson, they're never going to be hired again. Do you realize why your comparisons don't work?

    A press secretary for the WH is hired because of its partisan nature is hired to put a positive spin on events. A PR person working for a company does the same thing. A PR person working for a medical examiner's office has no such reason. They're there to present findings and nothing else. Presenting something other than the findings would literally mean medical examiners would lose credibility. I actually WORK with marketing and PR persons and I can't believe you'd make such an oddly ridiculous comparison.

    Do you realize that not all PR people are the same and some are hired to shield the people they represent? That's what the PR person for a medical examiner does. They're hired to present the findings and ensure that people don't decide to go after the medical examiners who actually proved their guilt.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  9. #2199
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:38 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,017

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    You'd be accurate with that statement if you removed the "deliberate", but you apparently just can't help yourself.
    My statement is accurate. Again, from the ME's handbook http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_me.pdf

    Natural—‘‘due solely or nearly totally to disease and/or the aging process.’’

    Accident—‘‘there is little or no evidence that the injury or poisoning occurred with intent to harm or cause death. In essence, the fatal outcome
    was unintentional.’’

    Suicide—‘‘results from an injury or poisoning as a result of an intentional,self-inflicted act committed to do self-harm or cause the death of one’s
    self.’’

    Homicide—‘‘occurs when death results from...’’ an injury or poisoning or from ‘‘...a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death. Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’

    Could not be determined—‘‘used when the information pointing to one manner of death is no more compelling than one or more other competing manners of death when all available information is considered.’’

    Pending investigation—used when determination of manner depends on further information.



    The ME did not declared Garner's death a homicide, not an accident. And yet again, I am not saying any of the officers actually wanted to kill Garner. It's that they made a deliberate choice to restrain Garner, and that action caused his death.

    Do you really not understand this yet?

  10. #2200
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    39,234

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    Homicide—‘‘occurs when death results from...’’ an injury or poisoning or from ‘‘...a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death. Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’ (emphasis added)

    Straight out of the Medical Examiner's Guide, published by the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_me.pdf

    And for the 2nd time: I explicitly stated that the ME's judgment does not mean or prove that the officers intended to kill Garner. It means they chose a course of action that killed Garner.
    Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’ (emphasis added)


    Which is exactly what I told you when I corrected you. You said homicide was "intentional actions". I corrected you, and now you're posting a definition that agrees with what I said.

    Are you being intentionally obtuse for some reason?

    And nobody denies that the officers were involved in the actions that resulted in his death. They were right there. I wasn't involved in this man's death because I was 5 states away. Are you trying to prove some sort of point by stating the obvious?
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •