• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

VanceMack, I'll make this really simple for you: What does homicide mean in every definition of the word?

The coroners report has to have a cause of death. What was his cause of death?

(PLEASE keep saying he died of homicide!)

Are you and Joko and now Tex working together? Great minds, you know....
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Ummmm... he provided an answer to a what if question that can't be answered either way. His question is what if he'd been like this? Well, that's what makes it a ridiculous argument. Stop being an apologist.



Using policies they banned themselves from using years ago? You're joking... right?



Lol, your weaving and dodging is ridiculous. If they are barred from using that practice, is it legal for them to use it? :lol: You're splitting hairs.

Again, cut it with the games, we're talking about THIS EVENT. And in case you need a reminder, there is a difference between a law and a department policy.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

The stupid, stupid claim that the ONLY potential criminal charge was murder is VERY annoying and was a CHEESY tactic of the DA.

What about "assault?" "Official oppression?" "Abuse?" "Violation of Civil Rights?"

Oh no, no - only debate and deal in absolutes - either it was or wasn't "manslaughter/murder." Let's not even discuss assault, abuse, oppression, civil rights...

Nor even think about any employment sanctions, reprimands either. ONLY the question of it was or wasn't murder. EVERY POSSIBLY WAY to eliminate liability for the man's death.

Heya Joko. :2wave: Didn't they lay off the Cop who put the chokehold on and assign the other to desk duty? Those reprimands took place before it went to the GJ.

I could see for excessive force for mashing the guys face into the sidewalk, while on his back.

Civil Rights Violation.....no way!
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Do cops get to arrest people? What do cops do when those people refuse to be detained ('resist arrest')?

Act normal and balanced to the situation. However, we do understand your view that they are to immediately attack and totally beat the person down.

Once again, you have no proof whatsoever he was ever told he was under arrest.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

You have no way to know what was in the mind of the officer who jumped on him with a chock hold from behind, do you?

No, but I do know thy first tried to cuff him standing up. Now you're just reaching.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Not all of them. The one who jumped him by surprise from behind with a chock hold. That was an outright violent illegal assault.

Was it? I'd love to see the trial transcripts where it was determined that the officer is guilty of an outright violent illegal assault. Can you provide that? Or...wait....that was your OPINION...right?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

It feels like from watching the news America is ready to boil over.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Tresspassing? On a city sidewalk?

Keep reaching for reasons to be for cops killing unarmed people selling cigarettes.

He was peddling blackmarket cigarrettes in front of a convenience store. The store manager called in a complaint.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Ummm you are stating what if. Your argument is basically: What if he had been health!? Then he would have been dangerous! That's why they needed to act like they did. Ummm - you don't know what he would have been like if he'd been healthy. He could have reacted in the same way as he did and police action would still be seen as excessive.

NO, that is NOT my argument. My argument is that subduing a 6'3" 360LB man requires a gang approach when, as is evidenced in the video, the police on site are more like 5'8" and 170 lbs. It also happened to be that Garner was so frail that that method contributed to his death.

I saw the video 3 months ago. Move along with that ****.

You miss the point. The video you saw doesn't actually show what it claims to show. Was Garner choked to death? No. He was put in a sleeper hold for 13 seconds and was very much alive afterward. Does it show that Garner did nothing to justify the arrest? No. The video cuts out for an indeterminate amount of time and comes back at the point of the arrest. Something in that period of time changed the police demeanor from standing cross armed to attempting to subdue him.

Maybe he used the f-word and that's the smoking gun evidence that putting him in a chokehold was required. :shrug:

You and a lot of other folks here are putting all of your argument on what is seen in that video of the altercation and ignoring that the video is missing the crucial piece to substantiate your argument. That is, it's missing what happened just before the police chose to subdue Garner.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Get back to the topic of the thread which doesn't require making up scenarios or playing it's like this games.

Lmao - your lack of arguments is so ridiculously see through it's almost funny. Here are the ridiculous arguments you've made/agreed with so far:

1. People have a right to defend themselves if they perceive police to be a threat to their lives but you don't get to actually determine whether it was a threat or not .....
2. If this guy had been healthier he'd be threatening but the only way of knowing that is to assume that he would have reacted differently in a different scenario. (agreed with)
3. Nobody can bring up what if scenarios unless those scenarios are meant to make Eric Garner look like a criminal.
4. Police don't have to tell you you're under arrest.... but if you defend yourself against a perceived threat, the acceptable reason is that you didn't want to be arrested (agreed with).

Please... stop this. You're defending the indefensible.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

So? It is a stupid thing for 5 cops to gang up on a guy for. Is NYC safer because they killed this master criminal?

You just keep excusing cops breaking their own rules.

Who calls the cops on the cops?

The community, and guess what, internal affairs responds. Do you really not know this?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Heya Joko. :2wave: Didn't they lay off the Cop who put the chokehold on and assign the other to desk duty? Those reprimands took place before it went to the GJ.

I could see for excessive force for mashing the guys face into the sidewalk, while on his back.

Civil Rights Violation.....no way!

Candidly I don't know about that. It will be months before we really know, because if they do any reprimand then the police union will involve.

I do not see Obama/Holder willing to take on the NYPD. Maybe a little noise about it, but nothing done in the end. If this was in Phoenix and the dead man Latino? Definitely.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Act normal and balanced to the situation. However, we do understand your view that they are to immediately attack and totally beat the person down.

Once again, you have no proof whatsoever he was ever told he was under arrest.
There was no 'beat down' and the grand jury did not indict him. Forget about a court trial...they cant even get an indictment based on the evidence at hand.

You keep refusing to answer questions (even ones not posed to you that you feel the need to jump in on). Do cops get to arrest people? What do cops do when those people refuse to be detained ('resist arrest')?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

I hope Sharpton and the other race hustlers stay out of this one. They tend to de-legitimize everything they open their mouths about.

Too late.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

The coroners report has to have a cause of death.

Yes, it also has a cause of death for every killing, that has zero relevance to whether they're homicides or not. :) Thanks for not answering VanceMack.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Chocking someone from behind while others take him to the ground and weight placed on the person's back or chest will "subdue" someone. The MOST effectively subdued people are dead people for sure.

None of those officers intended to kill Eric Garner.

Did they tell him he was arrested after he was unconscious or dead? Or never?

What is in the missing video just before they began to subdue him? Likely the GJ knows and that is a big part of why there was no indictment.

At least, then, it should be on his tombstone "You are under arrest."

Or "you should have gone quietly", maybe.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

He was peddling blackmarket cigarrettes in front of a convenience store. The store manager called in a complaint.

Is that trespassing?

Is trespassing a death penalty offense?

Do trespassers deserve illegal chokeholds?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

NO, that is NOT my argument. My argument is that subduing a 6'3" 360LB man requires a gang approach when, as is evidenced in the video, the police on site are more like 5'8" and 170 lbs. It also happened to be that Garner was so frail that that method contributed to his death.



You miss the point. The video you saw doesn't actually show what it claims to show. Was Garner choked to death? No. He was put in a sleeper hold for 13 seconds and was very much alive afterward. Does it show that Garner did nothing to justify the arrest? No. The video cuts out for an indeterminate amount of time and comes back at the point of the arrest. Something in that period of time changed the police demeanor from standing cross armed to attempting to subdue him.



You and a lot of other folks here are putting all of your argument on what is seen in that video of the altercation and ignoring that the video is missing the crucial piece to substantiate your argument. That is, it's missing what happened just before the police chose to subdue Garner.

"Subdue" is such a nice word.

Defense attorneys should use that in defending assault cases. "My client didn't assault her, he subdued her before taking her wallet from. There is no law against subduing a person."

Thus, Michael Brown did NOT assault that officer, he only attempted to subdue the officer. You'd agree with that, right?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

"Subdue" is such a nice word.

Defense attorneys should use that in defending assault cases. "My client didn't assault her, he only subdued her before taking her wallet from."

Guess what, the GJ doesn't agree with your ignorant assessment. Deal with it.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

The community, and guess what, internal affairs responds. Do you really not know this?

So, cops are who you call when a cop does something wrong.

Nice setup.

Keep apologizing for thugs.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

NO, that is NOT my argument. My argument is that subduing a 6'3" 360LB man requires a gang approach when, as is evidenced in the video, the police on site are more like 5'8" and 170 lbs. It also happened to be that Garner was so frail that that method contributed to his death.

Still lying? Here you are:

Had he been a relatively healthy then a combative 6'3" 360LB Gardener would probably be more than the officers could handle.

You made the what if argument based on a scenario only you seem to control. He wasn't combative at any point so there is no reason to suggest that if he'd be healthy, he would have been. Or do you know something we don't?

You miss the point. The video you saw doesn't actually show what it claims to show. Was Garner choked to death?

Didn't argue that. I argued police action led to his death. :shrug:

You and a lot of other folks here are putting all of your argument on what is seen in that video of the altercation and ignoring that the video is missing the crucial piece to substantiate your argument. That is, it's missing what happened just before the police chose to subdue Garner.

There are literally 4 or 5 other videos filling in the blanks of what happened. There is zero evidence he proved to be combative in whatever was omitted. There aren't reports from the police. There isn't testimony from any witness. You're essentially applying the what if argument here again. Nobody is buying it.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Is that trespassing?

Is trespassing a death penalty offense?

Do trespassers deserve illegal chokeholds?

Again, the police intent was not to kill Eric Garner. Your ignorant "death sentence" bulls*** only hurts your already week argument.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Lmao - your lack of arguments is so ridiculously see through it's almost funny. Here are the ridiculous arguments you've made/agreed with so far:

1. People have a right to defend themselves if they perceive police to be a threat to their lives but you don't get to actually determine whether it was a threat or not .....
2. If this guy had been healthier he'd be threatening but the only way of knowing that is to assume that he would have reacted differently in a different scenario. (agreed with)
3. Nobody can bring up what if scenarios unless those scenarios are meant to make Eric Garner look like a criminal.
4. Police don't have to tell you you're under arrest.... but if you defend yourself against a perceived threat, the acceptable reason is that you didn't want to be arrested (agreed with).

Please... stop this. You're defending the indefensible.

Please get back to the thread topic instead of wasting time mischaracterizing my arguments, you're just not very good at it.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Too late.

Yeah, Sharptones was standing next to the Wife as they handed NY a 750 Million dollar law suit.

Which we know Al will be trying to get his hooks into that money. Truly Sharptones isn't anything but a leech and a punk. His been scamning with civil rights from his beginning. Like Jesse Jackson.....they were only along for the Ride.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Is that trespassing?

Is trespassing a death penalty offense?

Do trespassers deserve illegal chokeholds?

Wow! Standing on a sidewalk is now "trespassing." The police groupie desperation continues to grow!!!
 
Back
Top Bottom